Ugh...Stock Market lost 700+ points today because of the no votes. My parents are are both freaking out about their investments. I have a 5k CD. (pretty much my life savings atm) If more banks fail, will this effect me? I'm pretty sure it won't since it's an insured investment, but if it does, that would stink. (stark understatement)

 

 

 

@imbackstinkers - It's not Bush's fault. -.- Yes, the economy has slowed, but the exponential increases of the US economy weren't going to last forever. It could have stalled last year, this year, 5 years from now, or whatever, but it wasn't going to just keep going up. On top of that, idiot banks were making deals with people with bad credit while the CEOs raked in the cash. Those losses piled up. Insert domino effect and Bingo! The present economy. NOT just Bush's fault.

 

 

 

Your CD is fine. It's an insured investment. The stock market is bad right now, but whenever they get something passed to help out the economy it will go back up.

The House of Representatives rejected the bailout. More uncertainty, great...

 

 

 

 

 

Edit - They voted 207 For to 226 against although BBC News 24 is suggesting that the vote isn't finalised until the gavel goes down, so they're trying to get the no voters to change their minds (it only needs 10 people to switch). What a mess.

 

Un...believable. I am totally lost for words.

 

 

 

I don't understand why they'd even bring it to a vote with it being so close. Surely it would have made more sense to keep talking until they had a comfortable majority before they took it to the floor. Such a lack of common sense.

 

It is just inconceivable logic from the conservatives. I just watched the video posted on the BBC's World Service and one of them stated this was the first step on the slippery slope to socialism.

 

 

 

For 1), to vote against this Bill for ideological reasons instead of having the common sense to realise the grave danger of this situation is idealism in the face of stark reality. I'm a socialist; impulsively, I'm actually against this Bill, but I have the ability to see this is for the good of the global financial system, and if it didn't work, the aftermath would hit the poor hardest and first. You have to be pragmatic.

 

 

 

2) This isn't even socialism. Socialism in its truest form would be calling for these banks to fail, all else failing, total nationalisation. A "bail-out plan" is nowhere near socialism. In fact, the only aspect of socialism I see here is government intervention, very limited at that.

 

 

 

Idiots. Puerile, indoctrinated, foolish idiots.

 

 

 

Barely 60% of Democrats voted for the bill. Most high profile Republicans voted for it. John Boehner, Roy Blunt, Eric Cantor, Dan Lungren and David Dreier all voted for it. Both party leaderships are ineffective. Enough Republicans voted for it that every Blue Dog Democrat could have voted against it and it still would have passed. It's Pelosi's fault for getting into some partisan rant right before the floor debate ended.

 

 

 

"We could have gotten there today had it not been for the partisan speech that the speaker gave on the floor of the House," said House Republican Leader John Boehner of Ohio , blaming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , D- Calif

It's obvious to me that the Republicans were willing to go along with this, and then John McCain went and roused up trouble to get people to follow him in the Republican party as "he's the new leader".

 

 

 

Not all Democrats supported, but that's because they didn't agree to vote on it until there was more oversight. Had McCain not been involved, there would have been a more bi-partisan solution WITH more oversight, resulting in higher Dem support. Still others originally voted for it, saw it wouldn't pass, and changed their vote.

 

 

 

Then of course you have your idealogues like Kucinich and Paul who wouldn't support it even if George Bush's impeachment was attached. Paul would never support it, Kucinich would demand MASSIVE discussion.

 

 

 

I just think that this bill, as it is set out, was rushed. I'm not an economic expert but I don't think it is possible to draft a bill of this magnitude in such a short period of time, but at the same time if the Republicans didn't just "get up and leave" the other day when John McCain came to town, it could have had more oversight and been a much better piece of legislation. The fact is: this is all John McCain's fault.

Thats ridiculous. House Republicans never had agreed to the bill before he even went to Washington. If anything he brought John Boehner and the GOP leadership on board. I just watched Pelosi's speech and it is completely ridiculous. Why on earth would you give a partisan speech like that when you are trying to pass a bi-partisan bill. It's Pelosi's fault this didn't pass.

 

 

 

We put everything we had into getting the votes to get there today, but the Speaker had to give a partisan voice that poisoned our conference

 

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=184953

 

 

 

Also I saw this...

They've done a tremendous job. There's been nothing that was indicated that's wrong with Fannie Mae. Freddie Mac has come up on its own. And the question that then presents is the competence that your agency has with reference to deciding and regulating these GSEs [government-sponsored enterprises]. And so I wish I could sit here and say that I am not upset with you but I am very upset because you know what you do is give, maybe giving a reason to, as Mr. Gonazlez said, to give someone a heart surgery when they don't need it," Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-New York) said

 

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=184743

The House Republicans didn't deliver the promised votes--they promised 75, but got 65. There were a couple Democrats who voted Aye, but then changed their votes to nay after it was clear that the measure wouldn't pass.

 

 

 

The Democrats delivered the number of votes that they had agreed upon. The Republicans didn't.

 

 

 

Thus, the failure of the bailout bill falls on them.

 

 

 

Besides, Chris Matthews is dead on:

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTRHIjlnfwU

Why don't we see what Keith Olberman has to say on the issue? That doesn't even make sense. I don't know where you heard that Boehner promised 75 votes. I haven't heard that. They probably could have got that though if it wasn't for Pelosi's speech.

I say we just keep pointing fingers while the economy crumbles.

Well if the Speaker would bring the Republican bill to the floor I bet it would pass.

That's still the republican bill. The democrats would find some reason to complain and we would have a repeat of what would happen today. There needs to be a bipartisan compromise. It's sad to see both sides playing politics at a time like this. Oh well, I guess it's pretty unreasonable of me to think that politics will ever be set aside to accomplish something quickly.

Barely 60% of Democrats voted for the bill. Most high profile Republicans voted for it. John Boehner, Roy Blunt, Eric Cantor, Dan Lungren and David Dreier all voted for it. Both party leaderships are ineffective. Enough Republicans voted for it that every Blue Dog Democrat could have voted against it and it still would have passed. It's Pelosi's fault for getting into some partisan rant right before the floor debate ended.

 

I said conservatives, not Republicans/Democrats.

 

 

 

Your aimless titfortat on this thread shows what the real underlying cause for the rejection of this Bill is.

 

 

 

The real issue here is not Republicans vs. Democrats, or she said this and he said that; it's the simple matter of a general election coming up in a month's time, and congressmen don't want to have to go home and say, "Well, we could have saved spending your taxpayers money, but we decided not to. Vote for me again please!"

Barely 60% of Democrats voted for the bill. Most high profile Republicans voted for it. John Boehner, Roy Blunt, Eric Cantor, Dan Lungren and David Dreier all voted for it. Both party leaderships are ineffective. Enough Republicans voted for it that every Blue Dog Democrat could have voted against it and it still would have passed. It's Pelosi's fault for getting into some partisan rant right before the floor debate ended.

 

I said conservatives, not Republicans/Democrats.

 

 

 

Your aimless titfortat on this thread shows what the real underlying cause for the rejection of this Bill is.

 

 

 

The real issue here is not Republicans vs. Democrats, or she said this and he said that; it's the simple matter of a general election coming up in a month's time, and congressmen don't want to have to go home and say, "Well, we could have saved spending your taxpayers money, but we decided not to. Vote for me again please!"

 

 

 

Obviously. They are getting calls and letters 10 to 1 against it. It's not conservatives only. People like Dennis Kucinich, Shiela Jackson-Lee, and John Conyers all voted against it. The Republican leadership mostly voted for it and I would hardly say they aren't conservative.