Transparency at last
If there's one great advantage to the failed $700 billion bailout bill, it is this: America has just been given one undeniable opportunity to see which side of the fence the bear squats on. In other words, we can now see exactly who is serving whom.
A majority of Republicans voted against the bailout bill. A majority of Democrats voted for it. So, who's kidding who? Who is serving their constituents? By all accounts that I've heard and read, Republican representatives are saying that they voted the bill down because their constituents were split on the matter 50/50. Fifty percent said no, the other fifty percent said hell no! Yes, we know this could hurt us a bit, but delaying the inevitable would hurt worse.
Your best investment today, in my humble opinion, is to go to Congress.org to review exactly how your personal representatives in government voted on the $700 billion bailout package. Then, armed with the facts, support the candidates who took your position on the most important piece of fiscal legislation brought to the floor in our lifetimes.
Pardon me Washington, but your slip is showing . . .
A majority of Republicans voted against the bailout bill. A majority of Democrats voted for it. So, who's kidding who? Who is serving their constituents? By all accounts that I've heard and read, Republican representatives are saying that they voted the bill down because their constituents were split on the matter 50/50. Fifty percent said no, the other fifty percent said hell no! Yes, we know this could hurt us a bit, but delaying the inevitable would hurt worse.
Your best investment today, in my humble opinion, is to go to Congress.org to review exactly how your personal representatives in government voted on the $700 billion bailout package. Then, armed with the facts, support the candidates who took your position on the most important piece of fiscal legislation brought to the floor in our lifetimes.
Pardon me Washington, but your slip is showing . . .











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
9-30-2008 @ 7:46PM
JCH said...
I would vote out a representative who put much stock in angry communications from voters. He/she is there to make a reasoned, intelligent decision, and is not there to rubber stamp reactionary mob rule.
Which is why they will pass a rescue bill that is little different than the one they just defeated, and they will do it this week - probably Thursday. Since it is absolutely beyond any reasonable doubt the right thing to do, they have little to fear from their constituents.
They've been harangued many times by massive barrages of angry constituent communications, and they seem to mostly survive it just fine. They're mad; the blood eventually drains out of their faces; they have a beer and kick the dog and pass out.
10-01-2008 @ 12:21AM
M. Young said...
Most people only heard "taxpayers dollars to bailout Wall Street" and it was needed because people defaulted on mortgages.
The public needed to hear the real facts. When a company is overburdened with debt and starts having trouble with cash flow, they borrow. If enough mortgages go in default, the companies credit rating & stock price goes down. All the "bad debt" isn't uncollectable funds. But when their debt is reduced, they can get better rates to borrow money.
When the Dow Jones fell 1.4 trillion it was a wake up call for many voters. They realized that it wasn't bailing out Wall Street when their retirement funds, college funds, etc. went so low.
Nancy Pelosi's speech just before voting convinced the undecided to vote NO. It appeared to me that anyone running for office this year voted no. Obama said he didn't approve of it but would vote yes. McCain said he hoped to see a plan he would vote yes for.
The democrats will not approve a plan that does not include ACORN, LaRaga, etc. their housing programs that don't work. Same as Fannie & Freddie that has already been bailed out. At least Fannie & Freddie are being investigated (again). And ACORN is being investigated in many states for voters fraud.
Our political parties do not work together. It is tit for tat. I will vote for you if you give me what I want.
10-01-2008 @ 12:22AM
Cantrell said...
I feel that many of us do not understand Americans anymore. I have heard from several american men (yes I said men) that ould rather lose it all and start over than pass the bail out bill.
These guys do not look at this situation the same way we do. Many of them think the best thing for our country is a good kick in the face.
These people do not want to pay their way out of trouble they want to fight out.
9-30-2008 @ 9:02PM
JCh said...
Again, in the early days of GWB's first term he gave a speech in which he stated the goal of having the highest minority home ownership in the history of the United States, and then he put the boots on the ground to accomplish that goal.
This is undeniable.
Allaynn GreenRandSpam started aggressively lowering interest rates so ARMs would be exceedingly low, and the stuff was heading for the fan.