To: davidosborne
Since all of the money is gonna be pissed away, that would have been a better way to do it.
2 posted on
02/06/2009 9:27:13 PM PST by
KoRn
To: politicallyincarrect; /\XABN584; 3D-JOY; 5Madman; <1/1,000,000th%; 11B3; 1Peter2:16; ...
Passing it on... vote has not yet posted to Senate website..
3 posted on
02/06/2009 9:27:55 PM PST by
davidosborne
(CALL YOUR SENATOR NOW !! Tell him/her to vote NO on this PORK !!)
To: davidosborne
Nobody would starve this year or be homeless with this type bailout. Obama hates the poor.
To: davidosborne
Two problems with that idea:
1. Money only went to TAXPAYING Americans—nothing to the poor, welfare recipients.
2. No PORK, and therefore, NO PAYBACK!
5 posted on
02/06/2009 9:28:32 PM PST by
erkyl
(The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in a period of moral crisis, stay neutral)
To: davidosborne
61? That means half the Republican caucus voted to kill tax cuts only.
Looks like I’ll be spending extra time at the rail at church this Sunday.
9 posted on
02/06/2009 9:31:55 PM PST by
VirginiaConstitutionalist
(The top 1% of income earners earn 17% of the income, but pay 39% of the income taxes. "Fair share?")
To: davidosborne
COLLINS SPECTOR and SNOWE !!
23 posted on
02/06/2009 9:43:30 PM PST by
davidosborne
(CALL YOUR SENATOR NOW !! Tell him/her to vote NO on this PORK !!)
To: davidosborne
26 posted on
02/06/2009 9:46:49 PM PST by
davidosborne
(CALL YOUR SENATOR NOW !! Tell him/her to vote NO on this PORK !!)
To: davidosborne
35 posted on
02/06/2009 10:15:22 PM PST by
mnehring
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson