Dems put lipstick on their a$$es........
Posted on 09/30/2008 5:42:37 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
Let's award a point of light to Matt Lauer. On this morning's Today, he called out Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.) for calling for an end to the blame game . . . right after the congressman blamed John McCain for failing to rally his Arizona troops to vote for the bailout. But that didn't stop Clyburn from continuing to try to pin the tail on the elephant.
JAMES CLYBURN: We promised 50% of our caucus; they promised 50% of their caucus, or their conference. We produced 60%, and they produced 33%.
MATT LAUER: Yeah, but in fairness, Congressman Clyburn, the Speaker of the House couldn't even deliver half of her own Democratic delegation from her own state.
CLYBURN: Well, that may be true. But zero from Arizona voted for this, and presidential candidate McCain came in, and he said he brought everybody to the table. But if you check, Matt, you will see that not a single person from Arizona voted for this legislation. So here is what we have to do, going forward. I think it's time for us to set aside blaming, set aside all of this extraneous stuff, like a speech that may have been delivered on the floor of the House [alluding to Pelosi's partisan spiel]. It's amazing to me that we can be so sophomoric to believe that a politician would not give a political speech.
That prompted Lauer's pointed response.
View video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
The fact that the Black caucus rebelled must mean the GOP go the ACORN earmark scrubbed
Or they are just patriots responding to their constituents’ deep concerns about socializing the financial markets...
take a pick
Is “Brave New World” even read in schools anymore?
Or have they banned it?
I remember reading it as a turning point in my life- I never listened to a politician again without noticing the double-talk.
I go for Gingrich’s proposals:
Gingrich’s four-point plan includes: (1) suspending immediately mark to market provisions (the accounting practice of valuing a financial position in an investment at its current market price) in the hopes of stopping the downward spiral in asset values and eventually replacing it with a three year rolling average; (2) repealing immediately Sarbanes-Oxley, the 2002 accounting law Gingrich described as “an enormous drag on small business”; (3) setting the capital gains tax rate at zero “matching the Chinese and Singapore” (to encourage private capital to flood into the market picking up properties without the taxpayers being at risk); and (4) passing an “extraordinarily powerful” energy bill (”to return $500 billion a year to the American economy that are currently going overseas”).
18 yeas, 21 nays. osamaobama voted absent, undecided, finger in the air, not sure, maybe, perhaps, and said that no matter which way he might vote it would be subject to CHANGE.
My guess is that you are probably correct. When the CRA (ACORN. La Raze, etc) provision was removed, none of the black members would vote for the bill.
La Raza
Wait a minute. I don’t like 0bama any more than the next conservative, but even The One doesn’t have a vote in the House of Representatives.
Dems put lipstick on their a$$es.
He could have asked him "Why are you blaming McCain for the failure of the three Democrat House Members from Arizona to get on board...wouldn't that be your job corralling the Democrat votes?"
Please see Bonus Coverage in NewsBusters item. Lauer did blame Pelosi for her floor speech.
Saw it earlier and had to rub my eyes to be sure I was watching NBC. It was a sight to behold.
At times I think we are living in the Twilight Zone but Lauer pointing out the extreme partisan nature of Pelosi’s speech was a brief break from the alternative universe I believe we live in.
why should that be read? They don't even read Wealth of Nation, Road to Serfdom, Gulag Archipelago.... unless it's to put down capitalism or compare Republicans to Nazis and Stalin....
We should start a great books vanity and post maybe 100 books that should be read by conservatives... Maybe just start out with 10 or 20.
Dems put lipstick on their a$$es........
Sounds like he knows who gored his financial ox.
The need for the nonsense of a bill in the first place SHOWS THE STUNNING FAILURE OF SOCIALISM.
Frederic Bastiat talked about it here...(bold mine)
Now, legal plunder can be committed in an infinite number of ways. Thus we have an infinite number of plans for organizing it: tariffs, protection, benefits, subsidies, encouragements, progressive taxation, public schools, guaranteed jobs, guaranteed profits, minimum wages, a right to relief, a right to the tools of labor, free credit, and so on, and so on. All these plans as a whole — with their common aim of legal plunder — constitute socialism.
But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.
Socialists desire to practice legal plunder, not illegal plunder. Socialists, like all other monopolists, desire to make the law their own weapon. And when once the law is on the side of socialism, how can it be used against socialism?
Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law — which may be an isolated case — is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.
Many 'rat socialist/collectivists voted no for the wrong reasons as noted on this thread. Bastiat talked about them in the 1st quote above.
Stay tuned, details at 11:00.
LMAO!
Well Nancy, that is a big improvement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.