Of course you leave off the context.
Bush wanted TARP passed because there was a genuine belief that Wall Street would implode without it. The Dems didn’t want to pass it so it wouldn’t help Bush.
“First we’ll go back to October 1, 2008. That morning, Governor Perry released a letter, co-signed by Democratic Governor Joe Manchin, urging D.C. lawmakers “to leave partisanship at the door” and “pass an economic recovery package.”
The Perry-Manchin letter came three days after TARP failed to pass the House by a vote of 228-205. Moments after the vote, an exasperated House Minority Leader John Boehner spoke to reporters. He blamed the failed vote on Speaker Nancy Pelosi highly partisan speech, delivered just before the roll call. Boehner said the speech “poisoned [the Republican] conference” and “caused a number of members that we thought we could get, to go south.”
The Bush Administration and the media predicted financial ruin if the House Republicans and Democrats failed to work out their issues with the bill.
Three days later, The Senate scheduled a vote on TARP. That morning, riding to the bi-partisan rescue, came Perry and Manchin. “There is a time for partisanship and there is a time for getting things done,” lectured the two governors.
Media outlets, including the Associated Press, hailed the letter as a bi-partisan endorsement of TARP. The Fort Worth Star Telegram, in Perry’s back yard, even ran the headline, “Perry joins with Democrat to push for bailout.”
Perry has since denied he wanted the bailout to pass, but it’s not difficult to see why media and politicians alike saw the Perry-Manchin letter as pro-TARP. The governors stressed bi-partisanship just days after partisan fighting derailed the first vote in the House, the letter was sent on the day of the Senate vote, and most obvious was the fact that Congress was not meaningfully considering any other proposals.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/09/the_tarp_test.html
All you have to do is read the date, the letter head and the contents of the letter to laugh about the “exposure” of this awful offense of the Agriculture Commissioner from Texas.
Poor Palin pups have nowhere else to go.
Speaking of dogs, there’s a real nice comment about Perry and dogs in the article.
To: Diogenesis .... Of course you leave off the context. "Context" is sooo 19th Century, Clairity.
Back in the days of the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, each candidate spoke for a total of 90 minutes. Context was explained and positions were explained.
Today, it is all about knee-jerk red meat and Sound Bites in 30 Seconds:
"Where's the beef?"
"TARP"
"Fence = Good. No Fence = Bad"
"He said heartless!"
You know who would lose this Sound Bites in 30 Seconds contest?
The State of Israel.
Israel, like Perry, knows that wasting resources on a Fence in the middle of the desert is rather stupid. ..... And the Israelis are not even giving away Rio Grande riverfront property if they build a Fence in the Negev Desert.
