Recommend
2 
 Thumb up
 Hide
67 Posts
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Not a huge Barney Frank fan, but... rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
So Congress voted down the bailout package. Republicans blamed Speaker Pelosi for poisoning the vote with a partisan floor speech that caused 12 or more Republicans who were going to vote for the bailout to vote against it. Multiple Republican leaders (including, apparently, McCain) stepped up in front of the cameras to say that they think the votes were there until Pelosi gave an inappropriately partisan speech which blew it.

Barney Frank replied (I'm paraphrasing), "So 12 Republicans thought that there was a major economic crisis facing our nation and that this bill was a good enough solution to vote for it but then someone insulted them and they decided not to vote in the interest of the country?"

I'm with him. Honest people can disagree over whether a bailout should happen or not and honest people who think a bailout was necessary can disagree over whether this bailout is the right one or whether it should be voted down so something better can be worked out. If, however, a Congressman or Senator concludes that a rescue is necessary and that this bill deserves a vote and then that person decides to vote against because of a F-ing floor speech, that person is guilty of dereliction of duty.

Frank's final offer -- again, paraphrasing -- was beautiful. "Give me the names of these 12 people and I'll talk really really nice to them and maybe then they can go back to thinking about their country instead of their hurt feelings."
9 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
"that's a smith and wesson, and you've had your six"
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:


Frank's final offer -- again, paraphrasing -- was beautiful. "Give me the names of these 12 people and I'll talk really really nice to them and maybe then they can go back to thinking about their country instead of their hurt feelings."


I'm not sure how these people who didn't even see the crash coming are now frickin' experts on the "fact" that this bailout will work. WTF ever.

Maybe they got enough emails from his voters saying they would vote him out if he did pass the bailout. And he figured that was more important than voting the party line.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick B
United States
Sunnyvale
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The video, for those interested:

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis FitzPatrick
United States
Yuma
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Personally, I'd like to see one of those 12 Reps. knock that fat, lying, sack on the deck. Lay him out flat if he really thinks this is "for the country." What a hughjazz load from that sorry whale.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
MWChapel wrote:
I'm not sure how these people who didn't even see the crash coming are now frickin' experts on the "fact" that this bailout will work. WTF ever.

Maybe they got enough emails from his voters saying they would vote him out if he did pass the bailout. And he figured that was more important than voting the party line.


Sure. There are lots of legitimate reasons someone might vote against the bailout. I'm just saying that, "Pelosi made a partisan floor speech" is not a member of that set.

This wasn't a bill to name a park after Bill Clinton or something. Regardless of where you stand, this is big deal, critical national interest stuff, and "she's being political" or "she hurt my feelings" shouldn't enter into one's decision.

(Nor, for that matter, do I think it did. I think this is simply an effort by Republicans to try to shift blame onto a "story" rather than let the numbers do the talking.)
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Boykin
United States
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
For BJ.....
Avatar
mb
Ah, Barney-
Why do you insist on trying to salvage Pelosi's screwups? You should have been the Speaker, not her. He's a MUCH better tactician-politician than she ever was, even if I think he's being disingenuous in this clip.

Oh well.....!

I love how its the 'fault' of the Republicans, upset at Pelosi's speech- which DID lay the blame of the crisis on the Republicans- and NOT at the feet of the defectors like Lloyd Doggett from Texas who voted against this as well.


So riddle me this. I'm suppossed to believe that because the MAJORITY PARTY can't pass its own bill, its somehow the MINORITY party's fault?

Only in Pelosi land.


Darilian
8 
 Thumb up
0.10
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Gearhead wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see one of those 12 Reps. knock that fat, lying, sack on the deck. Lay him out flat if he really thinks this is "for the country." What a hughjazz load from that sorry whale.


You're missing the point. If someone voted "nay" because they think the bailout is a bad idea or the bill is a bad bailout, more power to them. That's voting the interest of the nation. Frank was only talking about the hypothetical 12 Republicans who concluded that the bill was in the nation's interest but then changed their mind because they were offended by a floor speech.

I think Frank's point was that the Republican spin was nonsense and that the 12 don't exist.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Darilian wrote:
More stuff that completely misses the point of the thread.


Do you think that 12 Republicans were going to vote for this bill but changed their minds because of a floor speech?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Read the rulebook, plan for all contingencies, and…read the rulebook again.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Darilian wrote:
So riddle me this. I'm suppossed to believe that because the MAJORITY PARTY can't pass its own bill, its somehow the MINORITY party's fault?


As I heard it, it was a dozen Dems that torpedoed it. From Bloomberg:

"Democrats voted 140 to 95 in favor of the legislation, while just 65 Republicans backed the bill and 133 opposed it."

If the Dems were all on board, it would be a crushing 300 to 133 votes. If all they needed was a simple majority vote, they still could have pulled it off without any Republican help. If Pelosi couldn't ensure passage of the bill with votes from her own party, she certainly had no reason to expect it from the opposition.

But what's the reaction from the Dems?: Republicans are in the minority. And even though 40% of all House Democrats deserted their leader, we're going to put the blame on a dozen nameless Republicans who weren't on our side to begin with.

Oh, and get this: "Emergency Bill," right? Country's falling apart and we need the votes TODAY, right? House and Senate leaders BOTH pushing this oh-so-necessary measure to get done TODAY, right?

...So the Senate wasn't going to vote on it till THURSDAY! Oh, my, the country's falling apart. Hurry and get that bill that you MIGHT pass TODAY to the other side of the building THURSDAY.

"Swift-acting" Senators needed to read the reaction to the passage from constituents for TWO DAYS before they could REALLY DECIDE whether all this was an "emergency" not. That's part of the reason why the House axed it: they were being forced to act now while the Senators judged the fallout for two days before casting THEIR votes!
7 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Becker
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Who Killed Bambi? I am not taking any sides, but here is the vote for H R 3997 (QUESTION: On Concurring in Senate Amendment With An Amendment) RECORDED 29-Sep-2008 2:07 PM

Ayes Noes NV
Democratic 140 95
Republican 65 133 1
TOTALS 205 228 1
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rob Herman
United States
Cleveland
Ohio
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I never thought I would say this, but I'm very happy that the House Republicans decided to stick with their principles and sink this bill. I'm also proud of my representative, Dennis Kucinich, and the other Democrats who voted no.

I'm still not convinced that this whole thing is more of an inconvenience than a crisis. This all feels too fast, too much like a used-car-salesman rush. Even if it is a crisis, I'm sure that I don't want the person writing the checks to be the person who was too incompetent to see it coming six weeks ago.

If there has to be a next iteration of the bill, maybe with a couple days to write it it can include some serious regulation, some serious oversight, and some serious attempts to turn it into a loan rather than a gift.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Chad_Ellis wrote:
You're missing the point. If someone voted "nay" because they think the bailout is a bad idea or the bill is a bad bailout, more power to them. That's voting the interest of the nation. Frank was only talking about the hypothetical 12 Republicans who concluded that the bill was in the nation's interest but then changed their mind because they were offended by a floor speech.

I think Frank's point was that the Republican spin was nonsense and that the 12 don't exist.


They voted "nay" because they hated the damned thing but were going to vote for it because their leadership told them it was good for the country, would be good for the party, and the party would help them make up any damage it did at home (I'm guessing, but I bet I'm right).

Then that bomb goes off in the House chamber and there's no more political cover for voting for it if a democratic challenger decides to use it against you. Vote changes.

It was a dumb, dumb speech to give.
5 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BradyLS wrote:
If the Dems were all on board, it would be a crushing 300 to 133 votes. If all they needed was a simple majority vote, they still could have pulled it off without any Republican help. If Pelosi couldn't ensure passage of the bill with votes from her own party, she certainly had no reason to expect it from the opposition.


There was absolutely no way that spending $700 billion in a private bailout would be passed by a single party unless that party no longer wanted to have so many seats in the House.

This either got bipartisan support or it died.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rick B
United States
Sunnyvale
CA
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BradyLS wrote:
As I heard it, it was a dozen Dems that torpedoed it. From Bloomberg:

"Democrats voted 140 to 95 in favor of the legislation, while just 65 Republicans backed the bill and 133 opposed it."


Here's how I understand it. The plan wouldn't have even come to a vote as written if both sides didn't think they had the votes. Democratic leadership said they have X number of votes, and Republican leadership said they have Y number of votes. It came to the floor, and the Republicans only got Y-12 votes, so it was wasted time.

I don't particularly like the bailout myself, but in this case, I see this as the Republicans failing to deliver the votes, not the Democrats.

edit to take out "we" and "they." Nothing shows partisanship like those pronouns.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Read the rulebook, plan for all contingencies, and…read the rulebook again.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I hate this whole bailout deal, too. But if Dems are going to play the partisan blame game, they look like complete fools when they can't get their own side to vote for it.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I don't have the direct quote, but I believe it was Rep. Cantor that summed it up best:

"A bipartisan process means it's only as good as the reaction to the last bomb to be thrown into the room."

It was at the end of the press conference he gave with Boehner.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Read the rulebook, plan for all contingencies, and…read the rulebook again.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Here's how I understand it. The plan wouldn't have even come to a vote as written if both sides didn't think they had the votes. Democratic leadership said they have X number of votes, and Republican leadership said they have Y number of votes. It came to the floor, and the Republicans only got Y-12 votes, so it was wasted time.

I don't particularly like the bailout myself, but in this case, I see this as the Republicans failing to deliver the votes, not the Democrats.


I don't like the bailout, either. But if the Dems are in the majority, it was incumbent on them to _insure_ passage. Getting just enough to call a vote and then spitting in the face of your opposition allies before the vote is no way to insure passage. The Democrats planned poorly and they're the fools in my opinion.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bela's dead and Vampira won't talk
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
BradyLS wrote:

Oh, and get this: "Emergency Bill," right? Country's falling apart and we need the votes TODAY, right? House and Senate leaders BOTH pushing this oh-so-necessary measure to get done TODAY, right?

...So the Senate wasn't going to vote on it till THURSDAY! Oh, my, the country's falling apart. Hurry and get that bill that you MIGHT pass TODAY to the other side of the building THURSDAY.

"Swift-acting" Senators needed to read the reaction to the passage from constituents for TWO DAYS before they could REALLY DECIDE whether all this was an "emergency" not. That's part of the reason why the House axed it: they were being forced to act now while the Senators judged the fallout for two days before casting THEIR votes!


By not passing the vote today, Americans just lost $1.1 TRILLION instead of potentially--in a deal that may have turned a profit--losing $750 billion.

We will lose more tomorrow.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
le_cygne wrote:
By not passing the vote today, Americans just lost $1.1 TRILLION instead of potentially--in a deal that may have turned a profit--losing $750 billion.

We will lose more tomorrow.


I'm unconvinced. Citigroup just bought Wachovia. How many more banks are out there that might fail?

The Dow performance has all of the markings of a panic. But I haven't heard of a bank that regulators had to seize outside of IndyMac.

The problem I see is - we're responding to a potential crisis proactively. But the rhetoric is feeding the crisis before it actually happens.

Personally, the numbers don't make sense to me. Not every sub-prime mortgage is bad. And they represent something like 10% of all mortgages out there if I'm remembering my statistics right. That's $1.2 trillion in debt.

This is really bad enough that we're going to pony up almost 60% of the total value of 'em? Something in that math doesn't make sense.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Bela's dead and Vampira won't talk
United States
Madison
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Citigroup "bought" WB for $1 a share, and will have to raise capital to offset their awful balance sheet. The FDIC backed the deal. The FDIC meaning us. Was it a good deal for Citi? Maybe. (If so, then the government could be buying that same debt and possibly profiting on it.)

What other banks could fail? Any of them except for the biggest, which the government will need to step in to protect at all costs (JP Morgan, Bank of America, Citi, and probably a few others, like maybe Goldman, Wells Fargo or USBank).

Wachovia is gone. WaMu is gone. Lehman's gone. Bear's gone. Goldman and Morgan Stanley have been retooled into new companies. Banks are failing every day. Four European banks (Hypo, Fortis, B&B, Glitnir) failed ahem, "were rescued", today.

Meanwhile, some houses are selling below raw replacement costs, and this problem is compounded as banks are forced to liquidate those assets at even worse prices. Naturally, nobody can afford to buy those assets because they can't get credit.

Our whole economy is built on the notion of credit. There IS NO CREDIT right now. Credit markets have collapsed. Not forever and ever, but they have already collapsed in the short term, and that affects everything.

Student loans. Mortgages. IRAs. 401Ks. Paying your employees. Keeping your job.
1 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tony Allen
United States
Grand Prairie
Texas
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
All the Democrats needed was for twelve of their OWN party to go with the bailout for it to succeed, and when that doesn't happen they blame the Republicans!?

Typical Democrap!
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
nothing but static
New Zealand
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
le_cygne wrote:

Our whole economy is built on the notion of credit. There IS NO CREDIT right now. Credit markets have collapsed. Not forever and ever, but they have already collapsed in the short term, and that affects everything.


The chinese might have some.

I hear there is a bit of money in dubai as well.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ken
United States
Crystal Lake
Illinois
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tada wrote:
All the Democrats needed was for twelve of their OWN party to go with the bailout for it to succeed, and when that doesn't happen they blame the Republicans!?

Typical Democrap!


Hogwash. Drop this heap o' brown stuff in a time machine, take it to 2006 and have Dennis Hastert give that speech and the exact same thing happens. In fact, Hastert probably would have had a hard time not having the vote look exactly as it did today.

Pelosi's speech was dumb, but there was no way the Democrats were going to come up with the votes on their own. No way.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Becker
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In case you'd like to share your personal gains and losses this year, I've create a poll at http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/344179.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Ellis
United States
Brookline
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It isn't the sub-prime loans exclusively, but the derivatives tied to them as well.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.