So Disgusted With Them All.

[Randy Reed 0]

Unbelievable! The Senate has 'sweetend' the bill to includethe following provisions: New tax breaks in Bailout billFilm and Television Productions (Up to $15,000,000.00; Sec. 502) Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503) 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)Tax break "extenders" in the bailout billVirgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308) American Samoa (Sec. 309) Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310) Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311) Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312) Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315) Railroads (Sec. 316) Auto Racing Tracks (317) District of Columbia (Sec. 322) Wool Research (Sec. 325) Those mother****ers...couldn't keep their hands out of a $700,000,000,000.00 cookie jar.Yes, both Senators Obama and McCain voted 'aye'.The 'Maverick' against earmarks and pork barrel spending defended his vote by saying there were "plenty of other bills that I fought against". He then tried to spin responsibility to the president to veto the bill b/c of the outrageous additions...wtf?

[Loismustdie 0]

Yeah, I am pissed all around about this. That being said, there is a reason for that 9% approval rating. They suck as bad as any have ever sucked since the time we had the ability to measure suck. Tha's bad.

[vbnautilus 48]

“I will take an ink pen and I will veto every pork barrel earmark spending bill that comes across my desk. You will know their names and I will make them famous” -mccain...but until then I will continue to vote for bills that have earmarks. I think this is why as a lawmaker don't make such strong unbending statements for the sake of drama; you have to always leave yourself open to compromise and negotiation.

[copernicus 0]

Yeah, I am pissed all around about this. That being said, there is a reason for that 9% approval rating.They suck as bad as any have ever sucked since the time we had the ability to measure suck.Tha's bad. That sucks.

[Nimue1995 1]

Yeah, I am pissed all around about this. That being said, there is a reason for that 9% approval rating. They suck as bad as any have ever sucked since the time we had the ability to measure suck. Tha's bad.

Surprisingly you and I agree LMD. I'm so pissed off at our senior senator for voting yea that I may just be voting for "Eyebrows" Kelleher http://bobkelleher2008.com/ this year. At least John Tester had some balls to vote no.

[copernicus 0]

"I will take an ink pen and I will veto every pork barrel earmark spending bill that comes across my desk. You will know their names and I will make them famous" -mccain...but until then I will continue to vote for bills that have earmarks. I think this is why as a lawmaker don't make such strong unbending statements for the sake of drama; you have to always leave yourself open to compromise and negotiation.

We'll see how he handles this in the next debate, he will definitely have to respond to it.

[Randy Reed 0]

http://themountainsage.wordpress.com/2008/...-tax-extenders/I hope the link works. In the article is a link to whole bill.And this isn't just a McCain thing. They all need to answer to this crap.,

[copernicus 0]

http://themountainsage.wordpress.com/2008/...-tax-extenders/I hope the link works. In the article is a link to whole bill.And this isn't just a McCain thing. They all need to answer to this crap.,

Is this why the markets arent reacting more favorably?

[Sal Paradise 57]

does anyone have a link or something that shows how each senator voted?

[KONGOS 0]

[hblask 1]

does anyone have a link or something that shows how each senator voted?

Usually thomas.loc.gov would make this easy, but the links seems screwed up. It keeps pointing to some bill by Dead Senator Paul Wellstone, who obviously didn't introduce this bill today.

[Randy Reed 0]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14214.htmlhttp://trustbutverify.wordpress.com/2008/1...w-bailout-bill/Some more links about this.

[Sal Paradise 57]

Usually thomas.loc.gov would make this easy, but the links seems screwed up. It keeps pointing to some bill by Dead Senator Paul Wellstone, who obviously didn't introduce this bill today.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll...&vote=00213maybe that was the name of one of the earmarks? either way, this looks like the correct date and the correct vote count, so I'd imagine that its it. I will look more closely.

[hblask 1]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14214.html" target="_blank"

McCain's position on earmarks here makes no sense. As a Senator, he can vote for them if the bill is important, but as President he would veto it? That's silly. He's the R's presidential candidate. If he hated earmarks, he could've gone out in public and said "Look, I'd like to pass this bill, but the Democrats put the following earmarks in it....". Instead, he's just part of the problem.

[Randy Reed 0]

McCain's position on earmarks here makes no sense. As a Senator, he can vote for them if the bill is important, but as President he would veto it? That's silly. He's the R's presidential candidate. If he hated earmarks, he could've gone out in public and said "Look, I'd like to pass this bill, but the Democrats put the following earmarks in it....". Instead, he's just part of the problem.

Hey, I'm not arguing the logic there. Obama is behind this as well. I want to know who in the hell demanded to add them before they would vote for it? This is further evidence of the need for a line item veto.Bailout votes bought and paid by the wool industry.Yeah right. The wool over our eyes.

[AngloBoy 0]

LOL, I love you guys. It's true Socialism.WE've had 10 years of it here in England, and look at our Economy. You guys are gonna vote in the Black Blair, and then us Europeans will swoop in and buy up all your businesses when your economy tanks even more.It's a sign of things to come.

[hblask 1]

LOL, I love you guys. It's true Socialism.WE've had 10 years of it here in England, and look at our Economy. You guys are gonna vote in the Black Blair, and then us Europeans will swoop in and buy up all your businesses when your economy tanks even more.It's a sign of things to come.

<----- cries a littlesigh<----- cries some more

[colonel Feathers 5]

[url

[hblask 1]

[Nimue1995 1]

For all of congress' posturing about trying to help out small business, it's my belief that at the end of all this, we'll see a huge concentration of wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer entities. The protections for small business and the promotion by all these banks to borrow money to finance your business and the availability of easy credit up to now, spells the death knell of many small businesses. And those businesses will be gobbled up by larger entities until we're owned by a handful of companies. The lack of competition that this situation will produce will make things more expensive,not less. And I fear that this bailout will only serve to pull the disparate parts of the mortgage loan business into the hands of fewer and fewer corporations. Plus it adds that much more to our government's debt already staggering under the deficit spending that this government has been so fond of. So basically this is a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. And in the end, I think it will be healthier for our economy if we don't.

[El Guapo 8]

and fun for everyone!

[Randy Reed 0]

GODDAMMITT!!!!HAHAHAHA

[AngloBoy 0]

For all of congress' posturing about trying to help out small business, it's my belief that at the end of all this, we'll see a huge concentration of wealth in the hands of fewer and fewer entities. The protections for small business and the promotion by all these banks to borrow money to finance your business and the availability of easy credit up to now, spells the death knell of many small businesses. And those businesses will be gobbled up by larger entities until we're owned by a handful of companies. The lack of competition that this situation will produce will make things more expensive,not less. And I fear that this bailout will only serve to pull the disparate parts of the mortgage loan business into the hands of fewer and fewer corporations. Plus it adds that much more to our government's debt already staggering under the deficit spending that this government has been so fond of. So basically this is a damned if you do and damned if you don't scenario. And in the end, I think it will be healthier for our economy if we don't.

Absolutely right