Senate GOP SCUM vote to PROTECT Wall Street 3 Times so far

The GOP is showing it's true colors and the Democrats are going to make them vote for Wall Street to prove they don't care about the middle class and like to bailout their Wall Street buddies who stole our money.

Senate Majority Leader Harry (D-Nev.) on Wednesday upped the pressure on Republicans who are blocking debate on Wall Street reform from going forward. Shortly before the third vote this week to break a filibuster, Reid charged that it was "anti-American" to attempt to alter the bill through closed-door negotiations rather than hashing it out on the Senate floor.

"All the talk by Republicans about wanting to do something about this bill before it gets on the floor is really anti-Senate, anti-American," Reid said. "It appears they're more concerned about taking care of the fat cats on Wall Street."

The GOP beat back the attempt to break the filibuster 56-42, with Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) voting with the Republicans for the third straight time. Dick Durbin (Ill.), the no. 2 Democrat in the Senate, told reporters to prepare for a long evening Wednesday as Democrats prepare to force repeated votes into the night.

"Americans are counting on us to get results, so we are going to do our jobs and keep the Senate open all night - we will vote again and again, until Republicans stop protecting Wall Street and join us in moving forward to an open, public debate about how to hold Wall Street accountable," said Reid spokesman Jim Manley.

"We're rolling out the cots," a senior Democratic leadership aide added, noting that the sergeant at arms will be instructed to require the presence of senators on the floor for "live quorum calls." Democrats will also continuously ask for unanimous consent to move to debate on the Wall Street bill, forcing the GOP to object at all hours of the night.

I have a whole new respect for Senator Levin after yesterday's grilling about the "shitty deals" Goldman was pushing. :jointsmile: I'm sure its all a show, nothing will really happen, we all know who owns the congress, but still pretty good entertainment. :pimp:

So now we need the Feds to be a consumer reviewer? The same Fed that REFUSED to regulate sub-prime mortgages, credit card abuses, reckless commercial real-estate speculation and just about every kind of arcane, non-transparent and speculative banking activity, that has wreaked havoc on the American economy over the last 10 years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

So now we need the Feds to be a consumer reviewer? The same Fed that REFUSED to regulate sub-prime mortgages, credit card abuses, reckless commercial real-estate speculation and just about every kind of arcane, non-transparent and speculative banking activity, that has wreaked havoc on the American economy over the last 10 years?

---

Should replies to this post be directed at you or Nomi Prins @ AlterNet.org?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boaz

I have a whole new respect for Senator Levin after yesterday's grilling about the "shitty deals" Goldman was pushing. :jointsmile: I'm sure its all a show, nothing will really happen, we all know who owns the congress, but still pretty good entertainment. :pimp:

---

All Hail the Corporate Overlords! I got a kick out of the CEO stuttering as he was being berated by politicians questioning him, caught a few seconds of that flipping through the channels yesterday

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

So now we need the Feds to be a consumer reviewer? The same Fed that REFUSED to regulate sub-prime mortgages, credit card abuses, reckless commercial real-estate speculation and just about every kind of arcane, non-transparent and speculative banking activity, that has wreaked havoc on the American economy over the last 10 years?

---

So let me get this straight, your argueing that a lack of regulations caused the economic meltdown THEREFORE we DONT need more regulation?

Or do you contend that those good Republicans have been trying to regulate the banking industry for years but the evil Democrats have been blocking any attempt to requlate them?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElGordoSupremo

So let me get this straight, your argueing that a lack of regulations caused the economic meltdown THEREFORE we DONT need more regulation?

Or do you contend that those good Republicans have been trying to regulate the banking industry for years but the evil Democrats have been blocking any attempt to requlate them?

---

If you really want to know the thinking behind the argument presented I suggest you either ask the original writer or read the article in it's entirety..:thumbsup:

I thought i did ask him, thats why i used the whole quotes thingy. I was confused about the apparent contradiction in Islandborn's post.

And i did read the article, eastbaygordos post was excellent. If there was a link i missed it.

If ive violated some forum ettiquete I apologize :) never meant to cause hard feelings im new to all this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElGordoSupremo

I thought i did ask him, thats why i used the whole quotes thingy. I was confused about the apparent contradiction in Islandborn's post.

And i did read the article, eastbaygordos post was excellent. If there was a link i missed it.

If ive violated some forum ettiquete I apologize :) never meant to cause hard feelings im new to all this

---

heh, you misunderstand no biggie. The post you quoted was actually 100% plagiarized from this article Why Every Aspect of Dems' Handling of Wall St. Overhaul Seems Headed for Disaster | News & Politics | AlterNet
I wasn't getting on you or anything bro, continue :D

Actually, it's the SCUMBAG liberals pushing their socialists agenda...again. Sure love the adjectives the dems are using to describe reasonable educated people with a fairly comprehensive understanding of the decipet vomited as fact by the left. But not all of us are sheep following in the Mao tradition.

Obama Now Pushing Sneaky Wall Street Bailout - HUMAN EVENTS

Talk about taking another giant leap in the wrong direction.

Fresh off his successful (for now) effort to ram through an unpopular healthcare â??reformâ?� law, President Barack Obama is now fighting for legislation on Capitol Hill that would set up a permanent fund to bail out companies in the financial sector.

Of course, thatâ??s not how his team is spinning things. On the White House Blog, Jen Psaki claims that â??under the Senate bill, the taxpayers will never be asked to foot the bill for Wall Streetâ??s irresponsibility.â?� But thatâ??s simply not true.
â??If you liked the bailouts in 2008, youâ??ll love the Dodd bill,â?� Sen. David Vitter (R.-La.) tells HUMAN EVENTS. â??Congressional Democrats and the Obama Administration want to create a permanent bailout mechanism all while spouting their rhetoric of getting tough on Wall Street, but if you look at who is already lining up to support their â??reformâ?? measure itâ??s a whoâ??s who of the big banks that have already received the taxpayer bailout the first time.â?�

There are two specific problems with the Senate approach to â??reform.â?�

First, this legislation would create a new $50-billion bailout slush fund controlled by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Very big banks and other â??eligible financial companiesâ?� would be taxed by the FDIC to build up this fund. As with any tax, though, itâ??s consumers--you and meâ??who would eventually pay this levy.

The Obama Administration this weekend requested that the $50 billion pre-funded bailout money be removed from the bill. But according to Foxnews.com, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner advocated last year that any bailout funding should be addressed post bailout through a tax on big Wall Street firms. If Senate Democrats only take out the $50 billion slush fund and leave the bailout authority intact, then the taxpayers will still be on the hook for any future bailouts.

Another problem with this bill is that it would bail out the creditors of companies and wouldnâ??t require any creditor to take a loss after a company starts to fail. If the bailout slush fund is tapped, the FDIC would have the power to reimburse creditors. That could allow the FDIC to pay creditors more than they invested (pursuant to Section 210 of the Dodd bill).

So, besides the TARP bailout funds we alll are going to pay for till we die, which will come soon because we won't be able to afford to survive a cold on Osbamacare, we are going to tax the banks to fill a 50 billion dollar slush fund for failing banks. Then, that fund (which are now tax dollars owned by the people of the United States) will be used to bail-out mismanaged banks and lending houses? How about we let them fail and we'll use the money for defense or border security? Anyone care to bet that the "Bank of Mismanaged Unions" will get the first $50 billion.

The moderates and those on the right just saved your ass. Again.

:S2::S2::S2: "Reid charged that it was "anti-American" to attempt to alter the bill through closed-door negotiations rather than hashing it out on the Senate floor."

Yeah, because the Dems didn't use closed-door negotiations and shit to push Healthcare through, right?

Both parties can suck it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaggedEdge

Both parties can suck it!

---

:jointsmile: no doubt. I think we are real close to FINALLY getting third parties on the ballots here in Oklahoma! :smokin: when that happens I will never vote dem or repub again. :cool:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JaggedEdge

:S2::S2::S2: "Reid charged that it was "anti-American" to attempt to alter the bill through closed-door negotiations rather than hashing it out on the Senate floor."

Yeah, because the Dems didn't use closed-door negotiations and shit to push Healthcare through, right?

Both parties can suck it!

---

haha exactly, I wonder if the bipartisan politicians and their unquestioning supporters can hear themselves talk :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedLocks

heh, you misunderstand no biggie. The post you quoted was actually 100% plagiarized from this article Why Every Aspect of Dems' Handling of Wall St. Overhaul Seems Headed for Disaster | News & Politics | AlterNet
I wasn't getting on you or anything bro, continue :D

---

Sad...


:S2::S2::S2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty Trichome

Actually, it's the SCUMBAG liberals pushing their socialists agenda...again. Sure love the adjectives the dems are using

---

Really? What adjective did I use to piss you off so much?

From what i read in that article Obama wants the banks to pay for their own bailout if they want want one in the future instead of you and me paying for it. Also if my company is owed money by one of these failing banks the FDIC will possibly pay this out of this fund, that the failed bank contributed into Creditors always get consideration in the eyes of the court.

When I read more I find out that it will break up these 'too big to fail' companies. And that maybe selling something that is worth absolutly nothing maybe a bad thing.

Oh and btw you do know that most of the Tarp funds have been paid back dont you? Theres a few notable exceptions, but most have paid back at least 100%. Including General Motors. Looks like another good decision.



In regards to another post;
Closed door negotiations? I assume your refering to the health care bill. They held town hall meetings in every dumb fuck little county in AZ so I can imagine what they held in places that really mattered. When has ANY administration EVER done anything like that before? And from the other side all i saw on the news was a bunch of brownshirts shouting so no one could hear anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElGordoSupremo

Really? What adjective did I use to piss you off so much?

---

Oh IDK...perhaps the title of the thread had something to do with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElGordoSupremo

From what i read in that article Obama wants the banks to pay for their own bailout if they want want one in the future instead of you and me paying for it. Also if my company is owed money by one of these failing banks the FDIC will possibly pay this out of this fund, that the failed bank contributed into Creditors always get consideration in the eyes of the court.

---

From what I understand it is a required tax to be put in a federally managed fund. As with Social Security, are they going to put it in a "lock Box" or are they going to leverage ( Leverage (finance) - Wikipedia ) against it and bankrupt yet another business too big to fail? Who determines which bank get's to dip into the funds, and at which point? (just before elections perhaps...?) Are there repayment requirements, or is it a "bailout" fund? Once the $50 billion is in the fund, are the banks going to have to keep adding to it, or will the government then suspend taxes till necessary again? It's not that I don't trust thes government, but I in no way trust this administration and the bullshit Chicago dealmaking and social justice rhetoric.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElGordoSupremo

When I read more I find out that it will break up these 'too big to fail' companies. And that maybe selling something that is worth absolutly nothing maybe a bad thing.

---

You let them fall on their collective swords. The larger ones will be broken-up into individual or smaller companies through the bankruptcy restructuring process, the mismanaged portions will face liquidation. They are the ones that mismanaged the company. But you want to loan them money to do it again?

You can beat a dead horse with money, but it still won't pull it's weight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElGordoSupremo

Oh and btw you do know that most of the Tarp funds have been paid back dont you? Theres a few notable exceptions, but most have paid back at least 100%. Including General Motors. Looks like another good decision.

---

From a N.Y. Times article dated April 30, 2010:

...Truth seekers the nation over, therefore, are indebted to Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, who in recent days uncovered what he called a government-enabled â??TARP money shuffle.â?� It relates to General Motors, which on April 21 paid the balance of its $6.7 billion loan under the Troubled Asset Relief Program.

G.M. trumpeted its escape from the program as evidence that it had turned the corner in its operations. â??G.M. is able to repay the taxpayers in full, with interest, ahead of schedule, because more customers are buying vehicles like the Chevrolet Malibu and Buick LaCrosse,â?� boasted Edward E. Whitacre Jr., its chief executive.

G.M. also crowed about its loan repayment in a national television ad and the United States Treasury also marked the moment with a press release: â??We are encouraged that G.M. has repaid its debt well ahead of schedule and confident that the company is on a strong path to viability,â?� said Timothy F. Geithner, the Treasury secretary.

Taxpayers are naturally eager for news about bailout repayments. But what neither G.M. nor the Treasury disclosed was that the company simply used other funds held by the Treasury to pay off its original loan.

Did GM Repay TARP Bailout?

They used another TARP account to pay thier original debt. Would you call that paid-back? Wish my finances worked that way. How does it feel being lied to by the obama administration and the companies it runs? I wonder how those cars are really selling. :wtf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedLocks

heh, you misunderstand no biggie. The post you quoted was actually 100% plagiarized from this article Why Every Aspect of Dems' Handling of Wall St. Overhaul Seems Headed for Disaster | News & Politics | AlterNet
I wasn't getting on you or anything bro, continue :D

---

huh? Plagarized? Now thats rich. Sorry dude, this isnt a thesis statement. Nie try though.

Plagerized? Get the f--k outta heya. (new york accent)

did you make that shit up as you went along? What the hell was that supposed site you are quoted as saying I plagerized? Wierd shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

huh? Plagarized? Now thats rich. Sorry dude, this isnt a thesis statement. Nie try though.

Plagerized? Get the f--k outta heya. (new york accent)

---

ok sorry,forgot you capitalized a word or two after you copy pasted your entire post, and turned "decade" into "10 years" lol..:thumbsup:

Huh? Copy and pasted what exactly? That two line sentence? Laughable. Plagerize......funny stuff. What was the point of that.....very strange dude.

Better go and give me a big negative on my reputation. There is no room for plagerism in this world.

The point of my post is, try having your own thoughts.. dude.. It is a "discussion" forum, not a "regurgitate other people's writing, or other people's political commentary" forum. I see crap like this on this forum time after time after time, this is just an extreme case worth pointing out.

Quote:

---

Dodd now wants to house the new consumer regulator at the Fed.That's right, the same Fed that refused to regulate subprime mortgages, credit card abuses, reckless commercial real estate speculation and just about every kind of arcane, non-transparent and speculative banking activity, that has wreaked havoc on the American economy over the past decade.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

So now we need the Feds to be a consumer reviewer? The same Fed that REFUSED to regulate sub-prime mortgages, credit card abuses, reckless commercial real-estate speculation and just about every kind of arcane, non-transparent and speculative banking activity, that has wreaked havoc on the American economy over the last 10 years?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

Better go and give me a big negative on my reputation. There is no room for plagerism in this world.

---

:jumphappy:

We used the same words........where these funny plagerism charges you have created come from who knows. Oh dear god......i used someones sentence while writing between classes after surfing the net......ahhhhh.....im busted. And probably a racist in some way.:pimp:

lol now that is ur writing style!:woohoo:

Fell free to answer ElGordoSupremo's question directed at you.. :woohoo:

PLEASE tell me ur refering to easysupremo's comment about TARP funds.......cause GM is FULL OF SHIT and about to have some legal trouble for falsely claiming they paid back their loans.....with MORE TARP MONEY.....what a joke.

General Motors Deceptive Advertising Challenged by Watchdog Group in FTC Filing | CEI

heres another link
GM Pays Back TARP Loans With...TARP Loans! - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

oops....have I plagerized something? Get real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

PLEASE tell me ur refering to easysupremo's comment about TARP funds.......cause GM is FULL OF SHIT and about to have some legal trouble for falsely claiming they paid back their loans.....with MORE TARP MONEY.....what a joke.

General Motors Deceptive Advertising Challenged by Watchdog Group in FTC Filing | CEI

heres another link
GM Pays Back TARP Loans With...TARP Loans! - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

oops....have I plagerized something? Get real.

---

Grow up, posting links is not the same as posting the words of someone else and arguing it is your own.

and no he directly asked a question directed at you, quoted your text and everything........

Plagerism........that was some funny shit locks. I love you dude. Always good to start my day with a smug chuckle. Anyway......I have to go copy some Pakistani kids homework now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

Plagerism........that was some funny shit locks. I love you dude. Always good to start my day with a smug chuckle. Anyway......I have to go copy some Pakistani kids homework now.

---

you go get dem skool lerninz thur hoss!

Sorry you dont like how I do it but thats to bad. There is no format to follow and people can choose to post and write however they want and have time to do.

Talk about picky....one of those kinda kids huh. Sorry buddy, musta been rough. It is funny that your only bitch is that you dont like how I post....so I must be a child or a cheat or dumb......pretty typical lefty.

ya see.....there it is......somehow anyone with different opinions who posts stuff you disagree with has to be dumb......typical lefty. Email a mod and cry to them about it or up ur meds. Cause Imma post however I want and whatever I want. I still love you though.

regardless of who obstructs or vetoes, we need reform in that area particularly badly. and we need it to come from BOTH sides of the aisle if we want it to be meaningful, well thought out and long lasting.


by the way, i'm new here.... HI!:dance:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

Sorry you dont like how I do it but thats to bad. There is no format to follow and people can choose to post and write however they want and have time to do.

Talk about picky....one of those kinda kids huh. Sorry buddy, musta been rough. It is funny that your only bitch is that you dont like how I post....so I must be a child or a cheat or dumb......pretty typical lefty.

---

Typical rightwing? Assumes because our views differ I must without a doubt be a part of the American Shytstem as a "lefty". Believe it or not people are capable of making observations of things and people, it doesn't all boil down to rhetoric (in everyone's world), if someone calls you out as "a child or a cheat or dumb" they just might be making observations rather than saying what the media or their life coaches told them to say. Go ahead continue to pass other peoples words and thoughts off as your own, surely it will bear fruit of some kind...

By the way, you still haven't answered the question that was asked of you,stop being mad, and join in the discussion!

according to Greespan and multiple eonomics folks....the housing crisis kicked all this off. Those sub-primes were pushed by clinton and his cronies at Acorn...that was almost investigated in 2006 but was shot down by Barney Franks sissy ass & chris dodd. Sure......we need some regulations but the Feds should keep their greedy incompetant hands out as much as possible. The financial overhaul bills were crap.

Their bill was the biggest intrusion into privacy in generations. In addition to the shit list of of bad policies in the DODD bill, specifically pages 1039-1040 which extended the Govt.s reach into almosy everyones deposit account. No thanks......GOVERNMENT is the problem....never, ever the solution. We'll see what happens when the Dems lose both majorities in November, we can all pop bottles.

Did that make ya feel better locks? I sure hope so buddy.:wtf:


Oh.....their bill also makes it so every bank branch and telller who accepts deposits must keep a record of every dollar amount of every customer. THEN, whats worse, these banks will then HAVE to submit these records to some worthless new Govt. agency called CFPA (consumer financial protection agency). This group, according to Dodds law, can then use this info for ANY PURPOSE permitted by law under CFPA rules......WHICH THE CFPA CREATES THESE RULES.

So basically locks, you favor banks SNOOPING on its customers most personal information and giving that info to another govt. entity to use as THEY see fit????????????????

Fuck that. Big Government solutions create bigger problems everytime......history couldnt be any clearer.

Hope I didnt plagerize anything. Check it for me locks.....i dont have the time.

Capitalism working at its best. The US will look like Greece soon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

Did that make ya feel better locks? I sure hope so buddy.:wtf:

---

it ah deh rated hundred twenty percent bredbah, and no no pop up link on my curser

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedLocks

it ah deh rated hundred twenty percent bredbah, and no no pop up link on my curser

---

happy Victory Day :rastasmoke: an cinco de mayo all! :joint1:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Islandborn

...We'll see what happens when the Dems lose both majorities in November, we can all pop bottles.
...

---

well . . I gotta tell you the last time we had a repub congress and dem pres they spent the first year trying to create a new federal law to make the punishment death for getting caught with 2 oz. of weed. true story. :) sure hope we don't have to relive that nightmare.

but, I do agree with you, I will be glad to see a repub congress for the simple fact that having one party at the exec branch and the other party owning the legislative branch is what I like to refer to as a classic clusterfuck, :rastasmoke: NOTHING will get done in DC and that is blessing in and of itself. :jointsmile:

I would really like to see some independents win this year. :smokin: the soil has gotta be fertile for them this year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedLocks

it ah deh rated hundred twenty percent bredbah, and no no pop up link on my curser

---

I love it......AGAIN with the usual "uneducated" comments.....like clockwork redlocks...

Not that it matters cause I openly admit to cheating and plagerizing my entire way through college (thanks again Hasan)....but I did get a bachelors from the Univ. of DePaul in Chicago.

Independents will for sure have a great year I believe, and I do know the Republicrats aint much better currently......but if it slams the brakes on this pathetic nanny state, europeanesque bailout nation Im all for it. Not getting punked by weak leaders like Iran will be nice too.

you misunderstand somehow.. :jointsmile: