jerseyhoya wrote:At least 14 members will change their votes on the bailout bill according to The Hill.

Regardless of the merits of the bailout bill, I have a hard time seeing how you could be opposed on Monday but supportive on Friday. I can't believe the add-ons make the bill better--I'm almost positive they make it worse. You can believe that calmer heads are prevailing, or that a more persuasive argument has been made, but I'm convinced that at least 22 members of the house (by AP's count) are especially gutless hypocrites.

Passing by more than 2-1 right now. 117-49. 270 or so still to vote.

TenuredVulture wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:At least 14 members will change their votes on the bailout bill according to The Hill.

Regardless of the merits of the bailout bill, I have a hard time seeing how you could be opposed on Monday but supportive on Friday. I can't believe the add-ons make the bill better--I'm almost positive they make it worse. You can believe that calmer heads are prevailing, or that a more persuasive argument has been made, but I'm convinced that at least 22 members of the house (by AP's count) are especially gutless hypocrites.

The add-ons disgust me. They basically signal that x senator or representative wouldn't vote unless someone sweetened the deal.

IS THIS, OR ISN'T THIS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING EVER?

If it isn't, then have some scruples man (or woman) and don't vote for it, if it IS, then knock off the vote selling and do it.

In news not involving the election or debate, but still proving of America's shark-jumpedness:

Redskins ordered to provide hearing-impaired fans 'aural content' in stadium

It has crossed 218...

traderdave wrote:I think Biden did kinda sleepwalk through the first 45 minutes or so but I thought he really hit some HRs in the second half. I thought he crushed her when he described (without rebuttal) how McCain was going to pay for the $5,000 health care tax credit (including calling it the "Ultimate Bridge to Nowhere"); the foreign policy stuff wasn't even close and I loved the "he is no maverick on important issues" bit toward the very end.

this provides a very succint platform for me to describe why i don't like joe biden, or why i disagree with the guy. the answers you point out here SOUND like good answers, but when you look at them, they really aren't. unfortunately, palin is nowhere near qualified or knowledgeable to call him on them.

first, biden's health care answer is misleading. he is assuming that if the $12K goes away, and you are left with the $5kK credit credit you are on your own to make up the difference. he doesn't account for the consideration that money saved by a company would produce higher wages/salary, which is a very real possibility given today's shrinking labor market (over time, not the last few months). also, his "20 million of you will be dropped" has no basis in reality, as far as i can tell, and is just him making up a number. he does that a lot. he did it with his small business point as well in regard to obama's tax increase plan.

on foreign policy, generally, yes, he has more to say, but what does more to say really matter if his answers don't produce any insight? his little history lesson on hezzbollah was almost completely incorrect factually (bush let hezbollah into lebanon? pretty sure they've been there for a while, joe.) and his answer on afghanistan was completely nonsensical. it was somethign like "surge good, surge bad, obama wants a surge, mccain's surge is no good."

one candidate didn't know what to say and the other didn't know when to stop talking. it was kind of depressing. they're both very real liabilities.

also, biden remainds me of pat gillick for some reason.

TenuredVulture wrote:Um, would livestock even exist (and fart so much) if we weren't breeding them in order to eat them?

Then why don't the global warming people suggest that we stop breeding them? That'd go a lot further to solving the problem.

Philly the Kid wrote:What about Palin saying, "I don't have t answer questions as they are asked" ??

None of them do. Listen the next time Obama is asked about his plan being socialism.

The republicans are masters of repeating mantras over n over and telling a story, making people 'feel' a certain way, no matter how they lie or play fast n loose with facts and reality

.
You're not going to say with a straight face that the Democrats don't do that too.

They just repeat thigns over n over until the dumb-asses repeat it.

Just as all politicians do. McCain voted to let governments charge rape victims. Sen. McCain's tax plan provides virtually nothing to the middle class. How many people believe that Sarah Palin wants to ban books, make women pay for their rape kits, and has a huge social agenda?

What amazes me is that no one cares about Sarah Palin's record. No, she isn't the most intellectual. Forget that LBJ and Harry Truman weren't either. No, she isn't experienced on the national stage, but then how experienced were Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton? Democrats seem to think that being pro-life or believing in creationism somehow disqualifies a person from seeking office.

If you look at Palin's record you'll find a ton of positives like cleaning up corruption and renegotiating with the oil companies. And that she's refused to support bills pushing the conservative right's social agenda. Who cares if she does a good job? Let's find out if she believes in creationism.

Passed 263-171. Dems for 172-63. GOP against 91-108.

Laexile wrote:Democrats seem to think that being pro-life or believing in creationism somehow disqualifies a person from seeking office.

Doesn't everyone who doesn't believe in creationism think that?

Houshphandzadeh wrote:

Laexile wrote:Democrats seem to think that being pro-life or believing in creationism somehow disqualifies a person from seeking office.

Doesn't everyone who doesn't believe in creationism think that?

I do. In fact, I would say believing in creationism would disqualify you from being my doctor, a teacher for my child, or my accountant or lawyer. I might, in a pinch, let you work on my furnace.

TenuredVulture wrote:

Houshphandzadeh wrote:

Laexile wrote:Democrats seem to think that being pro-life or believing in creationism somehow disqualifies a person from seeking office.

Doesn't everyone who doesn't believe in creationism think that?

I do. In fact, I would say believing in creationism would disqualify you from being my doctor, a teacher for my child, or my accountant or lawyer. I might, in a pinch, let you work on my furnace.

Agreed. I don't see how this is unfair at all. I would not want someone I know to be a believer in creationism to be making important decisions for me.

Interesting article on the bailout, and specifically Rep. Ryan form Wisconsin, in WSJ...

"What leadership Looks Like"

Laexile wrote:

TenuredVulture wrote:Um, would livestock even exist (and fart so much) if we weren't breeding them in order to eat them?

Then why don't the global warming people suggest that we stop breeding them? That'd go a lot further to solving the problem.

[/quote]

I don't know who you mean by "global warming people" but maybe these people qualify.

http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/
http://forum.greenpeace.org/int/archive ... -2678.html
http://www.worldchanging.com/archives/008338.html

So the bailout passed, and the market is about to go into negative territory for the first time today. Hmm.

Oops, it's popping up again. Volatile day.

TenuredVulture wrote:So the bailout passed, and the market is about to go into negative territory for the first time today. Hmm.

Makes one wonder...

o'reilly vs frank. one for the ages.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yrfPMa3lONU&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yrfPMa3lONU&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

meatball wrote:Drink whenever she says "there" or "ya"

Drink whenever she says "also" ....you'll be hungover for days!

Scarlett wrote:

meatball wrote:Drink whenever she says "there" or "ya"

Drink whenever she says "also" ....you'll be hungover for days!

Same if you drink when Biden utters a falsehood, contradiction or outright lie.

Mountainphan wrote:Interesting article on the bailout, and specifically Rep. Ryan form Wisconsin, in WSJ...

"What leadership Looks Like"

I absolutely love Paul Ryan.