Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Senate Caves, 74-25
Read it and weep, not least for how quickly the nation's news services have adopted the interventionists' packaging of "rescue" over "bailout." This is your list of no-votes; needless to say the names "Obama" and "McCain" aren't among the 15 Republicans, nine Democrats, and one Bernie Sanders with an easily observable spine.
inverse tachyon pulse|10.1.08 @ 10:58PM|#
I didn't see Ron Paul's name on that list either...some Dr. No he is.
Just Plain Brian|10.1.08 @ 11:01PM|#
I didn't see Ron Paul's name on that list either
I would hope not - this was a Senate vote, and Ron
Paul is a Congressman
|10.1.08 @ 11:04PM|#
More pedantry! Senators are Congressmen. Ron Paul is (more
specifically) a Representative.
Both houses are called Congress.
|10.1.08 @ 11:13PM|#
Clearly, Ron Paul should have dressed up as Senator Kennedy and taken his vote. In fact, why isn't Ron Paul vetoing all of this legislation from the White House? Some Dr. No if he can't say no to things people don't even ask him about.
|10.1.08 @ 11:15PM|#
I wonder if we can get Joe Biden to tell Ted Kennedy to "put all of his brainpower" into this bill...
Just Plain Brian|10.1.08 @ 11:19PM|#
This is why they need to bring back Schoolhouse Rock - too many kids grow up without learning how a bill becomes a law, or how someone unpacks his adjectives, or which one is the magic number.
Dagny T.|10.1.08 @ 11:20PM|#
One of my wussy Washington women (alliteration is all I have to cling to post "rescue") actually voted 'no.' I'm mildly impressed.
Dagny T.|10.1.08 @ 11:29PM|#
they need to bring back Schoolhouse Rock
I loved it in its original incarnation, and the Simpsons only
improved it:
"But if we changed the Constitution..."
"...We could make all SORTS of crazy laws!"
Just Plain Brian|10.1.08 @ 11:33PM|#
Lisa: It's one of those campy 70's throwbacks that appeals to
Generation-X'ers.
Bart: We need another Vietnam to thin out their ranks a little.
Sick, Sick, Sick|10.1.08 @ 11:38PM|#
We're tying silk blossoms onto a dead tree, in order to give the illusion that the tree is alive and vital. Nothing short of Potemkin village capitalism. For shame. If this deal goes through the House tomorrow, the US dollar is doomed. We just can't keep miracling currency into existence to cover for the profligate deficit spending (present at all levels of our economy) without cratering. Debt is not wealth. No matter how many times you "leverage" it.
alan|10.1.08 @ 11:48PM|#
I may have to forgive Liddy the money she owes me after this one. How did she vote on the $612 billion defense authorization? If a no, we might be square.
Nick|10.1.08 @ 11:50PM|#
This bill's even worse than the first one.
Not only does it have one of the biggest (if not the biggest)
spending increases in history, it also includes tax cuts, as if
running up debt is not more expensive than paying for programs up
front...Stupid, stupid, stupid.
The thing I don't get is that, if the bill only puts up $250 at
first, why don't they just make that the bill and then approve more
if they think they need it down the road? Wouldn't that be more
politically feasible?
Both my asshole Senators voted for it. I plan to support their
opponents from now on.
|10.1.08 @ 11:51PM|#
I may have to forgive Liddy the money she owes me after this
one. How did she vote on the $612 billion defense authorization? If
a no, we might be square.
Dole voted no.
Franklin Harris|10.2.08 @ 12:01AM|#
I've been proofreading AP copy for tomorrow's newspaper all
night, and there are so many instances of the Newspeak term
"rescue" that I can't chase them all down to rewrite them as
"bailout."
Unfortunately, the editors above me in the food chain won't let me
use my preferred term, which involves replacing "plan" with
"scheme" whenever it appears after "rescue" or "bailout."
Franklin Harris|10.2.08 @ 12:04AM|#
Both of my senators, Sessions and Shelby, voted no. This only slightly complicates my tradition of voting against them because they never have more than token opposition, including one guy who was arrested for public intox just weeks before the election.
Franklin Harris|10.2.08 @ 12:06AM|#
This bill's even worse than the first one.
Not only does it have one of the biggest (if not the biggest) spending increases in history, it also includes tax cuts, as if running up debt is not more expensive than paying for programs up front...Stupid, stupid, stupid.
It's even worse than that. It more than doubles what FDIC will
insure, giving the banks even more reason to be reckless with their
lending and putting taxpayers on the hook for even more potential
losses.
Paul|10.2.08 @ 12:07AM|#
I didn't see Ron Paul's name on that list either...some Dr.
No he is.
*sigh*
Go back to sleep.
Paul|10.2.08 @ 12:09AM|#
One of my wussy Washington women
I know of whom you speak. She just got sexier. Bada-bing!
|10.2.08 @ 12:10AM|#
Constituent Rebellion Now!
Millions wrote and called to say No! and still the Senate said Yes?
It is time for a housecleaning! Time to show them that they work
for Main Street, not Wall Street.
Based on quick analysis, it looks like there are 2-4 Senators who
voted Yes who are in tight races, and 3 or 4 more who are
vulnerable.
In the House, the analysis is similar, 7 or 8 vulnerable races
where a little bit of influence might make all the
difference.
Targeting these so-called representatives of the people, with print
and radio ads highlighting their betrayal, could really make an
impact on their chances for re-election -- and put the fear of
constituency back into the Washington elite.
Are you interested in making it happen? There isn't much time
before the election, so it will take funds and effort. Can you
participate by offering time, skills or funds?
Let us know.
Contact the Constituent Response Team at
constituentresponse@gmail.com.
SIV|10.2.08 @ 12:23AM|#
Franklin Harris,
I wish I had Senators of principle like Shelby and in this case
Sessions.
On other "no" voting Senators, I wouldn't mind having Mary Landrieu
and Maria Cantwell in the sack at the same time as long as they
would spank each other really hard.
Billy Beck|10.2.08 @ 12:24AM|#
"If your children ever discover how lame you really are, they'll
murder you in your sleep."
(Frank Zappa, "Freak Out", 1966)
|10.2.08 @ 12:25AM|#
No matter how bat-shit crazy on social issues my Congressmen may
be (and you will know what I mean when I name them), I continue to
be comforted by the fact that they tend to get it right on fiscal
matters. Sometimes (but only sometimes) it pays to live in a "red"
state.
On the first POS bill:
Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R) KS........Nay
On the even worse POS amended bill today:
Sen. Pat Roberts (R) KS......Nay
Sen. Sam Brownback (R) KS.......Nay
Mr. X|10.2.08 @ 12:27AM|#
Don't despair yet. The House has killed this thing once, it can do it again. Call your Representative and urge them to stop it.
|10.2.08 @ 12:30AM|#
Of course, libertine that I am, I did write them several hundred times threatening to vote for ANYBODY who ran against them in the future if they voted Yea, even if their opponent was caught in a three-way with a live boy AND a dead girl.
SIV|10.2.08 @ 12:31AM|#
On a related note, I used to date a really hot girl from the same hometown and social class as Elizabeth Dole (about 30 years younger). Their voices sound exactly the same. I love hearing Elizabeth Dole talk even if I don't like what she is saying.
|10.2.08 @ 12:38AM|#
SIV | October 2, 2008, 12:23am | #
Franklin Harris,
I wish I had Senators of principle like Shelby and in this case Sessions.
On other "no" voting Senators, I wouldn't mind having Mary Landrieu and Maria Cantwell in the sack at the same time as long as they would spank each other really hard.
Dude!! Just stick with Palin for your pre-verted MILF/sexy
librarian fantasies. I think I just threw up a little in my
mouth.
You do know the difference between a prevert and a pervert? You
still stand a reasonable chance of talking a prevert out of it.
|10.2.08 @ 12:47AM|#
God, I wish I could go back in time and strangle whatever idiot started this "Main Street vs. Wall Street" meme. Referring to "Main Street" is on the same level of inane, meaningless pol-speak as "Middle America" or "Family Values".
SIV|10.2.08 @ 12:49AM|#
There are two economies, the "walking around" economy and the Wall Street economy. I only care about the health of one of them.
|10.2.08 @ 12:52AM|#
Dagny T. | October 1, 2008, 11:20pm | #
One of my wussy Washington women (alliteration is all I have to cling to post "rescue") actually voted 'no.' I'm mildly impressed.
My words went winging to Washingtons wussy women wequesting them to
wefwain fwom wimpiness: I weitewated: "We want waiting wather than
wescuing. Weave us awone you wascawwy wepwesentatives.
Said my piece (VOTE NO!) to both of 'em, but didn't weally expect
either to go along... count me too as mildly impwessed - though a
bit confused as well, and not qwite weady to twust without
weservation yet. Damn dastardly Dems!
(alliteration credit: courtesy Elmer Fudd)
|10.2.08 @ 12:53AM|#
I dunno, A. "Main Street" is no more inane than, say, "Rescue." It's all just worthless polspeak.
Jonas|10.2.08 @ 12:54AM|#
@Kant feel Pietzche:
Thank you for bringing it to my attention that KS's Senators were
in the right on this. Roberts just secured my vote, I think... I
wasn't sure I could stomach voting for the man. Certainly a "yes"
vote would have been a total dealbreaker.
KyleG|10.2.08 @ 12:57AM|#
Well, at least one of my senators voted nay. My letter to Salazar was ineffective, though.
Paul|10.2.08 @ 1:11AM|#
you Ron Paul worshippers are hilarious. Whatever
"Whatever", the universal pain-cry of the defeated.
What's hi-larious is when someone doesn't even know which house of
congress someone is in when the word "Rep." preceeds their
name.
Here's a quick primer:
Rep. = Representative, ie House of Representatives, commonly known
as Congress.
Sen. = Senator, or the Senate. Derived from the "House of Lords" in
the British parliamentary system.
The house of representatives most resembles the "House of Commons"
in same.
We're here to help.
Any other questions you'd like answered? We have regulars who are
experts on almost everything. Some of those subjects include, but
are not limited to:
Law
Physics (and many other sciences)
Computer Science & related systems
Healthcare
Finance
Literature
General Business
Urban planning (even!)
Humour and all things "funny"
Snark (everyone dabbles in that from time to time)
Pop culture
Star Trek (or so I gather)
Economics (shudder)
alan|10.2.08 @ 1:13AM|#
speaking of Newspeak, every anchor I saw, Gibson and whomever
was running the Newshour, reporting the Dow yesterday with this
sort of language, 'The stock market shot up yesterday responding to
optimistic news that a new id being worked on in the Senate.'
The propaganda is getting so thick you could make a decent
bouillabaisse from it. However you will have to hold your nose
given the dead fish smell.
tryagain|10.2.08 @ 1:15AM|#
speaking of Newspeak, every anchor I saw, Gibson and
whomever was running the Newshour, reporting the Dow yesterday with
this sort of language, 'The stock market shot up yesterday
responding to optimistic news that a new id being worked on in the
Senate.'
Speaking of Newspeak, every anchor I saw, Gibson and whomever was
running the Newshour, reporting the Dow yesterday used this sort of
language, 'The stock market shot up yesterday, responding to
optimistic news that a new plan is being worked on in the
Senate.'
David McElroy|10.2.08 @ 1:22AM|#
I'm shocked and pleased to see that both of my senators voted against this thing. The congresscritters from Alabama tend to vote against what I'd prefer about 98 percent of the time, so I'm surprised to find these two doing the right thing for a change.
|10.2.08 @ 1:28AM|#
Weird deal here in Hawaii -- all four members of Congress are
statist liberal Democrats. The two House members voted "no", the
two Senators voted "yes". Still trying to figure out that Whisky
Tango Foxtrot deal.
Be interesting to see if the House members switch now, because
they're two out of about 12 reps who would need to be flipped to
get this shit sandwich passed in the House.
Amakudari|10.2.08 @ 1:28AM|#
It more than doubles what FDIC will insure, giving the banks
even more reason to be reckless with their lending and putting
taxpayers on the hook for even more potential losses.
Even better, it limits the FDIC's ability to increase the premium
it charges to banks and allows it to tap the Treasury to make up
any losses. Brilliant!
Good thing we put AMT relief and alternative energy tax breaks in
there, too. I was worried this bill would just be a targeted
clusterfuck.
The thing I don't get is that, if the bill only puts up $250 at
first, why don't they just make that the bill and then approve more
if they think they need it down the road? Wouldn't that be more
politically feasible?
Because then there would be uncertainty and we would have an even
worse crisis of confidence and ... well, just trust Hank and Ben,
because they know what they're doing and have diagnosed the economy
so well.
I'd bet they come back a few months from now requesting a larger
balance sheet. The assets of Citi, BofA, JPMorgan, Goldman and
Morgan Stanley (after planned mergers) alone are about $10
trillion. Outstanding subprime ARMs in the US are over $800
billion, and they'll end up a small part of the problem as home
price decline further.
|10.2.08 @ 1:31AM|#
Trifecta time! I wrote to all three of my elected congress-types
in DC, urging them in no uncertain terms NOT to approve the
bailout, and ALL THREE have so far voted IN FAVOR of it!
Yeah, this is why we need "experienced leadership" in DC. Hell,
retarded monkeys could do as well.
Toss out the incumbents. Vote for independents or third party
candidates if attractive ones are available to you. But it is
clearly time to clean house (and senate).
|10.2.08 @ 1:34AM|#
Biden voted "yes". I wonder if Palin has the common sense to rip
into him about that in the VP debate tomorrow, or whether she's
gonna suck up and be McCain's wingman on his "yes" vote.
Seems like if she has the political instincts she claims she has,
she'd oppose this bad puppy, take McCain to the woodshed over this,
and run with it all the way to the White House -- in 2012.
|10.2.08 @ 1:36AM|#
Despite how much I have against my rep TaylorD(MS) he voted no in the house, and both MS senators voted no, so its been a good day.
Geotpf|10.2.08 @ 1:37AM|#
Franklin Harris | October 2, 2008, 12:06am | #
It's even worse than that. It more than doubles what FDIC will
insure, giving the banks even more reason to be reckless with their
lending and putting taxpayers on the hook for even more potential
losses.
I thought FDIC insurance was paid by the member banks themselves,
and there was a rate hike in there to pay for it. The FDIC
insurance limit hike is a good idea, IMHO. The thing that pushed
WaMu over the edge was that lots of people (and businesses and
other organizations) that had accounts with amounts over the
existing $100,000 limit withdrew their money.
The rest of the bill...well, Feingold voted no, so I'm going to
assume that it was as retarded as everybody else here thinks,
because I trust his judgement on most matters.
Bingo|10.2.08 @ 1:47AM|#
I'm trying to come up with a term to call our political system. "Representative democracy" no longer applies.
|10.2.08 @ 2:00AM|#
Maybe this will get the "hell no!" calls to congress
restarted.
I think everyone got complacent for a day or two.
|10.2.08 @ 2:10AM|#
Weird deal here in Hawaii -- all four members of Congress
are statist liberal Democrats. The two House members voted "no",
the two Senators voted "yes". Still trying to figure out that
Whisky Tango Foxtrot deal.
Prolefeed, that difference actually makes some kind of sense since
the house allegedly represents the people, who pay taxes, while the
senate represents the state(s). At least that's what they taught us
in public school.
I'm having trouble understanding how the federal government can lay
out 700 billion, that's almost $2000 per person (way more per tax
payer), and still the candidates claim they will reduce taxes on
the working class. Part of my problem might be I don't have a
degree in voodoo economics
Junter Klops|10.2.08 @ 2:14AM|#
How about "self-inflicted bureaucracy?"
Part of the problem is that, because the vote of a single person
doesn't count, the common folk have little incentive to get the
facts straight and learn about what's really going on. That little
bit that we do understand is more of a byproduct of our careers,
hobbies, and school days. Then there is the popular press, which
just makes everyone confused and scared. The politicians actually
know the facts, but they are strongly politically biased and their
incentives are not aligned with whats best for America (if there is
such a thing). So when something controversial comes up, we here
have a fun time yelling at them and calling them buffoons, even
though we have done even less research about the issues than they
have. Maybe we are just wingnuts, fully immersed in the echo
chamber of the anti-state, and this bailout is for the best. But I
don't think so, but what do I know?
So I think the best way to fix the system is to give ordinary
people a share of the responsibility and authority for government
functions. Then we could actually do something besides complain,
and could actually make things better. But I have no clue how this
would be done.
Pendulum|10.2.08 @ 2:22AM|#
Russ Feingold! *Sigh* Oh how I remember the good old days of
DraftRuss.com, and the "Russ2008" sticker on my car.
If there's one thing Americans look for in a President, it's a
twice-divorced liberal Jew from Wisconsin.
Franklin Harris|10.2.08 @ 2:25AM|#
I thought FDIC insurance was paid by the member banks themselves, ...
Until the money runs out.
johnl|10.2.08 @ 2:30AM|#
One thing to think about is who, specifically, on "Wall Street"
Paulson plans on rescuing by trading them treasuries for junk at
above market prices. That's
1 - Goldman Sachs
2 - The Chinese Communist Party
3 - The Saudi royal family
And those guys aren't going to use the windfall to increase lending
in the USA. They learned their lesson and they are done with that,
This windfall will pay for China's space program, Al Queda
operations, and, worse, whatever GS has planned.
|10.2.08 @ 2:30AM|#
I love how most the media last night kept saying that the House
"Failed" to pass the bill etc.
We are so fucked.
|10.2.08 @ 2:44AM|#
Once again, Dianne Feinstein showed that she's always willing to
set a new low in her long career of public disservice. I watched
that bloviating cow's snotty little speech where she claimed that
the 85 THOUSAND people who contacted her office to express their
opposition were just "confused".
Maybe, just maybe, the Democrats in California will bounce her
useless ass out of office in favor of a real Democrat: someone who
wants to rob us to give the money to poor people.
-jcr
|10.2.08 @ 2:58AM|#
I'm trying to come up with a term to call our political
system. "Representative democracy" no longer applies.
"Kleptocratic mob rule" = "democracy", though sometimes it is more
evident and blatant, like during the last month.
Michael Ejercito|10.2.08 @ 3:06AM|#
I wonder if Palin has the common sense to rip into him about that in the VP debate tomorrow, or whether she's gonna suck up and be McCain's wingman on his "yes" vote.
It depends.
What proportion of the American electorate support the
current bill?
|10.2.08 @ 4:31AM|#
Jonas | October 2, 2008, 12:54am | #
@Kant feel Pietzche:
Thank you for bringing it to my attention that KS's Senators were in the right on this. Roberts just secured my vote, I think... I wasn't sure I could stomach voting for the man. Certainly a "yes" vote would have been a total dealbreaker.
Well, as I said, the whole gang (with the exception of Moore-D from
KC area) are straight-up fiscal conservatives and are about as
small-government as any ot them can be these days. However, I don't
know your stand on social/religious issues. The whole lot of them
tend to be pretty fundamentalist in their religious views.
|10.2.08 @ 7:35AM|#
My Senators were split. Interestingly enough, the Republican
voted for and the Democrat voted against. I guess it's going back
to the House now. I sent the following email to my Representative
(Connie Mack) this morning:
First of all, THANK YOU for your no vote on HR 3997 (The
Bailout). I see from yesterday's Senate vote that this matter will
be back before the House, in bigger, more expensive form, with new
provisions to make financial executives even less responsible for
their actions, and to pass the costs of their poor judgment on to
our children and grandchildren.
As a voter in your district and a concerned taxpayer, I urge you to
hold your ground and to continue to represent the desires of your
constituents to oppose any sort of bailout/"rescue". There were
many good reasons to oppose HR 3997, and even more good reasons to
oppose the new measure the Senate approved yesterday. Nothing has
changed: it still deserves to go down in flames, and I strongly
encourage you to keep up the good work and to help make that
happen.
If we can get the naysayers to hold their ground then there is
still a chance of defeating this.
|10.2.08 @ 7:42AM|#
Both of the pieces of shit who represent Maryland voted "yes." Not that I'm all that surprised; actual courage and independent thinking from Babs Mikulski or Ben Cardin? Fugedaboudit.
ed|10.2.08 @ 8:00AM|#
It more than doubles what FDIC will insure
Which seems odd, given the fact that Main Street™ is broke. That's
what the politicians tell me, anyway. Do poor people have $250,000
in cash lying around? Where can I meet them?
Do they have hot daughters?
|10.2.08 @ 8:34AM|#
Do you honestly think these jackleg politicians read your
letters? I mean really what are the odds of that actually happening
when they don't even read the pages of the law they are about to
vote on? Can zero actually have an exponent?
When Dodd came on TV when all the back slapping and cock whacking
started after it passed he actually had the nerve to say government
worked today just as our Founding Fathers intended it to. WTF He
must have taken American history with Biden who thinks it is
Patriotic to pay MORE in tax. Yes because as we all know we had a
revolution with the King of England because our founding fathers
didn't think they were paying enough tax and wanted to pay even
MORE.
cunnivore|10.2.08 @ 8:37AM|#
Vast majorities of the American public supported the Patriot Act
and the Iraq war when those things were approved by Congress. Vast
majorities support Social Security and the War On Drugs.
Let's not pretend we want direct democracy because the public
happens to be on our side in this particular case. That would make
us no better than your garden-variety slimeball politician.
Chuck|10.2.08 @ 9:17AM|#
I don't know whether my email will make any difference or not. I DO know how much of a difference doing nothing will make, and I have a pretty good idea how much effect incoherent ranting on blogs will have.
|10.2.08 @ 9:24AM|#
I think the press is trying to fool the House leaners into a yes vote by reporting that opposition has softened. But when constituent contacts are overwhelmingly negative, the reps aren't buying it. It's sick to see made-up stories about stocks jumping on optimism for the bill passing. Lets see some actual poll numbers you lying fucks.
JP|10.2.08 @ 9:27AM|#
I emailed my Rep yesterday (Pitts, R-PA). He voted NO the first time around, and I'm hoping he doesn't wimp out now.
robc|10.2.08 @ 9:58AM|#
I voted for McConnell *ONCE* when there was a LP candidate on the ballot because of his fight against McCain-Feingold and his flip-flop on flag burning. His public acknowledgment that they were the same issue got my vote. Never again. Now, I guess Im going to have to reward Bunning with a vote in a few years, if he runs again.
tarran|10.2.08 @ 10:43AM|#
When Dodd came on TV when all the back slapping and cock whacking started after it passed he actually had the nerve to say government worked today just as our Founding Fathers intended it to.
Actually he's right: the U.S. Federal Government creation was
primarily championed by guys who wanted to have a government that
could tax more effectively and would be more interventionist on
economics than the confederacy it replaced.
In that sense it worked. Of course, the Senate was originally
intended to represent the interests of state governments.
I don't know what impact it would have had to have senators voting
according to the way the state governments ordered them to. We
probably would have had the Senate passing the bill anyway.
Geotpf|10.2.08 @ 11:34AM|#
Pendulum | October 2, 2008, 2:22am | #
Russ Feingold! *Sigh* Oh how I remember the good old days of
DraftRuss.com, and the "Russ2008" sticker on my car.
If there's one thing Americans look for in a President, it's a
twice-divorced liberal Jew from Wisconsin.
Well, I think that's kind of why he didn't run-he probably thought
he wouldn't win, and Feingold doesn't run in elections he doesn't
think he will win (he's never lost an election). He also actually
seems to like being in the Senate, especially
after the Dems retook the majority there.
Then again, one would think that America wouldn't want a black guy
with the middle name of Hussein for President either.
|10.2.08 @ 1:54PM|#
I have never felt so ashamed of my own government.
One bright note: Washington's own Senator Cantwell was one of the
brave few who voted 'No'.
You rock like Slayer, Senator Cantwell.
Jonas|10.2.08 @ 4:37PM|#
Kant feel Pietzsche
"Well, as I said, the whole gang (with the exception of Moore-D
from KC area) are straight-up fiscal conservatives and are about as
small-government as any ot them can be these days. However, I don't
know your stand on social/religious issues. The whole lot of them
tend to be pretty fundamentalist in their religious views."
_________________________
I'm actually a personally conservative Catholic, but I'm all about
keeping religion in the private sector and really hate these so-con
Republicans who would probably literally turn our nation into a
theocracy if they got the chance. "Faith without reason and no
reason without faith" seems to be their motto... however, their
fiscal conservatism makes it worth it when the alternative is
socialism...
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245