Obama Opens Up a 9-Point Lead

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Ramo

No one seemed to have told the House Republicans about a deal though.

A senior Boehner aide admitted that part of the reason why House R's raised a stink was that McCain came to town:

But a top aide to Boehner said it was Democrats who had done the political posturing. The aide, Kevin Smith, said Republicans revolted, in part, because they were chafing at what they saw as an attempt by Democrats to jam through an agreement on the bailout early Thursday and deny McCain an opportunity to participate in the agreement.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/09/26/business/26bailout2.php?WT.mc_id=rssmostemailed

McCain's narcissism clearly hurt the negotiation.

Wow... love the Democratic spin there on the quote.

What he was saying is that the House Republicans had some reservations, but McCain said he was coming down and the Dems tried to jam the bill through before McCain was around to make him look bad.

You may call it Republican spin, but saying that the guy admitted that the reason the House Republicans made a stink because McCain came to down is downright delusional!

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo

No one seemed to have told the House Republicans about a deal though.

A senior Boehner aide admitted that part of the reason why House R's raised a stink was that McCain came to town:

Like I said. The so called deal that had been announced didn't seem to have had the support of the House Rs. Nothing posted thus far seems to refute that.

rah: Believe it or not, we can read. A few of us can even write.

[Wezil]

Kevin Smith is a Republican!?

With all the dick and fart jokes I was sure he'd be a Democrat.

[Ramo]

What he was saying is that the House Republicans had some reservations, but McCain said he was coming down and the Dems tried to jam the bill through before McCain was around to make him look bad.

No, that's the spin. Every account is that Congress and Treasury were on the verge of an agreement before McCain came. This wasn't because they wanted to deny McCain any role in the process (given that he didn't even read the Paulson plan until a couple days ago, it wasn't clear he wanted one), but that the consensus position is that this is really important to get done.

You may call it Republican spin, but saying that the guy admitted that the reason the House Republicans made a stink because McCain came to down is downright delusional!

If you subtract the obvious spin, that's exactly what he said.

It looks like you believe in some paranoid conspiracy that Senate R's, the White House, and the Dems were in cahoots here to deny McCain a role in this.

[GePap]

The WH has been demanding that this get done ASAP since Monday Morning. To claim that the Democrats were "playing politics" by having hammered an agreement by Thursday morning in order to "hurt McCain" is silly. It's even more absurd because as John Stewart pointed out yesterday, it took McCain 22 HOURS to get back to Washington after "suspending" his campaign. If he thought it important to blow off his presidential campaign, and at the time put the debate in limbo, why not skip the Clinton Dinner? McCain could have been in Washington Wednesday afternoon., to help with the deal making. He wasn't.

[Ramo]

Like I said. The so called deal that had been announced didn't seem to have had the support of the House Rs. Nothing posted thus far seems to refute that.

Except that there was plenty of evidence that there was enough support from House R's. For example:

Passage Predicted

The agreement must still be passed by the House and Senate, and signed into law by the president. Senator Robert Bennett, a Utah Republican, predicted passage.

``I now expect we will indeed have a plan that can pass the House, pass the Senate, be signed by the president and bring a sense of certainty to this crisis that is still roiling in the markets,'' Bennett said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aIj.Z21Ahagw&refer=us

There are plenty of similar articles floating around...

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo

Like I said. The so called deal that had been announced didn't seem to have had the support of the House Rs. Nothing posted thus far seems to refute that.

Except that there was plenty of evidence that there was enough support from House R's. For example:

Passage Predicted

The agreement must still be passed by the House and Senate, and signed into law by the president. Senator Robert Bennett, a Utah Republican, predicted passage.

``I now expect we will indeed have a plan that can pass the House, pass the Senate, be signed by the president and bring a sense of certainty to this crisis that is still roiling in the markets,'' Bennett said.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aIj.Z21Ahagw&refer=us

There are plenty of similar articles floating around...

Here's the very next two sentences in the article you posted:

Still, Representative Eric Cantor, a member of the Republican leadership, said most House members of his party don't back it.

``We have not seen a way to getting majority support'' from Republicans, he said.

[Barnabas]

Do these republicans want to see the market crash?

[Ramo]

``We have not seen a way to getting majority support'' from Republicans, he said.

I don't think majority support is needed.

Edit: I'll see if I can find a better article later.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Barnabas
Do these republicans want to see the market crash?

No. They believe they can use market forces to fix the problem.

[DanS]

The thing with this is that even the democratic votes in the house haven't been counted. We can have a deal of the leaders, but that doesn't mean it will pass.

This is a tremendously unpopular bill. 2:1 against among these folks' constituents. 3:1 against a bailout of the car companies, FYI.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo

``We have not seen a way to getting majority support'' from Republicans, he said.

I don't think majority support is needed.

Edit: I'll see if I can find a better article later.

Then define what you mean by enough support from House Rs and provide evidence that doesn't contradict your point. Because right now I'm not seeing where they signed onto this deal.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by DanS
The thing with this is that even the democratic votes in the house haven't been counted. We can have a deal of the leaders, but that doesn't mean it will pass.

This is a tremendously unpopular bill. 2:1 against among these folks' constituents. 3:1 against a bailout of the car companies, FYI.

I can't believe how badly these bills are being explained to the American publc.

The rescue bill sounds like a give away...and a give away to the very people whose greed caused the problem. I've only heard one newscaster (one time) refer to a rescue bill. The drumbeat is all for bail out, bail out, bail out, bail out. No wonder it's unpopular. Lancer asked if any monies would be going to foreign banks. My guess that it wasn't has been contradicted. Why don't we KNOW this??

The money to the car industry is a loan, which will be paid back. With crashing financial industry, it's not easy to borrow money. And retooling is necessary so we can stop making SUVs.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Zkribbler

The money to the car industry is a loan, which will be paid back.

LOL!

Honestly, Zkribbler, it will not. We all know how this works. Ask GM about the "loans" it got from Canada and how much they've paid back of those. GM even recently got another "loan" in exchange for guaranteeing jobs for 3 years, then a couple weeks later took the money and announced it's closing the plant. These companies are shameless.

You're simply furthering your agenda as part of the union right now. It's dishonest.

You want this bailout money because it'll mean more jobs for your union. Not that it makes sense.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
The rescue bill sounds like a give away

That's because it is.