What is Digg?Related by Keyword 
How are these related stories? Tell us!
- mweber02, on 10/03/2008, -78/+617That's it folks. We're officially a fascist country. Time to dig up my passport.
- gravityPersists, on 10/03/2008, -8/+240You have to submit it to digg before we can digg it up...
- tendonut, on 10/03/2008, -25/+28I see what you did there.
- raynar, on 10/03/2008, -2/+25"Senate leaders quickly took custody of the measure, adding on $110 billion in tax and spending provisions designed to attract additional support, then grafting on legislation mandating broader mental health coverage in the insurance industry."
What a bunch of crooks. Add an extra $110 billion for crap that has nothing to do with the economy. - k3nshady89, on 10/03/2008, -6/+36Barack H. Obama and Joe "israel's whore" Biden both voted for the bailout Bill.
Ron Paul/Kucinich forever. - brad3378, on 10/03/2008, -3/+7$800 Billion spent and the market has been dropping like a rock since the Announcement.
http://finance.google.com/finance?q=INDEXDJX:.DJI
***** ***** is already failing!
My confidence in the market is GONE
BRB after I sell all my stocks. - vanimal, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2They had to make the amount bigger. At only $700 billion, no one would able to make change for their trillion dollar bill.
- AnalJustice, on 10/04/2008, -0/+0sadly no rep in digg or that would've been a +
- mikemil828, on 10/03/2008, -24/+125Socialist, Fascist, Communist, Republic, make up your minds diggers, America can't be all of them at once.
- lilhelper, on 10/03/2008, -9/+69Actually, it can..
Most governments have bits and pieces of all governments in them. - ballardr, on 10/03/2008, -5/+21Why not. The politicians change daily.
- nkleffman, on 10/03/2008, -12/+161We are a republic in virtue of our constitution.
In practice, however, we are in fact a socialist / communist / fascist country. We've been socialist ever since FDR and his New Deal, we've been communist ever since we got a graduated income tax and a central bank (#2 and #5 of the 10 planks of the communist manifesto), and fascist in that we have corporations running the government (Mussolini defined fascism as corporatism).
See how that works? - sindex, on 10/03/2008, -2/+57Run away! nkleffman is an informed citizen!
- coyote1284, on 10/03/2008, -4/+9EMPIRE!
ALL HAIL AMERICANA! - stealthc, on 10/03/2008, -2/+11It's *supposed* to be a Republic, and it's still one as far as the Constitution is concerned. The other three are interchangeable words for central planning and concentrated power in government.
- jbettineski, on 10/03/2008, -21/+12If we were actually Socialist, we'd be better off.
- Speed, on 10/03/2008, -13/+11Umm.... Socialist and Fascist are two completely different things.
- mikemil828, on 10/03/2008, -5/+17//See how that works?//
Not really, Communism is a socioeconomic structure based on a classless, stateless, egalitarian society, Facism is a totalitarian society that advocated the supremacy of the state, Communism and Fascism are naturally opposed to one another, indeed this is one of the main points of contention between Germany and Russia during WWII. Socialism is generally a transitional stage between Capitalism and Communism, a stage that most countries don't go over, and some (like America) don't quite achieve. you can say that France is socialist, but you can't really say that it is communist or fascist. Although America has taken a couple of things from socialism, it is still one of the most capitalistic countries even with things the way they are, the amount of controversy going on about the bailout is proof of that. - Bith8654, on 10/03/2008, -1/+8@mikemil: What he is saying is that we have aspects of each type of government implemented in our own. While you're right a completely Communist and completely Fascist government wouldn't mix together, specific aspects of each government are capable of co-existing with each other.
And of course American is still one of the more capitalistic countries, the point is we are clearly losing that title, the fact that the bailout passed in both the house and senate is proof of that. - joeanon, on 10/03/2008, -5/+2CAN SO !! Just ask your half educated public.
We can be anything we want all we have to so is say it over and over again. - jwoulf, on 10/03/2008, -0/+9Actually, we're displaying traits of each right now, and that's just *****.
Corporate influence of govt
Gun control.
Redistribution of wealth.
Wiretapping and surveillance of citizens.
Prisoners held without charge.
Yeah, we're prettymuch *****. - Paulish, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4Are they all so different? They may have different means of controlling individuals, but in the end they all seek to control me.
- mikemil828, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2//What he is saying is that we have aspects of each type of government implemented in our own.//
Not really, what actually is going on is that a Republic sometimes passes a law that people don't like, and those people in a fit of pique say that it has somehow turned into a random hated civic type when it really hasn't, that's all.
//the bailout passed in both the house and senate is proof of that.// That it wasn't able to pass without a major ruckus is proof against that, In Europe after the failure of the first bill, 5 countries passed bailout bills of their own with nary a peep from it's populace. - w3rdn4, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1This is why we just say AMERICA IS FUCT!
- gall0wsp0le, on 10/05/2008, -1/+1Time to enjoy our meat and bread shortages, vodka binges and fuel-rationed winters! Go USSA, comrades!
- lilhelper, on 10/03/2008, -9/+69Actually, it can..
- sassyjack, on 10/03/2008, -1/+61And go where? Where is the reach of this ***** going to end? The moon?
- odigity, on 10/03/2008, -4/+20We make our stand here:
http://freestateproject.org/ - sk33lz, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3The moon sounds nice. I will meet you on the dark side.
- odigity, on 10/03/2008, -4/+20We make our stand here:
- radu79, on 10/03/2008, -0/+51Well, good luck finding a destination, some countries in Europe also recently bailed out their banks..
- Pstmann, on 10/03/2008, -4/+20At least they don't pretend to be the bastion of "Free Market Economy"!
- bearzly, on 10/03/2008, -2/+4We got lots of room up here in Canada :)
- jsballardx, on 10/03/2008, -7/+6I'd rather go to hell. Than go to Canada.
- aristotle0dude, on 10/03/2008, -16/+75Before you do that, you might want to dig up a dictionary and look up the word fascist.
- pintomp3, on 10/03/2008, -4/+44Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.
Benito Mussolini - wrenchone, on 10/03/2008, -28/+12Except that fascism really is- ...a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.
...none of which is currently happen in America. - ancientsociety, on 10/03/2008, -4/+24"...none of which is currently happen in America."
Wow, how much of the Koolaid did you drink? - Pstmann, on 10/03/2008, -0/+15^^^ "none of which is currently happen in America" (whatever that means).
We may not be a Fascist country yet, but this administration is laying the groundwork for the transition. - DeviateSeptum, on 10/03/2008, -1/+7I think you should look up the word.
- neilschelly, on 10/03/2008, -1/+12wrenchone, which of those have we failed to accomplish yet?
Bush has pretty much shown that whatever he says will go through Congress nearly unopposed and he's reduced the ability of Congressional oversights to nil, while conducting multiple wars without the requisite Congressional approval. Opposition and criticism in media is a joke and the people are contained in free speech zones or arrested/raided/wiretapped, again without oversight. And now, several industries (banking, automotive, insurance) are all being bailed out by the government as it buys up overvalued investments. And I can't believe you haven't noticed the aggressive nationalism/racism that comes with things like the naming of the "Patriot" Act, "Freedom" fries, and the fear-mongering about Muslims and pretty much anyone with dark skin, etc.
If that's all your definition of fascism, then you've just proven the parent's point.
-N - wrenchone, on 10/03/2008, -1/+3I forgot the 'ing' on the end of happening.
And seriously, if you think the current state of American is ANYTHING like Italy during WWII, you need a history lesson.
The simple fact that you can get on the internet in America and access ANY information and say WHATEVER YOU WANT about the government with no fear of repercussions should be your first clue that we are NOT living in a totalitarian sate, one of the major factors of a fascist government.
When the day comes that I am required BY LAW to praise our president whom I was unable to vote for, when all industry is under complete Government control, and when I no longer have any ability to vote for my representative leaders, then I'd say we're living in a Fascist State. Until then I'll respectfully disagree. - fwertz, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2Wow a lot of you will go to great lengths to criticize this bill. Something tells me you'd different in opinion if it were your bad mortgage.
- Nerys, on 10/04/2008, -0/+5Fwertz. What part of this bill will DO NOTHING to assist with ANYONES MORTGAGE do you not understand.?
Not one penny will goto ANY homeowner. Not one single penny. The financial institutions are getting EVERY SINGLE PENNY.
You will STILL have your bad mortgage UNCHANGED and in fact it will be WORSE because the value of the dollars you use to PAY for that mortgage is going to suffer now AND your going to have to pay MORE in taxes to "repay" this bail out.
I will say it again. THIS BAILOUT IS NOT BAILING OUT MORTGAGES ITS BAILING OUT THE BANKS AND ONLY THE BANKS
HOMEOWNERS WILL GET NOTHING. - biggerapple3am, on 10/04/2008, -4/+1Nerys, I'm on the Harvard Economics Professors page, I'm trying to guess which one is you....
.....................................................................................................................................................
.......................................................................................................
...........................................................................................................................................
........................................................................................................... - mweber02, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1aristotle0dude, Fascism has rightly been called the merger of the corporations and the state. When Congress successfully passes a bill like this, what would you call it? Don't argue with me. I am smarter than you.
- coyote1284, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1"Wow, how much of the Koolaid did you drink?"
A gallon, I think I'm immune to the poison now.
- pintomp3, on 10/03/2008, -4/+44Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power.
- SuperWinner, on 10/03/2008, -10/+106Sweden has hot atheist babes!
- brad3378, on 10/03/2008, -1/+10But do they speak engrish?
- sassyjack, on 10/03/2008, -1/+15Inga-rish.
- highlite, on 10/03/2008, -0/+7McCain loves hot babes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5XpFb6n7-Yo
Dehydrated hot babies, that is. - Araya213, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2That was awesome!
- AbsurdParadox, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2And more socialists than America, lol.
- poxonyou, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Hot babes, freezing weather...great music, friendly government. Sweden is at the top of my must visit list (if I start earning some serious dough).
- shaka999, on 10/03/2008, -6/+12Cya later.
- OMGWTFROFLMAOx2, on 10/03/2008, -4/+17Dude...
then can I have your xbox and stereo?- burstaneurysm, on 10/03/2008, -2/+6dibs on his go-kart.
- hydroplane, on 10/03/2008, -6/+17Your papers, please.
- SonOfDisaster, on 10/04/2008, -1/+1Ihre papiere, bitte :D
- selfhelp, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2http://stressmanagementtips.wordpress.com/2008/10/ ...
- PhantomRogue, on 10/03/2008, -1/+65Some Earmarks of this bill...
In order to keep movie production in the US, production companies can deduct the cost of producing from their taxes. Representative Diane Watson, D-California has been one of the program's biggest supporters... The Measure would cost taxpayers $478 million over 10 years.
Oh, so you can now Deduct MOVIE PRODUCTION, ***** producing MOVIES, is now tax deductible. How the ***** does this get ignored. This bill allows GIANT ***** COMPANIES, to deduct the production of movies from their taxes...
13.25 of Every 13.50 dollar Tax on Imported RUM will now be refunded to PUERTO RICO and the US VIRGIN ISLANDS.
So, my taxes go up, yet Rum imports, now get back all but 25 cents of their tax... So of the 25% the Federal Government taxes from me, can I get back 24% of that please?- dfeifer, on 10/03/2008, -0/+9Guess they figure if they get us drunk enough, we won't care.
- ShadyG, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4Maybe it's that I don't fully understand the issue, but why aren't production costs deductible already? In any other business, you deduct all your costs against your revenues and pay taxes on the profit. Why would movie production be any different?
- GutterMoo, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3The price of the rum won't decrease in price either.
- rex84, on 10/03/2008, -2/+1@GutterMoo: Redundancy is redundant.
- homercles337, on 10/03/2008, -0/+8This is the part that really pissed me off:
...the Senate added about $100bn in new tax breaks to win Republican votes.
I mean, jebus ***** christ, Bush's tax loans alone account for 42% of the deficit. ***** the fire is going good now! Throw another $100B in there! You betchya! - joeanon, on 10/03/2008, -6/+1Oh please.. you don't make more than 250k a year your taxes aren't going up.. unless you vote Mccain of course.
- KibibyteBrain, on 10/03/2008, -1/+5Also, while I don't support the absurd taxcuts on Rum, they do sort of make sense. Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands are not fully represented in the US government and therefore should not be subject to the same tax responsibilities to the central government. I mean, wasn't that a founding principle of the US?
- mrn111, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6Oh, and let's not even talk about the wooden arrows.
- dfeifer, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2heh,.. try even shipping something to either of those places. I still have to do full international paperwork and everything like i do for any other country. Their treated like the bastard stepchild. "We will pretend you aren't part of the family, unless we need something from you"
- addiktion, on 10/04/2008, -1/+4So f*cking *****! Ok lets throw another 100 billion on there. Give them some extra limits on bank accounts to $250k when the government or most people don't even have that much in savings so it's worthless add-on and lets shove it back down the peoples throats. GREAT! Thanks you just accelerated our debt to unprecedented amounts you gay ASS rich f*cking elitist congress members! I'm so pissed off right now *sigh*
- blitzkriegpunk, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1more like Victory Gin ...
- mike17032, on 10/03/2008, -23/+6Dont let the door hit your ass on the way out.
- nycmac247, on 10/03/2008, -2/+4lol you get raped and ask for more. scientology? that LDS cult where those people dress like they're from the 1800s? German scat porn? keep looking around and you'll find a like minded community
- Donwangugi, on 10/03/2008, -18/+13I dunno if this is totally bad. Remember the New Deal? Was that fascism? Remember Hoover? He did nothing, how did that work out?
- Canadaa, on 10/03/2008, -9/+5you make good sense sir, dugg
- ancientshoes, on 10/03/2008, -6/+2THANK YOU! I've been waiting for someone to say this
- Zerohcool, on 10/03/2008, -2/+5Actually Hoover came up with many programs that were designed to attempt to jumpstart the economy and none of these worked. What Hoover opposed was the direct intervention of helping the average American citizen because he was afraid they would become dependent on the federal assistance. But thank you for your common misconception on the great depression please go distribute your ignorance elsewhere.
- joeanon, on 10/03/2008, -4/+7And he is getting dugg down while the fear mongers rise to the top.
I'm not sure if liberals are riding the economy to win the election or if people are really this stupid.
Bush spent 4 trillion on borrowed money and you SAID NOTHING.
We spend 2.2 trillion PER YEAR in health care costs and you SAY NOTHING.
We've spent 600b in Iraq war costs including a single bill worth 368b which passed without a blink of the publics or congresses eye.
Now all of sudden 800b is going to kill us. This is apocalyptic propaganda and it's not necessary to win the election.
No way 800b can bring down a 14 trillion dollar economy. There is also no way the banking industry can't take the hit.
I would buy up the sitting houses and that's all. I have no idea what congresses new plan consists of in it's entirety, but I am for some type of fiscal action.
For this to have bi-partisan support AND be introduced by Bush (who is basically in his own political party now) a lot of people must had legit fears. Warren Buffet clearly agrees we need it and has thrown his own money.
You know Bush and the GOP wouldn't make this move, knowing it's political suicide and will put Obama in the White House, unless they really thought the fallout was worse than asking the public for 800b.
This is in every way an uncharacteristic move for Bush and the GOP on an election year of a close race.
The dems want nothing to do with it really which is why they locked their votes to ensure it can only pass with bi-partisan support. The GOP probably though they would trick the Dems the first time with their prepared attack against Pelosi as an election year stunt.
No rational political mind would think this bill is a smart way to win an election and EVERYONE knows Bush is ***** himself with concern over not being protected by the next President. Though, I'd be very surprised if Obama didn't pardon him.
We've all been saying Bush wants the GOP to win this election at any cost. So the threat is most likely real, at least in the minds of our politicians and their advisers.
All facts point to the need for a stimulus package to the banking industry.
Of course, American's were all for it when THEY were getting the check, which was a pointless effort, and now faced with a true economic crisis they lock up in standard polarized fashion.
All I can think is many of you know this hurts the GOP most and want it dragged out as long as possible.
Or you're all really that stupid that you think 800b can sink a 14 trillion dollar economy.
In these last weeks I've lost a lot of respect for the IQ level of reddit. - xerigen, on 10/03/2008, -1/+5FDR prolonged what should have just been a severe recession.
- PhantomRogue, on 10/03/2008, -0/+9@joeanon
Oh where to start.
Bush and the GOP would make this move 100 out of 100 times. Why, because they got the deal sweetened FOR THEMSELVES. They got an EXTRA 100 Billion (not million, BILLION) in tax breaks and relief for their specific needs.
This Bill is NOT about the upcoming election. Its about the fake crisis they caused (dropping Rates lower and lower, no downpayments, etc). You do realize that Fannie and Freddie (Who this bill is supposed to bail out, not the "sweetened package"), are failing because they gave too much money to people THEY ***** KNEW couldn't pay it back. They couldn't sell their Junk Securities at any lower of a Rate to stay profitable. Thus they collapsed.
This Bill is about Bush and the Republicans causing a huge debt ***** and trying to find a way to sustain it even further until they are out of office, so in 4 years, the next Republican Candidate (not McCain, he will be dead by then), can say, "We tried to fix it with the 800 Billion dollar Bailout, but the Democrats still couldn't fix it 4 years later, blah blah blah."
As to Warren Buffet...
He bought STOCK. He gained Ownership Percentage of Goldman Sachs (Voting Stock). This 700 Billion gains us ZERO STOCK. It offers us Warrants for Future Stock. We will not own a portion of Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, this 700 Billion will buy us nothing tangible. When the time comes to "call the Warrants" it will be well past this "crisis" and by the time it happens, Wall Street Lobbyists will be crying, "You can't call on the Warrants now, we finally got Stable, if you take the 700 Billion back, we will go back into free-fall", and thus, we will have nothing to show for the 700Billion other than the rubbery and flabby ***** that just got ***** by a 800 Billion dollar dick.
- lithera, on 10/03/2008, -2/+49A great disturbance in the force was felt as millions of U.S. citizens suddenly cried out in pain due to a massive ass rape.
- ScottoGato, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2Should I pour coke in my ass?
- bacon_skoda, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4diet coke works better
- IpecacNeat, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Crack?
- Pstmann, on 10/03/2008, -2/+9Vote them out, place extra money (if you have any) in gold, land and ammo, stop funding 401k's (Corporate Elite Theft Funds) and don't use credit unless absolutely necessary.
- joeanon, on 10/03/2008, -6/+9Why didn't you assholes bother speaking out against the 600b in Iraq funding bills ?
They had one bill for 368b pass in 2003.
For, what, a useless war that idiots allowed fear to drive them toward.
This time you have a tangible problem, not false intelligence on WMD, and you're ALL about calling America Fascist.
But when they were funding your war you loved it.
Poor barely educated Americans. There is absolutely no way 700b can bring down a 14 trillion dollar economy.
Our total debt aren't even equal to our yearly GDP.
Where were you when Bush spend 4 trillion in borrowed money ?
Where were you all these years we've been spending 2.2 trillion in health care .. PER YEAR.
These costs make the bailout look fairly insignificant.
Why can't you people do basic math ? - Tomchei, on 10/03/2008, -2/+9A 14 trillion dollar GDP can be brought down by a 10 trillion dollar debt. That leaves the entire country with a working capital the size of the state of California. It won't be paid back yet, we'll still be in debt.
Payrolls will be met for the next 8 months, credit will be harder than it should be to get (to compensate for the gimmies), but once the new president is in, unemployment will reach 10% and he will be blamed for it.
- joeanon, on 10/03/2008, -6/+9Why didn't you assholes bother speaking out against the 600b in Iraq funding bills ?
- nick1971, on 10/03/2008, -2/+9I find it amazing the USA has managed to combine the worst of free-market theory with the worst of the interventionionist state.
Thanks from Germany for the definition of sub-optimal.- maximoo2, on 10/03/2008, -2/+6Similarly, with this 700$ bailout America can be seen as a socialist country -- but without all the benefits that most socialist countries have, such as inexpensive health care and housing.
- MASTERPL, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3If you are really rich come to Poland. Price are only 2 to 3x higher than in the states.
- davidkeithjones, on 10/03/2008, -5/+12Thats a lot of go-carts.
- joeanon, on 10/03/2008, -2/+7How is a banking bailout Fascism when the banking system is without a doubt broken.
Vs 368 billion in Iraq funding in one bill in 2003.
Tone down your propaganda please. You're using the same scare tactic that America wants change against.- Zerohcool, on 10/03/2008, -1/+6The Act of the bailout is not what people are referring to as fascist. It is the fact that the bill was passed based on the issuance of the ever widening power of the executive branch despite an outcry from the populous. One representative actually stated that they would be voting for the passage despite a 99% issuance of emails stating that his "constituents" were opposed to the bill.
- bacon_skoda, on 10/03/2008, -3/+299% of constituents are misinformed.
- Nerys, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4Does not matter the constituents are the boss. They (congress) are supposed to DO AS THEY ARE TOLD.
THATS the problem. They Don't - Memitim, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4And yet are still more informed that Congress apparently since we've seen this coming for a couple years. It was quite apparent when housing prices hit levels that were flagrantly ridiculous for the area/incomes and yet were defended as "what the market will bear." I guess some people have never heard of corrections.
It was obvious when people we knew with average jobs were snagging these overpriced houses with no money down. It's not like incomes were even keeping up with inflation so why in the hell would anyone think that any kind of mortgage would make living in these homes possible over the long term?
It became a goddamned puppet show when Fannie and Freddie started slicing up mortgage payments and playing with combinations of the pieces to create psychotic money making devices. Every transaction has positive aspects that make up the revenue and negative aspects that make up the costs. You can't just take the good and make the bad disappear; the costs always remain. And when you lose track of them, they will bite you in the ass like nothing else in the world. But we were being alarmists since what in the ***** could we understand about finance that those feeding at the money fountain could not?
These ***** wunderkind who are apparently so trusted that when they say something needs to be done, people eat in up like candy, are the architects of this mess. They failed to see it coming, they failed to implement safeguards, and they failed to react in a timely matter. Only when the ***** is really hitting the fan do they recognize the severity of the situation and react in a scared, irresponsible manner, swallowing the demands of a man who not only made a fortune as one of the prime beneficiaries of the system that created this mess, but then stepped into the executive cabinet and failed and/or neglected to raise the alarm until far too late to get a hold of the situation proactively but just soon enough to put the Congress in a massive squeeze right before their recess.
But what in the ***** do I know; I'm just a misinformed constituent.
- fuzzlog, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6I only see 2 options for ya!
1) bend over, spread wide and learn to say "Xie, Xie".
2) leave and never come back. - JerodSlay, on 10/03/2008, -0/+8The roll call
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml- ScottoGato, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3A little more interactive version:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/ho ... - tyronenguyen, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Yea my representative Stark voted no on both bailouts. I sent him emails to thank him and wish him luck, cause we're all gonna need it.
- JerodSlay, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1@ tyronenguyen, me too.
- ScottoGato, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3A little more interactive version:
- TheGuruStud, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6I'm sorry sir, your passport has been revoked. We aren't allowing any poor tax payers out of the country. We are under order to keep you here to bail out the rich. Have a nice day.
- vxp19, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2That actually is what Stalin did in the early-ish days of USSR (in the 1920s and 1930s).
ALL farmers were basically told: no, you're not going to get an external passport (noone else got it either) nor are you going to get an internal passport. So they weren't even able to move within the country itself, let alone out of it. They weren't even allowed on an airplane! Hell, DOGS were allowed to fly, but farmers weren't.
Same reason.. Stalin needed them to stay where they are and work, so he'd have enough money/resources for his industrialization.
Substitute industrialization for warfare/retarded bailouts/etc and.... sound familiar?
- vxp19, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2That actually is what Stalin did in the early-ish days of USSR (in the 1920s and 1930s).
- Minarchian, on 10/03/2008, -1/+11Hold on to your wallets....inflation is going to go through the ROOF!
- Infidelcastr0, on 10/04/2008, -5/+2Better than a deflationary spiral.
- ctnp, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Six of one, half-dozen of the other.
- bushout, on 10/03/2008, -0/+5Sorry, you're on the no-fly-list, you're not going anywhere son.
- EvergreenFF, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1agreed whole heartedly....and here's why
http://digg.com/business_finance/FINANCIAL_CRISIS_ ... - 30somethinDad, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4Time to stop paying taxes.
- SetOverSet, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Yep, and both Obama and McCain were for this bill. So if you vote for either one of them, well you're putting an idiot in office.
- duffman03, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1The result of fear mongering.
- gravityPersists, on 10/03/2008, -8/+240You have to submit it to digg before we can digg it up...
- censorshipwreck, on 10/03/2008, -14/+190Ground crew to economy, ground crew to economy. Pull up...pull up....PULL UP!!!!
- AuburnTigers, on 10/03/2008, -6/+12Ummm, where did "$800" come from? It clearly says 700 in the article.
- Recidivus, on 10/03/2008, -0/+21"The House adopted the new version after the Senate added about $100bn in new tax breaks to win Republican votes. "
Tis in the article. - iamichi, on 11/12/2008, -0/+1Cuz $700 clearly wouldn't be enough.
- Ericdigital, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2I haven't been keeping up on this. So they rejected the first one but passed the second one, more expensive one?
- tyronenguyen, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Yea the rejected the first one cause most of them forgot to ignore the public. Then on the second pass, they remembered to ignore the public. Also, they didn't bother to fix house.gov until today, so less people could contact their representative.
- Recidivus, on 10/03/2008, -0/+21"The House adopted the new version after the Senate added about $100bn in new tax breaks to win Republican votes. "
- rv361162, on 10/03/2008, -3/+45It's estimated $850 billion with all the extra ***** and whipped cream added to this bill.
Time to react:
http://www.700billiondollarparkinglot.com- PakoBedejo, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2The times are stupid...now. But once unemployment hits 10% or more, it'll make more sense :P
- inigomntoya, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4That is one frightening image...
Please warn me next time I am about to see Pelosi crack a smile. It reminds me of the time I watched a recreation of the Titanic break in two. - chokeaduck, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1We have enough trouble with gas reserves in Georgia, I don't need to burn more sitting in traffic.
- thealsir, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1That picture is going to go down in history as a shining exemplar of asshattery.
- azhura, on 10/03/2008, -6/+4"This is Ground Control to Major Tom
You've really made the grade
And the papers want to know whose shirts you wear
Now it's time to leave the capsule if you dare..."- Araya213, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1"This is Major Tom to Ground Control
Im stepping through the door
And Im floating in a most peculiar way
And the stars look very different today..."
- Araya213, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1"This is Major Tom to Ground Control
- DigitAl56K, on 10/03/2008, -2/+10Exactly. Now this bill has passed I'm just going to sit here and watch the market recover.
.. still waiting ..
.. still waiting ..
:S- lilbitmoreslyk, on 10/03/2008, -10/+4because the stock market exists in the land for faeries and lepruchans it just MAGICALLY in two ***** seconds TURNS completely AROUND and rebounds over 800 points!!! Because @DigitAl56k ***** said so.
stfu. - DigitAl56K, on 10/03/2008, -2/+61 - This isn't twitter and @replies don't work here.
2 - "stfu"? What gives you a monopoly on opinion?
3 - The stock market does make enormous swings almost instantaneously on major news. - lilbitmoreslyk, on 10/03/2008, -3/+3Not in this case, the money has to first reach the financial institutions.
- TheSabre, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1You do understand how the legislative process in America works, right? At the time you posted your response, Bush hadn't even signed it yet. Meaning, it was not yet law. And as lilbitmoreslyk said, it will take time for the newly signed law to actually dispurse any money.
- DigitAl56K, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4You do understand how the stock market works, right? It's based on speculation, which means it does not matter at all that the money hasn't been disbursed yet, only that the market knows that it will be.
- Nerys, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Yet the market was able to essentially take an instant nose dive this past monday when the house did NOT pass it the first time?
Monday was a temper tantrum. Wall street PURPOSELY dumped the market as "black mail" saying GIVE us the damned money or else.
This is nothing more than a HEIST of the largest variety.
- lilbitmoreslyk, on 10/03/2008, -10/+4because the stock market exists in the land for faeries and lepruchans it just MAGICALLY in two ***** seconds TURNS completely AROUND and rebounds over 800 points!!! Because @DigitAl56k ***** said so.
- Thoraseya, on 10/03/2008, -8/+2Thank God this legislation passed.
- rv361162, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2/sarcasm?
- theconster222, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2my cats name is ShrimpToast
- oxdeltaxo, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Sit back, Kick back, and watch the economy get bushwhacked.
- AuburnTigers, on 10/03/2008, -6/+12Ummm, where did "$800" come from? It clearly says 700 in the article.
- GetItBuilt, on 10/03/2008, -26/+125To bad I thought this was America. Good thing I can still Digg from where ever the heck I move too. Cause this country STINKS!
- rmxz, on 10/03/2008, -2/+100“I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me & the financial institutions at the rear, the latter is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless.”
- Abraham Lincoln, 16th President of the United States
Guess he called it even before Ron Paul did.- NidStyles, on 10/03/2008, -0/+9Lincoln was responsible for the legalization of corporations in the first place.
- Infidelcastr0, on 10/04/2008, -1/+4I just love how conservatives are so worried about the super-de-dooper rich
"elite." Wanna get rid of em? Here's a thought,
How about we tax the ever long crap out of their estates and close all the loopholes they hide their fortunes under. Maybe we could regulate their banks a bit while we're at it.
- nicheplayer, on 10/03/2008, -8/+12Even if I agreed with you, I could never digg up a comment with so many spelling errors in such a small space.
- coyote1284, on 10/03/2008, -5/+10Seig heil, grammar nazi!
- Firanide, on 10/03/2008, -1/+12Sieg*
:) - cdahlkvist, on 10/03/2008, -1/+5Grammar is all we have left. The government gave everything else away.
- nick1971, on 10/03/2008, -1/+5Sorry but as I come from Germany.
der Sieg (victory) has a capital letter as it is a nouns does Heil because it is a noun.
The US has been a fascist state for a long time
http://www.oldamericancentury.org/14pts.htm
There are a lot of comparisons between Nazi (NS) Germany and the US over the last 10 years.
Look up the words Reichsbrandverordnung and enabling legislation you get the patriot act et al.
its the same you have given powers to the executive branch that are frightening.
The pebbles get to vote until the avalanche starts - do not vote irresponsibly ,this is your chance not to vote for the worst of European history - don't make our mistake - we believe in you, do not let us down.
- rmxz, on 10/03/2008, -0/+57Oh, my mistake. Jefferson beat Lincoln to it.
“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.” - Thomas Jefferson- coyote1284, on 10/03/2008, -2/+12I think he's a little off with that ending thought. I think we'll end up as employees and dependents of the corporation that controls the region in which you live.
- dfeifer, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6Was actually thinking the same thing. An eventual return to the feudal system.
- ostracize, on 10/03/2008, -1/+9@coyote1284
You mean like corporation owned homes? Like not having our own homes? Like being homeless? Like exactly what Jefferson said? - Waterrat, on 10/03/2008, -0/+7 Indeed...And the corporations will own all the land,all the houses on the land,,all the shops,etc.
- coyote1284, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1@ostracize
What, is everyone who rents considered "homeless" now? Well *****, I'm must be doing pretty damn well for a homeless person.
- dfeifer, on 10/03/2008, -1/+8The status quo can be maintained now. the upper 10% get to keep their money now.
- JeddHampton, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2It's not about making money. It's about taking money. Disrupting the status quo, because the status is not quo.
- mike17032, on 10/03/2008, -5/+8Maybe you should work on moving out of your parents house before you dream of moving out of the country.
- metalgel, on 10/03/2008, -2/+7you're not going anywhere, sit back down.
- bernandoo, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3hasta luego
- Conseal, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3Suddenly the Scandinavian model doesn't seem so bad now, does it?
- Duncanizer1, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Hey, I could rent you my basement, here in Canada. Wireless internet, cozy, maybe a little cold in winter but eh! Should suit a digger's needs.
- Brad324, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1don't do it he'll molest you
- rmxz, on 10/03/2008, -2/+100“I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me & the financial institutions at the rear, the latter is my greatest foe. Corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless.”
- Lazydriver, on 10/03/2008, -31/+487God damn spineless *****.
- badenglishihave, on 10/03/2008, -3/+69Some spineless quotes:
"I voted against a bad bailout bill on Monday, and will now vote for a better rescue plan, not because I like it or want to, but because we fought as hard as we could for more reforms," Rep. Zach Wamp, R-Tennessee
"I don't want to have to vote for this bill, and I'm not defending it," ... "It's full of things that I don't believe in." Rep. Sue Myrick, R-North Carolina- PhantomRogue, on 10/03/2008, -1/+50"We were dealt a bad hand; we made the most of it," Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said Friday.
No, making the most out of it, would be to VETO THE ***** THING. You have failed us Ms. Pelosi. I hope you rot in hell for the atrocities you are imposing on the American People you proclaimed to defend when you ran on the ticket of Impeachment and reformation.
As to the rest of you spineless "Representatives," I hope your private plane crashes on the way back to wherever you came from, you deserve nothing less for selling out the American People to fraudulent banks and using my tax dollars to fund junk bonds and securities owned by foreign investors. - shig, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4Wamp is out. I'm joining the campaign of his challenger, a Ron Paul Republican.
- smurfsahoy, on 10/03/2008, -1/+3Yes, shockingly, national politics is not as it was protrayed in the Disney movies we watched in 5th grade while substitute teachers were in class, where a bill is presented and then voted yes or no on...
- Meekus, on 10/04/2008, -0/+12United States House of Representatives
Statement on HR 1424
October 3, 2008
"Madame Speaker, only in Washington could a bill demonstrably worse than its predecessor be brought back for another vote and actually expect to gain votes. That this bailout was initially defeated was a welcome surprise, but the power-brokers in Washington and on Wall Street could not allow that defeat to be permanent. It was most unfortunate that this monstrosity of a bill, loaded up with even more pork, was able to pass.
The Federal Reserve has already injected hundreds of billions of dollars into US and world credit markets. The adjusted monetary base is up sharply, bank reserves have exploded, and the national debt is up almost half a trillion dollars over the past two weeks. Yet, we are still told that after all this intervention, all this inflation, that we still need an additional $700 billion bailout, otherwise the credit markets will seize and the economy will collapse. This is the same excuse that preceded previous bailouts, and undoubtedly we will hear it again in the future after this bailout fails.
One of the most dangerous effects of this bailout is the incredibly elevated risk of moral hazard in the future. The worst performing financial services firms, even those who have been taken over by the government or have filed for bankruptcy, will find all of their poor decision-making rewarded. What incentive do Wall Street firms or any other large concerns have to make sound financial decisions, now that they see the federal government bailing out private companies to the tune of trillions of dollars? As Congress did with the legislation authorizing the Fannie and Freddie bailout, it proposes a solution that exacerbates and encourages the problematic behavior that led to this crisis in the first place.
With deposit insurance increasing to $250,000 and banks able to set their reserves to zero, we will undoubtedly see future increases in unsound lending. No one in our society seems to understand that wealth is not created by government fiat, is not created by banks, and is not created through the manipulation of interest rates and provision of easy credit. A debt-based society cannot prosper and is doomed to fail, as debts must either be defaulted on or repaid, neither resolution of which presents this country with a pleasant view of the future. True wealth can only come about through savings, the deferral of present consumption in order to provide for a higher level of future consumption. Instead, our government through its own behavior and through its policies encourages us to live beyond our means, reducing existing capital and mortgaging our future to pay for present consumption.
The money for this bailout does not just materialize out of thin air. The entire burden will be borne by the taxpayers, not now, because that is politically unacceptable, but in the future. This bailout will be paid for through the issuance of debt which we can only hope will be purchased by foreign creditors. The interest payments on that debt, which already take up a sizeable portion of federal expenditures, will rise, and our children and grandchildren will be burdened with increased taxes in order to pay that increased debt.
As usual, Congress has show itself to be reactive rather than proactive. For years, many people have been warning about the housing bubble and the inevitable bust. Congress ignored the impending storm, and responded to this crisis with a poorly thought-out piece of legislation that will only further harm the economy. We ought to be ashamed."
-Congressman Ron Paul
- PhantomRogue, on 10/03/2008, -1/+50"We were dealt a bad hand; we made the most of it," Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi said Friday.
- Plasmatica, on 10/03/2008, -3/+34I wonder what Ron Paul voted.
- odigity, on 10/03/2008, -3/+42You really have to wonder? You haven't paid any attention to the man, have you.
- badenglishihave, on 10/03/2008, -0/+19http://www.opencongress.org/people/voting_history/ ...
His vote should be up there soon if it isn't listed somewhere else already. - DiscoLando, on 10/03/2008, -1/+18Do you know what his nickname is?
- Plasmatica, on 10/03/2008, -1/+23I'm actually selling new and improved sarcasm-o-meters. It seems like you guys need an upgrade.
- dfeifer, on 10/03/2008, -0/+13listed as a nay ..http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml
- DreKor, on 10/03/2008, -1/+12Since no one has answered this, since it might be rhetorical, Paul voted against it. Just clearing that up.
- numb, on 10/03/2008, -1/+12Sometimes it's hard to tell who's being sarcastic or just plain ignorant around here. I'm sure there are plenty on here that don't know how Dr. No voted.
- odigity, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4
@DiscoLando: (raising my hand) Dr. No!
@Plasmatica: honestly, I couldn't tell, but yes, I suspected - CaptRage, on 10/03/2008, -1/+3If he voted Aye, would that change your mind how you feel about the issue?
- Plasmatica, on 10/03/2008, -0/+7@CaptRage, of course not. If he voted for it, I'd be the first to call him a rat...or a senile old man.
- odigity, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2If he voted yes, I'd accuse the machines of being rigged. :)
Occam's razor, bitches.
- psingl8715, on 10/03/2008, -5/+31Times like this I wish I believed in god. Atleast then, I could be relieved in knowing these bastards are going to hell.
- MRoCkEd, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3Amen to that.
- rv361162, on 10/03/2008, -9/+4Yeah, we're pretty well *****.
I tossed in a quick summary of the spiraling disaster we've put ourselves into below:.... Also we have to react and not just roll over and let the government ***** us with out at least squirming a bit.
http://www.700billiondollarparkinglot.com - Phate8263, on 10/03/2008, -1/+31***** those ***** *****!
- MRoCkEd, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2Well put.
- DreKor, on 10/03/2008, -0/+16Not all of them. My Congressman voted against it (and OMG he's a Democrat). He's up for re-election, I'm totally voting for him. WI-8!
- DreKor, on 10/03/2008, -0/+8Also, my Senator voted against it. Then again, he's Russ Feingold. I like Wisconsin. A lot.
- revjustin2, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4My congresssman, also a Dem, voted against it, as it the others in area and guess where I live....Texas!
- odigity, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4Voting against this bill is great, but before you go rushing off to enlist in the campaign, check the rest of his record. We need real patriots, not a guy who gets 95% wrong and occasionally accidentally stumbles across a good decision.
I'm just saying, complete your research before deciding. And maintain a high minimum threshold when considering Democrats or Republicans. If in doubt, vote third party/independent. - DreKor, on 10/03/2008, -0/+3I liked Kagen already, but this put him over the top. His opponent is a douche bag running on neocon talking points who has never run a clean ad (i know that's not a purely political statement, but it's true). Not much of a 3rd party showing. So, there you go.
- tyronenguyen, on 10/04/2008, -0/+0My California Democrat Congressman Stark voted against both bills. I should call him up tomorrow and thank him.
- socalftw, on 10/03/2008, -2/+25***** ---> Fan. *Splat.*
- kelmaster1, on 10/03/2008, -1/+5Seriously, but you had to know that this was going to happen. The whole legislature and the President is a ***** sham. The "Bank" will not die easily.
Those who oppose and actually have influence will be bribed or dealt with. (Kennedy?)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_11110 - fuzzmeister, on 10/03/2008, -4/+3I agree, even though I agree with the bailout. It is ***** pitiful that what got this bill passed was rampant pork, not an understanding of the economic situation.
- Wargalas, on 10/03/2008, -2/+7Welcome to your Democratically controlled Congress. Is it everything you hoped it would be?
- sirellyn, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2I was kind of hoping for a third party controlled congress. I mean without it I suppose I was expecting more of the same.
- Wargalas, on 10/03/2008, -0/+1Ok, ok, ok, FINE! I'll run. You talked me into it. :)
- PaulPi3rce, on 10/03/2008, -0/+8You want the real spinless list? Here is the list of the representatives that not only changed their vote, but had pork in the bill. The REP's that were bribed:
Rep. Melissa Bean [D, IL-8]
Rep. Judy Biggert [R, IL-13]
Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen [R, NJ-11]
Rep. Jim Gerlach [R, PA-6]
Rep. Alcee Hastings [D, FL-23]
Rep. James Ramstad [R, MN-3]
I'm not to fond of the others that changed their vote either. But according to opencongress.org there are those that were specifically porked.- sealink, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2What specific projects were each of them tied to?
- sealink, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2What specific projects were each of them tied to?
- repins, on 10/03/2008, -0/+8well at least the cost of wooden arrows should go down :(
- dfeifer, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2 SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS
DESIGNED FOR USE BY CHILDREN./
(a) In General- Paragraph (2) of section 4161(b) is amended by
redesignating subparagraph (B) as subparagraph (C) and by
inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new subparagraph:/
`(B) EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROW SHAFTS-
Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to any shaft
consisting of all natural wood with no laminations or
artificial means of enhancing the spine of such shaft
(whether sold separately or incorporated as part of a
finished or unfinished product) of a type used in the
manufacture of any arrow which after its assembly--/
`(i) measures 5/16 of an inch or less in
diameter, and/
`(ii) is not suitable for use with a bow
described in paragraph (1)(A).'./
(b) Effective Date- The amendments made by this section shall
apply to shafts first sold after the date of enactment of this Act./
hmm.. we really need children shooting arrows everywhere?
- dfeifer, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2 SEC. 503. EXEMPTION FROM EXCISE TAX FOR CERTAIN WOODEN ARROWS
- BullPucky333, on 10/03/2008, -4/+4Here's a list of the yea's. They need to be removed from office next month...starting with Pelosi (tool of the banking system).
Abercrombie
Ackerman
Alexander
Allen
Andrews
Arcuri
Baca
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Bean
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd (FL)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carson
Castle
Clarke
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Conaway
Cooper
Costa
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
DeGette
DeLauro
Dent
Dicks
Dingell
Donnelly
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Frelinghuysen
Gerlach
Giffords
Gilchrest
Gonzalez
Gordon
Granger
Green, Al
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herger
Higgins
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hobson
Hoekstra
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inglis (SC)
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Knollenberg
Kuhl (NY)
LaHood
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Lewis (KY)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCrery
McGovern
McHugh
McKeon
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Myrick
Nadler
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Ortiz
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Ramstad
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Ros-Lehtinen
Ross
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schmidt
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shays
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Solis
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Sullivan
Sutton
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tierney
Towns
Tsongas
Upton
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch (VT)
Weldon (FL)
Weller
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
- hsoj, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2*****
- visionviper, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4***** Democrats - majority of Republicans voted no. Who would have though - the Republicans are right on a economic issue!
- SetOverSet, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3Yep, and Obama and McCain both went along for the ride.
- badenglishihave, on 10/03/2008, -3/+69Some spineless quotes:
- cle2105, on 10/03/2008, -34/+213The Socialist Party of America just won this years political race without even fielding a candidate... lame
- swrostmore, on 10/03/2008, -11/+66I wish. At least with Democratic Socialists, the middle class gets a slice of the pie. These Corporate Socialists really make me sick - socialism for the Rich, capitalism for the poor is the worst of both worlds.
- jbettineski, on 10/03/2008, -0/+22Right! If it were really socialism, the money would come down from the top.
As it is, we're all going to be paying taxes for this. - swrostmore, on 10/03/2008, -1/+10If the Sanders Amendment had passed, it would have really been Socialism - a 10% income tax on millionaires to pay for the bailout. I imagine popular support for that amendment would have been 60% or higher had anyone actually known about it.
- wojtyk, on 10/04/2008, -2/+3Uhh yeah, because in every other real-life implementation of socialism, the working class and poor have always been treated so lavishly...
- Ymeg, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2It's not Capitalism if the poor pay the rich.
- jbettineski, on 10/03/2008, -0/+22Right! If it were really socialism, the money would come down from the top.
- SQLserver, on 10/03/2008, -9/+20What does this have to do with Socialism? This isn't socialism: It is what happens when Capitalist Corporations can lobby and control the government.
- regression, on 10/03/2008, -0/+27That's called corporatism. aka-fascism.
- Caerbannog, on 10/03/2008, -0/+14...and socialize all their bad debt (while pocketing the profits)
- Ymeg, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Capitalist Corporations = oxymoron.
- jarredm, on 10/03/2008, -13/+5This isn't socialisim guys you should look up the definitions of these words first. What this is, is much closer to fascism than anything else and is a direct result of the Republican theory of the unregulated free market. You know the theory right, get government off their backs so the greedy can screw the rest of us!
- snassiri, on 10/03/2008, -0/+6stop blaming the free markets. This is the result of anything but the free markets. It's the result of government meddling (supported by dems and repubs) in the market place. They may not be the kind of "regulations" you are thinking of. The kind of regulations we need are regulations on the government. Stop believing in the virtue of the state to take care of all your problems, cause as we are witnesses, the state is in it for itself.
- chadpyle, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4The government has been regulating the U.S. market since the early 1900s and has been responsible for several market crashes, including the Great Depression.
- Zuggy, on 10/03/2008, -0/+9This isn't a free market, because a free market would ALSO allow for bad business decisions to fail. Apparently the US is only a free market until someone ***** up.
- marx2k, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4No...tons of people can ***** up. The US is only a free market until someone large ***** up
- DirtyBinLV, on 10/03/2008, -3/+4Tons of people have thrown the word "Socialist" around the last couple weeks.
The only member of Congress that's remotely Socialist is Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT). He voted No on the bailout bill. Real Socialism involves spreading government money evenly among everyone, not giving all of it rich people.
From Sen. Sanders's web site-
"The Bush administration and Wall Street bankers got what they wanted - a $700 billion bailout with all the risk put on middle-income taxpayers," he said on Friday. "It is grossly unfair that the middle class, whose standard of living is declining, is forced to pick up the tab for Wall Street's greed and irresponsibility, and not the top 1 percent who have benefited from Bush's reckless policies. In the midst of the severe financial crisis facing our country it is clear that Congress must act, but this legislation does not accomplish what must be done,"- chadpyle, on 10/03/2008, -2/+4I think cle2105 was referring to the nationalization of private enterprise, which is indeed socialist.
- swrostmore, on 10/04/2008, -0/+4The bailout didn't nationalize anything except bad debt.
- nycmac247, on 10/03/2008, -3/+0National Socialists - NAZIs.
This is where a lot of those bankers got their startup money anyway... why do you think the Chase logo looks like a modernist Swastika?
http://www.gdusa.com/issue_2001/04_apr/feature/pic ...
National Socialism has always been the plan- enantiodromia, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2but but but, i thought the banks were controlled by the jews.
please, which one is it? - Infidelcastr0, on 10/04/2008, -0/+3I thought they were Lizard People?
I can't keep all the BS straight.
- enantiodromia, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2but but but, i thought the banks were controlled by the jews.
- graycat, on 10/03/2008, -3/+6This is not socialism. You don't even know what socialism is. There is a Socialist Party of the USA. And guess what? they have been against this ***** from the beginning: http://socialistparty-usa.org/statements/nobailout ...
- chadpyle, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2From what I can tell, the Socialist party has at least two candidates running in this election.
- r3negadeX, on 10/04/2008, -1/+1OH I GET IT MCCAIN AND OBAMA LOL!
Seriously, you should visit Wikipedia's page on socialism; you have no idea what you're talking about. - chadpyle, on 10/11/2008, -0/+1The nationalization of private enterprise (AKA: the "bailout") is a socialist practice. If it makes you feel any better, they're fascists too.
- r3negadeX, on 10/04/2008, -1/+1OH I GET IT MCCAIN AND OBAMA LOL!
- mempko, on 10/03/2008, -4/+1You mean Socialist Party for those that Matter. The poor have no socialism in this country. Capitalism survives for as long as it does because it has socialism to bail it out.
- jerbaker, on 10/04/2008, -1/+4What is wrong with this country is ignorance just like you have on display here. You don't even know what socialism is. You're gonna have to look it up on Wikipedia before you respond to me.
- swrostmore, on 10/03/2008, -11/+66I wish. At least with Democratic Socialists, the middle class gets a slice of the pie. These Corporate Socialists really make me sick - socialism for the Rich, capitalism for the poor is the worst of both worlds.
- bigfatpaulie, on 10/03/2008, -18/+275UN-BE-LEEEEEIV-ABLE.
What wonders $100 billion in pork will do.- gravityPersists, on 10/03/2008, -17/+12feed a hundred American fatasses.
"I like Bacon!"- DeucesWild, on 10/03/2008, -0/+23Whoa I hate the bill too but don't tarnish bacons name. Man I could eat a whole plate of bacon right now. Bacon & Dr Pepper MMmmmmm....
- welestgw, on 10/03/2008, -1/+8www.baconsalt.com
- blah247, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2Bacon salt! That is the best invention since the Internet!!
- jonshipman, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4I shall now proceed to blow your mind.
http://www.baconnaise.com/
And yes, it is what you think it is. - Orsigno, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2Om Nom Nom Nom!
- mikemil828, on 10/03/2008, -0/+16//UN-BE-LEEEEEIV-ABLE.//
What? You were surprised that congress wouldn't simply give up on the bailout.- jsd8cc, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4I believe what he meant to say was:
"UN-BUH-*****-LEIVABLE"
As in not surprise, but scorn. - mikemil828, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2//"UN-BUH-*****-LEIVABLE"//
I don't see how stuffing a swear word in the middle of another is supposed to change it's meaning, then again I have a hard time understanding the mind of your typical digger.
- jsd8cc, on 10/03/2008, -1/+4I believe what he meant to say was:
- pintomp3, on 10/03/2008, -1/+49they turned down the bill on monday because it didn't waste enough money. *****.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/03/2008, -4/+10I agree with the principle of the bailout bill, as I believe it is vital to staving off a collapse of the economy. However, $100 billion in pork is absurd. It is a sad reflection on the state of Congress that pork is what gets a bill like this passed, not economic understanding.
- latrosicarius, on 10/03/2008, -2/+5Excuse me for not believing you over actual economists and maybe something called "history" which make it plain as day that these bailouts do not help, and if anything, make things worse.
- fuzzmeister, on 10/03/2008, -1/+3Sorry, but I've also read many economists who think this bailout will help. There's never universal agreement on things like this. Further, I think that history has shown that while bailouts can have bad consequences, the lack of them also can.
- MrCobaltBlue, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2All the bail-out will do is drive us further into debt and extend the length of this recession (now most likely depression). As the dollar starts tanking you'll watch inflation go out of control and pretty soon your morning latte at Starbucks will cost $40 while you still make $250 a week.
- subliminalurge, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2"you'll watch inflation go out of control and pretty soon your morning latte at Starbucks will cost $40"
Why in the ***** would I drive to Starbucks for a latte in the morning when I have a perfectly good coffee pot at home?
- falstaff, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2Worst part is, at least one economist is saying that we were in worse shape at this same time last year, and nobody said anything. ***** election season!
http://www.poorandstupid.com/2008_09_28_chronArchi ...
(Pay attention to #2 especially)
There is no credit crisis!
"The main "crisis" concerning the financial markets seems to be in the quality of the news reports about them. "
A-*****-men - CMuffa, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2Are you saying the Jews aren't getting any of this money?
- jjmckay, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1This is why it was voted down in the first vote. Congress doesn't value free market economics, they value the pay off.
- xcvbn, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2sir, how dare you- addendums such as :
Sec. 503. Exemption from excise tax for certain wooden arrows designed for use by children ,
certainly you can not call this pork?
many "necessary" add ons also here - http://www.taxpayer.net/resources.php?category=&ty ... - SetOverSet, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1And I wonder what would have happened if Obama or McCain had stood up and opposed this bill? I guess in the end they felt like 700 billion plus a 100 billion in pork was a good deal.
- gravityPersists, on 10/03/2008, -17/+12feed a hundred American fatasses.
- gravityPersists, on 10/03/2008, -25/+292WHAT THE *****?!?
- SuperWinner, on 10/03/2008, -11/+6Clearly politics is a mystery to you my friend...
- infamousjeff, on 10/03/2008, -2/+22Well said. May I add a BBQ to that? WTFBBQ!@#
- cdahlkvist, on 10/03/2008, -0/+7Our government already added an LOL to it. WTFBBQLOLBITCHES!
- kevlar21, on 10/03/2008, -0/+4yep, about $100 billion in BBQ (pork)
- JoHnxXxKIddxXx, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1this mean no more 1.00 double cheese burgers.. from Mcdonalds.. PLain.. that is..
haha - Ghoztt, on 10/03/2008, -2/+13Thanks Obama! Thanks McSame! Thanks Pelosi! Thanks Bush! Thanks Cheney! Thanks Federal Reserve! Thanks 'Yes' voters in Congress!
- RevJonathan, on 10/03/2008, -1/+3May I add-
QUIT ***** SPENDING!!! - jave8u, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Hahaha 400 billion didn't cut it...
- addiktion, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1Such ludicrous amounts. HOW can you be so f*cking stupid congress. God you elite rich bastards.
- geddon, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1WANTED: Ben Shalom Bernanke
http://digg.com/users/geddon/gallery/8835063
Economic Terrorism - Extortion - Corporatism - Racketeering
- sprinter9109, on 10/03/2008, -17/+73Crap...
- thbigtiket21, on 10/04/2008, -1/+1it's amazing how many people think this should not have been passed. guess what happened when the government didn't do something last time a crisis like this happened. the great depression. then everyone's like "oh government, do something, its your job, save us." but i guess no one can be happy to see their money go to those goddamn greedy corporations. who the hell took loan regulations off of them? oh yah it was good ol' william clinton.
- brb1031, on 10/03/2008, -63/+13Crap, indeed. Now what?
Register to vote:
www.voteforchange.com- MRoCkEd, on 10/03/2008, -11/+79Obama voted for it too.
And you guys actually believe there is a difference between him and McCain?
It should be Ron Paul vs. Dennis Kucinich...- SchmuckofNI, on 10/03/2008, -4/+16Like I have (and many others) have been saying all along, this election is another lesser of two evils. If Obama and Mccain are supposedly "true" champions of the people, they would have pushed this bill to help homeowners, not these bankers and financial intuitions.
- coyote1284, on 10/03/2008, -9/+6Should have been, but isn't. Please, vote for the one you agree with the most instead of writing in someone or voting third party. *Hear me out.* The reason "3rd party" candidates get lees than 1% of the popular vote is because *no one has heard of them*! There's no buzz for them until after the Conventions. That's irresponsibly too late to start garnering interest for a serious candidate. If you want a third party in the White House, you better start planning for 2012 NOW!
- brb1031, on 10/03/2008, -1/+2Apparently, I should've used this link instead:
http://www.google.com/search?&q=voter+registration ...
Of which the one I posted above is the first sponsored link. - azbmr, on 10/03/2008, -1/+5@coyote1284 - I will NOT vote for a lesser of two evils. I will do exactly what a citizen is to do: vote for the person he/she feels will make the best President. If people stopped trying to be on the "winning team" we might be in better shape.
- MrM4nager, on 10/04/2008, -1/+4GRAVEL!!!
- coyote1284, on 10/06/2008, -0/+1@azbmr
As it stands right now, if your vote is not for Obama or McCain, it's a wasted vote. Your candidate *will not win*. People are not going to vote for a third party candidate if they don't know he exists until after the Dem and Rep Conventions. Start focusing on getting your candidate's name known for the 2012 election.
- MRoCkEd, on 10/03/2008, -11/+79Obama voted for it too.
- lyksbmx, on 10/03/2008, -19/+129Absolutely pathetic.
- MtnXfreerider, on 10/03/2008, -3/+7but its funny how republicans are being blamed already. yeah, it was a ***** bill, and it took 100 billion to convert enough republicans over.
Anyone can be bought over, 100 billion is a lot of breaks for their states.
If 170 democrats didnt vote yes on the bill we wouldnt be 800 billion farther in the hole. - DestroyFascism, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1860 pages of tax breaks, earmarks and bribes. Tax breaks for companies making flags....for e.g. The original bill was 4 pages.
Americans have just been robbed.
- MtnXfreerider, on 10/03/2008, -3/+7but its funny how republicans are being blamed already. yeah, it was a ***** bill, and it took 100 billion to convert enough republicans over.
- gravityPersists, on 10/03/2008, -21/+322What pisses me off the most is that I can't help but imagine all the ***** up, high power people, sitting back in their condos situated all over the nicest parts of the world, turning on their televisions and seeing the bailout passed, and then expressing joy that their corruption and greed paid off after-all, and they're not out of a job anymore.
- EntropyFan, on 10/03/2008, -1/+59Their corruption paid off a long time ago. They don't give a ***** if they have a job any more.
They had 6 figure salaries and parachute packages set and in place. They made their money regardless.
Didn't matter to them one God Damn if the bailout went through or not.- collution, on 10/03/2008, -0/+10Exactly, why don't people understand that already is beyond me.
- Pippers, on 10/03/2008, -5/+5EntropyFan has it right. What this bailout saves is all the small businesses and people on the bottom that didn't cause this.
- bpoteat, on 10/03/2008, -0/+136 figure? Try 7 and a few 8 figure salaries.
- TomT223, on 10/03/2008, -1/+13I think this proves honesty and decency no longer exists in America.
- kirkh, on 10/03/2008, -5/+0Yes. Everyone is out to get you. You are definitely the focus of all this corruption and greed. I can't believe someone finally uncovered this conspiracy. Kudos.
- ICSU, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2This is a long-time scam.
- jaundiced, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1oh people are still out of jobs.
you have no idea how much worse this is going to get. no ******* idea.
- jaundiced, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1oh people are still out of jobs.
- EntropyFan, on 10/03/2008, -1/+59Their corruption paid off a long time ago. They don't give a ***** if they have a job any more.
- paintgrl, on 10/03/2008, -45/+167To bad the Republicans in the house would not sign the dam bailout until tons of pork and tax cuts for the rich were added.
- Yarnage, on 10/03/2008, -17/+67If you compare the who voted for and against the bill, you'd realize that more Democrats voted for the bill than against it where as more Republicans voted against than for the vote.
This means your statement is backwards. Let's fix it:
"To bad the Democrates in the house would not sign the dam bailout until tons of pork and tax cuts for the rich were added."- zhallock, on 10/03/2008, -31/+14
original bill
Dem Yea 203 Nay 29
Rep Yea 20 Nay 176
Pork bill
Dem Yea 172 Nay 63 (-31 votes)
Rep Yea 91 Nay 108 (+71 votes)
sucks all over but get your ***** republican math right, the pork was for the republicans! duh ... - dreicher, on 10/03/2008, -1/+27@zhallock - WHO THE HELL IS DIGGING YOU UP?! Where did you pull your numbers from? Your ass.
Original Bill
Dems Yea 140
Reps Yea 65
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml
Pork Bill
Dems Yea 172 (+32 votes)
Reps Yea 91 (+26 votes)
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll681.xml
and my numbers are actually true. In your numbers the original bill passes 223 - 205. - curunir, on 10/03/2008, -0/+15You just made that up. The *actual* counts are:
original bill
Dem Yea 140 Nay 95
Rep Yea 65 Nay 133
Pork bill
Dem Yea 172 Nay 63 (+32)
Rep Yea 91 Nay 108 (+26)
So - liar - the only partisan BS you can come up with is that Dems are slightly easier to bribe than Republicans.
I guess if you are using "Democrat" math, it means you just get to make up numbers.
I even have references: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE1r_DuYH2j4rBy ...
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE1r_DuYH2j4rBy ... - lilbitmoreslyk, on 10/03/2008, -2/+11So basically this bill got passed because tax cuts for the rich were put in. Didn't matter what political party they were part of.
- allnone, on 10/04/2008, -3/+1Republicans held it up until they got more pork.
- zhallock, on 10/03/2008, -31/+14
- Bmarofsky, on 10/03/2008, -13/+37More Republicans voted NAY than Democrats. Who wanted their pork more?
- zhallock, on 10/03/2008, -22/+9original bill
Dem Yea 203 Nay 29
Rep Yea 20 Nay 176
Pork bill
Dem Yea 172 Nay 63 (-31 votes)
Rep Yea 91 Nay 108 (+71 votes)
sucks all over but get your ***** republican math right, the pork was for the republicans! duh ... - curunir, on 10/03/2008, -1/+11You just made that up. The *actual* counts are:
original bill
Dem Yea 140 Nay 95
Rep Yea 65 Nay 133
Pork bill
Dem Yea 172 Nay 63 (+32)
Rep Yea 91 Nay 108 (+26)
So - liar - the only partisan BS you can come up with is that Dems are slightly easier to bribe than Republicans.
I guess if you are using "Democrat" math, it means you just get to make up numbers.
I even have references: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE1r_DuYH2j4rBy ...
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iE1r_DuYH2j4rBy ...
- zhallock, on 10/03/2008, -22/+9original bill
- pintomp3, on 10/03/2008, -8/+17both sides voted for this and share blame. but it's pretty weak of the "conservatives" to refuse to vote for a bill unless it wasted even more money.
- tutfire, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2(shamelessly copied from curunir)
original bill
Dem Yea 140 Nay 95
Rep Yea 65 Nay 133
Pork bill
Dem Yea 172 Nay 63 (+32)
Rep Yea 91 Nay 108 (+26)
When the pork comes in 32 more Dems vote for it and 26 more Reps did as well. So I don't think you can say either side was more swayed by pork. Even after the pork the majority of Reps voted against it. But who am I to ruin your ignorance?
- tutfire, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2(shamelessly copied from curunir)
- Truth3, on 10/03/2008, -10/+8You see, Digg users accidentally think backwards. Its those who actually have intelligence that have to correct them.
- Demener, on 10/03/2008, -7/+6All wrong. You think the republicans who voted YEA are actually conservatives?
- Armadeon, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1They're called "neocons." So it depends on whether you think a "neocon" is actually conservative.
I don't.
- Armadeon, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1They're called "neocons." So it depends on whether you think a "neocon" is actually conservative.
- natemanAfter, on 10/03/2008, -1/+28Some statistical analysis:
Democrats represent 54% of the House vote.
Republicans represent 46% of the House vote.
73% of voting House Democrats voted "Yea" on the bill.
27% of voting House Democrats voted "Nea" on the bill.
46% of voting House Republicans voted "Yea" on the bill.
54% of voting House Republicans voted "Nea" on the bill.
Of those voting "Yea" on the bill:
65% were Democrats
35% were Republicans
Of those voting "Nay" on the bill:
37% were Democrats
63% were Republicans
Analyst Commentary: Don't blame me, I'm voting Third Party - harrisbradley, on 10/03/2008, -1/+15Hey keep in mind that the only majority that voted FOR the bill was the Dems.
GOP was 91 for, 108 against. I think your snide comments should be pointed towards the Dems. Or at least you should have mentioned them. The fact that you excluded them in your comment provides a microscope into you thought process.- beesaretasty, on 10/03/2008, -2/+2The Dems definitely betrayed our trust. The Republicans held out for more ***** to be added to betray our trust. A high class hooker is still a hooker.
- yoda17, on 10/03/2008, -1/+1That's not the way to talk if you want to be voted up.
- Naieve, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2@beesaretasty
31 Democrats were added to the Yea roster on the second vote, as opposed to 26 Republicans.
They are ALL corrupt.
Republican and Democrat alike...
The sooner everyone realizes this, the sooner we can get around to fixing the problem.
Voting in Obama will change NOTHING.
I'm voting for him, but he is the EXCEPTION in the Democratic Party, not the normal.
Even he is a politician when it comes down to it.
Real change requires voting out the House and the Senate, replacing them with people who aren't being bribed, and perhaps adding term limits.
- KIERANMULLEN, on 10/03/2008, -0/+2Democrats in their own words Covering up the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac Scam that caused our Economic Crisis
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs - phdude, on 10/04/2008, -0/+1The greed of the American elite is disgusting.
This is a very sad time indeed. - SetOverSet, on 10/04/2008, -0/+2Yeah, and Obama sure went along for the ride as well urging members to pass the bill. Don't blame the Republicans here. Last time I checked the Democrats overwhelming approved the first resolution and the second one, and THEY BOTH SUCK. This bill is not the answer.
- Yarnage, on 10/03/2008, -17/+67If you compare the who voted for and against the bill, you'd realize that more Democrats voted for the bill than against it where as more Republicans voted against than for the vote.
- ElectricC0wb0y, on 10/03/2008, -19/+215VOTE THEM ALL OUT!
P.S. I just finished my resume. If you are a non-US business hiring American, newly graduated, PhD electrical/control engineers, then drop me a line. K Thx Bye!- badenglishihave, on 10/03/2008, -5/+47Why did you get your PhD if you wanted to get a job? A PhD in industry is widely regarded as overqualified; maybe you should teach or research.
- treas, on 10/03/2008, -24/+5Is there a problem with being overqualified?
- BuddyDoQ, on 10/03/2008, -1/+57Means most places can't afford you. Being overqualified is a lot worse than being under. Weird, eh?
- enclaved, on 10/03/2008<
- badenglishihave, on 10/03/2008, -5/+47Why did you get your PhD if you wanted to get a job? A PhD in industry is widely regarded as overqualified; maybe you should teach or research.
