The neas in the Congress....are saying that they had other options to consider and not enough time to consider them.
Saying that it the DEMs and Polosi fault for putting up for a vote before they had the 218 to carry. That makes a lot of sense to me. Why would the DEMs place it to a vote......when they did not have enough to carry? Surely the polled them...and knew where the number stood.
And the DEMs being in majority.....could cause this to fail just by having a big block vote against.
The DEMs were not onboard at all. They were using it for political positioning on McCain and for attacks on GWB. Just to make points on for the NOv 4th election.
Now a pro vote. They are asking a DEM pro why it failed and why the DEMs did not support it. He is saying is was 'not explained well' enough to the people.
Saying the there was a presidence in the 80s to do this.
Says they are coming back Thursday and will try again. It is not a bailout....it is an investiment in our future. Says that the DEMs met thier commitment of 120 votes to carry. But that the REP did not make thier commitment.
Good question, Indy. Been asking that one myself. Part of is the 86% poll against the bailout....and amybe they are up for reelection.....is policial suciede to support.
But having said that.....Obummer is the standard bearer and Polosi is the whip......one would have thought that if Obummer was giving a strong to it........they would get onboard.
Polosi going after the President, tells them.....it is still political game time......she is not trying to herd them into voting for it. But letting them have thier own head. They caucus......and they message back and forth to each other.....see that the political career is on the line with pro vote....and give it the
Meaning Obummer is not as strong in the party as one might think. Think that if Reagon or Kennedy or Eisenhower had been in this position.........that the party would have split on the vote? No.
Invited them over for some hot dogs and burgers, sat around poolside, Barak....said guys see the pool.....we are about to take a dive in the deep end....with this.
Ras this is going to bigger than Enron. With Enron.....some lights went out. This some 1m foreclosures are expected. People moving out of thier houses.
I am not for the bailout.....but do feel some kind of bridge capitol or restricted credit line should have been made avialalbe while those investigations occurred to find the parties responsilbe.
Why not keep the firms solvent while that happens? Till the mess has been figured out?
The last time the millionaires paid for the mess.......was when the wheel was invented. Ain't going to happen Ras. These guys have thier assets diversified across the world. They lose in the US market or a litigation here......they have protected funds in Carribean, Swiss, or elsewhere.
My advice at this point....contact your congressman....tell them you want a intrimin funding program to keep them solvent till the investigations occurs. It is a compromise for both side still.....will not cost the $700b...and the parties responsible get determined.
At presest with 86% of the Americans saying they oppose the bailout and that has them locked out in providing anything. But if we let it go for a long period of time.....we are commiting economic hari kari.jmo
That tongue lashing cost them 12 REP vote, I hear. They would have only needed 10? more I think.
They (both sides) are using a crisis for political positioning.
Though I have to admit....the 94 DEM votes opposing it...caught me by surprise...Polosi should have saved the tongue lashing for those DEMs. They had the numbers there to make it happen. She is majority whip....her job to keep the majority in line. Having 94 vote against it......is a pretty big block.
I also wonder if Barak Obama was on the phone to the 94 trying to get them onboard.
Barak Obama and his camping have tried to move to the middle and in doing so they incorproated much of the philosphy of Martin Lurther King. But is that really the case? Do understand that those hires were at Barak's personal decision. And please don't tell me he did not a enough qualified women applying.......that simply is not the case.
When I siad I had along history with the Black community....I was honest in that. I go back to the days of Malcom-X and MLK in this. Back then the black movements for political power has two different philosphy and standard bearers.....MLK was non violent and Malcom-X was violent.
Some will debate that.
So as a poly sci guy....one tries to find the common demonimators of polical movements and thier evolutions. So follow this:
Malcom-X gender bias thru both his leadership group and supporters
A tactic that Malcom-X developes and uses is use issues of local black women to show whitie is unfair. v MLK some gender bias in the leadership group and no gender bias in the supporter group
MLK keeps to using non violent opposition as his principle tactic
They both die and their organzations evolve
Malcom-X to the Black Panters and MLK to the modern the Civil Right movement
Black Panthers Gender baiz in the leadership group and gender bias in the supporter group
Black Panther were a violent overthrow of the Whitie Government.
V Modern Civil Rights Movement Non gender bias in the leadership group or in the supporter group
Still non violent opposition of the gov't
Another evolution
Black Panther become Louis Ferracon group and Modern Civil Rights become lead by Jesse Jackson
Louis Ferracon Gender bias and supporter gender bias Example the million man march which Obama walked in. Why was it not the 2 million afro american march? There were some women there, but they were largely uninvited.
Louis Ferracon group suppoters limit violence to meet political ends also toss in Rev Wright Trinity Church Liberation Movement
v Jesse Jackson Civil Rights. some what gender bias in leadership no gender bias in the supporter
another evolution
Now we have the Barak Obama initial polical organization in Chicago, home of Louis Ferracon, the Black Panthers and Malcom-X. We know that Obama had Frank Davis as a mentor as a teen Frank Davis is a black panther.
We have Barak attending twice a week the the Trinity Church for 20 years. Not hearing the black liberation theory of Rev. Wright?
Now we begin to have gender bias in leadership group? We see him using women issues...just like Malcom-X did. When they do a campaign add on Women's pay equal pay for the same job. But he is not even giving women a chance for the job!
Is Barak Obama a violent man? No. He is largely a pacifist. There he fall out of the Louis Ferracon mold. And into the MLK mold. But for a President that is going to have three wars to fight next term being a pacafist is not a good qualification for the job.
Barak Obama is blend between the movements of Malcom-X, Black Panthers, Louis Ferracon and the MLK. But had he been all toMLK was, he would not have gender bias in his organization.
This is why Jesse Jackson said what he said, Sky. This is why many of the old MLK were hesitant to support Barak early in this.
Didn't mention McCain's voting pattern Tom, isn't that important to you as an indicator of his support for women's issues ie; women?
Seems like you were able to get the research done on the question that interested you the most.
That's good because I did the research on womens issues and McCain's voting record which tells me about vetting him which is also good.
Something that you need to remember on McCain staffing so far.
Where Obama has these 300 in foreign policy. McCain has 75. I have not looked at McCain staffing names of the 75 to give you a ratio of men to women. But will.
But if you tell me the 30 of his tops are women......and the foreign policy group is.......only 25% as big as Obamas......then that 30 women will come much bigger ratio of women to men.
Sky, Obama doesnot have the voting record of McCain. And are either of going to dig into those bills that was voted on to find where there might have been a rider or a clause that did not seem right to him? So he gives it a no. But it is fair fodder to bring up. There simply is not much in Obama's 3 years in the Senate on his voting record...other than being liberal.
The best apples to apples on these two...is thier staff hiring. when it comes to gender bias. By ratios. jmo
Sky, I research for a specific question. Not for broad and general information. It is much to hard to focus it down. I have a specific question.....now I want a answer. My question as you know, is Obama gender bias?
If he is not then fine, the research will prove it. If he is, it will be seen by the connect the dots analysis and the supported by the employment ratio of men to women.
Honestly, at present I don't have a answer. Earlier I said I saw leanings from the connect the dots and observations. But employment ratios can be pretty damming or confirming. 80/20 is not gender equality on the leadership of these two groups mentioned.
You better check what I just posted on Obama hiring practices. In his two leadership groups for foreign policy and Presidential Advisory.......a total of 35 positions.........28 men and 7 women.
80% men to 20% women.
That is what I am talking about when it come to gender bais.
When this entire thing began Dude...who was harping about race bais?
Now we have your Mr. Honorable putting together his administration......and it so weighted with men........in the leadership roles.......few women will get a chance in it. No glass busting here for women, Dude.
Gender is just one issue....but it is a big one.....51% of the American voter is women. You think that they will not only like having Hillary put down, and now being iced out his adminstration to a 80% to 20% ratio?
This is why Lady Chadsworth switched to McCain and Palin. She is a 30 year democratic Dude. She looking at the hiring.....and not seeing many woman being staffed. This is why Gerladine Ferraro is making the REP talk shows.
The economy will straighten itself out one way or the other. But fair employment practices.......that is a definite deal breaker if Obama does not abide by them.
We have nearly 20 years of Title 9 and Title 10 in our college sports programs...that say if you have a men program....you got to have a women of equality. We have discrimination laws on hiring both minorities and females. And Obama is not abiding by the spirit of either.
I am just starting to dig on this. Palin asking Biden......why have you only staff 7 women in your top 35 foreign foreign policy and Presidential advisory? Is an answer just about everyone will take note of. Specially the 51% that are women will.
I could not get the list of Obama full 300 foreign policy advisers.
But did get the name of the leaders of the 8 groups that they are organized into.
Results: 12 men 2 Women
Also he has a Presidential Advisory Group: 16 men 5 women
That is 20% of his top leadership in foreign policy and Presidential advisory is women. 80% male.
So not only is he structing with more men. But in the positions of leaderships there is a definite gender bias.
My bet is that if one does find the list of 300 foreign policy advisors.....you are looking at less than 25% being women. These are most likely staff positions that he personally hires and approves.
If he hold true to this thru the entire Adminstration....of around 5000 4000 men 1000 women
Think that any of these American were in Georgia when the first shots were fired? In Ossetia? Of course not.
Find me the names of the Russian killed in the Georgian assault. Let us check their families and were they were deployed. Let us get photos of thier bodies and thier burials. Russia has never provided it.
We already have Putin running a disinformation campaign on a lost American passport. In our court of law, Dude.....you lie one time....your entire testimony is suspect. Putin running that lame disinformation story made the entire Russian case suspect.
I have tried to tell you don't trust the polls, Dude. That games are being played and the samples are to small for accurate projections. But the real poll is coming on Nov. 4th.
And this week Palin/Biden........in debate........what happens if Biden plays the gender card? or insults her office? or state? or he cannot take her humor? or he tries to attack?
He has so many mines in front of him, it looks like Normandy invasion and D-Day. Anyone of them can blow and cost them the election.
Wish to know what I picked up on Obama's body language?
That when he is under attack......he places a thin smile on.
In that kind of debate....he cannot break the attack with an comment or a statement. He tried a couple of time, but McCain just kept to the attack.
But he goes to this smile.
I am sitting here saying to myself.....I wonder how well that works in say a G-8 meeting or a NATO meeting or a face to with Putin and Medvedev. When he is hearing something that he does like or something that they are attacking on.
Sometimes you have to let your real emotions show. I am not saying to be a Kruchsev and bang on the table with your shoe. But am saying that you have interject yourself into the fight and debate. In the world of negotiations and the world of real diplomancy.....being a patsie and being so self controlled that you are forcing a smile to hide behind does not work.
Foreign leaders like Putin and Medvedev will eat him alive when he put it on. It like a 'tell' in a card game , where you can read a player and his hand. It means you got him on the ropes when he puts the smile on. They will read the smile and know it is time to for the heart of the issue....and to win at the table.
That smile says you scoring points and his going to capulate......just like he did with McCain.....when says 'you are right, John.'
As one of the FOXX network commentators said....he better let Joe Biden do his foreign policy. Because he does not have the stuff to do it.
If Biden comes with a number of those during the debate will have the factcheck computer system failing. We will see smoke from thier building......as it overheats......
The far left in agreement with the clerics of the radical Islam put out a fatwa on Mickey Mouse. Singing that song is both PC incorrect and can get you beheaded.
On his trip the middle east, Obama banned wearing green because minnie mouse had a dress with green pokadots and mickie mouse had a green bow tie.
Both the far left and radical clerics take this very seriously. The threat the Mickey Mouse might run amuck at one of the KOS conventions and scare the participants is great. All would know it is GWB conspriracy, when Mickie Mouse would run to the head table....plant the American Flag and begin to say.....I pledge alligance to this flag, one country, indivisible, under God.......
At which point most the KOS participants will be covering their ears, fearing that the same fate that befell the wicked witch of the west was going to befall them.
For radicial clerics this is even a greater threat. Leading a mosque service, a run away Mickie Mouse that plants the American Flag in the middle of thier thier service...and begins the pledge...will cause the the RPGs, IEDs, and other munitions stored in the mosque to explode. This of course is a very deadly affair to them, then.
LOL....well if ACORN can make a rider on a financial bailout package for the country.....and it main purpose is to get registration of voters....which has nothing to do with financial aspects of the country......it tells you what else is on this thing. By the time it is ended...we will be rebuying Manhatten Island from the Indian tribe.....at a inflated market price.
They would likely do it by proxie fighters. Maybe somekind of high tech thing.....everytime one makes a good attack......the computer simulation...shows the virtual image of the other being knocked out.
Great...first the people pick up the tab for the bailout....then the bailout funds socialist organizations in the country....then the people lose the ability to make wealth.....so that the socialist organization can control the country.
As I said residency is easy to get. Move in with your brother....report a address change to the election office....you have legal residency.
I have had party workers bring me voters to vote that were homeless. Most of DEMs party workers.
They might have an old voter registration card.....and even a state of Florida drivers license......but without that address and residency...... I commit a felony if I let them vote. So do they by the way.
four year track, that i am sure...the 17m come from a 4-5 years ago. I looked it up from State Department data ..it might be down since then....I don't know.
You better hope that it does not fail. The German President was over here on a economic summit......said that if the US does not get its eocnomy squared away......it means bad things for Europe and the world.
So Dude....what is it....hope that GWB got it right....and the global economy is solid. Or hope that he missed it......and the global economy goes into the tank?
But don't you see....that when people lost thier mortage...they lose the house (e.g residency).....so while it easy to reestablish it....they move someplace...even a motel....they can be residency. They have to establish residency for 30 day prior to the registery closing in the State of Florida.....eash state is different.
They became Homeless because your George W Bush and his administration Lied them about an economy so strong that not a thing in world can destroy!
How come you have forget the way these Bushney,s talked a bout the economy and ignored all those who talked against this huge amount of commercial your current government shuved upo americans back then TT?
Of course you have forgot!
I don't give the blame on the economic problem to Clinton....or to GWB, Dude. Nor to blacks that bought a new house with out solid enough income to pay for it.
I know why the ecomomy got into this liquidity mess. That is what it is. Liquidity to a banking or lending organization....means the ability to move funds around inside of it to meet its requirments. OK? If you agree with that.
Then it pretty easy to understand how the banks and lenders got into the problem other than the bad loans.....which does also effect liquidity. But they have bad loan for many years...they have worked them into the business model by a rate factor. So the bad loans were not the only problem. So had the banks and lenders had other source of incoming funds, they are fine....they can shift them to meet the need.
NOW stop for a moment.....where is the major other sources for these major banks that are failing? Like Lehman Bro? Foreign trade. And the dollar has been what since 9/11? devalued by 20% by our main trading partner of Europe. Take 20% less income of financial flow to the billions of foreign trade....and you have a liquidity problem. A major liquidity probem.
That is the second major part of the economic problem of the US.
Dude do you have any idea of the number of LEGAL immigrants come into live in the country every year? Try 17m
If America was just for the rich and the beuatiful people.....why would the country let 17m legal aliens come into the country? We would not.
We would just close the doors.....say stay where you are.....we don't need or want you.
We bring into our country more LEGAL immigrants than Denmark has in population. Think abou that. They are on a 4 year road path to being naturalized citizens with full right of the vote, of property ownership, and all the benefits of being an American.
ttom500 Forum Posts (10,523)
to it........they would get onboard.
Can we apply your quotes to Sadam Hussien and his gov't?
in jail, is he wrote some pretty big checks to some parents.
RE: Obama for President.............A clear soloution is prosperity and peace!!!
The neas in the Congress....are saying that they had other optionsto consider and not enough time to consider them.
Saying that it the DEMs and Polosi fault for putting up for a vote before they had the 218 to carry. That makes a lot of sense to me.
Why would the DEMs place it to a vote......when they did not have
enough to carry? Surely the polled them...and knew where the number
stood.
And the DEMs being in majority.....could cause this to fail just by having a big block vote against.
The DEMs were not onboard at all. They were using it for political positioning on McCain and for attacks on GWB. Just to make points
on for the NOv 4th election.
Now a pro vote. They are asking a DEM pro why it failed and why
the DEMs did not support it. He is saying is was 'not explained well'
enough to the people.
Saying the there was a presidence in the 80s to do this.
Says they are coming back Thursday and will try again. It is not a bailout....it is an investiment in our future. Says that the DEMs met thier commitment of 120 votes to carry. But that the REP did not
make thier commitment.