If Mccain Votes In Favor Of This Bill ...

[Lounge Daddy]

Darn it all. McCain has been giving me reasons not to ever support him since the late 1990s. And now he is fully willing to dive right into socialism along with all the other leaders of both parties; the "Republicrats."

He had me with Palin, but obviously Palin isn't running for President. Whether or not McCain wins, Palin will run in 2012.

McCain just won't stop with the socialism, and talking about what the government should do, and now McCain is right in step with the other Statists in socializing the entire economy.

Thanks, McCain, for talking me out of voting for you.

Edited October 1, 2008 by Lounge Daddy

[Paddington]

Where is the option for "voting for McCain more grudgingly than before?"

[kenrockthefirst]

[quote name='Lounge Daddy' post='1667640' date='Oct 1 2008, 10:39 AM']Darn it all. McCain has been giving me reasons not to ever support him since the late 1990s. And now he is fully willing to dive right into socialism along with all the other leaders of both parties; the "Republicrats."

He had me with Palin, but obviously Palin isn't running for President. Whether or not McCain wins, Palin will run in 2012.

McCain just won't stop with the socialism, and talking about what the government should do, and now McCain is right in step with the other Statists in socializing the entire economy.

Thanks, McCain, for talking me out of voting for you.[/quote]
Hello? This is what I've been saying. McCain is TERRIBLE. As another poster has noted, you can't vote for him JUST BECAUSE he is allegedly pro-life. He stinks. We need another option, even if it is to write in Ron Paul.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='Paddington' post='1667641' date='Oct 1 2008, 11:41 AM']Where is the option for "voting for McCain more grudgingly than before?"[/quote]
Done. I forgot that there may still be some McCain supporters.

McCain did not have unified support from the base. He regained a lot of it with Sarah Palin. But McCain is blowing it... again.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='kenrockthefirst' post='1667644' date='Oct 1 2008, 11:44 AM']Hello? This is what I've been saying. McCain is TERRIBLE. As another poster has noted, you can't vote for him JUST BECAUSE he is allegedly pro-life. He stinks. We need another option, even if it is to write in Ron Paul.[/quote]

I was hoping that Bob Barr would bring some professionalism to the Libertarian Party; but he has been disappointing. I like the party philosophy but the people running the party are really erratic.

In the Clinton / Dole election I voted Constitution Party. I might be voting Constitution Party again: Chuck Baldwin.

[dairygirl4u2c]

"He had me with Palin, but obviously Palin isn't running for President. Whether or not McCain wins, Palin will run in 2012. "

let's not get ahead of ourselves. maybe if phatmass ran the world she would, but i doubt the public at large, even republicans, would go for that.

[CatherineM]

I couldn't vote in the poll. I've already cast my vote for president, so I can't change it now even if I wanted to.

[Lounge Daddy]

It's a good thing that "mister constant" made earmarks and pork a huge huge centerpiece of his campaign. That means that he'll strike down this bill. And it's really a great thing that McCain is not a socialist, right?

Like I wrote at over at[url="http://loungedaddy.us/?p=691"] loungedaddy.us[/url]
[indent] Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said that the average American should be “angry and he should be scared … angrier than he is scared.” I don’t know about that. I think that I’m pretty much an average American, and I am really just plain angry.[/indent]

[Lounge Daddy]

[url="http://loungedaddy.us/?p=815"]The bloated 451 page monster is stuffed with earmarks[/url]. Including:

- Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)
- Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)
- 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)

Tax earmark “extenders” in the bailout bill.
- Virgin Island and Puerto Rican Rum (Section 308)
- American Samoa (Sec. 309)
- Mine Rescue Teams (Sec. 310)
- Mine Safety Equipment (Sec. 311)
- Domestic Production Activities in Puerto Rico (Sec. 312)
- Indian Tribes (Sec. 314, 315)
- Railroads (Sec. 316)
- Auto Racing Tracks (317)
- District of Columbia (Sec. 322)
- Wool Research (Sec. 325)

[philothea]

I notice you didn't put an option for anyone who thinks voting for the bill is a good idea!

The truth is, in a capitalist democracy, the people with money run things, and generally they didn't get lots of money by being generous, virtuous people.

[Lounge Daddy]

[quote name='philothea' post='1667803' date='Oct 1 2008, 04:22 PM']I notice you didn't put an option for anyone who thinks voting for the bill is a good idea!

The truth is, in a capitalist democracy, the people with money run things, and generally they didn't get lots of money by being generous, virtuous people.[/quote]
! Ya, I didn't even do that. I should have put an option that said something like "I support Corporatism and I love it when McCain shows his true leftist quality. I would happily support McCain for voting to socialize the economy."

A few things that I have to point out about your comment, though. The United States is a Republic, not a Democracy. And what we are seeing is not Capitalism at all. It is Corporatism, and it is wrong.

Edited October 1, 2008 by Lounge Daddy

[Thy Geekdom Come]

Okay, I know next to nothing about economics, so forgive me if this sounds ignorant, but wouldn't it be a better plan to use $700 billion to pay off mortgages on behalf of those citizens who are both suffering the most and have the most potential to turn their financial woes around? Wouldn't that be literally investing in the middle class, something every politician has vowed to do for decades? I mean, we'd be talking about millions of Americans who would suddenly have considerably less debt and own their homes, freeing up their incomes for other purchases and even investments. Since the money would be paid to banks, the banks would also benefit. Now I'm not a plan of socialism, but that sounds much better to me. The government wouldn't even have to give it away outright...they could do it in conjunction with encouraging lower interest rates. There was a guy on Fox talking about this the other day and he said a feasible plan could along these lines would only require about $200 billion.

[philothea]

*sigh*

(I'm just getting a little tired of explaining things... not so much to you guys, but still.)

THE PROPOSAL IS NOT A BIG CASH PAYMENT OR BAILOUT.

It's more a line of credit, offered to large lending institutions, in exchange for mortgage-backed-securities. Normally the lenders have their own liquid capital, based on those securities (and many others), but because so many people are failing to pay their mortgages, all at the same time, no one who actually needs to make money will buy the securities.

The mortgages still do still have real value. The real estate bubble has made them, for the short term, unsellable. Financial institutions without liquid capital are dead, and many, many businesses and individuals rely on the credit available through large financial institutions, for day to day operations.

Simply paying of people's mortgages would be DREADFUL. Last I heard, 70% of the people in foreclosure LIED to get those mortgages they can't afford. Most of them bought much more house than is remotely reasonable at their income level. You want to reward that?

Edited October 1, 2008 by philothea

[T-Bone _]

[quote name='Raphael' post='1667810' date='Oct 1 2008, 03:00 PM']Okay, I know next to nothing about economics, so forgive me if this sounds ignorant, but wouldn't it be a better plan to use $700 billion to pay off mortgages on behalf of those citizens who are both suffering the most and have the most potential to turn their financial woes around? Wouldn't that be literally investing in the middle class, something every politician has vowed to do for decades? I mean, we'd be talking about millions of Americans who would suddenly have considerably less debt and own their homes, freeing up their incomes for other purchases and even investments. Since the money would be paid to banks, the banks would also benefit. Now I'm not a plan of socialism, but that sounds much better to me. The government wouldn't even have to give it away outright...they could do it in conjunction with encouraging lower interest rates. There was a guy on Fox talking about this the other day and he said a feasible plan could along these lines would only require about $200 billion.[/quote]

So, because, instead of buying a house I couldn't afford, I rented instead, I should pay for someone else to get a free house? You're proposing rewarding irresponsibility...

[princessgianna]

to point out the topic keyword [size=6]IF[/size] McCain votes in favor......
i think we need to see what he votes before we judge him whether we want to vote 4 him or not~!
Pax~