Posted by: Maysman | September 30, 2008

More evidence that Speaker Pelosi & Dems maneuvered to defeat the Bailout Bill…

—-HT …

—-Pelosi couldn’t deliver committee and subcommittee chairmen who owe their positions and posh offices to her good graces?

—-Obama couldn’t deliver the Congressional Black Caucus, including those from Chicago’s South Side, one of whom (Jesse Jackson, Jr.) is his campaign co-chair?

—-Neither of them could deliver safe incumbents who haven’t faced a competitive election in years, and will probably be in Congress until they die?

Laughable.  These representatives were told they were free to vote “no” without risk of repercussions from voters, Speaker Pelosi, or a prospective President Obama.  All this, to preserve the Wall Street meltdown as a crisis to blame on the Republicans and John McCain. The cherry on top is Pelosi’s disgraceful speech, which if nothing else at least alerted Republicans they were being set up.

MORE: The New York Times reports the number of Democratic holdouts Obama called to ask for their votes for a bill he ostensibly supported: zero.


  1. I fail to understand the point of this charge other than to find SOME feeble way to cast aspersions on Democrats.

    Are Pelosi and the Democrats the “bad guys” for failing to pass the bailout? If so, then what of the dozens of Republicans who voted against it? Aren’t they bad guys too? Why don’t you talk about how THEY deliberately torpedoed the bailout by failing to vote for it, instead of suggesting that by some wily machinations Pelosi, who rolled her terrible eyes, and gnashed her terrible teeth, and showed her terrible claws, somehow overwhelmed the good intentions of a dozen Republicans and frightened them into voting nay.

    More than twice as many Democrats as Republicans voted for the bill. How is it the fault of Obama or Pelosi for failing to muster sufficient Democratic votes to pass the bill? If the Republicans had matched the Democrats’ tally, the bill would have passed handily. They didn’t come close. Seems to me that it was more the responsibility of the Republican leadership to muster an extra dozen votes given their already paltry showing.

    If the bailout was a bad idea, and the Republicans were right in opposing it 2-1, then shouldn’t the nay-saying Democrats be praised for “reaching across the aisle” to scuttle the legislation? Where is the rub? I just don’t understand what you’re complaining about.

    If this crisis had happened ten years ago and Clinton had come to Congress asking for a $700 billion bailout, can you imagine what viciously partisan things the Republican Speaker of the House would have had to say before the vote?

    I don’t see why the Democrats are having ANYthing to do with this plan. They shouldn’t touch it with a ten-foot pole because an economic downturn plays into the hands of Obama. McCain should stick to his principles and oppose the bailout too because such a position would win him high favor with the large majority of Americans who oppose the bailout.

    Congressional Republicans don’t want to vote for this bill because America hates it. Plus, they believe in their heart of hearts it’s a bad idea. They want Democrats to pass it so that when things go south in a few years, they can shift all the blame to the Democrats instead of having to take responsibility for the miserable failure of the last 8 years.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: