Bailout vote

[X. Benedict]

I heard Pelosi's speech. There were a lot more mentions of Republicans than that one.

 

Really, her speech was far more obnoxious, condescending, and arrogant than the transcript implies. And to announce an important bi-partisan bill? It was really little more than a campaign speech, more appropriate to the chair of the DNC than the Speaker of the House.

 

You're right. The Record is different from the transcript:

 

Transcript:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/washingt...kTIJwdrFQvOD+eg

 

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxBtc-nq_L0

 

Although I don't think it is ever a good idea for a Speaker to make a floor speech. I don't think anything Pelosi said was a deal breaker.

[SDS]

this is ugly, but it sounds a little too partisan. I'm totally guessing here, but it sounds more like the Speaker refused to twist arms. She wanted her people to vote with their conscience, not because some Democratic leader told them they needed to support the bill.

 

 

That is as naive an assertion as one can make.

[SDS]

No the spectator is the most non partisan rag ya ever saw

 

So, your stance is that the quote from the democrat aide is a lie?

[blzrul]

umm not sure which speech you read, but there were prepared remarks, and then she deviated from that, with several zingers...

 

$700 billion. A staggering number. But only a part of the cost of the failed Bush economic policies to our country. Policies that were built on budget recklessness. When President Bush took office, he inherited President Clinton’s surpluses — four years in a row, budget surpluses, on a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. And with his reckless economic policies, within two years, he had turned that around.

 

and

 

Those days are over. The party is over in that respect. Democrats believe in a free market. We know that it can create jobs, it can create wealth, it can create many good things in our economy. But in this case, in its unbridled form, as encouraged, supported, by the Republicans — some in the Republican Party, not all — it has created not jobs, not capital, it has created chaos.

 

Truth hurts.

 

Heard an interview with a WSJ analyst this morning on the radio. Quite interesting...she explained quite clearly the fundamental issues and potential impacts if nothing is done. No scare-mongering, just basically the facts. And the facts is for those who are already living on the edge, it's gonna get much harder, and for the rest of us it will be irritating and somewhat inconvenient but over the long haul we'll recover.

 

She discussed economics only, not politics or policy.

 

At the end, the interviewere asked her whether she'd have voted for the bill. She tried to dodge the question saying "well the bill failed and it won't be offered in its current form for a vote, so it doesn't matter" but when pressed she stated that she would not have voted for the bill as it was written.

[finknottle]

I heard Pelosi's speech. There were a lot more mentions of Republicans than that one.

 

Really, her speech was far more obnoxious, condescending, and arrogant than the transcript implies. And to announce an important bi-partisan bill? It was really little more than a campaign speech, more appropriate to the chair of the DNC than the Speaker of the House.

 

Yeah, X Benedict probably read something put out by the Democratic leadership.

 

I listened to about an hour of the whole debate on C-Span, and she was ripping them a new one. What was odd was that the debate (or at least what I heard) was entirely civil up to that point. The previous speakers, for and against, laid out their concerns without regard to politics. Then Frank gives a gushing intro to Pelosi, and she launches right in. It was wierd.

[DC Tom]

You're right. The Record is different from the transcript:

 

Transcript:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/washingt...kTIJwdrFQvOD+eg

 

Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxBtc-nq_L0

 

Although I don't think it is ever a good idea for a Speaker to make a floor speech. I don't think anything Pelosi said was a deal breaker.

 

I don't think anything she said SHOULD have been...but like I said, they're all acting like !@#$ing children.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

I posted a link to the article looks like Newt is playing politics as well and beginning to prime the pump for 2012.

Newt's active elected political career is dead after he handed his wife divorce papers on her death bed as he was screwing around with the new Gingrich, the former Calista Bisek for years. Forget about it.

[Wacka]

Newt's active elected political career is dead after he handed his wife divorce papers on her death bed as he was screwing around with the new Gingrich, the former Calista Bisek for years. Forget about it.

 

Same old horse sh--. His first wife is not dead, and in an interview, she said it was her idea to bring the papers to the hospital room so she could sign them. They were getting divorced before she got sickand she said that as long as he was bringing the kids to the hospital for a visit, that he should bring the papers for her to sign.

 

This is from her mouth.

[X. Benedict]

Yeah, X Benedict probably read something put out by the Democratic leadership.

 

Congressional Quarterly and the Guardian (which just printed the Congression Quarterly version - to be exact)

[GG]

I heard a couple people say the fed should temporarily eliminate the mark to market accounting and temporarily replace it with something like a 3 yr rolling average, with the ability to revert or adjust as the market reacts. Seems like a relatively simple change that could have a huge effect. What's your take?

 

It is a simple change, but not a good one, because it will give greater license to play with the marks. Ok temporary solution, horrible solution. One alternative is to segregate assets that you don't plan on selling and value those closer to maturity value, as long as they're performing. But again, you would give a lot of room for internal machinations of balance sheets, which will not do anyone any good.

[finknottle]

Congressional Quarterly and the Guardian (which just printed the Congression Quarterly version - to be exact)

 

The link you posted was from the NYT - do you have one from the CQ? (I searched unsuccessfully.)

 

I've gotten accustomed to NYT/WP favorably editing the content of Obama's speeches and debates, but I would have expected CQ to be accurate about what is said on the floor.

[bills_fan]

It is a simple change, but not a good one, because it will give greater license to play with the marks. Ok temporary solution, horrible solution. One alternative is to segregate assets that you don't plan on selling and value those closer to maturity value, as long as they're performing. But again, you would give a lot of room for internal machinations of balance sheets, which will not do anyone any good.

 

 

To simplify greatly, Bank Holding Companies are permitted to segregate assets that they plan to hold to maturity and value them at original cost basis, rather than mark-to-market.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

Same old horse sh--. His first wife is not dead, and in an interview, she said it was her idea to bring the papers to the hospital room so she could sign them. They were getting divorced before she got sickand she said that as long as he was bringing the kids to the hospital for a visit, that he should bring the papers for her to sign.

 

This is from her mouth.

 

Glad to hear she recovered. Hadn't followed it that closely since he Calista tied the knot. Either way he cheated on her, his former wife knew it. Calista had a huge pearl on her finger for years before this happened and everyone knew who from. P.S. She got written up in Roll Call as being handsome in a Capitol Hill sort of way. That being said, nice person, always respectful unlike her now husband.

[X. Benedict]

The link you posted was from the NYT - do you have one from the CQ? (I searched unsuccessfully.)

 

I've gotten accustomed to NYT/WP favorably editing the content of Obama's speeches and debates, but I would have expected CQ to be accurate about what is said on the floor.

 

The CQ I pulled from Lexis-Nexis so I can't link ....but it is what I posted in this thread minus the changes for British spelling.

Actually the NYTimes transcript looks to match what was actually said.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

It is a simple change, but not a good one, because it will give greater license to play with the marks. Ok temporary solution, horrible solution. One alternative is to segregate assets that you don't plan on selling and value those closer to maturity value, as long as they're performing. But again, you would give a lot of room for internal machinations of balance sheets, which will not do anyone any good.

well whaddayaknow... at least they're trying to make a difference

 

SEC Clarification May Help Markets

 

Today's SEC rules clarifications do not end mark-to-market accounting. But they do let the holders of these low-value "toxic assets" to use other ways to value them, which probably will lead to an increase in their value, even though that is not the SEC's intention.

 

If all this sounds like voodoo accounting, well, all accounting can sound that way sometimes. But remember this: Even though homeowners have defaulted on sub-prime mortgages, there is a house at the bottom of it all and that has real value.

[bills_fan]

Interesting update...it appears yesterday's floor debacle has triggered a remarkable shift in the nature of incoming email/phone calls/letters from constituents. Whereas just 48 hours ago, some offices were hearing strident opposition from nearly all their constituents (some offices were north of 400-to-1 against), the tide has shifted considerably since then. Perhaps they're finally hearing from those with day jobs (and 401(k)s) who don't have time to pelt their elected reps with angry emails or protest all day in front of the Capitol.

[X. Benedict]

How did your congresscritter vote?

 

Mine....... Randy Kuhl was a nay.

 

edit: whoops wrong vote talley

[PastaJoe]

How did your congresscritter vote?

 

Mine....... Randy Kuhl was a nay.

 

edit: whoops wrong vote talley

 

Mine...Republican Jim Walsh voted for it. But he's retiring so he could vote his conscience and not politicize it.

[KD in CA]

Mine.....Chris Shays - R voted yes. Of course, half our district works in the financial/insurance industries.

[GG]

Mine - Pascrell (D) voted no. Insanity must be the reason given his constituency.