Pelosi on Bailout: Party is over for Wall Street. Bill to go for vote Monday

[ultraist]

Run time: 00:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9I5J4d_j_g   Posted on YouTube: September 28, 2008 By YouTube Member: Views on YouTube: 0   Posted on DU: September 28, 2008 By DU Member: ultraist Views on DU: 1182

 

Nancy Pelosi speaks on the bailout bill that will go up for a vote on Monday, September 29, 2008.

Pelosi states that while Democrats were met with resistance from the Bush administration on limiting Golden Parachuttes for CEOs, they did implement those limits in the bill.

Barney Frank noted that this is the first time in American history that Golden Parachuttes were curtailed and that this bailout will lead to tighter regulations in order to prevent a reoccurance.

The bill is online here: http://www.cspan.org/pdf/marketsbill_draft.pdf

[ShortnFiery]

1. No, Nancy, Bail-out is off of the table. Bail-out for Markets, some over seas. NO!!! eom

[jeff30997]

2. Golden Parachutes for CEOs

I would give them lead Parachutes instead.Bunch of parasites.

[gateley]

3. What about the unrestricted power Paulson's proposal wanted to grant to

the Secretary? Was that addressed? (Please don't make me read the entire thing -- my eyes will cross and I will understand it much more clearly from you, my DU sources.)

[ultraist]

4. Yes, that is included in the revision

Limiting the Secretary's power and oversight were included.

Full reviews are not in yet as the bill just went online but Obama did sign off on it today as did McCain, although McCain's advisor said that while McCain supports the new bill, he may not show up to vote for it.

[ShortnFiery]

6. No, it's like giving Wile E. Coyote an anvil as he steps off of the cliff. NO!

[gateley]

8. Thank you! nt

[femmedem]

5. Yes. Here it is:

Section 119. Judicial Review and Related Matters.
Provides standards for judicial review, including injunctive and other relief, to ensure
that the actions of the Secretary are not arbitrary, capricious, or not in accordance with
law.

Thanks to JDPriestly who posted it in another thread.

[ShortnFiery]

9. Yeah, Congress has done so well at this "checks and balances" thing, we're completely safe now.

:eyes: Oh, don't get me started about "The Judiciary." :nuke:

[ultraist]

11. You're right

A major component is how will this actually be implemented. If Obama is our next President, there is hope. If not...there is a lot of room for more corruption and profiteering.

[gateley]

12. I understand your concern, anger and frustration, SnF --

but what can we do about it now? We've written and phoned our reps, there have been demonstrations, they KNOW how the American people feel about this -- but it seems as though it's going ahead.

As unhappy as I am about this, I'm at least a little relieved they didn't sign off on Paulson's proposal as it was first presented.

And this has gotten the country so up in arms, MAYBE they will know that we're -- a lot of us! -- watching now. I also liked that Pelosi said the actions would all be posted on the internet. It's a step in the right direction.

Not trying to talk you down or imply that I think it's all okey dokey, but I hate to see you churning about something that is beyond our power to do anything about.

[alllyingwhores]

16. "I'm at least a little relieved they didn't sign off on Paulson's proposal as it was first presented

You're being sarcastic, right? The only thing more absurd than the absolutely unconscionable Paulson proposal, WAS THE LACK OF ABSOLUTE OUTRAGE BY OBAMA AND OTHERS IN REACTION TO IT!

The proposal absolutely epitomized the completely unconstitutional and totalitarian practices of the Bush administration.

Seriously, haven't we experienced this a few times before? It's a tried and true Rovian method--propose the most over the top, absurd idea in your wildest PNAC wet dream. Then, when the spineless Dems offer a little resistance, make a few small concessions and, of course, end up with an only slightly less outrageous bill.

[gateley]

18. No, I wasn't being sarcastic and you probably shouldn't have even wasted

your time responding to someone who is as stupid as I obviously am.

[gateley]

10. And thanks to you! I was really worried about that one. nt

[barack the house]

7. I think one thing we will really see under Obama/Biden is a very organised party.

[ultraist]

13. Agree

Obama is running a very tight ship.

I found it interesting that the only statement about Obama during this press conference was that both Obama and McCain provided some leadership. I don't think it's by accident that Obama is not being given full responsibility for this bill. The fact is, many Americans are very pissed off about the bailout. Distancing Obama somewhat from it, is a smart campaign strategy. If indeed that is what they are doing. (It seems they are but I could be wrong).

Obama offered the guiding principles early in the process to protect the taxpayers and the rest falls on the shoulders of Congress, both Democrats and Republicans.

[Phred42]

14. The PArty will be over Nancy - When they all go to jail and forefit the

money they made off of this over the past 8 years

Not Until Bitch

[whistle]

15. Here it is for review in three parts

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008:


Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

Summary of Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

Section-by-Section of Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008


Click the following link to view documents:


http://financialservices.house.gov/

[girl gone mad]

17. What a joke.

The Democrats ticked down a list of demands, but ended up rolling over on every last one.

[ryanmuegge]

19. Giving is what the Democrats do best. You had to know the Democrats and Republicans were

going to see to it that their CEO buddies that destroyed this economy got their money one way or another.