Forum Thread

Seneca Lake Topics

(Seneca Lake Specific)

0 messages

Updated

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

83,673 messages

Updated 6/13/2024 6:12:00 PM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,197 messages

Updated 6/10/2024 5:39:11 AM

Seneca Lake Fishing

(Seneca Lake Specific)

0 messages

Updated

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,170 messages

Updated 6/10/2024 6:29:37 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,261 messages

Updated 5/28/2024 6:31:10 AM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,977 messages

Updated 6/10/2024 6:30:23 PM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Markets Respond to "Bailout"
Date:	10/2/2008 11:25:43 AM

Things are going swimmingly well as we down almost 300 points on the glorious news that the 400-page bill filled with vote-buying pork passed the Senate. I am sad to say both my Senators (Georgia) voted Yea on this socialist abomination. I am hopeful the House can extract the more odious parts of this and restore some market-based solutions and fix the problem that was created by government in the first place.

Name:	roswellric -	Reply
Subject:	Markets Respond to "Bailout"
Date:	10/2/2008 11:28:44 AM

Saxby is tight with Bush and Johnny is a real estate developer. What did you expect?

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Markets Respond to "Bailout"
Date:	10/2/2008 2:45:04 PM

All the pork I believe was in the original bill that the Senate passed which was mainly to renew some expiring tax provisions. The "Bailout" was added as an Amendment since it had to orininate in the House if it were a standalone. The only item that I am aware of that was added was the increase for ONE year of the FDIC insurance. I wonder how many people will buy high interest CDs at shaky banks for multiple years over $100,000 and not realize the increase in FDIC is just for 12 months?

Name:	PikeSki -	Reply
Subject:	Sweetners ?
Date:	10/2/2008 3:25:25 PM

I was watching Fox news (I refuse to watch the 3 national networks anymore - way to left and biased to be real news people any more - not that fox is a whole lot better but . . . ) when the vote occured. They had a man that we describing the "sweeteners" that were added into this most important national economic bill. There are hundreds of pages that contained great "deals" (sweeteners) for specific businesses. He pointed out the following 2 (he said that there are hundreds like these in the bill but these are 2 that he stumbled upon.)

Companies that make Wool (yes the stuff from sheep)
Companies that make Wooden Arrows for children’s bow and arrow sets.

I kid you not. He read it right from the bill itself.

Can anyone explain to me the madness in this? Tell me our government is looking out the people that live on "main street" in this most troubling economic time?

I about fell off the couch when I heard him reading these items. My wife about choked on her water.

What do sheep and wooden arrow makers have to do with this critical economic crisis that we face and why are they getting these special deals?

I think this goes to show how "dis-engaged, dis-associated, or dis-lexic" politicians on the hill are from the real world because they are all dissing us and pulling the wool over our eyes.

I hope the great people of this country vote all of these jokers out of office in the up coming elections and show Washington who really has the power!

As for the "change" that Obama is promising . . . I believe that he is definitely going to do just that. He will take every dollar that you earn and give you a little bit of change in return. Unbelievable.

Just my opinion. OK. I feel better now.

Name:	water_watcher -	Reply
Subject:	Sweetners ?
Date:	10/2/2008 3:33:24 PM

You are right on my friend. It is this pork spending for special interests to get bills past that get us in trouble. Bush does not veto enough bills ... but that has been the practice in Washington to add this garbage to critical legislation to get it through ... because if the president vetos it because it is in there .... the news (the liberal media) will say the president turned down this critical legislation ... rather he sent it back because it was loaded with pork that we do not need.

They tried the line item veto .... but somehow that because "unconstitutional".

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	I beg to differ......
Date:	10/2/2008 3:36:43 PM

Here's a quickie list......I don't have 400 pages. None of this was in the original version. Not sure how much this all costs but I can assure you it will be billions if history is any guide.

Tax Earmarks in Bailout bill
1. Film and Television Productions (Sec. 502)
2. Wooden Arrows designed for use by children (Sec. 503)
3. 6 page package of earmarks for litigants in the 1989 Exxon Valdez incident, Alaska (Sec. 504)
4. Tax credit of $7,500 for a hybrid vehicle that surprisingly only fits a GM hybrid

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

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Why did McCain support earmark
Date:	10/2/2008 4:58:15 PM

I am against earmarks as you guys are. Why did McCain vote YES if it is laden with spending earmarks????? Well, it is important to understand these are NOT spending earmarks but tax reductions that are designed to get the Republican vote!!!!!!!!!!!!
Read the below explanation.

URL: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aRUjX6PNF_CQ&refer=us

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Why did McCain support earmark
Date:	10/2/2008 6:28:20 PM

McCain gave a "huma-huma" answer to that very question when he was asked on Morning Joe. He never really did answer the question and mumbled something about Presidential veto power. Made no sense whatsoever. I guess he hadn't had his coffee yet.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Why did McCain support earmark
Date:	10/2/2008 8:45:17 PM

Let's be honest, he didn't "support earmarks". He voted for a bill that contained pork that was intended to change some no votes in the House to yes. It bothers me much less that this bill contained the pork than what it actually says and will do. I am totally supportive of Congress intervening to help restore confidence but not to use this as an opportunity to make a socialist power grab. Candidates like McCain don't have the foresight to oppose this and propose a market based solution. He is taking a beating in the polls and he is looking for any way to get this behind him. Politics as usual.....

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Why did McCain support earmark
Date:	10/2/2008 10:44:20 PM

I think it was clear that he was uneasy about voting for the bill. All of us get put into a position sometimes where we have to do something we wish we didn't. I think he could have answered the question more straightforwardly and I don't think it would have hurt his credibilty.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Why did McCain support earmark
Date:	10/2/2008 10:59:37 PM

I agree and I suspect he expected to be hammered about the vote, which interstengly Biden did in the VP debate tonight. In a way I admire McCain voting for something he knew might cause him political problems (even though I think the bill is the wrong solution). When Obama is faced with a similar choice he votes present.

Quick Links
Seneca Lake News
Seneca Lake Photos
Seneca Lake Videos