Nancy Pelosi blamed for Wall Street bailout defeat

[bijou]

It was perhaps the costliest ad lib in political history, 90 seconds of ill-judged, ill-timed bile that helped to kill off any hope of consensus on Capitol Hill.

That was the charge against Nancy Pelosi after Congress’s rejection of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout plan yesterday, a rejection that Republicans blamed directly on her aggressive and overtly partisan speech shortly before the vote.

As Speaker of the House and second in line to the presidency after Dick Cheney, the most powerful woman in US political history has never been one to keep her thoughts to herself. Even at a time of national crisis she can be relied on to have a dig at President Bush.

But as she deviated from her prepared remarks on the floor of the House yesterday, Ms Pelosi appears to have gone too far. At a time of heightened sensitivities all around, she deployed the C-word — Clinton — and helped to give a group of Republicans the excuse they were waiting for to walk away from the bailout.
Ms Pelosi started off by stating the obvious: that $700 billion was a “staggering figure”, a figure that had prompted a “very informed debate on all sides” of which she, as Speaker, was duly proud.

But that was as far as her evenhandedness went. She was not going to let this moment go without making clear who she felt was to blame for this whole mess.

Picking up on the size of the bailout package again, Ms Pelosi said: “Seven hundred billion dollars: 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.

...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article4852384.ece

[Chris_]

She has got to be the absolute worst House Speaker in modern history, bar none........she is a daily reminder why the "best and brightest" of Americans wouldn't touch national politics as a career, with a ten foot pole.  She is an embarassment to any thinking citizen of this great Republic......

doc

[Peter3_1]

Lessee, you're a (R) Congress person who's been jawboned into a bill that has a 90% DISAPROVAL response from the elwectorate. AND you're in a close race. YOU'VE bowed to your president's requests with misgivings.

Then, the Dems. in the person of Nancy the Stupid , pronounces YOU UNOPATRIOTIC, THE CAUSE OF THE CREDIT CRUNCH, ERESPONSIBLE for LESSENING regulations etc.. And you continue to vote for it because......?

YOU DON'T, YOU VOTE "HELL NO" as your electiorate wants.

And that's what happened.

[Wretched Excess]

I always appreciate the british press for their objectivity.

[Chris_]

Lessee, you're a (R) Congress person who's been jawboned into a bill that has a 90% DISAPROVAL response from the elwectorate. AND you're in a close race. YOU'VE bowed to your president's requests with misgivings.YOU DON'T, YOU VOTE "HELL NO" as your electiorate wants.

Or you are a freshman (D) congressman who was elected ifrom a historically conservative district

And that's what happened.

Only slightly modified, but essentially correct.

doc

[Peter3_1]

Can't dissagree  with your addition doc, can't dissagree

[Chris_]

Can't dissagree  with your addition doc, can't dissagree

No one seems to be discussing the fact that Nancy couldn't keep 40% of her own caucus on board.....such leadership is simply dazzling to watch......

That said, I can't help but be pleased that this "great pile of steaming crap" went down to an ignoble defeat....

doc

[Wretched Excess]

Can't dissagree  with your addition doc, can't dissagree

No one seems to be discussing the fact that Nancy couldn't keep 40% of her own caucus on board.....such leadership is simply dazzling to watch......

That said, I can't help but be pleased that this "great pile of steaming crap" went down to an ignoble defeat....

doc

I am beginning to wonder if she was even trying to.  yes, she is incompetent, but surely even an incompetent speaker could have found another 10 votes if she had really wanted them.  I am reading in various places from house dems that claim they were under no pressure whatsoever from their leadership to vote for the bill.

I think pelosi/reid wanted the bill to be defeated, but wanted to avoid blame.  this way, they have the "crisis" itself as an effective general election campaign issue, and they can blame republicans for defeating the rescue bill.  best of both worlds.  if you recall that the pelosi/reid era has never stood FOR anything, but has rather been defined strictly in terms of what it has opposed, it begins to make a little more sense.

[Chris_]

Can't dissagree  with your addition doc, can't dissagree

No one seems to be discussing the fact that Nancy couldn't keep 40% of her own caucus on board.....such leadership is simply dazzling to watch......

That said, I can't help but be pleased that this "great pile of steaming crap" went down to an ignoble defeat....

doc

I am beginning to wonder if she was even trying to.  yes, she is incompetent, but surely even an incompetent speaker could have found another 10 votes if she had really wanted them.  I am reading in various places from house dems that claim they were under no pressure whatsoever from their leadership to vote for the bill.

I think pelosi/reid wanted the bill to be defeated, but wanted to avoid blame.  this way, they have the "crisis" itself as an effective general election campaign issue, and they can blame republicans for defeating the rescue bill.  best of both worlds.  if you recall that the pelosi/reid era has never stood FOR anything, but has rather been defined strictly in terms of what it has opposed, it begins to make a little more sense.

You are likely correct, however if she wanted for the bill to fail, and take the political cover....why bother to make the speech before the vote that the republicans could  use as "cover" also?  If I were the Speaker, I would have kept my mouth shut, and quietly let the bill fail......my opening speech would have focused on "bipartisanship"......

doc

[Wretched Excess]

Can't dissagree  with your addition doc, can't dissagree

No one seems to be discussing the fact that Nancy couldn't keep 40% of her own caucus on board.....such leadership is simply dazzling to watch......

That said, I can't help but be pleased that this "great pile of steaming crap" went down to an ignoble defeat....

doc

I am beginning to wonder if she was even trying to.  yes, she is incompetent, but surely even an incompetent speaker could have found another 10 votes if she had really wanted them.  I am reading in various places from house dems that claim they were under no pressure whatsoever from their leadership to vote for the bill.

I think pelosi/reid wanted the bill to be defeated, but wanted to avoid blame.  this way, they have the "crisis" itself as an effective general election campaign issue, and they can blame republicans for defeating the rescue bill.  best of both worlds.  if you recall that the pelosi/reid era has never stood FOR anything, but has rather been defined strictly in terms of what it has opposed, it begins to make a little more sense.

You are likely correct, however if she wanted for the bill to fail, and take the political cover....why bother to make the speech before the vote that the republicans could  use as "cover" also?  If I were the Speaker, I would have kept my mouth shut, and quietly let the bill fail......my opening speech would have focused on "bipartisanship"......

doc

all I have is conjecture.  maybe the bill had the votes to pass, and that was the whole problem (I wear a size 7 3/4 tin foil beanie, by the way ) . . . or maybe she just lost it.  it's not like this is the first galactically stupid/deranged thing she has ever said.

[Duke Nukum]

From Times Online
September 30, 2008
Nancy Pelosi blamed for Wall Street bailout defeat
Philippe Naughton

It was perhaps the costliest ad lib in political history, 90 seconds of ill-judged, ill-timed bile that helped to kill off any hope of consensus on Capitol Hill.

That was the charge against Nancy Pelosi after Congress’s rejection of the $700 billion Wall Street bailout plan yesterday, a rejection that Republicans blamed directly on her aggressive and overtly partisan speech shortly before the vote.

As Speaker of the House and second in line to the presidency after Dick Cheney, the most powerful woman in US political history has never been one to keep her thoughts to herself. Even at a time of national crisis she can be relied on to have a dig at President Bush.

But as she deviated from her prepared remarks on the floor of the House yesterday, Ms Pelosi appears to have gone too far. At a time of heightened sensitivities all around, she deployed the C-word — Clinton — and helped to give a group of Republicans the excuse they were waiting for to walk away from the bailout.

More at Link

[Duke Nukum]

I found this story to be a refreshing change of pace from the Blame Republicans First attitude of the media in general and the idiots on Fast Money on CNBC and the so called Conservative Intelligentsia in specific.

Really, though, I don't see why we need to rush.  The problem took years to create so I don't see how a single bill could fix anything, especially when nobody in the media or in the government is explaining how this problem started in the first place.  And then McCainez said something like the Treasury has 1 trillion dollars on hand to start buying things if they really wanted to.

[Duke Nukum]

Sorry, I didn't see this one when I posted mine.

[Peter3_1]

wELL, GET RID OF "MARK TO MARKET" first. It is irrational to value an asset by what someone will pay for it TODAY. Without instant liquidity, the value is ZERO? INSANE! STOP giving 100% mortgages. Mortgagee must pay `10% primary, 20% secondary as minimums.  confirm income.

Get ahold of bundeled mortgages market. They MUST BE  traded thru a recognised  regulated market. Further, there HAVE to be standards limiting what can and cannot be bundled, what % of a company's assets can be tied up in non-originated loans, and like that.

Then reduce cap gains. Give accellerated depreation to realestate . A 33 YEAR cycle is WAY too long. Make it 15 years instead.

Then get back to work increasing the energy supply! MORE OIL, natural gas, etc etc edtc small nuclear power, DO IT.

Credit will not be an issue any more if we do these things.