Question: Why was it signed without being read?

flarider wrote:

upset?
LOL...Dude, it's fun exposing people like you

Dogger wrote:

Exposing? LOL! What have i tried to hide? I could give a rat's azz what some liberal thinks about me. I grew up around libs and...

Exposing? LOL! What have i tried to hide? I could give a rat's azz what some liberal thinks about me.

I grew up around libs and know their game quite well.


Oh the hypocrisy of it all. They preach to love and accept everyone.....until someone disagrees with their ideals or logic. Then they try and ostracize them from the group. I'm one step ahead of you lib.


BTW-Do you drive a Toyota Prius with an Obama08 sticker on the back?



Just wondering?

flarider wrote:

www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hr1_text.pdf

flarider wrote:

www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hr1_text.pdf

Ivan wrote:

Thanks for the link but I think I'll wait for someone else to summarize.

flarider wrote:

www.rules.house.gov/111/LegText/111_hr1_text.pdf

Ivan wrote:

Thanks for the link but I think I'll wait for someone else to summarize.

flarider wrote:

Isn't that exactly what the Congressmen do and everyone is bitching about?

Ivan wrote:

Yup!
Mostly partisan BS. Some on here may not actually know that Congressmen don't write or read every word in legislation. I give them a pass.

Ivan wrote:

Yup!
Mostly partisan BS. Some on here may not actually know that Congressmen don't write or read every word in legislation. I give them a pass.

flarider wrote:

Least you understand it

Joetheplummer wrote:

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it...

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it away because God forbid some schmuck might ask questions that they should have answers for.
hey dave, do you have excuses for Charles Manson?

Ivan wrote:

Yup!
Mostly partisan BS. Some on here may not actually know that Congressmen don't write or read every word in legislation. I give them a pass.

flarider wrote:

Least you understand it

Joetheplummer wrote:

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it...

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it away because God forbid some schmuck might ask questions that they should have answers for.
hey dave, do you have excuses for Charles Manson?

flarider wrote:

Least you understand it

Joetheplummer wrote:

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it...

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it away because God forbid some schmuck might ask questions that they should have answers for.
hey dave, do you have excuses for Charles Manson?

Dean wrote:

"mostly welfare" ?


source?

Joetheplummer wrote:

isn't bailout another word for welfare?

flarider wrote:

So you say this is a "bailout"

and whom exactly is being "bailed out?"

flarider wrote:

So you say this is a "bailout"

and whom exactly is being "bailed out?"

flarider wrote:

Joetheplummer wrote:

ladies, they are bringing back the welfare programs Clinton did away with in 96. but you wouldn't know it because it's tucked away in this cluster...

ladies, they are bringing back the welfare programs Clinton did away with in 96.

but you wouldn't know it because it's tucked away in this cluster fuck of a bill.

Joetheplummer wrote:

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it...

yes, maybe with other legislation, but when they are pissing away billions on mostly welfare programs, they should at least know how they are pissing it away because God forbid some schmuck might ask questions that they should have answers for.
hey dave, do you have excuses for Charles Manson?

Dean wrote:

"mostly welfare" ?


source?

Oldmotoguy wrote:

lots of entitlement programs in that mess

flarider wrote:

So you say this is a "bailout"

and whom exactly is being "bailed out?"

flarider wrote:

Joetheplummer wrote:

ladies, they are bringing back the welfare programs Clinton did away with in 96. but you wouldn't know it because it's tucked away in this cluster...

ladies, they are bringing back the welfare programs Clinton did away with in 96.

but you wouldn't know it because it's tucked away in this cluster fuck of a bill.

Spinner wrote:

Show us.

flarider wrote:

So you say this is a "bailout"

and whom exactly is being "bailed out?"

Joetheplummer wrote:

spinner, you must do yer own homework, I'm to busy jerking off, sorry.

it's there, trust me.

flarider wrote:

So you say this is a "bailout"

and whom exactly is being "bailed out?"

flarider wrote:

Joetheplummer wrote:

spinner, you must do yer own homework, I'm to busy jerking off, sorry.

it's there, trust me.

Spinner wrote:

If it's there, show us.
I can't find what you're talking about.

flarider wrote:

So you say this is a "bailout"

and whom exactly is being "bailed out?"

Joetheplummer wrote:

so you give a pass because it business as usual, but didn't you vote for change, dave?

Oldmotoguy wrote:

Acorn got their payoff..2 billion..

flarider wrote:

So you say this is a "bailout"

and whom exactly is being "bailed out?"

flarider wrote:

Tiki wrote:

Granted Republicans are a guaranteed No vote, but why was it voted on with out being read? So they could go on vacation? Seriously is that...

Granted Republicans are a guaranteed No vote, but why was it voted on with out being read?

So they could go on vacation? Seriously is that the reason?