For the record: here are the Senators with sufficient stones to vote against...

... a $700 billion sell-out of taxpayer money to irresponsible credit markets adorned with another $100 billion worth of goodies for the folks back home.

I never thought I'd see the day when I had to stand up and congratulate Senators Cantwell, Feingold, and Sanders for putting America ahead of logrolling, fear-mongering, and pork-barrel politics. But for whatever reasons, they and the individuals listed below stood up when it counted.

Today, at least, they are among my list of heroes.

Here's the whole list:

Allard (R)
Barasso (R)
Brownback (R)
Bunning (R)
Cantwell (D)
Cochran (R)
Crapo (R)
DeMint (R)
Dole (R)
Dorgan (D)
Enzi (R)
Feingold (D)
Inhofe (R)
Johnson (D)
Landrieu (D)
Nelson (FL) (D)
Roberts (R)
Sanders (I)
Sessions (R)
Shelby (R)
Stabenow (D)
Tester (D)
Vitter (R)
Wicker (R)
Wyden (D)

Comments

ChrisNC said…

Jim DeMint of SC is a principled supporter of free trade and capitalism, i.e., for a Republican. But I wonder if Elizabeth Dole voted against it to shore up her base. I have been quoted widely as opposing the bailout, and I have been eating into her support.

October 2, 2008 at 9:24 PM

tom said…

Joe Biden quite predictably voted for it. According to opensecrets.org, among his 2008 contributions by industry are:

Real Estate - $941,859
Securities & Investment - $676,425
Misc Finance - $406,820
Commercial Banks - $200,850
Finance/Credit Companies - $103,350

Mike Castle voted for the failed House bill on Monday and will most likely vote for the flagrantly unconstitutional (violates Art I, Sec 7, Clause 1) Senate bill on Friday. Among his 2008 contributions by industry are:

Commercial Banks - $92,479
Securities & Investment - $81,900
Finance/Credit Companies - $49,000
Real Estate - $44,850
Misc Finance - $22,900
Home Builders - $14,871

Yep. Sure is obvious that they place the nation's best interests above those of their contributors.

October 3, 2008 at 2:02 AM

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

Search This Blog