WHY is DU happy that Repukes got their way? WHY WHY WHY?

[jesus_of_suburbia]

I'll never get it.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. As you may have noticed, there are some real &^%$* here

[walldude]

2. So anyone who thinks this bailout bill was a bad idea is an asshole?

I guess I better get in lock step then. Someone on the internets might call me an asshole.

[JuniperLea]

21. Me too

This has gone global... two European banks failed today... yet some here think $700 Bil is going to save the world.

This runaway train was heading for a wreck looooooong before this bill came along. I'm convinced the bill was whipped up to save someone face. But it was too late for that as well.

[walldude]

29. Yeah and what makes me think this is all bullshit is that number.. 700 billion

I mean who came up with that number? There is no way they could have determined exactly how much money they need to steal to bail them out, in such a short time. Which means that someone pulled that figure out of their ass. I'm getting tired of working hard for a living only to watch politicians and fat corporate cats STEAL it from me.

[ForeignSpectator]

72. Dude, check this out, if you haven't heard of this already :

http://current.com/items/89338457_700_billion_is_based_on_nothing

You can find links about that on kos and all over the web. Just google "treasury spokeswoman just a really big number"...

That alone tells you how bull that is...

[Heather MC]

86. Rachael Maddow reported exactly that a few days ago. $700 Billion

was quote "A really large number"

I was against the bill no research was done, Paulson ran to the House with a made up number and basically screamed give me all your money.

I know it seems scary but it would be a stronger bill if they took the time and had the time to do proper research. The White House has had this bill for over a year according the Maddow.

I think what this vote really represents is the utter collapse of the so called unified GOP
They are all terrified they are about to be out of work, for years hopefully decades to come

[MyNameGoesHere]

15. So assholes just throw thier money away to FAILED

corporations and institutions with nothing in return??????? Look here is my plan. Out of Iraq now out of Afghanistan NOW, cut the military budget by half. Use that to pay off this bs crap. See no worries and George Washington was right.

[walldude]

22. Hey no fair using common sense.

You must freak out and flail your arms wildly if you are going say things like that...

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

41. You plan is so brilliant it warrants membership in a special club

my ignore list

:hi:

[Joe Chi Minh]

75. We're all relieved to know you're leaving. Bye.

[blondeatlast]

76. It does subsistence farming so screw the rest of us. I got into it with it on another thread. nt

[MyNameGoesHere]

101. "It" Does a lot of things.

You can have your fake money. I choose to have what I need. _it__. See that's like "it"

[LooseWilly]

87. I just gotta ask...

Aside from the "middle class" who are worried about their property values... and peoples wanting a lot of credit so they can buy a new ('newly free from use') house... who cares?

I mean, if I'm just renting a shithole warehouse space with one window overrun by bamboo... and I don't have much money in Mutual Funds, and I have no health insurance and no 401k and my retirement plan is an early death... why the hell should I care whether this plan goes through or not?

Just saying... I mean, if you're so brilliant that this other plan was offensive enough to justify an ignore... why?

[MyNameGoesHere]

98. Which one of you ignored me? Your Kurt or Hunter persona?

Hey I don't mind. If you are one of those that think ANY problem can be solved by throwing money at it, more power to you. But i would suggest you buy a sailboat. You can throw all your money at it, but at least enjoy the quiet water for a little while, before your mast snaps and you have to throw more money at it.

[sufrommich]

3. There will be a bill passed,very similar to Obama's plan

soon I predict. In the meantime,it's done untold damage to John McCain.

[mohc]

16. You think that House Republicans are going to back an Obama bill?

They had a hard enough time rounding up votes for this centrist bill. There is no way we will get more Republican support for a more progressive bill than what we just saw. The Democrats in the House are not going to push through a bill without Republican support before the election, so at this point the only options are to push through a more conservative bill written by the House Republicans or wait until after the election. My guess is they will try the former and it will fail too.

[sufrommich]

26. I think,when the dust settles,they won't have the luxury

of choice.

[Joe Chi Minh]

77. Do you think the Republicans will have the gall to stymie a plan to

put the country back on its feet, instead of pampering a small parasitic elite? One they would call "populist", but we would recognise as a few bricks in a New Deal edifice.

[geek tragedy]

4. Stupid fucking populists who stop thinking once they hear

"Wall Street."

[rockymountaindem]

6. For once you and I agree n/t

[melody]

12. Amen n/t

[jesus_of_suburbia]

46. Thank you for truth. n/t

[msallied]

60. Bless you for speaking pure truth. I couldn't agree more.

[Joe Chi Minh]

78. "Populist" is for people, not just a vile, self-serving, parasitic crowd

of psychopaths, numbskull.

[Raineyb]

83. Since when is populist a bad word on a Democratic site?

Your panic is clouding your senses. We don't even have real numbers to work with here. We can do better than a bill thrown together because the shrub decided to scare the shit out of everyone.

Regards

[gmudem]

5. Because they don't understand that both Wall Street AND Main Street

will be hurt without a bailout bill passed. It's nice to rail against fat cat CEO's, but the reality here is that regular people are going to be screwed without a bailout, and it should set off a few lightbulbs in DU'ers heads that they have the same position on this bailout as extremist Republicans. They are voting against it because of ideology, and are putting ideology over country.

[Fresh_Start]

7. the fact that they are lying down with dogs

should clue them in

[gateley]

27. Well put. The credit mark is shut down, they're saying now.

Will companies be able to meet their payroll? Pay their light bill? I'm afraid that we will be hurt in ways we can't even imagine yet.

[walldude]

39. How is this going to "screw" me?

Please explain. I rent. I have no investments and no money in the bank. I own my car and the only debt I have is medical due to no health insurance. I'm self employed and have enough clients to carry me for the next 10 years. So how is this going to affect me? Unless there are food fuel and water shortages I don't see it.

[msallied]

62. Oh yeah, that's right. It's all about "you."

Congrats for having such a Depression-Friendly living situation!

[LooseWilly]

89. There's several of us around here with Depression-Friendly living situations....

And there are several, I'm sure, who have something better described as a Depression-evolved/adapted living situation. I think it's a real thing to consider... some of us would love to see home values around the country crash... 'cause then we could actually own a home...

Just saying... the have nots haven't a lot to lose... might even be a gain for us...

[liberalpress]

94. Here's how it may affect you

Grocery stores routinely order food on credit. Most retails stores do. (30 days same cash, etc.) That probably will stop, so expect food shortages. I'm glad you have plenty of clients willing to pay you money. But within the next year the may find their finances pinched to the point that they have to cancel your contract. Oh, and by the way, your landlord may no longer be able to meet his monthly mortgagee payment on your dwelling. It may face forclosure and you may face eviction.

[FlaGranny]

95. As a business person

are your customers going to lose their jobs or their businesses? Without customers you will be no better off than anyone else. Paying customers have a way of disappearing when money gets tight.

[eridani]

74. "A" bailout bill is not the same thing as "this" bailout bill

The following part of the bill MUST be eliminated! Why isn’t Congress supplying oversight instead of the same people who got us into this mess?

1. The Sec. of Treasury can violate all statutes with impunity, and no one can sue.

2. Even if you prove a constitutional violation in court, Congress stays any order in your favor PROVING A CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION until the secretary is done appealing -- or doesn't want the stay.

3. So, in effect, after you take a Constitutional whipping for months or years in appellate courts, and if you finally win in the trial court and the final court of appeal, you will get no money -- just an equitable order for the Secretary to stop violating your CONSTITUTIONAL rights (an equitable injunction).

4. But, even then, he can always keep on violating your statutory rights, forever.


The Sec Treasury should absolutely NOT have this kind of power. It ought to rest with Congress.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/29/business/29bill.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


During its weeklong deliberations, Congress made many changes to the Bush administration’s original proposal to bail out the financial industry, but one overarching aspect of the initial plan that remains is the vast discretion it gives to the Treasury secretary.

The draft legislation, which will be put to a House vote on Monday, gives Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. and his successor extraordinary power to decide how the $700 billion bailout fund is spent. For example, if he thinks it wise, he may buy not only mortgages and mortgage-backed securities, but any other financial instrument.

To be sure, the Treasury secretary’s powers have been tempered since the original Bush administration proposal, which would have given Mr. Paulson nearly unfettered control over the program. There are now two separate oversight panels involved, one composed of legislators and the other including regulatory and administration officials.

Still, Mr. Paulson can choose to buy from any financial institution that does business in the United States, or from pension funds, with wide discretion over what he will buy and how much he will pay. Under most circumstances, banks owned by foreign governments are not eligible for the money, but under some conditions, the secretary can choose to bail out foreign central banks.

[AlCzervik]

8. i lost a lot today, of course it was on paper, the major stock i own pretty much locked itself

in the garage, started the car, attached the hose and started breathing deeply. Am i worried, hell yes but at this point there is nothing i can do besides ride it out, my 401k, not even looking. I'm not wealthy btw, this is stuff we've spent 20 years investing in.

[melody]

17. Same here, but yet you and I are lumped in with fat cats around here

:eyes:

[AlCzervik]

24. oh look, you're in Ca. too, come on over and we can light a cigars with $100 dollar bills!

:(

[melody]

34. No kidding. It just might come to that, too

:(

[LooseWilly]

91. That's just silly...

Here in CA, we know that smokes are just absurdly too expensive... not to mention frowned upon. Liquor on the other hand, we do here in CA. $100 bills to light cigars?... there are towns here, like Belmont, where you can't even smoke them outdoors... or even in your own homes, unless they're actually physically separated from any other domiciles.

On the other hand... for $100 you can get 7 half-gallon bottles of Ten High whiskey at Lucky's ($12.99 on sale for the 1.75l bottles this week). I think we can all wait until the meltdown is fully underway before we start drinking the Safeway Select brand whiskey... unless you're dead set on paying for frivolities like rent...

[jgraz]

82. I also lost a shitload today, but I'm happy this bill failed

The idea of printing $700 billion in funny money to bail out failed speculators in lunacy. If this had passed, you'd be bringing garbage bags of cash to the Safeway.

There are smarter ways of dealing with this. Bush is attempting to panic people and slam through another Iraq War/Patriot Act. We can't let this happen.

[lamp_shade]

9. DU is happy? WTF?

[jesus_of_suburbia]

23. Get real. You've seen it. It feels like I'm on FreeRepublic. They are HAPPY!

[CJCRANE]

10. I think you mis-characterize DU somewhat.

Whatever you think of the bailout, the Republicans revealed themselves as double-crossers.

[gateley]

11. Because they are far smarter than we are, and we, once again, fell for

our leaders' bullshit because we're idiots. They're rejoicing because they're sooo much more intelligent than the rest of us slobs.

They're right. We're wrong. Got that? :sarcasm:

[natrat]

67. um...pelosi really is a crook so i'm not sure the sarcasm is warranted

[jenmito]

13. The Repubs. who DIDN'T get their way are McCain and Bush! n/t

[billyoc]

14. It was a bad bill.

[ContinentalOp]

18. I don't think they DID get their way.

They were hoping this would pass so they could hang this unpopular bailout around our necks and then campaign on the "anti-bailout" platform. They would have been sitting back, watching and laughing as the economy crumbled anyway and inflation started to go out of control thanks to the $700 billion.

We dodged a bullet politically. There is still time to fix the problem economically. Let's look for a better solution that won't deliver McCain the Presidency.

[ecstatic]

19. The reaction is mixed and/or confused nt

[Phoonzang]

20. Because "teh corporate blah blah" is evil or whatever. Too many fanatics here. n/t

[OwnedByFerrets]

25. Last time I looked, B*sh was/is a repuke....he didnt get his way

Im happy about that. Many very smart people are saying this was a horrible bill. Go to Youtube and listen to the videos that Ravi Batra put up today. Unless you are just happy running around saying THE SKY IS FALLING, THE SKY IS FALLING.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

31. Thank you for your reasoned response. Only time will tell. But it looks like a mess now.

Again, your response was the best I've seen (of those who didn't agree with me).

[harun]

28. The Repukes wanted to vote against this but still have enough

Dem's vote for it so from then on they could run against this bill in the upcoming election. That scenario goes down and from here on out the Dem's OWN the bail out and the rest of the economic problems associated with it.

They DID NOT get their way.

[CJCRANE]

33. EXACTLY nt

[beachmom]

30. Not all DUers. The fact is we are divided. I was for the bailout bill

as a least worst option. But many did not support it.

[harun]

43. If they would have gotten in to the bill the ability for single home owners to

renegotiate their loans with a bankruptcy judge and limit Executive pay to < 1 million I might have went along with it. Their language in the bill of "no golden parachutes" is to vague and doesn't limit base pay/compensation in any way.

[VolcanoJen]

32. Would DUers prefer for China, Russia, and Saudi Arabia to...

... come in and buy our assets rather than our own federal government?

It's troubling... and calling this a "Bailout" is inaccurate, and amounts to nothing more than political theater.

[JuniperLea]

36. They already have! And where do you think that $700 Billion would come from anyway?

We'd have to borrow that too!!

This is global! WE cannot save the world. $700 Billion doesn't even come close to what we are about to see go down. Mark my words.

The global economy is failing. It won't be fixed by anything we do. You are right about one thing... this is pure political theater.

[VolcanoJen]

37. I disagree... of course these nations own a big chunk of us now...

... and you want them to own more? For pennies on the dollar?

I prefer the bill as its written to allowing the global markets to fail. It's a rock and a hard place, to be certain. But I think we'll get a bill, hopefully in time to stop some of this rampant bleeding.

[JuniperLea]

40. Where do you think the bailout money is coming from? eom

[bowens43]

35. The American people OVERWHELMINGLY oppose this bail out.

All the hand wringing here is a bit premature. There is no consensus among economists that this bailout is necessary or even that it will be helpful. The only people guaranteed to profit from the bailout are those who caused it.

I have no idea whether or not it is the right thing to do.

[beachmom]

38. Not according to polls I looked at.

[harun]

44. They oppose it about 300 to 1. Gimme a break.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

45. Quit your lies.

[1corona4u]

70. Bullshit, see my post.

[Renew Deal]

56. Got a link?

The pro-bailout crowd keeps claiming that polls show voters support it. Where are these polls?

[1corona4u]

69. I just posted in reply to this...see my post.

When this thing first came out, 75% said they opposed it, but as the details started coming out, people started to think it through, and the numbers started to change. People were just starting to understand the magnitude of it.

[1corona4u]

66. BULLSHIT...

HERE ARE SOME POLL NUMBERS, FROM A RELIABLE SOURCE. FORBES;

What are people saying today? First, it is clear people are paying attention. Since 1985, Pew Research Center pollsters have been asking people how much attention they pay to various news stories. In the News Interest Index released this week, 49% said they were following the turmoil among financial institutions on Wall Street "very closely," a far higher level of interest than Pew found about the Fannie Mae (nyse: FNM - news - people ) and Freddie Mac (nyse: FRE - news - people ) takeover earlier this month, or even the 1989 savings and loan crisis.

How pollsters word their questions affects public opinion about what should be done. In the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll, 44% approved of "the steps the Federal Reserve and Treasury have taken to try to deal with the current situation involving the stock market and major financial institutions," while 42% disapproved.

In polling firm Zogby's question, which described the costs and benefits of a "sweeping bailout," 46% supported it and 46% were opposed. In Pew's question, 57% said the government was doing the right thing by "potentially investing billions to try and keep financial institutions and markets secure," but 30% said it was doing the wrong thing.

Though confidence in Wall Street is low and concern is high, just 28% told Fox News/Opinion Dynamics interviewers that, if they were given $10,000 today, they would put it under their mattress. Two-thirds said it would be safer in a bank.

http://www.forbes.com/opinions/2008/09/26/polls-wall-street-oped-cx_kb_0929bowman.html

[Eyes_wide_ open]

93. The American people OVERWHELMINGLY oppose this bail out.

Yet on any other day, about any other thing ALL of DU will tell you the American people are overwhelmingly stupid :shrug: just sayin'.

[crankychatter]

42. I haven't noticed that - nt

[jesus_of_suburbia]

47. Pull your fingers out of your ears.

[crankychatter]

53. I've been reading anything of interest on and off all morning

perhaps the obvious sarcasm in some of these posts eludes you

there seems to be an even split on both sides of the aisle regarding the wisdom of that bill as it's currently written

you have your opinion and your OP suggests that any Democrat that differs with YOUR opinion is a GOP tool

This exacerbates the problem

congratulations and mind your MF manners when speaking to me

[jesus_of_suburbia]

48. Bump because I'm so sick. This is not good for the Dems.

[chicagoexpat]

49. Look at it this way: the idjits come out of hiding to make ur "ignore" list...

The bomb throwers are either secret Freepers or part of the tin foil hat brigade, no loss.

[arKansasJHawk]

50. What about all the house Democrats?

From what I've been hearing, everyone who voted against the bill is hearing from constituents, and are running to distance themselves from the Paulson plan.

I know my Rep., D-Kansas Nancy Boyda, was absolutely deluged with anti-bailout messages. I can't find a list of exactly who voted yea or nay, but according to the last e-mail I got from her, she wasn't voting for anything resembling the Paulson plan.

I'm personally torn on this thing. If the credit crisis is going to be as bad as they say it is (something I'm not entirely convinced of), then I think this may be the equivalent of an amputation to save someone's life. It sucks, it's terrible, but it's the only way.

That's certainly how they're painting it, but since "they" are members of the Bush administration, my antenna are twitching like crazy.

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

52. a mix of cowardly scumbags & "brave" lunatics. Fuck 'em all.

They are all dead to me now.

[goodgd_yall]

51. Because they're stupid n/t

[nomaco-10]

54. Seperate your thinking from what is partisan politics and what ...

is right for this particular moment in history.

This is the wake up call that all of america needs. It's a DEFEAT for business as usual for this admin and a wake up call to the rampant, careless consumerism that has enveloped this country as a whole.

[nomaco-10]

57. self delete n/t

[Renew Deal]

55. So you side with Bush on the Bailout?

Maybe that's why.

[rucky]

58. Which DU-ers? Which repukes?

I'm not really seeing the party lines on this one.

[Mz Pip]

59. The only thing I'm happy about

is that Mccain looks more and more like an ass with each passing moment.

The rest of this sucks.

[girl gone mad]

61. Last time I checked, Bush, Paulson and Bernanke..

were all Republicans.

[nolabels]

79. I am not so sure how to classify Harry and Nancy

Guess it could have been better that they were kind of weak :shrug:

[natrat]

63. using 700 billion to buy worthless securities is not so smart, now is it?

[frickaline]

64. no one got their way (yet), this is just stalling at the moment.

[kwenu]

65. Ekanomicks iz harred!

:dunce:

[chicagoexpat]

71. yeaaaahhhhhhh!!!! and I never larned nuthin in school that wuz useful for skinning a muskrat

[Overseas]

68. Democratic party has mixed opinion. So does D.U. Not all are happy.

So please can the hyper drama. We have quite a balance of opinion.

[K8-EEE]

73. Why did "the Repukes" get their way? Bush, McCain & Boehner wanted it passed

Most Americans regardless of party were against it.

I don't think this is a "win" for anybody really.....I don't think it's clear what would have been the best thing.

[iheartmulletz]

80. Because for once it's not about political parties

My God, are you for the bailout? If so, does that mean that Bush "got his way?"

This bill is a disaster waiting to happen. Just because we are crashing and burning in the meantime doesn't mean that hastily passing a bill that is a Band-Aid on a hemorrhage is a good idea and I don't give a flying fig what party is the one involved if it's bad for our nation.

[Fractasticlicious]

81. A lovely bunch of coconuts!

Let me see - a bunch of Democratics support the bill, so I must support the bill, but a bunch of Republicans support the bill, so I must be opposed, however, a bunch of Democratics oppose the bill so opposed I am, all the while, a bunch of Republicans oppose the bill, so I must support it! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!




Edit for confused opposition

[jgraz]

84. The Repukes certainly did NOT get their way today.

The hardcore neocons wanted to use this crisis to repeal corporate taxes and repeal even more regulations.

The Repuke leadership wanted this bill to be passed by the Democrats so they could blame them for it.

Neither one of those things happened.

[Quantess]

85. Because it was a bad bill.

Don't panic. Take a deep breath, and calm down.
Better legislation will pass soon.

[Binka]

88. Why? Why? Why? Have You Never Put Five Fucking Bucks Into DU Coffers?

For someone so CONCERNED about the economy and the financial future why never donate to DU? The host of your inumerable bullshit posts. Now you post hand wringing horse shit (to quote your hero) once again on the board that allows you to spout your nonsense but you have yet to support. Why? Why? Why?

[Dems to Win]

90. I'M happy that Kucinich and Woolsey won.

The bailout plan was Paulson's giveaway with toothless window dressing added. I'm not convinced it would solve the problem. It was certainly unjust. I hope it stays dead.

[quakerboy]

92. Because It means that some other people I really respect got their way

I understand Defazio voted against it. I understand Kucinich voted against it. Those are 2 that I trust to be looking out for me far more than Bush and Paulson, or even Pelosi.

I am good when it comes to my personal finances, but I have never had the chance to expand much beyond that, but the more I read the more my initial misgivings are borne out, and I tend toward the its better this way side. Every serious and (in my mind) credible source I have seen said "this bill is a band-aid". It seems to me that it is a very expensive and possibly disabling band aid, when what we need is some sort of surgery, or at least a full sterile bandage and antibiotics.

I guess, I figure that this has at least the potential to work out for the best. The R's have thrown their little temper tantrum. But it is good for us, because they have made clear they are not playing along on this. So now there is No more incentive not to skip the "this is not the bill we would have wanted, but we are working with them" and move on to "the adults are going to actually fix things now, whether you like it or not" stage of negotiation. Hammer out a bill that either costs a lot less or does a lot more for the taxpayers who are funding it.

That is my nontechnical take on it. I don't care what the R's do. I care what the D's do and what ends up happening. And I hope that our representatives will take this oportunity to make a better bill, now that compromise for bipartisanship sake is a proven dud.

[polichick]

96. Actually this was Bush NOT getting his way for once - it wasn't a Dem bill...

...it was an administration bill.

[cabbage08]

97. Kick n/t

[slackmaster]

99. Whether or not some Republicans got their way is irrelevant

Serious question: Why do you care?

[LWolf]

100. The better questions:

Why the FUCK did mainstream Democrats support Bush on the bad "bail out" plan? Why the FUCK are they backing him AGAIN? Why the FUCK won't they EVER fucking oppose him when it counts? They won't even oppose him when his own fucking party does so.

Why do Republicans have the balls to say "no" to their own president, when the Democrats compromise every chance at opposition away?

Why aren't House Democrats proposing and supporting a GOOD plan?

[chicagoexpat]

102. THEY AREN'T -- 1.) u can't develop a GOOD PLAN in 1 week, only an EMERGENCY PLAN

& the House Dems supporting this are acting like adults, while the kids are playing to the petulant whiners that don't have a clue how the economy works

And if the tin foilhat fits, u should wear it

[LWolf]

103. Then I suggest

that, since the bill failed anyway, Democrats use this time to construct a GOOD plan.

Not that I expect them to listen to any suggestion that I, a lowly Democratic citizen, might make.

[iconicgnom]

104. Yah, Bush is crying in his beer too.

And Bush is, of course, the leader who's setting the US course for the future.
Oh well, just like with FISA, the congress'll eventually come around to the "right" side of this vote as well. Just wish it were as quick as it was for the Iraq war resolution. I mean, this having to vote twice, or even three times, before getting the result right for the country, and George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, wastes time that could be better spent pushing other Bush/Cheney ideas forward.

But there's a bright side of everything. The Dems have come a long way, and on this issue the majority of them, and all their leadership figures, "pre-caved" on the issue, and got some good photo-ops with George, their main man.

[Geek_Girl]

105. Some Repukes got their way Some dems got their way too

This is a bipartisan mess.

[baldguy]

106. Bush did not get his way - that's the point.

The GOP is fracturing in front of our eyes. The neocon ruling class wing, supported by Bush & McCain, is pushing for appeasement of the Wall Street terrorists - and the true conservative base is having none of it.

Unfortunately for us, the neocons have snowed the majority of Dems to support the $700B theft, instead of getting down to brass tacks and ACTUALLY SOLVING THE PROBLEM by re-introducing REAL oversight & REAL regulation and ACTUALLY HELPING PEOPLE. Instead, they're adding to the criminality by helping Bush.

Listen to Dennis Kucinich & Michael Moore - they're the only ones telling the truth here.

The fact is: nothing is going to be solved in the next few days or weeks. Bush is lying about the real problems, the Dems are too timid to stand up to him, and $700B by itself won't do squat. We have to wait for January for new solutions from President Obama, with Dem super majorities in both houses of Congress - with a brand-new spine transplant hopefully - and maybe with some new principled conservative Republicans as their allies in place of the extant slimy neocons.