Christopher S. Penn – Marketing AI Keynote Speaker

Time to keep our promise

—

by

Christopher S Penn
in ,
Warning: this content is older than 365 days. It may be out of date and no longer relevant.

Earlier this year, we asked our politicians to stand against the bailout, knowing that it would turn into a huge payday for a select few on Wall Street and not help Main Street America. Some did. Some did not. We’ve seen since then how badly abused our trust was, how badly abused our taxpayer dollars are being managed.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The chairman of the House Financial Service Committee accused financial institutions on Friday of “distorting” the government’s $700 billion economic bailout plan by using funds for bonuses, dividends and acquisitions.

We made a promise to Washington during the bailout talks. Vote for the bailout, we vote you out. Listen to your constituents, we listen to you for another term.

Now we have to keep our promise.

You voted for the bailout? We’re going to vote YOU out.

For the Senate:
https://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/14196.html

For the House:
https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

Spread the word. Tomorrow we reward those who exhibited courage, sense, and intelligence with re-election, and we punish those who ignored the counsel of the people to not bail out Wall Street.

Please RE-ELECT those who opposed the bailout!

Please VOTE AGAINST those who voted for Wall Street’s payday!

Did you enjoy this blog post? If so, please subscribe right now!

Time to keep our promise 1 Time to keep our promise 2 Time to keep our promise 3

Get this and other great articles from the source at www.ChristopherSPenn.com

Comments

12 responses to “Time to keep our promise”

  1. EdRoberts Avatar
    EdRoberts

    Can this include Senator McCain and Senator Obama? …. please?

    Reply
  2. Christopher S. Penn Avatar
    Christopher S. Penn

    I would hold to that. If they're up for re-election in their Senatorial positions, vote 'em out.

    As for the big election, that's a call you have to make yourself.

    Reply
  3. Nathan Avatar
    Nathan

    There is one Rep and one Senator up for reelection in my district. Both voted FOR the bailout. Both are being voted AGAINST in my household tomorrow.

    Reply
  4. EdRoberts Avatar
    EdRoberts

    No offense Chris (and you know I have a TON of respect for you), but I fail to see that logic. To call for the unilateral removal of those that voted for the bailout, yet find it ok to promote someone who DID simply does not make sense.

    In other words, we should weigh heavily against those that voted for the bailout, but not make it our only decision making tool for anybody running for office.

    Reply
  5. EdRoberts Avatar
    EdRoberts

    Can this include Senator McCain and Senator Obama? …. please?

    Reply
  6. Christopher S. Penn Avatar
    Christopher S. Penn

    I would hold to that. If they’re up for re-election in their Senatorial positions, vote ’em out.

    As for the big election, that’s a call you have to make yourself.

    Reply
  7. Nathan Avatar
    Nathan

    There is one Rep and one Senator up for reelection in my district. Both voted FOR the bailout. Both are being voted AGAINST in my household tomorrow.

    Reply
  8. Christopher S. Penn Avatar
    Christopher S. Penn

    The only reason I'd argue for coming down so heavily on the bailout folks is that it was a near-exact repeat of 9/11 and Iraq – imminent danger, financial meltdown only days away, sign this into law NOW and pay no attention to it! And Congress, or a majority of it, bought it a THIRD time, hook, line, and sinker – and we're seeing the results of their actions now with bonuses, dividends, and acquisitions, none of which were supposed to happen, but of course were baked into the cake.

    Once, sure, I can understand. 9/11 was legitimately terrifying, and lawmakers signed into law the PATRIOT Act, which was a stinker. They should have known better for Iraq – WMDs now!!! – but didn't. The bailout was strike #3.

    Reply
  9. EdRoberts Avatar
    EdRoberts

    No offense Chris (and you know I have a TON of respect for you), but I fail to see that logic. To call for the unilateral removal of those that voted for the bailout, yet find it ok to promote someone who DID simply does not make sense.

    In other words, we should weigh heavily against those that voted for the bailout, but not make it our only decision making tool for anybody running for office.

    Reply
  10. EdRoberts Avatar
    EdRoberts

    No offense Chris (and you know I have a TON of respect for you), but I fail to see that logic. To call for the unilateral removal of those that voted for the bailout, yet find it ok to promote someone who DID simply does not make sense.

    In other words, we should weigh heavily against those that voted for the bailout, but not make it our only decision making tool for anybody running for office.

    Reply
  11. Christopher S. Penn Avatar
    Christopher S. Penn

    The only reason I'd argue for coming down so heavily on the bailout folks is that it was a near-exact repeat of 9/11 and Iraq – imminent danger, financial meltdown only days away, sign this into law NOW and pay no attention to it! And Congress, or a majority of it, bought it a THIRD time, hook, line, and sinker – and we're seeing the results of their actions now with bonuses, dividends, and acquisitions, none of which were supposed to happen, but of course were baked into the cake.

    Once, sure, I can understand. 9/11 was legitimately terrifying, and lawmakers signed into law the PATRIOT Act, which was a stinker. They should have known better for Iraq – WMDs now!!! – but didn't. The bailout was strike #3.

    Reply
  12. Christopher S. Penn Avatar
    Christopher S. Penn

    The only reason I'd argue for coming down so heavily on the bailout folks is that it was a near-exact repeat of 9/11 and Iraq – imminent danger, financial meltdown only days away, sign this into law NOW and pay no attention to it! And Congress, or a majority of it, bought it a THIRD time, hook, line, and sinker – and we're seeing the results of their actions now with bonuses, dividends, and acquisitions, none of which were supposed to happen, but of course were baked into the cake.

    Once, sure, I can understand. 9/11 was legitimately terrifying, and lawmakers signed into law the PATRIOT Act, which was a stinker. They should have known better for Iraq – WMDs now!!! – but didn't. The bailout was strike #3.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Shares
Share This