Obama voted against a 30 percent ceiling on charge card interest rates?

[wyldwolf]

We hear all the time on DU about "corporatist" this and "corporatist" that. Big whoops are made about Hillary Clinton's "ties" to the healthcare industry and the money she's received as a result. OK. We get it.

Obama? The clean guy? He has gotten big bucks from Wall Street - more than any other Democrat. He voted against a 30 percent ceiling on charge card interest rates.

"To some liberals, the proposal was a no-brainer: a ceiling of 30 percent on interest rates for credit cards and other consumer debt," the Trib writes. "And as he left his office to vote on it, Obama planned to support the measure, which was being considered as an amendment to a major overhaul of the nation's bankruptcy laws.

"But when the amendment came up for a vote, Obama was standing next to Sen. Paul Sarbanes (D-Md.), the senior Democrat on the banking committee and the leader of those opposing the landmark bill, which would make it harder for Americans to get rid of debt.

"'You know, this is probably not a smart amendment for us to vote for,' Obama recalled Sarbanes telling him. 'Thirty percent is sort of a random number.'

"Obama joined Sarbanes in voting against the amendment . . . There remains no federal ceiling on credit card interest rates."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-obama_senate_recordjun12,0,1010006.story

Did Hillary vote the same way? I dunno. Does it matter? We already know (according to many here) she's the big "corporate whore." Obama? Hmmm....

[durrrty libby]

1. A snake in sheep's clothing. Lovely

[Ethelk2044]

6. Yes, we really know who the snake is and it is not Obama

http://obama.senate.gov/votes/index.cfm?start=181



:shrug:

[durrrty libby]

28. By "we", don't include me honey.. Just you and desperation

[AtomicKitten]

2. Unspinning the spin.

Obama stated publicly that the amendment the OP cites was poorly written (and a moot issue anyway); the fact is that all 25 amendments put forth by the Democrats were shot down by the GOP Congress.

Of note here is that Obama voted AGAINST the bankruptcy bill. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00044 What is interesting is that there is a concerted effort on the internets to try to muddle the issue and paint Obama as having supported the bankruptcy bill -- not unlike the OP here who apparently feels smearing other candidates will somehow elevate his.

Just for fun, we checked to see how the Democratic presidential candidates voted on the bill. Neither New Mexico governor Bill Richardson nor former Alaska senator Mike Gravel seem to have taken a position on the legislation; John Edwards was gone from the Senate by the time the bill came up in 2005, but spoke out against it.

For:
Joe Biden

Against:
Chris Dodd
Barack Obama
Dennis Kucinich

Not Voting:
Hillary Clinton

Clinton was the only senator who didn't vote on the bill. Given her recent stirring defense of lobbyists and her growing collection of endorsements from financial industry sources, one might suspect her sympathies were not entirely with the little people on this one.

Republicans, whose moral consciences long ago sought and gained bankruptcy protection, voted unanimously for the legislation. That includes Man of the People presidential candidate Ron Paul.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/9218/print

Obama's floor speech on the Bankruptcy Bill: http://obama.senate.gov/speech/050228-floor_statement/

[wyldwolf]

3. this isn't the bankruptcy bill

And as I pointed out in my OP, resorting to the "but Hillary did it" defense is not a defense at all. Obama is supposed to be above all this.

[Forkboy]

4. resorting to the "but Hillary did it" defense is not a defense at all.

Did you type that with a straight face? :rofl:

Here's your defense of Hillary on the fundraiser issue;

wyldwolf Thu Sep-06-07 10:33 AM
Response to Original message
31. google: Obama Alexi Giannoulias mob

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3499266&mesg_id=3500380

The "Obama does it too" defense = good and clever
The "Hillary does it too" defense = bad and no defense at all.

Got it.

[wyldwolf]

7. I'm glad we agree.

See, you won't find a Hillary supporter anywhere who believes she walks the "progressive" straight ans narrow path.

Obama supporters, though? Even though his actions constantly defy his words, many of his supporters have a Neverneverland view of his candidacy.

[Forkboy]

9. This has nothing to do with your hatred of "progressives".

It has nothing to do with Obama supporters buying what he's selling.

It DOES have to do with the hypocrisy of you doing what you just claimed is wrong for others to do.

Your distraction tactics are old and obvious.

[wyldwolf]

10. again, we agree.

It has to do with Obama claiming to be a different kind of politician and his supporters buying into it.

[Forkboy]

42. You keep leaving out your own hypocrisy.

My post had nothing to do with anyone's hypocrisy but your own.So no,we don't agree yet.Take up the other issue with others defending Obama's.I'm not.I pointing out YOURS.And naturally, you once again try to distract and divert.

Get a new act, this one is reaching Carrot Top quality.

[AtomicKitten]

12. No, it's about you trying to smear Obama on behalf of SS Clinton.

Your perpetuation of the myth that Obama voted FOR the bankruptcy bill through this lame subterfuge of spotlighting this one amendment that was among 25 Democratic amendments that failed is duly noted.

[wyldwolf]

13. Are you saying the point in the OP never happened? Or is just wrong to point it out?

[AtomicKitten]

14. I'm saying exactly what I said.

[wyldwolf]

15. ok.

:shrug:

[SOS]

43. It isn't the bankruptcy bill? Really?

Here's the sentence you disingenuously edited from the Tribune story:

"Obama joined Sarbanes in voting against the amendment, but they lost the larger battle when the new bankruptcy law passed by a lopsided 74-25. There remains no federal ceiling on credit card interest rates."

So Obama voted against the 2005 bankruptcy bill and against codifying into law the loan shark rate of 30%.

The amendment should have been a reintroduction of the 1991 D'Amato limit of 14%.
But by 2005, none of them, including Obama, Clinton and Edwards, had the courage to introduce a decent limit, as D'Amato did in 1991.

[zulchzulu]

22. Zing..zing...and another zing!

Thanks AK!

:thumbsup:

[durrrty libby]

40. "Thanks AK" Too bad neither one of you can edit out ignorance

[zulchzulu]

44. Bye

Your posts never contain any substance...it's iggy time...

[durrrty libby]

45. And your so called substance was a big lie. Enjoy

[AtomicKitten]

46. we can edit out ignorance by putting you on ignore (nt)

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AtomicKitten]

52. Oh, so terribly sorry I took the spin out of this horseshit by TELLING THE TRUTH.

The truth put the kibosh on this bit of misleading nastiness, and even this projection from you can't ease the pain.

Too bad. So sad. Better luck in your next candidate assault.

[durrrty libby]

54. Ooh big bad caps. Silly delusional little one. Rant on rant on

[AtomicKitten]

55. waaaaaaaaaaa !!!

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Alamom]

33. March 10, 2005: Former President Bill Clinton underwent (heart) surgery

Not Voting:
Hillary Clinton

Clinton was the only senator who didn't vote on the bill. Given her recent stirring defense of lobbyists and her growing collection of endorsements from financial industry sources, one might suspect her sympathies were not entirely with the little people on this one.

Real nice (uninformed) spin...




March 10: Former President Bill Clinton underwent surgery that removed fluid and scar tissue from his chest cavity, clearing up complications from a heart bypass operation




http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7127096/

Clinton surgery called successful
Doctor says former president ‘awake,
resting comfortably’

Updated: 7:40 p.m. CT March 10, 2005
NEW YORK - Surgeons successfully removed fluid and scar tissue from Bill Clinton’s chest cavity Thursday, cleaning up complications from the former president’s heart bypass operation of six months ago.

Clinton was “awake and resting comfortably” after four hours of surgery, said Herbert Pardes, president of New York-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center. “We expect Mr. Clinton to be walking” within 24 hours.

His wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, and daughter, Chelsea, were with him and were said to be elated by the successful surgery and a prognosis from one of his surgeons for an “even better than a full recovery.”

Surgeons removed a thick rind of scar tissue, in some places up to 8 millimeters (0.3 inches) thick, which made it impossible to use a minimally invasive videoscopy. Instead, surgeons performed more traditional surgery.

[durrrty libby]

39. They would still denigrate her if she was attending his funeral

There are some pathetic and ignorant people here.

[durrrty libby]

35. Wow her husband was having heart surgery. How sad you are

[AtomicKitten]

47. I did not comment on Hillary which makes your response knee-jerk AND sad.

If you have a problem with the SmirkingChimp blurb I posted, take it up with them.

Point of fact: I have corrected DU'ers about a gazillion times that HRC did not vote on this bill because BC was having surgery, again unspinning the spin.

Have you done the same for a candidate you don't support? Ha, ha, as if; that's just not the way you roll. And I think it's that fabulously easy-to-unspin cheesy nastiness you exude that serves only to put people off your candidate. And in that vein, carry on.

[Ethelk2044]

5. Sarbanes Oxlany Act 2002 _ Obama Vote

139 1 4/24/07 On the Motion to Table S.Amdt. 928 to S. 761 (No short title on file)
To amend the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, with respect to smaller public company options regarding internal controls. Motion to Table Agreed to (62-35) Yea

http://obama.senate.gov/votes/index.cfm?start=181

[wyldwolf]

8. This isn't about the Sarbanes Oxlany Act 2002.

[Colobo]

What's the issue here, wyld? I fail to see any.

[ellacott]

16. He is wrong and he knows it.

He fails to provide to full context and he knows he's being dishonest.

He claims it has nothing to do with Sarbanes or the Bankruptcy Bill when this is the full context.

He and other supporters who operate like him need to be ashamed but they have no shame.

[wyldwolf]

17. So you contend Obama DID NOT vote against a 30 percent ceiling on charge card interest rates.

[ellacott]

18. What's wrong with you? Can't you read?

I said you took it out of context.

I know you are not so stupid that you don't understand that you have to take into account many factors on these votes.

You are not so ignorant that you have ignored how opposing campaigns bring up the vote of their opponents in those ads. You can't be so dumb that you don't know that they don't include the full context of that vote.

I refuse to believe you are this stupid. If you are I will feel sorry for if Hillary makes it to the general election and the right begins to run ads(just like this post) with Hillary's voting record.

[wyldwolf]

19. So, what context could that action possibly be acceptable in?

[MH1]

24. Here's one.

If one or more states have a better law that would be overridden by the (worse) federal law.

I believe that may have been the case here, but I don't have time to investigate. But I know Kerry got hammered by some shallow (or manipulative) attackers for a similar situation back in 2004. In that case he was right to protect the better state standard and hold out for a federal law that would respect more restrictive (i.e. more pro-consumer or more pro-environment, depending on the issue) state laws.

[wyldwolf]

26. so, you've created a hypothetical context?

[MH1]

38. No, I answered your question.

This context has definitely come up in past situations. You asked, "So, what context could that action possibly be acceptable in?" and I gave you one.

Do you really think it's "hypothetical"? Even if it were (which it isn't, as it has happened on other legislation at least, if not this case), it would still be an answer to your question!

[ellacott]

25. Why are you refusing to read?

It's been posted in this thread. As soon as I saw this sad thread I did a google search and found the entire context, of which you conveniently left out.

[wyldwolf]

27. I'm not.

:shrug:

[ellacott]

30. That's unfortunate, or is it duplicitous?

Oh well...:shrug:

[wyldwolf]

31. "oh well" is right.

[ellacott]

32. yep, yep, yep

[Colobo]

50. wyld, don't try to imitate Howard Wolfson. The guy is sleazy and his spin jobs suck.

Be more creative. I know you can.

[Colobo]

11. Dupe.

[SaveElmer]

20. Nothin but a corporate gigolo, a shill for the credit industry...

Trying to prop up his puppet masters on wall street. He's nothin but a pseudo populist mole for Tony Rezko and his developer friends...

(Note: I got a hold of the preprogrammed function keys Hillary bashers usually use...thought I would try them out)

[wyldwolf]

21. preprogrammed function keys? I though Hillary bashers used a database of "cut and paste" lines!

[SaveElmer]

23. Well they've been at it so long it got to be too much work...nt

[Sandaasu]

29. I voted for it before I voted against it!

Looking the details over, it does seem that there was something screwy about this particular amendment that caused a number of democratic senators to vote against it while support was pretty solid for the other amendments with similar goals. I get the distinct feeling that those voting against it had reasons for doing so other than supporting the credit card companies.

This is a good example of why nitpicking at a senate record is a bad idea. If you pull out one specific vote without looking at a broader scope of things, you might get the wrong idea about what's going on.

[ellacott]

34. This goes right over many people's head n/t

[jefferson_dem]

36. Lovely. Simpleton right-wing smear tactics employed by some of our own

long-standing DUers.

Sad, really.

[ellacott]

37. It really is sad. n/t

[Sandaasu]

59. Indeed

Seeing this kind of attack used here, especially so soon after it was used against one of our own candidates, is quite frightening really.

[Lochloosa]

41. You beat me to it Sandaasu

There could have been a 1000 reasons to vote against the bill.

[AtomicKitten]

48. This was one of 25 amendments to the bill that ALL failed.

[Qutzupalotl]

57. Welcome to DU.

I think you're right on target.

And I think (or hope) jefferson_dem meant to respond to someone besides you.
:hi:

[Sandaasu]

60. Thanks! (n/t)

[Imagevision]

49. After taking a long second look at Hillary and Obama, I'm definitly

sold on new leadership in Washington and disgusted with the old brand of politics, Obama in my view is an excellant solution to no more of the, same ole - same ole malarky. These candidates keep spinning the same crap, day after day year after year, enough already!!!

[jefferson_dem]

53. But ... but ... but ... Hillary says "the system" is necessary and good...

and "change" actually means turning the dial back to 1992.

How can we not buy into that bill of goods? :sarcasm:

[maximusveritas]

58. Obama was right to vote against it

30% is way too high of a cap. It should be closer to the 14% cap that D'Amato proposed in 1991. 19 Senators who voted for that tougher cap in 1991 voted against the 30% cap in the Dayton ammendment, including Sarbanes.