• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Bush Bust Recovering?

A

Anonymous

Guest
Conference Board: Recession Losing Steam

Thursday, June 18, 2009 2:11 PM

NEW YORK -- A private research group's forecast of economic activity rose in May by the largest amount in more than five years, the latest sign that the recession is easing.


The Conference Board said Thursday that its index of leading economic indicators -- designed to forecast activity in the next three to six months -- rose 1.2 percent, the biggest gain since March 2004. Economists surveyed by Thomson Reuters expected a 0.9 percent increase in May.


The New York-based group said activity in the six-month period through May also rose 1.2 percent -- the first time that measure has grown since April 2007. The April reading was revised up to a 1.1 percent gain from 1 percent.


"The recession is losing steam," said Conference Board economist Ken Goldstein. "If these trends continue, expect a slow recovery beginning before the end of the year."


However, Goldstein said the job market will take longer to rebound.


The Labor Department on Thursday said the total number of people filing for unemployment insurance fell by 148,000 to nearly 6.7 million in the week ending June 6.


That was the largest drop in more than seven years and snapped a streak of 19 straight record-highs. Initial claims for jobless aid, meanwhile, rose 3,000 to a seasonally adjusted 608,000 last week.


Seven of the Conference Board index's 10 components grew in May, including money supply, building permits, consumer expectations, stock prices and vendors' deliveries of supplies to companies.


But employment factors -- claims for jobless aid and weekly manufacturing hours -- weighed down the index, as did the level of manufacturers' orders for consumer goods.


While conditions are in place for a rebound later this year, "prospects of a recovery are still fragile," said Sal Gautieri, economist at BMO Capital Markets. "There's no guarantees."


U.S. households have lost billions of dollars in the stock market in the last two years, and gasoline prices have risen by more than $1 since the start of the year. That could weigh on consumer spending -- which makes up 70 percent of U.S. economic activity.


"We're not completely out of the woods, but as long as interest rates stay low and fiscal stimulus keeps coming, equity markets consolidate recent gains, we still think recovery is on track for the fourth quarter," Gautieri said.


Some economists say the recession may be followed by a "jobless recovery," as skittish employers remain reluctant to hire, even as their business improves. That shows "how deep a hole we're in," Goldstein said.


The country's jobless rate, which rose to a 25-year high of 9.4 percent in May, is expected to hit double digits by next year.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Just think how far ahead this economy would be had the Democrats not blocked Bush's attempts to put more regulations on Fannie and Freddie.....

I bet we never would of had this Democrat bust.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Just think how far ahead this economy would be had the Democrats not blocked Bush's attempts to put more regulations on Fannie and Freddie.....

I bet we never would of had this Democrat bust.

And Foreclosure Phil, Greenspan, and GW hadn't went balls to the walls for deregulation and let all the crooked banking and financial industry to wide open rape and pillage the country while they were pocketing $Zillions .....
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
What OT will not accept is that Obama has did nothing that has reached the streets yet. Actually he has slowed down the recession recovery but hurting consumer confidence.

Recessions come and go, always have and always will. Just a simple economic pattern.

Obama's plan was to cry the sky is falling and get all his social programs in place under the umbrella of stimulus and then claim credit when it finally comes out of the recession.

Thing is I believe his socialist agenda will do one of two things, either we will move sideways and never have any real economic growth again for years. Or we will eventually have a larger bust than we have now.

Thing is both are probably accurate, we will probably move sideways and then elect a Republican that will see the bust, much like Bush felt the Clinton bust. Things usually have an affect years later not so immediate!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Just think how far ahead this economy would be had the Democrats not blocked Bush's attempts to put more regulations on Fannie and Freddie.....

I bet we never would of had this Democrat bust.

And Foreclosure Phil, Greenspan, and GW hadn't went balls to the walls for deregulation and let all the crooked banking and financial industry to wide open rape and pillage the country while they were pocketing $Zillions .....

Without Fannie and Freddie with their Democrat agenda and fiat money, no rape and pillaging would of been possible. Without that, NO BUST.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Just think how far ahead this economy would be had the Democrats not blocked Bush's attempts to put more regulations on Fannie and Freddie.....

I bet we never would of had this Democrat bust.

And Foreclosure Phil, Greenspan, and GW hadn't went balls to the walls for deregulation and let all the crooked banking and financial industry to wide open rape and pillage the country while they were pocketing $Zillions .....

Once again phil was just a single congressman, Clinton signed it and democrats by large margin approved it.

You see why you get no respect on here, it is you density that you can not learn even the simplest things when showed you over and over.

Not to mention you will not accept Bush warned congress to do something about Fannie and Freddie but the Democrats blocked it!

You are as biased as they come! And as dense also!
 

Tam

Well-known member
Didn't the CBO say that the economy would recover with or without the stimulus package and that in the long term the stimulus will actually hurt the US economy?


And Oldtimer Obama said the jobless rate would not surpass 8% if the stimulus package was passed, what happened? What happen to all the jobs he PROMISED his stimulus package would create? :(

His also predicted some pretty rosy numbers on the economy can we believe him there when he was so far off on the Jobless rate? :???:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Miss Tam, you & A+ need to realize that no matter what facts are presented or lies exposed, AT's dementia only allows blame to be cast at the feet of GWB. If there was video of Buckwheat killing Lee Harvey Oswald (ala Jack Ruby), AT would STILL blame Bush!!
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Just think how far ahead this economy would be had the Democrats not blocked Bush's attempts to put more regulations on Fannie and Freddie.....

I bet we never would of had this Democrat bust.

And Foreclosure Phil, Greenspan, and GW hadn't went balls to the walls for deregulation and let all the crooked banking and financial industry to wide open rape and pillage the country while they were pocketing $Zillions .....

Oldtimer who was President that signed the repeal of the Glass Seagall Act? Hint it was repealed in 1999!!! :wink:

Who was it that STOPPED Bush from putting regulations back on Fanny and Freddy when Bush was President? Hint he is gay and was sleeping with an executive at FannyMae.

Who was it that recieved the most campaign donations from Fanny and Freddy? Hint
Top Recipients of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008



Name
Office
Party/State
Total

1. Dodd, Christopher J
S

D-CT
$133,900

2. Kerry, John
S
D-MA
$111,000

3. Obama, Barack
S

D-IL
$105,849

4. Clinton, Hillary
S

D-NY
$75,550

5. Kanjorski, Paul E
H
D-PA
$65,500

6. Bennett, Robert F
S
R-UT
$61,499

7. Johnson, Tim
S
D-SD
$61,000

8. Conrad, Kent
S
D-ND
$58,991

9. Davis, Tom
H
R-VA
$55,499

10. Bond, Christopher S 'Kit'
S
R-MO
$55,400

11. Bachus, Spencer
H
R-AL
$55,300

12. Shelby, Richard C
S
R-AL
$55,000

13. Emanuel, Rahm
H
D-IL
$51,750

14. Reed, Jack
S
D-RI
$50,750

15. Carper, Tom
S
D-DE
$44,389

16. Frank, Barney
H
D-MA

$40,100

17. Maloney, Carolyn B
H
D-NY
$38,750

18. Bean, Melissa
H
D-IL
$37,249

19. Blunt, Roy
H
R-MO
$36,500

20. Pryce, Deborah
H
R-OH
$34,750

21. Miller, Gary
H
R-CA
$33,000

22. Pelosi, Nancy
H
D-CA
$32,750

23. Reynolds, Tom
H
R-NY
$32,700

24. Hoyer, Steny H
H
D-MD
$30,500

25. Hooley, Darlene
H
D-OR
$28,750


Who is really in the pocket of Fanny and Freddy? Hint go back to the list Oldtimer and look for Bush or McCain, they are NOT there. But guess who is Oldtimer Obama, Clinton, Dodds, Frank, Pelosi and Rahm Emanual. So who was really allowing the raping and pillaging to protect their campaign donations? :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Bill Clinton- who was almost as dumb as GW Bush...
Which party controlled both houses of Congress in 1999 Tammy--I'll give you a hint- it begins with R :wink:

The Glass-Steagal Act was actually repealed over many years starting with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 signed by Carter- followed by Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 that deregulated the Savings and Loan Industry and was signed by Reagan.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act and opened up wide open casino gambling with investors money and ultimately brought down the countries economy was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. It was backed and pushed by Greenspan, and signed into law by Clinton....The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives..

Financial events following the repeal

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, which was in 1999 the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. It is believed by some including Elizabeth Warren, co-author of All Your Worth: The Ultimate Lifetime Money Plan (Free Press, 2005) (ISBN 0-7432-6987-X) and one of the five outside experts who constitute the Congressional Oversight Panel of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, that the repeal of this act contributed to the Global financial crisis of 2008–2009, although some believe that the increased flexibility allowed by the repeal of Glass-Steagall mitigated or prevented the failure of some American banks.

The year before the repeal, sub-prime loans were just 5% of all mortgage lending. By the time the credit crisis peaked in 2008, they were approaching 30%. Although, this correlation is not necessarily an indication of causation, as there are several other significant events that have impacted the sub-prime market during that time. These includes the adoption of mark-to-market accounting, implementation of the Basel Accords, the rise of adjustable rate mortgages etc.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Bill Clinton- who was almost as dumb as GW Bush...
Which party controlled both houses of Congress in 1999 Tammy--I'll give you a hint- it begins with R :wink:

The Glass-Steagal Act was actually repealed over many years starting with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 signed by Carter- followed by Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 that deregulated the Savings and Loan Industry and was signed by Reagan.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act and opened up wide open casino gambling with investors money and ultimately brought down the countries economy was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. It was backed and pushed by Greenspan, and signed into law by Clinton....The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives..

Financial events following the repeal

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, which was in 1999 the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. It is believed by some including Elizabeth Warren, co-author of All Your Worth: The Ultimate Lifetime Money Plan (Free Press, 2005) (ISBN 0-7432-6987-X) and one of the five outside experts who constitute the Congressional Oversight Panel of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, that the repeal of this act contributed to the Global financial crisis of 2008–2009, although some believe that the increased flexibility allowed by the repeal of Glass-Steagall mitigated or prevented the failure of some American banks.

The year before the repeal, sub-prime loans were just 5% of all mortgage lending. By the time the credit crisis peaked in 2008, they were approaching 30%. Although, this correlation is not necessarily an indication of causation, as there are several other significant events that have impacted the sub-prime market during that time. These includes the adoption of mark-to-market accounting, implementation of the Basel Accords, the rise of adjustable rate mortgages etc.

I am tired of correcting you, so I just want to ask you one question, why do you keep doing this? What is your purpose? Is it some plot to stimulate site activity or do you just laugh at us for keeping to correct you even though you know the correct answer?

You know the vote came out of committee and the actual vote of the bill that Clinton signed was not along party lines, it was almost unanimous in its support.

So I ask you why do you keep posting lies? Is it just to mess with everyone on here? Or is it to get activity to the site by causing arguments?

Why? Please Answer?

Because just as much as the liberals say mean good ole boy conservatives push people away. You are just as much of deterrent to come on here. It is like talking to a brick wall and starting to be a waste of time! So if you are trying to stimulate more post you may be shooting yourself in the foot!
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Bill Clinton- who was almost as dumb as GW Bush...
Which party controlled both houses of Congress in 1999 Tammy--I'll give you a hint- it begins with R :wink:

The Glass-Steagal Act was actually repealed over many years starting with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 signed by Carter- followed by Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 that deregulated the Savings and Loan Industry and was signed by Reagan.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act and opened up wide open casino gambling with investors money and ultimately brought down the countries economy was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. It was backed and pushed by Greenspan, and signed into law by Clinton....The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives..

Financial events following the repeal

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, which was in 1999 the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. It is believed by some including Elizabeth Warren, co-author of All Your Worth: The Ultimate Lifetime Money Plan (Free Press, 2005) (ISBN 0-7432-6987-X) and one of the five outside experts who constitute the Congressional Oversight Panel of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, that the repeal of this act contributed to the Global financial crisis of 2008–2009, although some believe that the increased flexibility allowed by the repeal of Glass-Steagall mitigated or prevented the failure of some American banks.

The year before the repeal, sub-prime loans were just 5% of all mortgage lending. By the time the credit crisis peaked in 2008, they were approaching 30%. Although, this correlation is not necessarily an indication of causation, as there are several other significant events that have impacted the sub-prime market during that time. These includes the adoption of mark-to-market accounting, implementation of the Basel Accords, the rise of adjustable rate mortgages etc.

I am tired of correcting you, so I just want to ask you one question, why do you keep doing this? What is your purpose? Is it some plot to stimulate site activity or do you just laugh at us for keeping to correct you even though you know the correct answer?

You know the vote came out of committee and the actual vote of the bill that Clinton signed was not along party lines, it was almost unanimous in its support.

WHEN DID 54-44 BECOME UNANIMOUS :???:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Bill Clinton- who was almost as dumb as GW Bush...
Which party controlled both houses of Congress in 1999 Tammy--I'll give you a hint- it begins with R :wink:

The Glass-Steagal Act was actually repealed over many years starting with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 signed by Carter- followed by Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 that deregulated the Savings and Loan Industry and was signed by Reagan.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act and opened up wide open casino gambling with investors money and ultimately brought down the countries economy was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. It was backed and pushed by Greenspan, and signed into law by Clinton....The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives..

I am tired of correcting you, so I just want to ask you one question, why do you keep doing this? What is your purpose? Is it some plot to stimulate site activity or do you just laugh at us for keeping to correct you even though you know the correct answer?

You know the vote came out of committee and the actual vote of the bill that Clinton signed was not along party lines, it was almost unanimous in its support.

WHEN DID 54-44 BECOME UNANIMOUS :???:
but it passed di it not?????
Twist and shout, spin and twist you are still wrong!!!! :roll: :roll: :roll:

EH?

I can just see oldtimer taking the oath before a judge prior to being placed on the stand!
Bailiff "do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?

Oldtimer "Ill tell the truth depending on how I can twist it to suit my needs"

Judge: you mean to say you will only tell what you perceive to be the truth?

oldtimer "yea something about like that unless I can lie as usual"
:liar:

Judge " Mr prosecutor is this your idea of a joke???"

Prosecutor "no your honor Mr Britzman is the joke, the whole county knows it"

Judge "case dismissed"
EH!! OH VEY!!!!
:wink: :wink:
 

Silver

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Bill Clinton- who was almost as dumb as GW Bush...
Which party controlled both houses of Congress in 1999 Tammy--I'll give you a hint- it begins with R :wink:

The Glass-Steagal Act was actually repealed over many years starting with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 signed by Carter- followed by Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 that deregulated the Savings and Loan Industry and was signed by Reagan.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act and opened up wide open casino gambling with investors money and ultimately brought down the countries economy was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. It was backed and pushed by Greenspan, and signed into law by Clinton....The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives..

Financial events following the repeal

The repeal enabled commercial lenders such as Citigroup, which was in 1999 the largest U.S. bank by assets, to underwrite and trade instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations and establish so-called structured investment vehicles, or SIVs, that bought those securities. It is believed by some including Elizabeth Warren, co-author of All Your Worth: The Ultimate Lifetime Money Plan (Free Press, 2005) (ISBN 0-7432-6987-X) and one of the five outside experts who constitute the Congressional Oversight Panel of the Troubled Asset Relief Program, that the repeal of this act contributed to the Global financial crisis of 2008–2009, although some believe that the increased flexibility allowed by the repeal of Glass-Steagall mitigated or prevented the failure of some American banks.

The year before the repeal, sub-prime loans were just 5% of all mortgage lending. By the time the credit crisis peaked in 2008, they were approaching 30%. Although, this correlation is not necessarily an indication of causation, as there are several other significant events that have impacted the sub-prime market during that time. These includes the adoption of mark-to-market accounting, implementation of the Basel Accords, the rise of adjustable rate mortgages etc.

I am tired of correcting you, so I just want to ask you one question, why do you keep doing this? What is your purpose? Is it some plot to stimulate site activity or do you just laugh at us for keeping to correct you even though you know the correct answer?

You know the vote came out of committee and the actual vote of the bill that Clinton signed was not along party lines, it was almost unanimous in its support.

So I ask you why do you keep posting lies? Is it just to mess with everyone on here? Or is it to get activity to the site by causing arguments?

Why? Please Answer?

Because just as much as the liberals say mean good ole boy conservatives push people away. You are just as much of deterrent to come on here. It is like talking to a brick wall and starting to be a waste of time! So if you are trying to stimulate more post you may be shooting yourself in the foot!

aplus, looks like OT just got you. I bet that sucks :lol:
 

Mike

Well-known member
The conference vote on the original S900 passed by 90-8 in the Senate when the Republicans allowed the "Community Re-Investment Act" language into the Bill, while reconciliating differences between the House version and the Senate version.

In other words, the Dems were OK with the Bill if certain language against "Red-Lining" (Dems wanted to keep interest rates low for less qualified home borrowers, no matter their credit worthiness).

In the final outcome, most of the CRA stuff was left out. Which is why the Dems turned against it in that final vote.

In short, if the Dems wishes had remained in the final outcome, there would no doubt be more "less than worthy" homeowners today, and many more foreclosures taking place, thus making today's situation more dire than it is today.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Silver said:
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Bill Clinton- who was almost as dumb as GW Bush...
Which party controlled both houses of Congress in 1999 Tammy--I'll give you a hint- it begins with R :wink:

The Glass-Steagal Act was actually repealed over many years starting with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 signed by Carter- followed by Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 that deregulated the Savings and Loan Industry and was signed by Reagan.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act and opened up wide open casino gambling with investors money and ultimately brought down the countries economy was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. It was backed and pushed by Greenspan, and signed into law by Clinton....The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives..

I am tired of correcting you, so I just want to ask you one question, why do you keep doing this? What is your purpose? Is it some plot to stimulate site activity or do you just laugh at us for keeping to correct you even though you know the correct answer?

You know the vote came out of committee and the actual vote of the bill that Clinton signed was not along party lines, it was almost unanimous in its support.

So I ask you why do you keep posting lies? Is it just to mess with everyone on here? Or is it to get activity to the site by causing arguments?

Why? Please Answer?

Because just as much as the liberals say mean good ole boy conservatives push people away. You are just as much of deterrent to come on here. It is like talking to a brick wall and starting to be a waste of time! So if you are trying to stimulate more post you may be shooting yourself in the foot!

aplus, looks like OT just got you. I bet that sucks :lol:

Problem with OT is he only tells half the truth. So no he did not get me here is the actual truth.

The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8 (1 not voting) and in the House: 362-57 (15 not voting). ' The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glass-Steagall_Act

If you will notice, the final bill was passed in the senate 90 to 8. That is pretty close to unanimous as I stated and a long ways from party lines as OT stated.

Who cares what the first original vote was, what Clinton signed is what became law and that bill passed with support from both Republicans and Democrats.

Wouldn't you concur silver? :wink:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Bill Clinton- who was almost as dumb as GW Bush...
Which party controlled both houses of Congress in 1999 Tammy--I'll give you a hint- it begins with R :wink:

The Glass-Steagal Act was actually repealed over many years starting with the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 signed by Carter- followed by Garn-St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982 that deregulated the Savings and Loan Industry and was signed by Reagan.

The bill that ultimately repealed the Act and opened up wide open casino gambling with investors money and ultimately brought down the countries economy was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. It was backed and pushed by Greenspan, and signed into law by Clinton....The bills were passed by Republican majorities on party lines by a 54-44 vote in the Senate and by a 343-86 vote in the House of Representatives..

I am tired of correcting you, so I just want to ask you one question, why do you keep doing this? What is your purpose? Is it some plot to stimulate site activity or do you just laugh at us for keeping to correct you even though you know the correct answer?

You know the vote came out of committee and the actual vote of the bill that Clinton signed was not along party lines, it was almost unanimous in its support.

WHEN DID 54-44 BECOME UNANIMOUS :???:

Clinton did not sign that version of the bill, He signed the version that was voted passed 90 to 8.

Once again you are proved to be a liar. Because you knew this, you are either a liar who wants to mislead people. Or you are just trying to stimulate traffic to the site by arguing.

Which is it?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Clinton did not sign that version of the bill, He signed the version that was voted passed 90 to 8.

The 90-8 vote was only a "Conference" vote. Clinton signed the final, which was 54-44 in the Senate and an overwhelming bipartisan vote in the House.

The Wikipedia info is wrong.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Mike said:
Clinton did not sign that version of the bill, He signed the version that was voted passed 90 to 8.

The 90-8 vote was only a "Conference" vote. Clinton signed the final, which was 54-44 in the Senate and an overwhelming bipartisan vote in the House.

The Wikipedia info is wrong.

There are a few on PB who like to quote Wikipedia.

Wikipedia relies on user submissions and editing for it's content. It is very liberally biased, and in many cases is a distortion or re-writing of history.

If quoting Wikipedia or using it in any type of research, always double check the information.
 
Top