Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Pivotal Day in US History Supreme Court says FU to Contract Law
- This topic has 135 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by PCinSD.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 10, 2009 at 5:02 PM #15862June 10, 2009 at 5:08 PM #413343BuyerWillEPBParticipant
With a precedent like this, good luck selling any corporate bonds in the future. Or good luck selling 10 year and 30 year treasuries for that matter. Ooops!
June 10, 2009 at 5:08 PM #413577BuyerWillEPBParticipantWith a precedent like this, good luck selling any corporate bonds in the future. Or good luck selling 10 year and 30 year treasuries for that matter. Ooops!
June 10, 2009 at 5:08 PM #413828BuyerWillEPBParticipantWith a precedent like this, good luck selling any corporate bonds in the future. Or good luck selling 10 year and 30 year treasuries for that matter. Ooops!
June 10, 2009 at 5:08 PM #413897BuyerWillEPBParticipantWith a precedent like this, good luck selling any corporate bonds in the future. Or good luck selling 10 year and 30 year treasuries for that matter. Ooops!
June 10, 2009 at 5:08 PM #414048BuyerWillEPBParticipantWith a precedent like this, good luck selling any corporate bonds in the future. Or good luck selling 10 year and 30 year treasuries for that matter. Ooops!
June 10, 2009 at 5:16 PM #413352EugeneParticipant[quote] our Supreme Court decided that it would no longer adhere to Bankruptcy Law nor Contract Law. Our Government, headed by Barrack Obama[/quote]
So was it Supreme Court or Barack Obama that decided … whatever it is you say it decided? Last I checked, the Supreme Court was very conservative. Out of nine judges, two were appointed by Reagan, two by Bush Senior, and two by Bush Junior. They are no friends of Barack Obama.
June 10, 2009 at 5:16 PM #413587EugeneParticipant[quote] our Supreme Court decided that it would no longer adhere to Bankruptcy Law nor Contract Law. Our Government, headed by Barrack Obama[/quote]
So was it Supreme Court or Barack Obama that decided … whatever it is you say it decided? Last I checked, the Supreme Court was very conservative. Out of nine judges, two were appointed by Reagan, two by Bush Senior, and two by Bush Junior. They are no friends of Barack Obama.
June 10, 2009 at 5:16 PM #413838EugeneParticipant[quote] our Supreme Court decided that it would no longer adhere to Bankruptcy Law nor Contract Law. Our Government, headed by Barrack Obama[/quote]
So was it Supreme Court or Barack Obama that decided … whatever it is you say it decided? Last I checked, the Supreme Court was very conservative. Out of nine judges, two were appointed by Reagan, two by Bush Senior, and two by Bush Junior. They are no friends of Barack Obama.
June 10, 2009 at 5:16 PM #413907EugeneParticipant[quote] our Supreme Court decided that it would no longer adhere to Bankruptcy Law nor Contract Law. Our Government, headed by Barrack Obama[/quote]
So was it Supreme Court or Barack Obama that decided … whatever it is you say it decided? Last I checked, the Supreme Court was very conservative. Out of nine judges, two were appointed by Reagan, two by Bush Senior, and two by Bush Junior. They are no friends of Barack Obama.
June 10, 2009 at 5:16 PM #414058EugeneParticipant[quote] our Supreme Court decided that it would no longer adhere to Bankruptcy Law nor Contract Law. Our Government, headed by Barrack Obama[/quote]
So was it Supreme Court or Barack Obama that decided … whatever it is you say it decided? Last I checked, the Supreme Court was very conservative. Out of nine judges, two were appointed by Reagan, two by Bush Senior, and two by Bush Junior. They are no friends of Barack Obama.
June 10, 2009 at 6:04 PM #413384ArrayaParticipantpaying back the UAW for all the contributions to Obama’s campaign for election.
haha.. Do you know how much the UAW contributed to his campaign? And really should we even get upset when a politician pays back it’s contributors. It is the status quo in DC. But still 38 million from wall street compared to 400K from the ever shrinking, almost gone forever UAW. That don’t buy you much in DC. As JP morgan dines on the corpse of GM.
June 10, 2009 at 6:04 PM #413620ArrayaParticipantpaying back the UAW for all the contributions to Obama’s campaign for election.
haha.. Do you know how much the UAW contributed to his campaign? And really should we even get upset when a politician pays back it’s contributors. It is the status quo in DC. But still 38 million from wall street compared to 400K from the ever shrinking, almost gone forever UAW. That don’t buy you much in DC. As JP morgan dines on the corpse of GM.
June 10, 2009 at 6:04 PM #413869ArrayaParticipantpaying back the UAW for all the contributions to Obama’s campaign for election.
haha.. Do you know how much the UAW contributed to his campaign? And really should we even get upset when a politician pays back it’s contributors. It is the status quo in DC. But still 38 million from wall street compared to 400K from the ever shrinking, almost gone forever UAW. That don’t buy you much in DC. As JP morgan dines on the corpse of GM.
June 10, 2009 at 6:04 PM #413939ArrayaParticipantpaying back the UAW for all the contributions to Obama’s campaign for election.
haha.. Do you know how much the UAW contributed to his campaign? And really should we even get upset when a politician pays back it’s contributors. It is the status quo in DC. But still 38 million from wall street compared to 400K from the ever shrinking, almost gone forever UAW. That don’t buy you much in DC. As JP morgan dines on the corpse of GM.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.