Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: CptTrips on September 30, 2008, 10:52:18 AM
-
http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2008/09/this-is-when-youtube-really-comes-in.html (http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2008/09/this-is-when-youtube-really-comes-in.html)
Why isn't this on every news channel right now?
Wab
-
Because there's only one slightly conservative network.
-
http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2008/09/this-is-when-youtube-really-comes-in.html (http://rightwingsparkle.blogspot.com/2008/09/this-is-when-youtube-really-comes-in.html)
Why isn't this on every news channel right now?
Wab
Perhaps because something from "rightwing..blogspot.." does not sound very unbiased source ?
-
Because there's only one slightly conservative network.
That's probably truer than anything. Another might be that it popped up on a blog...Sent directly in to the MSM offices, or someone like Bill O'Reilly, it might have gotten proper exposure.
-
That'll get yanked off youtube pretty quick.
Everybody knows how biased C-Span is, right?
Hey, let's get Dos Equis in here to tell us the Dems had absolutely nothing to do with it again.
-
Pretty damning video. :eek:
-
I'll betcha this makes it into the Republican ad campaign.
-
Perhaps because something from "rightwing..blogspot.." does not sound very unbiased source ?
Those are clips off C-SPAN. You think the Republicans used super-computer technology to artificially create images of those democrats saying that stuff?
Or do you admit the democrats involved did say exactly those things as recorded by C-SPAN?
Wab
-
Its just sad that so many Americans mostly Dems, are so mislead about what has happened, nothing was made up about what was heard and seen, what other proof is needed. The proof is in the pudding.....
-
Perhaps because something from "rightwing..blogspot.." does not sound very unbiased source ?
Did you bother to watch the video that was linked the in the blog?
I thought not.
-
The partisan bloodbath has yet to get spooled up to full carnage level.
As I was trying to fall asleep last night the thought intruded...
"will there be a government left after it finishes eating itself? Will Wall Street get away with getting the electorate to focus on the bozo's in washington, pointing fingers and laying blame, while they empty american homes and the tills of small businesses? Will americans figure out that the amateurs on capital hill are just cheerleaders and while we're focused on the wardrobe malfunction the CEO's that practiced accounting magic to obtain massive bonuses and strip investors are getting outta the stadium?"
Then I fell asleep... dreaming of the carnage on capitol hill.
This morning.. looks like the dream is coming true.
-
No crockett or Dos here yet?
*crickets*
(http://fireflyforest.net/images/firefly/2006/February/cricket.jpg)
-
I think we need to oil up the guillotines.
-
yup. Rapacious corporate greed. It's a cult. We need a boardroom bill.. and a 12-hole guillotine.
-
What I'm curious to, is to why McCain's speaking so much about getting this to pass.
McCain urges Treasury Department to take action 1 hour, 19 minutes ago
DES MOINES, Iowa - Republican presidential nominee John McCain is urging the Treasury Department to intervene aggressively to limit damage from the financial meltdown, action that McCain says President Bush can take with the stroke of a pen.
ADVERTISEMENT
Opening a business round-table Tuesday in Des Moines, Iowa, McCain said he has urged the Treasury to use its exchange stabilization fund "as creatively as possible" to backstop the market crisis. He says officials also should use the authority granted in a housing bill to purchase up to a trillion dollars in mortgages.
McCain decried the defeat of the financial bailout measure in the House, and he warned that the nation's political leaders will have to take risks even though solutions to the crisis may be unpopular.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_el_pr/mccain (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_el_pr/mccain)
-
What I'm curious to, is to why McCain's speaking so much about getting this to pass.
Because the man doesn't know how to campaign for $%!@.
-
What I'm curious to, is to why McCain's speaking so much about getting this to pass.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_el_pr/mccain (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_el_pr/mccain)
Trying to change the subject? Unlike the self serving democrats shown in this video McCain was one of those republicans warning of an unrestrained Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back when we had time to reign them in.
-
i don't know what the fuss is about, fanny and freddy are fine, barney frank said so and he should know , he is the chair of the house committee that over sees them. :rolleyes: :uhoh
-
i don't know what the fuss is about, fanny and freddy are fine, barney frank said so and he should know , he is the chair of the house committee that over sees them. :rolleyes: :uhoh
:lol :lol :lol :O :frown:
-
Trying to change the subject? Unlike the self serving democrats shown in this video McCain was one of those republicans warning of an unrestrained Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back when we had time to reign them in.
I expect we're going to see a lot of avoidance through deflection in this thread.
Wab
-
Trying to change the subject? Unlike the self serving democrats shown in this video McCain was one of those republicans warning of an unrestrained Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac back when we had time to reign them in.
McCain pulling this crap will make the original subject (Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) dissapear into the woodwork, if they get that ill-minded bailout plan through. The voters' at that point won't bother going back to 2004 to criticise any Dems'...They will hammer on the GOP in the here and now about the bailout, and it's repercussions.
-
McCain pulling this crap will make the original subject (Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac) dissapear into the woodwork, if they get that ill-minded bailout plan through. The voters' at that point won't bother going back to 2004 to criticise any Dems'...They will hammer on the GOP in the here and now about the bailout, and it's repercussions.
Avoidance through deflection.
Q.E.D.
-
Frode has a point. McCain SHOULDN'T be pulling for this bill. And it does hurt his campaign with the base. McCain can ill afford to anger the base.
-
Frode has a point. McCain SHOULDN'T be pulling for this bill. And it does hurt his campaign with the base. McCain can ill afford to anger the base.
I've always said, he's a democrat in republican clothing. The Dems can't go wrong this election OsamaBinBiden (thks Lazs) or McInsane.
-
Avoidance through deflection.
Q.E.D.
So is pining about what's already been done, and letting today's problem run away because of it. We can't (unfortunately) go back to 2004 and email those representative's that trying to persue the goals of getting their constituents out of the ghetto (dirty slums, but they could at least pay for it with welfare) and into McMansions' out in the suburbs (Which they can't afford, and soon turn those into dirty slums anyway) and show those congressman the problem we have today-an apparantly difficult to solve financial crisis where the cure might be more damaging than the affliction.
Now's the time to E-mail the toejam out of McCain, and tell him to shut up and vote against the bailout in it's present form.
-
I've always said, he's a democrat in republican clothing. The Dems can't go wrong this election OsamaBinBiden (thks Lazs) or McInsane.
I agree although I think Obamassiah has made plenty of mistakes the left acts like its genius when he does.
-
yup. But the old bugger has a history of flip-flops in a spectacular way.. how this one goes remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the administration is calling in all their chips and owed favors to back paulson and the fed. If mccain expects to get elected he'd better come up with a heluva 'dog ate my homework' story 72 hours before election day.
I still see the house republican revolt as the best thing the hill has done for america in recent history. that bailout bill was a trainwreck.. they need to get it right.
meanwhile, the dem smokescreen will become the hot political potato.. we'll be seeing some fire and brimstone flaming finger pointing in the weeks ahead. obama and the dems better invest in nomex.
-
So is pining about what's already been done, and letting today's problem run away because of it. We can't (unfortunately) go back to 2004 and email those representative's that trying to persue the goals of getting their constituents out of the ghetto (dirty slums, but they could at least pay for it with welfare) and into McMansions' out in the suburbs (Which they can't afford, and soon turn those into dirty slums anyway) and show those congressman the problem we have today-an apparantly difficult to solve financial crisis where the cure might be more damaging than the affliction.
Now's the time to E-mail the poop out of McCain, and tell him to shut up and vote against the bailout in it's present form.
I agree that no bailout should reward those responsible for this nightmare. However, recognizing those responsible for this disaster is necessary to avoid the same mistake in the future. Every single politician that defended the practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be tarred and feathered.
-
I agree that no bailout should reward those responsible for this nightmare. However, recognizing those responsible for this disaster is necessary to avoid the same mistake in the future. Every single politician that defended the practices of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be tarred and feathered.
That's too true. My original point was, if McCain backs the bailout, and it turns out to be as ruinous as the original problem, the focus will shift to his actions, not those of the house Dem's you saw in the CNN clips. In short, McCain would actually snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.
-
What I'm curious to, is to why McCain's speaking so much about getting this to pass.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_el_pr/mccain (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080930/ap_on_el_pr/mccain)
Ya that's it, try to change the subject.
-
If thats the video I'm thinking of ( Waters and Frank saying "nothing is wrong with Fannie Mae"), it has gotten air time on Fox news. Obviously, the propaganda networks aren't going to air it because it damns some Democrats.
McCain would do himself well to distance himself from this bailout, and back Newt Gingrich's plan to suspend market to market accounting as a way to increase liquidity. The problem is, it would take a huge amount of time to explain this to the average voter as the propaganda media will not talk about it. Most people have no idea what market to market accounting is.
Do yourself a favor. Read about it:
http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/30/will-suspending-mark-to-market-rule-solve-the-financial-crisis/print/
-
I don't know if the government is to blame for this mess or not. If we are going to blame the government then it should rest squarely on those who refused to heed warnings and the democrats should bear at least as much as the republicans. Pelosi should be censured.
-
Ya that's it, try to change the subject.
I pointed it out because McCain will have a helluva time using that as ammo in his campaign if he backs the bailout; Anything done 4 years' prior will fade back into history, because McCain's actions' in the here and now will become the main focus. If he wants to use any of those news clips to his advantage, he needs' to do as BTW said, and distance himself from this bailout. Even if it means distancing himself from the Bush administration (which arguably he should have done anyway.)
-
I don't know if the government is to blame for this mess or not. If we are going to blame the government then it should rest squarely on those who refused to heed warnings and the democrats should bear at least as much as the republicans. Pelosi should be censured.
To her own discredit, Pelosi seems to be simply voting for the bailout, to get back at the Bush administration in some weird way. She's already come back out and damned Bush for pushing a bill she voted yes for. It's a national crisis, and she's playing partisan politics. :rolleyes:
-
where is obama, he said he was going to save the country.
-
There are aspects of both parties that I just can't stand. However, the democrats have for more of them that I can't stand than the republicans do. This is one of them. I call it the 'George Costanza Paradigm', "It's not a lie as long as you believe it.". There's another common factor in that video but I shant bring it up here. And we all know what it is.
-
This piece right here says alot:http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080930/us_time/thebailoutdefeatapoliticalcredibilitycrisis (http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080930/us_time/thebailoutdefeatapoliticalcredibilitycrisis)
-
There are aspects of both parties that I just can't stand. However, the democrats have for more of them that I can't stand than the republicans do. This is one of them. I call it the 'George Costanza Paradigm', "It's not a lie as long as you believe it.". There's another common factor in that video but I shant bring it up here. And we all know what it is.
I think I know what common factor you speak of. ;)
Save it for another thread.:D
-
I have heard that in any bailout.. the encouraging of "minorities" and "low income" borrowers will not be allowed in the future. I hope that is true.. If the free market wants to make loans then let em fail on their own.. if the government forces em to make bad loans.. that is a different story.
I think the democrats want this to go through as quickly as possible to take some of the discussion away from who was to blame till after the election.. I don't think they want to have much focus on how well socialism really works.
lazs
-
I have heard that in any bailout.. the encouraging of "minorities" and "low income" borrowers will not be allowed in the future. I hope that is true.. If the free market wants to make loans then let em fail on their own.. if the government forces em to make bad loans.. that is a different story.
I think the democrats want this to go through as quickly as possible to take some of the discussion away from who was to blame till after the election.. I don't think they want to have much focus on how well socialism really works.
lazs
Keep in mind that alot of home buyers bought too much house, such as those who bought huge houses during the housing boom, with Interest-Only loans, expecting to make a fortune off the house in a couple of years of ownerhsip....
-
Keep in mind that alot of home buyers bought too much house, such as those who bought huge houses during the housing boom, with Interest-Only loans, expecting to make a fortune off the house in a couple of years of ownerhsip....
True. Absolutely. They should be punished like the rest.
-
Oh.. I absolutely do take that into consideration.. I am saying that the socialism opened the floodgates for all these creative loans that the stupid and the sleazy all took advantage of... Like any socialist program.. it opens the floodgates for those looking for loopholes.. the 1/32 indian or whatever then the next step is anyone can get the loan.
lazs
-
Oh.. I absolutely do take that into consideration.. I am saying that the socialism opened the floodgates for all these creative loans that the stupid and the sleazy all took advantage of... Like any socialist program.. it opens the floodgates for those looking for loopholes.. the 1/32 indian or whatever then the next step is anyone can get the loan.
lazs
I have a close friend in the mortgage industry that writes loans for a bank. They send applications to a 3rd party for review/recommendation/approvals of said loans based on background. He said they'd get loan approvals within 2 hours for house loans, which means no one was doing anything regarding credit checks, background checks, etc., except checking SSN and typo's....
-
Keep in mind that alot of home buyers bought too much house, such as those who bought huge houses during the housing boom, with Interest-Only loans, expecting to make a fortune off the house in a couple of years of ownerhsip....
You are absolutely correct. My wife and I bought a house in 2004. We were approved for 250,000. Our calculations said we could afford a 125,000 home. We ended up buying a 115,000 home. The bank didn't take into consideration any of our auto loans, credit cards, or basic costs of living like heat, food, gas, etc.
-
I If he wants to use any of those news clips to his advantage, he needs' to do as BTW said, and distance himself from this bailout.
Hehehe bro... gross understatement IMHO. He should be running in the opposite direction of the bill and screaming at the top of his lungs what a bad idea the bill is.
-
Yep, but that's what happens when the republican party chooses a liberal like mccain. I figured the republicans would know better than to choose a liberal after the Bush 1 & 2 Presidency's but they didn't learn. Osamabama is getting a totally 'free pass' for anything he does or doesnt do on this issue... It seems the only one being held accountable is mccain.
-
While I am fairly sure there is some blame to lay at both the Repubs. and Dems. , after watching that....the Dems bare WAY more. It's unreal and the worst part is NOTHING will come out of it until well after the money is gone.
Damn this type of watermelon pisses me off more and more everyday. I can't imagine how much we the people are getting F'ed on a daily basis.
-
Frode has a point. McCain SHOULDN'T be pulling for this bill. And it does hurt his campaign with the base. McCain can ill afford to anger the base.
Everytime McCain opens his mouth, I come one step closer to sitting the whole thing out.
-
Everytime McCain opens his mouth, I come one step closer to sitting the whole thing out.
Yeah, the only thing that stops me from doing that is when his opponent speaks. I don't like McCain much, if any more than Bush.
-
Everytime McCain opens his mouth, I come one step closer to sitting the whole thing out.
Ain't that the truth.
Charon
-
... It seems the only one being held accountable is mccain.
Remember last week when McCain stopped his campaign to get this legislation done? Well, obviously he didn't. Arizona's 6 Republican House Reps. voted NO on the issue. Thank god for McCain's leadership :aok
-
Remember last week when McCain stopped his campaign to get this legislation done? Well, obviously he didn't. Arizona's 6 Republican House Reps. voted NO on the issue. Thank god for McCain's leadership :aok
At least he tried....what was it that Obama did, exactly?
-
Nancy Pelosi hurt my feelings. What a bunch of Republican cowards :cry
-
Nancy Pelosi hurt my feelings. What a bunch of Republican cowards :cry
Nancy Pelosi is a Socialist Harridan.
-
Nancy Pelosi hurt my feelings. What a bunch of Republican cowards :cry
And the 93 Dems. that voted no? I supposed they're hero's huh. :rolleyes:
-
And the 93 Dems. that voted no? I supposed they're hero's huh. :rolleyes:
Yup. Hope they continue to refuse assimilation in the hive.
;)
-
Yup. Hope they continue to refuse assimilation in the hive.
;)
Im sure you knew I was being sarcastic..........right?
-
And the 93 Dems. that voted no? I supposed they're hero's huh. :rolleyes:
It was supposed to be a bi-partisan deal, which obviously fell through. I'll try to explain this so it makes sense. The plan was to have enough votes from both sides to push the legislation forward. The bi-partisan attempt had to have people oppose it in order to make the numbers more even for each party. This would result in legislation that is backed by a proportional amount of Republicans and Democrats. This on paper allows for both parties to take credit for pushing forward with $700 Billion bailout plan. They can say "we" instead allowing only 1 party to take the credit. It's definitely weird, but that is how Washington works.
On a different note, Pilosi's speech (which she was 100% right on) hurt some Republican's feelings. So they changed their mind. Should she have said what she said? I think she should have done it after the vote in my opinion. Hopefully we can get a better deal later this week.
-
It was supposed to be a bi-partisan deal, which obviously fell through. I'll try to explain this so it makes sense. The plan was to have enough votes from both sides to push the legislation forward. The bi-partisan attempt had to have people oppose it in order to make the numbers more even for each party. This would result in legislation that is backed by a proportional amount of Republicans and Democrats. This on paper allows for both parties to take credit for pushing forward with $700 Billion bailout plan. They can say "we" instead allowing only 1 party to take the credit. It's definitely weird, but that is how Washington works.
Wow. The dems held back so that when the rest of the country wakes up and realizes they've had their pocket picked in broad daylight for nothing, they could say it was a republican plan backed by republicans and passed by republicans. Fortunately, the idiots aren't as stupid as previously thought.
Personally I don't care how or why it failed as long as it did.
-
Im sure you knew I was being sarcastic..........right?
yup. didn't even need the emoticon thingy. however, I am getting called on it a lot lately.
i have no idea why.
-
On a different note, Pilosi's speech (which she was 100% right on) hurt some Republican's feelings. So they changed their mind. Should she have said what she said? I think she should have done it after the vote in my opinion. Hopefully we can get a better deal later this week.
You need to read this article.-
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63
''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''
Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.
''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.
(start squirming fan boi)
-
i don't know what the fuss is about, fanny and freddy are fine, barney frank said so and he should know , he is the chair of the house committee that over sees them. :rolleyes: :uhoh
Well, he should know, he was buggering an executive from one of them.
ack-ack
-
That's the one that looks like a condemnation of the black democrats wailing at the whitey republicans for attempting curb their black inner city constituents freddie and fannie gravy train..
Or is that just a coincidence?
Or is it why it's being avoided by the mainstream liberal media... what with a black lookin guy up for election and all?
-
.... This would result in legislation that is backed by a proportional amount of Republicans and Democrats. This on paper allows for both parties to take credit for pushing forward with $700 Billion bailout plan.
Wouldn't it be great if the GD legislation from Washington would work this way all the time , instead of having half assed BS POC legislation all the time that has to be thrown around like a football? Then play the blame game everyday?
HEY...There's an idea.....make frikin LAWS that are RIGHT instead of getting someone rich. WOW...What a concept.
-
HEY...There's an idea.....make frikin LAWS that are RIGHT instead of getting someone rich. WOW...What a concept.
they killed that in committee.
-
You need to read this article.-
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63
(start squirming fan boi)
Nice find. That article sure does leave an ugly stain on the reasons for today's current events.
Yep, off the taxpayers 401k plans, we were able to make affordable housing for those poorer families that couldn't afford a house in the first place, but Fannie Mae was certainly going to give them a loan anyway. :rolleyes:
-
It was supposed to be a bi-partisan deal, which obviously fell through. I'll try to explain this so it makes sense. The plan was to have enough votes from both sides to push the legislation forward. The bi-partisan attempt had to have people oppose it in order to make the numbers more even for each party. This would result in legislation that is backed by a proportional amount of Republicans and Democrats. This on paper allows for both parties to take credit for pushing forward with $700 Billion bailout plan. They can say "we" instead allowing only 1 party to take the credit. It's definitely weird, but that is how Washington works.
On a different note, Pilosi's speech (which she was 100% right on) hurt some Republican's feelings. So they changed their mind. Should she have said what she said? I think she should have done it after the vote in my opinion. Hopefully we can get a better deal later this week.
Dude, buy a ticket for the clue bus. Pelosi didn't want the bill to pass.
-
So is pining about what's already been done, and letting today's problem run away because of it. We can't (unfortunately) go back to 2004 and email those representative's that trying to persue the goals of getting their constituents out of the ghetto (dirty slums, but they could at least pay for it with welfare) and into McMansions' out in the suburbs (Which they can't afford, and soon turn those into dirty slums anyway)
So the problem is crackheads from the welfare ghetto bought mcmansions in the burbs?
lol, too funny
-
So the problem is crackheads from the welfare ghetto bought mcmansions in the burbs?
lol, too funny
In an extreme example...earlier, and I believe in another thread, Crockett showed that it was all walk's that got in over their heads.
But for all of our arguments up to this point, there's a new twist; They are gonna try the same bill again, with some riders' to try to make the House Repub's happy enough to make it pass:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown)
-
In an extreme example...earlier, and I believe in another thread, Crockett showed that it was all walk's that got in over their heads.
But for all of our arguments up to this point, there's a new twist; They are gonna try the same bill again, with some riders' to try to make the House Repub's happy enough to make it pass:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown)
And I wonder how much of the bells and whistles are germain(sp) to the bill. I'd be willing to bet not alot. Tax cuts? Health insurance provisions? B.S.!! B.S. stinks and this smells like more B.S..
-
In an extreme example...earlier, and I believe in another thread, Crockett showed that it was all walk's that got in over their heads.
But for all of our arguments up to this point, there's a new twist; They are gonna try the same bill again, with some riders' to try to make the House Repub's happy enough to make it pass:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown)
No, it was this thread
yeah, funny isn't it? Borrow 700 billion you have to pay interest on, and call it a tax cut
How about tying it to reducing the debt to x amount in x amount of years? How about to a balanced budget? Are there any fiscal conservatives left?
btw, my rep(Tierney) voted no, I emailed to thank him
-
why would you want to say no to that??? because our banks are about to bankrupt. freddy mac and fannie may really <F> our economy. i think if we are gonna spend our tax money put it towards helping our economy start back up. we need to focus on getting our banks back in order. FM and FM really <F> a lot of banks and hell im just prayin im gonna be able to take out a loan for college pretty soon.
wouldnt a boost of money help get us back on track? yes the government is gonna make a but load of money in return but wouldnt that be a good too? i mean we are trillions of dallars in debt.
we need a jump start. our ecomony is on it death bed with cancer. its only a matter of time!
and gee the democrats well theyed love to have a communist country as far as i see it. looks like we are getting closer and closer too it with all the veto/ no plan returns to help us get out of our struggle.
what would yall think a better idea would be HUH???
-
i mean we are trillions of dallars in debt.
Yeah, so borrow 700 billion more
-
we already have the 700 billion plus the government is gonna make about a trillion in a couple of years if they follow through with this plan
-
we already have the 700 billion
oh we do?
-
its called tax money
then when the market gets back on track
they will sell all the unpaid loans back to the banks and make a profit off it.
im pretty sure thats whats gonna happen
-
its called tax money
It's called a budget, those tax dollars are already spent, if you take that money, how do you pay what those tax dollars were budgeted for?
-
(http://seoblackhat.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/dollar-toliet-paper.jpg)
-
(http://seoblackhat.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/dollar-toliet-paper.jpg)
There's a real danger of the U.S. dollar becoming just that.
-
i could be wrong on that but i know the gment will make a ton more money somehow of the unpaid loans
-
its called tax money
then when the market gets back on track
they will sell all the unpaid loans back to the banks and make a profit off it.
im pretty sure thats whats gonna happen
It's not gonna work that way. You're gonna have to go back to the beginning of this thread, and follow it all the way back through to see why...This has already been argued. The end result could be runaway inflation.
-
On a different note, Pilosi's speech (which she was 100% right on)
Ok smart boi...explain how it was 100% right on.
Have you even read anything that has been posted here that details warning signs and attempts by many (including John McCain) to reform the brewing mess that today is a major problem? All of these attempts were blocked by the dems at every turn.
Don't be afraid, open your eyes....you might learn something.
Take this video for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs)
Watch it and then come back and tell me how Pelosi's speech was 100% right on.
-
Man oh man, I'm not going to wade through 6 pages of responses, but this stuff is GOLD!
These guys were trying FOUR years ago to do something about it and they were blocked! :lol
This really needs to get some air time. I hope it doesn't get pulled but I'm guessing it will.
-
All of these attempts were blocked by the dems at every turn
cmon, give it a rest already. The repubs had total control for 7 years, the dems could do nothing to stop them, they could do what they want.
It's funny, I'm listening to Rush the other day, and he comes out with this: "I am sitting at the convention with fellow republicans, and I said, we had control of congress, we had control of the white house, what went wrong?"
And he says "And we came to the conclusion, it was the democrats..."
And he goes on to say how the dems tricked them into doing things they wouldn't have done, pretty funny
But hey, typical of the times, blame someone else, don't take responsibility for your actions
-
cmon, give it a rest already. The repubs had total control for 7 years, the dems could do nothing to stop them, they could do what they want.
It's funny, I'm listening to Rush the other day, and he comes out with this: "I am sitting at the convention with fellow republicans, and I said, we had control of congress, we had control of the white house, what went wrong?"
And he says "And we came to the conclusion, it was the democrats..."
And he goes on to say how the dems tricked them into doing things they wouldn't have done, pretty funny
But hey, typical of the times, blame someone else, don't take responsibility for your actions
So I guess that makes all of the blocking by the dems ok?
Is that your logic?
Oh, well the republicans had control and did nothing....so it's ok for the dems to block any attempt to do something :confused:
c'mon....explain that logic to me....I'm listening.
-
So I guess that makes all of the blocking by the dems ok?
Is that your logic?
Oh, well the republicans had control and did nothing....so it's ok for the dems to block any attempt to do something
c'mon....explain that logic to me....I'm listening.
I'm wondering the same thing. The democrats in that video got down right indignant when republicans warned of big trouble ahead. So because the republicans have done a less than stellar job of running the country we're supposed to give the democrats another shot at the white house even after seeing how clueless they are? Ever hear the expression out of the frying pan and into the fire? That's the sort of change Obama offers.
-
cmon, give it a rest already. The repubs had total control for 7 years, the dems could do nothing to stop them, they could do what they want.
It's funny, I'm listening to Rush the other day, and he comes out with this: "I am sitting at the convention with fellow republicans, and I said, we had control of congress, we had control of the white house, what went wrong?"
And he says "And we came to the conclusion, it was the democrats..."
And he goes on to say how the dems tricked them into doing things they wouldn't have done, pretty funny
But hey, typical of the times, blame someone else, don't take responsibility for your actions
The Democrats could do nothing to stop the Republicans? Really? I guess all of G.W. Bush's judicial nominees just breezed right on through then, huh?
Now, on the flip side, the Republicans got drunk with power, forgot why they were elected, and screwed the pooch. As much their fault as anyone's.
But don't say the Democrats could not stop the Republicans, because they mastered obstructionist politics. They should hope that the Republicans forgot the lessons on that subject the Democrats showed them.
-
cmon, give it a rest already. The repubs had total control for 7 years, the dems could do nothing to stop them, they could do what they want.
It's funny, I'm listening to Rush the other day, and he comes out with this: "I am sitting at the convention with fellow republicans, and I said, we had control of congress, we had control of the white house, what went wrong?"
And he says "And we came to the conclusion, it was the democrats..."
And he goes on to say how the dems tricked them into doing things they wouldn't have done, pretty funny
But hey, typical of the times, blame someone else, don't take responsibility for your actions
So what you are saying is it's time for the Democrats to get in there and really screw things up. They have control of the house and senate. Why couldn't they get this "bailout" to pass. They just didn't want to get stuck when it blows up in their face six months from now.
I HATE politics! I'm sick of hearing about this bail out. They (Fannie & Freddie, AIG) screwed up, why should I have to pay for it? I pay my mortgage, I pay my taxes, and I work for a living. And I sure in Hell didn't make 90 million dollars in the last 6 years.
(breathing into a brown paper bag). Ok, I swore I wouldn't post in these political topics. Crawling back into my cave. Please continue. :)
-
The Democrats could do nothing to stop the Republicans? Really? I guess all of G.W. Bush's judicial nominees just breezed right on through then, huh?
Since when do judicial nominees control spending?
-
So what you are saying is it's time for the Democrats to get in there and really screw things up.
just carrying on a 7 year tradition
-
Since when do judicial nominees control spending?
Are you really that dense? Is reading comprehension part of your vocabulary? Must we hold your hand and explain what a sentence means?
-
Are you really that dense? Is reading comprehension part of your vocabulary? Must we hold your hand and explain what a sentence means?
enlighten me
-
enlighten me
He was referring to the fact that W's judicial nominees met resistance from the dems....implying that they were able to roadblock things that W tried to get through.....kind of like what they did in blocking any attempts to put things in place that would have prevented the mess we are in today.
Understand now?
-
He was referring to the fact that W's judicial nominees met resistance from the dems....implying that they were able to roadblock things that W tried to get through.....kind of like what they did in blocking any attempts to put things in place that would have prevented the mess we are in today.
Understand now?
apples to oranges, how did the dems prevent the republicans from cutting spending? Or is this one of those deflection things?
-
apples to oranges, how did the dems prevent the republicans from cutting spending? Or is this one of those deflection things?
You're hopless.
Dem's on board to cut spending? :rofl That's a good one!
And yes, your response was one of the deflection things.....nice try.
-
You're hopless.
Dem's on board to cut spending? :rofl That's a good one!
And yes, your response was one of the deflection things.....nice try.
Yeah, I thought so. Would be nice if you would man up and admit the republican party failed
And it was an epic fail
So the right finds that fed mac was a dem failure, and we tie the whole credit debacle to that, yeah, wtg
Truth is the republicans spent like no democrat could dream of spending, and they both like to spend
The difference is the dems tax and spend, the repubs borrow and spend and say they don't raise taxes
So when bama and his 'i'm gonna get whitey wife' reside in the white house, the repubs have no where to look but the mirror
But hey, look at the bright side, maybe then the fiscal conservatives can get control of congress back(Newt comeback?)
-
So what you are saying is it's time for the Democrats to get in there and really screw things up. They have control of the house and senate.
too late. they have already screwed it up.... 17% approval rating. rofl.
-
So the right finds that fed mac was a dem failure, and we tie the whole credit debacle to that, yeah, wtg
It's not?
Explain please.
What is the bailout for?
-
It's not?
Explain please.
What is the bailout for?
ummm, to infuse capital into the credit markets? Or is fm still operating and lending money to banks?
-
ummm, to infuse capital into the credit markets? Or is fm still operating and lending money to banks?
Thanks to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who made billions in bad loans. The republicans warning of this foolish practice were basically decried as racists for wanting to deprive poor minorities a home they couldn't afford.
-
ummm, to infuse capital into the credit markets? Or is fm still operating and lending money to banks?
And why are the credit markets in need of capital?
Why are they in the position they are in now?
-
Thanks to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who made billions in bad loans. The republicans warning of this foolish practice were basically decried as racists for wanting to deprive poor minorities a home they couldn't afford.
Ahhh, the whole mess is freddie mac giving loans to minorities, rof!
You, my sheep friend, have been listening to Rush
Turn off the radio, and step away
-
And why are the credit markets in need of capital?
Why are they in the position they are in now?
Wait, don't tell me, it's freddie mac right?
-
Ahhh, the whole mess is freddie mac giving loans to minorities, rof!
You, my sheep friend, have been listening to Rush
Turn off the radio, and step away
Can you refute that? Facts? Links?
-
Ahhh, the whole mess is freddie mac giving loans to minorities, rof!
You, my sheep friend, have been listening to Rush
Turn off the radio, and step away
This whole mess is because too much money was loaned to people for homes they could not afford. It was the democrats crying racist when they warned.
-
Wait, don't tell me, it's freddie mac right?
You tell me...you seem to be up on the reasons....why is it?
-
You tell me...you seem to be up on the reasons....why is it?
There were alot of banks lending money it shouldn't have, if it were just FM, it wouldn't be a problem.
But seeming you are going to run with FM, shouldn't you be blaming mcain too?
-
Democrats bitterly resisted the warnings made by Republicans. John McCain warned of impending disaster in 2005. What was Obama's postion these last few years? Does anyone even know? McCain fought for the troop surge in Iraq. We at least know where Obama stood and still stands on that.
-
There were alot of banks lending money it shouldn't have, if it were just FM, it wouldn't be a problem.
But seeming you are going to run with FM, shouldn't you be blaming mcain too?
What a piece of work.
When shown that the dems really fluffied something up, the only thing you can do is first try to spin, then push blame off on someone else.
If anything McCain tried to fix what was wrong with FM.
I have yet to see anything that shows that dems tried to fix anything.....instead they blocked any attempts to fix the problem before it became what we have today. You seem to have a problem acccepting this fact so you try to spin it to not be the case.
Sad, actually....but typical for a head in the sand dem who fails reading comprehension and a basic understanding of facts.
-
Democrats bitterly resisted the warnings made by Republicans. John McCain warned of impending disaster in 2005. What was Obama's postion these last few years? Does anyone even know? McCain fought for the troop surge in Iraq. We at least know where Obama stood and still stands on that.
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/24/on-davis-s-ties-to-freddie-mac-mccain-gets-boomeranged.aspx
"My major example was McCain's attacks on Obama for associating with former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson. The problem? McCain's own campaign is swarming with 26 advisers or fundraisers who have lobbied or are currently lobbying for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac--including campaign manager Rick Davis. When the New York Times reported Monday that Freddie Mac had previously paid an advocacy group run by Davis $30,000 a month until the end of 2005, the McCain campaign vehemently denied that Davis still had ties to the mortgage giant. In fact, Davis told reporters during a conference call that "it's been over three years since there's been any activity in this area and since I had any contact with those folks."
Unfortunately, that's not quite accurate. As NEWSWEEK's tireless investigative ace Mike Isikoff reports this morning, Freddie Mac also paid Davis's consulting and lobbying firm Davis Manafort a consulting fee of $15,000 a month starting in 2005--before Davis took a leave of absence to work on the McCain campaign--and ending only last month, when the U.S. government acquired the firm. (The New York Times has also posted a story on the payments.) Davis is still a partner and equity-holder in Davis Manafort, so he continues to benefit from its income. So far, Team McCain has attacked the messengers--as usual--but they haven't disputed the allegations, except to say Davis isn't profiting personally from Freddie Mac and therefore doesn't have, according to the Atlantic's Marc Ambinder, a "direct financial conflict of interest in helping McCain develop policy." But that ignores the larger issue: whether Freddie put Davis's firm on retainer--at Davis's request--because of Davis's relationship with McCain. "The story's not about profit," writes Ambinder. "It's about influence buying."
Woops!
-
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/09/24/on-davis-s-ties-to-freddie-mac-mccain-gets-boomeranged.aspx
"My major example was McCain's attacks on Obama for associating with former Fannie Mae CEO Jim Johnson. The problem? McCain's own campaign is swarming with 26 advisers or fundraisers who have lobbied or are currently lobbying for Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac--including campaign manager Rick Davis. When the New York Times reported Monday that Freddie Mac had previously paid an advocacy group run by Davis $30,000 a month until the end of 2005, the McCain campaign vehemently denied that Davis still had ties to the mortgage giant. In fact, Davis told reporters during a conference call that "it's been over three years since there's been any activity in this area and since I had any contact with those folks."
Unfortunately, that's not quite accurate. As NEWSWEEK's tireless investigative ace Mike Isikoff reports this morning, Freddie Mac also paid Davis's consulting and lobbying firm Davis Manafort a consulting fee of $15,000 a month starting in 2005--before Davis took a leave of absence to work on the McCain campaign--and ending only last month, when the U.S. government acquired the firm. (The New York Times has also posted a story on the payments.) Davis is still a partner and equity-holder in Davis Manafort, so he continues to benefit from its income. So far, Team McCain has attacked the messengers--as usual--but they haven't disputed the allegations, except to say Davis isn't profiting personally from Freddie Mac and therefore doesn't have, according to the Atlantic's Marc Ambinder, a "direct financial conflict of interest in helping McCain develop policy." But that ignores the larger issue: whether Freddie put Davis's firm on retainer--at Davis's request--because of Davis's relationship with McCain. "The story's not about profit," writes Ambinder. "It's about influence buying."
Woops!
Keep trying.
-
Keep trying.
yeah, I could feel the squirming from here
-
Keep trying.
It's pointless. Democrats will vote for Obama no matter what because he is promising them a bigger piece of the American pie. Or is it bread and circuses?
-
i don't know what all the fuss is about, everything is fine with fanny an freddy, barney frank said so and he should know, he heads the house committee that oversees the banks. :rolleyes:
-
i don't know what all the fuss is about, everything is fine with fanny an freddy, barney frank said so and he should know, he heads the house committee that oversees the banks. :rolleyes:
Oh, that's so 2005, John!
Today the dipchit says we need to bail them out....essentially he's saying we need to bail HIM out from the mess he made.
That's what I just don't understand......how people can be so stupid to even listen to anything he has to say. I mean, we have video of him in 2004 saying everything was ok and now we see him on tv saying we need to get this bailout approved.
It's like me borrowing money from you, going to Vegas and losing all of it and then coming back to you and telling you that you HAVE to give me more money so I can give you back the money I borrowed from you in the first place!
-
lol.. Donzo.. you and Six are on the same team. Really.
It's like two guys, caught stealing the bus, are watching the two cops that bagged 'em arguing over which one of the two put the most mileage on it.
meanwhile, the thieves are slinking off under the cover of the heated debate.
This ain't a partisan failure.... both sides reached across the isle to rip us off and fill the lobbyists bag orders and make it easy for the CEO's get away with more buses full of taxpayer money.
Pretty soon, there's gonna be nothin left but an empty parkin lot and we're gonna be lookin mighty foolish.
-
i would not be surprised if some day the military said "enough of this crap" and took over the govt.