03-08-09 01:51 PM
387 12345 ...
tools
  1. Masun's Avatar
    I wanted to see Ron Paul win.
    02-26-09 12:38 AM
  2. exelant's Avatar
    Great, a retread of the election thread where we hashed these issues out for three months. Some contributed good ideas and arguments on both sides, and some couldn't write in complete sentences. Sorry Doc, I'm not buying it, Jindal? He trotted out the same old junk that got us into this mess to begin with. The Republicans have had the White House all but twelve of the last 40 years and look what it's gotten us. People complain about Obama's stimulus designed, he believes, to create jobs for middle and lower class people and everyone starts complaining before he's even had a 100 days in office and without giving the guy a chance to pull us out of the worst economy since the Great Depression - thank you George Bush. Oh but no one cried when GB threw almost the same amount of money at the banks, who turned around and gave lavish bonuses to already wealthy executives but didn't loosen the purse strings to ease the credit crises. So much for the Republican stimulus idea.

    I almost choked when you said JFK and Roosevelt would be appalled, wrong. Haven't you heard of the New Deal? Another attempt to create jobs for the working person. Maybe some things won't work out, that's the way it is. He's pragmatic, he won't hesitate to change if something isn't working. He's not locked into some tired old disproved rhetoric. Fanny and Freddy did not create those derivatives that have single handed brought us to the brink of a depression, Goldman Sach did, Citi Group did, any of a number of failed or bailed out banks did. To blame our problems on small percentage of government backed loans that shouldn't have been written is the conservative lie as they try to avoid blame for their actions. Sorry, that dog don't hunt. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. We aren't being fooled any longer. Give the guy a chance to dig us out of this mess and he will.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by exelant; 02-26-09 at 01:17 AM.
    02-26-09 01:14 AM
  3. thinkamp's Avatar
    Sadly what happened is that people just voted for "change" without realizing what it was. Sure, it's nice we have racial diversity in the Government's highest office, but diversity for the sake of diversity is nothing more than lip service.

    I know people who voted for Obama because he's black, because he's not Bush, because he's handsome, and people who wouldn't vote for McCain because he's white, a war hero or because they thought Palin was annoying... in other words, people make political decisions for the stupidest reasons.

    I wish there truly was a truth in advertising law in political campaigns with full disclosure of revenue sources... you would see that ALL politicians are basically beholden to their direct constituents and contributors.

    Jeesus, I have to tell people every dam side effect of a medicine down to whether or not it gave someone gas one time if they took it... and we aren't allowed to know (or should I say, don't seem to care) who is pulling the strings of our politicians.

    Obama just borrowed a couple trillion dollars from your, my and his kids... he had a history of voting for deferring payments and responsibility. Get frosted at that comment if you want, but he pushed Fanny Mae financing scheme and then tried to deny it... and now this bill is about 50% not going to do a damn thing to "stimulate" the economy in any way.

    JKF and Roosevelt would frankly, be appalled. They CUT taxes to help stimulate the economy, and before you say that Obama is cutting taxes... take that average $13 a month you are going to get under his plan and send it to Bobby Jindall. lol.

    you mean more than 50% of this bill is not going to "stimulate" the economy!
    02-26-09 06:49 AM
  4. thinkamp's Avatar
    I know Obama cannot change this around with the snap of his fingers, but I do not believe that this is a One Man job! Yea I know there are more people in the gov't than just Obama, but really One president? Idk just have never thought it was a One man job.
    02-26-09 06:53 AM
  5. wnm's Avatar
    You're kidding right? We all know Obama says nothing better than anyone before him, he even does it better than slick willy Bill Clinton. You just listen to the way he presents the words to you that makes you fawn over him. But if you actually dissected his message, you would know you were being conned.

    There's nothing new about liberalism and socialism. If socialism worked so well, name me one successful socialist country. How about Cuba, there's a socialist nation for you...I don't see many Americans fleeing the USA to get into Cuba but Cubans trying to flee shark infested waters to get to America.
    Clearly this thread was not title correctly. It should be Nobama rant.
    02-26-09 07:00 AM
  6. thinkamp's Avatar
    Clearly this thread was not title correctly. It should be Nobama rant.
    no because I wanted everyone to come in and be able to give their opinions. not my fault that everyone is all nobama...obama lovers are welcome too!
    02-26-09 07:02 AM
  7. exelant's Avatar
    You didn't read my post. I'm just getting warmed up, got my fingers flexed and my search engine ready, . I love a good political debate, especially with people advocating discredited political ideas. As long as the name calling can be kept out of it, let's debate.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 07:51 AM
  8. thinkamp's Avatar
    You didn't read my post. I'm just getting warmed up, got my fingers flexed and my search engine ready, . I love a good political debate, especially with people advocating discredited political ideas. As long as the name calling can be kept out of it, let's debate.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Yea I'd like to leave name calling out of it! Just state your opinions!!
    02-26-09 08:00 AM
  9. exelant's Avatar
    I only deal with facts, Amp. Anyone who was a part of the election thread will remember this. Don't bring anecdotal BS to the debate. I will be prepared and I expect the same from those on the right - none of that "I've got a friend who" baloney. We all have friends who...

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 08:37 AM
  10. jdoc77's Avatar
    I almost choked when you said JFK and Roosevelt would be appalled, wrong. Haven't you heard of the New Deal?
    For the young people here *cough* do I have to slog through Rush Limbaugh (ugh) archives and find the speech where JFK said that cutting taxes is the best way to reverse economic slow down.

    And the new deal created thousands of PUBLIC WORKS jobs... I say it again, FDR would be appalled at the gigantic run of PORK (squeal) in this bill.

    Anyone who has ever had a credit card knows that there is NO WAY to spend your way out of a debt or a recession... If the plan actually created and saved jobs, fine.. but giving 4 thousand million (thats 4 billion for the democrats in the audience.. its a lot of $$ in case you hadn't heard) dollars to ACORN? Come on. My alarm went off in the ninties... your wake up call appears to have been delayed.
    02-26-09 09:56 AM
  11. editionfws's Avatar
    i shouldnt have gotten off here so early last night!
    02-26-09 10:50 AM
  12. exelant's Avatar
    Again we have to endure the same old tired rhetoric. I do believe the point of the stimulus is public works, unless you don't call water and wastewater plants, and highways and bridges public works. Like I said, you people can't even give the guy the traditional 100 days. Economists on both side recognize the need for targeted stimulus. Am I to believe your trotting out the campaign slurs about Acorn is supposed to serve as a reason the stimulus plan won't work? Spare me the rhetoric and come up with a real argument. I love how the tax argument keeps getting brought up. The mess we're in happened in part because the right cut taxes and then increased spending. Anyone who runs a budget knows you have to pay for what you buy. As the president said, the time is now, and I believe him when he says this is going to happen. I'm willing to give him a chance because the other side doesn't have any answers - if they did, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.
    Like I said, they had the White House 28 of the last 40 years, and 8 of the Dem's 12 years were pretty darn good.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Last edited by exelant; 02-26-09 at 10:53 AM.
    02-26-09 10:51 AM
  13. exelant's Avatar
    i shouldnt have gotten off here so early last night!
    Don't worry, I have a feeling we're just getting warmed up and this debate will go on for some time. Hopefully we can get to some substance and not have a argument of slogans and innuendo - like where did the conservatives hide the bill for the bank bail out? Innuendo!

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 11:03 AM
  14. exelant's Avatar
    Like FDR, the president is pragmatic. If something isn't working, he will try something else. It is the sign of a good leader. We shall see if greatness is in his future, I hope so for all our sakes. FDR was considered a traitor to his class for all he did to make life better for the working class. If one reads the history of his presidency, they'll see many of the same things said about him then are being said today about Obama. That alone gives me confidence he is on the right track. There probably is some pork in the stimulus bill, but it isn't shameless welfare for already rich bankers. We gave them 700 thousand million dollars to free up credit and what did they do with it? We tried cutting taxes on the rich and what did they do?
    They turned around and conned even more from the less sophisticated poor by pushing mortgages they could not hope to repay - do an internet search of how much money was really dumped into the economy to sell those mortgages, and the biggest players were not known by first names.

    Those same people turned those mortgages into investment instruments doomed to fail from the beginning because there was no oversight. Then we give them half a trillion dollars to recover and jump start the economy, what did they do with the money? Down a rat hole, none of it was released to spur credit, but plenty of bonuses got paid.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 12:02 PM
  15. thinkamp's Avatar
    Glad some people are throwing there opinions out there..seems like some people don't even wanna get into it.
    02-26-09 12:16 PM
  16. editionfws's Avatar
    for the most part it seems like the people FOR obama dont want to get into it.
    02-26-09 12:31 PM
  17. thinkamp's Avatar
    for the most part it seems like the people FOR obama dont want to get into it.
    how did you know that was what i was thinking?

    I'm not saying all people that didv ote for him are now going against him, but I've seen a lot of people that I DO KNOW personally that did vote for him and are now turning against him because they are seeing what he is honestly about. Wished some people would have done some research before they voted!
    02-26-09 12:35 PM
  18. exelant's Avatar
    That's not true Amp, all the polls show he has strong approval numbers. How can anyone know how his plans are going to work after less than a month? He is doing exactly what he said he was going to do. It took Bush 8 years to get us into this mess, and some can't give Obama a month. Talk about doing research, try looking up poll numbers before saying stuff that is wrong. Please try to remember anecdotal stuff like "people I know" is not an argument based in fact. I can truthfully say people I know are very upset Bush and his administration have distroyed our economy. Does that make it true without finding any facts to back it up?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 01:45 PM
  19. jdoc77's Avatar
    Again we have to endure the same old tired rhetoric. I do believe the point of 1. the stimulus is public works, unless you don't call water and wastewater plants, and highways and bridges public works. Like I said, you people can't even give the guy the traditional 100 days. 2. Economists on both side recognize the need for targeted stimulus. Am I to believe your trotting out the campaign slurs about Acorn is supposed to serve as a reason the stimulus plan won't work? Spare me the rhetoric and come up with a real argument. I love how the tax argument keeps getting brought up. 3. The mess we're in happened in part because the right cut taxes and then increased spending. Anyone who runs a budget knows you have to pay for what you buy. As the president said, the time is now, and I believe him when he says this is going to happen. I'm willing to give him a chance because the other side doesn't have any answers - if they did, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in.
    Like I said, 4. they had the White House 28 of the last 40 years, and 8 of the Dem's 12 years were pretty darn good.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    This has to be some of the biggest head in the sand reasoning I have ever seen. Let's take this on point by point.

    1. You completely ignore the BILLIONS of dollars that is NOT going towards anything that will "stimulate" the economy. You refuse to say anything about 4 billion for ACORN. Until you address that, you are pretending to know what you are talking about.

    2. True experts on the economy will tell you that spending is NOT the way to stimulate a failing economy. I'm sure you can find partisan hacks that have a finance degree that will tell you whatever their boss says is the policy du jour. Also, you refuse to acknowledge that the most successful democrat in the last 60 years (Kennedy) ... agreed that lowering taxes was the way to stimulate a failing economy.

    3. Dood... You can't be serious. Answer this question: Who writes the checks? I'll answer for you since you prolly don't know or won't admit it. The congress. For how many years of the last 60 have the Republicans been in controll of the checkbook? Um... 8? For how many of the last 60 years has the budget been balanced? Hmm.. it was the last 4 of the years the Repubs had the checkbook. Coincidence? NOPE! lol. Facts just suck, don't they?

    4. For ALL of the years that the Dems had BOTH Congress and the White house (The Repubs have never had such luxury except Bush's first few) How many times have their been recessions? Oh yea, every single time except when Clinton was riding the dot com bubble...

    Get some game... then come back and make more stuff up, please.
    02-26-09 02:08 PM
  20. thinkamp's Avatar
    That's not true Amp, all the polls show he has strong approval numbers. How can anyone know how his plans are going to work after less than a month? He is doing exactly what he said he was going to do. It took Bush 8 years to get us into this mess, and some can't give Obama a month. Talk about doing research, try looking up poll numbers before saying stuff that is wrong. Please try to remember anecdotal stuff like "people I know" is not an argument based in fact. I can truthfully say people I know are very upset Bush and his administration have distroyed our economy. Does that make it true without finding any facts to back it up?

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    Well its hard to not throw that out there when I hear people complaining about him when they voted for him.
    and im sure you have read up on this but oh well:
    Tea Party Protests Planned - 11Alive.com | WXIA | Atlanta, GA
    02-26-09 02:08 PM
  21. jdoc77's Avatar
    There probably is some pork in the stimulus bill, but it isn't shameless welfare for already rich bankers. We gave them 700 thousand million dollars to free up credit and what did they do with it? We tried cutting taxes on the rich and what did they do?
    They turned around and conned even more from the less sophisticated poor by pushing mortgages they could not hope to repay - do an internet search of how much money was really dumped into the economy to sell those mortgages, and the biggest players were not known by first names.

    Those same people turned those mortgages into investment instruments doomed to fail from the beginning because there was no oversight. Then we give them half a trillion dollars to recover and jump start the economy, what did they do with the money? Down a rat hole, none of it was released to spur credit, but plenty of bonuses got paid.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    This cannot go un-addressed. YOU need to do an internet search and see how Republicans led by.. hmm.. who was it.. oh yea, John McCain said, "We need to do something about these lending practices before it collapses." .. in 2006... and who was helping lead the charge to keep Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac making loans that they KNEW were insolvent... But of course, it was Senor NoBama. One of the few things he actually voted on in Congress was to keep the practice of making BAD LOANS going and going and going...
    02-26-09 02:14 PM
  22. jdoc77's Avatar
    It took Bush 8 years to get us into this mess, and some can't give Obama a month.
    No, it took a Democratic Congress less than 5 years to turn a balanced budget into run-away deficit ON PURPOSE so they could blame it on Bush... get it right. I'm not saying that Republican's in the Congress were blameless. Far from it, but who was IN CHARGE OF THE CHECKBOOK when the budget turned around... Congress writes the checks and last time I checked, the D's were ahead when that happened.
    02-26-09 02:17 PM
  23. exelant's Avatar
    Less than 5 years? Dood, they only had a majority 2 years of the last eight. The fact remains the mortgage lenders made the vast majority of those loans, not Freddy and Fanny, as much as you'd like you fantasy revisionist history to be true. Sorry, it doesn't pass muster. The investment instruments that are causing the current problems were NOT sold by the government, if fact the very people who were supposed to be watching out for that kind of fraud didn't even understand what they were regulating. typical conservative thought, always say accept responsibility for ones actions, but soon as they have screwed up it's throw up a smoke screen and blame the other guy.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 02:30 PM
  24. exelant's Avatar
    And what about the 700 billion Bush gave the banks, what exactly is that stimulating? And they're back for more? Give me a break! I am at least willing to give the guy a chance. You completely ignore the fact he is pragmatic and will try different things - unlike the last occupant who wouldn't. Someone's head is in the sand, but it's not mine.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 02:35 PM
  25. exelant's Avatar
    Now on to facts, eh? Repubs like to say congress, like Barney Frank and Sen Chris Dodd blocked the federal housing reform act and therefore allowed Freddy and fanny to continue unregulated. The fact remains the bill made it out of committee, but never came to a vote in the REPUBLICAN controlled Senate in 2005. The Repubs blocked it before there was even a debate.

    There is a lot of blame to pass around, here's a partial bipartisan list from the Economist, that bastion of , er, liberal thought
    As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility ... with*hard-working homeowners*and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here's a partial list of those alleged to be at fault: The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap. Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively. Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses. Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes. The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families. Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates. Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages. Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral. The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market. An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic. Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) the crisis is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult
    Lots of people want to assign blame, but there's plenty to go around on both sides. My point is is something must be done. You had your chance, now move aside and give the guy a chance. If he doesn't do it, I'll be the first to vote against him.

    Posted from my CrackBerry at wapforums.crackberry.com
    02-26-09 02:59 PM
387 12345 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD