im just gunna leave this here...

[Chad]

if you want to argue who caused our economic calimity, you'll have to go back to the Clinton Era when the notion that everyone should be able to buy a home with govenrment loan subsidies came from. Bush didn't fix it (the mortgage crisis we now enjoy), and Obama was handed it in full effect. It wil likely linger with the next president, regardless or their party, skin color, or religious beliefs.

 

I'm not saying it's Clintons fault either, we voted for all those fools into office that make this happen, and we (as consumers) took advantage of the situation when ever we could. We are here because of our own greed, not because of the Dmocrats or Republicans, or any president.

 

While I won't say lobbist can't influince our system, I find it hard to believe that they (big corporations) run our govenrment. Who put those "bought" people in office? The voting public did. Want it to stop? Quit voting in people that can be bought in the first place.

[BrazilBoy]

Chad if there is any one person who is enemy number one at the whole housing bubble it is Barney Frank and his control of Fannie and Freddy...

[Chad]

I'm sure there are a lot of people to put in league with him. I just don't see a presidents name on that list personally (past, present, or future).

 

If the office of president had power to influince such things, we'd never have had a single recesion in our history. It's all those other people in office, and our own greedy selves that cause the Economy to either work, or to fail.

 

Thus, saying it's president "so an so's" fault seems silly to me, and saying canidate "so and so" will be the answer to all our problems is also just as silly. We need to change ourselves, and we need to be more careful with all the other BOZO's we vote into office. The president is a virtual figure-head when you really discect the power he has or does not have. We do need that posisition filled, but it's not like he can really do much by himself, good or bad.

[ucw458]

Ug, politics makes my head hurt.

[BrazilBoy]

If Obama can blame Bush for 1 stimulus then the american people and I should be able to blame Obama for the last 2.... He claims Bush is the root cause of the economic collapse..Really?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_D9tYg1I8jhE/THVQh97xdKI/AAAAAAAAAxI/B9jOCe9lCN8/s640/How%2Bmuch%2Bdid%2Bthe%2BIraq%2Bwar%2Bcost.gif

 

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/obama-deficit-2011.jpg

 

http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/bush-vs-obama-unemployment-june-data.jpg?w=640

Edited December 20, 2011 by BrazilBoy

[BrazilBoy]

Ug, politics makes my head hurt.

It will make your wallet hurt even more if you don't pay attention Jeff...

[Magnesiac]

 

Yeah I know what you mean. After the stupid choice we made electing Bush two times in a row, America had no choice but to hire a democrat to get things back in order. Glad we agree.

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I don't know what kind of work you do now but you should DEFINATELY quit and go be a writer for SNL. That was hilarious.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(you WERE joking right?)

 

Merry Christmas to you and yours Chip. Thanks for defending my right to give you a hard time.

[chiplee]

 

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I don't know what kind of work you do now but you should DEFINATELY quit and go be a writer for SNL. That was hilarious.

 

(you WERE joking right?)

 

Merry Christmas to you and yours Chip. Thanks for defending my right to give you a hard time.

 

Lol, thanks. A job at SNL wouldn't suk, but I'm not holding my breath. Yes I was joking. And Merry Christmas to you, too. It's an honor to serve, and you thank me when you live a happy and peaceful life with your family, but your direct thanks is appreciated as well.

 

 

Back in order? 17 trillion in debt that your daughters kids will still be paying for... 9% unemployment... A BBB credit score...I am no fan of Bush but he left office with 7.2% unemployment, 4.2% average in 8 years, 800 billion in debt and a AAA credit...

 

Standard and Poor's lowered the US sovereign credit rating from triple A to double A+. That is a one point drop. The drop from AAA to BBB would be an 8 point drop. The ratings between AAA and BBB are AA+, AA, AA-, A+, A, A-, and BBB+. You're off by a factor of 8, meaning the situation is 8 times better than you say it is. Your national debt and unemployment numbers also are incorrect, but not as badly. The point is that you're still going after facts that fit your opinion, vice going after the facts and then forming your opinion. The reality is that Bush DID cause this crisis, and your own charts reflect it; especially this one.

http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/bush-vs-obama-unemployment-june-data.jpg?w=640

What did you expect that soaring red line to do when Obama took office? Level off immediately or peak there and start back down? Nonsense.

 

So what did Obama fix exactly?

 

What portion of his record can he run on?

 

In what way has your life been improved by Obama?

 

Lots of things have been fixed. As just one example, in January of this year the Obama administration scored one of many huge wins for human rights by giving patients the right to declare who could visit them in the hospital. The Janice Langbehn and Lisa Pond case that prompted that change is just tragic. The two women were together 18 years with 3 adopted children and they were kept apart during Janice's last 8 hours alive? Their kids were not allowed in to say goodbye to their mom. The list goes on and on, but I'm sure you know all about all of that right?

 

Where Obama's progress seems limited, it tends to be because he has had serious damage control to do, and while it may be true that the financial crisis has its roots in Clinton policy, it is false to suggest that Clinton and Bush share equal or even similar responsibility. Bush took several "groundbreaking" steps to overstimulate home ownership between 2002 and 2004, including the American dream act in 2003 and the Bush treasury department preempting state laws on predatory lending in 2004. The first step put people into homes and subsidized the down payment. The second step prevented state law from putting a stop to banks taking gross advantage of it. The rabbit hole goes much deeper than that though, as these terrible loans were then securitized and traded globally with AAA ratings from the same company about which you seem to care so much and know so little. Bush justified these policies as a way to stimulate the economy after 9-11, and let's not forget that many if not all of the terrible mortgage products that got us into this mess did not exist under Clinton. They were not legal.

Edited December 21, 2011 by chiplee

[Chad]

 

http://iowntheworld.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/obama-deficit-2011.jpg

 

http://reflectionsofarationalrepublican.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/bush-vs-obama-unemployment-june-data.jpg?w=640

 

OK

Second graph, I see Obama was handed a runaway train, and after a year or so, stabilized it.

 

In Bushes term, unemployment almost doubled, in Obamas term, it went up about 30%.

 

Pretty big difference if you ask me.

[BrazilBoy]

Your belief that what Obama has done is so great and what Bush did was so wrong is filled with folly.. The landslide victory last November will ounce again be evident in Nov. 2012...

The housing crisi spawned from the Community Reinvestment Act in 1977 by the Carter administration forcing banks to lend to subprime borrowers penned mostly by Barney Frank who later from 2000-2005 who forced Fannie to make loans to those would likely default on them aka unqualified borrowers ... Banks knew complying would mean that they were going to take on garbage loans, if they declined mergers and other bank business could be held hostage to not complying with the CRA or its thug lobbyists like NACA and ACORN, etc.... The fact is that this mess began with the

Frank but unfortunately won't end with his long overdue "retirement"

 

 

 

 

BTW The Dream Act had nothing to do with housing it had to do with minor illegal aliens.

[chiplee]

Your belief that what Obama has done is so great and what Bush did was so wrong is filled with folly.. The landslide victory last November will ounce again be evident in Nov. 2012...

 

I agree. Obama is going to win by a landslide again. So, no comment on the gross magnitude of your credit rating error? No comment on what you expected unemployment to do when Obama took office?

 

The housing crisi spawned from the Community Reinvestment Act in 1977 by the Carter administration forcing banks to lend to subprime borrowers penned mostly by Barney Frank who later from 2000-2005 who forced Fannie to make loans to those would likely default on them aka unqualified borrowers

 

Got a reference?

 

BTW The Dream Act had nothing to do with housing it had to do with minor illegal aliens.

 

I didn't say the "Dream Act". I said the American Dream act, and what I meant to say was the American Dream down payment act. Considering the fact that I described it as "putting people into homes and subsidizing the down payment," I would think you might have gathered that I misspoke calling it the American dream "act".

Edited December 21, 2011 by chiplee

[averse]

When I look at that nifty red/blue line graph, what I see is that we, the American People, caused the unemployment ourselves. We (as a nation of individuals) started "flipping" houses for profit. Realtors started selling more and more homes as a result and getting commissions, and then lubricated the wheels to keep the moneytrain rolling. Mortgage companies fell into line, and then banks, etc... Everyone had a good ole time until the "bubble" burst, creating a vaccuum of debt. 07-08 is when the bottom started falling out of the real estate market and the economy took a hit as a result. Ergo, that muticolored line showing unemployment reflects how the businesses started crashing shortly thereafter.

 

I think we put too much into which party is responsible for what, much in the tenor of The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism suggests about the connection between "the people" and "the politics".

[Fanta]

I think we put too much into which party is responsible for what, much in the tenor of The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism suggests about the connection between "the people" and "the politics".

 

This is true. We, as a people, elect our representatives. As Chip put it, we need to try to start electing those who aren't willing to be bought out ( for the sake of example, a majority of the republicans have been having their jackets padded by Hollywood, RIAA and MPAA to push the SOPA act through. ).

 

Just remember folks, it's not just one branch of the government, but all three ( Executive, Legislative and Judicial ). Checks and Balances.

 

http://www.socialstudieshelp.com/Images/ChksBalnces.gif

Legislative Executive Judicial

• Writes and enacts laws
  
• Enacts taxes, authorizes borrowing, and sets the budget
  
• Has sole power to declare war
  
• May start investigations, especially against the executive branch
  
• The Senate considers presidential appointments of judges and executive department heads
  
• The Senate ratifies treaties
  
• The House of Representatives may impeach, and the Senate may remove, executive and judicial officers
  
• Sets up federal courts except the Supreme Court, and sets the number of justices on the Supreme Court
  
• May override presidential vetoes
  

• May veto laws
  
• May not refuse to spend money allocated for certain purposes
  
• Wages war at the direction of Congress (Congress makes the rules for the military)
  
• Makes decrees or declarations (for example, declaring a state of emergency) and promulgates lawful regulations and executive orders
  
• Appoints judges and executive department heads
  
• Has power to grant pardons to convicted persons, except in cases of impeachment
  

• Determines which laws Congress intended to apply to any given case
  
• Determines whether a law is unconstitutional
  
• Determines how Congress meant the law to apply to disputes
  
• Determines how a law acts to determine the disposition of prisoners
  
• Determines how a law acts to compel testimony and the production of evidence
  
• Determines how laws should be interpreted to assure uniform policies in a top-down fashion via the appeals process, but gives discretion in individual cases to low-level judges. (The amount of discretion depends upon the standard of review, determined by the type of case in question.)
  
• Polices its own members
  

 

This is how our government works.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Fanta

[chiplee]

When I look at that nifty red/blue line graph, what I see is that we, the American People, caused the unemployment ourselves...

 

...I think we put too much into which party is responsible for what, much in the tenor of The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism suggests about the connection between "the people" and "the politics".

 

Well, sure, but you do have to consider the facts, and at least attempt to make an assessment as to which party tends to favor policies that allow, or perhaps even lead "we the people" to cause huge problems. Left to our nature we might never have moved past tribalism. Governments form from the masses, in civil society, to engage in the business of protecting society from itself and others. I swore to defend the constitution against all foreign and domestic enemies, not the people, because the constitution is but an embodiment of the people. Thomas Hobbes, regarded as the first sociobiologist, made this point beautifully in 1651 in the opening words of his masterpiece "Leviathan, or The Matter, Forme, and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil". Hobbes poetically regards the commonwealth as nothing but an artificial man, though of greater stature and strength than the natural man for whose protection and defense it was intended.

[Turborusty]

Well, should we get used to a lot more golf and weeks upon weeks of vacations to Hawaii? This president has vacationed more than the Roaming Gnome.

 

 

Turborusty

[chiplee]

Well, should we get used to a lot more golf and weeks upon weeks of vacations to Hawaii? This president has vacationed more than the Roaming Gnome.

 

 

Turborusty

 

Did you hear that on the Hannity or something? While it may be true that the president has vacationed "too much", it is probably unwise for republicans to invite scrutiny on the whole "presidential vacation" subject. According to CBS news, "President Obama had taken 61 vacation days after 31 months in office. At that point in their presidencies, George W. Bush had spent 180 days at his ranch, and Ronald Reagan had taken 112 vacation days at his ranch. Among recent presidents, Bill Clinton took the least time off -- 28 days. To be fair to all 4 men, they are never "out of touch" when they're on vacation, and they usually have a slew of staff with them.

[Burton]

I normally vote Republican, but I have voted Democrat 2 times. Once for Clinton, who I thought had a great personality, and Obama, who promised all his "Change" and such. I was let down by both. Many of the economic problems we have now, started with Clinton and his cronies. Some of his choices helped make sure I lost jobs and my house over a decade later. After Bush 2 I was ready for "Change", Obama was a smooth talker, and McCain was a joke, so Obama got my vote. I feel like I was blatantly lied to. He's turned out to be as bad, and actually worse than Bush 2.

 

 

I think the days of great Presidents are over. Instead of chosing between top-notch politicians, we are forced to pick the least evil of all our choices. That's sad. I used to be into politics, researched everybody's angle, and voted at any election that was going on- Nationwide or local. Lately, I barely even pay much attention to local elections anymore.

 

No matter who gets in, they're gonna suck. 4 or 8 years from now we'll be complaining about them, just like we do/did about Obama, the Bushes, and Clinton. Perry won't get the nomination, so I don't plan on voting this election. I think I'll be waiting to vote until we have a candidate that either wants to change trade agreements and restructure unions and/or plans to legalize marijuana. Those are some things that could totally save our economy, yet the politicians we have now are either too stupid to see it, or are too paid off (I suspect the later), to do anything about it.

 

 

In the meantime, you guys have fun debating about it. I'm glad to see some people are still passionate about making educated decisions about which candidate they want to stand behind. The sad thing is that is a lot of time wasted in making a choice that is gonna suck no matter which way it goes. No matter who wins, we'll just be stuck with some idiot loser that is as bad or worse than all the other Presidents we've had the last 20-30 years.

Edited December 21, 2011 by Burton

[hachi_destroyer]

clinton can still talk his way into anyones pants. he has that voice.

[dmyers151]

I can't stand politics, it seems so dirty.

 

These old guys & ladies sit around and argue Red v. Blue all day to no end. It feels to me, like the interests of the people have taken a back seat to flexing party muscle and gloating over wins.

[PDX87Starion]

The idea that banks were forced to give Loans to people is crazy. Banks and lenders were making lots of money on every loan. I had friends that were having a house built before the collapse, their budget was $400,000. That's what they decided they could afford. They were approved for $700,000 based on their income. And no, barney frank did not force the bank to offer that much.

 

As for the deficits you can't compare the bush deficits to obamas because all the war spending was not included during bush. You have to compare total spending not the budget deficits.

 

The reality is that our grandkids aren't going to pay it back. The 1.3 trillion that Reagan borrowed never got payed back. Now its so high its mathematically impossible to pay down. All we can hope for is not to add to it any more. Problem is that all that borrowed money is part of our propped up economy and has been for a long time.

 

And props to Ron Paul he is by far the most consistent politician alive.

It's also nice to see a republican march to the beat of his own drum instead of the drum of limbaugh or fox news. He panders to no one, it seems. Which really sets himself apart from the rest.

Edited December 21, 2011 by PDX87Starion

[chiplee]

Crickets....

 

 

Well republicans? Where are you? Can any of you explain why you can't support Obama with something other than hearsay from conservative talk shows? When someone rebuts your points you're supposed to either rebut back or concede. Your bias is getting the best of you if you can't do either.

[SubZero]

Crickets....

 

 

Well republicans? Where are you? Can any of you explain why you can't support Obama with something other than hearsay from conservative talk shows? When someone rebuts your points you're supposed to either rebut back or concede. Your bias is getting the best of you if you can't do either.

 

 

 

Chip,

 

Are you also declaring here that you will always vote for a democrat regardless of good or bad his/her qualifications are?

[chiplee]

 

 

 

Chip,

 

Are you also declaring here that you will always vote for a democrat regardless of good or bad his/her qualifications are?

 

Is that a serious question? No. What part of my post suggests that I would ever act like a typical one issue conservative?

[Jody1]

I suggest consideration of a voter poll/education tax.

 

ie..you have to pass a simple test in order to vote. The test could include a couple of procedural questions with a couple of current topics as well. Nothing extensive, or arbitrary. Simple identification of structure.

 

The voting process/ballots/chad's etc., could use some polishing anyway.

 

As I am not an original thinker, I am curious as to why this, or something similiar, is not bandied about with any frequency.

[dmyers151]

I'd imagine it's not done because such things can be biased and potentially keep certain people out of voting.

 

Just like that law they had way back, where you had to own a certain amount of land in order to vote? That law was passed mainly to exclude the poor and former slaves.