RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

     

     



    More BS. The policies promulgated by the the gov't affect peoples /business's action. Just look at TAX LAW  for example!!!!!!

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Of course they do.  But that doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of other factors that have nothing to do with government policy and that typically exert an even bigger impact.  

    If you think the problem is tax law, tell me exactly what Obama has changed in the tax code that has been so bad for business? 

    By the way, one can make a very good argument that the biggest thing the government did that impacted the current economy was deregulating the financial industry.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Some might buy that But the COMMUNTY REINVESTMENT ACT passed in the mid nineties with Frank and Waters "rolling the dice" was a major cause of the FINANCIAL crisis along with mortgage lending to everybody who wanted to cash in. 20% of that lending was speculator driven. Big banks  packaged the loans to"knowing buyers". FANNIE/FREDDIE, gov't agencies were used to 'guarantee" the loans. GOV,T INTERVENTION started the debacle. Did not happen in Canada because the Gov't did not "guarantee" loans to people who could not afford them.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

     

     



    More BS. The policies promulgated by the the gov't affect peoples /business's action. Just look at TAX LAW  for example!!!!!!

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Of course they do.  But that doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of other factors that have nothing to do with government policy and that typically exert an even bigger impact.  

    If you think the problem is tax law, tell me exactly what Obama has changed in the tax code that has been so bad for business? 

    By the way, one can make a very good argument that the biggest thing the government did that impacted the current economy was deregulating the financial industry.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Pro

    Well, dodd frank is good for the too big to fail banks, after all one of them just gave Hillary 400 k for 2 speaches , and Ithis is the first I heard it called detregulation

    On tax policy - well obamacare is chock full of new taxes,and there are thousands of pages of bunked up regulations

    You are right, normally a president alone doesn't have aALl encompassing powers. But he isn't alone, he has Harry Reid and his lobbyist sons to look the other way. Just wait for the new epa and  immigration regs coming down the pike. And if you don't think Obama is being unconstitutional listen to Jonathan Turley , a left wing pro Obama legal professor who says obama is down right dangerous

    I think your heart is in the right place, but how all the mess ups these guys do and you still swallow it

    i don't get it

    no pats for me today not in nj

    [/QUOTE]


    +10

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

    Some might buy that But the COMMUNTY REINVESTMENT ACT passed in the mid nineties with Frank and Waters "rolling the dice" was a major cause of the FINANCIAL crisis along with mortgage lending to everybody who wanted to cash in. 20% of that lending was speculator driven. Big banks  packaged the loans to"knowing buyers". FANNIE/FREDDIE, gov't agencies were used to 'guarantee" the loans. GOV,T INTERVENTION started the debacle. Did not happen in Canada because the Gov't did not "guarantee" loans to people who could not afford them.



    The CRA had nothing to do with the mortgage crisis.  All of the horrible subprime lenders were institutions that were not subject to the law and any securities that were made out of those toxic loans were securitized by the private sector because they did not meet the credit standards required by Fannie and Freddie.  Fannie and Freddie's market share decreased dramatically during the housing boom because of this.

    There were housing bubbles and busts in many other countries that didn't have the CRA or Fannie and Freddie.  In addition there was a huge bubble in commercial real estate which is a market in which the CRA and GSEs are not involved.  No this crisis was caused by private sector greed which has been enabled by the deregulation of the financial sector over the years.

    I don't believe in the existence of Fannie and Freddie as I think they no longer serve their original purpose, and they certainly acted irresponsibly during the housing boom, but they did not cause the housing bubble regardless of how much you anti-government types want to believe it.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Some might buy that But the COMMUNTY REINVESTMENT ACT passed in the mid nineties with Frank and Waters "rolling the dice" was a major cause of the FINANCIAL crisis along with mortgage lending to everybody who wanted to cash in. 20% of that lending was speculator driven. Big banks  packaged the loans to"knowing buyers". FANNIE/FREDDIE, gov't agencies were used to 'guarantee" the loans. GOV,T INTERVENTION started the debacle. Did not happen in Canada because the Gov't did not "guarantee" loans to people who could not afford them.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The CRA had nothing to do with the mortgage crisis.  All of the horrible subprime lenders were institutions that were not subject to the law and any securities that were made out of those toxic loans were securitized by the private sector because they did not meet the credit standards required by Fannie and Freddie.  Fannie and Freddie's market share decreased dramatically during the housing boom because of this.

     

    There were housing bubbles and busts in many other countries that didn't have the CRA or Fannie and Freddie.  In addition there was a huge bubble in commercial real estate which is a market in which the CRA and GSEs are not involved.  No this crisis was caused by private sector greed which has been enabled by the deregulation of the financial sector over the years.

    I don't believe in the existence of Fannie and Freddie as I think they no longer serve their original purpose, and they certainly acted irresponsibly during the housing boom, but they did not cause the housing bubble regardless of how much you anti-government types want to believe it.

    [/QUOTE]


    Let me see if I read you clearly. You claim the crisis was caused by "private sector greed". And persons who expect the government, as steward of the economy capable of enacting laws to prevent such greed from doing great harm, to do exactly that, are "anti-government"?

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Not really.  The economic problems in the US actually have very little to do with Obama.  In general, Presidents have less influence on the economy than most people assume.  It's still a private sector economy and most of what happens is because of market forces. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Liberal hogwash. Not unexpected.

    The actions of Presidents have a huge impact on the economy. As just one example: with a word, Obama could dramatically affect the US economy for the better by ending the wars.

     

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Not really.  The economic problems in the US actually have very little to do with Obama.  In general, Presidents have less influence on the economy than most people assume.  It's still a private sector economy and most of what happens is because of market forces. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Liberal hogwash. Not unexpected.

    The actions of Presidents have a huge impact on the economy. As just one example: with a word, Obama could dramatically affect the US economy for the better by ending the wars.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what is hogwash. Nixon ended Vietnam and the economy still sucked.

    [/QUOTE]

    The VW devastated the economy you Megatool. After the VW, arab oil became the load on the economy. You're a history moron.

    It's called "guns and butter" imbecile. Read up on it.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

     

    I always laugh at simple minded people who think the president can walk into the WHite House, flip a switch and change an economy.

    It used to be easier. The president had more power and the economy was nowhere like it is today with so much complexity to it.  

     



    Says the imbecile as he defends his liberal hero who has dropped the economic ball for over half a decade. LMAO@U

    You are so pathetically stupid. The LAST thing you do in a bad economy is create a massive new spending program like Obamacare. This is 1st grade economics dum bass.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Some might buy that But the COMMUNTY REINVESTMENT ACT passed in the mid nineties with Frank and Waters "rolling the dice" was a major cause of the FINANCIAL crisis along with mortgage lending to everybody who wanted to cash in. 20% of that lending was speculator driven. Big banks  packaged the loans to"knowing buyers". FANNIE/FREDDIE, gov't agencies were used to 'guarantee" the loans. GOV,T INTERVENTION started the debacle. Did not happen in Canada because the Gov't did not "guarantee" loans to people who could not afford them.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The CRA had nothing to do with the mortgage crisis.  All of the horrible subprime lenders were institutions that were not subject to the law and any securities that were made out of those toxic loans were securitized by the private sector because they did not meet the credit standards required by Fannie and Freddie.  Fannie and Freddie's market share decreased dramatically during the housing boom because of this.

     

    There were housing bubbles and busts in many other countries that didn't have the CRA or Fannie and Freddie.  In addition there was a huge bubble in commercial real estate which is a market in which the CRA and GSEs are not involved.  No this crisis was caused by private sector greed which has been enabled by the deregulation of the financial sector over the years.

    I don't believe in the existence of Fannie and Freddie as I think they no longer serve their original purpose, and they certainly acted irresponsibly during the housing boom, but they did not cause the housing bubble regardless of how much you anti-government types want to believe it.

    [/QUOTE]

    If FANNIE/FREDDIE were not guaranteeing loans the debacle THOSE securitized loans would have been harder to float and the money used to make more loans would dried up. AGAIN, it didn't happen in Canada which is closely linked to the US economy.WHY?

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to pcmIV's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    Some might buy that But the COMMUNTY REINVESTMENT ACT passed in the mid nineties with Frank and Waters "rolling the dice" was a major cause of the FINANCIAL crisis along with mortgage lending to everybody who wanted to cash in. 20% of that lending was speculator driven. Big banks  packaged the loans to"knowing buyers". FANNIE/FREDDIE, gov't agencies were used to 'guarantee" the loans. GOV,T INTERVENTION started the debacle. Did not happen in Canada because the Gov't did not "guarantee" loans to people who could not afford them.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    The CRA had nothing to do with the mortgage crisis.  All of the horrible subprime lenders were institutions that were not subject to the law and any securities that were made out of those toxic loans were securitized by the private sector because they did not meet the credit standards required by Fannie and Freddie.  Fannie and Freddie's market share decreased dramatically during the housing boom because of this.

     

    There were housing bubbles and busts in many other countries that didn't have the CRA or Fannie and Freddie.  In addition there was a huge bubble in commercial real estate which is a market in which the CRA and GSEs are not involved.  No this crisis was caused by private sector greed which has been enabled by the deregulation of the financial sector over the years.

    I don't believe in the existence of Fannie and Freddie as I think they no longer serve their original purpose, and they certainly acted irresponsibly during the housing boom, but they did not cause the housing bubble regardless of how much you anti-government types want to believe it.

    [/QUOTE]

    If FANNIE/FREDDIE were not guaranteeing loans the debacle THOSE securitized loans would have been harder to float and the money used to make more loans would dried up. AGAIN, it didn't happen in Canada which is closely linked to the US economy.WHY?

    [/QUOTE]

    Canadians will tell you a big reason is because the banks are better regulated up here.  It's kind of  a point of pride, actually.  Some of the strongest banks in the world . . . 

     

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from oklahomapatriot. Show oklahomapatriot's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?


    Obama is a clown. Mandela should've have tried what MLK did, a peaceful movement. He would not have been in prison for 25 years.

     

     

     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    Draw your own conclusion.

     

     

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yC8qQE4Y2Js#t=104

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:

     

     

     



    More BS. The policies promulgated by the the gov't affect peoples /business's action. Just look at TAX LAW  for example!!!!!!

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Of course they do.  But that doesn't mean that there aren't a lot of other factors that have nothing to do with government policy and that typically exert an even bigger impact.  

    If you think the problem is tax law, tell me exactly what Obama has changed in the tax code that has been so bad for business? 

    By the way, one can make a very good argument that the biggest thing the government did that impacted the current economy was deregulating the financial industry.  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    You mean like repealing Glass-Stegall which basically contributed to the housing market plunge and trading in toxic derivatives? This wasn't obama's deal, it was Clinton's. but it almost single handedly plunged us and other parts of the world into recession As foreign governments were coerced to buy these toxic derivatives in exchange for goods and services. 

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Not really.  The economic problems in the US actually have very little to do with Obama.  In general, Presidents have less influence on the economy than most people assume.  It's still a private sector economy and most of what happens is because of market forces. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Liberal hogwash. Not unexpected.

    The actions of Presidents have a huge impact on the economy. As just one example: with a word, Obama could dramatically affect the US economy for the better by ending the wars.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Actually this is true Babe. However, the private entity that has the single biggest influence and control over economic policy and the economy is the Fed. 

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to melswitt's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to TSWFAN's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to melswitt's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to PatsLifer's comment:

     

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Wow, seawolf, calm down dude.  It's fine not to like Obama and Hilary Clinton or their politics.  But really, get a grip.  No one who graduates from a top law school and ends up becoming a Senator, a President, or a Secretary of State is "unaccomplished."  Those are achievements that few can match, and I doubt many of us on this website are anywhere close to that accomplished in our own professional lives. 

     

     



    Yes, pres, Secretary of State, etc are accomplish,nets. However, in order to attain them, you have,to be a career politician. There should never in this country be a career politician. 

     

    I have more respect for joe the plumber that gets up,at 5am every morning and home by 8pm who can barely provide for,his family than these career politicians.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Simpleton moron...like most Fox Noise Watcherrs......

     

    "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran...

    "I can see Russia from My House!"

    "Nothing will happen if we default on our debt!"

    "Under the Affordable Care Act, there will be "Death Panels!"

     

    "Who needs Big Government, but keep your hands off my Social Security and Medicare!"

    Amazing....simply mind boggling.....

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Hey Mel's witt... Stick to the issue. Is Obama a liar?

    [/QUOTE]

    That's not the issue...the issue is Mandela...are you a Moran...LMFAO...I think so...

     

    BTW...Was George Bush a liar?  Did he not create the largest financial crisis in  the this nation's history since the great depression...Yeppers to both questions...

    You see...if you TPers don't stick to the main issue, you open yourself up to vast oceans of egg on face issues...enjoy...Also..ALL POLS ARE SOCIOPATHIC LIARS..ALL

    [/QUOTE]

    Of course he was, as was Clinton, Obama, etc. 

    however, GB didn't engineer anything. clinton enabling the repeal of Glass-steagall allowed big banks to trade in toxic derivatives backed by bad loans resulting in the housing market crash. 

    When did the economy start,to tank? 

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsLifer. Show PatsLifer's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Not really.  The economic problems in the US actually have very little to do with Obama.  In general, Presidents have less influence on the economy than most people assume.  It's still a private sector economy and most of what happens is because of market forces. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    ^ Liberal hogwash. Not unexpected.

    The actions of Presidents have a huge impact on the economy. As just one example: with a word, Obama could dramatically affect the US economy for the better by ending the wars.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    That's what is hogwash. Nixon ended Vietnam and the economy still sucked.

    [/QUOTE]

    The VW devastated the economy you Megatool. After the VW, arab oil became the load on the economy. You're a history moron.

    It's called "guns and butter" imbecile. Read up on it.

    [/QUOTE]

    Wars usually help an economy.  WWI, WWII, Korean War, etc.  All thriving economies post war occur when you win/gain something. Duh.

    We lost Vietnam, dingleberry.  That's why the economy sucked. It was too long and we lost. It's not because it was a war we were involved in.  

    This whole anti-war pacifism act you're trying to pull here is phony and a joke, so forget it.

    You're a moron.  

    This latest economic collapse has more to do with Glass-Steagall and the wild corruption than our military budget, dummy.

    I know more about history than you could ever dream, Diapers.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Correct on Glass-Steagall. Who was running the show when this was repealed? Clinton.

    so before you start labeling all right wing nutjob s, perhaps you should look closer,to home to see who is responsible. 

    Russ , what we have now is a perpetual war economy. We have been involved in war, military build up for 60 years because its big business. This is the primary reason war exists. To make money. You think the US gave a damn about some little country called Vietnam? Bull, it was about money, period, not democracy not communism. 

    why the build up of troops in Afghanistan? To stop terrorism? Ha. Look deeper Russ, its all economically driven, it always has been, always will be. 

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Mandela was considered by many a terrorist. He certainly was no Ghandi or MLK. Obama could well be the new Mandela.

    [/QUOTE]


    Typical idiot tea bagger post

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DeadAhead's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

    I always laugh at simple minded people who think the president can walk into the WHite House, flip a switch and change an economy.

    It used to be easier. The president had more power and the economy was nowhere like it is today with so much complexity to it.  

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Says the imbecile as he defends his liberal hero who has dropped the economic ball for over half a decade. LMAO@U

     

    You are so pathetically stupid. The LAST thing you do in a bad economy is create a massive new spending program like Obamacare. This is 1st grade economics dum bass.

    [/QUOTE]

    Reagan raised taxes in the early 1980s, moron.  You're a moron deluxe.  

    Your stupidity is amazing. I will expose you all day on these topics. All day.

    Reagan signed his 1982 tax increase into law in September 1982, even though the early 1980s recession didn’t end until November 1982. Following that tax increase, as former Reagan economic official Bruce Bartlett has pointed out, gross domestic product “grew 4.5 percent in 1983 and 7.2 percent in 1984 – an exceptionally strong performance. The stock market had one of its best years ever in 1983…The unemployment rate fell from 10.6 percent in December 1982 to 8.1 percent by December 1983 and 7.1 percent in December 1984.”

    [/QUOTE]


    And we're still paying interest on the debt Reagan ran up

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BabeParilli. Show BabeParilli's posts

    Re: RIP NELSON MANDELA..is OBAMA the new MANDELA?

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Mandela was considered by many a terrorist. He certainly was no Ghandi or MLK. Obama could well be the new Mandela.

    [/QUOTE]


    Typical idiot tea bagger post

    [/QUOTE]


    Hi Rusty.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share