# Americans aren't as Stupid as you think, Barack!



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/us/po ... .html?_r=1

43% disapprove of the current stimulus package.
37% are for the package as it stands now.

Obama is NOT listening!......change my a$$


----------



## fishless (Aug 2, 2005)

I saw a 38% approval the otherday (different poll). Be interesting to see how the liberals do in the next election with 37% of the vote.


----------



## Bustem36 (Feb 5, 2008)

The guys a MORON!


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It's hasn't stopped going down hill. I think Obama is in a rush to get it signed before the economy recovers on it's own. That would be a disaster for him wouldn't it?


----------



## Bgunit68 (Dec 26, 2006)

It doesn't matter. If the economy gets better even with out his help he will get credit. If it doesn't they'll just blame Bush. Dealing with diehard Obama supporters is like dealing with infants. They don't understand reason and they are always right. I was interested to see what all this change was about. He does not impress me yet.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I tried to keep an open mind, but he isn't impressing me either. He has been appointing some real shady people to his cabinet. Yesterday the first time he encounters resistance he gets real testy. I don't think he is familiar with having any opposition. So far everything has been handed to him on a silver platter. He got some resistance from Hillary, but the media turned on their golden girl and crapped on her for him.

More and more I am agreeing with hunter9494, that Obama is not his own man and doing what Nancy and Harry tell him to do. However, he does think he can issue a royal command and expect it to be followed. I hope the republicans have some new found guts to resist the pork.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

It would take 32 years to spend a billion dollars at the rate of 1 million a second.
It would take 32,000 years to spend a trillion at the rate of 1 million a second.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Bgunit68 said:


> It doesn't matter. If the economy gets better even with out his help he will get credit. If it doesn't they'll just blame Bush. Dealing with diehard Obama supporters is like dealing with infants. They don't understand reason and they are always right. I was interested to see what all this change was about. He does not impress me yet.


Just remember Mark...

It took Bush a good 8 years to F up the economy...

so how long are you going to give Obama to fix it? If the solution hurts, don't blame the guy trying to fix the fock up. Blame the guy that created the mess.

I could care less who fixes it or how... I could even care less if there is an extra 100 Million of pork somewhere snuck in.. that is peanuts in the overall cost of this.

But if it gets us out of this mess within 4 years? Hell I'll gladly take that in a heartbeat.

Like has been said over and over and over... Has anyone heard of the Republican plan or idea that is better than what is on the table? Anyone?

Hello?

I didn't think so... all that anyone hears is how we are b!tchin' and moanin about some little problem here or there.. and how it won't stimulate the economy... I have no idea at this point ... I'm not sure anyone does really? What type of spending will work? Sorry guys.. tax cuts for the rich and businesses won't do it this time. The Republican playbook doesn't have anything that will solve this..

But keep up the sabotage of the plan.. seems to be working great for you. And don't worry.. everyone sees who is playing politics.. even as Americans continue to suffer..


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

4CurlRedleg said:


> It would take 32 years to spend a billion dollars at the rate of 1 million a second.
> It would take 32,000 years to spend a trillion at the rate of 1 million a second.


And yes 4curl I agree completely with you...

That is an astonishingly breath taking statistic.. almost too hard to fathom a Trillion...

I'm not sure that anyone has really sat down and considered how HUGE that really is...

And how long it will take us to pay it off...


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Ryan I'm feelin' it!! :beer:

Repubs are talking "stimulating" tax cuts an incentives to give small and LARGE companies the kick in the butt to start growing business. They started folding their teeth back way back when the writing was on the wall come election time.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Washington times
Wednesday, February 4, 2009 
CBO: Obama stimulus harmful over long haul
Stephen Dinan (Contact)
President Obama's economic recovery package will actually hurt the economy more in the long run than if he were to do nothing, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said Wednesday.

CBO, the official scorekeepers for legislation, said the House and Senate bills will help in the short term but result in so much government debt that within a few years they would crowd out private investment, actually leading to a lower Gross Domestic Product over the next 10 years than if the government had done nothing.

CBO estimates that by 2019 the Senate legislation would reduce GDP by 0.1 percent to 0.3 percent on net. [The House bill] would have similar long-run effects, CBO said in a letter to Sen. Judd Gregg, New Hampshire Republican, who was tapped by Mr. Obama on Tuesday to be Commerce Secretary.

The House last week passed a bill totaling about $820 billion while the Senate is working on a proposal reaching about $900 billion in spending increases and tax cuts.

But Republicans and some moderate Democrats have balked at the size of the bill and at some of the spending items included in it, arguing they won't produce immediate jobs, which is the stated goal of the bill.

The budget office had previously estimated service the debt due to the new spending could add hundreds of millions of dollars to the cost of the bill -- forcing the crowd-out.

CBOs basic assumption is that, in the long run, each dollar of additional debt crowds out about a third of a dollars worth of private domestic capital, CBO said in its letter.

CBO said there is no crowding out in the short term, so the plan would succeed in boosting growth in 2009 and 2010.

The agency projected the Senate bill would produce between 1.4 percent and 4.1 percent higher growth in 2009 than if there was no action. For 2010, the plan would boost growth by 1.2 percent to 3.6 percent.

CBO did project the bill would create jobs, though by 2011 the effects would be minuscule.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Wall Street Journal

By GEORGE MELLOAN
As Congress blithely ushers its trillion dollar "stimulus" package toward law and the U.S. Treasury prepares to begin writing checks on this vast new appropriation, it might be wise to ask a simple question: Who's going to finance it?

That might seem like a no-brainer, which perhaps explains why no one has bothered to ask. Treasury securities are selling at high prices and finding buyers even though yields are low, hovering below 3% for 10-year notes. Congress is able to assure itself that it will finance the stimulus with cheap credit. But how long will credit be cheap? Will it still be when the Treasury is scrounging around in the international credit markets six months or a year from now? That seems highly unlikely.

Let's have a look at the credit market. Treasurys have been strong because the stock market collapse and the mortgage-backed securities fiasco sent the whole world running for safety. The best looking port in the storm, as usual, was U.S. Treasury paper. That is what gave the dollar and Treasury securities the lift they now enjoy.

But that surge was a one-time event and doesn't necessarily mean that a big new batch of Treasury securities will find an equally strong market. Most likely it won't as the global economy spirals downward.

For one thing, a very important cycle has been interrupted by the crash. For years, the U.S. has run large trade deficits with China and Japan and those two countries have invested their surpluses mostly in U.S. Treasury securities. Their holdings are enormous: As of Nov. 30 last year, China held $682 billion in Treasurys, a sharp rise from $459 billion a year earlier. Japan had reduced its holdings, to $577 billion from $590 billion a year earlier, but remains a huge creditor. The two account for almost 65% of total Treasury securities held by foreign owners, 19% of the total U.S. national debt, and over 30% of Treasurys held by the public.

In the lush years of the U.S. credit boom, it was rationalized that this circular arrangement was good for all concerned. Exports fueled China's rapid economic growth and created jobs for its huge work force, American workers could raise their living standards by buying cheap Chinese goods. China's dollar surplus gave the U.S. Treasury a captive pool of investment to finance congressional deficits. It was argued, persuasively, that China and Japan had no choice but to buy U.S. bonds if they wanted to keep their exports to the U.S. flowing. They also would hurt their own interests if they tried to unload Treasurys because that would send the value of their remaining holdings down.

But what if they stopped buying bonds not out of choice but because they were out of money? The virtuous circle so much praised would be broken. Something like that seems to be happening now. As the recession deepens, U.S. consumers are spending less, even on cheap Chinese goods and certainly on Japanese cars and electronic products. Japan, already a smaller market for U.S. debt last November, is now suffering what some have described as "free fall" in industrial production. Its two champions, Toyota and Sony, are faltering badly. China's growth also is slowing, and it is plagued by rising unemployment.

American officials seem not to have noticed this abrupt and dangerous change in global patterns of trade and finance. The new Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, at his Senate confirmation hearing harped on that old Treasury mantra about China "manipulating" its currency to gain trade advantage. Vice President Joe Biden followed up with a further lecture to the Chinese but said the U.S. will not move "unilaterally" to keep out Chinese exports. One would hope not "unilaterally" or any other way if the U.S. hopes to keep flogging its Treasurys to the Chinese.

The Congressional Budget Office is predicting the federal deficit will reach $1.2 trillion this fiscal year. That's more than double the $455 billion deficit posted for fiscal 2008, and some private estimates put the likely outcome even higher. That will drive up interest costs in the federal budget even if Treasury yields stay low. But if a drop in world market demand for Treasurys sends borrowing costs upward, there could be a ballooning of the interest cost line in the budget that will worsen an already frightening outlook. Credit for the rest of the economy will become more dear as well, worsening the recession. Treasury's Wednesday announcement that it will sell a record $67 billion in notes and bonds next week and $493 billion in this quarter weakened Treasury prices, revealing market sensitivity to heavy financing.

So what is the outlook? The stimulus package is rolling through Congress like an express train packed with goodies, so an enormous deficit seems to be a given. Entitlements will go up instead of being brought under better control, auguring big future deficits. Where will the Treasury find all those trillions in a depressed world economy?

*There is only one answer. The Obama administration and Congress will call on Ben Bernanke at the Fed to demand that he create more dollars -- lots and lots of them.* The Fed already is talking of buying longer-term Treasurys to support the market, so it will be more of the same -- much more.

*And what will be the result? Well, the product of this sort of thing is called inflation. *The Fed's outpouring of dollar liquidity after the September crash replaced the liquidity lost by the financial sector and has so far caused no significant uptick in consumer prices. But the worry lies in what will happen next.

Even when the economy and the securities markets are sluggish, the Fed's financing of big federal deficits can be inflationary. We learned that in the late 1970s, when the Fed's deficit financing sent the CPI up to an annual rate of almost 15%. That confounded the Keynesian theorists who believed then, as now, that federal spending "stimulus" would restore economic health.

Inflation is the product of the demand for money as well as of the supply. And if the Fed finances federal deficits in a moribund economy, it can create more money than the economy can use. The result is "stagflation," a term coined to describe the 1970s experience. As the global economy slows and Congress relies more on the Fed to finance a huge deficit, there is a very real danger of a return of stagflation. I wonder why no one in Congress or the Obama administration has thought of that as a potential consequence of their stimulus package.

Mr. Melloan is a former deputy editor of the Journal's editorial page.


----------



## Bustem36 (Feb 5, 2008)

RYAN

I've heard a better argument from the Republicans and Dems that oppose the bill in that that they don't want the big pork barrel spending and still want to help the economy. I care if there is an extra 100 billion, heck I care if there is an extra billion. Why? BECAUSE IT IS EXTRA!!!

Why do we have to spend more than is needed when say 600Billion is spent to stimulate why do we need to spend another 200Billion. It is so obvious its stupid. First off our government doesn't even have the money and is loaning it so lets just grab another few hundred billion and wipe our A$$es with it at least I'd get to use the money.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...kage/support_for_stimulus_package_falls_to_37


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Nothing in Obamas plan is stimulative its nothing but a bunch of tired old liberal crap they could not pass any other way and thats why Obamas in the big rush to pass it now with scare tactics

people are starting to read and follow this and see the reality of the Obama stimulus and support has fallen from 78% to the high 30s% and continues to fall.

The big rush to spend our childrens futures is necessary we cannot even take afew weeks to consider whats in this and why ?????? :eyeroll:

Its a big lie

Anyone stupid enough to think washington can spend its way to prosperity is beyond hope. Fortunately most people once they get the facts aren't buying the libs bs.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

see comment below from a Yahoo forum.....on the mark.

A common side show attraction at fairs was to guess the weight of the cow , the horse, the pig. It was always a money maker, even the local 'experts' would typically fail to guess the exact weight, yet if you looked at the average guess, the collective wisdom of all the guesses was almost always correct. In our current financial crisis the only way to employ this collective wisdom is to make an across the board tax cut allowing the average productive citizen to spend, save, invest, pay down debt as they see fit. App;ying a collective just right fix. Instead we place our trust in the same "experts" that brought us into this mess to begin with. Congressman that not long ago were threatening Fmae and Fmac to extend loans to individuals clearly unable to assume this financial responsibility, driving up the values of the home market. A bubble market fed even further by the notion that 'securitized mortgages' were safe. A notion brought to us by other "experts" Nobel prize winners that contended by mathematical contortions that bad mortgages could be laundered, made pristine, made safe, brought other "experts", bankers streaming to this housing boom throwing good money after bad filling an ephemeral bubble doomed to burst. It is time for the "experts" to stand aside. Give the cash back to the ordinary working, productive individuals and businesses that are in the end the only source of real wealth in this nation. Let US make the decisions it will be JUST RIGHT!!!


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

Bobm said:


> Nothing in Obamas plan is stimulative its nothing but a bunch of tired old liberal crap they could not pass any other way and thats why Obamas in the big rush to pass it now with scare tactics
> 
> people are starting to read and follow this and see the reality of the Obama stimulus and support has fallen from 78% to the high 30s% and continues to fall.
> 
> ...


new poll shows 45% of people believe the stimulus package will have little or no effect over the economy......as i said, people are not stupid, they see the crap and phony waste!


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

It looks like we are going to keep throwing money at this thing until they finally figure out that, like every other issue that this has been done to, it won't work.

Education = huge spending, more of the same issues.

Drug War = huge spending, more of the same issues.

Welfare = huge spending, more of the same issues.

Health care = huge spending, more of the same issues.

Some things just take time to run their cycle, and I fear, all's that we will do is prolong it and make it worse in the end.

The problem is government can't get out of it's own way and the republicans began acting like democrats, and the democrats began drifting further and further to outright socialism. Mix the two together and we get what we have today.

The final straw will be when the obvious occurs and none of this works that the gov't will come in to take over everything so they can "save" us all, in the end, ending 200+ years or free market in favor of the total socialism that has failed everywhere it has been tried. Then they will blame us for too many freedoms, and start taking those away, starting with things like the fairness doctrine, then moving on the first and second amendments, and so on.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

R y a n said:


> Bgunit68 said:
> 
> 
> > It doesn't matter. If the economy gets better even with out his help he will get credit. If it doesn't they'll just blame Bush. Dealing with diehard Obama supporters is like dealing with infants. They don't understand reason and they are always right. I was interested to see what all this change was about. He does not impress me yet.
> ...


Ryan you smugly talk about the rest of us playing politics. In this post alone you are whining about Bush and how he F...ed up the economy, perhaps you should take your own advice and study the situation a bit. I know that you seem to think that you are intellectually superior to us hicks back here in ND now that you are out there on the left coast with all of the truly intellegent people. Do a search, or read some news articles about the US economic problems and how they are connected to Global economic problems, and how they started.



> Too many countries and people have been living above their means for too long. Family savings used to be about ten percent or more of income, whereas in recent years savings have dwindled to the neighbourhood of zero. Our society has gone from one that creates and produces wealth to one which consumes it. As proof, the US consumer has now become responsible for fully 70 percent of the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Without the gorging consumer coupled with Chinese manufacturing and financing, this level of consumption would not have been possible.
> 
> The US central bank (FED) Federal Reserve Board policies, encouraged by politicians, set interest rates considerably below the rate of inflation and made it easy for everyone to assume and carry debt. Moreover, easy money includes both low interest rates and easy credit. Anyone with a pulse was able to get credit to acquire all manner of things and lifestyle enhancements which constitute the attributes of the good life. In fact it became so universal that almost everyone assumed this was the natural order of things. Moreover, this kind indulgent lifestyle was thought to be normal. I don't know how many times I said that this kind of comfortable lifestyle was guaranteed to come to an end when the downside of the current economic cycle again emerged. However, I just did not know exactly when or what specifically would initiate the down cycle or how severe the wake up call would be.
> 
> We now are getting the message. The global financial system turned on a dime about the beginning of October 2008, four weeks before the US elections. It took the form of a quick and forceful blind sided slap to the consumer's head. Stock markets cratered followed by a stampeding horde of exploding and imploding financial institutions...commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds and most other financial institutions on the fringe. The evolving disaster has not stopped and continues to this day. In fact it moved from the US and North America to Europe and beyond and continues to wreck its havoc on the prices of commodities and assets of all kinds from houses to stocks and pension funds. Less than two months ago most analysts were concerned about the gathering storm of price inflation, now asset price deflation is the overriding concern.


Entire article: http://www.gold-eagle.com/editorials_08/bock120208.html

This isn't a problem that was created by President Bush, it was created by people and financial institutions and their borrowing and lending habits. Printing and throwing more money at this problem is not going to fix it.

I care if there is an extra 100 million dollars of pork. Where is all this money going to come from, we don't have it. Oh, yeah, Obama can just order the FED to print more. That'll do it. The solution being pushed by Obama and the democratic leaders is not going to help this economic problem. No, I don't have an answer, but then neither do they. All they are doing is appeasing the public outcry, for the time being.

Doesn't really matter though. As long as Obama has people like you he comes out smelling like a rose either way. If by chance the problem does get fixed, he did it. And if it doesn't, well hell Bush made the problem so bad we just couldn't fix it. What a crock.

I'd do some more searching on the issue but I really need to get this paper on juvenile justice finished, 12 pages due and I am only on page 2.

huntin1


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

relax huntin, i think the junior senator.....er, i mean the Prez will have many more opportunities to disappoint the voters of this country. so far his judgement on many issues is more than suspect....let's just relax, he will stub that toe soon enough and in a big way..... :lol:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

I see he has turned on the tough guy act now. Talk about fear mongering. Ya, we may never recover. He hasn't much patience, and it's like going to one of these places that want you to buy a condo. Nope the deal is no good tomorrow, how can you pass it up today? The country isn't going to pot in a week.



> Obama ratchets up the rhetoric on stimulus plan
> When open hand yields nothing, Obama shows GOP a clenched fist on stimulus bill
> Charles Babington, Associated Press Writer
> Friday February 6, 2009, 5:52 pm EST
> ...


----------



## Matt Jones (Mar 6, 2002)

R y a n said:


> 4CurlRedleg said:
> 
> 
> > It would take 32 years to spend a billion dollars at the rate of 1 million a second.
> ...


Contrary to the title of this thread, maybe Americans are that stupid...or we just really suck at math. Which makes sense, hence our growing deficit.

If you spent a million a second it would take you 1000 seconds to spend a billion. Or 16 minutes and 40 seconds.

To get to a trillion, it would take you one million seconds at a million dollars a second...it would take you less than 12 days.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Matt Jones said:


> R y a n said:
> 
> 
> > 4CurlRedleg said:
> ...


I like this one better:

A billion is a difficult number to comprehend,
but one advertising agency did a good job of
putting that figure into some perspective in
one of it's releases.

A. A billion seconds ago it was 1959.

B. A billion minutes ago Jesus was alive.

C. A billion hours ago our ancestors were living in the Stone Age.

D.. A billion days ago no-one walked on the earth.

E. A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate our government is spending it.While this thought is still fresh in our brain... let's take a look at New Orleans ... It's amazing what you can learn with some simple division.

Louisiana Senator,
Mary Landrieu (D)
is presently asking Congress for
250 BILLION DOLLARS
to rebuild New Orleans Interesting number...
what does it mean?

A.
Well... if you are one of the 484,674 residents of New Orleans
(every man, woman, and child)
you each get $516,528.

B.
Or... if you have one of the 188,251 homes in
New Orleans , your home gets$1,329,787.

C.
Or... if you are a family of four...
your family gets $2,066,012.

It's not exact either, but it's damn close.

huntin1


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

huntin1 said:


> Ryan you smugly talk about the rest of us playing politics. In this post alone you are whining about Bush and how he F...ed up the economy, perhaps you should take your own advice and study the situation a bit.


I smugly have done nothing of the kind in regards to whining. It is an unfair attempt to use those words to portray me in a certain light. I'm sure it helps paint a certain picture of me some need to justify their disdain. For you to insinuate that I haven't "studied" the situation a bit is ridiculous. What makes you think I haven't taken a look at various articles from all sides in this? That is a normal practice I try to do when trying to understand an issue thoroughly...

Whining is complaining about something perceived to be unfair.. or so is my understanding. I wasn't complaining about anything about Bush. I was pointing out where blame should be directed.



huntin1 said:


> I know that you seem to think that you are intellectually superior to us hicks back here in ND now that you are out there on the left coast with all of the truly intellegent people. Do a search, or read some news articles about the US economic problems and how they are connected to Global economic problems, and how they started.


Gosh you sure know alot about how I feel? Maybe you and Plainsman shouldn't spend late nights discussing me, and you wouldn't arrive at such conclusions.  You see huntin1, that is a label that Plainsman has been trying to stick on me for some months now. I never ever said intellectually superior. That is just the interpretation of someone who didn't like my description of the lack of quality of discourse on this Politics forum in general. In order to minimize my presence here, there has been a concerted effort to discredit me on continual basis in order to "put me in my place" for earlier transgressions by referring to me in such ways, or with little snips about "intellectual superiority" ad nauseum.

I will tell you that the general level of political debates (from _both_ sides of the political spectrum) is generally deeper out here. That is not a slam, but a general observation that this area of the country does indeed have a higher per capita # of educated people living out here, due to the industries here. I'm sorry, but when you have for example, Microsoft(100,000+ employees/contractors), Google, Yahoo, Boeing, U of W Medical Center, 5 Cancer research facilities, Bill Gates Foundation, 2 law schools, 1 medical school etc etc.. you do have a generally more educated population per capita than most of the middle of the country. That is simply a fact and nothing more. I'll let the facts speak for themselves.. Honestly I could give a chit. But apparently some have an inferiority complex to it. I won't address it again, and will let it go at that. Folks need to get over themselves. :withstupid:



huntin1 said:


> > Too many countries and people have been living above their means for too long. Family savings used to be about ten percent or more of income, whereas in recent years savings have dwindled to the neighbourhood of zero. Our society has gone from one that creates and produces wealth to one which consumes it. As proof, the US consumer has now become responsible for fully 70 percent of the nation's Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Without the gorging consumer coupled with Chinese manufacturing and financing, this level of consumption would not have been possible.
> >
> > The US central bank (FED) Federal Reserve Board policies, encouraged by politicians, set interest rates considerably below the rate of inflation and made it easy for everyone to assume and carry debt. Moreover, easy money includes both low interest rates and easy credit. Anyone with a pulse was able to get credit to acquire all manner of things and lifestyle enhancements which constitute the attributes of the good life. In fact it became so universal that almost everyone assumed this was the natural order of things. Moreover, this kind indulgent lifestyle was thought to be normal. I don't know how many times I said that this kind of comfortable lifestyle was guaranteed to come to an end when the downside of the current economic cycle again emerged. However, I just did not know exactly when or what specifically would initiate the down cycle or how severe the wake up call would be.
> >
> ...


You know huntin1.. it might surprise you to know that I fully agree with this article. In fact in recent earlier postings, I alluded to some of the very same things outlined here.

However this article doesn't go far enough in laying out all of the blame. It glosses over placing proper blame on the "watchdogs" overseeing the industries. Their failure to do their job, and rein in the corruption and unfair practices that led us to this point.

You are right this isn't Bush's fault. He isn't smart enough to have been able to figure out such a complex combination of actions required to send us spiraling out of control. However his advisors who assisted him had the opportunity to ensure that properly qualified individuals were put into key cabinet and regulatory positions. It was THOSE individuals who failed to do their jobs, or they held a political leaning that caused them to overlook or allow certain practices that made them complicit with the problem.

I hold the Republican party responsible for allowing big business and banks to figure out ways to create financial instruments and market manipulations, without reining them in before their greed cost everyone dearly. I hold the FED and Treasury responsible for not reining in the market and forseeing the implosion of the housing market due to the mortgage industry running amok. I hold the SEC responsible for allowing rampant speculation, hedge funds and derivative markets to undermine the stability of the markets, drive oil higher, and allow greed to become commonplace. I hold the Democratic party somewhat responsible for not holding any of the above to higher standards.



huntin1 said:


> Doesn't really matter though. As long as Obama has people like you he comes out smelling like a rose either way. If by chance the problem does get fixed, he did it. And if it doesn't, well hell Bush made the problem so bad we just couldn't fix it. What a crock.
> 
> huntin1


It might also surprise you to know that I don't blindly support Obama, contrary to what many here have tried painting me as. I'm not completely in favor of what Obama is doing, but we have no alternative. The issue is way too complex for a quick simple obvious fix. However applying a stimulus package will hold down the panic that could cause a fast total collapse of several markets and job cuts becoming catastrophic. We need to do something... anything.... so although I'm not keen on the size of the package, I'm not sure we can NOT do anything.

This will only be the first of a couple stimulus packages. Knowing this.. it is time we get this one thru the door, and focus on the next one to make sure it has narrowly tailored solutions to address recovery in various sectors of the economy.

I just hope that Obama has read some of these same articles and takes them to heart... He seems willing to do whatever it takes for us to get to the root of the real problems. Let's hope he identifies what the root causes of the disease are...

Good luck on your paper...

Hopefully this makes sense.. I've been typing it over the course of an hour as Hockey Night In Canada is on.. so I've been getting distracted now that the games have started eh? :lol:

Ryan


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

ryan, the one thing EVERYONE agrees with on this forum is that YOU ARE A WHINER! whining or living in the past doesn't support your candidate or your position today....time to live in the present and consider the future, son......you and Obama can't drag Bush through the crack of your monstrous a$$ forever.....time to turn the page..... :lol: :lol:


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Ryan said this



> Gosh you sure know alot about how I feel? Maybe you and Plainsman shouldn't spend late nights discussing me, and you wouldn't arrive at such conclusions. You see huntin1, that is a label that Plainsman has been trying to stick on me for some months now. I never ever said intellectually superior. That is just the interpretation of someone who didn't like my description of the lack of quality of discourse on this Politics forum in general. In order to minimize my presence here, there has been a concerted effort to discredit me on continual basis in order to "put me in my place" for earlier transgressions by referring to me in such ways, or with little snips about "intellectual superiority" ad nauseum.


Its a total bs attempt to rewrite his past, he cannot take dissent without using the "club of I'm the moderator" dont dare post a opposing view or I will threaten you blah blah blah.

Ryan You are pathetic, the premise that Plainsman would do anything dishonest or dishonorable to discredit your worthless a$$ is a smear and everyone on this site knows better.

ANd the idea that opposing comments on here are discouraged is more of your whining crybaby crapola.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

R y a n said:


> I smugly have done nothing of the kind in regards to whining. It is an unfair attempt to use those words to portray me in a certain light. I'm sure it helps paint a certain picture of me some need to justify their disdain.


Whatever you say. The words you use and the tone they are written in paints the picture.



R y a n said:


> Whining is complaining about something perceived to be unfair.. or so is my understanding. I wasn't complaining about anything about Bush. I was pointing out where blame should be directed.


I see, better go back a bit further then. One of the biggest reasons our economy is in the ****er is the sub-prime lending practices of the housing lenders. Something that started with Clinton did it not? I will concede that Bush did nothing to alleviate the situation, but he didn't cause it either.



> Gosh you sure know alot about how I feel? Maybe you and Plainsman shouldn't spend late nights discussing me, and you wouldn't arrive at such conclusions. You see huntin1, that is a label that Plainsman has been trying to stick on me for some months now.


Sorry, I'm much too busy to discuss you with anyone. It may surprise you to know that I am capable of my own thoughts and they come from the manner in which you talk down to most of us.



R y a n said:


> Folks need to get over themselves.


Good advice......................



R y a n said:


> This will only be the first of a couple stimulus packages.


That's what I'm afraid of.



R y a n said:


> Knowing this.. it is time we get this one thru the door, and focus on the next one to make sure it has narrowly tailored solutions to address recovery in various sectors of the economy.


And waste billions in the process. Wouldn't our tax dollars be better spent narrowly tailoring this one to address recovery where needed most? Instead of adding all the pork.
This one smacks of simple feel-good political posturing by Obama and the Dems, not a solution to any part of our current economic problems.



R y a n said:


> Good luck on your paper...


Thanks. Paper is done, one due the end of every week.

huntin1


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Bobm said:


> Ryan said this
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I typed up a huge reply but it isn't worth it to put out in public. Needless to say Bob I'll take it to a PM to you.

Call me pathetic if you will, but I will not tolerate how I've been treated here as of late. I do not deserve the amount of flak I've continued to take.

I whine do I? Hmm.. ok.. no more whining.. but I expect full support to treat others the way the liberals on this board are being treated. I think you are missing a bunch of posts that would prove the point I'm trying to make Bob.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Bruce ( plainsman) is a man of impeccable integrity who would never ever use his position of power as a moderator to prevent discussion of opposing viewpoints.

go ahead put it in the public....

and you'v been asked to stay out of the politics forum and not just by the conservatives in the mod group this issue has got nothing to do with liberal or conservative and everything to do with honesty, something you with your insinuations about plainsman obviously just don't have.


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

We should not have to spend anything at all it is sink or swim. And we would not have half the problem we do now if all the educated folks out there new how to figure out a budget and stay with in there means. What is the foreclosure rates out there in educated country compared to us dummys back here in nd and sd?


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Bobm said:


> Bruce ( plainsman) is a man of impeccable integrity who would never ever use his position of power as a moderator to prevent discussion of opposing viewpoints.
> 
> go ahead put it in the public....
> 
> and you'v been asked to stay out of the politics forum and not just by the conservatives in the mod group this issue has got nothing to do with liberal or conservative and everything to do with honesty, something you with your insinuations about plainsman obviously just don't have.


I'll lay it out here as raw and real as I can....

No he has not prevented discussion of opposing viewpoints. I never ever said that.

However both of you should be doing more to remain completely objective if you are going to be moderators. I'm more frustrated that there has been belittling or preemptive belittling of an argument in the phrasing or characterization of the opposing viewpoint before anyone can even offer insight (regarding new/recent posts).

I think where we are at odds is the implication that I ever "attempted to prevent discussion of opposing viewpoints". That is a ridiculous pathetic attempt at justifying actions to the events surrounding the controversy with my posts during that time period last September? Long story short(er) Bob, I was simply disgusted that blatant out and out lies were continually allowed to be posted here as facts, and nothing was done to moderate what was clearly borderline threads, and SPAM at worst. We were told that noone could possibly be the "fact checking Police" in here, and remove all the crap from both sides. Well... fact is.. that the offending posts were by and large false accusations about Obama being a Muslim, false birth certificate etc... all things that were clearly shown to be false. But yet they were allowed to remain and no effort was done by anyone to even attempt at maintaining a decent forum where everyone truly tried keeping high brow and having a higher standard of debate. Note that even though this statement about "fact checking police" was made, one or both mods in the Politics forum has managed to post every day and almost in every thread that would have been an example. Instead of checking every "fact", what could have been done is to simply state in an existing thread that certain lies were found to be non factual and to quit repeating them to the offender(s)... that would have been an example of keeping the main contributors here honest, and they in turn could have assisted others by keeping them in check too and correcting them. Overall, it would have reduced the majority of blatant mis-truths that took over this forum last fall during the Presidential race. THAT was my major beef that I was trying to address myself when I overstepped. So shoot me for trying... which is what was done.

I'll be the first to admit that I did the same thing with Palin's baby. I even came back on here several times and publically said I'll retract my earlier statement.

I was asked to cool it in the Politics forum. You are correct. I even posted that I was taking a break which I did. I took time, surfed other forums and completely stayed out of this forum for a few months.

I'm quite simply frustrated that I can't come in here and say anything ever again. Since coming back and occasionally posting here... (read: posting only a few times total a week, where before it was many times per day), I've been treated like dirt. Plain and simple. It is focking ridiculous. I haven't come back in here and posted anything outrageous. I haven't stirred any pot. I haven't done a damn thing that would warrant the treatment I've received since coming back. I've simply stuck up for myself and demanded it stop.

What you haven't seen Bob, and others I'm sure surely have, is that I have been continuously nit picked, insinuations have been directed my way, conversations & PM's have been alluded to, and my intelligence, honor, and honesty has been called into question in this politics forum by Plainsman. I'm sorry but that is not impeccable integrity in my book, and I'm tired of it.

I have a right to stick up for myself. I don't think the way I've been treated in the recent past has been on the up and up. Especially when I've been trying to go out of my way to just be honest without getting too personally invested. Heck I've even tried expressing that by how I'm typing my posts.

Plainsman I do hold you in high regard. I've said that numerous times before, but lately you have to admit you've been riding me. It has to stop.

That is my honest truth to the bone.

Listen guys... my life has been super duper stressed these past couple weeks. More than any of you know.. more than anyone realizes. I come here to vent my politics, bs with guys on the BP, and look at outdoors pics. I don't come here with a chip on my shoulder, looking to prove anything to anyone. I have no idea how to convey such things over a typed out written forum. I used to love debating on the Politics forum. I truly want to get back to the point in the past we had the previous winter/spring... I used to look forward to explaining my thoughts, and coming here to read others thoughts even if different than mine. I used to crave the links and other stuff others would post, as a way to learn more about politics. I miss that. It has just become antagonistic back and forth... and not just with me.. but it seems everyone.. you know? Maybe it is the current state of the economy combined with having a black man be a Democratic President.. I'm sure those things factor in too...

But I'm up to my ears in stress... you all seriously have no idea at the moment.. and although I love bs'n in the BP, I also love the intellectual stimulation of trying to comprehend the world around me better, which on this site comes from the Politics forum.

Anyways.. that is all I got at the moment... I'm tired. I'm frustrated. Nothing in the world seems logical at the moment. I dunno...

Maybe its time I just move on... I'm sincerely sick of people trying to impune my integrity and honesty too...

If anyone has constructive advice.. please PM me..

see ya all around.

Peace.

Ryan


----------



## KurtR (May 3, 2008)

Drink a beer , that might help you feel better.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

Ryan,

I don't do the PM thing, but here is just one example of why people are getting on your case all the time.

I had to read your last post like 6 times to get past one statement you made.

You basically called us racists on here with your comment about some of the demeanor coming from there being a black man president. I know that was not your intent, but it sure can be easily construed that way.

No matter how much sense the rest of your post makes, you loose all credibility with statements like that. So you may have 99% good info or a valid point on any post, but one statement can alienate everyone or seem like whining to most, and really piss people off.

Your first post to this topic, the last thing you accuse the republicans here of is sabotage of the plan while americans are hurting. Another needless statement. No one is sabotaging anything, it is a discussion about ideas and peoples opinions of some of the needless junk in the bill.

I think most of your posts are ok for the most part, but for one or two jabs/barbs/statements that make them not ok, and cause people to give you grief.

And that is why I think everyone gets on your case from time to time.


----------



## Gun Owner (Sep 9, 2005)

I'll put it simply. Ryan I dont like you.

You constantly find sneaky ways to belittle the conservatives on this forum.

Just today you tried to prove a point by saying you live in an area with more educated people. I'm sorry bu just because Im not a doctor, a lawyer, or an investment banker is no reason to assume Im not intelligent.

Im a mechanic by choice. I also test around 140 on an IQ test. One of these days Im going to join Mensa just to I can add it to my sig line. Another frequent poster here is Decoy Dummy. This guy is smarter than most people I have ever met. He cleans carpet for a living.

Im sorry your life is full of stress. But some of your more educated freinds up north should probably suggest to you that you avoid stressfull situations, like arguing liberal policy on a conservative leaning forum. Maybe go find a forum on Obamas website and talk policy with people who agree with you. Probably a lot less stressful for you over there.

Oh and FYI, goin on about being stressed about your personal life in defense of yourself is the very definition of whining.


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

Ryan you really just should not discuss politics you dont have the self control to do so, I'm sorry but thats just the way it is.

The claim that opposing viewpoints on here are not allowed is ridiculous, opposing viewpoints are critcally discussed all the time.

The reality is that most liberal ideas and only some conservative ideas cannot stand the scrutiny of logical rational analysis and when they are challenged the originator of them gets frustrated with the logical response and then its down to demonizing ie racist,( I mean if you don't like Obama it must be because your a racist and can't possibly be because he is a Marxist)

Your comments looking down your nose at these poor under educated north Dakotans :eyeroll: ( like North Dakotans don't have the same internet, television, radio, and media to analize world events as the super libs in your beloved adopted state).

You've been living in liberal la la land of the Northwest for so long you've lost your roots and look down you nose at the very place your from, thats sad.

I've always wondered why libs on both coasts believe they are somehow more enlightened than the people of the south and upper mid west and thus cannot get past the belief that we need to be managed according to their liberal non workable ideas

pick most every issue... name it

-gun controll- they institute it in their state it doesn't work so whats their solution ?? Its never it doens it work because it defies human nature, it must be it doesn't work because the south or the midwest doesn't have it.

state economies -take michigan they tax the hell out of business support poorly performing overpaid unions, business then leaves and in their minds it cannot be because they interfere with commerce it must be because other places that are successful dont interfere with commerce

medical insurance costs- another thing the libs are always screaming about but their but when allowing competition (which drives prices down and quality up everytime its tried )and getting lawyers out of the mix is suggested NO WAY is the liberal response, BY GOD they know we cannot make these decisions without their "guidance" being the undereducated hicks we are.

ANd then to get back to the point when their logic is skewed they attempt to demonize and censor ( as does Ryan which is why I've been so harshly critical)

One only has to look at the so called fairness doctrine and Obama's recent appalling attack on talk radio. Note no such attack on TV newspapers magazines internet media exists, but talk radio is a dissenting point of view and Obama and libs in general cannot allow that can they?? Marxism....

and the bigger problem is that libs screw up their own state with awful taxes and mismanagement then these state demand the succesful ones pay for the stupid stuff they've done  California is a perfect current example of this what a broke messed up place :eyeroll: but hey illegal immigration, no oil drilling industry, no industry friendly anything, ridiculous environmental regs and what happens next the productive flee elsewhere and the whole damn thing collapses and Arnold wants the rest of the country to pay for California's liberal folly

thats on a state basis , now they control the whole countries govt ,business is leaving for the same reason and instead of saying "gee maybe we should quit these foolish things" instead its evil coporations outsourcing

they cannot seem to see the forest for the trees

So after they destroy this country where are we going to go?


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

http://www.morganquitno.com/edrank.htm

Just for the heck of it I looked up how North Dakota ranks nationally against Washington State for public school success

North Dakota is ranked 20th

Washington State ( home of the enlightend) ranks 30th

I'm not surprised


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

And here I thought Ryan was serving up a new tone. Geez, I let up on him for a few days and the whole deals slides south.

Disappointing.


----------



## DecoyDummy (May 25, 2005)

Ryan ... your post regarding "Bush hurting the economy" tells us all we need to know about how your mind functions.

You need to turn your attention back way past the time you were born and see a much wider spectrum than you seem capable of in order to identify the whos, hows and whys about this economy not doing well.

This mess is well beyond your paygrade my friend.

Oh about stress ... did you bury your Mother yesterday ... I did ;


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

There are things that you know nothing about Ryan. A couple years ago we had one very extreme liberal on here. He PMed me calling me every name in the book. I said nothing. He tried to play Bobm and I against each other buddying up to one downing the other, then when that didn't work he tried it the other way around, that didn't work either. I still didn't' say anything to Chris or anyone else. I was real perturbed when the little weasel sent me a trojan horse and a virus that my Norton Antivirus caught. The final straw was when he sabotaged Alaskan Brown Bear Killers computer. Sorry, that's the most whining I have done in a long time, but I was trying to give you an example of things that happen that are just part of the package. I can count on the fingers of one hand the people I have asked be banned, and only one of those was in the political form. Some with huge imaginations have thought that I asked for them to be banned.

Ryan, I have told you what my problems are, and it would be unprofessional for me to whine about them in open form. I'm not running for a popularity contest. Things like that just lead to disorganization and internal squabbling. I refuse to act like a school boy.

Speaking of school boys and education. You talk about education and how poor it is in North Dakota. I have some background in that Ryan. As everyone more than likely knows I have a degree in Wildlife, but did you know also Forestry, oh and Entomology, and Botany, and guess what ---- education. Education sort of runs in the family. My mother was a teacher, my brother, his wife, my wife has an education degree, my sister-in-law etc. The odd thing about North Dakota is they pay their teachers about the lowest in the nation yet our children rate at the top, or nearly so. I don't know about doctorate or masters, but North Dakota rates near the top when looking at bachelor degrees per capita. Hats off to our North Dakota teachers.

This talk of education though is simply a way to try hold oneself aloof and above others. I think in today's world where the internet reaches the corners of the earth that no one geographic location is more sophisticated than any other. Combine that with my personal philosophy that everyone deserves respect. No matter what job a person works at if he works I will not look down on him. Even if he is unemployed but desires to work I will not look down on him or her. I know your impressed with people that make six figures, but I'm as impressed with those who make minimum wage. God bless them.

I also concur with Bobm's assessments, and thank you for the kind words Bob. Your going to put tears in my eyes you old bugger.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Ryan perhaps some of your stress is coming from unrealistic expectations. You lay out your qualifications and I think have unrealistic expectations that people will automatically be swayed to believe your opinions. Things don't work that way. Everyone has a mind of their own, everyone has their own agenda, everyone has their own priorities and that leads to individual conclusions.

My personal philosophy is people who demand respect do so because they are incapable of earning it. No big salary will earn anyone respect. No supper IQ earns anyone respect. I may be wrong, but I think respect is earned by first respecting others. That ball is always in our court. It often takes years to earn credability and only seconds to blow it. This last paragraph isn't intended as advise to anyone, it's simply so people know where I stand, and how I think.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

ryan, if you want advice, here it is. when penning a post or response to this forum, send it to yourself first.......wait and read it 48 hours later and ask yourself, "if i am a stranger to this forum and read this post, how would it "read"?

taking time to reflect on your own words, instead of posting them "NOW" in frustration or during a stressful time, just makes good sense. you will never gain any one's trust or present a meaningful alternative position that one may consider by turning to aggressive posts or name calling.

judging people by "your" standards and degrading them through "your" unconscious references will always leave you on the defensive, always.

you need to learn to respect others and stop with the elevation of self...no one is buying that crap, no one....and no one else on this forum has found the need to "build themselves up", elaborate on their own experiences, education or financial success, in order to convince someone that they are correct in their political thinking.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Oh about stress ... did you bury your Mother yesterday ... I did


DecoyDummy, I just caught this. My deepest sympathy. In you your mother has left behind a monument to herself.


----------



## DecoyDummy (May 25, 2005)

Thanks Plainsman ...

I really only stuck that in to make the point back to Ryan that folks all around him have stuff going on that is often pretty profound .... and he is completely unaware of it. He ought not presume all the rest of us live in Eutopia everyday and he is the challenged one.

Mom had live a very full life ... so no real regrets ... thanks for your kind thoughts.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

"Tired old theories" caused the National Debt to double in the last 8 years?

Really? Those tired old theories were working pretty well for most of the last 8 years

"By now," Obama opens, "it's clear to everyone that we have inherited an economic crisis as deep and dire as any since the days of the Great Depression." This is untrue.

Article at
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/ ... bamas.html

For the cool-aid drinkers, check the numbers.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> "Tired old theories"


This morning was interesting and I nearly started another thread called observing life.

I mentioned a degree in education. It was never my intention to be a teacher, but there were 100 applications for every job in wildlife and I wanted a back up plan. So what I did to get a secondary teaching certificate was take all the educational psychology classes I could, and some that were strictly tailored for education. My thoughts were it wouldn't be a complete waste because the psychology classes would help me deal with people no matter what vocation I ended up in.

One teacher greatly influenced the way I look at things. He called himself an observer of humanity and taking his class has perhaps cheated me some. He once said that even when a man gets old he enjoys watching a pretty woman walk into a room. Then he said that it's even more interesting to watch the expression on other peoples faces when a pretty girl walks into a room. So that's where I get cheated, I'm watching everyone else. 

So that leads to this. It links to politics when you mentioned "tired old". It's a big mistake to try fix something that isn't broke. Like Obama's statement that this is the greatest nation on earth and within the next sentence say "I want you to help me change it". Why? Well, perhaps when things are a little bumpy everyone wants to change. Especially those who have not gone through these things before. We heard that Obama really attracted the youth. So I have a little story for the youth and the old to think about and see if you can fit it into politics.

It was very icy this morning. Near my home and around the south end of the Jamestown airport on my way to work over the years I have seen a lot of cars in the ditch on a banked curve. Now when I was young I had one bad habit and that was driving to fast. I don't mean that I was the type to drive everywhere at 100 miles per hour. Something had to be wrong with my car to drive that slow. You might think I am joking. Anyway, over the years I have noticed the old folks complain about the young folks driving to fast. I have also heard the young people complain about the old folks driving to slow. You know those curves I talked about? It separates those people out. How does this fit into the icy roads. I have observed that the old people who think they are super safe will drive slow and they always go in the ditch on the bottom edge of the curve. I have also observed that the young people that think they are ten feet tall and bullet proof are always in the ditch on the outside of the curve. The people who go into the curve thinking about the reality of centrifical force (or centrifugal, or inertia if you prefer) and traction have no problem. Life has thrown this nation a curve. The old want to slow down take it easy, and the young want big changes. They are sick of the old theories about traction. The old don't want to speed up because they see rocks like Obama on the outside of the curve. It will be interesting because we have a collision of theory and experience. Most of that experience is failed theories. I'm a little cautious because were high on the outside bank and I don't see a guard rail.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Great analogy, but I'm not old  not young either :beer:

Sing like no one can hear you,

Dance like no ones watching,

and drive like your late for work! But watch the curves!


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

To let you know one thing that people need to realize is that Bush did not put the economy in this situation.

It was the housing market that drove all of this.

Think about it. The stock market and people not investing in that......the reason was because you could make more money in real estate, buying and selling loans. Then people were borrowing more than they could afford.

Now Again for those of you who don't read or don't want to believe this....but many of the loan programs put in place that hurt this economy or drove it to where it was today was put in place way *before* Bush.

The idea of every citizen should own a home was not president Bush's philosophy. So don't blame him for this.

Yes he did have screw ups while a president but don't put the economy on him. Sorry do research and you will see.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

That's exactly right Chuck and those who say they have looked at every angel to come to the conclusion it's Bush's fault I have news for them. There are 360 degrees in that circle of enlightenment not 3.6 degrees.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

A good article,

The Bush administration made many mistakes, but deregulation was not one of them.

Not only was there no major deregulation passed during the past eight years, but the Bush administration and a Republican Congress approved the most sweeping financial-market regulation in decades.

The bipartisan Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted in 2002 to prevent corporate fraud and restore investor confidence after the collapse of Enron and WorldCom. It failed to prevent the accounting fraud and influence-peddling scandals at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. And even after those scandals were widely understood, regulators sent Fannie and Freddie back into the market to continue buying subprime loans, lending and borrowing with implied taxpayer backing.

Across the government, the Bush administration supported new regulations that added almost 1,000 pages a year to the Federal Register, nearly a record. If this is insufficient regulation, it's hard to imagine a scope that would be effective.

Powell of course was spot on. Sarbanes-Oxley was indeed a comprehensive and encompassing piece of legislation specifically designed to prevent a repeat of the tech bubble and Enron. Yet, as the financial crisis raged last fall, media members who wanted to blame the problem on Bush and deregulation conveniently forgot this sweeping bill.

But there's more:

Our present crisis began in the 1970s, during the Carter administration, with passage of the Community Reinvestment Act to stem bank redlining and liberalize lending in order to extend home ownership in lower-income communities. Then in the 1990s, the Department of Housing and Urban Development took a fateful step by getting the GSEs to accept subprime mortgages. With Fannie and Freddie easing credit requirements on loans they would purchase from lenders, banks could greatly increase lending to borrowers unqualified for conventional loans. In the name of extending affordable housing, this broadened the acceptability of risky loans throughout the financial system.

The risk lurking in the GSE portfolios was acknowledged in the Bush administration's first fiscal-year budget, released in April 2001. It stated that Fannie and Freddie were "a potential problem" because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in the financial markets, affecting federally insured entities and economic activity." Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan issued repeated warnings that the GSEs "placed the total financial system of the future at substantial risk." Such warnings went unheeded even after accounting scandals rocked Fannie and Freddie.

*How much warning do "lawmakers" need?*

The link is here, 
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-shepp ... ial-crisis


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Bowstring....good find.

Yes people could see it coming....But the Lawmakers did nothing. Now Bush is not a Law maker.....Congress is.

How could people not see it coming......Home values going up by 10-15% or more depending on where you lived a year. While inflation, wage increases were near 5%. But this lasted from the mid 90's to 2006 (or so).

Here is a little math thrown into this......

A families wage is $30,000 in 1996. The home value is $100,000. Now in that ten year span using 5% on wage and 10% on home for increases. This is what the "market" value of the home was...

Home Value is now $259,000. Income is $49,000. With that is also inflation on goods, services, and expenses to live.

They (elected officials.....all of them) should have for seen this coming. But no they wanted to keep lining their pockets and get re-elected.


----------



## MOB (Mar 10, 2005)

This fits in rather well here for all the liberal Bush blamers. I got this in an email and don't have a source and it is a cut n paste, but it does explain many of today's problems.

Subject: history lesson lest we forget

Profile In Incompetence: The Worst President In American History. We still pay the price.

Jimmy Carter became our 39th president at the young age of 52. He was a one-term governor from Plains, GA, where he managed the family peanut farm and taught Sunday school. He was also a graduate of the Naval Academy and served seven years in the Navy, leaving as a lieutenant.

He came to power in the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the resignation of President Nixon. The public wanted change and someone new, and Carter was an ambitious, hands-on politician who promised better days. As good as his intentions were, however, the things he tried were not successful. In fact, he created far more serious problems than he ever solved.

The centerpiece of Carter's foreign policy was human rights, and he did achieve one noble success -a peace treaty between Egypt 's Anwar Sadat and Israel 's Menachem Begin.Unfortunately, that later led to Sadat's assassination at the hands of Muslim radicals.

Many people felt Carter was a good man who worked hard and meant well. But he was naive and incompetent in handling the enormous burdens and complex challenges of being president. He wrongly believed Americans had an 'inordinate fear of communism,' so he lifted travel bans to Cuba , North Vietnam and Cambodia and pardoned draft evaders. He also stopped B-1 bomber production and gave away our strategically located Panama Canal.

His most damaging miscalculation was the withdrawal of U.S. support for the Shah of Iran , a strong and longtime military ally. Carter objected to the Shah's alleged mistreatment of imprisoned Soviet spies who were working to overthrow Iran 's government. He thought the exiled Ayatollah Khomeini, being a religious man, would make a fairer leader.
Having lost U.S. support, the Shah was overthrown, the Ayatollah returned, Iran was declared an Islamic nation and Palestinian hit men were hired to eliminate opposition.

The Ayatollah then introduced the idea of suicide bombers to the Palestine Liberation Organization, paying $35,000 to PLO families whose young people were brainwashed to kill as many Israelis as possible by blowing themselves up in crowded shopping areas.

Next, the Ayatollah used Iran 's oil wealth to create, train and finance a new terrorist organization, Hezbollah, which later would attack Israel in 2006.

In November 1979, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other Iranians stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran and took 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. Not until six months into the ordeal did Carter attempt a rescue. But the mission, using just six Navy helicopters, was poorly executed. Three of the copters were disabled or lost in sandstorms. (Pilots weren't allowed to meet with weather forecasters because someone in authority worried about security.) Five airmen and three Marines lost their lives.

So, due to overconfidence, inexperience and poor judgment, Carter undermined and lost a strong ally, Iran , that today aggressively threatens the U.S. , Israel and the rest of the world with nuclear weapons.

But that's not all. After Carter met for the first time with Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev, the USSR promptly invaded Afghanistan . Carter, ever the naive appeaser, was shocked. 'I can't believe the Russians lied to me,' he said.
The invasion attracted a 23-year-old Saudi named Osama bin Laden to Afghanistan to recruit Muslim fighters and raise money for an anti-Soviet jihad. Part of that group eventually became al-Qaida, a terrorist organization that would declare war on America several times between 1996 and 1998 before attacking us on 9/11, killing more Americans than the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

On Carter's watch, the Soviet Union went on an unrestrained rampage in which it took over not only Afghanistan, but also Ethiopia, South Yemen, Angola, Cambodia, Mozambique, Grenada and Nicaragua.

In spite of this, Carter's last defense budget proposed spending 45% below pre-Vietnam levels for fighter aircraft, 75% for ships, 83% for attack submarines and 90% for helicopters.

Years later, as a civilian, Carter negotiated a peace agreement with North Korea to keep that communist country from developing nuclear weapons. He also convinced President Clinton and Secretary of State Madeleine Albright to go along with it. But the signed piece of paper proved worthless. The North Koreans deceived Carter and instead used our money, incentives and technical equipment to build nuclear weapons and pose the threat we face today.

Thus did Carter unwittingly become our Neville Chamberlain, creating with his well-intended but inept, unrealistic and gullible actions the very conditions that led to the three most dangerous security threats we face
today: Iran , al-Qaida and North Korea.

On the domestic side, Carter gave us inflation of 15%, the highest in 34 years; interest rates of 21%, the highest in 115 years; and a severe energy crisis with lines around the block at gas stations nationwide.

In 1977, Carter, along with a Democrat Congress, created a worthy project with noble intentions-the Community Reinvestment Act. Over strong industry objections, it mandated that all banks meet the credit needs of their entire communities.
In 1995, President Clinton imposed even stronger regulations and performance tests that coerced banks to substantially increase loans to low-income, poverty-area borrowers or face fines or possible restrictions on expansion. These revisions allowed for securitization of CRA loans containing subprime mortgages.

By 1997, good loans were bundled with poor ones and sold as prime packages to institutions here and abroad. That shifted risk from the loan originators, freeing banks to begin pyramiding and make more of these profitable subprime products.
Under two young, well-intended presidents, therefore, big-government plans and mandates played a significant role in the current subprime mortgage mess and its catastrophic consequences for the U.S. and international economies.

Hardest-hit by the mortgage foreclosures have been the citizens that Democrats always claim to help most-inner-city residents who fell victim to low or no down payment schemes, unexpected adjustable rates, deceptive loan applications and commission-hungry salespeople.

Now we're having to bail out at huge cost Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the very agencies that were supposed to stabilize the system. In time, this should improve the situation. But the party of Carter and Clinton that midwifed our mortgage mess now wants to be trusted to take over and have the government run our entire system of health care!

Don't forget his "incompetent" interventions in the elections of Nicaragua (Daniel Ortega), the elections of Venezuela (Hugo Chavez) and his "stupid"
decisions with Cuba (Fidel Castro).

And everyone is blaming Bush for our current problems.


----------



## Bowstring (Nov 27, 2006)

Great information Chuck and Bob. I still have a few friends standing in line to get their glass of "cool-aid" , and I like to give them something that they hate to hear, the truth. I hope you don't mind that I copy and send this stuff.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

MOB as bad as my memory is ( names of people ) I remember many of those events as if they were yesterday. Carter damaged the security of this nation so bad we may never recover, and Obama is here to finish the job. I don't know if we can withstand another four years of liberal naive thinking. God help us. If I didn't have children and grandchildren I would say this generation deserves what they are going to get. Every time someone blames Bush for the current financial problems another nail is driven in the coffins of truth and integrity. Most of the relatives of truth and integrity proceeded them in death and they are survived only by their weaker cousins hope and change.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

and that damn old fool, Carter, is kissing the Palestinians ***** some more. what a loser, what an embarrassment to our country, but he will be overshadowed by Obama.......Obama will ruin what is left of this country in 4 years........he will be a disaster! :eyeroll:


----------



## MOB (Mar 10, 2005)

I posted that article because it seems we never learn anything from history. The current generation in power seems to always think they are so much smarter than their predecessors! It's much like how everyone thinks their parents are old and dumb when they're teenagers and realizing later that their parents aren't so dumb after all. It seems to me that many liberals are spoiled brats that never really realize this. 
Here's another history lesson to think about:
http://www.flixxy.com/political-systems.htm


----------



## TK33 (Aug 12, 2008)

> Hardest-hit by the mortgage foreclosures have been the citizens that Democrats always claim to help most-inner-city residents who fell victim to low or no down payment schemes, unexpected adjustable rates, deceptive loan applications and commission-hungry salespeople.


Actually the leading rate of foreclosure is the homes valued at over 300k, it used to be higher but now that property values have crashed so have the home values. We went through this in an earlier forum.

This big of an economic collapse maybe could have been avoided if the fed had not continuously cut interest rates, that should have been an indicator also.



> Not only was there no major deregulation passed during the past eight years, but the Bush administration and a Republican Congress approved the most sweeping financial-market regulation in decades


They de-regulated the commidities markets in 2003. Although not as big of a factor as the housing market the surge and sudden crash of metals, oil, etc has not helped this either.



> The bipartisan Sarbanes-Oxley Act was enacted in 2002 to prevent corporate fraud and restore investor confidence after the collapse of Enron and WorldCom


This had good intentions but it doesn't do any good to put laws in place and then not enforce them. Or then enforce them and just give out slaps in the wrist. The SEC and the fed both are at huge fault in this, at the time we all thought Greenspan was a genius but I wonder how many think that now?


----------

