Attachment 44477Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
President Rufio
45th President of the United States
Printable View
Attachment 44477Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
President Rufio
45th President of the United States
Spitzer may have his black eyes but he's right on. This is why AIG is "too big to fail":
More on Dodd being bought out:Quote:
The Real AIG Scandal
It's not the bonuses. It's that AIG's counterparties are getting paid back in full.
By Eliot Spitzer
Posted Tuesday, March 17, 2009, at 10:41 AM ET
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everybody is rushing to condemn AIG's bonuses, but this simple scandal is obscuring the real disgrace at the insurance giant: Why are AIG's counterparties getting paid back in full, to the tune of tens of billions of taxpayer dollars?
For the answer to this question, we need to go back to the very first decision to bail out AIG, made, we are told, by then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, then-New York Fed official Timothy Geithner, Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke last fall. Post-Lehman's collapse, they feared a systemic failure could be triggered by AIG's inability to pay the counterparties to all the sophisticated instruments AIG had sold. And who were AIG's trading partners? No shock here: Goldman, Bank of America, Merrill Lynch, UBS, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Deutsche Bank, Barclays, and on it goes. So now we know for sure what we already surmised: The AIG bailout has been a way to hide an enormous second round of cash to the same group that had received TARP money already.
It all appears, once again, to be the same insiders protecting themselves against sharing the pain and risk of their own bad adventure. The payments to AIG's counterparties are justified with an appeal to the sanctity of contract. If AIG's contracts turned out to be shaky, the theory goes, then the whole edifice of the financial system would collapse.
But wait a moment, aren't we in the midst of reopening contracts all over the place to share the burden of this crisis? From raising taxes—income taxes to sales taxes—to properly reopening labor contracts, we are all being asked to pitch in and carry our share of the burden. Workers around the country are being asked to take pay cuts and accept shorter work weeks so that colleagues won't be laid off. Why can't Wall Street royalty shoulder some of the burden? Why did Goldman have to get back 100 cents on the dollar? Didn't we already give Goldman a $25 billion capital infusion, and aren't they sitting on more than $100 billion in cash? Haven't we been told recently that they are beginning to come back to fiscal stability? If that is so, couldn't they have accepted a discount, and couldn't they have agreed to certain conditions before the AIG dollars—that is, our dollars—flowed?
The appearance that this was all an inside job is overwhelming. AIG was nothing more than a conduit for huge capital flows to the same old suspects, with no reason or explanation.
So here are several questions that should be answered, in public, under oath, to clear the air:
What was the precise conversation among Bernanke, Geithner, Paulson, and Blankfein that preceded the initial $80 billion grant?
Was it already known who the counterparties were and what the exposure was for each of the counterparties?
What did Goldman, and all the other counterparties, know about AIG's financial condition at the time they executed the swaps or other contracts? Had they done adequate due diligence to see whether they were buying real protection? And why shouldn't they bear a percentage of the risk of failure of their own counterparty?
What is the deeper relationship between Goldman and AIG? Didn't they almost merge a few years ago but did not because Goldman couldn't get its arms around the black box that is AIG? If that is true, why should Goldman get bailed out? After all, they should have known as well as anybody that a big part of AIG's business model was not to pay on insurance it had issued.
Why weren't the counterparties immediately and fully disclosed?
Failure to answer these questions will feed the populist rage that is metastasizing very quickly. And it will raise basic questions about the competence of those who are supposedly guiding this economic policy.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/200...politico/30833
Quote:
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) looks like he may be facing a fresh political firestorm.
Dodd just admitted on CNN that he inserted a loophole in the stimulus legislation that allowed million-dollar bonuses to insurance giant AIG to go forward – after previously denying any involvement in writing the controversial provision. .
“We wrote the language in the bill, the deal with bonuses, golden parachutes, excessive executive compensation that was adopted unanimously by the United States Senate in the stimulus bill,” Dodd told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer this afternoon.
“But for that language, there would have been no language to deal with this at all.”
Dodd had previously said that he played no role in writing the controversial language, and was not a part of the conference committee that inserted the language in the bill. As late as today, Dodd’s spokeswoman denied the senator’s involvement.
He'd probably die trying to drift a riced-out Air Force One.
This AIG shit is it for me. I believed the idea of too big to fail, but after this bullshit I say fuck it. It's time we let the house of cards fall down so we can rebuild it into something better.
Agreed. The only black person I've ever seen more white than Obama is Yoshi.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
Y'know after I had the full scope of the AIG situation explained to me by a friend who cares more about it than me, I still felt the same way. Let em choke.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
But I'm the guy who routinely thinks we should get hit by some cosmic event that causes a societal collapse because we need a perspective adjustment, so I admit I'm a bad person to ask about these kinds of things.
Don't forget they also want to spend $10 million on remodeling the CEO's office.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
Also, Geithner is such a tool.
Obama will be on with Leno tonight.
Either he's a fool or a blatant liar. I can't determine which of the two is worse.Quote:
President Barack Obama has told Jay Leno he was stunned when he learned of the bonuses that bailed-out insurance giant AIG was paying its employees.
Obama told "The Tonight Show" host the payments raise moral end ethical problems -- and the administration's going to do everything it can to get them back.
I'm glad Barry feels that way.Quote:
Obama also spoke about his embattled Treasury chief, Timothy Geithner, saying he is doing an "outstanding job."
He said that Geithner is a smart guy who's been handed an incredibly full plate. But he's handling it all with grace and good humor.
I'm confused, since they're already mid processing of a bill to tax 90% of those bonuses.
House already approved it.
I still support the full collapse of global financial institutions.
Fuck em. Fuck em dirty.
Make Fight Club Real!!
First, I doubt it will end up as a 90% tax. Secondly, these guys already got their money, their prior bonuses aren't subject to a clawback, the same bonuses that were generated off of false profits. Thirdly, we're in a recession now, bonuses will be low to zero for many people anyway, so they're threatening to tax the lowest bonus base in recent memory.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
And then why this outrage over $120mm or whatever was paid out in contractual bonuses that were long known to be paid out by Obama, Dodd, the Dems, everyone who was involved in the AIG bailout when $170 billion has already been handed out to the counterparties of AIG, essentially paying off AIG's gambling debts? The banks on the other side of those gambling bets get bailed out, yet no one screams bloody murder of that, rather Obama and crew would prefer to redirect the public ire towards the bonuses paid out that comprise a small percentage of the bailout money paid. This is typical politics and Obama is a typical politician. I see no distinction between him and Bush at this point.
Obama on 'Tonight Show' Discusses Economy, Makes Special Olympics Joke
Biden's contagious.Quote:
President Obama sat down with Jay Leno on Thursday for a late-night TV interview that spanned a range of topics -- from the economic crisis to the presidential dog -- and even, at one point, featured the president joking that his bowling ability was suitable for the Special Olympics.
The bowling comment was a reminder of his poor performance on the lanes last year during one of his campaign stops. Obama bragged to "The Tonight Show" that he recently bowled 129 on the White House alley.
"It's like Special Olympics," he said.
Take away the teleprompter, and he's an idiot. I wonder who writes the teleprompter stuff so that he can pretend to not be an idiot.
It's not that he's an idiot, it's that he's just a normal guy when he's relaxed. It's been such a long time since we've had a prominent political figure act like himself when he's not on the clock that we forget these are normal people. Our politicians beforehand were just like it and I'd rather have a president who can be himself in a relaxed situation than one who is always on the puppet strings.
That said, that nigga needs to go back to work. He's doing this because his popularity is dropping and he rather have a silly time than go on an interview with an accredited reporter. Don't fuck up my paycheck because you want to bail out AIG. I understand why it has to happen but I don't understand why they're being given money with little to no oversight.
Sorry, I don't want a "normal guy" as the most powerful man in the world.
You'd rather a mouthpiece sit at the helm while others make his decisions for him, all the while he shows no leadership, personality, or insight? Come on, man. You're not this naive. I didn't vote this guy into office, either, but I like that he has an opinion that's his own.
Just who in the hell do you want? What do you want?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
You just described Obama perfectly. He is the mouthpiece and has shown no leadership, personality, or insight. I know exactly why Hollywood loves him. He's a great actor when someone else writes his lines.
I'll start with above average intelligence and understanding of minor things like economics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
Specifics. Not some abstract "in a perfect world" shit. Who do you want to be president?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Yoshi doesn't live in the real world. He can't answer that question. The best your going to get is, "Well John McCain would at least be better because he's a Republican..."Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
That's a fantastic question, and I honestly don't have a good answer. Since we're only given maybe six realistic candidates, even if you include the primaries, I never bothered to think about who of the 300 million Americans it should be. Out of those six realistic candidates though, it should have been Romney.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr-K
The absolute best person is probably one of the CEOs of one of the massive companies like GE, since they operate like the federal government anyway in a lot of ways.
:lol: Oh baby. I'm tearing up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Obama is intelligent and has shown leadership talent (he couldn't get all those votes without it since he's black and we ALL know that's true) but I don't think he's shown any insight.
Come on, Yoshi. Give me something good here. You're the one on these boards I believe to be the most knowledgable in politics since Diff disappeared.
His speech making is impressive. That, frustration with Bush, and a complete free pass from the media is what got him elected. It had nothing to do with intelligence or leadership. If you read his "plans" carefully during the election, they were pretty awful, and that was before he started going back on them three and a half minutes after he was sworn in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
I am completely serious when I say that my feeling is that he is a teleprompter with a smile. And I think being black helped him. Black people who had never bothered to vote before voted for him for absolutely no other reason than he was black. It was easily the most racist election ever.
edit: Hell, where are all the vocal supporters from the election thread in this thread? When they bother to come here at all, they go way off topic on nonsense like creationism. I can't say I blame them, as he's been indefensible as a president. I just can't understand how they didn't see it coming.
edit2: Bill Clinton is a far, far more intelligent man than Barack Obama. I hate his views, but he can think off the cuff and react without needing to read his next line.
I don't want to look up the figures now. But after all the hubbub, I thought the black and college votes didn't really go up significantly. Most of them still stayed home and played Gears or smoked out.
The numbers were way up but still not impressive on a percentage basis. It was a reasonably close election though, so a bump like that makes a significant difference.
I understood his stance on issues, it's why I didn't vote for him. He has many things I agree with but his plans for our nation were too lofty to even seem fathomable. Don't talk down to me like I don't know this shit.
Thinking off the cuff and intelligence are not the same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Also, you voted for Bush twice. You really can't say anything about wanting someone intelligent running the country.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Er are you singling me out as a vocal Obama supporter?
I think I made it pretty clear I was going to vote for McCain until he went insane and chose the one VP candidate I couldn't possibly support, (both because she was insane, and his own age making her a very likely presidential candidate), and then proceeded to have a complete meltdown that scared that shit out of me.
Maybe you meant Frog?
No, you've been here, as opposed to your cohorts.
They are very, very closely correlated.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
/yawnQuote:
Also, you voted for Bush twice. You really can't say anything about wanting someone intelligent running the country.
I'm not talking about you at all. I shouldn't have said "you" up there, but I meant the collective, generic "you", not the single person "you".Quote:
Originally Posted by Razor Ramon
I think we are going through a slight, "No one can get their point across properly phase..." everyone take a deep breath.
Shut the fuck up, YAWA.
I love you as well Razor.
~ swoon ~
And he's already apologized for the gaffe...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090320/...ecial_olympicsQuote:
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama has apologized to the chairman of the Special Olympics for his late-night talk show quip equating his bowling skills to those of athletes with disabilities.
Appearing on "The Tonight Show" Thursday, the president told host Jay Leno he'd been practicing at the White House's bowling alley but wasn't happy with his score of 129. Then he remarked: "It was like the Special Olympics or something."
The audience laughed, but the White House quickly recognized the blunder. The Special Olympics, founded in 1968, is a global nonprofit organization serving 200 million individuals with intellectual disabilities.
On his way back to Washington on Air Force One, Obama called the chairman of the Special Olympics, Tim Shriver, to say he was sorry — even before the taped program aired late Thursday night.
"He expressed his disappointment and he apologized in a way that was very moving. He expressed that he did not intend to humiliate this population," Shriver said Friday on ABC's "Good Morning America." Obama, Shriver said, wants to have some Special Olympic athletes visit the White House to bowl or play basketball.
Still, Shriver said, "I think it's important to see that words hurt and words do matter. And these words that in some respect can be seem as humiliating or a put down to people with special needs do cause pain and they do result in stereotypes."
Shriver is the son of Special Olympics founder Eunice Kennedy Shriver and nephew of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy, whose endorsement early in the Democratic primaries was critical to Obama winning his party's nomination.
Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton told reporters traveling with Obama that the president's offhand remark was not meant to disparage the Special Olympics, only to poke some fun at the commander in chief's bowling skills.
"He thinks that the Special Olympics are a wonderful program that gives an opportunity to shine to people with disabilities from around the world," Burton said.
Despite making fun of his score, the president appears to be getting better the more he visits the White House lanes, which President Truman installed in 1947. During a campaign photo op a year ago at a bowling alley in Altoona, Pa., he rolled only a 37 in seven frames. The clip of the disastrous game was replayed on late night television shows such as Leno's — one of Obama's few campaign gaffes.
That was quick.
There is no apology large enough to cover for a stupid comment made while appearing on a fucking talk show while Rome is burning. It's excellent that he has things so well under control that he can appear on national TV filling out his NCAA bracket and making tasteless (for a President) jokes.
Fuck it, I love Obama now!Quote:
Obama, Shriver said, wants to have some Special Olympic athletes visit the White House to bowl
You're right. I think the right thing to do when Rome is burning is take a vacation.
RE: Doc... It's a good thing Pelosi is so close then.
I want old Craig Kilborn Daily Show like footage of him kicking their fucking asses without remorse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doc Holliday
Quote:
Hey Shriver, sorry 'bout that retard comment. Bring those little dribblers over though, I take 'em to the court.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
I miss Kilborn.Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
I have no problem with MCO taking time for Leno and B-ball, you got to take a break at times. But G-Luv thinking he can take on this mess alone and not properly filling his office is bullshit. Not to mention he's doing a swell job at fuckin' it up.
How he can say G's doing an "outstanding job" is like the blind man describing Picasso.
EDIT: this press release just came in on the offical names to be used for the current Administration.
Quote:
MCO - President
Joe B - Vice President
Rah Dogg - Chief of Staff
Lil' Hill - Secretary of State
G-Luv - Secretary of Treasury
Rob Rac - Secretary of Defense (pronounced rĉk like Iraq or rock)
The Judge - Attorney General
Ken Baby - Secretary of the Interior
Tom Daddy - Secretary of Agriculture
G Lok - Secretary of Commerce
Dr Seb - Secretary of Health and Human Services
Appearing on a talk show is far more forgivable than setting a new record for taking the most vacation time off while in office. At least he's actually out there talking to people and not fucking around on a ranch.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I'm sorry but his version of Late Late Show was practically unwatchable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yellerdog
Obama probably ran out of things to do on vacation after being an absentee Senator during one of the worst Congress sessions ever in terms of work days.
But I like the fact that that weak defense is the best you have, since the clock is ticking on the 100 day mark, and your boy hasn't done a damn positive thing still.
This is right on the money. Obama is a talking head, nothing else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Cough, Stem Cell Research, Cough...Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
That was congress pushing that, asshat.
And he signed off on it idiot. The previous president wouldn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Othello Harrington
Ergo, positive.
He tried to capitalize veteran's insurance too, but you socalists wouldn't let him!
He also loaned $40 pototoes to struggling AIG, because he's there when the market needs him!
Yeah me too.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
Him challenging that WNBA player to a game of 1 on 1, building it up like he was going to lose, then wiping the fucking floor with her was one of the greatest moments of television I've ever seen.
I checked Youtube and cannot find a video of that unfortunately, but it is awesome.
I miss when Daily Show wasn't almost entirely political. Give me back Vance DeGeneres interviewing a man in a toilet costume.
I'm not talking about the Late Late Show. The combination of that era's Daily Show writers and Kilborn was solid aztec gold.Quote:
Originally Posted by TODE
You Had To Be There!
Fuck yeah! That was the best!Quote:
Originally Posted by youandwhosearmy
To all of you who cry about the sky falling when the deficit increases:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Associated Press
Have fun, kids!
I saw a thread about this earlier today on a music forum I go to.
Tin foil hat shit.
It's Alex Jones... that's all he does.
Someone else mentioned it already but STEM CELLS. Also NOT ACTING LIKE A DOUCHEBAG TO EVERYONE.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
And I am happy you disagree with me, since your track record for these things is incredibly bad!
Also, what had Bush accomplished in his first 50 days, except 52 days of vacation? I kid, I kid! But he ended up setting a new record for it, and I doubt Obama spent 1/8th of his time in the Senate clearing brush from his Chicago ranch...style home. A truant president is WAY worse than a truant senator.
YAWA said it. Like f'ing 10 posts above this post.Quote:
Originally Posted by TODE
A lot more than Obama.Quote:
Originally Posted by TODE
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/fe.../100_days.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by PBS
So, he pandered to the religious right, began the clusterfuck that is No Child Left Behind, pandered again to the religious right, backpeddled on an environmental stance, rejected Kyoto, and went over the border to Mexico.
Impressive!
So after listening to Obama supporters trumpet how great he was for months, we're now two months into his first term, and all that noise has been reduced to "well he's marginally better than Bush, who we hated." Impressive.
Certainly hasn't been enough Change, but inheriting this crisis makes it harder to judge, especially this early into the term, by the end of the year if he's still "Marginally better than bush" then we've all fucked up.
I highly commend Barack for taking this step:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7956504.stm
This is more along the lines of what I was hoping for.
No we wouldn't have. The alternative would have been equal to or worse than Bush. What it means is our system fucked up by presenting us with no viable options yet again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
I will punch anyone upset by the Special Olympics comment for free. Fucking crybabies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
And then I will give Obama a good one (also for free) for doing this whole, "Hey, everything's not as bad as you think," nonsense like appearing on television shows. You're the President. Aside from that, on the campaign trail his big thing was talking about how we ignored the problems that lead up to where we are now - well, dude, going out and pretending shit is okay is the same exact thing.
Agreed, but that's not the point. The President should have a higher level of class than to barely exceed what is offensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calliander
You commend him for being told that his offer was bullshit and being handed demands by Iran? This is exactly the stupidity that McCain tried to nail him on in the first debate but failed due to a poorly orated message.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch
Even the Ayatollah has to be a politician, Yoshi. Politics transcends even religion. He has to take a hardline stance even if he personally believes that not all his stated demands are reasonable.
The Ayatollah can not come out and directly praise Obama even if he personally desired to. These quotes by the Ayatollah are what I found to be encouraging:Quote:
The BBC's Sadeq Saba says the Iranian supreme leader may be acting to prevent any internal division between moderates and hardliners over how to react to President Obama's offer.
Quote:
Ayatollah Khamenei said Iran had "no experience with the new American government and the new American president".
Quote:
"We will observe them and we will judge," he said.
Quote:
"If you change your attitude, we will change our attitude."
Did you learn this during pillow talk?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gooch
When Iran and the US are treating each other like they are on the same level, our leader has already failed.
Eh, I honesty don't have a problem with that. But I also really didn't care when Bush would mis-speak or sound stupid. I just have a problem with Obama having been there to make the comment in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
EDIT: At least Bush would fuck up during press conferences.
No, I usually go right to sleep after sex.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Quote:
When Iran and the US are treating each other like they are on the same level, our leader has already failed.
- Abraham LincolnQuote:
Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?
Yeah, but if Iran has no intentions of acting decently, then it doesn't matter. So this move is POTENTIALLY good, but it is also potentially disasterous
China is an enemy. Iran is a terrorist state. Those are distinct things.
Oh fuck off.
You don't live in a vacuum.
You live in America? You can vote for the US President? Oh wait ...Quote:
Originally Posted by Melf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
No, but Iran is a terrorist state. That's for certain. Unless you've lived in a vacuum. You'd know Iran currently is pretty fucking terrible and a country to pay attention too.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
Dig dig dig. You know, you probably weren't great at your new job after two months, either. If you believe that people believed that Obama = Jesus or something then you're just as bad as those right-wing blowhards that you claim you don't pay attention to.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
After the last eight years, I think everyone's still getting used to the idea of the President's role coming back to this. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
You just keep strengthening my case.
LOL, that WAS pretty bad. I you're admitting he's done a bad job (not saying I agree 100%, but that seems to be your implication) and then saying that it's acceptable because it's a new job, then we need help.
You're supposed to be good at your new job. That's why you get it in the first place, right?
wow that was pretty fucking bad.
GG TODE. Glad you could play.
The problem here, with you, is that we know from the past you're hinting here that the Republicans would somehow be different. I personally think McCain may have been the better choice, but not with Palin on the ticket.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Also Bush and Obama are the same, apparently. Atleast this one has great lines. Although Bush had funnier lines, so who can really say?
Go away TODE.
I'm not saying he is doing a bad job. I'm saying that a lot of people, both supporters and detractors, create or perpetuate the myth that Obama was going to save this country the minute he got into office.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
But if you pay attention to the guy, even when he plays up what his administration and the government had done and is doing to help the nation, there's always an undercurrent of realism to it.
The problem is that a lot of Obama's opponents (and perhaps the same could be said of anyone opposing any president) tend to criticize the myth and not what's really there. This is why I roll my eyes when assholes say "HAY IT'S BEEN SIX WEEKS AND EVERYTHING'S STILL SHIT SOME SAVIOR" or some non-comical variation thereof.
The "new job" comment was supposed to comical; I keep forgetting that we have to be Serious Business in this thread.
I am seeing some backpeddling here
First you say "If you believe that people believed that Obama = Jesus or something"
Then you say "both supporters and detractors, create or perpetuate the myth that Obama was going to save this country the minute he got into office"
And your job performance thing sounded really serious to me. One of those, "Well you aren't perfect either" things.
Realism? You have to be fucking kidding me. There hasn't been a shred of realism about him ever. He's a puppet. He's as real as Pinocchio. Maybe Obama's dream is to be a boy too.
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...1&d=1237741679Quote:
Originally Posted by TODE
The 50 days is pushing it. It's supposed to be the First 100 days. The First 100 days of any politician has been a standard since FDR. In his (FDR's) First 100 days he set into motion a lot of what this country now takes as a norm. Welfare, Social Security, The FDIC, Farm suppliments, etc. Bush's actions while maybe critisized, he did a lot. Obama ... all he did was sign the Bailout and had a bitch of a time finding a Secretary of the Treasury.Quote:
Originally Posted by TODE
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/board/a...1&d=1237741679Quote:
Originally Posted by TODE
I laughed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon McShig
Seriously. I can't stand Jon Stewart, he's so fucking smug. And tearing Bush apart for misspeaking or something - the kind of stuff the Daily Show built its success on - was never 'cutting edge satire,' just lazy pandering to know-it-potheads holding "zomgBush=naziwarkriminal!!111" rallies. At least Bush's brain didn't explode if there wasn't a teleprompter to read from.
What case? Your case is based entirely on negative reinforcement of the "other" party. Acting like the Republicans would be doing any better is hysterical since they weren't doing any better when they had control.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
And again.
I'm happy you answered this way, what is the Republican plan for the economy Yoshi? Besides deregulation (which they did) and leaving everything alone (which they did as well) of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
The government should stay the fuck out of most everything, especially forcing banks to make bad loans and then using tax money to bail them out when those awful loans default.
But, please, continue lowering Obama's bar of success to barely better than Bush in liberals' eyes. That's about the only one he has a chance of clearing.
So the government should do absolutely nothing? Let it be as it were. Not regulate, or participate in anything.
I'm not saying I agree with the bail out, nor have I ever, we both are in agreement on that. But what you're suggesting is fantasy. Allowing every bank that made those loans (which is to say every bank) to collapse on their watch is not something any politician would do, Republican or Democrat, so I think it's time you stop armchair quarterbacking this shit and actually offer a realistic political solution that could happen. Stating the government shouldn't intervene is both obvious and unrealistic.
Government intervention is going to happen and continue to happen in these matters no matter what party is in control. So right there is your starting point.
If the government, under a Democratic President and Congress, would not have forced the banks to make the loans, nothing after that would have been necessary. I'm glad your assholes are the ones that are going to have to fix the shit they created. Of course, they'll fail, but at least that'll get a lot of them thrown out of office.
Privatize absolutely as much as possible. Always.
And if Bush hadn't gone to Iraq to build a nation, we would have caught Bin Laden and not been in a clusterfuck with our soldiers caught in the middle.
That argument is bullshit. You used to chastise those who didn't deal with the here and now and brought that up all the time (me). Well we get what started the housing bubble. So again the issue is in front of us, so like you used to say, deal with it.
You also have dodged the question on what you think we should do (realistically, not in your fantasy bubble) and what you think the Republicans would do, and I'm guessing because you know damn well they'd be tripping over themselves to bail companies out the way the Dems are now.
So I'll ask again, knowing that neither party wouldn't intervene at this point had the election been different, and knowing that the government is going to do something about this no matter who is in charge, what do you think the solution is?