Obama's speech he just made

I'm sorry, but you haven't answered either of my questions, and instead have reverted to attacking me as a person. What a joke.
 
hahahaha. says the dude with the mad magazine comment. hold on ill find the damn article.
 
found it. pm me your email and ill send it to you. i only have it as a pdf, and idk how to post that to the internet.
 
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-190

republicans actually tried to put legislation into place to oversee the mortgage "crisis"

Sets forth operating, administrative, and regulatory provisions of the

Agency, including provisions respecting: (1) assessment authority; (2)

authority to limit nonmission-related assets; (3) minimum and critical

capital levels; (4) risk-based capital test; (5) capital

classifications and undercapitalized enterprises; (6) enforcement

actions and penalties; (7) golden parachutes; and (8) reporting.

Sen. Charles Hagel [R-NE]hide cosponsors

Cosponsors [as of 2008-11-09]

Sen. John McCain [R-AZ]

Sen. Elizabeth Dole [R-NC]

Sen. John Sununu [R-NH]

 
screw it, ill copy paste the first two paragraphs. but i think i emailed this to you already justin

Some three weeks before New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was forced to resign his office in disgrace (sex! scandal! floozies!), he

published an op-ed in the Washington Post. Titled "Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime: How the Bush Administration Stopped the

States From Stepping In to Help Consumers," the piece expressed Spitzer's concern that for several years there had been a marked

increase in predatory lending practices, including distortion of terms, surprise balloon payments, hidden fees and deceptive "teaser"

rates. These practices, he wrote, were having a "devastating effect on home buyers." In addition, the sheer number of such

transactions, "if left unchecked, threaten...our financial markets." To those in the know (OK, those few egghead "elites" not enthralled

by the birth of the Brangelina twins), the situation loomed so egregious that the attorneys general of all fifty states, both Democrats

and Republicans, lodged suits against the worst predatory subprime lenders. A number of states, including New York, passed laws to

rein in such practices.

The response was shocking, and not nearly wellpublicized enough: the Bush administration employed a little-used 1863 law to annul

all state antipredatory-lending laws and, if that wasn't enough, to block states from enforcing their own consumer protection laws in

suits against national banks. Thus, when Spitzer tried to open an investigation into discriminatory mortgage lending in New York, the

administration actually filed a federal lawsuit to block it. These interventions were so extreme and so unprecedented that the

attorneys general and the banking superintendents of all fifty states came together to oppose the rulings unanimously. But to no avail.

 
yes. so which is right? who the fuck knows. just like there are sources arguing for and against the bailout. i have my opinions, you have yours. im voicing mine.
 
hey dipshit. the wall street journal is a conservative shit rag espousing nothing but the old boys club of neo-classical capitalism. a system that has utterly failed the world. it's time to move on to something new.
 
And now that we've gotten to the "Shit shit how can we blame clinton", "No it's bush's fault", "Give me one good reason it's Bush's fault because for inadequately explained reasons it's incumbent upon you to answer my questions despite the fact that I care nothing for your answer and would dismiss it anyway", "Republicans have failed at everything else, so they must have been responsible for this too", "Look at the votes, who is to blame, republicans wanted oversight", "No obama wanted oversight, he publicly called for it in 2006"...

Whatever. Who gives a fuck. None of that even matters, regardless of who's right. And odds are you're both spewing so much distorted bullshit that whatever hidden gems of truth are concealed therein aren't worth the effort to find. Enjoy your bickering, children.
 
That's funny, because I believe most of us were actually trying to argue the economics behind the plan, and then you came along and brought the recent past into the argument:

"Your way didn't work, you screwed up for 8 years and lost an election

in what could reasonably be described as a landslide. To continue to

insist that it's the only possible course of action is, as mentioned,

downright hilarious.

Of course, it's also politics, so if this doesn't work republicans

can pull the "I told you so" card, and if it does, they can claim it

wasn't because of what Obama did and that their way would have worked

soooo much better!"

Don't come back and act like you're above us, you pretentious asshole.
 
More political BS. Anyone with half a brain in his head could see that the points I made there were entirely about the present:

1. Once someone loses the election, it's pretty silly to complain that the guy who won isn't fulfilling the campaign promises of the loser, and isn't governing like the guy whose 8 year term led to his party being routed. Why WOULD he?

2. If the primary purpose for bitching and moaning about this is so that you can say "I told you so" later, or "mine would have worked better", you're a political hack and no one should listen to you. Which is what's been going on, because everyone knows this is going to pass anyway.

Baiscally, you're either a moron for not recognizing the above, or you're being intentionally dishonest. I'm going with the latter, because spewing bullshit has been the trend from you and so many others so far in this thread. It's just the same old tired crap and it's pointless bickering. I'm not saying I'm above you, I'm saying you're wasting time going around in meaningless circles for no reason and if you're going to argue at that level you should probably find something better to do.
 
"I find it downright hilarious that McCain ran on tax cuts and lost

badly, and then Republicans immediately begin whining that Obama isn't

governing like John McCain.

Infrastructure building is simply a great idea because it achieves

more than economic assistance. The US power grid is in very sore need

of modernization. The ports need significant upgrades. Transportation

needs to be more efficient. Countries like China are pulling way, way

ahead of you guys in a ton of these areas because while republicans

were cutting taxes over the last decade, they were improving the status

quo in their country.

Your way didn't work, you screwed up for 8 years and lost an

election in what could reasonably be described as a landslide. To

continue to insist that it's the only possible course of action is, as

mentioned, downright hilarious.

Of course, it's also politics, so if this doesn't work republicans

can pull the "I told you so" card, and if it does, they can claim it

wasn't because of what Obama did and that their way would have worked

soooo much better!"

did someone jack your account?

up until THIS point, the discussion stayed at least somewhat on topic (the PORK bill) then you come in and make some BULLSHIT assessment on taxes. then you got enlightened on how your tax post was wrong. now you are somehow above all of this?

seriously, the tone of your first post contains so much childish bickering in it i find it hard to believe they came from the same set of brain matter.

"Your way didn't work, you screwed up for 8 years and lost an

election in what could reasonably be described as a landslide. To

continue to insist that it's the only possible course of action is, as

mentioned, downright hilarious."

 
Ben. you really need to stay away from these types of threads. I am man enough to admit that I don't know dick about shit, and even I can tell you have no idea what your talking about.
 
all i know is that rebuilding infrastructure and public works projects ran by the government doesn't create long term jobs that really help the economy. They are really just temporary. What does stimulate the economy is cutting taxes for everyone so the lower and middle class have money but also so the wealthy have more money to invest and create new jobs with. If you increase taxes on the rich then they don't want to spend money in the form of expanded or new business. That trickles down and hurts the lower and middle class even more
 
hahahaha. i dont think i know everything, but i def have a decent idea of what im talking about.
 
Granted I've only read through a few threads that you've managed to spew dribble in, I've never actually seen you make a legitimate post. Just stuff like this, "its was oh so so so so so so so much more than that". Good one dude, at least TRY to substantiate your claims. (Please don't do anything with this one, it was just an example.)
 
i admit the last 2 threads i havent done much in. but i have homework coming out my ass right now so arguing politics with kids who have no idea what they are talking about is really not my first priority. look back to threads from the election season, or the isreal palestine threads from more recently, and youll see i really do make more thought out posts alot of the time.
 
I would really love too...but i have homework coming out my ass right now so digging up threads about kids who have no idea what they are talking about is really not my

first priority.

 
obama has surrounded himself with scandal and it is his fault. His nominee for head of the IRS didnt pay his taxes for four years, blagovich is a complete idiot and everyone knows obama's people had something to do with it, dont even start with hilary clinton problems, and he absolutly favors interestes groups and lobyists, he even was a lobbyist earlier in his career.
 
to come out of a recession the government has to spend money. i dont think it really matters on what as long as it gives people jobs.
 
Hey bro, way to make a coherent post, I didnt get enough of JD's post from your repost and your repost in your quote and then the repost of the repost.
 
he's givin cough syrup to a cancer patient. our government is fucked up. read some marx and understand what we actually need. europe has done whats necessary...when will america understand what we need to do?
 
"there is some good stuff like a few billion for coal companies to research clean coal etc"

This is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. There is no such thing as clean coal and coal is not the answer to our future energy needs, it needs to be phased out not researched...

I agreed with you on some of it. The democratic party is using this bill to push a lot of their ideology through congress, but we do need a stimulus package to completely redirect our economy towards a carbon-free, sustainable economy and simultaniously stimulate the economy through public works, technology, and jobs in all sectors. People work in the Arts industry too... However, I also think the package should me more geared toward the housing crisis. The package is a little pork filled but it is also far too small.
 
thanks bro, glad you noticed. hopefully you also noticed how JD made a (by his standards) a childish post, and then bitched out the rest of the thread for being children.

glad my point came across.

the last little snippet was quoted for effect, because its a doosy when compared to the tone of his second post...
 
well thats what i learned in socials in high school. depression in the 30's started getting better in canada when government did something for farmers with irrigation cause they could farm again some act i dunno really know that part. and they started spending money on the ww2 which gave people jobs. jobs=more money in peoples pockets=more money to spend=more money to companies

i dont really know much but thats what makes sense to mee

 
Just watched some nonstop coverage of the stimulus vote....3 turncoat republicans are supporting it, one of them is from New England...I'm ashamed. Even top liberal economists say this is going to cause more harm than not acting at all. At to the kid who was talking about Geithner, you had it 1/4 correct. 4 of Obama's cabinet choices have each had experiences with fraudulence and failure to pay taxes. Tom DascHOLE was a doozy of a choice, even he knew he shouldn't be there. Obama looked like a total tool supporting him for that long until the guy himself acknowledged he was not fit for the position. If only this would extend to Geithner and that bitch he has as head of Labor, no good unionist.
 
i've accepted that it will be passed, what pisses me off is after the crisis is over they aren't going to bring the spending back to normal amounts and we're going to be dishing out tons of extra dough for a long long time
 
im looking at the political aspect of it yes i have accepted that it will most likely be passed but not without a sour taste in the mouth of our "bipartisanship", this is not how gov. should be functioning, especially in a time like this, and obama is not being the necessary leader that he should be.
 
I hate how the american people dont want this stimulus plan yet obama and congress keep telling us that we want it
 
i totally agree with you, but we didn't want the first stimulus to pass under bush and it passed. we dont want this new one to pass under Obama and it will.

To the thread creator, i will try to stay on topic here and talk about the stimulus.

For the record, Im against the spending, stimulus, whatever you want to call free money nowadays.

1) when did the government actually give back our money to the people when they said they would; even in a form of a "stimulus package" to help out the american people? they should have labeled it "this is how we are screwing the american public" package.

- look at the bushes stimulus. what is is, almost half has been spent, but almost non of it is accounted for? that sure stimulated the economy by giving these companies money to host a superbowl party, or fly their corporate jets down to florida, mexico and wherever for a getaway. we are stupid to have it pass but we have no say because we have a corrupt government (on both sides of the political spectrum). And now Obama is coming in and is trying to do the exact same thing? serious?

2) The new stimulus is filled with more bullshit and more bullshit but i will agree (because im trying to be civil here to my opposition) that it is much better organized than the bushes package. at least we know where we are throwing our money at right?! haha

- but, we should have equality in this country right? so i will once again side with my opposition. since bushes plan sucked i will let the Obama pass his plan and see if it works. Even though i disagree STRONGLY with the man i still want him to succeed and its his turn in power.

3) This one is important so PAY attention. Do you think the government can spend your money better than you can? i don't but we are told they can, time and time again. but why do we think this? its because our generation, yes, you me, your brother, sister... have a fallacy of an entitlement program mentality when we should not. no other generation is as lazy, worthless, anti-work driven than any other generation in our history. our generation is spoiled beyond no extent and we have no respect for our elders, authority leaders. We have no accountability as a generation and we believe everything should be handed to us for free or very little effort or money. examples, A) everybody should own a house. false B) everybody deserves to live like everybody else with money. false (you work to get to that point). C) i need everything now and i can afford more than i make. false.

4) the last thing that im going to add is that for everybody saying America is evil should shut their spoiled mouths (i dont think that is the case in this thread but its been on my mind lately). im sick of hearing that, we all have it pretty good here, which is why everybody is trying to get into our country, nobody is trying to get out. at the end of the day we still live in a free society to do as we please (like bitch on NS like its going to change anything, haha)

THIS WAS JUST MY THOUGHTS!

 
This whole debacle conforms what I have been in saying about Obama for over a year...that he has no economic plan and that he is totally clueless as to how an economy works.

That utter piece of garbage thats being called a "bailout" is one of the most impractical, worthless, and poorly thought out things to hit the senate floor in years. All that bailout truly amounts to is a collaboration of nonsense pet projects operating under the guise that it will "help" the American people. It will in fact make the situation worse rather than better.

Look at the way Obama's administration is handling the whole affair. They're trying to scare people into thinking the economy is a lot worse than it actually is as an excuse to get that piece of shit "bailout" passed. Assuming Obama and his cabinet weren't either crooked or totally clueless (or both)...they would be trying to build consumer confidence and lowering payroll taxes to encourage companies to hire more people.

Part of the reason the economy is where it is today is because of irresponsible regulation by the government...and yet we see Obama and his cabinet trying to dig their meddlesome little hands even further into it. The mortgage problem has been persisting for 10 years and many people were warning that it would collapse...for the past 5 or so years you couldn't make a profit on mortgages unless you make a bunch of crooked loans and sold off the debt...and look where we are today!

Change we can believe in? Maybe if you're gullible. This is the same kind of crap that has been stinking up Washington for many years.

What need really need is more responsible regulation. We also need to allow poorly managed companies to self destruct and fail rather than having the government try to run them. The government doesn't know the first fucking thing about running a business...if the did, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today. We also should not be raising taxes...its counter productive in times where the economy is strained.

The government's role in capitalism should be left to regulating, nothing more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top