Chef Jim Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 I guess I'd join The Revolution. So why is this different? You do realize that AIG's party was not paid directly by you and me however this was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Really? Bush would of have been thrilled to hear that we can hit the reset button on letting Bin Laden Escape, repealing GS, putting pressure on Fannie and Freddy to lend more than they should of and the aftermath of the tech bubble which led to his recession. Damn, who knew it was so easy? Over and done, clean slate. So you're saying that Bush didn't let Bin Laden escape from Tora Bora, didn't choose to invade Iraq, he did put pressure on Freddie/Fannie to curtail lending, and he prevented the recession and reduced the debt with his tax cuts without spending cuts? Because those were all things that happened on his watch. And since Cons like to throw security around, let's not forget that Obama has kept us safe for longer than Bush since the start of his presidency, something Dick Cheney convienently forgets. (9/11+100 days and counting). I'm still waiting for anyone from the left side on this board to make a sound defense with facts and numbers of Obama's policies. The President has complete control over his own actions and decisions. Being dealt a tough hand does not support poor decisions and solutions to the hand you're dealt. Dick Jauron inherited a bad team, made many decisions in nearly 4 years that you could argue left the team in even worse shape. You can opine and speculate, but that's all your analysis of his decisions are. You're not going to change your mind no matter what facts are presented to you, so what's the point. I'm satisfied with his decisions on Iraq, Afghanistan, the economy, global warming, and health care, and believe they were good decisions that will have positive outcomes. He's doing what he can with the cards he was dealt, and is keeping his campaign promises as much as he can given the herd of cats in the Congress. Having a big tent means having alot of conflicting opinions, which is where the Congress is at. Too much for the right and not enough for the left, which is probably the best that can be expected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 So you're saying that Bush didn't let Bin Laden escape from Tora Bora, didn't choose to invade Iraq, he did put pressure on Freddie/Fannie to curtail lending, and he prevented the recession and reduced the debt with his tax cuts without spending cuts? Because those were all things that happened on his watch. And since Cons like to throw security around, let's not forget that Obama has kept us safe for longer than Bush since the start of his presidency, something Dick Cheney convienently forgets. (9/11+100 days and counting). No, who said that? You just missed the whole point as usual Sherlock. It's easy to throw stones and blame it on one source, when the reality is that isn't usually the case. Bin Laden could have been taken out during Clintons tenure as president. Fannie and Freddy were pressured by his administration to lend more, and to correct your statement, in 2003 Bush recommended a significant regulatory overhaul of the housing finance industry in 2003, Barney opposed a Bush administration proposal for transferring Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from Congress to a new agency that would of been created frin the Treasury Department, but Barney Frank and other Democrats vehemently opposed it, why because they were afraid that it would reduce lending to people who shouldn't of been receiving loans in the first place. and guess what Franks response was? "These two entities...are not facing any kind of financial crisis.... The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." But nice try pasta, too bad those pesky little things called facts, sometimes get in the way of points you try to make. which leads me to who was just polled as the THE FINANCIAL VILLAIN OF THE DECADE. Madoff won, but you'd be surprised to see who came a close second. In our Financial Villain of the Decade poll, SmartMoney readers declared Bernard Madoff the hands-down winner out of a field of nine. Given his notoriety, perhaps, that’s hardly an upset. However, the thousands of you who participated did surprise us with your write-in candidate, Rep. Barney Frank (D., Mass.): He grabbed enough votes to beat out the likes of imprisoned WorldCom CEO Bernard Ebbers and Enron poster boy Kenneth Lay. In all, 25% of readers believe Frank is the most egregious financial scoundrel of the decade. Readers criticized Frank, who serves as chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, for supporting the easing of mortgage standards, and for failing to reform government-created Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Those companies owned or guaranteed more than half of the U.S. mortgage market by 2008, and were hobbled by the subprime mortgage crisis. Frank was not immediately available for comment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 And since Cons like to throw security around, let's not forget that Obama has kept us safe for longer than Bush since the start of his presidency, something Dick Cheney convienently forgets. (9/11+100 days and counting). Except for the terrorist who killed a dozen soldiers in cold blood at Ft. Hood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 And since Cons like to throw security around, let's not forget that Obama has kept us safe for longer than Bush since the start of his presidency, something Dick Cheney convienently forgets. (9/11+100 days and counting). Oh, that's not forgotten, since the golden one hasn't changed any policies that were put in place by the evil overlords before him. Perhaps you're the one with a faulty memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 And since Cons like to throw security around, let's not forget that Obama has kept us safe for longer than Bush since the start of his presidency, something Dick Cheney convienently forgets. (9/11+100 days and counting). Oh ya, try telling that to this family, or his, or his, or his, or his, or his, or her, or his, or his, or his, or her with her unborn baby, or her or his Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Oh ya, try telling that to this family, or his, or his, or his, or his, or his, or her, or his, or his, or his, or her with her unborn baby, or her or his But these people were not victims of terrorism. They were victims of a misguided and misunderstood soul who wasn't properly treated for stress and he snapped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 So why is this different? You do realize that AIG's party was not paid directly by you and me however this was. I was being sarcastic. I'm not going to join any revolution because I have suddenly become indignant about wasteful government spending. Where was the "Tea Bag Revolution" prior to 2009? It's a !@#$ing joke this temper tantrum mentality a revolution. It's an insult to legitimate revolutions throughout history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 It's a !@#$ing joke this temper tantrum mentality a revolution. It's an insult to legitimate revolutions throughout history. Says the person who doesn't understand the risks of our exploding national debt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Says the person who doesn't understand the risks of our exploding national debt. Right, Joe Tea Bagger understands EXACTLY what he's protesting. You sure do seem to always be pretty damned sure about what you know. It suits you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 It's a !@#$ing joke this temper tantrum mentality a revolution. You keep telling yourself that, Geno. You keep telling yourself that. Just because these people aren't holding muskets doesn't mean they're not ready to do some serious damage in 2010. You know why? Because they're pissed, and they're not going to suddenly stop being pissed because the current administration is not going to suddenly stop it's embarrassing spending. And here's another thing I've mentioned before, over and over, and it somehow never sinks as a viable answer for you. The reason people weren't this pissed prior to 2009 is because they were asleep. It's just that simple. And believe it or not, the people who are pissed now aren't just pissed at Obama. They aren't just pissed at Democrats or liberals. They're pissed at every career politician who has gotten fat by wasting our tax dollars. It was bound to happen one day. People stood around all day at the water cooler saying "Oh, well. There goes more government waste." Then Obama shows up, blatantly spends billions of taxpayer dollars paying off everyone who got him elected, then followed it up with one of the most poorly managed reform bills in the history of mankind, and it all just broke the camel's back. But you keep saying it's nothing. You keep saying Joe Tea Bagger doesn't understand what he's protesting. Please. I'm counting on it. Because the folks who cried and wailed and campaigned for Obama are NOT coming back out a second time. They blew their wad. They won't be out to save his ass in 2010, and at this rate, they'll be in hiding come 2012. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 You keep telling yourself that, Geno. You keep telling yourself that. Just because these people aren't holding muskets doesn't mean they're not ready to do some serious damage in 2010. You know why? Because they're pissed, and they're not going to suddenly stop being pissed because the current administration is not going to suddenly stop it's embarrassing spending. And here's another thing I've mentioned before, over and over, and it somehow never sinks as a viable answer for you. The reason people weren't this pissed prior to 2009 is because they were asleep. It's just that simple. And believe it or not, the people who are pissed now aren't just pissed at Obama. They aren't just pissed at Democrats or liberals. They're pissed at every career politician who has gotten fat by wasting our tax dollars. It was bound to happen one day. People stood around all day at the water cooler saying "Oh, well. There goes more government waste." Then Obama shows up, blatantly spends billions of taxpayer dollars paying off everyone who got him elected, then followed it up with one of the most poorly managed reform bills in the history of mankind, and it all just broke the camel's back. But you keep saying it's nothing. You keep saying Joe Tea Bagger doesn't understand what he's protesting. Please. I'm counting on it. Because the folks who cried and wailed and campaigned for Obama are NOT coming back out a second time. They blew their wad. They won't be out to save his ass in 2010, and at this rate, they'll be in hiding come 2012. You wish. Wake me up when "The Revolution" starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 So who here is pissed that every Naval Academy Midshipman gets $800 spending cash PER MONTH? At 1200 enrolled, that's approx $1M each month. And that's just Navy. Oh yeah, taxes also pay for their education, housing, and meals, and those have nothing to do with the $800 PER MONTH allowance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 So who here is pissed that every Naval Academy Midshipman gets $800 spending cash PER MONTH? At 1200 enrolled, that's approx $1M each month. And that's just Navy. Oh yeah, taxes also pay for their education, housing, and meals, and those have nothing to do with the $800 PER MONTH allowance. Brownies used to really !@#$ me up too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Brownies used to really !@#$ me up too. Did you have something to say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 I'm still waiting for anyone from the left side on this board to make a sound defense with facts and numbers of Obama's policies. The President has complete control over his own actions and decisions. Being dealt a tough hand does not support poor decisions and solutions to the hand you're dealt. Which sounds suspiciously like the lefties arguments over the previous 8 years. Welcome to why the cycle continues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Did you have something to say? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 So who here is pissed that every Naval Academy Midshipman gets $800 spending cash PER MONTH? At 1200 enrolled, that's approx $1M each month. And that's just Navy. Oh yeah, taxes also pay for their education, housing, and meals, and those have nothing to do with the $800 PER MONTH allowance. Actually, that salary isn't cash in their pocket, it covers necessary personal expenses (such as uniform costs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 Actually, that salary isn't cash in their pocket, it covers necessary personal expenses (such as uniform costs). Not according to my friend who was commissioned in 2007. And even if it did, what sort of "necessary personal expenses" require $800/mo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 23, 2009 Share Posted December 23, 2009 You wish. Wake me up when "The Revolution" starts. On the contrary, I'd prefer you kept sleeping right through it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts