[quote]Then look at Obama's "If I'm elected" $800 million new spending spree and see if that's truly what's best for the nation![/quote] It won't happen. Things are going to be very different in January and some of us realize this. What is being said vs. reality will be very different in Jan. With 5 weeks left neither candidate is going to begin to change much of what they say unless they start slipping in the polls. The debate showed that. Next week should be interesting. If the bai
Smoothseas
[quote]When (in modern memory) have they not?[/quote] Ill get back to you on that one.
[quote]Want to go to the congressional record? You will lose.[/quote] I don't think so I have researched the issue for a long time [quote]you sure are sensitive to democrat criticism[/quote] I just try to point out some falsehoods, misleading information, and ignorance in what is mostly a blogsite filled with the republican flock. When Im posting to blogsites that are mainly geared towards the democratic flock I point out some fal
[quote]s. However, there have been 2 posted that trace it back - to the democrats[/quote] It traces back to both democrats and republicans......Unfortunately FOX edits their stories to make the flock think otherwise.
[quote]Am I the only one doubting the capabilities of our duly elected representatives (instead of, say, economists) to determine the best course of action?[/quote] The problem is they turned it into a political circus from the start. Since they can't go back their districts to campaign they are doing it from the halls of congress.
The government should set up a trust fund and use the estimated $700 bill tax debt to get preferred shares and warrants from the financial institutions in exchange for treasuries instead of using the shotgun proposal of the administration. If the financial institutions are forced to keep their lousy derivatives then they will have less of an incentive to simply create and/or buy more further fueling the problem. Preffered share purchases would significantly boost the values of the companies s
[quote]Less regulation is not a bad thing, and regulation isn't the cause of this problem.[/quote] Maybe you should look up the Glass Steagall Act that was enacted during the Great Depression and then look up the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which repealed certain parts of it in 1999.
[quote]No, they are just as (well, not quite but almost) nanny as the democrats for citizens. [/quote] This is true....Its hard to pander votes if you dont cradle both groups. [quote]The Current Wall Street Crises, while it may look like republican due to constituencies, can actually be traced directly back to Barney Frank and Chuck Schumer. [/quote] look at my post elsewhere....you posted that fox video there but that is a perfect example of how fox forms a perfectly
Wow....pretty good distortion of the facts...or maybe just abusing the timeline and facts to make it look like it was partisan thing. Fannie and Freddie were giving contributions to almost every member of the house and senate. The house bill failed to pass in a Republican controlled congress. The senate bill was first shelved during a Republican controlled Senate. http://www.allbusiness.com/government/532756-1.html Here's a decent article that explains how these two bills went
[quote]It was clearly blocked by Frank and Schumer.[/quote] Oh really? Show the exact legislation would you please. You might as well add Dodd since much of what he has "advocated" is nonsense also. But be careful if you are referring to Fannie/Freddie. They are not the root cause of the problem, merely a symptom.
[quote]WHo blocked attempts at reform at every turn[/quote] It was actually specific democrats and republicans who do not know the difference between over and under regulation, specific republicans and democrats who were being pressured by lobbyists and either did not know enough about the issue or were more concerned with campaign contributions to be able to make a good decision. Some saw the problem a long time ago others didn't. Some who helped create the problem tried to f
[quote]yes, but again, regardless what they say, they can't cover the fact that a "present" vote does not yield well for anyone[/quote] It does not yield well for those who do not take the time to look at the record and see exactly what each present vote pertains to and try to figure out why the present vote was used. [quote]lets stop the BS and be honest here. A "present" vote is not a realistic vote[/quote] I am being honest. If you knew anything about the system use
[quote]but just a population that has been taught there is no down side risk so they act like there is no tomorrow[/quote] This is very true, however the economic crisis is due to the folks on Wall St. The investment banks who created a model to provide a quick return, the ratings agencies who assigned inappropriate ratings on the securities backing up these models. Corporations who used these securities along with shady at best accounting methods to provide a quick return, etc. etc.
[quote]So what you are saying is that a politicians opinion about the "present" vote outweighs my opinion about it? [/quote] I insuate nothing. The statements are made by members from the illinois legislature. One statement from a republican and another from a democrat. I added no opinion of my own to that specific post. Its more just to point out to some who may or may not know what the present vote is all about. Its no different from manipulating a politicians nay vote on a
[quote]This is everyones fault[/quote] Not really. Most of the fault lies within wall st. and in certain corporate boardrooms but there are also some politicians who I would say aided and abetted the situation.
[quote]"I want it nooooowwwww" [/quote] This is a mentality that certainly crosses party lines
[quote]YOu say you are an independant - just like all the seminar Democrat talking parrots[/quote] Im certainly not a registered democrat but I would probably say I lean left at this point in time particularly when it comes to federal policy. A decade ago I suppose I leaned right of center but that just shows how much things have gone to the right over the past 3 decades. I do vote republican in my state tho but that is because the republican party in my state is moderate.....mostly f
[quote]But the second part of your statement is clearly false. The "great medical crises" is causing less than 1% of Americans to file for bankruptcy. That is hardly a crises.[/quote] Never said it was a crisis just a growing problem. However it certainly isnt helpful when it results in foreclosure. Particularly when a 2% foreclosure rate is causing todays economic problems.
[quote]It is not the official government position[/quote] A lot of it was. Compare the versions of "National Security Strategy of the US" 2002 and 2006. When you do you will see how the policy changes have been implemted and how they have played out.
[quote]I already mentioned above that they are back on for the debate as planned.[/quote] I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. Things seemed to be moving forward earlier in the day but then came to a grinding halt as far as the bailout bill is concerned.....Hard to get past the spin its flowing from both sides full force. Its the house reps. holding things up so I don't think McCain can do anything in any case so he might as well fly to Mississippi.
[quote]The nice thing though is that she has kept her stance on these issues quite separate from her politics. [/quote] Those really aren't the issues for many. They are mostly wedge issues that are used to pander votes. None of them will be implemented at the federal level any time soon. The world will go on if Fed money isnt used for Emb. stem cell research. Some states, universities and the private sector will fund research, but if you look at how Bush played with the issue its kin
[quote]With all the "Present" votes Obama made, how would you feel him voting "Present" when being President? [/quote] "To insinuate the 'present' vote means you're indecisive, that you don't have the courage to hold public office, that's a stretch. But, it's good politics," said state Rep. Bill Black (R), a 22-year veteran of the House and his party's floor leader. In fact, he said, Illinois legislators get attacked for their "present" v
[quote]good way to hold me to the truth as well.[/quote] You should expect that of me by now...lol...or atleast a reasonable explanation since the truth can be hard to find within all the propaganda that is being cast upon all of us these days.
[quote]it seems that Mass is just making the problem worse by penalizing people that perhaps cannot afford it [/quote] Its hard to say. I dont live in Mass. so I dont what the cost of living is. It depends on the level set that determines getting assistance or govt coverage. The fine for non coverage is $1000. Compare that to the lowest lvl of assisted which is around $3600. If the level is set properly it shouldnt be a problem so the worst case scenerio is paying $1000 to gambl
[quote]I guess you are too busy reading wacko websites [/quote] Possibly.....if you consider PNAC a bunch of Wacko's