How many blame republicans?

[JWBooth]

Great point, but lets not forget if it had not been for 9/11 we never would have went to Iraq in the first place and the events leading up to 9/11 was due to clinton and his adminastraition dropping the ball.

Shrubbie would have found his excuse, 9/11 just made it easy.

But the biggest mess of all is the community re-envestment act that help to build the mega giants Fredy Mac and Fanny Mae. with their fall thus fell the U.S. Economy.

Just more bricks in the wall.

 

[Immanuel]

You are one of the few maybe you haven't noticed though that there is a lot of blame being pushed off on the Republicans.
How about Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae failures?

Oh sorry, I have noticed it.

I simply don't agree that it should be entirely pushed off on Republicans nor do I believe that Republicans are entirely without fault.

It is that way in most issues as far as I can tell.

Now, please don't ask me where I find fault with the Republicans in this case, because that is a big issue and quite frankly I'm not sure I can lay my fingers on a good answer to it. Although, I have little doubt that some blame can be placed with the Republicans in regards to the issue.

Immie

Are you also aware that the Republicans tried to regulate Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae in 2003,2005,2006? But they did not have enough power to stop any Democratic fillabuster.

Is this not similar to Obama's claims that he was going to make the legislative process transparent?

All talk not a damned bit of action.

lie lie lie lie lie like a rug...

the republicans NEVER EVEN BROUGHT THE BILL TO THE FLOOR, for a vote....

NEVER, nada, nothing from the republicans that the senators or congress could even vote on....it was held back from debate by republican leadership...

plus freddie mac LOBBIED THE REPUBLICANS in congress to PREVENT the bill from coming to the floor for debate.

GOP LOBBY TIED TO KILLING OVERHAUL BILL - NYPOST.com

Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million in a bid to kill legislation three years ago that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae.

Freddie - which along with Fannie this year has required a taxpayer-back rescue plan to avoid collapse - hired the Washington consulting firm DCI to target a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. In a yearlong effort, the firm lobbied 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by the Associated Press. The bill died January 2007.

Read more: GOP LOBBY TIED TO KILLING OVERHAUL BILL - NYPOST.com
[/repubs were just giving a ''song and a dance'' to look good...they too did NOT want to regulate fannie and freddie.

Noted and thanks for that info Care.

Immie

 

[maineman]

No I didn't change the subject but the subject was brought up and I addressed it.

and subsequently ran away from it when your lies were exposed.

I lied? show the lie.

you suggested that a majority of democrats in congress supported the Iraq war. that will ALWAYS be a lie. I laid it out for you and you ran away from it.... go back and follow the thread if you need to.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Apparently it was a good thing, since Bush expanded the CRA concept by promoting no money down loans, with fewer qualifications for those loans.

Did bush do that or are you twisting tha fact? Now if he did do this why would he try regulate Fredy mac and Fanny Mae in 2003?

There used to be a White House link to Bush's announcement, but it's been scrubbed from WhiteHouse.gov because he doesn't rent that house anymore. But you can maybe find something imbedded here, a FoxNews article on the subject (which may be more to your liking). As for F&F and its relationship to Bush's homeownership program, he wanted to see more conventional loans made by private mortgage companies. Well, he got that wish all right. Where are they now?

FOXNews.com - Bush Ties Policy to Record Home Ownership - You Decide 2004

What is it about the year 2003 when Bush said Freddy and Fanny had to be regulated rhat you do not understand?
Bush Administration Tried to Reform Freddie and Fannie Five Years Ago
CNSNews.com - Bush Administration Tried to Reform Freddie and Fannie Five Years Ago

And the filty New York Times.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 10— The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - The New York Times

 

[bigrebnc1775]

and subsequently ran away from it when your lies were exposed.

I lied? show the lie.

you suggested that a majority of democrats in congress supported the Iraq war. that will ALWAYS be a lie. I laid it out for you and you ran away from it.... go back and follow the thread if you need to.

No it was not a lie and you know it I was trying to be civbil to you but you had to lie when you said I lied.

Here is what I posted
On Oct. 10 and 11, 2002, the U.S. Senate debated and authorized President Bush's request to wage war on Iraq. Joe Biden voted with the 77-23 majority, which included 48 Republicans and 29 Democrats.
Sen. Joe Biden on Going to War Against Iraq - Joe Biden in His Own Words on War With Iraq

United States House of Representatives
Ayes 297
Nay's 133
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

 

[Care4all]

blaming CRA is FAULTY btw....

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70006-cra-not-to-blame-for-housing-debacle.html

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Oh sorry, I have noticed it.

I simply don't agree that it should be entirely pushed off on Republicans nor do I believe that Republicans are entirely without fault.

It is that way in most issues as far as I can tell.

Now, please don't ask me where I find fault with the Republicans in this case, because that is a big issue and quite frankly I'm not sure I can lay my fingers on a good answer to it. Although, I have little doubt that some blame can be placed with the Republicans in regards to the issue.

Immie

Are you also aware that the Republicans tried to regulate Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae in 2003,2005,2006? But they did not have enough power to stop any Democratic fillabuster.

Is this not similar to Obama's claims that he was going to make the legislative process transparent?

All talk not a damned bit of action.

lie lie lie lie lie like a rug...

the republicans NEVER EVEN BROUGHT THE BILL TO THE FLOOR, for a vote....

NEVER, nada, nothing from the republicans that the senators or congress could even vote on....it was held back from debate by republican leadership...

plus freddie mac LOBBIED THE REPUBLICANS in congress to PREVENT the bill from coming to the floor for debate.

GOP LOBBY TIED TO KILLING OVERHAUL BILL - NYPOST.com

Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million in a bid to kill legislation three years ago that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae.

Freddie - which along with Fannie this year has required a taxpayer-back rescue plan to avoid collapse - hired the Washington consulting firm DCI to target a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. In a yearlong effort, the firm lobbied 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by the Associated Press. The bill died January 2007.

Read more: GOP LOBBY TIED TO KILLING OVERHAUL BILL - NYPOST.com
[/repubs were just giving a ''song and a dance'' to look good...they too did NOT want to regulate fannie and freddie.

Noted and thanks for that info Care.

Immie

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - The New York Times

They never brought to the floor beczause the democrats would have fillabustered they said they would do it. The Republicans did not have enough power to stop it. and with the war going they felt the need to put their engery's to better use.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

blaming CRA is FAULTY btw....

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/70006-cra-not-to-blame-for-housing-debacle.html

Nothing faulty about it. Its the truth.

 

[Immanuel]

Are you also aware that the Republicans tried to regulate Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae in 2003,2005,2006? But they did not have enough power to stop any Democratic fillabuster.

Is this not similar to Obama's claims that he was going to make the legislative process transparent?

All talk not a damned bit of action.

lie lie lie lie lie like a rug...

the republicans NEVER EVEN BROUGHT THE BILL TO THE FLOOR, for a vote....

NEVER, nada, nothing from the republicans that the senators or congress could even vote on....it was held back from debate by republican leadership...

plus freddie mac LOBBIED THE REPUBLICANS in congress to PREVENT the bill from coming to the floor for debate.

GOP LOBBY TIED TO KILLING OVERHAUL BILL - NYPOST.com

Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million in a bid to kill legislation three years ago that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae.

Freddie - which along with Fannie this year has required a taxpayer-back rescue plan to avoid collapse - hired the Washington consulting firm DCI to target a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. In a yearlong effort, the firm lobbied 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by the Associated Press. The bill died January 2007.

Read more: GOP LOBBY TIED TO KILLING OVERHAUL BILL - NYPOST.com
[/repubs were just giving a ''song and a dance'' to look good...they too did NOT want to regulate fannie and freddie.

Noted and thanks for that info Care.

Immie

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - The New York Times

They never brought to the floor beczause the democrats would have fillabustered they said they would do it. The Republicans did not have enough power to stop it. and with the war going they felt the need to put their engery's to better use.

My reply to that?

Everyone has an excuse.

Bush proposed a much needed overhaul of the Social Security System as well and we got nothing and will get nothing.

A proposal is about as valuable as well, was it you that mentioned horseshit in this thread earlier? A proposal is not quite as valuable as horseshit when everything is said and done.

Immie

 

[maineman]

I lied? show the lie.

you suggested that a majority of democrats in congress supported the Iraq war. that will ALWAYS be a lie. I laid it out for you and you ran away from it.... go back and follow the thread if you need to.

No it was not a lie and you know it I was trying to be civbil to you but you had to lie when you said I lied.

Here is what I posted
On Oct. 10 and 11, 2002, the U.S. Senate debated and authorized President Bush's request to wage war on Iraq. Joe Biden voted with the 77-23 majority, which included 48 Republicans and 29 Democrats.
Sen. Joe Biden on Going to War Against Iraq - Joe Biden in His Own Words on War With Iraq

United States House of Representatives
Ayes 297
Nay's 133
Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

so... when I said that a majority of congressional democrats voted against it, and you called me out on that, you were wrong. I have done the math for years now and have no desire to go back and get links again just to prove what I KNOW to be the truth. Count up the democrats in congress when those votes were cast. As I said before, a MAJORITY of them voted AGAINST the use of force.

thanks for playing.

 

[JWBooth]

What is it about the year 2003 when Bush said Freddy and Fanny had to be regulated rhat you do not understand?
Bush Administration Tried to Reform Freddie and Fannie Five Years Ago
CNSNews.com - Bush Administration Tried to Reform Freddie and Fannie Five Years Ago

And the filty New York Times.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 10— The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.
New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae - The New York Times

Shrubbie said a lot of shit that he didn't much try to get introduced, or didn't expend any real political capital on. Right to life issues, Fannie and Freddie, restraining spending...
What he did spend capital on - wars without end and Medicare D - stuff that meant spending buttloads of money on - he went balls to the wall after.

 

[JWBooth]

Near every democrat in the House of representatives voted AGAINST IT....

This WAS THE REPUBLICAN medicare pill bill, NOT the democratic.

May I remind you, the House kept a 15 minute vote that came to the NO VOTES winning, opened for 3 HOURS so that they could twist republican congressmen that voted against it to change their vote to yes.... it took them 3 hours to bribe and twist arms until they finally had enough votes to pass the bill....

and that republican congressman Billy Tauzine who was in charge of the bill let PHARMA write it and also LOCKED Democrats out of the negotiations...AND Tauzine quit after he got his bill passed and went to WORK FOR PHARMA with a multi million dollar salary....for him getting PHARMA'S bill passed with no ability to negotiate with foreign countries and no ability to negotiate for bulk discounts....

I had supported GOPers all my adult life until they pulled the shenanigans that were used to pass this act.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

you suggested that a majority of democrats in congress supported the Iraq war. that will ALWAYS be a lie. I laid it out for you and you ran away from it.... go back and follow the thread if you need to.

No it was not a lie and you know it I was trying to be civbil to you but you had to lie when you said I lied.

Here is what I posted
On Oct. 10 and 11, 2002, the U.S. Senate debated and authorized President Bush's request to wage war on Iraq. Joe Biden voted with the 77-23 majority, which included 48 Republicans and 29 Democrats.
Sen. Joe Biden on Going to War Against Iraq - Joe Biden in His Own Words on War With Iraq

United States House of Representatives
Ayes 297
Nay's 133
Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

so... when I said that a majority of congressional democrats voted against it, and you called me out on that, you were wrong. I have done the math for years now and have no desire to go back and get links again just to prove what I KNOW to be the truth. Count up the democrats in congress when those votes were cast. As I said before, a MAJORITY of them voted AGAINST the use of force.

thanks for playing.

Can you count?
435 members in the house of Representatives
297 voted for the war approval
100 members in the U.S Senate
77voted for the war approval

That is a majority

Don't mention it I was glad I could help you understand what a majority is.

 

[Immanuel]

No it was not a lie and you know it I was trying to be civbil to you but you had to lie when you said I lied.

Here is what I posted
On Oct. 10 and 11, 2002, the U.S. Senate debated and authorized President Bush's request to wage war on Iraq. Joe Biden voted with the 77-23 majority, which included 48 Republicans and 29 Democrats.
Sen. Joe Biden on Going to War Against Iraq - Joe Biden in His Own Words on War With Iraq

United States House of Representatives
Ayes 297
Nay's 133
Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

so... when I said that a majority of congressional democrats voted against it, and you called me out on that, you were wrong. I have done the math for years now and have no desire to go back and get links again just to prove what I KNOW to be the truth. Count up the democrats in congress when those votes were cast. As I said before, a MAJORITY of them voted AGAINST the use of force.

thanks for playing.

Can you count?
435 members in the house of Representatives
297 voted for the war approval
100 members in the U.S Senate
77voted for the war approval

That is a majority

Don't mention it I was glad I could help you understand what a majority is.

You seem to be missing something. The number you gave are Congress in full, both Democrat and Republican.

It seems to me that what your numbers need to show is the count of Democrats in Congress and how many of them voted for the Approval of the war.

Just my humble opinion in reading this discussion.

Immie

 

[DiamondDave]

I have been a member of this board for less then a day and I have read a few misinformed replies about blaming the republicans for all that is wrong with this country. I am here to set the record straight.


Since 1945 the democrats have controlled the house all but 7 times

From 1949 to 1993 the Democrats have controlled the house.
= 44years

2006 until the present the Democrats have controlled the house.
=4 years

Democrats controlled the senate
1945,
1949,
1951
1955
1957
1959
1961
1963
1965
1967
1969
1971
1973
1975
1977
1979
=32years

Also I will add that the democrats control both house and senate from
1955-1979
= 24 years

and from1987-1993
= 6 years
And in 2001 the democrats controlled the senate
= 2years


Years Democrats controlled White House and Congress[/B]
1945
1949
1951
1961
1963
1965
1967
1977
1979
1993
1995
1997
1999
2009
= 28 years


The Repoublicans controlled the Senate
1947
1953
1981
1983
1985
1995
1997
1999
2003
2005
= 20years

the Republicans had controlled the house
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
=12years

Years Republican controlled the White House and Congress
2003
2005
=4years
And here is a look at each year
Party In Power - Congress and Presidency - A Visual Guide To The Balance of Power In Congress, 1945-2008

*you're* going to set the record straight?

who are you?

baby bush took over... there was a surplus.

baby bush left, the deficit was doubled because he ran a 200 bililion dollar war of choice on our credit card while cutting taxes for rich people.... only leader in recorded history to cut taxes during war time.

you were saying?

jill... you have been told before to stop posting about some debunked surplus... THERE WAS NO FUCKING SURPLUS and you have been shown this over and over and over again

 

[bigrebnc1775]

so... when I said that a majority of congressional democrats voted against it, and you called me out on that, you were wrong. I have done the math for years now and have no desire to go back and get links again just to prove what I KNOW to be the truth. Count up the democrats in congress when those votes were cast. As I said before, a MAJORITY of them voted AGAINST the use of force.

thanks for playing.

Can you count?
435 members in the house of Representatives
297 voted for the war approval
100 members in the U.S Senate
77voted for the war approval

That is a majority

Don't mention it I was glad I could help you understand what a majority is.

You seem to be missing something. The number you gave are Congress in full, both Democrat and Republican.

It seems to me that what your numbers need to show is the count of Democrats in Congress and how many of them voted for the Approval of the war.

Just my humble opinion in reading this discussion.

Immie

out of 535 members in Congress 375 members voted for approval of the war.

OH I SEE NOW

Democratic 82 126 one did not vote
126 (61%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.
21 (42%) of 50 Democratic Senators voted against the resolution
and thats not a large majority of Democrats. A majority but not a large majority

 

[rikules]

What exactly is the point of this?

he is another conservative idiot who wants to ignore the fact that repubs have controlled congress for most of the past 16 years and had the presidency for most of the 2000's

if the country is in a mess then there is plenty of blame for BOTH sides

only an irresponsible nit wit would REFUSE to accept culpability for his side while placing ALL BLAME on the other

i think morons like this believe that if they can convince enough OTHER deranged morons just how EVIL the other side is them maybe they can round them up and deport them

or execute them

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Can you count?
435 members in the house of Representatives
297 voted for the war approval
100 members in the U.S Senate
77voted for the war approval

That is a majority

Don't mention it I was glad I could help you understand what a majority is.

You seem to be missing something. The number you gave are Congress in full, both Democrat and Republican.

It seems to me that what your numbers need to show is the count of Democrats in Congress and how many of them voted for the Approval of the war.

Just my humble opinion in reading this discussion.

Immie

out of 535 members in Congress 375 members voted for approval of the war.

OH I SEE NOW

Democratic 82 126 one did not vote
126 (61%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.
21 (42%) of 50 Democratic Senators voted against the resolution
and thats not a large majority of Democrats. A majority but not a large majority

Then again look at the democrats who did vote for the war Biden being one Clinton being another Kennedy being another.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

What exactly is the point of this?

he is another conservative idiot who wants to ignore the fact that repubs have controlled congress for most of the past 16 years and had the presidency for most of the 2000's

if the country is in a mess then there is plenty of blame for BOTH sides

only an irresponsible nit wit would REFUSE to accept culpability for his side while placing ALL BLAME on the other

i think morons like this believe that if they can convince enough OTHER deranged morons just how EVIL the other side is them maybe they can round them up and deport them

or execute them

I want you to show the post where I said that the Republicans are blamless?

And this comment is an out right lie
The Republicans have controled the house an Senate for 10 years
From 1995-1999 election cycle =6 years
and from 2003 -2005 election cycle =4 years
And it wasn't the Republicans that voted for all the freebes and handouts but it was the democrats who voted for the bailout of the CEO's

 

[Immanuel]

Can you count?
435 members in the house of Representatives
297 voted for the war approval
100 members in the U.S Senate
77voted for the war approval

That is a majority

Don't mention it I was glad I could help you understand what a majority is.

You seem to be missing something. The number you gave are Congress in full, both Democrat and Republican.

It seems to me that what your numbers need to show is the count of Democrats in Congress and how many of them voted for the Approval of the war.

Just my humble opinion in reading this discussion.

Immie

out of 535 members in Congress 375 members voted for approval of the war.

OH I SEE NOW

Democratic 82 126 one did not vote
126 (61%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted against the resolution.
21 (42%) of 50 Democratic Senators voted against the resolution
and thats not a large majority of Democrats. A majority but not a large majority

Okay two things about this because I have not been digging into the discussion between you and Maineman.

One: do you have a link to back up these numbers? Just curious where you got them from.

Two: I thought you were arguing that the majority supported the resolution... is that not correct? Your numbers say:

61% in the House voted against the resolution and 42% of Senate Democrats voted against the resolution. So you would be correct for the Senate but wrong for the house and the combined total would be:

111 of 258 (43%) Democrats who supported the resolution. That is not a majority that supported the resolution.

Per your info:

Total Democrats in Congress 208 + 50 = 258

Reps that supported the resolution 208 - 126 = 82

Senators that supported the resolution 50 - 21 = 29

111 of 258 Democrats supported the resolution. That would only be 43%

Please check my facts on that and make sure I am reading both of your arguments correctly.

Immie