PA Putting Election on Hold Is a Good Taste of Government Controlled Healthcare

[Weatherman2020]

They refuse to even start counted again until 10AM. They just stop providing an expected service to the public simply because they want to for no good reason.

Welcome to government run Healthcare ahead of us.

I just heard on Fox that the count in PA might take till Monday. The guy talking thought what the Govt of PA was doing isn't legal. They will count every vote.

Interesting........I'm watching NBC. While Chuck Todd has let his bias show now and then they have seemed to be pretty cautious and fair overall.

My wife is in the back room watching Fox. She tells me that Fox seems very pessimistic for Trump.

Well Trump leads Biden by 700,000 votes in PA so I guess we shall see.

I see Trump winning PA, North Carolina and Georgia. He still needs something else.

P.S. It's below 600,000 now.

I think he has a good shot at Nevada. Biden is talking about a big shut down if he's elected and Las Vegas is about to have everything closed for good. You can bet they won't be voting for Biden. Those casino's pay all the taxes for everyone in Nevada.

Biden is talking about shutting down the virus, not the economy. Every other nation in the world which has seen minimal deaths and economic impact, has shut down the virus, and successfully re-opened the economy.

Shutting down a virus.
But not the economy.

You’re a special kind of stupid sheeple.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

I agree they did not have to. They did though. Where would we be if there was no Federal Reserve and our ability to go into an incredible amount of debt?

Where would we be if we had done the right thing and allowed a large number of banks and businesses to fail?

Where would we be if we weren't handing corporate farms billions of dollars?

Where would we be indeed....

The governments job is the defense of the people. Thats it. I didn't need oil companies, gm, solyndra, and all the other scam bailouts to occur to be protected.
No company should ever be considered too large to fail. Can't sell seats on your airplane sell the fucking airplane and cut your payroll

What you think is irrelevant to what we do. You believe we should practice capitalism. Great. I won't argue that. I'm arguing what we actually do.

What i think IS RELEVANT. Thats why our election is still up in the air. Because of our voices.
But your defeatist attitude is noted.

I'm not discussing what people want. I am discussing what we actually do. We do not practice capitalism. You want us to and that is fine. We aren't going to.

Capitalism includes bailing out financial institutions occasionally, ignoramus.

Capitalism most definitely does NOT bail out privately owned companies EVER! The essence of capitalism is to "let the market decide". Mitt Romeny and the Republican Party had no problem bailing out Wall Street, but they continue to have HUGE problems bailing out Main Street. Romney and the rest of the vulture capitalists could not wait to buy up the GM assets, break them apart and sell them off - just like they did in de-industrializing the rest of the Rust Belt.

When W bailed out Wall Street, that money didn't save jobs. The big banks used it to pay bonuses to the asshats who sold the derrivatives and subprime mortgages that collapsed the economy in the first place. And none of that money was ever repaid.

Yet Republicans, who glad handed the money out to Wall Steet, said "No fucking way" to the Auto Industriy - 80% of which of the money was returned to the Treasury, and the jobs were saved at a time when they were most needed. Of course the Republican Party was pissed about this because Romney and the rest of the super wealthy stood to profit handsomely from those bankrtupcies.

In every Republican economic crash, including Trump's Covid Crash, the rich have gotten a whole lot richer, and the poor and the middle class has gotten a whole lot poorer.

Don't know about your stupid ass but I'm doing well as is everyone I know.

No one gave wall street money. Any money companies keep is because they use the loop holes the Govt. has provided.

You sure don't know facts very well.

Quantitative Easing was indeed injecting billions (probably Trillion) into Wall Street,

Educate yourself.

Barack Obama says banks paid back all the federal bailout money

On the campaign trail, President Barack Obama has spoken much more of the bailouts for auto companies than their bank br

www.politifact.com

 

[kaz]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

- Democrats told bank CEOs they will increase subprime lending or they will be dragged over the coals in Congress

- The banks made the loans. They were funded with endless free money from the Fed.

- W came in and correctly said wow, that's a bad idea. Then in typical Republican fashion he expanded the program.

- When the economy burped, sub primes started failing in big numbers and dragged down the rest of the economy with it. That was the Great Recession.

Both parties caused it. Democrats did start it, but Republicans took it over mid stream and ensured disaster. The Federal Reserve is the greatest criminal cartel in the history of mankind. No one has remotely stolen more money than the Fed.

I opposed the policies that caused the need for bailouts as well as the bailouts themselves. So of course it's my fault

 

[kaz]

They refuse to even start counted again until 10AM. They just stop providing an expected service to the public simply because they want to for no good reason.

Welcome to government run Healthcare ahead of us.

I just heard on Fox that the count in PA might take till Monday. The guy talking thought what the Govt of PA was doing isn't legal. They will count every vote.

Interesting........I'm watching NBC. While Chuck Todd has let his bias show now and then they have seemed to be pretty cautious and fair overall.

My wife is in the back room watching Fox. She tells me that Fox seems very pessimistic for Trump.

Well Trump leads Biden by 700,000 votes in PA so I guess we shall see.

I see Trump winning PA, North Carolina and Georgia. He still needs something else.

P.S. It's below 600,000 now.

I think he has a good shot at Nevada. Biden is talking about a big shut down if he's elected and Las Vegas is about to have everything closed for good. You can bet they won't be voting for Biden. Those casino's pay all the taxes for everyone in Nevada.

Biden is talking about shutting down the virus, not the economy. Every other nation in the world which has seen minimal deaths and economic impact, has shut down the virus, and successfully re-opened the economy.

Shutting down a virus.
But not the economy.

You’re a special kind of stupid sheeple.

The economy is only an idea

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

I agree they did not have to. They did though. Where would we be if there was no Federal Reserve and our ability to go into an incredible amount of debt?

Where would we be if we had done the right thing and allowed a large number of banks and businesses to fail?

Where would we be if we weren't handing corporate farms billions of dollars?

Where would we be indeed....

The governments job is the defense of the people. Thats it. I didn't need oil companies, gm, solyndra, and all the other scam bailouts to occur to be protected.
No company should ever be considered too large to fail. Can't sell seats on your airplane sell the fucking airplane and cut your payroll

What you think is irrelevant to what we do. You believe we should practice capitalism. Great. I won't argue that. I'm arguing what we actually do.

What i think IS RELEVANT. Thats why our election is still up in the air. Because of our voices.
But your defeatist attitude is noted.

I'm not discussing what people want. I am discussing what we actually do. We do not practice capitalism. You want us to and that is fine. We aren't going to.

Capitalism includes bailing out financial institutions occasionally, ignoramus.

Capitalism most definitely does NOT bail out privately owned companies EVER! The essence of capitalism is to "let the market decide". Mitt Romeny and the Republican Party had no problem bailing out Wall Street, but they continue to have HUGE problems bailing out Main Street. Romney and the rest of the vulture capitalists could not wait to buy up the GM assets, break them apart and sell them off - just like they did in de-industrializing the rest of the Rust Belt.

When W bailed out Wall Street, that money didn't save jobs. The big banks used it to pay bonuses to the asshats who sold the derrivatives and subprime mortgages that collapsed the economy in the first place. And none of that money was ever repaid.

Yet Republicans, who glad handed the money out to Wall Steet, said "No fucking way" to the Auto Industriy - 80% of which of the money was returned to the Treasury, and the jobs were saved at a time when they were most needed. Of course the Republican Party was pissed about this because Romney and the rest of the super wealthy stood to profit handsomely from those bankrtupcies.

In every Republican economic crash, including Trump's Covid Crash, the rich have gotten a whole lot richer, and the poor and the middle class has gotten a whole lot poorer.

Don't know about your stupid ass but I'm doing well as is everyone I know.

No one gave wall street money. Any money companies keep is because they use the loop holes the Govt. has provided.

You sure don't know facts very well.

Quantitative Easing was indeed injecting billions (probably Trillion) into Wall Street,

Educate yourself.

Barack Obama says banks paid back all the federal bailout money

On the campaign trail, President Barack Obama has spoken much more of the bailouts for auto companies than their bank br

www.politifact.com

Obama lied. Your link also has absolutely nothing to do with Q.E. You educate yourself.

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

 

[kaz]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

 

[kaz]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

 

[Dragonlady]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

I agree they did not have to. They did though. Where would we be if there was no Federal Reserve and our ability to go into an incredible amount of debt?

Where would we be if we had done the right thing and allowed a large number of banks and businesses to fail?

Where would we be if we weren't handing corporate farms billions of dollars?

Where would we be indeed....

The governments job is the defense of the people. Thats it. I didn't need oil companies, gm, solyndra, and all the other scam bailouts to occur to be protected.
No company should ever be considered too large to fail. Can't sell seats on your airplane sell the fucking airplane and cut your payroll

What you think is irrelevant to what we do. You believe we should practice capitalism. Great. I won't argue that. I'm arguing what we actually do.

What i think IS RELEVANT. Thats why our election is still up in the air. Because of our voices.
But your defeatist attitude is noted.

I'm not discussing what people want. I am discussing what we actually do. We do not practice capitalism. You want us to and that is fine. We aren't going to.

Capitalism includes bailing out financial institutions occasionally, ignoramus.

Capitalism most definitely does NOT bail out privately owned companies EVER! The essence of capitalism is to "let the market decide". Mitt Romeny and the Republican Party had no problem bailing out Wall Street, but they continue to have HUGE problems bailing out Main Street. Romney and the rest of the vulture capitalists could not wait to buy up the GM assets, break them apart and sell them off - just like they did in de-industrializing the rest of the Rust Belt.

When W bailed out Wall Street, that money didn't save jobs. The big banks used it to pay bonuses to the asshats who sold the derrivatives and subprime mortgages that collapsed the economy in the first place. And none of that money was ever repaid.

Yet Republicans, who glad handed the money out to Wall Steet, said "No fucking way" to the Auto Industriy - 80% of which of the money was returned to the Treasury, and the jobs were saved at a time when they were most needed. Of course the Republican Party was pissed about this because Romney and the rest of the super wealthy stood to profit handsomely from those bankrtupcies.

In every Republican economic crash, including Trump's Covid Crash, the rich have gotten a whole lot richer, and the poor and the middle class has gotten a whole lot poorer.

Don't know about your stupid ass but I'm doing well as is everyone I know.

No one gave wall street money. Any money companies keep is because they use the loop holes the Govt. has provided.

You sure don't know facts very well.

I doing quite fine, but then I'm not suffering from memory loss like you are either:

The Big Bank Bailout

Most people think that the big bank bailout was the $700 billion that the treasury department used to save the banks during the financial crash in September of 2008. But this is a long way from the truth because the bailout is still ongoing. The Special Inspector General for TARP [...]

www.forbes.com

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

 

[kaz]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

Which is why I do not care who wins. Overall they are all the same.

 

[Claudette]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

I agree they did not have to. They did though. Where would we be if there was no Federal Reserve and our ability to go into an incredible amount of debt?

Where would we be if we had done the right thing and allowed a large number of banks and businesses to fail?

Where would we be if we weren't handing corporate farms billions of dollars?

Where would we be indeed....

The governments job is the defense of the people. Thats it. I didn't need oil companies, gm, solyndra, and all the other scam bailouts to occur to be protected.
No company should ever be considered too large to fail. Can't sell seats on your airplane sell the fucking airplane and cut your payroll

What you think is irrelevant to what we do. You believe we should practice capitalism. Great. I won't argue that. I'm arguing what we actually do.

What i think IS RELEVANT. Thats why our election is still up in the air. Because of our voices.
But your defeatist attitude is noted.

I'm not discussing what people want. I am discussing what we actually do. We do not practice capitalism. You want us to and that is fine. We aren't going to.

Capitalism includes bailing out financial institutions occasionally, ignoramus.

Capitalism most definitely does NOT bail out privately owned companies EVER! The essence of capitalism is to "let the market decide". Mitt Romeny and the Republican Party had no problem bailing out Wall Street, but they continue to have HUGE problems bailing out Main Street. Romney and the rest of the vulture capitalists could not wait to buy up the GM assets, break them apart and sell them off - just like they did in de-industrializing the rest of the Rust Belt.

When W bailed out Wall Street, that money didn't save jobs. The big banks used it to pay bonuses to the asshats who sold the derrivatives and subprime mortgages that collapsed the economy in the first place. And none of that money was ever repaid.

Yet Republicans, who glad handed the money out to Wall Steet, said "No fucking way" to the Auto Industriy - 80% of which of the money was returned to the Treasury, and the jobs were saved at a time when they were most needed. Of course the Republican Party was pissed about this because Romney and the rest of the super wealthy stood to profit handsomely from those bankrtupcies.

In every Republican economic crash, including Trump's Covid Crash, the rich have gotten a whole lot richer, and the poor and the middle class has gotten a whole lot poorer.

Don't know about your stupid ass but I'm doing well as is everyone I know.

No one gave wall street money. Any money companies keep is because they use the loop holes the Govt. has provided.

You sure don't know facts very well.

I doing quite fine, but then I'm not suffering from memory loss like you are either:

The Big Bank Bailout

Most people think that the big bank bailout was the $700 billion that the treasury department used to save the banks during the financial crash in September of 2008. But this is a long way from the truth because the bailout is still ongoing. The Special Inspector General for TARP [...]

www.forbes.com

I don't have memory loss. But you sure do.

That bank bail out was Barry's doing. Many banks were forced to take the money even though they didn't need it. They weren't in financial difficulty at all. They were told the Fed would audit the shit out of them if they didn't take it. So they took it to avoid the hassle. You can thank Obama for that one dumbass.

And that's the only bank "bail out" I've ever heard about outside of the savings an loan debacle back in the 80's.

 

[kaz]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

Which is why I do not care who wins. Overall they are all the same.

And yet I wrote a detailed chronology and you read the first post and knee jerk stopped reading and defended Democrats even though had you kept reading you'd have realized I actually did blame both parties

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

Which is why I do not care who wins. Overall they are all the same.

And yet I wrote a detailed chronology and you read the first post and knee jerk stopped reading and defended Democrats even though had you kept reading you'd have realized I actually did blame both parties

That's what I do when you start off with a fallicy.

 

[kaz]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

Which is why I do not care who wins. Overall they are all the same.

And yet I wrote a detailed chronology and you read the first post and knee jerk stopped reading and defended Democrats even though had you kept reading you'd have realized I actually did blame both parties

That's what I do when you start off with a fallicy.

First of all, you don't know what "fallacy" means. That doesn't even make sense.

And you're lying. Clinton clearly did press banks to lower lending standards. You're a hack liar and a Democrat partisan hack. Sorry for repeating myself.

How do you possibly not know that? You're supposed to sip the kool-aid, not stick your head in the punch bowl

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

Which is why I do not care who wins. Overall they are all the same.

And yet I wrote a detailed chronology and you read the first post and knee jerk stopped reading and defended Democrats even though had you kept reading you'd have realized I actually did blame both parties

That's what I do when you start off with a fallicy.

First of all, you don't know what "fallacy" means. That doesn't even make sense.

And you're lying. Clinton clearly did press banks to lower lending standards. You're a hack liar and a Democrat partisan hack. Sorry for repeating myself.

How do you possibly not know that? You're supposed to sip the kool-aid, not stick your head in the punch bowl

I never said he (along with many others) didn't. I said he didn't say what you said he said.

Be honest.

 

[kaz]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

Which is why I do not care who wins. Overall they are all the same.

And yet I wrote a detailed chronology and you read the first post and knee jerk stopped reading and defended Democrats even though had you kept reading you'd have realized I actually did blame both parties

That's what I do when you start off with a fallicy.

First of all, you don't know what "fallacy" means. That doesn't even make sense.

And you're lying. Clinton clearly did press banks to lower lending standards. You're a hack liar and a Democrat partisan hack. Sorry for repeating myself.

How do you possibly not know that? You're supposed to sip the kool-aid, not stick your head in the punch bowl

I never said he (along with many others) didn't. I said he didn't say what you said he said.

Be honest.

OK, you're just engaging in endless double talk. You're a waste of time, you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I said both partied had the same basic policies. You're arguing you blame both parties while you're arguing Democrats didn't do anything. You don't know what the hell you're talking about.

And apparently you're triggered that I said when both Clinton and W did it, I said Clinton started the policy.

HELLO, CLINTON WAS BEFORE W. I mean think about it you stupid cow. How could they have had the same policy at the same time?

 

[pknopp]

The trillions that taxpayers have had to pay to bail out the banks/wall street is a sign of the failure of capitalism.

Seems fair.

Taxpayers didn't "have to" bail out anyone in order for capitalism to function properly. That was the decision of crooked politicians.

And politicians caused the banks to need to be bailed out. They forced them to make bad loans and funded them. Then they had to bail out their own mess. No capitalism was involved here at all

It was a quid pro quo. Banks made the loans in exchange for relaxing regulations.

Here's the actual history.

- Clinton said home ownership is the American dream and everyone should be able to buy a home whether they are responsible and can afford it or not

That isn't what he said.

Of course it is. Obviously you just don't know what you're talking about. I also agreed with you the Fed fueled the disaster. But you just can't criticize Democrats. I criticized both parties, they were both guilty

I didn't defend what Clinton did. I'm just honest in my criticism.

Clinton clearly started the pressure for banks to reduce their lending standards. Then the Democrats pressured the banks to make the loans and funded them through the Fed with free money.

That's not disputable other than dishonestly

Bush also argued the same thing.

I already addressed W and his culpability. You were so busy trying to absolve Democrats that you didn't read the whole post where I blamed both parties. You just read the first post where Democrats started it, got triggered and stopped reading.

Of course Democrats started it since it started, hello, under the CLINTON administration. Then I already said W continued the policy. Sheesh

Which is why I do not care who wins. Overall they are all the same.

And yet I wrote a detailed chronology and you read the first post and knee jerk stopped reading and defended Democrats even though had you kept reading you'd have realized I actually did blame both parties

That's what I do when you start off with a fallicy.

First of all, you don't know what "fallacy" means. That doesn't even make sense.

And you're lying. Clinton clearly did press banks to lower lending standards. You're a hack liar and a Democrat partisan hack. Sorry for repeating myself.

How do you possibly not know that? You're supposed to sip the kool-aid, not stick your head in the punch bowl

I never said he (along with many others) didn't. I said he didn't say what you said he said.

Be honest.

OK, you're just engaging in endless double talk. You're a waste of time, you clearly don't know what the hell you're talking about.

I said both partied had the same basic policies. You're arguing you blame both parties while you're arguing Democrats didn't do anything.

I never said any such thing. You are simply trying to cover for making up a statement that Clinton never said. You most likely think it's a minor thing. I do not. Be honest.