"You didn't get there on your own"

[The T]

oh T, you are copying everything I write?

ahh, you make me feel so proud...surely you understand that when everything is said and done, you will be the one in the corner being laughed at?

for real, you do know that? oh well

what reason would you have to copy what i write...weird

s0n? Keep going. Please troll. This is being fowarded...

forwarded

dear god man, now you are simply making a fool of yourself in front of everyone

Keep going. Last post I'll make toward you s0n.

 

[ConzHateUSA]

s0n? Keep going. Please troll. This is being fowarded...

forwarded

dear god man, now you are simply making a fool of yourself in front of everyone

Keep going. Last post I'll make toward you s0n.

but you said you were forwarding them, are you copy and pasting and forwarding them to the head office at tea party central?

moran

 

[Listening]

You really shouldnt respond to anything i say ever, it really is embarrassing for you to do so.

I am afraid it you who should be embarrassed for any of your posts.

Stay down for gods sake, here you didnt have to respond, yet you did, proving once again that you dont really understand this game

What game, moron ?

You spam the board with irrelevant garbage and it gets pointed out.

Aren't you the one who claims to wear a Rolodex and drive a BMW ?

Good grief.....reality has found the Twilight Zone.

 

[Listening]

.

Obama is taking an interesting and dangerous approach on the campaign trail, telling successful business owners that they "didn't get there on their own", that their success is predicated in part on the labor and efforts (and taxes) of others. This gives the GOP an opening to say, "see, he hates business owners, we told you so."

On the other hand, it opens up a national conversation that I've never seen before, building on Elizabeth Warren's comments as she runs for office.

This tactic is flying right into the teeth of the GOP's strength, that business and employers are the key to economic success. He's betting that the GOP, so controlled by absolutists right now, is going to look anti-ALL workers, not just union.

Pretty brave, and I think it's a good conversation to have.

Obama Mocks Rich: 'You Didn't Get There On Your Own'

.

Did anyone think a thread could fill close to 300 pages ?

Let's get back to basics.

Obama does not know what the hell he is talking about.

 

[Dr Grump]

The irony of course, is that Bill Clinton single-handedly created the mortgage bubble and sub-prime ponzi scheme, when he signed the Community Re-Investment Act and forced banks to make loans to people who didn't previously qualify.

It's what happens when communist/marxist/socialist government interferes with the free market.

Before Bill Clinton and that bill, a house was an asset that went up and up and up in price over the years. After Bill Clinton, the housing market collapsed. And then the left blames the "free market" for their oppresive regulations that eliminated the free market. The irony is so thick, you could cut it with a knife.

CRA originated under Jimmy Carter, Clinton expanded it and Witch Hunter Janet Reno took the unprecedented action of suing banks for failing to meet CRA goals.

That said, without securitized mortgage bundles, the thing still would not have collapsed. Mortgage securities began under Clinton, but exploded under Bush. 2003-5 saw the majority of new mortgage debt bundled into securities, right along with the toxic loans made under CRA.

Carter, Clinton, AND Bush all share responsibility for that mess.

You forgot Raygun...

 

[Dr Grump]

Does anyone notices how this liberal assholes chart stops at 2005?

Definitely don't want anyone to see that the debt went from $9 trillion under GWB to $16 trillion. Think about how astounding those numbers are. Obama added more to the debt in 3 years than GWB and Reagan combined did in 16 years!!!

Two things:
1) It stops at 2007 which makes me wonder if you can't read something as simple as that chart, what else do you get wrong.
2) Ok, so the debt went up to $16 trillion. But you forgot the 'why'. Doesn't suprise me. A partisan hack is a partisan hack...

 

[saveliberty]

Obama tried to create class warfare. Every socialist leader resorts to it at some point.

 

[Bfgrn]

Seems to me that the Obama apologists are getting a little frantic trying to raise up President Bush as the great Satan once again and focus attention on him rather than look at the record of their own hero. Most especially when at least one continues to spam the thread with the same tired charts and graphs over and over and over. Others want to point to the "evils" of free market, laissez faire economic principles by demonizing former Presidents or focus on evil corporations or Wall Street as the villains in the current economic maliase. A few support the President in the concept that everything is just hunky dory all things considered.

After all he has raised the deficit and increased spending less than any of his predecessors. Once you sort of ignore his first year in office that is. But it is true. If you spend and borrow and obligate the people about as much as is possible to do that and then continue at that level from that point on, you can claim you aren't raising spending or increasing the deficit much.

And none of that changes the fact that the President does not give the business owner or the working man credit for much of anything, and he continues to look to government as the solution for all things.

Obama's first year (2009) in office WAS Bush's budget. Is it that you don't understand the FACTS about federal budgets, or are you just dishonest Foxfyre?

TARP was Bush, not Obama. It was necessary, as much as all of us held our noses. If the banks and lending institutions had collapsed, every working American's 401k and retirement would have been wiped out with the banks collapse. Not to mention our economy would have collapsed with it.

The "evils" of free market, too much laissez-faire, evil corporations and Wall Street ARE the villains in the current economic malaise. It was the PRIVATE sector operating outside of government regulations that destroyed our economy, not the government.

The Stimulus bill was absolutely essential. It dramatically reversed the hemorrhaging of job loses (750,000 per month). If you believe McCain would have done nothing while America was hemorrhaging 750,000 jobs per month, you are not a person with an adult brain.

 

[saveliberty]

BS Bfgrn. I remember Obama was there with Obama at the signing of TARP, because Obama was going to inherit it. TARP had Obama's blessing from day one. None of this justifies Obama's acceleration of the deficit.

 

[Dr Grump]

BS Bfgrn. I remember Obama was there with Obama at the signing of TARP, because Obama was going to inherit it. TARP had Obama's blessing from day one. None of this justifies Obama's acceleration of the deficit.

Please explain point by point:
1) How expanded the deficit
2) Why he expanded it
3) What you would have done differently
4) Take your time...

 

[Bfgrn]

BS Bfgrn. I remember Obama was there with Obama at the signing of TARP, because Obama was going to inherit it. TARP had Obama's blessing from day one. None of this justifies Obama's acceleration of the deficit.

Yes, it had Obama's blessing. And I just said I agree with it. It was necessary, but no one liked it. Not Bush, Obama, me or anyone but the banks.

Bush began the bailouts of the auto industry. And he said he would do it again.

Bush Would “Do it Again” on Auto Bailouts

Former pres. tells dealers it prevented “21% unemployment.”

“I’d do it again,” proclaimed Bush, speaking to the annual convention of the National Automobile Dealers Association.

The bailout, which ultimately totaled $85 billion, was originally begun during the waning days of the Bush Administration. With a specific rescue effort rejected by Congress, the former Commander-in-Chief decided to tap into a separate, $700 billion fund Capitol Hill did approve for the bailout of Wall Street and the banking industry.

“Sometimes circumstances get in the way of philosophy,” said the ex-President, during his speech in Las Vegas, referring to his normal stand in favor of free trade. “If you make a bad decision, you ought to pay,” he said, referring to the collapse of both General Motors and Chrysler.

But Bush also noted that coming on top of the failure of Lehman Brothers, the meltdown of the banking industry and the collapse of the housing market, a painful shift in policy was needed.

“I didn’t want there to be 21% unemployment,” he stressed, echoing forecasts at the time that the loss of GM, Ford and the automotive lenders also covered by the bailout could lead to the loss of 1 million jobs.

The former President has kept a low-key profile since leaving office in January 2009 – though he did call the bailout “the only option” in his 2010 book, “Decision Points” — leaving his successor to field much of the criticism.

In that book, the 43rd President argued that, “The immediate bankruptcy of (Chrysler and GM) could cost more than a million jobs, decrease tax revenues by $150 billion and set back America’s Gross Domestic Product by hundreds of billions of dollars.”

Republican president candidate Mitt Romney is among those who have said they would have rejected a bailout.

more

 

[The T]

BS Bfgrn. I remember Obama was there with Obama at the signing of TARP, because Obama was going to inherit it. TARP had Obama's blessing from day one. None of this justifies Obama's acceleration of the deficit.

Yes, it had Obama's blessing. And I just said I agree with it. It was necessary, but no one liked it. Not Bush, Obama, me or anyone but the banks.

Bush began the bailouts of the auto industry. And he said he would do it again.

Bush Would “Do it Again” on Auto Bailouts

Former pres. tells dealers it prevented “21% unemployment.”

“I’d do it again,” proclaimed Bush, speaking to the annual convention of the National Automobile Dealers Association.

The bailout, which ultimately totaled $85 billion, was originally begun during the waning days of the Bush Administration. With a specific rescue effort rejected by Congress, the former Commander-in-Chief decided to tap into a separate, $700 billion fund Capitol Hill did approve for the bailout of Wall Street and the banking industry.

“Sometimes circumstances get in the way of philosophy,” said the ex-President, during his speech in Las Vegas, referring to his normal stand in favor of free trade. “If you make a bad decision, you ought to pay,” he said, referring to the collapse of both General Motors and Chrysler.

But Bush also noted that coming on top of the failure of Lehman Brothers, the meltdown of the banking industry and the collapse of the housing market, a painful shift in policy was needed.

“I didn’t want there to be 21% unemployment,” he stressed, echoing forecasts at the time that the loss of GM, Ford and the automotive lenders also covered by the bailout could lead to the loss of 1 million jobs.

The former President has kept a low-key profile since leaving office in January 2009 – though he did call the bailout “the only option” in his 2010 book, “Decision Points” — leaving his successor to field much of the criticism.

In that book, the 43rd President argued that, “The immediate bankruptcy of (Chrysler and GM) could cost more than a million jobs, decrease tax revenues by $150 billion and set back America’s Gross Domestic Product by hundreds of billions of dollars.”

Republican president candidate Mitt Romney is among those who have said they would have rejected a bailout.

more

And BUSH was WRONG...Happy?

MANY of us have said this BUFU...YOU just keep on with it. DOES NOT MAKE OBAMA correct either. Obama is doing the same fucking thing...and YOU seem to be fine with it...WHY?

 

[Dr Grump]

And BUSH was WRONG...Happy?
MANY of us have said this BUFU...YOU just keep on with it. DOES NOT MAKE OBAMA correct either. Obama is doing the same fucking thing...and YOU seem to be fine with it...WHY?

I'm not gonna speak for BFGN, but where did he say Bush was wrong. It was one of the few things that Bush did that was right...

 

[Listening]

And BUSH was WRONG...Happy?
MANY of us have said this BUFU...YOU just keep on with it. DOES NOT MAKE OBAMA correct either. Obama is doing the same fucking thing...and YOU seem to be fine with it...WHY?

I'm not gonna speak for BFGN, but where did he say Bush was wrong. It was one of the few things that Bush did that was right...

He didn't.

We did.

 

[Bfgrn]

BS Bfgrn. I remember Obama was there with Obama at the signing of TARP, because Obama was going to inherit it. TARP had Obama's blessing from day one. None of this justifies Obama's acceleration of the deficit.

Yes, it had Obama's blessing. And I just said I agree with it. It was necessary, but no one liked it. Not Bush, Obama, me or anyone but the banks.

Bush began the bailouts of the auto industry. And he said he would do it again.

Bush Would “Do it Again” on Auto Bailouts

Former pres. tells dealers it prevented “21% unemployment.”

“I’d do it again,” proclaimed Bush, speaking to the annual convention of the National Automobile Dealers Association.

The bailout, which ultimately totaled $85 billion, was originally begun during the waning days of the Bush Administration. With a specific rescue effort rejected by Congress, the former Commander-in-Chief decided to tap into a separate, $700 billion fund Capitol Hill did approve for the bailout of Wall Street and the banking industry.

“Sometimes circumstances get in the way of philosophy,” said the ex-President, during his speech in Las Vegas, referring to his normal stand in favor of free trade. “If you make a bad decision, you ought to pay,” he said, referring to the collapse of both General Motors and Chrysler.

But Bush also noted that coming on top of the failure of Lehman Brothers, the meltdown of the banking industry and the collapse of the housing market, a painful shift in policy was needed.

“I didn’t want there to be 21% unemployment,” he stressed, echoing forecasts at the time that the loss of GM, Ford and the automotive lenders also covered by the bailout could lead to the loss of 1 million jobs.

The former President has kept a low-key profile since leaving office in January 2009 – though he did call the bailout “the only option” in his 2010 book, “Decision Points” — leaving his successor to field much of the criticism.

In that book, the 43rd President argued that, “The immediate bankruptcy of (Chrysler and GM) could cost more than a million jobs, decrease tax revenues by $150 billion and set back America’s Gross Domestic Product by hundreds of billions of dollars.”

Republican president candidate Mitt Romney is among those who have said they would have rejected a bailout.

more

And BUSH was WRONG...Happy?

MANY of us have said this BUFU...YOU just keep on with it. DOES NOT MAKE OBAMA correct either. Obama is doing the same fucking thing...and YOU seem to be fine with it...WHY?

I don't care how much you yell and scream, the bailout of the auto industry was not only the right thing to do, it was a HUGE success. American auto industry is, by nearly all measures, healthier than it’s been in many years. G.M. and Chrysler, not to mention Ford, which didn’t get taxpayer money but benefited indirectly, are profitable, hiring more workers, competing more effectively, gaining market share and building better cars and trucks.

And we have a prime example of a corporate bankruptcy untainted by any taxpayer money or government rescue operation. Lehman Brothers, which remains the largest bankruptcy ever measured by assets.

The once venerable investment bank emerged from three and a half years in Chapter 11. Gone, along with the gleaming Midtown Manhattan tower now branded with the Barclays logo, are most of the more than 25,000 jobs once on the firm’s payroll and nearly all the over $600 billion in assets that once swelled its balance sheet. Lehman still owns a large portfolio of troubled real estate assets and derivative securities. Its only reason for existence is to manage those assets to pay off its remaining creditors, whose claims total more than $300 billion. It remains mired in contentious litigation.

 

[Dr Grump]

And BUSH was WRONG...Happy?
MANY of us have said this BUFU...YOU just keep on with it. DOES NOT MAKE OBAMA correct either. Obama is doing the same fucking thing...and YOU seem to be fine with it...WHY?

I'm not gonna speak for BFGN, but where did he say Bush was wrong. It was one of the few things that Bush did that was right...

He didn't.

We did.

He was inferring that BFGN seemed to be saying that because Bush did it, Obama can do it to. He didn't.

And I know you think it wrong.....the idea of others helping each other out is anathema to your idealogy.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Listening to you just reinforces a universal truth.

Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear.
William E. Gladstone

Leftism is the rule of people without compassion or mercy.

Yea, the people who created Medicare, the Civil Rights bill, Social Security and ended child slavery, NOW want to kill them all...

And southern slave owners were "compassionate" and "merciful" because they provided housing, food, and clothes to their slaves, right?

There's a lot more to compassion and mercy than just not killing people, and making them into helpless, dependent pets isn't it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You didn't get there on your own is supposed to impose the idea that business owners accepted welfare. Welfare in the form of infrastructure. Having accepted welfare, they should not now claim they did it on their own.

To the democrats even a government contract, in which the government becomes a customer is a form of welfare.

But even that doesn't hold up, because the business owners PAID for that stuff in the form of taxes. The highest corporate taxes in the WORLD.

Yup. Or perhaps President Obama thinks that all that infrastructure magically appeared as a benevolent act of the great God government which allowed somebody to then build a business. Does he think there would be ANY infrastructure anywhere if there were not people starting businesses, hiring people, and fueling an economy?

Maybe he thinks government doesn't need us at all? You just set up a government, print up some money, and run a country?

Of course government needs us. There's no point in having power if you don't have peons to lord it over.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I drive around and look to see what infrastructure we need that we don't have.

I can't see any.

What is it that you would spend money on.

Right now, my city is busy tearing up good roads and resurfacing them so they can spend all their budgeted dollars. What a racket.

The best thing we could do would be to spend the money on severance for all the government people who need to be let go (and their departments shut down) so small business can more easily get started.

To Obama's way of thinking, the existing roads and bridges are largesse gifted to us by the government of many years ago, and the taxpayers of that time (if you really press him on the subject). Only problem with that is that existing roads and bridges have to be repaired and even rebuilt. The Interstate highway system may have originally been put in in the 1950s, but - as an example - the stretch of I-10 that runs through my city has been in the process of being totally rebuilt for several years now, since the original structure was totally inadequate to traffic needs now. It's far from the first time just in my memory that it's needed work, not even counting the regular repavings. So Obama and his ass-kissers don't need to be telling me how I'm not paying for those roads and bridges because their original contruction was paid for before I was born.

 

[oreo]

But even that doesn't hold up, because the business owners PAID for that stuff in the form of taxes. The highest corporate taxes in the WORLD.

Yup. Or perhaps President Obama thinks that all that infrastructure magically appeared as a benevolent act of the great God government which allowed somebody to then build a business. Does he think there would be ANY infrastructure anywhere if there were not people starting businesses, hiring people, and fueling an economy?

Maybe he thinks government doesn't need us at all? You just set up a government, print up some money, and run a country?

Of course government needs us. There's no point in having power if you don't have peons to lord it over.

DITTO---

"When you don't have a record to run on, you paint your opponent as someone people should run from"--Barack Obama