This Week: Senator Kyl Says It's The Democrats In Congress Who Are Hoover-Like, Not Bush
By Nicole Belle Saturday Mar 22, 2008 6:00pm
Download | play 
Download | play (h/t Heather)
It is a universal rule observed by all Republicans time and time again: repeat something over and over again, irrespective of its truth and by repetition, it becomes conventional wisdom, otherwise known as living in a post-fact society. So in discussing the state of the economy with Senators Chuck Schumer and Jon Kyl on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, when Schumer points out that the Bush administration policies of protecting corporate welfare, such as the Bear Stearns bailout, and ignoring consumer issues like the rising foreclosures has resulted in the worse economy since Hoover, Kyl lashes out and says it's the Democrats in Congress who are like Hoover, not Bush.
I was wondering how long it would take my friend Chuck Schumer to blame the Bush Administration here. Of course, it wasn’t the Bush Administration so much as the Democrats in Congress who were pushing the lending institutions to get out there and lend more money even to unqualified buyers: to the minorities, to the poor, to the young. So that everyone could own a home. The Bush administration was somewhat to blame for that as well. But Democrats in Congress were making that push. And as a result, a lot of people took loans who couldn’t qualify. In fact, they didn’t have to qualify. No money down. There was no credit reporting. And a lot of them, frankly, couldn’t afford it. So let’s don’t blame the Bush administration for this, and as to Hooverism, it’s Sen. Schumer and his Democratic colleagues who want to raise taxes like Hoover did when he refused to allow the Coolidge tax breaks to stay in effect and put in the Smoot-Hawley and they of course, are opposing the free Trade agreements that the President is trying to bring up. Let’s understand here the Bush Administration is trying to be pro-active on both the tax and trade fronts and it does not oppose some of the things Chuck talked about.
Um, huh??? The Democrats, who have only had a paper-thin majority since January of 2007 and couldn't even get most of their bills on the table before that are the ones like Hoover? What are you smoking? Kyl blames the defaulters on their loans (those undeserving minorities and poor) and conflates that with free trade and taxes. And what on earth does the Smoot-Hawley TARIFF act have to do with the current crisis other than Smoot and Hawley were Republicans?
Hale Stewart looks and the pros and cons of the Fed's actions last week in a far more intellectually honest way than Kyl does:
The central reason why the Federal Reserve acted like it did was to prevent a financial sector meltdown. While there is no way of knowing for sure there was a strong possibility that a Bear Stearns bankruptcy would have frozen the credit markets. This would have had chilling effect on the credit markets and could have frozen them solid. This could have sent the economy which is already teetering on the edge of recession (if it's not already in one) into a very deep recession. It's important to remember that leading up to this event were signs of extreme distress in the credit markets. Auction rate securities -- a primary way that municipalities obtain short-term funds -- pretty much dried up over the last 2-3 months. Structures Investment Funds -- SIVs for short -- were experiencing the same problems. In effect, the Bear Stearns situation occurred at the end of a building problem in the credit markets. If Bear had failed there is more than a small likelihood that the end result would have been a much deeper recession than we will have.
On the con side, the Federal Reserve clearly bailed out a firm who's own decisions were responsible for its downfall. Bear decided of its own free will to get involved in the hedge fund and mortgage market. That was a bad decision and they have paid the price. In a free market economy (which we're supposed to be in) stupidity of this type is supposed to fall by the wayside by being unprofitable and therefore eventually going bankrupt. Some commentators have correctly noted that the Fed's action essentially "privatizes the gains and socializes the losses" of the investment community. Finally the Fed's action creates what economists call a "moral hazard". This simply means that by bailing out stupid behavior the Federal Reserve is essentially allowing it to happen again.
CREDO Action has a petition you can sign asking your congrescritters to pass the Foreclosure Prevention Act.
Login or Register to post comments.
another attempt of the gop and bush/cheney to
misdirect their crimes on to someone else.
the fascists bushco needs NO MORE DAYS IN WASHINGTON D C
Hey, go ahead, let the GOP try to blame their deregulation hysteria's "sub-prime" problem on the poor, the coloreds, the wimminz.
Let 'em bring it on.
They're gonna lose this time. Bigger than that, the country's 30 year fascination with Reaganite deregulation and anti-regulation regulators may now THANK GOD be OVER.
Well the lying liars have to say something - and it can't be the truth - after all, they are lying liarrs.
Yeah guys in SUITS have all the answers.
About those massive bonuses that the Bear Sterns executives and traders awarded themselves shortly before the meltdown: recoverable?
Is the camera on? Let the lying begin. These repukes may be stupid, but they are evil!
Doesn't that Kyl just look like a super-prick SOB? I could definitely see him throwing a crippled old war widdow out of her home, and happily handing over her property deed to some Ken Lay type of f#@ker!
Remember, those Kyl supporter's are the same ones who elect McInsane.
Nicole, more needs to be known regarding Bear Sterns. Normally I would have said this admin would 'bail out' a company like this. That isnt really what happened. It really isnt clear what happened. We know for example that about 1/3 of the investors were used to fund (the employees) the purchase. I would have expected investors to be protected. They werent. This was done for a different reason - perhaps having something to do with JP Morgan. This needs much closer examination. I smell a croney in this mess somewhere. Who are the specific actors and how are they connected.
As a note, you will find some using the phrase 'socializing the losses' as justification for calling this 'socialism'. You need to deal with that talking point.
(unedited)
"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."
Thomas Jefferson
NoGWBpolicyleftinplace @ 6:
Kyl is my senator. McCain is an opportunist. Kyl is just another deluded selfserving 'me first and last' conservative. McCain doesnt really believe in anything - Kyl believes it all.
L.A. Confidential @ 8:
Well here we are.
Finally! atleast someone is saying it, the dems are hell bent on this diveristy thing and help the sub-prime mess. Banks are smart enough to know whom to lend to whom not to!!!
I like to use the more fancy term "post-hoc".
How do they get history so wrong???!!!!! I just don't get it!!!!! The Hawley-Smoot Tariff helped push us further into the great depression. The "cowboy culture" of the lending industry shoulders a lot of the blame, and of course, fighting an unnecessary war with borrowed money could help...I think? Wow, so FDR followed Hoover's act...Wonder how that worked out for us????
L.A. Confidential @ 10:
Tried it in the Soviet Union, does not work...
chris @ 11:
Diversity thing. Are you suggesting that "whites" are only capable of repaying a loan??? And, just so you know, the predatory lending boomed during a Republican help congress. Do I need to give you a history lesson?
Explain the "diversity" comment please. Thanks!
Hillary Clinton. LIAR
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It6JN7ALF7Y
On a completely different topic!!! I hope I am just being fed a load of crap by a reliable source here....
Supposedly a news story will break tomorrow or Tuesday about David Patterson, our newly sworn in governor. Something he failed to mention to the people and the press, AND his wife after his open press conference about his infidelity. He apparently has another family in MA, a lady and two kids...kids that are HIS.
This is gonna suck! I hope this is not true!!! The next in line is Joe Bruno, state Republican Majority Leader and currently under investigation by the FBI......GREAT!
chris @ 14:
So essentially you're calling Thomas Jefferson a communist pig.
Funny, Chris never seems to qualify his remarks or defend his positions.
You'll have to ask Ben Stein about the Smoot/Hawley Tariff Act.
It was what his character was talking about in class.
Anyone....Anyone.
Did anyone else hear the republican senator say that the democrats were pushing the lending institutions "to lend money even to unqualified buyers, to the MINORITIES, the poor, the young"??? Since when did being a minority suddenly make one unqualified for a home loan? Why is it that republicans always try to inject race into an issue when the facts do not support them? I guess some things never change.
I think he means by "Hoover like" that like Hoover, the Dems favor trade restrictions, taxes and protectionism re American business. Whereas, the GOP are more free traders and no or low tariffs.
The phrase that goes something like:
"Privatize the profits... and socialize the losses..."
is basically how the Bush Crime Family conducts business. Remember Neal and the Savings and Loan Scandals? In a larger scope,
THAT's how W has been waging the war in Iraq. His friends and Cheney's friends have privatized and profiteered every possible level of military support and foreign policies in Iraq... and when it comes to taking losses... well, you know, suddenly it's STATE DEPARTMENT cash that comes up missing... or another sepecial spending bill from Congress to BUY BULLETS becomes necessary.
It is maddening to consider how much has been stolen from this country's public coffers in the last seven years... for bail-outs, bullets, and bullshit.
chris @ 11:
Are they? In 1988, they nearly bankrupted themselves by overextending themselves in South America. I'm not surprised that they are killing themselves again. Their lending officers, like mortgage brokers (not all), are mostly interested in getting their up front money from the borrower. Whatever happens after...they could give a damn.
Every day we see the same thing. It is not that the Republicans only repeat lies over and over and over until Blitzer starts chanting it, it is that they repeatedly simply say the opposite of what is true. Over and over and over. Bald faced. With no facts.
"Clear Skies"
"No Child Left Behind"
"Healthy Forests"
"War is Peace"
"Democrats are like Hoover"
WTF. Somebody has to just take off the gloves and hit them sqare in the jaw. This "civil" TV ratings friend - the two or three talking heads chattering over each other, like NFL commentators, has to stop. It is white noise until someone starts punching.
The False Flag
Ricky Bones @ 13:
how do they get it so wrong? join the gop and sign an oath
to follow in stupidity. the gop is so fucking intentionally ignorant.
you can not have an IQ higher than 29 if you want to be a gop repug.
thats right, minorities, the poor and the young are the scum of the earth
christ, i hate the repugs
Ted @ 22:
no, what he means is that the dems are at fault for the economy
but nice try....now back to redstate you go....and you can sit around and commiserate with them as to how the dems are gonna make things even worse
Corporate welfare is just that! I thought that in a free market or capitalist society, it was the nature of the beast to eat or be eaten...you know, survival of the fittest. So, why welfare for rich?
Jay Severin Has a Small Pen1s @ 24:
of course you have your tems mixedup again and you mean gop/repigs when you say dem
The entire history of modern Republican executive leadership since Hoover has them dumping the more successful, more fiscally responsible legislation put in place by the Democrat before them, steamrolling their Supply-Side/Trickle Down policies in it's place and then getting booted out of office after their failed policies result in an "It's the economy, Stupid!" final straw for an electorate that discovers they are suffering more under Republican leadership than the worst of the Democratic leadership.
The only marginal exception to that common refrain has been when Ronald Reagan took over after 4 years of Jimmy Carter. But the economic quagmire Carter inherited the Nixon disaster would have taken any president at least 6 years to sort out anyway.
Moreover, Reagan's economy only improved marginally for the ordinary American after Carter because he DIDN'T dump Carter's brilliant Fed Chairman appointee, Paul Volker, and left many of Carter's policies in place after Carter paid the political price for them.
Except for the massive, record deficits and debt part. Those were alllll Reagan.
Still waiting for an intelligent response from Chris. Where is she????
anon @ 9:
You and I finally agree on something. Senator Kyl loves to lie and to repeat the lies of others at truth. Take for example this opinion piece in today's Arizona Republic.
The current crop of Republican's wouldn't be able to tell the truth if they were visited by Jesus Christ himself, except for maybe former Senator Lincoln Chaffee and Senator Hagel.
Phoenix Justice @ 32:
Hell, they couldn't look a cyclops in the eye!
Uncle Joe, you're in error, please read below (quoted ver batim from above):
"So let’s don’t blame the Bush administration for this, and as to Hooverism, it’s Sen. Schumer and his Democratic colleagues who want to raise taxes like Hoover did when he refused to allow the Coolidge tax breaks to stay in effect and put in the Smoot-Hawley and they of course, are opposing the free Trade agreements that the President is trying to bring up. Let’s understand here the Bush Administration is trying to be pro-active on both the tax and trade fronts and it does not oppose some of the things Chuck talked about."
Maybe someone should ask Sen. Kyl why President Bush repealed the Davis-Bacon of act of 1931 right after Katrina. The act ensures that workers are given the market wages for work, particularly construction. Hmmmmmm?
Ricky, did you know that the Davis Bacon act was originally enacted to keep blacks out of the trades, by guaranteeing wages above those being then paid to blacks?
Ricky Bones @ 28:
Only in a true capitalist society. In a Republicanized capitalist society, "the minorities, the poor and the young" must forever serve the needs of the Republicanized capitalist without expecting any form of reciprocation. There is to be no "safety net" for the common citizenry, only the wealthy and only the corporations.
In the sexual world, that is known as getting "f**ked in the ass without the benefit of a reach around".
Nicole, cant'we get more of the clip with Schumer's response? He looked like someone that just wanted to punch Kyle. I would have liked to have seen his rebuttle.
Hmmm....
from Wikipedia - Judge William B. Bryant (himself African-American) rejected that Davis-Bacon was a Jim Crow law. He stated: "Americans of all races were in need of aid from the government during the Great Depression. Congress enacted the DBA (Davis Bacon Act) to assure workers a fair wage, provide local contractors a fair opportunity to compete for local government contracts and to preserve its own ability to distribute employment and federal money equitably through public works projects." With the claim rejected, the plaintiffs did not appeal. Despite notable attempts to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act, the law for the most part continues to enjoy often bi-partisan local support across the nation.
Ted @ 36:
Sorry, I meant to respond by quoting your comment
from Wikipedia - Judge William B. Bryant (himself African-American) rejected that Davis-Bacon was a Jim Crow law. He stated: “Americans of all races were in need of aid from the government during the Great Depression. Congress enacted the DBA (Davis Bacon Act) to assure workers a fair wage, provide local contractors a fair opportunity to compete for local government contracts and to preserve its own ability to distribute employment and federal money equitably through public works projects.” With the claim rejected, the plaintiffs did not appeal. Despite notable attempts to repeal the Davis-Bacon Act, the law for the most part continues to enjoy often bi-partisan local support across the nation.
Actually, the mortgage fiasco was precipitated by Bush's declaration of the new "ownership society," which was supposed to turn a large group of people into homeowners (and therefore Republicans, by typical Republican logic). This was the grand domestic vision of the Bush administration.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis-Bacon_Act#Efforts_to_Repeal
Ricky, the Davis Bacon Act was passed in order to prevent non-unionized black and immigrant laborers from competing with unionized white workers. The discriminatory effects continue, as even today minorities tend to be vastly under-represented in highly unionized skilled trades, and over- represented in the pool of unskilled workers.
Pongo, the mortgage fiasco was largely caused by regs and pressure on lenders to loan to less qualified payees and minorities, rather than based on creditworthyness.
Ted @ 43:
Quite possibly, but today that act ensures that people get fair wages. I am CERTAIN that President Bush did not attempt to repeal an act simply based on it being racist and during Katrina, the current market wages were already below the national in that region. So, I may be missing the point, unless you were simply throwing a little tid bit of knowledge out there.
Ricky, well, the discriminatory effect does still continue, yes?
Ted @ 22:
What the heck?!? All of this comparing Democrats to Hoover is just astonishing! Hoover was a Republican under whose administration poor people (many of them Democrats) suffered greatly, and there were NO safety nets.
Ricky Bones @ 45:
Also, the act gets bi-partisan support and it was a mess when there was an attempt to indefinitely suspend it. Just sayin'
pongo @ 41:
Yeah Kind of like Uncle Ronny Reagan's Shining City on a Hill.
That worked out real well.
Ted @ 46:
Discriminatory will continue as we all know, good example was the "minorities" remark by Sen. Kyl
did shumer refute him?
did stephie retrieve a fact?
Ricky Bones @ 15:
Chris is a dope.
Anais, that's part of the point, todays Dems are acting like Republicans of the late 20's and early 30's in terms of trade restrictions, thus exacerbating the faltering economy.
The reason people took loans that they didn't qualify, why there was no credit reports and so forth is because the lender was bundling the mortgage into securities that were then sold to third parties. If it was like the old days, where your community bank loaned you the money, and then you repaid your community bank, this would have never happened. This also never would have happened if the mortgage backed securities were correctly graded, because they wouldn't have been able to be sold at a profit. Instead, they were graded "AAA", and the rest is history.
Captain Hussein Kangaroo @ 52:
I know :-) I was wondering if she was going to attempt to defend her comments, but I guess the prospect of watching American Idol on the DVR was much more rewarding. As Paula said, "The reward paid off" Gee that show has some smart-like people! ( I hate Idol)
Ted @ 44:
BS TED, the unregulated banking industry actually believe that the market will control itself. They convince repugnants that deregulation will work. As soon as they get the laws changed, they get greedy because they actually think they are right. Now that we see how deregulation doesn't work, they want a bailout and they still think they were right. The only evidence they have that it works is they were able to make huge amounts of money doing it. Never mind that it breaks our treasury and most of the population of the country.
Nobuddy, and the lenders were crticized for red-lining areas where no questionable loans would have been made -- so the lenders caved in to the pressure and went ahead and made those loans.
Senator Kyl is a national security threat, as are all the Fascist Republicans.
Living in their own fantasy world of lies, deceit and greed, these Republican fools have endangered every U.S. citizen, weakened our economy, weakened our military and trashed our nation's reputation around the world.
Had enough yet?
I found this interesting - http://www.starnewsonline.com/article/20080323/ZNYT01/803230447/1002/new...
Ted @ 57:
So again, you are being racist.
Ted @ 53:
Right. We need more cheap high profit lead poisoned children's toys, poisoned food, etc, etc.
Who needs stupid restrictions-regulations on trade and imports.
A huge percentage (I’m sure it is not a majority percentage) of foreclosures are speculators who bought homes to resell in less than a year for a profit. They needed no down payment and when the profit didn’t materialize they walked away. They should be held liable for fraud!
Another large percentage of foreclosures were really people who could NOT afford the house they were buying. They were talked into a mortgage instead of being told, like they should have been told, that they could not afford the payments. They were given these “teaser” interest rates (1% in some cases and a scam that let them not pay any principle and even pay a lesser percentage to be added on to the price of the mortgage at the end of the contract) that made the payment almost affordable but when those rates jumped to a realistic rate the people simply could not and can not make the payments. The companies and people who were issuing these mortgages should be held liable for fraud!
Don't worry, Senator Kyl....Neither Hillary nor Obama (nor, of course, McCain) will oppose those wonderful "free trade" agreements.
"As it happens, Clinton and Obama have pretty much the same record on the issue. They both support the existence of NAFTA. They both call for its reform, along quite similar lines. Neither was in Congress in 1994, so they didn't vote on NAFTA when it passed. But they have both voted in favor of most free trade deals when they have had a chance."
Just sit tight. Help is on the way.
Ron, I'm not saying pro or con, simply that many of those loans went bad -- and then the politicians go and unfairly blame the lenders rarher than the borrowers taking on more than they can comfortably assume, and the lenders were pressured to make those loans.
Eat the rich. It's the only thing they're good for.
Yeah right, the S&L scandal, junk bonds, Enron, etc., etc., now the cheap mortgage fuck-up, it`s all the fault of the poor uneducated masses. Without the poor and middle class the unsupervised rich and powerful would have nothing to feed on.
Just goes to show that anybody can say anything. Hitler could have said that he loved Jews. Nixon said he wasn't a crook. Capone said he was just an honest businessman.
And now Jon Kyl says Democrats are to blame for seven years of BushCo economic plundering.
Anybody can say anything at any time. Depending how stupid we are, we might even believe it.
Moronic troll in Brit Hume thread - I suggest you guys go there and set him straight - he's saying McCain was right about the Al Qaeda / Iran link lol!
There are also people who lived in their house for more than a few years and when they saw that their house appreciated much faster than it should have they saw a lot of money sitting there. They also saw their neighbors and in-laws refinancing their houses and buying boats and vacations and big ole mutherfucking TVs and big ole stupid ass SUVs and a lot of crap. I’ll tell you that kind of thing will make you want some of the stuff. Especially with your wife of husband telling you that “dumb stupid Shirley just bought a new something” or that “dumbass Tom has a new boat why can’t I have one” and all of a sudden they are down to the mortgage people doing a “Re-Fi” and those payments are not that much more except when they reset. The rest is history.
Ted @ 64:
I agree! I know a few people in my office who cannot even get the corporate Amex card because their credit is in shambles, yet they get offers from high interest cards with a low limit and get further in debt. One of these guys is going to default on his loan and even admits, he knew he couldn't afford his place, but "just had to have it" This guy is a Senior VP and makes good dough, but just has poor fiscal discipline. He is a HIGH risk borrower. Also, he is not a minority.
I don't think Ted was being racist. High risk borrowers come in all colors.
The Oracle @ 58:
Last week on NPR Senator Kyl (R-Az) stated that the US military had been 'decimated' by.....President Clinton! Too many Americans are unfortunately too willing to believe these incompetents and liars.
Ted @ 64:
That's crap of the highest order. Try a little reading. The growing mess grew because of unregulated greed: Sub-prime securities.
"Yet such loans were primarily offered to those least able to evaluate them. “Why are the most risky loan products sold to the least sophisticated borrowers?” Mr. Gramlich asked. “The question answers itself — the least sophisticated borrowers are probably duped into taking these products.” And “the predictable result was carnage.”
Ron @ 56:
Ted, the fiasco was caused by greed. Pure and simple!!!!! These assholes were loaning money to people who could not afford it.
Ted @ 44:
Fixed.
Ted @ 64:
Ted, I worked in the mortgage business. I didn't putpeople into loans they could not afford and I live in an area where the market is fairly stable. The problem with the loans for some of the people in the country where the market is not stable is that they took out loans called ARMs. When the market went south the value of their homes went down and they weren't able to get a 30 year fixed loan because they owed more than the home will appraise for. The banking industry were making it easier to get loans because they were too stupid to see that the bubble had to burst at some time.
Ricky Bones @ 33:
the only eye the gop looks in with enthusiasm is
the one on the other end of cheney as he is bent over.
such a dark place to peer into and kiss by the gop repugs
It wasn't 1980s- and 1990s- era fairness in lending rules for minorities and minority areas and immigrants and all the other people the GOP hates when it came to making stupid loans of vast sums at tricky or even tricked up interest mortgages to people here outside Atlanta snapping up the $500,000 and $1,000,000 suburbs.
I know, I know, the Repugnicants desperately want this once again to be seen as the damn liberals givin' all our money away to the greedy negroes, but, I'm sorry -- it ain't gonna work.
Your decades of cutting through every valuable banking regulation, of appointing no one but anti-regulation ideologues, it's through.
In the 1980s you Republican crap-ants (along with your Democratic enablers) destroyed an entire branch of our banking system -- the Savings & Loan. That cost us maybe $400 Billion dollars. That was under Reagan I.
Now, under Reagan II (Bush Jr., who for a good few years you Repukes were all fellating as Reagan's re-incarnation) you've gotten us another, now $1 Trillion (if we're lucky) set of losses by more of your crappy de-regulation nonsense.
So now although it costs the nation severely for once again letting the Republicans attack our financial systems once again, it seems like finally the message has gotten through.
Wow, Kyl feels the Democrats have been forcing lenders to make loans with no credit reports, job history, or money down.
Sounds like a good thing to take part in if your living under an overpass and need a place to stay. It would be a while the banks could foreclose on you and your hobo friends that never intended to make payments.
The evil democrats..................
And the democrats that want to raise taxes so the wealthy won't have to have, their tax dollars bailing out Bear Stearns and the likes. This way only the middle class pay for the corporate welfare and bail outs.
Uh, right, it's all the Dems fault.
But in a sense the Dems have brought this false accusation upon themselves, since they don't publicly fight against the Repugs bills and bullshit.
chris @ 11:
Yeah, banks are really smart. In fact, they're so smart they make predatory loans that used to be illegal, then get shills like Kyl to carry their water and get a huge bailout from the taxpayers. That's not only smart, it's what the Republic party means by "free enterprise". As in, "We're free to bankrupt the country, but not the big banks, and can rely on the Republic party to lie and obfuscate for us."
Very, very smart.
Ted @ 64:
This is why there should be regulation. And also there was no downside for the jerk making the loan. He gets paid a commission. The idiots trying to get the loas are at fault to a certain extent but it would happen every time. Especially when the person making the loan tells the borrower that he will loan him the money.
This is the fault of the lenders more than anybody else. Period.....
And nowhere in Kyl's trip through Wonderland does he confront one of the biggest problems: poor regulation.
Ricky Bones @ 19:
Can you say "indefensible"?
woodguy @ 80:
The banks are too smart for sucke...er....Chris to understand. They have played the system well, at least in the short run. At our expense.
slippy hussein toad @ 74:
Fixed better.
Ted @ 36:
Hey CONCERN TROLL, if you knew anything about the history of the union movement, you'd know how stupid that statement is. I won't argue with you, just wanted everyone here to know how we spanked this CONCERN TROLL earlier in the day and he magically disappered. I'd recommend the same treatment here.
Ted @ 43:
Absolute BS. I belong to a highly skilled labor union and we actively recruit all minorities. CONCERN TROLL
Captain Hussein Kangaroo @ 85:
Let me lay this down in simple terms
1. The banks own almost all the land in this country
2. Signing a mortgage contract does not make you a home owner. These people losing their homes never owned a home in the first place.
3. The banks have roped people into signing contracts(mortgages) to buy land at 3 to 4 times the market value, by making monthly payments. At the end of the contract, the bank agrees to transfer ownership of the poperty, not before. The deed is ownership; the contract to purchase a deed is the mortgage.
4. If a person defaults on a mortgage, they don't really lose anything; becuase they never owned anything, the bank did.
5. Those of you who signed mortgage contracts; just to be blunt. You are going to lose your mortgage. The contracts are written in such a way as to make you fail. That way you spend your whole life paying money to the bank then when you fail; they find some other schmuck to write a similar contract too.
6. The real reason this system is failing. The younger generations are not buying into it. They know it's a scam; becuase, they saw their parents, grandparents, and aunts and uncles all get screwed over by signing shady bank contracts.
7. The baby-boomers are finally getting to old to work. The banking industry tried this subprime mumbo jumbo as a way of roping in young people (first time homeowners). They got quite a few people to buy into it by offering them cheap payments upfront with a promise that after 5 years of being a good debtor they could refinance and keep the cheap rate.
8. The 5 years came up and the banks said well I would love to live up to what we promised you; but, in the fine print here it says that we can charge you even more money. I'm sorry kid: "WE LIED".
9. The banks were hedging on the belief that young people would accept this abuse; becuase, they had equity sunk into the property.
10. Young people have a very different veiw of credit than the boomers. We see it more as a crock of shit that we do not want to get roped into. The idea of having a mortgage foreclosed upon gets filed somewhere under GETTING BLOOD OUT OF A TURNIP. It requires a 12 pack of beer at most to fix.
Personally, I see this bank failure as a good thing. The present scheme of homeownership was cooked up by President Herbert Hoover, does this ring a bell with anyone.
It goes something like this; the government burrown money from a private business called the Federal reserve Board; this money is in turn loaned to banks; the banks in turn loan it to mortgage companies; the mortgage company loans the money to private individuals.
Do you notice a pattern here? Let me spell it out; A lot of people are making money off of home ownership that are completely completely not needed. Instead of loaning and reloaning money to all these bankers; the government could loan money directly to private individuals to own homes. That would fix the problem completely. This would transfer huge amounts of land from the bankers to private citizens so I wouldn't hold my breathe on this happeneing.
Otay @ 88:
Just another change.
.
What Senator Kyl meant to say was:
"YOU'RE more like I am than I am"
.
Ted @ 53:
Yeah, and Bill Clinton did it, too. CONCERN TROLL.
I wish for a day when it's just recruiting all qualified and being a minority wasn't even an issue. It sucks that we are wired that way.
Timmy D11 @ 68:
bingo!
It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a Republican pinhead in possession of a talking point must be in want of a network. And they usually find one.
Peter G @ 95:
Nice pick-up of a Jane Austen quote from a few week ago!
woodguy @ 96:
Dude, did you just come on to rip on everyone? I am just curious. I am sure, most here agree with you. If you really want to argue with those of differing opinions, go to rightwingnews.com You will get a workout there.
We all know the blame is on the greed heads who tried to make money on homes they could not afford and on the greed heads who tried to buy 10 or 15 houses to resell at a profit as long as the prices were going up and greed heads who wrote the loans for the insane commissions they earned and on the greed head Republican financial houses who bought and sold these loans for huge profits for doing nothing and on the Republican congress who did not regulate these fuckers because Congress people like Duke Cunningham and Tom Delay were getting their pockets stuffed with ill-gotten cash. Ok?
The hard part is fixing the problem. Economics is a very difficult subject. The best economists in the world differ on how and what to do about so much economically. Do not fall into the trap of the easy way out and what to do about it. I really think these people (not Bush, he is too stupid to fix a flat tire), now, are trying to fix these fuck ups. It is a huge huge huge problem. The fat cat sons of bitches could very easily go bankrupt. They don’t want that. And they do not know who is next.
Having said that, people like Kyl should be tarred and feathered for blaming the Democrats for something that was completely controlled by the Republicans. And I really mean tarred and feathered. Boiling hot tar.
Fact, recession in 2000. Bush pulled the country out of recession, then out of the effects of the attack on 9-11. The economy roared and unemployment was lowest in history. Democrats take over leadership of congress in Jan 07 and it's been down hill since. All you have to do is dump the BDS before it becomes like it has for millions, an incurable mental illness and look at facts. You might just want to lay off the drugs a few days also and see what daylight really looks like. Say democrat, I say what kind of street drugs are they hooked on. Statictics show the democrats are destroying the country to get and keep personal power, the hell with the American public. Keep it going, I'll make you a bet that I can survive, feed myself and stay warm on the acres I own lock, stock and barrel, while millions of you fools are dying daily.
Scrapiron @ 99:
Ok, if you are for real...PLEASE try and back that up with some facts.
Chuck @ 89:
I hate to burst your bubble but you are wrong so many times.
Read the facts and weep. Electing idiots isn't a good idea.
Since The DIM-O-Crats Came to Power: Truth AND Consequences!
It has been a little over 14 months since the Democrats took over both houses of congress; the Senate AND the House of Representatives. They also want to take over the White House so, before you pull that lever for Hillary or Obama in November, take a look at what it has cost YOU since then.
Here are some of the outcomes of them being in control.
Up:
* Gasoline up from $2.19 to $3.35 or 53%
* Unemployment up from 4.5% to 5% or 11.1%
* National dept per capita was $27,677 then and now $31,551 or 14% higher.
* Congressional pay increase, ten times what you got.
Down:
* Consumer confidence at multiple year lows.
* Equity value of mutual funds down $2.3 trillion.
* Home equity values down $1.2 trillion
* Congress's approval rating at all time low (even lower than BUSH's)
If you add together the loss of equity value of mutual funds AND the loss of home equity values the total figure is approximately six (6) times the cost of the Iraq war for 5 years.
Bears thinking on doesn't it?
And a Tip O' The GM Derby to Greg at Rhymes with Right
I can't seem to remember, who was in control for most of the last eight years. Can you help me out?
Ricky Bones @ 100:
Ricky Bones @ 97,
Sorry if I offended you. I'm here to express my opinion, just like you. One of my opinions is that Ted is right-wing troll and comes on to almost every thread to divert and disrupt. I apoligize. I'm not quite sure why you considered my post @ 96 a rip, though, because it was just the opposite.
Ricky doesn't have any bones, just a limp wrist for Hussein 'O'. And the facts are facts.
Scrapiron @ 102:
And you think that the SLIM majority they held allowed all of this? Seriously? Yeah, congress got a low approval rating, because they ALL couldn't set aside party rivalry. Once again, I ask, who was in control for almost al of that time that President Bush has been in office?
Wow, you may want to revisit the source of your facts as well. Where did you happen to find those?
woodguy @ 105:
OK, I stand corrected. It just seemed that you were coming out swinging with the all caps troll and the other post seemed to be mocking. It's just hard to tell the tone of those who are typing :-)
Cool!
Ricky Bones @ 100:
Oh he is for real alright. It is sad to think that there are people who think like this "person". He probably just lost his house but voted for Bush. This person is clearly insane. Hopefully it is temporary but sadly, probably not. If Reagan had not gutted the mental illness industry this person would be resting comfortably in an institution that would take him in for free. Sad Sad.
Scrapiron @ 99:
You have fun with those sheep there Mr. Militia-Bob.
Scrapiron @ 106:
What could that possibly have to do with what we are talking about??? Please don't be another fine example of another conservative who can only resort to childish slams. Please show some sign of maturity. Don't perpetuate a stereotype.
If you are talking about Hoover in the sense of the vacuum cleaner, I think it's a fair call to say that the Democrats in Congress AND george bush both are Hoover-like. They suck.
Ricky Bones @ 111:
By the way, Saddam Hussein was a horrible man, why would I have a limp wrist for.....OH...you were trying to conflate Sen. Barack Obama with Saddam Hussein. Oh....ok, Republican trick! Misdirection and deception...Ah, an honest ploy by such a moral group. Very nice!
Scrapiron @ 102:
Gasoline prices have been going up since 2002.
http://zfacts.com/p/35.html
Unemployment went up from 2001 to its highest in 2003.
http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&gr...
Nice try for the reality-impaired.
Hey Bones, look at the downturn starting in Jan 07 and if you need proof pick up any left wing newspaper and see how low real estate values have dropped and stop at any gas station for proof of gas prices. Don't forget to say Boooosh owns oil wells. Well he was in the oil business until 1987 when he sold out and bought to the Texas Rangers baseball team. Ok, 21 years out of the business but he's still responsible for it. Who writes and passes all bills and laws. The congress but they have been real ineffective the past year. Biggest 'do nothing' bunch in history. Actually it's funny, they're in charge and can't do one thing in a year other than brainwash a bunch of dummies into hyping their failures as positives.
Otay @ 114:
Damn, I was just gathering those up :-) Good ones!!!!!!
Ricky Bones @ 108:
Not a problem. Ted tried to disrupt a thread earlier today and a bunch of us regulars sent him packing. I'm just a bit miffed that he returned. I take your point about the caps, I rarely use them. The Jane Austen quote was from a discussion about something Nicole wrote. Anyway, carry on.
I do like many of your earlier comments, btw.
Chuck @ 110:
Funny. When he posted this I imagined a ranch in Montana.
Scrapiron @ 102:
Who are you going to blame the dollar turning into a piece of shit paper to the rest of the world the last 8 years? Tax cuts for the rich? An astronomically expensive war we're not even paying for yeat? Middle class wages and living standards dropping like a rock? Health care continuing to go out of control?
This all happened in 14 months or whatever?
And I'll call you on one of your BULL SHIT remarks - I remember playing 3 dollars plus for gas YEARS ago.
ASSHOLE.
Scrapiron @ 115:
"Actually it’s funny, they’re in charge and can’t do one thing in a year other than brainwash a bunch of dummies into hyping their failures as positives."
But, you were arguing that they were responsible for causing this with their sloppy legislation and asserting that, in turn, caused their low poll numbers. Which is it? Are you on your mom's computer again without her permission? Bad boy!
woodguy @ 117:
Ahh, I see. I do hate when people use the whole ploy of fake concern to argue a point. That kind of fake concern that President Bush gives when things like Katrina happen.
I admire the Republican dude for trying to blame these consequences of Bush Jr. policies on the Democratic Congress.
I say go for it. Give it your best. But, it's going to get really, really frustrating for you, given that this crap just doesn't fly anymore.
Hey, check this out, from today's New York Times.
See, just like back in the Great Depression, as the calamity approaches, even the super-rich and the big business executives start to support regulation as a way of keeping their industry, and the country, from falling apart.
yep, the Dems, who have been in the MINORITY for the last 7 years, just rode roughshod over those poor Republicans (the majority) and made them do it. Like every school yard idiot who when the teacher comes out to stop the fight claims the little kid made him do it, dared him even.
Sorry Jon, we're not buying it.
Scrapiron @ 115:
Facts or assertions, which is it? Don't come to a battle of the wits completely unarmed. Wait, try a gay joke or a dirty f'ing hippie jab - that will get you out of this. Or, you could just use the mother of all debate busters, "Bill Clinton did it!".."and he did it with his dick."
Hey Pigiron,
This Congress has passed almost 50% more bills than last year, although one more would have done wonders for this country-Bills of Impeachment.
Got facts?
Scrapiron @ 115:
Just wait til we have that veto-proof and filibuster-proof majority next year and cram every progressive liberal socialist bill right down your retarded redneck throat ASSHOLE.
Blaming the democratic congress for the sorry state financially or otherwise that our country is in today??? The only thing dumber than the Republican lawmakers is its constituency that believes their drivel. may they rot in hell for their lies. all of them.
The problem is that you could have President Bush, with all Republican lawmakers (Lieberman too), on tape, and President Bush looking into the camera saying that they will intentionally cause the economic problems - that would be factual. But most Republicans would say that it was either taken out of context, or the American people were mislead by the nature of the tape. Kinda like when it was ON TAPE that President Bush was warned about the levees and he acted completely surprised by them breaking. Many conservatives would not take it as evidence of wrong-doing. They would jump on the psychotic horse and ride it back into the burning barn.
OK, I have beat this horse enough. Off to bed! Night all!
Timmy D11 @ 126:
It surely will be a sweet day!!
Ricky Bones @ 129:
Night, Ricky.
Bangkok Bob,
I know this is off topic but I would like to pick your brain about job opportunities in the land of smiles. If you would be cool with that, please let me know and I'll give you my email address.
Tim (in Japan)
chris @ 14:
The Federal Reserve, which is not a part of the government per se, was our answer. Sadly, the idiots running that have no idea what they are doing as
'Traditional Economics' and it's adherents have no understanding of derivatives, financialization and the rest of the 'modern' mechanisms of the market.
Ol' Big Doggy lettin' them ReThugs repel Glass-Steagel warn't no hep neither.
Timmy D11 @ 119:
I do seem to remember me oil at $24/barrel when the Republicans set out to 'bring honor back to the White House'.
Seven years ago....
What's it now?
$110....$113...
Bush movin' to Paraguay? I am not really sure that there is far enough pal.
Scrapiron, you have got to be one of the dimmest bulbs on the planet. Are you 16 years old? If you remember the 1990's, and then compare them to the first decade of this century, you'll have a clear picture of who Republican policies benefit. Check the Median Household Income.
Kyl couldn't be more inaccurate. The Dems have done nothing yet - except pass the Republican freeze of the budget for 2007. The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (an entirely Republican plan) has nothing to do with extending income tax cuts for the wealthy. The housing bubble and the predatory lendind (enable by the OCC) has been going on since 2000, all under the watchful eye of the Republican congress.
And don't expect the Republican cure to be any better than the Republican disease. The Fed just decided to open up its low-interest lending to investment banks (and several are lining up already). The only catch is whereas banks (who could traditionally borrow from the fed) are regulated (things like the FDIC), investment firms are not. So, remember the Savings and Loan scandal of the 1980's? Well, get ready for phase two. They are playing with house money again. Someone keep an eye on John McCain.
For another example of crony capitalism, note this Yahoo article about the Minneapolis bridge collapse. URS Corp. was responsible for inspections from 2003 to 2007, and apparently had some evidence of structural instability. Nothing was done. Martin Koffel, President and CEO of URS, is a trustee of the American Enterprise Institute. URS is really good at leveraging high-debt buyouts of other companies; not so good at doing bridge inspections. For a company whose CEO is such a fan of the "free market," they sure do suck down plenty of money in big government contracts. Of course, all the facts aren't in regarding who knew what and when - but if anyone knows how to make money on a falling stock, URS is going down quickly.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080323/ap_on_re_us/bridge_collapse_plates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/URS_Corp.
Interesting side-note: Dianne Feinstein's husband is also a VP for URS.
Peter G @ 5:
Apparently not. I read that the real reason we 'bailed' b.s. was to protect those big fat bonuses. If the firm had gone bankrupt, the poor souls would've had to give em up.
Check out Paul Krugman at his NYT site: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/
Observe the photo of the Bank Deregulators holding a chainsaw.
Isn't it great the CEO of Bear Sterns gave himself a 30 million dollar bonus? For tanking his company?
Isn't it great that we the taxpayers are underwriting this screw-up's bonus? Chris and Scrapiron may be glad to call themselves suckers, but if I want to throw my hard-earned money away, I'll find my own way to do so, and get something out of it, thanks.
John Kyl also says there
wereare WMD in Iraq.Consider the source!
After listening to Kyl shovel the BS, it's totally understandable why the retiring Virgina Republican Rep. Thomas M. Davis quite accurately said, "The House Republican brand is so bad right now that if it were a dog food, they'd take it off the shelf."
Quick history lesson for Senator Kyl and his fellow Republicans in Congress:
The Great Depression started because of the combined economic policies of Warren G. Harding, Calvin Coolidge, AND Herbert Hoover - like Dumbya, all were Republicans and all were considered among the worst Presidents in history. It took a Democratic President - Franklin Delano Roosevelt - to get us out of the Great Depression.
NoGWBpolicyleftinplace @ 6:
It's not "what are you smoking?" MJ doesn't make people stupid and violent. It enhances creativity and introspection. It should read "what are you drinking?" Alcohol makes people uninhibited and is a central nervous system depressant.
Wow! That was one of the finest examples of Victim Blaming that I've seen in a very long time.
ski @ 141:
You are right these repukes are just greedy evil bastards! They have only one reason for being in government to enrich themselves and that is what they have done a taxpayer expense.
We need to put every republican that runs out next election and do the same thing the following election. Then hopefully we can do the same thing to the dems in the following two cycles. Then we can get real people in office like the founding fathers intended! Thomas Jefferson said he could see the country going one of two ways, it could be rulled by the rulling class eliete or by the maybe not as clever but much more well intentioned average person.
I'd like to know what Schummer's response was. Did he preface his comments with "my esteemed colleague", "my good friend"? Enough of the Washington kabuki theater. Democrats need to "propel the propaganda" and hang the stigma of Hoover around every Republicans gilded throat.
Che's Lounge @ 142:
Been saying this for years :) I swear half the congressmen, and mostly the republicans, seem completely loaded everytime I see them. We should add alcoholic to the long line of common adjectives we use when insulting them lol.
Fact: NBER placed the peak of the business cycle, which precipitated the 2001 recession, in March of 2001. GWB did NOT inherit a recession from anyone.
Fact: 9/11 didn't just "happen" on Bush's watch. In order to allow it to happen on his watch, Bush had to dump Clinton's counter-terrorism office within DAYS of taking the oath, demote Richard Clarke as it's hub of inter-agency information and ignore the unprecedented blinking red warning lights during the Summer of Terrorist Threat, 2001, by not having even ONE high-level meeting, urgently and repeatedly requested by Clarke, until days before the attack. To whine about the detrimental economic effects of 9/11 and characterize Bush as a "victim" of it without attributing Bush's personal responsiblity in allowing that attack to take place is ridiculous.
Fact: A low unemployment number WITHOUT commensurate growth in new jobs means nothing. It only counts people collecting unemployment benefits. Which end after 6 months of unemployment, resumes again 6 months later and end totally after that.
Fact: This Republican Supply-Side/Trickle Down economy has produced the LOWEST amount of new jobs (read: domestic economic expansion) in any eight years in U.S. history. The monthly average of new, private sector jobs has fallen to well below 120,000. To give a perspective on that number, Jimmy Carter's and Bill Clinton's economies produced a monthly average of 245,000 and 225,000, respectively. Just an ordinary business cycle, you say? Think again. ALL of the Republican administrations on either side of those two Democratic administrations, "Supply-Siders" all, produced almost HALF as many domestic jobs.
Fact: GDP growth rate has DECLINED every year for the last 5 years, since the failed Bush/Republican Supply-Side/Trickle Down economic policies took effect.
Do a google search on "Presidents and Prosperity" and you will be directed to a Forbes Magazine review of modern presidents since FDR and the level of prosperity they presided over on key economic factors that matter most.
NO Republican administration of 4 years or more beats a Democratic administration of any length, except Ronald Reagan (who ranked 4th behind 3 Democrats, Bill Clinton being ranked #1), and his ecnomy only ranked higher than Jimmy Carter's by a slim margin.
Congress matters, of course. But presidents submit a budget to Congress and wield the veto pen to accept, veto or return legislation at their discretion.
Some idiot in the Dallas Morning Nudes tried to blame the economic meltdown on the paper thin Democrats in the Sunday Letters to the Editor (Points).
It's like there's an official response floating around that these people "borrow" from without proper citation.
I signed the petition, and although I was tempted to I did not check off Rev.
I'm not sure if the Church of the Sub-Genius would impress them.
Gotugye @ 145:
There, is that any better for you?
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/05/images/070504-sumo-pictu...
Login or Register to post comments.