Dow Jones up $374.44

[Independent Harry]

I'm just saying...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/detail/stock_quote?ipage=qdi&Symbol=%24INDU

[GetAClue]

BHO must not have spoken to the media today. Give him a day or so and he will open his mouth again promising to give taxpayers money away to someone else, or raise more taxes on the so called "Rich" (i.e. those with jobs) or fund a HUGE government program. When he does, Wall Street will react negatively again.

[Independent Harry]

BHO must not have spoken to the media today. Give him a day or so and he will open his mouth again promising to give taxpayers money away to someone else, or raise more taxes on the so called "Rich" (i.e. those with jobs) or fund a HUGE government program. When he does, Wall Street will react negatively again.

you ever hear the term retarded? It applies to most of the posts you make.

[GetAClue]

you ever hear the term retarded? It applies to most of the posts you make.

Why, because I disagree with you? Spare me! Better yet, show me where I am wrong. You are a typical liberal, unable to back up anything with fact so you resort to personal attacks. You should run for office!

[GetAClue]

A couple of articles just to back up my original statement:

Wall street sinks as Obama Speaks
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wall-St-falls-as-Obama-speech-rb-14464125.html

Dow Drops 4%, Gold Up $20 Obama Verdict
http://news.goldseek.com/PeterCooper/1232542800.php

There are plenty more if you care too look.

[michiganFats]

A couple of articles just to back up my original statement:

Wall street sinks as Obama Speaks
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Wall-St-falls-as-Obama-speech-rb-14464125.html

Dow Drops 4%, Gold Up $20 Obama Verdict
http://news.goldseek.com/PeterCooper/1232542800.php

There are plenty more if you care too look.

I guess that's OK if you think that Obama has anything at all to do with the economy. If you don't, and you still put up those links , then all I can say is make sure to put towels under your door so your mother doesn't smell you smoking weed in her basement.

[Smurf-Herder]

Citibank showing a profit did more in one day to boost confidence in the stock market than all the great promises and legislation Obama has come up with in the past two months.

[ROdger Right]

I didnt know that the points meant dollars. $374 lol

[mwillman]

OF course, Obama is not trying to fix the Stock market you one sided nimrods.

He is trying to fix the economy which the stock market is just one not very good in the short term indicator of.

You guys are just looking for anything to attack with and its gotten kind of pathetic to be honest.

[ROdger Right]

hey jackass this is your buddies thread

[Dale escondido]

OF course, Obama is not trying to fix the Stock market you one sided nimrods.

He is trying to fix the economy which the stock market is just one not very good in the short term indicator of.

You guys are just looking for anything to attack with and its gotten kind of pathetic to be honest.



Well hes doing a good job of not fixing it for sure.
If spending is what obama believes will fix the economy then he better pour it on cause its not getting anyone excited yet.
If hes sure of this then get it going and stop talking.
He passes a 3/4 trillion dollar package in days and hes got nowhere to spend it:lmao2:
Maybe the printing presses cant keep up.

[mwillman]

he has been president for less then 2 months. He was handed the biggest economic downturn in modern history.

Get you heads out of your ideological asses and start looking at reality.

Yes he did what 90% of economists thought was the right thing to do.

the truth is much simpler your just a bunch of partisan hacks who only care about your selves and your ideologies.

[ROdger Right]

Ill burn that nigger house to the ground if our ideals are forgotten. What are the chances micelle o would grab George Washingtons portrait like the first lady of James Madison did to save it before the brits burned it down.

Should i care about the government? I like to think that Americans should oppose their government. If you didnt, would it not prove that you are only looking after your own security by being a tool and in your case probably a knark for the gov.

the 2nd stimulus will work as good as the first stimulus did.

[doctordog]

I'm just saying...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/detail/stock_quote?ipage=qdi&Symbol=%24INDU

Wish me luck, I just pulled part of my 401K out and bought all Ford stock!

[mwillman]

Ill burn that nigger house to the ground if our ideals are forgotten. What are the chances micelle o would grab George Washingtons portrait like the first lady of James Madison did to save it before the brits burned it down.

Should i care about the government? I like to think that Americans should oppose their government. If you didnt, would it not prove that you are only looking after your own security by being a tool and in your case probably a knark for the gov.

the 2nd stimulus will work as good as the first stimulus did.


You are a disgusting person and your comments are a perfect example of why the republican party will never win another major election unless it shows that it has rejected you and your kind.

[MintJulep]

BHO must not have spoken to the media today. Give him a day or so and he will open his mouth again promising to give taxpayers money away to someone else, or raise more taxes on the so called "Rich" (i.e. those with jobs) or fund a HUGE government program. When he does, Wall Street will react negatively again.Yep. As soon as he opens his mouth, it will tank again. Never fails.

[Dale escondido]

he has been president for less then 2 months. He was handed the biggest economic downturn in modern history.

Get you heads out of your ideological asses and start looking at reality.

Yes he did what 90% of economists thought was the right thing to do.

the truth is much simpler your just a bunch of partisan hacks who only care about your selves and your ideologies.


90% of the economists advised bush and all former presidents to get us to this moment in time where decisions can decide the future or lack of it for our country.
So lets go back to those hacks and get further info and plans laid out.
Wheres the fucking change we hear about.
Oh yes we closed gitmo west.
This smell like the stink bush just did.
We did change the president but the congress smells the same.
If bush got another term and was doing the same as we see now youd hate it .:banghead:
Why does it all change cause the party changed?
GEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[SeniorChief]

I'm just saying...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/detail/stock_quote?ipage=qdi&Symbol=%24INDU

That should take a significant dent out of the $7 Trillion dollars the Muslim President of ours has obligated since inauguration day. I feel so relieved I got $21 back into my 401K today. Hope, change......




My ass...

[mwillman]

Sorry Dale but I would rather get my information from people that have bothered to learn economics rather then an ideology.

Bush and other Republicans were listening to Wall Street financiers not economists. Sure Greenspan made some huge mistakes but deregulation was not advice from economists it was advice from the people being regulated.

Running around not understanding things and then just throwing blame around haphazardly is not a good strategy.

[mwillman]

That should take a significant dent out of the $7 Trillion dollars the Muslim President of ours has obligated since inauguration day. I feel so relieved I got $21 back into my 401K today. Hope, change......
My ass...


Look another racist ignorant fool thinks the world cares what his ignorant ass thinks. Dont you have a deck to swab.

[Dale escondido]

Sorry Dale but I would rather get my information from people that have bothered to learn economics rather then an ideology.

Bush and other Republicans were listening to Wall Street financiers not economists. Sure Greenspan made some huge mistakes but deregulation was not advice from economists it was advice from the people being regulated.

Running around not understanding things and then just throwing blame around haphazardly is not a good strategy.

And obamas cabinet doesnt have any of the characters from wall street.
And the congress was dems when the derugulating came.
I guess now they have obama to advise them and they will make better decisions.

[ROdger Right]

Well arent you are trigger happy throwing around who is racist and who isnt.

I havent hung a nigger from a tree quite yet so where do you get off calling me such a thing?
Defend the nigger some more cause we know someone has to tell you wehat to do in your life.

Oh yea, I actually am not a racist. I just like using the term because you pc bitches say i cant.
Ill choose what I say and whom I say it to.

[doctordog]

Look another racist ignorant fool thinks the world cares what his ignorant ass thinks. Dont you have a deck to swab.

Are you capable of any other insults besides "Racist"? Are you the whipping boy for the liberal progressive propaganda machine?:D

[mwillman]

Actually President Obama does get his information from more then just Wall Street unlike Bush and his ilk.

Maybe you should look into it in stead of having one knee jerk reaction after another.

[ROdger Right]

Yea the treasury secatary helped write the bailout.
So dont get off saying this is a clean administration.

[mwillman]

Are you capable of any other insults besides "Racist"? Are you the whipping boy for the liberal progressive propaganda machine?:D

I dont call people racist to insult them.
I call them racist because they are racist.

Are you supporting racists because your one or because they are willing to help you fight for greed and ignorance.

[mwillman]

Yea the treasury secatary helped write the bailout.
So dont get off saying this is a clean administration.


Please, I don't have a problem with most of the bail out although I think it wasn't handled well for the first few months which has caused some problems.

I'm really hoping that with a president who is smart and who wants to do the job well we can get things working again but its a hard battle especially with the republicans doing everything they can to destroy this nation.

[doctordog]

I dont call people racist to insult them.
I call them racist because they are racist.

Are you supporting racists because your one or because they are willing to help you fight for greed and ignorance.

I don't call people racist just because their ideas are different that mine. That is what liberals have done since Obama won the primary saying you can't be critical of our new leader without being a racist, it is just total bullshit.

[mwillman]

I call people racist that hate or think people of other races are inferior or deserving of less because they are not the same race as the racist.

I stand by who I have called racist because even though they deny it. Its obvious from what they support and what they say.

It has nothing to do with their beliefs on the economy and everything to do with their racism.

[doctordog]

I call people racist that hate or think people of other races are inferior or deserving of less because they are not the same race as the racist.

I stand by who I have called racist because even though they deny it. Its obvious from what they support and what they say.

It has nothing to do with their beliefs on the economy and everything to do with their racism.

Does that mean the NBA is a racist organization?

[ROdger Right]

How do i or senior chief treat other races as inferior? Back the statement up if you want to continue to stand by it.

Saying nigger makes me a racist why?

The first part of the bailout probably helped the banks more than the last part. For the fact that the banks did alot of shady shit that wouldnt fly if you wanted to trace the money.

[Dale escondido]

How do i or senior chief treat other races as inferior? Back the statement up if you want to continue to stand by it.

Saying nigger makes me a racist why?

The first part of the bailout probably helped the banks more than the last part. For the fact that the banks did alot of shady shit that wouldnt fly if you wanted to trace the money.

I find the n word offensive and it doesnt help make a point it only puts focus on the fact it was used.
It reflects a time when blacks were sub species in many peoples minds.

Chinese and native americans were treated equally bad.
But you probably dont know what they were called?
I wish the blacks would stop using it. Its not cute and doesnt help us get past all the ugliness that should just die and go away.

[ROdger Right]

Well theres usually a variety of names, chinks, slant eye, i could go on but eh. redskins, hell we said they are savages in the declaration of independance
I dont see the problem starting or ending with words. I believe its deeper than that. I actually know quite a bit of history.
Using the words gets the emotions out from all sides so we can talk about issues instead of hiding behind a curtain hoping it goes away one day.

[disrupter]

Reports are that because citibank is PROJECTING an 8.3 billion dollar for the quarter the market is rallying.

While citibank has already received 45 billion dollars in taxpayer bailouts.

Is citibank recovering or is it just the most humongous Ponzi scheme ever?
Run at the taxpayer's expense for the benefit of shareholders.

I know citi was heavily into SIVs [Structured Investment Vehicles].
ie. Issuing short term paper at low interest & buying long term paper with higher interest rates & 'banking' the difference.

the trouble is,
they bought 'securitized mortgage' paper which we all know has gone way down &
there is almost no market at all for short term securities.

Maybe i am wrong, but i don't think, as the market seems to, that this is the light at the end of the tunnel. but that is just my thinking.

stray thought: Maybe citi has CDSs [insurance] from AIG that backs some or many of their bad mortgage paper?
What a Chinese puzzle of accounting schemes.

[ROdger Right]

haha yea they are trying to get people to buy again, heres one of them spikes that will disappear soon enough

[Moby]

What I find interesting is that all through out history if the world's largest insurance company said that the $160 Billion in tax payer wasn't enough, or 750,000 job losses were announced in a month, or GM claimed that the billions they just received won't keep them out of bankruptcy would normally send the stock market tumbling.

In 2009, none of those things have any negative effect on the stock market. Of course market forces that move the market up are normal. Market forces that move the market down just don't happen any more. :lmao2:

[Dale escondido]

What I find interesting is that all through out history if the world's largest insurance company said that the $160 Billion in tax payer wasn't enough, or 750,000 job losses were announced in a month, or GM claimed that the billions they just received won't keep them out of bankruptcy would normally send the stock market tumbling.

In 2009, none of those things have any negative effect on the stock market. Of course market forces that move the market up are normal. Market forces that move the market down just don't happen any more. :lmao2:

That why i said earlier I believe the market has come to exspect the worst of news and actually is over the initial shock.
I am looking for the end of this this summer and hope to see some good signs returning.
Although I exspect this summer to be the scariest of times ever. But we will see the real bottom and what it is.

[SeniorChief]

Saying nigger makes me a racist why?



Only if you're white. If you're black, it's perfectly acceptable to use that word in daily conversation, in movies, in music, whereever.

[GetAClue]

I guess that's OK if you think that Obama has anything at all to do with the economy. If you don't, and you still put up those links , then all I can say is make sure to put towels under your door so your mother doesn't smell you smoking weed in her basement.

Well instead of smoking dope (as you suggest) I actually use my brain and am able to put together logical thoughts that are then able to show a pattern.

The statement of "Open his mouth" actually refers to the practice of BHO unveiling his socialist policies. Universal Health Care, Card Check, Cap and Trade and quite a few other programs are socialist in nature. Wall Street has a negative reaction to these policies in that they are detrimental to doing business. Hence, the economic projection becomes bleak and prospects for long term prosperity are dashed. Therefore their investments in businesses that operate in this country become less valuable and thus the decline in stock prices.

Now, instead of pulling the typical liberal playbook out and redirecting the argument to that of me smoking dope simply because I am able to piece together bits of information into a logical thought process, try and DEFEND your position. Although I guess that if you were capable of logical thought and could defend a position or policy, you would not be a liberal.

[Independent Harry]

Citibank showing a profit did more in one day to boost confidence in the stock market than all the great promises and legislation Obama has come up with in the past two months.

That woudl be the case for any president...

[Independent Harry]

Wish me luck, I just pulled part of my 401K out and bought all Ford stock!

Are you serious? I mean Ford only has one way to go, but that's quite a gamble. What was Ford sitting at when you bought it?

[michiganFats]

Well instead of smoking dope (as you suggest) I actually use my brain and am able to put together logical thoughts that are then able to show a pattern.

The statement of "Open his mouth" actually refers to the practice of BHO unveiling his socialist policies. Universal Health Care, Card Check, Cap and Trade and quite a few other programs are socialist in nature. Wall Street has a negative reaction to these policies in that they are detrimental to doing business. Hence, the economic projection becomes bleak and prospects for long term prosperity are dashed. Therefore their investments in businesses that operate in this country become less valuable and thus the decline in stock prices.

Now, instead of pulling the typical liberal playbook out and redirecting the argument to that of me smoking dope simply because I am able to piece together bits of information into a logical thought process, try and DEFEND your position. Although I guess that if you were capable of logical thought and could defend a position or policy, you would not be a liberal.

Well, first off I have to say that I think you're wrong about national health care. It's already here. No one is proposing some new "socialist" system, all they're talking about now is connecting the existing parts. Second, if you want to accuse me of using the "liberal playbook", and of deflecting attention from the issue, that's fine. But, For the last 10 years I've been saying on various boards that UHC was going to be done piecemeal, were you doing the same? That's not a knock against you, I'm just wondering if you were.

You claim BHO is a socialist. I tend to agree, but why exactly do you think he is? Just repeating your opinion over and over doesn't make it true, get detailed in your accusations. Share your knowledge with others. What exactly is it about BHO that makes him a socialist? And, if you can't answer that, perhaps you should stop calling him one. Also, is that an entirely bad thing?

As of this moment, you have 68 posts on this board, I've read them all. I see a lot of accusations, but very little substance. If you want me to take your BHO socialist accusations seriously, get detailed or get off the pot.

[GetAClue]

Well, first off I have to say that I think you're wrong about national health care. It's already here. No one is proposing some new "socialist" system, all they're talking about now is connecting the existing parts. Second, if you want to accuse me of using the "liberal playbook", and of deflecting attention from the issue, that's fine. But, For the last 10 years I've been saying on various boards that UHC was going to be done piecemeal, were you doing the same? That's not a knock against you, I'm just wondering if you were.

You claim BHO is a socialist. I tend to agree, but why exactly do you think he is? Just repeating your opinion over and over doesn't make it true, get detailed in your accusations. Share your knowledge with others. What exactly is it about BHO that makes him a socialist? And, if you can't answer that, perhaps you should stop calling him one. Also, is that an entirely bad thing?

As of this moment, you have 68 posts on this board, I've read them all. I see a lot of accusations, but very little substance. If you want me to take your BHO socialist accusations seriously, get detailed or get off the pot.

To your first point, yes I have been warning others of the move to the UHC. The problem however exists in that we have created a dependent class of people in this country that expect something for nothing. In years past, if your child had a cold, you fed them chicken soup, kept them home from school and let the cold run its course.

Now people are running to the doctor and getting prescriptions for antibiotics to alleviate the symptoms of the cold that would go away on its own. And to make matters worse, they claim that their Insurance provider should pay for it. But those same people start to complain when they cannot afford their insurance any more. Where to they think the money will come from. Washington’s answer is to nationalize it! That is part of BHO’s plan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/02/25/ST2009022502826.html

To quote from the article: “Obama aims to make a "very substantial down payment" toward universal coverage by trimming tax breaks for the wealthy and squeezing payments to insurers, hospitals, doctors and drug manufacturers, a senior administration official said yesterday.”

You then ask a question, “Also, is that [socialism] an entirely bad thing?” My answer would be YES it is. Socialism as I understand it is when the State (government) controls the economy thru taking over ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange for the “Good” of the people. This philosophy “assumes” that the people in charge of this are doing it “solely” for the good of the people. But as we all know, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. For evidence, see the U.S.S.R, Cuba, China, North Korea, etc.

And to your last point, I don’t care if you take my BHO is a socialist accusations seriously. While true that I have not laid out a ton of facts and references, I usually comment of the subject at hand, which by the time I get to it, is common knowledge. I also then write my views using logic and reason with said common knowledge to come to my conclusions. As of this point, I have not seen ANYONE argue effectively to disprove ANY of it. The usual response I get is the name calling and misdirection to change the subject to avoid any real discussion.

[GetAClue]

For the record, I would love nothing more than to be able to have a reasoned and civil discussion with those on the left regarding either BHO's or Congress's policies. But to this date, the responses I get from those on the left are "You're smoking dope", "You're and idiot", “You and the other sheep…” or other disparaging comments. While that may be your opinion, it does not do much to advance your argument.

I have posted on other political forums and see this pattern mainly from the left elsewhere as well. I was HOPING that this forum would be different, but sadly it to this point has not been so.

[Independent Harry]

To your first point, yes I have been warning others of the move to the UHC. The problem however exists in that we have created a dependent class of people in this country that expect something for nothing. In years past, if your child had a cold, you fed them chicken soup, kept them home from school and let the cold run its course.

Now people are running to the doctor and getting prescriptions for antibiotics to alleviate the symptoms of the cold that would go away on its own. And to make matters worse, they claim that their Insurance provider should pay for it. But those same people start to complain when they cannot afford their insurance any more. Where to they think the money will come from. Washington’s answer is to nationalize it! That is part of BHO’s plan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/02/25/ST2009022502826.html

To quote from the article: “Obama aims to make a "very substantial down payment" toward universal coverage by trimming tax breaks for the wealthy and squeezing payments to insurers, hospitals, doctors and drug manufacturers, a senior administration official said yesterday.”

You then ask a question, “Also, is that [socialism] an entirely bad thing?” My answer would be YES it is. Socialism as I understand it is when the State (government) controls the economy thru taking over ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange for the “Good” of the people. This philosophy “assumes” that the people in charge of this are doing it “solely” for the good of the people. But as we all know, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. For evidence, see the U.S.S.R, Cuba, China, North Korea, etc.

And to your last point, I don’t care if you take my BHO is a socialist accusations seriously. While true that I have not laid out a ton of facts and references, I usually comment of the subject at hand, which by the time I get to it, is common knowledge. I also then write my views using logic and reason with said common knowledge to come to my conclusions. As of this point, I have not seen ANYONE argue effectively to disprove ANY of it. The usual response I get is the name calling and misdirection to change the subject to avoid any real discussion.

Who do you think advertised to these people to relieve the symptoms of the cold anyway. It's not just people that have become dependent. what do you think these no bid contracts, and social bailouts. It's not just individuals, its everyone in this country.

[GetAClue]

Who do you think advertised to these people to relieve the symptoms of the cold anyway. It's not just people that have become dependent. what do you think these no bid contracts, and social bailouts. It's not just individuals, its everyone in this country.

They advertised to me also. I also saw advertisements for zero down home loans, crazy credit card deals and male enhancement products. The difference is that I DECLINED to respond. I used my better judgment and just said NO. It's called personal responsibility.

And it IS the people who have become dependent. They depend on everyone except themselves to satisfy their needs. And when they feel that their needs have not been satisfied, they turn to the next politician that promises free stuff.

If you are referring to large corporations and the excessive bailouts, you are right. But think about that for a minute. If you owned and company and KNEW the government would bail you out, would YOU have made high risk - high reward decisions in an effort to boost the bottom line? You bet you would have! Who in their right mind wouldn't?

So now we find ourselves continuing down this road. What are we really teaching these corporations? That if you do it again, we will bail you out again? I say, QUIT BAILING THEM OUT! Let them fail. That is how people learn. When you were young and learning to walk, did you ever fall down? If the government raised you, they would have saddled you with some mechanical device that did not allow you to fall. And after all these years, you still would not be able to walk!

[GetAClue]

My whole point is that socialism and any socialist policy promoted by ANY politician, is simply a form of enslavement and a loss of freedom. And BOTH sides of the aisle have been cramming this stuff down our throats for years now. The difference is that now BHO is not even being subtle about it, yet a lot of people are giving him a pass all in the name of party.


"If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labour. Any alleged "right" of one man, which necessitates the violation of the rights of another, is not and cannot be a right. No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man. There can be no such thing as "the right to enslave."

Ayn Rand - 20th century philosopher

[disrupter]

No one is talking about 'single payer' healthcare,

instead you are going to be MANDATED, yoked & enslaved, BY LAW, to profit gouging by Insurance companies,

where they sacrifice your life, health & safety for the sake of their ever expanding parasitic, profit margins.

The Vast Majority of Americans support single payer.
surveys show two-thirds of Americans and 59 percent of U.S. physicians support [single payer healthcare].http://www.accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1945

Once again the politicians have whored their slut-assed selves to Insurance company money,

at your expense.

[GetAClue]

As I suspected, no liberals showed up to defend their positions with ANY arguements to refute my position. Why am I not suprised?

[Dale escondido]

As I suspected, no liberals showed up to defend their positions with ANY arguements to refute my position. Why am I not suprised?

Socialism is the opiate for the masses.
Responsibility requires actions and more actions.
Once the forbidden fruits are tasted its best to enjoy and dont sweat the small stuff.
Like defending your drug habit.

[Moby]

As I suspected, no liberals showed up to defend their positions with ANY arguements to refute my position. Why am I not suprised?
What was your position? Should I ask what pundit's position are you taking today?

[GetAClue]

I don't need to take a "pundits" position. You are the one that seems fascinated with pundits. That is a CONSERVATIVE position that I need no pundits to coach me on.

Seems to me the ones that screen the loudest about "pundits" are usually the sheep that follow such voices.

[GetAClue]

But yet again, you fall into that same catagory as most liberals. Deflect from the topic to avoid any meaninful discussion of the topic at hand. Do you have an opinion about the topic, or are you just going to continue to babble on about pundits and sheep?

[doctordog]

Are you serious? I mean Ford only has one way to go, but that's quite a gamble. What was Ford sitting at when you bought it?

1.73/share

[Independent Harry]

1.73/share

nice where is it today?

[MintJulep]

The dumb bastard spoke (uh, uh) again on TV today so I suspect the Dow will drop 500 pts on Monday.

:banghead:

[Dale escondido]

The dumb bastard spoke (uh, uh) again on TV today so I suspect the Dow will drop 500 pts on Monday.

:banghead:

The fall depends on how many adjectives he used.:D

[MintJulep]

The fall depends on how many adjectives he used.:DWell, he was without da 'prompter so it was mainly uh's and um's. :)

[SeniorChief]

I'm just saying...

http://moneycentral.msn.com/detail/stock_quote?ipage=qdi&Symbol=%24INDU

What you fail to mention it's down 4,000 points since inauguration day.

Now that we have that taken care of, your point?

[mwillman]

are you fucking kidding me.

Senior Fool do you have the gaul to lay this crap on Obamas door?
You are so fucking far gone from reality you should be institutionalized.

[SeniorChief]

Senior Fool do you have the gaul to lay this crap on Obamas door?



Don't tell me -- everything fucked-up since inauguration day is Bush's fault?

You are really a dumb fuck.

Seriously.

[mwillman]

The economy wasn't broken on January 20th 2009 and it wont be fixed in 2 months either.

You can lie all you want but everyone knows that the economy was in a nose dive long before President Obama was elected.

I think your are the dumb fuck swabby boy.

[SeniorChief]

The economy wasn't broken on January 20th 2009.

Dear God, are you fucking dense.

[mwillman]

You lie and misinform and you call me dense, hell you make diamond look flexible.

Why don't you take your ignorant lies and feed them to your children since they are already beyond help.

[SeniorChief]

You lie and misinform and you call me dense, hell you make diamond look flexible.



Where was the Dow in November 08, January 09 and today.

Look it up dipshit. Then get back with us.

[mwillman]

And anyone that knows anything knows that the Dow is a lag indicator not a predictor but I wont bother to try and educate and ignorant asshat like you.

Trying to lay the drop in the Dow on President Obama is like giving you credit for the creation of the earth, Its absurd.

[MintJulep]

And anyone that knows anything knows that the Dow is a lag indicator not a predictor but I wont bother to try and educate and ignorant asshat like you.

Trying to lay the drop in the Dow on President Obama is like giving you credit for the creation of the earth, Its absurd.Fact: The Dow has dropped more since the inauguration day than for any President in the past 100 years.

[mwillman]

Yes, and because the Stock market is a lagging indicator it indicates that Bush and the republican economic agenda did more to ruin the world economy then anything in 80 years.

President Obama is doing everything he can to fix the huge problems created by the neocons of the last 8 + years.

[MintJulep]

Yes, and because the Stock market is a lagging indicator it indicates that Bush and the republican economic agenda did more to ruin the world economy then anything in 80 years.What did Bush "do" which ruined the economy? I suggest you google the Community Reinvestment Act along with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd.

President Obama is doing everything he can to fix the huge problems created by the neocons of the last 8 + years.Sorry, but writing a trillion dollar check to research cow shit and study a mouse isn't going to do shit to help the economy. That's probably the DUMBEST thing anyone could have done.

[mwillman]

What the neocons have been doing since Reagen is pretty simple

1. Deregulated the markets allowing them to create all kinds of schemes that
created alot of the toxic assests the have almost brought down the whole system.

2. They legalized derivatives and allowed banks to get into investments causing more gambling and less valid investment.

3. They gave huge tax cuts to the rich with the argument that it would trickle down but the numbers prove that it doesn't trickle down in fact the opposite has occurred namely the rich got much richer while the rest of society got much poorer.

4. They filled many posts in the government with idiots and political appointees rather then trained professionals which caused a huge decrease in efficiency as shown by FEMAs response to New Orleans.

I could go on but I realize that if you don't see tax cut at least 3 times a sentence you loss interest.

[Smurf-Herder]

Yes, and because the Stock market is a lagging indicator it indicates that Bush and the republican economic agenda did more to ruin the world economy then anything in 80 years.

President Obama is doing everything he can to fix the huge problems created by the neocons of the last 8 + years.

Why is it then, that argument didn't apply when Bush was left with Clinton's recession?

[mwillman]

I have never said that Bush was responsible for recessions that existed when he took office.
He was responsible for the huge spending on the War in Iraq that feed many international corporations but did nothing for this nation. He was also responsible for much of the deregulation that has created this huge economic problem we are in now.

[Smurf-Herder]

I have never said that Bush was responsible for recessions that existed when he took office.
He was responsible for the huge spending on the War in Iraq that feed many international corporations but did nothing for this nation. He was also responsible for much of the deregulation that has created this huge economic problem we are in now.


Others on this board have.

The deregulation started with Clinton, BTW.

[mwillman]

No the major deregulation began with Reagen, it continued under Clinton but much of that actually came from a republican congress. Clinton signed off on it because he was a free market democrat but the majority of deregulation has always been a large part of the republican agenda.

[Smurf-Herder]

No the major deregulation began with Reagen, it continued under Clinton but much of that actually came from a republican congress. Clinton signed off on it because he was a free market democrat but the majority of deregulation has always been a large part of the republican agenda.


You must have missed the hundreds of posts about the history of the Democrats on this.

[mwillman]

You must have not been around when all of this was happening.

what do you think Reagen meant when he said what we don't need is more government. He was talking about regulation.

[Smurf-Herder]

You must have not been around when all of this was happening.

what do you think Reagen meant when he said what we don't need is more government. He was talking about regulation.

The devil is in the details, isn't it.

Deregulation on what, in what way?

Now we gotta go all the way back the Reagan?

Geeeze!

As long as we don't talk about the Democrats, right?

[mwillman]

Specifically I am talking about things like Derivatives, and the removal of the regulations that allowed smaller and smaller groups of companies to own more and more of there specified markets.

They are call oligopolies and they created the giant banks like lehman brothers which started the huge fall and AIG which now has our economy in a chock hold.

[Dale escondido]

The devil is in the details, isn't it.

Deregulation on what, in what way?

Now we gotta go all the way back the Reagan?

Geeeze!

As long as we don't talk about the Democrats, right?

Alot of the proiblems did begin back to reagan.
Little fixes to not confront the "real value" existing in the market place.
Keeping the economy going at any costs.
Every admin adds a little to the demise of the real value of assets to keep economies going strong.
Now we hit the wall and values are adjusting and were trying to spend things back to better days.
Thats why i dont support obama.
It wont work, just a putting off of the inevitable.
I do believe the stimilus spending on tangables will help and unemployment needs to be there for the bad times.
But the rest is crap.

[Smurf-Herder]

Specifically I am talking about things like Derivatives, and the removal of the regulations that allowed smaller and smaller groups of companies to own more and more of there specified markets.

They are call oligopolies and they created the giant banks like lehman brothers which started the huge fall and AIG which now has our economy in a chock hold.

Media Mum on Barney Frank's Fannie Mae Love Connection
Democratic House Financial Services Committee Chair promoted GSEs while former 'spouse' was Fannie Mae executive.

Are journalists playing favorites with some of the key political figures involved with regulatory oversight of U.S. financial markets?

MSNBC’s Chris Matthews launched several vitriolic attacks on the Republican Party on his Sept. 17, 2008, show, suggesting blame for Wall Street problems should be focused in a partisan way. However, he and other media have failed to thoroughly examine the Democratic side of the blame game.

Prominent Democrats ran Fannie Mae, the same government-sponsored enterprise (GSE) that donated campaign cash to top Democrats. And one of Fannie Mae’s main defenders in the House – Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., a recipient of more than $40,000 in campaign donations from Fannie since 1989 – was once romantically involved with a Fannie Mae executive.

The media coverage of Frank’s coziness with Fannie Mae and his pro-Fannie Mae stances has been lacking. Of the eight appearances Frank made on the three broadcasts networks between Jan. 1, 2008, and Sept. 21, 2008, none of his comments dealt with the potential conflicts of interest. Only six of the appearances dealt with the economy in general and two of those appearances, including an April 6, 2008 appearance on CBS’s “60 Minutes” were about his opposition to a manned mission to Mars.

Frank has argued that family life “should be fair game for campaign discussion,” wrote the Associated Press on Sept. 2. The comment was in reference to GOP vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin and her pregnant daughter. “They’re the ones that made an issue of her family,” the Massachusetts Democrat said to the AP.

The news media have covered the relationship in the past, but there have been no mentions since 2005, according to Nexis and despite the collapse of Fannie Mae. The July 3, 1998, Reliable Source column in The Washington Post reported Frank, who is openly gay, had a relationship with Herb Moses, an executive for the now-government controlled Fannie Mae. The column revealed the two had split up at the time but also said Frank was referring to Moses as his “spouse.” Another Washington Post report said Frank called Moses his “lover” and that the two were “still friends” after the breakup.

Frank was and remains a stalwart defender of Fannie Mae, which is now under FBI investigation along with its sister organization Freddie Mac, American International Group Inc. (NYSE:AIG) and Lehman Brothers (NYSE:LEH) – all recently participants in government bailouts. But Frank has derailed efforts to regulate the institution, as well as denying it posed any financial risk. Frank’s office has been unresponsive to efforts by the Business & Media Institute to comment on these potential conflicts of interest.

While the relationship reportedly ended 10 years ago, Frank was serving on the House Banking Committee the entire 10 years they were together. The committee is the primary House body which along with the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) has jurisdiction over the government-sponsored enterprises.

He has served on the committee since becoming a congressman in 1981 and became the ranking Democrat on the committee in 2003. He became chairman of the committee, now called the House Financial Services Committee, in 2007.

Moses was the assistant director for product initiatives at Fannie Mae and had been at the forefront of relaxing lending restrictions at the company for rural customers, according to the Feb. 23, 1998, issue of National Mortgage News (NMN).

“Herb Moses, who helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs, has left the mortgage industry,” Darryl Hicks wrote for NMN. “Mr. Moses - whose last day was Feb. 13 - spent the past seven years at Fannie Mae, most recently as director of housing initiatives. Over the course of time, he played an instrumental role in developing the company’s Title One and 203(k) home improvement lending programs.”

Hicks explained in his story how Moses orchestrated a collaborative effort between Fannie Mae and the Department of Agriculture.

“The Dartmouth grad also played a crucial role in brokering a relationship between Fannie Mae and the Department of Agriculture,” Hicks wrote. “This led to the creation of Fannie Mae’s rural housing program where the secondary marketing agency agreed to purchase small farm loans insured through the department.”

While Moses served at Fannie Mae and was Frank’s partner, Frank was actively working to support GSEs, according to several news outlets.

In 1991, Frank and former Rep. Joe Kennedy, D-Mass., lobbied for Fannie to soften rules on multi-family home mortgages although those dwellings showed a default rate twice that of single-family homes, according to the Nov. 22, 1991, Boston Globe.

BusinessWeek reported in its Nov. 14, 1994, issue that Fannie Mae called on Frank to exert his influence against a Housing & Urban Development proposal that would force the GSE to focus on minority and low-income buyers and police bias by lenders regardless of their location. Fannie Mae opposed HUD on the issue because it claimed doing so would “ignore the urban middle class.”

Moses left Fannie in 1998 to start his own pottery business. National Mortgage News called Moses a “mortgage guru” and said he developed “many of Fannie Mae's affordable housing and home improvement lending programs. Moses ended his relationship with Frank just months after he left Fannie.

Even after the relationship ended, however, Frank was a staunch defender of Fannie Mae even as other experts suggested there were serious problems building in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

According to an article by Kathleen Day in the Oct. 8, 2003, Washington Post, Frank opposed giving the Bush administration the right to approve or disapprove business activities that “could pose risk to the taxpayers.” He told the Post he worried the Treasury Department “would sacrifice activities that are good for consumers in the name of lowering the companies’ market risks.”

Just a month before, Frank had aggressively thwarted reform efforts by the Bush administration. He told The New York Times on Sept. 11, 2003, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s problems were “exaggerated,” a gross miscalculation some five years later with costs estimated to be in the hundreds of billions.

“These two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis,” Frank said to the Times. “The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.”

Frank has also reaped campaign contribution benefits from Fannie Mae and its counterpart Freddie Mac. According a front page story in the Sept. 19, 2008, Investor’s Business Daily by Terry Jones, Frank has received $40,100 in campaign cash over the past two decades from the GSEs.

Frank is ranked 16th on a list that includes both houses of Congress and fifth among his colleagues in the House. According to data from the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets.org, political action committees financed by both Freddie and Fannie have contributed $3,017,797 to members of Congress since 1989. And according to the July 16 issue of Politico, the two entities have spent a whopping $200 million to buy influence – including not only campaign donations to members of Congress, but also presidential campaigns and lobbying efforts.

In a July 23 op-ed, Wall Street Journal Editorial Page Editor Paul Gigot put the blame for the GSEs’ collapse firmly on the members of the liberal establishment who took money from Freddie and Fannie. “Fan and Fred also couldn't prosper for as long as they have without the support of the political left... This includes Mr. Frank and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.) on Capitol Hill, as well as Mr. [Paul] Krugman and the Washington Post's Steven Pearlstein in the press.”

Frank was asked by CNN’s John Roberts on the Sept. 22, 2008 “American Morning” about this and his opposition to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Originally, he claimed he didn’t think the two GSEs were facing any problems when the issue first surfaced in 2003. He instead blamed the Republican-controlled Congress for their ultimate fall, failing to mention his friendly relationship with Fannie Mae and the contributions it had made to his campaign over the years.

“Yes, I did not think we were facing a crisis in 2003, but that didn't mean we didn't have to have reform,” an animated Frank said when confronted with the question. “Here’s the deal, the Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 through 2006. They did zero to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”

However, on Sept. 17, 2008, former Bush administration Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove elaborated on the Bush administration’s efforts to curb abuses at the two GSEs in 2003. He told Fox News’ “Hannity & Colmes” that Frank was among the most aggressive opponents of White House attempts to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

“All of this bad stuff on Wall Street happened because people got greedy and the greed started at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” Rove said. “And I know this because five years ago, the administration was alerted by the regulator, James Lockhart, that there was insufficient authority and that these institutions – particularly Fannie – were out of control.”

Rove said the Bush administration’s efforts to reform Fannie and Freddie were opposed by congressional Democrats – specifically Frank and Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn.

“And I got to tell you, for five years, I was part of an effort at the White House to fight this and our biggest opponents on the Hill who blocked this every step of the way were people like Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. And Fannie and Freddie are the $200 billion contagion at the center of this.”

Frank has been quick to blame deregulation for some of the problems in the financial environment, as he did on Bloomberg television’s Sept. 19 “Political Capital with Al Hunt.” However, as earmark crusader Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. pointed out – it’s not deregulation, but it was the structure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that had been guarded by Frank and other members of Congress.

“Some people point at deregulation,” Flake said to the Business & Media Institute on Sept. 23. “It’s not deregulation at all. We have for far too long shielded Fannie and Freddie for example, with the implicit and now explicit guarantee. I just found it humorous.”

Flake specifically named Frank as one of the members behind letting allegations of transgressions at the two GSEs for slipping by without oversight from Congress.

“Just a few minutes ago, a reporter was asking me about this and saying, ‘Barney Frank is saying that’s just – because there were allegations,’ correct ones – ‘that Fannie and Freddie have been the playground for politicians for years and now the other side is saying Fannie and Freddie were just a small part of this and this goes far beyond.’ It does, but these same people a couple of weeks ago said, ‘You got to bail out Fannie and Freddie because they touch everything out there. They touch nearly every mortgage out there.’ And because of that explicit guarantee – that we would come and bail them out, nobody has been subject to market discipline.”

Frank claims differently, according to a letter to the editor published in the Sept. 17, 2008 Wall Street Journal. Frank noted that in 2005 he supported regulating compensation for Fannie and Freddie executives.

“In fact, my reform efforts had begun when we were still in the minority. In 2005, I joined Michael Oxley, then chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, in supporting legislation to increase the regulation of Fannie and Freddie that passed the House by a vote of 330 to 90,” Frank wrote. “When former Congressman Richard Baker proposed to examine the compensation structure of Fannie and Freddie's top executives, and some members of Congress tried to block him, I explicitly spoke out in support of his right to do that and our right, as a Congress, to examine the GSE’s compensation practices.”

The red flags were raised long before the government bailed out the two GSEs in August 2008. The first egregious scandal involving Fannie Mae occurred in 2004. A 2004 Wall Street Journal editorial was first to point out claims in an OFHEO report that showed accounting malpractices by the GSE.

“For years, mortgage giant Fannie Mae has produced smoothly growing earnings. And for years, observers have wondered how Fannie could manage its inherently risky portfolio without a whiff of volatility, the Oct. 4, 2004, editorial, “Fannie Mae Enron?” said. “Now, thanks to Fannie’s regulator, we know the answer. The company was cooking the books. Big time.”

http://businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080924145932.aspx

[mwillman]

The rights obsession with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac are nothing but a red herring again.
They did have some serious issues but they are far from the whole of the problem.

[Smurf-Herder]

The rights obsession with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac are nothing but a red herring again.
They did have some serious issues but they are far from the whole of the problem.




No, it's the two men heading the regulatory committees, their deals, payoffs and conflicts of interest.

[Smurf-Herder]

Economic Meltdown Fueled By Barney Frank/Christopher Dodd

January 29, 2009 – As our nation faces a serious economic crisis in 2009, Americans need to understand the origins of this crisis.

The subprime mortgage crisis fueled instability in other sectors of the economy and has led a crisis in the banking industry, housing industry, auto industry – and is resulting in the layoffs of millions of Americans. A subprime mortgage is one granted to individuals with a bad credit history or no credit history. They were given no-money-down, low interest, or interest-only loans.

Democrats effectively blamed President Bush for the economic crisis and this propelled Obama into office as President of the United States for the next four years.

Is President Bush to blame? No. It was Democrat leadership going back to the Carter Administration that created this economic disaster.

The fact is that the roots of this economic crisis go back to the Clinton and Carter Administrations , the radical group ACORN, and Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT).

Here are the facts:

Under President Jimmy Carter, the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was passed. It required federal financial institutions to encourage banks to give home loans to persons with little credit and low income. Economist Russell Roberts said that the CRA played a major role in creating the sub-prime mortgage crisis in the U.S.

Under Bill Clinton, the CRA was expanded and Clinton set targets for low-income home ownership at the Department of Housing and Urban Development and at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Banks were forced by the federal government to provide bad loans to unqualified people.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) is Chairman of the Financial Services Committee in the House of Representatives. In 2003, he said of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: “These two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.” In the late 1980s and early 90s, Frank was engaged in a sexual relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie Mae’s assistant director of product initiatives! Bill O’Reilly exposed Frank’s involvement in the mortgage crisis: YouTube - O 'Reilly - Barney Frank Had Affair with Fannie Mae Exec. Frank looked the other way, while our economy was being destroyed by federal policies created in Clinton and Carter Administrations. (Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae help fund the homosexual agenda.

In 2008, Freddie gave $20,000 to a Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) event; Fannie Mae gave nearly $19,000 to the same event. Freddie has donated $125,000 and Fannie donated $80,000 to homosexual groups since 2005.)

Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) is head of the powerful banking committee in the Senate. He and Barney Frank consistently resisted attempts by the Bush Administration to closely regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Dodd also got preferential treatment from Countrywide on two mortgages. Countrywide was one of the biggest subprime providers.

Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd received thousands of dollars in contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years. Dodd has received $133,900 since 1989; Frank received $40,100. (While in the Senate, Barack Obama received $105,849).

As long ago as 2003, President Bush was trying to get the House and Senate to carefully monitor the actions of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. His efforts were rejected by Democrats.

Obama associates headed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the years that the crisis was getting out of control. Obama friend Franklin Raines ran Fannie Mae and collected $50 million from it. Obama friend Jamie Gorelick worked for Fannie Mae and earned $26 million; Jim Johnson, formerly Obama’s vice president search committee chairman, hauled in millions from his work with Fannie Mae as CEO.

ACORN, the socialist group that routinely engages in voter fraud, was involved in pushing for risky loans to people with bad credit histories or little money for down payments. ACORN intimidated banks in Chicago and elsewhere to give risky loans! Obama actually trained ACORN workers when he was a community organizer in Chicago! ACORN used provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act to delay or halt efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had lowered their credit standards!

http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3541

[Dale escondido]

The rights obsession with Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac are nothing but a red herring again.
They did have some serious issues but they are far from the whole of the problem.

This proves how non objective you are.
Of course everything played a part.
If you only considered parts then your limiting yourself.
Policys at fanny mae encouraged other to join in the money fest.
Thank god not all. And those who did should be names we soon wouldnt even remember, not resurected dead entities.
When only recognizing wrong doing by one side you limit your wit to half.

[mwillman]

I think your over simplification and childish level of blame disbursement show that you are not even deep enough or educated enough to have a valid opinion.

I look for the core problems that create instablility, you are looking for some way to blame the poor.

Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac had accounting issues a few years ago and that was fixed but what they do is not evil nor did it cause the economic turmoil we are facing now.

The huge amount of Toxic debt created by banks and wall street selling and reselling debt so many times they cant even track it back to its origin any more created the problem. It is also the loss of equity because of the reduction in housing prices that were over inflated by fools on both sides of the isle.

I say you are blinded by the group think of the generation of greed. The eights and nineties were a foolish time were CEO's started thinking they should all be billionaires and wall street became the largest Las Vegas gambling den in history.

[ROdger Right]

Nope i blame the people. Its their duty no one elses to secure their voices and rights.

[Independent Harry]

I don't get how people still blame a few million foreclosures on the economic crisis. Smurfy, it just shows how short sighted and biased you are. The problem wasn't writing a few bad loans, a perentage in the single digits of the actual number of homes paying on time. It was the 60 trillion dollar credit swap and insurance market made to make selling these loans super profitable. Which was created due to a lack of regulation that was hugely part of the Bush administration. You keep talking about Freddie and Fannie and Chris Dodd, but he didn't cause this. The greedy bankers did...

[Smurf-Herder]

I think your over simplification and childish level of blame disbursement show that you are not even deep enough or educated enough to have a valid opinion.

I look for the core problems that create instablility, you are looking for some way to blame the poor.

Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac had accounting issues a few years ago and that was fixed but what they do is not evil nor did it cause the economic turmoil we are facing now.

The huge amount of Toxic debt created by banks and wall street selling and reselling debt so many times they cant even track it back to its origin any more created the problem. It is also the loss of equity because of the reduction in housing prices that were over inflated by fools on both sides of the isle.

I say you are blinded by the group think of the generation of greed. The eights and nineties were a foolish time were CEO's started thinking they should all be billionaires and wall street became the largest Las Vegas gambling den in history.

So, you're saying we should ignore any accountability by the Senate Financial Services Committee and the House Banking Committee, who are supposed to oversee and regulate all this? We are to ingnore the people getting sweetheart deals from these same companies and in one case are literally in bed with them?

[GetAClue]

I think your over simplification and childish level of blame disbursement show that you are not even deep enough or educated enough to have a valid opinion.

I look for the core problems that create instablility, you are looking for some way to blame the poor.

Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac had accounting issues a few years ago and that was fixed but what they do is not evil nor did it cause the economic turmoil we are facing now.

The huge amount of Toxic debt created by banks and wall street selling and reselling debt so many times they cant even track it back to its origin any more created the problem. It is also the loss of equity because of the reduction in housing prices that were over inflated by fools on both sides of the isle.

I say you are blinded by the group think of the generation of greed. The eights and nineties were a foolish time were CEO's started thinking they should all be billionaires and wall street became the largest Las Vegas gambling den in history.

Are you really this dense? The mere fact that Fannie and Freddie were being backed by the Federal Government allowed ALL of these institutions to participate in these practices KNOWING that the Federal Government would bail them out.

Yes, people in business are greedy and get into the business to make money. Yes the default credit swaps and risk based derivatives were vehicles that enabled many to make money off of these securitized mortgages.

However, NONE of this would have happened without the lack of oversight of Fannie and Freddie and the implicit understanding that these securities were going to be backed by the Federal Government. So now you would ignore all of this and blame greed on Wall Street?

If you ever want to fix a problem, you first need to get to the source of the issue and address it. Until we do, we will continue to experience these issues.

[MintJulep]

Up 81 pts so far. Here's hoping the uptick continues.

[mwillman]

Are you really this dense? The mere fact that Fannie and Freddie were being backed by the Federal Government allowed ALL of these institutions to participate in these practices KNOWING that the Federal Government would bail them out.

Yes, people in business are greedy and get into the business to make money. Yes the default credit swaps and risk based derivatives were vehicles that enabled many to make money off of these securitized mortgages.

However, NONE of this would have happened without the lack of oversight of Fannie and Freddie and the implicit understanding that these securities were going to be backed by the Federal Government. So now you would ignore all of this and blame greed on Wall Street?

If you ever want to fix a problem, you first need to get to the source of the issue and address it. Until we do, we will continue to experience these issues.

I would ask the same question of you are you really that dense.

I know you guys are one trick ponies. Government bad private industry good but come on already. Private industry were the ones trading debt back and forth like there was no tomorrow.

Again I say Freddie and Fannie are red herrings and are just the republican talking point because it allows then to blame the government and not there cronies on wall street.

If you want to blame governmental oversight then put the blame where it goes the republicans controlled congress up until 2007 and they are the ones that deregulating everything.

[MintJulep]

Up $150. Was the Chosen One's speech cancelled today?

[bairdi]

Up $150. Was the Chosen One's speech cancelled today?
No, you fools were just wrong................................again.

[MintJulep]

No, you fools were just wrong................................again.I surely hope so. I don't want to see our economy destroyed.

[mwillman]

Thats not how it sounds to me.

You guys sound like cheerleaders of failure.

[GetAClue]

I would ask the same question of you are you really that dense.

I know you guys are one trick ponies. Government bad private industry good but come on already. Private industry were the ones trading debt back and forth like there was no tomorrow.

Again I say Freddie and Fannie are red herrings and are just the republican talking point because it allows then to blame the government and not there cronies on wall street.

If you want to blame governmental oversight then put the blame where it goes the republicans controlled congress up until 2007 and they are the ones that deregulating everything.

Maybe your really are that dense. Freddie and Fannie are red herrings? So they had no part in any of this? Gotcha! Care to buy some swamp land in Florida?

[MintJulep]

Thats not how it sounds to me.

You guys sound like cheerleaders of failure.No, I believe you've gotten us mixed up with the moonbat traitors of the past eight years.

I want my country to succeed.

[mwillman]

Maybe your really are that dense. Freddie and Fannie are red herrings? So they had no part in any of this? Gotcha! Care to buy some swamp land in Florida?


Again your the dense one if you have bought the republican line so rapidly. Actually Fannie and Freddie are nothing but a side note in the economic collapse and the sooner you start looking at more then just them the sooner you will start to see the real issues that have done so much to damage this country over the last 30 years and most specifically the last 8.

[Smurf-Herder]

No, you fools were just wrong................................again.

No we weren't.

I fell to negative territory at the close today.

[Dale escondido]

Again your the dense one if you have bought the republican line so rapidly. Actually Fannie and Freddie are nothing but a side note in the economic collapse and the sooner you start looking at more then just them the sooner you will start to see the real issues that have done so much to damage this country over the last 30 years and most specifically the last 8.

Hard to argue with you as you obviously go on ignore if the info doesnt lead back to the repugs.
Alot of policy has led to a point where a whole economy could collapse.
Mostly allowing entities to appear solvent when its just a trick of accounting.
This started during the saving and loan crisis in the 80s

[mwillman]

I realize there has been crap done by the democratic party but in my years of life the republicans have controlled the presidency and the congress for most of its Nixon, Ford, Reagen, Bush, and Bush 2 and all I see is shit so you will have to forgive me if I blame the people that had the power most of the time.

The 8 years we had Clinton we had great economic growth. So what I see is years of republican rule causing the poor and the middle class to suffer and them trying to blame everything on democrats which seems so absurd being it was republicans in power for most of it.

[Dale escondido]

I realize there has been crap done by the democratic party but in my years of life the republicans have controlled the presidency and the congress for most of its Nixon, Ford, Reagen, Bush, and Bush 2 and all I see is shit so you will have to forgive me if I blame the people that had the power most of the time.

The 8 years we had Clinton we had great economic growth. So what I see is years of republican rule causing the poor and the middle class to suffer and them trying to blame everything on democrats which seems so absurd being it was republicans in power for most of it.

Now i dont have any arguement with you on this.
I agree,,,,,,, both side dont do anything but campaign.

Therefore legislation just keeps the phantom economy going and the day of recoking pushed back.
I never try to see who is more the cause, cause they both only represent themseves so I dont care.
ps we had explosive growth under reagan and clinton and Id take either back in a heartbeat.
But they are still guilty of putting off facing fiscal responsibility.
Eventually the law of the physical universe will overtake the schemes of man.

[mwillman]

The only things that grew explosively under Reagen was the Deficit and military spending.
Many things were killed with Reagen namely much of the financial regulation that kept things like we have happening right now from happening.

Hell even welfare reform was done during Clintons time.

I will not put Reagen up as a great president because the truth is he did little to improve this nation and much to indebt us.

[ROdger Right]

Yes, he thought government should be limited. Whats your point?
Didnt you just say in a different thread you believe in limited government. Stop bull shitting.

[doctordog]

The only things that grew explosively under Reagen was the Deficit and military spending.
Many things were killed with Reagen namely much of the financial regulation that kept things like we have happening right now from happening.

Hell even welfare reform was done during Clintons time.

I will not put Reagen up as a great president because the truth is he did little to improve this nation and much to indebt us.

Clinton cut the DOD by 50% AND PUT 100,000 OUT OF WORK

[mwillman]

No in another thread I said I don't support unlimited government.

Its not my fault you cant grasp the difference.

When limiting government means the whole society takes a giant dive off the cliff then no I don't support it being that limited. This is not the fucking Wild west and all your self centered desires cant come true because they end up dicking over way to many people.

Freedom doesn't mean you are free to destroy.

[Smurf-Herder]

Hell even welfare reform was done during Clintons time.

I will not put Reagen up as a great president because the truth is he did little to improve this nation and much to indebt us.

Didn't the Republican controlled Congress push Welfare Reform.

Reagan didn't do much to improve the nation?

I'm not going to even bother.

[mwillman]

Yes and he created far more jobs then he lost by not over spending on the military.

We have the largest military in the history of the fucking world even if we cut it 50% it will still be the largest fucking military in history of the world.

Why do care so little about trillions of dollars going to death and destruction and so much for money going to help Americans.

[ROdger Right]

Actually i was givin the right to destroy say if there is to much centralized power in our country. Ill do what i can to get us back where we should be but to be honest id rather watch her burn than see her in the hands of a few.

[mwillman]

Blah blah blah

Crying rebellion all the time doesn't make you a man and it really doesn't help the nation either.

If all you care about is you and yours then fuck off because that means you don't care about anyone else.

[ROdger Right]

Why would i be doing this for myself? I have little to do with this actually.
Am i supposed to become all powerful coming out of the ashes or something?

Its that I know I have the ability to act, thats just my situation. And yea this is my country too. I know you wont understand this but watch scarface. I have a similar problem. i see the problems with the system and i wont be content.

[Smurf-Herder]

Yes and he created far more jobs then he lost by not over spending on the military.

We have the largest military in the history of the fucking world even if we cut it 50% it will still be the largest fucking military in history of the world.



And how many times did we hear during Iraq that we needed an even bigger military to handle a protracted conflict?