• Advertisement

Debate...

Whatever you want to discuss

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:16 am

kevin wrote:
The whole deal then was about perception of leadership.


as is this deal, so stop trying to feed me cake about mccain being a great leader. now who is wanting to have the cake and eat it too??? :shock:

I never said he was being "a great leader". Pay attention! I said it was his calculation that he was hoping to be seen as a strong leader by going to Washington to handle this businesss.

How is The Empty Suit showing any leadership qualities in this situation!?

Pay attention again - McCain only wants to postpone the debate not cancel it! Unless there is some news I missed!
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby Taproot » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:23 am

Scott, maybe I'm not being clear, because I'm pissed off, but I think we agree and just don't see it. Most people, like you and I, don't want the government meddling in anything and this bailout is pissing people off, because meddling got us there. McCain's political move to supposedly tend to the situation for me and you (nukka please) has further inflamed voters. A fast decision on anything of this proportion will, I guarantee you, will be a bad one.

I will not get into a Bush/Katrina analogy, but someone said something one time that applies to the bad element of that disaster as well as this one. "Help, I'm drowning, throw me a check!"
User avatar
Taproot
10 Point
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:30 am

Taproot wrote:Scott, maybe I'm not being clear, because I'm pissed off, but I think we agree and just don't see it. Most people, like you and I, don't want the government meddling in anything and this bailout is pissing people off, because meddling got us there. McCain's political move to supposedly tend to the situation for me and you (nukka please) has further inflamed voters. A fast decision on anything of this proportion will, I guarantee you, will be a bad one.

I will not get into a Bush/Katrina analogy, but someone said something one time that applies to the bad element of that disaster as well as this one. "Help, I'm drowning, throw me a check!"

Yes people are ticked off about it because most see this (because of the MSM message) as corporate greed and them being helped out by the gov't. That aint exactly the case. The MSM does that to make the Republican look bad just as they did with Bush after Katrina...Bush hates black people!

If the economy goes into the tank becasue of inaction by Congress is your bank account ready for the consequences?
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby brewer03 » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:32 am

One of the main reasons for McCains return and wanting the democrat to return is that congress is scheduled to recess after friday.... Why cant the debate be delayed a day or to so that all of the elected officials in Washington do their job that is asked of them by us people regardless of party.... I dont want government medalling either but it is gonna happen and I am glad McCain is going to battle this plan becaus eI truelly believe he will fight for the best possible scenario for the people...

I also believe the media is making way more out of the debate deal than should be becaus eof the liberal biases of the media.. I would rather watch the news tonite and see what the politicians have done to try and save some of my money spent in taxes than to watch a debate that we can have monday night when the rest of the elected officials arent in washington either...
Triple Threat 2015- 2016

Serious Six 2014-2015

Rajun Sardis Bucks
2013-2014 deer hunting champs

life is great the oppurtunity to hunt and fish make it even better
brewer03
Pope&Young
 
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: Raymond Ms

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:39 am

Food for thought:

Before the Democrats' affirmative action lending policies became an embarrassment, the Los Angeles Times reported that, starting in 1992, a majority-Democratic Congress "mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains."

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.

Meanwhile, economists were screaming from the rooftops that the Democrats were forcing mortgage lenders to issue loans that would fail the moment the housing market slowed and deadbeat borrowers couldn't get out of their loans by selling their houses.

A decade later, the housing bubble burst and, as predicted, food-stamp-backed mortgages collapsed. Democrats set an affirmative action time-bomb and now it's gone off.
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby Taproot » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:40 am

Scott wrote:Yes people are ticked off about it because most see this (because of the MSM message) as corporate greed and them being helped out by the gov't. That aint exactly the case.


I think you give the MSM a little too much credit for influence. Coorporate greed and being helped out by the same government that allowed (and sometimes forced) them to get away with this garbage is exactly what this is about. I promise you this was not due to the MSM. This transcends the Rep/Dem argument by light years. When it's all said and done, it's simply not right.
User avatar
Taproot
10 Point
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Debate...

Postby Taproot » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:51 am

I just looked back over this thread and I think I hijacked my on topic. I sure was in a good mood on that first post. :roll:

My head hurts. I'm heading up to Debate Central to put out some brochures for the studio. I'd better get some business rolling in quick. 8)
User avatar
Taproot
10 Point
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Debate...

Postby kevin » Thu Sep 25, 2008 9:56 am

This transcends the Rep/Dem argument by light years. When it's all said and done, it's simply not right.


preach on, some people however, are not capable of transcending themselves, and must find a place to put the blame, preferbly on the party opposite of which they vote.

i have read over a ton of info about this debacle and there are plenty blaming each major party, i suspect the whole lot is guilty in some way.

The problem with the delay is that much time and money has been put into this, the university is supposedly over 5 mill in for it, i know i truely never understood how much work is involved in hosting one of these things, but it aint no cakewalk. There is no need to delay it, NONE. he can do everything he wants. I can GURANTEE you those cats are planning on being in office friday night at 8pm.

I wish they would just go back to the original top, which was supposed to be domestic policy, before mccain had the topic changed to foreign policy after the georgia issues blew up. he thought he would have an advantage. Now, why not just make it about domestic issues, including this economic situation. i think it would be extremely beneficial for the general public to hear how our future leader thinks the situation should be handled. and i admit, i want to see mccain try and defend his 'our economy is fundamentally strong' statement. :lol:
kevin
4 Point
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:41 am

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:01 am

Taproot wrote:
Scott wrote:Yes people are ticked off about it because most see this (because of the MSM message) as corporate greed and them being helped out by the gov't. That aint exactly the case.


I think you give the MSM a little too much credit for influence. Coorporate greed and being helped out by the same government that allowed (and sometimes forced) them to get away with this garbage is exactly what this is about. I promise you this was not due to the MSM. This transcends the Rep/Dem argument by light years. When it's all said and done, it's simply not right.

Taproot,
So what media told you the fact that the gov't was forcing Freddie Mac and Fannie May to hand out these NINJA loans. I'll bet you heard that from no one in the mainstream press. All of thier spewing has been about deregulation and corporate greed. You are overlooking some very very important facts in all this!
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby kevin » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:04 am

nobody forced them to give bad loans. they wanted minorities to get more loans, but not more bad ones. there is a difference.

just b/c you arent wealthy doesnt mean your are not worthy of any sort of loan.
kevin
4 Point
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:41 am

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:06 am

kevin wrote:
This transcends the Rep/Dem argument by light years. When it's all said and done, it's simply not right.




I wish they would just go back to the original top, which was supposed to be domestic policy, before mccain had the topic changed to foreign policy after the georgia issues blew up. he thought he would have an advantage. Now, why not just make it about domestic issues, including this economic situation. i think it would be extremely beneficial for the general public to hear how our future leader thinks the situation should be handled. and i admit, i want to see mccain try and defend his 'our economy is fundamentally strong' statement. :lol:


That will be the topic for one of the other debates. This isn't the only one on the schedule! The fundamental's of this economy are/were strong when he said that. There is no debate about it! Aside from the lending/housing issue the other economic sectors of the economy are fairly strong! There are "fundemental" aspects of the economy that are doing very well!

I want to hear The Empty Suit give his leftist/marxist proposals for the country! Bwahahaha
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:07 am

kevin wrote:nobody forced them to give bad loans. they wanted minorities to get more loans, but not more bad ones. there is a difference.

just b/c you arent wealthy doesnt mean your are not worthy of any sort of loan.

Kevin,
Do you even know what a NINJA loan is? Apparantly you do not!
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:08 am

I'll post this again:

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby Taproot » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:11 am

Scott wrote:Taproot,
So what media told you the fact that the gov't was forcing Freddie Mac and Fannie May to hand out these NINJA loans. I'll bet you heard that from no one in the mainstream press. All of thier spewing has been about deregulation and corporate greed. You are overlooking some very very important facts in all this!


In all honesty, I learned of this practice, while recording a series of lectures about this very topic. This was several years ago. Ironically the lectures were about how to sue the banks for discrimination for not issuing loans that were mandated under these congressional acts. Needless to say, this was bad gig. It was hard to sit there.

I consciously try to watch a small increments of all media (internet, radio, tv) and come up with something on my own, based on what I "perceive" as facts and the rest is gut feeling. There's no such thing as an unbiased media. It's not humanly possible and I have no problem with that.
User avatar
Taproot
10 Point
 
Posts: 721
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 2:10 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Debate...

Postby kevin » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:16 am

Scott wrote:I'll post this again:

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.


well these companies and CEO's should have manned up and stood up to it and said "no, this isnt good business, we are not going to mortgage our future for this crapt", but they didnt.

yes i am fully aware of what a NINJA loan is. I love some acronyms. i am not advocating ninja loans. what would be interesting is whether or not people think NINJA type loans got us here, or adjustable rate, sub-prime types, by that i mean, not NINJA people (super broke) but people who just bit off more than they could chew, but still were not at NINJA low standards?
kevin
4 Point
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:41 am

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:22 am

Taproot wrote:
Scott wrote:Taproot,
So what media told you the fact that the gov't was forcing Freddie Mac and Fannie May to hand out these NINJA loans. I'll bet you heard that from no one in the mainstream press. All of thier spewing has been about deregulation and corporate greed. You are overlooking some very very important facts in all this!


There's no such thing as an unbiased media. It's not humanly possible and I have no problem with that.

Taproot,
Right on! To me it's not about bias so much as presenting both sides! There's not doubt the MSM leans left so I go out there and dig around and get the other side of the story. That's what I've been trying to do here. Present the other side of this deal. But why do I have to go out there and dig for it? Why is my "side" not on the evening news or in the daily newspaper? All I want is each national/local media organization to present both sides. (I know there is going to be bias...I know FOX is and rarely watch them either) Why do most of the MSM have to be partisan left all the time?
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:31 am

kevin wrote:
Scott wrote:I'll post this again:

Under Clinton, the entire federal government put massive pressure on banks to grant more mortgages to the poor and minorities. Clinton's secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Andrew Cuomo, investigated Fannie Mae for racial discrimination and proposed that 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low- to moderate-income borrowers by the year 2001.

Threatening lawsuits, Clinton's Federal Reserve demanded that banks treat welfare payments and unemployment benefits as valid income sources to qualify for a mortgage. That isn't a joke -- it's a fact.


well these companies and CEO's should have manned up and stood up to it and said "no, this isnt good business, we are not going to mortgage our future for this crapt", but they didnt.

yes i am fully aware of what a NINJA loan is. I love some acronyms. i am not advocating ninja loans. what would be interesting is whether or not people think NINJA type loans got us here, or adjustable rate, sub-prime types, by that i mean, not NINJA people (super broke) but people who just bit off more than they could chew, but still were not at NINJA low standards?


It's all the same thing basically. They gave out the "arm" loans to rightfully try to cover their butts in all of this. When the housing bubble burst (housing prices were over inflated in areas of the country such as California and others) everything went to pot so to speak.

Very funny Kevin! Have you ever manned up to the federal government? Just try it sometime. Talk to someone who has tried to "man up" to the IRS before and see what they went through afterwards. The fact that you use the term "man up" as in the Banks should have "manned up" to the federal government confirms about you what I've suspected in this thread all along. Trust me you don't just "man up" to the Fed government. Nobody does or can!

When we do have to use the 2nd amendment against our Gov't one of these days soon enough all he** will break loose. Trust me!
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby kevin » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:43 am

Trust me you don't just "man up" to the Fed government. Nobody does or can!


i beg to differ(see google standing up to fed govt illegal records requests), and if they didnt want to, where were the senators then? This bailout wouldnt be happening if not for their previous incompetance, and they expect us to trust them now?
kevin
4 Point
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:41 am

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 10:54 am

kevin wrote:
Trust me you don't just "man up" to the Fed government. Nobody does or can!


i beg to differ, and if they didnt want to, where were the senators then? This bailout wouldnt be happening if not for their previous incompetance, and they expect us to trust them now?


You won't or can't fight the government when it gets a head of steam behind it. They will smash you like a bug! Beg to differ if you want to!

The fact is the gov't wanted to put these "poor" and minorities in homes they couldn't afford. The government knew there could be consequences to this system but didn't care. They wanted those poor people in a HOUSE no matter what! It's called politics...dirty politics! Doing this would help them politically and I don't have to say who "them" is. "Them" gets 90 percent of that vote and they were just shoring it up some more. You don't really think they care about those people do you?

If the Banks wanted to man up to the feds how would they do it. They certainly have no mouthpiece in the MSM to do it? How do they get the message out that this is bad policy? I read earlier that they were trying to do this and Dems such as Barney Franks came out and said they were pickin' on the poor minorities! How do you fight that with no mouthpiece in the media? PLMK.
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby kevin » Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:02 am

First off, i dont think people involved in this watch mainstream media, nor do powerful politicians, its worthless to them, so i doubt they put much stock in it.

As far as the housing situation, i have no doubt the motivation behind give these "people" homes was to increase support from a demographic, thats how politics work. you go to washington, you try and do things to scratch the back of your constituancy. Whethere that be poor people, middle class, or fat cats, whatever, i dont think anybody will argue that that is what goes on.

i agree with you, rarely do i think these guys put what is best for the country in front of what is best for me to get re-elected.

i have no idea how the banks would have stood up. If the clinton administration threatened law suits then the banks should have taken them to court IF they knew how truely bad a situation it was creating. It would have went to the surpreme court and maybe they would have been able to present a case that showed that the long term success of this type of lending was very bleak. As it is, neither the gov't NOR the lenders did much of anything, and just rode the plane down till it crashed. I would feel better if there had been an effort for a while to stop this, but its like it happened overnight and nobody saw it coming, i just have a hard time believing that.
kevin
4 Point
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:41 am

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:23 am

When I say MSM I mean all or most media outlets. I don't mean just what's "watched" on TV! The MSM pervades/invades us from everywhere! It's more than what you watch on TV!

So the banks should take the gov't to court if they don't like the deal!? It would have cost them enormous sums of money to take the federal gov't to court. The people in Congress that passed this knew this was bad policy from the very start! Don't you get it? They didn't care! They can just print more money! This is proving the old adage that it is better to ask forgiveness than to ask permission. It's especially true when Republicans/Bush/McCain/the banking corporations are taking most of the blame for this according to the polls out there! The Democrats are the ones getting a free ride on this....especially Obama!

I don't know about overnight but when the housing market buble burst folks (at least in the conservative media) have been saying it was coming. That is the straw that broke the camels back! From what I've read in the conservative media this morning there have been warnings for years about this. Some of these warnings were coming from President Bush's staff. I'm sure I'll have to go back and provide that link as you won't believe that the President actually warned folks avout this. That's really all he could do as Congress makes the laws not him. He wasn't the President that signed this into law either.
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby kevin » Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:30 am

you dont have to go back and provide links, i believe you. People write tons of articles predicting the world will end every day. For example when they turned on the partical collider the other week the world was gonna explode. :roll:

its not that nobody could predict something bad happening, its that nobody cared enough to bother trying to prevent it. I also dont see how anybody is getting a free ride. The one news site i got to (cnn) has at this moment multiple articles up about the crisis, none of which blame either party exclusively, rather point out the intricacy in these problems and how many people have had a hand in them.

i dont see anybody blaming mccain or obama, or giving either one a free pass, i think you guys are a bit paranoid.
kevin
4 Point
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 10:41 am

Re: Debate...

Postby Scott » Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:54 am

kevin wrote:you dont have to go back and provide links, i believe you. People write tons of articles predicting the world will end every day. For example when they turned on the partical collider the other week the world was gonna explode. :roll:

its not that nobody could predict something bad happening, its that nobody cared enough to bother trying to prevent it. I also dont see how anybody is getting a free ride. The one news site i got to (cnn) has at this moment multiple articles up about the crisis, none of which blame either party exclusively, rather point out the intricacy in these problems and how many people have had a hand in them.

i dont see anybody blaming mccain or obama, or giving either one a free pass, i think you guys are a bit paranoid.


It wasn't a link to some article that was written...it was a link to the Bush administration peoples statement (I guess at some press conference in the past) that it was a looming crisis!

IMO the fact that the administration was telling folks including members of Congress that it was bad policy was a necessary thing. You may say it wasn't doing enough to "prevent" any of it. What else can the President do? Like I said before when Republicans tried to do something about it or either spoke against it they were labled as picking on the poor minorities by liberal members of Congress!

There's no doubt that the MSM is painting this as either a Republican problem or that it is caused soley by corporate greed and deregulation. Yeah we really need some pinheads from the government to regulate the banking industry!
Scott
Spike
 
Posts: 62
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 6:51 pm
Location: Copiah

Re: Debate...

Postby brewer03 » Thu Sep 25, 2008 11:57 am

:pop:
Triple Threat 2015- 2016

Serious Six 2014-2015

Rajun Sardis Bucks
2013-2014 deer hunting champs

life is great the oppurtunity to hunt and fish make it even better
brewer03
Pope&Young
 
Posts: 4548
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 1:46 pm
Location: Raymond Ms

Re: Debate...

Postby outdoorswoman » Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:23 pm

kevin wrote:
i know this board is one of the most hard core conservative p9laces i visit, but other people i know who are die hard mccain voters are really scratching their heads on this one.



well what do you know ... you and I finally agree on something.

this was a bad move and whichever advisor advised him to do it should be canned ... he should have just said that there was a crisis and that the debate would be 2nd on his priority list and he would fly in and out

he also should have sent Palin to Letterman because I'm about ready to fly to New York and slap him upside his stupid head
User avatar
outdoorswoman
10 Point
 
Posts: 503
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 3:54 pm
Location: Batesville, MS

PreviousNext

Return to General Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 3 guests