Newt or Mitt VS Obama. Can either of 'em beat him?

[BC]

LOL BillyB, you're wasting your time. despite the realistic, factual information like this:

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/10/20081009-10.html

Is interesting:

February: The President's FY05 Budget again highlights the risk posed by   the explosive growth of the GSEs and their low levels of required capital and   calls for creation of a new, world-class regulator:  "The Administration has   determined that the safety and soundness regulators of the housing GSEs lack   sufficient power and stature to meet their responsibilities, and therefore … should be replaced with a new strengthened regulator." (2005 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 83)

Isn't new regulation against the mantra of the GOP?  Is this not 'bigger government'? or 'more regulation' ?  Did the Bush's party not have the majority in both House and Senate at that time?  Where did the ball get dropped?

I dunno.... I think my wife would make a great Republican.  When all avenues of discourse fail, her standard answer is 'That does not account [sic]'  we both chuckle about those words.

I used to hate history, but as I age I learn to appreciate it much more.

[GQBlues]

Is interesting:...

Isn't new regulation against the mantra of the GOP?  Is this not 'bigger government'? or 'more regulation' ?....

BC-

The proposed regulation of FM/FM was for the most part give oversight responsibilities other than the Democrat-controlled body - Frank Barney's bandits...then as the years went on, ensuing proposal/request from the WH was to conduct investigations, etc...because leading indicators were suggesting real bad trouble brewing. The yearly (monthly) info was posted for consumption and you should really take the time and read it so all this silly Kool-Aid silliness about the financial collapse being *Bush's fault* can be put to rest already, OK?

Admit it. Objective guy that you are, you were dupe to believing it was Bush's fault because until now you didn't know better. This is one of those critical moment one finds themselves faced with the truth and had to decide what's the right thing to do.

..  Did the Bush's party not have the majority in both House and Senate at that time?  Where did the ball get dropped?...

You should really stop deflecting the issue, even if he did, doesn't negate the fact BUSH more than once, every year, sounded the alarm about trouble looming ahead DESPITE all the other events taking place DURING his 8 years tenure (You know what they are as they weren't too long ago) so blaming BUSH for the financial collapse is simply ridiculous.

But, FWIW, IINM/IMMSMC/IIRC....

110th Congress was largely Democratic. So need to go there...

The 109th Congress had the minority number momentarily when the first inauguration was held because Cheney took over Gore was a deciding vote in the Senate. But by May 2001, a Senator from back east changed party, from Rep. to Independent but sleeps with the Democrats and thereby giving the Dems the majority. The Tom, the Barrel Skimmer, Daschle became the minority leader until that year's election (2002), which gave the majority back to the Republicans but Independent's caucused with the Dems literally making filibuster moves a constant reality.

I didn't do too much recall nor did any intense Googling so I may stand to be corrected. The floor is open for contention.

...I dunno.... I think my wife would make a great Republican.  When all avenues of discourse fail, her standard answer is 'That does not account [sic]'  we both chuckle about those words....

Your wifey sound as if she's a very smart woman if you believe she'd make a great Republican. You're a very lucky man.

...I used to hate history, but as I age I learn to appreciate it much more....

Don't have time to watch the vid...but if what Roosevelt said 70 years ago still applies to your present day political opinion, then please read the following as well..

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/02/18/the-first-blow-against-public-employees/fdr-warned-us-about-public-sector-unions


....George Meany was not alone. Up through the 1950s, unions widely agreed that collective bargaining had no place in government. But starting with Wisconsin in 1959, states began to allow collective bargaining in government. The influx of dues and members quickly changed the union movement’s tune, and collective bargaining in government is now widespread. As a result unions can now insist on laws that serve their interests – at the expense of the common good. Union contracts make it next to impossible to reward excellent teachers or fire failing ones.

Union contracts give government employees gold-plated benefits – at the cost of higher taxes and less spending on other priorities. The alternative to Walker's budget was kicking 200,000 children off Medicaid....


In light of the recent events in our political landscape and social events, it sounds as though you were fairly selective in your choices for appreciation. Why did I say that? Well, because ironically enough it was John F Kennedy who actually accepted and introduced public sector union into our lives despite the warnings laid out by FDR - both characters you've showcased in your post above.

Ironic, isn't it?

[BC]

You seem happy with Obama's program and think Americans don't want American cars. If Obama did things the Japanese way to boost economy within, I would be saying American's don't want Japanese cars.
http://economyincrisis.org/content/japans-cash-clunkers-program-excludes-us-cars

Not quite what I said (again)..   I said "many of those that participated could not find or were not interested in replacement cars made in USA that qualified.  Why is that? "   Maybe it would be helpful answering that question first.

 
You are satisfied with the action Obama has taken? It's too little, too late. End result is Obama couldn't save American businesses and wasted tax payers money on companies that produced product that people didn't buy.

There was one fallacy with government subsidizing solar panel installations.  The demand exceeded domestic capacity in almost all markets, both in the US and overseas.  China was quickly able to fill that gap with huge production facilities.  It was thought that domestic production would also rise, and it did.  When subsidies dropped, also due to the financial crisis, so did the prices of panels made in China. Both Governments AND Business were caught with their pants down.
 

BC, the program was started in Clinton's term. The program continued to raise it's target of getting poor into homes in Bush's term. The way it was done alarmed Bush and he called for an investigation yet you keep implying he was in on this self destructing program. He's for the poor moving up in the world and getting into homes. Isn't everybody? Only the means and methods to do so should be in question and Bush did not agree with Clinton's program so he called for an investigation and was met with a lot of resistance.

"Fannie Mae, was founded in 1938 during the Great Depression as part of the New Deal." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae

Freddie Mac "was created in 1970 to expand the secondary market for mortgages in the US. Along with other GSEs, Freddie Mac buys mortgages on the secondary market, pools them, and sells them as a mortgage-backed security to investors on the open market." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freddie_Mac

Clinton served as President from January 20, 1993 – January 20, 2001

He did later express some thoughts:

Clinton said he has two regrets: First, not pursuing more aggressively an aborted attempt to provide stricter oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. According to Clinton, the move was stymied by Democratic and Republican members of Congress and by mayors, who saw the lending giants as "the New Jerusalem" and "pure" because of their role in increasing home-ownership to historic levels. But "it just didn't feel good," Clinton said of Fannie and Freddie's outsized political influence.

http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/09/bill-clinton-re.html

See my prior post on this topic.  One cannot point a finger in any one direction.
 

Laws tell no one to act irresponsibly but laws can be created to where it's easily abused to achieve the desired affect.  Think about it. How do you get the poor to buy houses when they make little money or have no job? The only way to achieve the target of getting a large percentage of poor into homes is to allow them to lie on applications or have the lenders educate and encourage them to lie. HUD has a target and tells the lenders to meet that target. They can figure it out how to do it.

Both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were serving the secondary market.. They did not have customers in front of them.  Yes it seems that they did slack up on their processes enough to catch the eye of both Clinton and Bush and Congress.  Who though approved loans that were later sold to these GSE's?  Therein lies the problem.. Can industry be relied upon to deal fairly without regulation?

 
Obama has a good chance at winning. If Obama could run for a 3rd term, he would have a good chance at winning again even with an economy that's struggling. Many who voted for Obama 4 years ago pointed to the economy as the reason Obama should be elected. I doubt they believe or even care about Obama's economic policies because it's evident that he can be elected in a bad economy with high unemployment. Even you seem satisfied and happy with what Obama has done for the economy. Japan has a superior cash for clunkers program to improve their economy and we have a President that can't do better. Think about it. We can do better.

Yes, we can.  Start by building newer and better products than the rest of the world does with a proud 'Made entirely in USA' sticker, and not just 'Designed in USA'

Yes, Obama will win and I do hope he can 'Brass up' and really push his agenda.  The second term is unrestricted, even better if Congress follows along. 

Third term?..  Well... no worries, I'm tipping that Michelle will show up on a future ticket.  She may just have what it takes and certainly is smart enough to learn and get even more first hand experience with her husband at the helm for  a full 8 years and surviving well through two campaigns.  Can Obama then be VP?  One thing is sure, the GOP sorely needs to come up with decent competition and modernize, hell totally reconstruct their platform.  I thought they had learned something last time around and would have been better prepared.

I fear in the upcoming debates Obama will cook his goose.

[BC]

BC-

The proposed regulation of FM/FM was for the most part give oversight responsibilities other than the Democrat-controlled body - Frank Barney's bandits...then as the years went on, ensuing proposal/request from the WH was to conduct investigations, etc...because leading indicators were suggesting real bad trouble brewing. The yearly (monthly) info was posted for consumption and you should really take the time and read it so all this silly Kool-Aid silliness about the financial collapse being *Bush's fault* can be put to rest already, OK?

GQ,

I sense a lot of negative emotion in your posts.  If you really read and understand I think you will find that many of my last comments address not who is wrong or right, but instead that in such discourse you sometimes can't  have your cake and eat it too..  You critique me for using the same methods of discourse that you and others do?  Economic crashes are much like airplane crashes... multiple systems failing, leading to loss of positive lift..  The only single system that can fail and bring an aircraft down is the pilot and guess what there are two of them so both have to fail.  In Government there are also three pilots.. Executive, Legislative and Judicial to balance things out.  Pointing at pilot error is simply wrong.  Do take some time to digest my posts.. they all lead to systemic failures.  You may not like me to point out some of the components involved, but hey not my problem.

Admit it. Objective guy that you are, you were dupe to believing it was Bush's fault because until now you didn't know better. This is one of those critical moment one finds themselves faced with the truth and had to decide what's the right thing to do.

Clarified above.  I like many others will vote in good conscience.  Others here have expressed they will vote for one party not out of conviction that their candidate is the best to lead the Nation, but instead because they feel anything has to be better than Obama getting re-elected.  Doing so is well within their rights, just as it is the right of ALL citizens to have an equal vote, but to tell you the truth, in their shoes I could not sleep well after casting my ballot for ideological reasons.  If Obama was a Republican and Romney a Democrat it would not affect my choice at all.  Not one iota.  I'll vote for the best man and not party.

You should really stop deflecting the issue, even if he did, doesn't negate the fact BUSH more than once, every year, sounded the alarm about trouble looming ahead DESPITE all the other events taking place DURING his 8 years tenure (You know what they are as they weren't too long ago) so blaming BUSH for the financial collapse is simply ridiculous.

See my comments above and upthread.

But, FWIW, IINM/IMMSMC/IIRC....

I did read the rest of your post and thank you for your input, but think I have said enough for now.. except for one thing..  The unions have a long history and their existence is historically justified.  As long as a worker or employee is not forced to join a union and employment is not based on whether or not a prospective employee has joined a union or not they can do whatever they want to.  Pointing a finger at unions being the root of all evil in the US is wrong.  Surely the USA is better than that.

[Faux Pas]

Yes, Obama will win and I do hope he can 'Brass up' and really push his agenda.  The second term is unrestricted, even better if Congress follows along.

Third term?..  Well... no worries, I'm tipping that Michelle will show up on a future ticket.  She may just have what it takes and certainly is smart enough to learn and get even more first hand experience with her husband at the helm for  a full 8 years and surviving well through two campaigns.  Can Obama then be VP?  One thing is sure, the GOP sorely needs to come up with decent competition and modernize, hell totally reconstruct their platform.  I thought they had learned something last time around and would have been better prepared

Wow BC. I'm shocked that after the last 3.5 years, anyone can actually think in those terms. Michelle on a future ticket and Barack as VP? Seriously?

Keep in mind, other than Obamacare, none of Obama's 08 campaign promises have come to fruition. Do you remember these?

1 Balance the budget
2 Cut the deficit in half by the end of his term
3 Close Gitmo
4 End the war in Afghanistan and Irag
5 Jump start the economy
6 Improve America's relations overseas

The battle cry was "if we could just get rid of those pesky republicans America will be the land of milk and honey and the world will love us again". How has that worked out so far? Obama had the house and the senate for the first two years of his term. If he hadn't, he wouldn't have gotten OC passed. He could have done any number of those other promises if he chose to. He didn't. If he does win a second term unlikely he will have either the house or the senate. You think he'll be a better president in the second term? Michelle has learned to be president how exactly?

[GoodOlBoy]

Yeah FP..... That one (Michelle) just flew right over my head. 
 
Maybe BC was referring to Michele Bachmann ?!?! 
 
GOB

[BC]

Wow BC. I'm shocked that after the last 3.5 years, anyone can actually think in those terms. Michelle on a future ticket and Barack as VP? Seriously?

I thought that would raise some eyebrows... LOL.

If the next ticket is Paul / Palin.. I'd be quite serious.  GOP needs to do a lot of work to get some serious candidates going for them.

Keep in mind, other than Obamacare, none of Obama's 08 campaign promises have come to fruition. Do you remember these?

1 Balance the budget
2 Cut the deficit in half by the end of his term
3 Close Gitmo
4 End the war in Afghanistan and Irag
5 Jump start the economy
6 Improve America's relations overseas

The battle cry was "if we could just get rid of those pesky republicans America will be the land of milk and honey and the world will love us again". How has that worked out so far? Obama had the house and the senate for the first two years of his term. If he hadn't, he wouldn't have gotten OC passed. He could have done any number of those other promises if he chose to. He didn't. If he does win a second term unlikely he will have either the house or the senate. You think he'll be a better president in the second term? Michelle has learned to be president how exactly?

FP,

I am a realist.  He got some things done, has tried hard to get others done.  Overall progress on most points has been made.  No one can really expect wonders and I don't think Obama promised he will get all done in one term.  His compass is pointing in the right direction though and I support that.   If he were a King or Emperor I would agree with you and say he failed miserably, but considering we're talking about the harder road of democracy..... yeah it's all stuff still worth going after.

[BC]

Yeah FP..... That one (Michelle) just flew right over my head. 
 
Maybe BC was referring to Michele Bachmann ?!?! 
 
GOB

Paul Bachmann / Bachmann Paul... yea right that would be another 'sure winner'..  How about Palin / Bachmann  OMG..  I'm ROFL just thinking about it.

GOB,

Who would you propose for 2016 if Romney is considered a 'goner'?....

[Faux Pas]

BC

All BO has been is abject failure. He did have an opportunity to actually be a good president and a leader again, he chose not to. Do you have any idea what his "agenda" is? Personally, I haven't a clue. I know what his pro and detractors claim his agenda is but, Obama has yet to reveal what that is. Every one of his policies have been self serving debt repayments to the democratic power base. Most of those have failed miserably. I am very dogmatic on politicians to begin with but I have seen absolutely nothing from Obama but an empty head and a flashy smile. 4 more years of this likely will cripple the nation beyond repair.

[GoodOlBoy]

GOB,

Who would you propose for 2016 if Romney is considered a 'goner'?....

BC 2016 is a long way off, but I kinda' like Marco Rubio.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marco_Rubio
 
I have actually had the honor of meeting the man twice.
He was giving a speech one of the two times.
Pretty smart dude.
 
GOB

PS... No "silver spoon" in his mouth.

[Faux Pas]

Paul Bachmann / Bachmann Paul... yea right that would be another 'sure winner'..  How about Palin / Bachmann  OMG..  I'm ROFL just thinking about it.

GOB,

Who would you propose for 2016 if Romney is considered a 'goner'?....

Now my years with you on these boards have taught me that you are a well read bright individual. A strong believer and purveyor of logic.

With that preface I have only one question. What in your mind, is wrong with either Bachman or Palin on a national ticket? Feel free to compare them to Obama if you wish

[BC]

Now my years with you on these boards have taught me that you are a well read bright individual. A strong believer and purveyor of logic.

With that preface I have only one question. What in your mind, is wrong with either Bachman or Palin on a national ticket? Feel free to compare them to Obama if you wish

Wrong? absolutely nothing.. just thinking about these two very strong minded women stepping all over each other.  It would likely be very entertaining.  I was fairly impressed with Bachmann diring the debates and stated so a while back, maybe on another board.  Their views though seem to be a good bit on the extreme side and doubt full support of even their own party.

GOP needs fresh candidates and not re-runs.

JIMHO

[GQBlues]

GQ,

I sense a lot of negative emotion in your posts.  If you really read and understand I think you will find that many of my last comments address not who is wrong or right, but instead that in such discourse you sometimes can't  have your cake and eat it too..  You critique me for using the same methods of discourse that you and others do?  Economic crashes are much like airplane crashes... multiple systems failing, leading to loss of positive lift..  The only single system that can fail and bring an aircraft down is the pilot and guess what there are two of them so both have to fail.  In Government there are also three pilots.. Executive, Legislative and Judicial to balance things out.  Pointing at pilot error is simply wrong.  Do take some time to digest my posts.. they all lead to systemic failures.  You may not like me to point out some of the components involved, but hey not my problem.

Negative? Heck, no. More like frustration. Why? Because the fact this country gave the world what we call *superinformation highway*, it is more than obvious its population are too stupid to use it for its purpose to begin with. Fact checking is freely available to anyone/everyone. It's often said that the first step to an alcoholic's progress is admitting he's an alcoholic. Obviously doesn't universally apply to anything else. Indeed, it isn't Obama's re-election that worries me really as I've never been a surrogate to the Republican party. What worries me is the looming reality that the majority of mis-informed and misguided Americans had enveloped this country's once proud legacy.
 
Oh, and the pilot metaphor is a riot, man! LOL. Thanks for the humor. I suppose one can't wrestle with facts - toos 'em speculations and metaphors...I got yah!
 
  [font=][/font]

[font=]...Clarified above.  I like many others will vote in good conscience.  Others here have expressed they will vote for one party not out of conviction that their candidate is the best to lead the Nation, but instead because they feel anything has to be better than Obama getting re-elected.  Doing so is well within their rights, just as it is the right of ALL citizens to have an equal vote, but to tell you the truth, in their shoes I could not sleep well after casting my ballot for ideological reasons.  If Obama was a Republican and Romney a Democrat it would not affect my choice at all.  Not one iota.  I'll vote for the best man and not party.[/font]

Yeah...considering Obama's 2008 qualifications and his 2012 accomplishments, or lack thereof, it's plain to see you don't always walk your pretty talk.
 

...I did read the rest of your post and thank you for your input, but think I have said enough for now.. except for one thing..  The unions have a long history and their existence is historically justified.  As long as a worker or employee is not forced to join a union and employment is not based on whether or not a prospective employee has joined a union or not they can do whatever they want to.  Pointing a finger at unions being the root of all evil in the US is wrong.  Surely the USA is better than that.

http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm
 
Like I've said before BC, you've been gone too long...

[BC]

I presume you mean new laws are enacted and regulations written.   How did business fail with healthcare such that we needed Obamacare?   Is Dodd-Frank the correct response to the financial crisis?

Gator,

sorry for taking so long to reply in this fast moving thread.

Regarding healthcare, as expressed many times I do believe that universal healthcare should be a given.  I also understand the constraints of the US government interfering in commerce.  Romney/Obamacare after a lot of thought, to me, is good middle ground to start with.  Quite honestly I think that under the circumstances this legislation is well thought out.

How did business fail?.. It failed to recognize that healthcare legislation also levels the playing field.  Indeed there is a cost involved, but what is better, the cost of leveraging good employees with healthcare benefits or instead putting the healthcare burden (and it is significant) on the employee alone?

In my time in countries that offer universal healthcare, as employee AND employer, I have seen first hand that although levies are high, they are also shared between employee and employer.  As employer the number paid was high but I was also pretty much assured that a sick employee would have to report to a doctor in a determined amount of time for a medical certificate stating the length of the illness and sick days involved.  As employee, for a genuine illness I was pretty much assured that a genuine illness would not affect my employment, and even if recovery was lengthy, financial damages to myself or employer was limited.

Obamacare is still a long way from the same, but is a start.. JFK mentioned 30 years behind UK... what does that mean now... almost a century behind EU?

Dodd-Frank....

Here I truly believe that industry took advantage of government guarantees.  It failed to act responsibly as a whole.  The 'aftershock' of reducing regulation if you will...

So yes, looking in the rear view mirror such regulation is necessary.  I wish it was not that way but industry did have a very good chance to show that self regulation works.. but that conflicts with the intent of business itself so am not at all surprised at the results.
 

 

The current labor initiatives are doing the following according to the US Chamber of Commerce:
 
Source:  http://www.uschamber.com/press/releases/us-chamber-highlights-continued-barriers-job-creation-annual-labor-day-briefing
 
Next, consider immigration.  Enough already. 
 
As the Chamber wrote, " For those who may doubt the challenges to an employer under this reality, read a few pages of the existing Code of Federal Regulations, or randomly select one of the many court decisions interpreting existing law. Then picture yourself as a small business person or the head of human resources now faced with numerous other changes in a maze of already confusing and daunting compliance obligations."

Republicans want a smaller government.  Democrats want a larger government.   Why is that so?

Smaller, larger.... to me they are both irrelevant.  I want balanced government and that totally depends on whether or not business can act in ethical and responsible manner.

Immigration..... heck... simply open the borders and compete..  So what if south of the borders pays less.. one border less means the workforce will follow success.  Right now immigration from Mexido is negative?  Why argue with that?

Yes, due to geographic circumstances it is hard to compete directly with China... but Mexico and South America?  Allowing those from the south to profit from mowing lawns allows those in the US to achieve higher goals in life.  Is that not proper?... or are you resigning yourself to a position that workers in the south that want 'in' are better than you?

Just points to think about...

[BC]

Negative? Heck, no. More like frustration. Why? Because the fact this country gave the world what we call *superinformation highway*, it is more than obvious its population are too stupid to use it for its purpose to begin with. Fact checking is freely available to anyone/everyone. It's often said that the first step to an alcoholic's progress is admitting he's an alcoholic. Obviously doesn't universally apply to anything else. Indeed, it isn't Obama's re-election that worries me really as I've never been a surrogate to the Republican party. What worries me is the looming reality that the majority of mis-informed and misguided Americans had enveloped this country's once proud legacy.

GQ,

I really believe that one of the fundamental problems the US faces is not ignorance... it is geographic isolation.  If the very few US based relatives of mine that were bold enough to book a flight in this direction have done nothing but increased their knowledge of the 'unknown' that is quite fine by me.  Here, it is very much normal.  Italians going to Germany, Germans going to Italy etc etc....  Bottom line, I do not fault those who have not had such opportunities, but only wish there were many, many more from the US that could boldly take a very important step... that of going beyond their own geographic borders.  I do hope the next decade is one of geographic enlightenment.
 

Oh, and the pilot metaphor is a riot, man! LOL. Thanks for the humor. I suppose one can't wrestle with facts - toos 'em speculations and metaphors...I got yah!
 
  [font=][/font]

Happy you enjoyed that!  Certainly made the effort worthwhile.
 

Yeah...considering Obama's 2008 qualifications and his 2012 accomplishments, or lack thereof, it's plain to see you don't always walk your pretty talk.
 
http://www.nrtw.org/rtws.htm
 
Like I've said before BC, you've been gone too long...

I am all for 'right to work'.. or 'right to unionize'...and certainly against forced unionization,  but overall, I do think that there are greater challenges to be addressed first.  Thanks for pointing me to this reference.  I will investigate more.

[Faux Pas]

FP,

I am a realist.  He got some things done, has tried hard to get others done.  Overall progress on most points has been made.  No one can really expect wonders and I don't think Obama promised he will get all done in one term.  His compass is pointing in the right direction though and I support that.   If he were a King or Emperor I would agree with you and say he failed miserably, but considering we're talking about the harder road of democracy..... yeah it's all stuff still worth going after.

You apparently know some things I don't. What has he gotten done and what has he tried hard to get done? What is this progress you speak of? This compass? Forget the polish job afforded him by the mainstream media. Can you really name anything he has accomplished and moved forward? Anything at all?

I don't think anyone expected BO to have accomplished all of his promises in his first term. Yet no one thought he would have exacerbated them as thoroughly as he has. He's made them much worse, provided zero leadership, stays on vacation or the golf course, extravagant shopping trips for the Missus and steadily makes the rounds on the talk show circuit. What have I missed?

[BC]

You apparently know some things I don't. What has he gotten done and what has he tried hard to get done? What is this progress you speak of? This compass? Forget the polish job afforded him by the mainstream media. Can you really name anything he has accomplished and moved forward? Anything at all?

I don't think anyone expected BO to have accomplished all of his promises in his first term. Yet no one thought he would have exacerbated them as thoroughly as he has. He's made them much worse, provided zero leadership, stays on vacation or the golf course, extravagant shopping trips for the Missus and steadily makes the rounds on the talk show circuit. What have I missed?

FP,

it's getting pretty lat here and am shutting down for the night but what do you think about

http://business.time.com/2012/09/20/home-sales-prices-rise-is-housing-finally-ready-to-lead-a-recovery/

Economic indicators are up, but indeed fragile. not to 'boom' standards, but i think  at the very least minimum healthy growth levels that are being experienced throughout the global market.

[Faux Pas]

Wrong? absolutely nothing.. just thinking about these two very strong minded women stepping all over each other.  It would likely be very entertaining.  I was fairly impressed with Bachmann diring the debates and stated so a while back, maybe on another board.  Their views though seem to be a good bit on the extreme side and doubt full support of even their own party.

GOP needs fresh candidates and not re-runs.

JIMHO

BC

This doesn't exactly dovetail with your earlier post:

Paul Bachmann / Bachmann Paul... yea right that would be another 'sure winner'..  How about Palin / Bachmann  OMG..  I'm ROFL just thinking about it.

GOB,

Who would you propose for 2016 if Romney is considered a 'goner'?....

I've never understood the attack on either of these women by the left or the media. You are correct, that there is absolutely nothing wrong with these women aside from they are ackkk "republicans". Strong willed intelligent women who have made a life of public service, highly respected in the Republican party yet, are continually denigrated by the media and the left as queens of the KKK. I only picked at that scab to say this:

BC, you don't recognize the hypocrisy here in the talking points and the battle cries of the democratic left? Once you start peeling back the layers and looking underneath of what you are reading about the right, written by the left rather than looking for the truth, you'll find it's very, very thin 

Since Obama's coronation election in 2008, America has installed Chicago style politics in Washington. Trust me, this isn't a good thing.

[Faux Pas]

FP,

it's getting pretty lat here and am shutting down for the night but what do you think about

http://business.time.com/2012/09/20/home-sales-prices-rise-is-housing-finally-ready-to-lead-a-recovery/

Economic indicators are up, but indeed fragile. not to 'boom' standards, but i think  at the very least minimum healthy growth levels that are being experienced throughout the global market.

KEWL! I'll read it and comment on it. Actually it's something pretty close to home for me as I have had a house on the market for just about a year now. I'll read it, give you my observation of the story and my personal experience in the market that is real time and not just another fluff story generated to make Obama appear as if he has a real working policy. 

Rest well there guy

[Gator]

Wow! This thread is in the fast lane and I am in the slow lane needing to take the next exit..
 
BC, it does seem to me that you are a democrat at heart.  I can understand liberal views.   However, I find it misguided to believe that big government is necessary.  And I find it absurd that you support the thesis that democrats are better protectors of the public.   
 

Compare the history of two candidates with regard to helping the little guy.  The RNC was one testimony after another of something good that Romney did for the little guy.   I did not hear one testimony for Obama.  Hell, just consider how little he has done for his half brother!
 

So you support your liberal views by voting for the Democrat platform.  Fine, but blindly advocating the Presidential candidate!!!!  Never have I seen so much disgust expressed by mainstream America against a President.  Many of the religious consider him the antiChrist.  Veterans abhor the man, thinking he is sellling out our country and making us weak.  Small businesses, the growth engine for America, are overwhelmed by direct and indirect regulatory initiatives.  Fiscal conservatives.... %32*^!*%
 

If Obama is elected, he will not represent America. 
 
How will this affect us?  Conservatives will dig in, and he will not be able to broker a fiscal deal. Yep, more gridlock while the national debt accelerates.

Debt!  So what!  The Fed will  monetize it with QEinfinity.   One day inflation will raise its ugly head.  And we will repay our debt with inflated dollars.  Pity the man who is depending upon bonds and savings for his retirement.  In contrast, assets in the ground will inflate.  Maybe that is why one of my friends, a commercial real estate developer/owner, is an avid Obama supporter.  He welcomes inflation, if he can somehow stay above water in the short term.
 
Obama is a bad man.  He is twisting much of what I subscribe to as the American spirit.   

 

[Gator]

[Eduard]

Maybe that is why one of my friends, a commercial real estate developer/owner, is an avid Obama supporter.  He welcomes inflation, if he can somehow stay above water in the short term.

  I have a friend like that too. He is a precious metals investor and he voted for Obama in 2008 because he believed that Obama's policies will drive gold/silver, etc. prices up. He was right. But I don't think he will be voting for Obama in this election because although he believes that PM prices will keep going up if Obama is reelected he also believes that we are on the wrong path as a country and with 4 more years of Obama will bring the US to the point of no return.

 
Obama is a bad man.  He is twisting much of what I subscribe to as the American spirit.

The more I learn about him, about his mentors and friends, people who influenced and surrounded him the more bizarre it seems how was somebody with his communist/anti-colonialist , radical leftist background was elected to be a United States president in the first place?!?!
I'd love to find out why he spent $750,000.00 yo get his college records sealed. Nobody spends this kind of money to hide something unless this something was really worth hiding... I've heard speculations that 1. he was granted financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia (was he lying then or is he lying now?) 2. He doesn't want people to see his thesis works because they contained communist/anti-American themes.
Anyway, for the most "open" president in the US history he is hiding a bit too much for my taste.
I just have a very bad feeling about him.

[BillyB]

Isn't new regulation against the mantra of the GOP?  Is this not 'bigger government'? or 'more regulation' ? 

The way HUD, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac was doing business, I agree on calls to investigate and have someone oversee their activities. Do you agree nothing should happen? Nothing did happen and then came disaster.
 

  Did the Bush's party not have the majority in both House and Senate at that time? 

Don't know but Obama owned the House and Senate when he was re-elected. So much for getting the economy on it's feet.
 

Where did the ball get dropped?

GQBlues laid it out for you. Numerous times Bush called for action but Democrats resisted denying it's broke.
 
I liked how you post a video of FDR warning of the Republicans. Ironic. Little did FDR know his creation Fannie Mae would contribute to a world wide economic disaster. Freddie Mac and HUD is another liberal invention.
 
BC, you believe the economic mess was created by Republicans and evil businessmen. Imagine waking up from your dream and realizing the economic mess was created actually created by Democrats and poor people. After people abused a system endorsed by the government getting into homes they couldn't afford to pay on, people got behind on payments, got deeper into debt, they stopped buying products and businesses began to fail due to lack of business, and people lost jobs because business failed, and after disaster in America, it spread to the rest of the world. You think Capitalism is to blame. Government caused this mess.
 
There are uninformed people. They most likely will vote for Obama because it's easy to blame things on Bush since economy went bad on his watch and will agree with Obama it's going to take more than 4 years to fix the problem.
 
There are misinformed people. They read bias news or read mainstream news and believe everything they read or don't have the ability to take the opinions of the author and separate it from fact. Pertaining to economy and reading about who's to blame, Bush, they will vote Obama too.
 
BC, you are informed yet you resist and try to debate by selecting certain quotes from certain sites in an effort to blame the economic mess on Bush and corportate
America and promote Obama. You have tried real hard to make an innocent man look guilty.
 
I mentioned 4 years ago on the forum that Presidents and government have little to do with improving economy. Economy will have it's ups and downs and government can assist aiding it back to health. What is now certain after the housing market crash is government has a much greater ability to destroy the economy than fixing it.
 
Personally I think most social programs are necessary. Welfare, food stamps, section 8 housing. The reason they are necessary is because almost everyone will lose their job and go through rough times. These programs can help inividuals and families get back on their feet but it should be temporary. Many people have abused the programs and the programs allow themselves to be abused. In the effort to help the poor by getting them into houses was too much of a burden for everyone to carry we self destructed.
 
Most of us really aren't much different and we have the same opinions but what separates us is the amout of money to get things done. If one tenth of one percent of our taxes wer needed to make poor people's life comfortable, I think we all will be fine with that. If 5% is needed, GQBlues may get upset but not me or Olga. If 10% is needed, I will start agreeing with GQBlues. Olga may be fine with giving 20% of her family's earnings the poor but even she has a limit. Her limit may be a generous 50% before she starts siding with me and GQBlues and she may even start using bad language when refering to the poor calling them lazy and leeches! People can only give so much to the needy before they start having to make sacrifices for their own families.
 

[Gator]

 The more I learn about him, about his mentors and friends, people who influenced and surrounded him the more bizarre it seems how was somebody with his communist/anti-colonialist , radical leftist background was elected to be a United States president in the first place?!?!

It says much about the decline in America.  Observers state that Americans do not know what it means to be American.  This started long before Obama.  Obama is not the disease, he is only a symptom.
 

I'd love to find out why he spent $750,000.00 yo get his college records sealed.

Obama is hiding more than his college records.  His closet is full of skeletons.  And his supporters have the gall to complain that Romney is not releasing his taxes?

[BC]

Obama is hiding more than his college records.  His closet is full of skeletons.  And his supporters have the gall to complain that Romney is not releasing his taxes?

There seems to be two sides to that story.

http://factcheck.org/2012/07/obamas-sealed-records/

Anyone seen a check for 750K?