NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/09/MNJ1156PC1.DTL&type=politics

He says his greatest failure was immigration reform. He says it proved in a lot of people's eyes that Republicans are racist.

He also regrets most of his war rhetoric. He confessed to a few missteps.

His best accomplishments:
No Child Left Behind which was designed to lift minorities out of academic poverty and forcing Congress to include prescription medication as a medicare benefit for seniors.

I think he left out his efforts to combat AIDS in Africa.

Considering we already know what he did wrong, what, besides NCLB, prescriptions, and AIDS help for Africa has he done right???

This is meant to discuss the positive things he has done. We already know all the negatives. Thank You.


Here's a list to start:
NCLB
Prescription Drug Coverage for Seniors
Combating AIDS in Africa
General AID to Africa

What else????

hmmm. Wonders if getting rid of Rumsfield counts as a positive???

as people waiting to get out of prison or the military, when counting the days down to this few, have been heard to holler: SHeeeeeORT!

p.s. "getting rid of rumsfield" counts as VERY positive! (but no panacea, just one of many major steps in the right direction), oh you mean bush, well the question remains, did he REALLY "get rid" of rummy, rove, or any of them, or simply remove their official titles and salaries?

how do we know and why do we believe. personally i remain extremely skeptical about that one.

on to other news: did you hear his great parting, "see i'm an environmentalist after all" shot?

the one about, i had to check to make sure this wasn't april first, making something resembling a national park out of the marianas trench and a couple of other places, out in the middle of the ocean and under it. there being a slight obvious problem with this. several. such as i rather suspect, at lest the trench anyway, not being within legitimate u.s. territorry, and thus equivelant to claiming to make the moon and mars national parks also. then of course there's the thing about his insistence of reopening off shore oil drilling everywhere. does he honestly believe that a drifting oil spill will respect the boundries of a national park, or any other kind of boundries. yet another of course is, how is any such ''protection" to be inforces? perhapse he could be hired to patrol the floor of the marianas trench, himself personally.

NCLB was a mixed bag. some minorities benefited if their parents knew how to play the system. most got screwed up by the standardized testing.

What we need to do is take steps to standardize the curriculum.

This is meant to discuss the positive things he has done.

Hum. Well.

Hm.

...he's stepping down in ten days. Does that count?

He will leave his mark. Also, you're giving him credit for too much, or agreeing with him giving himself the credit.

Bush should've made more nukes. To hell with the nuke restrictions. MORE NUKES NOW!

He managhed to win two elections

He is the first president to give more aid to Africa then we give to Israel.

I'm struggling to think of anything positive.

He managhed to win two elections

i'm not sure "win" is entirely the accurate word.

i'm not sure "win" is entirely the accurate word.

Well yeah but hey he was President and Gore wasn't. Same goes for Mr. Kerry

He gave nuclear technology to india in return for a more generous allotment of mangoes.

AIDS help for Africa

What's this?

It's a present eight Christmases too late, but it is nice anyway.

What's this?

He gave the africans aids or someshit.

Bush should've made more nukes. To hell with the nuke restrictions. MORE NUKES NOW!

We haven't nuked anywhere in years. We could save money using that uranium for reactors and filling the warheads with concrete. Just don't tell anyone you did it and you'll be fine.

He gave nuclear technology to india in return for a more generous allotment of mangoes.

Mmm... Mangoes.

I'm not sure I'd count his AIDs help to Africa as a positive either since it was contingeant upon teaching abstinence and not distributing birth control (ie condoms).

Regardless of whether or not his programs were providing help for people already with AIDS, his conditions meant that more people would GET AIDS.

Preaching abstinence doesn't work in an area where most people believe that AIDS can be cured by (for a male anyway) by having sex with a virgin. And not having condoms available is an obvious way to help spread AIDS.

He gave nuclear technology to india in return for a more generous allotment of mangoes.
i love mangos

put that into the positive category.

He managed to go eight years without starting WWIII.

...it's sad when you have a leader so bad that said acomplishment is surprising enough to be noted...

No Child Left Behind which was designed to lift minorities out of academic poverty and forcing Congress to include prescription medication as a medicare benefit for seniors. ?

NCLB is a huge, bureaucratic mess that puts even more focus on standardized testing by tying it to funding, and is counter intuitive - a school does bad, so it gets less funding. I guess some one ignored the fact that better funded schools do better. And sure, things got added for seniors, and then they turned Medicare into a huge, bureaucratic mess leaving seniors to have to know what is good for them and what isn't, which the doctors barely even know.

I'm not sure I'd count his AIDs help to Africa as a positive either since it was contingeant upon teaching abstinence and not distributing birth control (ie condoms).


This.

Anything you could even pretend he did right turns into something he did wrong if you do more than scrape the surface of the issue.

Anything you could even pretend he did right turns into something he did wrong if you do more than scrape the surface of the issue.

not the mango thing. thats all good.

hmmm. Wonders if getting rid of Rumsfield counts as a positive???

I suppose in the same way that getting rid of the bout of chlamydia you got when you had unprotected sex with a hooker counts as a "good thing"

He exposed what an idiot Limbaugh is, especially after the majority of Republicans stop standing behind Bush, Rush kept his position under Bush's desk....

HAHA try to get that image out of your head NSG!

HAHA try to get that image out of your head NSG!

I'm trying to get it in there, and I can't.

I'm trying to get it in there, and I can't.

You really want an image of Rush sucking off Bush?

really?

You really want an image of Rush sucking off Bush?

really?

Well I don't know what Limbaugh looks like, but now I've got an image of Obama sucking off Cheney, and it won't go.

Well I don't know what Limbaugh looks like, but now I've got an image of Obama sucking off Cheney, and it won't go.

http://millerkevd.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/rush-limbaugh.jpg

http://millerkevd.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/rush-limbaugh.jpg

Oh dear God.

not the mango thing. thats all good.

They were probably poison mangoes

Considering we already know what he did wrong, what, besides NCLB, prescriptions, and AIDS help for Africa has he done right???


NCLB was not something he did "right". Also, considering where that money for African AIDs relief went, Id argue he did that wrong too.

They were probably poison mangoes

They're not Chinese mangoes.

I'm not sure I'd count his AIDs help to Africa as a positive either since it was contingeant upon teaching abstinence and not distributing birth control (ie condoms).

Regardless of whether or not his programs were providing help for people already with AIDS, his conditions meant that more people would GET AIDS.

Preaching abstinence doesn't work in an area where most people believe that AIDS can be cured by (for a male anyway) by having sex with a virgin. And not having condoms available is an obvious way to help spread AIDS.

actually no the emergency aids fund C in in its ABC was condom use.
originally 20% of the funding was to be for prevention of which 33% went to abstinence programs. for a total 6.6% of funding going to abstinence programs.

However the 2008 revision removed both those requirements and even gave an exemption to the Mexico city rule (global gag rule).

as the Aids package sits now I would say it is pretty good.


oh yeah cause people are going to cry for it.
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/110385.pdf

What has Bush done well?

He's made Obama look really, really, really GOOD.

That's about it I'm afriad.

Only 10 more days of Bush? I feel like its going to be a damn dream, like Sarkhaan was talking about in another thread. We are going to see inauguration day, everyone is happy, and then BOOM!!! We wake up from the dream to realize its November 3rd, 2004 and Mr. Bush has been declared the winner for a second term.

Please don't let this be a dream!!!

What he did good:

Didn't get the US nuked 10 times over

Kagetora;14385935']What he did good:

Didn't get the US nuked 10 times over
not much of an accomplishment is it? all the other presidents have done the same.

not much of an accomplishment is it? all the other presidents have done the same.

Even CARTER managed that.

*Is completely oblivious as to why Jimmy Carter is regarded as one of the worst presidents in history*

Even CARTER managed that.

*Is completely oblivious as to why Jimmy Carter is regarded as one of the worst presidents in history*

Good intentions, didn't achieve shit. He's a lot like Obama in that regard.

Good intentions, didn't achieve shit. He's a lot like Obama in that regard.

seriously, he's accomplished absolutely nothing in the time that he hasn't become president.

Good intentions, didn't achieve shit. He's a lot like Obama in that regard.

I don't think Obama has good intentions.

His plan for the islamification of American has recieved plenty of coverage in all reputable news sources.

seriously, he's accomplished absolutely nothing in the time that he hasn't become president.

I already know what's going to happen with Obama, because we have what is essentially a carbon copy of him over here.

I don't think Obama has good intentions.

His plan for the islamification of American has recieved plenty of coverage in all reputable news sources.

He's Barack Obama, not Yousef al-Khattab.

Congratulations, you're one of only two people on earth who think NCLB did anything other than pull what few resources poor schools had out from under their feet.

Congratulations, you're one of only two people on earth who think NCLB did anything other than pull what few resources poor schools out from under their feet.

oh shut the fuck up, what do you know about the educational system? Who do you think you are, some...school...teaching..person?

Good intentions, didn't achieve shit. He's a lot like Obama in that regard.

Of course Obama didn't achieve shit: He hasn't been sworn into office yet.

With your eagerness to look for the least pretense of Obama Fails you might have a shot at working for FOXNews, Potato Boy.

Good intentions, didn't achieve shit. He's a lot like Obama in that regard.

They might look into laxatives. They might achieve shit after some of those.

-nods-

Good intentions, didn't achieve shit. He's a lot like Obama in that regard.

Don't all Presidents have good intentions? It's just that some of their "good" intentions tend to screw other people over...in horrible horrible ways....

seriously, he's accomplished absolutely nothing in the time that he hasn't become president.

HIS ADMINISTRATION IS A FAILURE! HE ISN'T THE MESSIAH, HE MUST BE CRUCIFIED ON THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT!

I already know what's going to happen with Obama, because we have what is essentially a carbon copy of him over here.

So you have a half black guy who was born in Hawaii been in the Senate for three years, ran for Prime Minister, won, and now hasn't done anything because it's the 10th and he's still not Prime Minister?

Congratulations, you're one of only two people on earth who think NCLB did anything other than pull what few resources poor schools out from under their feet.

Yea, from what I've seen when I was studying to become a teacher, NCLB was a clusterfuck. I dunno if this holds true for you, but I know many teachers here were reduced to "teaching the test".

So you have a half black guy who was born in Hawaii been in the Senate for three years, ran for Prime Minister, won, and now hasn't done anything because it's the 10th and he's still not Prime Minister?
I believe its called the House of Lords

I believe its called the House of Lords

I'm from Australia, so yeah, it's senate.

I'm from Australia, so yeah, it's senate.

Wow...and I was just guessing!

I'm awesome! :D

He exposed what an idiot Limbaugh is, especially after the majority of Republicans stop standing behind Bush, Rush kept his position under Bush's desk....

HAHA try to get that image out of your head NSG!

Dude, Rush couldn't fit under the desk. God.

oh shut the fuck up, what do you know about the educational system? Who do you think you are, some...school...teaching..person?

I know, who the fuck do I think I am, talking about things that actually effect my profession?

Yea, from what I've seen when I was studying to become a teacher, NCLB was a clusterfuck. I dunno if this holds true for you, but I know many teachers here were reduced to "teaching the test".

Lemme put it this way: I teach kindergarten and I can barely find time to finish one round of testing before another starts.

Lemme put it this way: I teach kindergarten and I can barely find time to finish one round of testing before another starts.

Really? Wow....does anyone know if Obama will repeal NCLB?

Dude, Rush couldn't fit under the desk. God.
that is what makes it such a horrifying image. great big rush squeezed into the kneehole blowing little george who isnt quite big enough to fill the chair.

Really? Wow....does anyone know if Obama will repeal NCLB?
i dont think thats on the agenda. but some kind of revamping is.

i dont think thats on the agenda. but some kind of revamping is.

Anyone ever wondered if maybe some kids need to be left behind?

Anyone ever wondered if maybe some kids need to be left behind?
thats what got us into this mess.

the problem is that nclb doesnt really get us out of it.

i dont think thats on the agenda. but some kind of revamping is.

No way he'll trash it--people would scream, even though pretty much every part of it is made of fail. But hopefully the revamping will be of Vista proportions, so that it bears very little resemblance to its former incarnation.

Lemme put it this way: I teach kindergarten and I can barely find time to finish one round of testing before another starts.

... You give tests in kindergarten?

Anyone ever wondered if maybe some kids need to be left behind?

What some kids NEED is better nutrition, a safe home environment, free quality education, a clear path to a career, and, in the case of students who are unable to work at grade level because of mental disabilities or disorders, an educational program structured to teach them what they can learn and help them become as independent and self-sufficient as possible. But all of that shit takes, like, money, apparently.

No way he'll trash it--people would scream, even though pretty much every part of it is made of fail. But hopefully the revamping will be of Vista proportions, so that it bears very little resemblance to its former incarnation.
it seems like there should be a way to make it work. with so much diversity in this country i have no idea how it can be done.

... You give tests in kindergarten.

State-fucking-mandated.

What some kids NEED is better nutrition, a safe home environment, free quality education, a clear path to a career, and, in the case of students who are unable to work at grade level because of mental disabilities or disorders, an educational program structured to teach them what they can learn and help them become as independent and self-sufficient as possible. But all of that shit takes, like, money, apparently.No Child Left Behind is not the way to get this done, either. Standardized testing is a bitch.

it seems like there should be a way to make it work. with so much diversity in this country i have no idea how it can be done.

Money, money, money. Money for materials, money for resource, speech, arts and after school programs, money for teachers who are qualified and want to help children. Which is why it won't ever happen.

State-fucking-mandated.

Wow. You know, here in Aus, our kindergartens focus on things that actually help kids.

In fact, we don't get tests until Year 7 (age 13).

Money, money, money. Money for materials, money for resource, speech, arts and after school programs, money for teachers who are qualified and want to help children. Which is why it won't ever happen.
how much does california spend per child?

how much does california spend per child?Per-pupil spending in California ranged from $4,806 to a high of $34,279. Some rural districts spent far more than the median, or midpoint, of $6,857 per student because of extremely low enrollments combined with high operational costs.
Anywhere from lower than anywhere in the country to higher than anywhere in the country. Based on a 2003-2004 funding study.

Linky.
(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/03/25/state/n095807S47.DTL)

Anywhere from lower than anywhere in the country to higher than anywhere in the country. Based on a 2003-2004 funding study.

Linky.
(http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/n/a/2006/03/25/state/n095807S47.DTL)
whats alabama spend?

whats alabama spend?


Linky (http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=whats+alabama+spend+per+child%3F)

Linky (http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=whats+alabama+spend+per+child%3F)
lol
thanks

looking at those 2 figures. california sucks.

looking at those 2 figures. california sucks.
It does have beautiful weather, though.

It does have beautiful weather, though.

They refuse to accept the fact that they have no water.

They refuse to accept the fact that they have no water.
A bold claim for a coastal state.

whats alabama spend?Around $6,500 average per student.

Wow. You know, here in Aus, our kindergartens focus on things that actually help kids.

In fact, we don't get tests until Year 7 (age 13).

So you didn't bother with the spelling and maths tests in Year 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6?

Congratulations, you're one of only two people on earth who think NCLB did anything other than pull what few resources poor schools had out from under their feet.

there was one thing that made it nice.
your in an under achieving school you can legally go to another school. so if you had parents who know how to play the system you could have your pick of the local well off schools. given most people in the under performing districts dont know how to play the system.

A bold claim for a coastal state.

Being coastal doesn't prevent drought.

So you didn't bother with the spelling and maths tests in Year 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6?

Not formal ones. Maybe a short quiz occasionally.

Being coastal doesn't prevent drought.

I think it is more California doesn't realize they need to invest in desalination plants on a massive scale.

Not formal ones. Maybe a short quiz occasionally.

Well there was the weekly spelling test not to mention various maths tests maybe once a fortnight.

But depending on how old you are surely you know of the standardised once a year literacy and numeracy tests for those in Year 3, 5 and in some states 8 or 9.

But still on Kindergarteners is a bit much.

I already know what's going to happen with Obama, because we have what is essentially a carbon copy of him over here.

Because youve shown to know so much abou American politics and government in the past, Im really inclined to believe you here.

....I've been trying to come up with something, but I've got nothing yet. Sorry!

So is there any help in the 100 THINGS AMERICANS MAY NOT KNOW ABOUT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION RECORD pdf (http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/bushrecord/documents/appendix_acc_for_web.pdf) that the White House has deemed it necessary to release? Any big positive thing that he can be remembered for?

KEPT AMERICA SAFE
• For more than seven years after September 11, 2001, prevented another attack on our homeland.

Yeah, and I've got a rock that keeps Tigers away. Fail.

Waged the Global War on Terror
• Removed threatening regimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, which freed
50 million people.
• Weakened the al-Qaeda network and its affiliates.
• Disrupted terrorist plots and built a coalition of more than 90 nations to fight terrorism.
This could have been something, but looking at the whole "War on terror" thing in a larger picture, and the Iraq war in particular, I cannot say that this was that much of a positive thing - at least, a positive thing that isn't offset by the negative thing of starting the "war on terror" in the first place.

Some of the things on this list isn't too bad, but then again... Most of it is just politics as usual, and all in a day's work, really. Nothing to shout about.

Advocated for and signed the Patriot Act,
Oh dear.

• Arrested and convicted terrorists in the United States and captured and isolated key financiers and facilitators of terrorism.
Can you say "Guantanamo" and "undermining the rule of law"?

Secured a commitment from North Korea to end its nuclear weapons program.
:D

Withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and operationalized missile defense.
...that's a good thing?

Dismantled the A.Q. Khan nuclear proliferation network.
Are you certain about that?

Removed Totalitarian Regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq and Helped Transform Both Nations into Emerging Democracies and Allies in the War on Terror
...riiiiight. (By the way, how the fuck can this be one of the things Americans don't know about the Bush administration?!

Oh, maybe it's the part about Emerging Democracies and Allies in the War on Terror... :p )

Helped establish an emerging democratic Iraqi government and the Iraqi Army, and ordered the surge of U.S. forces, which dramatically reduced violence and created the conditions for political and economic progress.
After invading Iraq illegally, mucking it up and creating the violence in the first place, the Surge is hailed as the one fantastic thing? Hmm...

Laid the foundation for a future Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement and a democratic Palestinian state by launching direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) at the Annapolis Conference and working with the PA to build accountable institutions.
http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-lolani.gif

Led the international response to the genocide in Darfur and worked to end major conflicts in Africa.

"Led"?

STRENGTHENED AMERICA’S INTERESTS AND
ALLIANCES ABROAD
http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-24.gif

Signed an historic civil nuclear agreement with India,
Is that good?

Worked with Mexico and Central American nations to combat drug cartels and gangs and helped Colombia fight narco-terrorism and restore democratic governance
Not very successfully, it would seem.

Led the response to the 2008 financial crisis.
Again; "Led"?

Increased the accountability, transparency, and effectiveness of the Federal Government, which improved the Government’s performance and helped save billions of dollars.
"Transparency" is not a word the Bush administration knows the meaning of, and they also believe "accountability" is a kind of cheese.

SET A BRIGHT COURSE FOR AMERICA’S FUTURE
Too bright, since people demanded change...

Convicted nearly 1,300 individuals of corporate fraud and corruption.
Yay Bush administration! Silly people believing that to be the responsibility of the courts...

Prohibited foreign nongovernmental organizations that receive U.S. tax dollars for family planning from performing or actively promoting abortion.
... yay? So no aid to African initiatives that mentions abortion as an alternative, for example...

Appointed Judges Committed to Ruling by the Letter of the Law
• Appointed Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito, and more than one-third of all active Federal judges, who will not legislate from the bench.
Oh dear lord... :tongue:

Worked to build international consensus on practical actions to address climate change as a global issue.
The Hell you did!

Warned of the risk that government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac posed to America’s financial security beginning in 2001.
...so you saw the dangers, but did nothing?

Led the most comprehensive and forward-leaning effort in modern history to facilitate a smooth and effective transition.
Yeah, Bush was tired and wanted to quit already in 2007.


In conclusion, most of the good things he did was just business as usual. I find no grand thing to remember his presidency for, and only feel elated that he'll be kicked out on hiss ass in a few days. Good riddance to the fucker!

The mods should change this topic's title daily. It's a slow, much-more-popular version of the ball drop! XD

Does anyone else wonder if the quality of The Daily Show going to drop now that we don't have bumbling, dunce George in office for John to make fun of?

Does anyone else wonder if the quality of The Daily Show going to drop now that we don't have bumbling, dunce George in office for John to make fun of?

There are still plenty of idiot right wing politicians to mock, as well as imcompetent left wing ones.

I think the next four years will be Jon Stewart mocking the right wings foaming at the mouth anger and tin foil hat paranoia towards the Obama administration. I think the quality will be fine.

There are still plenty of idiot right wing politicians to mock, as well as imcompetent left wing ones.

I think the next four years will be Jon Stewart mocking the right wings foaming at the mouth anger and tin foil hat paranoia towards the Obama administration. I think the quality will be fine.

Meh, that gets old and stale after awhile though. Well here's hoping Joe Biden does something or say something stupid!

I saw one comedian, I forget which... Chris Rock, perhaps, who commented on that subject, actually. He said, as far as humor goes, he'll love the Obama administration because he'll actually need to come up with new politics jokes, and they won't always be incredibly obvious ones. Making a joke about Bush is like shooting fish in a barrel, to use the old cliche. And had McCain won, he could have just dusted off his old Reagan jokes.

I saw one comedian, I forget which... Chris Rock, perhaps, who commented on that subject, actually. He said, as far as humor goes, he'll love the Obama administration because he'll actually need to come up with new politics jokes, and they won't always be incredibly obvious ones. Making a joke about Bush is like shooting fish in a barrel, to use the old cliche. And had McCain won, he could have just dusted off his old Reagan jokes.

I look forward to Chris Rock's new act. "When a black guy's in office, it's the greatest thing to ever happen to the universe! When a white guy's in office, he's inferior white scum that's just enslaving, invading and exploiting!"

I look forward to Chris Rock's new act. "When a black guy's in office, it's the greatest thing to ever happen to the universe! When a white guy's in office, he's inferior white scum that's just enslaving, invading and exploiting!"

Huh, I must have missed the joke where Chris Rock called white guys "inferior white scum". Was that his HBO special? I dont have HBO.

I look forward to Chris Rock's new act. "When a black guy's in office, it's the greatest thing to ever happen to the universe! When a white guy's in office, he's inferior white scum that's just enslaving, invading and exploiting!"
I think you should instead look forward to ever seeing one of Chris Rock's performances.

I look forward to Chris Rock's new act. "When a black guy's in office, it's the greatest thing to ever happen to the universe! When a white guy's in office, he's inferior white scum that's just enslaving, invading and exploiting!"

Still missing Georgie, Johnny and Tony huh Potato Boy? Because I could swear Chris Rock's comedy routines never had the slightest bit of Black Superiority in them. Yeah, must be an HBO Special I missed.

Still missing Georgie, Johnny and Tony huh Potato Boy? Because I could swear Chris Rock's comedy routines never had the slightest bit of Black Superiority in them. Yeah, must be an HBO Special I missed.

Remember, Rusty thinks everyone is as racist as he is.

Remember, Rusty thinks everyone is as racist as he is.

Don't forget also that Potato Boy thinks "Organized" Racism is bad, but "Individual" Racism is A-Okay.

;)

1. Its the Democratic majority and their control of the financial sub-commities for the economic problems
2. Most people today have no sense of the difference between a modern war, which takes about 2 weeks, and an occupation/rebuilding/assistance role, which takes many years.
3. The REvolutionary war took 8 years to fight just the war part! It took even longer for the government to even get started in actually passing laws, which the Iraqis have now been doing for years. It takes time and they are on the right track.
4. Most Iraqi vehicles are over 20 years old and need repair and replacement. They are good enough to counter insurgents, but they have no ability to defend themselves from even the smallest outside threat.
5. If you didn't notice, BEFORE the Democrats took control of congress, the Market was at its best EVER.

5. If you didn't notice, BEFORE the Democrats took control of congress, the Market was at its best EVER.

Didn't the whole tech bubble collapse in 2001, which was when we had a Republican controlled Congress?

1. Its the Democratic majority and their control of the financial sub-commities for the economic problems
2. Most people today have no sense of the difference between a modern war, which takes about 2 weeks, and an occupation/rebuilding/assistance role, which takes many years.
3. The REvolutionary war took 8 years to fight just the war part! It took even longer for the government to even get started in actually passing laws, which the Iraqis have now been doing for years. It takes time and they are on the right track.
4. Most Iraqi vehicles are over 20 years old and need repair and replacement. They are good enough to counter insurgents, but they have no ability to defend themselves from even the smallest outside threat.
5. If you didn't notice, BEFORE the Democrats took control of congress, the Market was at its best EVER.

can't we just, for once, get a right winger who is actually even MODERATELY intelligent? Someone who is capable of independent thought, for ONCE?

1. Its the Democratic majority and their control of the financial sub-commities for the economic problems

:rolleyes:

2. Most people today have no sense of the difference between a modern war, which takes about 2 weeks, and an occupation/rebuilding/assistance role, which takes many years.

Maybe most people are angry because the Bush Admin said it would be quick.

3. The REvolutionary war took 8 years to fight just the war part! It took even longer for the government to even get started in actually passing laws, which the Iraqis have now been doing for years. It takes time and they are on the right track.

False. The Revolution lasted for roughly six years of armed, military conflict (1775-1781). We passed the Articles of Confederation in 1781 (same year the war ended) and our Constitution in 1787. The very first bill ever put before the US Senate was in 1789. Thats not "much longer" than eight years. We were also passing laws before that, thats just the first bill put before the Senate under the new Constitution.

4. Most Iraqi vehicles are over 20 years old and need repair and replacement. They are good enough to counter insurgents, but they have no ability to defend themselves from even the smallest outside threat.

Bwuah?

5. If you didn't notice, BEFORE the Democrats took control of congress, the Market was at its best EVER.

This is 100%, pure, bullshit. The economy has been lagging and/or in tatters for the eight years Bush has been president. For the love of God, learn at the very least recent history before you open your mouth.

How old are you? Because there is no way you can be over 13 and actually believe any of this tripe. I mean, Id at least right off your ignorance to being too young if you were only 5 when he was elected.


Didn't the whole tech bubble collapse in 2001, which was when we had a Republican controlled Congress?

Apperantly Conserapedia and Rush Limbaugh say otherwise.

can't we just, for once, get a right winger who is actually even MODERATELY intelligent? Someone who is capable of independent thought, for ONCE?

Probably not.

can't we just, for once, get a right winger who is actually even MODERATELY intelligent? Someone who is capable of independent thought, for ONCE?

Hence why I saw WE MUST BRING RONALD WILSON REAGAN BACK TO LIFE!!!!!!!

Well if you don't believe me. Then go check out your facts and tell me how a modern war is fought. Tell me which party controls the financial sub-commities in congress. Prove to me that Fannie May and Freddie Mac didn't Lobbie the top Democratic party leaders (including Obama) to pass the lending bills which destroyed the housing market and our whole financial system.

And maybe I am just right. Because I really don't get how I am not an independant thinker because These things are all proven which makes me feel that I am right on this.

Well if you don't believe me. Then go check out your facts and tell me how a modern war is fought. Tell me which party controls the financial sub-commities in congress. Prove to me that Fannie May and Freddie Mac didn't Lobbie the top Democratic party leaders (including Obama) to pass the lending bills which destroyed the housing market and our whole financial system.

And maybe I am just right. Because I really don't get how I am not an independant thinker because These things are all proven which makes me feel that I am right on this.

really, these things are "proven" huh? Tell you what, why don't you name me those lending bills that so destroyed the housing markets, hm? What are their names? What are their titles? When were they passed and when did they become law?

Who sponsored them? Who cosponsored them? Who voted for them? Were they vetoed? What was the final vote to over come the veto?

You've "proven" who was "responsible for those "lending bills" that led to the current situation huh? Then you should have absolutely no problem telling me which ones those are.

I'll wait here.

really, these things are "proven" huh? Tell you what, why don't you name me those lending bills that so destroyed the housing markets, hm? What are their names? What are their titles? When were they passed and when did they become law?

Who sponsored them? Who cosponsored them? Who voted for them? Were they vetoed? What was the final vote to over come the veto?

You've "proven" who was "responsible for those "lending bills" that led to the current situation huh? Then you should have absolutely no problem telling me which ones those are.

I'll wait here.

I think I will too, just for lulz.

can't we just, for once, get a right winger who is actually even MODERATELY intelligent? Someone who is capable of independent thought, for ONCE?

Ssshh, if they were capable of independent thought, they wouldn't be right-wing. :Þ

Ssshh, if they were capable of independent thought, they wouldn't be right-wing. :Þ

I fear, some days, that this must just be the case.

Well if you don't believe me. Then go check out your facts and tell me how a modern war is fought. Tell me which party controls the financial sub-commities in congress. Prove to me that Fannie May and Freddie Mac didn't Lobbie the top Democratic party leaders (including Obama) to pass the lending bills which destroyed the housing market and our whole financial system.

And maybe I am just right. Because I really don't get how I am not an independant thinker because These things are all proven which makes me feel that I am right on this.


Since you were wrong both about Revolutionary and very recent history, I dont intend to "look up" anything you say, especially when I already know its crap. But if, like Neo Art said, you feel like sourcing your claim...

Well if you don't believe me. Then go check out your facts and tell me how a modern war is fought. Tell me which party controls the financial sub-commities in congress. Prove to me that Fannie May and Freddie Mac didn't Lobbie the top Democratic party leaders (including Obama) to pass the lending bills which destroyed the housing market and our whole financial system.

And maybe I am just right. Because I really don't get how I am not an independant thinker because These things are all proven which makes me feel that I am right on this.
geee did you miss the 6 years of republican congress with republican president where they could have fixed any problem with freddie/fannie that they wanted?

even with their 3 day workweek, they had plenty of time to get it done.

geee did you miss the 6 years of republican congress with republican president where they could have fixed any problem with freddie/fannie that they wanted?

even with their 3 day workweek, they had plenty of time to get it done.

I swear to God, for Republicans, economic history didnt start until 2006.

I swear to God, for Republicans, economic history didnt start until 2006.

That's not true! Under Reagan, everything was a perfect Utopia where nobody had to pay any taxes and everybody could get a job!

Then economic history took a break, and then it didn't start back again until 2006.

I swear to God, for Republicans, economic history didnt start until 2006.
barney frank may be powerful--and he is--but he still had george bush to veto anything that got passed that was damaging to the economy.

until the republican party faces up to what they did, they will never regain power.

until the republican party faces up to what they did, they will never regain power.

If only that were true. Because if it was, they would die as a party. The Republican party has no accountability.

Alas, I dont think it is true.

:rolleyes:



Maybe most people are angry because the Bush Admin said it would be quick.



False. We passed the Articles of Confederation in 1781 (same year the war ended) and our Constitution in 1787. The very first bill ever put before the US Senate was in 1789. Thats not "much longer" than eight years. We were also passing laws before that, thats just the first bill put before the Senate under the new Constitution.



Bwuah?



This is 100%, pure, bullshit. The economy has been lagging and/or in tatters for the eight years Bush has been president. For the love of God, learn at the very least recent history before you open your mouth.

How old are you? Because there is no way you can be over 13 and actually believe any of this tripe. I mean, Id at least right off your ignorance to being too young if you were only 5 when he was elected.




Apperantly Conserapedia and Rush Limbaugh say otherwise.



Probably not.

True most people are angry because we said it would be quick. We didn't ecpext Iran to start sending in people to fight in the south and the Iraqi army to be so terribly destroyed that they would take years to recover.

True we were passing laws beforehand, but that was because we already had a system somewhat in place long beforehand. What you just said proved my point to. The constitution wasn't until '87 FOUR years after the official end to the war the Iraqis are STILL fighting a war and already have a constitution.

If the Market was really in tatters then explain to me why 2 years ago the DOW was at 15,000? Thats not exactly in tatters is it?

There were problems in 2001, but those were soon fixed and the economy shot up, making millions for stockholders and businesses alike. But the core of this financial meltdown was the housing market, which in turn collapsed the credit market and effectivly destroyed teh financial situation temporarily.

I'm a 15 year old, and, am quite possibly smarter than you in this matter. I am in the 99th Percentile (More specifically in the top 14% of the top 5%) and have attended Johns Hopkins courses on international politics in Carlisle Penn. and have been accepted to the Duke Summer program on International relations and the THINK program in Reno on another politics course. I scored a 1130 on my SATs (in 8th grade) because I completely bombed the essay (I am a terrible essay writer) SO i wouldn't think that I was a dumb little kid.

Prove to me that Fannie May and Freddie Mac didn't Lobbie the top Democratic party leaders (including Obama) to pass the lending bills which destroyed the housing market and our whole financial system.

I actually had to reread this to make sure I read it right. Fannie and Freddie are bankrupt as a result of this financial situation. Your logic is so convoluted and twisted, I must accept that you didn't come up with it yourself, but read it off some right wing rant site and thought it sounded good without bothering to give it more than a cursory glance.

Your general position seems to be that Fannie and Freddie lobbied the democrats to pass "lending bills" (still waiting on which), for their benefit. And those lending bills screwed the economy.

Except for the fact that...it pretty much screwed Fannie and Freddy too. Your argument seems to be "prove to me that fannie and freddy didn't bribe democrats to pass laws that would bankrupt them!"

Seriously? I mean...fucking seriously?

I'm a 15 year old, and, am quite possibly smarter than you in this matter. I am in the 99th Percentile (More specifically in the top 14% of the top 5%) and have attended Johns Hopkins courses on international politics in Carlisle Penn. and have been accepted to the Duke Summer program on International relations and the THINK program in Reno on another politics course. I scored a 1130 on my SATs (in 8th grade) because I completely bombed the essay (I am a terrible essay writer) SO i wouldn't think that I was a dumb little kid.

oh my god...oh it's so cute. He reminds me of myself when I was a pretentious little teenager. God, seeing this, it just reminds me what an obnoxious little prick I was. Man, I was a fucking moron...

Can I keep it?

True most people are angry because we said it would be quick. We didn't ecpext Iran to start sending in people to fight in the south and the Iraqi army to be so terribly destroyed that they would take years to recover.

lulz.

True we were passing laws beforehand, but that was because we already had a system somewhat in place long beforehand. What you just said proved my point to. The constitution wasn't until '87 FOUR years after the official end to the war the Iraqis are STILL fighting a war and already have a constitution.

Hey, look, you can show that the American Revolution and the Iraq War are different! Dude, youre the one that made the connection. The point is, not only was your description of the events after the Revolution wrong, but they are totally unrelated, as circumstances are entirely different. A better example would be how long it took us before the post-Civil War South stopped lynching blacks.

If the Market was really in tatters then explain to me why 2 years ago the DOW was at 15,000? Thats not exactly in tatters is it?

Because, to determine the strength of the economy, you look at other things too, boy genius. Housing, price of food, unemployment etc. All those things were not in that great of shape for the past eight years.

There were problems in 2001, but those were soon fixed and the economy shot up, making millions for stockholders and businesses alike. But the core of this financial meltdown was the housing market, which in turn collapsed the credit market and effectivly destroyed teh financial situation temporarily.

Which has been a problem since 2001...a problem the Republican controled congress was perfectly content to let fester.

I'm a 15 year old, and,

It shows.

am quite possibly smarter than you in this matter. I am in the 99th Percentile (More specifically in the top 14% of the top 5%) and have attended Johns Hopkins courses on international politics in Carlisle Penn. and have been accepted to the Duke Summer program on International relations and the THINK program in Reno on another politics course. I scored a 1130 on my SATs (in 8th grade) because I completely bombed the essay (I am a terrible essay writer)

Suuuuuuuuure. Let me guess, you have a PhD in medicine too?


SO i wouldn't think that I was a dumb little kid.

Ill stop thinking it when you say something that shows me otherwise.

oh my god...oh it's so cute. He reminds me of myself when I was a pretentious little teenager. God, seeing this, it just reminds me what an obnoxious little prick I was. Man, I was a fucking moron...

Can I keep it?


Only if you feed it and take it for walks.

geee did you miss the 6 years of republican congress with republican president where they could have fixed any problem with freddie/fannie that they wanted?

even with their 3 day workweek, they had plenty of time to get it done.

The problems didn't really start until the congress turned Democrat. Thats when the lending bills were passed. True Bush should have vetoed them, but not the entire Republican party is innocent in this. There were dozens of Republicans who also liked this idea because it was lax on many businesses. If he had opposed this, his own party would have been against him and he would have no control over his party. Also, when you look at the bill, it doesn't look like it even remotly had the possibility to cause such a problem. SO he probably thought that it wouldn't cause anything to happen.

What I find amusing is that general idea that rampant, seemingly unchecked and largely inexplicable growth in one sector is considered signs of a good economy.

No...no it's not. It's the signs of a very bad one. And when other sectors of the economy start hitching their wagons to that rampant unchecked and inexplicable growth...that's a very, VERY bad one.

Which is exactly what happened. The housing market was growing too fucking fast, and everyone was using that to bolser their own growth. Sure it made the numbers look good, but only someone without even the most basically rudimentary grasp of economic theory would think "republicans caused the market to go up, democrats caused the market to go down!"

The market went up, for a series of years, precisely because it all got tied up in a particular sector that was spinning out of whack. And what administration allowed that to happen?

Gee, I wonder.

The problems didn't really start until the congress turned Democrat.

Patently absurd. The housing market has been out of whack with the general growth trends of the overall economy since at least Q3 FY 02. By Q2 FY 04 it was pretty obvious for just about everyone. At that point everyone who was actually involved knew the end was coming, they just tried to milk it as long as possible, and failed.

Thats when the lending bills were passed.

I asked you before, which lending bills?

Well if you don't believe me. Then go check out your facts and tell me how a modern war is fought.

Hey sweety. Before you go on spouting about modern wars; you might want to remember you could very well be talking to a veteran....

The problems didn't really start until the congress turned Democrat.

This is a lie. Do you know your lying, or do you really believe this shit?

Thats when the lending bills were passed.

You really havent proven much in this vein.

True Bush should have vetoed them, but not the entire Republican party is innocent in this. There were dozens of Republicans who also liked this idea because it was lax on many businesses. If he had opposed this, his own party would have been against him and he would have no control over his party.

He already has no control over the party.

Also, when you look at the bill, it doesn't look like it even remotly had the possibility to cause such a problem. SO he probably thought that it wouldn't cause anything to happen.

So the democrats are malicious and corrupt, and Bush is just some dope who had good intentions but was an unwitting pawn?

You do know that of the top ten share holders in Fannie and Freddie, 5 of the ten are Republicans, right?

Of course Obama didn't achieve shit: He hasn't been sworn into office yet.

Its the greatest revelation of the century! :eek:

I think it is more California doesn't realize they need to invest in desalination plants on a massive scale.

They can't because the environmentalist hippies would scream "ohz noz! You cant kill the sea turtles!"


...so you saw the dangers, but did nothing?


Simple, the Democrats blocked it in the senate because quote

"Fannie May and Freddie Mac are fine, there is nothing wrong with them"
-Barney FRank

can't we just, for once, get a right winger who is actually even MODERATELY intelligent? Someone who is capable of independent thought, for ONCE?

They are out there, they are just hiding in holes waiting to come out after the 4 years are over. :tongue:

really, these things are "proven" huh? Tell you what, why don't you name me those lending bills that so destroyed the housing markets, hm? What are their names? What are their titles? When were they passed and when did they become law?

Who sponsored them? Who cosponsored them? Who voted for them? Were they vetoed? What was the final vote to over come the veto?

You've "proven" who was "responsible for those "lending bills" that led to the current situation huh? Then you should have absolutely no problem telling me which ones those are.

I'll wait here.

A huge one was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, Passed by the 96th Congressional Congress and under President Carter. The main sponsors of the bill were the Democrats, and the bill was not vetoed. This legislation was soon added by the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act (1989). The Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 was a huge one as well.

Basicly, the bills 'forced' lending companies to give people mortgages regardless of credit and background so they could get into a home. Many of these mortgages were 'teaser rates' that were quickly adjusted and spiked around the turn of the century. When these rates spiked, suddenly these people could not pay off their mortgages, and ultimately, the banks couldn't get their loans back, and the mortgage companies (Fannie and Freddie) couldn't get their loans back. This started the domino effect that lead to the current instability on the global market, since many of these top lending companies also had branches and stockholders world-wide.

The Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act also had Fannie and Freddie give out these ridiculous lending packages to banks, which also contributed.

Ssshh, if they were capable of independent thought, they wouldn't be right-wing. :Þ

That's right, they would be moderates/populists, the ultimate fear of the left-wing. :D.

I'm a 15 year old, and, am quite possibly smarter than you in this matter. I am in the 99th Percentile (More specifically in the top 14% of the top 5%) and have attended Johns Hopkins courses on international politics in Carlisle Penn. and have been accepted to the Duke Summer program on International relations and the THINK program in Reno on another politics course. I scored a 1130 on my SATs (in 8th grade) because I completely bombed the essay (I am a terrible essay writer) SO i wouldn't think that I was a dumb little kid.


darlin' this is a political debate forum. everyone here is above average.

you do have pretty good spelling for a 15 year old. you might want to review it a bit before you post though...maybe run it through a spellchecker to catch the dropped letters here and there.

What I find amusing is that general idea that rampant, seemingly unchecked and largely inexplicable growth in one sector is considered signs of a good economy.

No...no it's not. It's the signs of a very bad one. And when other sectors of the economy start hitching their wagons to that rampant unchecked and inexplicable growth...that's a very, VERY bad one.

Which is exactly what happened. The housing market was growing too fucking fast, and everyone was using that to bolser their own growth. Sure it made the numbers look good, but only someone without even the most basically rudimentary grasp of economic theory would think "republicans caused the market to go up, democrats caused the market to go down!"

The market went up, for a series of years, precisely because it all got tied up in a particular sector that was spinning out of whack. And what administration allowed that to happen?

Gee, I wonder.

Patently absurd. The housing market has been out of whack with the general growth trends of the overall economy since at least Q3 FY 02. By Q2 FY 04 it was pretty obvious for just about everyone. At that point everyone who was actually involved knew the end was coming, they just tried to milk it as long as possible, and failed.



I asked you before, which lending bills?

Dude, what the fuck do you know? Youre just a Harvard Law grad who does this kind of shit for a living. You call those credentials? Have you seen his:
I'm a 15 year old, and, am quite possibly smarter than you in this matter. I am in the 99th Percentile (More specifically in the top 14% of the top 5%) and have attended Johns Hopkins courses on international politics in Carlisle Penn. and have been accepted to the Duke Summer program on International relations and the THINK program in Reno on another politics course. I scored a 1130 on my SATs (in 8th grade) because I completely bombed the essay (I am a terrible essay writer) SO i wouldn't think that I was a dumb little kid.

Who do you think Im going to believe?

Dude, what the fuck do you know? Youre just a Harvard Law grad who does this kind of shit for a living. You call those credentials? Have you seen his:


Wait! He is an intellectual elitist!!!!!! We can now ignore him!

If they were competent, they would have realized that Iran would meddle.

We had the articles of confederation as a constitution. it wasn't working, so they switched to the current one.

First of all, the highest that the stock market reached was 14,164.53, and second of all, it was in a bubble. You may wish to read about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania, as classic example of a market bubble.

For the record, we've been in a bear market since Bush entered office. Keep in mind when you include inflation, a bubble-less Dow Jones 14,000 in October 2007 wouldn't much better than a Dow Jones 11,700 in January 2000. While we're at it, October 3nd 2006 is a whopping five points higher than that january 2000 average -- and considering thta we've had inflation since then.

Oh, and since you like to compare IQ and SAT scores, keep in mind that my graded 8 SATs were 1270 (which was BEFORE they added essays, so it's on a 400-1600 scale not a 600-2400 scale) and that my IRL IQ test put me at 164 (which is a bit higher than top 1% of the top 1%).

Wait! He is an intellectual elitist!!!!!! We can now ignore him!

It gets worse. Hes lives in Mass. That means hes an "East Coast Ivy League Intellectual" elitest.


Thats like...worse than Hitler.

darlin' this is a political debate forum. everyone here is above average.

you do have pretty good spelling for a 15 year old. you might want to review it a bit before you post though...maybe run it through a spellchecker to catch the dropped letters here and there.

I'm just aying that KoL is talking like he knows everything and how the world should be run and probably thinks that he has a cure for AIDS to.

Never said that I did good on the spelling part of the test. And partly because I don't really care how its spelled, as long as it sounds the same and gets the point across.

A huge one was the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, Passed by the 96th Congressional Congress and under President Carter. The main sponsors of the bill were the Democrats, and the bill was not vetoed. This legislation was soon added by the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act (1989). The Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act of 1992 was a huge one as well.

Basicly, the bills 'forced' lending companies to give people mortgages regardless of credit and background so they could get into a home. Many of these mortgages were 'teaser rates' that were quickly adjusted and spiked around the turn of the century. When these rates spiked, suddenly these people could not pay off their mortgages, and ultimately, the banks couldn't get their loans back, and the mortgage companies (Fannie and Freddie) couldn't get their loans back. This started the domino effect that lead to the current instability on the global market, since many of these top lending companies also had branches and stockholders world-wide.

That is...pretty much false. More to point, I will note that this particular OP was talking about the JUST PREVIOUS DEMOCRATICALLY LED CONGRESS. Bills passed in 77, 89, and 92 doesn't really pertain to them.

As for the CRA, it's patently false to refer it to something that "forced banks to give people mortgages regardless of credit and background." That's just actually completely and utterly untrue.

Essentially...you're lying. Or your just ignorant. Really one or the other.

The CRA was essentially designed to stop the practice of "redlining", which basically meant that credit worthy borrowers were denied regardless of their credit, simply because of certain factors (neighborhood, occupation, race gender, age, etc). It was meant to aid banks in making sound business decisions, and not reject applicants out of hand.

Indeed, any argument that CRA was behind this could be deconstructed by one simple factual statement. On the whole, mortgages that followed CRA guidelines...were profitable. And profitable mortgages don't cause credit crunches when they're used to back mortgage backed bonds. Only unprofitable ones do.

No, what caused this mess was banks, totally on their own and without government mandate or regulation, deciding to give credit risky subprime loans, on the assumption that a rising housing market would increase the value of the property they were mortgaging, allowing for an "in worst case" foreclosure and sale, to recoup their money.

Banks were counting on, even if their mortgagors couldn't pay, the foreclosed home sale would bring enough back to satisfy the money they loaned out. Government regulation didn't cause this, CRA didn't cause this, CRA mortgages, propertly following the guidelines, were profitable.

What caused this was unchecked and unregulated greed.

I'm just aying that KoL is talking like he knows everything

Everything? No. More than you? It appears that way. Enough to know youre full of shit? Yes.

and how the world should be run

I do.

and probably thinks that he has a cure for AIDS to.

$180,000 injected into your blood stream.

Never said that I did good on the spelling part of the test. And partly because I don't really care how its spelled, as long as it sounds the same and gets the point across.

The mark of a true intellectual.

If only that were true. Because if it was, they would die as a party. The Republican party has no accountability.


And you are saying that Democrats are angles and have no accountability either? If so, then that's bull. Both sides contributed, but it is unfair to say which side contributed more, the ones who started it, or the ones who spoke out but then kept silent.



Because, to determine the strength of the economy, you look at other things too, boy genius. Housing, price of food, unemployment etc. All those things were not in that great of shape for the past eight years.


I can understand Housing Prices which exploded, but food was at an all time low, unemployment was between 4-5%, and consumer spending and average income all rose, so I don't see the problem with that time period. :confused:

If they were competent, they would have realized that Iran would meddle.

We had the articles of confederation as a constitution. it wasn't working, so they switched to the current one.

First of all, the highest that the stock market reached was 14,164.53, and second of all, it was in a bubble. You may wish to read about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania, as classic example of a market bubble.

For the record, we've been in a bear market since Bush entered office. Keep in mind when you include inflation, a bubble-less Dow Jones 14,000 in October 2007 wouldn't much better than a Dow Jones 11,700 in January 2000. While we're at it, October 3nd 2006 is a whopping five points higher than that january 2000 average -- and considering thta we've had inflation since then.

Oh, and since you like to compare IQ and SAT scores, keep in mind that my graded 8 SATs were 1270 (which was BEFORE they added essays, so it's on a 400-1600 scale not a 600-2400 scale) and that my IRL IQ test put me at 164 (which is a bit higher than top 1% of the top 1%).


Wasn't talking to you in the first place, so thats great that your really smart, as long you don't talk like i'm an idiot, then I'm happy for you.

I can understand Housing Prices which exploded, but food was at an all time low, unemployment was between 4-5%, and consumer spending and average income all rose, so I don't see the problem with that time period. :confused:


Unemployment fluctuated, but more often than not was relatively high. Food, I remember it rising. But I could be thinking in terms of more recent history there.

And you are saying that Democrats are angles

If I said you were acute, would you think me obtuse?


I can understand Housing Prices which exploded, but food was at an all time low, unemployment was between 4-5%, and consumer spending and average income all rose, so I don't see the problem with that time period. :confused:

The problem? Most of that was predicated on a growing housing market. It's basic economic principles. If one sector rises rapidly, the tendency is for other sectors to become tied into that one. And as long as that one rises, everyone rises.

But when it crashes.......well, we know how that particular song and dance ends, don't we?

That is...*snip*

Now Neo! Don't let facts keep you from the truth!

So if you were that way as a kid; did you ever get a swirly? ;)

I'm just aying that KoL is talking like he knows everything and how the world should be run and probably thinks that he has a cure for AIDS to.

Never said that I did good on the spelling part of the test. And partly because I don't really care how its spelled, as long as it sounds the same and gets the point across.
no youre spelling is very good. not perfect but noticibly better than most teens--do you go to catholic school where they dont teach a whole language curriculum?

my point really is that you are welcome here but if you are going to survive the pigpile you have to bring your A-game. no squeezing by on bluffing or shaky evidence. no sketchy logic. no assuming that the other guy doesnt know what he is talking about. NO RUSH LIMBAUGH TALKING POINTS!

we have actual experts here. not everyone, of course, but if you are going to talk about law, we have lawyers and law students here; if you are going to talk about medicine we have doctors and medical students here; if you are gonig to talk about politics, we have political science students here (no actual politicians i think); if you are gong to talk about the vietnam war, we have people here who served in vietnam.

and we have bullshitters who pretend all of the above.

its fun. youll enjoy it.

Everything? No. More than you? It appears that way. Enough to know youre full of shit? Yes.



I do.



$180,000 injected into your blood stream.



The mark of a true intellectual.

Now your making me think that your jealous.

lets see it happen

Might be fun to try out just for the heck of it

Correction. The mark of a true LAZY intellectual

Now your making me think that your jealous.


Of what? Im quite happy to not have the veil of ignorance over my eyes anymore. Its like the Matrix. Seeing the truth is shocking at first, but in the end, youre probably better off for it.

lets see it happen

My army is still training.

Might be fun to try out just for the heck of it

Watch South Park.

no youre spelling is very good. not perfect but noticibly better than most teens--do you go to catholic school where they dont teach a whole language curriculum?

my point really is that you are welcome here but if you are going to survive the pigpile you have to bring your A-game. no squeezing by on bluffing or shaky evidence. no sketchy logic. no assuming that the other guy doesnt know what he is talking about.

we have actual experts here. not everyone, of course, but if you are going to talk about law, we have lawyers and law students here; if you are going to talk about medicine we have doctors and medical students here; if you are gonig to talk about politics, we have political science students here (no actual politicians i think); if you are gong to talk about the vietnam war, we have people here who served in vietnam.

and we have bullshitters who pretend all of the above.

its fun. youll enjoy it.


No, I go to a regular little high school. Nice place, but REALLY old. Good food, but apparently they don't have the federal program that lets me get free lunches if my family's financial situation is bad. SO it took like 3 weeks for the school to get it fixed up. Not a very bright group there.

I don't pretend or make stuff up. I just post info that I remember (though im not always spot on correct) from something. And trust me, I have no idea about anything in medicine or law so I'm not going to argue with ANYONE who says they have even the slightest clue of any of that stuff.

It gets worse. Hes lives in Mass. That means hes an "East Coast Ivy League Intellectual" elitest.


Thats like...worse than Hitler.

That's at least 7 kilonazis. At least.

I don't pretend or make stuff up. I just post info that I remember (though im not always spot on correct) from something.

Yeah, I can tell. Mainly due to the misaligned rants about Freddie/Fannie. The connections and donations have NOTHING what so ever with just previous Congress passing lending regulation. None. To argue that they gave money to democrats and democrats passed bad lending bills, and oh how so suspicious, is to say that Fanny/Freddie paid democrats to bankrupt them. It's a silly, silly argument and makes you look like a silly, silly person for suggesting it.


And trust me, I have no idea about anything in medicine or law so I'm not going to argue with ANYONE who says they have even the slightest clue of any of that stuff.

But...what do you think a "lending bill" in the context of congress...is, exactly? Again...what bills? You're posting arguments you "heard somewhere" but didn't even bother to verify them, or check them, or even make sure you have the slightest and most basic rudimentary knowledge in the subject.

So why should I take you seriously? Why should I bother?

That is...pretty much false. More to point, I will note that this particular OP was talking about the JUST PREVIOUS DEMOCRATICALLY LED CONGRESS. Bills passed in 77, 89, and 92 doesn't really pertain to them.

Okay, I though that when you slammed the guy who was talking about his 'intellectualness' :p, you were refering to any bills passed in a democratic congress. Not just the previous one, if that is the case, then no, the democrats wouldn't have had time to pass legislation that would have screwed anything up. But also, the Republicans just stood by and watched, so neither side is to fully blame.


As for the CRA, it's patently false to refer it to something that "forced banks to give people mortgages regardless of credit and background." That's just actually completely and utterly untrue.

In reality, it is quite true, it didn't exactly use the wording "force" but the bill's main purpose was to prevent racism when applying for a loan.


Essentially...you're lying. Or your just ignorant. Really one or the other.
I guess from my perspective I am telling the truth, so I must be ignorant then. But if that is the case, then I have nothing to base an argument off of.
Darn corners that I am thrown into!


The CRA was essentially designed to stop the practice of "redlining", which basically meant that credit worthy borrowers were denied regardless of their credit, simply because of certain factors (neighborhood, occupation, race gender, age, etc). It was meant to aid banks in making sound business decisions, and not reject applicants out of hand.

The main intent of what I was trying to point out to was the amendments to the CRA, not just the CRA itself. But again, that proves my above point.


Indeed, any argument that CRA was behind this could be deconstructed by one simple factual statement. On the whole, mortgages that followed CRA guidelines...were profitable. And profitable mortgages don't cause credit crunches when they're used to back mortgage backed bonds. Only unprofitable ones do.

So the profitability of the CRA mortgages ultimately lead to the whole crisis, is that what you are saying?


No, what caused this mess was banks, totally on their own and without government mandate or regulation, deciding to give credit risky subprime loans, on the assumption that a rising housing market would increase the value of the property they were mortgaging, allowing for an "in worst case" foreclosure and sale, to recoup their money.

Yes, but who gave the subprime mortgage packages to the banks? The lending companies such as Fannie and Freddie.


Banks were counting on, even if their mortgagors couldn't pay, the foreclosed home sale would bring enough back to satisfy the money they loaned out. Government regulation didn't cause this, CRA didn't cause this, CRA mortgages, propertly following the guidelines, were profitable.

What caused this was unchecked and unregulated greed.

Something we can agree on.

So the profitability of the CRA mortgages ultimately lead to the whole crisis, is that what you are saying?

No, I'm saying mortgages given under CRA guidelines more or less had nothing to do with it. They were on the whole profitable.

Yes, but who gave the subprime mortgage packages to the banks? The lending companies such as Fannie and Freddie.

Well..sure, ok. That just makes them another idiot in the line of idiots.

Unemployment fluctuated, but more often than not was relatively high. Food, I remember it rising. But I could be thinking in terms of more recent history there.

I do remember, that unemployment stayed relatively low, but it did fluctuate. Food was low, but then it skyrocketed. I was shocked that milk went up to 3 dollars, and it was about $1.14.

If I said you were acute, would you think me obtuse?

Depends, am I acute?


The problem? Most of that was predicated on a growing housing market. It's basic economic principles. If one sector rises rapidly, the tendency is for other sectors to become tied into that one. And as long as that one rises, everyone rises.

But when it crashes.......well, we know how that particular song and dance ends, don't we?

Of course, all the other sectors crash and the house of cards falls down until it is flat on the table. Or the cards fall through the table and it gets worse.

No, I'm saying mortgages given under CRA guidelines more or less had nothing to do with it. They were on the whole profitable.

Which lead to them being given out in a mass rate. :confused:


Well..sure, ok. That just makes them another idiot in the line of idiots.

Response 1: Woot Score for me!

Response 2: Lol for the idiots. :)

Depends, am I acute?


No, just cute :p.

No, just cute :p.

KoL just said a independent (leaning republican) was cute! The end is near :)!!!!!!!

Depends, am I acute?


Don't know. Do you have apicture?

KoL just said a republican was cute! The end is near :)!!!!!!!

Amusingly, one of the most kinky, sex crazed girls I dated was a hard core catholic.

Epic repression.

Which lead to them being given out in a mass rate. :confused:

Well, I guess if we want to take the long view and argue that the success of CRA did cause some banks to go "hey guys, look, we can loan to people living above 110th street and still make money!" which might (and I use the term loosely) MIGHT hae caused a bit of the impotus behind it, but that's one hell of a tenuous connection, and I prefer it to be as I said, CRA didn't really play into it at all.

Amusingly, one of the most kinky, sex crazed girls I dated was a hard core catholic.

Epic repression.

One of my friends once dated a hardcore evangelical...

who was very fond of sneaking off during the middle of a sermon to have sex somewhere in the church.

Don't know. Do you have apicture? Depends, will it determine weather I am acute or obtuse?

Amusingly, one of the most kinky, sex crazed girls I dated was a hard core catholic.

Epic repression.

That is an oxymoron within itself.

Well, I guess if we want to take the long view and argue that the success of CRA did cause some banks to go "hey guys, look, we can loan to people living above 110th street and still make money!" which might (and I use the term loosely) MIGHT hae caused a bit of the impotus behind it, but that's one hell of a tenuous connection, and I prefer it to be as I said, CRA didn't really play into it at all.

But it still is a connection, you also have to look at the fact that since the bill was passed, it was about 30+ years, that is plenty of time for that theory to be put into effect.

I'm a 15 year old, and, am quite possibly smarter than you in this matter. I am in the 99th Percentile (More specifically in the top 14% of the top 5%) and have attended Johns Hopkins courses on international politics in Carlisle Penn. and have been accepted to the Duke Summer program on International relations and the THINK program in Reno on another politics course. I scored a 1130 on my SATs (in 8th grade) because I completely bombed the essay (I am a terrible essay writer) SO i wouldn't think that I was a dumb little kid.

I know this was posted a bit earlier in the board, but I'd really like to respond to it. With all due respect, I'd just like to express how little your test scores mean to anyone, including colleges (Ivy League schools are notorious for rejecting perfect scores). In your efforts to make us think you were a shining star who knows what he's talking about, you don't really come off as a lot more than a bragging, pretentious kid.

As well, your being in the "99th percentile" doesn't impress me as much as it shocks me that the 99% of the people who score lower than you are so unexceptional. Also, please not that I, as well, am 15, but would never have the nerve to think I knew more than people who had already disproven and shot down my thoughtless arguments numerous times.

I know this was posted a bit earlier in the board, but I'd really like to respond to it. With all due respect, I'd just like to express how little your test scores mean to anyone, including colleges (Ivy League schools are notorious for rejecting perfect scores). In your efforts to make us think you were a shining star who knows what he's talking about, you don't really come off as a lot more than a bragging, pretentious kid.

As well, your being in the "99th percentile" doesn't impress me as much as it shocks me that the 99% of the people who score lower than you are so unexceptional. Also, please not that I, as well, am 15, but would never have the nerve to think I knew more than people who had already disproven and shot down my thoughtless arguments numerous times.
odd first post.

why the puppet?

odd first post.

why the puppet?

Actually, I'd done a few thousand posts or so on my old account, but then I didn't sign in for a few months and completely forgot my username and password. So I just remade one.

Actually, I'd done a few thousand posts or so on my old account, but then I didn't sign in for a few months and completely forgot my username and password. So I just remade one.
you can revive it yourself now. go to the moderation forum and look at the stickies.

Oh, really? Alright, thanks for the tip. I'm debating doing it, though. I don't mind starting from scratch.

Don't all Presidents have good intentions? It's just that some of their "good" intentions tend to screw other people over...in horrible horrible ways....



HIS ADMINISTRATION IS A FAILURE! HE ISN'T THE MESSIAH, HE MUST BE CRUCIFIED ON THE WASHINGTON MONUMENT!



So you have a half black guy who was born in Hawaii been in the Senate for three years, ran for Prime Minister, won, and now hasn't done anything because it's the 10th and he's still not Prime Minister?



Yea, from what I've seen when I was studying to become a teacher, NCLB was a clusterfuck. I dunno if this holds true for you, but I know many teachers here were reduced to "teaching the test".

and they weren't doing that already before NCLB???

I know, who the fuck do I think I am, talking about things that actually effect my profession?



Lemme put it this way: I teach kindergarten and I can barely find time to finish one round of testing before another starts.

And you never taught to the test before Bush became President? I know of teachers who spent almost their entire time teaching to the test. Because they didn't want to teach, they just wanted the money. And that was a decade before Bush was even President.

State-fucking-mandated.

They've always had state mandated testing since the birth of America. What does that have to do with Bush? He was the first President to spend federal dollars to directly improve the education system nationwide. Given it didn't work out the way it should have, it was a first step at a time when everyone was saying that the US federal government should give absolutely nothing schools and when everyone was saying that federal government should not be involved in education. Part of the problem was that white people in Beverly Hills claimed they were poor black folk so they syphon the money that was meant for the poor black folk who lived in South Central. There was no accountability. How does abolishing NCLB create accountability where none ever existed?

Money, money, money. Money for materials, money for resource, speech, arts and after school programs, money for teachers who are qualified and want to help children. Which is why it won't ever happen.

Depending on where you live. California's teachers are already the highest paid in the nation. Also, many states have already been throwing money at the problem. California is about to collapse because of it. Money won't solve the problem because too much money is being thrown at it.

Around $6,500 average per student.

Alabama also has far less people and far less students

Didn't the whole tech bubble collapse in 2001, which was when we had a Republican controlled Congress?

The Republicans didn't take over the Congress in 2001. They took over in 1994 when the Democratic lead Congress nearly resulted in the economy's collapse with their socialist policies.

IE: refusal to accept and implement need for welfare reform, etc.

During the 90's the US economy prospered under Republican control of both Houses of Congress and a Democratic President. Having both branches in the same party has never been good for the US economy. If this holds true, it can be used to say that the Republicans will sweep the Congress in either 2010 or 2012. Depending on how far down the toilet the economy goes, which it looks like it will.

The Republicans didn't take over the Congress in 2001. They took over in 1994 when the Democratic lead Congress nearly resulted in the economy's collapse with their socialist policies.

IE: refusal to accept and implement need for welfare reform, etc.

During the 90's the US economy prospered under Republican control of both Houses of Congress and a Democratic President. Having both branches in the same party has never been good for the US economy. If this holds true, it can be used to say that the Republicans will sweep the Congress in either 2010 or 2012. Depending on how far down the toilet the economy goes, which it looks like it will.

So you voted for Kerry in 2004 and Dem Senate candidates when Bush was President, right?

really, these things are "proven" huh? Tell you what, why don't you name me those lending bills that so destroyed the housing markets, hm? What are their names? What are their titles? When were they passed and when did they become law?

Who sponsored them? Who cosponsored them? Who voted for them? Were they vetoed? What was the final vote to over come the veto?

You've "proven" who was "responsible for those "lending bills" that led to the current situation huh? Then you should have absolutely no problem telling me which ones those are.

I'll wait here.I don't know the names but I know about them becaues they were a big when Bush first became President and before 9/11 happened. They were strongly supported by the Democrats and their buddy, George W Bush.
Now the Dems want to pretend they never agreed with Bush on anything. anything that is except for NCLB and Subprime mortgages for people who never should have gotten them.

Right wing nutjobs, cheerleaders for a cheerleader.

I actually had to reread this to make sure I read it right. Fannie and Freddie are bankrupt as a result of this financial situation. Your logic is so convoluted and twisted, I must accept that you didn't come up with it yourself, but read it off some right wing rant site and thought it sounded good without bothering to give it more than a cursory glance.

Your general position seems to be that Fannie and Freddie lobbied the democrats to pass "lending bills" (still waiting on which), for their benefit. And those lending bills screwed the economy.

Except for the fact that...it pretty much screwed Fannie and Freddy too. Your argument seems to be "prove to me that fannie and freddy didn't bribe democrats to pass laws that would bankrupt them!"

Seriously? I mean...fucking seriously?

Except that anyone who was around at the time remembers that they did lobby for it. Bush asked for it, Fannie lobbied for it, and the Democrats in the Congress soft Republicans to vote for it so Bush could sign his pet project into law. And that is why the US economy is currently screwed up. Why did they lobby for it? Because they thought they were going to make a quick buck. According to Fannie and mortgage trading companies, it was totally impossible for real estate prices to ever go anywhere but up up and away.

I don't know the names but I know about them becaues they were a big when Bush first became President and before 9/11 happened. They were strongly supported by the Democrats and their buddy, George W Bush.
Now the Dems want to pretend they never agreed with Bush on anything. anything that is except for NCLB and Subprime mortgages for people who never should have gotten them.

"oh no, our boy was a royal screw up. let's pin him on the enemy!"

foolish heathen and your political sacrifices, how well did that work Nov 4, but still babbling on about it?

This is a lie. Do you know your lying, or do you really believe this shit?



You really havent proven much in this vein.



He already has no control over the party.



So the democrats are malicious and corrupt, and Bush is just some dope who had good intentions but was an unwitting pawn?

You do know that of the top ten share holders in Fannie and Freddie, 5 of the ten are Republicans, right?

Bush never had any control over the Republicans, just like Clinton never had any control over the Democrats. Do you think it will be different with Obama or will his relationship with Congress be the same as all the other Presidents'?

If they were competent, they would have realized that Iran would meddle.

We had the articles of confederation as a constitution. it wasn't working, so they switched to the current one.

First of all, the highest that the stock market reached was 14,164.53, and second of all, it was in a bubble. You may wish to read about http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania, as classic example of a market bubble.

For the record, we've been in a bear market since Bush entered office. Keep in mind when you include inflation, a bubble-less Dow Jones 14,000 in October 2007 wouldn't much better than a Dow Jones 11,700 in January 2000. While we're at it, October 3nd 2006 is a whopping five points higher than that january 2000 average -- and considering thta we've had inflation since then.

Oh, and since you like to compare IQ and SAT scores, keep in mind that my graded 8 SATs were 1270 (which was BEFORE they added essays, so it's on a 400-1600 scale not a 600-2400 scale) and that my IRL IQ test put me at 164 (which is a bit higher than top 1% of the top 1%).
Perhaps the Iranian meddling was due to Bush declaring Iran a member of the "Axis of Evil" and declaring they would be next to be invaded.

So you voted for Kerry in 2004 and Dem Senate candidates when Bush was President, right?

I didn't vote.

I don't know the names but I know about them becaues they were a big when Bush first became President and before 9/11 happened. They were strongly supported by the Democrats and their buddy, George W Bush.
Now the Dems want to pretend they never agreed with Bush on anything. anything that is except for NCLB and Subprime mortgages for people who never should have gotten them.

Yeah, totally! I mean, I don't remember what they were called, or what they did, or when they happened, or who voted for them, but they totally did that, and democrats totally supported it.

Sorry, names, dates, and code sections or gtfo.

Right wing nutjobs, cheerleaders for a cheerleader.

Again, left wing bias. I don't even want to see it again, in fact, don't even post in my general direction.

how well did that work Nov 4, but still babbling on about it?

It went rather well, now I am assured that a Republican will win in 2012.

Yeah, totally! I mean, I don't remember what they were called, or what they did, or when they happened, or who voted for them, but they totally did that, and democrats totally supported it.

Sorry, names, dates, and code sections or gtfo.

Am I still the only Republican Leaning Person on NSG that actually presented facts? If so....again, then I feel special.

Remind me to never, ever, ever get into an argument with Neo Art unless it's something I'm completely and totally certain about.

And by the by, I think we need Neu Leonstein in here. He might be able to provide a, economically at least, right wing perspective which contains both facts and logic.

Then again, on most of these issues, he'd probably just agree with the general consensus. It seems the dreams of a well reasoned, logical, factual right-winger must inevitably be dashed.

makiavellianism's reality check is bouncing. get over it or we go down with it.

no different then the colapse of procustianism, its the brittleness of fanatacism (and the corruption it conceals and creates opportunities for) either way.

Perhaps the Iranian meddling was due to Bush declaring Iran a member of the "Axis of Evil" and declaring they would be next to be invaded.

Invading Iran? With what? These guys?

http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/political-pictures-george-bush-only-reserves-left.jpg

Huh, I must have missed the joke where Chris Rock called white guys "inferior white scum". Was that his HBO special? I dont have HBO.

Dude, you need to get HBO and not for Chris Rock I'm talking about the good stuff.

oh my god...oh it's so cute. He reminds me of myself when I was a pretentious little teenager. God, seeing this, it just reminds me what an obnoxious little prick I was. Man, I was a fucking moron...

Can I keep it?

Was? :p

I'm a 15 year old, and, am quite possibly smarter than you in this matter. I am in the 99th Percentile (More specifically in the top 14% of the top 5%) and have attended Johns Hopkins courses on international politics in Carlisle Penn. and have been accepted to the Duke Summer program on International relations and the THINK program in Reno on another politics course. I scored a 1130 on my SATs (in 8th grade) because I completely bombed the essay (I am a terrible essay writer) SO i wouldn't think that I was a dumb little kid.

*spits out water* LMAO
Sorry while I disagree on KOL or was it Neo on many matters even this made me laugh. At least I and others who disagree have the decency to recognise that they have intelligence.

Unemployment fluctuated, but more often than not was relatively high. Food, I remember it rising. But I could be thinking in terms of more recent history there.

Well if you are looking at inflation and it is rising then that is generally the sign that the economy must be growing.

Was? :p

fine, I'll rephrase. I was an unjustifiably obnoxious little prick. These days at least I have several years of higher education backing me up.

fine, I'll rephrase. I was an unjustifiably obnoxious little prick. These days at least I have several years of higher education backing me up.

lol, you forgot pretentious haha

lol, you forgot pretentious haha

and you forgot about Poland.

and you forgot about Poland.

Woosh

Did you hear that Neo? That was the sound of your joke going straight over my head.

Woosh

Did you hear that Neo? That was the sound of your joke going straight over my head.

You forgot Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_involvement_in_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq#.22You_forgot_Poland.22)

You forgot Poland (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_involvement_in_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq#.22You_forgot_Poland.22)

Oh!

lol ok then well yeah I didn't know about that.

I hope that Bush stays away from the "NUKE" button.

knights of liberty, bush is not a dope, he's a bumbling idiot

knights of liberty, bush is not a dope, he's a bumbling idiot
he is fucking clueless..

he was just asked what he thinks he should have done differently...

he said....well ive thought about katrina....and ...what could i have done? i could have flown right in on airforce one but...then y 'all would have complained about how i bunged up traffic....

he thinks that the criticism of his handling of katrina was not showing up in person quickly enough?!

lol ok then well yeah I didn't know about that.Worse yet, that character was an interesting nation here on NS. No more, lamentably.
:(

I hope that Bush stays away from the "NUKE" button.
The trick is to make them both "NURSE", just leaving the labels different.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxx7uXesq7Q

What else????Ask Sumamba Buwhan. *nods*

get that shrub out of the white house! we have a power vacuum because he is a stupid idiot

I hope that Bush stays away from the "NUKE" button.

he keeps saying he wants to go out with a bang.

this thread will be old on tuesday because bye-bye shrub hello BO that day

this thread will be old on tuesday because bye-bye shrub hello BO that day

*sigh* It was ALREADY old...

dear mr shrubery: don't let the door hit ya where the dog bit ya!

a dog bit shrub? when? or don't you know cameroi?