I actually agreed with Bush tonight.
Yes, it sucks that hard working Americans have to, once again, bail out low lives and scum bags who can't take care of themselves...but maybe this time the cost of helping is much less than the cost of not helping.
Anyone who says they KNOW the perfect solution is full of crap.
I don't know what the best solution is...my first reaction is to let the losers fall by the way side...
But it seems like this is too big...
Lots of people let us down, in my opinion the biggest to blame are 1) people calling for "equality" in approving loans 2)people who gave the loans anyway 3)people who took them knowing they couldn't pay for them
So now we see if Obama and McCain put politics aside and try and help fix this...
So far it seems McCain does what he always does...puts what he thinks is the right thing to do first
And Obama does what he always does...tries to further is political career
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Bush warns 'entire economy is in danger'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
29 comments:
"So far it seems McCain does what he always does...puts what he thinks is the right thing to do first
And Obama does what he always does...tries to further is political career"
based on what?
the fact is, obama made the first bi-partisan move by calling mccain and asking him to join with him in a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the treasury proposal and urging congress and the white house to act in a bipartisan manner to pass a proposal.
"Colby political scientist Sandy Maisel observes that, "If Obama in fact reached out first, as he claims, and then McCain turned it into a political issue, I cannot imagine how the people will not react negatively to McCain."
I have an idea...cut taxes! That always brings in more money and improves our economy! Eliminate them completely and the country will be brimming with money!
It's really sad to see how people can't think out side of their party talking points. Double standards are amazing - Give free money to big, irresponsible corporations and blame minority people for their irresponsibile decisons. WOW - Sounds very logical to me. Fair and balanced!
Thank God - At least, some conservatives spoke against the corporate welfare!! Still, there is some hope.
They need to make the executives of the companies they drove into the ground put up their assets as collateral for a bailout. But the relationship between Wall Street and the White House is too close.
So bicker all you want about the right vs the left while we all take it up the alley from your loyal (bought and paid for by business) government.
TerryN
Hang all Congressmen and start over.
THERE'S an idea no one has mentioned.
Why can't Bush Jr go hide in Cheney's secure location until the adults figure this out? Every time he shows his face bad things happen.
American,
You’re beating this “talking points” thing to death. What, is this a new term you just learned? You accuse others of using talking points, and then go on to spout old, tired, cliché’s to make your point.
Here’s a clue, they’re just plain ole ”points”, or arguments. Debate the point man! Labeling something a “talking point” might make you feel better, but it doesn’t qualify as a decent counter-argument.
Jeez.
Ron,
You’re beating this “no tax equals the best economy” falsehood to death. No one has claimed any such thing. Just because someone argues for less tax, you’re not making a decent argument by claiming “duh, I, ah, guess ah, that means no taxes are better dude”. Let me spell it out for ya. It’s like being overweight (and our gov’t is overweight), just because I argue losing weight is better for our health, doesn’t mean I believe zero weight is optimal. Get a grip!
Well, then blamin at what point do we see diminishing returns? Taxes have been being reduced for years and our debt is higher than ever. Republicans who are suppose to be the spendthrifts like Reagan and Bush ran up the biggest debts and Bush 1 and Clinton who raised taxes had the lower debts. What is the right amount? Who pays? How much. Sorry to use the old worn out thing but lower taxes is a "talking point" to get idiots to vote for those who get most of the reductions and steal your and my money.
These are new and more complex times that require more than the typical bloviating about lowering or raising taxes. The richest country on earth and we're running a $7 trillion credit line with the Chinese? The recent trend has been for Republicons to bash government, get elected, blame somebody else, and give more reason to bash government. Nice gameplan they got there.
Ron,
We haven’t reached the point of diminishing returns. Under the current tax structure, many taxpayers pay over 50% in federal and state income/employment taxes. I don’t care how “rich” you think someone may be, it’s patently unfair for the government to get more of the money you earned (legally) than you get to keep.
The optimal rate would be a top individual income tax rate around 25% to 33%, with 0% capital gains, corporate, and estate tax. Or better yet, do away with income taxes and institute a national sales tax.
But, the main point to your ridiculous comment is you make much of the relationship between taxes and the national debt. No mention of spending whatsoever.
You’re such a patsy, falling for the old class warfare trick. Damn, man, one would think it’d take a new, more insidious argument to sway the sheep. But, noooo, you fall for the tired, old, used over and over again argument.
The same damn argument used every time taxes are debated. No matter how high the tax rates may be the argument is always the same.
The bottom line – “It’s the spending, stupid”.
Blamin,
You didn't surprise me. You are doing what you do the best - Showing loyalty!! Smiles...
take care!
that worthless comment brought to you by american...
Game,
I think I know a little bit of economy since I have my own business and operate in three different countries. When you run a business, it's 'your' responsibility to balance the book!! There is no point in crying atfer making bad choices!
If big corporations were stupid enough to give loans to those who couldn't repay, it's time for them to step up and accept the responsibility. Why are we rewarding bad behavior?
Otherwise, where do you the draw the line? Today banks, tomorrow lazy auto industry and then the airlines? Give me a break!
There is a consequence to your choices. Free lunch is a classic 'welfare' mentality. It's funny to see pseudo-conservatives like you and blamin supporting it!! (again, not surprised!) I can't expect anything better from 'loyalists'....
American,
Who's supporting "corporate" welfare?
I guess when you have a choice between reality and your own pre-conceived notions, we know what side you'll pick every time.
As far as your "loyalist" comments go, again you disconnect from reality.
Simply put, I support McCain, because, hands-down, he's a better choice. It ain't even close!
Did I say close? Hell, it's not even in the same hemisphere. Hell, it't not in the same universe. Hell, it's not in the same realm of reasoning.
Hell, no reasoning individual should even spend a nano-second on this decision.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o
Watch the above. It repeats what I've been reading since this shit hit the fan. It shows that the lenders were forced by Democratic buttinskies to make things easier for those of lesser means to aquire a home, and it invites you to check its sources for yourselves. Why would a lender want to lend to someone who has a higher chance of defaulting on the loan? Answer: they wouldn't without coercion. Used to be that 20% down was standard before a loan would be approved. It showed fiscal responsibility on the part of the borrower to have that kind of scratch up front, despite the fact that many would simply borrow the 20% from family or friends. Now, they give the loans away in order to appease those Democratic champions of the people who blocked attempts to regulate the industry by such losers as GW Bush and JS McCain, as well as others who were paying attention.
Blamin,
It would be much easier if you admit who you really are. If your posts are any indication, it's an easy guess! :)
Not to be rude, but...your 'reality' hardly goes beyond the 'party talking points'. So, it's really really hard to make you understand the meaning of 'independent view' when you can't grow beyond your party uniform.
Take care, dude! :)
American...I am really starting to question your intelligence...sorry.
I said over and over that I agree with what you have said. I hate free handouts and rewarding people for bad behavior...it is a liberal staple.
I just think this MIGHT be different. See, I said might. I am not in any way going to pretend I understand this topic enough to say that I KNOW anything about what is going to happen.
I THINK that if we do nothing we MIGHT completely stop our entire financial network. If I was SURE our economy and country would be okay without a bailout...I say let them burn for their bad choices...
Based on what I know and what I THINK might happen, I think you have to do something in this situation...
No American, you no not what you speak of.
“My” party has let me down on numerous occasions. The Democrats let me down on most every occasion.
Many like to label themselves as “independents’. It’s a way they can pat themselves on the back and claim “look at me, I’m not partisan”.
But there’s a big fight going on, for the very soul of this country. There’s no room for independents. People need to educate themselves and choose sides.
It’ll be a cold day in hell before you see me with a fence post stuck up my ass and a yellow streak down my back.
"There’s no room for independents"
Very very scary thought. But I realize that you are not alone. It was not the first time I heard 'You are with us or against us'.
Country is already divided. And, this is not the first time we saw a divided country either. You like it or not, at the end of the day, it's 'Independents' and 'moderates' who maintain some sanity and decide the future of the country/society.
Peace.
American said:
”You like it or not, at the end of the day, it's 'Independents' and 'moderates' who maintain some sanity and decide the future of the country/society.”
Is that a fact? It just so happens that I'm currently reading a book on US history. And surprise, surprise, there just aren't that many "moderates" represented in our history.
But you go man - whatever you need to tell yourself to feel better about lack of convictions.
Sure - why do you think we fought a civil war? LOL
There are loyalists on both sides who will never change their vote. So, it's moderates who decide the fate of an election.
It's the moderates like McCain who bring some sanity by working across the party lines. Because, people like you will never agree with anything from the 'other' side, essentially bringing the whole country to a complete stop!
Being moderate is not about lack of convictions. It's about being logical, non-partisan and making a choice that's best for the country and society. The precise reasons why you can't understand the concept. :)
Sooo it’s your assumption that we fought the civil war, at what, the behest of moderates? Utterly ridiculous.
I find your example of McCain especially telling. Let’s see if I understand your logic. McCain’s a “good” moderate because he’s willing to “work across party lines”. Hmmm, it seems I don’t see too much reciprocal action on the part of dems, unless of course they’re up for re-election.
Don’t you see American; it’s precisely about making decisions that’s best for the country, which excludes moderates from those discussions. Persons of conviction don’t abandon their principals just for the sake of agreement. Sometimes people have to do what’s right – to hell with the political wind.
I do admit it seems that moderates will decide this election, good or bad, that remains to be seen.
"Persons of conviction don’t abandon their principals" - Blamin
Who told you that moderates will 'abondon' their principles? I think you are talking about someone else!!
No doubt - You should do what's right. But....what's right will change from person to person. In a spilt world, moderates are more efficient in keeping things move forward.
American said:
…No doubt - You should do what's right. But....what's right will change from person to person. In a spilt world, moderates are more efficient in keeping things move forward.
That has got to be the single most ridiculous statement I’ve heard in many moons.
A few observations. “What’s right will change from person to person.” That’s the whole point Sherlok. Some points never change, person to person. Regardless of what you believe, “right” doesn’t change from person to person, and that is at the crux of the “big debate” in this country.
”in a split world, moderates are more efficient in keeping things move forward”
Exactly what things are they moving forward? “Moderate” things? What’s the split? Which side are you giving up on in your quest for moderation? Where the hell do you stand?!!!!
What a useless twit!
;{>
Blamin,
Why do you get so emotional and act like a kid when someone calls you out on your partisan behavior? To be fair, parties survive because of loyalists like you. So, you don't need to get soo defensive or feel ashamed. :)
Let me try again - Yes - What's right will change from person to person. That's why we have so many positions, opinions and solutions. It's one thing when it's science or math. When it comes to social policies, the definition of 'right' is not an absolute thing. I can see why you, as a loyalist, are not open for other ideas. However, your inability to even acknowledge this simple concept scares me!!
Then, second concept you had trouble understanding is on how moderates are more efficient in a 'split world'. Today's america is probably a good example for a split world. You have 50% of country opposing the other 50%. How can you get anything done if both parties believe that "they are right and others are wrong"?
Since moderates truly believe in 'country first', not the 'party first', they always tend to be more effective in connecting with both parties, workout some of the differences and make progress.
Somehow, you have this strange notion that 'middle ground' means 'principles abondoned'! It's very wrong to believe so.
Finally, when I hear your rhetoric, something else comes to my mind:
"The broad masses of a population are more amenable to the appeal of rhetoric than to any other force.
---Adolf Hitler"
Peace, dude! :)
American ;{>
You call it partisan, I call it realism ;{<
Let me reiterate – what’s right rarely changes from person to person. Liberals like to claim that everything is subjective, conservatives believe many things aren’t. ;{>
Just because you may believe something is right, don’t make it so. It is almost always an “absolute thing”, there are rare, very rare exceptions. ;{< :-0 :-ughh
There’s no doubt that we have many opinions, but to arbitrarily give all opinions equal standing is folly.
Well who decides such things you may ask? Free people, grounded in a common philosophy, free of socialist élites who wish to steal the very freedoms you pretend to cherish.
;-0 :=( ;<>) :+> and any other cute emoticons you feel the need to waste time on.
Post a Comment