The Great Uniter Fails

[ttogreh]

James Carville is not a member of congress, and is indeed as much a partisan hack as Rush Limbaugh is. Get me a quote from an elected Democrat.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Yeah, obviously the only way that Congress can end a war is by denying footsoldiers bullets. Right. Do you have any idea how Viet Nam ended?

Rather complicated... when we ran out of oil due to the embargo... The Paris accords went into affect (though the North ignored them) and by Presidential order.. we pulled out.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

James Carville is not a member of congress, and is indeed as much a partisan hack as Rush Limbaugh is. Get me a quote from an elected Democrat.

Neither am I... and I am the one getting shit for wanting him to fail.

[phee]

but it was totally OK when Democrats wanted Bush to fail.

I am not speaking for the Democrats.... never said I was... I was speaking for me.

[Scary Guy]

I am not speaking for the Democrats.... never said I was... I was speaking for me.

Ditto, I voted Paul

However I don't know what is more annoying. When the right was talking up their president bitching about the left, or now when they're bitching about the president being a part of the left.

[ttogreh]

If you want to play ball, Gaf, you had better wear a cup. You claimed that "Democrats" wanted him (Bush) to fail. Do you want to refine your statement to be "some people who affiliate themselves with the Democratic party", or are you going to continue to use that old tired Black-and-White binary line of thinking where "Democrats" are all the same, think the same thoughts, and are a monolithic bloc that must be fought against by all free thinking people everywhere?

We've had this conversation before Gaf. It goes the same way, every time.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Yes it does. I do get tired of you and phee trying to change the subject when you get proven wrong.

[candyman]

Bush vowed to bring justice to those responsible for 9/11 - which he did not.

Hell, Bush based his entire presidency on 9/11 - what justice was served? Some prisoners at Guantanamo?

My point is, since Gaf felt a need to point at our current president (whom has only been in office a few months) and mock him and call him a failure I thought maybe Gaf should step back and take a look at the other president. I mean - I can see why Gaf is so ready to take down Obama after just a short few months in office - clearly that shoudl've been enough time for Obama to get everything done, right Gaf?

Or should some people pull their heads out of their asses and start looking at things in a more realistic way??????

Obama is trying to fix such a large financial problem that our last president certainly didn't do anything to actually help. What? He gave back a few extra tax dollars telling us the whole time it would make our economic troubles dissapear.

Talk about the ostreage with it's head in the sand.

I mean, if Gaf is truely being fair in his finger pointing then he should'nt stop with Obama.

Well, I like to keep my finger pointing at people that are the problem...only I don't have enough fingers. When people were giving Bush crap I stopped pointing because it we getting stupid. People are always holding us next to other countries and with that has also gone far past stupid. Before, ranking was done on an even base because it seemed that people had a sense of dignity and fairness. Now, people seem to take only the good from a foreign sample and hold it up next to only the bad or out sample.

Honeslty, Bush did nothing different, good or bad, than any other figure in history. He was given way too much blame for things that, even though he was president, were out of his control. Katrina was one of those things and I still can't get my mind to wrap around the idiotic ideas that people are tossing around.

To keep it fair, Obama can be given this much shit even though his time in office so far has been short. It has been done to others and will continue to be done to others. If he is really that good he will prove his worth by standing up to all the shit and getting things done. Personally, I believe that harsh criticism has more of a place than blind praise. Nobody can deny that Obama and his image have been inflated to levels that he cannot reach. Well, he could maybe reach them but to do so would just turn the tables around and would screw over the other side...and if he is truly a good president then that would not be his goal.

I take Obamas presidency like I take the green movement...it is full of shit with a little truth hidden beneath all of the crap. As soon as Oprah gives the thumbs up I stop listening, then I continue with my research and find out what really needs to be looked at.

[ttogreh]

Lol wat?

The Viet Nam war came to a close under Presidential decree because Nixon knew the score. The Iraq war changed course because Bush knew the score. Democrats are a diverse bunch, but partisan fearmongers are all the same. Bush did nothing to stop the mortgage bubble from popping. What exactly did you prove wrong, here?

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

That a Democrat made a public statement calling on Bush to fail.

Nixon campaigned on ending the war.

You might want to look into what Bush tried to do to keep the bubble from popping. I have already linked it before. Bush was warning that it was going to happen all the way back to 2001.

[ttogreh]

Nixon and McGovern campaigned on ending the war. Bush failed at deflating the mortgage bubble. Try again.

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

Bush vowed to bring justice to those responsible for 9/11 - which he did not.

Hell, Bush based his entire presidency on 9/11 - what justice was served? Some prisoners at Guantanamo?

My point is, since Gaf felt a need to point at our current president (whom has only been in office a few months) and mock him and call him a failure I thought maybe Gaf should step back and take a look at the other president. I mean - I can see why Gaf is so ready to take down Obama after just a short few months in office - clearly that shoudl've been enough time for Obama to get everything done, right Gaf?

Or should some people pull their heads out of their asses and start looking at things in a more realistic way??????

Obama is trying to fix such a large financial problem that our last president certainly didn't do anything to actually help. What? He gave back a few extra tax dollars telling us the whole time it would make our economic troubles dissapear.

Talk about the ostreage with it's head in the sand.

I mean, if Gaf is truely being fair in his finger pointing then he should'nt stop with Obama.

My finger is pointing at everyone in congress going back to 1996. Specifically John Kerry, Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, John Murtha and Nacy Pelosi. The authors of the various regulations that caused this mess.

Now, don't get me wrong.. i dont think less regulation would have been good etiher. But regulations that forced banks to give loans to people without means to pay them back shouldhave been tossed.. not defended and strengthed.

Just look at who got the most lobby money from Fannie May and Freddie Mac.

Edited April 8, 2009 by Gaf The Horse With Tears

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Rg3LcSNylA

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs...feature=related

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvG-s_Ssb0...feature=related

[phee]

Yes it does. I do get tired of you and phee trying to change the subject when you get proven wrong.

What exactly did you prove me wrong about? I stated that IMO I would not hope for either president to fail, that I might disagree with method however. I made no assertions about either political party.

[Mizuna]

I really enjoy reading this forum when it has threads such as this.

I agree with Phee, I am dumb-founded how someone would wish for their country to go in the wrong direction in order for someone they do not approve of to fail. I always believed that who ever made something better should be celebrated regardless of how minor the improvements may be.

I understand that people like to blame others and point the finger. But no one here has a prefect track record. I mean look at Gaf's arguments... He attacks Obama due to his disapproval, however with lack of actual facts to hold against him he calls upon acts of the past democratic party and Clinton. I am not sure, I also refuse to check, but was Obama even influential politically when that happened? I don't think so... So how the hell is that his fault?

Atleast when people blame Bush it for something he has done or could have done, not on something that isn't dirctly related to him, just what the hell. Just give him some time to actually attempt to change things, quit screaming revolution it would only make it worse. Look! That man is having a heart attack! Lets light him on fire so he gets better; No. If you think he did a bad job, don't re-elect him, simple, solved, stop complaining until his government actually screws it up please.

I personally feel that there is nothing wrong with business men running a country. Running a country like a charity case for the people doesn't work. Yes, blahblahblah <insert mildly relevent comment on bail out plan here>, but at the end of the day a country should be run like any other organisation, for profit. Even if its for something as simple as increases in living standards, because these things reflect financial growth also. I don't really know to be honest, I just feel that some people are crucifying those who do not deserve it, not yet anyway.

Still, tsk tsk, blaming Clinton for the mortgage crisis, yes it is easy to ignore that Bush could have remedied it, yes it is easy to point the finger at the other; but it was sure as hell easy for Americans to take loans that they knew damn well they couldn't pay back. Don't just blame government, Demo. or Rep., a lot of blame still falls on the public in my opinion. I guess I just feel a lot of people forget that people in the masses also influence the economy and pretty much everything else as well. Although, its nice to blame the government, we do it here too...

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

I understand that people like to blame others and point the finger. But no one here has a prefect track record. I mean look at Gaf's arguments... He attacks Obama due to his disapproval, however with lack of actual facts to hold against him he calls upon acts of the past democratic party and Clinton. I am not sure, I also refuse to check, but was Obama even influential politically when that happened? I don't think so... So how the hell is that his fault?

Atleast when people blame Bush it for something he has done or could have done, not on something that isn't dirctly related to him, just what the hell. Just give him some time to actually attempt to change things, quit screaming revolution it would only make it worse. Look! That man is having a heart attack! Lets light him on fire so he gets better; No. If you think he did a bad job, don't re-elect him, simple, solved, stop complaining until his government actually screws it up please.

I personally feel that there is nothing wrong with business men running a country. Running a country like a charity case for the people doesn't work. Yes, blahblahblah <insert mildly relevent comment on bail out plan here>, but at the end of the day a country should be run like any other organisation, for profit. Even if its for something as simple as increases in living standards, because these things reflect financial growth also. I don't really know to be honest, I just feel that some people are crucifying those who do not deserve it, not yet anyway.

Still, tsk tsk, blaming Clinton for the mortgage crisis, yes it is easy to ignore that Bush could have remedied it, yes it is easy to point the finger at the other; but it was sure as hell easy for Americans to take loans that they knew damn well they couldn't pay back. Don't just blame government, Demo. or Rep., a lot of blame still falls on the public in my opinion. I guess I just feel a lot of people forget that people in the masses also influence the economy and pretty much everything else as well. Although, its nice to blame the government, we do it here too...

I am dumb-founded how someone would wish for their country to go in the wrong direction in order for someone they do not approve of to fail.

I don't want my country to fail, I want Obama to fail. I beleive he is leading the country in the wrong direction.

He attacks Obama due to his disapproval, however with lack of actual facts to hold against him he calls upon acts of the past democratic party and Clinton. I am not sure, I also refuse to check, but was Obama even influential politically when that happened? I don't think so... So how the hell is that his fault?

Why would you refuse to check? Why would you rather beleive the hype than the truth? I am not attacking Obama on his approval ratiing... I was pointing out that the person who was thought to be the one to get rid of all the division in our country is causing the an even greater divide. And lack of facts? Did you watch the videos of the key players in the Democratic party that caused this mess? Have you read my posts with links to the congressional record that shows the Democrats pushing new regulations into place that forced the banks to give more and more bad loans out?

Yes, Obama was influecial enough. Hence Fanny May giving him so much money.

But I forget... you refuse to actually read any facts on the subject.

[Rev.Reverence]

I think you are ALL fucking insane...I cleared this ALL up...I'll do it again...

...Clinton, Bush, Obama...not tremendously different peoples (look at their yearly earnings statements)...they ALL in this for THEM (period).

They are makin' it LOOK like they are trying to help..they are helping themselves (THOUGH SOME SEE THROUGH IT)....this is ALL a HUGE machination...designed to divide the peoples...so that there are only 2 classes...THEM & US...N~W~O~

[Gaf The Horse With Tears]

2001

April: The Administration's FY02 budget declares that the size of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is "a potential problem," because "financial trouble of a large GSE could cause strong repercussions in financial markets, affecting Federally insured entities and economic activity." (2002 Budget Analytic Perspectives, pg. 142)

2002

May: The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) calls for the disclosure and corporate governance principles contained in the President's 10-point plan for corporate responsibility to apply to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. (OMB Prompt Letter to OFHEO, 5/29/02)

2003

February: The Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) releases a report explaining that unexpected problems at a GSE could immediately spread into financial sectors beyond the housing market.

September: Then-Treasury Secretary John Snow testifies before the House Financial Services Committee to recommend that Congress enact "legislation to create a new Federal agency to regulate and supervise the financial activities of our housing-related government sponsored enterprises" and set prudent and appropriate minimum capital adequacy requirements.

September: Then-House Financial Services Committee Ranking Member Barney Frank (D-MA) strongly disagrees with the Administration's assessment, saying "these two entities – Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – are not facing any kind of financial crisis … The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing." (Stephen Labaton, "New Agency Proposed To Oversee Freddie Mac And Fannie Mae," The New York Times, 9/11/03)

October: Senator Thomas Carper (D-DE) refuses to acknowledge any necessity for GSE reforms, saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." (Sen. Carper, Hearing of Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, 10/16/03)

November: Then-Council of the Economic Advisers (CEA) Chairman Greg Mankiw explains that any "legislation to reform GSE regulation should empower the new regulator with sufficient strength and credibility to reduce systemic risk." To reduce the potential for systemic instability, the regulator would have "broad authority to set both risk-based and minimum capital standards" and "receivership powers necessary to wind down the affairs of a troubled GSE." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Remarks At The Conference Of State Bank Supervisors State Banking Summit And Leadership, 11/6/03)

2004

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

February: Then-CEA Chairman Mankiw cautions Congress to "not take [the financial market's] strength for granted." Again, the call from the Administration was to reduce this risk by "ensuring that the housing GSEs are overseen by an effective regulator." (N. Gregory Mankiw, Op-Ed, "Keeping Fannie And Freddie's House In Order," Financial Times, 2/24/04)

April: Rep. Frank ignores the warnings, accusing the Administration of creating an "artificial issue." At a speech to the Mortgage Bankers Association conference, Rep. Frank said "people tend to pay their mortgages. I don't think we are in any remote danger here. This focus on receivership, I think, is intended to create fears that aren't there." ("Frank: GSE Failure A Phony Issue," American Banker, 4/21/04)

June: Then-Treasury Deputy Secretary Samuel Bodman spotlights the risk posed by the GSEs and calls for reform, saying "We do not have a world-class system of supervision of the housing government sponsored enterprises (GSEs), even though the importance of the housing financial system that the GSEs serve demands the best in supervision to ensure the long-term vitality of that system. Therefore, the Administration has called for a new, first class, regulatory supervisor for the three housing GSEs: Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan Banking System." (Samuel Bodman, House Financial Services Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Testimony, 6/16/04)

2005

April: Then-Secretary Snow repeats his call for GSE reform, saying "Events that have transpired since I testified before this Committee in 2003 reinforce concerns over the systemic risks posed by the GSEs and further highlight the need for real GSE reform to ensure that our housing finance system remains a strong and vibrant source of funding for expanding homeownership opportunities in America … Half-measures will only exacerbate the risks to our financial system." (Secretary John W. Snow, "Testimony Before The U.S. House Financial Services Committee," 4/13/05)

July: Then-Minority Leader Harry Reid rejects legislation reforming GSEs, "while I favor improving oversight by our federal housing regulators to ensure safety and soundness, we cannot pass legislation that could limit Americans from owning homes and potentially harm our economy in the process." ("Dems Rip New Fannie Mae Regulatory Measure," United Press International, 7/28/05)

2007

August: President Bush emphatically calls on Congress to pass a reform package for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, saying "first things first when it comes to those two institutions. Congress needs to get them reformed, get them streamlined, get them focused, and then I will consider other options." (President George W. Bush, Press Conference, the White House, 8/9/07)

August: Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd ignores the President's warnings and calls on him to "immediately reconsider his ill-advised" position. (Eric Dash, "Fannie Mae's Offer To Help Ease Credit Squeeze Is Rejected, As Critics Complain Of Opportunism," The New York Times, 8/11/07)

December: President Bush again warns Congress of the need to pass legislation reforming GSEs, saying "These institutions provide liquidity in the mortgage market that benefits millions of homeowners, and it is vital they operate safely and operate soundly. So I've called on Congress to pass legislation that strengthens independent regulation of the GSEs – and ensures they focus on their important housing mission. The GSE reform bill passed by the House earlier this year is a good start. But the Senate has not acted. And the United States Senate needs to pass this legislation soon." (President George W. Bush, Discusses Housing, the White House, 12/6/07)

2008

February: Assistant Treasury Secretary David Nason reiterates the urgency of reforms, saying "A new regulatory structure for the housing GSEs is essential if these entities are to continue to perform their public mission successfully." (David Nason, Testimony On Reforming GSE Regulation, Senate Committee On Banking, Housing And Urban Affairs, 2/7/08)

March: President Bush calls on Congress to take action and "move forward with reforms on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They need to continue to modernize the FHA, as well as allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to homeowners to refinance their mortgages." (President George W. Bush, Remarks To The Economic Club Of New York, New York, NY, 3/14/08)

April: President Bush urges Congress to pass the much needed legislation and "modernize Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. [There are] constructive things Congress can do that will encourage the housing market to correct quickly by … helping people stay in their homes." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With Cabinet, the White House, 4/14/08)

May: President Bush issues several pleas to Congress to pass legislation reforming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac before the situation deteriorates further.

"Americans are concerned about making their mortgage payments and keeping their homes. Yet Congress has failed to pass legislation I have repeatedly requested to modernize the Federal Housing Administration that will help more families stay in their homes, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow state housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance sub-prime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/3/08)

"[T]he government ought to be helping creditworthy people stay in their homes. And one way we can do that – and Congress is making progress on this – is the reform of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. That reform will come with a strong, independent regulator." (President George W. Bush, Meeting With The Secretary Of The Treasury, the White House, 5/19/08)

"Congress needs to pass legislation to modernize the Federal Housing Administration, reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to ensure they focus on their housing mission, and allow State housing agencies to issue tax-free bonds to refinance subprime loans." (President George W. Bush, Radio Address, 5/31/08)

June: As foreclosure rates continued to rise in the first quarter, the President once again asks Congress to take the necessary measures to address this challenge, saying "we need to pass legislation to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac." (President George W. Bush, Remarks At Swearing In Ceremony For Secretary Of Housing And Urban Development, Washington, D.C., 6/6/08)

July: Congress heeds the President's call for action and passes reform legislation for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as it becomes clear that the institutions are failing.

September: Democrats in Congress forget their previous objections to GSE reforms, as Senator Dodd questions "why weren't we doing more, why did we wait almost a year before there were any significant steps taken to try to deal with this problem? … I have a lot of questions about where was the administration over the last eight years." (Dawn Kopecki, "Fannie Mae, Freddie 'House Of Cards' Prompts Takeover," Bloomberg, 9/9/08)

[phee]

I don't want my country to fail, I want Obama to fail. I beleive he is leading the country in the wrong direction.

There is a difference here sir.

You believe that he is doing his job badly yes? This is a fair comment/opinion. But wanting him to do his job badly (ie: fail) seems to be the same as wanting the country to fail.

When Bush was in office, I kept hoping that he would succeed so that the country would improve. It seems that wanting the president to fail would be very counter productive to anything helpful.

Wanting him ousted because he is doing a bad job is one thing, wanting him to do a bad job so he will get ousted is another.

Perhaps it would make more sense instead of stating a wish for him to fail, it might be more accurate for you to state that to you he has already failed, and you want him removed.

If you state it the way you have been ("I hope Obama fails" to paraphrase) it makes it sound like he has not yet failed and you wish him to screw things up and make things worse just so you will be happy. Just a thought about ways you might be better understood in your viewpoints take it or leave it as always.

[Rev.Reverence]

There is a difference here sir.

You believe that he is doing his job badly yes? This is a fair comment/opinion. But wanting him to do his job badly (ie: fail) seems to be the same as wanting the country to fail.

When Bush was in office, I kept hoping that he would succeed so that the country would improve. It seems that wanting the president to fail would be very counter productive to anything helpful.

Wanting him ousted because he is doing a bad job is one thing, wanting him to do a bad job so he will get ousted is another.

Perhaps it would make more sense instead of stating a wish for him to fail, it might be more accurate for you to state that to you he has already failed, and you want him removed.

If you state it the way you have been ("I hope Obama fails" to paraphrase) it makes it sound like he has not yet failed and you wish him to screw things up and make things worse just so you will be happy. Just a thought about ways you might be better understood in your viewpoints take it or leave it as always.

..I don't see it as the same...indeed a selfish wish...but not the same as wishing for the whole country to fail...anytime a human fails & it brings joy to another human, it is just that much further that we must travel until we are One Tribe again...

[phee]

..I don't see it as the same...indeed a selfish wish...but not the same as wishing for the whole country to fail...anytime a human fails & it brings joy to another human, it is just that much further that we must travel until we are One Tribe again...

Perhaps.... but I guess when I hear someone saying that they want who is in charge of the countries interersts to fail.... it sounds to me like... well... you know.

[Rev.Reverence]

Perhaps.... but I guess when I hear someone saying that they want who is in charge of the countries interersts to fail.... it sounds to me like... well... you know.

...& here...I've been sitting & praying that SOMEONE will get it RIGHT...

(I guess we COULD use a few more of me in the world)

Edited April 9, 2009 by Rev.Reverence

[Der Nister]

Perhaps it would make more sense instead of stating a wish for him to fail, it might be more accurate for you to state that to you he has already failed, and you want him removed.

If you state it the way you have been ("I hope Obama fails" to paraphrase) it makes it sound like he has not yet failed and you wish him to screw things up and make things worse just so you will be happy. Just a thought about ways you might be better understood in your viewpoints take it or leave it as always.

It's like saying "I hope the one that is leading us through this desert (that we are lost in) fucks up and gets us in a worse situation." just so those that are unhappy with someone that was elected to help us will be "exposed" as some kind of fruad.

Maybe my analogy is odd but I hope my meaning is understood.

I understand what Phee is saying and I agree. I myself hoped that Bush would have stepped up and done more, he didn't. I think things would've been better if Bush had done more than deny that our country was in a recession but for many months (too many) all we heard out of his mouth was " this is not a recession " ---- denial seemed to be Bush's only tactic because let's face it - the man has a history of not making things better but worse (anyone remember the oil company he ran into the ground?).

But I will give up on those that WANT our president to fail just so they can say "I told you so" --- it's very childish and selfish and if they want to be that way then do the rest of us a favor and keep your negativity to yourself because honestly - there are those of us that want things to get better regardless of who does it. We have little say in who fixes these problems and we're tired of struggling just to hear negative people spew their prejudces at us.