We're becoming like Romans B/4 the Empire collapsed. The so-called Christian Right, and the Neo-Con will leads us to that tragic end yet.
We're becoming like Romans B/4 the Empire collapsed. The so-called Christian Right, and the Neo-Con will leads us to that tragic end yet.
We are a fiscally conservative country. What American would favor deficits, spending like drunken sailors, and higher, and higher taxes? This is NOT the same as social conservatism, where most Americans do not believe abortion should be illegal, especially in cases of rape/incest, and certainly not in the case of the mother's health or life in danger. Nor is this the same as the neocon hawks who embrace preemptive strikes, unilateralism, warrant-less wire taps, Gitmo/torture, etc. The country was split about 50/50 against the invasion of Iraq from the start, and there is now a clear majority against the war.
So who are you people who keep saying our country is conservative? I suspect you are conservatives who want to convince others to be like you. Also, Obama is not as liberal as you try to portray him. Stop fear-mongering. Fear is all you right-wing radicals know.
"it has enabled us to muddle along for well over two centuries, always expanding, not contracting, individual liberty under law." What a crock. This guy is either a moron (which I doubt) or just another corrupt politico in jounalist's clothing. Can you say Guantanamo, illegal wiretapping and exported torture?
Obama in this video is campaigning at a convention of Acorn and I believe two other Community Activist's organizations. Ask if he will be their ally if he becomes President and pledge to meet with leaders of Acorn and the others present at the convention in his first year, Obama says, quote:
"Yes, but let me say that before I even get inaugurated, during the transition, we are going to be calling all of you in to help us shape the agenda."
See and hear it for yourself. Obama has promised that Acorn and other groups like it will a part of his transition and setting his agenda if elected:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vJcVgJhNaU
"Eight years of Republican rule have produced two seemingly endless wars, an economy in recession, a giant federal intervention in the financial sector and a nearly universal feeling of unease in the country" -
Bush's two terms have been far from great, let's be clear. But things are not so black and white. It was an attack on U.S. soil that led to the two "seemingly endless wars": one of which resulted from the Al Quaida threat not being taken seriously enough by the previous administration and the other a result of a decade of containment sanctioned by failed U.N. policies on Iraq. As for the "economy in recession, a giant federal intervention in the financial sector", the policy of the previous administration to actively oblige the banks to lend to poor people who - by definition - could not afford to buy a home (and pay for it!), together with Greenspan's easy credit and unwillingness to deal with a recession, are a fundamental reason for the current mess. Certainly, the people are feeling uneasy. But when 5% of the world's populous (i.e. the U.S.) has been using 25% of the world's resources, you've got to anticipate that it may not be sustainable and a crash is ahead.
See Barney Franks comments on the news, including face the nation last week, stating that Democrats in Congress intend to greatly raise taxes and go on a spending spree.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1Mazjm_A5k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJGnSAlqjoU
See http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/23617.html
And again what was Frank saying at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
"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."
So who really is the liar that soaked the American people?
See also: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/08/politics/main2335631.shtml
In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we found out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, Davis, Ayers, Wright, etc., and that he is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Obama's tax and spending plans alone would be bad enough, but add Reid and Pelosi to the mix, with the three of them controlling both houses of Congress and the executive branch without any effective restraint, and you have something that should causes concern even among moderate Democrats.
See Wall Street Journal: A Liberal Supermajority:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html
Their failed policies are what brought us to ruin. Even Bill Clinton says so. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsynspIqAoE
Obama and a supermajority of Democrats simply is not the change we need, nor is it change we can afford.
Obama's programs require him to tax, and his health care plan alone is a substantial hidden tax on all business, large an small. In reality, it does not really matter who he taxes, those taxes are going to be passed through the economy. He has to tax, because it is they only way he can pay for his massive social engineering experiments. Any first year economics student knows that taxation is a tool used to contract an economy experiencing inflation, because it reduces demand by reducing the amount of money individuals and businesses have to spend. It is contractionary, which is exactly what you do not want to do when the problem is that the economy is contracting already into recession. Like Hoover and FDR, Obama's plans will only make it worse for longer.
See e.g. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/03/opinion/main4499465.shtml
And
http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/FDR-s-Policies-Prolonged-Depression-5409.aspx
THE GREAT BUSH DEPRESSION
I follow an economist named Bob Proctor. He has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
He perfectly predicted the current meltdown and the picture he paints about what will happen next
is terrifying.He thinks it will be worse then the great depression.
The banks in the U.S. are going under one after the other. Countrywide ,Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch , Fanny and Freddy Mae ,AIG
The government took them over because they are bankrupt. Even with the goverment nationalizing hundreds of billions of dollars in debt the stock market is crashing
the credit markets are frozen and all of us may suffer beyond anything seen in generations
McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy".
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand how its been broken.
It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use quantum mathematical models very few people understand.
Bush and McCain both can take the credit for this mess since they helped deregulate the laws that were protecting us.
Bush's economic advisor Phil Graham wrote the deregulation bill that allowed banks to take huge risks with all of our future.
Now, Phil Graham is the head of McCain's economic policy.He is also McCain's choice for the next secretary of the treasury.
No one in this country can afford for that to happen. The last time Bush met with his economic advisors was in March. He was the last to know somthing was wrong. Phil Graham had the guts to say that we are in a mental recession after he helped create the worst economy meltdown in our lifetime. Check out this link to the truth http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo
It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this nightmare. As bad as Bush has done, McCain would be
even more destructive because things are in much worse shape. The next president will not inherit a budget surplus like Bush did but a crashing economy and a 11,600,000,000,000 (trillion) dollars deficit. Most of it Bush created and it will take decades to pay it back.
If you do what you have always done then you will get what you have always got.
When it comes to policy Bush and McCain are the same 90 percent of the time.
So why are the polls even close then ?
Mccains team just said they no longer want to talk about the economy.Instead they would like to spend time talking about obama
which means running the biggest smear campaign in history.
They think they can just tell you lies and you wont be smart enough to see through it
Let's teach him we are smarter than that
Stand up and hold them accountable
Bush isn't on the ballot this year but his policies are
Elect Obama Biden 2008
THE GREAT BUSH DEPRESSION
I follow an economist named Bob Proctor. He has called the top and bottom of every market crash since the 70s correctly.
He perfectly predicted the current meltdown and the picture he paints about what will happen next
is terrifying.He thinks it will be worse then the great depression.
The banks in the U.S. are going under one after the other. Countrywide ,Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch , Fanny and Freddy Mae ,AIG
The government took them over because they are bankrupt. Even with the goverment nationalizing hundreds of billions of dollars in debt the stock market is crashing
the credit markets are frozen and all of us may suffer beyond anything seen in generations
McCain just like Bush " doesn't understand the economy".
That not just my opinion its his own words. Not only does he not understand how to fix it but he does not understand how its been broken.
It is no surprise that he doesn't. The people that make up these securities use quantum mathematical models very few people understand.
Bush and McCain both can take the credit for this mess since they helped deregulate the laws that were protecting us.
Bush's economic advisor Phil Graham wrote the deregulation bill that allowed banks to take huge risks with all of our future.
Now, Phil Graham is the head of McCain's economic policy.He is also McCain's choice for the next secretary of the treasury.
No one in this country can afford for that to happen. The last time Bush met with his economic advisors was in March. He was the last to know somthing was wrong. Phil Graham had the guts to say that we are in a mental recession after he helped create the worst economy meltdown in our lifetime. Check out this link to the truth http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo
It will take the best and brightest minds in the world to get us out of this nightmare. As bad as Bush has done, McCain would be
even more destructive because things are in much worse shape. The next president will not inherit a budget surplus like Bush did but a crashing economy and a 11,600,000,000,000 (trillion) dollars deficit. Most of it Bush created and it will take decades to pay it back.
If you do what you have always done then you will get what you have always got.
When it comes to policy Bush and McCain are the same 90 percent of the time.
So why are the polls even close then ?
Mccains team just said they no longer want to talk about the economy.Instead they would like to spend time talking about obama
which means running the biggest smear campaign in history.
They think they can just tell you lies and you wont be smart enough to see through it
Let's teach him we are smarter than that
Stand up and hold them accountable
Bush isn't on the ballot this year but his policies are
Elect Obama Biden 2008
People on these bogs are fond of saying that the current economic meltdown was caused by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac underwriting bad mortgages. While Fannie and Freddie obviously are guilty of writing bad mortgages, and worse, guilty of lobbying Congress to allow them to do so with impunity, their actions are just a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to determining who (or what) caused the financial crisis we face today.
In 1929 the stock market crash caused the banks to fail, because the banks were in bed with the stock market. Back then, banks owned investment houses, so when the stock market fell, the banks fell too. This triggered the Great Depression. So in 1933 the Congress wrote laws that regulated banking, making it illegal for banks to own investment companies, mortgage guaranty companies or insurance companies. The idea was to keep key industries separated by a fire wall, so that if one industry failed the whole economy would not go down in flames.
But the Republicans under Bush deregulated the banking industry. Senator Phil Gramm wrote legislation (the Gramm Rudman Act, the Gramm Leach Biley Act, etc.) that stripped away the regulations in the financial and insurance industies. He pushed them through the Republican Congress and they were signed into law by Geo. W. Bush. John McCain voted in favor. Everybody said how great it is to deregulate and create free markets.
Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch each gave over a million dollars to Senator Gramm's re-election campaign.
The economic collapse that happened later was a direct result of the deregulation, and here's how: the banks wrote bad mortgages, then bundled the mortgages into investment vehicles that they sold all over the world, and they even got firms like AIG to insure the investments. It was all a house of cards.
If there had been no deregulation, sure we would have had a bunch of bad mortgages, and the mortgage guaranty and real estate industries would have suffered, but there would not have been a global financial meltdown, since the problem would have been contained in one sector of the economy. You can thank Geo W. Bush, Sen. Phil Gramm and Sen John McCain for the meltdown, since they were strong proponents of deregulation.
Furthermore, although Fannie and Freddie are now holding the bulk of these bad mortgages, Fannie and Freddie did not originally write most of these mortgages. They bought them after the fact, bundled by banks/investment companies. Fannie and Freddie got screwed by the Wall Street fat cats. And so did you, if you pay taxes.
What is Phil Gramm doing today? He works as a lobbyist in Washington, trying to make it legal for the Swiss bank he represents to sell Death Bonds in the United States. Nice guy, Phil Gramm. Incidentally, John McCain has said that he wants to appoint Phil Gramm as Treasury Secretary. Some people just can't learn from their mistakes.
People on these bogs are fond of saying that the current economic meltdown was caused by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac underwriting bad mortgages. While Fannie and Freddie obviously are guilty of writing bad mortgages, and worse, guilty of lobbying Congress to allow them to do so with impunity, their actions are just a small piece of the puzzle when it comes to determining who (or what) caused the financial crisis we face today.
In 1929 the stock market crash caused the banks to fail, because the banks were in bed with the stock market. Back then, banks owned investment houses, so when the stock market fell, the banks fell too. This triggered the Great Depression. So in 1933 the Congress wrote laws that regulated banking, making it illegal for banks to own investment companies, mortgage guaranty companies or insurance companies. The idea was to keep key industries separated by a fire wall, so that if one industry failed the whole economy would not go down in flames.
But the Republicans under Bush deregulated the banking industry. Senator Phil Gramm wrote legislation (the Gramm Rudman Act, the Gramm Leach Biley Act, etc.) that stripped away the regulations in the financial and insurance industies. He pushed them through the Republican Congress and they were signed into law by Geo. W. Bush. John McCain voted in favor. Everybody said how great it is to deregulate and create free markets.
Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch each gave over a million dollars to Senator Gramm's re-election campaign.
The economic collapse that happened later was a direct result of the deregulation, and here's how: the banks wrote bad mortgages, then bundled the mortgages into investment vehicles that they sold all over the world, and they even got firms like AIG to insure the investments. It was all a house of cards.
If there had been no deregulation, sure we would have had a bunch of bad mortgages, and the mortgage guaranty and real estate industries would have suffered, but there would not have been a global financial meltdown, since the problem would have been contained in one sector of the economy. You can thank Geo W. Bush, Sen. Phil Gramm and Sen John McCain for the meltdown, since they were strong proponents of deregulation.
Furthermore, although Fannie and Freddie are now holding the bulk of these bad mortgages, Fannie and Freddie did not originally write most of these mortgages. They bought them after the fact, bundled by banks/investment companies. Fannie and Freddie got screwed by the Wall Street fat cats. And so did you, if you pay taxes.
What is Phil Gramm doing today? He works as a lobbyist in Washington, trying to make it legal for the Swiss bank he represents to sell Death Bonds in the United States. Nice guy, Phil Gramm. Incidentally, John McCain has said that he wants to appoint Phil Gramm as Treasury Secretary. Some people just can't learn from their mistakes.
What do you really know about Obama???s economic philosophy? Since he has never run a town, state or business, he has no record to look at. Oh, he has made lots of promises, but given that he broke his promise to be limited to public campaign funds, you can???t put much faith in that, and there will be means to keep those promises anyway.
But you do know that Obama, along with his democratic buddies in Congress, personally and professionally advocated for a residential housing policy favoring forced sub-prime lending, which subsequently resulted in massive defaults and foreclosures, leading to your loss of significant equity value in your home, to the point that it destabilized your banks, which panicked the stock market, which wiped out your savings.
Look and listen to Obama for yourself. Obama in this video, addressing his community activist work and his work representing ACORN in litigation against the banks and relating to the Community Reinvestment Act, and addressing the failure of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae as those actions relate to the destruction of our economy by causing the current real estate and subsequent financial crisis, states that, and I quote:
"Subprime lending started out as a good idea, helping Americans buy homes who previously could not afford to. Financial institutions created new financial instruments that could securitize these loans, slice them into finer and finer risk categories, and spread them out among investors and around the country, as well as around the world. In theory, this should have allowed mortgage lending to be less risky, and more diversified."
Acknowledging the catastrophe, but as apologist for the Democrats, Obama then offers this justification.
"The original idea was a good one, which was, lets see if we can distribute risk more broadly, and make it easier to provide loans to people who otherwise might not be able to get one."
Yah, great idea. Economically unsound, but embraced by Obama. Listen for yourself. You cannot dispute the mans on words recorded live:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lr1M1T2Y314&feature=related
Below is a link to C-SPAN video clips of the Congressional hearings at roughly the time McCains attempt at S.190. to fix Fannie and Freddie. See for yourself who said what.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs
See also
http://www.newsweek.com/id/164732 from this web site. (oops!) stating that Freddie Mac was spending tax payer money to target Republicans in 2005 who were trying to regulate Fannie and Freddies fraud. Democrats were not targeted, as the were all in the tank with Fannie and Freddie to kill the regulations. Hear that, the article admits that Republicans were trying to regulate Freddie and Fannie, and Democrats were trying to stop it from happening as a means to facilitate the Community Reinvestment Act.
See also: http://www.newsweek.com/id/164972
Stating that Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act wasn't what caused the meltdown, and noting that "economists on both sides of the political spectrum have suggested that the act has probably made the crisis less severe than it might otherwise have been."
In the exchange with "Joe the plumber" we find out that Obama really is as radical as his early political acquaintances, Davis, Ayers, Wright, etc., and that he is into the failed economic policy of wealth redistribution. Obama's tax and spending plans alone would be bad enough, but add Reid and Pelosi to the mix, with the three of them controlling both houses of Congress and the executive branch without any effective restraint, and you have something that should causes concern even among moderate Democrats.
See Wall Street Journal: A Liberal Supermajority:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420205889842989.html
Their failed policies are what brought us to ruin. Even Bill Clinton says so. Obama and a supermajority of Democrats simply is not the change we need, nor is it change we can afford.
Jon, please remember that "Elections have consequences". Also, remember that if the Democrats get a "mandate", you should expect this country to move farther to the left of center. Recall that Bush had two miserable terms ruling from the far right, from two elections that were stolen by a slim majority. Bush always claimed to have a mandate and then proceeded to push through his far right agenda, with the support of a republican controlled congress that marched in lockstep with him. So please Jon, prepare yourself for the reverse of that
Yes the reverse would would be 76-80 and 92-94. Be warned and be prepared.
It's time for an intelligent, calm leader who can unite our country - that is why I support Barack Obama. I don't care about labels - left vs. right - I just want the smartest guy to win!
The smartest guy in the room 30 years ago was Jimmy Carter and look at the mess he left us with: 21% interest rates, 10% inflation, 9% unemployment, gas lines and the cherry on top, hostages in Iran and mullahs spreading radical islam.
Want Jimmy II, be careful what you wish for, you may just get it.
Do people on this site actually believe that the rich pay their fair share of taxes? Puleaase. They have accountants who understand all of the loopholes and tax shelters.
Wealthy people had to pay a lot more in taxes during the '60s and '70s and they did just fine. They can afford it.
Wrong, the rates were 70% and they accounted for 15% of the tax dollar, the top rate is 35 and the account for 40% of the tax dollar.
Who's not paying their Fair share? The bottom 50% only pay 2.9 cents on the tax dollar.Besides, it is not your money to begin with. It belongs to whoever earns it. Go earn your own money, this is not the olde soviet union
I do "earn" my own money, but my question to you is.... where would you be if you didn't have someone taking your trash to the landfill for you? Packaging meat and growing vegetables for your grocery store? Waiting on your table? Providing your technical support when you need it? Able to help you at your local retail store? We all pay our taxes, but honestly, you'd be nowhere without the lower and middle class. we can't all be rich, no matter how hard we work.... so why not give those that do work hard but don't make the big bucks a break?
Great mentality.
The ultra rich own a HUGE majority of a country's wealth, more than they could ever spend. Yet they should be able to accumulate more at the expense of the poor.
Sickening
Jon, please remember that "Elections have consequences". Also, remember that if the Democrats get a "mandate", you should expect this country to move farther to the left of center. Recall that Bush had two miserable terms ruling from the far right, from two elections that were stolen by a slim majority. Bush always claimed to have a mandate and then proceeded to push through his far right agenda, with the support of a republican controlled congress that marched in lockstep with him. So please Jon, prepare yourself for the reverse of that.
I love all the hate coming from the liberals because they might actually win an election. Hatred for people who are successful and looking to share the wealth. Well, the last I checked the best way to become wealthy was to work hard and better your self. No one paid for me to go to college, and no one "gave" me anything. Like the article states, when there is a crisis people tend to look to the government, when things are going well, they don't like government. I for one think the government screws things up no matter who's in charge, so the less the better. All we are seeing is the same thing we see every 20 years or so, everybody starts complaining about how mean and evil the republicans are and we elect a democrat, then a few months later most people start to remember why we don't elect democrats. So live it up liberals, we'll see you in four years, if there's anything left.
Love how the "redistribute the wealth" crowd always goes on the hunt. I'm college educated and doing okay for myself. I'm not making the big bucks though :( 250k. I don't hate those that do, unless of course, they evade taxes, or take advantage of the poorer, or run corporations (and pensions) in the ground, or come running to us to bail them out when they dug their own graves. I love the "if there's anything left" comment. What exactly has Bush left us???? Not a whole lot.
So far all the hatred you refer to seems to come from Palin and the Republicans - especially at those horrible rallies.
Taxation is and always has been a redistribution of wealth. Once you recognize that point, the question is, how are we going to spend the money we raise in taxes?
For the past 8 years, our tax dollars have gone to killing civilians in Iraq and giving big payoffs to Halliburton (co-incidentally owned by the Cheney family). And since there wasn't enough in the treasury to do this in style, we borrowed money from communist China and ran up the national debt to pay for it.
Like 80% of Americans, I am sick of this particular redistribution plan.
Obama's plan reduces taxes on 98% of Americans. The other 2% of us (who make over $250,000 a year) can afford to pay an extra 3%. That extra 3% comes out to only $300 for every $10,000 they make above $250,000. It's not going to kill them. In fact, if you make over $250,000 a year, $300 probably doesn't mean much to you. The other source of increased revenue will be making corporations that ship jobs overseas pay a higher share of tax. Right now, these corporations pay a lower share than companies that keep their employees in the USA. No more incentives to hurt America. We all can agree with that.
Obama promises to go through the Federal budget line by line and cut all the wasteful spending. He promises to have transparency, a website where you can go and actually see the real Federal budget, not the made for TV version you can access under Bush.
Furthermore, Obama's economic plans will lead to a strong economy, an educated workforce, more American based jobs, affordable health care, and freedom from foreign oil. We will regain our position as a world leader, a nation that spreads democracy not with guns and threats, but with prosperity and diplomacy.
How do I know this? I read Obama's Blueprint for Change. And I compared it to what McCain had to offer (more tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, more wars, a really inadequate health plan, and the stated intention of overturning Roe v. Wade). You really should visit the websites of both candidates and read their platforms.
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/
http://www.johnmccain.com/Issues/jobsforamerica/
It is fine to be fiscally conservative. But when you speak of social issues (gay rights, abortion, same sex couples, etc.) a truly conservative government would leave people to themselves. Sadly, this is not the case with modern day 'Conservatives'.
It is fine to be fiscally
Enter comments if any for reporting abuse
Discuss