Republicans Are Dead to Me.

[opendebate]

Bush questioned Fannie Freddie lending practices and Barney boy said everything was great and Bush was stupid.

Well, I'll give you this part of it.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Well, I'll give you this part of it.

You are turning into the normal lib in here, I had hoped I finally found one worth talking too. Oh well.

 

[thinkforyoursel]

The Bush economy was great until the housing collapse brought on by the dems and their mandatory sub prime lending fiasco.

This is the talking point being pushed by the right to cover the disaster Bush left the country in. This theory I call...."THE POWERFUL POOR PEOPLE THEORY"!!

The banks were never informed to seek out under qualified individuals...scam them into taking mortgages ...and then quickly dump the crap on the market. No law was passed for that will-full act to happen.

This would be like ...blaming the very slaves ...for slavery!!

The people who ran the scam ....knew it was a scam and when the bubble burst they had already taken that money and ran with it. Now imagine ...after the scam ...after running away with the money leaving millions in sudden poverty ....in comes congress to ....BAIL THEM OUT!!

This was what's so upsetting ...it's like somebody robs your house and steal your valuables ....you call the police ...and the police take more money from your neighbors and give to the thief!!

 

[sawyerloggingon]

This is the talking point being pushed by the right to cover the disaster Bush left the country in. This theory I call...."THE POWERFUL POOR PEOPLE THEORY"!!

The banks were never informed to seek out under qualified individuals...scam them into taking mortgages ...and then quickly dump the crap on the market. No law was passed for that will-full act to happen.

This would be like ...blaming the very slaves ...for slavery!!

The banks were forced by the dem congress to make sub prime loans and in the interest of their stock holders did everything they could to unload that worthless paper.

 

[thinkforyoursel]

The banks were forced by the dem congress to make sub prime loans and in the interest of their stock holders did everything they could to unload that worthless paper.

That's the lie.....the banks were never instructed to seek out un-qualified borrowers and lend them money!! That's a flat out lie!

 

[sawyerloggingon]

That's the lie.....the banks were never instructed to seek out un-qualified borrowers and lend them money!! That's a flat out lie!

They were however instructed to lower their lending standards so poor pople could share in the "American dream". It just wasn't fair that poor people couldn't buy homes.

 

[clownboy]

They were however instructed to lower their lending standards so poor pople could share in the "American dream". It just wasn't fair that poor people couldn't buy homes.

Indeed and the government regulatory environment on the sub-prime market was silent as the sharks tore at the chum.

 

[opendebate]

You are turning into the normal lib in here, I had hoped I finally found one worth talking too. Oh well.

Well that's awfully open minded of you Sawyer. I on the other hand, still have hope for you.

 

[thinkforyoursel]

They were however instructed to lower their lending standards so poor pople could share in the "American dream". It just wasn't fair that poor people couldn't buy homes.

You're back pedaling now ....let me say it again. Nobody in congress instructed the banks to seek out unqualified borrowers and lend them money.
They did it because they saw a way to scam the public.

I bought my first house in 95 and my second in 2004...and I was shocked at the difference in due diligence performed by the bank on my second mortgage. Unlike my first mortgage they didn't even bother to verify my employment.

The banks will-fully scammed the American people ...and the LIE you're trying to tell is congress told them to do it!!

What's sad is.... the banks get paid ...Fox news and Rush Limbaugh gets paid for this lie ....what do you get out of it?

Because guess what ....the banks didn't just hurt the people they lend to ..in case you still havent' figured it out yet!

 

[Visbek]

Obama was handed a golden opportunity with all the new oil technology that came on line on his watch and we could be in an oil boom instead of this economic quagmire we are in if he wasn't obsessed with AGW.

Domestic oil production has increased by 40% during his term. Oil production had previously peaked in 1970, and fallen for years; levels haven't been this high since 1991.

Domestic natural gas production has also increased by around 45% during his term.

After decades of importing oil and fuel, the US has reduced its imports, and is on the verge of exporting more energy than it imports.

This boom in energy production has supposedly increased GDP by a whopping 0.7% since 2009. Much of it is in states with low population, like Montana. So it's a nice little bump -- emphasis on "little."

But hey, don't let facts get in your way.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

Domestic oil production has increased by 40% during his term. Oil production had previously peaked in 1970, and fallen for years; levels haven't been this high since 1991.

Domestic natural gas production has also increased by around 45% during his term.

After decades of importing oil and fuel, the US has reduced its imports, and is on the verge of exporting more energy than it imports.

This boom in energy production has supposedly increased GDP by a whopping 0.7% since 2009. Much of it is in states with low population, like Montana. So it's a nice little bump -- emphasis on "little."

But hey, don't let facts get in your way.

ND is having an economic boom that could be coast to coast and would lift us out of this obamarepression if.....

 

[sawyerloggingon]

You're back pedaling now ....let me say it again. Nobody in congress instructed the banks to seek out unqualified borrowers and lend them money.
They did it because they saw a way to scam the public.

I bought my first house in 95 and my second in 2004...and I was shocked at the difference in due diligence performed by the bank on my second mortgage. Unlike my first mortgage they didn't even bother to verify my employment.

The banks will-fully scammed the American people ...and the LIE you're trying to tell is congress told them to do it!!

What's sad is.... the banks get paid ...Fox news and Rush Limbaugh gets paid for this lie ....what do you get out of it?

Because guess what ....the banks didn't just hurt the people they lend to ..in case you still havent' figured it out yet!

Do some research, congress demanded banks lower their lending standards.

 

[sawdust]

An old weatherman doesn't understand modern science, and you hold that up as an example of something?

Did you notice that EVERY significant scientific organization in the world has basically stated CAGW (or if you prefer, Climate Change due to CO2 emissions) is real and a future problem? Not one organization says the opposite. None.

Look at National Geographic. NASA. NOAA. Scientific American. It's accepted as factually as evolution, or gravity, or the existence of electrons.

Scientific opinion on climate change - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's not a controversial issue in science. At all.

An old weatherman who holds a doctorate in meteorology who happens to be the man who invented the term global warming. In logic, there is a fallacy called appeal to authority. That's when you claim someone is an expert and he says something about a topic he's not an expert in. That's not the case here. It was interesting to me that the first thirty feet of atmosphere catches the vast majority of the suns heat and that is mostly trapped by water vapor.

I was a geology major in college and we studied climate change through the ages. The climate always changes. There have been five ice ages. It's been warmer than it is today. There was more oxygen in the atmosphere than there is now, one reason by the way the planet could support the large bodies of dinosaurs. Wiki however is hardly a scientific source. With a password I can change the post. Take a look at appeal to authority.

If you follow the money, you'll see why AGW gets support in the scientific community.

 

[Visbek]

ND is having an economic boom that could be coast to coast and would lift us out of this obamarepression if.....

No, it really wouldn't. That's why I pointed out that the current energy boom is only increasing GDP by 0.7%.

North Dakota's GDP in 2010 was the second-lowest in the country ($33 billion). The 13% increase in North Dakota's GDP is equivalent to a 0.26% increase in California's GDP. North Dakota's population is around 700,000 -- as in, twice as many people live in Philadelphia than in all of North Dakota.

Also, a lot of the opposition to hydraulic fracking and to transmission pipelines is local, not federal.

 

[Threegoofs]

An old weatherman who holds a doctorate in meteorology who happens to be the man who invented the term global warming. In logic, there is a fallacy called appeal to authority. That's when you claim someone is an expert and he says something about a topic he's not an expert in. That's not the case here. It was interesting to me that the first thirty feet of atmosphere catches the vast majority of the suns heat and that is mostly trapped by water vapor.

I was a geology major in college and we studied climate change through the ages. The climate always changes. There have been five ice ages. It's been warmer than it is today. There was more oxygen in the atmosphere than there is now, one reason by the way the planet could support the large bodies of dinosaurs. Wiki however is hardly a scientific source. With a password I can change the post. Take a look at appeal to authority.

If you follow the money, you'll see why AGW gets support in the scientific community.

So wait a second... your old weatherman plus your degree in geology trumps the list of every major scientific organization on the planet just because that list is published on Wikipedia? You're welcome to disprove that ANY ONE of those organizations (the NAS, AAAS, Royal Society, etc) dont agree with AGW by going to their websites. You'll find that wiki page quite accurate. And apparently, you seem to have missed the concept of time in your geological studies, which is kinda funny, because the past changes happened at a geological pace, and this warming is happening in decades.

And as for dinosaurs being large because of oxygen levels... thats not true. You're thinking of Cambrian or Carboniferous life, with giant insects, etc. But hey.. its just science. Its not like its based on factual information or anything, right? Its just opinion!

Dinosaurs grew to outpace their young : Nature News & Comment

 

[sawdust]

No, all I said was climate always changes and the science isn't settled. The geologic record has lots of examples of rapidly changing climate. Understand this however. Science has very narrow definitions which pertain to the words they use. I said AGW is a theory. That doesn't mean it's invalid. It only means that a phenomenon has been noticed in nature, a hypothesis formed resulting in a theory which is being tested. Science isn't interested in beliefs. (However money changes that at times.) Science deals with theory and fact.

I have to say that I would not have the gall to make fun of the "old weatherman." His scientific background surpasses mine, and from what you've written, far surpasses yours. Keep and open mine and don't let your personal beliefs overshadow scientific study. Also understand that fluctuations in climate are measured in eons, not years months and weeks but if you want to look at in years, the planet hasn't warmed since the 90's.

Your article said that oxygen levels were higher during Permian, Triassic and Jurassic periods however two studies didn't find a correlation between oxygen levels and body size. That's not what I was taught in college but thanks for the article. I still enjoy reading that stuff.

 

[davidtaylorjr]

The alternative is to simply let King Barack rule as he wishes, setting a precedent that will be much harder to ever overturn.

No, the precedent is 1776.

 

[sawyerloggingon]

No, it really wouldn't. That's why I pointed out that the current energy boom is only increasing GDP by 0.7%.

North Dakota's GDP in 2010 was the second-lowest in the country ($33 billion). The 13% increase in North Dakota's GDP is equivalent to a 0.26% increase in California's GDP. North Dakota's population is around 700,000 -- as in, twice as many people live in Philadelphia than in all of North Dakota.

Also, a lot of the opposition to hydraulic fracking and to transmission pipelines is local, not federal.

You live in your own make believe world.