NoJingoLingo
Banned
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2009
- Messages
- 2,320
- Reaction score
- 325
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I think we all notice that you didn't have a rebuttal other than :fly:
Your personal opinion not backed by anything factual
I believe most people with an education understand that 60 votes in the Senate is a super majority and that Obama had that super majority in both houses.
You haven't a clue as to how our economy works yet claim to be or have been a CEO in a corporation. You are a fraud.
As expected you have no solutions that Obama has proposed but that doesn't stop you from spreading the lies from that empty suit.
LOL, yep, keep buying the rhetoric you are being told. Tell that to the 15 million workers unemployed and the 1.1 million increase in discouraged workers that they aren't in a depression.
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
In order to do that he has to increase private sector jobs and there is no evidence he is trying to do that. It takes the creation of 200,000 per month just to break even and there is no evidence that is happening.
Keep buying the rhetoric as apparently you have little pride in yourself as you have no problem being made a fool of.
I think we all notice that you didn't have a rebuttal other than :fly:
Got ANY proof that I was the one who reported your post?I don't deal with people who run to the moderators when challenged, :2wave::2wave:
That is the best you can do? Of course there is no filibuster in the House but that doesn't mean he didn't have a super majority. Now how about addressing the post?
Got ANY proof that I was the one who reported your post?
I did. You are the one who said the House has a super majority, and according to the definition of a super majority, it does not exist in the House. I was merely calling you out for your lack of knowledge.
If the Country is in as bad a shape in 7 years when Obama leaves office as it was when he took over...then yes....I will rag on Obama the same way that I diss Bush.
I just don't expect Obama to get us out of the mess GWB created overnight.
Thank you. Obama inherited a mess and is dealing with it piece by piece with no help from half the country that is still just pouting from losing the election.
They forget that Bush's presidency sucked so badly that the talking point from his bootlickers as he left office was "well, other than the deadliest terror attack on american soil ever, he kept us safe!"
It's hilarious how you have no idea how wrong you are. Just lol'ing yourself to glee.the house has a HUGE majority
better?
LOL!
yet, president pieface received the backing of ONLY EIGHTY PERCENT of his OWN CAUCUS on this radical restructuring of 1/6 of united states society
how does pie-in-the-face intend to EXPAND medicare and medicaid, both already strained to breaking point, by THIRTY ONE MILLION new enrollees while simultaneously CUTTING their funding by HALF A TRILLION DOLLARS?
an example of an IMPORTANT consideration...
now, what were we arguing about, again?
LOL!
Back up your statements with actual facts, not media rhetoric. BEA.gov, bls.gov, and the U.S. Treasury sites paint a different picture. Suggest you go there then realize how legislation is created and passed in this country.
Get over your Bush derangement syndrome. Bush didn't create the 1.6 trillion debt that will occur this year? Bush didn't raise the unemployment number to 15 million? Bush didn't take over GM and Chrysler nor bailout the unions.
you can continue to buy the rhetoric and I doubt anything including the facts I present will change your mind. Some are just lost causes.
Of course. The president is only responsible for what happens under his watch when he has a "D" after his name, right?
When he has the same letter after his name as the party in control of Congress. Congress since January, 2007 has been under control of the Democrats who were more concerned about regaining the WH than they were preventing a recession. Now we are paying the consequences for that vote and it has nothing to do with GW Bush. This economy is Barack Obama's and the Democrat Congress
And exactly what legislation did they pass to cause the recession?
What should they have done over and beyond what they've already done to prevent it? More Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, since that worked out so well during his presidency?
Show me any source that claims 31 million new enrollees will join medicaid/medicare...
why don't liberals like links?
LOL!
Conservative:
Lets talk about your boy Phil Gramm shall we?
In the 1990s, as chairman of the Senate banking committee, he routinely turned down Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Arthur Levitt's requests for more money to police Wall Street; during this period, the sec's workload shot up 80 percent, but its staff grew only 20 percent.
Gramm also opposed an sec rule that would have prohibited accounting firms from getting too close to the companies they audited—at one point, according to Levitt's memoir, he warned the sec chairman that if the commission adopted the rule, its funding would be cut.
And in 1999, Gramm pushed through a historic banking deregulation bill that decimated Depression-era firewalls between commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, and securities firms—setting off a wave of merger mania.
But Gramm's most cunning coup on behalf of his friends in the financial services industry—friends who gave him millions over his 24-year congressional career—came on December 15, 2000. It was an especially tense time in Washington. Only two days earlier, the Supreme Court had issued its decision on Bush v. Gore. President Bill Clinton and the Republican-controlled Congress were locked in a budget showdown. It was the perfect moment for a wily senator to game the system. As Congress and the White House were hurriedly hammering out a $384-billion omnibus spending bill, Gramm slipped in a 262-page measure called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. Written with the help of financial industry lobbyists and cosponsored by Senator Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), the chairman of the agriculture committee, the measure had been considered dead—even by Gramm.
the legislation contained a provision—lobbied for by Enron, a generous contributor to Gramm—that exempted energy trading from regulatory oversight, allowing Enron to run rampant, wreck the California electricity market, and cost consumers billions before it collapsed. (For Gramm, Enron was a family affair. Eight years earlier, his wife, Wendy Gramm, as cftc chairwoman, had pushed through a rule excluding Enron's energy futures contracts from government oversight. Wendy later joined the Houston-based company's board, and in the following years her Enron salary and stock income brought between $915,000 and $1.8 million into the Gramm household.)
But the Enron loophole was small potatoes compared to the devastation that unregulated swaps would unleash. Credit default swaps are essentially insurance policies covering the losses on securities in the event of a default. Financial institutions buy them to protect themselves if an investment they hold goes south
Because of the swap-related provisions of Gramm's bill—which were supported by Fed chairman Alan Greenspan and Treasury secretary Larry Summers—a $62 trillion market (nearly four times the size of the entire US stock market) remained utterly unregulated, meaning no one made sure the banks and hedge funds had the assets to cover the losses they guaranteed.
These unregulated swaps have been at "the heart of the subprime meltdown
How about sourcing where you got this from, because you sure as hell did not type it
Don't bother. You'll never convince him that all the country's problems are not the fault of democrats. He doesn't understand that the economy is like a train and doesn't change on a dime. His ilk doesn't want to hear about the Shrub anymore because they are sick of getting bashed over their decisions. I don't blame them, the problem however is that they still want us to believe they have good ideas. :dohAnd exactly what legislation did they pass to cause the recession?
What should they have done over and beyond what they've already done to prevent it? More Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, since that worked out so well during his presidency?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?