Obama fails to get Nobel Prize in Economics
 

On Thu, 15 Oct 2009 09:32:23 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"KotP-A" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:38:52 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"KotP-A" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 01:05:59 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"CalifBill" wrote in message
news:dtadnUwiLtya7kjXnZ2dnUVZ_rOdnZ2d@earthli nk.com...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"CalifBill" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"CalifBill" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"CalifBill" wrote in message
m...

"wf3h" wrote in message
...
On Oct 12, 12:23 pm, John H wrote:
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:40:01 -0400, Jim wrote:
wf3h wrote:
On Oct 12, 10:55 am, Canuck57 wrote:

His achievement was $1.3 trillion debt-corruption-spend in
only
8
months. Guinness Book of records material perhaps?-

what's really a record is how quickly george bush and his
rich
free
market friends stole my 401K

So sorry for your loss. Too bad you don't have at least some
control of
your 401. You might look at fixing that instead of blaming the
boogyman.

He has blamed everyone *but* the person responsible for his
terrible
loss - himself.

really? i caused the collapse of the economy?

well let's tally up shall we?

the right wing believes i personally am responsible for the
collapse
of the economy

it also believes obama's been president for the last 8 years

and on that basis it thinks it has everything figured out..

no wonder they got their asses handed to them in the last
election

It started under Clinton. Bush did not help the situation. But
Clinton wanting to make sure of his reelection partnered up with
ACORN and gave the OK for lots of loans that were not able to be
repaid. Paulson and Wall Street jumped on these loans and turned
them in to bonds, gave them a AAA rating and sold them to the
401K's, etc. The next foreclosure wave is starting. The $500k
homes. people making $50k a year can not afford the loan on a
home
10x their income. Clinton's appointee Raines, should have had to
return all the stolen money, times maybe 2x and gone to jail.
but
the Justice dept under the Executive branch cuts a deal with him
for
the return of $5 million and lets him keep the $95 million.

You should really drop the ACORN nut. It's stale and has no
nutritional value. It's an empty shell of an argument. Ok, enough
puns for the day...

--
Nom=de=Plume


Can not drop the nut. Is a critical part of the disaster.

Come on... it's kind of looney to blame everything on one
relatively
small organization. If you want to pick something to blame, pick
Fox.
They're just a noisemaker for the right-wing, but lots of people
just
listen to them.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Not just Acorn, but the pandering to it to get out the vote for the
one
in power. Changing the rules on loans, so those in power at the
time,
could buy votes. The melt down was the fact that the loans were
made
to
those who could not afford them. Then they were sold by Wall
Street,
the same people who got the bail out "stimulus", as AAA bonds.
Those
who packaged them and rated them should be in jail. but nope,
Paulson
and his buddies are sharing billions of bail out bucks as bonus
money.
But ACORN was the major reason for the loan changing.
FreddieMac/FannieMae buying all loans.

In your opinion... people tend to leave that part out when they can't
actually show established facts.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Not just my opinion.

No doubt, but that doesn't make the long rant fact-based either.

They were facts. You should face them.


Please provide the references to each of you "points." Then, I'll face
what
exists in the real world.

Last time I provided you references you squabbled.

Look 'em up yourself.


Right. Did that.

I'll bet.

Nothing found except right-wing rants. You seem very
concerned by ACORN,

I've said nothing about ACORN.

but have little or no concern about the right-wing
voting to force companies like Haliburton (who are taking lots and lots of
tax-payer money) to stop forcing employees to sign away their right to sue
(e.g., if they've been gang raped).

I've not been asked about the vote.


Here are some facts. I'd like to hear how you can justify this, which is
clearly a huge and disgusting issue:

I think that the bowing to the money guys is just as bad whether done
by Republicans or Democrats.

Franken's amendment ended up passing, 68-30. Here's a list of the Senators
who showed broad support for Roman Polanski by voting against it:

Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bond (R-MO)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Gregg (R-NH)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Wicker (R-MS)

ADDENDUM: It's been pointed out to me that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
lobbied against the Franken amendment as well:

Republicans point out that the amendment was opposed by a host of business
interests, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and applies to a wide
range of companies, including IBM and Boeing.

Read more at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_312976.html
Maybe you should pass this along to your daughters. It might show that you
at least have the potential to learn something new.

Please point out to me where I said I disagreed with the amendment.