On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 12:24:10 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 22:24:52 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

goldman sachs did.

i saved hard. since my 20's. every year.

and the GOP deregulated me right into working forever

I suggest that before you blame this all on the GOP you look at the
votes on the 2 major deregulation bills ... and the president that
signed them.

you mean the president the GOP impeached? yeah. looks like he had ALOT
of control over congress, right?


BTW if you are still hurt from the correction a couple years ago you
were not properly diversified. I only have one major holding that is
still a loser (EXP). My IBM stock is doing better than it was in 2006.
FLR is still a "double". CLNE is more like 4- 5x from 2006.

ROFLMAO!! me and 100M other americans. you right wingers really love
to hate the middle class, don't you?

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:03:50 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 13:48:51 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

and the GOP deregulated me right into working forever

I suggest that before you blame this all on the GOP you look at the
votes on the 2 major deregulation bills ... and the president that
signed them.

you mean the president the GOP impeached? yeah. looks like he had ALOT
of control over congress, right?


Bill Clinton was the cheerleader on the commodities deregulation bill
that allowed CDOs.

you mean the gramm bill? named after phil gramm, the REPUBLICAN who
authored it, on behalf of his enron VP wife?

that the bill you referring to?

I am sure you can find his signing statement on
youtube. It was in the 60 Minutes piece on this. He is smiling and
telling us how this is a great step forward. Trying to rewrite history
and saying he was opposed to deregulation is dishonest.

i never said he was opposed. i said he was powerless to oppose it. the
GOP impeached him. his power was, to say the least, marginal.




BTW if you are still hurt from the correction a couple years ago you
were not properly diversified. I only have one major holding that is
still a loser (EXP). My IBM stock is doing better than it was in 2006.
FLR is still a "double". CLNE is more like 4- 5x from 2006.

ROFLMAO!! me and 100M other americans. you right wingers really love
to hate the middle class, don't you?

So there are 100m Americans who made bad choices with their money

this reminds me of the east german communist party statement during
anti-communist rioting....'the party had lost faith in the people'

the right SCREWS the middle class like $2 whores THEN tells 100M hard
working americans it's their fault, otherwise it would be free market
capitalism that's at fault.

and god knows we CANT have that, right?


.. Why
is that supposed to surprise me? I bet you thought getting a 125% home
equity loan on a bubble priced house, to buy something stupid, was
sound business.

hey genius...a house aint a 401K



Anyone with their head a quarter inch out of their ass knew the house
prices in 2005-2006 was an anomaly. There were a few home builders who
understood this too. If you watched the insider trading and management
shuffling in CTX in 2005-6 you had a very good idea of where the
housing market was heading. Centex stopped building any houses that
were not sold as early as 1q06, There was also a bit of insider
selling. The CEO, CFO and director of construction took a buy out.That
was your warning (among other things) that the main engine in the
economy was running out of steam. If you weren't watching signs like
this, you had no business investing. Google up things I was saying
then and you can see, someone knew. If you are not willing to watch
what is driving the market, buy CDs and take your 2%.

this babbling about 'centex' has zip to do with anything. your
religious belief in the power and ethics of the rich is touching

too bad you just proved how much right winers hate the middle class.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:23:09 -0500, bpuharic wrote:


you mean the president the GOP impeached? yeah. looks like he had ALOT
of control over congress, right?


Bill Clinton was the cheerleader on the commodities deregulation bill
that allowed CDOs.

you mean the gramm bill? named after phil gramm, the REPUBLICAN who
authored it, on behalf of his enron VP wife?

that the bill you referring to?


No that was Gramm-Leach-Bliley in 1999. Clinton was in favor of that
too, along with 43% of the democrats voting for it.
BTW that was what allowed banks to be brokerage houses.
I am talking about The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000
that repealed the bucket shop laws and allowed CDOs
The house voted 292-60 (9 democrats said no) and the senate gave it
unanimous consent
The democrats are neck deep in that **** hole. You can go look at the
vote if you want http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2000/roll603.xml

Perhaps it's time to revoke it and get back to some normal banking behavior.


I am sure you can find his signing statement on
youtube. It was in the 60 Minutes piece on this. He is smiling and
telling us how this is a great step forward. Trying to rewrite history
and saying he was opposed to deregulation is dishonest.

i never said he was opposed. i said he was powerless to oppose it. the
GOP impeached him. his power was, to say the least, marginal.




BTW if you are still hurt from the correction a couple years ago you
were not properly diversified. I only have one major holding that is
still a loser (EXP). My IBM stock is doing better than it was in 2006.
FLR is still a "double". CLNE is more like 4- 5x from 2006.

ROFLMAO!! me and 100M other americans. you right wingers really love
to hate the middle class, don't you?

So there are 100m Americans who made bad choices with their money

this reminds me of the east german communist party statement during
anti-communist rioting....'the party had lost faith in the people'

the right SCREWS the middle class like $2 whores THEN tells 100M hard
working americans it's their fault, otherwise it would be free market
capitalism that's at fault.

and god knows we CANT have that, right?


It sure sounds like that was a bi-partisan screwing if those 2
deregulation bills were the cause. The democrats and Bill Clinton were
leading the charge to pump up the market and increase corporate power
over us.

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:51:04 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:23:09 -0500, bpuharic wrote:


It sure sounds like that was a bi-partisan screwing if those 2
deregulation bills were the cause. The democrats and Bill Clinton were
leading the charge to pump up the market and increase corporate power
over us.

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

yeah that's plain nuts. if he could, he'd blame obama for the civil
war...

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:51:04 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:23:09 -0500, bpuharic wrote:


It sure sounds like that was a bi-partisan screwing if those 2
deregulation bills were the cause. The democrats and Bill Clinton were
leading the charge to pump up the market and increase corporate power
over us.

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

yeah that's plain nuts. if he could, he'd blame obama for the civil
war...



Well, he's half black and half white, so it fits.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:20:36 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:21:34 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:51:04 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:23:09 -0500, bpuharic wrote:


It sure sounds like that was a bi-partisan screwing if those 2
deregulation bills were the cause. The democrats and Bill Clinton were
leading the charge to pump up the market and increase corporate power
over us.

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

yeah that's plain nuts. if he could, he'd blame obama for the civil
war...

He is far from without blame in all of that deregulation you people
are blaming this crash on. If it was good for big business, Clinton
was your guy.

really? obama has blame for events that happened when he was 18?

tell us about that

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:51:04 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

Why? You have seen the votes by now. It was 51 GOP representatives and
9 democrats that opposed the deregulation of CDOs.


And, it began long before that vote. You act like that was the beginning or
the end of the situation.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 23:22:57 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:51:04 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

Why? You have seen the votes by now. It was 51 GOP representatives and
9 democrats that opposed the deregulation of CDOs.

it was actually gramm who wouldn't let the bill pass with the original
regulations of CDO's intact. he forced amendments that stripped govt
regulations out of the bill

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 06:33:32 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 23:22:57 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:51:04 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Stop blaming Clinton and the democrats for something that's obviously
been
supported far longer and with more fervor by the right wing.

Why? You have seen the votes by now. It was 51 GOP representatives and
9 democrats that opposed the deregulation of CDOs.

it was actually gramm who wouldn't let the bill pass with the original
regulations of CDO's intact. he forced amendments that stripped govt
regulations out of the bill

How does Gramm make 99 other senators go along? How does he keep the
president from vetoing the legislation. How does he make all but 9
democrats in the house go along, yet losing 51 republicans?
Somehow I have to believe he was just the point man on things that a
lot of other people wanted. (the bankers who buy congress and the
white house)


How does DeMint prevent 99 senators from confirming the TSA nominee?

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 11:03:05 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

How does DeMint prevent 99 senators from confirming the TSA nominee?

--
41 of them must not be convinced he is the right guy.


Nope. One. He quit because he didn't want to become a political football. He
was highly qualified. Read up on it.

--
Nom=de=Plume