"CalifBill" wrote in message
...

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

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 10:29:22 -0500, John H
wrote:


Them's blasphemous words around here, my friend. If there's the
slightest chance a post can be called 'racist', the libs here will do
so, unless a lib made the post, of course.

the right thinks that racism never existed in this country...unless
it's blacks against poor, innocent, concerned whites...

the history of lynching not withstanding


Blacks in the south were racist also.



Yeah, all those lynchings and cross-burnings. The blacks did it!

--
Nom=de=Plume


Moron.



Self-identification goes a long way. Good for you!

--
Nom=de=Plume

"CalifBill" wrote in message
m...

"bpuharic" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 15:54:46 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Jan 2010 22:11:10 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:



i did my grad work at lehigh. they didn't admit women until '71.
neither did princeton. there's still alot of bias in the system

So you went to racist, sexist school.

i went there in 1980

Bad for you. Every school I went to
had blacks, Latinos, and every religion possible and all 3 sexes.

lehigh didn't. MIT didnt. princeton didn't. believe it or not, those
schools have SOME influence on corporate america

I did go
to school in San Francisco. Hell, I was a minority at San Francisco City
College. And we even allowed a future murderer to matriculate there when
I
was going to school. OJ Simpson. My best friend growing up was Chinese
and
my mom's best friend and her LVN was black. Too bad you grew up in a
racist
area. Must have rubbed off on you.

tell it to MIT and princeton.



Both stupid and ignorant. MIT graduated the first black student in 1890
or so. Customer of mine in the 1980's was a black MIT graduate. May not
have been a lot, but there were black students.



I bet you even had a black friend at some point in your life!

--
Nom=de=Plume

"bpuharic" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 18:43:42 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"CalifBill" wrote in message
news:gpudnR6F_LQuacHWnZ2dnUVZ_vCdnZ2d@earthlink. com...



35k is not dire straights.



With four kids???? You're cracked.

--
Nom=de=Plume


And you are clueless to the real world.



Really. Please show us where in the US that $35K/year for a family with
four
kids is doing well... go for it.

for the right wing, $35K is 35K too much for a family of 4.


Blow it out your ass, idiot. It is not easy street, but it is a hell of
along ways from dire straights.

wrote:
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:51:07 -0500, Harry
wrote:

You righties seem to have no understanding whatsoever about the purpose
of a labor union.
I know all about unions, remember my mom worked for the Teamster's
international for 20 years.
Unfortunately the UAW and the big 3 management companies were all
creating an unsustainable bubble in what they were giving the
employees. It wasn't about "fair" or "enough", it was always about
"more".
They simply jacked up the prices of the cars, everybody was making a
lot of money and we paid it.
That bubble popped.

But but. My whole life is invested in unions. My pension, My health
insurance, My dear sweet wifes job. My writing career. If my union goes
tits up I'm sunk.

On Mon, 25 Jan 2010 00:16:15 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:10:32 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

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

funny that the person most instrumental in the CFMA was...phil gramm.
the bill, as originally written, allowed the SEC to regulate swaps and
allowed the CFTC to regulate certain bank financial products

gramm, at the best of enron, etc., held up passage of the bill until
these provisions were stripped from the bill...essentially allowing
the bank robbers to guard the bank.


"Statement by Treasury Secretary Lawrence H. Summers” (“We are pleased
with the agreement reached last night on over-the-counter derivatives.
We hope that Congress will now pass this important legislation that
will allow the United States to maintain its competitive position in
this rapidly growing sector by providing legal certainty and promoting
innovation, transparency and efficiency in our financial markets.”)

i guess you really didn't read what i wrote

there was an original bill that provided protections by regulating
commodities, CDO's etc.

gramm wouldn't let this bill pass, in the same way that the GOP today
is waging class warfare on health

he held up the bill until the govt regulations were stripped and no
protection was left

THEN the bill was passed.

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

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

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 20:51:46 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 18:36:06 -0500, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 12:24:30 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

What was GM's largest financial liability?

it wasn't labor. labor accounts for less than 10% of a car's cost

try again...you already proved how much right wingers hate the middle
class when you blamed us for the financial meltdown, instead of your
god, wall street.

You try again, The biggest cost of a GM car was the pension and
benefit obligation

... and we ARE the middle class

and in many other countries, such costs are picked up by the govt. the
US is engaged in a race to the bottom


And where does the "government" get this mana from heaven?

by holding down healthcare costs and distributing costs to industries
that are domestic rather than competing worldwide like GM does

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 21:06:12 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 19:12:04 -0700, Canuck57
wrote:

and some of us work for a living. we dont have your luxury. we hired
wall street because morons like you said that if you give good
companies a good environment they'll provide jobs

recognize the asshole who still believes that?

First, kill your newsgroup access for 6 months and then do some research on
the web, or go to Scottrade, Ameritrade or any of the other discount brokers
and look the education stuff they post. Sign up to the www.fool.com

and yet i still work for a living and believe it's better to regulate
thieves than it is to permit them to continue to steal

you? you're a right winger. as long as the rich steal, you're happy.
as long as tthey steal from the middle class you're ecstatic

On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 22:11:47 -0800, "CalifBill"
wrote:


"bpuharic" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 18:43:42 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:



for the right wing, $35K is 35K too much for a family of 4.


Blow it out your ass, idiot. It is not easy street, but it is a hell of
along ways from dire straights.

and the right will soon change THAT by taking even that money