wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.



The Bush "policy" decision was that he didn't want to be known as the
president who caused the world financial markets to collapse. He had to be
pushed into it by Paulson, et. al.

--
Nom=de=Plume

nom=de=plume wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.
and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making
uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.



The Bush "policy" decision was that he didn't want to be known as the
president who caused the world financial markets to collapse. He had to be
pushed into it by Paulson, et. al.

Correct. He had no choice. Always got pushed around by others.
But he redeemed himself by resisting Cheney's effort to have him pardon
Scooter. So he came out of his 8 years in fine shape, and so it will be
written when the history of his Presidency is scribed.
BTW, I apologize for calling you "toots." Didn't want to sound sexist.
Is honeybuns ok? Seems pretty neutral, but I'm not real sure.

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:30:38 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:23:39 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 02:28:15 -0500, wrote:




We'll see how much really gets paid. The big banks were able to pay
but some of them are now saying they didn't really need the money in
the first place. The rat hole that won't give up any of it's money is
AIG. There is nobody there to pay it back. Hedge fund guys like Soros
have it all.

and how much money will iraq pay to the US for the trillion we spent
there?


Again, you can hate Haliburton but they did create a lot of jobs

and the war created 4400 corpses...the flower of american youth. but,
then, they were middle class kids. and the right doesn't particularly
care about american soldiers.

I am not a fan of the war, never have been. I am still waiting for
Obama to get us out.

you just don't leave a war like you leave a dance. and the last
american marine has already left iraq. the army will follow next
year.

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:28:55 -0500, wrote:

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.

actually it was bernanke. and it was a keynesian policy that bush had
to implement because the monetarism of greenspan had collapsed.

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:43:33 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, bpuharic wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.

The idea that it "saved or created" any jobs has been pretty much
debunked.

really? the american enterprise institute, an archconservative 'think
tank' (there's an oxymoron) says it created jobs

and i just referenced 50 economists who said it make 1.2M jobs

oh. you're a right winger. you don't read

sorry. i forgot

On 1/29/10 9:19 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:43:33 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.

The idea that it "saved or created" any jobs has been pretty much
debunked.

really? the american enterprise institute, an archconservative 'think
tank' (there's an oxymoron) says it created jobs

and i just referenced 50 economists who said it make 1.2M jobs

oh. you're a right winger. you don't read

sorry. i forgot


It's far worse than that: Tosk is an ill-educated, uninformed,
skill-less hippy wannabe who couldn't hold down a job sweeping streets.

Harry wrote:
On 1/29/10 9:19 PM, bpuharic wrote:
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:43:33 -0500, I am Tosk
wrote:

In ,
says...

On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 06:22:14 -0500, wrote:

The TARP (and other handouts) cost twice that much in one tenth the
time.

and the TARP saved the banking system, created over 1M jobs and
prevented a great depression

We didn't even create any jobs. At least The Iraq war employed
lots of people for 10 years making

uh huh. according to a consensus of economists interviewed monday by
USAToday, the TARP created about 1.2M jobs

Surprising to see you praising a Bush policy decision with such vigor.
I still think it was a big gift to a lot of rich people.

The idea that it "saved or created" any jobs has been pretty much
debunked.

really? the american enterprise institute, an archconservative 'think
tank' (there's an oxymoron) says it created jobs

and i just referenced 50 economists who said it make 1.2M jobs

oh. you're a right winger. you don't read

sorry. i forgot


It's far worse than that: Tosk is an ill-educated, uninformed,
skill-less hippy wannabe who couldn't hold down a job sweeping streets.


And you talk about sniping....

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:47:03 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

But it's his fault that the country is in financial trouble, even though
Bush got us into Iraq, which is costing $10B a month???

Which Bush? HW got us into Iraq and his 3 sons have not extracted us
yet. Granted W was the worst by a long shot but they all spent
exorbitant sums there


I was talking about Obama, but you chopped that part out. At least Bush I
stopped before toppling the gov't. He actually listened to his advisors.
Bush II just listened to Cheney.

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:48:07 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:42:39 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Not so with the deaths in Iraq.
Haliburton soak us out of billions, and it's still going on.

I agree the Iraq war was stupid but I have thought that since 1991. We
should have come home when Powell said we should.

Haliburton was simply the price we paid for not having a draft. In
earlier times it would have been army draftees doing those jobs.
Haliburton was simply the only company that had the resources to do
the mission. They really don't have any meaningful competition in that
arena. This is not really a "Cheney" problem. I made a lot of money in
the 90s on HAL when it was Clinton buying their services ... in a no
bid contract. If you realized Clinton was not going to stop the Iraq
war in 1992 and loaded up on HAL in the single digits you saw it go
to $30. They were doing the logistics for the ground services in the
"no fly zone" war too.
That was where we got the money for our kitchen remodel ;-)


Give me a break. Cheney orchestrated the increase of use of Haliburton and
Blackwater.

Unless you were a stock watcher you probably thought Haliburton was an
oil service company in 1990-91 but that was the Gulf War play when
Kuwait was invaded because they were the prime DoD contractor for
logistics. For the 6 months of GW1 there was a lot of money to be made
betting on them, then after the war they went down with the rest of
the market.
After it was clear that Clinton was not going to end the war the stock
soared again. As I said, they were the prime contractor for the no fly
zone war throughout the Clinton administration (when Cheney worked
for them).


Clinton never said he was going to end the war.

--
Nom=de=Plume

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:23:29 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

Give me a break. Cheney orchestrated the increase of use of Haliburton
and
Blackwater.

Unless you were a stock watcher you probably thought Haliburton was an
oil service company in 1990-91 but that was the Gulf War play when
Kuwait was invaded because they were the prime DoD contractor for
logistics. For the 6 months of GW1 there was a lot of money to be made
betting on them, then after the war they went down with the rest of
the market.
After it was clear that Clinton was not going to end the war the stock
soared again. As I said, they were the prime contractor for the no fly
zone war throughout the Clinton administration (when Cheney worked
for them).


Clinton never said he was going to end the war.

I know but we thought it would be over soon. After all we won the war
didn't we?? ... but there was too much money to be made staying
there.
Clinton was saber rattling for his whole 8 years, bombing people in
Iraq almost every day and W was so dumb he took the threats Clinton
made in 1998-1999 seriously, enforcing those UN resolutions that were
just supposed to be empty rhetoric. Didn't he understand the UN is
just a paper tiger?


So, even though he never said that, it's still his fault?

Clinton was slammed over and over by the right for not being militaristic
enough...

--
Nom=de=Plume