Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Other
  • →
  • Politics
  • →
  • Dems in their own words.
Welcome to Our Hoosier Board!

Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions.

Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful.

Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine!

Cheers,
sirbrianwilson

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
Dems in their own words.; Freddie and Fannie hearing in 2004
Tweet Topic Started: Sep 30 2008, 09:03 AM (237 Views)
yawnzzz Oct 1 2008, 07:51 PM Post #16
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
HoosierLars
Oct 1 2008, 06:54 PM
We can just wait to see more of the facts regarding who's deserves the lion's share of the mortgage crisis blame, and it's not going to be pretty for Obama and Democrats. My links show that Bush and other Repubs were trying to address the sub-prime mortgage problems back in 2003 while the Democrats were being obstructionists. You spend most of your time arguing whether McCain co-sponsoring the bill in May, 2006 was meaningful, and made the absurd comparison to predicting a football game after it's over. No, most people didn't know we had a serious problem in 2006. This is a fact.

You also spent quite a bit of energy arguing about campaign contributions, when it clearly looks very suspicious that Obama is the #2 recipient with such a short time in Washington. You cut and pasted something from the NY Times that allegedly helped your campaign contribution case, but I'm skeptical.
The whole point of when McCain co-sponsored the bill is only relevant because it happened immediately after OFHEO came down with their findings. McCain then makes a comment basically saying we should do what OFHEO just said we should do. The bill was dead at that point, so co-sponsoring it only has relevance if he sticks with his proposals. After this quote, he disappears from the issue and fails to co-sponsor the reproposal of it in 2007. The other co-sponsors were on board, so it's strange that he took his eye away from the issue. To me, that appears like someone that swings their vote in whatever direction the populous is looking at any particular moment.

Being in favor of this proposal is a positive, but his actions are not of one that really understood the crisis like he claims to now based off of this one quote that was basically just a summary of what OFHEO said two days before.

Here's a video of McCain being interviewed in November 2007:
http://www.nhelects.com/NHPrimaryVideos.asp?MultiID=77&HTitle=VLTitle

Overall, McCain sounds very intelligent in this video. At the end though, he says this in regards to the current crisis, "I'd like to tell you that I did anticipate it, but I have to give you straighttalk, I did not."

If McCain would discuss this issue like he did in this interview, then I think he would garner a lot more respect than I'm going to give him for trying to play up his one quote from 2006 as him being the Nostradamus of this crisis.

As to campaign contributions, you brought them up. I then refuted your claims, you apparently replied without reading my post, so I posted another saying the same as my first again. That thread would be half the size it is if you would've read my entire posts instead of replying and making me repeat myself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Oct 1 2008, 08:10 PM Post #17
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Oct 1 2008, 07:51 PM
The whole point of when McCain co-sponsored the bill is only relevant because it happened immediately after OFHEO came down with their findings. McCain then makes a comment basically saying we should do what OFHEO just said we should do.
McCain is not an economist, however upon reviewing a report from economists he understood their reasoning and passed his judgement based on the expert analysis right? This is exactly what smart people do. I am not a CPA, however I meet with my CPA every quarter to review my books and get his analysis. I ask some questions, and make judgement based on his expertise. I am also not an attorney, however before my mediation this last Monday, I met with my attorneys for hours and trusted their judgement on mediation strategy.

End result, my company stays cash positive, and we performed very well in mediation and received a sizeable settlement. This makes me a smart leader (in this instance), and my company reaps the rewards of that good judgement. This is exactly what McCain did in Lars example. Your anti-McCain bias seems to be clouding your judgement on this issue faithful.
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yawnzzz Oct 1 2008, 08:49 PM Post #18
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
aaronk2727
Oct 1 2008, 08:10 PM
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Oct 1 2008, 07:51 PM
The whole point of when McCain co-sponsored the bill is only relevant because it happened immediately after OFHEO came down with their findings. McCain then makes a comment basically saying we should do what OFHEO just said we should do.
McCain is not an economist, however upon reviewing a report from economists he understood their reasoning and passed his judgement based on the expert analysis right? This is exactly what smart people do. I am not a CPA, however I meet with my CPA every quarter to review my books and get his analysis. I ask some questions, and make judgement based on his expertise. I am also not an attorney, however before my mediation this last Monday, I met with my attorneys for hours and trusted their judgement on mediation strategy.

End result, my company stays cash positive, and we performed very well in mediation and received a sizeable settlement. This makes me a smart leader (in this instance), and my company reaps the rewards of that good judgement. This is exactly what McCain did in Lars example. Your anti-McCain bias seems to be clouding your judgement on this issue faithful.
You're misinterpreting what I've said. If you read our comments going back and forth in the other thread, you'd realize I gave McCain respect for reading the document. I have no problem with him following what a document says, and I wish more politicians would listen to the experts.

The difference is that people like Hagel deserve credit for foreseeing this, and for continuing to try and solve it. McCain didn't foresee this. All he did was make one comment and attach himself to a dead bill. If from that point on he decided to pursue an end result like Hagel, than it would greatly improve his resume. The fact is that he didn't. He reacted to a report at a time when a large majority of the populous held the same beliefs. As America's attention span faded, so did McCain's.

My entire point was not that McCain did something wrong in supporting the bill. The bill should have been supported. The point is that he didn't actually do anything. You've harped on Obama for attaching himself to bill's when they're popular. That's exactly what McCain did. He had no ambition to solve a problem. All he did was stick his name to a bill that could never pass when it was viewed very positively by the public due to OFHEO's report.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
md11flyer Oct 1 2008, 09:58 PM Post #19
Member Avatar
Assistant Coach
Posts:
2,387
Group:
Members
Member
#49
Joined:
February 6, 2008
Great post stan. It's too bad it is 10 minutes long because a lot of people will lose interest in it or will not like where it is heading and choose to ignore it. There is plenty of blame to be spread around but it is pretty clear to me that the left's view that it is the right of everyone in the country to own a home that started us down this path.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Oct 1 2008, 11:33 PM Post #20
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Oct 1 2008, 08:49 PM
aaronk2727
Oct 1 2008, 08:10 PM
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Oct 1 2008, 07:51 PM
The whole point of when McCain co-sponsored the bill is only relevant because it happened immediately after OFHEO came down with their findings. McCain then makes a comment basically saying we should do what OFHEO just said we should do.
McCain is not an economist, however upon reviewing a report from economists he understood their reasoning and passed his judgement based on the expert analysis right? This is exactly what smart people do. I am not a CPA, however I meet with my CPA every quarter to review my books and get his analysis. I ask some questions, and make judgement based on his expertise. I am also not an attorney, however before my mediation this last Monday, I met with my attorneys for hours and trusted their judgement on mediation strategy.

End result, my company stays cash positive, and we performed very well in mediation and received a sizeable settlement. This makes me a smart leader (in this instance), and my company reaps the rewards of that good judgement. This is exactly what McCain did in Lars example. Your anti-McCain bias seems to be clouding your judgement on this issue faithful.
You're misinterpreting what I've said. If you read our comments going back and forth in the other thread, you'd realize I gave McCain respect for reading the document. I have no problem with him following what a document says, and I wish more politicians would listen to the experts.

The difference is that people like Hagel deserve credit for foreseeing this, and for continuing to try and solve it. McCain didn't foresee this. All he did was make one comment and attach himself to a dead bill. If from that point on he decided to pursue an end result like Hagel, than it would greatly improve his resume. The fact is that he didn't. He reacted to a report at a time when a large majority of the populous held the same beliefs. As America's attention span faded, so did McCain's.

My entire point was not that McCain did something wrong in supporting the bill. The bill should have been supported. The point is that he didn't actually do anything. You've harped on Obama for attaching himself to bill's when they're popular. That's exactly what McCain did. He had no ambition to solve a problem. All he did was stick his name to a bill that could never pass when it was viewed very positively by the public due to OFHEO's report.
Where was Obama and his collegues on the Freddie/Fannie/subprime problem in 2005/2006? I would say that McCain has a huge leg up on Obama on this issue, even though as you have said, McCain didn't take it far enough. Obama and his "friends" were actually on the other end CREATING THE PROBLEM.
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Oct 2 2008, 01:31 PM Post #21
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,921
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
dreachon
Oct 1 2008, 11:37 AM
That vid definitely looks damaging to Dems in general. A couple questions though, because I'm pretty clueless when it comes to the Fannie and Freddie stuff.

1) The congress at the time of the video was majority republican, no? So if all republicans wanted to pass more regulations on Fannie and Freddie, why did nothing happen?

2) The end of the vid says McCain and the repubs wanted more regulations. I think I've heard this before but why didn't the video have a clip of McCain asking for more regulatiions?
The Congress was pretty balanced with a slight Repub majority, and you have seen how militant Waters and Meeks were. They made it into a racial issue, and may have shamed a couple of Repubs from addressing the issue, or maybe a couple of Repubs were getting contributions or didn't believe it was a problem. The left likes to use blacks to cry racism to help them win political battles.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
md11flyer Oct 2 2008, 01:53 PM Post #22
Member Avatar
Assistant Coach
Posts:
2,387
Group:
Members
Member
#49
Joined:
February 6, 2008
Dreach,
See my reply in Lars last posting about kstan's and my vids.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Oct 2 2008, 02:29 PM Post #23
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,077
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
Hey, I'll respond to you in this thread from here on out.

1) It does bother me that Obama is #2 on the list. It bothers me less that it's only $120,000. And it makes me not even give a shit when I think about how Obama takes ZERO money from lobbyists. That's really where I respect him and have hope in him as a President. By not taking money from lobbyists and runnign a complete grassroots campaign, he holds ZERO responsibility to the lobbyists and all o fhis responsibility to the peoplethe fund his campaign...you and me. I believe that is why he can change Washington, because he doesn't need to be accountable to the same people as every other politician.

2) I understand that congress was slightly majority republican. But saying a few dems changed the minds of a few repubs is not enough. So I'm supposed to believe that every single democrat in congress was opposed to more regulations? And every single republican was for more regulations? If some repubs didn't vote for more regulations, I'm sure there were some democrats that did vote for more regulations. I think both parties are to blame, even if more of the blame goes to Dems.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
IUCOLTFAN Oct 2 2008, 03:00 PM Post #24
Coach
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#131
Joined:
February 9, 2008
dreachon
Oct 2 2008, 02:29 PM
Hey, I'll respond to you in this thread from here on out.

1) It does bother me that Obama is #2 on the list. It bothers me less that it's only $120,000. And it makes me not even give a shit when I think about how Obama takes ZERO money from lobbyists. That's really where I respect him and have hope in him as a President. By not taking money from lobbyists and runnign a complete grassroots campaign, he holds ZERO responsibility to the lobbyists and all o fhis responsibility to the peoplethe fund his campaign...you and me. I believe that is why he can change Washington, because he doesn't need to be accountable to the same people as every other politician.

2) I understand that congress was slightly majority republican. But saying a few dems changed the minds of a few repubs is not enough. So I'm supposed to believe that every single democrat in congress was opposed to more regulations? And every single republican was for more regulations? If some repubs didn't vote for more regulations, I'm sure there were some democrats that did vote for more regulations. I think both parties are to blame, even if more of the blame goes to Dems.
Thats the democratic way to think about it........."Maybe we were wrong, but so were you guys".....thats political accountability for you.
Posted Image

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Oct 2 2008, 05:22 PM Post #25
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,077
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
As opposed to saying, "It was all the Dems fault!" Where is the accountability in that?
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Oct 2 2008, 05:50 PM Post #26
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,921
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
dreachon
Oct 2 2008, 05:22 PM
As opposed to saying, "It was all the Dems fault!" Where is the accountability in that?
It's appearing that most of the fault belongs with the Dems. If that hurts your feelings, too bad.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Oct 2 2008, 06:12 PM Post #27
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,077
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
HoosierLars
Oct 2 2008, 05:50 PM
dreachon
Oct 2 2008, 05:22 PM
As opposed to saying, "It was all the Dems fault!" Where is the accountability in that?
It's appearing that most of the fault belongs with the Dems. If that hurts your feelings, too bad.
Apparantly you didn't read too thoroughly as I've said it appears more of the blame goes to the Dems. But the purpose of this thread and the subsequent posts were all about blaming ONLY the Dems. Obviously that's not the case. Both parties are to blame. If that hurts your feelings, too bad.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Oct 2 2008, 06:41 PM Post #28
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,921
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
dreachon
Oct 2 2008, 06:12 PM
HoosierLars
Oct 2 2008, 05:50 PM
dreachon
Oct 2 2008, 05:22 PM
As opposed to saying, "It was all the Dems fault!" Where is the accountability in that?
It's appearing that most of the fault belongs with the Dems. If that hurts your feelings, too bad.
Apparantly you didn't read too thoroughly as I've said it appears more of the blame goes to the Dems. But the purpose of this thread and the subsequent posts were all about blaming ONLY the Dems. Obviously that's not the case. Both parties are to blame. If that hurts your feelings, too bad.
Sound like the Jesus "he who is without sin may cast the first stone" defense is being employed by you. ALL of the McCain supporters here have been critical of him many times, so we know that neither he nor Repubs in general are perfect.

I think Iraq and the mortgage crisis are both going to blow up in Obama's face before the election, even with the MSM cheering him on. But McCain/Palin is looking like a weak ticket, so the race will still be close up to election day.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 2:35 PM Jul 11
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy