Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Other
  • →
  • Politics
  • →
  • Obama positives
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
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
Obama positives; for the anti-Obama crowd
Tweet Topic Started: Nov 7 2008, 03:40 PM (765 Views)
yawnzzz Nov 10 2008, 06:05 PM Post #61
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 05:42 PM
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Nov 10 2008, 05:34 PM
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 04:51 PM
Exactly, Aaron. And I've never said the Repubs deserve none of the blame, and think they deserve 20-30% for not standing up to the Dems in 2003-2005. In their defense, the Dems and MSM loved to accuse the Repubs of being racist.

It's just ironic that the economy was probably the main reason The Messiah was elected, and most of the blame falls on the Dems.

Think of how many times Biden and The Messiah talked about "eight years of failed economic policy and deregulation" being the cause of the financial crisis. Did you ever once see the MSM ask for any of the details about these accusations? They wanted their guy to win, and were even more biased than the refs at a BT bball game.
I think you give way too much credit to the Republicans. Charles Hagel saw this coming and a handful of other Republicans. The other Republicans just voted with their party and didn't push the issue. Give Hagel credit, but 90% of the Republicans were in the same boat as the Democrats.
Faithful, I don't have the link, but heard that 100% of the Repubs on the finance committee voted for Hagel's bill, and 100% of the Dems voted against, far from "being in the same boat."
I'd love to see it considering the Committee had a majority of Republicans (I believe 2 more to be precise) and you only need a majority to get out of committee....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Nov 10 2008, 06:52 PM Post #62
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Nov 10 2008, 06:05 PM
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 05:42 PM
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Nov 10 2008, 05:34 PM
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 04:51 PM
Exactly, Aaron. And I've never said the Repubs deserve none of the blame, and think they deserve 20-30% for not standing up to the Dems in 2003-2005. In their defense, the Dems and MSM loved to accuse the Repubs of being racist.

It's just ironic that the economy was probably the main reason The Messiah was elected, and most of the blame falls on the Dems.

Think of how many times Biden and The Messiah talked about "eight years of failed economic policy and deregulation" being the cause of the financial crisis. Did you ever once see the MSM ask for any of the details about these accusations? They wanted their guy to win, and were even more biased than the refs at a BT bball game.
I think you give way too much credit to the Republicans. Charles Hagel saw this coming and a handful of other Republicans. The other Republicans just voted with their party and didn't push the issue. Give Hagel credit, but 90% of the Republicans were in the same boat as the Democrats.
Faithful, I don't have the link, but heard that 100% of the Repubs on the finance committee voted for Hagel's bill, and 100% of the Dems voted against, far from "being in the same boat."
I'd love to see it considering the Committee had a majority of Republicans (I believe 2 more to be precise) and you only need a majority to get out of committee....
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j-G-fDVnv0WN1pXdMWjXX43CjyeAD93TN70O0

Freddie Mac's payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel's bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.

In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress.

The political backdrop to the debate "was like bizarre-o-world," said the second of three people familiar with the program. "The Republicans were pro-regulation and the Democrats were against it; it was upside down."
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yawnzzz Nov 10 2008, 06:59 PM Post #63
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 06:52 PM
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Nov 10 2008, 06:05 PM
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 05:42 PM
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Nov 10 2008, 05:34 PM
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 04:51 PM
Exactly, Aaron. And I've never said the Repubs deserve none of the blame, and think they deserve 20-30% for not standing up to the Dems in 2003-2005. In their defense, the Dems and MSM loved to accuse the Repubs of being racist.

It's just ironic that the economy was probably the main reason The Messiah was elected, and most of the blame falls on the Dems.

Think of how many times Biden and The Messiah talked about "eight years of failed economic policy and deregulation" being the cause of the financial crisis. Did you ever once see the MSM ask for any of the details about these accusations? They wanted their guy to win, and were even more biased than the refs at a BT bball game.
I think you give way too much credit to the Republicans. Charles Hagel saw this coming and a handful of other Republicans. The other Republicans just voted with their party and didn't push the issue. Give Hagel credit, but 90% of the Republicans were in the same boat as the Democrats.
Faithful, I don't have the link, but heard that 100% of the Repubs on the finance committee voted for Hagel's bill, and 100% of the Dems voted against, far from "being in the same boat."
I'd love to see it considering the Committee had a majority of Republicans (I believe 2 more to be precise) and you only need a majority to get out of committee....
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j-G-fDVnv0WN1pXdMWjXX43CjyeAD93TN70O0

Freddie Mac's payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel's bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.

In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress.

The political backdrop to the debate "was like bizarre-o-world," said the second of three people familiar with the program. "The Republicans were pro-regulation and the Democrats were against it; it was upside down."
:rofl:

Did you even read that article?

Quote:
 
In the midst of DCI's yearlong effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.


So it did get voted out of committee, but REPUBLICAN Bill Frist wouldn't allow a vote. That's just great. That whole article was about this:

Quote:
 
Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae, three years before the government took control to prevent their collapse.


Pretty funny that you use an article referencing Republicans being paid to kill the bill in your argument that Democrats kill it. Thanks for finding that for me. Both parties dropped the ball pretty equally, except for a few like I said.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boilergrad01 Nov 10 2008, 07:01 PM Post #64
Working on the last 5
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#135
Joined:
February 9, 2008
The Repubs have not shown leadership for along time.
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Nov 10 2008, 07:33 PM Post #65
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Faithful, again you show your anti-conservative bias. I read the entire article, and included the center blurb that explains why Frist didn't bring it up for a vote.

In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress.

He didn't have the votes because he needed a few Dem votes, and didn't have them. Yes, there was an attempt to buy some Repub votes, but the Dems were ALREADY against the bill. So saying "Both parties dropped the ball pretty equally, except for a few like I said" is either ignorant, or intentionally misleading. Please reread the bolded sentence, and then try to make the case of equality here.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
dreachon Nov 10 2008, 08:46 PM Post #66
Member Avatar
Creative Title Here
Posts:
24,067
Group:
Members
Member
#148
Joined:
February 10, 2008
aaronk2727
Nov 10 2008, 04:24 PM
dreachon
Nov 10 2008, 04:06 PM
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 02:26 PM
dreachon
Nov 10 2008, 01:00 PM
Fair enough, but I think in the course of history Bush will go down as one of the 3 worst.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/10/bush.transition.poll/index.html
If Iraq is viewed as a long term success, and helps lead the Middle East out of the dark ages, Bush will be graded as middle of the pack.

If the current economic crisis turns into a depression, the Democrats should be remembered as the party that deserves the most blame.
Question Lars,

If the Dems are to blame for deregulating Fannie and Freddie, and all these people knew we were going to have the sub-prime loan crisis, why didn't Bush reregulate them? He had control of the house and senate his first two years. He had support at the time. IF it was so obvious, he should have fixed it before it broke. Everyone is to blame for this mess.
The sub-prime mortgages that lead to this disaster were not generated prior to 2002, therefore there really was no large problem to address
I'm still confused. I thought you guys said this is because of the Clinton administration's changes to the Community Reinvestment Act. If that is the case, Bush could have changed it back when he became President.
Posted Image
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
boilergrad01 Nov 10 2008, 08:56 PM Post #67
Working on the last 5
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#135
Joined:
February 9, 2008
Dreach,

Bush could have done alot of things. He didn't because he is not a leader. The state of the nation is due to lack of leadership by Leader Frist Speaker Hassert and pres Bush. The Republican party has paid for that lack of leadership in the last 2 elections. The Repubs must find some leadership in the next 24 months. The two party system is fucked up but when one party offers no leadership it really fucks the people
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yawnzzz Nov 10 2008, 08:57 PM Post #68
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
HoosierLars
Nov 10 2008, 07:33 PM
Faithful, again you show your anti-conservative bias. I read the entire article, and included the center blurb that explains why Frist didn't bring it up for a vote.

In the end, there was not enough Republican support for Hagel's bill to warrant bringing it up for a vote because Democrats also opposed it and the votes of some would be needed for passage. The measure died at the end of the 109th Congress.

He didn't have the votes because he needed a few Dem votes, and didn't have them. Yes, there was an attempt to buy some Repub votes, but the Dems were ALREADY against the bill. So saying "Both parties dropped the ball pretty equally, except for a few like I said" is either ignorant, or intentionally misleading. Please reread the bolded sentence, and then try to make the case of equality here.
This is your problem, you fail to realize that both sides are morons, so instead you blame it on my prejudice. The overwhelming majority vote with their party and likely don't even have a complete understanding of the bills they vote on. In this case, it was a Republican bill in a Republican majority. The only reason they needed Dems was because there was Republicans against it. If they got those Republicans to vote with them, the bill passes. Dems were going to vote with their party because that's what helps you get reelected. Most Republicans were going to vote with their party for the same reason. Those Republicans that got bought off were just as much to blame if not moreso to blame than the Dems. The Dems were just ignorantly voting with their party lines like the majority of politicians do. The Republicans that voted against it were doing so for their own financial benefit.

I'll repeat again. Both sides are to blame. Republicans could've passed this bill without Dems if they didn't have corrupt members taking bribes, and Democrats are to blame because they voted with party lines just to oppose the Republican party even though the bill tended to be something that they all would've voted for if a Democrat proposed it. In my opinion, you're showing a lot more prejudice than myself. I'm not defending Dems as having nothing to do with this, yet you're saying Republicans that had members bought-off are off the hook because more voted for it then Dems when that's going to be the case on almost all bills that aren't cosponsored by both parties.

Overall, you're just giving way too much credit to politicians by thinking that the majority of Republicans that voted for this bill weren't doing so just because it was a Republican bill.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Nov 10 2008, 09:30 PM Post #69
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Faithful, I have no idea why you consistently apologize for dems in this issue. Sure, there were Republicans who were asleep at the wheel, but the root of this problem has democrats all over it, and I'm sure you know that. Democrats had a goal of "100% home ownership" and have passed multiple platforms to attempt to achieve that goal, with no fear of repercussions.

Who is at fault for the IU b-ball problems last year, Kelvin Sampson or the assistants that knew it was happening?
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 Nov 10 2008, 09:58 PM Post #70
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
aaronk2727
Nov 10 2008, 09:30 PM
Faithful, I have no idea why you consistently apologize for dems in this issue. Sure, there were Republicans who were asleep at the wheel, but the root of this problem has democrats all over it, and I'm sure you know that. Democrats had a goal of "100% home ownership" and have passed multiple platforms to attempt to achieve that goal, with no fear of repercussions.

Who is at fault for the IU b-ball problems last year, Kelvin Sampson or the assistants that knew it was happening?
Well, you're now discussing two issues. The 100% home ownership I completely disagreed with, but it's not really here nor there on this issue. If the lenders treated these loans as high risk, then there would be no bailout and maybe a few lenders would've went under, which is what should've happened.

The reason why you and Lars have trouble arguing with me is because you still view politics as Republicans and Democrats when both are essentially the same. This bill is a perfect example. If you didn't know who proposed this bill, you'd assume it was a Democrat. The principles definitely lean left with government regulation. The reason Democrats opposed it was because of the names attached to it followed by the letter R. The reason why Republicans supported it was because of that R. There's a ridiculous amount of sheep in Congress, which is what this bill shows. It's why I never support either party, and I think both are to blame. The 'Republicans' as a whole didn't see this coming. Hagel and his cosponsors did. Minus them, the rest of Congress is to blame.

A better example would be whose at fault for letting Kelvin Sampson continue to coach. IU fans or Illinois fans? IU Fans supported Kelvin Sampson just because he was the IU coach. Illinois fans opposed Kelvin Sampson just because he was the IU coach. Some people knew that Sampson was cheating and spoke out against it. The IU fans still supported their coach because they're IU fans. It turns out Kelvin Sampson did cheat, so who deserves credit and who deserves blame? Do the IU fans deserve blame because they supported their school, and do the Illinois fans who opposed Kelvin Sampson just because he was their rival deserve credit? I don't think either does. The only people who deserve credit are the ones who spoke out. The rest just followed their own teams.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old_School Nov 11 2008, 12:18 AM Post #71
Member Avatar
Defender of Mars, Kicker of Ass
Posts:
2,313
Group:
Members
Member
#143
Joined:
February 10, 2008
Cattman96
Nov 10 2008, 11:28 AM
Old_School
Nov 9 2008, 04:05 PM
brumdog44
Nov 9 2008, 11:10 AM
Old_School
Nov 8 2008, 01:11 PM
eelbor
Nov 8 2008, 11:43 AM
I like the fact he is not from Texas.
Hey now...Ron Paul was from Texas.
But he left. You can choose where you are born, but you can choose to leave.

IU fans don't hold anyone responsible for being born in West Lafayette...if they stay, that's another matter.
He left? He was actually born in Pennsylvania, but has been a congressman in Texas for over 20 years. There's nothing wrong with Texas, LBJ and Bush were both just godawful presidents (LBJ was worse).
What you're saying LBJ's "Great Society" was a mistake??? :ermm:
Not just a mistake, but a failure of epic proportion.
The poster formerly known as mybracketownsyou.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old_School Nov 11 2008, 12:20 AM Post #72
Member Avatar
Defender of Mars, Kicker of Ass
Posts:
2,313
Group:
Members
Member
#143
Joined:
February 10, 2008
aaronk2727
Nov 10 2008, 11:52 AM
Cattman96
Nov 10 2008, 11:28 AM
Old_School
Nov 9 2008, 04:05 PM
brumdog44
Nov 9 2008, 11:10 AM
Old_School
Nov 8 2008, 01:11 PM
eelbor
Nov 8 2008, 11:43 AM
I like the fact he is not from Texas.
Hey now...Ron Paul was from Texas.
But he left. You can choose where you are born, but you can choose to leave.

IU fans don't hold anyone responsible for being born in West Lafayette...if they stay, that's another matter.
He left? He was actually born in Pennsylvania, but has been a congressman in Texas for over 20 years. There's nothing wrong with Texas, LBJ and Bush were both just godawful presidents (LBJ was worse).
What you're saying LBJ's "Great Society" was a mistake??? :ermm:
Old_School and I may differ a little on the rankings here, but I say LBJ is the 2nd worse president in American History in terms of the after-effect of their policies on the nation, ranking behind FDR and in front of Lincoln.

Don't get me wrong....I don't necessarily think that FDR & Lincoln were "bad" people with "bad" intentions at all, but I think the side affects of their efforts to fix societal problems of their time have severely hurt America. LBJ...well, he was just a bad person!!!
Wilson's not in your top 3?! The Fed, the 16th and 17 Amendments, WWI, "making the world safe for democracy"...........



The poster formerly known as mybracketownsyou.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Old_School Nov 11 2008, 12:38 AM Post #73
Member Avatar
Defender of Mars, Kicker of Ass
Posts:
2,313
Group:
Members
Member
#143
Joined:
February 10, 2008
dreachon
Nov 10 2008, 12:03 PM
aaronk2727
Nov 10 2008, 11:52 AM
Cattman96
Nov 10 2008, 11:28 AM
Old_School
Nov 9 2008, 04:05 PM
brumdog44
Nov 9 2008, 11:10 AM
Old_School
Nov 8 2008, 01:11 PM
eelbor
Nov 8 2008, 11:43 AM
I like the fact he is not from Texas.
Hey now...Ron Paul was from Texas.
But he left. You can choose where you are born, but you can choose to leave.

IU fans don't hold anyone responsible for being born in West Lafayette...if they stay, that's another matter.
He left? He was actually born in Pennsylvania, but has been a congressman in Texas for over 20 years. There's nothing wrong with Texas, LBJ and Bush were both just godawful presidents (LBJ was worse).
What you're saying LBJ's "Great Society" was a mistake??? :ermm:
Old_School and I may differ a little on the rankings here, but I say LBJ is the 2nd worse president in American History in terms of the after-effect of their policies on the nation, ranking behind FDR and in front of Lincoln.

Don't get me wrong....I don't necessarily think that FDR & Lincoln were "bad" people with "bad" intentions at all, but I think the side affects of their efforts to fix societal problems of their time have severely hurt America. LBJ...well, he was just a bad person!!!
I know. "That side effect" of Lincoln freeing the slaves ended up giving us equal rights and a black President. What a jerk!


In all seriousness though, Bush isn't in your top 3?
Dreach, Lincoln didn't give a shit about black people. The war wasn't about freeing slaves, it was about protectionist tariffs. You need to look no further than his own words on the issue.

Quote:
 
“I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races [the crowd applauds] – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people, and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the black and white races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race.”

-Abraham Lincoln, 1858


Thomas DiLorenzo is one of the most outspoken critics of Lincoln, if you have some extra time check out what he has to say about him in this C-SPAN interview.

Part 1


Part 2


Part 3


Part 4


Part 5
The poster formerly known as mybracketownsyou.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Nov 11 2008, 12:42 AM Post #74
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Hoosier_Faithful_07
Nov 10 2008, 08:57 PM
I'm not defending Dems as having nothing to do with this, yet you're saying Republicans that had members bought-off are off the hook because more voted for it then Dems when that's going to be the case on almost all bills that aren't cosponsored by both parties.
Every single Repub member of the committee voted for increasing the regulations for mortgages, and every single Dem voted against it. Allegedly some Repubs would have voted against it due to being bought, but that is pure conjecture. Maybe some of them were backed by developers, bankers, and Realtors who didn't want to risk damaging the home market. The fact of the matter is Repubs made a good effort to increase regulation, and the Dems obstructed that effort. I said the Repubs deserved about 20-30% of the blame, and would be interested in your take on the relative blame. Preferably something more intelligent than "I'm not defending Dems as having nothing to do with this."

In an earlier thread, you said most people knew there was a problem, yet Dems voted against it, and accused the Repubs of being racist. (check out my signature videos)
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
troubleatiu Nov 11 2008, 05:44 AM Post #75
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
3,218
Group:
Members
Member
#21
Joined:
February 5, 2008
"I'm still confused. I thought you guys said this is because of the Clinton administration's changes to the Community Reinvestment Act. If that is the case, Bush could have changed it back when he became President."-dreachon

you're getting close. throw in glass-steagall being repealed in (99 i believe) and the seeds for this mess were sown. the repealing of glass-steagall led to the ability to run up the cds and derivative markets by betting on all the bad loans the community reinvestment act would ultimately make. bring the fed in with lower than needed interest rates and we get very close to ground zero of this problem. as you can see, everything was in place by late 2001. which, ironically, coincides with the housing bubble taking off.
the current situation spans a decade and runs through 2 presidential administrations and both parties having control of congress. minus a few individuals, everybody in washington can share some blame.
Posted Image
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger
"What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler
"Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Our users say it best:
"Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used."
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 7:17 PM Jul 10
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy