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
  • …
  • 5
  • 6
Obama positives; for the anti-Obama crowd
Tweet Topic Started: Nov 7 2008, 03:40 PM (763 Views)
Mr Gray Nov 11 2008, 08:59 AM Post #76
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
Old_School
Nov 11 2008, 12:20 AM
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"...........



It's a traffic jam at the top, and Wilson is definitely involved, but didn't Taft institute the 16th Amendment (my LEAST favorite governmental move of all time)? The 17th amendment was just to elect Senators instead of having them appointed right? I'm sure you'll enlighten me, but I just don't have a strong feeling either way about that one.
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 11 2008, 10:09 AM Post #77
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
HoosierLars
Nov 11 2008, 12:42 AM
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 Eepub 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)
I'm not sure how an estimated percent shows intelligence. I've stated several times that the only people that deserved credit are the sponsors of the bill. If you need that simplified, then i'm blaming 100% of democrats and roughly 90% of republicans.

As to my comment before about it being common knowledge about this problem, the report took place after the committee's votes were cast, but two days prior to McCain attaching his name.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
HoosierLars Nov 11 2008, 11:27 AM Post #78
Member Avatar
3 in a row
Posts:
22,916
Group:
Members
Member
#20
Joined:
February 5, 2008
troubleatiu
Nov 11 2008, 05:44 AM
"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.
Trouble, I've never said the Repubs should be let off the hook for all of the pre-2000 deregulation and the subsequent sub-prime meltdown. However, I don't understand how Obama could repeatedly parrot "8 years of failed economic policy and deregulation" and place ALL of the blame on the Repubs. Since the MSM was in the tank for him (or running bullshit stories about nuclear fusion) the facts didn't get reported, and tens of millions of Americans voted for his message of "change."

I would enjoy hearing any of the Obama supporters explain how Repubs deserve more than half of the blame for our current 1929 economic scenario.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create your own social network with a free forum.
Learn More · Register Now
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • …
  • 5
  • 6

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