| Author | Post |
|---|
Gordy
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:54 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2, what state do you live in ?
|
Gordy
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:52 pm |
|
For the far left that like to say 100 more years over there? It means having a base there like we do in germany and many many other countries. All smoke and mirrors.
|
Gordy
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:49 pm |
|
Nothing is too much for terrorism to be over there and not here.
|
Corn Nugget
Member
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1712 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:41 pm |
|
CRIMECRUNCHER wrote: This entire financial mess with the Fannie May and Freddie Mac failures and the rest of them are surely the fault of the dems. If any Republican could be blamed, the dems would be screaming for hearings and investigations, hoping to discredit the GOP and perhaps put a ffew in jail. Since Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer and Chris Dodd are actually some of the biggest names responisble, they won't even think about calling for any kind of inquiry.
You are right on CC. I posted an article earlier which even alluded to Obama as involved. His finance advisor was head of a failed bank which was in theory saved by her family, with FDIC guarentees, ultimately failed but managed to salvage huge monetary gains from litigation following to over a billion dollars. The article is way back now but take interest in her guest to come.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:40 pm |
|
Corn Nugget wrote: surprisemotherof2 wrote:
And to think, McCain said he is ok with us staying there another 100 years.
Just lost your credibility, Suprise. Much has happened since that remark and the all interpreted understanding of it.
Ok Nugget, but what about the costs that were presented to USA and the real costs of the war. How can we afford the cost of $ and the costs of lives lost? Is there no end? I support our troups, I just want my family and friends to come home, alive.
At the outset of the Iraq war, the Bush administration predicted that it would cost $50 billion to $60 billion to oust Saddam Hussein, restore order and install a new government Five years in, the Pentagon tags the cost of the Iraq war at roughly $600 billion and counting. Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and critic of the war, pegs the long-term cost at more than $4 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office and other analysts say that $1 trillion to $2 trillion is more realistic, depending on troop levels and on how long the American occupation continues.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/19/washington/19cost.html
|
Jlivin
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 17th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 526 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:37 pm |
|
Corn Nugget wrote: surprisemotherof2 wrote:
And to think, McCain said he is ok with us staying there another 100 years.
Just lost your credibility, Suprise. Much has happened since that remark and the all interpreted understanding of it.
Oh it happened a lot earlier- go back and look at some of the posts! LOL
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:37 pm |
|
4Godncountry wrote:
Gee, everything I post gets twisted. I said that he is not lily white. I just said He is the better choice, especially with Palin. I didn't say I liked him per say. While sad , people have been losing homes and farms since time began. No politician is going to stop these things. Neither one will do a forth of what the say. I just said that the economy is not the issue for me. Sin is sin no matter how you paint it. I dare say though if one looks close enough you can find skeletons in everyones closet. McCain/Palin is just closest to my beliefs, than Obama or any of the Democrats currently.
Thank you for being honest 4God. Skeletons are indeed popping out of peoples closets, we're all sinners.
It is interesting though that Biden is Catholic and yet he understands there's a difference between church and state.
|
Corn Nugget
Member
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1712 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:35 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 wrote:
And to think, McCain said he is ok with us staying there another 100 years.
Just lost your credibility, Suprise. Much has happened since that remark and the all interpreted understanding of it.
|
CRIMECRUNCHER
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:32 pm |
|
| This entire financial mess with the Fannie May and Freddie Mac failures and the rest of them are surely the fault of the dems. If any Republican could be blamed, the dems would be screaming for hearings and investigations, hoping to discredit the GOP and perhaps put a ffew in jail. Since Barney Frank, Chuck Schumer and Chris Dodd are actually some of the biggest names responisble, they won't even think about calling for any kind of inquiry.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:31 pm |
|
Do you think Bush's miss on how much the war would cost might have something to do with the mess we're in now?
At the outset of the Iraq war, the Bush administration predicted that it would cost $50 billion to $60 billion to oust Saddam Hussein, restore order and install a new government Five years in, the Pentagon tags the cost of the Iraq war at roughly $600 billion and counting. Joseph E. Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize-winning economist and critic of the war, pegs the long-term cost at more than $4 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office and other analysts say that $1 trillion to $2 trillion is more realistic, depending on troop levels and on how long the American occupation continues.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/19/washington/19cost.html
And to think, McCain said he is ok with us staying there another 100 years.
|
4Godncountry
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1105 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:24 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 wrote: 4Godncountry wrote: surprisemotherof2 wrote: What makes you like McCain's answers for the economy more than Obama's?
I am really not that concerned about the economy. It goes up, it comes down. I have lived through odd and even gas days, The toilet paper shortage, etccc. My parents and Gr. Parents lived through the depression. The economy cycles, just like the weather. (global warming is a joke) We have froze, than cooled and froze again down through the last whatever eons. My concerns lie with moral issues..Abortion, Traditional family values, The gay and lesbian agenda, etc.. I Know where Obama stands on all of those....on the left. McCain is surely not lily white either, Palin does bring some of the moral issues to the forefront, even though she would be second in command, and not really make many decisions regarding these issues.
Interesting that morals would be the most important to you and yet you still like McCain.
Gee, everything I post gets twisted. I said that he is not lily white. I just said He is the better choice, especially with Palin. I didn't say I liked him per say. While sad , people have been losing homes and farms since time began. No politician is going to stop these things. Neither one will do a forth of what the say. I just said that the economy is not the issue for me. Sin is sin no matter how you paint it. I dare say though if one looks close enough you can find skeletons in everyones closet. McCain/Palin is just closest to my beliefs, than Obama or any of the Democrats currently.
|
2times
Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 14th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 218 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:22 pm |
|
scrapple wrote: 4Godncountry wrote: The economy is the direct result of the do nothing Democratic Congress!
Yeah, you wish. It's the fault of Republicans and Democrats alike going back decades. Stop trying to blame everything on your imaginary devils.
How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett
Commentary by Kevin Hassett
Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) -- The financial crisis of the past year has provided a number of surprising twists and turns, and from Bear Stearns Cos. to American International Group Inc., ambiguity has been a big part of the story.
Why did Bear Stearns fail, and how does that relate to AIG? It all seems so complex.
But really, it isn't. Enough cards on this table have been turned over that the story is now clear. The economic history books will describe this episode in simple and understandable terms: Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac exploded, and many bystanders were injured in the blast, some fatally.
Fannie and Freddie did this by becoming a key enabler of the mortgage crisis. They fueled Wall Street's efforts to securitize subprime loans by becoming the primary customer of all AAA-rated subprime-mortgage pools. In addition, they held an enormous portfolio of mortgages themselves.
In the times that Fannie and Freddie couldn't make the market, they became the market. Over the years, it added up to an enormous obligation. As of last June, Fannie alone owned or guaranteed more than $388 billion in high-risk mortgage investments. Their large presence created an environment within which even mortgage-backed securities assembled by others could find a ready home.
The problem was that the trillions of dollars in play were only low-risk investments if real estate prices continued to rise. Once they began to fall, the entire house of cards came down with them.
Turning Point
Take away Fannie and Freddie, or regulate them more wisely, and it's hard to imagine how these highly liquid markets would ever have emerged. This whole mess would never have happened.
It is easy to identify the historical turning point that marked the beginning of the end.
Back in 2005, Fannie and Freddie were, after years of dominating Washington, on the ropes. They were enmeshed in accounting scandals that led to turnover at the top. At one telling moment in late 2004, captured in an article by my American Enterprise Institute colleague [url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Peter+Wallison&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date :S:d1]Peter Wallison[/url], the Securities and Exchange Comiission's chief accountant told disgraced Fannie Mae chief [url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Franklin+Raines&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:S:d1]Franklin Raines[/url] that Fannie's position on the relevant accounting issue was not even ``on the page'' of allowable interpretations.
Then legislative momentum emerged for an attempt to create a ``world-class regulator'' that would oversee the pair more like banks, imposing strict requirements on their ability to take excessive risks. Politicians who previously had associated themselves proudly with the two accounting miscreants were less eager to be associated with them. The time was ripe.
Greenspan's Warning
The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 [url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Alan+Greenspan&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:S:d1]Alan Greenspan[/url] told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''
What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.
Different World
If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.
But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.
That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: ``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''
Mounds of Materials
Now that the collapse has occurred, the roadblock built by Senate Democrats in 2005 is unforgivable. Many who opposed the bill doubtlessly did so for honorable reasons. Fannie and Freddie provided mounds of materials defending their practices. Perhaps some found their propaganda convincing.
But we now know that many of the senators who protected Fannie and Freddie, including [url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Barack+Obama&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:S:d1]Barack Obama[/url], [url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Hillary+Clinton&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:S:d1]Hillary Clinton[/url] and [url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Christopher+Dodd&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:S:d1]Christopher Dodd[/url], have received mind-boggling levels of financial support from them over the years.
Throughout his political career, Obama has gotten more than $125,000 in campaign contributions from employees and political action committees of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, second only to Dodd, the Senate Banking Committee chairman, who received more than $165,000.
Clinton, the 12th-ranked recipient of Fannie and Freddie PAC and employee contributions, has received more than $75,000 from the two enterprises and their employees. The private profit found its way back to the senators who killed the fix.
There has been a lot of talk about who is to blame for this crisis. A look back at the story of 2005 makes the answer pretty clear.
Oh, and there is one little footnote to the story that's worth keeping in mind while Democrats point fingers between now and Nov. 4: Senator [url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=John+McCain&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:S:d1]John McCain[/url] was one of the three cosponsors of S.190, the bill that would have averted this mess.
([url=http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Kevin+Hassett&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:S:d1]Kevin Hassett[/url], director of economic-policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, is a Bloomberg News columnist. He is an adviser to Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona in the 2008 presidential election. The opinions expressed are his own.)
To contact the writer of this column: Kevin Hassett at khassett@aei.org
Last Updated: September 22, 2008 00:04 EDT
|
scrapple
Member
| Joined: | Tue Dec 4th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1196 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:20 pm |
|
4Godncountry wrote: The economy is the direct result of the do nothing Democratic Congress!
Yeah, you wish. It's the fault of Republicans and Democrats alike going back decades. Stop trying to blame everything on your imaginary devils.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 09:11 pm |
|
By the way, this is what rights Palin thinks women deserve:
...The town of Wasilla had rape victims to pay for their own medical exams during Palin's mayoral tenure, and Palin's hand-picked police chief publicly opposed the state law (to not make rape victims pay) when it was passed in 2000.
Asked when Palin learned of the policy, and what Palin did to try to change the policy, her spokesperson chose not to respond.
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_09/014669.php
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 08:48 pm |
|
4Godncountry wrote: surprisemotherof2 wrote: What makes you like McCain's answers for the economy more than Obama's?
I am really not that concerned about the economy. It goes up, it comes down. I have lived through odd and even gas days, The toilet paper shortage, etccc. My parents and Gr. Parents lived through the depression. The economy cycles, just like the weather. (global warming is a joke) We have froze, than cooled and froze again down through the last whatever eons. My concerns lie with moral issues..Abortion, Traditional family values, The gay and lesbian agenda, etc.. I Know where Obama stands on all of those....on the left. McCain is surely not lily white either, Palin does bring some of the moral issues to the forefront, even though she would be second in command, and not really make many decisions regarding these issues.
Interesting that morals would be the most important to you and yet you still like McCain. McCain speaks frequently re: when he was a POW but when does he speak about when he came back to USA to find his wife had been in a disfiguring car accident. Now I know some people say she wasn't disfigured but she lost about 4 inches in height and almost died! He said she wasn't the same woman (she used to be a model) she used to be. He cheated on her numerous times and then ended up leaving her for the current Mrs. McCain. A woman who is much younger and richer than the other Mrs. McCain. What traditional values does a man who cheats on his wife represent? Obama is happily married to the same woman and never strayed. Why is McCain's sins ok for you? Is cheating ok? Is abandoning wife ok? What about Cindy McCain and all of the stuff she's done? Stealing, prescription drugs and abusing her own charity! Which sins are ok? Palin's daughter had unprotected teenage premarital sex, is that a sin? Is that traditional family values?
I will vote based upon the issues, economy being number 1. My friend voted for Bush the last two terms because she is Republican. She used to be a stay at home mom in a beautiful house. She now has lost her home and is renting and has gone back to work. Her husband works two jobs now. The economy used to not be important to her either.
|
4Godncountry
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1105 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 08:28 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 wrote: What makes you like McCain's answers for the economy more than Obama's?
I am really not that concerned about the economy. It goes up, it comes down. I have lived through odd and even gas days, The toilet paper shortage, etccc. My parents and Gr. Parents lived through the depression. The economy cycles, just like the weather. (global warming is a joke) We have froze, than cooled and froze again down through the last whatever eons. My concerns lie with moral issues..Abortion, Traditional family values, The gay and lesbian agenda, etc.. I Know where Obama stands on all of those....on the left. McCain is surely not lily white either, Palin does bring some of the moral issues to the forefront, even though she would be second in command, and not really make many decisions regarding these issues.
|
SueCarol
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 2246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 08:25 pm |
|
I dont think increasing taxes on the workers, the businesses and all the other types of taxes Obama wants to increase is the way to go in an economy that is struggling.
It has been proven that cutting taxes across the board helps generate more revenues for government and allows people to keep more of their money.
Senator McCain has said he will keep the tax cuts in effect...Senator Obama wants to raise them.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 08:16 pm |
|
What makes you like McCain's answers for the economy more than Obama's?
|
4Godncountry
Member
| Joined: | Fri Jul 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1105 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 08:13 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 wrote: Gordy wrote: So what he voted 95% of the time the same as Bush. Who else did ? It depends on what was getting voted on.
The point is our country is in trouble and Bush was leading us to H E double Hockey sticks and McCain was voting the same as him over 90% of the time. That should tell America what kind of leader McCain would be. Palin squanders $, earmarks, etc. What's the worst thing is that McCain and Reps try to act like Palin is the one who stands up for women's rights. Do you even know that while she was mayor in Wasilla, women were charged for their own rape kits! She is not the answer.
We need responsible, educated people who will lead our country back to where we should be.
I'm from Az and I know about McCain and what kind of person he is and what kind of people he cares about. We need someone who will take care of the whole country, not just the ones who make over $5 million dollars a year.
The economy is the direct result of the do nothing Democratic Congress! Obama is not the answer, McCain may not be, but he is the better choice of the two! Unless someone gets Pelozi, Boxer, Hillary and the HE-men women out of Congress, as well as the liberal Men, America does not stand a chance (except for supernatural intervention).
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 08:06 pm |
|
...The claim is true. According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time – the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office – and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001).
I said McCain votes IN LINE with the Pres. position. But let's not get caught up in a battle of words. It's all facts.
And no, I don't believe I described both candidates when I asked for educated people to be running for office.
Does the economy bother you? I know some people think that if they didn't lose their own personal house then everything is someone else's problem. Our economy is in terrible trouble and only now does Bush understand that. McCain is starting to catch on. He now admits that the election is about change. Funny when you think about it. Problem is that I don't see any change with McCain/Palin. I see the same good old boy mentality with a lot of rich people getting richer. McCain's family (they own a beer company out here) doesn't even have thier company as union but McCain says he is for union? That' a problem.
|
Corn Nugget
Member
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1712 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 07:33 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 wrote:
We need responsible, educated people who will lead our country back to where we should be. Well, actually, we need responsible, educated voters to elect the best leadership. Not those sucked into political rhetoric or those who fail to acknowledge a candidates weakness.
I'm from Az and I know about McCain and what kind of person he is and what kind of people he cares about. We need someone who will take care of the whole country, not just the ones who make over $5 million dollars a year.
SO, who's your choice. You just described both McCain and Obama. No change on that one concept from either. Oh, and so you know, Bush does not vote and have you ever heard about the congressional veto process where as anything that congress does trully not agree with from "leadership", they can even after it might have been signed.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 07:18 pm |
|
Gordy wrote: So what he voted 95% of the time the same as Bush. Who else did ? It depends on what was getting voted on.
The point is our country is in trouble and Bush was leading us to H E double Hockey sticks and McCain was voting the same as him over 90% of the time. That should tell America what kind of leader McCain would be. Palin squanders $, earmarks, etc. What's the worst thing is that McCain and Reps try to act like Palin is the one who stands up for women's rights. Do you even know that while she was mayor in Wasilla, women were charged for their own rape kits! She is not the answer.
We need responsible, educated people who will lead our country back to where we should be.
I'm from Az and I know about McCain and what kind of person he is and what kind of people he cares about. We need someone who will take care of the whole country, not just the ones who make over $5 million dollars a year.
|
Corn Nugget
Member
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1712 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 05:46 pm |
|
Barack Obama, Penny Pritzker, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad And Our Money
It is amazing how Barack Obama has so many, um, how do I say this kindly, ”unscrupulous” people around him as advisors. Here is another one to add to his growing number of advisors that I don’t want touching my money or handling my governmental matters. Maybe this is why Obama really has NO comment on the current crisis other than to say he wants some polictical points out of it, nothing to offer other than an empty bucket.
Obama’s Finance Treasurer is HOSTING Hitler wannabee, AHMADINEJAD, at HER family’s hotel, the Grand Hyatt in NYC. September 21, 2008 —
Barack Hussein Obama’s campaign finance committee’s chairwoman, ]Penny Pritzker, is hosting Hitler wannabee, Ahmadinejad, on Thursday at the Hyatt. Clearly Obama’s chief fundraiser could refuse to host Ahmadinejad at her hotel. Instead, she has rolled out the red carpet.
The Pritzker family, Penny in particular, were pioneers in creating a new financial product in the late 1990s & early 2000. When their bank failed, they ended up owing the government 1/2 billion dollars in unreimbursed FDIC insurance payments.
Penny Pritzker is Barack Obama’s chair She is National Finance Chair/Treasurer of Barack Hussein Obama’s presidential campaign & is the owner of the Grand Hyatt in NYC, the hotel hosting the genocidal Hitler wannabee, Ahmadinejad.
The Grand Hyatt in NYC is owned by the Hyatt Corporation, which is owned by H Group Holding. The Hyatt Corporation is a private company owned by the Pritzker family. Penny Pritzker is one of 4 major heirs.
“Part of the reason we got a current mortgage crisis has to do with the fact that people got suckered in to loans that they could not pay,” he told a crowd in Reading, Pa., last week. “There were a lot of predatory loans that were given out, a lot of teaser rates. Banks and financial institutions making these loans were making money hand over fist.”
Housing Blood Money - Profits made mainly on the foreclosure blood and misery of millions of Americans. The profits and mortgages made by these lending corporations, Wall Street, and investors, over the last 3- 5 years was nothing more than fools gold and snake oil. The oil that I am speaking of is real estate and mortgages. In particular Alt-A and subprime loans.
Let’s take a look at the Bank that Pritzker was connected to. She knew exactly what she was doing and what the bank’s loans were doing to the people of her community and of our country:
OTS Closes Superior Bank FSB; Hinsdale, Ill. Thrift is Insolvent
Superior Bank suffered as a result of its former high-risk business strategy, which was focused on the generation of significant volumes of subprime mortgage and automobile loans for securitization and sale in the secondary market. OTS found that the bank also suffered from poor lending practices, improper record keeping and accounting, and ineffective board and management supervision.
Penny Pritzker and Superior Bank - Is she the innovator who founded the predatory subprime business model in 1993?
A quick walk down the Google memory lane shows that at minimum she was one of the pioneers of the model that has blown sky high now. Let’s take a look at how Pritzker and Bear Stearns started the subprime wave that has now turned into a foreclosure tsunami that is engulfing or Nation and now the world:
The purchase of Superior Bank:
The thrift had come into the Pritzker fold in 1988, when Jay Pritzker and Alvin Dworman-old social friends and partners in several past business ventures-put up $42.5 million for the insolvent Lyons Savings Bank, as it was then called, in return for an estimated $645 million in federal tax credits and loan guarantees. (By one estimate, it would have cost the government $200 million less simply to shut Lyons down.)
Although Dworman had agreed to run the renamed Superior Bank out of his New York office, Jay deputized his niece Penny-a Harvard educated go-getter who had just earned her law degree and M.B.A. from Stanford-to help keep tabs on the investment. She served as chairman of Superior from 1989 to 1994, long enough for the bank to regain its financial health and embark on an aggressive new strategy, making high-interest home andauto loans to people with bad credit. For a time, that strategy appeared to work like a charm, yielding big profits-and large dividends for the Pritzkers and Dworman.
When is the media going to give Obama the media bashing he deserves for his contradictory speeches and hollow words? How can you bash predatory lenders for snookering Americans, when your campaign finance chairwoman was involved in snookering the very borrowers in your own community?
Mr. Obama, Penny Pritzker was as involved in predatory lending as you can get, and it’s time to address that what you have been sweeping under the campaign “money” rug.
Money and billionaires seem to put blinders on our presidential candidates. It’s time to help Obama take them off, and place a media spot light on Pritzker and the truth!
|
SueCarol
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 2246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 05:18 pm |
|
Truth is, McCain is the candidate that will work with the other side.
He has a track record of doing so quite often. In fact, that has often gotten him in trouble with his conservative base.
Obama on the other hand does not work well with the other side.
He is in fact the most liberal Senator bar none.
|
Gordy
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 05:12 pm |
|
So what he voted 95% of the time the same as Bush. Who else did ? It depends on what was getting voted on.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 04:46 pm |
|
Sorry Nugget, here's the facts:
...The claim is true. According to Congressional Quarterly's Voting Studies, in 2007 McCain voted in line with the president's position 95 percent of the time – the highest percentage rate for McCain since Bush took office – and voted in line with his party 90 percent of the time. However, McCain's support of President Bush's position has been as low as 77 percent (in 2005), and his support for his party's position has been as low as 67 percent (2001).
Democrats are, of course, attempting to make the case that a vote for McCain is a vote to continue the policies of Bush, whose approval ratings are, to put it charitably, not a political asset for McCain...
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/is_it_true_john_mccain_voted_with.html
|
Corn Nugget
Member
| Joined: | Wed Feb 14th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1712 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 04:39 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 wrote:
What else, oh, someone said that Bush isn't running but McCain is. How is he different than Bush when we all know he voted over 90 % with Bush?
Actually, is was less than 70%. The true analysis is that he became a centrist in his voting. Your 90% plus figure was actually Obama voting liberal. He became a liberal extremist. McCain is in the middle being able to appease both, left and right, to a more compromised leadership than Obama.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 04:39 pm |
|
SueCarol wrote: No what McCain said was the backbone of our economy is strong....and it is.
There is a difference when something is taken out of context.
As for Palin, I dont mind her being asked questions and if you listen to her I believe she answers them very well.
I wish they would ask Obama some of the tougher questions.
I do mind her and her family being negatively attacked in a partisan witchhunt.
Obama has answered all the tough questions plus he has been attacked by ridiculous stuff. People are still trying to say he's a Muslim! Just an FYI, Obama is a Christian and has never been a Muslim if people are still wondering.
Let's keep this about the issues I agree! 
|
SueCarol
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 2246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 04:30 pm |
|
No what McCain said was the backbone of our economy is strong....and it is.
There is a difference when something is taken out of context.
As for Palin, I dont mind her being asked questions and if you listen to her I believe she answers them very well.
I wish they would ask Obama some of the tougher questions.
I do mind her and her family being negatively attacked in a partisan witchhunt.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 04:12 pm |
|
Whoa, everyone take a breath! I'm not far left, just out west. j/k 
Palin is trying to be VP, not me. Although I am a sports mom too so maybe I'm qualified? People can't have it both ways. People say she's qualified but they claim she's being attacked when she is questioned. Please, we all know that Hillary was attacked with questions constantly but now everyone wants to say people are sexist for asking the semi tough questions of Palin. It's not our fault that she didn't know the answers. She's not applying for a manager job at Walmart, this is the VP of USA. I would hope we would be able to at least ask her questions.
Our country is in trouble with the economy, McCain doesn't get it, he just said last week that our economy was strong. Are you kidding me? Our families, you know the ones who make less than 5 million dollars, can't handle McCain's crazy lack of understanding about our economy.
What else, oh, someone said that Bush isn't running but McCain is. How is he different than Bush when we all know he voted over 90 % with Bush?
|
Jlivin
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 17th, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 526 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 04:00 pm |
|
CRIMECRUNCHER wrote: Most important is the war on terror. It doesn't matter what shape the economy is in if we don't keep the islamofacists and their fellow travellers in check. Gas could be $1 a gallon and the Dow up 2000pts and none of that would matter if Habib and Abdul and their buddies manage to sneak a portable nuke device into the US and detonate it. You have to be ALIVE to worry about the economy.
How can this not obvious to everyone?
|
Gordy
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:55 pm |
|
I agree and I guess that's why I enter into discussions.
|
SueCarol
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 2246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:53 pm |
|
Just so the spin doesnt become the only reality on the board.
At least the truth gets out there.
|
Gordy
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:49 pm |
|
Sue, it was just more uneducated firebombing so why do we bother.
|
SueCarol
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 2246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:47 pm |
|
As for Palin and "troopergate", this man is still a state trooper.
I am not so sure he deserves to be however, since he tasered a small boy and made threats against Palin's family.
There were no threats by Palin to force the firing of this man and the Commissioner who left the State did so because he didnt want to be transferred.
He was being transferred because of insubordination.
She did stop the bridge when other plans were made for the traffic problems in that area.
|
CAPT WINKY
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:46 pm |
|
| I wonder why the the people coming into this country don't have to go through NY like they used to?
|
Gordy
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:43 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 , now we have heard you about what you don't like about Palin with the typical firebomb throwing of the far left . But what is it exactly that you like about Obama ?
BTW, Bush is not running for Pres.
|
SueCarol
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 2246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:41 pm |
|
What you fail to speak to however, is that Pres. Bush tried to reign in Fannie & Freddie and was stopped by Congress in 2006.
Who was in control of Congress in 2006. Who was in control of the banking and finance committees.
|
CRIMECRUNCHER
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:39 pm |
|
| Most important is the war on terror. It doesn't matter what shape the economy is in if we don't keep the islamofacists and their fellow travellers in check. Gas could be $1 a gallon and the Dow up 2000pts and none of that would matter if Habib and Abdul and their buddies manage to sneak a portable nuke device into the US and detonate it. You have to be ALIVE to worry about the economy.
|
CAPT WINKY
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:38 pm |
|
surprisemotherof2 wrote: SueCarol wrote: I listened to some of the interviews of Palin and she is very outspoken, clear and concise in her views and a very strong lady.
I believe she is a breath of fresh air and exactly what Washington needs....a lady with the ability and the courage to shake things up.
I also think scrapple, that with all due respect, you insult more than you educate.
Why do you have to speak with so much hatred against Palin and McCain on a personal level.
If you dont like their policies speak to that directly instead of making inane personal remarks about them.
I don't like the work that Palin has done with Alaska----earmarks, bridge to nowhere, troopergate, etc. McCain's health is scary----but then again, I worry about McCain and his lack of ability of understanding the economy of our country. I know McCain finally understands we need change, but I don't think he understands what change is.
And I don't care how many times you repeat yourself CAPT WINKY, I disagree with you. So if you disagree with me then your saying that it's ok to get into Palin's personal business such as her childrens lives? Put yourself in her shoes how'd you like everyone in your personal business?
MOST IMPORTANT IS THE ECONOMY!
McCain just said last week that our economy's infrastructure was strong. He just doesn't get it. I don't know if you all can afford it, but my family cannot withstand another eight years of Bush.
|
surprisemotherof2
Member
| Joined: | Thu Aug 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 1008 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 03:19 pm |
|
SueCarol wrote: I listened to some of the interviews of Palin and she is very outspoken, clear and concise in her views and a very strong lady.
I believe she is a breath of fresh air and exactly what Washington needs....a lady with the ability and the courage to shake things up.
I also think scrapple, that with all due respect, you insult more than you educate.
Why do you have to speak with so much hatred against Palin and McCain on a personal level.
If you dont like their policies speak to that directly instead of making inane personal remarks about them.
I don't like the work that Palin has done with Alaska----earmarks, bridge to nowhere, troopergate, etc. McCain's health is scary----but then again, I worry about McCain and his lack of ability of understanding the economy of our country. I know McCain finally understands we need change, but I don't think he understands what change is.
And I don't care how many times you repeat yourself CAPT WINKY, I disagree with you.
MOST IMPORTANT IS THE ECONOMY!
McCain just said last week that our economy's infrastructure was strong. He just doesn't get it. I don't know if you all can afford it, but my family cannot withstand another eight years of Bush.
|
CAPT WINKY
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 12:59 pm |
|
| I think Palin is a down home type person with old fashion family values and has tryed her best to take care of business.
|
CAPT WINKY
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 12:59 pm |
|
| I think Palin is a down home type person with old fashion family values and has tryed her best to take care of business.
|
SueCarol
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 2nd, 2005 |
| Location: | Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 2246 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 12:02 pm |
|
I listened to some of the interviews of Palin and she is very outspoken, clear and concise in her views and a very strong lady.
I believe she is a breath of fresh air and exactly what Washington needs....a lady with the ability and the courage to shake things up.
I also think scrapple, that with all due respect, you insult more than you educate.
Why do you have to speak with so much hatred against Palin and McCain on a personal level.
If you dont like their policies speak to that directly instead of making inane personal remarks about them.
|
CAPT WINKY
Member
|
Posted: Mon Sep 22nd, 2008 11:19 am |
|
| Why is the press and lots of other people picking on Palin? Yo |