2012 Republican Convention....

[billc]

And obama's involvement in the mortgage melt down...

http://dailycaller.com/2012/09/03/w...subprime-loans-to-chicagos-african-americans/

President Barack Obama was a pioneering contributor to the national subprime real estate bubble, and roughly half of the 186 African-American clients in his landmark 1995 mortgage discrimination lawsuit against Citibank have since gone bankrupt or received foreclosure notices.
As few as 19 of those 186 clients still own homes with clean credit ratings, following a decade in which Obama and other progressives pushed banks to provide mortgages to poor African Americans.
The startling failure rate among Obama’s private sector clients was discovered during The Daily Caller’s review of previously unpublished court information from the lawsuit that a young Obama helmed as the lead plaintiff’s attorney. [RELATED: Learn about the 186 class action plaintiffs]

And again with the stimulus...

What did we get for all the stimulus spending...

http://news.investors.com/021712-601...es-down-7.aspx

Without any fanfare whatsoever from the White House, February 17 marks the three-year anniversary of the day President Obama signed the much ballyhooed stimulus into law.At the time, Obama claimed that it would "create or save" up to 3.5 million jobs, and that "a new wave of innovation, activity and construction will be unleashed across America." The stimulus, would, he promised""ignite spending by businesses and consumers" and bring "real and lasting change for generations to come."

So three years later, how do the stimulus results stack up? Here's where various indicators stood in or around February 2009, and where they stand today.

Unemployment rate: The jobless rate is unchanged from February 2009 to January 2012, the latest month for which we have data. Both stood at 8.3%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Obama's economists had initially predicted that with the stimulus, unemployment would stay below 8%.Number of long-term unemployed: The number of workers who have been unable to find a job in 27 months or more has shot up 83%, with their ranks now at 5.5 million.Civilian labor force: It has shrunk by 126,000. In past recoveries, the labor force climbed an average of more than 3 million over comparable time periods.Labor force participation: The share of adults in the labor force — either looking or working — has dropped 3% — also highly unusual in a recovery. At 63.7%, labor force participation is at a low not seen since the middle of the very deep 1981-82 recession, when fewer women were in the work force. A lower participation rate makes the unemployment rate look better.

Household income: Median annual household income is about 7% below where it was in February 2009, according to the Sentier ResearchHousehold Income Index.

National debt: Up $4.5 trillion, or 41%, according to the Treasury Department's monthly reports. The latest Treasury figures put the national debt at $15.4 trillion, larger than the entire U.S. economy.Deficits: The deficit for fiscal year 2009 totaled $1.4 trillion. The Obama administration's proposed deficit for 2012 is $1.3 trillion, which would mark the fourth year of deficits topping $1 trillion.Gross Domestic Product: Real GDP has climbed just 6% between Q1 2009 and Q4 2011, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis.Spending by consumers and businesses:

Personal consumption has managed to climb 10% in the past three years, according to the BEA, but companies continue to hoard cash, with cash on hand up 27% since Q1 2009, according to the Federal Reserve Bank.Stimulus price tag: The original estimate for the cost of the stimulus was $787 billion.

Now the Congressional Budget Office says that, when all is said and done, it will have cost$825 billion .​

 

[billc]

A stimulus that didn't stimulate anything...

http://reason.com/archives/2011/07/07/the-stimulus-was-a-success

The Stimulus Was a Success

...unless you wanted it to stimulate anything.

In their May study, “The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act: Public Sector Jobs Saved, Private Sector Jobs Forestalled” [pdf], economists Timothy Conley (University of Western Ontario) and Bill Dupor (Ohio State University) try to provide the mechanism to explain a phenomenon seen throughout the country during the period of maximum ARRA stimulus: As unemployment continued to climb, public-sector jobs grew in number and salary. Here’s the brief explanation:

ARRA created/saved approximately 450 thousand state and local government jobs and destroyed/forestalled roughly one million private sector jobs. State and local government jobs were saved because ARRA funds were largely used to offset state revenue shortfalls and Medicaid increases rather than boost private sector employment.
​

Conley and Dupor use more equations than a simple-hearted soul should trust, and the necessary data are not all there. (“It is important to note that we do not have enough precision in our estimates to conclude that number of jobs lost/destroyed was (probably) greater than the number created/saved.&#8221 But they detail the nitty gritty of ARRA handouts. Some ARRA funds were relatively fungible, allowing states to use them to boost general funds rather than engage in stimulus. But even when federal payments were legally committed to be spent in a certain way, this allowed states to reduce their own spending in this area. Texas, for example, reduced its spending on highway, bridge, and street construction from $3.38 billion in 2009 to $2.82 billion in 2010—the period when it was receiving $700 million in ARRA infrastructure stimulus.

In some cases funds came with a requirement that states match federal spending, but the number of states that responded to ARRA funding by diverting spending to other areas is striking. It also makes more sense than anything else we have learned about the stimulus. The states were in, and remain in, the most severe fiscal crisis of the postwar period, and stimulus funds helped cover some of the shortfall. Jared Bernstein, the failed former economic advisor to Vice President Joe Biden, hints at this achievement when he says, “That ain’t nothing” to describe the ARRA’s achievement.
Of course, it also ain’t what the voters were told to expect from the stimulus. And it turned out to be only a temporary solution, as state and local governments have again run out of other people's money and are laying employees off anyway. But Bernstein's right: By the strictest possible definition, the stimulus was not nothing.

It will take years to figure out where the entire $787 billion went, but the evidence that keeps coming in suggests it went to tide over broke state governments; backfill unfunded commitments to public employees; extend rent control and homeowner assistance; andsupport film schools in a moviemaking backwater called Hollywood. But more than any of those, it went to tide over broke state governments.

 

[granfire]

and we continue......
le sigh

 

[Master Dan]

First all the goose stepers are refusing to admit that Bush and all his cronies caused the crash in the first place there for creating a need for a stimulus which did work on many levels but we needed more and the tax payers made money on the repayment of it. Just like Romney spoke that GM needed to be left to fail loosing thousands of job he now says he and Ryan are responsible for saving the car industry?? What part of ******* crazy do you not understand.

Clint I love him and to a point he represented some of those disapointed in Obama after voting for him but disrespecting the office of the President did not help Republicans and for me he could have only done one worse thing and that was to kiss a man on the mouth and liked it! thank God he has not done that yet?

 

[billc]

Actually, obama and the democrats in congress caused the mortgage melt down.

Here is a nice article that summarizes why obama shouldn't be re-elected. It goes topic by topic...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/why_blame_obama.html

Before inauguration. Senator Obama voted for the budgets he would later blame on Bush, and for the TARP bailout. After just two months of TARP, the Bush administration said it was done -- crisis averted. In fact, President Bush was done after using about $270 billion of the $350 B that was authorized by Congress. But as a courtesy to the incoming president, Bush would request the second $350B from Congress if President-Elect Obama asked for it.

President-Elect Obama asked for it, and he got it. Tim Geithner, who could not do his own taxes and who, as a regulator, did nothing about the Libor scandal, would have all $700B to play with.
We usually call TARP a "bank bailout," but the banks are paying back every cent lent to them. In fact, the part of TARP that went to banks is expected to return $3B to taxpayers. And most of that was paid back quickly. The "cost" of the "bank bailout" was less than zero!
The real bailouts. When the dust clears, the CBO expects TARP to cost taxpayers $32B. Who got that money if banks didn't? General Motors, Chrysler, and "mortgage programs." But GM and Chrysler went bankrupt anyway.
The U.S. auto industry was not "saved." Going bankrupt does not have to mean going out of business. See, for example, Delta Airlines. It went bankrupt in the usual, lawful way and is operating today. On the other hand, GM could be heading into bankruptcy again, post-bailout. Oh, and since the bailout, "GM has increased its manufacturing capacity in China by 55 percent."
The government auto takeovers did not prevent bankruptcies. What they prevented was the usual rule of bankruptcy law. Instead of paying back creditors in a predictable and lawful way, the federal government simply robbed bondholders and non-UAW workers and retirees (especially at Delphi) and delivered sweet, sweet payback to the union bosses of the UAW.
The effect goes beyond the direct costs to taxpayers and specific investors and employees. Who would make investments or long-term decisions with this kind of rule-of-man uncertainty and ascendant cronyism?

The Stimulus. Obama sold the stimulus this way: it would keep the unemployment rate from going above 8%, the jobs were shovel-ready, and it would cost $787B.

Since the Stimulus was passed three and half years ago, the unemployment rate has not gone below 8%. President Obama himself said, "Shovel-ready was not as shovel-ready as we expected." And the Congressional Budget Office "estimates that the legislation will increase budget deficits by about $831 billion over the 2009-2019 period." The stimulus stimulated nothing but our debt problem.
Spending overall. Obama requested $350B of TARP before his inauguration. Within weeks of inauguration, his $831-B "Stimulus" was passed. And within days of that, he signed a $410-B Omnibus spending bill.
The Omnibus bill and much of the Stimulus and TARP spending occurred in FY 2009, a year that Democrats always try to pin on Bush. Every dime spent in both FY 2008 and FY 2009 was due to budgets written by a Democrat-led Congress. And President Obama reigned for the majority of FY 2009. Democrats own FY 2009.
The result was that federal government spending shot up like a rocket in 2009, to levels unprecedented in peacetime, and stayed there. In every year of Obama's four years in office, federal spending was above 24% of GDP. Prior to Obama, it had not reached that level in even one year since World War II.
Compare federal spending in Obama's first four years to the four years that just preceded them: Obama's 24.4% of GDP compared to Bush's 20.1% of GDP. In today's dollars, that is almost $700B -- every year.

​

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/why_blame_obama.html#ixzz25WA83SE5


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/why_blame_obama.html#ixzz25W9i1z1Q
​

 

[blindsage]

Every president from Nixon on is responsible in some way for the crash.

 

[Master Dan]

Actually, obama and the democrats in congress caused the mortgage melt down.

Here is a nice article that summarizes why obama shouldn't be re-elected. It goes topic by topic...



[/SIZE]
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/why_blame_obama.html#ixzz25WA83SE5
[/COLOR]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/09/why_blame_obama.html#ixzz25W9i1z1Q
[/LEFT]

No Bill your just plain wrong on all of it as much as I dislike what Bill Mauher spews on HBO about hate of orgainzed religion he is spot on when time after time he in an attempt to have a balanced rebutal by the right and the guest just plain refuse to admit to any facts that do not support thier position and if you cannot get a person to plainly admit that 2 + 2 = 4 on what basis can you comprimise or have any productive discussion. Our economic crash was started 12 years or more ago with Bush and Chenney doing the most damage in the previous 8 years and if in fact they and all thier architects were right and so successfull why are they absent from any apearance or any mention why are they in hidding so to speak. People like Romney who had vast assets could weather the total melt down of an extreme depression in fact they make money on buying for 5 cents on the dollar and then making huge profits as the value later goes up this is not creating jobs but making huge profits off the missery of others and at the same time using methods to not pay taxes like the majority of Americans have to and do not have access.

 

[Tgace]

All the evil Rep hype is true.. all the evil dem stuff is false.

Yawn.

Your as deep in the left as billi is in the right.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[billc]

The sillyness of calling the Tea Party any number of names...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...the_lefts_racist_sexist_homophobe_mantra.html

About two hundred members of the San Francisco Tea Party were stationed next to a mix of disgruntled Democrats, Code Pinkers, Occupiers in training, and dope-heads at an anti-Obama rally in San Francisco long before the 2012 campaign was underway.
The chant du jour was "Racist, Sexist, Anti-Gay. Tea Party Go Away." Radical lefties were screaming this at four Tea Partiers, separated only by metal barricades. The irony was that the Tea Party recipients of this vile message happened to be...a gay man, a white woman, an Hispanic man, and, I believe, an Hispanic woman.
It's difficult for me to recall the actual makeup of this particular Tea Party quartet because Republicans and Tea Partiers don't sort people based on their color, religion, or sexual orientation. The only reason I found out one was gay and the others Hispanic is because they told me when pointing out the idiocy of the chant.
No matter what Republicans or Tea Partiers advocate, the left always hits us between the eyes with the "racist, sexist, anti-gay" mantra -- in the press, in the classroom, in pop culture. We are the Party of Hate and the Party of No.
But the Big Chant is a Big Lie.
Republicans don't seek out members because of gender, sexual orientation, race, creed, or religion. We are interested simply in your principles and political ideology. If you embrace the conservative principles of constitutional adherence, limited government, fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, and individual freedom, we are your political home. We don't care how you look, what your mother tongue is, what G-d you pray to, or what you do in your bedroom.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012...st_sexist_homophobe_mantra.html#ixzz25kJ9xoLY

 

[crushing]

Every president from Nixon on is responsible in some way for the crash.

I submit the following evidence to support the Oligarchy claim.

[yt]HmaE2Aez_XY[/yt]

 

[Tez3]

Off topic for a minute, I expect you've seen more of Clinton than we have recently but we saw him the other day when he was speechifying and dear me he looks old! You can ignore people around you getting old but when you haven't seen someone for a long time it only serves to remind you how much older you are getting! I despised Thatcher but I really don't want to see her now, it would be too sad to see her as old and gaga instead of as the Iron Lady we loved to hate.

 

[crushing]

Off topic for a minute, I expect you've seen more of Clinton than we have recently but we saw him the other day when he was speechifying and dear me he looks old! You can ignore people around you getting old but when you haven't seen someone for a long time it only serves to remind you how much older you are getting! I despised Thatcher but I really don't want to see her now, it would be too sad to see her as old and gaga instead of as the Iron Lady we loved to hate.

There seems to be more than age at work. Clinton's withering sickly look is being championed by vegetarians as a success of his healthful vegan diet. He lost 24 pounds, thus he must be more healthy.

 

[Big Don]

​

 

[ballen0351]

I thought the same thing he looks like crap. I was thinking all the extra marital activity caught up with HIV oops I meant Him

 

[elder999]

There seems to be more than age at work. Clinton's withering sickly look is being championed by vegetarians as a success of his healthful vegan diet. He lost 24 pounds, thus he must be more healthy.

Well, he may only be 66, but aging is genetic. On top of which, in the last 8 years he's had a quadruple bypass, a collapsed lung, and had two coronary stents installed.


Enough to make me wrinkled and white on top.....

 

[arnisador]

I think it's the vegetarianism. BUt however he looked, he rocked the speech. The man can preach.

 

[Master Dan]

View attachment $Dick Cheney.jpg




two unpaid for wars tax cuts for the rich

huge deficits wall street deregulation theft

2008 economic disaster

refused to kill osama to keep war machine going

 

[elder999]

I think it's the vegetarianism. BUt however he looked, he rocked the speech. The man can preach.

Nah-nothing wrong with vegetarianism, and it's a medically sound approach given his coronary history-especially with occasional fish. It will make him thinner, though-with maybe a gaunt appearance, coupled with the normal effects of aging. His mom's aged pretty well, though-he must take after William Blythe.

Remember this guy, though? Out for a jog, and finish it up with MacDonald's....:lfao:

 

[Master Dan]

View attachment 17258View attachment 17259

NOW RYAN IS SAYING WE FIRED CARTER AND HIRED REAGAN?

Really were you alive or just pooping in your pants back then? Plus Obama didn't cause the mess of 2008 he just saved most of you from loosing what you have today!!!

The two guys above and the currrent GOP lead policies of the past caused our current problems. If your so smart and so RIGHT how come your two buddies above were absent from the Convention or anything to do with any public apearances but more or less being kept silent like your foreign policy or failure to mention the current ongoing wars or Veterans and troops in your acceptance speach? Oh I forgot it wasn't on your laundry list of things to do did not have priority.

And what is crap now is to say ok 4 years ago but two years ago Obama didn't do anything. Are you Deaf time after time he went on air here is a bill after bill lets go to work and right down party lines Republicans voted it down!! Instead of jobs it was attack womens health care and job 1 is to see that Obama was a one term president even ruining our countries credit rating for no other reason than partisan politics.

Its not an election its civil war and no matter what because of that mentality one side will be a looser? if Romney wins if Obama wins he will still do what is best for the majority of all people regardless of party.