Reading mode: Light Dark

Bush Retrospective, Photo Editors discuss images

Go to last post
Laurentiu Todie said:
…
Laurentiu Todie said:
You took a misleading extract from my statement and commented on it
in an erroneous way. That's a common ploy, but it's really a
disservice.

--mamallama
Click to expand...
it is a "disservice" to ignore video of schumer/frank/dodd saying
that fannie mae is fine
Click to expand...
I'm aware of what they said and am NOT ignoring anything I know of. Now, if you have something that's really incriminating, bring it on, instead of pointing at generalities. Many people have said many things. When it was said and under what context are important. Tell me what you really want me to know.
Laurentiu Todie said:
(UN resolutions, putin warnings, 500 tones of Uranium, embargo
breaches, and so on)
Click to expand...
Oooh Boy! Now, Putin is the source of truth. That's really reaching to the bottom of the barrel.
Laurentiu Todie said:
don't say that you didn't, or change the subject
[that is your "ploy"]
Click to expand...
I didn't change any subject. I was addressing a specific point made by RRJackson.

--mamallama
 
Here is a 2003 NY Times article about Bush trying to regulate Fannie and Freddie. If you read to the end, Barney Frank says that Bush is exaggerating the situation. There is plenty of blame for the democrats in this subprime mess too.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Here is a 1999 article how the Clinton administration relaxed lending standards

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9c0de7db153ef933a0575ac0a96f958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1

Sally
 
Waldo_O said:
lanef said:
Waldo_O said:
lanef said:
Billions of taxpayers’ money has been used to bail out those fat cats
on Wall Street. Many citizens have lost their homes, their jobs, and
their savings, the country is bankrupt while those fat cats have
taken massive payout for their failure. Anyone who defends that kind
of policy needs more than being enlightened, more like a brain
transplant. Frankly, I would be utterly ashamed to even try to
defend that evil and destructive Policy.
Click to expand...
Seems a bit wordy for a bumper sticker, but hey, give it a shot!
Click to expand...
I leave bumper stickers for those who enjoy having BS stickers
slapped on their eyes.
Click to expand...
Why don't you slap your blindfold on and go back to sleep laney.
Click to expand...
Trying to defend that destructive policy or being apathetic about it tells me how the BS has put your brain to sleep. Your posts are insignificant not factual so it is a waste of time to have any discussion with you.
Good day
 
sallyls said:
Here is a 2003 NY Times article about Bush trying to regulate Fannie
and Freddie. If you read to the end, Barney Frank says that Bush is
exaggerating the situation. There is plenty of blame for the
democrats in this subprime mess too.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Here is a 1999 article how the Clinton administration relaxed lending
standards
Click to expand...
Duh!! In 2003 Bush had a Republican congress and much has happened since. In terms of today's economic crisis, that's ancient history. Same as for what happened in Clinton years. That's the ploy of Republican finger pointing. Let's not go back to what Carter did, for heaven's sake.

--mamallama
 
Laurentiu Todie said:
just look at how quickly you ignored the UN
(I'd say more, but you'd ignore that too, so I won't)
Click to expand...
Oh, you want to know about UN resolutions? Many are made on political side taking without basis of facts. That's the truth.

--mamallama
 
Did you read either article? The New York Times is not a conservative paper. Remember that the republicans did not have 60 seats in the senate in 2003 so the democrats were able to block any reform of fannie and freddie. I just want you to consider there is a lot of blame for both sides including Obama and Bush.

Sallyls
 
mamallama said:
mamallama said:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Here is a 1999 article how the Clinton administration relaxed lending
standards
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
mamallama said:
Duh!! In 2003 Bush had a Republican congress and much has happened
since. In terms of today's economic crisis, that's ancient history.
Same as for what happened in Clinton years. That's the ploy of
Republican finger pointing. Let's not go back to what Carter did, for
heaven's sake.

--mamallama
Click to expand...
How is this ancient history? Do you think the housing market imploded instantly because Bush was president? When the Clinton administration relaxed lending standards and Congress refused to reform fannie and freddie in 2003 the snowball gained speed until we reached the tipping point last year. Those are just facts.

Here is a quote by the New York Times writer in the 1999 article:

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

That was said BEFORE Bush became president.

Sally
 
sallyls said:
Did you read either article? The New York Times is not a
conservative paper. Remember that the republicans did not have 60
seats in the senate in 2003 so the democrats were able to block any
reform of fannie and freddie. I just want you to consider there is a
lot of blame for both sides including Obama and Bush.
Click to expand...
The NYT just is reporting the news. I did not say the NYT was doing the finger pointing. The Republicans are using news stories like this to do the finger pointing. You seem to be caught up in it too.

Lots of blame to go around, yes. But Bush was top dog during ther major development of the mess which was a bit after 2003. Obama has just become top dog, so not much blame for him in this CURRENT mess.

--mamallama
 
sallyls said:
sallyls said:
sallyls said:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2

Here is a 1999 article how the Clinton administration relaxed lending
standards
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
sallyls said:
Duh!! In 2003 Bush had a Republican congress and much has happened
since. In terms of today's economic crisis, that's ancient history.
Same as for what happened in Clinton years. That's the ploy of
Republican finger pointing. Let's not go back to what Carter did, for
heaven's sake.

--mamallama
Click to expand...
How is this ancient history? Do you think the housing market
imploded instantly because Bush was president? When the Clinton
administration relaxed lending standards and Congress refused to
reform fannie and freddie in 2003 the snowball gained speed until we
reached the tipping point last year. Those are just facts.

Here is a quote by the New York Times writer in the 1999 article:

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie
Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any
difficulties during flush economic times. But the
government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic
downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the
savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

That was said BEFORE Bush became president.
Click to expand...
Those were just predictions (in the last of the Clinton administration) of what will occur IF a downturn occurs. There are always predictions; it's up to the man in charge (Bush in this case) to take action IF it occurs. Bush was so out of touch at the start of the downturn, he did not heed the warning.

Any economic snowball that started in 2003 can be headed off in 5 years. That's what the predictions foretold. But the bus is now in the ditch. You can't just steer it out, you need a crane which takes more time that just steering it out. Obama is now calling the crane.

He was so occupied defending his bad choice to go to war in Iraq, he was lost in the economic woods. Did you know he could not answer a reporter's question, what was the price of gas when it was around $4.00 a gallon? What does that tell you?

I can go into other cases where Bush was lost (e.g.,Katrina, Iraq, etc). But that's for another day.

--mamallama
 
mamallama said:
Lots of blame to go around, yes. But Bush was top dog during ther
major development of the mess which was a bit after 2003. Obama has
just become top dog, so not much blame for him in this CURRENT mess.

--mamallama
Click to expand...
I am referring to when Obama was a senator in 2005 and did not support a bill that was aimed at reforming freddie and fannie.

In the summer of 2005, a bill emerged from the Senate Banking Committee that considerably tightened regulations on Fannie and Freddie, including controls over their capital and their ability to hold portfolios of mortgages or mortgage-backed securities. All the Republicans voted for the bill in committee; all the Democrats voted against it. To get the bill to a vote in the Senate, a few Democratic votes were necessary to limit debate. This was a time for the leadership Sen. Obama says he can offer, but neither he nor any other Democrat stepped forward.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122403045717834693.html?mod=todays_us_opinion

I find almost all politicians on both sides too corrupt to support. We need term limits I believe. I would just like to see less blind loyalty for the Democrats. Can you not admit they helped create the situation we are in? If Congress won't pass the legislation, the President can't sign it.

Sally
 
mamallama said:
Laurentiu Todie said:
just look at how quickly you ignored the UN
(I'd say more, but you'd ignore that too, so I won't)
Click to expand...
Oh, you want to know about UN resolutions? Many are made on political
side taking without basis of facts. That's the truth.

--mamallama
Click to expand...
no, that may be porn
you don't know the truth
how could you when there's so much you ignore?
 
sallyls said:
sallyls said:
Lots of blame to go around, yes. But Bush was top dog during ther
major development of the mess which was a bit after 2003. Obama has
just become top dog, so not much blame for him in this CURRENT mess.

--mamallama
Click to expand...
I am referring to when Obama was a senator in 2005 and did not
support a bill that was aimed at reforming freddie and fannie.

In the summer of 2005, a bill emerged from the Senate Banking
Committee that considerably tightened regulations on Fannie and
Freddie, including controls over their capital and their ability to
hold portfolios of mortgages or mortgage-backed securities. All the
Republicans voted for the bill in committee; all the Democrats voted
against it. To get the bill to a vote in the Senate, a few Democratic
votes were necessary to limit debate. This was a time for the
leadership Sen. Obama says he can offer, but neither he nor any other
Democrat stepped forward.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122403045717834693.html?mod=todays_us_opinion
Click to expand...
Hey, Sally, that's not a news report. It's an Opinion Column in a conservative newspaper during the political season. What do you expect, a balanced view?

I can pull up many opinion columns to show Bush is a devil and stupid as well as some to show Obama's a genius. I don't do that.
sallyls said:
I find almost all politicians on both sides too corrupt to support.
We need term limits I believe. I would just like to see less blind
loyalty for the Democrats. Can you not admit they helped create the
situation we are in? If Congress won't pass the legislation, the
President can't sign it.
Click to expand...
I'm not a blind Democrat loyalist. I supported Ronald Regan and Richard Nixon until he went crazy in the latter part of his presidency. Nixon's policy towards China is something I give him much credit for. But Bush is unsupportable, in my opinion. He's been wacky from the start.

--mamallama
 
Laurentiu Todie said:
mamallama said:
Laurentiu Todie said:
just look at how quickly you ignored the UN
(I'd say more, but you'd ignore that too, so I won't)
Click to expand...
Oh, you want to know about UN resolutions? Many are made on political
side taking without basis of facts. That's the truth.

--mamallama
Click to expand...
no, that may be porn
you don't know the truth
how could you when there's so much you ignore?
Click to expand...
You haven't said what I'm ignoring that is relevant to the argument. You just throw sh!t on the wall and hope some of it sticks. Be specific and see what sticks.

--mamallama
 
mamallama said:
mamallama said:
I am referring to when Obama was a senator in 2005 and did not
support a bill that was aimed at reforming freddie and fannie.

In the summer of 2005, a bill emerged from the Senate Banking
Committee that considerably tightened regulations on Fannie and
Freddie, including controls over their capital and their ability to
hold portfolios of mortgages or mortgage-backed securities. All the
Republicans voted for the bill in committee; all the Democrats voted
against it. To get the bill to a vote in the Senate, a few Democratic
votes were necessary to limit debate. This was a time for the
leadership Sen. Obama says he can offer, but neither he nor any other
Democrat stepped forward.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122403045717834693.html?mod=todays_us_opinion
Click to expand...
Hey, Sally, that's not a news report. It's an Opinion Column in a
conservative newspaper during the political season. What do you
expect, a balanced view?
Click to expand...
I realize this article is an opinion piece but that doesn't change the fact that the Democrats voted against moving a bill forward that would have reformed fannie and freddie and perhaps headed off the collapse. I am getting the impression whenever a fact is pointed out that contradicts your idea that Bush is the cause of all evil in the world, you don't address the statement but attack the source of the message.

I just quoted that article because it succinctly stated what happened. The bill went to committee in the Senate. The Democrats blocked it from coming out of committee for a vote and neither Obama or Clinton or any other Democrat pushed for a vote. Clinton and Obama were two of the biggest recipients of money from freddie and fannie. They are part of the problem and act like Bush was asleep at the wheel. Starting in 2003 the administration pushed for reform but the Democrats in the Senate blocked it by procedural moves. Many Republicans were on the dole too and contributed to the problem.

Anyway I just wish it was possible to discuss facts and leave out all the emotion. The Democrats are quick to place all blame on Bush and rewrite any negative history on their part. Frank and Dodd should have been removed from the committee.

One note on Iraq that makes it slightly different than just invading other countries is that at the time there was a cease fire in place from the first gulf war. Iraq had broken the cease fire agreement numerous times. We were still technically at war with them.

I disagreed with Bush many times and was quite disillusioned when he never vetoed the pork spending. It seems to me we have been spending like crazy for years now so I don't think the solution is to spend 1 trillion dollars more. We are playing with fire down the road. Please don't label me as a Bush apologist. I think the only way to clean up the mess is to look at how we got here so we can find solutions that will be long term corrections. I don't like how the current crises is being used as an excuse to throw money at every pet project congress has.

Sally
 
Putin was saddam's military adviser just before the US invasion,

there's nobody in the world besides saddam himself, who could've known saddam's plans of aggression against the US
yet, you dismiss his warning to Bush as a cockamamy fabrication

instead of attacking Putin's credibility, why don't you build a case against the fact of his warning

(you take licenses and shortcuts to thinking, not to trying to understand the truth)

there's a lot more, but you keep ignoring
 
Don't forget, world-wide recession, that could very well lead to world-wide depression, LOL, what a disastrous eight years; economically, the rich got richer, the poor got poorer, and the entire world is now loosing jobs and so many people their economic means of survival, just about everywhere, as world economies appear close to collapse ...

--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)


Mikeobe said:
Just want to make sure I've got this Straight, "Boosh Lied, Millions
Died!"

How ma doin here, Jules??

LOL
Click to expand...
 
"Oh Yea of Little Faith," "The Messiah" has arrived, Bam Bam it gonna make it all better, "A chicken in Every Pot!"

"Happy Days are Here Again!":)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top