The Goat Pen

ALiceville? Goodness, that's in the middle of nowhere.

Exactly. That's why I'm not sure I want to put in for it. At least Butner was near Raleigh-Durham and Estill was near Savannah.

If I apply for and get the Aliceville job, we'd probably live in - IRONY OF IRONIES - Tuscaloosa. They've got a Catholic high school that is supposedly very good. They also accept and help dislexic kids, and I've got one.

You are a liar. I don't have time for you. Like at Worldcrossing, where you were only one of two people that I ever filtered, I will now do the same thing here.

So I'm the liar? Which of us came in here claiming that the other was certifiable? Which came in here posting a paragraph that was clearly intended to be accepted as a quote when it was not a quote?

I'm not going to accuse you of lying, as from what I know of you, I suspect that you really do remember my words this way. What you forget is that those are not my words, but merely your memory of my words - Two different things altogether.

We all have filters. We only remember certain points other people make. Sometimes people even substitute the characterizations of third parties for what a person actually said. Someone posted a video here yesterday showing that people attributed a quote to Sarah Palin that was actually a quote by that woman on SNL when she was making fun of Palin.

Scream if you like.

Ignore me if you wish.

I can not offer answers, neither can I grant absolution; all I can do is hold up a distorted mirror, an imperfect reflection of what is ugly and horrible. I attempt to live without the blinders that others wear, my eyes aimed at the dirty underside of the rocks we inhabit. It is not a road for everyone.

Tuscaloosa is still a good ride from Aliceville.


And, if you're talking Holy Spirit, it is a good school. That's where Shula sent his kids. Don't recall it being too badly affected by the tornado, either (but it was damn close).

Therefore, I assume, Red Bird, that you would agree that "freedom of the press" ONLY applies to a wooden box with moveable lead letters using linseed oil and soot for ink that is "pressed" to dried parchment by a big wooden handle. That is the only "press" covered by the 1A. I assume, Red Bird, that there is no first amendment freedom of journalism in radio since that is not a Gutenberg-style "press." Kiss NPR goodbye. Furthermore, there is no first amendment freedom of journalism on television since that is not a Gutenberg-style "press." Bye bye ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. Moreover, there is no first amendment freedom of journalism on the internet because that is not a Gutenberg-style "press." Arrest Ariana Huffington for treason immediately.

Congrats on your straw man.

I never said we should go back to flint locks and muzzle loading guns. Only that the constitution doesn't guarantee the right to keep semiautomatic and automatic weapons. However, you raise an interesting point. Times change. And with time, technology changes, and as technology changes so must out interpretation of what the constitution means.

Good point. Again, I agree with you 100%.

AlabamAlum wrote:"I never said that all beer tastes the same"

You are a liar or crazy or both. I don't have time for you. Like at Worldcrossing, where you were only one of two people that I ever filtered, I will now do the same thing here.


Get treatment.

WE CAN FILTER?!!! GOD DAMMIT!!! NOW YOU TELL ME?!!!

Yes, dear lord, free at last, free at last, free at last! You can filter. Go to user control > friends and foes > foes > type in the dingbat's name.

Who are you talking to, AA?

AlabamAlum wrote:ALiceville? Goodness, that's in the middle of nowhere. Knew a beagle breeder out there. Hated making the trek.

Even the middle of nowhere has to be better than big 10/11/12 country...with snow up to your backside...

Even the middle of nowhere has to be better than big 10/11/12 country...with snow up to your backside...

I like having every Christmas as a white Christmas. It gives everything a Currier and Ives look. But after that, snow is a huge pain. This year I finally broke down and bought a snow blower. It was the best purchase of my life.

But then I tremble at the idea of sending my last kid to an Alabama public school in a rural place like Aliceville.

AA, this winter you need to make the trekk up here to middle Tennessee and bring your beagles. I live in the middle of the best dog runnin country you could imagine. We'll rabbit hunt in the day and coon hunt at night. We can do this out the back door of my new house.

AA,

I forgive you for the making up false quotes and attributing them to me. I also forgive you for calling me crazy, and saying I'm certifiable. I hope one day you'll forgive me for telling the truth.

Sincerely, Red Bird

Palin doubles down on her ignorance of history and sticks by her story that Paul Reveres 's ride was about warning Americans that the British were coming to confiscate their guns

And once again, any time she gives a daft answer to something, she complains that the question itself was a "gotcha" kind of question

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011 ... ul-revere/

But she purty and smell nice and those daughter put out!

Big Orange Junky wrote:AA, this winter you need to make the trekk up here to middle Tennessee and bring your beagles. I live in the middle of the best dog runnin country you could imagine. We'll rabbit hunt in the day and coon hunt at night. We can do this out the back door of my new house.

I might take you up on that. I have two champions and another one who should place this year. Beagles running and baying is a special thing.

Are you ready for Bonaroo, BOJ?

10ac wrote:Are you ready for Bonaroo, BOJ?

No I didn't open my office until AFTER bonaroo.

Did you get my post the other day? I will open for business at 0800 on July 15th. I'll be happy to take care of you or put you in touch with someone else that will be good for what you need. 1030 McArthur Street, Manchester TN

AlabamAlum wrote:

Big Orange Junky wrote:AA, this winter you need to make the trekk up here to middle Tennessee and bring your beagles. I live in the middle of the best dog runnin country you could imagine. We'll rabbit hunt in the day and coon hunt at night. We can do this out the back door of my new house.

I might take you up on that. I have two champions and another one who should place this year. Beagles running and baying is a special thing.

You need to. We got weed mules coming out our ears around there. The nursery men hate them cause they eat their business up and best of all it's all flat ground around there. I think we can have a blast.

puterbac wrote:Can't remember if it was toe or IB, but a hard rule 0f 20% down with no regard for how credit worthy someone may be is fucking just as dumb as sub prime.

If someone has a credit score high enough that putting down 5% is considered safe, then fine.

It was me that insisted upon the 20% down in cash, and NO it most certainly is not fine if you have less than that, (not as far as I'm concerned.) If you don't have enough cash for 20% down, buy a smaller/cheaper home, save another six-months/year/whatever, or (if you are functionally incapable of saving cash) then you are too incompatant to be homeowner. Rent for the rest of your life. You are not entitled to a home mortgage.

It was the people who put just 5% down (or less) that got us into this mess. And why? Because they didn't have any real skin in the game. It is against the principle of human nature to continue paying for an asset that you can walk away from if it is worth so much less than what you owe on it, IF you haven't really invested any real money in it. I don't give a fuck what your credit rating is. I know more than just a few people who willfully allowed their 750+ credit ratings to be utterly obliterated simply because they couldn't flip their house.

GREED trumps RESPONSIBLITY

Putting 20% down means a REAL LOSS TO YOU if you walk away from your responsibilities. There should be real financial pain to you if you welch. You want that $500,000 house (you really think you need it) then come up with $100,000 in cash. Don't give me any excuses. What, you can never save that much, ever? Looks like you are stuck in that 3-bedroom condo for the rest of your life.

puterbac wrote:We have excellent credit and did an 80-15-5, but only bought house that we could afford ALL our bills on my salary alone as we knew she would be staying home with kids in the near future.

Common sense rules mean common sense.

Common sense, horseshit puter. You sir, are Cheating.

http://www.accentloan.com/programs/80_15_5.html

I'm quite sure you pulled this 80-15-5 shit off before the 2008 financial crisis. Good luck getting that situation today. The fact that your lender allowed you to take a second loan on your house for 15% of its value (just so you could avoid that infernal mortgage insurance) makes them fools. You don't have enough skin in the game. At anytime, you could welch, and the two banks would either have to write off your debt, go after your other assets, or try and collect on their AIG insurance policies.

If I am a bank President, I would NEVER allow you to do this, never. I'm going to want to see all the cash in your bank account to cover 20% of the purchase price before I move on any home loan. There is too much risk, otherwise.

There's not too much risk if the person has demonstrated years of responsibility and has the credit score to prove it.

There's not too much risk depending on the situation such as the old Physician Loans that had an almost zero default rate even though they were 100% loans (because they were specialty loans to allow residents, who make nothing, to move into a home in their price range at their new practice location).

Every situation is different and each individual should be looked at.

That's the problem though, they gubment was mandating that for everyone with great credit that could afford the home the banks had to lend to someone that was on gubmen assistance with a poor credit score on a house they couldn't pay for.

Big Orange Junky wrote:There's not too much risk if the person has demonstrated years of responsibility and has the credit score to prove it.

I disagree ENTIRELY.

How many people do you know (personally) with great credit who (of their own free will) allowed their homes to go into foreclosure? You might not have known any, but I knew of 3 people in my own IT department who did this very thing.

And why? Greed. They wanted to flip their houses and when they couldn't, they just couldn't stomach being so upside down on their assets. When you are looking at something that is $200,000 upside down, the desire to preserve that 750 credit rating is of almost no value if you have NO real financial investment in the asset you are paying off....

Big Orange Junky wrote:There's not too much risk depending on the situation such as the old Physician Loans that had an almost zero default rate even though they were 100% loans (because they were specialty loans to allow residents, who make nothing, to move into a home in their price range at their new practice location).

Every situation is different and each individual should be looked at.

That's the problem though, they gubment was mandating that for everyone with great credit that could afford the home the banks had to lend to someone that was on gubmen assistance with a poor credit score on a house they couldn't pay for.

I don't know anything about these "old Physician Loans." The fact that you had to add that adjective "old" to describe them, makes me think that that these 100% loans could not be gotten with today's financial realities. So I'm not going to comment on them.

The other issue you mentioned (government mandates for people on government assistance with poor credit scores getting approved for loans) I think that is more the Community-Reinvestment-Act. The original principle behind this was to prevent banks from redlining.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redlining

Banks redlined, because they didn't have as much credit information in the 1950s, 60s, and even the 70s as they do today. It was much easier for a lender to say "...hey, that loan application is for a building in a predominantly black neighborhood. Black people can't be trusted with a home loan, so in this area, we will have to charge a higher interst rate or maybe, not even offer a loan because we don't think they will ever make a payment..." It was racially motivated based on the belief that certain people are just too risky. So Congress passed a law, the Community Reinvestment Act.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_Reinvestment_Act

They couldn't really tell a private bank that they HAD to lend in these areas (per se) but they COULD say that if they DIDN'T make loans in previously redlined areas, that the bank could not "expand" (add branches/merge with other banks). That was the punishment for assuming the worst in people based on where they want to invest to live and work. As far as I know, that is still the punishment. Some lenders willingly accept this punishment since they may have no interest in expanding.

Here is what has been done recently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_ ... anges_2007

The Obama Administration started cracking down on lenders that refused to do business in predominantly black communities. He did that the first few days of his administration. The fact that so many of the loans that were in default (and so many of the houses in foreclosure) were the result of loans that came into being specifically because of the Community Reinvestment Act, was not an issue that was allowed to impact current legislation. To me, this is yet another reason why I feel that Congress never really wanted to fully fix the 2008 Financial Crisis because politics and responsibility were more important to our Congressmen, than reality.