The Goat Pen

Professor Tiger wrote:

C'mon PT. You know better. There was NO fiscal discipline until you had R's in congress

The R's controlled the White and House and the Senate from 2000 - 2008. The R's also controlled the House from 2000 - 2006.

During that time, they had no fiscal discipline. Zero, zip, nada. They also failed to use their majority status to either detect or prevent the insane lending practices that led to the financial meltdown of the fall of 2008.The start of the current recession is largely their fault. Making the current recession worse and mortgaging the country's long-term future is the Dem's fault.

I agree. They failed when they had all three and it was very disappointing.

Re: Lending practices...wasn't this started by Clinton and Dems? Didn't Bush try and get Freddie/Fanny reigned in and Barney and company scoffed that there was an issue? Was anybody even talking about this until 2005 or 2006? I don't know that you can say the start of the decline was anything but business cycle but made worse by the lending issues.

And now you have enormous uncertainty with taxes, regs, healthcare, etc and biz is afraid.

Started by Carter, revvvveed waaay up under Clinton.

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA, Pub.L. 95-128, title VIII of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1977, 91 Stat. 1147, 12 U.S.C. § 2901 et seq.) is a United States federal law designed to encourage commercial banks and savings associations to help meet the needs of borrowers in all segments of their communities....

Ronnie fixed Carters blunders. That's a non issue.

Run Herman Run!

Our current status (Obammer spending in 09 and 10 not withstanding) is due to 30+ years of "do gooder/re-election is all that counts" policies from our central gubment.

If you are going to blame leaders of our central gubment over the last 30 years for our current mess, then you had better include blame for both President Bush's, Speakers of the House Dennis Hastert, House Majority Leaders Dick Armey and Whip Tom DeLay, Senate Majority Leaders Trent Lott, and Bob Dole.

Didn't Bush try and get Freddie/Fanny reigned in and Barney and company scoffed that there was an issue?

So Bush wisely saw the dangers of Freddy and Fanny, and tried desperately to fix it. But he was unable to harness his party's control of all three branches of elective government to break Barney's tyrannical grip. LMAO.

Was anybody even talking about this until 2005 or 2006?

So Bush and the R's didn't see a problem with Freddy and Fanny until 2005 or 2006? Please clarify: were the R's aware of the problem but unable to stop it, or were they unaware until it was too late?

then you had better include blame for both President Bush's, Speakers of the House Dennis Hastert, House Majority Leaders Dick Armey and Whip Tom DeLay, Senate Majority Leaders Trent Lott, and Bob Dole.



My post was all inclusive...damn yer obtuse.

You forgot Earl Pomeroy.

Triumph the Insult Comic Dog visits the Occupy Wall Street protest in NYC...

[youtube]O-253uBJap8[/youtube]

[youtube]CSRONjYVvAQ[/youtube]

The difference between the left and the right. The left has no problem mocking the extremists on its side.

The fallacy is that it's the left that is going after Cain. They would love for Cain to knock off Romney. This was most likely leaked from one of the Republican camps. But it was going to come out anyway. Multiple allegations against a major candidate running for President. If Cain wins the nomination, it'll be the best thing that it occurred now as opposed to later.

No matter who it is running for President, multiple allegations of sexual harassment are going to make news.

TheBigMook wrote:The difference between the left and the right. The left has no problem mocking the extremists on its side.

What choice do you have, really?

Owlman wrote:The fallacy is that it's the left that is going after Cain. They would love for Cain to knock off Romney. This was most likely leaked from one of the Republican camps. But it was going to come out anyway. Multiple allegations against a major candidate running for President. If Cain wins the nomination, it'll be the best thing that it occurred now as opposed to later.

No matter who it is running for President, multiple allegations of sexual harassment are going to make news.

Harry Belafonte, Al Sharpton and Cornell West are Republicans? And the Clarence Thomas allegations certainly weren't orchestrated by Republicans. Let's face it, the dems have a long history of this sort of thing.

x

Hacksaw wrote:

TheBigMook wrote:The difference between the left and the right. The left has no problem mocking the extremists on its side.

What choice do you have, really?

Ignore it and then accuse the other side of media bias when they get mocked. You know, like the conservative edia did with the Tea Party protests.

It is a rare moment in political life when the Dem's and the Republican Establishment agree on anything. Maintaining the current tidal wave of illegal immigration is one of them. But destroying Cain is another.

The liberals hate him because they consider Cain to be a traitor to his race and to his rightful white liberal overseers. How dare he?

The Republican Establishment hates Cain because they have already reserved the White House for one of their own, Mitt Romney. Cain is an uppity disruption in their plans to anoint the magic underwear guy. The R Establishment doesn't like Cain because they've never had a cocktail party conversation with him at Augusta National or Wharton alumni reunion.

I don't hate Cain. I think he's a clown. But I in no way hate him. I'd be quite happy if he wound up winning the GOP nomination instead of Romney.

Bachman and Santorum on the other hand are hatable.

If you thought Cain had a real chance at winning the nomination, you'd Clarence Thomas him.

Speaking of Clarence Thomas and the last time the media/Democrats engaged in high tech lynching of an uppity black man, here's a gratuitous opportunity for me to brag about my prediction of the media's assault on Cain:

Professor Tiger wrote:I bet the MSM have already lined up a whole platoon of Anita Hill types, who will make up some wild tales about Cain, for fun and profit. Especially profit:

Democratic Senator of the Senate Committee Investigating Candidate Cain: "...and THEN what did he do to you, little lady?

Bribed Bimbo: "Well sir.... then Mr. Cain told me.... he said... I'm not sure I can even say it..."

Democratic Senator of the Senate Committee Investigating Candidate Cain: "C'mon, honey, you've got to try and tell us..."

Bribed Bimbo: "Okay sir, I'll try. He said... he said.... [tears welling up} "THERE'S A PUBIC HAIR IN MY PEPPERONi!'