Quiklilcav wrote:Tribals wrote:McCain was speaking today in New Mexico, doing his usual personal attack on Barack Obama, as the stock market plummeted (you can see the ticker next to McCain on the screen, an apt reminder of what McCain and his fellow Republicans represent)....What a sad way to run a campaign.
I agree that the McCain/Palin campaign has taken an ill turn that I don't support, and I wish McCain would get back to the positive campaign he started on a year ago. He did not get to the position he was at a month ago by throwing insults, or allowing them to be thrown, at the competition. He got there by talking about what he would do to improve our country. I fully believe that the ground he is now losing is due to the change in tactics, and not properly rebutting the lies spread by the Democrats.
However, the notion that he and the Republicans represent the bullsh!t that caused the stock market to crash is a lie that has been spread by the Democrats, and believed by you and millions of others. McCain warned about it 3 years ago, and it was the Democrats that shot it down. The Bush administration tried to do something about the housing bubble 5 years ago, and it was blocked by the Democrats. Don't believe me, do the research yourself. The facts are there. Included in the lies are the facts that the entire premise that the Democrats (and Obama) based the need for keeping the CRA pressures on the banks was that the banks were redlining (descriminating who they gave loans to). Even some of the Democrats stated that the studies were flawed, in that they did not survey equal income families. They looked at mostly poor black families, and the turn-down rates on them, and then claimed that the banks were discriminating. They did not allow for the fact that they were simply not financially able to take on the burden of home-ownership and a mortgage. So the attempt at tightening the reigns on the CRA was killed based on lies, and more bad loans were forced on banks.
Again, don't take my word for it, look it up for yourself. There are plenty of sources out there, and plenty of them that are unbiased. If you believe that the Republicans are to blame for this mess, you are simply not looking at the facts. They tried to stop it years before it came to a head, and it was blocked.
Are you seriously delusional are what? I would recommend immediate mental health assistance, if you can afford it...
"There is no point in looking fast if your not."
Quote:
Are you seriously delusional are what? I would recommend immediate mental health assistance, if you can afford it...
Acully he's spot on. If most of you guy's would take a little time and do about 10 minutes of research you'd be amazed at what the MSM(main stream media) isn't telling you about the Big O and the Dem's that are pushing them to lie to you.
Feel free to check some of my posts...
"The FACTS are always subject to CHANGE once the TRUTH is applied"
"In the entire history of man the only stupid questions are the ones that don't get asked"
john317(AKA Gary the Old guy) wrote:Quote:
Are you seriously delusional are what? I would recommend immediate mental health assistance, if you can afford it...
Acully he's spot on. If most of you guy's would take a little time and do about 10 minutes of research you'd be amazed at what the MSM(main stream media) isn't telling you about the Big O and the Dem's that are pushing them to lie to you.
Feel free to check some of my posts...
im sorry but isnt 'main stream media' mainly republican controlled?
"There is no point in looking fast if your not."
Shawn Reps. are also to blame. Here is a good point, Bush a Rep. came into office with a budget surplus and 5 trillion in debt.
Now in a republican administration Bush has doubled that debt. So enough with the whole Dems. are responsible for out of control spending
and they did not stop it. Bush did enough spending for three administrations. Afterall he is the one who signed off on the spending. You cant just
point the finger at dems when the leader is a rep and approaves all the spending.
Also here is my proof before you accuse all us Dems. of stating things without proof.
National debt in 2000 when bush took over
$5,674,178,209,886.86
And in 2008
$10,192876,167,365.80
And these numbers are from the national treasury website. So they have no spin and are not bias
Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:john317(AKA Gary the Old guy) wrote:Quote:
Are you seriously delusional are what? I would recommend immediate mental health assistance, if you can afford it...
Acully he's spot on. If most of you guy's would take a little time and do about 10 minutes of research you'd be amazed at what the MSM(main stream media) isn't telling you about the Big O and the Dem's that are pushing them to lie to you.
Feel free to check some of my posts...
im sorry but isnt 'main stream media' mainly republican controlled?
No if anything it would be more left biased.
FORGET GIRLS GONE WILD WE HAVE GOVERNMENT SPENDING GONE WILD!
Quiklilcav wrote:Mike, I have no argument over what happened with the budget. Bush has blown an insane amount of money on the war, that I believe is only still going on because it wasn't done right from the beginning. But that's another debate all together.
My argument is over where the country's financial market is. That is not because the government owes too much money, it's because of the housing market crash. The subprime mortgages that have been out of control, with so many out-of-the-box designs (like short-term variable APR, interest only, etc.), set up millions of home owners for failure. Once these mortgages started getting out of the budgets of the people who had them, they defaulted, resulting in banks getting severely hurt, an influx of homes on the market, driving the values back down from where they inflated to. Also, as people began to not be able to afford their homes, they stopped spending other money, thereby slowing down other sectors of the economy.
This was all due to the GSE's Fannie and Freddie being able to force banks into taking on mortgages that were very high risk. In the past decade, the Bush administration and McCain have both tried to get bills passed that would curb these practices, and slow the housing market down to a stable pace again, so we did not have the bubble, and we would not have had the millions of junk mortgages.
And by the way, I don't accuse all Democrats as not having proof, just the people that post rhetoric without substance. 
And Red2.ZCavi, I'm just done even trying to have a resonable debate with you. You provide nothing useful. You insult with nothing to back up your redicullous claims. At least some of the people on here, like Lucky03, are making a point with facts, and not e-thugging with unintelligent comebacks to valid points. You might want to stop now, before you prove yourself to be a total moron.
How is it that Bush and McCain tried to get this passed when the Republicans had controll of the House, Senate and the White House and couldnt get it done, I didnt realize the Democrats had so much pull.
KevinP (Stabby McShankyou) wrote:
and I'm NOT a pedo. everyone knows i've got a wheelchair fetish.
Quiklilcav wrote:Mike, I have no argument over what happened with the budget. Bush has blown an insane amount of money on the war, that I believe is only still going on because it wasn't done right from the beginning. But that's another debate all together.
My argument is over where the country's financial market is. That is not because the government owes too much money, it's because of the housing market crash. The subprime mortgages that have been out of control, with so many out-of-the-box designs (like short-term variable APR, interest only, etc.), set up millions of home owners for failure. Once these mortgages started getting out of the budgets of the people who had them, they defaulted, resulting in banks getting severely hurt, an influx of homes on the market, driving the values back down from where they inflated to. Also, as people began to not be able to afford their homes, they stopped spending other money, thereby slowing down other sectors of the economy.
This was all due to the GSE's Fannie and Freddie being able to force banks into taking on mortgages that were very high risk. In the past decade, the Bush administration and McCain have both tried to get bills passed that would curb these practices, and slow the housing market down to a stable pace again, so we did not have the bubble, and we would not have had the millions of junk mortgages.
And by the way, I don't accuse all Democrats as not having proof, just the people that post rhetoric without substance.
And Red2.ZCavi, I'm just done even trying to have a resonable debate with you. You provide nothing useful. You insult with nothing to back up your redicullous claims. At least some of the people on here, like Lucky03, are making a point with facts, and not e-thugging with unintelligent comebacks to valid points. You might want to stop now, before you prove yourself to be a total moron.
im a moron for asking a question? yea, ok. my vote isnt going to matter anyways; i live in texas, there is no way itll ever go democratic.
Office of the Secretary of State
Race Summary Report
1992 General Election
11/3/1992
RACE NAME PARTY CANVASS VOTES PERCENT
President/Vice-President
Bill Clinton/ Al Gore DEM 2,281,815 37.07%
George Bush/ Dan Quayle(I) REP 2,496,071 40.56%
Andre Marrou/ Nancy Lord LIB 19,699 0.32%
Ross Perot/ James Stockdale IND 1,354,781 22.01%
Howard Phillips/ Albion W. Knight W-I 359 0.00%
Quinn Brisben/ Barbara Garson W-I 78 0.00%
James Bo Gritz/ C.W. 'Cy' Minett W-I 505 0.00%
Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr./ James L. Bevel W-I 169 0.00%
James Wellington Wright/ Levi M. Cunningham W-I 23 0.00%
Lenora B. Fulani/ Maria Munoz W-I 301 0.00%
John S. Hagelin/ Mike Tompkins W-I 217 0.00%
-----------
Race Total 6,154,018
yea thats back in '92, closest it came in the last 17 years, in Texas.
http://elections.sos.state.tx.us/elchist.exe
"There is no point in looking fast if your not."
Quiklilcav wrote:Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:im a moron for asking a question?
No, you're a moron for responses like this to legitimate arguments:
Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:Are you seriously delusional are what? I would recommend immediate mental health assistance, if you can afford it...
Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:my thoughts. if your middle or low class and you vote for mccaine you should be shot or maybe given a brain implant.
Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:i could go on and on about this one. but ill simple state. same @!#$ ing difference. and btw, grow a brain.
what was said imo were not legit arguments. i simply stated my opinion. it is a free country you know... you choose to call me names, which i never did. i only implied that you may be an idiot.
"There is no point in looking fast if your not."
Quiklilcav wrote:Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:what was said imo were not legit arguments. i simply stated my opinion. it is a free country you know... you choose to call me names, which i never did. i only implied that you may be an idiot.
So in your narrow mind the posts you responded to (not just mine), even though clearly articulated with statements of fact, were not legitimate arguments, so a first-grade schoolyard personal attack was the response? You really don't get it, do you? You have not made a single intelligent point, you have merely resorted to insulting someone who made a point. How is it that you do not see the childish mentality of this?
If you read my original point again regarding the maturity level of your posts, you will se that I actually hadn't called you a name, I simply stated that if you keep going with this type of ignorant post, you're going to end up proving yourself to be a moron. But since other posts popped up in between the one I was responding to, and mine, you figured I was talking about you asking a rhetorical question.
And you're right about it being a free country, and you can act as foolish as you like. Anyone is also free to point out that you are acting so.
However, I am now done even responding to you, since you are incapeable of adult-level debate. I come into these threads to debate valid points with people. Many are able to do so, and it's even enjoyable when a good debate goes on in a mature manner. Arguing with someone such as yourself just brings the level of the thread down.
Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:
im a moron for asking a question? yea, ok. my vote isnt going to matter anyways; i live in texas, there is no way itll ever go democratic.
Office of the Secretary of State
Race Summary Report
1992 General Election
11/3/1992
RACE NAME PARTY CANVASS VOTES PERCENT
President/Vice-President
Bill Clinton/ Al Gore DEM 2,281,815 37.07%
George Bush/ Dan Quayle(I) REP 2,496,071 40.56%
Andre Marrou/ Nancy Lord LIB 19,699 0.32%
Ross Perot/ James Stockdale IND 1,354,781 22.01%
Howard Phillips/ Albion W. Knight W-I 359 0.00%
Quinn Brisben/ Barbara Garson W-I 78 0.00%
James Bo Gritz/ C.W. 'Cy' Minett W-I 505 0.00%
Lyndon H. LaRouche, Jr./ James L. Bevel W-I 169 0.00%
James Wellington Wright/ Levi M. Cunningham W-I 23 0.00%
Lenora B. Fulani/ Maria Munoz W-I 301 0.00%
John S. Hagelin/ Mike Tompkins W-I 217 0.00%
-----------
Race Total 6,154,018
yea thats back in '92, closest it came in the last 17 years, in Texas.
http://elections.sos.state.tx.us/elchist.exe
point made.
Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:Quiklilcav wrote:Tribals wrote:McCain was speaking today in New Mexico, doing his usual personal attack on Barack Obama, as the stock market plummeted (you can see the ticker next to McCain on the screen, an apt reminder of what McCain and his fellow Republicans represent)....What a sad way to run a campaign.
I agree that the McCain/Palin campaign has taken an ill turn that I don't support, and I wish McCain would get back to the positive campaign he started on a year ago. He did not get to the position he was at a month ago by throwing insults, or allowing them to be thrown, at the competition. He got there by talking about what he would do to improve our country. I fully believe that the ground he is now losing is due to the change in tactics, and not properly rebutting the lies spread by the Democrats.
However, the notion that he and the Republicans represent the bullsh!t that caused the stock market to crash is a lie that has been spread by the Democrats, and believed by you and millions of others. McCain warned about it 3 years ago, and it was the Democrats that shot it down. The Bush administration tried to do something about the housing bubble 5 years ago, and it was blocked by the Democrats. Don't believe me, do the research yourself. The facts are there. Included in the lies are the facts that the entire premise that the Democrats (and Obama) based the need for keeping the CRA pressures on the banks was that the banks were redlining (descriminating who they gave loans to). Even some of the Democrats stated that the studies were flawed, in that they did not survey equal income families. They looked at mostly poor black families, and the turn-down rates on them, and then claimed that the banks were discriminating. They did not allow for the fact that they were simply not financially able to take on the burden of home-ownership and a mortgage. So the attempt at tightening the reigns on the CRA was killed based on lies, and more bad loans were forced on banks.
Again, don't take my word for it, look it up for yourself. There are plenty of sources out there, and plenty of them that are unbiased. If you believe that the Republicans are to blame for this mess, you are simply not looking at the facts. They tried to stop it years before it came to a head, and it was blocked.
Are you seriously delusional are what? I would recommend immediate mental health assistance, if you can afford it...
point made again, i didnt agree with your opinion. the mental health thing was because most people cant afford heath insurance, maybe u missed that one.
Red2.ZCavi (The Slanky One) wrote:john317(AKA Gary the Old guy) wrote:Quote:
Are you seriously delusional are what? I would recommend immediate mental health assistance, if you can afford it...
Acully he's spot on. If most of you guy's would take a little time and do about 10 minutes of research you'd be amazed at what the MSM(main stream media) isn't telling you about the Big O and the Dem's that are pushing them to lie to you.
Feel free to check some of my posts...
im sorry but isnt 'main stream media' mainly republican controlled?
u go and watch msnbc or fox and many others, then watch cnn. and u tell me who is partisan and who is not. again i make my points, just not in so many words.
"There is no point in looking fast if your not."
I am getting so sick and tired of hearing people piss and moan about the "mainstream media"...
What ISN'T mainstream media?
Bad Ace Design wrote:I am getting so sick and tired of hearing people piss and moan about the "mainstream media"...
What ISN'T mainstream media?
mainstream media is every media outlet that your not watching yourself, this makes you a leader and smart guy, and every other single person a brainwashed idiot. or at least this is what it seems when people talk about it.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
sndsgood wrote:the republicans are to blame, the democrats are to blame and every single idiot that went out and bought a house they new they couldnt afford is to blame.
This is the best response and probably the most correct response, out of this entire thread......
Click Sig for Jersey GM's Official Website
