Back to the issues, please!

The point of this thread’s main article is simple: You can not REASON with an UNREASONABLE person.

Obama can (and will) talk – because that’s what he does best _ until he is blue in the face. North Korea’s leadership principles will not change until they have a change in leader. Kim Jong Il is a pathological misfit and a bully, incapable of compassion or remorse. He will never change unless he gets a lobotomy (planned or otherwise).

Jeff V

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Red is a C A N U C K….wow……say hello to Terrance and Phillips (and Dudley DoRight).

Europe is part of NATO??? Really??? So when the Serbs were going on the killing spree, this is the same Euroland who basicly stood by and watched. Thas is, until the Americans cajoled them into action.

Euroland can’t send anymore troops…they depend upon the Americans to do it. Kind of Like Canada needs the US to defend its artic region and NW passage. I can just see you guys fending off the territorial claims by the Russians…..NOT.

A British journalist said it best. Europe likes the US military umbrella, they like their money, and they like to bitch. You can add Canada to that list.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The mainstream media wouldn’t do it. So we are trying to get your important messages to the American people. This post is a suggested read at, http://aresay.blogspot.com/

Like or Dislike: 0  0

So lay off the recycled rhetoric of “de-regulation. that was NOT the problem, it was intimidation by government that created the so called predatory lending because banks had no choice.

CRA caused problems, but you can’t blame all or even most of this mess on it. First of all, there are plenty of other bad debts – not just subprime mortgages – that are causing problems. Second, housing prices bubbled all over the world, not just in the US – and CRA can’t be to blame for that. And the use of extremely poor models to value the MBS has been well-documented elsewhere. I think it would be pretty hard to make the case that we both *should* bail out the banks, *and* that we shouldn’t have more regulation/oversight. Who’s going to accept being on the hook for a trillion dollars of someone else’s losses, and then say ‘well, I wouldn’t want to impair this productive engine of capitalism with onerous red tape’? It’s a joke.
Now as it happens, and contrary to what people say about the market somehow failing, I think we had a working regulator in the form of the market. It was in the process of destroying every one of these poorly run banks (and AIG). Unfortunately, these industries are politically well-connected, so instead of taking their lumps as they should have they were able to blackmail the government into bailing them out.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

The UN is the world’s greatest debating society. And the absolute beauty of it is that few understand what the other is saying. Its absolutely wonderful. A gathering of the worlds elites who will invariably, “complicate the obvious and trivialize the momentous”.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Really, Red? Considering that the price of housing is instrumental in toxic assets (and not only in the US), just how doth thou explain your own housing bubble that needed to crash?

Or perhaps your income went up along with the housing prices? Ooops… look at the nosedive in unemployment starting in the early 90s….

Why not take care of your own back yard instead of pompously lecturing us on legislation in the 90s you apparently know nothing about.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

b1 … We don’t have no stickin’ sub-prime mortgages in Canada due to R-E-G-U-L-A-T-I-O-N. As a result we don’t have the housing crisis you are having, though we will pay the price for yours. See … we know that you can regulate for both greed and stupidity, that it isn’t a simple ideological either/or.

However, the housing crisis could have been somewhat contained and isolated, if it weren’t for the AIG insurance, non-insurance of these and other risky ventures.

See, AIG insured risk (stocks, subprime mortgages, etc), but because they weren’t regulated, they didn’t have to hold any money against the liability they took on, like regulated insurance companies have to. Because they insured risk (but without the regulated requirement to have the money to pay), crappy risks got a AAA rating. These got bought up all over the world as AAA.

Then, when the unregulated mortgage thingy started to happen, not just the housing sector got effected. Now everyone levered on them AAA assets, backed by AIG insurance started to discover they didn’t have AAA assets, because the insurance company (AIG) didn’t have the ability to pay the insurance. Banks no longer had the assets to support their 30 to 1 lending, in fact they didn’t even have that ratio anymore. Same for business assets for loans …

This is how deregulation took a simple housing problem and radiated it to the whole world. If it weren’t housing that brought it down, a downturn in other AIG ‘insured’ risk woulda brought it down … due to the consequences of deregulation upon the creation of AAA rating for crappy assets

Red

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Obama’s speech in Prague said that we probably wouldn’t see nuclear disarmament in his lifetime, much less in his Presidency.

The nuclear threat is not ICBMs. It would be idiocy for any country to launch a nuclear weapon with a missile. This leaves a return address. Said country would be turned into glass, with me and most other liberals cheering the glassmaking.

Here’s how to deliver a nuke. Put it on a small fishing boat. Or a recreational sailboat. Anchor it in your port city of choice. Set the timer on the fuse. Take your Zodiac to shore, hail a cab, and go to Las Vegas. Or whereever.

No return address. Pinpoint delivery.

That’s the threat. Not a North Korean missile.

- Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA

Like or Dislike: 0  0

RED:

Oh really and how did the Bush administration cause the financial meltdown? Wasn’t because of a lack of regulation which is the latest “populace” rhetoric from the liberals.

How about this, let’s go back to 1977 during Carter’s(D) term when he enacted the Community development act of 1977. That made it easier for people who really couldn’t afford a house a chance to get one.

Fast forward to 1993-94. CRA has been left alone but along comes Bill Clinton(D) and his pet friends Adrew Cuemo(D) the HUD secretary, and Janet Reno(D) of the DOJ. They schemed a plan to give more low income/poor people that ability buy a home either with little or no down payment or intimidate banks into giving loans to people who couldn’t afford them.

The power of government was used to intimate financial institutions into giving loans to people who couldn’t afford them.

Then comes Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. Two peas in a pod stonewalled any attempt to bring this whole financial matter out in the open and managed to hold off until the Dems regain control in congress in 06′.

There were no Republicans who had anything to do with the CRA and government intimidation to the financial institutions…not one.

So lay off the recycled rhetoric of “de-regulation. that was NOT the problem, it was intimidation by government that created the so called predatory lending because banks had no choice.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Larry:

We can wait 20 years for the worthless fat cats at the UN to pass their non-applying resolution that don’t hold water to anything.

By then, North Korea along with other fringe kook regimes will have a good supply of Nukes by then and will dare to “call the bluff” to the world.

By then the US will have no missile defense because of defense cuts during the OBama administration so it will have to go to DECON 1 but the problem then…there will be no more nukes for deterrence because Obama scrapped them all out of good faith hoping nations like Russia and China will follow but never did.

North Korea is so unstable it wouldn’t take much to cause them to collapse. If the Soviet Union collapsed…North Korea can fall just as easily. Military force wouldn’t be necessary..that should make the libs happy.

Like or Dislike: 0  0