Capitalism

[El Kabong]

Listen Kirkland we've had a week or so of Barry bad mouthing his own country and he doesn't have any harsher words for North Korea or the Chinese who are allowing this.

You're comparing your Liberal Saviour to one of the saddest excuses for a leader we've had in modern history (save your other buddy Jimmy Carter)...and who is the one who should feel more upset by this

Bush's economic policies weren't great in regards to government spending especially. And you're defending Obama's policies by comparing him to W......oh you MUST be proud

[El Kabong]

North Korea is a BIG issue because maybe they don't use the missles or the nukes but their economy has been bad FOREVER (maybe on account of the fact that they are communist) and they could sell those things to oooooh I don't know Iran or Syria or even some crazy ass people we've never heard of.

The UN has done all it can do with North Korea and with 'Big Brother' China on the Security Council along with the Ruski's nothing worse will be allowed to happen to North Korea....I am sure you in all your wisdom understand that .

It's a testy situation and I didn't like the response.



And Obama also did a full bow to YOUR BOY Abdul Aziz...and I recall you giving W all types of shit for dealing with that guy so I will take the time for you to give Barry some crap for it

[VictorCharlie]

Kirk normally your research trumps Lyle's conservative dogma, but he has a point. Sooner or later there is a statute of limitations on blaming Bush. And even on right wing talk radio it is getting harder and harder to find hardy Bush supporters. Even my really conservative friends will agree that the guy made a lot of mistakes. So the constant comparing of the two doesn't really earn points. From our discussions I don't get the feeling that you are completely sold on Obama either. I think your utter hatred for Bush much like Lyle's for Obama might be keeping you from being objective. Of course its the free for all forum on the internet so who is really keeping score?

[El Kabong]

...one of these days some reporter is going to ask Barry a tough question where he has to make a stand and stick by his answer and whether it's "We don't want the warning sign to be a mushroom cloud", "Wear a sweater and turn the thermostat down", "I did not trade arms for hostages" or "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" Barry will say something, the people won't agree, and eventually people will get used to really questioning him instead of getting drunk off of his celebrity.

Right now we don't have a President, we have a movie star in charge of things

[Andre]

The New York Times > Log In

Oh well, its helped these kids.

On the other note , Nth Korea really is having a poke arent they.

This will test Obama and his team out some, (hope they are decent poker players).

[VictorCharlie]

I think considering the possible death toll any attack or military action against N. Korea must be initiated by the South Koreans first. If NKR decided to roll south or just fire their thousand artillery pieces there would be thousands of US deaths but that pails in comparison to the SKR deaths. I think its in China's best interest not to have a ground war on its border. They will let Kim Jong Il saber rattle but in the end I think they will yank his chain and put him back in line.

[Andre]

I think considering the possible death toll any attack or military action against N. Korea must be initiated by the South Koreans first. If NKR decided to roll south or just fire their thousand artillery pieces there would be thousands of US deaths but that pails in comparison to the SKR deaths. I think its in China's best interest not to have a ground war on its border. They will let Kim Jong Il saber rattle but in the end I think they will yank his chain and put him back in line.

I hope you're right.

Gee you would have to hit them hard and for a long time combined with the south if it was us to draw blood first.
Horrible thought really; I imagine all the other fronts the US are on all over the globe would arc up against it and give it their all too even though they are fighting for different reasons, it may be on for young and old .

[Kirkland Laing]

I think considering the possible death toll any attack or military action against N. Korea must be initiated by the South Koreans first. If NKR decided to roll south or just fire their thousand artillery pieces there would be thousands of US deaths but that pails in comparison to the SKR deaths. I think its in China's best interest not to have a ground war on its border. They will let Kim Jong Il saber rattle but in the end I think they will yank his chain and put him back in line.

South Korea don't want to fight a war with NK and don't want us stirring trouble in the region and hyping a "threat" just so our war industry can claim trillions more dollars for a missile defence system that doesn't work. Nobody in the region wants us to do anything militarily, they all want us to back off and resolve the situation peacefully.

[Kirkland Laing]

Kirk normally your research trumps Lyle's conservative dogma, but he has a point. Sooner or later there is a statute of limitations on blaming Bush. And even on right wing talk radio it is getting harder and harder to find hardy Bush supporters. Even my really conservative friends will agree that the guy made a lot of mistakes. So the constant comparing of the two doesn't really earn points. From our discussions I don't get the feeling that you are completely sold on Obama either. I think your utter hatred for Bush much like Lyle's for Obama might be keeping you from being objective. Of course its the free for all forum on the internet so who is really keeping score?

So the crisis caused by a bunch of decisions between 2001 and 2005 deregulating and ending regulatory oversight of the financial industry, a period of time when the GOP controlled all three branches of government and the Bush administration/Bush appointees made all the crucial (disastrous) decisions to let the financial industry go wild is now Obama's fault after two months of office? How does that work exactly?

I'm only "comparing" the two to show that Bush created the current problems while Obama is trying to clear up the mess, clearing up inaccuracies and general wrongness in Lyle's previous posts, etc.

[VictorCharlie]

Kirk normally your research trumps Lyle's conservative dogma, but he has a point. Sooner or later there is a statute of limitations on blaming Bush. And even on right wing talk radio it is getting harder and harder to find hardy Bush supporters. Even my really conservative friends will agree that the guy made a lot of mistakes. So the constant comparing of the two doesn't really earn points. From our discussions I don't get the feeling that you are completely sold on Obama either. I think your utter hatred for Bush much like Lyle's for Obama might be keeping you from being objective. Of course its the free for all forum on the internet so who is really keeping score?

So the crisis caused by a bunch of decisions between 2001 and 2005 deregulating and ending regulatory oversight of the financial industry, a period of time when the GOP controlled all three branches of government and the Bush administration/Bush appointees made all the crucial (disastrous) decisions to let the financial industry go wild is now Obama's fault after two months of office? How does that work exactly?

I'm only "comparing" the two to show that Bush created the current problems while Obama is trying to clear up the mess, clearing up inaccuracies and general wrongness in Lyle's previous posts, etc.

As I've said before I'm no economic specialist but Clinton's repealing (I know it was authored by Gramm) of Glass/Steagal set the stage for all of this mess. Both parties can share a some blame. Where was the JEC, Committe on Energy/Commerce or the Commitee for Financial Services? The "its all Bush's fault" tag line is just getting old. He is the President. Once he got swore in they are his problems and he better have a solution. If in a year from now we are not any better will you still be putting the whole thing on Bush and the GOP? I want to hear ideas and solutions from my President not how he got dealt a crappy hand from the last guy. There is no ONE right answer to our crisis and while Lyle's responses can sometimes be likened to rhetoric I think his questioning of our President's plan is very justified. On a side note I didn't like his speech either nor do I care for the celebrity persona but thats just my opinion.

[Kirkland Laing]

Kirk normally your research trumps Lyle's conservative dogma, but he has a point. Sooner or later there is a statute of limitations on blaming Bush. And even on right wing talk radio it is getting harder and harder to find hardy Bush supporters. Even my really conservative friends will agree that the guy made a lot of mistakes. So the constant comparing of the two doesn't really earn points. From our discussions I don't get the feeling that you are completely sold on Obama either. I think your utter hatred for Bush much like Lyle's for Obama might be keeping you from being objective. Of course its the free for all forum on the internet so who is really keeping score?

So the crisis caused by a bunch of decisions between 2001 and 2005 deregulating and ending regulatory oversight of the financial industry, a period of time when the GOP controlled all three branches of government and the Bush administration/Bush appointees made all the crucial (disastrous) decisions to let the financial industry go wild is now Obama's fault after two months of office? How does that work exactly?

I'm only "comparing" the two to show that Bush created the current problems while Obama is trying to clear up the mess, clearing up inaccuracies and general wrongness in Lyle's previous posts, etc.

As I've said before I'm no economic specialist but Clinton's repealing (I know it was authored by Gramm) of Glass/Steagal set the stage for all of this mess. Both parties can share a some blame. Where was the JEC, Committe on Energy/Commerce or the Commitee for Financial Services? The "its all Bush's fault" tag line is just getting old. He is the President. Once he got swore in they are his problems and he better have a solution. If in a year from now we are not any better will you still be putting the whole thing on Bush and the GOP? I want to hear ideas and solutions from my President not how he got dealt a crappy hand from the last guy. There is no ONE right answer to our crisis and while Lyle's responses can sometimes be likened to rhetoric I think his questioning of our President's plan is very justified. On a side note I didn't like his speech either nor do I care for the celebrity persona but thats just my opinion.

Clinton repealing Glass Steagal didn't help as it let more players into the market for the securities which blew up the system, but all those securities would have been created, traded and then done exactly the same damage without the big commercial banks having been involved. The only real damage done by Clinton was when he wanted to regulate derivatives with the same bill but Gramm insisted on no regulation of the derivatives market and inserted no-regulation legislation into the bill that he then wouldn't let through the Senate without it being accepted. But the deregulation of mortgage-related derivatives and other financial products from 2001-5 dwarfed the Gramm legislation in terms of the damage it eventually caused as far as the regulation or lack of with derivatives was concerned.

You can't blame Obama for a crisis that was created and that was in full swing when he took office. The problems we're facing now are Obama's to deal with but weren't created by him. We can blame Obama for how he deals with the crisis Bush created but not the crisis itself. And he's definitely making mistakes in how he's handling it! It looks like the choice Americans have is to have their country badly run by a Democrat or insanely badly run by a Republican. But Bush deserves all the blame for how it started, as I already showed in this thread by using facts and evidence :

http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...italism-5.html

That page shows part of the story. Interestingly, in the photograph, the Bush appointee holding the chainsaw over the stack of mortgage regulations was the guy entrusted with monitoring AIG, something he totally failed to even try to do. He just took their word everything was kosher. If I told you the story of the part AIG actually played in the meltdown you'd be reaching for a pitchfork, you just wouldn't believe it possible.

But page 5 only shows part of the story. It doesn't explain how the government ended regulation of the mortgage companies like Countrywide and Ameriquest in 2001, allowing them to write as many mortgages as they wanted then sell them to Wall Street who turned them into (now-toxic) securities. It doesn't explain how when the AGs of every State in the country used Depression-era laws to try and prevent predatory lending to bad debtors (laws brought in after the same shit helped cause the Depression) the Bush administration used the federal regulatory agency that was meant to prevent predatory lending to block the lawsuits and let the mortgage companies continue to make bad loans. It doesn't explain how the Bush administration allowed the banks in 2005 to lever up their debt:asset ratios from an historically safe 10:1 to 30 and 40:1, making the bad debt bubble (and eventual losses) dozens of times bigger overnight. And lots more besides. Too much to mention.

Here's one article about the predatory lending just to confirm some of the above stuff :

Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime - washingtonpost.com

But there's endless more stuff where this came from.

[Kirkland Laing]

North Korea is a BIG issue because maybe they don't use the missles or the nukes but their economy has been bad FOREVER (maybe on account of the fact that they are communist) and they could sell those things to oooooh I don't know Iran or Syria or even some crazy ass people we've never heard of.

The UN has done all it can do with North Korea and with 'Big Brother' China on the Security Council along with the Ruski's nothing worse will be allowed to happen to North Korea....I am sure you in all your wisdom understand that .

It's a testy situation and I didn't like the response.



And Obama also did a full bow to YOUR BOY Abdul Aziz...and I recall you giving W all types of shit for dealing with that guy so I will take the time for you to give Barry some crap for it

Other than continuing to wet the bed over the nonexistent "threat" from NK, thee's nothing substantive in this post to reply to other than the "full bow" thing. Can you give me some facts on that so I can see what you're talking about please.

[Kirkland Laing]

Listen Kirkland we've had a week or so of Barry bad mouthing his own country and he doesn't have any harsher words for North Korea or the Chinese who are allowing this.

You're comparing your Liberal Saviour to one of the saddest excuses for a leader we've had in modern history (save your other buddy Jimmy Carter)...and who is the one who should feel more upset by this

Bush's economic policies weren't great in regards to government spending especially. And you're defending Obama's policies by comparing him to W......oh you MUST be proud

Exactly how did Obama badmouth America? Before you even answer I know that you're going to reply with an out-of-context couple of lines from a speech that some radio yakker has convinced you means Obama hates America, but when put in its proper context you'll realise that the yakker (and by extension you) is full of shit.

And I see you're now terrified over North Korea, a country which like Iran is no threat at all to America. The vast coverage in the media given to NK's "terrifying" missile test is as usual fact-free and designed only to get a large percentage of Americans to wet the bed over nonexistent "threats", thus giving the war industry even more money for missile defence programmes which don't work either. You've got a shit NK missile unable to do anything and shit US missile defence systems unable to hit missiles, and both countries filling their people full of shit about the threat from the other side. Epically ridiculous.

I'm not comparing Obama to Bush. I'm explaining that Obama is a couple of months into a salvage job of a mess that took eight years to create, and pointing out how utterly wrong (as usual) about everything you are.