How many more...

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by bssb

you're right, we should tolerate racism in this counrty Only a true republican bigot would make that argument.

well buddy, maybe do a little digging and you'll find a very hard fact. Racism is not illegal. Thats right, there are no laws against it and in the country we are free to beleive what we want.

Its a unique facet in America that the KKK and American Nazis can practice and preach freely. Welcome to the USA.
If you think republicans are racists you're misinformed and quite honestly not very bright.

[bssb]

all the proof I need are those videos. you see how many people are saying Muslum! Terrorist! you show me an obama rally where people are yelling NATZI! SKinhead! Fascist! go on... find proof of your racist democratic rallies. I'll be waiting, but not holding my breath.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by bssb

all the proof I need are those videos. you see how many people are saying Muslum! Terrorist! you show me an obama rally where people are yelling NATZI! SKinhead! Fascist! go on... find proof of your racist democratic rallies. I'll be waiting, but not holding my breath.

Nothing like responding to a question by changing the argument. Who here mentioned anything about racist Democratic rallies? I did yell "fascist" last week, but it was at my mother when she tried to serve me green beans at a family dinner.

And by the way, your spelling stinks.

[RIJIMMY]

do a little reading my friend....As Bob Marley siad, know your history, so you will know where you're coming from

On this day in 1869, the Republican-controlled 40th Congress passed the 15th Amendment, extending to African-Americans the right to vote. 98% of Republicans in Congress voted in favor (a few abstained because they thought the measure did not go far enough). 97% of Democrats voted against the 15th Amendment.

At a March 20, 1854 meeting convened by anti-slavery activist Alvan Bovay, fifty-five men and three women called for all opponents of slavery to unite in a new organization, to be called "the Republican Party."

On this day in 1877, Republican President Rutherford Hayes appointed Frederick Douglass the U.S. Marshall for the District of Colombia. His chief duty was enforcing federal court orders within the nation's capital. Another of his duties was introducing the President at official functions. Democrats expressed their outrage at an African-American being in such a high-visibility government post.

Robert DeLarge, an African-American congressman and Republican, who was born on this day in 1842. He helped write the South Carolina state constitution of 1868 and then won election to the state legislature.

Henry Blair, the Republican who led the GOP's final attempt to defend African-Americans from their Democrat oppressors in the post-Civil War South. After rising to the rank of Lt. Colonel of the 15th New Hampshire Volunteers, Blair entered politics, winning a seat in the state legislature in 1866. He then won the first of two terms in the U.S. House of Representatives before being elected to the U.S. Senate in 1874.

On this day in 1956, nineteen Democrat U.S. Senators and seventy-five Democrat U.S. Representatives signed the Southern Manifesto, criticizing the Supreme Court's Brown v. Board of Education decision that struck down racial segregation in public schools.

On this day in 1965, police under the command of Democrat Governor George Wallace attacked African-Americans demonstrating for voting rights in Selma, Alabama. Democrats used bull whips, attack dogs, billy clubs, and tear gas in their "Bloody Sunday" assault

On this day in 1954, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower appointed Ernest Wilkins, an African-American lawyer, as his Asst. Secretary of Labor. Among the responsibilities of his high-profile position was representing the U.S. at international labor conferences

On this day in 1976, Republican President Gerald Ford signed a proclamation formally rescinding Democrat President Franklin Roosevelt's notorious Executive Order 9066, which authorized the internment of 120,000 Japanese-Americans during WWII

Senator Lyman Trumbull (R-IL), the person who wrote the 13th Amendment abolishing slavery. On this day in 1865, the 13th Amendment was passed in the U.S. House of Representatives with unanimous Republican support and against intense Democrat opposition. The measure had already passed in the Republican-dominated U.S. Senate.

On May 2, 1963, police in Birmingham, Alabama -- under the command of the Democrat sheriff, Eugene "Bull" Connor -- attacked several thousand African-American schoolchildren who were demonstrating peacefully for their civil rights. Connor's men used high-pressure hoses, clubs and police dogs in their assault, and then jailed nearly a thousand children.

[EarnedStripes44]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

well buddy, maybe do a little digging and you'll find a very hard fact. Racism is not illegal. Thats right, there are no laws against it and in the country we are free to beleive what we want.

Its a unique facet in America that the KKK and American Nazis can practice and preach freely. Welcome to the USA.
If you think republicans are racists you're misinformed and quite honestly not very bright.

...we are free to believe what we want, but the KKK and American Nazis engage in terrorist activity and incite violence. That is where the line is crossed, and although I do believe a racist is a racist irrespective of political affiliation, forgive the generalization, but liberals dont keep well in the company of Nazi's and the KKK. Just ask Sean Hannity and Pat Buchanan.

[JoeP]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

BTW, JoeP, for such a smart guy, I'm not sure why you hang around with that Rockhound nut.

Fishing crosses all political borders... We both know where we stand & don't take these debates too seriously - it's all in fun. Anyways, he'll come around to the light someday...


On another note Jim - don't bother trying to argue logic and reason with the illogical and ignorant ... like on this thread. Facts speak for themselves and if some choose to ignore facts and completely make up other facts in ranting & raving fashion I just laugh and move on.

[bssb]

too bad all your examples are 30-100 years old. and you're right, 30-100 years ago the democratic party was much more racist than the republicans. but things change. the republican party has been taken over by the ultra-conservitive, evangelical far right wing of the party. The Sarah Palins of the world. wanting prayer in schools, creationism and abstinence only. global warming is a hoax, and everyone should own an uzi. If this group had their way we would be living in a theocracy, governed by the rules of the bible. I bet RIJIMMY would vote for Bush again if he could.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by JoeP

Fishing crosses all political borders... We both know where we stand & don't take these debates too seriously - it's all in fun. Anyways, he'll come around to the light someday...
.

I keep saying the same thing about him Jim, especially regarding climate change!!!

You should see the email debates we have! Lots of from both sides, sans the BSSB BS

BSSB,
I'm a very liberal guy, but you are making the rest of us 'moonbats' look bad!
Give it a rest dude! You are obviously new to these discussions. Jim is actually a sane, level-headed guy, and posting the same Bill Maher videos won't get you instant credit here. at the end of the day, no one takes it personal, I'd still fish with RIJ if he ever gets back in the water and off his fiberglass jetty!

[Nebe]

the end is near.

[bssb]

you can all say what you want, fact of the matter is in less than one week we will have a democraticly controled white house and congress and the republican party will be irrelevant. that being said, I like ranting to all you republicans. this counrty was founded on our ability to non-violently argue our opposing views. I believe everyone has a right to their opinion( no matter how flawed I believe that opinion to be). I encourage everyone to go out and vote for the canidate of thier choice. and yes I do dislike most republicans.

[JoeP]

Originally Posted by bssb

you can all say what you want, fact of the matter is in less than one week we will have a democraticly controled white house and congress and the republican party will be irrelevant. that being said, I like ranting to all you republicans. this counrty was founded on our ability to non-violently argue our opposing views. I believe everyone has a right to their opinion( no matter how flawed I believe that opinion to be). I encourage everyone to go out and vote for the canidate of thier choice. and yes I do dislike most republicans.

Wow am I glad you are a spokesman for the far left that has taken over control of the Democratic Party - your "points" say it all and validate many of us Republicans' points...

Oh no, a prayer in school, how horrible , the insanity of it all.

And by the way you may think you are getting a democratically controlled Obama Whitehouse but you'll soon realize (but I'm sure will never admit) that you just bought socialism!

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by JoeP

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10...sial-activist/

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10...-college-days/

Wait, when did Faux News become a reputable source for any kind of bipartisan information.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by JoeP

Wow am I glad you are a spokesman for the far left that has taken over control of the Democratic Party - your "points" say it all and validate many of us Republicans' points...

Oh no, a prayer in school, how horrible , the insanity of it all.

And by the way you may think you are getting a democratically controlled Obama Whitehouse but you'll soon realize (but I'm sure will never admit) that you just bought socialism!

so what is the boy in the class that is muslim supposed to do when the whole class is supposed to prey??

Bush's wallstreet bailout plan was as socialized as they come, so it seems that the republicans were the first to buy it.

[RIJIMMY]

You guys are like the disfunctional family I never had.



Hmm, would I have voted for Bush again? I think the answer is No. I dont know if Kerry would have been better or worse, but I would be willing to gamble he might be better.

[EarnedStripes44]

Originally Posted by Nebe

so what is the boy in the class that is muslim supposed to do when the whole class is supposed to prey??

Bush's wallstreet bailout plan was as socialized as they come, so it seems that the republicans were the first to buy it.

As socialized as they come........

+ he helps secure those multi-million dollar bonuses for the corporate masters of the universe

[EarnedStripes44]

happy devils night everybody

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

As socialized as they come........

+ he helps secure those multi-million dollar bonuses for the corporate masters of the universe

I struggle with the rationalization of this one,,,,I mean it was supported by both house and senate and by both candidates.
Why does it get labeled the "Bush" bailout?

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

I struggle with the rationalization of this one,,,,I mean it was supported by both house and senate and by both candidates.
Why does it get labeled the "Bush" bailout?

It's the "Bush" bailout because he sat down and wrote up the entire proposal himself, without any help. He's also responsible for the suspension of game 5 of the World Series and the extinction of the Dodo bird.

I understand Bush being blamed for a lot of what has gone wrong in this country over the last 4 years because he has been a failure as a President and a leader. But to blame him for the economy or the bailout package shows how little people know about what's going on in government.

The economy was largely good while the Republicans controlled Congress (look at consecutive quarters of economic growth) and it has really suffered in the last 1 1/2 years since Congress has been Democrat controlled. Coincidence? Maybe. But, the horrible bills that made it possible for people who in no way could afford home ownership to get mortgages, were Democrat written and approved by Democrat votes in Congress.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

Why does it get labeled the "Bush" bailout?

Because his Friggin Signature is on it....


I know its probably in Crayon.....but its there

[EarnedStripes44]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

I struggle with the rationalization of this one,,,,I mean it was supported by both house and senate and by both candidates.
Why does it get labeled the "Bush" bailout?

because Wolfson, Bush's treasury secretary, is the architect all of this and he is "doling out the bread" to banks that got so big that when they fail, they bring securities industry with them.

The fed, with Bernanke at the helm, who is sort of stuck between a rock and a hard place but is probably the smartest bureaucrat in washington, does not need congress to act and he is has been pumping billions of capital into AIG, Bear Stearns and others. Hopefully that clears things up for you.

[EarnedStripes44]

Originally Posted by fishbones

It's the "Bush" bailout because he sat down and wrote up the entire proposal himself, without any help. He's also responsible for the suspension of game 5 of the World Series and the extinction of the Dodo bird.

I understand Bush being blamed for a lot of what has gone wrong in this country over the last 4 years because he has been a failure as a President and a leader. But to blame him for the economy or the bailout package shows how little people know about what's going on in government.

The economy was largely good while the Republicans controlled Congress (look at consecutive quarters of economic growth) and it has really suffered in the last 1 1/2 years since Congress has been Democrat controlled. Coincidence? Maybe. But, the horrible bills that made it possible for people who in no way could afford home ownership to get mortgages, were Democrat written and approved by Democrat votes in Congress.

The republicans pushed for the deregulation of it all and democrats wanted to help there constituents. Almost a perfect storm of party interests. After decades of deregulartion debt became an asset and under the new rules of doing things the economy grew like a house of cards. What would you expect when you can forecast profit. But to lay blame on the shoulders of democrats does not do the argument much justice. Both parties are complicit; end of story. And sure lets blame the little people who could not afford this or that because when the octopus pulling the strings tries to escape it pisses ink. Anyway, if anything is clear, surveillance in the interest of protecting investors from surging losses should not be left to the will of financial institutions. Its called a mixed economy for a reason. So lets come full circle: deregulation, deregulation, deregulation...

[EarnedStripes44]

By the way, Republicans controlled both Controlled both houses of congress from 1995 to 2006. In the 107th session there were 50 (d) senators and 50 (r) senators. Guess who was the tie breaking vote, none other than the great #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney.

Oftentimes kinks in the economy take years to iron out, I see no reason to believe socio-economic ramifacations from republican-controlled congressional legislation are any different. I could be wrong though it could just be a coincidence.

[EarnedStripes44]

sorry about the grammatical errors, this political stuff really rocks my socks.

[RIJIMMY]

But EVERYONE supported it, why isnt it everyone's plan?

Im not trying to be funny here, isnt that the Obama way? Arent we supposed to be about uniting? It should be OUR plan, right? Dems AND Repubs passed it. Or, are you expect Obama to change everything?

[The Dad Fisherman]

If the Ship Sinks its the Captains Fault.....Thats the way it is in the military, and he IS the commander in Chief.

[EarnedStripes44]

Jim if it makes you feel better we can just call it the Wolfson Bailout. He's crafted it and brought the plane in for a landing. Elected officials are just that, the vast majority senators and congressmen/women probably know as much about the economy as you and I. Wolfson and Bernanke are the guys in charge here. They are shepharding a socialist policy of unprecendented proportion.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

By the way, Republicans controlled both Controlled both houses of congress from 1995 to 2006. In the 107th session there were 50 (d) senators and 50 (r) senators. Guess who was the tie breaking vote, none other than the great #^&#^&#^&#^& Cheney.

Oftentimes kinks in the economy take years to iron out, I see no reason to believe socio-economic ramifacations from republican-controlled congressional legislation are any different. I could be wrong though it could just be a coincidence.

You make a great point ES44. The economy was pretty darn good from 95 to 06'. Anyone who wants to do a little digging can find facts to support their argument as to whether it's the Dems or Repubs fault for the economy tanking. The economy got better under Clinton and continued to get better under Bush (with a Republican Congress). Now, it's in the hopper and will be for the foreseeable future. If Obama's elected and the economy isn't out of the crapper while he's in office, is it his fault? Not unless it get's worse due to poor fiscal planning or passing of legislation like some of the recent bills.

The point that I've made previously is that some of the worst damage to this countries economy is a direct result of the mortgage industry being strong-armed into giving mortgages out to people who they knew couldn't afford them. Then, follows the chain reaction as people start defaulting on loans, losing jobs, etc... Christopher Dodd and Barney Frank can be blamed for this. Is this the sole reason for the sucky economy? Not at all, but a lot of people would be in better shape financially if these loans weren't given out in the first place.

[EarnedStripes44]

My whole point about congressional control from 1995-2006 is that we reeling in the effects of deregulation from the those years now. Actually from the last 25 years. Clinton was the greatest republican president in the last 100 years and Greenspans served as the chairman of the fed under his administration but I dont blame either party, I blame deregulation, it just so happens that this school of thought has been embraced by most in the republican party and some in democratic party. But special emphasis is necessary on those years 2001 thru 2006, oil companies and war profiteers not withstanding, our economy turned to paper. Now its wet and red.

Now indulge me for a moment, for the sake of argument, lets just say s**** rolls down hill. Maybe you dont agree, and prefer highlighting irresponsible borrowers as a significant contributing cause to this mess, you'd be right I suppose, but we do lock up drug dealers for years on end, not the users. So what about the irresponsible lenders, they made a lot of money, lots of bonuses off incredible bubbles in home prices. "Speculative" bubbles in homeprices that outstripped the pace of real purchasing power for working people who secured inflated loans.

So what about Greenspan, are his inherent philosophical flaws about corporate self-regulation of derivatives backseated by some green sign in South Atlanta that says WE FINANCE.....BAD CREDIT, NO CEDIT, 0 DOWN. So lets continue to blame the folks waiting in line to get their fix of the china bubbling in the dealers spoon.

Who put the rules in place Bones?

Now I'll give you this, Liberals can think up some brilliant headf****. However, let us not neglect the parisitic self interest and greed that hitchiked its way onto well intentioned policy that often happens as a result of a collision of interests. This is what has turned a good policy proposal bad. Self interest is, to varying extents, an essential part of the human condition and it should be held in check where necessary. Is that not a cornerstone of conservatism, keeping self interest in check and under control. The irony for me here, is that conservatism, dating back to Thomas Hobbes, insists on checking people with prisons, police, illegal wiretaps, etc, etc but they dont want to check corporations which enjoy the same citizenship rights as the people they pursue to control. I don't know dude, I just don't know...

Bones, you should include Phil Gram in that sentence with Barney Frank.

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by EarnedStripes44

Now indulge me for a moment, for the sake of argument, lets just say s**** rolls down hill. Maybe you dont agree, and prefer highlighting irresponsible borrowers as a significant contributing cause to this mess, you'd be right I suppose, but we do lock up drug dealers for years on end, not the users. So what about the irresponsible lenders, they made a lot of money, lots of bonuses off incredible bubbles in home prices. "Speculative" bubbles in homeprices that outstripped the pace of real purchasing power for working people who secured inflated loans.

I like your analogy of the drug dealers/users. It does fit this discussion to a point. Would you rather see drug users put behind bars and then the dealers would have noone to sell to? Or do you try to put the dealers away so the users can't get their drugs? Realistically, you can't do either to the point that it's going to end the drug problem in this country.

Same goes for loan companies. Blame the loan companies or blame the borrowers. It doesn't matter because in the long run they both are screwed. People lose their homes and companies go bankrupt. I do blame the big mortgage companies for preying on uneducated or unqualified loan applicants. Now, they are reaping what they sow. But, just like drug dealers, when one goes away, another will pop up to take it's place sooner oor later. Hopefully this crisis has at least made people more aware of their own financial state.

My point earlier was just that as much as everyone would like to blame the Republicans for everything that ails this country, the Democrats are equally to blame.

[JohnnyD]

Originally Posted by fishbones

The economy was largely good while the Republicans controlled Congress (look at consecutive quarters of economic growth) and it has really suffered in the last 1 1/2 years since Congress has been Democrat controlled. Coincidence? Maybe. But, the horrible bills that made it possible for people who in no way could afford home ownership to get mortgages, were Democrat written and approved by Democrat votes in Congress.

1 1/2 years is not nearly enough time for the effects of a Democratically controlled congress to come to light. Our current situation has largely been developed through policies enacted 6-8 years ago. Many economists expect any policy changes to take at least 4 years before being able to make an educated judgment on the performance effects of those policies.

Actually, "the horrible bills that made it possible for people who in no way could afford home ownership" were written and approved by the Republican Congress 4 years ago. The Republicans pushed forth massive de-regulation bills that sowed *some* of the seeds of the crisis we face today. On the other hand, the Democrats didn't do anything to rectify the bad policy as was promised.