If you want to claim that the democrats in congress were not equally responsible for their votes...
Posted By: sam on 2008-09-08
In Reply to: Here's the rest of the story. - sm
there is no talkin' to ya. But anyone who knows how voting works, knows the Dems share responsibility for any action or inaction that was taken.
I still say Petraeus knows more about it than Barack Obama does. And frankly, than you or I do.
Yes, that is the same thing we heard about Viet Nam, so no matter what we promised them about helping them, we just left. And the worst genocide in history followed right behind...the killing fields of Cambodia. And here the left is...wanting to do it again. No matter what indeed. Sigh.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Tell that to the democratic congress - they are responsible
And while people are getting laid off left and write the democratic congress who gave the bail outs are not giving back any of the money. And the people who ran FM/FM are not giving back any of the money. And the money that was given for the bail outs but instead the people used it to take lavish vacations and put more money in their pockets are not giving it back, and the DEMOCRATIC congress is not enforcing that they should give it back.
Democrats are not responsible
for the mess we are in. It's the republicans and all their deregulation, for one thing. How about the war in Iraq and the huge deficit we now have? And then there are the corporate tax breaks. All of those things have contributed to the mess we are in. The money didn't trickle down, did it? It only made the top 1% of the people in this country better off. Those aren't things the democrats have done.
The republicans made this mess and then they have the gall to turn around and blame the democrats. Do you know why? Because there are those out there who don't know better and will believe them. That's what they are relying on. The republicans got into office with lies and misleading the public and they are still trying the same tactics. Hopefully enough people will not buy into it this time.
Even knowing the Democrats are responsible....
for this mess we are in and going to be on a 7billion dollar hook if they have their way....we are cleaning up THEIR mess...and your Mr. Obama is second on the list for donations from Fannie...he has gotten almost as much in 4 years as some senators in 30 years...even KNOWING that...you want to put him in the White House. How can you possibly ignore that??
The Democrats had enough votes to pass it without the Republicans...
but refuse to. Why don't THEY grow up and go ahead and pass it? Because they don't want to be the ones to vote it in if it tanks. I repeat...put up or shut up, democrats!
Wrong. Democrats are responsible for the mortgage meltdown, not Bush....
McCain tried to tell them in 2005...Dems blocked the regulation he begged for for Fannie/Freddie. But the Dems were too deep in the pockets...Franklin Raines, Jamie Gorelick, James Johnson, Timothy Howard...all democrats, all walked away from fannie Mae with golden parachutes of millions...and we are left holding the bag. Fannie contributed more to Chris Dodd, Democratic head of Banking and COmmerce committe than any other senator in the past 20 years...followed closely by Barack Obama, who has only been IN the senate for 2 years...you do the math and follow the money. Democrats largely responsible for this. ANd you want to put one in the white house. Who wants to raise taxes in this financial crisis. What part of collapse of the economy don't you...and Mr. Obama...understand?
Since the democrats in Congress took over 2 years
nm
but Democrats control congress.
Did you miss that?
answer the question. Why do the Democrats in congress...
Chris Dodd, Barney Frank...why do you not hold the them and the democrats in congress who blocked bill after bill for the past 6-7 years that would have stopped this?
If you would hold your Dem Congress as responsible as you hold me...
THAT would be progress. lol.
Most of his votes are not voting votes....
nm
It's sad that all are not treated fairly and equally...
- on this board or in the real world. But that is the way things are and it's time to accept it, I guess.
Your reply is equally mature.
nm
Pardon me. Are you saying the rules are not enforced equally? sm
I asked for an example, i.e., a specific post. Which post is it specifically. I do not have time to read every post on this board. Also, you said insults. I asked for examples of that. Again, you did not provide any. I am not quite sure how I am to do something about anything when you are not cooperating. I have, in the past, posted equally on both boards regarding sticking to the boards you belong on. However, I can't assume that simply because someone disagrees with your point of view, that they are of a certain political persuasian. That would be, indeed, labeling and unfair on my part. I will post another reminder about which board to stay on, but I don't appreciate your insinuation that there is favoritism here. As the board owner has said before, if this board is not to your liking, you certainly have options.
BTDT. This is an equally offensive opportunity.
x
W's clueless response is equally as disturbing.
"So what if the guy threw his shoe at me?" Bush told a reporter in response to a question about the incident.
"Let me talk about the guy throwing his shoe. It's one way to gain attention. It's like going to a political rally and having people yell at you. It's like driving down the street and having people not gesturing with all five fingers. ...These journalists here were very apologetic. They ... said this doesn't represent the Iraqi people, but that's what happens in free societies where people try to draw attention to themselves."
So what? How many agree that this guy was seeking attention? Only on the W planet would the alleged leader of the free world be so unconscious and so casual about this deepest of insults. Who cares? Not W, evidently.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/12/14/bush.iraq/index.html
O's votes support his claims. JM's votes support Bush.
Believe what you like. Voting records tell the tale. Could use a few more details on that budget. Just what programs will he slash and and how many tax dollars will be directed away from middle class and in the direction of the rich? How much longer can the infrastructure afford to crumble?
JM adopted O's withdrawal plan when he saw how well it went over with the public in an election year. He flipped on the war once. What's to stop him from flipping again once elected? The nation is war weary. Some prefer a surge in diplomacy, not military answers to diplomatic failures. Ask the Iraqis who have lost more than 100,000 among them how sucessful the war has been. Obama has always understood that the OBL/Taliban live in Afganistan, not Iraq. JM, a little slow on the draw there.
I see nothing in JMs platform that backs his claims about transparency. I see specific plan on the O side under technology initiatives, continued initiatives which originated under Clinton and were reversed during the undercover Bush administration. Pork barrel spending for pubs means something different than it does to dems. Slash the poor to give to the rich? Hard seel in the current economic frefall. Also find nothing in JM's plan to address runaway contract corruption in Iraq. Having Halliburton and companies there props up those struggling American corporations. Show me the plan.
Antiglobal/antidiplomacy. No surprise there. This is about the futureworld, not American imperial delusions of grandeur. So much data on the drilling scam being an immediate relief for gas problems out there it is not worth addressing. Can you say T-Bone Pickens, i.e., we can't drill our way out of this one. He should know. Been an oil man all his life.
Since these are just a few, what else do you have up your sleeve?
There are other choices. I find Obama and McCain equally offensive, so I am voting for Ralph Nader.
Bob Barr might also be a good choice.
Thank you for being responsible..
enough to read up on someone and not take someone else's talking points and pass them off as fact. I am amazed at how many people are quick to jump on the bandwagon of rumor, name calling and hatred just because someone else has a different opinion. To those of you who can't do your own homework on the candidates without a little help from the far left or the far right, please don't vote, it is a waste of your time. Please don't vote for someone based solely on gender, color, military service or age.
As I said in my other post, there are a lot of gullible people out there who believe anything and everything they read. Do your own research, branch out further than Fox News, MSNBC, NY Times, etc. Educate yourselves!
Because someone is responsible for us being where we are...
people we trusted to be taking care of us, and they sold us down the river. And that is wrong. I would be saying the same thing if it were the Republicans responsible. They have been responsible for other things, sure they have. I am not an id*ot. However, this crisis, this huge crisis we find ourselves in, was completely avoidable. And I believe they should be held accountable. This is a really big deal. We are going to be on the hook for a huge amount of money before this is over. I guess I am the only one who cares how we got here. But I do care.
No, I'm responsible for my own "O"
nm
You mean the same way O is not responsible for
Rev Wright's sermons, Tony Rezko's shady deals, Bill Ayers actions 40 years ago, Acorn's discrepancies and Blago's corruption?
Yes, because I am responsible I am SOL
Exactly... oh because I have never been late on a payment, you wont help me? I have to be at least 3 months behind on my mortgage? No thanks.
Even though I lost the 50K I put down and I'm in an upside down mortgage (in a west coast state)...
I also bought at the height of the market in an ARM (7 years) with a stated income, probably someone they never should have given a loan to, however I can afford it! For now at least...
Yes it irks me like no other that I can't refinance simply because I've done the right thing.
it is quite disturbing
good luck to you!
Yes, he is responsible...(sm)
He's responsible for cleaning Bush's deficit, 2 wars, an economic meltdown that Bush ignored, etc..etc...etc...
The owner is responsible for her pet.
I do not hate cats, but I don't particularly like them either. And I especially do not like doing my puttering in my flower bed and unearthing a nice fresh pile of cat poo. It's disgusting. But back to the issue at hand. Is there a reason why this woman cannot keep this cat in the house? Other than the fact that she is secretly enjoying this in some perverse way? It's really pretty simple. Keep. The. Cat. In. The. House. Period.
who they hold responsible for what?
nm
This is about responsible leadership.
No blame game here. That's your job. This is about what Bush did and did not do while the catastrophe was unfolding in front of our very eyes. Your post demonstrates the blind eye you are turning toward the abysmal response on the part of Bush and the feds. Bush was on vacations turning his blind eye. The viewing audience did not turn that same blind eye, and they remember seeing all the local official's pleas for help fall on deaf ears. This is what republicans do. Deny, divert and dismiss in their hurry to make anybody and everybody else responsible for their own failures. All the spin in the world will not change what the American people are smart enough to figure out for themselves. Ask them who failed New Orleans.
Perhaps...as individuals are responsible for the way they act...
and the politics of personal destruction, frankly, suck. No matter who is on the receiving end. And this has been particularly nasty, hateful and sexist toward Palin...but Obama supporters are a different breed. They cut the hide off Hillary in strips too. It is a strange phenomenon.
a responsible American
how about you being a responsible American too and stop blaming EVERYTHING on republicans. Do you think the Dems had no role in the current situation in this country? Take your head out of the sand. There is enough blame to go around for both the republicans AND the democrats. And a responsible American would embrace the freedom of respect the other opinions of other people. We all have a right to express our opinions and be respected for them, not criticized for not thinking just like you.
No, he's not responsible for anyrthing....
He wasn't responsible for going to Selma, AL of all places and trying to kiss up to them, relating how he was born because of the marches, when the marches didn't even take place until 4 years after he was born.
When I hear Obama say how saddened he is to hear this or better yet, do like McCain who has already taken the time to call this lady's family and care about her well being, then we'll talk.
No black people don't start anything. It's always just the whites. You can believe whatever helps you sleep at night.
It works both ways. Reverse discrimination is alive and well in the U.S. as well.
responsible obama
I sleep at night just fine..as far as Obama is concerned with his going to Selma; I belive that people there are intelligent enough to know what is and is not true regarding his statement; and for those who believe everything he says..that is their perogative...as I said, the Bill O'Reilly's, Pat Buchanans and like of the world can spout bigotry, hatred and division all they want and those who cannot see it for what it is are indeed blind and driven by the same hatred and bigotry that they themselves will never admit to. I will say that the majority of remarks made here about black people and other minorities have been bigoted, hateful and mean - how do you think it makes me feel when I come here and see remarks like 'towelhead', 'oreo' etc. Most people say '**gger' is just a word too but you have no idea what it feels like when you are called one - I have experienced this and it feels like someone is spitting in your face and then they slap you. Do you know what it is like to be literally run out of a neighborhood you chose to live in, have your windows broken, cross burned on your lawn, children threatened and even your dog killed because 'your kind' (meaning me) we dont want here? I know what it is because I have lived it, yet always being mindful of the fact that most people, be they black, white, red, brown, etc - are basically decent people who do not condone this type of behavior yet there are those who think it's okay. When you have lived through something like this then perhaps you can tell ME something.
No, it's to make them RESPONSIBLE for themselves!
Can't you read?
Throwing money at them will not help.
Until they start demanding more of THEMSELVES, there is nothing anyone else can do to FORCE them to learn.
(There. I CAPPED the important words for you, seeing as you had a problem comprehending my last post.)
P.S. I'm glad you're not my kid.
Wrong again. I am not responsible for
spreading joy to anybody else who is so miserable that they cannot stand it until they make everybody else around them just as miserable. This sludge has no power over me or what I feel about the amazing transformation we are about to witness in this country, and I intend to enjoy every single moment of it, despite obamaknockers best efforts at killjoy. Like most Obots, I can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Get ready for a compliment. Giving up is the smartest thing you've said all night.
But you are responsible for your own posts, jj. sm
I'm not surprised this "sm" poster was you above. Same tone and defensive style that you have from time to time.
But I personally did enjoy your first post about Baltimore crowds greeting Obama. It was a nice story.
The government is not responsible....(sm)
for shielding kids from everything. You're right, it is natural curiosity, but realistically you cannot control that. Kids are smarter than you give them credit for. If a young boy wants to see a naked female, then guess what? He'll figure out a way to do that with or without the internet. What did they do before the internet came along? It's a waste of time and money for the govt to try to alter the progression of nature.
And yes, I believe in sex education, but think it is the parents' responsibility to do it. When a child starts asking questions, he deserves real answers.
I think the question is, would you rather him learn by you teaching him about these things, grasping what he can from a glimpse at an internet page, or maybe just the girl next door? It's up to parents to provide guidelines for their children, not the govt.
BTW, not everyone that looks at porn on the internet is a social deviant. Curiosty does not end at age 12.
Bill Clinton is no more responsible for 9-11 than..sm
you or I am. It is Al quaeda who is responsible.
OK, he didn't take Osama bin Laden when he was offered up by the Sudan. Do you actually think taking bin Laden down would have stopped 9-11. So, Osama was the only terrorist out there. 9-11's plan had been in motion and was much bigger than Osama. Case and point, the fact that this admin. is not even focusing the bulk of their attention on Osama, so that's a mute point.
And I wouldn't try to defend the DEFICIT that Bush has brought to the White House because I'd take a projected surplus over a projected never ending deficit anyday.
No one is saying that they don't grow up to be good or responsible?!
All I am saying is they would have wanted you home, instead of a babysitter or someone else! No one said anything about the quality of person they turn out to be!? Little children need their moms and that is the truth! I know, I used to work at a daycare and how they would leave those poor little babies is beyond me! I couldn't do it! And it was anywhere from 8 to 12 hours a day! And then they would get jealous if they got attached to us!? Hello!? Who is raising them?! Not you lady! And I'm not talking about single moms either. These were "business" women who had husbands and felt the need to support their "lifestyle" and to give their kids "everything," when all they REALLY wanted was their love and time! I may not have the nicest, newest, biggest house, but my kids want for nothing, including me, and I am there for them!
Well, the fact that they are largely responsible for...
the problem we find ourselves in right now and the fact that he was 2nd on the donations list from fannie among all senators throughout their careers and he has only been up there what...3 years? I would think that should be enough to apologize for.
Very responsible and insightful post.
Enough of this childishness already!
We are ONE nation and our nation has elected President Obama. At least give the man a chance to succeed or fail before you crucify him.
Here is responsible lending practices
Canadian banks are typically leveraged at 18 to 1 -- compared with U.S. banks at 26 to 1.
Fareed Zakaria
NEWSWEEK
Feb 16, 2009
The legendary Editor of The New Republic, Michael Kinsley, once held a "Boring Headline Contest" and decided that the winner was "Worthwhile Canadian Initiative." Twenty-two years later, the magazine was rescued from its economic troubles by a Canadian media company, which should have taught us Americans to be a bit more humble. Now there is even more striking evidence of Canada's virtues.
Guess which country, alone in the industrialized world, has not faced a single bank failure, calls for bailouts or government intervention in the financial or mortgage sectors. Yup, it's Canada. In 2008, the World Economic Forum ranked Canada's banking system the healthiest in the world. America's ranked 40th, Britain's 44th.
Canada has done more than survive this financial crisis. The country is positively thriving in it. Canadian banks are well capitalized and poised to take advantage of opportunities that American and European banks cannot seize. The Toronto Dominion Bank, for example, was the 15th-largest bank in North America one year ago. Now it is the fifth-largest. It hasn't grown in size; the others have all shrunk.
So what accounts for the genius of the Canadians? Common sense. Over the past 15 years, as the United States and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries, the Canadians refused to follow suit, seeing the old rules as useful shock absorbers. Canadian banks are typically leveraged at 18 to 1—compared with US banks at 26 to 1 and European banks at a frightening 61 to 1. Partly this reflects Canada's more risk-averse business culture, but it is also a product of old-fashioned rules on banking.
Canada has also been shielded from the worst aspects of this crisis because its housing prices have not fluctuated as wildly as those in the United States. Home prices are down 25 percent in the United States, but only half as much in Canada. Why? Well, the Canadian tax code does not provide the massive incentive for over consumption that the U.S. code does: interest on your mortgage isn't deductible up north. In addition, home loans in the United States are "non-recourse," which basically means that if you go belly up on a bad mortgage, it's mostly the bank's problem. In Canada, it's yours.
Ah, but you've heard American politicians wax eloquent on the need for these expensive programs—interest deductibility alone costs the federal government $100 billion a year—because they allow the average Joe to fulfill the American Dream of owning a home. Sixty-eight percent of Americans own their own homes. And the rate of Canadian homeownership? It's 68.4 percent.
Canada has been remarkably responsible over the past decade or so. It has had 12 years of budget surpluses, and can now spend money to fuel a recovery from a strong position. The government has restructured the national pension system, placing it on a firm fiscal footing, unlike our own insolvent Social Security. Its health-care system is cheaper than America's by far (accounting for 9.7 percent of GDP, versus 15.2 percent here), and yet does better on all major indexes.
Life expectancy in Canada is 81 years, versus 78 in the United States; "healthy life expectancy" is 72 years, versus 69. American car companies have moved so many jobs to Canada to take advantage of lower health-care costs that since 2004, Ontario and not Michigan has been North America's largest car-producing region.
I could go on. The U.S. currently has a brain-dead immigration system. We issue a small number of work visas and green cards, turning away from our shores thousands of talented students who want to stay and work here. Canada, by contrast, has no limit on the number of skilled migrants who can move to the country. They can apply on their own for a Canadian Skilled Worker Visa, which allows them to become perfectly legal "permanent residents" in Canada—no need for a sponsoring employer, or even a job. Visas are awarded based on education level, work experience, age and language abilities. If a prospective immigrant earns 67 points out of 100 total (holding a Ph.D. is worth 25 points, for instance), he or she can become a full-time, legal resident of Canada.
Companies are noticing. In 2007 Microsoft, frustrated by its inability to hire foreign graduate students in the United States, decided to open a research center in Vancouver. The company's announcement noted that it would staff the center with "highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S." So the brightest Chinese and Indian software engineers are attracted to the United States, trained by American universities, then thrown out of the country and picked up by Canada—where most of them will work, innovate and pay taxes for the rest of their lives.
If President Obama is looking for smart government, there is much he, and all of us, could learn from our quiet—OK, sometimes boring—neighbour to the north. Meanwhile, in the councils of the financial world, Canada is pushing for new rules for financial institutions that would reflect its approach. This strikes me as, well, a worthwhile Canadian initiative.
JTBB - are you ever going to hold him responsible
For things he is doing. If he's in there the next 50 years (god help us) are you still going to blame Bush. Obama promised things during his campaign. He has broken those promises. Now your saying it's not his fault? Lets blame the previous administration? For promises the O made and has broken? For going back on his word? It's the previous administrations fault???? He said he was not going to do certain things (re: Patriot Act) but now has changed his tune. Helloooooo. This is the O doing this. Has nothing to do with previous administration, but if your going to pull that little stunt, then you must blame the previous administration before that (B.C.) because GW inherited a lot of crap he had to deal with.
LOL. 3 more votes....obviously you ...
don't know who the heck she is....lol.
only two votes...
regardless of the weight of their votes, it was a "yes" to a bill that should be better. i still want to know what the crap this "tax exemption for wooden arrows made for use by children" is all about????
Ask the American people who they hold responsible.
nm
Tell it to the Lone Star. W is solely responsible
More premedicated murder and gestapo police state policies than any gov in history heere. Hope he gets brought up on the criminal charges he deserves so he can get a taste of his own medicine.
Bush is not responsible for New Orleans' plight
Their wonderful mayor is and he loves it and still loves it. Bush didn't cause Katrina; sorry but you obviusly needed to hear that. Bush didn't cause all those folks to be standing around screaming for the government to help them. Now, on the other hand, their previous mayor WAS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE for much of the disaster that took place afterwards and before. Why didn't he fix the levy with the 60 million dollars he was given years ago? Why isn't the citizens of New Orleans having a pissfit over that? I'll tell you why........because he's a black mayor. Bush had nothing to do with their situation, just like Obama would have had nothing to do wiht their situation. Mayor Ray Negan had LOTS to do with it. The only reason he wants everyone to come back and live there is because the more moochers living there, the more federal money, i.e., MY MONEY and YOURS, he will receive to once again squander away just like he has done for years.
They needed a new charity hospital; he could have built several with all the billions he has received but he didn't. Didn't hear any of those poor folks yelling about that did ya? No! They go for the white guy in power, which was Bush. Now, if that had been Obama, you would not have heard all the screaming and preaching about the big bad President.
On the other hand, the ones really hit hard by Katrina, the gulf coast of Mississippi, where was all their help? Why weren't they standing in the streets blaming the president for their plight? Because they were folks who worked for a living and never thought for a minute a human being cause a hurricane! They got up and got to work clearing and doing what they could until help came, which by the way should have been them first but it was those screaming in the streets down in New Orleans. Katrina hit the Mississippi gulf coast the hardest, a direct blow!
I encourage all responsible people to ignore this message
This kind of rhetoric is old. Responsible people are well informed. Responsible people read both sides and make their own decisions on what they believe or don't believe. To tell people not to listen or to have someone banned is NOT responsible. It is the exact hate filled rhetoric the left-wingers spew.
If you don't like what she has to say don't listen to her, but this is a complete turnoff telling people what they should or shouldn't listen to. Makes me want to listen all the more. I am tired of division and name calling. That is why I am not a liberal anymore. As for spreading trash...yes, I do see that a lot.
Pastors would be held responsible from the pulpit just teaching
XX
Hold your president responsible!! Call your senators!!
XX
And why would we thank him when it took 217 votes for this to pass?
nm
It does not matter who votes for it or against it....
it is morally wrong. Because it is legal does not make it right. While I will obey the law of the land, as my faith teaches me to do, I will continue to speak out against a procedure that is murder, no matter who chooses it. See link if you do not believe that life begins at conception. View that and tell me that abortion is not killing a living baby and then defend it as right because someone chooses it. That choice is choosing to kill a child. The one portion of this. If you feel that a woman needs a choice of whether or not to kill a baby, so be it, that is your right and I respect your right to say it. I do not and will continue to speak against it, and I hope that you believe it is my right to do that as well. Some of us must speak for the most innocent who cannot speak for themselves.
http://video.msn.com/v/us/v.htm?g=76c82299-9a7a-4656-8ec4-0f6fc1fd6ae0&f=06/64&fg=copy
If it doesn't, whoever votes against it
will probably have a severe media backlash. They made these changes so that the two main arguments - that it covers illegal immigrants and rich people - are discredited. If it doesn't pass, I'm sure they're going to have to deal with the media.
|
