Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › Obama takes on credit rating agencies!
- This topic has 50 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 10 months ago by
scaredyclassic.
-
AuthorPosts
-
January 25, 2009 at 11:18 AM #336065January 25, 2009 at 11:55 AM #335582
TheBreeze
Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Following is DIRECT QUOTE FROM NYT ARTICLE you buffoon: “But other proposals the Obama administration is preparing to make, like tighter federal regulation of mortgage brokers, had been recommended in Mr. Paulson’s blueprint.”[/quote]
I’m sure Paulson had some good ideas and I’m glad to see that Obama is picking out the good stuff and leaving the rest. It’s very smart and pragmatic on his part and is a move away from Bush’s “you’re either with us or against us” policies.
If you’re not a right-wing nutjob, then why do you care who gets credit for Obama’s policies? And who do you recommend voting for? Ron Paul? He didn’t even bother to put his name on the ballot in California.
So far, Obama is making smart and pragmatic moves. Why are you so intent on criticizing and belittling his every move?
January 25, 2009 at 11:55 AM #335913Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Following is DIRECT QUOTE FROM NYT ARTICLE you buffoon: “But other proposals the Obama administration is preparing to make, like tighter federal regulation of mortgage brokers, had been recommended in Mr. Paulson’s blueprint.”[/quote]
I’m sure Paulson had some good ideas and I’m glad to see that Obama is picking out the good stuff and leaving the rest. It’s very smart and pragmatic on his part and is a move away from Bush’s “you’re either with us or against us” policies.
If you’re not a right-wing nutjob, then why do you care who gets credit for Obama’s policies? And who do you recommend voting for? Ron Paul? He didn’t even bother to put his name on the ballot in California.
So far, Obama is making smart and pragmatic moves. Why are you so intent on criticizing and belittling his every move?
January 25, 2009 at 11:55 AM #335998Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Following is DIRECT QUOTE FROM NYT ARTICLE you buffoon: “But other proposals the Obama administration is preparing to make, like tighter federal regulation of mortgage brokers, had been recommended in Mr. Paulson’s blueprint.”[/quote]
I’m sure Paulson had some good ideas and I’m glad to see that Obama is picking out the good stuff and leaving the rest. It’s very smart and pragmatic on his part and is a move away from Bush’s “you’re either with us or against us” policies.
If you’re not a right-wing nutjob, then why do you care who gets credit for Obama’s policies? And who do you recommend voting for? Ron Paul? He didn’t even bother to put his name on the ballot in California.
So far, Obama is making smart and pragmatic moves. Why are you so intent on criticizing and belittling his every move?
January 25, 2009 at 11:55 AM #336026Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Following is DIRECT QUOTE FROM NYT ARTICLE you buffoon: “But other proposals the Obama administration is preparing to make, like tighter federal regulation of mortgage brokers, had been recommended in Mr. Paulson’s blueprint.”[/quote]
I’m sure Paulson had some good ideas and I’m glad to see that Obama is picking out the good stuff and leaving the rest. It’s very smart and pragmatic on his part and is a move away from Bush’s “you’re either with us or against us” policies.
If you’re not a right-wing nutjob, then why do you care who gets credit for Obama’s policies? And who do you recommend voting for? Ron Paul? He didn’t even bother to put his name on the ballot in California.
So far, Obama is making smart and pragmatic moves. Why are you so intent on criticizing and belittling his every move?
January 25, 2009 at 11:55 AM #336112Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
Following is DIRECT QUOTE FROM NYT ARTICLE you buffoon: “But other proposals the Obama administration is preparing to make, like tighter federal regulation of mortgage brokers, had been recommended in Mr. Paulson’s blueprint.”[/quote]
I’m sure Paulson had some good ideas and I’m glad to see that Obama is picking out the good stuff and leaving the rest. It’s very smart and pragmatic on his part and is a move away from Bush’s “you’re either with us or against us” policies.
If you’re not a right-wing nutjob, then why do you care who gets credit for Obama’s policies? And who do you recommend voting for? Ron Paul? He didn’t even bother to put his name on the ballot in California.
So far, Obama is making smart and pragmatic moves. Why are you so intent on criticizing and belittling his every move?
January 25, 2009 at 12:04 PM #335602Allan from Fallbrook
ParticipantBreeze: I’m not. A careful reading of my responses would indicate that I’m taking issue with your perfervid ranting on about Obama’s greatness.
I’m also going to great lengths to point out, and in a non-partisan fashion, that he is not all that he is cracked up to be.
His relationships with Rezko, and Reverend Wright, and especially Bill Ayers, do matter. Ayers is not a “community activist”, he’s a homegrown terrorist. I don’t use that term lightly, but he is. He’s famously quoted as saying, following 9/11, that he wished he’d blown up more buildings.
Rezko is as dirty as they come, and if you spend any time researching the land deal that the Obama’s did, you’ll see that Michelle Obama and her law firm are just as involved with this mess.
I could care less about his political stripe, but it does MATTER TO YOU. You rant against “right-wing nutjobs”, when many of us are anything but. I’m an arch-conservative, but it doesn’t clearly connote slavish adherence to the Republican Party, as evidenced by the fact that I haven’t voted for them since 1996. I found Dubya to be a well meaning frat boy, who got thrown into a much bigger job than he was prepared for and blew it (not unexpectedly).
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.
January 25, 2009 at 12:04 PM #335933ParticipantBreeze: I’m not. A careful reading of my responses would indicate that I’m taking issue with your perfervid ranting on about Obama’s greatness.
I’m also going to great lengths to point out, and in a non-partisan fashion, that he is not all that he is cracked up to be.
His relationships with Rezko, and Reverend Wright, and especially Bill Ayers, do matter. Ayers is not a “community activist”, he’s a homegrown terrorist. I don’t use that term lightly, but he is. He’s famously quoted as saying, following 9/11, that he wished he’d blown up more buildings.
Rezko is as dirty as they come, and if you spend any time researching the land deal that the Obama’s did, you’ll see that Michelle Obama and her law firm are just as involved with this mess.
I could care less about his political stripe, but it does MATTER TO YOU. You rant against “right-wing nutjobs”, when many of us are anything but. I’m an arch-conservative, but it doesn’t clearly connote slavish adherence to the Republican Party, as evidenced by the fact that I haven’t voted for them since 1996. I found Dubya to be a well meaning frat boy, who got thrown into a much bigger job than he was prepared for and blew it (not unexpectedly).
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.
January 25, 2009 at 12:04 PM #336018ParticipantBreeze: I’m not. A careful reading of my responses would indicate that I’m taking issue with your perfervid ranting on about Obama’s greatness.
I’m also going to great lengths to point out, and in a non-partisan fashion, that he is not all that he is cracked up to be.
His relationships with Rezko, and Reverend Wright, and especially Bill Ayers, do matter. Ayers is not a “community activist”, he’s a homegrown terrorist. I don’t use that term lightly, but he is. He’s famously quoted as saying, following 9/11, that he wished he’d blown up more buildings.
Rezko is as dirty as they come, and if you spend any time researching the land deal that the Obama’s did, you’ll see that Michelle Obama and her law firm are just as involved with this mess.
I could care less about his political stripe, but it does MATTER TO YOU. You rant against “right-wing nutjobs”, when many of us are anything but. I’m an arch-conservative, but it doesn’t clearly connote slavish adherence to the Republican Party, as evidenced by the fact that I haven’t voted for them since 1996. I found Dubya to be a well meaning frat boy, who got thrown into a much bigger job than he was prepared for and blew it (not unexpectedly).
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.
January 25, 2009 at 12:04 PM #336045ParticipantBreeze: I’m not. A careful reading of my responses would indicate that I’m taking issue with your perfervid ranting on about Obama’s greatness.
I’m also going to great lengths to point out, and in a non-partisan fashion, that he is not all that he is cracked up to be.
His relationships with Rezko, and Reverend Wright, and especially Bill Ayers, do matter. Ayers is not a “community activist”, he’s a homegrown terrorist. I don’t use that term lightly, but he is. He’s famously quoted as saying, following 9/11, that he wished he’d blown up more buildings.
Rezko is as dirty as they come, and if you spend any time researching the land deal that the Obama’s did, you’ll see that Michelle Obama and her law firm are just as involved with this mess.
I could care less about his political stripe, but it does MATTER TO YOU. You rant against “right-wing nutjobs”, when many of us are anything but. I’m an arch-conservative, but it doesn’t clearly connote slavish adherence to the Republican Party, as evidenced by the fact that I haven’t voted for them since 1996. I found Dubya to be a well meaning frat boy, who got thrown into a much bigger job than he was prepared for and blew it (not unexpectedly).
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.
January 25, 2009 at 12:04 PM #336132ParticipantBreeze: I’m not. A careful reading of my responses would indicate that I’m taking issue with your perfervid ranting on about Obama’s greatness.
I’m also going to great lengths to point out, and in a non-partisan fashion, that he is not all that he is cracked up to be.
His relationships with Rezko, and Reverend Wright, and especially Bill Ayers, do matter. Ayers is not a “community activist”, he’s a homegrown terrorist. I don’t use that term lightly, but he is. He’s famously quoted as saying, following 9/11, that he wished he’d blown up more buildings.
Rezko is as dirty as they come, and if you spend any time researching the land deal that the Obama’s did, you’ll see that Michelle Obama and her law firm are just as involved with this mess.
I could care less about his political stripe, but it does MATTER TO YOU. You rant against “right-wing nutjobs”, when many of us are anything but. I’m an arch-conservative, but it doesn’t clearly connote slavish adherence to the Republican Party, as evidenced by the fact that I haven’t voted for them since 1996. I found Dubya to be a well meaning frat boy, who got thrown into a much bigger job than he was prepared for and blew it (not unexpectedly).
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.
January 25, 2009 at 12:32 PM #335618Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.[/quote]Uhhh, no. It was obvious even back in 2000 that Bush was a bumbling idiot. I actually voted for him back then even though I knew he was a retard. I figured that the fact he was Republican (and presumably fiscally conservative) would trump his mental deficiencies. Boy was I wrong (on both counts).
By 2004, I knew Bush was a mistake and would have voted for Kerry if he had come out against the Iraq War. Kerry didn’t, so I didn’t vote in 2004.
Obama on the other hand is clearly 10x smarter than Bush and way more politically savvy. Bush was able to fool people for a while with his good ol’ boy act. When that wore off, he was able to play ‘divisive’ politics with the Iraq War. But other than that he was politically and mentally inept.
Obama just amazes me. From his speeches to his actions to the way he plays politics. He is incredibly gifted. I never attributed any of these characteristics to Bush because it was obvious from the beginning that Bush had none of them.
Bush was just lucky enough to be the Republican presidential candidate at a time when Americans could afford to punish Democrats just because the Democratic president had gotten a blowjob in the White House. Today, Obama could star in a porn where he bangs the Virgin Mary herself and Americans wouldn’t give a rat’s so long as he turns the economy around and keeps us safe.
Anyway, if you can’t see the stunning differences between Obama and Bush all I can figure is that you must be willfully blind.
January 25, 2009 at 12:32 PM #335948Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.[/quote]Uhhh, no. It was obvious even back in 2000 that Bush was a bumbling idiot. I actually voted for him back then even though I knew he was a retard. I figured that the fact he was Republican (and presumably fiscally conservative) would trump his mental deficiencies. Boy was I wrong (on both counts).
By 2004, I knew Bush was a mistake and would have voted for Kerry if he had come out against the Iraq War. Kerry didn’t, so I didn’t vote in 2004.
Obama on the other hand is clearly 10x smarter than Bush and way more politically savvy. Bush was able to fool people for a while with his good ol’ boy act. When that wore off, he was able to play ‘divisive’ politics with the Iraq War. But other than that he was politically and mentally inept.
Obama just amazes me. From his speeches to his actions to the way he plays politics. He is incredibly gifted. I never attributed any of these characteristics to Bush because it was obvious from the beginning that Bush had none of them.
Bush was just lucky enough to be the Republican presidential candidate at a time when Americans could afford to punish Democrats just because the Democratic president had gotten a blowjob in the White House. Today, Obama could star in a porn where he bangs the Virgin Mary herself and Americans wouldn’t give a rat’s so long as he turns the economy around and keeps us safe.
Anyway, if you can’t see the stunning differences between Obama and Bush all I can figure is that you must be willfully blind.
January 25, 2009 at 12:32 PM #336033Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.[/quote]Uhhh, no. It was obvious even back in 2000 that Bush was a bumbling idiot. I actually voted for him back then even though I knew he was a retard. I figured that the fact he was Republican (and presumably fiscally conservative) would trump his mental deficiencies. Boy was I wrong (on both counts).
By 2004, I knew Bush was a mistake and would have voted for Kerry if he had come out against the Iraq War. Kerry didn’t, so I didn’t vote in 2004.
Obama on the other hand is clearly 10x smarter than Bush and way more politically savvy. Bush was able to fool people for a while with his good ol’ boy act. When that wore off, he was able to play ‘divisive’ politics with the Iraq War. But other than that he was politically and mentally inept.
Obama just amazes me. From his speeches to his actions to the way he plays politics. He is incredibly gifted. I never attributed any of these characteristics to Bush because it was obvious from the beginning that Bush had none of them.
Bush was just lucky enough to be the Republican presidential candidate at a time when Americans could afford to punish Democrats just because the Democratic president had gotten a blowjob in the White House. Today, Obama could star in a porn where he bangs the Virgin Mary herself and Americans wouldn’t give a rat’s so long as he turns the economy around and keeps us safe.
Anyway, if you can’t see the stunning differences between Obama and Bush all I can figure is that you must be willfully blind.
January 25, 2009 at 12:32 PM #336062Participant[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]
His, however, is a cautionary tale for Obama as well. If you think for a second that the people and news media won’t turn on him and savage him without surcease, well, look at how the people and media lionized Bush in 2000. See any similarities? They’re painfully obvious.[/quote]Uhhh, no. It was obvious even back in 2000 that Bush was a bumbling idiot. I actually voted for him back then even though I knew he was a retard. I figured that the fact he was Republican (and presumably fiscally conservative) would trump his mental deficiencies. Boy was I wrong (on both counts).
By 2004, I knew Bush was a mistake and would have voted for Kerry if he had come out against the Iraq War. Kerry didn’t, so I didn’t vote in 2004.
Obama on the other hand is clearly 10x smarter than Bush and way more politically savvy. Bush was able to fool people for a while with his good ol’ boy act. When that wore off, he was able to play ‘divisive’ politics with the Iraq War. But other than that he was politically and mentally inept.
Obama just amazes me. From his speeches to his actions to the way he plays politics. He is incredibly gifted. I never attributed any of these characteristics to Bush because it was obvious from the beginning that Bush had none of them.
Bush was just lucky enough to be the Republican presidential candidate at a time when Americans could afford to punish Democrats just because the Democratic president had gotten a blowjob in the White House. Today, Obama could star in a porn where he bangs the Virgin Mary herself and Americans wouldn’t give a rat’s so long as he turns the economy around and keeps us safe.
Anyway, if you can’t see the stunning differences between Obama and Bush all I can figure is that you must be willfully blind.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
