[patientlywaiting]

In order to understand what is happening, you have to understand politics.

Democrats did the right thing for the country, even though that meant siding with Bush. Republicans didn’t.

Guys, it’s actually very admirable of you to admit that you’re voting your pocketbooks.

Unfortunately, the majority of Republican voters in the heartland (or in Lakeside) don’t vote their pocketbooks. They vote on issues such as faith, abortion, gay marriage, etc…

As a progressive, I should be kinder but as far as I’m concerned, those “poor” Republican voters are simply hopeless. I say “let them eat cake”. But liberals have “bleeding hearts” and can’t do that.

I can understand people in Carmel Valley or La Jolla voting their pocketbooks but those Republican voters in rural Mississippi are simply dumb.

So FLU, as a well-to-do professional, you should be happy that idiots are born everyday.

[patientlywaiting]

In order to understand what is happening, you have to understand politics.

Democrats did the right thing for the country, even though that meant siding with Bush. Republicans didn’t.

Guys, it’s actually very admirable of you to admit that you’re voting your pocketbooks.

Unfortunately, the majority of Republican voters in the heartland (or in Lakeside) don’t vote their pocketbooks. They vote on issues such as faith, abortion, gay marriage, etc…

As a progressive, I should be kinder but as far as I’m concerned, those “poor” Republican voters are simply hopeless. I say “let them eat cake”. But liberals have “bleeding hearts” and can’t do that.

I can understand people in Carmel Valley or La Jolla voting their pocketbooks but those Republican voters in rural Mississippi are simply dumb.

So FLU, as a well-to-do professional, you should be happy that idiots are born everyday.

[patientlywaiting]

In order to understand what is happening, you have to understand politics.

Democrats did the right thing for the country, even though that meant siding with Bush. Republicans didn’t.

Guys, it’s actually very admirable of you to admit that you’re voting your pocketbooks.

Unfortunately, the majority of Republican voters in the heartland (or in Lakeside) don’t vote their pocketbooks. They vote on issues such as faith, abortion, gay marriage, etc…

As a progressive, I should be kinder but as far as I’m concerned, those “poor” Republican voters are simply hopeless. I say “let them eat cake”. But liberals have “bleeding hearts” and can’t do that.

I can understand people in Carmel Valley or La Jolla voting their pocketbooks but those Republican voters in rural Mississippi are simply dumb.

So FLU, as a well-to-do professional, you should be happy that idiots are born everyday.

[patientlywaiting]

In order to understand what is happening, you have to understand politics.

Democrats did the right thing for the country, even though that meant siding with Bush. Republicans didn’t.

Guys, it’s actually very admirable of you to admit that you’re voting your pocketbooks.

Unfortunately, the majority of Republican voters in the heartland (or in Lakeside) don’t vote their pocketbooks. They vote on issues such as faith, abortion, gay marriage, etc…

As a progressive, I should be kinder but as far as I’m concerned, those “poor” Republican voters are simply hopeless. I say “let them eat cake”. But liberals have “bleeding hearts” and can’t do that.

I can understand people in Carmel Valley or La Jolla voting their pocketbooks but those Republican voters in rural Mississippi are simply dumb.

So FLU, as a well-to-do professional, you should be happy that idiots are born everyday.

[patientlywaiting]

In order to understand what is happening, you have to understand politics.

Democrats did the right thing for the country, even though that meant siding with Bush. Republicans didn’t.

Guys, it’s actually very admirable of you to admit that you’re voting your pocketbooks.

Unfortunately, the majority of Republican voters in the heartland (or in Lakeside) don’t vote their pocketbooks. They vote on issues such as faith, abortion, gay marriage, etc…

As a progressive, I should be kinder but as far as I’m concerned, those “poor” Republican voters are simply hopeless. I say “let them eat cake”. But liberals have “bleeding hearts” and can’t do that.

I can understand people in Carmel Valley or La Jolla voting their pocketbooks but those Republican voters in rural Mississippi are simply dumb.

So FLU, as a well-to-do professional, you should be happy that idiots are born everyday.

[patientlywaiting]

The two posts above show how partisan Republicans are while they ask for bi-partisanship on the part of the Democrats.

The truth is that Paulson and Bush are the ones who wanted this bill.

Nancy Pelosi should have let Bush squirm and beg his own party for the votes. Bush would have gotten it done in a matter of weeks but that would have split his own party and destroyed the Republican presidential campaign.

*

I think that progressives are more intellectually honest and flexible in doing what’s good for the country (in their minds).

Progressives see things in shades of gray instead of black and white.

I believe that’s why Democrats are not as strong as they would be.

The truth is that the Karl Rove strategy of divide and conquer works.

Democrats should have let this bill twist in the wind and blamed it on the Republicans.

Nancy Pelosi should have insisted on a majority Republican vote before allowing the bill.

I’m ideologically progressive, but, just like Conservatives, I believe that the end justifies the means.

[patientlywaiting]

The two posts above show how partisan Republicans are while they ask for bi-partisanship on the part of the Democrats.

The truth is that Paulson and Bush are the ones who wanted this bill.

Nancy Pelosi should have let Bush squirm and beg his own party for the votes. Bush would have gotten it done in a matter of weeks but that would have split his own party and destroyed the Republican presidential campaign.

*

I think that progressives are more intellectually honest and flexible in doing what’s good for the country (in their minds).

Progressives see things in shades of gray instead of black and white.

I believe that’s why Democrats are not as strong as they would be.

The truth is that the Karl Rove strategy of divide and conquer works.

Democrats should have let this bill twist in the wind and blamed it on the Republicans.

Nancy Pelosi should have insisted on a majority Republican vote before allowing the bill.

I’m ideologically progressive, but, just like Conservatives, I believe that the end justifies the means.

[patientlywaiting]

The two posts above show how partisan Republicans are while they ask for bi-partisanship on the part of the Democrats.

The truth is that Paulson and Bush are the ones who wanted this bill.

Nancy Pelosi should have let Bush squirm and beg his own party for the votes. Bush would have gotten it done in a matter of weeks but that would have split his own party and destroyed the Republican presidential campaign.

*

I think that progressives are more intellectually honest and flexible in doing what’s good for the country (in their minds).

Progressives see things in shades of gray instead of black and white.

I believe that’s why Democrats are not as strong as they would be.

The truth is that the Karl Rove strategy of divide and conquer works.

Democrats should have let this bill twist in the wind and blamed it on the Republicans.

Nancy Pelosi should have insisted on a majority Republican vote before allowing the bill.

I’m ideologically progressive, but, just like Conservatives, I believe that the end justifies the means.

[patientlywaiting]

The two posts above show how partisan Republicans are while they ask for bi-partisanship on the part of the Democrats.

The truth is that Paulson and Bush are the ones who wanted this bill.

Nancy Pelosi should have let Bush squirm and beg his own party for the votes. Bush would have gotten it done in a matter of weeks but that would have split his own party and destroyed the Republican presidential campaign.

*

I think that progressives are more intellectually honest and flexible in doing what’s good for the country (in their minds).

Progressives see things in shades of gray instead of black and white.

I believe that’s why Democrats are not as strong as they would be.

The truth is that the Karl Rove strategy of divide and conquer works.

Democrats should have let this bill twist in the wind and blamed it on the Republicans.

Nancy Pelosi should have insisted on a majority Republican vote before allowing the bill.

I’m ideologically progressive, but, just like Conservatives, I believe that the end justifies the means.

[patientlywaiting]

The two posts above show how partisan Republicans are while they ask for bi-partisanship on the part of the Democrats.

The truth is that Paulson and Bush are the ones who wanted this bill.

Nancy Pelosi should have let Bush squirm and beg his own party for the votes. Bush would have gotten it done in a matter of weeks but that would have split his own party and destroyed the Republican presidential campaign.

*

I think that progressives are more intellectually honest and flexible in doing what’s good for the country (in their minds).

Progressives see things in shades of gray instead of black and white.

I believe that’s why Democrats are not as strong as they would be.

The truth is that the Karl Rove strategy of divide and conquer works.

Democrats should have let this bill twist in the wind and blamed it on the Republicans.

Nancy Pelosi should have insisted on a majority Republican vote before allowing the bill.

I’m ideologically progressive, but, just like Conservatives, I believe that the end justifies the means.

[patientlywaiting]

[quote=temeculaguy]
Also, there is no way to get the wife “at arms length” even if the house and loan is only in one spouse’s name, community property and community credit. You could divorce her on paper then go into default as an individual but my guess is that few women will agree to a paper divorce to preserve credit because they will suspect you are just looking for an easy divorce with no court battle or alimony. Since alimony can never be renegotiated after the ink is dry (child support can but not alimony or asset division) I imagine there will be a few news stories of one spouse duping the other and you won’t see this happen very much after that. Come to think of it, it is kinda ingenious. [/quote]

Come to think of it, that might be good advice for that divorcing couple of the other thread 😉

I agree with Peter, it’s not what people do at the individual level, it’s what upside-down homeowners will do on the aggregate will count. They will create their own bailouts.

[patientlywaiting]

[quote=temeculaguy]
Also, there is no way to get the wife “at arms length” even if the house and loan is only in one spouse’s name, community property and community credit. You could divorce her on paper then go into default as an individual but my guess is that few women will agree to a paper divorce to preserve credit because they will suspect you are just looking for an easy divorce with no court battle or alimony. Since alimony can never be renegotiated after the ink is dry (child support can but not alimony or asset division) I imagine there will be a few news stories of one spouse duping the other and you won’t see this happen very much after that. Come to think of it, it is kinda ingenious. [/quote]

Come to think of it, that might be good advice for that divorcing couple of the other thread 😉

I agree with Peter, it’s not what people do at the individual level, it’s what upside-down homeowners will do on the aggregate will count. They will create their own bailouts.

[patientlywaiting]

[quote=temeculaguy]
Also, there is no way to get the wife “at arms length” even if the house and loan is only in one spouse’s name, community property and community credit. You could divorce her on paper then go into default as an individual but my guess is that few women will agree to a paper divorce to preserve credit because they will suspect you are just looking for an easy divorce with no court battle or alimony. Since alimony can never be renegotiated after the ink is dry (child support can but not alimony or asset division) I imagine there will be a few news stories of one spouse duping the other and you won’t see this happen very much after that. Come to think of it, it is kinda ingenious. [/quote]

Come to think of it, that might be good advice for that divorcing couple of the other thread 😉

I agree with Peter, it’s not what people do at the individual level, it’s what upside-down homeowners will do on the aggregate will count. They will create their own bailouts.

[patientlywaiting]

[quote=temeculaguy]
Also, there is no way to get the wife “at arms length” even if the house and loan is only in one spouse’s name, community property and community credit. You could divorce her on paper then go into default as an individual but my guess is that few women will agree to a paper divorce to preserve credit because they will suspect you are just looking for an easy divorce with no court battle or alimony. Since alimony can never be renegotiated after the ink is dry (child support can but not alimony or asset division) I imagine there will be a few news stories of one spouse duping the other and you won’t see this happen very much after that. Come to think of it, it is kinda ingenious. [/quote]

Come to think of it, that might be good advice for that divorcing couple of the other thread 😉

I agree with Peter, it’s not what people do at the individual level, it’s what upside-down homeowners will do on the aggregate will count. They will create their own bailouts.

[patientlywaiting]

[quote=temeculaguy]
Also, there is no way to get the wife “at arms length” even if the house and loan is only in one spouse’s name, community property and community credit. You could divorce her on paper then go into default as an individual but my guess is that few women will agree to a paper divorce to preserve credit because they will suspect you are just looking for an easy divorce with no court battle or alimony. Since alimony can never be renegotiated after the ink is dry (child support can but not alimony or asset division) I imagine there will be a few news stories of one spouse duping the other and you won’t see this happen very much after that. Come to think of it, it is kinda ingenious. [/quote]

Come to think of it, that might be good advice for that divorcing couple of the other thread 😉

I agree with Peter, it’s not what people do at the individual level, it’s what upside-down homeowners will do on the aggregate will count. They will create their own bailouts.

[Author]

Posts