Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 I also pointed out a FACT!! The FACT is, NYS is a BLUE state and always was!! You've had a little too much kool aid and talking to you is like talking to an inmate at the inebriate asylum on the hill, so I will no longer respond to your ignorance!! Is everything red and blue to you Tom? Are you that simple? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Yes obviously it's the liberals fault, I mean they've had their "liberal" president in office for the entire time the economy has started to take a downturn, not just 31 days or so. They believe if McCain was elected this whole crisis would be over and the Dow would be up to about 20,000. I guess that's what happens when you have both feet planted outside of reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Yes obviously it's the liberals fault, I mean they've had their "liberal" president in office for the entire time the economy has started to take a downturn, not just 31 days or so. once again.. the democrap libs have been running the houses since 2006.. remember bragging on here about how the republicans got smeared etc... The failure belongs to Reid and Pelosi, Kennedy and the rest.. Just keeping it real.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 once again.. the democrap libs have been running the houses since 2006.. remember bragging on here about how the republicans got smeared etc... The failure belongs to Reid and Pelosi, Kennedy and the rest.. Just keeping it real.. Drinking a little early, aren't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Attacks Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 once again.. the democrap libs have been running the houses since 2006.. remember bragging on here about how the republicans got smeared etc... The failure belongs to Reid and Pelosi, Kennedy and the rest.. Just keeping it real.. Can you please quote any legislation that was pushed through during the 3 years of democrat controlled senate/house that directly contributed to the decline in the economy? Then can you please also remember that in the end Bush had the power to veto any of that legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Can't defend something if you don't understand it, also you can't attack it unless you understand it. It isn't actually a cancellation, if you read the bill Section 2101 you'll find that the original wording of the document that would have allowed an increase of unlimited amount was changed in it's final form. The part of the PRWORA ( concerning TANF) you're referring to was a cap on the amount of money that the federal government would be able to dump into the emergency fund (Welfare). The increase in spending allowed to the Welfare program of each stateappears if you read the bill to be only allowed if the state sees an increase in it's case loads. Basically what the bill is allowing is an increase in federal funds to the state welfare programs should that state experience a sharp increase in welfare cases. It's a stop gap measure aimed at helping states that get hit hard by job cuts. It does not end the welfare reform act. Most would disagree with your interpretation. "The House and Senate stimulus bills will overturn the fiscal foundation of welfare reform and restore an AFDC-style funding system. For the first time since 1996, the federal government would begin paying states bonuses to increase their welfare caseloads. Indeed, the new welfare system created by the stimulus bills is actually worse than the old AFDC program because it rewards the states more heavily to increase their caseloads. Under the stimulus bills, the federal government will pay 80 percent of cost for each new family that a state enrolls in welfare; this matching rate is far higher than it was under AFDC." http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm2287.cfm So, the new Stimulus bill is actually encouraging more dependence on welfare, not encouraging people to become more productive/self-sufficient. When your done with welfare, try to address the pork in rewarding Reid with a high speed railroad between from LA to Las Vegas. Pork and payback in the purest sense of the definition. Then you can move on to Pelosi's pork in the renovation of the shoreline around Pelosi's husbands property. This is the change, apparently, that Obama was campaigning for. Same old political payback pork business as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Can you please quote any legislation that was pushed through during the 3 years of democrat controlled senate/house that directly contributed to the decline in the economy? Then can you please also remember that in the end Bush had the power to veto any of that legislation. I can tell you some democrat legislation that directly contributed to the downfall of our economy. It's called the Community Re-Investment Act. It happened much more than 3 years ago, but it eventually brought down Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and sparked the recession we are in right now. I can provide links also if you need them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Friday, 2/20, ll:30 AM. Dow now down 144. Liberals have to be proud of their stimulus in reverse. Those who know obviously don't like it. If the economy and the public liked the stimulus package, the DOW should be heading the opposite way. Come on Liberals, admit Obama's stimulus was a huge mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Friday, 2/20, ll:30 AM. Dow now down 144. Liberals have to be proud of their stimulus in reverse. Those who know obviously don't like it. If the economy and the public liked the stimulus package, the DOW should be heading the opposite way. Come on Liberals, admit Obama's stimulus was a huge mistake. Stupidest post of the day, Part II Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Friday, 2/20, ll:30 AM. Dow now down 144. Liberals have to be proud of their stimulus in reverse. Those who know obviously don't like it. If the economy and the public liked the stimulus package, the DOW should be heading the opposite way. Come on Liberals, admit Obama's stimulus was a huge mistake. Liberals cannot see any coincidence in the DOW tanking when Obama was elected and the DOW tanking when Obama signed the pork, payola, welfare incentive bill!! It's amazing!! Liberalism is a mental disorder!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Liberals cannot see any coincidence in the DOW tanking when Obama was elected and the DOW tanking when Obama signed the pork, payola, welfare incentive bill!! It's amazing!! Liberalism is a mental disorder!! It has nothing to do with liberals or conservatives Tom, although I understand how you like to simplify things to not overwhelm your brain. It has to deal with the further decline of the worldwide economy. Read more, post less Tom. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123513190945132543.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Attacks Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Most would disagree with your interpretation. "The House and Senate stimulus bills will overturn the fiscal foundation of welfare reform and restore an AFDC-style funding system. For the first time since 1996, the federal government would begin paying states bonuses to increase their welfare caseloads. Indeed, the new welfare system created by the stimulus bills is actually worse than the old AFDC program because it rewards the states more heavily to increase their caseloads. Under the stimulus bills, the federal government will pay 80 percent of cost for each new family that a state enrolls in welfare; this matching rate is far higher than it was under AFDC." http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/wm2287.cfm So, the new Stimulus bill is actually encouraging more dependence on welfare, not encouraging people to become more productive/self-sufficient. When your done with welfare, try to address the pork in rewarding Reid with a high speed railroad between from LA to Las Vegas. Pork and payback in the purest sense of the definition. Then you can move on to Pelosi's pork in the renovation of the shoreline around Pelosi's husbands property. This is the change, apparently, that Obama was campaigning for. Same old political payback pork business as usual. There are many ways to interpret what is written in section 2101, have you yourself read it? I doubt that states will attempt to increase their welfare caseloads it's counterproductive to the state. They don't receive "bonuses" for having welfare participants, they receive more federal money to pay those welfare participants but no actual increase in funding anywhere else. Welfare collectors do not pay taxes, hence hurting revenue of the state, no state is going to take a burden on themselves to increase their welfare caseloads to get money to pay for those welfare dependents that they still will have to pay in part for. I cannot understand where that idea stems from. Yes the matching rate is higher than it was under AFDC. Look at it like this, states are going bankrupt, if the federal government doesn't step in then they were sink further into debt, this will either lead to a direct increase in taxes by the state, or will result in the state being unable to fund various programs either way it will hurt the tax paying citizens of the state. Ok, the 8 billion for the railroad, this is actually a myth. Yes there is 8billion set aside for rail production between cities. However this money is not earmarked for any project as of yet. It actually exists in an open competitive state, until that money is actually approved for the railroad from LA to Las Vegas then you cannot really cry foul it's speculation. It's not earmarked specifically for that as of yet, hopefully never will be. Shoreline, can you please point me to the part in either the bill, or a relevant news story so I can read about it; I'll admit I haven't heard about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Attacks Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 I can tell you some democrat legislation that directly contributed to the downfall of our economy. It's called the Community Re-Investment Act. It happened much more than 3 years ago, but it eventually brought down Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and sparked the recession we are in right now. I can provide links also if you need them. The CRA has been both argued for and against by both sides, the original act was posted in what the late seventies? Yes I feel that the CRA did help push for sub-prime mortgages that did not help the economy. However to state that this is a purely democratic piece of legislation is a fallacy, at any time from 1980-1992 or 2000-2005 it could have been fought against by republicans. So please give me a piece of DEMOCRAT legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Attacks Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Liberals cannot see any coincidence in the DOW tanking when Obama was elected and the DOW tanking when Obama signed the pork, payola, welfare incentive bill!! It's amazing!! Liberalism is a mental disorder!! Can you please tell me when the DOW first started tanking who was president then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Can you please tell me when the DOW first started tanking who was president then? Come on. You must know better than to post this type of stuff. The market reacts to current events and anticipates the future. This is a specious argument. If Obama's stimulus was looked at as a real stimulus, the market would be optimistic and reflect interest in investing in the future. That hasn't happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Attacks Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Come on. You must know better than to post this type of stuff. The market reacts to current events and anticipates the future. This is a specious argument. If Obama's stimulus was looked at as a real stimulus, the market would be optimistic and reflect interest in investing in the future. That hasn't happened. Agreed, low blow without any facts to back it up. Something about Tom makes me want to post things like this, don't know what it is. That being said, the market is a many variable beast, there are other reasons for the DOW taking a plunge. Low earning expectations amongst them, it's somewhat unfair to state that a stimulus package isn't working if it hasn't be implemented as of yet. I could also argue that it is a specious argument to blame the state of the DOW on one factor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Something to think about...Maybe the markets aren't reacting so much to the stimulus pork as they are to the Obama Administration threatening to send people into each bank and go over their books with a fine government comb. Investors are thinking that things may be a little worse in the dark than what's being shown when the lights are on. The Obama Administration needs to stay out of corporate business unless it is to regulate monies received through the bailout plan. @ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 The CRA has been both argued for and against by both sides, the original act was posted in what the late seventies? Yes I feel that the CRA did help push for sub-prime mortgages that did not help the economy. However to state that this is a purely democratic piece of legislation is a fallacy, at any time from 1980-1992 or 2000-2005 it could have been fought against by republicans. So please give me a piece of DEMOCRAT legislation. Obviously, you are out of touch!! Here, listen to the words and notice who is speaking them!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs Next, I expect to hear from you "Oh, youtube. That explains it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Can you please tell me when the DOW first started tanking who was president then? Yes, I can tell you who was president, and I can also tell you why it started tanking then also!! Refer to post #168 in this thread!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Attacks Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Obviously, you are out of touch!! Here, listen to the words and notice who is speaking them!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs Next, I expect to hear from you "Oh, youtube. That explains it." Actually can't view youtube from where I'm at, it's filtered out by the all seeing firewall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Obviously, you are out of touch!! Here, listen to the words and notice who is speaking them!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs Next, I expect to hear from you "Oh, youtube. That explains it." And Tom resorts to the doctored youtube videos to try and prove his insane logic. What a surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 And Tom resorts to the doctored youtube videos to try and prove his insane logic. What a surprise. Oh yeah!! Everything the liberals said in those videos was doctored and it's all imaginary!! LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lawyer # 1 Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 It has nothing to do with liberals or conservatives Tom, although I understand how you like to simplify things to not overwhelm your brain. It has to deal with the further decline of the worldwide economy. Read more, post less Tom. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123513190945132543.html LOL LOL LOL!!! Tom post less??? Good one!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logical Attacks Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Oh yeah!! Everything the liberals said in those videos was doctored and it's all imaginary!! LIBERALISM IS A MENTAL DISORDER!!! Well since I can't honestly quote on the youtube videos because I can't get to them... Why is it Tom that you see directly down the party line as the only source of right and wrong. You cry that liberalism is a mental disorder, isn't racism, apathy and in the inability to judge ideas based upon their content a much larger mental disorder? I don't mind that you have a different opinion then me, what I mind is that your opinion seems to be such a parrot of the talking heads on the television that it scares the living crap out of me. Honestly re examine yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom Posted February 20, 2009 Report Share Posted February 20, 2009 Well since I can't honestly quote on the youtube videos because I can't get to them... Why is it Tom that you see directly down the party line as the only source of right and wrong. You cry that liberalism is a mental disorder, isn't racism, apathy and in the inability to judge ideas based upon their content a much larger mental disorder? I don't mind that you have a different opinion then me, what I mind is that your opinion seems to be such a parrot of the talking heads on the television that it scares the living crap out of me. Honestly re examine yourself. I didn't like Bush either as evidenced by many of my previous posts, although I defended him everytime I saw liberal hypocracy. George Bush turned out to be a fiscal socialist and I was very outspoken about it. Maybe you can understand why I say "you can't cure anthrax with more anthrax". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.