Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

ROMNEY: Ex-Republican’s view of class warfare rhetoric

Letter by Jennifer Al-Abboud, Dubai, UAE on Jan. 25, 2012 at 12:36 pm with 140 Comments »
January 25, 2012 1:42 pm

Mitt Romney’s claim that President Obama is promoting class warfare is a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black. As someone who left the Republican Party because of its divisive rhetoric and shameless lies – i.e., Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck – I find this laughable, especially in light of Romney’s tax bombshell.

Make no mistake, class warfare began with reckless deregulation and was waged in earnest by the super rich when they crashed our economy with impunity. Not only did the perpetrators of the global meltdown escape prosecution in what amounts to legalized fraud, they’ve actually profited from it as have our elected leaders (“As Americans Get Poorer, Members of Congress Get Rich” –ABC News, Dec. 22, 2011).

Since the crisis, the Republican Party has become a public mouthpiece for the corporate elite and has come to symbolize the growing cancer that threatens our society, which is systemic corruption; income disparity is merely a symptom.

In response to the claim that Americans who criticize Romney are all coveters who aren’t doing enough for their country, this hard-working, tax-paying critic is calling on both sides to restore dignity and power to the American people.

Whether through taxes or fines, those who caused and profited from the economic meltdown should pay; it’s as simple as that.

(Al-Abboud is a graduate of the University of Puget Sound.)

Leave a comment Comments → 140
  1. You’re absolutely correct. It’s greed followed by more greed. And then they blame the middle class accusing us of class warfare.

  2. philichi says:

    Jennifer, If I know people that bought houses that they could not afford and let them go back to the bank, should we fine them? should we tax them? If everyone kept paying their mortgages, we wouldn’t have a problem right now, would we? Did Mitt Romney do this?

  3. That’s funny Jen, I left the democrat party for the same reason… but I didn’t leave my country.

  4. SPeters, what if Jennifer happens to be serving in the military and is out of the country for that reason? “My what a big mouth you have,” said Red to the wolf dressed like grandma.

  5. So, phil tell us specifically about a person you know who knowingly bought a house they could not afford. Remember to document it with verifiable sources.

  6. commoncents says:

    Phil – had those loans been sold to investors with the correct risk associated with them we wouldn’t be in this mess regardless of the number of foreclosures…why? Because no one would have bought them. All those Mtg brokers and subprime lenders (none of whom were subject to CRA so don’t even go there) would have had no market for their product and those companies would not have lent quite so liberally. That would have kept Wall St and AIG largely out of the picture. Keep them out and it’s a whole different ball game.

    Why blame the person who APPLIED for a loan. After all, an application is not a guarantee of receipt.

  7. commoncents says:

    SPeters – or perhaps she is employed by a company that does business in Dubai. Plenty of valid reasons for an American to be an Ex-Pat…but then again it’s easier to cast aspersions than to actually think about it.

  8. ManuelMartini says:

    Why would a lender loan money for anything knowing that the buyer can’t afford it?

    I think Philichi forgot that the lenders were violating the laws by encouraging false information on the applications. You see, they are salespeople by trade and get commissions regardless of future defaults. Close the deal, get paid. If someone defaults, it’s not your problem.

    It’s much like Eddie Murphy’s character in “Trading Places” describes a stock broker, once hearing they make money regardless of their client making money:

    “Sounds to me like you guys a couple of bookies”

  9. ManuelMartini says:

    SPeters seems to be biting his tongue quite a bit today. (pun intended)

  10. ManuelMartini says:

    “As someone who left the Republican Party because of its divisive rhetoric and shameless lies – i.e., Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck”

    SPeters: “That’s funny Jen, I left the democrat party for the same reason”

    So, SPeters left the Democrats because of Limbaugh, Palin and Beck? The blind leading the blind. Again.

  11. And don’t forget folks… At least some of those people who could no longer afford to pay their mortgage payments ended up that way because:

    Mitt Romney, and rich guys like him, went in and laid off all the employees of their company, so Mitt could cut up the assets of the company and pocket the profits from the big sell-off, and at the same time Mitt turned over the debt on the company retirement plan to the government so the American taxpayers could pay for that and Mitt didn’t have to.

    “Did Mitt Romney do this?” Why, YES HE DID!!!

    New Slogan: You’ll really Feel the Pain, when you’re cut by Bain! (Bain Capital, America’s Wealth Builder and Poverty Creator since 1984, Mitt Romney – Co-founder)

  12. Stop reading into what I wrote. ;)

  13. philichi says:

    Publico, I don’t know one person, I know a whole culture of people that took home equity loans. They took the money and spent it or bought other houses. They bought cars and vacations. They new that their houses would always be worth more than what they paid. They ran up their credit cars and do it all again. I would give you names, butdon’t you think that that would be sort of personal? I suppose that this is all George Bush and Mitt Romney’s fault.
    As far as laws being broken, shouldn’t Obama have prosicuted someone by now? Just one?

  14. aislander says:

    Jennifer accuses various people she identifies as Republicans (one of whom is avowedly NOT one), and accuses them of being liars while never providing an example of even one lie. But, never mind that.

    When someone says or writes: “As someone who left the Republican Party because of…” I KNOW I have isolated at least ONE liar…

  15. You can always tell when a Republican is lying.

    His or her lips are moving!

  16. X-ring – Showing your lack of knowledge again, are we? Millions of people took out loans they couldn’t afford – how about that “interest only” loan? How about adjustable rate mortgages? Many people were way overextended to begin with and when they lost their jobs? Bankrupt city, walk away from the house and short sales. Millions took home equity loans and blew through the cash then found out the party was over.

    Jennifer – Yes, Obama is waging class warfare. Romney is not. Obama can’t run on his record so he’s going for the fear-mongering approach and the American people are not going to buy it just like in 2010. You must be out of touch being overseas. And by the way, it was President Clinton that signed the repeal of the Glass-Steagull Act in 1999. Not Bush.

  17. writnstuff says:

    Nice letter Jennifer. Good job.

  18. Xring , LMAO @ u.

  19. Pacman33 says:

    “Why would a lender loan money for anything knowing that the buyer can’t afford it?”

    I sure hope that is a hypothetical question.

    Sarcasm? Maybe only joking around?

    Rhetorical or trick question?

    Just seeing the seed or the initial spark of what eventually became to, both directly and indirectly, ignite the near collapse of our economy followed by an international crisis, in the form of a question, I must admit, is a shocking visual. No matter it’s context.

  20. ManuelMartini says:

    I answered the question in the next paragraph. Don’t get caught not paying attention.

  21. ManuelMartini says:

    “How about adjustable rate mortgages?”

    How about them? Mine went down two percent after five years.

    How about putting the responsibility on defaults where it belongs? Predatory lending practices.

  22. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Responsibility for default is on the lender? In what world did you get a loan?

    This is why you were banned from this site.

  23. aislander says: “When someone says or writes: “As someone who left the Republican Party because of…” I KNOW I have isolated at least ONE liar…”

    I left the Republican party for the same reasons as Jennifer, and additionaly because of the hypocracy of Newt Gingrich and the 1990’s Republican Congressional witch-hunts, plus the self-righteous sham of the Religious Right.
    Knowing that your list of liars is of your making and therefore meaningless. Make it TWO. I’m proud to be on your list with Jennifer.

  24. ManuelMartini says:

    If I was “banned” from this site, why am I on this site? Can you at least attempt to stay on topic and not get into personal crap because you don’t comprehend the issue? I know that this subject matter is probably beyond your thought capacity, but if you are not able to discuss it like an adult, leave me out of your game.

    The lender chooses how much to lend on what collateral. The borrower doesn’t approve his own loan. If the lender issues a loan that is beyond the capacity of the borrower, don’t they play a part in their own problem?

    Then there is the mortgage insurance on the loan (premiums paid by the borrower), which pays off the lender, even though the borrower defaults, thus the lender can’t lose.

    I’m sure I just went past you like the roadrunner leaving the coyote in the dust, so I’ll just leave the issue there.

  25. blakeshouse says:

    Another bunch of BS but the ever present Kardy Martini

  26. lamofred says:

    This letter is eloquent, courageous, and speaks truth to power. Thank you. I’m sure the wing nuts will give you their usual compliment: they will call you a socialist. Keep writing. Keep speaking out. Expect to be called names. Your message is important.

  27. Speaking of GOP “class warfare” lies:

    Newt Gingrich claims that “more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history.” He’s wrong. More were added under Bush than under Obama, according to the most recent figures.
    [....]
    It’s possible that when the figures for January 2012 are available they will show that the gain under Obama has matched or exceeded the gain under Bush. But not if the short-term trend continues. The number getting food stamps declined by 43,528 in October. And the economy has improved since then.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-01-18/fact-check-gingrich-obama-food-stamps/52645882/1

  28. ManuelMartini says:

    concernedtacoma7 –

    The only one that claims I changed my name is you, and your multiple aliases. Of course, you’ve also claimed muckibr to be kard, and ehill. I guess that makes ehill muckibr and I’m the King of England. You need a scorecard to keep track.

    Back to the subject. If you are dragging “Fannie and Freddie” into the fray, how about their “consultant”? You know, the one and only Newt Gingrich, who pulled down $25,000 a month from their bank account? Aren’t you glad you brought that up?

    I didn’t see the lending institutions complaining while they were writing all that bad paper and banking all those commission checks. Top that off with mortgage insurance to make sure that they don’t lose the principle on the mortgage and it’s a pretty good deal for investors. It’s called a “can’t lose”.

  29. ManuelMartini says:

    beerBoy, take a look at this

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-01-18/fact-check-gingrich-obama-food-stamps/52645882/1

    Anyone knowing how to count to 10 on their fingers would realize that the Obama Administration inherited the food stamp recipients from the Bush era. Gingrich depends on two things – racism and ignorance. His faithful always deliver.

  30. hansgruber says:

    Interesting letter. No real information. Like your ex-wife talking about you?

  31. ManuelMartini says:

    I’m thinking that your ex-wife would be an excellent source for information about you, Hans.

    You’ll note that the letter author provided a data source. You probably missed it, while coming up with your witty response.

  32. Regarding the Food-Stamp attack from Gingrich…

    Strictly speaking, based on numbers and dates alone, there may be more people on food stamps under the Obama administration than any prior presidential administration. I don’t know that for a fact, but…

    I recall the 2008 presidential campaign. I clearly recall when John McCain “temporarily suspended his campaign” to “rush back to D.C.” to take care of the national financial crisis created by the Wall Street meltdown. I recall that very clearly, because he cancelled a scheduled appearance on Dave Letterman’s late-night TV show so he, McCain, could “rush back to Washington” to fix the problem.

    But, Dave caught McCain, on camera, still in New York taping an interview with Katie Couric at the very same moment he was supposed to have been on Dave’s show, when McCain was supposedly “rushing” to get back to D.C. McCain obviously lied to Dave, but that’s not really the point. It seems Republicans do that kind of thing all the time.

    That moment was like a stake in the ground that clearly pegged those events in time, and indelibly linked them to the Wall Street financial meltdown, which was the initial starting point of the world-wide financial disaster that caused the American recession, that threw millions of Americans out of their jobs, and thus caused many newly unemployed American workers to need to seek assistance from things like Food Stamps, and that all started BEFORE BARACK OBAMA WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT.

    So, if you want to be honest about it, regardless of any numbers you can quote today, you cannot in good conscience blame President Obama for putting people on food stamps like that liar Newt Gingrich has.

    Be honest. Don’t be a Newt!

  33. ManuelMartini says:

    muckibr – don’t you love Newt’s latest? Promising a permanent station on the Moon? Now there’s something we really need, when Americans are starving.

  34. aislander says:

    cirrus: If you and Jennifer were Republicans–and I’ll take your word for it–you left the party because your own ideological compass “evolved” so that you began to believe that some Americans have a right to the property of other Americans. I’ve read your posts, after all!

    So, if you believe it is all right to enslave your fellow countrymen, you certainly don’t belong in the party that was responsible for ending slavery in America.

  35. I recall Obama promising to take public financing as Senator McCain had pledged. We all know how that turned out.

  36. Excellent point aislander.

  37. stumpy567 says:

    “As someone who left the Republican Party because of its divisive rhetoric and shameless lies – i.e., Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck – I find this laughable, especially in light of Romney’s tax bombshell”

    Sorry you feel that way Jennifer.
    Pehaps you would prefer Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman and Ed Schultz.
    You can find them on MSNBC. They tell it how it is. Right……

    What “Tax Bombshell”

    You and every other Democrat have the very same opportunity to earn and invest money just like Romney did and you cry that he didn’t pay enough taxes. That’s laughable!!
    You would rather listen to Warren Buffett, who would make you believe he’s a saint. His holding company owns G.E who paid no corporate taxes last year. Do you Democrats have anything to say about that???

  38. stumps… “Pehaps you would prefer Rachel Maddow, Keith Olberman and Ed Schultz. You can find them on MSNBC.”

    Sorry stumps, but you are WRONG, again! You cannot find Olbermann on MSNBC.

    Keith Olbermann hasn’t been on MSNBC since July 2011. You really should expand your viewing horizons beyond Fox. If you did, you might realize that Warren Buffett is making a lot more sense than anyone in the Republican Party is right now.

    And you ask, “Do you Democrats have anything to say about that???”

    Well, I’m not a Democrat, but I was just watching MSNBC and President Obama, who is a Democrat you know, was just talking about Warren Buffett and the new Buffett Rule that rich guys making over a million a year should pay taxes at a 30% rate. So, YES! Democrats are talking about Buffett! Can you dig it?

    See Olbermann here…
    http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/41201964/ns/today-entertainment/t/olbermann-signs-msnbc/#.TyGcMZgXg8M

  39. ManuelMartini says:

    Obama learns as he goes.

    A wise idea not to enter into a public financing agreement with Republicans, considering what was coming around the corner…..

    The best quarterback in the NFL changes plays when he sees the defense.

  40. ManuelMartini says:

    “You and every other Democrat have the very same opportunity to earn and invest money just like Romney did”

    We all had rich daddies to set us up in business?

  41. aislander says:

    I know a guy who is worth a couple of hundred million who didn’t have a “rich daddy,” either…

  42. ManuelMartini says:

    Everyone on the internet knows someone that is anonymous.

  43. BlaineCGarver says:

    Look back at congress and try to remember was trying to level the playing field between people who had good credit, and those that were forever whining that it wasn’t fair they couldn’t be approved for a loan….There ya go..now you’re on the right track (hint, it was NOT republicians)

  44. BlaineCGarver says:

    I’ll bet a buck that Jen was never a Conservative. This is a typical ploy, just like all the make believe friends politicians make up when trying to prove a point.

  45. SandHills says:

    Well a lot of Americans who ran up large debts are truly following the example of our elected officials who continually raise the debt limit to pay the bills. The difference is that when banks made bad loans they got bailed out because they have open doors through their lobbyists to get to the head of the line. But when an individual took on a mortgage which became upside down, or heavy credit card debt in order to pay for necessities to keep their heads above water, those same banks want to squeeze blood from a rock ( even increase interest and fees).

    I believe foreclosures and bankruptsies will rise even more as we realize this economy is not turning around as quickly as some desparately want to believe.

    My own house rose in value by more than 50% in the boom times, no one predicted it would crash so fast. Those who were allowed to get a below prime mortgage in 2007-8 found themselves in very suddenly inquicksand with an upside down mortgage and, in some cases, even worse without a job due to the economic crisis brought on by the very cosy relationship between the banks, Wall Street, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and our elected officials (Congress is allowed inside trading as well). Te banks got their bad loans covered by the taxpayers – many who had homes foreclosed because those very same banks would not make any adjustments to their mortgage.

    Those chickens have yet fully come home to roost – and adds to a very real potential of class warfare, not the rhetorical political kind, but the French Revolution kind. I certainly cant’t see someone like Romney (who made money from downsizing and getting cheaper labor outsourced overseas) or Gingrich (who is the consumate insider, who was a paid consultant for Fannie Mae when some of these bad loans were being made) as those who, by their very wealth and how they achieved it, actually fan the flames of class warfare much more so than Obama ever could.

  46. SandHills says:

    An edit, since either this forum doesn’t allow: my last point above is that I can’t see either Romney or Gingrich being seen as anti-class warfare, because they are part of the 1 % who have specifically obtained their wealth through the unconstrained aspects of raw capitalism and government in bed together that were root causes of our economic crisis.

  47. Too bad Mitt doesn’t follow his Dad’s example – 23% to charity while paying 36% tax rate…..George Romney also gave back some of his salary to AMC when he felt his compensation as CEO was too high.

  48. Obama learns as he goes. One could only HOPE

  49. Too bad Obama doesn’t follow HIS dad’s example.

  50. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Bb- too bad BHO doesn’t follow Mitt’s example. Only since 2010 has he contributed any significant amount.

    Biden, with his fake Indian accent and all, gives basically zero.

    Mitt’s father has nothing to do with this. You want to talk about Obama’s father? The guy who didn’t even claim he had a son for years? His mother, who moved to collocate with communist teachers?

  51. Pacman33 says:

    The Left

    “The best quarterbacks in the NFL changes plays when he sees the defense”

    The Right

    The best quarterbacks in the NFL operate a system of offense that utilize plays that are based on the quarterback’s ‘Pre-Snap Read’ or perception and anticipation of the opposing defense’s play call. Instead of changing plays at the line of scrimmage, the offense comes to the line of scrimmage with a play called featuring multiple options.

    The final selection of which particular option is dictated by the defense’s “Look” or their personnel package and how it lines up. The rest of the variable options in the play call are then determined by the quarterback and communicated to teammates through hand signals and/or his “Cadence”, a particular series of vocal calls which determine the snap of the ball and the start of the play.

    =======================================
    Instead of a scheme where the quarterback “changes plays when he sees the defense.” Basically abandoning a minutes old decision and hoping a hasty guess is a better determination. The best quarterbacks have achieved their success through a sophisticated strategy that is designed around the reality of the existence of factors that present themselves at the last minute. A strategy that approaches the line with confidence of being supplied with the tools allowing it to make the decision with the best shot at success.

  52. ManuelMartini says:

    Don’t ask Pacman what time it is. He’ll give you directions on building a watch. The quarterback only has 35 seconds or less to recognize the defense and make a decision. I don’t think the “War and Peace” of rhetoric is part of their decision.

  53. ManuelMartini says:

    Concerned – why don’t you tell us what your charitable giving was, since that’s such an important issue to you. You have plenty to say about others, but you seem reluctant to disclose your affairs.

  54. ManuelMartini says:

    Meanwhile, any Democratic politician that would trust a handshake agreement from a Republican about campaign financing, just isn’t paying attention to the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision.

    $5,000,000 here and $5,000,000 there is buying state primaries.

  55. Pacman33 says:

    SandHills exposes the truth by accident ~
    “the economic crisis brought on by the very cosy relationship between the banks, Wall Street, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and our elected officials”

    Fueled by the battle cry of class warfare, “Social Justice”, chanted by and enforced by attorneys for ACORN, set the stage for the above.

    Sadly, a repeat of this economic crisis is almost certain with the incredible flurry of lies from the left. In addition, just as those who opposed their poisoning of the market were labeled racist, those who correctly recount the poisoning of the market are also labeled racist.

    The Economic Crisis and the Ethics Crisis
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=RG1PW_kIhwc

    Even”Slick Willy” Clinton Has Too Much Integrity to Lie About This
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMPPGlOpUiM

    At ACORN, Obama was part of the “social justice” movement which created the incredibly stupid regulatory climate that caused banks to make loans they otherwise would never have made.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574459763052141456.html

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2011/11/10/media-parrot-obama-financial-crisis-campaign-propaganda/2/

  56. commoncents says:

    pacman – You must be running the Cadillac Fleetwood Broughum offense. Sure looks good but isn’t effective in today’s nfl.

    The best quarterbacks are those that can and do audible at the line of scrimmage. Arguably the best decision ever made in an NFL championship game (not play but decision) was made by Bart Starr in the ice bowl when he called a play but then changed his mind as he approached the line of scrimmage and ran the ball in himself. History doesn’t call it an audible because he never even told his teammates. Peyton Manning comes to the line of scrimmage after being told 2 plays in his helmet – he calls one (again at the line as he runs a no-huddle offense) and then audibles out of it about 30% of the time. Jim Kelly not only audibled often – he ran the no huddle AND called his own plays.

    That being said – what’s happening before the ball is snapped is only part of the equation. The best quarterbacks distinguish themselves with their decision making while the ball is in play. Those that think the quickest based upon what is happening end up with the best results. These QB’s can cycle through all 4 or 5 of their reads before QB’s like our own TJack only get to #2. This is where Aaron Rogers, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees shine. They recognize what’s happening mid-play and react to it.

  57. ManuelMartini says:

    Who was recently “consulting” to Fannie and Freddie?

  58. ct7 “You want to talk about Obama’s father? The guy who didn’t even claim he had a son for years? His mother, who moved to collocate with communist teachers?

    Now you want to criticize single-parent families! For a single-mom I think Barack Obama’s mother did a pretty good job raising her kids.

    Perhaps Barack Obama was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth, as was Willard Mitt Romney. Perhaps Barack Obama had no biological father to help raise him, and only for a short while a step-father. Yet, Barack Obama did not turn to a life of crime, or despite alleged “communist teachers” he did not succumb to the Dark-side of The Force (The Republican Party).

    Condemning single-parent families certainly does qualify as a form of Class Warfare does it not?

    Let us not assassinate this president’s character or that of his family any further, ct7. You have done enough. Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?

  59. Pacman33 says:

    Obama blaming banks for the credit crisis and even saying that “you guys caused the problem” and calling them “fat cats.”

    = The height of hypocrisy.

    Thanks to the despicable distortion and war on honesty by the left, everyone needs to be reminded that banks only operate within the regulatory environment that politicians create for them. All throughout the 80’s and 90’s, leftist groups led by ACORN harassed banks with protests, boycotts and lawsuits, falsely claiming banks were “discriminating” against minorities in terms of their lending practices.

    Banks were forced to make high risk loans through harassment and the filing of lawsuits against them by attorneys, including Obama. Some of these suits were successful in that they often ended in settlements in which the banks agreed to make high risk loans to people who simply were not credit worthy.

    Here is the actual docket from a suit against Citibank. It includes an ACORN attorney with the name …. Obama.
    http://www.mediacircus.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/FH-IL-0011-9000.pdf

    Hey, lets try it AGAIN. WTF.

    The National Urban League has aggressively opposed stricter credit standards. It argues that requiring 20% down payments “stifles homeownership for communities of color.
    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/BofA-Must-Fund-Acorn-Clones-ibd-4235251746.html

  60. ManuelMartini says:

    Barack Obama filed a civil rights suit, on behalf of a client, while employed as a civil rights attorney.

    Now THERE is some earth shattering news.

  61. aislander says:

    ManuelMartini wrote: “Everyone on the internet knows someone that(sic) is anonymous.”

    I’ve written about this on another thread and provided enough information to identify the man if someone were interested. Not my fault you chose to ignore it…

    As for Mitt’s “rich daddy,” Mitt inherited nothing, but built his fortune on his own merits. THAT’S the American Dream, no?

    Not only that, but George Romney had not yet made HIS fortune by the time Mitt was born…

  62. aislander says:

    ManuelMartini writes: “[concernedtacoma7 has] plenty to say about [the charitable giving of] others, but you seem reluctant to disclose your affairs.”

    concerned’s giving isn’t relevant because, unlike Democrats, he isn’t trying to FORCE people to be “charitable” by force of government….

  63. concernedtacoma7 says:

    No silver spoon? He went to a private school that today costs $20k+/year. Traveled the world (how did he end up staying with the current ruler of pakistan’s regime when he was in his 20’? very odd).

    Your left wing pal Bb brought up the parenting, as has BHO when he makes millions of a book titled “Dreams from my Father”. And as he himself pointed out, you are who you are based on the values taught by your parents.

    Don’t you have a racist to go defend, Muck?

  64. yabetchya says:

    ManuelMartini says

    Jan. 26, 2012 at 10:57 am

    “Obama learns as he goes” Thats the problem.

  65. yabetchya says:

    muckibr says

    Jan. 26, 2012 at 3:45 pm

    For a single-mom I think Barack Obama’s mother did a pretty good job raising her kids

    Even if his mother was single, the times she had him, they traveled to far away places, was he was introduced to different cultures. (Pretty lucky)
    I thought his grandparents raised him mostly. Grandma was a VP of a bank and he went to private schools….pretty good life if you ask me.

  66. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Thanks Ai, I am also not claiming I am charitable. There are times where charity, based on good intentions, has a negative long term effect.

    Not that it is relevant, but I do give to military support charities and animal rescues. I do not want one cent of my money going to an able bodied individual who is just a lazy leech or drug addict. My taxes do too much of that already.

    MMnos goes to a meeting once a month, drinks some coffee and whines that they do not have enough of other people’s money to spend on grander meetings. Some saint I’m sure.

  67. ManuelMartini says:

    Yeah. Obama should be more like Bush. Know he’s wrong and do nothing to change. That resulted in the Iraq War and billions of dollars of debt.

  68. ManuelMartini says:

    concernedtacoma7 – Are you trying to say that I attend Alcoholics Anonymous? Your failed description seems to be alluding to such.

    Since you are demonstrating a strong lack of knowledge of AA, allow me to provide you the information that you could find on your own if you weren’t…how do you say it…oh yeah….A LAZY LEECH.

    Most people attending AA go far more than once a month. They do drink coffee, paid for by their own donations. As per the AA tradition –

    “Every A.A. group ought to be fully self-supporting, declining outside contributions.”

    Personally, I have attended AA meetings, in support of loved ones. It is truly wonderful to see a group of people, of a common cause, that are totally self supporting, seeking sobriety to change their lives.

    It is my experience that most people with a resentment about AA are the people who probably need the organization the most.

    As to Obama’s education – the scholarships were granted for his work and his need. “Silverspoon” is a terminology referring to those born into wealth. A person born into wealth would not be scholarshipped.

    I feel sort of funny explaining all of this to you, Concerned, because I know that you are smart enough to look it up on the internet, but just refuse to do so because you don’t want to look too smart.

    You’re doing a great job. Keep it up.

  69. ManuelMartini says:

    Since you are so interested in my charitable work, Concerned, I’ll share that I volunteer to the Board of Directors (was a director, but resigned and now just support) of a farm that provides jobs for developementally disabled adults and adults who have had challenges with the law and are wanting to change their lives.

    The farm is partly funded by grants and philantropy, but is also self sustaining by selling produce, chickens and eggs that the workers produce.

    I know it’s not nearly as important as sitting back and ridiculing people who are trying to improve themselves, but we do what we can.

  70. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Exactly, you go to a meeting every now and then.

    Because of his work? I’ll give you the need part, his mother was a professional student in Hawaii and his father ditched him. But fellow students and teachers said he was a poor student.

  71. BTDT. I bet you play piano too.

  72. Still hasn’t made his grades public. Wonder why (not).

  73. ManuelMartini says:

    concernedtacoma7 – you need to quit getting your information from Newsmax.

    There are a few other things that I’d suggest you quit, but that’s up to you.

    SpeFine – why should Obama make his grade public? Because he is a black man and black people aren’t smart? What were Mitt’s grades? How about Newt?

    As I recall, Obama made his birth certificate public and nothing changed. The racists will always be racists.

    One doesn’t attend Harvard without grades. You should know that.

  74. ManuelMartini says:

    SPeters – do you do anything other than try to start crap on an internet forum?

    Do you donate time in your community? Do you have a hobby? Do you own a business?

    I’m just asking because it appears that you have a tremendous resentment with people that do these things. Usually people that are incapable have such resentments, as opposed to trying to learn something.

    There are adult education classes at TCC. You could take yoga or play pickup basketball.

    It might improve your self image.

    Just wonderin’ yanno?

  75. concernedtacoma7 says:

    Well, here is another theory how a pot/coke using kid gets into Harvard.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/m-obama_the_affirmative_action_president.html

    Funny, I recall Bush getting blasted for his grades but BHO gets a pass? Hypocrites

  76. ManuelMartini says:

    I’ll expect the last comment to be removed tomorrow when the moderator gets your complaint.

    You are as predictable as rain in Seattle.

  77. ManuelMartini says:

    Wow, American Thinker instead of Newsmax.

    I’m impressed.

    What were Bush’s grades? I though all of his records were burned in a fire.

  78. ManuelMartini says:

    Since when does affirmative action have anything to do with a posh Ivy League private school?

    This has all the credibility of a birth certificate complaint.

    I’m not going to waste a lot of time on this, but I can’t find one thing that says affirmative action is applicable in a private college.

    This is one more case of the racist attitudes are given the information they WANT to hear, regardless of the truth and buy it lock, stock and barrel.

  79. yabetchya: “I thought his grandparents raised him mostly. Grandma was a VP of a bank”

    Barack Obama’s grandmother dies
    Death of Madelyn Dunham, 86, announced day before election

    The Kansas-born Dunham and her husband, Stanley, raised their grandson for several years so he could attend school in Honolulu while their daughter and her second husband lived overseas. Her influence on Obama’s manner and the way he viewed the world was substantial, the candidate himself told millions watching him accept his party’s nomination in Denver in August.

    “She’s the one who taught me about hard work,” he said. “She’s the one who put off buying a new car or a new dress for herself so that I could have a better life. She poured everything she had into me.”

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27522679/ns/politics-decision_08/t/barack-obamas-grandmother-dies/#.TyIQF5gXg8M

    Doesn’t sound like Toots was a very rich bank VP. Certainly not as rich as an Exec at Chrysler in Detroit would be.

  80. aislander says:

    Frank Marshall Davis…

  81. Aislander,
    Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Mitt Romney – which one is not a republican?

    Chili74,
    At least I’m not blaming the victims who lost everything because predatory credit lenders told them they could afford the loans or the Wall Street Liars who told investors the mortgage back securities were primo investments.

    BTW: I am one of those who took a home equity loan.

    SPeter – You may laugh at me, but You Have to Blame Yourself for your remarks.

    Pac33
    Why would a lender loan money for anything knowing that the buyer can’t afford it?”
    Because the lender made their money on the fees the charged for the loans, then dumped the loans on Wall Street before the loans failed.

    ManuelMartini – you were lucky. Your rate could have gone up just as easily.

    B-G-C,
    The Republican idea of a level playing field is no taxes on the rich, and no government regulations.

  82. aislander says:

    Why, Glenn Beck, of course…

  83. aislander “Republicans (one of whom is avowedly NOT one), and accuses them of being liars”

    avow |əˈvou|
    verb [ reporting verb ]
    assert or confess openly : [with clause ] he avowed that he had voted Republican in every election | [ trans. ] he avowed his change of faith | [as adj. ] ( avowed) an avowed Marxist.

    “Beck’s strongest supporters, such as Republicans and white Evangelicals, perceive real differences between their own faith and Beck’s Mormon faith, and this may become a liability in his efforts to lead as a religious figure.[138]”

    Glenn Beck may avow he’s not a Republican, but there’s no doubt his supporters and audience are Republicans, ergo, he’s a Republican, OMG, and a MORMON! No wonder they cancelled his show on Fox.

  84. Wish I could have traveled to different countries and been raised in Hawaii. Shucks.

    That would have been Extraordinaire.

  85. The same ol’ nonsense coming from the right – blaming the CRA for the sub-prime crash:

    SUMMARY: Several conservatives in the media have recently blamed the Community Reinvestment Act for the current financial crisis — when, in fact, the CRA does not apply to institutions making the vast majority of troubled loans underlying the crisis. It applies only to depository institutions, such as banks and savings and loan associations. Experts have estimated that 80 percent of high-priced subprime loans were offered by financial institutions that are not subject to the CRA.

    http://mediamatters.org/research/200809300012

  86. Of course, those populist sounding words during Obama’s SOTU are, unfortunately, not much more than words:

    I’ll admit it: Listening to Barack Obama, I am ready to enlist in his campaign against the feed-the-rich Republicans … until I recall that I once responded in the same way to Bill Clinton’s faux populism. And then I get angry because betrayal by the “good guys” for whom I have ended up voting has become the norm.

    Yes, betrayal, because if Obama meant what he said in Tuesday’s State of the Union address about holding the financial industry responsible for its scams, why did he appoint the old Clinton crowd that had legalized those scams to the top economic posts in his administration? Why did he hire Timothy Geithner, who has turned the Treasury Department into a concierge service for Wall Street tycoons?

    Why hasn’t he pushed for a restoration of the Glass-Steagall Act, which Clinton’s deregulation reversed? Does the president really believe that the Dodd-Frank slap-on-the-wrist sellout represents “new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like this never happens again”? Can he name one single too-big-to-fail banking monstrosity that has been reduced in size on his watch instead of encouraged to grow ever larger by Treasury and Fed bailouts and interest-free money?

    http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-scheer/41003/obamas-faux-populism-sounds-like-bill-clinton

  87. Pacman33 says:

    “Does the president really believe that the Dodd-Frank slap-on-the-wrist sellout represents “new rules to hold Wall Street accountable, so a crisis like this never happens again”?

    Why doesn’t 0bama get “Chuck” Schumer, Maxine Waters and Frank Raines, AKA Fwank Rwaines, to write the new rules? That would only make sense if we want to avoid another … crisis. Right? … That is the goal isn’t it?

    0bama is incapable of rational thought, yet feeble, little obamabot-drones adore him. Excessive narcissistic idealism, like excessive grandiosity, is a compensatory mechanism that develops when an idealized person (such as a Parent) fails to live up to expectations. Not able to adequately deal with this truth, the self immediately transfers its idealization to a new object of adoration.
    Mmm, mmm, mmm …

  88. Pacman33 says:

    The world-famous think-tank at MediaMatters, features the world’s finest financial market virtuosi. MM’s econo-guru’s have revolutionized ecnomic theory as we know it …. literally.

    Fannie and Freddie were competing with Wall Street and one another for low-quality loans. Even when they were not the purchasers, the GSEs were Wall Street’s biggest customers, often buying the AAA tranches of subprime and Alt-A pools that Wall Street put together. By 2007 they held $227 billion (one in six loans) in these nonprime pools, and approximately $1.6 trillion in low-quality loans altogether.

    From 2005 through 2007, the GSEs purchased over $1 trillion in subprime and Alt-A loans, driving up the housing bubble and driving down mortgage quality. During these years, HUD’s regulations required that 55% of all GSE purchases be affordable, including 25% made to low- and very low-income borrowers. Housing bubbles are nothing new. We and other countries have had them before. The reason that the most recent bubble created a worldwide financial crisis is that it was inflated with low-quality loans required by government mandate.

    http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/13/housing-bubble-subprime-opinions-contributors_0216_peter_wallison_edward_pinto.html

  89. ManuelMartini says:

    Who consulted to Fannie and Freddie recently?

  90. As Paul Harvey would say, “And now for THE * REST * OF * THE STORY” Here’s the last paragraph from the smirking-chimp article posted above, the part that really relates to Romney and class warfare….

    “Of course, Romney, Obama’s most likely opponent in the general election, will never challenge the Wall Street hold on Washington, since he is the personification of the vulture capitalism that is the true cause of America’s decline. Obama should shine in comparison with his Republican challenger, but there is little in his State of the Union speech to suggest he will chart a much-needed new course in his second term.”

    http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-scheer/41003/obamas-faux-populism-sounds-like-bill-clinton

  91. ManuelMartini says:

    For general information:

    NEW YORK — Forget the so-called liberal media. Right now Newt Gingrich’s most ardent critics are conservative pundits and columnists, many of whom have launched aggressive campaigns to discredit him and trip up his run for the Republican nomination.

    This crew has largely been lukewarm about Gingrich’s chief rival, Mitt Romney, considering him too moderate. But their open criticism of Gingrich is evidence that for all their misgivings about the former Massachusetts governor, they see him as a much stronger contender against President Barack Obama.

    To hear columnists Ann Coulter and Charles Krauthammer and the conservative media aggregator Matt Drudge tell it, Gingrich is an inconsistent conservative who didn’t fully support President Ronald Reagan and whose undisciplined nature mirrored that of President Bill Clinton, who was Gingrich’s Democratic adversary in the 1990s.

    The conservative media hits against Gingrich have come with force just as the GOP establishment seems to be rallying around Romney in earnest, perhaps out of fear that Gingrich may end up winning the nomination.

    source – Comcast.net

  92. Pacman33 says:

    What was the point of that. General info? I’ve read it 3 times now, and only leave with … ‘A candidate was criticized’.

    Thanks for the news flash there, Investigative Reporter Extraordinaire.

    Romney is getting “his fair share” also, so don’t all you Marxocrats fret.

  93. aislander says:

    WHAT is the fixation with the rhetorical devices and/or word choices used by other members of the forum at the expense of–gasp!–the actual topic?

    Seems to me that behavior is diversion if not deflection…

  94. “WHAT is the fixation with the rhetorical devices and/or word choices”

    That’s really funny coming from the king of “The Word Of The Day Calendar” user.

  95. aislander says:

    Seems as though that shouldn’t be of concern to YOU…mucky. I COULD spend all my time hounding you about your various errors in usage, but that would mean reading your interminable posts, and that is not a sacrifice I’m prepared to make.

    I can barely get through your paragraphs that contain my screen name…

  96. ManuelMartini says:

    LF – I see. You “family values” folks would select a known philanderer over a family man.

    Thanks for letting us know.

    Now that we see Pacman and “SPeters” with the “extraordinaire” fetish, we know that they are one and the same.

  97. Pacman33 says:

    Merely being listed as a member on a board for an org., spanning a massive 3 year stint, is all that’s needed to meet the requirements for an over-inflated ego and self-righteousness.

    I had always thought the prerequisites for an inflated sense of one’s own self worth were more stringent.

    What do I know. I thought 2 saxophones were too much and that 3 were tacky.

  98. aislander “but that would mean reading your interminable posts, and that is not a sacrifice I’m prepared to make. I can barely get through your paragraphs that contain my screen name…”

    This is what I have been saying for a long time. If all you guys on the RIGHT ever read is stuff that you already agree with, then you can never hope to learn and grow. You have to be willing to at least consider someones else’s point of view if you ever hope to escape your own self-contained bigotry.

    There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

  99. concernedtacoma7 says:

    MMnos- how about electing a community organizer who got everything for free his whole life to run the world’s largest economy? Kind of like hiring a tax cheat to run the treasury.

  100. ct7, If President Obama “got everything for free his whole life” why was he still paying on his college LOANS just 2 years before he ran for president. How do you explain that?

    Can you prove anything you write?

  101. LOL, K. There’s a board of black and white ivories hidin’ your lyin’ eyes.

    Remember, not all of these topics have to be kept in reverent seriousness. I was just trying to lighten it up a bit. ;)

  102. Congress, spurred on by Liberals, insisted that banks load to women and minorities that otherwise could not have qualified for loans

    Nope…..over 80% of the subprime loans were made by institutions that were not impacted by CRA.

  103. From Stephen Colbert – the difference between Mitt Romney and a statue of Mitt Romney is that the statue won’t change positions.

  104. aislander says:

    If I FIND a “point of view”–new or otherwise–in any of those posts, I would be willing to consider it, but the search is so painful it isn’t worth the paltry “reward.” It’s like looking for a particular needle in a needlestack.

    You guys ARE predictable, after all…

  105. aislander, dodging and deflecting, again?

  106. Pacman33 says:

    beerBoy quotes MM ~
    “.over 80% of the subprime loans were made by institutions that were not impacted by CRA.”
    ————
    Translated from Leftainan w/ Cantonese-telltruth dialect =
    ————
    80% of the subprime loans were made by institutions that were not impacted by PRE-1995 era CRA rules. Even though Clinton merely EXPANDED CRA REGULATIONS to more institutions, lefties call them “GSE Loans” for …. devious, underhanded purposes including trashing Bush and confusing Dronocrat voters. Splitting Hairs is taken to another level, until one is asked for an explanation of why Government institutions possessed over 2/3 of the total sub & non-prime outstanding mortgages.
    or
    Rephrase the statement as: Government CRA & CRA ‘Based’ Policy’s Intrusion on the Housing Market and Inevitably the Financial Sector of the Economy.

    I can’t believe we can just allow an Agency Of The Government to Intervene and Meddle in the Market as if it’s nothing. Forcing institutions to make bad investments with the threat of law. Ignoring our Founders and almost every Economist to study capitalism. Then shrug off it’s obvious danger, falling for decades old leftist antics.

    Blaming Wall Street, CEO’s and Banks in general when only a few cheaters from a few branches of a large encompassing Sector of the Economy. When most are innocent, refraining from participation in the Gov.’s corrupt attack on economic competence. The left has fooled America and our economic illiteracy may be our destruction.

    Maybe a picture would help:

    http://news.investors.com/PhotoPopup.aspx?path=ISSloan_111021.png&docId=588856&xmpSource=&width=348&height=185&caption=

  107. SolAllinandSki says:

    who is concerned?

  108. Concerned about what?

  109. pacman – I didn’t quote MM.

    You provide no evidence to support your assertions.

    Your linked graph demonstrates Mark Twain’s “lies, damned lies and statistics” analysis of the methodology of dissembling quite well.

  110. “a community organizer who got everything for free his whole life”

    Do you really just make this fecal matter up and expect people to believe you?

  111. ehill, don’t expect an answer from ct7, but it is true… he just does make that stuff up almost never provides any proof for his foolish comments!

  112. Looks like he’s ignoring the clown posse.

  113. …by not responding to you.

  114. aislander says:

    Have yuh READ the Bill Ayers-written books? The guy never had a real job in his life. Everything WAS handed to him because he fit Joe Biden’s description, and his grandmother was “comfortable…”

  115. Joe Biden’s description LMAO.

  116. In case you haven’t noticed Erik, I’m not the one illiciting a response from concerned. ;)

  117. Now that it has been revealed that Saul Alinsky was a good friend and advisor to many conservative Republicans, including none other than one George Romney (father of Willard Mitt Romney) now aislander won’t be slinging out “Alinsky!” “Alinsky!” “Alinsky!” “Alinsky!” as the vile advisor of the lefty-libs.

    So now aislander is bringing up BILL AYERS! How utterly predictable!!!

    And aislanders little cheerleader soul-mate and playmate SPeters is following close behind to cheer on aislander with his uniquely juvenile prattle.

    What any of their NONSENSE has to do with “ROMNEY” and “class warfare” is anyone’s guess. Apparently they (aislander and SPeters) just like to play tag-team together so it really doesn’t matter what the topic is or was.

  118. Looks like the election is shaping out to be Wall Street puppet vs. Wall Street puppet……gosh….the suspense is killing me….I wonder if Wall Street is gonna win.

    Mitt Romney has been leading the way in the 2012 presidential race when it comes to donations from Wall Street, pulling in millions from the financial sector since he launched his campaign. And the industry’s favor for Romney comes across even more when looking at just the five biggest banks in the U.S.: JP Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, and Goldman Sachs

    In fact, as McClatchy News noted, Romney has received more in donations from employees of the nation’s five biggest banks than all of the other presidential candidates combined
    http://www.truth-out.org/romney-collects-more-donations-five-biggest-banks-all-other-candidates-combined/1327760394

    A report from October claims that it is Obama that is the big winner in the Wall Street sweepstakes:

    Obama has brought in more money from employees of banks, hedge funds and other financial service companies than all of the GOP candidates combined, according to a Washington Post analysis of contribution data.
    http://patdollard.com/2011/10/obama-receives-more-financial-sector-donations-than-all-gop-candidates-combined/

  119. Now SPeters id following aislander’s EXAMPLE of posting OBSCENE COMMENTS!!

    I wonder who else is going to emulate aislander and make those words common on these threads?

  120. aislander says:

    Mucky has much more delicate sensibilities than anyone would have suspected. I’ll bet there’s a fainting couch in Muck Manor for use when the muckster is overcome with a case of the vapors!

    Besides, the word “sod” has a number of meanings, both literal and figurative. I wonder why mucky chose to believe a particular one was aimed at him?

  121. aislander: “I wonder why [muckibr] chose to believe a particular one was aimed at him?”

    Even you, aislander, cannot be as stupid as you pretend to be.

    Reread the three words in the middle of SPeter’s 1/28 @ 9:34 PM post above. I won’t REPEAT the two preceding OBSCENE words you, aislander, have REPEATEDLY posted on these threads which makes you a REPEAT OFFENDER, but the third of the three words is “muckibr”. (Properly spelled I might add.)

    That kind of makes it pretty obvious who that comment was “aimed at”. Or are you, aislander, really so stupid that you can’t even see that much?

    PLEASE NOTICE: I have NOT called aislander “stupid” or any other name in this entire comment. I am only asking aislander if he is really as stupid as evidence would suggest he is. No name-calling from me!

  122. aislander says:

    Yeah, right…

    Anyway, I didn’t say the comment wasn’t aimed at you–it was–but I did question how you knew (or IF you knew) which sense of the word was intended, since there are so many…

  123. Very easy aislander, I just considered the source of the OBSCENE message above, and your initial message on the previous thread. Just consider the source, based on your history, and it’s obvious what you and your pal meant by it.

  124. aislander says:

    It may be obvious to you, muck, but based on some of the questions (demands, really) you’ve asked in your multitudinous and extended postings, I would have to say your grasp of the obvious is tenuous at best.

    As for understanding the subtle, well you don’t…

  125. He’s about to go off the deep end, again, aislander.

    Heck, I even said I was kidding about telling him to go away.

    It speaks volumes to the mindset.

  126. Newt Gingrich, the Wailing Warrior of Class Warfare. Great article to get a good glimpse into the strategy and tactics of the Newtron Bomb of Republican Class Warfare!

    How Newt Gingrich Gets Away with ‘Class Warfare’ and ‘Race Baiting’
    By CONOR FRIEDERSDORF
    JAN 25 2012, 5:09 PM ET

    “Isn’t it amazing to see Newt Gingrich soar in a Republican primary even as he asserts that (a) rich guys are so clueless it’s like they live in a fantasy world and (b) investing money and earning a return on it is tantamount to “no work”? Isn’t it stranger still that while saying all this he accuses President Obama of class warfare?”

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/how-newt-gingrich-gets-away-with-class-warfare-and-race-baiting/252005/

  127. took14theteam says:

    On Jan 28 @ 6:09 AM bB says:

    “You provide no evidence to support your assertions.”

    On Jan 27 @ 1:44 PM bB says:

    “Nope…..over 80% of the subprime loans were made by institutions that were not impacted by CRA.”

    Yet the above comment by bB has no evidence to support his assertions.

    LMAO at the hypocrisy of the Idaho “Professor”.

    I for one am jubilant that there is an archive out there to bring the professor back to the island every now and then.

  128. took 14

    I had posted links previously. I saw no reason to repost them. But…since you are making a false assertion about my post, I will quote yet another source:

    the know-nothings blame the subprime crisis on the Community Reinvestment Act — a 30-year-old law that was actually weakened by the Bush administration just as the worst lending wave began. This is even more ridiculous than blaming Freddie and Fannie.

    The Community Reinvestment Act, passed in 1977, requires banks to lend in the low-income neighborhoods where they take deposits. Just the idea that a lending crisis created from 2004 to 2007 was caused by a 1977 law is silly. But it’s even more ridiculous when you consider that most subprime loans were made by firms that aren’t subject to the CRA. University of Michigan law professor Michael Barr testified back in February before the House Committee on Financial Services that 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision and another 30% were made by affiliates of banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations.

    http://www.businessweek.com/investing/insights/blog/archives/2008/09/community_reinv.html

    50% + 30% = 80%

  129. “In case you haven’t noticed Erik”

    You’re right, I haven’t noticed Erik. Who is Erik?

  130. beerBoy,

    Here’s a link to a Federal Reserve study on the CRA. It shows:

    1. only “6 percent of all higher-priced [i.e., sub-prime] loans in 2006 were made by CRA-covered institutions or their affiliates to lower-income borrowers or neighborhoods in their assessment areas.”

    2. “the 90-day or more delinquency rate as of August 2008 for subprime and alt-A mortgages originated between January 2006 and April 2008 is high regardless of neighborhood income”.

    3. CRA-covered subprime loan holders performed slightly better than those with similar incomes who weren’t covered by the CRA.

    http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/20081203_analysis.pdf

  131. Well, you did respond, Jr.

  132. beerBoy “took 14 — I had posted links previously. I saw no reason to repost them. But…since you are making a false assertion about my post, I will quote yet another source:”

    You could have simply suggested to took1…. that he go back up-thread and actually read the comment and click on the link you posted on 1/27 @ 5:44 AM, that he obviously skipped and/or forgot about for some unfathomable reason.

    However, you provided him yet another link to prove that your “assertions” are indeed correct, but he would have known that had he bothered to read your first reference. (I will bet you he’s going to find some way to either dispute this link as well, or just completely ignore it since it doesn’t agree with his talking points.)

    beerBoy, you are truly a scholar and a gentleman! I salute you! (You certainly have a lot more patience with these blinder-borne naysayers than I have. Although, I am working on developing more tolerance for their game playing.)

  133. eHill, You too are truly a scholar and a gentleman. I salute you. (As much for your knowledge as well for your patience.)

    Your additional link and comments are the icing on the cake to the CRA question. How can took1… possibly dispute both you and beerBoy now? I don’t know, but I am predicting he will either try to dispute your proof, or completely ignore you. He isn’t the type to ever admit he could have been wrong and will never accept that either of you, or the rest of the world are correct and he is in error. To do so would require some measure of humility and integrity.

    But, at least you tried! Good on you!!!

  134. sozo: “Try to read this for meaning: I am not suggesting that anyone ignore facts. I am saying that it is called critical thinking when, after thoughtful exploration, you form a reasoned opinion and express it.”

    But sozo, if you present your “reasoned opinion” without providing any supporting facts as proof or even an attempt to identify how you arrived at your “reasoned opinion”, then all you have really presented is your “opinion.” Without some documented evidence there is no proof whatsoever of that “critical thinking” you claim was used to arrive at your alleged “reasoned opinion.”

    And, opinions, by themselves are not facts.

    Try this for an analogy…

    Dump your “reasoned opinion” in one hand, and then dump manure in the other hand. Now tell me, which hand fills up first?

  135. OOPS, somehow my 9:05 AM comment was posted here instead of on the Krauthammer topic where I intended it to be. Sorry about that, but as long as it is here too, enjoy!

  136. took14theteam says:

    There is nothing to enjoy about your comments, self appointed thread police…..

  137. ManuelMartini says:

    I find much to enjoy in muckibr’s comments.

    The subsequent tight undies of readers is the most enjoyable feature

  138. ManuelMartini says:

    If one is going to use general data base information, they may want to make sure that “E” isn’t:

    Ea Eadoin Eamon
    Ean Eara Earl
    Earleen Earlene Early
    Earnest Earvin Easter
    Easton Eastwood Eavan
    Ebba Ebbe Eben
    Ebenezer Ebony Ece
    Echo Ed Edalene
    Edaline Edan Edana
    Edda Eddie Eddy
    Edeline Eden Edena
    Edgar Edgardo Edge
    Edgerton Edie Edison
    Edita Edith Edmund
    Edna Edolie Edom

  139. Thank you Manuel! I appreciate and enjoy reading your comments as well.

  140. Pacman33 says:

    bB displays his credibility –
    ________________
    beerBoy
    JAN. 28, 2012 AT 6:09 AM
    pacman – I didn’t quote MM.
    You provide no evidence to support your assertions.
    ————————–
    beerBoy
    JAN. 27, 2012 AT 5:44 AM
    ..80 percent of high-priced subprime loans were offered by financial institutions that are not subject to the CRA.

    http://mediamatters.org/research/200809300012
    __________________________

    I don’t think I can help you understand any of this if this is the example of what I have to work with.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0