HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Good Reads (Forum) » Lo, there will be much gn...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:50 PM

Lo, there will be much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments in Republican salons tonight...

Last edited Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:17 PM - Edit history (1)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/02/09/open-thread-11/

LO, THERE WILL BE MUCH GNASHING OF TEETH AND RENDING OF GARMENTS IN REPUBLICAN SALONS TONIGHT!

...... Economists are becoming more optimistic about 2013 - expecting growth to increase despite all Republican efforts to sabotage any recovery Obama and the Dems can manage to the Republican's Trickle Down - Deregulation catastrophe.

USA Today quarterly survey of economists reveals they are gaining in optimism for the economy in 2013... despite threats of Government shutdowns, defaults, filibustered jobs bills. http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/...

"The nation's economy and job-creating engine will start to purr later this year as business activity picks up — more than offsetting federal government cutbacks, predict economists surveyed by USA TODAY.

After starting the year slowly, the economy will shift into a higher gear this summer and then grow for the next nine months at the fastest pace in three years, according to the median estimates of 46 economists."


Oh, it's tough being a Republican these days. Nihilism and internecine insurgencies just aren't what they used to be. (cf: "Let's just say it: The Republicans are the Problem" - Mann & Ornstein - WaPO: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-04-27/opinions/35453898_1_republican-party-party-moves-democratic-party

"Rep. Allen West, a Florida Republican, was recently captured on video asserting that there are “78 to 81” Democrats in Congress who are members of the Communist Party. Of course, it’s not unusual for some renegade lawmaker from either side of the aisle to say something outrageous. What made West’s comment — right out of the McCarthyite playbook of the 1950s — so striking was the almost complete lack of condemnation from Republican congressional leaders or other major party figures, including the remaining presidential candidates.

It’s not that the GOP leadership agrees with West; it is that such extreme remarks and views are now taken for granted.

We have been studying Washington politics and Congress for more than 40 years, and never have we seen them this dysfunctional. In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party.

The GOP has become an insurgent outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme; scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition."



37 replies, 5884 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 37 replies Author Time Post
Reply Lo, there will be much gnashing of teeth and rending of garments in Republican salons tonight... (Original post)
Bill USA Feb 2013 OP
annabanana Feb 2013 #1
Bill USA Feb 2013 #3
kardonb Feb 2013 #7
elleng Feb 2013 #2
2naSalit Feb 2013 #5
elleng Feb 2013 #6
Wednesdays Feb 2013 #11
elleng Feb 2013 #14
Moostache Feb 2013 #4
Bill USA Feb 2013 #15
abelenkpe Feb 2013 #8
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #9
abelenkpe Feb 2013 #10
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #12
abelenkpe Feb 2013 #13
Bill USA Feb 2013 #17
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #18
Bill USA Feb 2013 #19
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #20
Bill USA Feb 2013 #21
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #23
Bill USA Feb 2013 #27
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #28
Bill USA Feb 2013 #29
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #31
Bill USA Feb 2013 #32
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #35
Bill USA Feb 2013 #37
Recoverin_Republican Feb 2013 #33
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #34
Recoverin_Republican Feb 2013 #36
Bill USA Feb 2013 #22
jtuck004 Feb 2013 #24
KoKo Feb 2013 #25
Bill USA Feb 2013 #26
calimary Feb 2013 #16
Amonester Feb 2013 #30

Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:55 PM

1. Jeez! Imagine how well we'd be doing if

those sonsofbitches didn't have their feet slammed onto the brakes at every turn...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to annabanana (Reply #1)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 08:05 PM

3. they've been fighting Obama and Dems every step of the way, though M$M echo chamber won't report on

..it. we would be down around 6% Unemployment rate now, if they hadn't have been filibustering jobs bills, threatening Government closure, and Government default, which scares businesses and results in businesses holding a mountain of cash and not hiring but using contract labor and overtime to get by, rather than hire new full-time permanent people. http://www.democraticunderground.com/101644072

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #3)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:18 PM

7. MSM

they all learned their lesson from
the Sarah" : say something stupid , and you will be in the news .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 07:56 PM

2. Right, but one thing I learned tonight gives me pause:

Year of the Snake tends to mean \ / for economy I heard, but don't find it written.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #2)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:11 PM

5. Help, please...

what does \ / mean? is it a big "V" for victory or something I haven't figured out yet...?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 2naSalit (Reply #5)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:14 PM

6. Sorry, tried to be more clear by editing

and separating the 2 legs; means DOWN, NOT GOOD, BAD!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #2)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 06:29 AM

11. Huh??

True, 2001 was a sucky year economically. But despite St. Ronnie's trickle-on economy, things were moving up in 1989, not down. Same thing with 1977, 1965, and 1941. I can't think offhand which way the economy was headed in 1953, but I don't ever remember hearing it was a horrible year. Same deal with 1917...and the Panic of 1907 occurred two years after the year of the snake.

So, by my count the crash year of 1929 and the 2001 recession year are the only ones over the past century that fit that supposition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Wednesdays (Reply #11)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 12:28 PM

14. Good, so I'll forget about my 'prediction,'

and have a feast this week!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:07 PM

4. That writer needs to be careful...

The last sentence that is quoted in the OP reads almost VERBATIM to an episode of "The Newsroom" where the Jeff Daniels character is discussing the Tea Party as the American Taliban.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Moostache (Reply #4)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 03:42 PM

15. the editorial was by Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann, two political scientists who've been studying

the American political scene for about 40 years.

Sorry, but my link to the editorial didn't work (since fixed on edit) here's a working one: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2012-04-27/opinions/35453898_1_republican-party-party-moves-democratic-party ).

The editorial appeared in the Washington Post April 27, 2012. Newsroom, written by the brilliant Aaron Sorkin (West Wing) ran from June - Aug 2012. The finale had a soliloquy you speak of by Jeff Daniels at the end.

Daniels finished with this: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/08/27/1124698/--The-Newsroom-airs-the-news-program-we-ve-been-waiting-for

"They can call themselves the Tea Party. They can call themselves Conservatives. And they can even call themselves Republicans. Though Republican’s certainly shouldn’t. But we should call them what they are: The American Taliban. And the American Taliban cannot survive if Dorothy Cooper is allowed to vote. "

Actually, the metaphor he used is the same as Markos Moulitsas used in title of his excellent book: The American Taliban, published Sept. 2010.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:21 PM

8. The economy is getting better

That's good. I must have been imagining things when they called and told me last nite the co I've worked for for the past 12 years went bankrupt and many lost their job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to abelenkpe (Reply #8)

Mon Feb 11, 2013, 10:44 PM

9. They don't mean your economy. They mean the economy of the bankers and those


who trade internationally. People who own much in the way of assets, and no debt they can't just hang on someone else.

That leaves about 100 million Americans with a replay of this past year, in the dirt as it were, while the government pursues a policy of making the wealthy wealthier at the expense of everyone else. We will see continuing growth in crappy jobs, further loss and depression of wages, and shit for opportunity, while our infrastructure crumbles around us and our government struggles to keep the wealthy intact. People who are 40ish today are going to see 65 with nothing in the bank, a broken healthy care system, and a continuing assault, some successful, on any thing that even looks like Social Security, in much higher numbers than the 1/3 of retirees we see today.

People who make a couple hundred thousand a week are, and will continue, to do fine, however.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #9)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 05:09 AM

10. Pretty sure you are 100 percent correct :( nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to abelenkpe (Reply #10)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 06:29 AM

12. I applogize, I meant to say also I 'm sorry you lost your job. I can't know what it

means to you. But I know how it hurt us and a lot of others, so I can sure empathize. We will hope for some better possibilities for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #12)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 07:23 AM

13. Thank you!

Hope the year is good for us all!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #9)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 06:37 PM

17. Well, I guess then, the Republicans have a few things to feel proud of, given their great efforts to

sabotage any recovery Obama and the Dems have tried to get started. They have obstructed, by one estimate, 4.2 million jobs. I guess they can feel their efforts at filibustering jobs bills and threatening a Government shutdown and Default on its debt, didn't go entirely unrewarded.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101644072

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #17)

Wed Feb 13, 2013, 09:09 PM

18. Absolutely. If it hadn't been for them we could have had 4 million more low-paid


home health care aides, waiter, waitresses, and phone sales people, after the disappearance of about 60% of our higher-paying mid-wage jobs. We could have had far more than the record 10.3 million working poor we have now. Those bastards must have forced the President's appointee to the Treasury to set aside trillions for the banks, including the $40 billion we are paying them monthly and the zero percent interest loans which they are now loaning out for a better and more profitable spread in mortgages, (and the 350% payday loans in Idaho), banks who are now more profitable than ever, while we yank 50,000 people out of their homes each month in foreclosure, the number of people on food stamps increased to 47 million, and those in poverty increased to about 50 million poverty increased. And their blockade which kept us from staffing the FBI so they could investigate the crimes of the banksters, crimes they have testified about and recorded in our public documents for years was, and is, unconscionable. If they would only take our advice and tell everyone to work hard because that is the only thing between them and the American Dream.

Those bastards.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #18)

Thu Feb 14, 2013, 04:59 PM

19. how much better if the GOP who created the Trickle Down Deregulation disaster had been

Last edited Thu Feb 14, 2013, 07:09 PM - Edit history (2)

handling things. We would have seen all those foreclosures happen in the first year of the Trickle Down Deregulation depression.


REPUBLICAN APPROACH TO THE TRICKLE DOWN DEPRESSION WOULD HAVE BEEN "LET IT HAPPEN"


(Migrant Mother, victim of the First Great Depression - 1936)



I agree with you that the efforts to help people with foreclosures have been very poor. But if Republicans had been handling things there would have been no help for people at all. The number of forecosures would have been far greater.......however, overall...

Your criticism of Geitners efforts is misinformed

Geithners efforts were focused on the banks because he knew if credit completely froze-up we would have been in the Second Great Depression in a matter of weeks. Without immediately available credit (from banks), commerce would have come to a screaching halt. Companies would not be able to make payrolls - that is, millions of people would have been without their paychecks. Businesses need short term credit, supplied mostly by banks, in order to conduct daily business - buy inventories, pay suppliers, make payrolls. The economy would have hit a brick wall in a matter of weeks. Also, this would have precipitated a world - wide depression. The costs of such a crash and of getting the World economy started again would have been MUCH greater than what we have seen in the currrent Trickle Down Deregulation disaster.

You seemed to be blaming the quality of jobs created on Obama. This again in ill-informed to the point of being nonsensical.

If you are putting the responsibility for that on Obama you are assigning much greater powers to the man (who is in fact a mere mortal) than anyone can pretend to possess. The type of jobs available is the result of many business and economic factors which no one human can control. Democrats and more recently Obama have tried to pass training and retraining legislation to produce a better trained work-force only to have them thwarted by Republicans opposed to "Government intervension". The amount of investment in R&D by private industry has been sub-par for many years. This investment leads to new products (and even new technologies) and to the creation of higher skilled (and higher paid) jobs. Again, this is the result of years of public policy and business decisions Obama had no power over. (however, its worth noting that 1.45 million manufacturing jobs were saved by Obama's extending the TARP to GM and Chrysler - mainly, again, to prevent the Trickle Down Deregulation Disaster from becoming the Second Great Depression. Republican Senators were adamantly opposed to this action.)

When I said the Republicans caused the Great Trickle Down Deregulation disaster I wasn't just talking about their blowing up the Clinton surplus, funding two wars with debt and pursuing a recklessly expansionist monetary policy (in order to boost consumer spending) and of course deregulation of the Financial services sector (see "Who Blew up the Economy: Foreclosure Phil (Gramm)") and the Bush administration's fighting efforts to rein in predatory lending (see: "Predatory Lenders Partner in Crime") . I am also talking about the three decades of gradual tax reductions mostly going to the highest income taxpayers instigated by the GOP. This, over time leads to reduced demand as the 90% - 96% of the population is gradually finding less money in their pockets which leads to less consumer demand (without easy money to boost spending) which leads to higher unemployment and greater difficulty for businesses to make desired profits (which leads to cost cutting measures such as shipping jobs over-seas).

Regarding jobs and the economy the evidence is clear, Democrats are better for the economy than Republicans. Greater distribution of income leads to greater consumer demand, producing greater job creation and lower unemployment. Businesses do better, grow more and the rich do better than they could have imagined. see: ("Who's better for the Economy, Republicans or Democrats"- the Atlantic)

and: ( "Bulls, Bears, Donkeys and Elephants" )

Since 1929, Republicans and Democrats have each controlled the presidency for nearly 40 years. So which party has been better for American pocketbooks and capitalism as a whole? Well, here’s an experiment: imagine that during these years you had to invest exclusively under either Democratic or Republican administrations. How would you have fared?



As of Friday, a $10,000 investment in the S.& P. stock market index* would have grown to $11,733 if invested under Republican presidents only, although that would be $51,211 if we exclude Herbert Hoover’s presidency during the Great Depression. Invested under Democratic presidents only, $10,000 would have grown to $300,671 at a compound rate of 8.9 percent over nearly 40 years.





and...

Private Jobs increase more with Democrats in White House - Bloomberg


The BGOV Barometer shows that since Democrat John F. Kennedy took office in January 1961, non-government payrolls in the U.S. swelled by almost 42 million jobs under Democrats, compared with 24 million for Republican presidents, according to Labor Department figures.

Democrats hold the edge though they occupied the Oval Office for 23 years since Kennedy’s inauguration, compared with 28 for the Republicans. Through April, Democratic presidents accounted for an average of 150,000 additional private-sector paychecks per month over that period, more than double the 71,000 average for Republicans.
(more)

Chart: More Private Jobs Gained Under Democrats

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #19)

Fri Feb 15, 2013, 11:29 AM

20. That is such B.S.


Don't forget Bill Clinton made their evil possible with the Securities Modernization Act without which we would have had transparency and been able to regulate the worst of what the banks were doing.

"Geithners efforts were focused on the banks because he knew if credit completely froze-up we would have been in the Second Great Depression in a matter of weeks."

That whole "We're going to scare you with a Depression Lie" is nothing more than the Republican meme that what is good for business is good for everyone, and it's a sorry excuse that anyone with an ounce of integrity would have trouble spouting. Lots of people want to hang their hat on it, but it's the same thing the wealthy were saying when FDR tried to make working people whole. It's was a lie then and it's a lie now, used to justify making the criminals who torched this economy wealthy while letting people on food stamps go hungry and their parents lose everything they have worked for. But at least the Rethugs are honest about their wish to put every one into poverty.

Frankly, the only people who worry about losing money are those that have it - there are already tens of millions living their Depression today, more and longer because of our current policies of enriching the criminals in the banks. And the government certainly had the capacity to make sure other people didn't get hurt, but chose not to support them.

Being an American, I dislike disingenuous liars and fools, people who will stab you in the back far worse than people who are just straight up evil and are honest enough about it to tell you so.

Hey, if it does one's soul good to keep telling themselves that making the wealthy richer, making sure that they keep their pockets lined, while some kid cries themselves to bed at night hungry, or some senior, retired school teacher sleeps in a homeless shelter because the people in power would rather send money to their rich friends and excuses to the most vulnerable, then good for them.

But I am pickier about my friends than that. Mine actually would tell a banker to go to hell before they would profit from the misery of others. Obviously not everyone has that kind of spine.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #20)

Fri Feb 15, 2013, 04:27 PM

21. you are prattling nonsense:

you said:

"That whole "We're going to scare you with a Depression Lie" is nothing more than the Republican meme..."


This statement makes absolutely no sense. The Republicans have taken every opportunity to be highly critical of TARP, especially after Obama was elected, and any actions to produce a recovery to their Trickle Down Disaster. Try to make some sense if you are going to post here.


Economists agree: Legislation Reid led to passage prevented economic collapse


Economists agree that TARP, stimulus helped avert depression

Blinder and Zandi: Policies "probably averted what could have been called Great Depression 2.0." In July, former Federal Reserve vice chairman Alan Blinder and Moody's Analytics chief economist Mark Zandi issued a report citing analytic models to demonstrate that the "multifaceted and bipartisan" response to the financial crisis, including the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - both of which passed the Senate under Reid's leadership -- had a "huge" effect on real GDP, jobs, and inflation, and "probably averted what could have been called Great Depression 2.0":

~~
~~
Krugman: Government intervention helped avert "second Great Depression." In his August 9, 2009, New York Times column, Nobel laureate Paul Krugman wrote that governmental actions kept the U.S. from going into "a second Great Depression":


A few months ago the possibility of falling into the abyss seemed all too real. The financial panic of late 2008 was as severe, in some ways, as the banking panic of the early 1930s, and for a while key economic indicators -- world trade, world industrial production, even stock prices -- were falling as fast as or faster than they did in 1929-30.

But in the 1930s the trend lines just kept heading down. This time, the plunge appears to be ending after just one terrible year.

So what saved us from a full replay of the Great Depression? The answer, almost surely, lies in the very different role played by government.

Probably the most important aspect of the government's role in this crisis isn't what it has done, but what it hasn't done: unlike the private sector, the federal government hasn't slashed spending as its income has fallen. (State and local governments are a different story.) Tax receipts are way down, but Social Security checks are still going out; Medicare is still covering hospital bills; federal employees, from judges to park rangers to soldiers, are still being paid.



The point is that this time, unlike in the 1930s, the government didn't take a hands-off attitude while much of the banking system collapsed. And that's another reason we're not living through Great Depression II.

Last and probably least, but by no means trivial, have been the deliberate efforts of the government to pump up the economy. From the beginning, I argued that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, a k a the Obama stimulus plan, was too small. Nonetheless, reasonable estimates suggest that around a million more Americans are working now than would have been employed without that plan -- a number that will grow over time -- and that the stimulus has played a significant role in pulling the economy out of its free fall.

All in all, then, the government has played a crucial stabilizing role in this economic crisis. Ronald Reagan was wrong: sometimes the private sector is the problem, and government is the solution.

(more)


Was TARP perfect? NO. But were the people involved in getting TARP started and maintained (specifically Geithner) honestly afraid that without Government intervention we could drop into a Great Depression II and that that would take the World economy into a depression - YES.

To paraphrase Mr. Pope: Enthusiasm (and even compassion) without knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #21)

Sat Feb 16, 2013, 06:37 AM

23. Too bad hungry kids, denied the money paid to the thieving banks, can't eat excuses. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #23)

Sun Feb 17, 2013, 04:12 PM

27. Some legislation U should be interested in, will help up to 12 million refinance mortgages: GOP will

Last edited Sun Feb 17, 2013, 05:35 PM - Edit history (2)

oppose it en masse! (shit! Up to 12 million people could save up to $3,000 a year from refinancing?? No way! we can't have that!)

Mortgage Refinance Bill Praised By Obama Faces Uphill Battle In Congress

Uh-oh, I guess you would say I'm making "an excuse" for Obama administration.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #27)

Mon Feb 18, 2013, 11:51 AM

28. Just more cover for thieving bankers. After having destroyed the market


they were given money to make mortgages. They refused, and used it for other purposes, and their statements to this effect are a matter of public record. So instead of putting restrictions on the money, they are allowed to avoid jail and these programs are created, effectively covering for their bad behavior.


One would think that if a person had a reasonable amount of thinking power they would see that, if the real estate had ay value, there would be no need for a "program" to do the same financing that credit unions and banks have been making for hundreds of years. Instead they are now rewarding the criminals who caused the problem, covering up for criminals. And if the real estate doesn't have the value, why are we creating a program to create new debt to replace it. That is economically stupid.

Perhaps people wrap themselves so tightly in a flag it cuts off the circulation to their brain and they can't see when they are being fooled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #28)

Mon Feb 18, 2013, 08:06 PM

29. "if the real estate doesn't have the value, why are we creating a program to create new debt to.."

You said: "..if the real estate doesn't have the value, why are we creating a program to create new debt to replace it.(?)"

this statement makes no sense....

1) no 'new' debt is being created. Mortgages are to be refinanced ..at a lower interest rates... which will save homeowners up to $3,000 a year. This was stated in comment you responded to (see below).

2) the bill will enable up to 12 million homeowners obtain refinancing. This will enable these homeowners to obtain currently available mortgage rates that are lower than the rates they currently pay on their loans. This program will enable homeowners to achieve significant savings. This seems a rather obvious good thing to do. Enable homeowners to refinance at currently available market rates and achieve significant savings. What's not to like about that?



Nearly 12 million homeowners have Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans and stand to benefit refinancing, the two senators said. Many can't refinance at a lower rate because of red tape and high fees. The red tape has reduced competition among banks, so borrowers pay higher interest rates than they would if they were able to shop around more, according to the senators.

The bill also would reduce up-front fees that borrowers pay on refinances and eliminate appraisal costs for all borrowers. The measure seeks to expand the Obama administration's Home Affordable Refinancing Program, which saves an average homeowner about $2,500 per year, they said.



You stated:
"a 'program' to do the same financing that credit unions and banks have been making for hundreds of years"

... the financing is still being provided by the lending institutions - banks or savings and loans.

You stated:
"Instead they are now rewarding the criminals who caused the problem, covering up for criminals."


.. Again, this statement makes absolutely no sense.

Wow! Your capacity for BULLSHIT is astounding. But then, you're a Republican. That's your 'stock in trade', the con man's kit bag.


Where is there a reward for lending institutions? By enabling homeowners who qualify, to obtain mortgage insurance, we are taking away the reason banks have provided for why they are not refinancing home owners loans. Without this excuse the banks are thus induced to refinance and accept LOWER interest rates to be paid to them.

You stated:
"if the real estate doesn't have the value, why are we creating a program to create new debt to replace it"


I covered the "new debt" anti-logic already. Let's examine the other part of this statement...

2) when you say: "...if the real estate has no value" you seem to be trying to float a rationale for agreeing with your fellow Corporate Lobbyist Partiers (aka. the GOP) that we shouldn't do anything to help the homeowners.

This position, to Democrats, is not acceptable. The real estate has value to the owners as a home to live in, and it still does have a market value. Helping the homeowners, to Democrats, is also just the right thing to do.

I can see to Republicans this program has the drawback that it is not helping corporations or the super wealthy and also by saving people money it would provide an extra boost to the recovery to the Republican Trickle Down Deregulation disaster.

Ahhhh, there's the rub... helping President Obama's efforts to repair and rebuild the economy from the damage wrought by all that Republican Supply Side prosperity that would have resulted in a Great Depression II - had the Government not stepped in to prevent it. That's why Republicans will oppose this bill, en masse.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #29)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 09:21 AM

31. It only makes sense if you are stupid

is the title of one of the posts on DU. Reading the above reminds me of that post. But that's the job of Fox News cheerleader types, to take the side of bankers over hungry children and unemployed workers, throwing excuses and insults at people as if that somehow justifies what is going on. I guess I shouldn't be surprised to find it here. As far back as 1932 the NLRB found that business was spending upwards of $80 million a year on finks and spies to hurt people who just wanted a decent job and decent wage. So just because someone wraps themselves in the flag of the current party doesn't mean they are anyone that can be trusted. You do seem to know a LOT more than I do about what Republicans like and don't like, so I am guessing you must spend more time listening to them. Maybe, if I cared, that would be a lesson for me, but such postings are just not important enough to me to waste any further time on, especially when the source might be questionable.

We wouldn't need the program if we had put the thieving bankers in jail and fixed the problem. But perhaps their money made a difference in what some people see as justice. A great man told us that there are people who would work harder to save their Master's house than their own, or their neighbors, and they can be bought fairly cheaply. Maybe that's the real problem.

Diminished Lives and Futures: A Portrait of America in the Great-Recession Era include:

Some 73% either lost a job themselves, or have a member of their household, a close relative, or a friend lose a job at some point in the past four years.

A majority of Americans (56%) report having less money in savings than before the recession began, including 38% who say they have a lot less.

The vast majority thinks that college will be permanently out of the financial range for most young people.

More than half of those who were laid off or lost a job during the recession say they cut back on medical treatment or doctor visits, 40% borrowed money from family or friends, and just under one in four sought professional help for stress or depression.

Here.

The simple fact is that there are tens of millions of people who continue to hurt, will likely never recover, while much of what is being done enriches the wealthy in the mistaken belief that this will spill over to others. That is the most Republican of ideas, and we were publicly warned against it a hundred years ago. There are those who take great pride in ignoring that, as well as the pain and devastation in the lives around them, even as banks grow richer and their stocks increase in value. Regardless of the invective in the garbage above.

So I will leave you with this and quit wasting my time.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #31)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:04 PM

32. You have a facility and dedication to the techniques of demagoguery and disinformation..

insinuating my proferring the Refinancing bill as a good thing as "taking the side of bankers".

By insinuating my offering of the Refinancing bill is "taking the side of bankers" is actually being a "cheerleader" for the banks, and equivalent of FOX news is pure disinformation and demagoguery - of the brand the GOP is so proficient in.

First of all you claim/insinuation makes no logical sense on the face of it, since as I pointed out in Cmt 29, the Mortgage Refinance bill seeks to enable as many as 12 million homeowners get refinancing that will save them up to $3,000 per year - BUT, as I repeated in 29, it will mean less revenues coming into the banks after refinancing to a lower interest rate. How this can be construed as of no help to homeowners and merely a way of helping bankers is inconcievable and you have said nothing to prove this point or disprove my criticisms of your implied points that I clearly stated in my comment 29.

You further insinuate that by pointing out that the Mortgage Refinance Bill proposed by the Obama administration, I am somehow therefor a defender of every nefarious business practice Wall Street Banksters have engaged in. This is patent nonsense, disinformation, demogoguery and character assassination by insinuation, rather than by explicity making a case. You have done this in one way or another in virtually ALL of you comments in this thread (see cmnt 20, 23, 28). I find this behavior contemptible, dishonest and which gives me (and anyone) adequate reason to vigorously criticize such behavior as I did in my cmt 29.

I feel it is important to emphatically condemn the use of demagoguery and disinformation as you have done - time and again - in this thread. And, I have nothing to apologize for in such condemnation. I do not back away from expressing my contempt for such behavious with strong language - when you persist in the use of demogoguery and insinuated character assasination. The continuation of such contemptible behavior will most certainly be met with strong reaction from me.

You say:
"You do seem to know a LOT more than I do about what Republicans like and don't like"

I have heard Republican propaganda, disinformation and Big Lies since before the Reagan administration, so I can certainly recognize the very same techniques in your rhetoric. INsinuation instead of making an explicit case. You avoid making an explicit argument as that would expose your premises and conclusions to review and possible criticism and the possibilty that the object of your insinuations would prove that your argument is fallacious. Thus, not having a case, you lurk behind insinuation and implied accusations of evil motivations.


you said:
"But that's the job of Fox News cheerleader types, to take the side of bankers over hungry children and unemployed workers, throwing excuses and insults at people as if that somehow justifies what is going on"


Again, we have patent demogoguery and character assassination by insinuation. Indeed, (this is) very contemptible devious behavior.


YOU have mischaracterized a proposed piece of Legislation, as helping bankers at the expense of 'hungry' children and unemployed workers. THIS IS UTTER NONSENSE and entirely dishonest rhetoric. The legislation is intended to help up to 12 million home owners. The other economic and social concerns of unemployed workers is something which the Obama administration and House and Senate Democrats have tried to address with several jobs bills only to have them filibustered to death by the GOP -(always with sanctimonious hypocritical rationale much like those you have repeatedly use in this thread.

You included an excerpt from a study with, again, the insinuation that my pointing out a bill which is directed at dealing with part of the problem and pointing out the successes of Obama's and Democrats efforts to build a recovery from the Republican's Trickle Down Deregulation Disaster (seriously compromised by your GOP's cynical efforts to prevent their success ..and see here) - SOMEHOW - means that I (or anybody else making the same points) am guilty of having no compassion or consideration for the situation of the ~95% who were most hurt by the Republicans policy of the Supply-Side Trickle Down Con game - is a rather transparent effort to desparage me , soley by insinuation, and an outrageous Big Lie.

The study at the link you provided (a link!) addressed ways to work out of a depression such as:
Diminshed Lives and Futures

> Give tax credits to businesses that hire new workers
> Longer and higher benefits from unemployment insurance
> Have government create jobs for unemployed people
> Require people to enter training programs in order to
> receive unemployment insurance
> Long-term education and training programs that help people change careers


the study also includes the following information from their poll of people at the short end of the Supply-Side prosperity given us by the Republicans. This addresses ways to respond to an economic downturn....

By wide margins, the two most popular strategies are providing tax credits to businesses that hire new workers (81%) and funding long-term education and training programs that help workers change careers (76%). Employed (78%) and unemployed (79%) respondents alike agree that the government should support more robust training programs.

In fact, nearly 7 in 10 Americans (and 63% of those who are currently unemployed) also say that people receiving unemployment insurance should be required to enroll in retraining programs, a strategy that is common in European countries. Somewhat less popular, but still garnering the support of 6 in 10 respondents, are proposals that would have the government create jobs for the unemployed. These strategies were utilized in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (commonly known as the stimulus package) in 2009 and during other major recessions and the Great Depression.

Compared to working Americans, unemployed workers are much more supportive of implementing federal policies to reduce unemployment, including governmentfunded job creation programs (72% vs. 61%) and extending and improving unemployment insurance benefits (61% vs. 41%). Employed workers are also more likely than unemployed Americans to favor tax credits for businesses that hire new workers (80% vs. 70%).


The Obama administration has tried about everything listed above - and met obdurate Republican Opposition on almost every Bill proposed to attempt almost any (save unemployment benefits extensions) approach tried. As far as Extension of Unemployment benefits -- the Republicans demanded either extension of the Bush Tax cuts for the those in the top few percent of the income tax brackets or more cuts to Government discretionary spending (in the then current year - adding to the austerity hole which only makes recovery harder).

All the examples of human costs from the Trickle Down Deregulation disaster you have referred to have been exacerbated by the Republicans in their monstrous effort to keep Obama and the Dems from succeeding in building a recovery to the Republican Trickle Down Disaster. Nothing I have said can be construed by any rational person as constituting evidence of a lack of concern for the people hurt by Republican Elitist Economic policies and their war to keep Obama and the Dems from succeeding. NOthing I have said could be construed by any fair minded, rational person as evidence that I think the steps taken to preclude a second Great Depression and to stimulate the economy have been PERFECT. They have not been. But much of the reason for the steps to produce a recovery being less than we would like them to have been is because of the Republicans implacable opposition to any and every effort of the Obama administrations efforts to build a recovery to the REpublican Trickle Down Deregulation disaster.

I suspect that the whole overarching objective of you rather considerable efforts is to confuse the whole issue of recovery from the Trickle Down Deregulation disaster and to provide 'cover' for the Republicans in their implacable opposition to and cynical machinations to sabotage and undermine every effort of the Obama administration and the Democrats in the House and Senate to rebuild our economy - and society- from the damage wrought by Republican policies and philosphies.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #32)

Wed Feb 20, 2013, 03:04 AM

35. And they said Eugene McCarthy was dead. LIYF. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #35)

Thu Feb 21, 2013, 05:13 PM

37. Wellll, if your implication is that I am like Eugene McCarthy, I accept the compliment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #31)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 06:47 PM

33. You finally got smart! This guy's got you dead to rights. He's right, everything you've said

is pure demogoguery. You imply because he mentions a proposed bill to help millions of people get refinanced - that he doesn't care about all the people hurt in this Republican caused depresssion. -- What obvious Bull!

You profess to care about the people hurt by this REpublican depression and then you talk like the Refinance bill is not worth bothering with(???) Sounds just like a rationale cooked up by the GOP grifters.

So is that it, you're trying to confuse people to help Republicans dodge responsibility for doing everything they can to keep the recovery from continuing and to try to damage the Democratic 'Brand'?

I used to believe all that Bull from the GOP too. Yeah, I thought I was gonna be one of those newly minted millionaires. What a sucker I was. I have friends - from my former life as a GOP Sucker - I remember them saying (this was before I woke up to the GOP Con-game) how they hated this Democratic LIBERAL web-site called "Democratic Underground". They had plans to get on this hated site and disrupt and degrade the discussions on there. Is that what you are doing?

(I'm glad they told me about DU though. I came here a couple years ago to check it out and started to learn a lot. Reading posts on here has helped me learn what a huge sucker I was for the Republican 'Con'.)

I wonder that nobody else has called you on your BS? This place isn't like it used to be (a couple years ago).


Well, I don't think you got anywhere this time. Maybe you better stay away from this guy's posts. (just a little of advice)



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Recoverin_Republican (Reply #33)

Wed Feb 20, 2013, 02:56 AM

34. Actually, I don't give a flying fuck about rethugs, along with snipey little posts like this.

And I won't waste any more time with it, disposing of it as the other posts, just like I pick up and throw away the stinking dogshit in my yard. That's about the same level as excuses for the criminals that run our banks and the boot-licking words of uncritical support for their ill-gotten gains.

Btw, here's a code to figure out.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #34)

Wed Feb 20, 2013, 07:22 PM

36. I'll let your statement stand for itself. You've revealed yourself as you truly are ---

---- I don't need to say anything more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jtuck004 (Reply #20)

Fri Feb 15, 2013, 05:53 PM

22. Securities Modernization act?.. are you referring to the Commodities Futures Modernization act?...

This act was a rider slipped onto the Omnibus Funding bill 2000 which was an 11,000 page document, a must pass or the Government would close without funding act. Phil Gramm slipped it in as a rider to the Omnibus Funding bill. Nobody even knew it was in there!

It was Phil Gramms baby. He had been trying to get it out of committee for over a year. see: Foreclosure Phil -- (only if you want to learn something) http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2008/05/foreclosure-phil

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #22)

Sat Feb 16, 2013, 06:41 AM

24. I learned something from someone that seems appropriate right now.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Reply #19)

Sat Feb 16, 2013, 12:26 PM

25. You need to be more subtle in your Spamming of Talking Points, though.

That's quite a job you did with the links...but, it's so aggressive that it's overwhelming.

Also...the "Blue Links," are a give away of what are sometimes known as "paid" Political TP's. Not that your post is that....but, it does seem to be very professionally done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KoKo (Reply #25)

Sat Feb 16, 2013, 03:58 PM

26. thnks for your comment. I guess my approach has been affected by commenting on other sites

responding to major BSers and disinformation disseminators. I have wondered, in the past, if some people here on DU might think I am a professional, that is: a 'ringer'. I'm not, ... just believe in researching my topic... before opening my mouth.


I'll keep what you said in mind... though I don't want to give up linking to good articles, as I want to show people my positions are based on research, not just something off the top of my head.

Re "blue" links - the problem is that is so often they are where you find the best, most meaningful analyses. Should we feel we can't mention articles from the NYT, WaPo or Center on Budget and Policy Priorities?

thanks for your observations. will keep them in mind.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Tue Feb 12, 2013, 08:32 PM

16. Kick!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bill USA (Original post)

Tue Feb 19, 2013, 01:32 AM

30. I hope they accounted in the constant rises in gas prices.

Because if they didn't, and the prices keep going up, up, up, against all odds...

Something's going to break...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread