Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 101 to 120 of 182
  1. #101  
    I actually spoke with the builder today and they seem to be willing to work with me. It will be interesting to see what they come back and offer me.
  2.    #102  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    12/17/07
    There's been alot of recent news and new developments on this topic during the last month or so -- but unfortunately I've been too preoccupied to write about them.

    Most significant was the plan announced by junior a couple of weeks ago -- the plan he publicized by giving out the number for The Freedom Christian Academy instead of the organization he had created ostensibly to "help" endangered homeowners.

    My view is that the administration’s plan is nothing more than a feeble fig leaf -- a pose of compassion to dodge making the hard decisions required to truly deal with the housing crisis and repair the horrific damage that is continuing to gnaw against america's economy and its social fabric.

    Junior's plan will perhaps help thousands of at risk borrowers, when the problem encompasses millions. And even the relief that those few do receive is in a form that's temporary -- and would mostly just delay their difficulties while extending the overall crisis.

    Their economic theories and ideological preconceptions are limiting their imaginations in finding any real remedies for this crisis that would save those endangered homeowners and revive the collapsing housing market that threatens to suck down even homeowners who are not now in trouble..

    And though advertized as targeted at desperate home owners, the ultimate potential beneficiaries of this proposal are in my opinion, the lenders and hedge funds who are now most at risk in this debacle.

    This is because the courts are likely to rule in the end that any plan that compels them to unilaterally modify legally binding contracts regarding the terms of their loans would constitute a government sanctioned taking of their property.

    This despite the fact that much of the securitized mortgage paper that these investors hold is little more than worthless, and getting more so every day.

    Junior’s idea is essentially to individually research each and every subprime borrowers financial and housing situation, and on a one-at-a-time basis evaluate whether they are truly desperate, whether they can afford their existing loan at the current teaser rate, whether the home is worth more foreclosed than their debt, and whether they can be forced to pay the onerous terms of their existing mortgage after it resets.

    There are at least 3-4 million homeowners who could be at risk of foreclosure. The bureaucratic paperwork involved in processing and researching each of them separately is monumental. The potential for abuse and stupidity is unlimited. The probability that this program could save all who need help is less than dubious.

    Perhaps most importantly, its also very unlikely to have the needed effect of increasing liquidity in the housing lending system.

    I still believe that the solutions I proposed of about 2 months ago are best:

    Tax policy on the these securtized mortgages needs to be changed so as to disincentivize conditions that lead to these loans failing -- and incentivize and reward investors who properly and appropriately adjust the lending terms of loans in their portfolios so as to minimize the number of loans they own that will fall into foreclosure.

    Failure to act aggressively and expeditiously will gravely worsen the recession that now seems unavoidable.

    Originally Posted by BARYE 9-25-07
    ...The consensus that I've seen among respected economic observers is that the Fed cut was enough to stave off a recession.

    And with an election coming up next year, junior's Fed will be under enormous pressure to ensure that any downturn happens after November '08.

    Jim Cramer -- whose opinions I highly respect (despite his idiotic support of Mitt Romney), also believes that the Fed's action has been timely enough to avert that recession.

    Over the next year I see the Fed cutting at least a full point off interest rates, perhaps even more.

    It will be enough to dampen the fall that's already begun, but the damage and its momentum -- are already too huge to be stopped.

    The Fed cannot catch up to this falling piano.

    There were big developments Sunday in the financial system.

    The reverberations from junior's legacy --his catastrophic mismanagement our economic system, his endless borrowing to finance endless war and tax cuts for his rich friends, his appointment of incompetent leaders to the Federal Reserve Board, his ideologically inhibited recognition of the depth of the crisis, the enormity of the problem, and the gigantic resources and attention required to begin to reverse it -- has brought forth yet another event singularity -- yet another institution has been absorbed into its colossal black hole.

    I had hoped that with the election of a Democrat -- (especially one named Clinton) -- that the bottom might have been found by next summer.

    As I have become less and less confident of preventing junior from getting his 3rd term, I am also increasingly dubious of the prospects for the american economy.

    On Monday there may be a horrific early sell off -- followed by an even larger upside reversal late in the day. (sparked by a big and belated Fed rate cut).

    If that happens it will be a suckers rally -- the situation is bad and still getting worse.

    The consequences of Fanny/Freddies collapse -- something that a gleeful GOP celebrated last week -- is still to play out.

    Even those homes for whom a willing buyer is available, are having trouble closing because of how hard it is to get a mortgage -- especially an affordable mortgage.

    But alas, few people want to buy when circumstances continue to drive home values inexorably lower.


    After Frantic Day, Wall St. Banks Falter
    By ANDREW ROSS SORKIN NYT
    September 15, 2008

    ...In one of the most dramatic days in Wall Street’s history, Merrill Lynch agreed to sell itself on Sunday to Bank of America for roughly $50 billion to avert a deepening financial crisis, while another prominent securities firm, Lehman Brothers, announced it will file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy...as a result of hundreds of billions of dollars in losses because of bad mortgage finance and real estate investments.

    But even as the fates of Lehman and Merrill hung in the balance, another crisis loomed as the insurance giant American International Group appeared to teeter. Staggered by losses stemming from the credit crisis, A.I.G. sought a $40 billion lifeline from the Federal Reserve, without which the company may have only days to survive...

    “My goodness. I’ve been in the business 35 years, and these are the most extraordinary events I’ve ever seen,”...

    It remains to be seen whether the sale of Merrill, which was worth more than $100 billion during the last year, and the controlled demise of Lehman will be enough to finally turn the tide in the yearlong financial crisis that has crippled Wall Street and threatened the broader economy.

    Questions remain about how the market will react Monday, particularly to Lehman’s plan to wind down its trading operations, and whether other companies, like A.I.G. and Washington Mutual, the nation’s largest savings and loan, might falter...

    Though the government took control of the troubled mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac only a week ago, investors have become increasingly nervous about whether major financial institutions can recover from their losses.

    How things play out could affect the broader economy, which has been weakening steadily as the financial crisis has deepened over the last year, with unemployment increasing as the nation’s growth rate has slowed.

    What will happen to Merrill’s 60,000 employees or Lehman’s 25,000 employees remains unclear...

    ...The Treasury and Federal Reserve had already stepped in on several occasions to rescue the financial system, forcing a shotgun marriage between Bear Stearns and JPMorgan Chase this year and backstopping $29 billion worth of troubled assets — and then agreeing to bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac...

    The bankers were told that the government would not bail out Lehman and that it was up to Wall Street to solve its problems...

    ...Merrill has the nation’s largest brokerage force and its name is known in towns across America, while Lehman’s main customers are big institutions. But during the credit boom both firms piled into risky real estate and ended up severely weakened, with inadequate capital and toxic assets...

    ...A.I.G. will be the next test. Ratings agencies threatened to downgrade A.I.G.’s credit rating if it does not raise $40 billion by Monday morning, a step that would crippled the company. A.I.G. had hoped to shore itself up, in party by selling certain businesses, but potential bidders, including the private investment firms Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and TPG, withdrew at the last minute because the government refused to provide a financial guarantee for the purchase. A.I.G. rejected an offer by another investor, J. C. Flowers & Company.

    The weekend’s events indicate that top officials at the Federal Reserve and the Treasury are taking a harder line on providing government support of troubled financial institutions...

    ...Both Mr. Paulson and Mr. Bernanke worried that they had already gone much further than they had ever wanted, first by underwriting the takeover of Bear Stearns in March and by the far bigger bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac...
    Last edited by BARYE; 09/15/2008 at 01:40 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  3.    #103  
    the market plummeted 500 points today -- Lehman has gone bankrupt, AIG nears collapse.

    Tomorrow the Fed will announce yet another Rate cut --

    Extraordinary futility -- unprecedented ignorance.

    Why has no one besides BARYE proposed a workable path out of the crisis ??

    How has junior and his ideological disciples escaped blame and retribution for the destruction they've wrought ???



    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE 1336072


    8-25-07



    Lots of MBA textbooks include the western translation of the Chinese characters for "crisis" as also meaning "opportunity".

    While I understand that is literally not quite true, its an apt summation to what I see as the way out of this catastrophe.

    About six months ago, after I came onto some extra funds, I approached my lender about paying off about 10 % of my loan, and having my monthly payments reduced accordingly. I reminded him that my loan was at a rate lower than the market -- that it was in his interest to get me to reduce it.

    He politely said that he was willing to allow me to prepay without "penalty" -- but all he could offer was to shorten the payoff term of my loan.

    In early August I called him again. The mortgage crisis was by then getting into the news. I pointed out that loans like mine (no doc, low interest), were trading at a significant discount in the market place.

    Cash short mortgage companies were themselves going bankrupt because of being unable to buy back loans as demanded by their bond holders -- and because they lacked the ability to refinance their pool of lending funds so that they could make more loans.

    Though his company -- the nation’s largest mortgage maker, was reported at that time to be sound, I thought that they were in more trouble than they were willing to admit.

    I made a slightly different offer than the one I made months earlier. In a brief conversation I explained why it was in both our interest to give me an additional 20 % bonus against my loan for every dollar that I'd prepay. (i.e. for every $10,000 I would pay off, I'd get $12,000 in benefit.)

    The mutual advantage of this to me seemed obvious. Enabling their customers (me specifically) to buy back their debt at a comparable discount to which it was already trading at in the market seemed to be simple, elegant solution to a multiplicity of needs. Some debt was being discounted by 50% or more. He politely said it potentially made sense -- but he would have to talk to his regional manager.

    Despite many attempts by me, we've not spoken again.

    Marking the outstanding mortgage debt to its market value is both an accounting requirement and a debtors opportunity. This is particularly true of the millions of exotic ARM mortgages made during the last 2 years -- many many of which are doomed to inevitable foreclosure.

    If the debt can be repriced to reflect its actual current market value (80 % discount ??), many of the distressed homeowners can possibly restructure or refinance their debt sufficiently to keep their homes.

    The same principal would also incentivize cash capable households to act as a reverse resource to their own lenders. ...

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post

    10-25-07

    "Experts" are beginning to catch up to BARYE's analysis of the depth of the mortgage crisis.

    They still have not offered solutions anywhere commensurate to the catastrophe that confronts them.

    As I've written previously, there can be nothing except more bloodletting and foreclosures going forward, until the issuers of the doomed to fail mortgages and the parties behind those securitized loans are coerced into renegotiating terms that could remain affordable for their borrowers.

    Though I'm normally dead against using tax incentives to achieve socially desirable actions, I would make an exception in this case.

    A tax change must be made that will encourage lenders to renegotiate their loans so that they have an incentive to have significantly fewer foreclosures.

    Conversely, that same law would impose a major tax penalty as punishment on companies that have above average foreclosure rates.

    Until lenders begin to see themselves on the same side as their borrowers, we are in for a very bumpy ride.

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post

    11-15-07
    Todays NYTimes has what I think is one of the first really positive developments in the mortage meltdown mess.

    A judge has ruled that in many if not most cases, the mechanism through which securitized mortgages are foreclosed upon is illegal because the mortgage's ties to specific property is not properly documented.

    Because of the way that these loans were securitzed (i.e. pooled into quasi bonds, and then resold in various fragments), often the note trustee hasn't the documents to support their legal standing to sue to take the property.

    Should other judges reach a similar understanding, lenders will soon feel compelled to renegotiate unworkable loans to prevent themselves from being decimated in court.

    As I have said earlier, the only solution to this crisis is to mark the mortgage value to the market -- thereby discounting a mortgage by sometimes as much as 70 %. Borrowers would then be able to redo their mortgage loans at far more realistic and reasonable levels.

    In most cases now, everyone is losing.

    Borrowers who can't get a loan restructured are now doomed to foreclosure. And lenders usually won't get the full value of their loan after a foreclosure because housing prices are falling so fast.

    Discounting a loan down to its market value will rescue homeowners, making it possible for them to be able to afford to stay in that home.

    Perversely, the current system harms even responsible owners who are repaying their loans.

    For example, there are large swaths of Cleveland where houses were stripped of anything of value soon after a foreclosure: Pipes, wiring, aluminum siding... Soon criminals and drug dealers move in.

    Whole neighborhoods are devastated overnight -- even people being responsible and keeping up with their loans, watch their homes lose all value as their communities are surrounded by decay and crime. ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  4.    #104  
    Stunning.

    Unanimously the Fed has kept interest rates unchanged.

    They continue to speak of inflation.

    AIG -- the world's largest insurer of everything, including mortgage backed securities, is on the verge of bankruptcy.

    The potential catastrophe that would follow a liquidation of AIG is almost unimaginable.

    But what most matters though, is that the consequences for the economy, for the nation -- will be largely unseen until after the election...

    Move along -- there's nothing to see here ...
    Last edited by BARYE; 09/16/2008 at 02:15 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  5.    #105  
    MSNBC's Jim Cramer -- whose stock market advice has cost BARYE thousands -- (but who nevertheless has valuable insights into the global financial system) said this afternoon that the collapse of AIG would freeze the international banking system.

    AIG insures banks.

    Those banks -- especially in Europe -- rely on AIG for risk transference. Should AIG fail many would not be able to transact business, almost all would be required to raise massive amounts of capital -- all at a time when there is almost no capital to be had.

    AIG's insurance entities also insure everything from homes to airplanes.

    It would be indescribably difficult to disentangle all the mutual interdependencies implied in all of AIG connections between businesses, banks, enterprises, individuals.

    Until clarity was restored as to the whether insurance continued to exist, whether captital needed to be raised etc etc -- business globally might well come to a a screeching halt.

    (disclaimer: though BARYE is a former CEO of a major European Empire, he -- like John McCain -- is not an economist -- and knows nothing about business...)
    Last edited by BARYE; 09/16/2008 at 05:16 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  6.    #106  
    in a pathetic exercise of laissez faire hypocrisy, junior tonight has in effect nationalized the world’s largest most influential insurance company.

    I will leave it to others to explain, justify, and rationalize this absolute contravention of their heroic pose in defense of unfettered free market capitalism.

    Though admittedly this collective story is far less sexy than that of the sex education-phobic PTA President's daughter being unmarried and prego -- nonetheless, the long term effects of this week's (and this year's) events on america, its economy, and its place in the world -- are profound.

    Regrettably, junior's responsibility for letting a growing problem become a catastrophic cataclysm is not much discussed in the media or in the campaign -- but I expect over time it will become one of the defining effects of junior's misbegotten 8 years of calamity – one that future historians will study and comment on in depth.


    September 17, 2008
    Fed Readies A.I.G. Loan of $85 Billion for an 80% Stake
    By MICHAEL J. de la MERCED and ERIC DASH

    In an extraordinary turn, the Federal Reserve was close to a deal Tuesday night to take a nearly 80 percent stake in the troubled giant insurance company, the American International Group, in exchange for an $85 billion loan...

    ...the Fed would receive warrants that could be exchanged for an ownership stake. ...

    ...Without the help, A.I.G. was expected to be forced to file for bankruptcy protection.

    The need for the loans became necessary after the major credit ratings agencies downgraded A.I.G. late Monday, a move that likely to have forced the company to turn over billions of dollars in collateral to its derivatives trading partners worsening its financial health.

    Until this week, it would have been unthinkable for the Federal Reserve to bail out an insurance company, and A.I.G.’s request for help from the Fed of just a few days ago was rebuffed.

    But with the prospect of a giant bankruptcy looming — one with unpredictable consequences for the world financial system — the Fed abandoned precedent and agreed to let the money flow...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  7. #107  
    Bayre, are you not taking this a little too far blaming everything here on Junior? Was it not in 2005 that McCain submitted legislation that addressed exactly what is happening now and was not that legislation shot down by the Democrats? Is that true? Google it, Bayre and read around. McCain detailed everything at that time and everything he said is happening at this time. McCain. Did not Barney Frank want it left alone? What about when Bush talked about it in 2003? Did you Google it? Let me relieve your stress with Google: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...prod=permalink.

    Now, read it and then look a bit further in your reading and research. I believe even you will have to admit the Republic administration does not deserve the complete blame. In fact, most of the blame lies directly at the feet of your Democrat leadership.

    You know, you keep saying something often enough and people just gotta start believing it. Even you.

    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    the market plummeted 500 points today -- Lehman has gone bankrupt, AIG nears collapse.

    Tomorrow the Fed will announce yet another Rate cut --

    Extraordinary futility -- unprecedented ignorance.

    Why has no one besides BARYE proposed a workable path out of the crisis ??

    How has junior and his ideological disciples escaped blame and retribution for the destruction they've wrought ???
  8. #108  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Bayre, are you not taking this a little too far blaming everything here on Junior? Was it not in 2005 that McCain submitted legislation that addressed exactly what is happening now and was not that legislation shot down by the Democrats? Is that true? Google it, Bayre and read around. McCain detailed everything at that time and everything he said is happening at this time. McCain. Did not Barney Frank want it left alone? What about when Bush talked about it in 2003? Did you Google it? Let me relieve your stress with Google: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpag...prod=permalink.

    Now, read it and then look a bit further in your reading and research. I believe even you will have to admit the Republic administration does not deserve the complete blame. In fact, most of the blame lies directly at the feet of your Democrat leadership.

    You know, you keep saying something often enough and people just gotta start believing it. Even you.
    They were in charge so they deserve the blame. If they hadn't been so polarizing and divisive while in control they might have gotten more done legislatively. But what is even more rich about this is that Bush COULD HAVE GOT THIS THROUGH in 2003 since the GOP controlled the House and Senate. Could have, should have, would have.

    Moreover, you're telling half-truths again. The whole idea was shot down by both parties. And as far as I can tell, the 2005 bill sponsored by Chuck Hagel (who I admire very much) wasn't co-sponsored by McCain until 2007....well into the Presidential campaign cycle.
    Last edited by moderateinny; 09/17/2008 at 07:06 AM.
  9.    #109  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Bayre, are you not taking this a little too far blaming everything here on Junior?...
    There is so so very much he is to blame for --

    Hoover was genius compared to this guy --

    He campaigned on the platform that he was going to take Clinton's prosperity to even higher levels -- that he was going to cut taxes on corporations, on the very rich -- that he would somehow magically get more tax revenue, and that this would all trickle down to all the little people.

    This putz fashioned himself a CEO -- a "businessman", a chief executive with an MBA.

    If there was anything he knew, it was economics, business.

    Thank God for that -- where would we be if it were'nt for his wealth of knowledge and experience?

    For the record, junior bankrupted ALL his oil company businesses -- so he knows very well what he's doing.

    He took office with the announced goal of lifting the "burden" from the wealthiest -- to eliminate the inheritance taxes paid by the richest 2% of families (calling it the "Death Tax"). He was determined to slash rates on capital gains. Cut taxes and fees paid by the oil companies.

    The Repugnicans controlled the government -- the White House, the Congress, the Courts -- they spent lavishly on earmarks for their pet "Bridges to Nowhere", for their research into the mating habits of Alaskan crabs...

    Apropriations zoomed and budget deficits exploded, but junior never vetoed any Repugnican spending bills, never fought against any earmark.

    He then launched Iraq -- the largest, most costly pure waste of blood and treasure this planet has perhaps ever seen. An event without any justification or possible return on his "investment" of trillions.

    He "pays" for this catastrophe not by raising taxes which would make his escapade less popular -- but by borrowing billions from the Chinese.

    He smugly advocates an ideology of "free markets", of ending government regulation.

    He appoints "regulators" whose ideology is in direct contradiction to the historic missions of the agencies that they are supposed to supervise.

    From departments as diverse as the EPA, the Justice dept, and the SEC -- to name just a few -- all the people he appoints do all they can to corrupt from within and destroy, the very roles these agencies were created for.

    Germane to this thread and the current turmoil on Wall Street this week -- Cox, the SEC Chairman he appointed -- eliminated the naked shorting / uptick rules -- that had for decades restrained a practice that has been used to bring down the financial system these last several months.

    Today -- after the damage has largely been done -- he decided that maybe he should reinstitute them.

    Pathetic.

    Yet they have the balls to tell us that it wasn't their fault -- that no one could have prevented the housing collapse, that the mortgage meltdown was unforeseeable, that no solution was available last year that could have prevented things from getting out of control.

    Lies.

    It could have been prevented, it was stoppable -- the piano I have written about since last summer need not have gathered unstoppable momentum and rolled to its now inevitable crash.

    BTW -- if you want to understand about the implications of the "uptick / naked shorting" rule, watch this dissertation from Cramer -- a republican who had been a strong Romney supporter.

    I hope someone takes the time to read what I have written over the last year within this thread -- there's is almost nothing in it that was wrong or that I would change.
    Last edited by BARYE; 09/17/2008 at 04:52 PM. Reason: many typos have been corrected ...
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  10. #110  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    There is so so very much he is to blame for --

    Hoover was genius compared to this guy --

    He campaigned on the platform that he was going to take Clinton's prosperity to even higher levels -- that he was going to cut taxes on corporations, on the very rich -- that he would somehow magically get more tax revenue, and that this would all trickle down to all the little people.

    This putz fashioned himself a CEO -- a "businessman", a chief executive with an MBA.

    If there was anything he knew, it was economics, business.

    Thank God for that -- where would we be if it were'nt for his wealth of knowledge and experience?

    For the record, junior bankrupted ALL his oil company businesses -- so he knows very well what he's doing.

    He took office with the announced goal of lifting the "burden" from the wealthiest -- to eliminate the inheritance taxes paid by the richest 2% of families (calling it the "Death Tax"). He was determined to slash rates on capital gains. Cut taxes and fees paid by the oil companies.

    The Repugnicans controlled the government -- the White House, the Congress, the Courts -- they spent lavishly on earmarks for their pet "Bridges to Nowhere", for their research into the mating habits of Alaskan crabs...

    Apropriations zoomed and budget deficits exploded, but junior never vetoed any Repugnican spending bills, never fought against any earmark.

    He then launched Iraq -- the largest, most costly pure waste of blood and treasure this planet has perhaps ever seen. An event without any justification or possible return on his "investment" of trillions.

    He "pays" for this catastrophe not by raising taxes which would make his escapade less popular -- but by borrowing billions from the Chinese.

    He smugly advocates an ideology of "free markets", of ending government regulation.

    He appoints "regulators" whose ideology is in direct contradiction to the historic missions of the agencies that they are supposed to supervise.

    From departments as diverse as the EPA, the Justice dept, and the SEC -- to name just a few -- all the people he appoints do all they can to corrupt from within and destroy, the very roles these agencies were created for.

    Germane to this thread and the current turmoil on Wall Street this week -- Cox, the SEC Chairman he appointed -- eliminated the the uptick shorting rules -- that had for decades restrained a practice that has been used to bring down the financial system these last several months.

    Today -- after the damage has largely been done -- he decided that maybe he should reinstitute them.

    Pathetic.

    Yet they have the balls to tell us that it wasn't their fault -- that no one could have prevented the the housing collapse, that the mortgage meltdown was unforeseeable, that no solution was available last year that could have prevented things from getting out of control.

    Lies.

    It could have been prevented, it was stoppable -- the piano I have written about since last summer need not have gathered unstoppable momentum and rolled to its now inevitable crash.

    BTW -- if you want to understand about the implications of the "uptick- shorting" rule, watch this dissertation from Cramer -- a republican who had been a strong Romney supporter.

    I hope someone takes the time to read what I have written over the last year within this thread -- there's is almost nothing in it that was wrong or that I would change.
    Your best post ever.
  11. #111  
    Quote Originally Posted by BARYE View Post
    [...] Cramer -- a republican who had been a strong Romney supporter.
    Since when is Jim Cramer a Republican? Are you sure you aren't confusing him with his former co-host Larry Kudlow?
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  12. #112  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Since when is Jim Cramer a Republican? Are you sure you aren't confusing him with his former co-host Larry Kudlow?
    I don't think that he is (sorry Barye). He contributes to Dems almost exclusively.

    Not sure if this site is trustworthy but it would seem to be pretty accurate. http://www.newsmeat.com/media_politi...Jim_Cramer.php - I verified some of the contributions here http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/se...&submit=Submit
  13.    #113  
    Quote Originally Posted by moderateinny View Post
    I don't think that he is (sorry Barye). He contributes to Dems almost exclusively.
    BARYE wrong ??@!!!??

    OK -- maybe its kinda of like when BARYE lost his virginity -- there is, I suppose, a first time for everything...

    For the record -- Cramer went on and on about Romney -- discussing him in more than one interview. (Yes he later interviewed Hillary -- and was very decent to her -- but he actually endorsed Romney.)

    He lovingly spoke of the first time he'd met Governor Silly Puddy -- how he'd gone to be interviewed by him for a job. A job he either didn't get or didn't accept. But that Cramer from that moment on felt that Mr. Silly Puddy was one of the most impressive business people he'd ever met. Cramer absolutely GUSHed about Silly Puddy. (this is all from memory -- as is almost all I write... )
    Last edited by BARYE; 09/17/2008 at 09:13 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  14. #114  
    Barye, what about Obama's "top" advisors, those 2 who were directly involved with Fannie and Freddie? What about Barney Frank? What about Obama accepting donations during that time period, in fact to the tune of being the 2nd highest recipient? What about 2005 with McCain and 2003 with Bush? The blame is on both sides of the isle, not just the Republican side.
  15.    #115  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    Barye, what about Obama's "top" advisors, those 2 who were directly involved with Fannie and Freddie? What about Barney Frank? What about Obama accepting donations during that time period, in fact to the tune of being the 2nd highest recipient? What about 2005 with McCain and 2003 with Bush? The blame is on both sides of the isle, not just the Republican side.
    Ben, junior came into that office with an agenda that included dismantling Fanny and Freddie.

    Why ??

    Maybe some misunderstood snippet of some Cato Institute theory he heard -- your guess is no doubt better than mine.

    Fanny & Freddie clearly had enemies -- amongst them many of the investment banks that have now gone bankrupt.

    They were jealous of the legally advantaged position those companies enjoyed dealing in mortgages, their having an implied government guarantee, their being able to borrow at far less than could investment banks. I believe they even operated exempt from most taxes -- at least all local taxes (they paid NO taxes to DC, where their headquarters and most of its staff were.

    Clearly they had enemies. Most especially after junior's junta seized power.

    It was entirely rational and conservative to cultivate friendship and support wherever possible to offset junior's evil gaze.

    The facts are that Fanny & Freddy provided the mechanism by which most americans came to be able to buy their own homes during the last 70+ years.

    The system worked well for decades because it was respected and protected -- despite its occasional excesses and deficiencies.

    junior should feel proud at how successful he was in destroying it and everything else ---

    thank God for junior ...
    Last edited by BARYE; 09/17/2008 at 09:17 PM.
    755P Sprint SERO (upgraded from unlocked GSM 650 on T-Mobile)
  16. #116  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    The blame is on both sides of the isle, not just the Republican side.
    Well we're making progress now aren't we Ben. Yes, both sides are to blame.

    BUT...but, there is only one Commander in Chief, is there not? Only one decider? And there were nothing but Republicans in control in 2003, right?

    I'm really disappointed in your Ben. Personal responsibility. That is one of your biggest issues....you said so yourself on this very forum. Yet, here you are trying so very hard to pass the buck (pun intended) on GW Bush.

    I'll wager you'd be taking ALL OF THE CREDIT for Bushy and the GOP if the economy was thriving now wouldn't you? C'mon. God is listening...tell the truth.
  17. #117  
    yes there is one commander in chief, and yes, both houses of Congress are controlled by Democrats (Nancy and Harry)and they have never let anything supported by the Republican party happen, whether good or bad, 'cause it takes it away from the Democrats - no wonder their popularity is lower that Junior's.
  18. #118  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    yes there is one commander in chief,
    Baby steps Ben...baby steps. So we've established that there is one commander in chief. Good.

    and yes, both houses of Congress are controlled by Democrats (Nancy and Harry)and they have never let anything supported by the Republican party happen, whether good or bad, 'cause it takes it away from the Democrats - no wonder their popularity is lower that Junior's.
    * sigh * and then you go off on one your diversionary delusional BS statements. So let's try this again. Who controlled both houses in 2000? How about 2003? How about 2005? Who controlled ALL branches of government for 6 out of 8 years Bush was in the White House?

    I have my issues with Pelosi and Reid. But you're not playing fair again Ben.
  19. #119  
    So, you still have not acknowledged who 2 of his top advisers are and where they came from. Are you afraid of that?
  20. #120  
    Quote Originally Posted by bclinger View Post
    So, you still have not acknowledged who 2 of his top advisers are and where they came from. Are you afraid of that?
    I don't really know. Name them.

    But to get you back on point - let me repeat the questions:

    Who controlled both houses in 2000? How about 2003? How about 2005? Who controlled ALL branches of government for 6 out of 8 years Bush was in the White House?

Posting Permissions