Did any of you "obama bin lyin'" testicle swinging duped boob IMBECILES notice one of "bin lyin's'" sycophants called "bin lyin" a dyck on live TV yesterday????????????????????

quote:

Originally posted by Bob H:

quote:

Originally posted by ET2278:

quote:

My post is referring that nothing will happen to Obamas health before the campaign or election process begins or ends.
Injury or death that would not allow Obama or opponent to run a complete campaign.
Bet would be off if anything would happen to either candidate.
Sound fair???

Sounds fair to me. Malibus bet is Obama is a one term President and any opposing candidate can beat him. If you two agree to the bet on here, I'll privately give my account info. Sounds like fun to me, but I have no money invoked. Lets get it on!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have no problem of sending you 500 and maybe a few other chumps can scrape a few pennies and jump right in. I don't need anybodys permission to have a friendly wager.
They only have to cough up 100. each.

Jim, I trust you above all others behind Wes.

Lets line up the dolts and you will recieve my share into your account.


Plenty of room for blackie, mr. muck and I was told Mary gave the old man permission to play.

Still waiting for the dolts who constantly flap thier gums then turn into piss ants when confronted.

Everyone knows who they are.......

After two years of Obama ... Here's your change!

January 2009 TODAY % chg Source
Avg.. Retail price/gallon gas in U.S. $1.83 $3.44 84% 1
Crude oil, European Brent (barrel) $43..48 $99..02 127.7% 2
Crude oil, West TX Inter. (barrel) $38..74 $91..38 135.9% 2
Gold: London (per troy oz.) $853.25 $1,369.50 60.5% 2
Corn, No.2 yellow, Central IL $3.56 $6.33 78.1% 2
Soybeans, No. 1 yellow, IL $9.66 $13..75 42.3% 2
Sugar, cane, raw, world, lb. Fob $13..37 $35..39 164.7% 2
Unemployment rate, non-farm, overall 7.6% 9.4% 23.7% 3
Unemployment rate, blacks 12.6% 15.8% 25.4% 3
Number of unemployed 11,616,000 14,485,000 24.7% 3
Number of fed. Employees 2,779,000 2,840,000 2.2% 3
Real median household income $50,112 $49,777 -0.7% 4
Number of food stamp recipients 31,983,716 43,200,878 35.1% 5
Number of unemployment benefit recipients 7,526,598 9,193,838 22.2% 6
Number of long-term unemployed 2,600,000 6,400,000 146.2% 3
Poverty rate, individuals 13.2% 14.3% 8.3% 4
People in poverty in U.S. 39,800,000 43,600,000 9.5% 4
U.S.. Rank in Economic Freedom World Rankings 5 9 n/a 10
Present Situation Index 29.9 23.5 -21.4% 11
Failed banks 140 164 17.1% 12
U.S.. Dollar versus Japanese yen exchange rate 89.76 82.03 -8.6% 2
U.S.. Money supply, M1, in billions 1,575..1 1,865..7 18.4% 13
U.S.. Money supply, M2, in billions 8,310..9 8,852..3 6.5% 13
National debt, in trillions $10..627 $14..052 32.2% 14
Just take this last item: In the last two years we have accumulated national debt at a rate more than 27 times as fast as during the rest of our entire nation's history.Over 27 times as fast. Metaphorically speaking, if you are driving in the right lane doing 65 MPH and a car rockets past you in the left lane. 27 times faster, it would be doing 7,555 MPH!

Sources1) U.S. Energy Information Administration; (2) Wall Street Journal; (3) Bureau of Labor Statistics; (4) Census Bureau; (5) USDA; (6) U.S. Dept. Of Labor; (7) FHFA; (8) Standard & Poor's/Case-Shiller; (9) RealtyTrac; (10) Heritage Foundation and WSJ; (11) The Conference Board; (12) FDIC; (13) Federal Reserve; (14) U.S. Treasury

I agree with everything but the speed of the fast car, 1,755 MPH.

Just think, the snowball started rolling downhill under Bush.

quote:

Just think, the snowball started rolling downhill under Bush.

I disagree,
No body listened to Brooksley Born..........Just a dumb woman with a big mouth, or so they said. Clinton just ignored her and played hardball with the boys on both sides

I disagree

Clinton left office with the economy in good shape.
Businesses were thriving, unemployment was down and not to mention the surplus he left bush.

How was the economy under Clinton???

From bush, it was all downhill starting with the lies and deceptions of the Iraqi war.

Im talking about the big picture. Once Wall Street and its fairy tale world crumbled the snowball effect took over. Deficits and surpluses were piss in the ocean compared to what happened there. Even Greenspan later admitted he was wrong. It wasn't what Clinton left. its what he ignored.

quote:

Originally posted by ET2278:
Im talking about the big picture. Once Wall Street and its fairy tale world crumbled the snowball effect took over. Deficits and surpluses were piss in the ocean compared to what happened there. Even Greenspan later admitted he was wrong. It wasn't what Clinton left. its what he ignored.

Ah.....Jim, the wall st. collapse and the bailout to wall st. were under bush's belt.

This happened in 2007 and no way can you blame Clinton.





Bush demands passage of Wall Street bailout


President George Bush’s call, in his televised speech Wednesday night, for a massive bailout of Wall Street.

Bush’s 13-minute speech was a compendium of evasions, half-truths and outright lies. While declaring that the United States is “in the midst of a serious financial crisis” and demanding the immediate passage of legislation that will hand over at least $700 billion to Wall Street banks—by buying up their unsalable assets at inflated prices and placing the burden for their losses on millions of working class families—Bush offered no credible explanation of the cause of the crisis. Nor did he explain how the proposed bailout of the bank will be implemented, let alone how it will stave off economic disaster for the working class.

His claim that the “rescue effort” will “help American consumers and businesses get credit to meet their daily needs and create jobs” is patently untrue. There is a consensus in the financial press, especially outside the United States, that the bailout will accelerate the descent of the American and world economy into the deepest recession, if not depression, since the end of World War II.

“I know many Americans have questions tonight,” Bush stated. “How did we reach this point in our economy? How will the solution I propose work? And what does this mean for your financial future?”

“These are good questions,” he continued, “and they deserve clear answers.”

But no such answers were provided by Bush. Instead, he offered a bizarre narrative which presented the unfolding disaster as if it were the result of inexplicable cosmic forces.

“Investment banks,” he stated, “found themselves saddled with large amounts of assets they could not sell. They ran out of money needed to meet their immediate obligations, and they faced imminent collapse.

“Other banks found themselves in severe financial trouble. These banks began holding on to their money, and lending dried up, and the gears of the American financial system began grinding to a halt.”

But amidst all the banalities and despite his own intentions, Bush’s speech amounted to a devastating and unprecedented exposure and indictment of the social, economic and political system in the United States. Speaking before a national and international audience, he admitted that the largest capitalist economy in the world stands on the very brink of collapse.

“There has been a widespread loss of confidence,” Bush stated, “and major sections of America’s financial system are at risk of shutting down.”

He declared that if the bailout package was not supported by Congress, “America could slip into a financial panic and a distressing scenario would unfold.

“More banks could fail, including some in your community. The stock market would drop even more, which would reduce the value of your retirement account. The value of your home could plummet. Foreclosures would rise dramatically.

“And if you own a business or a farm, you would find it harder and more expensive to get credit. More businesses would close their doors, and millions of Americans could lose their jobs.

“Even if you have a good credit history, it would be more difficult for you to get the loans you need to buy a car or send your children to college. And, ultimately, our country could experience a long and painful recession.”

As for how this desperate situation had developed, Bush made some perfunctory remarks about the housing crisis, followed by vague references to bad decisions, irresponsible actions by a few unnamed individuals, and excesses on Wall Street.

But he could not explain how the handover of more than $700 billion in taxpayer money to the banks and investment firms will resolve the crisis.

In fact, his bailout plan is a naked attempt by the most powerful sections of the American ruling class to exploit a crisis of their own making to further enrich themselves, while imposing the burden on the working class of the United States and the entire world.

Bush concluded by assuring one and all that “democratic capitalism” is the “best system the world has ever devised.” In reality, capitalism stands exposed as an inherently unstable system riven by corruption, in which the social interests of the masses of people are placed at the mercy of economic parasites.

Perhaps the greatest falsehood in Bush’s speech was his assertion that the handout to Wall Street is needed because “The market is not functioning properly.” In reality, the market is functioning in accordance with the laws of capitalism, where irrationality and criminality in economic decision-making is rooted in the very nature of the profit system.

As for the bailout plan proposed by Bush, it has been devised for one central purpose—to protect the financial elite from the economic losses resulting from the collapse of the mountain of debt they have created in pursuit of super profits and gargantuan personal incomes.

In congressional hearings held this week, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke were incapable of providing any coherent explanation of how their bailout plan will do anything other than provide a massive windfall for the banks, while consigning millions of workers who face the loss of their homes and livelihoods to their fate.

The naked class character of the bailout plan is underscored by the bitter opposition of the banks to even the most minimal restraints on executive pay and suggestions that they give up some stock in exchange for their plundering of the public treasury.

With Bush’s speech, the pressure for quick congressional action to pass the bailout plan will intensify. Throughout the week, the Democratic Party leaders in both the House and Senate have accepted the basic framework of the bailout. Their half-hearted and semi-theatrical objections to various aspects of the plan have been little more than cynical gestures to the massive popular opposition to the bailout.

Bush bailed out Wall St. and Bush did not inherit a recession.

THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The duped boob IMBECILES ignoring the facts and lying through their as$es like always!
President Bush inherited a recession when he took office, as shown here over and over there NEVER was a surplus and the rapist regime's policies forcing lenders to loan money to unqualified borrowers is what led to the housing and financial meltdown!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FACTS that can be taken to the bank!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Check this: http://www.usatoday.com/money/...7-17-recession_x.htm
We all know President Bush was super efficient but to pull the nation out of the rapists recession in just 8 months was phenomenal!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
President Bush didn't whine once about being saddled with the rapist's recession either!

On another financial front, "dyck obama bin lyin's'" assertion that the "evil" riches taxes are lower now then they've been since the 50's is so laughable it is utterly pathetic!!!!!!!!
What were the top tax rates before the President Kennedy tax cuts, pushing 90% if I recall correctly??????????????????

http://www.factcheck.org/pro-b...conomy_medicare.html

The recession started after Bush took office and after he took us into Iraq.
The recession was the result of Bush's leadership on the economy.

Why do you post lies all the time?????????????????????????????????????????

Bob, Brooksely Born was the chairperson of the CFTC from '96 - '99. She saw the what was going to happen to wall street with their unregulated derivative's and told Clinton the doo-doo was gonna hit the fan, but Clinton , Greenspan, Rubin, Levitt, and Summers just did what they wanted to do. This is where it all STARTED. Really, Bush inherited( I know you like that word) the real problem from Clinton, since it started on his watch. The facts below dont lie, all the Wall street problems were done under Clinton and he even admits he got bad information, which I personally think is bull, but I wasn't in the meetings
I'll c&p you the truth,

Born was appointed to the CFTC on April 15, 1994 by President Bill Clinton. Due to litigation against Bankers Trust Company by Procter and Gamble and other corporate clients, Born and her team at the CFTC sought comments on the regulation of derivatives,[3] a first step in the process of writing comprehensive regulations. Born was particularly concerned about swaps, financial instruments that are traded over the counter between banks, insurance companies or other funds or companies, and thus have no transparency except to the two counterparties and the counterparties' regulators, if any. CFTC regulation was strenuously opposed by Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, and by Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers.[4] On May 7, 1998, former SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt joined Rubin and Greenspan in objecting to the issuance of the CFTC’s concept release. Their response dismissed Born's analysis and focused on the hypothetical possibility that CFTC regulation of swaps and other OTC derivative instruments could create a "legal uncertainty" regarding such financial instruments, hypothetically reducing the value of the instruments. They argued that the imposition of regulatory costs would "stifle financial innovation" and encourage financial capital to transfer its transactions offshore.[8] The disagreement between Born and the Executive Office's top economic policy advisors has been described not only as a classic Washington turf war,[6] but also a war of ideologies,[9] insofar as it is possible to argue that Born's actions were consistent with Keynesian and neoclassical economics while Greenspan, Rubin, Levitt, and Summers consistently espoused Austrian, neoliberal, and neoconservative laissez faire policies.

The market continued to grow unregulated nearly throughout both terms of George W. Bush's administration, but began to stumble in the early months of 2007. On September 15, 2008, the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers forced a broad recognition of a financial crisis in both the US and world capital markets, a crisis which has inflicted egregious long-term damage, as these characteristic costs of private financial accumulation are transferred to the detriment of social infrastructure, communities, labor's economic security, social mobility, families and individuals, democratic law, and political pluralism in the US, Europe, Africa, and East Asia. As Lehman Brothers' failure temporarily reduced financial capital's confidence, corporate newspapers began reporting on some of the failure's possible causes, including the ongoing and continual reassurances of Greenspan, Rubin, Summers, and Levitt, who had long insisted that the capital markets could be trusted to regulate themselves, and the Presidential administrations' continued rejection of Born's (and thus the CFTC's) urgent warnings for the necessity of regulation to stave off just such a collapse.[4][10]

Born declined to publicly comment on the unfolding 2008 crisis until March 2009, when she said: "The market grew so enormously, with so little oversight and regulation, that it made the financial crisis much deeper and more pervasive than it otherwise would have been."[6] She also lamented the influence of Wall Street lobbyists on the process and the refusal of regulators to discuss even modest reforms.[6]

An October 2009 Frontline documentary titled The Warning [11] described Born's thwarted efforts to regulate and bring transparency to the derivatives market, and the continuing opposition thereto. The program concluded with an excerpted interview with Born sounding another warning: "I think we will have continuing danger from these markets and that we will have repeats of the financial crisis -- may differ in details but there will be significant financial downturns and disasters attributed to this regulatory gap, over and over, until we learn from experience."[9]

In 2009 Born, along with Sheila Bair of the FDIC, was awarded the John F. Kennedy Profiles in Courage Award in recognition of the "political courage she demonstrated in sounding early warnings about conditions that contributed to the current global financial crisis". According to Caroline Kennedy, "...Brooksley Born recognized that the financial security of all Americans was being put at risk by the greed, negligence and opposition of powerful and well connected interests... The catastrophic financial events of recent months have proved them [Born and Sheila Bair] right."[12]

In 2010 the documentary film Inside Job further explored the disastrous work of the men and woman who have crafted financial deregulation and publicly-financed financial institution bailouts from the Clinton administration on. Along with fellow whistleblower, former IMF Chief Economist Raghuram Rajan, who was also aggressively rebuked by the economic establishment,[13] Brooksley Born was cited as one of the very rare and marginalized liberal voices arguing that financial derivatives increase economic risk, and that the US government has a compelling interest in imposing social rationality on the financial industry.

Heres some more truth about Robeert Rubin, Clintons Secratary of the Treasury

Upon Rubin's retirement, Clinton called him the "greatest secretary of the Treasury since Alexander Hamilton." On April 18, 2010, in an interview on ABC’s “This Week” program, Clinton said Rubin was wrong in the advice he gave him not to regulate derivatives.[8]

"During his tenure as Treasury Secretary," Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE) said, "Bob was an ideal public servant who put policy before politics."[9][dead link]

In 1997, together with then-Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, Rubin strongly opposed the giving the Commodity Futures Trading Commission oversight of over-the-counter credit derivatives when this was proposed by then-head of the CFTC Brooksley Born. Rubin's role was highlighted in a Public Broadcasting Service Frontline report, "The Warning."[10] Over-the-counter credit derivatives were eventually excluded from regulation by the CFTC by the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000.

Arthur Levitt Jr., a former chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, has said in explaining Rubin's strong opposition to the regulations proposed by Born that Greenspan and Rubin were "joined at the hip on this." "They were certainly very fiercely opposed to this and persuaded me that this would cause chaos."[11] However, in Mr. Rubin’s autobiography, he notes that he believed derivatives could pose significant problems and that many people who used derivatives did not fully understand the risks they were taking.[12]

In a December 2009 Newsweek piece, Robert Rubin described the extraordinary combination of circumstances that led to the global financial crisis, including market and credit excess, low interest rates, massive increase in the use of complex derivatives, misguided AAA ratings, stagnant median real wages, abusive mortgage practices, and the overleveraging of financial institutions, among many other factors. In the article, Rubin advocates for the reform of the financial system in order to better protect against systemic risk and devastating crises in the future. Rubin says that “the market-based model must be combined with strong and effective government, nationally and transnationally, to deal with critical challenges that markets won’t adequately address.”[1

Here's the truth about Larry Summers, Rubins deputy
Summers's role in the deregulation of derivatives contracts

On May 7, 1998, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issued a Concept Release soliciting input from regulators, academics, and practitioners to determine "how best to maintain adequate regulatory safeguards without impairing the ability of the OTC (Over-the-counter) derivatives market to grow and the ability of U.S. entities to remain competitive in the global financial marketplace." [21] On July 30, 1998, then-Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Summers testified before congress that "the parties to these kinds of contract are largely sophisticated financial institutions that would appear to be eminently capable of protecting themselves from fraud and counterparty insolvencies." Summers, like Greenspan and Rubin who also opposed the concept release, offered no proof that the contracts would not be misused by financial institutions. Instead, Summers stated that "to date there has been no clear evidence of a need for additional regulation of the institutional OTC derivatives market, and we would submit that proponents of such regulation must bear the burden of demonstrating that need." [22] This argument suggests that the default position in the disagreement was that Summers, Greenspan, and Rubin were right, and that anyone (i.e., Brooksley Born) who disagreed with them bore the burden of proving their position. In fact, subsequent events have proven that Summers, Rubin, and Greenspan misjudged the dangers posed by derivatives. contracts.

In 1999 Summers endorsed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which removed the separation between investment and commercial banks, saying "With this bill, the American financial system takes a major step forward towards the 21st Century."[23]

The lack of regulation that allowed A.I.G. to sell hundreds of billions of dollars in credit default swaps on mortgage-backed securities was a direct result of efforts by the Treasury (first under Rubin and then under Summers), the Federal Reserve (under Greenspan), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (under Arthur Levitt) to deregulate the derivatives markets. The first response to the CFTC Concept Release was issued as a joint statement from Rubin, Greenspan, and Levitt who stated that they "have grave concerns about this action and its possible consequences." [24] Levitt and Greenspan have admitted that their views on this issue were mistaken. Levitt told WGBH in Boston that "I could have done much better. I could have made a difference." Greenspan told a congressional hearing that "I found a flaw ... in the model that I perceived is the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works." [25] [26] When George Stephanopoulos asked Summers about the financial crisis in an ABC interview on March 15, 2009, Summers replied that "there are a lot of terrible things that have happened in the last eighteen months, but what's happened at A.I.G. ... the way it was not regulated, the way no one was watching ... is outrageous."

At the 2005 Federal Reserve conference in Jackson Hole, Raghuram Rajan presented a paper called "Has Financial Development Made the World Riskier?" Rajan pointed to a number of potential problems with the financial developments of the past thirty years. [27] The problems that Rajan considers include skewed incentives of managers, herding behavior among traders, investment bankers, and hedge fund operators who suffer withdrawals if they under-perform the market. Rajan also discusses (on pp. 337–40) the problems associated with firms that "goose up returns" by taking risky positions that yield a "positive carry." This is how the infamous Joseph J. Cassano impressed his superiors at A.I.G. for a decade while sowing the destruction of the firm. [28] During the boom years of the housing market, the credit default swap contracts that A.I.G. Financial Products sold provided a stream of premium payments to the company with no expense stream. That's an example of what Rajan calls "goosing up returns" with latent risk. Rajan asks (on page 388) "If firms today implicitly are selling various kinds of default insurance to goose up returns, what happens if catastrophe strikes?" This is a fair question.

The flip side of the trade is equally problematic. Gregory Zuckerman in his book The Greatest Trade Ever about John Paulson's hedge fund recounts the difficulties that Paulson and others had holding on to their bets against the housing market. Even Paulson, whose timing couldn't have been better, spent a great deal of his time persuading investors to persist with the bet against the market. But month after month, millions of dollars were paid out on the credit default swap premia. The investors saw money spent and gone that could have been used to buy assets with rising prices, or at least held safely with a positive yield. As Rajan puts it (p. 338), "it takes a very brave investment manager with infinitely patient investors to fight the trend, even if the trend is a deviation from fundamental value."

Justin Lahart, writing in the Wall Street Journal in January 2009 about the response to Rajan's paper at the conference recounts that "former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, famous among economists for his blistering attacks, told the audience he found 'the basic, slightly lead-eyed premise of [Mr. Rajan's] paper to be largely misguided.'"[29]

In a recent paper (on pages 285–87), Steven Gjerstad and Nobel laureate Vernon L. Smith describe more fully (1) the contribution of derivatives to the flow of mortgage funds that supported the housing bubble, (2) the concerns that Brooksley Born had raised about the dangers inherent in these contracts, (3) Summers's contribution to their deregulation, and (4) how these contracts precipitated the collapse of the financial system in 2007 and 2008. [30]

On April 18, 2010, in an interview on ABC's “This Week” program, Clinton said Summers was wrong in the advice he gave him not to regulate derivatives.[31]

There is a book just out by a writer from the left-wing lame stream moron media New York Times that lays out the FACTS of the financial meltdown and it's not good news for the rapist's regime!
Notice how the duped boob IMBECILES manage to remain that way, I posted a link from a left-wing lame stream moron media paper documenting the recession President Bush inherited from the rapist and boobh comes right back with his lies!
Tax cuts and the promise of steady governing nipped that recession in the bud!
Instead in 2009 we had the porkeria costing every man, woman and child about $4,000.00 and two and a half years later we are still mired at 18% unemployment!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Looks like Perry spit in the half honkey all donkey's face and went ahead and Texicuted the Mescan that brutally killed the sixteen year old girl 17 years ago in San Antonio.

Justice was served, 16 years late but still served! Perry just went up a notch in my opinion.

Is it any wonder "dyck obama bin lyin'" would try to save a murdering Mexican rapist? After all he has been sending them assault weapons courtesy of the American tax payers!
"dyck obama bin lyin'" is going gray so fast in a job he has zero qualifications for that he will have snow white hair by Christmas!
Lucky it's so short or he'd have it all pulled out and be bald!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How does one opine "dyck obama bin lyin'" is feeling about his endless blathering about the commie chinese wondrous work on infrastructure now that a newly opened highway had a section collapse a couple of days after the road opened?????????????????

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Koski:
Did any of you "obama bin lyin'" testicle swinging duped boob IMBECILES notice one of "bin lyin's'" sycophants called "bin lyin" a dyck on live TV yesterday????????????????????

Oh boy.
Do you know how this stuff makes you look Bill?

Just in the eye of the "beholder"!

quote:

Originally posted by Bill Koski:
Just in the eye of the "beholder"!

No. Really. I don't disagree with all your views, nor do I agree with all that many of them. But you make it darn difficult to say anything in agreement when you are calling people names because their views differ from yours. Not that you care, but it reflects poorly on you, and is counterproductive to your arguments. It is impossible to gain any credibility with others when you talk like a deranged fanatic.

Gene Simmons Military Tribute

Zell/Granny 2012

Project Augusta


Of all the things I've lost,
I miss my mind the most
Grandpa Bob
Professional Fence Hanger / Spectator
Former Crew Chief
Grandma's Rocking Chair