quote Originally posted by fierobear: OK, ray, can you tell us HOW Bush managed the following? stocks prices crashed more people out of work and pay rates flat or down balance of payments out of wack so much for ''free'' trade!!! home prices crashed repo's up debts up both personal and the governments voodoo tax policys failed again both afgan and iraq wars a mess more stupid laws and ever more more more people in prisons more states broke ? .....

he DIDNT manage them - and that was the problem. I agree fully that these were problem created prior. But, these dark seed were growing rotten fruit here in Michigan by the end of his first term. and thru the 2nd term is when they spread across the USA. This whole collapse happened due to neglect. plain old neglect. where were the soothsayers/economists? were they gagged? deported? hidden? did not one speak up for the fact that having cash as our largest export is stupid? or was it that everyone was to distracted by Iraq/Afghan? I am fully willing to beleive that "the war" provided a fine distraction. But when "the fundementals of our economy....." - oops wrong guy - but anyways - how blind were these folk? or is it not caring? because from their perspective - they be fine - the economy is still just dandy, aint it?

If only some politicians had tried to reform regulation of Fannie Mae before the mortgage meltdown.
Oh wait, Bush and McCain both tried, and failed.

Well it must be because they didn't really try, because it's not like there was any opposition to the reform.
Oh wait, Chris Dodd and a multitude of Democrats stonewalled any changed and kept insisting there is "nothing wrong with Fannie Mae."

The only thing Bush is guilty of is not fully taking advantage of the majority power he had to push through legislation.
You can tell Obama isn't going to make that same mistake. He's trying to ram everything he can through Congress as fast as he can. Why? Because he knows he may only have that majority until the 2010 elections. Gotta strike while the iron is hot.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: The only thing Bush is guilty of is not fully taking advantage of the majority power he had to push through legislation.

BINGO! Add to that the fact that the ENTIRE Republican Party is gutless!

quote Originally posted by texasfiero: BINGO! Add to that the fact that the ENTIRE Republican Party is gutless!

Except 6 of us.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Except 6 of us.

And 4 of you are just plain rude.

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: And 4 of you are just plain rude.

An attribute not specifically isolated to within the conservative sector.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: If only some politicians had tried to reform regulation of Fannie Mae before the mortgage meltdown. Oh wait, Bush and McCain both tried, and failed. Well it must be because they didn't really try, because it's not like there was any opposition to the reform. Oh wait, Chris Dodd and a multitude of Democrats stonewalled any changed and kept insisting there is "nothing wrong with Fannie Mae." The only thing Bush is guilty of is not fully taking advantage of the majority power he had to push through legislation. You can tell Obama isn't going to make that same mistake. He's trying to ram everything he can through Congress as fast as he can. Why? Because he knows he may only have that majority until the 2010 elections. Gotta strike while the iron is hot.

yes, I dont doubt that one bit. and that is exactly why this partisan BS is so damaging. these polical unions must be busted up. they are hindering any hope of ever having a great nation again. they will purposely shoot down the greater good for their own party gain. it is more important who proposes something, that what they actually propose.

get in the middle, screw the maniacs, and take this nation back to reality. we all know what needs to be done. just noone wants to say it, because they will never get re-elected.
same mentality that sank GM - to big to fail. horsecrap. already failing.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: OK, ray, can you tell us HOW Bush managed the following? stocks prices crashed more people out of work and pay rates flat or down balance of payments out of wack so much for ''free'' trade!!! home prices crashed repo's up debts up both personal and the governments voodoo tax policys failed again both afgan and iraq wars a mess more stupid laws and ever more more more people in prisons more states broke ? Yes, he started the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Aside from that, what about the other points? How did he cause the stock market to tank? And if he did, how do you explain the big run-up of stocks prior? And if he had such power, why would he crash them BEFORE he left office, rather than waiting until the next president was in office? How about "more stupid laws and ever more more more people in prisons"? Presidents don't pass laws, congress does. The Democrats were in power in congress the last 2 years of Bush's presidency. They didn't pass any laws? Oh, and what "stupid laws" did the Republicans pass? Can you name one or two? OK, now THIS one is downright comical..."debts up both personal and the governments". The Democrats PROMPTLY outspent every other president and congress in the history of this country in less than 100 days. Care to explain that one, ray? "home prices crashed...repo's up" - We've already covered this one. Carter, Clinton, the CRA, fannie and freddy, Barney Frank...proven to be caused by Democrats. "oodoo tax policys failed again" - again, proven wrong. Tax revenues when UP with Bush's tax cuts. Man, this is so much fun, and so easy, I could go on and on. But, like a good conservative, I have work to do.

BuSh2 started two wars but didnot send enuff men and equipment into the first afgan war
to get the tali-ban the al-kiddies and ben forgotton or cut off their retreat into packie tribal areas

then went into a second un-needed war draining everything in afgan to a barebones level
plus had no real plan in iraq past get goddamm insane
didnot collect or control the iraq army or guns and ammo
allowing the nuts to get well armed and supplyed and trained
sent many christian low level political hacks instead of state dept pro's to admin the mess
in short very very poor leadership and worse planing

stocks tanked because the houses tanked taking out the banks
the whole mess was a result of the GOP ideal of less gov
they cut the reg's and told the people in charge of seeing they were followed the rules to keep hands off
so guys like madoff could loot the system
banks made tonnes of stupid loans [ no down liers loans ]
the gov reg guys were told to go to sleep all thru the BuSh2 years
the results are clear but the Neo CONNED blame carter
and fail to see their own policys are the real fault

GOP law and order policys are modern racisum
the whole war on drugs is a GOP plan from nixon to raygun to BuSh2
resulting in a prison system they then support and try to sell [privatize] to CORPs
5 million people can not vote far tooo many blacks esp in the racist south
are there by cut out of system

but instead of trying to correct the problem
the neo-conned blame others
for the stuff their plan was the direct results of
and still think trying again harder will work
buy a clue your plans had years to work
with your guys in total control
YOUR PLAN FAILED
time to try something else

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

and, dont forget the $4/gallon gasoline - which seems to have been the tipping point of our collapse.
but $200,000 per minute in Iraq sure wasnt helpful. every 5 minutes - a million dollars. for how many years?

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: and, dont forget the $4/gallon gasoline - which seems to have been the tipping point of our collapse.

Curious. Gasoline seems to be trending back that way. Prices here have increased by about $0.60/galling in a little over three months (It's $2.47/gallon in Tulsa today). at that rate we will be back to "Evil Bush" (TM) prices certainly by the end of the year. Who will take the blame then?





Should I go ahead and make a new one that says:
-----------------------------------
WHEN OBAMA TOOK OFFICE,
GAS WAS [$1.61]
-----------------------------------

As if the president (ANY president) has direct control over gasoline prices...

[This message has been edited by OKflyboy (edited 06-09-2009).]

quote Originally posted by ray b: stocks tanked because the houses tanked taking out the banks the whole mess was a result of the GOP ideal of less gov they cut the reg's and told the people in charge of seeing they were followed the rules to keep hands off so guys like madoff could loot the system banks made tonnes of stupid loans [ no down liers loans ] the gov reg guys were told to go to sleep all thru the BuSh2 years the results are clear but the Neo CONNED blame carter and fail to see their own policys are the real fault

Have you mentioned your memory problems to your doctor?

what ever happen to the idea of personal responsibility
your neo-con's screwed up big time but will not admitt it
instead like a little kid point fingers at everyone else
claiming that ''they did it''
your nut faction took total control for 6 long years
your guys could have changed almost anything
cut spending and repealed laws ect
but in fact really did very very little right
and totally screwed up our country as a direct result
you can whine and bwitch about liberals
but the truth is it was nobody but the neo-con's who did it

it is way past time to admit that simple fact

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

quote Originally posted by ray b: what ever happen to the idea of personal responsibility your neo-con's screwed up big time but will not admitt it instead like a little kid point fingers at everyone else claiming that ''they did it'' your nut faction took total control for 6 long years your guys could have changed almost anything cut spending and repealed laws ect but in fact really did very very little right and totally screwed up our country as a direct result you can whine and bwitch about liberals but the truth is it was nobody but the neo-con's who did it it is way past time to admit that simple fact

So when faced with the facts of your own party's complicity, your excuse is it's the GOP's fault because they had the majority?
Typical.

Personal responsibility seems to be pretty rare these days. I don't see you or any Democrat demonstrating it.

quote Originally posted by ray b: what ever happen to the idea of personal responsibility your neo-con's screwed up big time but will not admitt it instead like a little kid point fingers at everyone else claiming that ''they did it'' your nut faction took total control for 6 long years your guys could have changed almost anything cut spending and repealed laws ect but in fact really did very very little right and totally screwed up our country as a direct result you can whine and bwitch about liberals but the truth is it was nobody but the neo-con's who did it it is way past time to admit that simple fact

Actually the economy was great for those 6 years. Once Dems took over in 2007, that is when he started to get sky rocket gas prices and the Great Recession started. The Republicans after 2007 has no power and Bush was rendered lame.

So no, you neo-libs are the ones that wrecked the country.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: yes - the KKK is christian - just ask them. while YOU personally do not have the power to kick people out of "the chistian club". just as the "good" muslims dont have the power to kick out the extremists. yes, I agree what they do just dont seem like christians. but, that is to us. to them - they are doing Gods work. all you can do is voice your displeasure at them claiming themselves to be christian. like abortion center bombers. doing Gods work. or at least what they have been BS'ed into thinking was Gods work. yes - the KKK was formed by democrats yes - them democrats who formed the KKK were conservatives the fun of stereotyping. psycho killers & idiots. thats what conservatives & liberals are. and everyone is one or the other.

Christians really arent defined only thru calling themselves Christians. Thus I would say they are not.

quote Originally posted by 2.5: Christians really arent defined only thru calling themselves Christians. Thus I would say they are not.

the ONLY qualifictaion is:
do you take Jesus Christ as your lord and Saviour?
if you say "YES" - that is that. you can kill murder and rape all you like, and still claim yourself christian.
just because OTHER christians go ahead and do the unchristian practice of JUDGING - does not take away anything at all

It is NOT up to YOU who is christian. and - any REAL christian knows that.

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: the ONLY qualifictaion is: do you take Jesus Christ as your lord and Saviour? if you say "YES" - that is that. you can kill murder and rape all you like, and still claim yourself christian. just because OTHER christians go ahead and do the unchristian practice of JUDGING - does not take away anything at all It is NOT up to YOU who is christian. and - any REAL christian knows that.

Not to me. It takes one quick comparison.

Christian:
1. Professing belief in Jesus as Christ or following the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. Relating to or derived from Jesus or Jesus's teachings.
3. Manifesting the qualities or spirit of Jesus; Christlike.
4. Relating to or characteristic of Christianity or its adherents.
5. Showing a loving concern for others; humane.
6. exhibiting a spirit proper to a follower of Jesus Christ; Christlike: She displayed true Christian charity.
7. decent; respectable: They gave him a good Christian burial.
n.
1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.


Showing concern for others, as Jesus did?
They quickly turned that into "people of the same nationality or skin color".
To me that is a FAIL plain and simple.

I agree I don't determin who is and isn't, but thier own religion does.

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 06-10-2009).]

I have not found the time or desire to wade through three pages of points and counter-points, attacks and counter-attacks.

Going back to the original post:

We limit ourselves too much by accepting that there are only two schools of political thought. Why? Often, somewhere between the extremes, common sense (and maybe common ground) can be found. I'm not talking about being politically "moderate" (another useless moniker).. I'm talking about putting aside kneejerk rigidity in favor of reason.

I think the primary (and constitutionally mandated) responsibility of the Federal Government is protecting individual property rights of its citizens (including ownership of one's self) from violation by other individuals or entities, domestic or foreign.

Classify that however you wish...but who can deny that this administration (so far), and the previous one, have failed, mostly because they have breached those limits to a nauseating degree? And they have different party affiliations, don't they?

quote Originally posted by Formula88: So when faced with the facts of your own party's complicity, your excuse is it's the GOP's fault because they had the majority? Typical. Personal responsibility seems to be pretty rare these days. I don't see you or any Democrat demonstrating it.

GOP had the power 50% +1 or more votes in both houses and the prez
they and only they failed to do their job
the party out of power gets to say what ever
but had no power to stop anything
they do not have the votes to make or change laws
nor were the the demo votes needed to act
so that sound bite list proves
your neo-cons knew there was a problem
and failed to act
talk is cheap
action is the only thing that counts
and the NEO-CON'S FAILED

would be one thing if that was their only failure
but they had tooo many other failures too
like free trade we lost jobs while china got rich
or madoff did the demo's steal all that cash?
or tell the feds to keep hands off the markets?

------------------
Question wonder and be wierd
are you kind?

rayb cannot let go of this "neo-conned" blame game, but here's an article excerpt from back in last October, which explains a bit about how this financial mess happened and who is to blame...

http://www.americanthinker....n_to_name_names.html

The good news for McCain, should he decide to grasp it, is that the party against which he is (supposed to be) running can easily be pegged with the lion's share of the blame regarding our economic meltdown. There is no doubt that liberal policies on energy and housing have combined to put the country in this situation, and only unwinding these policies will lead the nation out of this problem. Naming names properly will name a whole lot of folks with "D" beside their names.

Congress, of course, is now led by the very people who put us into this mess to begin with. If McCain thinks he can thread the needle in a bi-partisan fashion here, he is sadly mistaken. If he does not point out the facts, then his party will take the blame for and he will not win the election. It cannot happen. As far as he has run from President Bush, he will never get as far away from Bush as Obama can.

Bush has actually been on the right side of the energy production debate and the Fannie Mae-Freddie Mac regulation debate all along. The President has been a feckless advocate of the correct positions on these issues to be sure, but at least one can legitimately claim that the administration was intellectually correct on Fannie, Freddie and oil.

McCain himself eloquently and correctly pointed out problems with Fannie and Freddie back in 2005 and 2006, only to have the reforms he wanted defeated by Democrats in Congress. President Bush was with McCain on these issues. Obama meanwhile, garnering more Fannie Mae contributions in two years than all other senators not named Chris Dodd in the last nine, has been on the wrong side of these issues. This is a slam dunk waiting for McCain simply to take advantage of it.

Recently he has been out rambling on about government spending, CEO pay and earmarks. Yawn. None of this is pertinent unless you point out that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were Democrat earmarks and that the worst CEO pay abuse in recent memory is Franklin Raines' incentive compensation from Fannie triggered by fraudulent accounting. McCain did not bother to point any of that out of course. We must not "assign blame.'

The simple fact is this: if the Democrats do not get their deserved blame for this economic situation, Republicans will experience a bloodbath on Election Day. The way our elections work, it is up to McCain to make that happen. The fact that he seems not to understand it is why many conservatives loathed the idea of a McCain nomination to begin with.

quote Originally posted by ray b: GOP had the power 50% +1 or more votes in both houses and the prez they and only they failed to do their job the party out of power gets to say what ever but had no power to stop anything they do not have the votes to make or change laws nor were the the demo votes needed to act so that sound bite list proves your neo-cons knew there was a problem and failed to act talk is cheap action is the only thing that counts and the NEO-CON'S FAILED would be one thing if that was their only failure but they had tooo many other failures too like free trade we lost jobs while china got rich or madoff did the demo's steal all that cash? or tell the feds to keep hands off the markets?

"The neo-cons KNEW there was a problem and didn't act?" Seriously? Apparently it doesn't matter that the Democrats didn't act? Minority party members are still able to write and present bills last I checked. Oh, wait, the Democrats DID ACT! When the Republicans who DID recognize the problem presented a bill, the Democrats DENIED there was a problem and voted it down. Did you miss that fact? There are even videos of them doing it...

So, by your logic, it somehow doesn't matter that the democrats didn't do anything to head off the "problems" either. It takes the whole of Congress to "vote" on something and make changes. Simply having 50% +1 doesn't do it unless virtually everyone on that side is in agreement which seldom occurs in either party. This means that the OTHER party has to have people who want to make changes, so this means that the democrats ALSO did NOTHING to save the day, doesn't it? Funny thing is, the actual historical record, as already pointed out, shows that Republicans DID present "changes" that could have helped prevent the housing crisis, and that Democrats in Congress crushed it. That is historical fact. Not the ravings of a partisan lunatic web site or book.

And just how many "bills" did the democrats present in Congress related to "fixing these problems" were there that were de-railed by the Republicans? I'd be happy to entertain your position if you could show me where they presented Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac reform bills that the Republicans voted down. Or where they presented ANY other "reform" bills that would have headed off the current crisis that the Republicans defeated. Somehow, I think that will be a tough task though.

[This message has been edited by FieroFanatic13 (edited 06-10-2009).]

That's the difference between rayb and a Republican.
ray's only looking for someone to blame. The GOP, even now as a minority party, is still active in the process and doing what we can to put forward issues we're concerned with.

I guess the last 8 years were just a big vacation for all the Democrats. Do they only show up for work when they have the majority and a guaranteed victory? Judging by recent activity in NY, I'd have to say yes, since the moment they lost the majority there the Dems all stormed out like spoiled kids being told playtime is over.
ray's great for blaming others. I'm sure he'll continue to do so now that the Dems have the majority, and by his own words no longer have any excuse for anything less than 100% success.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 06-10-2009).]

quote Originally posted by fogglethorpe: We limit ourselves too much by accepting that there are only two schools of political thought. Why? Often, somewhere between the extremes, common sense (and maybe common ground) can be found.

BINGO, we gotta bingo.

Thats not what people want to hear though.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: That's the difference between you and a Republican. You're only looking for someone to blame. The GOP, even now as a minority party, is still active in the process and doing what we can to put forward issues we're concerned with. I guess the last 8 years were just a big vacation for all the Democrats. Do they only show up for work when they have the majority and a guaranteed victory? Judging by recent activity in NY, I'd have to say yes, since the moment they lost the majority there the Dems all stormed out like spoiled kids being told playtime is over. You're great for blaming others. I'm sure you'll continue to do so now that the Dems have the majority, and by your own words no longer have any excuse for anything less than 100% success.

Who is this directed at Formula88? I can't tell and it immediately follows my post above?

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: And just how many "bills" did the democrats present in Congress related to "fixing these problems" were there that were de-railed by the Republicans? I'd be happy to entertain your position if you could show me where they presented Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac reform bills that the Republicans voted down. Or where they presented ANY other "reform" bills that would have headed off the current crisis that the Republicans defeated. Somehow, I think that will be a tough task though.

Yeah, that's a good point. Why don't you lefties show us proposed legislation that would have dealt with the financial issues that were shot down by Republicans?

quote Originally posted by FieroFanatic13: Who is this directed at Formula88? I can't tell and it immediately follows my post above?

ray. I edited the post to make that clear. Sorry for any confusion.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 06-10-2009).]

quote [B]but reality is: never mind - think for yourself. dont drink the cool-aid. of either flavor.

Yeah, because you don't look like a chicken s**t when you can't pick a side...

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: the ONLY qualifictaion is: do you take Jesus Christ as your lord and Saviour? if you say "YES" - that is that. you can kill murder and rape all you like, and still claim yourself christian. just because OTHER christians go ahead and do the unchristian practice of JUDGING - does not take away anything at all It is NOT up to YOU who is christian. and - any REAL christian knows that.

Yes, anyone can call themselves Christian, however, are they actually Christian? The Bible says "Faith without works is dead"

So I put it to you that Christ also listed folks who will not inherit the Kingdom of God, ergo.. they aren't really Christians. The Apostle Paul also talked about people who put on the appearance of Christianity but are not Christian and actually mislead true believers.

Alot of these so called "Christians" who do not reflect Christ in their lives are not Christian IMHO. Of course forgiveness is given to the truly penitent, not the "convenient" Christians.

Arn

Back to the causes for the housing price situation, for rayb...

The Liberal Housing Crash

The American people are pretty well convinced that the mortgage meltdown was the fault of greedy bankers, stupid borrowers, and the odd Friend of Angelo Mozilo like Sen. Christopher Dodd (D-CT). That's hardly surprising, since the mainstream media has shown a vivid disinterest in getting to the bottom of it all.

That's why we have Thomas Sowell. His latest book, The Housing Boom and Bust, is a workmanlike analysis of the housing crisis. It's short enough, at about 50,000 words, for anyone to get through on a weekend.

Needless to say, Dr. Sowell does not find that the meltdown was all the fault of greedy bankers -- or even foolish borrowers. He puts most of the blame on politicians and activists that insisted that the US had an "affordable housing" crisis when it didn't. The government agencies that implemented the will of the political sector -- the Federal Reserve System, Fannie and Freddie, and the US Department of Housing and Urban Development -- they were the guilty suspects with actual fingerprints on the victim.

When analyzing a political scandal, our liberal friends usually like to expose the "myths" that the stupid American people were in thrall to. Dr. Sowell does not descend to such oversimplification, but we will.

Myth #1: The Housing Boom was Nationwide. No it wasn't. It was concentrated in just a a few places. News reports and scholarly research have found that even during the boom affordable housing "has been the norm across most of the country, but with glaring exceptions[.]" Writes Dr. Sowell:

Almost invariably... these are places where severe local government restrictions on land use, and other impediments to building, have driven the cost of houses and of apartment rents to levels that take as much as half of the average family's income[.]

In cities like Dallas and Houston where there are few restrictions on land use, home prices have not skyrocketed; nor have they collapsed in the downturn. "In Dallas the home price decline was only 3 percent."

Myth #2: Greedy Bankers Foisted Sub-Prime Loans on the Poor. Oh no they didn't. It was government. You see, liberal politicians and activists were convinced that banks were unjustly denying loans to minorities and low-income borrowers. They even had studies to show that minorities were discriminated against. The solution? Force. Liberals would force the banks to loan money to less-qualified borrowers.

Various community activists across the country have been able to pressure banks into making concessions in money or in kind, in order to get those activists to withdraw their objections to pending mergers or to banks opening new branches in another state, for example.

Myth #3: Lack of Regulation Caused the Crisis. Actually the regulators were part of the problem. With the politicians cheering them on, the regulators were all over the banks forcing them to lower their lending standards. And when the regulators finally did try to restrain the banks, the politicians reined them in.

When the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight... turned up irregularities in Fannie Mae's accounting and in 2004 issued what Barron's magazine called "a blistering 211-page report," Republican Senator Kit Bond [R-MO] called for an investigation of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, tried to have their budget slashed, and sought to have the leadership of the regulatory agency removed. Democratic Barney Frank [D-MA] likewise declared: "It is clear that a leadership change at OFHEO is overdue."

These three myths are familiar. They are verses from the favorite refrains of the liberal songbook. You can also find them in the "whereas" sections of countless liberal Enabling Laws. Whereas there's a national crisis; Whereas business is to blame; Whereas government doesn't have enough regulations: Now therefore... more liberal administrative power is the answer.

Then the liberals act surprised when the Law of Unintended Consequences kicks in, and government ends up hurting the very people liberals want to help. The result of cranking up house prices in San Francisco is that "the black population has been cut in half since 1970." Who knew?

Whatever your grand vision, you cannot ultimately escape from the costs of your vision, writes Sowell.

One of the biggest differences between economic decisions in the market and political decisions in government is that costs are an inescapable factor in economic decisions, while political decisions can often ignore costs[.]

But not forever.

For some legitimate functions of government, like defense, excessive cost goes with the territory. When you are defending against Hitler, you crank up the National Debt to 150 percent of GDP and worry about paying it off later.

But cranking up the National Debt over 100 percent of GDP to clear up the mess after some liberals had a dream of "affordable housing" that they thought other people should pay for is something different. After paying for that, people might just decide they want to change their governing elite for another one.

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: Yes, anyone can call themselves Christian, however, are they actually Christian? The Bible says "Faith without works is dead" So I put it to you that Christ also listed folks who will not inherit the Kingdom of God, ergo.. they aren't really Christians. The Apostle Paul also talked about people who put on the appearance of Christianity but are not Christian and actually mislead true believers. Alot of these so called "Christians" who do not reflect Christ in their lives are not Christian IMHO. Of course forgiveness is given to the truly penitent, not the "convenient" Christians. Arn

not for anyone but God to decide, is it?

I betcha there are PLENTY of people who call themselves "christians" who will never see "The Kingdom of God"
and - again - that is NOT for any of us to decide.

fierobear thanks again.

the huge difference between the Conservative Canadian government and the Republican American government was that the Canadian Conservatives behaved like Conservatives. They kept the regulatory reigns tight and now the Canadian banking industry is the strongest in the world. The Republicans stopped being financial conservatives and this was the real cause.

The article you quote is absolutely correct. Extending credit to those who do not qualify was the root cause. The American dream is based on hard work, and equal opportunity. It does not equate to all economic classes being land owners, or for that matter, part of the middle class. It does mean that the economically disadvantaged can better themselves with work and initiative. This made America great. But hey, I'm Canadian eh? What do I know about the American dream?

Arn

quote Originally posted by ray b: Anything Ray B

Do you have Rabies or something?

quote Originally posted by Arns85GT: But hey, I'm Canadian eh? What do I know about the American dream? Arn

apparently more than the majority of Americans

My friend Tom uses small, easy to understand words, short sentences, and simple pictures to explain the current Conservative Mindset:





Full size version here: http://www.salon.com/comics...6/16/tomo/index.html

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 06-30-2009).]

Do liberals only know the caricatures of conervatives?

quote Originally posted by 2.5: Do liberals only know the caricatures of Conservatives?

Pretty much.
'Caricature of conservatives' is like 'little shrimp'.

Don't both words mean the same thing?

Look at Rush, Newt, Shaun, and Bill, and tell me they aren't.

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 07-01-2009).]

quote Originally posted by NEPTUNE: Pretty much. 'Caricature of conservatives' is like 'little shrimp'. Don't both words mean the same thing? Look at Rush, Newt, Shaun, and Bill, and tell me they aren't.

Proved my point well I think. You only know the extremes.

All we ever do when it comes to these political terms is point our finger at extremes, caricatures of what is real. It really is a joke and it is ruining the country.

quote Originally posted by 2.5: Proved my point well I think. You only know the extremes. All we ever do when it comes to these political terms is point our finger at extremes, caricatures of what is real. It really is a joke and it is ruining the country.

the whole point of this thread

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: the whole point of this thread

Well, yes.
I get it.
Now about that OTHER thread, the one that spawned this one.
Doesn't that seem more than a little bit like a caricature?

[This message has been edited by NEPTUNE (edited 07-01-2009).]

quote Originally posted by Pyrthian: the whole point of this thread

Ok I will change that to...proved Pyrthians point.

As far as the other thread is concerned, as the 1st post in this thread says, Pyrthian made this one making fun of the other thread and how it ands up doing the same thing.
I am not casting blame at one side here, simply pointing out how it is ruining our country.

[This message has been edited by 2.5 (edited 07-01-2009).]