PDA

View Full Version : The GOP: Officially Against Social Justice



Qtec
09-18-2010, 04:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Shakesville's Melissa McEwan made a great catch when Sen. Judd Gregg opened his mouth <span style='font-size: 14pt'>and said what he actually believes </span>about the proper role of Elizabeth Warren at the new consumer protection agency:

Senator Judd Gregg (R-Eprobate)—who once upon a time (until he withdrew) was Obama's nominee for Commerce Secretary (lol)—is Very Concerned about Elizabeth Warren using her position in a new consumer protection agency to promote social justice.

Gregg, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee and a senior member of the Banking Committee, expressed dismay at President Obama's decision to tap Warren as a key "adviser" to help set up the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency established in the Wall Street reform bill.

...<span style='font-size: 17pt'>"My concern is that she would use the agency for the purpose of promoting social justice," </span>Gregg said on ABC's "Top Line" webcast.

LOL! OH NOES!

<span style='font-size: 14pt'>The Republican Party: Officially Against Social Justice.</span>

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>And what does Gregg think that Warren should be using <u>the CONSUMER PROTECTION bureau </u>to do?

The agency, Gregg said, should <u>promote improving access to credit, as well as other financial services.</u></span> </div></div>

OMG. These people are so detached.

with video (http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/sen-gregg-worries-elizabeth-warren-ma)

Q

LWW
09-18-2010, 04:27 AM
Can you show me where in the COTUS that the role of the state is social justice?

LWW

Qtec
09-18-2010, 05:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can you show me where in the COTUS that the role of the state is social justice?

LWW </div></div>

Intent.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We <span style='font-size: 17pt'>the People</span> of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, <span style='font-size: 17pt'>establish Justice,</span> insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the <span style='font-size: 17pt'>common</span> defence,[1] <span style='font-size: 23pt'> promote the general Welfare,</span> and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> promote the general Welfare </div></div>

What does that mean do you?

Q

LWW
09-18-2010, 05:34 AM
Justice is fairness before the law regardless of station.

"SOCIAL" justice is leftist for state confiscation and redistribution of wealth from the productive class to the non productive class.

IOW, the American ideal was that each individual would be held accountable for their own personal crimes and would be allowed to keep the wealth they crated.

The leftist ideal is that all crimes are committed by all races and all classes in the same numbers, so blacks/whites/rich/poor must all be incarcerated at the same rates. If that means locking up innocents and/or letting the guilty run free then so be it.

The leftist ideal is that all wealth should be evenly distributed regardless of whether or not one contributed to that wealth creation. If that means the producing class must be demolished until it sinks to the non producing class then so be it.

Wrap you head around these questions and then answer them.

1 - If race X commits murder at a rate double that of race Y is it right that race X would also be incarcerated at a rate twice that of race Y?

2 - If group X attends school, works hard, and takes risk to create wealth should group Y (Which quit school, sleeps till noon, and eschews risk.) be entitled to the wealth created by group X?

The answers are self evident if one believes in actual justice, Those committing crime should be judged by their acts and not by their class or race in question #1.

In question #2, allowing one group to forcibly take from the efforts of another differs from slavery only by degree, but the principle remains the same.

LWW

pooltchr
09-18-2010, 05:55 AM
"Promote the general welfare" means creating an enviornment where people can function without excessive interference from outside sources.

Social justice is the exact thing that brought about a big part of our economic crisis. Social justice told banks and lending institutions that they needed to make more home loans to people who were not good credit risks, simply because of the part of town they wanted to buy a home in. Social justice encouraged builders to build homes in less desirable areas. Social justice is the government's version of racial profiling. Social justice is affirmative action.

Social justice is socialism.

Steve

LWW
09-18-2010, 06:45 AM
"SOCIAL JUSTICE" is unjust in the extreme.

It punishes hard work and personal responsibility while promoting sloth and irresponsible behavior.

It is the polar opposite of the ideology upon which this nation was founded ... which explains why the moonbat crazy left and Imam Hussein Obama are enamored of it.

LWW

Sev
09-19-2010, 06:08 AM
Sorry Q your off base on this one.

There is no place for social justice in America. Its a form of justified discrimination.

hondo
09-19-2010, 06:59 AM
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Sorry,Q the Constitution doesn't mean anything to the neo-con pseudo-Libertarians on here.

When the COTUS says "establish justice", they didn't actually
mean " justice". Understand?

To this crew Ignorance Is Strength.

However, next week, if Beck says that liberals in government are against social justice, they will be outraged.

mustwatchbeckmustwatchbeckmustwatchbeckmustwatchbe ck

Chopstick
09-19-2010, 07:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

establish Justice,

insure domestic Tranquility,

provide for the common defence,

promote the general Welfare,

secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,

</div></div>

<span style="color: #000066">and which of the above has our current crop of social justicers provided? In my view, they have broken them all and a whole lot more. If I were a federal judge, I would be issueing warrants for their arrest.</span>

pooltchr
09-19-2010, 07:38 AM
I don't believe the term "social justice" even existed when the constitution was written. When they wrote "justice", there is little doubt they were talking about criminal justice.

Social justice is just another liberal interpertation being used to further their own crazy agenda. It is nothing more than a cover for more redistribution of wealth. If I can afford a home, and you can't, that's not fair, so someone has to give you something to give you the same thing I have. That's social justice, aka, socialism!

Steve

Sev
09-19-2010, 07:53 AM
AKA. Reparations.

llotter
09-19-2010, 08:00 AM
and busing and affirmative action and community organizers and sex education and political correctness and feminism and gay rights and the list just keeps going of ways the statists want to organize our lives.

Feel free to expand the list.

LWW
09-19-2010, 09:20 AM
Justice is on an individual basis.

Social justice is on a collective basis.

Because you can quote the COTUS obviously doesn't mean that you have the slightest comprehension of what the words mean.

LWW

llotter
09-19-2010, 04:27 PM
Good point. It is only possible to control people if they are divided into groups because there are simply too many individuals.

Gayle in MD
09-20-2010, 08:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Sorry,Q the Constitution doesn't mean anything to the neo-con pseudo-Libertarians on here.

When the COTUS says "establish justice", they didn't actually
mean " justice". Understand?

To this crew Ignorance Is Strength.

However, next week, if Beck says that liberals in government are against social justice, they will be outraged.

mustwatchbeckmustwatchbeckmustwatchbeckmustwatchbe ck </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> To this crew Ignorance Is Strength.
</div></div>


Amen!

Qtec
09-21-2010, 12:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Social justice is just another liberal interpertation being used to further their own crazy agenda. It is nothing more than a cover for more redistribution of wealth. </div></div>

Lets get ONE THING STRAIGHT so we can be done with you repeating a total falsehood, ok?
In the last 30 yrs, the wealth HAS been redistributed and its all one way, right to the top.

Q

Stretch
09-21-2010, 03:02 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Social justice is just another liberal interpertation being used to further their own crazy agenda. It is nothing more than a cover for more redistribution of wealth. </div></div>

Lets get ONE THING STRAIGHT so we can be done with you repeating a total falsehood, ok?
In the last 30 yrs, the wealth HAS been redistributed and its all one way, right to the top.

Q

</div></div>

It's astonishing. Executive pay for fortune 500 Company's went up on average 600% at a time when millions of workers lost their jobs, their homes and their retirement saveings in the worst finacial crisis since the Great Depression. Ya, redistribution alright. St.

hondo
09-21-2010, 05:53 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Social justice is just another liberal interpertation being used to further their own crazy agenda. It is nothing more than a cover for more redistribution of wealth. </div></div>

Lets get ONE THING STRAIGHT so we can be done with you repeating a total falsehood, ok?
In the last 30 yrs, the wealth HAS been redistributed and its all one way, right to the top.

Q

</div></div>

Tap! Tap! Tap!

Gayle in MD
09-21-2010, 06:29 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Social justice is just another liberal interpertation being used to further their own crazy agenda. It is nothing more than a cover for more redistribution of wealth. </div></div>

Lets get ONE THING STRAIGHT so we can be done with you repeating a total falsehood, ok?
In the last 30 yrs, the wealth HAS been redistributed and its all one way, right to the top.

Q

</div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">To this crew Ignorance Is Strength.
</div></div>

And, it WAS Republican policies that led to the biggest redistribution of wealth in history, yet they vote for the same policies which caused that redistribution, over and over. The failed Republican economic and domestic philosophies began with their hero, Ronald Reagan.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

G.

pooltchr
09-21-2010, 07:24 AM
Kindly explain why those who earn wealth are not entitled to it, while those who do not earn it should be entitled to the wealth earned by others.
Thank you

Steve

Chopstick
09-21-2010, 07:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

And, it WAS Republican policies that led to the biggest redistribution of wealth in history, yet they vote for the same policies which caused that redistribution, over and over. The failed Republican economic and domestic philosophies began with their hero, Ronald Reagan.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

G. </div></div>

That is because the Republicans are a bunch of flaming left wing secular progressive liberals too. There hasn't been a right wing politician in office for over a hundred years.

hondo
09-21-2010, 08:00 AM
The Tea Party will soon change all of that. Praise JEEESUS!

The good ole days are back.
They might even revive segregation.

Gayle in MD
09-21-2010, 08:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

And, it WAS Republican policies that led to the biggest redistribution of wealth in history, yet they vote for the same policies which caused that redistribution, over and over. The failed Republican economic and domestic philosophies began with their hero, Ronald Reagan.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

G. </div></div>

That is because the Republicans are a bunch of flaming left wing secular progressive liberals too. There hasn't been a right wing politician in office for over a hundred years. </div></div>

How convenient for you, to just categorize everything that Republicans do that fails, as Liberal.

Republican policies destroyed this country.

Amnesty
Deregulation of industries which pollute the earth, scam the public, and turned Wall Street into a ponzi scheme.
Reagan's turn away from renewables
REagan and Republicans fighting against higher cafe' standards
Accpetence of FRAUD in the Financial industry, (Greenspan said fraud didn't bother him)
Flaming the mortgage bubble, with unreasonably low interest rates.
Cutting taxes in the middle of two wars
Republican spending and wasted both home an abroad
Allowing war profiteering, the worst in history
Invading another country on lies, for oil contracts.
Launching multi trillion dollar Prescription drug programs, and not paying for any of it.
Borrowing more money than all previous administrations combined, while imposing tax cuts, and launching two wars, and growing the government, and spending like there was no tomorrow.

Yet, no one can tell me how we could have avoided a depression, without spending money....

There is no doubt, that Republicans controlled this country throughout the policies, and failures, which gained the downward momentum whichh we are currently trying to recover from.

Bush wasn't a Liberal, he was a rightie, through and through. So were the Republican Leaders. You can't wiggle out by just using semantics.

When Democratics gained control, we were already in a recession. Bush and his cronies denied it for a whole year, while economists were telling us we were in a recession. Throughout, Bush and his rightie leadres, were saying the fundamentals of the economy were strong.

The Wall Street Yuppies manufactured a fake market, based on fraud, and hence, we had a crash, and all of it happened right under Bush and Greenspan's nose, while they were being warned about their fiscal irresponsibility, and they failed to take any action, for political reasons.


G.

pooltchr
09-21-2010, 09:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Republican policies destroyed this country.

G.


</div></div>

Interesting that you would suggest that the country has been destroyed.
Most of us think it's still a darn good country that is being systematically demolished by the Obama "fundamental transformation" agenda.


Steve

Chopstick
09-21-2010, 11:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The Wall Street Yuppies manufactured a fake market, based on fraud, and hence, we had a crash,

G.
</div></div>

You don't even know what a CDO or a CDS is much less where they came from and they did not cause the crash. CRA did. CDSs only came into play AFTER the market crashed. That is what they are for.

LWW
09-21-2010, 03:50 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Social justice is just another liberal interpertation being used to further their own crazy agenda. It is nothing more than a cover for more redistribution of wealth. </div></div>

Lets get ONE THING STRAIGHT so we can be done with you repeating a total falsehood, ok?
In the last 30 yrs, the wealth HAS been redistributed and its all one way, right to the top.

Q

</div></div>

Tap! Tap! Tap! </div></div>

Yet neither of you can mount a fact based argument that demonstrates your fantasy is a reality.

LWW &lt;---Unsurprised.

LWW
09-21-2010, 03:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They might even revive segregation. </div></div>

I told you that confession was good for the soul.

LWW

LWW
09-21-2010, 03:52 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
The Wall Street Yuppies manufactured a fake market, based on fraud, and hence, we had a crash,

G.
</div></div>

You don't even know what a CDO or a CDS is much less where they came from and they did not cause the crash. CRA did. CDSs only came into play AFTER the market crashed. That is what they are for. </div></div>

Expecting an agitprop to follow such things would be expecting too much.

LWW

Deeman3
09-21-2010, 04:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">AKA. Reparations. </div></div> <span style="color: #FF0000">

As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif</span>

Sev
09-21-2010, 04:51 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

And, it WAS Republican policies that led to the biggest redistribution of wealth in history, yet they vote for the same policies which caused that redistribution, over and over. The failed Republican economic and domestic philosophies began with their hero, Ronald Reagan.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

G. </div></div>

That is because the Republicans are a bunch of flaming left wing secular progressive liberals too. There hasn't been a right wing politician in office for over a hundred years. </div></div>

How convenient for you, to just categorize everything that Republicans do that fails, as Liberal.

Republican policies destroyed this country.

Amnesty
Deregulation of industries which pollute the earth, scam the public, and turned Wall Street into a ponzi scheme.
Reagan's turn away from renewables
REagan and Republicans fighting against higher cafe' standards
Accpetence of FRAUD in the Financial industry, (Greenspan said fraud didn't bother him)
Flaming the mortgage bubble, with unreasonably low interest rates.
Cutting taxes in the middle of two wars
Republican spending and wasted both home an abroad
Allowing war profiteering, the worst in history
Invading another country on lies, for oil contracts.
Launching multi trillion dollar Prescription drug programs, and not paying for any of it.
Borrowing more money than all previous administrations combined, while imposing tax cuts, and launching two wars, and growing the government, and spending like there was no tomorrow.

Yet, no one can tell me how we could have avoided a depression, without spending money....

There is no doubt, that Republicans controlled this country throughout the policies, and failures, which gained the downward momentum whichh we are currently trying to recover from.

Bush wasn't a Liberal, he was a rightie, through and through. So were the Republican Leaders. You can't wiggle out by just using semantics.

When Democratics gained control, we were already in a recession. Bush and his cronies denied it for a whole year, while economists were telling us we were in a recession. Throughout, Bush and his rightie leadres, were saying the fundamentals of the economy were strong.

The Wall Street Yuppies manufactured a fake market, based on fraud, and hence, we had a crash, and all of it happened right under Bush and Greenspan's nose, while they were being warned about their fiscal irresponsibility, and they failed to take any action, for political reasons.


G.


</div></div>

It would seem to me by what you have listed that government interference is the root of all our problems. Perhaps if politicians stayed out of the free market we would not be in the situation we are in today.

Instead of spending money the government should have been the first to downsize. Reducing the civilian federal government employee population to 500,000 individuals and passing a law that caps government salaries and benefits to the US median of a single male or female would save the country trillions.
Elected officials should be forced to donate their time for serving their nation.

Gayle in MD
09-21-2010, 10:28 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Gayle in MD]
The Wall Street Yuppies manufactured a fake market, based on fraud, and hence, we had a crash,

G.
</div></div>

You don't even know what a CDO or a CDS is much less where they came from and they did not cause the crash. CRA did. CDSs only came into play AFTER the market


The Community Reinvestment Act, did not cause the Crash. Greed, fraud, and corruption on Wall Street, corrupt banking practices, corrupt rating agencies, the Bush Administration's pressure for his "Ownership society" held back SEC action, held down interest rates, predatory lending practices transformed a program which had worked just fine for thirty years, into what became nothing more than a greedy scam, designed to make quick bucks, and then sell off the risk before the boom fell....

Banking and lending became a corrupt industry, without oversight, without conscience, and based on pure greed and fraud....those crooks at the top walked away with billions and billions of investors money, and justified all of it with the BS ideology that the market can do no wrong.

There is a difference between a free market, and a free for all scam upon the unsuspecting public, by supposed professionals.

The private sector got into the sub prime market, big time, AFTER Fannie and Freddie got out in 2003, after their own accounting scandal.

That's when the bubble really took off, and predatory lenders were everywhere, writing bad loans left and right. Predatory Mortgage companies were popping up everywhere.

Wall Street was at the core of the global crash. Greedy Crooks!
They used CDO's and CDS's to put distance between themselves, and their own bad debts...

Trying to blame all of it on CRA, OR Fannie and Freddie, is a JOKE!


G.

Qtec
09-22-2010, 05:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Social justice is just another liberal interpertation being used to further their own crazy agenda. It is nothing more than a cover for more redistribution of wealth. </div></div>

Lets get ONE THING STRAIGHT so we can be done with you repeating a total falsehood, ok?
In the last 30 yrs, the wealth HAS been redistributed and its all one way, right to the top.

Q

</div></div>

Tap! Tap! Tap! </div></div>

<u>Yet neither of you can mount a fact based argument that demonstrates your fantasy is a reality.</u>

LWW &lt;---Unsurprised. </div></div>


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Report Says That the Rich Are Getting Richer Faster, Much Faster </span><span style="color: #990000">Oh my....!</span>

The increase in incomes of the top 1 percent of Americans from 2003 to 2005 exceeded the total income of the poorest 20 percent of Americans, data in a new report by the Congressional Budget Office shows.

The poorest fifth of households had total income of $383.4 billion in 2005, while just the increase in income for the top 1 percent came to $524.8 billion, a figure 37 percent higher.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>The total income of the top 1.1 million households was $1.8 trillion, <u>or 18.1 percent of the total income of all Americans, up from 14.3 percent of all income in 2003.</u></span> The total 2005 income of the three million individual Americans at the top was roughly equal to that of the bottom 166 million Americans, analysis of the report showed.

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>The report is the latest to document the growing concentration of income at the top, a trend that President Bush said last January had been under way for more than 25 years.</span> </div></div>

link (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/15/business/15rich.html)

LWW
09-22-2010, 05:47 AM
You are aware that this doesn't support your initial claim?

Probably not.

LWW

LWW
09-22-2010, 05:56 AM
By the way. if you read your "PROOF" ... which we both know you didn't ... you again wouldn't have posted it because it proves your initial claim to be wrong:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 11pt'>Much of the increase at the top reflected the rebound of the stock market after its sharp drop in 2000, economists from across the political spectrum said. About half of the income going to the top 1 percent comes from investments and business.</span>

In addition, Congress in 2003 cut taxes on long-term capital gains and most dividends, which advocates said would encourage people to turn untaxed wealth into taxable income.<span style='font-size: 14pt'> Some economists have said that the increase in incomes at the top is illusory and is in good part simply converting untaxed assets into taxed income to take advantage of reduced tax rates.</span> ...

Chris Frenze, Republican staff director for the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, said the increase in top incomes is much more modest if viewed over longer time periods. <span style='font-size: 17pt'>Since 2000, he said, the average income of the top 1 percent has risen $97,900, or 6.7 percent, the same percentage increase this group had from 1992 to 1997.</span> ...

The share of all federal taxes paid by the top 1 percent grew, but only slightly more than half the rate of their growth in incomes because of the tax rate cuts. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>The top 1 percent paid 27.6 percent of all federal taxes in 2005, up from 22.9 percent in 2003, while the share paid by the middle fifth of taxpayers declined to 9.3 percent from 10 percent in 2003.</span></div></div>

LWW &lt;--- Shooting holes in leftist mythology since 1980.

Qtec
09-22-2010, 06:20 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Chris Frenze, Republican staff director</span> for the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, said the increase in top incomes is much more modest if viewed over longer time periods. Since 2000, he said, the average income of the top 1 percent has risen $97,900, or 6.7 percent, the same percentage increase this group had from 1992 to 1997. ... </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Republican Economist Asks "Retraction" - But Our Facts Stand
December 22, 2003
Updated: December 23, 2003
Official statistics still show most US families lost income in 2002 even after taxes, despite misleading GOP claim to contrary.
Summary
A Republican economist on the staff of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress,<span style='font-size: 20pt'> Christopher Frenze, </span>says FactCheck.org made “multiple and blatant factual errors” in an article we published Dec. 5, and he says a retraction is required.

We don’t think so – but we are happy to post the full text of his letter (see “supporting documents” in the right column) along with our responses to his main points. </div></div>

Factcheck (http://www.factcheck.org/republican_economist_asks_retraction_but_our.html)



Also,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Census Says Income is Down, but Some Republicans Claim it's Up
December 5, 2003
Updated: December 22, 2003
Did the Bush tax cuts make up for income lost to the recession? <span style='font-size: 17pt'>No - but watch out for Republicans who claim it did. </span>

But that did not stop House Republicans on the Joint Economic Committee from putting out a news release claiming Census figures showed tax cuts had produced an after-tax income gain of $249. "This is the first increase in after-tax median income since 1999," said the committee's vice chairman, Republican Rep. Jim Saxton of New Jersey. Without the Bush tax cuts, Saxton said, "there is no doubt that middle income households would have suffered reductions in take-home pay in 2002."

Actually, middle income households did suffer reductions in take-home pay by every measure that the Census bureau published. It publishes 16 different measures of before- and after-tax income, some of which attempt to count such things as the value of Medicare or the paper profit from rising home values. All 16 went down in 2002, including definition 1b, the bureau's official measure of money income minus federal, state and local income taxes.

The Republican release was based on an obscure statistic not included in the official publication, "table RD-1", which Census calls "experimental." </div></div>

Factcheck (http://www.factcheck.org/census_says_income_is_down_but_some.html)

Its true. Live with it.

Q

pooltchr
09-22-2010, 07:40 AM
Larry...talking economics with these people is like discussing rocket science with the greeter at Wal-Mart. They only know what they are told by their leaders. How else can you explain spending more money you don't have to bolster the economy???

Steve

Gayle in MD
09-22-2010, 07:58 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 17pt'>Chris Frenze, Republican staff director</span> for the Congressional Joint Economic Committee, said the increase in top incomes is much more modest if viewed over longer time periods. Since 2000, he said, the average income of the top 1 percent has risen $97,900, or 6.7 percent, the same percentage increase this group had from 1992 to 1997. ... </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Republican Economist Asks "Retraction" - But Our Facts Stand
December 22, 2003
Updated: December 23, 2003
Official statistics still show most US families lost income in 2002 even after taxes, despite misleading GOP claim to contrary.
Summary
A Republican economist on the staff of the Joint Economic Committee of Congress,<span style='font-size: 20pt'> Christopher Frenze, </span>says FactCheck.org made “multiple and blatant factual errors” in an article we published Dec. 5, and he says a retraction is required.

We don’t think so – but we are happy to post the full text of his letter (see “supporting documents” in the right column) along with our responses to his main points. </div></div>

Factcheck (http://www.factcheck.org/republican_economist_asks_retraction_but_our.html)



Also,

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Census Says Income is Down, but Some Republicans Claim it's Up
December 5, 2003
Updated: December 22, 2003
Did the Bush tax cuts make up for income lost to the recession? <span style='font-size: 17pt'>No - but watch out for Republicans who claim it did. </span>

But that did not stop House Republicans on the Joint Economic Committee from putting out a news release claiming Census figures showed tax cuts had produced an after-tax income gain of $249. "This is the first increase in after-tax median income since 1999," said the committee's vice chairman, Republican Rep. Jim Saxton of New Jersey. Without the Bush tax cuts, Saxton said, "there is no doubt that middle income households would have suffered reductions in take-home pay in 2002."

Actually, middle income households did suffer reductions in take-home pay by every measure that the Census bureau published. It publishes 16 different measures of before- and after-tax income, some of which attempt to count such things as the value of Medicare or the paper profit from rising home values. All 16 went down in 2002, including definition 1b, the bureau's official measure of money income minus federal, state and local income taxes.

The Republican release was based on an obscure statistic not included in the official publication, "table RD-1", which Census calls "experimental." </div></div>

Factcheck (http://www.factcheck.org/census_says_income_is_down_but_some.html)

Its true. Live with it.

Q </div></div>


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif Blew the troll away again, I see....

Kudos! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

Gayle in MD
09-22-2010, 08:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">AKA. Reparations. </div></div> <span style="color: #FF0000">

As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif</span> </div></div>

How can you make such an irrational statement? This country was built on slave labor!

African Americans fought for this country alongside whites, and then treated like scum when they returned home.

President Truman got so angry when he heard about a black soldier being blinded hours afterr returning home from the war, he began desegregation, including desegration of the Military.

Republiicans hold our country back with their racist, homophobic attitudes.

Sorry, but I think you have a very narrow view of who is really in need, in this country, nd about who gets what, and they are not all African Americans....not by a long shot!
Republican policies have created more poverty, more wars, more division, more corruption, and a failing economy to boot.

People who have the NERVE to attack insuring the opportunity for black students to have a college education, really show their racism, and here we have a President, being attacked for having benefitted from it, and his accomplishments, which have been extremely diluted and lied about, pooh poohed by the WANNABE ELITISTS, who think that government debts don't matter, when their party is running them up. Geniuses who reveal with everry post their extraordinary ignorance, believing that nature does not include homosexuality in the animal kingdom, buying into the birther, idiocy, touting Islamophobia, and embracing homophobia.

Unbelievable! No one is talking about reparations, in the first place, Deeman, but to make such a statement as this one you make in this post, requires volitional suspension of critical thinking.


G.

pooltchr
09-22-2010, 09:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[

People who have the NERVE to attack insuring the opportunity for black students to have a college education, G.[/b] </div></div>

What world do you live in???
Down here in the backward South, black students can be found in great numbers on every college campus. And if that isn't enough of an opportunity, they even have their own network of black only colleges.

Who says they don't have the opportunity to get an education? Scholarship programs are available to everyone. One of the easiest ways to get a college education is to WORK in the public schools, get good grades, and apply to the programs that will assist, and in many cases, cover the cost of college.

The OPPORTUNITY is there for the taking. But it isn't just handed out...it requires some personal responsibility on the part of the student to do what is necessary to get it.

I'm sorry if the progressive state of maryland doesn't offer these same opportunities. Maybe you should move down south!

Steve

Deeman3
09-22-2010, 09:53 AM
Gayle,

This country was not built on slave labor other than a part of the agricultural base up until the Civil War.

The rest of your rant is just more silly attempts to paint all Republicans as hating everyone because they are black, gay, mentally ill and so forth. You tie every bit of nut case claims to everyone you oppose. If I had ever said anything about the birther issue, you would remember it.

I like to discuss items with you but any opposition to your views just pulls up you old labels of evil for all but yourself.

My opposition to reparations is not racist. You think that anyone who questions giving more money to a racial group is racist? We can't have converesations based on that leap.

Gayle in MD
09-22-2010, 10:39 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gayle,

This country was not built on slave labor other than a part of the agricultural base up until the Civil War.

The rest of your rant is just more silly attempts to paint all Republicans as hating everyone because they are black, gay, mentally ill and so forth. You tie every bit of nut case claims to everyone you oppose. If I had ever said anything about the birther issue, you would remember it.

I like to discuss items with you but any opposition to your views just pulls up you old labels of evil for all but yourself.

My opposition to reparations is not racist. You think that anyone who questions giving more money to a racial group is racist? We can't have converesations based on that leap.

</div></div>

Dee,
I am not aiming all of my comments at you, other than your ridiculous mention of reparations.

It's just another stab intended to paint the Democratic agenda with policies which none of them are even talking about.

This country most certainly was built on slave labor, before and after the Civil War.

If Republicans were not the obvious nutjobs that they are, then why are we still having to defend the already proven facts about President Obama, his birthplace, his good intentions for the country, the right of an ethnic group, not to be profiled by law officers, building a Mosque, blocks away from where American/Muslims died, on 9/11, in the WTC, which actually had two Mosques inside of it?

Your statement about reparations was a racist statement to make.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country. </div></div>


Do tell, who is "They" and what damag to the country do you suggest that "They" did????


There could be no doubt of racist attitudes in that statement.

The rest, is just as obvious, regarding the way Republicans vote against equal rights, every time they come up....your party is backing a woman who dabbled in witchcraft, in fact, two of them.

Newt Gingrich's statements were as unAmerican as anything Ive ever heard. Sara Palin, is outrageous, as is Angle, Bachmann, and a slew of other Republilcans who go about fear mongerring on a daily basis. You can call it a rant, if you like, that is what you always call everything written by myself, with which you do not agree, but it surely doesn't change my mind about the racism included in your statement.

Republican Attacks based on pure hate, clearly suggesting that if a man is in proximity to another man, that affirms that he agrees with everything that comes out of the other man's mouth, or runs through his brain, even if it is a father, whom he never even knew, or a pastor, with whom he did not agree. I surely sat in front of a slew of Catholic Priests, for decades, with whom I did not agree, about much of anything at all, hence, I'm not sitting there any longer.

I do not doubt your honor, but I must say, you don't seem to realize the tone of your statements about the poor in this country, many of whom were doing fairly well, before Bush, and many of whom are white Americans, hard for you to believe, I'm sure!

Let's get real here, slave labor has been the way of the white man for thousands of years, and in this country, it is still being exploited to some degree, by the Republican Party, which has resisted any reasonable immigration reform for decades, ever since Reagan invited them all to flood across our borders.

Cheap labor, and the exploitation of those who are not legal, is just another form of slavery, in this economy. Republicans voted against refoorms, without having the opportunity to protect the companies which pay their slave illegal population, under the table.


All of the gay bashing I read on this forum, is from the right, period.

You can deny the voting record, and often horrendous statements, of your own Republican Party in every single equal rights subject, from Muslims, to Gays, to African Americans, to women who have been raped and abused by men,, that doen't change the facts. I don't make this stuff up, I read it right here, and see it on the Senate Floor, every day. When the activist, RW Supreme Court, decided that a woman's life was not as valuable as a fetus, and that a woman who was kidnapped and gang raped, should have no legal recourse, and a woman who was underpaid for doing the same job that her male counterparts were doing, for decades, it became undeniably clear, that the right, is sexist. Republicans votes show the same anti equal rights lean.


I, too, am against reparations, but I would never make the statement which you made. Who are "They"
G.

eg8r
09-22-2010, 11:08 AM
Thanks for this post Deeman.

eg8r

Deeman3
09-22-2010, 01:24 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for this post Deeman.

eg8r </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Ed,

Thanks but I don't know why we try! The only response you get when asking for thoughtful discussion is this programmed aqusatory reaction of "Racist!" No wonder we just ignore the root causes of our problems if any discussion is turned so ugly early on.

They certainly can't believe we hate Obama because of his color. It has to be a planned reaction to switch the subject from content to race card playing. I have no idea what any of these folks did in their life to blacks, muslims or other minorities to feel so racked with personal guilt but it has to be there. I know my ancestors were back in Ireland being starved out by the Brits when the blacks were being set upon by folks here. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

It is hilarous that if I were to say, "Whites commit murder and violent crime at a rate of 7 times those of backs!" I'd be getting high fives from the guilt ridden left but the fact that the opposite is true is not only no longer factual in their eyes but somehwo racist to boot? How do you address the problem and develop solutions if they can't be stated honestly without a lame accusation of racism. Wanna bet how many minorities I have hired, promoted and defended vs. what most of the liberal left folks has done carrying a sign to throw more good money after bad while not allowing sane discussion of the issues?

Gang bangers can kill thousands of their own every year, rape the girls in their gangs from initiation and destroy their entire community and they will still be talking about a soldier wrongly blinded 55 years ago! Now, I and you know the Hell's Angels are not much better but with ony 55 members nationwide not in prison, they are no the risk that Bloods and Cribs and MS 13 are....

So, Ed, thanks for understanding I don't hate blacks, Latinos, women or gays. I still reserve the right to comment on my opinion on them without fugile attepts to paint me as some crazy dude in Upper Michigan practicing for the end all race wars. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I can honestly say I have used the "N" word less often than that model of the left, Bill Mahre. Why don't they go after him? Answer, 'cause he's not a racist either! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span>

pooltchr
09-22-2010, 03:36 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
How do you address the problem and develop solutions if they can't be stated honestly without a lame accusation of racism. </div></div>

You may have hit the nail on the head with that question. I'm not sure they even want to address the problems. It's not just the race card. If you say anything about Obama's policies, they immediately point to the problems during the previous administration. If you try to discuss the illegal alien problem, their only answer is to point to Reagan. (How many years has he been out of office?) If you try to discuss the spending and growth of government taking place, they just cry how the past administration was "just as bad". And while I would agree that Bush spent too much money, it certainly isn't helping the problem that Obama is spending more.

I don't think they want to discuss solutions. That's why, when someone has an opposing opinion, they simply ignore them, or refuse to respond. They only want to discuss these issues with people who will validate their beliefs.

Steve

Gayle in MD
09-22-2010, 08:35 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country. </div></div>


Who is "They"???????????? And what "damage" did "They" do to this country?

g.

Qtec
09-23-2010, 01:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Justice is fairness before the law regardless of station. </div></div>

You don't have that either.

Q

Gayle in MD
09-23-2010, 04:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for this post Deeman.

eg8r </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Ed,

Thanks but I don't know why we try! The only response you get when asking for thoughtful discussion is this programmed aqusatory reaction of "Racist!" No wonder we just ignore the root causes of our problems if any discussion is turned so ugly early on.

They certainly can't believe we hate Obama because of his color. It has to be a planned reaction to switch the subject from content to race card playing. I have no idea what any of these folks did in their life to blacks, muslims or other minorities to feel so racked with personal guilt but it has to be there. I know my ancestors were back in Ireland being starved out by the Brits when the blacks were being set upon by folks here. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

It is hilarous that if I were to say, "Whites commit murder and violent crime at a rate of 7 times those of backs!" I'd be getting high fives from the guilt ridden left but the fact that the opposite is true is not only no longer factual in their eyes but somehwo racist to boot? How do you address the problem and develop solutions if they can't be stated honestly without a lame accusation of racism. Wanna bet how many minorities I have hired, promoted and defended vs. what most of the liberal left folks has done carrying a sign to throw more good money after bad while not allowing sane discussion of the issues?

Gang bangers can kill thousands of their own every year, rape the girls in their gangs from initiation and destroy their entire community and they will still be talking about a soldier wrongly blinded 55 years ago! Now, I and you know the Hell's Angels are not much better but with ony 55 members nationwide not in prison, they are no the risk that Bloods and Cribs and MS 13 are....

So, Ed, thanks for understanding I don't hate blacks, Latinos, women or gays. I still reserve the right to comment on my opinion on them without fugile attepts to paint me as some crazy dude in Upper Michigan practicing for the end all race wars. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I can honestly say I have used the "N" word less often than that model of the left, Bill Mahre. Why don't they go after him? Answer, 'cause he's not a racist either! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span> </div></div>


Deeman,
I did not accuse you of being a racist.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country </div></div>

I said that this sentence, sounds racist, to me.

I've asked you several times to explain it, the sentence, and reveal exactly whom you were aiiming it at, and have yet to get an answer.

My other remarks were about the Republican Party's obvious and on going attacks on gays, the poor, African Americans, Muslims, women, and racial profiling, were general remarks, not more of a "rant" than your own remarks...

As I wrote originally, I respect you and think of you as a person of honor.

Please don't accuse me of doing something I did not do.

Also, I have been a follower of Bill Maher from the beginning of his career. I've neverr heard him usse the N. word.

Using the race card, is a far fetch, from acknowledging it where it is obvious, and what does one call the act of denying that racism even exists in our society.....

G.

Sev
09-23-2010, 04:48 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Thanks for this post Deeman.

eg8r </div></div>

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Ed,

Thanks but I don't know why we try! The only response you get when asking for thoughtful discussion is this programmed aqusatory reaction of "Racist!" No wonder we just ignore the root causes of our problems if any discussion is turned so ugly early on.

They certainly can't believe we hate Obama because of his color. It has to be a planned reaction to switch the subject from content to race card playing. I have no idea what any of these folks did in their life to blacks, muslims or other minorities to feel so racked with personal guilt but it has to be there. I know my ancestors were back in Ireland being starved out by the Brits when the blacks were being set upon by folks here. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

It is hilarous that if I were to say, "Whites commit murder and violent crime at a rate of 7 times those of backs!" I'd be getting high fives from the guilt ridden left but the fact that the opposite is true is not only no longer factual in their eyes but somehwo racist to boot? How do you address the problem and develop solutions if they can't be stated honestly without a lame accusation of racism. Wanna bet how many minorities I have hired, promoted and defended vs. what most of the liberal left folks has done carrying a sign to throw more good money after bad while not allowing sane discussion of the issues?

Gang bangers can kill thousands of their own every year, rape the girls in their gangs from initiation and destroy their entire community and they will still be talking about a soldier wrongly blinded 55 years ago! Now, I and you know the Hell's Angels are not much better but with ony 55 members nationwide not in prison, they are no the risk that Bloods and Cribs and MS 13 are....

So, Ed, thanks for understanding I don't hate blacks, Latinos, women or gays. I still reserve the right to comment on my opinion on them without fugile attepts to paint me as some crazy dude in Upper Michigan practicing for the end all race wars. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I can honestly say I have used the "N" word less often than that model of the left, Bill Mahre. Why don't they go after him? Answer, 'cause he's not a racist either! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span> </div></div>

I hear ya Deeman.
Its tough arguing with loons.

Sev
09-23-2010, 04:56 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Deeman3][quote=eg8r]Thanks for this post Deeman.


My other remarks were about the Republican Party's, obvious and on going attacks on gays, the poor, African Americans, Muslims, women, and racial profiling.


</div></div>

Yup that all the Republicans do. Attack the downtrodden.
But wait. Why are these same people also part of the Republican party???

Chopstick
09-23-2010, 09:14 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Gayle in MD]
The Wall Street Yuppies manufactured a fake market, based on fraud, and hence, we had a crash,

G.
</div></div>

You don't even know what a CDO or a CDS is much less where they came from and they did not cause the crash. CRA did. CDSs only came into play AFTER the market


The Community Reinvestment Act, did not cause the Crash. Greed, fraud, and corruption on Wall Street, corrupt banking practices, corrupt rating agencies, the Bush Administration's pressure for his "Ownership society" held back SEC action, held down interest rates, predatory lending practices transformed a program which had worked just fine for thirty years, into what became nothing more than a greedy scam, designed to make quick bucks, and then sell off the risk before the boom fell....

Banking and lending became a corrupt industry, without oversight, without conscience, and based on pure greed and fraud....those crooks at the top walked away with billions and billions of investors money, and justified all of it with the BS ideology that the market can do no wrong.

There is a difference between a free market, and a free for all scam upon the unsuspecting public, by supposed professionals.

The private sector got into the sub prime market, big time, AFTER Fannie and Freddie got out in 2003, after their own accounting scandal.

That's when the bubble really took off, and predatory lenders were everywhere, writing bad loans left and right. Predatory Mortgage companies were popping up everywhere.

Wall Street was at the core of the global crash. Greedy Crooks!
They used CDO's and CDS's to put distance between themselves, and their own bad debts...

Trying to blame all of it on CRA, OR Fannie and Freddie, is a JOKE!


G. </div></div>

Greed, fraud and corruption have always been a part of banking and the market and it has been going on longer than America has existed. They never caused anything like what caused the financial meltdown and they never will because it is against their self interest. That is a croc about Fannie and Freddie. They are the number one holders of bogus paper to this day and Barney and crew are on Youtube lying their asses off about cooking the books to cover it up.

Gayle in MD
09-23-2010, 09:57 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[quote=Gayle in MD]
The Wall Street Yuppies manufactured a fake market, based on fraud, and hence, we had a crash,

G.
</div></div>

You don't even know what a CDO or a CDS is much less where they came from and they did not cause the crash. CRA did. CDSs only came into play AFTER the market


The Community Reinvestment Act, did not cause the Crash. Greed, fraud, and corruption on Wall Street, corrupt banking practices, corrupt rating agencies, the Bush Administration's pressure for his "Ownership society" held back SEC action, held down interest rates, predatory lending practices transformed a program which had worked just fine for thirty years, into what became nothing more than a greedy scam, designed to make quick bucks, and then sell off the risk before the boom fell....

Banking and lending became a corrupt industry, without oversight, without conscience, and based on pure greed and fraud....those crooks at the top walked away with billions and billions of investors money, and justified all of it with the BS ideology that the market can do no wrong.

There is a difference between a free market, and a free for all scam upon the unsuspecting public, by supposed professionals.

The private sector got into the sub prime market, big time, AFTER Fannie and Freddie got out in 2003, after their own accounting scandal.

That's when the bubble really took off, and predatory lenders were everywhere, writing bad loans left and right. Predatory Mortgage companies were popping up everywhere.

Wall Street was at the core of the global crash. Greedy Crooks!
They used CDO's and CDS's to put distance between themselves, and their own bad debts...

Trying to blame all of it on CRA, OR Fannie and Freddie, is a JOKE!


G. </div></div>

Greed, fraud and corruption have always been a part of banking and the market and it has been going on longer than America has existed.

I'd say that is a matter of "Degree"


They never caused anything like what caused the financial meltdown and they never will because it is against their self interest.

I guess you didn't see Greenspan, testifying that he never thought that Wall Street, and the financial industry, we behave in a way that was against their own self interest? That is exactly what happened, according to him.
That is a croc about Fannie and Freddie.

Again, Fannie and Freddie got out of the sub prime market in 03. It was after they got out, that loads of predatory mortgage companies popped up everywhere, all of them doling out bad loans, to anyone and everyone. that, along with the gross greed on Wall Street, the banking industry loaning out far more money than they could possibloy cover in holdings, corrupt rating operations, CEO's, across the board in the financial industry, who didn't understand, nor care to find out, the convoluted financial instruments, desinged for theier confusion, and above all, GREED and NEGLIGENCE! This, in a global market, created a crash that was not like anything that ever happened before.

They are the number one holders of bogus paper to this day

Yes, because they had to buy toxic assets from those on Wall Street, and other banks, in order to divert a Depression.

and Barney and crew are on Youtube lying their asses off about cooking the books to cover it up. </div></div>


LOL, Really? The book cooking went on before the crash, and before the CEO's had gambled everyone's money away, and walked out with pockets full of money.

What do you call it when financial corporations are in the business buying fake ratings, selling off toxic loans and insurance, and then betting their own money on failure!!!!

Let's not forget where TARP came from, Bush and Paulson, BTW, who told us that without going into even more debt than Bush and the Repubs had already racked up, and borrowed, and wasted and lost in their war for oil, weakening the country's ability to recover from, or respond to, anything that came along, without more debt, both of them saying that if they didn't get the eight hundred billion, we'd have a depression that could last a decade, those were Bush's exact words, remember Bush, the guy who drove us into massive debts, and the earmark breaking, corruption laden, Republican majority?

Trying to blame all of this multi faceted, Wall Street Ponzi Scheme, on F & F, or the CRA, is absurd.

G.

Deeman3
09-23-2010, 10:05 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country </div></div>

I said that this sentence, sounds racist, to me.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> About everything sounds racist to you. At least that is the reaction I get on most discussions where I bring up situations where I disagree with policy, something in itself not racist despite the newer definition. I define it as characterizing a person by the color of their skin by ommision or act to smear, cause physical harm or in some manner block their ability to enjoy their freedoms simple because you don't like or have an unreasonable detrimental view of them as a race.

Now, I might say we are all complicient in the inability of the blacks to move forward as most people who have been mis-treated in some periods of our history. Indians were murdered and practically wiped out, as bad or worse than any other people have been treated. Our policies, for the most part, did not help them assimilate into the mainstream and they, overall, are a broken people now. The Italians were looked on as dirty and almost sub-human here, Chinese were killed off and even the Irish were shot on sight for even coming out of coal mines in our history.

With the exception of the American Indian and African American, as a whole, they have all assimilated into society with moderate damage to society as a whole.

We have spent hundreds of times the money on the black population as we have with any other. The result is a very poor yield per dollar spend. There was a better way as the black folks in the 1950's were on the cusp of achieving their status. Yes, they were still tated as second class citizens but as they rose up, many in our communities supported them and even marched beside them. Then came the buy-off, We gave them money to be quiet, welfare that could have been used to take advantage of the new opportunties given them in changing schools and new opportunity.

Some took good advantage and got educations. The vast majority were, while not happy, placated by the monthly checks the food stamps and the polities that diminished the role of the family and even in law helped break up the family units. Yes, they were not as visible, did not march any longer in the streets but the bars of education were lowered, the rules enforced differently for them than for others, the first time this had happened across the board and their second enslavement began with us subsidizing it all along.

While seemly as an advantage to the ones who were "helped" along, it was a death trap for many as far as further education and opportunity. Still today, young black males are passed on through secondary schools across the country feeling they are prepared for university level education, then they arrive, are discouraged and fail.

Now, if I felt they were inherently unable because of their race to complete the academic work, I would certainly be a racist. I feel they have as much mental ability as anyone else except for their home environment that we, as a compassionate nations, provided and contineu to provide. Would I have made it out of the slums given the same situation, probably not.

We still reward unwed mothers for the total amount of babies they produce! How can that end well? Is that racist? Tell me.

Do you think working class blacks are the ones producing the drug dealers and gangs? No, they are producing the Obamas. However, our poor approach to funding the poor and the even worse decisions to destroy the entire education system to enable a marginal few to eek their way through is not a favor to any of us.

Yes, I lay a lot of this at the door of the left, the progressives who designed and pushed this agenda in part to help in their misguided way but also to control a group of people and create a need for the left and their agenda.

When my school was integrated in the late 1960's there was a gap between the black teachers and students and the whites. However, it was closable with hard work, understanding while not taknig the whole system down to where the gaps is as wide or wider than ever. I was not aware enoough at that time to know it or how to accomplish it but there certainly were people who could have.

The race card has been played many time since then and in many case rightfully and properly. Now, when used a simply political tool when you disagree diminishes both those making real charges and those just throwing bombs. </span>

I've asked you several times to explain it, the sentence, and reveal exactly whom you were aiiming it at, and have yet to get an answer.

My other remarks were about the Republican Party's obvious and on going attacks on gays, the poor, African Americans, Muslims, women, and racial profiling, were general remarks, not more of a "rant" than your own remarks...

<span style="color: #FF0000"> I don't defend every Republican comment but what attacks are you speaking of? Physical violence? Opinion or what. If they are attacking women I must have missed it while seeing everyone attack Palin. You are only interested in defending women who you see as sharing you views. That invalidates your concerns over women. It is opposition you want to comdemn, not actual mistreatment by Republicans. Are Republicans stoning women in the streets? Is that the mistreatment you are so upset with? Is that the same Muslim we might question from the right or is it the peace loving Muslims we are again "attacking". Look up the number of Muslims Republicans kill vs. Muslims that kill each other. </span>

As I wrote originally, I respect you and think of you as a person of honor.

Please don't accuse me of doing something I did not do.

<span style="color: #FF0000">If I read you wrong, I am sorry. </span>

Also, I have been a follower of Bill Maher from the beginning of his career. I've neverr heard him usse the N. word.

<span style="color: #FF0000">You were not followingf as closly as you think if you didn't catch your buddy on Larry King last week. He is being hit on all sides for his use of the word as he thought he was "in" enough to slide by with it. I wouldn't think it would get much coverage in the left press. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </span>

Using the race card, is a far fetch, from acknowledging it where it is obvious, and what does one call the act of denying that racism even exists in our society.....

<span style="color: #FF0000"> I have never, ever said racism does not exist. It does, I know that. It is just weakening to the cause of race to use it when that is not the case. </span>


</div></div>

Gayle in MD
09-23-2010, 12:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country </div></div>


Deeman,
I did not bring up reparations.


I don't understand how you could write that sentence, and then deny that it was a racist statement, and I also don't understand how you could possibly think that President Lincoln, President Truman, President Johnson, and President Kennedy, all took actions to make sure that our constitution speak for ALL Americans, by abolishing slavery, Legislating against racial discrimination, and defending the oppressed in our society, and all of them, for political gain???????????

That makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever, given the price they each paid for doing what was right.

Talking about Reparations, is not using the race card? How do you deny that, when no one, not Democratics, not Liberals, not Libertarians, and surely not Republicans, is even considering imposing, or legislating for reparations? Bring that subject up, ID playing the race card.

You compare discrimination of others in our history, who chose to come to America, of their own free will, to a people who were kidnapped from their homeland, thrown into holds, in chains, and shipped to this country to be auctioned and bought by white people, who owned them body and mind, like an ox or a horse, and were not even considered to be full human beings by our own documents.

How do you justify that comparison?

You have, in this post, blamed African Americans for the decline in our educational system, while I, OTOH, saw Maryland public schools, become unfit learning institutions, due to an educational experiment, of an open block, non graded, teaching transformation which was promoted as a way to save money, by Republicans!

Obviously, that gives me a very different view about what happened to our educational system, especially since it is a fact, that one of the greatest negative impacts to our educational system, was a direct result of Ronald Reagan, giving Amnesty to illegal aliens, for whom the entire educational system in this country was to absorb, and transform, to accomodate non english speaking students.

MOTHERS, were the former over sight committees, of our educational system, before they flooded out of their homes and into the workforce, and that exodus occured during the same span of time that integration occured....

As for Bill Maher, I watched Larry King, twice, and did not once hear him use the N word. I have never heard him use that word. I did hear Dr. Laura, however, use it over and over again, in one of hte most racist rants in history.


Pointing out your statement again:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country </div></div>

If anyone weakened their cause, or used the race card, I believe this sentence proves that it was you who did so.

Further, if there were a completely unqualified woman, running for the presidency, who happened to be a Democratic, and who had proved herself unable to string together three logical sentences in a row, you can bet I would be on here sying that she had no business presumming herself to be presidential material. Supporting women's rights, has nothing to do with supporting unqualified candidates.

If you choose to deny that Republican Representatives always vote against women's rights, gay rights, and even better support for our troops, it is your right to do so, however, I surely do not agree with you, but then, I often watch the votes as they are being calculated.

The embodiment of person rights, and freedoms, begin with ones having control over one's own body, and one's private, personal, family affairs, such as, having the right to end an unwanted pregnancy, pulling the plug on one's brain dead wife or husband, having the right to sue a corporation whose employees gang raped you, having the right to serve your country, regardless of your sexual preferences, and having a right to decent, affordable access to health care, for all of our ill citizens, not just the well to do Americans, and being free of racial profiling on the streets of our nation, on the basis of skin color.

None of those issues are supported by Republicans.

Yes, I have seen a good deal of racism since this President took office. If you haven't seen it, perhaps you should turn off Fox News., it is out there, and the Republican rhetoric, such as Gingrich's statements, and Palin's and ODonnell's terrorist accusations, are an excellent example of it, just as the leadership of the Republican Leadership has exascerbated those lies, and attacks, for political purposes, proving their total lack of honor and integrity, in failing to clearly take a stand against them.

Additionally, Bill Maher is no racist. I did not see, nor do I believe, that he used the N. Word, and that is so far away from his philosophies, and his history, I have no idea from whence it came, but I can certainly imagine how such a lie got started, or twisted....given that there are people out there who are claiming that this president is seeking to impose Muslim laws in America, is channelling his dead father's thoughts and views, and that he is himself, a Muslim.

Do you actually think such ridiculous lies would be circulating right now if his skin wasn't dark?


That kind of thinking is not straight thinking, in my view, any more than justifying the use of torture, because "They" do it, is rational, in my view, or suggesting that African Americans are any more likely to get stuck in poverty, than any other minority. To me, those kind of thoughts are the essence of racism.

Oh, and BTW, Sara Palin would still be a total twit, regardless which party she belonged to. Standing up for women's rights, does not require that one support a blathering idiot for the Vice Presidency.

G.

pooltchr
09-23-2010, 12:55 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> [

Yes, I have seen a good deal of racism since this President took office. If you haven't seen it, perhaps you should turn off Fox News., it is out there, and the Republican rhetoric, such as Gingrich's statements, and Palin's and ODonnell's terrorist accusations, </div></div>

Just exactly how is calling Obama out for his ties to known and admitted terrorists and other criminals an example of racism???

Steve

Deeman3
09-23-2010, 01:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country </div></div>


Deeman,
I did not bring up reparations. <span style="color: #FF0000">Reparations was brought up by another poster. I only made a comment on it.

Only a small group of people in the Republican party said anything about Obama being a Muslim. Apparently 20% of the people think he is Muslim. I am not and never have been among them. 20% of the people believe that Hawaii is not a state. That does not, as well, include me. Get over it. Associating me with other's views is just trying to further push the fantasy that I am a racist and hate Obama. I have been fair with him and still give him the benefit of the doubt in many more cases than others do.

Your other statements are unanswerable as you string together these accusations toward me rather than discussion of the point. </span>


I don't understand how you could write that sentence, and then deny that it was a racist statement, and I also don't understand how you could possibly think that President Lincoln, President Truman, President Johnson, and President Kennedy, all took actions to make sure that our constitution speak for ALL Americans, by abolishing slavery, Legislating against racial discrimination, and defending the oppressed in our society, and all of them, for political gain???????????

<span style="color: #FF0000"> No one thinks these presidents had il intentions in making men equal. The problem has become how the laws were applied to make them equal and the money that was misused to accomplish what? Give them a fair chance at success and freedom. Not a bad idea but very flawed in application. like the Health care fiasco. I think they all had good intent but others could not do the right thing. </span>

That makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever, given the price they each paid for doing what was right.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Of course it makes no sense to you. If it made sense to the left, we'd be on the same page and do something about our education system, the poor and the really needy. It will never make sense to your side as many of my thoughts would not make sense to those on the very far right. This tug of war will go on, blacks will still suffer and you will feel fine if enough money is paid, you act like reparations are only direct dollars paid to someone in a goovernment ceck each month or a cash settlement. It is and more. Do you really think the hundreds of billions we have spent are not indirect reparations? Really? </span>

Talking about Reparations, is not using the race card? How do you deny that, when no one, not Democratics, not Liberals, not Libertarians, and surely not Republicans, is even considering imposing, or legislating for reparations? Bring that subject up, ID playing the race card.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Agaiin, if you'll go back and read you will find i did not bring up the subject. It has been brought up by the Black Caucus, by many community leaders. Are they racists for talking about it? Do you think I came up with this all on my own? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span>

You compare discrimination of others in our history, who chose to come to America, of their own free will, to a people who were kidnapped from their homeland, thrown into holds, in chains, and shipped to this country to be auctioned and bought by white people, who owned them body and mind, like an ox or a horse, and were not even considered to be full human beings by our own documents.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Where so I start? The American Indians, whom I mentioned, were here already and treated as harshly as slaves.

The Iriah were escaping the British who were staring them out and killing them off.

None of this makes slavery right. It was terrible but we have done worse. The fact that they were trapped and sold by their own families and fellow Africans is also sad but you can't be victims forever without a lot of help. The people who alowed this race of people to be further disadvantaged by the social welfare system are as guilty as anyone for their continueing community devestation. </span>

How do you justify that comparison?

<span style="color: #FF0000"> I just did. I know you think slavery was the very worse of what we have done but it is one of several mistakes this country made. The response has been almost as bad. </span>

You have, in this post, blamed African Americans for the decline in our educational system, while I, OTOH, saw Maryland public schools, become unfit learning institutions, due to an educational experiment, of an open block, non graded, teaching transformation which was promoted as a way to save money, by Republicans! <span style="color: #FF0000">

How surprised I must be for you to lay this all off on Republicans! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif Was that destruction back when that enlightened education system was rioting in the streets against bussing or later? If you think the above is the root cause of the problems in education in this country just keep blaming Bush and it will all be better. Geesh! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span>

Obviously, that gives me a very different view about what happened to our educational system, especially since it is a fact, that one of the greatest negative impacts to our educational system, was a direct result of Ronald Reagan, giving Amnesty to illegal aliens, for whom the entire educational system in this country was to absorb, and transform, to accomodate non english speaking students.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Why Gayle, you seem to be expressing what you would call racist views toward our neighbors to the South and beiong able to lay it all at Reagan's size 13's. That is too funny. Sharpton may let you slide on it but watch out for the hispanic lobby.</span>

MOTHERS, were the former over sight committees, of our educational system, before they flooded out of their homes and into the workforce, and that exodus occured during the same span of time that integration occured....


<span style="color: #FF0000">Then they handed it all over to the NEA Union, right? That has worked out well don't you think? </span>


As for Bill Maher, I watched Larry King, twice, and did not once hear him use the N word. I have never heard him use that word. I did hear Dr. Laura, however, use it over and over again, in one of hte most racist rants in history.

<span style="color: #FF0000">Well, if you didn't see it, it must have not happened. I saw it on MSNBC but only a story as I never watch King. They may have dupped into running it by Fox, Reagan or Bush may have been involved as well. What about watching him on Friday night. I do every week, if he does not address it, I was wrong. I can't beleive no one else witnessed this statement. </span>


Pointing out your statement again:

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As I have said many times, I do not believe in reparations, they can never pay us back for the damage they have done to this country </div></div>

If anyone weakened their cause, or used the race card, I believe this sentence proves that it was you who did so.

Further, if there were a completely unqualified woman, running for the presidency, who happened to be a Democratic, and who had proved herself unable to string together three logical sentences in a row, you can bet I would be on here sying that she had no business presumming herself to be presidential material. Supporting women's rights, has nothing to do with supporting unqualified candidates.

<span style="color: #FF6666">Does it just so happen that every Republican women we have had is in this class for you or have we just missed your defending one from attack? </span>

If you choose to deny that Republican Representatives always vote against women's rights, gay rights, and even better support for our troops, it is your right to do so, however, I surely do not agree with you, but then, I often watch the votes as they are being calculated.


<span style="color: #FF0000">I don't get to sit in congress for every vote or to watch C-Span all day but I do not think they all vote against every subject on race or equal rights in a discriminatory manner. Yes, more often than the Dems but that is their voting block. </span>

The embodiment of person rights, and freedoms, begin with ones having control over one's own body, and one's private, personal, family affairs, such as, having the right to end an unwanted pregnancy, pulling the plug on one's brain dead wife or husband, having the right to sue a corporation whose employees gang raped you, having the right to serve your country, regardless of your sexual preferences, and having a right to decent, affordable access to health care, for all of our ill citizens, not just the well to do Americans, and being free of racial profiling on the streets of our nation, on the basis of skin color.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Your simplistic view of these things are not settled math, only your slant and take on them. Some of these I agree on, others certainly not. You will crash on Reagan for opening the borders but call out Arizona for protecting their's? It's all which side your politics fall for you. I judge each case regardless of official Republican policy. YOu should try that one day. </span>


Yes, I have seen a good deal of racism since this President took office. If you haven't seen it, perhaps you should turn off Fox News., it is out there, and the Republican rhetoric, such as Gingrich's statements, and Palin's and ODonnell's terrorist accusations, are an excellent example of it, just as the leadership of the Republican Leadership has exascerbated those lies, and attacks, for political purposes, proving their total lack of honor and integrity, in failing to clearly take a stand against them.

<span style="color: #FF0000">It is clear that whenever a person on the right says anything about race, it is racist. We just can't argue that like you could not agrue with me if I said a man could live in a whale. Which, by the way, I would not. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </span>

Additionally, Bill Maher is no racist. I did not see, nor do I believe, that he used the N. Word, and that is so far away from his philosophies, and his history, I have no idea from whence it came, but I can certainly imagine how such a lie got started, or twisted....given that there are people out there who are claiming that this president is seeking to impose Muslim laws in America, is channelling his dead father's thoughts and views, and that he is himself, a Muslim.

Do you actually think such ridiculous lies would be circulating right now if his skin wasn't dark?

<span style="color: #FF0000">I really didn't think the color of his skin was related to that. Therte are as many dark Christians as dark Muslims. I fail to the see the point. </span>


That kind of thinking is not straight thinking, in my view, any more than justifying the use of torture, because "They" do it, is rational, in my view, or suggesting that African Americans are any more likely to get stuck in poverty, than any other minority. To me, those kind of thoughts are the essence of
racism.

<span style="color: #FF0000">That is where you are so wrong. Pointing out the tough facts of a races challenges when it succeeds and when it fails is not racist. It may be by your Al Sharpton definition but not in reality. </span>

Oh, and BTW, Sara Palin would still be a total twit, regardless which party she belonged to. Standing up for women's rights, does not require that one support a blathering idiot for the Vice Presidency.

<span style="color: #FF0000">We both know, not if she were a Democrat. Come on, fess up. i won't tell a soul. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </span>





</div></div>

Gayle in MD
09-23-2010, 02:20 PM
I did not call you a racist.

Bill Maher's comment, which apparently I missed, was not an act of his using the n word, to express himself, but a description of the RW Tea party's hidden agenda behind their Muslim BS accustions and lies about the President, and what it is really all about, IOW, it was used to describe what the Tea Party's true hidden, fear mongering, buzz words, are actually all about, and intended to ignite.

A poll on CNN shows that 67% didn't not consider it a racist comment, in the context in which it was used... so, as I expected, the truth was spun into an unrecognizable falsehood, no doubt, launched by the right.

I've tried to make it clear to you that it was your sentence which I found racist, not you personally. Apparently, you don't want to understand that.

The American Indians were indeed wrongly treated, but I know of no document that compared them to being only 7/8 a human being, nor of any case where they were enslaved for generations, forbidden educational opportunities, and further, they were not placed in chains, kidnapped and sold off as slaves. No comparison, IMOl, although I do agree that the White Man surely treated the American Indians horribly.

The Open Track, non graded educational experiment, happened before the Bussing hit. My point was that you seem to believe that the entire educational system declined purely because of integration.

Unlike you, I believe there were a range of causes, not just integration.

As for the illegal alien discussion, the spanish are far from the only group who comprise it, and there is also proof, that it expanded tremendously, after Reagan gave them ALL amnesty. I've already posted a thread which proved that it was RR's policy, and he was firmly behind it.

It seems you look at integration only in terms of dollars spent, instead of lives changed, for the better.

I don't view everything in life, according to dollars spent. Some things are not measurable in dollars and cents, IMO.

And yes, I do believe that non english speaking students flooding into our classrooms, was far more detrimental to our educational system, than any other single social event in our history, but by the same token, I also think that profiling by law enforcement, iw wrong, period, and unconstitutional, just as discrimination against one religion, is wrong and unconstitutional.

However, if Republicans win back the Congress, there won't be a public education system, anyway, (or SS, or Medicare) so this may be a moot issue.

As for your accusation that I attack only Republican women, and defend only Democratic women, I can surely prove that you are very wrong about that.

In fact, I just posted a thread last week, praising Meghan McCain, clearly a Republican, according to her statements....AND, it is far from the first thread I have launched on tis forum, giving praise to honorable and honest, Republicans, although there have been very few of those, since the emergence of the Bush, and the rise of the neocons, that I found worthy of praise.

I have posted more accolades for those Republicans whom I admire, and yes, agree with, than any of you righties on here, have for Democratics.

IMO, all of us admire and defend those with whom we agree, the most, not just me, and not just Liberals, but, a perfect example of that same partisanship of which you accuse me, might be your constant attacks and accusations against Hillary, claims that she is nothing but the ultimate opportunist, while not a word of condemnation about Palin's obvious money grubbing, and blatant opportunism.

In the final analysis, it seems our values are far from similar, when it comes to desegregation. You don't seem to have any approval, at all, or are not able to acknowledge any of the good things that imporved many lives, lives that were changed, for the better, by doing what was right, nor any appreciation for any of the positive results, from integration, or the values added to our society, as a result.

We don't agree about what is best for our country, what is honorable behavior, and what is a worthwhile expenditure by our government, and probably a whole range of other things, but then, I don't defend what I think is poor repesentation by Democratics, while you seem comfortable defending the thought of Sara Palin in the VP office, so, I'd have to say, Deeman, you are in no position to call me, simplistic, or partisan.... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif


I still think your sentence, not you, was a very racist statement.


G.

Deeman3
09-23-2010, 02:28 PM
Context Right? It's o.k. if done by the right person. Exactly used as many have to describe the usage of a bad word but o.k. if the person is from the left. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif


Bill Maher drops n-word on Larry King. Tuesday was a huge day for Bill Maher.

Not only was he awarded with his very own star on the famed Hollywood Walk of Fame but he also managed to drop the N-word on "The Larry King Show" and no one seemed to even blink.

During Larry King Live on September 16th, guest Bill Maher called "Teabaggers" racists and claimed they hate black people.



According to the CNN transcripts Maher said "How are they going to out fire-breathe each other? I mean where this rhetoric has gone to at this point? It's only 2010. And we're having Newt Gingrich, as we were talking about before, calling [the president] an anti-colonial Luo tribesman. Luo tribesman."

Maher continued "That's the new Kenyan, Larry. And Kenyan, of course, was code for [the N-word]. But that's where they are. They can't say it out loud. But that's where this whole campaign is going to be."

Gayle in MD
09-23-2010, 02:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Context Right? It's o.k. if done by the right person. Exactly used as many have to describe the usage of a bad word but o.k. if the person is from the left. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif


Bill Maher drops n-word on Larry King. Tuesday was a huge day for Bill Maher.

Not only was he awarded with his very own star on the famed Hollywood Walk of Fame but he also managed to drop the N-word on "The Larry King Show" and no one seemed to even blink.

During Larry King Live on September 16th, guest Bill Maher called "Teabaggers" racists and claimed they hate black people.



According to the CNN transcripts Maher said "How are they going to out fire-breathe each other? I mean where this rhetoric has gone to at this point? It's only 2010. And we're having Newt Gingrich, as we were talking about before, calling [the president] an anti-colonial Luo tribesman. Luo tribesman."

Maher continued "That's the new Kenyan, Larry. And Kenyan, of course, was code for [the N-word]. But that's where they are. They can't say it out loud. But that's where this whole campaign is going to be."

</div></div>

Absolutely! Isn't he doing the very thing that you just said you should be able to do, speak your truth, without being accused of racism.

What the h. do you think is behind these buzz words, that the Tea Partiers and Republicans, have propagated since the President announced for his candidacy?

Did Geroge Bush kiss the Saudi Prince? Did anyone accuse him of paling around with terrorists? How about his father, in business, both of them, with Saudi's, and the bin Laden's!!!!

Just imagine, if president Obama, had been in business with the bin Ladens'!!!!!!

Double standard?

Terrorist fist bump?

Barack the Magic Negro?

Get Real!


Racist, fear mongering, clearly, that is their campaign policy, both Republicans, like Gingrich, and the Tea Partiers.

You have your opinion, and Bill and I have our opinions, which, IMO are dead on!

G.

ps, I honestly did not hear him use that word, and I watched it twice! But, I did look it up, and as I said, 67% said in the CNN poll, that it wasn't used as a racial slur against AFrican Americans, but as a description of how the Tea Partiers think.

Deeman3
09-23-2010, 03:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I did not call you a racist.

Bill Maher's comment, which apparently I missed, was not an act of his using the n word, to express himself, but a description of the RW Tea party's hidden agenda behind their Muslim BS accustions and lies about the President, and what it is really all about, IOW, it was used to describe what the Tea Party's true hidden, fear mongering, buzz words, are actually all about, and intended to ignite.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> Well, if 67% found it acceptable then there is no problem like if 70% of Americans think health care reform was a disaster, right? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

I said he is not a racist asDt. Laura was not. She used the word to say it is o.k, for certain folks to use, not for others. I guess she was right. </span>


A poll on CNN shows that 67% didn't not consider it a racist comment, in the context in which it was used... so, as I expected, the truth was spun into an unrecognizable falsehood, no doubt, launched by the right.

I've tried to make it clear to you that it was your sentence which I found racist, not you personally. Apparently, you don't want to understand that.

The American Indians were indeed wrongly treated, but I know of no document that compared them to being only 7/8 a human being, nor of any case where they were enslaved for generations, forbidden educational opportunities, and further, they were not placed in chains, kidnapped and sold off as slaves. No comparison, IMOl, although I do agree that the White Man surely treated the American Indians horribly.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> NO, not 7/8th of a person just shot on sight, land stolen, forced onto reservations, not that bad.</span>

The Open Track, non graded educational experiment, happened before the Bussing hit. My point was that you seem to believe that the entire educational system declined purely because of integration.

<span style="color: #FF0000">No, It was not integration but poor management of funds, lax standards, permissive policy as well as pass everyone regardless of knowledge or ability. </span>

Unlike you, I believe there were a range of causes, not just integration.

<span style="color: #FF0000">You know I never said that! </span>

As for the illegal alien discussion, the spanish are far from the only group who comprise it, and there is also proof, that it expanded tremendously, after Reagan gave them ALL amnesty. I've already posted a thread which proved that it was RR's policy, and he was firmly behind it.

<span style="color: #FF0000">The Spanish have never been much of a threat. The ilegal Mexicans have contributed to the downfall of the schools but are of much more recent origin. </span>

It seems you look at integration only in terms of dollars spent, instead of lives changed, for the better.

<span style="color: #FF0000">Again, integration was not at the heart of the issue, it was the lowering of standards ahead of requiring excellence in boht teachers and students. Integration was not that expensive, building large communities that destroyed families, incentive to work and the value of education are the issues. </span>

I don't view everything in life, according to dollars spent. Some things are not measurable in dollars and cents, IMO.

<span style="color: #FF0000">That is exactly the problem. While money is secondary, if you don't look for, measure and require results the money does no impact the situation in a positive way except to make the guilty feel much better about themselves. Of course, that is never a waste of money! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif </span>

And yes, I do believe that non english speaking students flooding into our classrooms, was far more detrimental to our educational system, than any other single social event in our history, but by the same token, I also think that profiling by law enforcement, iw wrong, period, and unconstitutional, just as discrimination against one religion, is wrong and unconstitutional.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> No, second language do better than most natives if they have a strong family. Most first generation Mexicans still do and are ultimately successful, the losses to Gangs excluded. Profiling by law enforcement is not only a good idea but lawful under the federal laws if another crime is in progress. You can ask them in Europe, you won't catch many IRA members stopping Sousers but a few stopping Irish Catholics.

WASP Grandmothers are still not likely suicide bombers but Muslims are. Now, we all know the majority of Muslims won't be doing this but it is only common sense if not PC to watch them a might closer. Most non-victim mentality Muslims understand this.

By the way, congratulations on your gal getting the Muslim Journalist of the Year Award by CARE. Seems her hate of Jews is paying off after her retirement. JK</span>

However, if Republicans win back the Congress, there won't be a public education system, anyway, (or SS, or Medicare) so this may be a moot issue.

<span style="color: #FF0000">Don't yoiu see how you are? A couple of tea party candidates say something about SS or medicare and you ectend that through exergeration to the party. No wonder the poles (not racial) are killing you guys! First HCR was a money saver, now attack everyone with a few extreamsists comments. I don't claim that Barney Frank makes the whole Democratic Party real teabaggers, do I? </span>

As for your accusation that I attack only Republican women, and defend only Democratic women, I can surely prove that you are very wrong about that.



In fact, I just posted a thread last week, praising Meghan McCain, clearly a Republican, according to her statements....AND, it is far from the first thread I have launched on tis forum, giving praise to honorable and honest, Republicans, although there have been very few of those, since the emergence of the Bush, and the rise of the neocons, that I found worthy of praise.

<span style="color: #FF0000">Only a momentary comment when one of them siders with you or says something bad about a Republican. If a General is a Republican he is Betrayus until he works for the DEms then he is a hero. We have seen this before. Palin may not be the smartest person in the world but she is not stupid. She will never be president but will raise more money than any women from the Dems side shirt of Hillary with only 10% of the lies told per day as her. </span>

I have posted more accolades for those Republicans whom I admire, and yes, agree with, than any of you righties on here, have for Democratics.

<span style="color: #FF0000">Not true. I have cited Obama for many god things, his war efforts in Afghanisitna and Iraq, Clinton's ride to the center and many others. </span>

IMO, all of us admire and defend those with whom we agree, the most, not just me, and not just Liberals, but, a perfect example of that same partisanship of which you accuse me, might be your constant attacks and accusations against Hillary, claims that she is nothing but the ultimate opportunist, while not a word of condemnation about Palin's obvious money grubbing, and blatant opportunism.


<span style="color: #FF0000">I am not afraid to brand them both money grubbers, one living off her husband's career and the other off very limited accomplishments. Both have been blatant opportunists, both known for exeration and outright lies. One can see Russia from her home and the other dodges gunfire only she can see. </span>


In the final analysis, it seems our values are far from similar, when it comes to desegregation. You don't seem to have any approval, at all, or are not able to acknowledge any of the good things that imporved many lives, lives that were changed, for the better, by doing what was right, nor any appreciation for any of the positive results, from integration, or the values added to our society, as a result.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> I don't get this focus on integration you have. I have defined the problem well outisde that narrow strip. You are right. We will never agree and the status quo will never change. You will spend more monay and I will ask for some accountability for it and you will see that as racist. </span>

We don't agree about what is best for our country, what is honorable behavior, and what is a worthwhile expenditure by our government, and probably a whole range of other things, but then, I don't defend what I think is poor repesentation by Democratics, while you seem comfortable defending the thought of Sara Palin in the VP office, so, I'd have to say, Deeman, you are in no position to call me, simplistic, or partisan.... /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

<span style="color: #FF0000">I don't want her in office any more than I want Hillary there.

I wish we could get together and really discuss the issues but as long as we deal in comments on how to deal with these issues as racist, we will still be fighting this battle, or someone will when the whole education system falls in on itself. Sad.. </span>


I still think your sentence, not you, was a very racist statement.

<span style="color: #FF0000"> You'll never understand why it is not. Best wished anyway. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif</span>


G.

</div></div>

Gayle in MD
09-23-2010, 03:21 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Don't yoiu see how you are? A couple of tea party candidates say something about SS or medicare and you ectend that through exergeration to the party. </div></div>


Oh my, do I do that????????

I'm sure, you'd never do that, Deeman. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Take care, you're my favorite rightwing denier! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif

hondo
09-23-2010, 03:41 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Context Right? It's o.k. if done by the right person. Exactly used as many have to describe the usage of a bad word but o.k. if the person is from the left. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif


Bill Maher drops n-word on Larry King. Tuesday was a huge day for Bill Maher.

Not only was he awarded with his very own star on the famed Hollywood Walk of Fame but he also managed to drop the N-word on "The Larry King Show" and no one seemed to even blink.

During Larry King Live on September 16th, guest Bill Maher called "Teabaggers" racists and claimed they hate black people.



According to the CNN transcripts Maher said "How are they going to out fire-breathe each other? I mean where this rhetoric has gone to at this point? It's only 2010. And we're having Newt Gingrich, as we were talking about before, calling [the president] an anti-colonial Luo tribesman. Luo tribesman."

Maher continued "That's the new Kenyan, Larry. And Kenyan, of course, was code for [the N-word]. But that's where they are. They can't say it out loud. But that's where this whole campaign is going to be."

</div></div>

Sounds to me like Maher was dead on.
I find it ironic that we can't even use the word to say we hate the word anymore.
Of course it's white Republicans attacking him for saying it.
If a Republican had said it, the Republicans would be saying it was out of context and the Democrats would be attacking him.

And the beat goes on. America in 2010. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

hondo
09-23-2010, 03:43 PM
Gayle, don't you realize if you disagree with the Right, you hate America?

Deeman3
09-23-2010, 03:55 PM
Never! Well, not that often! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Right back at you. Right wing that is....

Gayle in MD
09-24-2010, 05:24 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: hondo</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Deeman3</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Context Right? It's o.k. if done by the right person. Exactly used as many have to describe the usage of a bad word but o.k. if the person is from the left. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif


Bill Maher drops n-word on Larry King. Tuesday was a huge day for Bill Maher.

Not only was he awarded with his very own star on the famed Hollywood Walk of Fame but he also managed to drop the N-word on "The Larry King Show" and no one seemed to even blink.

During Larry King Live on September 16th, guest Bill Maher called "Teabaggers" racists and claimed they hate black people.



According to the CNN transcripts Maher said "How are they going to out fire-breathe each other? I mean where this rhetoric has gone to at this point? It's only 2010. And we're having Newt Gingrich, as we were talking about before, calling [the president] an anti-colonial Luo tribesman. Luo tribesman."

Maher continued "That's the new Kenyan, Larry. And Kenyan, of course, was code for [the N-word]. But that's where they are. They can't say it out loud. But that's where this whole campaign is going to be."

</div></div>

Sounds to me like Maher was dead on.
I find it ironic that we can't even use the word to say we hate the word anymore.
Of course it's white Republicans attacking him for saying it.
If a Republican had said it, the Republicans would be saying it was out of context and the Democrats would be attacking him.

And the beat goes on. America in 2010. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif </div></div>

Believe me friend, if there had been any racist intentions behind that statement, Larry King would have spoken up immediately.

Maher was dead on the money, as he always is. Can't wait for tonight, when we'll get another quote from the new member of the Palinban, Minnie Mousebrains. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

pooltchr
09-24-2010, 06:26 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body">[ Can't wait for tonight, when we'll get another quote from the new member of the Palinban, Minnie Mousebrains. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif </div></div>

Another tasteless attack on another successful female...


/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/crazy.gif

Steve