Oh Snap! Colbert on "Palin Fatigue"

[MasterKiller]

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/371413/january-18-2011/mika-brzezinski-experiences-palin-fatigue

[David Jamieson]

Transcript for those with crappy connections.:


S.Colbert

Mika, you need to buck up.

I know you think this story has no purpose other than keeping Sarah Palin’s name in the headlines for another news cycle.

I know you think she has nothing to offer the national dialogue and that her speeches are just coded talking points mixed with words picked up at random from a thesaurus.

I know you think Sarah Palin is at best a self-promoting ignoramus and at worst a shameless media troll who will abuse any platform to deliver dog-whistle encouragement to a far right base that may include possible insurrectionists.

I know you think her reality show was pathetically unstatesmanlike, and at the same time I know you believe it also represents the pinnacle of her potential and that her transparent, transparent desperation to be a celebrity so completely eclipsed her interest in public service so long ago that there would be more journalistic integrity on reporting on one of the lesser Kardashian’s ass implants.

I know, I know that when you arrive at the office each day you say a silent prayer that maybe, just maybe Sarah Palin will at long last shut up for ten f@#king minutes.

I know because I can see it in your eyes. Well guess what, Mika. That’s the gig. And it’s only January of 2011, kiddo. And you have a minimum of 2 more years of this ahead of you. You want to stay in this game? You dig deep. You find another gear. You show up to work every day, get your hair and makeup done, you slap on a smile, get out there on TV and repeat what Sarah Palin said on Hannity last night right into the lens. You know – news. I have faith in you kid. You can do it! I’ll see you in New Hampshire … I’ll buy.

lol. This guy is pretty funny and he has good writers.

[BJJ-Blue]

I bet if she uh used a uh teleprompter whenever she uh spoke in uh public she would uh sound alot more uh educated like the uh President does.

[MasterKiller]

I bet if she uh used a uh teleprompter whenever she uh spoke in uh public she would uh sound alot more uh educated like the uh President does.

http://www.blackenterprise.com/files/2010/04/obama-official-photo1.jpeg
B.A. in Political Science from Columbia
Juris Doctor (J.D.) Magna Cum Laude from Harvard Law School


http://i649.photobucket.com/albums/uu219/GreenLaker/sarahpalin_200908_477x600_7.jpg
B.A. in Communications from Univesity of Idaho (by way of Univ. of Hawaii, Hawaii Pacific Univ., N. Idaho College, and Matanuska-Sustina College).

[David Jamieson]

I bet if she uh used a uh teleprompter whenever she uh spoke in uh public she would uh sound alot more uh educated like the uh President does.

You're kidding right? lol

[BJJ-Blue]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/George-W-Bush.jpeg/453px-George-W-Bush.jpeg
B.A. in History from Yale
MBA from Harvard Business School

The only US President to have earned an MBA.

[David Jamieson]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/George-W-Bush.jpeg/453px-George-W-Bush.jpeg
B.A. in History from Yale
MBA from Harvard Business School

The only US President to have earned an MBA.

yeah, an MBA! wow! lol.
It's a rather small accomplishment these days wouldn't you think.
Although, I'm not crazy about academia anyway and take the same sort of view of it as Sir Ken Robinson. It needs a paradigm shift.

Bush would've done well to get himself a PMP diploma. lol at least that way, he would have had a fairly well thought out plan.

His MBA got you a useless war and a lot more debt. Still wish he was back? lol

[MasterKiller]

B.A. in History from Yale
MBA from Harvard Business School

The only US President to have earned an MBA.

Yup. Hard to believe he blew threw a USD 400 million surplus, huh?

[BJJ-Blue]

yeah, an MBA! wow! lol.
It's a rather small accomplishment these days wouldn't you think.

His MBA got you a useless war and a lot more debt. Still wish he was back? lol

If it's no big deal, why is he the ONLY President to earn one?

Of course I wish he was back. You liberals who always blast Bush on debt always give Obama a pass on debt, and the debt under the community organizer is at a record. For you slow liberals, that means it's never been higher.

Civilian non-farm employment:
137,790,000 employed when taxes were cut in June 2003
146,032,000 employed when Democrats took control in Jan 2007

Unemployment rate Dec 2008: 7.4%
Current unemployment rate: 9.4%

Unlike the community organizer, the numbers don't lie.

[BJJ-Blue]

Yup. Hard to believe he blew threw a USD 400 million surplus, huh?

What was the debt when he left, and what is it now?

And FYI, the Constitution gives control of the budget to Congress, not the President.

[MasterKiller]

If it's no big deal, why is he the ONLY President to earn one?

Of course I wish he was back. You liberals who always blast Bush on debt always give Obama a pass on debt, and the debt under that community organizer is at a record. For you slow liberals, that means it's never been higher.

Civilian non-farm employment:
137,790,000 employed when taxes were cut in June 2003
146,032,000 employed when Democratss took control in Jan 2007

Unemployment rate Dec 2008: 7.4%
Current unemployment rate: 9.4%

Unlike the community organizer, the numbers don't lie.

Was 4.2 Percent in 1999 -- the Lowest Since 1969
Bush raised it 3.2%
Obama only raised it 2% over Bush's numbers

http://z.about.com/d/jobsearchtech/1/0/_/1/122099.gif

[David Jamieson]

If it's no big deal, why is he the ONLY President to earn one?

Of course I wish he was back. You liberals who always blast Bush on debt always give Obama a pass on debt, and the debt under the community organizer is at a record. For you slow liberals, that means it's never been higher.

Civilian non-farm employment:
137,790,000 employed when taxes were cut in June 2003
146,032,000 employed when Democrats took control in Jan 2007

Unemployment rate Dec 2008: 7.4%
Current unemployment rate: 9.4%

Unlike the community organizer, the numbers don't lie.


Well, quite frankly I can think of a principle reason why many presidents didn't have an MBA. the main one being that in the form it is in now didn't even exist until post ww2. Yes, a masters in commerce could be had as far back as 1900, but anyway, not important.

If his MBA was worth the parchment it was printed on, Perhaps Arbusto wouldn't have been such a dismal failure and the Texas Rangers would have had a better chance at the pennant. lol Bush was a notoriously poor businessman. that's documented history and fact.

I'm not saying he's stupid, he's not. Obviously he can't be as he won governor of Texas and the US presidency and sat for two terms. What I am saying is that he was a terrible president who greatly contributed to making the world an even crappier place than it was before he took office. You can try to persuade me otherwise, I doubt you will succeed. Too much against him and you are all too willing to sweep his failures away in favour of trumpeting obscure accomplishments.

he can barely get a speaking gig though. You ever wonder why no one wants him on their speaking tour with darn few exceptions?

[wenshu]

I bet if she uh used a uh teleprompter whenever she uh spoke in uh public she would uh sound alot more uh educated like the uh President does.

Um, you can see the teleprompter reflected in her glasses.

[sanjuro_ronin]

http://i649.photobucket.com/albums/uu219/GreenLaker/sarahpalin_200908_477x600_7.jpg
B.A. in Communications from Univesity of Idaho (by way of Univ. of Hawaii, Hawaii Pacific Univ., N. Idaho College, and Matanuska-Sustina College).

I'd hit it.

[David Jamieson]

I'd hit it.

Indeed. If Palin looked like Madeleine Albright she would have been run out of the country on a rail for her crazy diatribes long ago. Luckily, for her, people can be extremely shallow and find the other part of her they like. lol

Me personally, I'd feel like I was doing my aunt or something.

[wenshu]

sigh (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9kfcEga0lk&feature=player_embedded)

[sanjuro_ronin]

Me personally, I'd feel like I was doing my aunt or something.

You say that as if it was a bad thing

[BJJ-Blue]

Was 4.2 Percent in 1999 -- the Lowest Since 1969
Bush raised it 3.2%
Obama only raised it 2% over Bush's numbers

Who cares what percent the community organizer raised it, the point is he raised it, and after he ran on Bush spending too much. And then he spent MORE than Bush did. It's amazing the lengths you go to in order to never say Obama has done anything wrong or Bush has never done anything right.


Well, quite frankly I can think of a principle reason why many presidents didn't have an MBA. the main one being that in the form it is in now didn't even exist until post ww2. Yes, a masters in commerce could be had as far back as 1900, but anyway, not important.

Excuses, excuses. If it's so easy to get one, I'm guessing someone as intelligent as you must have 3 or 4 MBAs hanging on your wall, right?


If his MBA was worth the parchment it was printed on, Perhaps Arbusto wouldn't have been such a dismal failure and the Texas Rangers would have had a better chance at the pennant. lol Bush was a notoriously poor businessman. that's documented history and fact.

Business and sports success are two different things. The GM and Manager are in the business of winning pennants, the owners are in it to make money. That's why it's called an investment. Bush invested $800k in the Rangers and sold his shares for $15 million. Sounds like a good businessman to me. And FYI, the first time the Rangers made the playoffs was while Bush owned a stake in them.


What I am saying is that he was a terrible president who greatly contributed to making the world an even crappier place than it was before he took office. You can try to persuade me otherwise, I doubt you will succeed.

God himself couldn't convince you you're wrong. So I can't. As I've said before, I dont debate hoping to hear you (or any other liberal here) say, 'Gee 1Bad, you were right all along'. I do it so those reading can see both sides and make up their minds.


You ever wonder why no one wants him on their speaking tour with darn few exceptions?

It's actually because he doesn't choose to do them. He is a private person, notice he often vacationed at his ranch where he had privacy, not at glitzy resorts with an enormous entourage.

And Republicans are typically like Bush is in that regard, unlike Democrats. You don't see Ford or GHW Bush doing public events much, but Carter and Clinton are often worse than reality TV media *****s. I'll predict right now Obama follows the lead of Carter and Clinton and refuses to step back out of the spotlight when his term (or terms) is over.

[David Jamieson]

Excuses, excuses. If it's so easy to get one, I'm guessing someone as intelligent as you must have 3 or 4 MBAs hanging on your wall, right? I'm sorry, were we talking about me? I'm fine with my education, it got me a good job and I make good bank and have a tidy portfolio. :)



It's actually because he doesn't choose to do them. He is a private person, notice he often vacationed at his ranch where he had privacy, not at glitzy resorts with an enormous entourage. Yeah, he "vacationed" or rather hid from responsibility for some 33% of his first term as president! And close to that in the second term. He was a crap president.


And Republicans are typically like Bush is in that regard, unlike Democrats. You don't see Ford or GHW Bush doing public events much, but Carter and Clinton are often worse than reality TV media *****s. I'll predict right now Obama follows the lead of Carter and Clinton and refuses to step back out of the spotlight when his term (or terms) is over.

yeah, CLinton in haiti was a real whorish thing to do. Good thing he did it with W's dad so as to not make it look all bad. :rolleyes:

As an aside, you are the most amateurish of spin doctors ever. lol seriously dude, the more you defend these people, the worse you make them look.

[MasterKiller]

It's amazing the lengths I go to in order to never say a Republican has done anything wrong or a Democrat has never done anything right.

Fixed that for you.

[BJJ-Blue]

I'm sorry, were we talking about me? I'm fine with my education, it got me a good job and I make good bank and have a tidy portfolio. :)

Those who belittle others often do it due to insecurity. Why can't you just acknowledge the man's achievement?


Yeah, he "vacationed" or rather hid from responsibility for some 33% of his first term as president! And close to that in the second term. He was a crap president.

I notice you didn't mention the cost of said vacations. It's laughable to see the guy who ran against his predecessor's spending outpsending him at every turn.


yeah, CLinton in haiti was a real whorish thing to do. Good thing he did it with W's dad so as to not make it look all bad. :rolleyes:

If all Clinton did publicly was Haiti relief, I'd not have said what I did. The guy is on TV more than Ford, GWH Bush, and GW Bush combined.


As an aside, you are the most amateurish of spin doctors ever. lol seriously dude, the more you defend these people, the worse you make them look.

Yeah, those facts I post are all spin. :rolleyes: Just don't be too upset that you can't refute them.

And I'd rather defend Bush than a racist community organizer.


Fixed that for you.

How so, considering you're dead wrong?

I've openly said the spending was too much under Bush and gave Obama props for not closing down Gitmo.

Let me ask you a question. ;) Can you show us ONE example of you praising something Bush did and criticizing ONE thing Obama did? Or will you duck it repeatedly and then lock the thread? You know, your standard MO.

And FYI, sincerity is the greatest form of flattery. I use the word 'ya' though, so take note. Maybe you went to the Joe Biden School of Plagiarism.

[MasterKiller]

Let me ask you a question. ;) Can you show us ONE example of you praising something Bush did and criticizing ONE thing Obama did? Or will you duck it repeatedly and then lock the thread? You know, your standard MO. LOL at me locking threads. You're the one that started calling me names TRYING to get a thread locked because you wouldn't admit you were wrong.

At any rate, I'm not going to go through every post I ever made to prove a point. Bush gave lots of money to Africa for AIDS relief. Obama d1ck-tucked on the Bush tax credits, and I'm not crazy about a lot of the provisions in the Healthcare plan, especially insurance companies being forced to cover kids until they are 25. I think they should have focused on the ecoonomy instead of pushing healthcare through, but I understand why they did it to capitalize on his momentum.

[pateticorecords]

If it's no big deal, why is he the ONLY President to earn one?

Of course I wish he was back. You liberals who always blast Bush on debt always give Obama a pass on debt, and the debt under the community organizer is at a record. For you slow liberals, that means it's never been higher.

Civilian non-farm employment:
137,790,000 employed when taxes were cut in June 2003
146,032,000 employed when Democrats took control in Jan 2007

Unemployment rate Dec 2008: 7.4%
Current unemployment rate: 9.4%

Unlike the community organizer, the numbers don't lie.




Facts are facts my friend... BUSH got us in debt:mad:

And all of the numbers you choose to display are all the trickle effect of what his administration did. We will continue to suffer the repercussions of their mismanagement.
Do you really think it takes 1-2 years to recover from the economic disaster that were the last 8 years? Come on, really? Be realistic dude!

[pateticorecords]

[QUOTE=BJJ-Blue;1073467]Who cares what percent the community organizer raised it, the point is he raised it, and after he ran on Bush spending too much. And then he spent MORE than Bush did. It's amazing the lengths you go to in order to never say Obama has done anything wrong or Bush has never done anything right.

--- any CEO or Entrepreneur knows that to generate profits you need to SPEND on the company not throw money out the window with failed policies (in this case wars).


Excuses, excuses. If it's so easy to get one, I'm guessing someone as intelligent as you must have 3 or 4 MBAs hanging on your wall, right?
-Actually, with the right ammount of money and influence you can get an MBA... oh, and it doesn't make you smarter either:rolleyes:


God himself couldn't convince you you're wrong. So I can't. As I've said before, I dont debate hoping to hear you (or any other liberal here) say, 'Gee 1Bad, you were right all along'. I do it so those reading can see both sides and make up their minds.
-When I am wrong I admit it... when you are wrong you do not:p

And Republicans are typically like Bush is in that regard, unlike Democrats. You don't see Ford or GHW Bush doing public events much, but Carter and Clinton are often worse than reality TV media *****s. I'll predict right now Obama follows the lead of Carter and Clinton and refuses to step back out of the spotlight when his term (or terms) is over.

-They hide because they have nothing else to bring to society since they already bled the country dry:D

[MasterKiller]

Starting Unemployment/Ending Unemployment (ending in January of the term)

Truman (D): 4.3/2.9
Eisenhower (R): 2.9/ 6.6
JFK/Johnson (D): 6.6 /3.4
Nixon (R): 3.4/7.5
Carter (D): 7.5/7.5
Reagan (R): 7.5/5.4
Bush I (R): 5.4/7.3
Clinton (D): 7.3/4.2
Bush II (R):4.2/7.6

Since 1928 there have been 13 president, 7 Republicans (Hoover, Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush Sr, and Bush Jr) and 6 Democrats (FDR, Truman, JFK, Johnson, Carter and Clinton).

Six of the seven Republican Presidents had unemployment increase while in office. Ronald Reagan is the only Republican President since 1928 to leave office with a lower unemployment rate.

All six Democratic Presidents had unemployment decrease or stay the same while in office. The worst Democratic performance was Jimmy Carter, who had the same unemployment rate when he left office as when he entered.

[BJJ-Blue]

LOL at me locking threads. You're the one that started calling me names TRYING to get a thread locked because you wouldn't admit you were wrong.

Actually YOU just did it a few days ago, minus the name-calling. You jumped on early reports about the Arizona shooter being "pro-constitution" and "anti-government" before it came out he was actually a nutbar with mental issues who railed against the right as well. And when I asked you whether you were picking and choosing his beliefs of if you cast judgement before all the facts were in, you repeatedly refused to answer it, then locked the thread.

Care to answer that question now?

I've openly used the term "I stand corrected" more than once on this site. I can't seem to recall you doing it however. But if you indeed have admitted an error/mistake/etc, I'll have to say it again. ;)

And Jamieson is the name-caller, not me. I admit I used to a bit, but I said a few months ago I was going to stop. But if you can show a RECENT thread where I called you names, I'll apologize to you for that.


At any rate, I'm not going to go through every post I ever made to prove a point. Bush gave lots of money to Africa for AIDS relief. Obama d1ck-tucked on the Bush tax credits, and I'm not crazy about a lot of the provisions in the Healthcare plan, especially insurance companies being forced to cover kids until they are 25. I think they should have focused on the ecoonomy instead of pushing healthcare through, but I understand why they did it to capitalize on his momentum.

Fair enough. I don't need previous posts since you answered it now. I just wanted to see an example. Thanks for the answer.

[BJJ-Blue]

Facts are facts my friend... BUSH got us in debt:mad:

And all of the numbers you choose to display are all the trickle effect of what his administration did. We will continue to suffer the repercussions of their mismanagement.
Do you really think it takes 1-2 years to recover from the economic disaster that were the last 8 years? Come on, really? Be realistic dude!

Congress makes the budget, not the President. Look at the debt and unemployment under Bush with a GOP Congress vs Bush with a Democrat Congress.

And Reagan got us out of Carter's mess in under 2 years. Heck, he got us out so fast we even had a mini-recession in 1982 because he had to raise interest rates to combat the inflation he inherited. And unlike Obama, he was honest about it, he openly said it would hurt the economy in the short term, but solve the inflation problem. He could have just did like Obama and made all sorts of false promises about how it would be an immediate boon for the economy, and then it wasn't just blamed Carter.


--- any CEO or Entrepreneur knows that to generate profits you need to SPEND on the company not throw money out the window with failed policies (in this case wars).

Or you can cut prices. Or labor cost. Or production costs. Or marketing costs. It's not always spending that solves problems, often times its cutting costs and streamlining, something NEVER done in Gov't program.

As to spending, the community organizer threw an ENORMOUS amount of money we didn't have on that failed stimulus because we were promised "shovel ready" jobs and that unemployment would not go over 8%. The New Deal was the greatest failed economic policy in our history, and yet the community organizer repeated it, just on an even more expensive scale.


Actually, with the right ammount of money and influence you can get an MBA... oh, and it doesn't make you smarter either:rolleyes:

And it can buy you a law degree as well, right? Just give the man some darn credit. Heck, I think Obama is a bumbling fool as a President, but I'll admit the guy EARNED his degrees. Can't you guys do the same? :rolleyes:


They hide because they have nothing else to bring to society since they already bled the country dry:D

You forgot to add they've created AIDS, homelessness, stolen from the poor, destroyed the environment, starved children, and forced old people to eat dog food as well.

[Syn7]

And Republicans are typically like Bush is in that regard, unlike Democrats. You don't see Ford or GHW Bush doing public events much, but Carter and Clinton are often worse than reality TV media *****s. I'll predict right now Obama follows the lead of Carter and Clinton and refuses to step back out of the spotlight when his term (or terms) is over.

i bet clinton has raised more money for the unfortunate people of the world than both bushes, nixon, reagan and ford have combined... clinton is doing alot and people are noticing his exellence... whereas guys like bush sr sit behind the scenes and play chess for an agenda... clinton just happens to be not only a smart man but a likable man and he gets sh1t done... i like how on fox news when he went all out he said he could truly focus on doing good things in this world without having his days dictated by world events and politics... as potus he could do alot but he can also do alot as a private... and he is.... and you criticise that? why? im not a dem or a republican and i can say from an outside view that clinton was a good president... and isnt what he's doing supposed to be like the great american dream? make money, help people and lead if you youre called???

[Syn7]

Starting Unemployment/Ending Unemployment (ending in January of the term)

Truman (D): 4.3/2.9
Eisenhower (R): 2.9/ 6.6
JFK/Johnson (D): 6.6 /3.4
Nixon (R): 3.4/7.5
Carter (D): 7.5/7.5
Reagan (R): 7.5/5.4
Bush I (R): 5.4/7.3
Clinton (D): 7.3/4.2
Bush II (R):4.2/7.6

Since 1928 there have been 13 president, 7 Republicans (Hoover, Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush Sr, and Bush Jr) and 6 Democrats (FDR, Truman, JFK, Johnson, Carter and Clinton).

Six of the seven Republican Presidents had unemployment increase while in office. Ronald Reagan is the only Republican President since 1928 to leave office with a lower unemployment rate.

All six Democratic Presidents had unemployment decrease or stay the same while in office. The worst Democratic performance was Jimmy Carter, who had the same unemployment rate when he left office as when he entered.

i notice how blue decided to answer others and not even acknowledge this one??? come on now... speak on it, blue...

[MasterKiller]

Actually YOU just did it a few days ago, minus the name-calling. If you read the last few posts in that thread, you will see I locked it because it turned into a discussion on the finer intricasies of using deregatory racial slurs.


You jumped on early reports about the Arizona shooter being "pro-constitution" and "anti-government" before it came out he was actually a nutbar with mental issues who railed against the right as well. And when I asked you whether you were picking and choosing his beliefs of if you cast judgement before all the facts were in, you repeatedly refused to answer it, then locked the thread. Why should I rescind a statement that has yet to be proven false? I will retract it if evidence comes out that he was not, indeed, influenced by "pro-constituition" "anti-government" rhetoric. But until then, all evidence seems to indicate that was at least part of his mindset.

[David Jamieson]

Facts are facts my friend... BUSH got us in debt:mad:

And all of the numbers you choose to display are all the trickle effect of what his administration did. We will continue to suffer the repercussions of their mismanagement.
Do you really think it takes 1-2 years to recover from the economic disaster that were the last 8 years? Come on, really? Be realistic dude!

hahahaha...don't hold your breath with this one.

His whole thing is being a neo-con shill no matter what.
Fun to banter with, but don't take him seriously because you just can't.

lol :p

[BJJ-Blue]

i notice how blue decided to answer others and not even acknowledge this one??? come on now... speak on it, blue...

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/unemployment.jpg

Ask, and ye shall receive.

[BJJ-Blue]

If you read the last few posts in that thread, you will see I locked it because it turned into a discussion on the finer intricasies of using deregatory racial slurs.

True, but you repeatedly refused to answer the question before the thread was locked.


Why should I rescind a statement that has yet to be proven false? I will retract it if evidence comes out that he was not, indeed, influenced by "pro-constituition" "anti-government" rhetoric. But until then, all evidence seems to indicate that was at least part of his mindset.

You were not asked to rescind any statement. You were asked if you only posted his political beliefs that furthered your agenda OR if you posted before all the facts came out.

Now if I had posted 'Well, "anti war" "atheist" nut bag shoots Congresswoman', I would have been skewered, and rightly so for politicizing the tragedy and/or jumping to conclusions before all the facts came out, even though that statement is 100% true.

[David Jamieson]

There's three kinds of lies.

BJJ has chosen the last of them. They are:

1) lies

2) **** lies

3) statistics

hey, did you take into account who was sitting when and what the population of the country was and not to mention how were democratic houses effected by teh poor decisions of republican ones?

Your lie is number 3. Make note. :)

[BJJ-Blue]

Those who can't refute facts always try and find ways to disregard them.

[MasterKiller]

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/unemployment.jpg

Ask, and ye shall receive.

1995 through 2010....:rolleyes:

[BJJ-Blue]

1995 through 2010....:rolleyes:

It is recent history, and it emcompasses 3 different Administrations as well. Of course you're free to post data from further back than that.

[MasterKiller]

It is recent history, and it emcompasses 3 different Administrations as well. Of course you're free to post data from further back than that.

The graphic is basically useless. The highpoint under the Republicans (Dec 2003) coincides with the highpoint under the Democrats (~May 2009), which was right before the **** hit the fan with all the bailouts, etc... (under Bush, no less). It also conveniently stops in May 2010, even though it was already starting to trend downward.

[David Jamieson]

Those who can't refute facts always try and find ways to disregard them.

What facts have you got for us then?
All is see is statistics on a graph.
All statistics are manipulable and can be made to shown whatever you like.

You have zero facts and just a bunch of lame spin.

amateur. lol :p

Here's a fact, many good paying jobs with benefits have been eliminated from the American economy because businesses choose to outsource those jobs to foreign countries.

Manufacturing has basically been handed to China over the last 10 years, with service and warranties being given to India.

That guy who was making 50k, had benefits and a decent life is now struggling because of corporate laws put in place that have essentially devalued the American people.

Your country and mine openly deal with a dictatorial regime. We shouldn't be without concessions that we haven't made. A lot of them revolving around human rights. I'm talking about China here.

You have the dictator Hu Jintao in your country making deals with you and now all your debt belongs to the Chinese dictator. What do you think the net result of that will be?

there's some facts for you.
America as a nation will not be in the next 50 years. pretty much guaranteed and the incessant desire to be partisan is only making it worse.

But then, you cannot use dubious means to create a good ending. It is temporary if so, but that is the nature of reality. :-)

[BJJ-Blue]

The graphic is basically useless. The highpoint under the Republicans (Dec 2003) coincides with the highpoint under the Democrats (~May 2009), which was right before the **** hit the fan with all the bailouts, etc... (under Bush, no less). It also conveniently stops in May 2010, even though it was already starting to trend downward.


What facts have you got for us then?
All is see is statistics on a graph.
All statistics are manipulable and can be made to shown whatever you like.

You have zero facts and just a bunch of lame spin.

Once again; Those who can't refute facts always try and find ways to disregard them.

The graph plots actual data. If either of you have any actual data to refute it, feel free to post it. ;)


Here's a fact, many good paying jobs with benefits have been eliminated from the American economy because businesses choose to outsource those jobs to foreign countries.

Manufacturing has basically been handed to China over the last 10 years, with service and warranties being given to India.

You got one right! And why do you think those jobs have been outsourced?


That guy who was making 50k, had benefits and a decent life is now struggling because of corporate laws put in place that have essentially devalued the American people.

Can you provide us with examples of some of this legislation, including which Presidents signed said legislation into law?


Your country and mine openly deal with a dictatorial regime. We shouldn't be without concessions that we haven't made. A lot of them revolving around human rights. I'm talking about China here.

You have the dictator Hu Jintao in your country making deals with you and now all your debt belongs to the Chinese dictator. What do you think the net result of that will be?

I agree. It's not good to owe dictatorial regimes tons of money. And under the community organizer we have borrowed record amounts of money from them.


there's some facts for you.
America as a nation will not be in the next 50 years. pretty much guaranteed and the incessant desire to be partisan is only making it worse.

That's actually a prediction, not a fact. No wonder you have a hard time accepting facts, you apparently don't know the difference between a fact and a prediction.

I think we will survive. We finally have people in power who understand you cant be prosperous while having record debt.

People have predicted our demise for a couple hundred years now, and they've been wrong every time. We've survived an invasion, the Great Depression, two World Wars, the Cold War, several Presidential assassinations, a civil war, and the Carter years.

As for the problem being partisan, that's ridiculous. The Founding Fathers were so partisan there were actually duels due to political differences and rhetoric, Hamilton vs Burr being the most famous. What goes on now is tame by comparison.

Our biggest problem is a growth of the Federal Government. Up until the 1930s, this country relied on the 'rugged individual' to make this country great, and we became the most powerful and the richest country in the world in under 200 years. As Gov't and Gov't intrusion, regulation, taxes, and entitlements grew, we have not grown at near the same rate we did when we had no entitlements and small Gov't as the Founders intended.

[BJJ-Blue]

The highpoint under the Republicans (Dec 2003) coincides with the highpoint under the Democrats (~May 2009), which was right before the **** hit the fan with all the bailouts, etc... (under Bush, no less).

I once again challenge anyone blaming Bush to provide examples of legislation signed into law by Bush that caused the mess we are in now.

FYI, I've seen this done (and done it myself) on many sites/forums and have yet to see any replies by those blaming Bush.

[Drake]

It wasn't Bush OR Obama. We sunk ourselves as a nation because we were rolling in money and low interest loans, and nobody stopped to ask why things were going so good.

I do feel that the public at large should bear a great deal of the burden when it comes to the housing market crash, and even the bailouts. Think about it... the stupidly high pensions at GMC, the poor management across the board in the financial sector (millions of bad managers playing along with hundreds of bad executives), the inability to understand a mortgage that you were signing, and acknowledging that you understood, the employees who happily breezed through mortgage defaults, most of the time not even reading them, the lower class refusing to educate themselves, KNOWING that globalization was threatening the uneducated labor market, DESPITE the whole issue with robotics getting people laid off in the 80s (not learning a lesson, here?), and demanding lower taxes and all the while complaining about our declining education system.

Bush/Obama's fault? No, I don't think so.

[MasterKiller]

I once again challenge anyone blaming Bush to provide examples of legislation signed into law by Bush that caused the mess we are in now.

FYI, I've seen this done (and done it myself) on many sites/forums and have yet to see any replies by those blaming Bush.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8

[pateticorecords]

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/unemployment.jpg

Ask, and ye shall receive.


Hahaha... this is great, again look at the source;-)

Conservative journalist's analysis of current events and politics.
http://michellemalkin.com

[BJJ-Blue]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNqQx7sjoS8

So let me get this straight, you guys support welfare but blast Bush for helping "a qualified low-income buyer make a downpayment" and with their closing costs??

Also, you need to show the correlation between the American Dream Downpayment Assistance Act and the subprime mess. What percentage of home buyers using this program defaulted on their mortgages vs those who defaulted on sub-prime mortgages?

Of course they may well have defaulted at a lower rate since that Act only covered "qualified" buyers. That video had no links to any data to show the success of failure of that Act. Hopefully you can provide some.

[BJJ-Blue]

Hahaha... this is great, again look at the source;-)

Those numbers are accurate, even if you despise who posted them.

See for yourself:
http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp
http://www.dol.gov/

[pateticorecords]

Those numbers are accurate, even if you despise who posted them.

See for yourself:
http://www.miseryindex.us/urbymonth.asp
http://www.dol.gov/



I do not despise you, nor have I ever said anything of sorts... it's fun to have debates regardless of what we think on a subject matter personally. I have friends and family members who are republicans and who are democrat, we have debates and conversations and we don't always meet eye to eye but because someone's political views or beliefs do not align with mine doesn't me that I would shun them:)

[pateticorecords]

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/PromisesKept?source=fb
http://www.whatthe****hasobamadonesofar.com


■Reversed restrictions on stem cell research
■Appointed an assistant to the president for science and technology policy
■Created a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners
■Expanded loan programs for small businesses
■Extended and indexed the 2007 Alternative Minimum Tax patch
■Expanded eligibility for State Children’s Health Insurance Fund (SCHIP)
■Expanded funding to train primary care providers and public health practitioners
■Directed military leaders to end war in Iraq
■Sent two additional brigades to Afghanistan
■As promised gave a speech at a major Islamic forum in the first 100 days of his administration
■Granted Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send money to Cuba
■Restored funding for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne/JAG) program
■Released presidential records
■Now requires new hires to sign a form affirming their hiring was not due to political affiliation or contributions
■Pushed for enactment of Matthew Shepard Act, which expands hate crime law to include sexual orientation and other factors
■Created a White House Office on Urban Policy
■Supported increased funding for the NEA
■Funded a major expansion of AmeriCorps
■Worked to overturn Ledbetter vs. Goodyear
■Banned lobbyist gifts to executive employees
■Pledged to weatherize 1 million homes per year
■Invested in all types of alternative energy
■Enacted tax credit for consumers for plug-in hybrid cars
■Provided grants to encourage energy-efficient building codes
■As promised appointed at least one Republican to the cabinet
■Extended unemployment insurance benefits and temporarily suspended taxes on these benefits.

[Syn7]

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/unemployment.jpg

Ask, and ye shall receive.

ok now post one that goes back 60 or 70 years and we're talkin... throwing one up that only shows the last 15 years is pretty useless for what we're talking about... one could easilly argue that it went up because of the republican houses actions... these decisions have consequences and they dont all come up right away, some take a few years for them to come crashing down... you need to post a graph that shows more... more time esspecially...

[Syn7]

It wasn't Bush OR Obama. We sunk ourselves as a nation because we were rolling in money and low interest loans, and nobody stopped to ask why things were going so good.

I do feel that the public at large should bear a great deal of the burden when it comes to the housing market crash, and even the bailouts. Think about it... the stupidly high pensions at GMC, the poor management across the board in the financial sector (millions of bad managers playing along with hundreds of bad executives), the inability to understand a mortgage that you were signing, and acknowledging that you understood, the employees who happily breezed through mortgage defaults, most of the time not even reading them, the lower class refusing to educate themselves, KNOWING that globalization was threatening the uneducated labor market, DESPITE the whole issue with robotics getting people laid off in the 80s (not learning a lesson, here?), and demanding lower taxes and all the while complaining about our declining education system.

Bush/Obama's fault? No, I don't think so.


word... its nice to see that im not alone on that one... theres enough blame for everyone on this one... now im not saying bush or obama havent done anything wrong, but given the scope of what has been happening, its just not possible to put all this on one guy...


all that right left partisan finger pointing is so annoying...

[BJJ-Blue]

ok now post one that goes back 60 or 70 years and we're talkin... throwing one up that only shows the last 15 years is pretty useless for what we're talking about...

Why not go back to 1776 then?

You haver to use recent history for many reasons. We didn't have welfare like we do now until the 60s. Blacks couldn't vote until the 60s. Too many things were different, including the Parties themselves. Look at JFK, Democrats now would renounce him. He was anti-communist, for a strong defense, and for tax cuts. I truly feel he would be a Republican if he were alive today. Does 'Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country' sound like the Democrat Party today? No friggin way.

[BJJ-Blue]

And I'm still waiting on MK (or anyone else) to show how legislation enacted by Bush caused the mess we are in...

So far no one has produced anything.

[MasterKiller]

So let me get this straight, you guys support welfare but blast Bush for helping "a qualified low-income buyer make a downpayment" and with their closing costs??
You honestly don't think pushing aggressive home-ownership policies which encourage people to buy house they could not initially afford without taxpayer handouts has no correlation to the housing collapse?

"....consumers with poor credit will be able to get a mortgage with an interest rate that automatically goes down after a period of consistent payments."--Bush (2002).


Also, you need to show the correlation between the American Dream Downpayment Assistance Act and the subprime mess. What percentage of home buyers using this program defaulted on their mortgages vs those who defaulted on sub-prime mortgages?

"The government-sponsored corporations created to increase the liquidity of mortgage markets, so more capital would be available for mortgage loans, are supposed to lead the market in reaching underserved populations. While these corporations have increased their commitments to these efforts, they lag behind private lenders in this regard, according to government studies. The Administration will revisit the regulatory goals for these corporations' purchases of affordable housing loans, which are set to expire in 2003. The federal government should demand more and should hold such publicly-chartered corporations accountable for better performance."--Bush (2002)

In this instance, "better performance" is seen as an increase in capital available for mortgage loans to underserved populations. That's the opposite of what should have been happening if Republicans were concerned about the fragility of the industry.

"In 2002, the President issued America's Homeownership Challenge to increase first-time minority homeowners by 5.5 million through 2010. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage program is an important tool for reaching that goal. In 2006, 31 percent of those using FHA mortgages were minorities purchasing their first home. The 2008 Budget continues Administration efforts to modernize FHA by improving its ability to reach traditionally underserved homebuyers aka those who do not normally qualify for loans (such as low- and moderate-income families, individuals with blemished credit, and families who have little savings for a down payment)"--Bush Administration's White House Press Release

It's a bit of a problem to claim that the Democrats were responsible for pushing risky loans and relaxed underwriting, when the Republican President, with the complicity of his party, demanded loans be extended to individuals with blemished credit, or who could not afford down payments.

[BJJ-Blue]

You honestly don't think pushing aggressive home-ownership policies which encourage people to buy house they could not initially afford without taxpayer handouts has no correlation to the housing collapse?

"....consumers with poor credit will be able to get a mortgage with an interest rate that automatically goes down after a period of consistent payments."--Bush (2002).

And Bush's legislation WORKED:

"The initial proposed scope for the study focused on homeowners who received assistance through the American Dream Downpayment Initiative (ADDI), which was implemented by Congress in 2003. Due to the limited history of the ADDI program when the study was initiated, the scope was expanded to include homebuyers who participated in the HOME program, a similar federal program established in 1990 to assist low-income homebuyers.

The HOME/ADDI program did not experience an increase in foreclosure risk in the first part of this decade, unlike the rest of the mortgage market.

Results of the HOME/ADDI and FHA loan foreclosure comparison include the following:

* Foreclosure rates in the HOME/ADDI programs were generally lower than in the FHA loan program.
* Foreclosure rates for FHA-insured loans with HOME/ADDI assistance were 40 percent lower than FHA-insured loans with seller-funded downpayment assistance.
* Among HOME/ADDI-assisted homebuyers, those with FHA-insured loans had a higher probability of foreclosure."

Complete article:
http://www.abtassociates.com/Page.cfm?PageID=40945

So please show any legislation signed by Bush that caused the housing collapse. You've so far only mentioned the American Dream Downpayment Assistance Act, and as I've shown it was a success, not a contributing factor to the collapse. And it helped thousands of poor families achieve (and keep) home ownership.

[MasterKiller]

Due to the limited history of the ADDI program when the study was initiated, the scope was expanded to include homebuyers who participated in the HOME program, a similar federal program established in 1990 to assist low-income homebuyers. Uuuh...yeah.


And it helped thousands of poor families achieve (and keep) home ownership.
Since when is it the government's role to help people "achieve their dreams"? The government is supposed to stay out of your way so YOU can make your dreams come true. Right?