• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Mitt should expose Obama's roll in the economic meltdown of 2008..

Travis007 said:
wrong......
Click to expand...

What's wrong about what I wrote....that discrimination is different than lending to people that can't pay back a loan? Redlining is when you don't loan out to areas when the individuals are qualified to take out a loan. That's drastically different than Countrywide giving loans to anybody with a pulse. Nobody forced them to do that.
 
Redress said:
It is a Gateway Pundit story. About 4 people in the world take them seriously, and they all post here sadly. It takes a really incredible site to make WND look reliable and unbiased.
Click to expand...

LOL... tell yourself whatever gets you threw the night..

PS: you were flat out wrong about the Jumah also.. so good luck
 
iliveonramen said:
What's wrong about what I wrote....that discrimination is different than lending to people that can't pay back a loan? Redlining is when you don't loan out to areas when the individuals are qualified to take out a loan. That's drastically different than Countrywide giving loans to anybody with a pulse. Nobody forced them to do that.
Click to expand...

Obama sued them under the false premise that was discrimation, it wasnt..it was that they didnt qualify, but of course to Obama and to a Lib that can only be because of race..Obama is a race hustler...period..
 
Last edited:
KopeAcetic said:
You do realize that the housing crisis was started because mortgage companies packaged toxic subprime mortgages as AAA and sold them off as such, so when the purchaser of said "AAA" packaged mortgages found out it was too late and lead to a spiral of debt and unpaid loans right?

Please try harder. I'm not giving anyone a pass. This wasn't all Bush's fault, it was both political parties that put us in this hole, blaming the "other side" because they're not "your team" is actually just making the situation worse.
Click to expand...

They got those "AAA" ratings why? Because AIG insured them. A derivative is exactly that, a derivative from an original source. In this case bad loans were not selling well, so along comes the financial industry to figure out a way to make a pile of **** smell and look like a pile of chocolate. Answer? Insure them. Now why would AIG insure crap? Easy, they made money off of each insured package. :)

Perfect little scheme, helped on by the laxing of loan regulations and risk management. In a nutshell, politicians gave the greedy bastards in the financial industry a way to realize their full potential.


Tim-
 
Travis007 said:
Obama sued them under the false premise that was discrimation, it wasnt..it was that they didnt qualify, but of course to Obama and to a Lib that can only be because of race..Obama is a race hustler...period..
Click to expand...

If you have set standards applied to all people fairly it's pretty hard to prove there was discrimination. Obviously it was proven to the courts that discrimination existed. I might have to call the journalistic integrity of the Daily Caller into question on this article.
 
Travis007 said:
LOL... tell yourself whatever gets you threw the night..

PS: you were flat out wrong about the Jumah also.. so good luck
Click to expand...

Actually I was, once again, 100 % correct.
 
Hicup said:
They got those "AAA" ratings why? Because AIG insured them. A derivative is exactly that, a derivative from an original source. In this case bad loans were not selling well, so along comes the financial industry to figure out a way to make a pile of **** smell and look like a pile of chocolate. Answer? Insure them. Now why would AIG insure crap? Easy, they made money off of each insured package. :)

Perfect little scheme, helped on by the laxing of loan regulations and risk management. In a nutshell, politicians gave the greedy bastards in the financial industry a way to realize their full potential.


Tim-
Click to expand...

Yes, Exactly! Not a single wrod here I disagree with :) Thank you Tim.

Like I said in another post. Clinton signed those laxing of the loan regulations with sweeping bipartisan support. Politicians as a general term is to blame here, not one side.
 
Hicup said:
They got those "AAA" ratings why? Because AIG insured them.
Click to expand...
Wrong Tim, they got high ratings because the ratings agencies were paid by those seeking the ratings, not because of who was "insuring" them.
 
iliveonramen said:
If you have set standards applied to all people fairly it's pretty hard to prove there was discrimination. Obviously it was proven to the courts that discrimination existed. I might have to call the journalistic integrity of the Daily Caller into question on this article.
Click to expand...

Please be my guest and vette this as far as you like...Im all for that..

my point is Obama was a part of the big problem... and if Im Mitt , I make sure people know that as the Fraud Obama cries all day how it was all GWB... but always forgets that Reid and Pelosi were there for 2 years from 06 to 08...
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Wrong Tim, they got high ratings because the ratings agencies were paid by those seeking the ratings, not because of who was "insuring" them.
Click to expand...

again wrong... without the insuring it would be impossible ..
 
KopeAcetic said:
You are both 100% correct, the hourly forecast says no rain..why I don't know? But the daily says 40% chance. Stop arguing over the weather please lol.
Click to expand...

The hourly doesn't. You have to notice that he started the hourly forecast at his link at 10pm. It in fact calls for rain starting about 5.
 
Travis007 said:
its not the reason to cancel 75,000 people...period...Obama is a fraud.. he cant get 20,000 to go.. who would?...

we had higher chance of rain at the Giants game...
Click to expand...

Giant's game not nearly the same thing as nomination speech. I am sure you believe that it isn't why it is moved, but considering some of the things you believe.....
 
Travis007 said:
its not the reason to cancel 75,000 people...period...Obama is a fraud.. he cant get 20,000 to go.. who would?...

we had higher chance of rain at the Giants game...
Click to expand...


Thats rich you calling some one a fraud...,.
 
Travis007 said:
again wrong... without the insuring it would be impossible ..
Click to expand...
You and Tim are both making the same error, the ratings of a derivative and its insuring are two separate actions, they are two separate issues. The ratings agencies were the most culpable in the collapse of the MBS/CDO markets since their "seal of approval" was what investors relied on when purchasing them.
 
Redress said:
It is a Gateway Pundit story. About 4 people in the world take them seriously, and they all post here sadly. It takes a really incredible site to make WND look reliable and unbiased.
Click to expand...
Exactly, Jim Hoft is an idiot.
 
Redress said:
Giant's game not nearly the same thing as nomination speech. I am sure you believe that it isn't why it is moved, but considering some of the things you believe.....
Click to expand...

I know they are not the .. The Giants sold out.. Obama didnt.. oh boo..

I went to Bon Jovi and Aerosmith in the pouring rain...they sold out..
 
Travis007 said:
its not the reason to cancel 75,000 people...period...Obama is a fraud.. he cant get 20,000 to go.. who would?...

we had higher chance of rain at the Giants game...
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but I have to ask. Travis you were caught in an obvious lie that you perpetuated for multiple posts, finally get caught in it and now you are changing the subject? Can you please explain why you feel this is rational behavior in an honest debate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom