2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[Roy Karrde]

To answer your original question, here's the info on when Biden is speaking:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...a9a82ed8dd0417

"Biden's speech was slated for 9:35 p.m. in Eastern time zones Thursday, before most television networks were scheduled to broadcast live coverage and before Obama speaks."

Makes sense, don't want to have him screw up on national TV.

[Dark Sage]

Makes sense, don't want to have him screw up on national TV.

I'll be glad if he just doesn't distort the truth, like someone I know did in his speech.

[Roy Karrde]

I'll be glad if he just doesn't distort the truth, like someone I know did in his speech.

I wouldn't hold out hopes, this is the guy who did the racist dog whistle a few weeks ago about Republicans putting blacks back into chains.

Of course if you are mad at a politician distorting the truth, I think we can both be fuming in bipartisan anger at Clinton's speech last night.

[Dark Sage]

Roy, Biden could publically use the N-word, and doubt that it would help Romney draw more African-Americans to his side.

And thank you, Plantae. I was going to say the same thing, but every time I blame Bush for the mess we're in, I get an arguement that never ends.

[Plantae]

I'm going to revise my previous statement. I'm sure Roy is about to make some mention of how Bush inherited a recession and the housing bubble that burst in 2008 started forming under Clinton. I don't believe these statements even approach the economic truth of the matter, but I'd rather not see Roy pull out some meaningless second-hand article to prove his point.

[Dark Sage]

I'm going to revise my previous statement. I'm sure Roy is about to make some mention of how Bush inherited a recession and the housing bubble that burst in 2008 started forming under Clinton. I don't believe these statements even approach the economic truth of the matter, but I'd rather not see Roy pull out some meaningless second-hand article to prove his point.

I agree with you 100%, and it seems you were right.

[Roy Karrde]

I agree with you 100%, and it seems you were right.

If you have any rebuttal for the NY Times, please I would be glad to hear it.

[Roy Karrde]

On what logical basis could you possibly give Clinton any portion of the blame for the economic downturn in 2008, when it arose after the two-term tenure of perhaps one of the least fiscally responsible presidents ever elected to office in the United States?

I will point you over to the NYTimes

"Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

...

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/bu...e-lending.html

Clinton pressured Fannie Mae and the banks to make risky loans to low income people, which fed a cycle of gobbling up underwater loans till the point that it all collapsed.

I'm going to revise my previous statement. I'm sure Roy is about to make some mention of how Bush inherited a recession and the housing bubble that burst in 2008 started under Clinton. I don't believe these statements even approach the economic truth of the matter, but I'd rather not see Roy pull out some meaningless second-hand article to prove his point.

The NY Times speaking of the dangers of what Clinton is engaging in is suddenly meaningless?

Roy, Biden could publically use the N-word, and doubt that it would help Romney draw more African-Americans to his side.

Biden's argument wasn't made to offend Black People, it was made to offend Republicans, and backfired on him by hurting his standing with independents.

[Plantae]

The NY Times speaking of the dangers of what Clinton is engaging in is suddenly meaningless?

A news piece isn't exactly a credible source for examining economic trends. Nevertheless, I will acquiesce that this move by Fannie Mae may have contributed to the problem.

Bush initially moved for greater regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but later opposed it, so his stink is certainly on this too. The catastrophe still happened under his watch. And I assume you're not going to bother to blame the disastrous Bush tax cuts? Or the vast increase in income inequality that occurred during Bush's tenure?

The truth is that any one piece is insufficient by itself to explain the crisis. I just happen to think that George W. Bush was responsible for a few too many pieces.

But yes, Clinton isn't blameless; and neither is George H.W. Bush, or Ronald Reagan, or Jimmy Carter, or any of the long line of presidents that led up to these economic times.

[Roy Karrde]

A news piece isn't exactly a credible source for examining economic trends. Nevertheless, I will acquiesce that this move by Fannie Mae may have contributed to the problem.

May? Unless you forgot 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac played a LARGE part of the problem.

Bush initially moved for greater regulation of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but later opposed it, so his stink is certainly on this too.

Well lets see...



Bush and Republicans repeatedly warned that without the proper regulation disaster would happen. The Democrats blocked the regulation....

The catastrophe still happened under his watch.

That is a rather simple view of it.

And I assume you're not going to bother to blame the disastrous Bush tax cuts? Or the vast increase in income inequality that occurred during Bush's tenure?

And that has to deal with underwater mortgages how?

The truth is that any one piece is insufficient by itself to explain the crisis. I just happen to think that George W. Bush was responsible for a few too many pieces.

Then please make a argument for it, but remember I will be providing rebuttles such as the video above showing Democratic obstructionism.

[Dark Sage]

Clinton's approval rating: 60%

Bush's approval rating: Worse than Obama's

I tend to think that more people think the way Plantae does than you do, Roy. After all, you didn't see the RNC invite Bush, or even mention his name.

[Roy Karrde]

Clinton's approval rating: 60%

Bush's approval rating: Worse than Obama's

I tend to think that more people think the way Plantae does than you do, Roy. After all, you didn't see the RNC invite Bush, or even mention his name.

And that matters to the current discussion how?