Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


pahunkboy -> Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 3:32:37 PM)

Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy...

well-   isnt that interesting.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:05:36 PM)

I guess he was an absentee SML for the last two years of the Bush administration.




pahunkboy -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:10:53 PM)

I wonder if anyone believes that.




Politesub53 -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:11:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I guess he was an absentee SML for the last two years of the Bush administration.


So it was Bush`s fault ?  Or does GW get a pass and the Senate carry the can ?




Owner59 -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:12:54 PM)

bushies are to blame and most people think so.

One of the 1st industries to sink during a recession is gambling.That`s all NV is.They don`t do much else.

Till Vagas get`s back up to speed,the state`s economy will suffer.

I never ever hear what cons would do otherwise tho, except to say "no".

Just how is it that that brings gambling back to NV?





willbeurdaddy -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:20:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59



I never ever hear what cons would do otherwise tho, except to say "no".






Then youre not listening




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:24:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I guess he was an absentee SML for the last two years of the Bush administration.


So it was Bush`s fault ?  Or does GW get a pass and the Senate carry the can ?


Nobody gets a complete pass, but the Democrat controlled Congress and committees control the agenda, not the POTUS.




Politesub53 -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:38:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Nobody gets a complete pass, but the Democrat controlled Congress and committees control the agenda, not the POTUS.


So the senate majority before 2007 get the blame for what took place on their watch ?  Either way, most of the road to ruin was already in motion way before 2007. You can trace it back to Regan relaxing banking controls and Clinton not doing much about reinstating them either.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:42:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Nobody gets a complete pass, but the Democrat controlled Congress and committees control the agenda, not the POTUS.


So the senate majority before 2007 get the blame for what took place on their watch ?  Either way, most of the road to ruin was already in motion way before 2007. You can trace it back to Regan relaxing banking controls and Clinton not doing much about reinstating them either.


As has been said many times, there are many moving parts that contributed to the current financial crisis, but the proximate causes can clearly be laid at the feet of Dem controlled Congresses.




Politesub53 -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 4:46:52 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Nobody gets a complete pass, but the Democrat controlled Congress and committees control the agenda, not the POTUS.


So the senate majority before 2007 get the blame for what took place on their watch ?  Either way, most of the road to ruin was already in motion way before 2007. You can trace it back to Regan relaxing banking controls and Clinton not doing much about reinstating them either.


As has been said many times, there are many moving parts that contributed to the current financial crisis, but the proximate causes can clearly be laid at the feet of Dem controlled Congresses.
  

So, the President is immune from any of his policy making ? If so it makes me wonder why you give Obama a hard time. My next question would be, since Congress is made up from both houses, have the Democrats always been in control, at least during and since Reagans time in office ?  Because if not, your last claim is incorrect.




willbeurdaddy -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 5:14:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

Nobody gets a complete pass, but the Democrat controlled Congress and committees control the agenda, not the POTUS.


So the senate majority before 2007 get the blame for what took place on their watch ?  Either way, most of the road to ruin was already in motion way before 2007. You can trace it back to Regan relaxing banking controls and Clinton not doing much about reinstating them either.


As has been said many times, there are many moving parts that contributed to the current financial crisis, but the proximate causes can clearly be laid at the feet of Dem controlled Congresses.
  

So, the President is immune from any of his policy making ? If so it makes me wonder why you give Obama a hard time. My next question would be, since Congress is made up from both houses, have the Democrats always been in control, at least during and since Reagans time in office ?  Because if not, your last claim is incorrect.


no, it isnt incorrect. You apparently missed the word "proximate".




popeye1250 -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 5:42:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy...

well-   isnt that interesting.




PaHunk, yes, isn't it?
The Dems have been in charge since 2006 and Harry Reid has been in office for how many decades now and he doesn't know how we got into so much debt?




servantforuse -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 5:56:23 PM)

Wasn't Obama just a few months ago telling people not to go to Las Vegas. ?




THELADY -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 6:01:20 PM)

that is a hoot. kinda like obama did not hear any of rev wright's inflamatory remarks.

those in congress are fully responsible for anything they ignore or let pass. it may be called obama care, but obama really only sponsored it, it would never have been written and passed if it were not for tbe democrat majority (no rep. voted for it)

all spending bills start in the house must be approved by the senate before the pres says yea or nay. and in the last 2 yrs of the bush era the dems had complete control.

if reid had nothing to do with todays economy then he must have done absolutely nothing in all his years in that office!!!

LOL...... bush couldn't have done it without him!




popeye1250 -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 6:14:02 PM)

I was watching CNN tonight and they said one of the polls said that respondants favored Repubs by 49%
Dems by 40% and they said similar polls are comming "in waves."
Rick Sanchez said it's shaping up to be a "political tsunami" in November and it will be, "even worse than the Democrats think it will be."
And "the dog" Obama broke his leash yesterday and was barking at people.
And try to find one (1) Democrat who's up for reelection who voted for Obama's healthcare program! You can't! They're all invisable!!!




servantforuse -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 6:17:48 PM)

Hopefully, Harry reid and his ilk will have nothing to do with the economy in 2011 and beyond.




brokedickdog -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 6:27:12 PM)

It wasn't Reid's fault, or least not his alone. We've 535 member of congress and a President. They are all equally culpable in my eyes.

I'm sure, as is evident above, that some want to draw lines in the sand, cast blame to others and keep any from sticking to them. But really, none of these people are worth a bucket of warm spit, much less deserving or worthy of high elected office.

The people need to retake control of government and make it again, as was originally intended, the servant of the people.




DarkSteven -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 6:30:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

I guess he was an absentee SML for the last two years of the Bush administration.


So it was Bush`s fault ?  Or does GW get a pass and the Senate carry the can ?


Nobody gets a complete pass, but the Democrat controlled Congress and committees control the agenda, not the POTUS.


Wrong.  In theory, you're right, but not in practice.  The Dems rolled over, while making loud objections to Bush's insane policies.  They thought, correctly, that they could get more seats in 2008 by letting Bush run rampant while showing at least objections to his policies.

The groundwork for this current mess was laid by numerous bodies, and both sides of the aisle.  That included trickle down and the Laffer curve, repeal of financial regulation rules, and deficit spending.  The dot-com and RE bubbles didn't help, nor did CDOs and outright fraud with inflating ratings of financial instruments.




pahunkboy -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 6:32:58 PM)

It is NEVER anyones fault-  EVER.




StrangerThan -> RE: Harry Reid: 'I had nothing to do with' bad economy... (9/7/2010 6:52:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

I was watching CNN tonight and they said one of the polls said that respondants favored Repubs by 49%
Dems by 40% and they said similar polls are comming "in waves."
Rick Sanchez said it's shaping up to be a "political tsunami" in November and it will be, "even worse than the Democrats think it will be."
And "the dog" Obama broke his leash yesterday and was barking at people.
And try to find one (1) Democrat who's up for reelection who voted for Obama's healthcare program! You can't! They're all invisable!!!


Here's what I think will happen.

If republicans win the house but not the senate - which right now is the most likely scenario, legislation will be stalled, both sides will talk about working for the American people while what they mostly do is point fingers at each other, play the blame game and jostle for position in two more years.

If republicans win both house and senate, unlikely given that only a 3rd of the senate is up each election, it will be put up or shut up time. They've talked a lot about cutting spending. Well, that was tried before under someone, maybe hoover and it led to the depression. The rock and the hard place we are in is one where we can';t really cut spending much and can't borrow much more either to spend. So despite all the talk about winning both, I'd be willing to bet strategists will be happy to win the house and leave the senate in the hands of the democrats. Otherwise, they're are suddenly going to be held to the fire, wherein they'll offer legislation they know the president will veto for the purpose of having him veto it so they can use it against him in the next election.

The same shit will go in reverse. And we'll go round and round and round and the rhetoric will be scathing. It'll be that way because there is no quick fix for the economy. We are a service oriented economy now like it or not. It won't recover until people feel good enough to spend. People won't feel that way until the economy picks up and the fear of losing jobs and homes starts to fade. The rather monstrous sea of credit that was opened to the public by virtually every administration since Reagan, no longer exists. Homes no longer carry equity like they did. In fact, a good percentage of people owe more than their house is worth these days. The credit card industry has been undergoing a painful retraction in the past couple of years. Even good customers who never missed a payment saw limits reduced and rates raised last year before the looming reforms that took effect earlier this year.

I honestly don't know what the answer is. Cutting taxes isn't going to do it. Spending isn't either this time around because we have so much debt to service.

So both are talking out their ass in my opinion. Both are lazy and assume victory gives them a mandate of sorts to run with their agendas. If swapping congress out completely twice in 14 years isn't a signal, I don't know what is. That signal is, we're tired of the bullshit. Do something that actually benefits us rather than increasing the bureaucracy, increasing the amount of money coming out of my pocket, and hell, you don't even have to give me real hope, just tell me my job will be there tomorrow if I work hard.

I don't know why that is so difficult for people in Washington to understand. Dems promised change. The only real changes I have seen is 1) we have a different party controlling the purse strings and they are just as incapable as the party that left and 2) the agenda went from fucking people over for one cause to fucking them over for another. We have states suing over health care, going to court to battle over immigration with another 19 or 20 states slated to join them in the battle, the economy in ruins

and the funny thing is, if you listen to the cock suckers in washington, it's all someone elses fault.




Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875