How Stupid Can ObamaBot's Be? Real Stupid!

[mindseye]

Franklin Raines – ex-Chairman and CEO of Fannie Mae. Walked away from Fannie Mae with a $90,000,000.00 golden parachute. Raines is an advisor to the Obama Campaign.

Tim Howard – ex-CFO of Fannie Mae. Walked away from Fannie Mae with a $20,000,000.00 golden parachute. Howard is Chief Economic Advisor to Obama.

Jim Johnson – ex-CEO of Fannie Mae. Walked away with a $28,000,000.00 golden parachute. Johnson is Senior Finance advisor to Obama and ran Obama’s Vice Presidential Search committee

snopes.com: False

How mendacious can McCainholes be? Real Mendacious!

 

[hot-rod]

Good stuff. Keep Obama voters properly educated.


ObamaBots - Look I agree with the American form of democracy. If you want to vote in a racist communist that has criminal and terrorist friends that he pays off for special favors, hey its a free country. But just make sure you KNOW that is what you are voting for.

Yeah, and the same goes for all you McCain supporters. Name one really important project where he really did something worthwhile to change the quality of the lives of Americans in a possitive way. Has he lowered the cost of healthcare, and how many jobs is he credited with creating for people. Has he done anything to bring peace anywhere in the world? People are moving away from this rightwing ideology where only the wealthy make it big and to hell with everybody else. I think we ought to form posse's and go after some of these bloodsuckers. What do ya'll think?

 

[1BiGG1]

snopes.com: False

How mendacious can McCainholes be? Real Mendacious!

However, although at least some of these men have had connections to the Obama campaign at one time or another …

So what’s allegedly true here as your link shows is Obama was getting large amounts of money from these guys and doing nothing towards trying too regulate them like George Bush and John McCain were.

 

[Industrialsize]

The gay thingy in this country is the very-least or close of our concerns

It's not a "gay thingy" and it may be the least of YOUR concerns, but it is NOT the least of mine. You speak for yourself.

 

[Principessa]

Aren't Howard and Johnson also the men we have to thank for putting turquoise and orange together in a nation-wide color scheme and then putting clam strips on the menu?

:lmao:That's correct, and darn fine clam strips they were, too!

 

[TurkeyWithaSunburn]

Maybe the government shouldn't encourage people to own houses! And I'm not being sarcastic, I truely feel that way.

How many trillions of dollars does freddie/fannie back in mortgages. The GSEs are a form of "socialism". (Government Sponsored Entities) What everybody thought would happen to freddie/fannie did happen. The gov't stepped in and secures them.

I'm so glad we have Paulson who made $168,000,000 in one year pulling in all his buddies from the bank he used to run to hand out the government money. :sigh: (now that was sarcasm)

As for golden parachutes if they did get them. Isn't that the free market? I mean it's insane people can be paid more money than god and be a manager of a Fortune500 company. Maybe Social Security taxes should be paid for all wages, not just on the first $100,000 or so. (That's indexed for inflation, so it goes up a little bit every year).

Surely the question has to be asked, why were they paid so damned much in the first place. CEOs make way too much money, 500times the average worker (maybe more). Twenty million dollars could provide 400 people a job at $50,000 a year.

(added...)
Maybe if you can't vote in an election you shouldn't be able to make political contributions to a party or candidate. Problem solved for the future. Just because a corporation is legally a person doesn't give them more say than what I should have.

 

[1BiGG1]

Already proven false here: He signed on as a co-sponsor to that bill sixteen months after it was introduced, and ten months after it had been killed in committee by its Republican chair, Richard Shelby.

Proven false my ass! That bill was not dead if the democrats supported it at anytime.

And maybe you should buy up a nice foreclosed home so you can move out of that glass house you're living in.

Too many properties in the portfolio already but make no mistake it’s very tempting.

 

[1BiGG1]

It's not a "gay thingy" and it may be the least of YOUR concerns, but it is NOT the least of mine. You speak for yourself.

Duh … I was stating my opinion and never said I was speaking for you. Sorry for your confusion.

 

[mindseye]

However, although at least some of these men have had connections to the Obama campaign at one time or another …

So what’s allegedly true here as your link shows is Obama was getting large amounts of money from these guys

How do you go from "at least some of these men have had connections" to "Obama was getting large amounts of money"?

and doing nothing towards trying too regulate them like George Bush and John McCain were.

Again, false. McCain was a co-sponsor to S.190, a measure which had only Republican support, which had no chance of passing the Senate, which was trashed even by conservative writers, and which was killed in committee by a fellow Republican. Obama was a co-sponsor to S.98, which had bipartisan support, but which was opposed by Bush and eventually pulled by one of its own (Republican) sponsors.

 

[Industrialsize]

Duh … I was stating my opinion and never said I was speaking for you. Sorry for your confusion.

Nope...you spoke for more than yourself:

"The gay thingy in this country is the very-least or close of our concerns "

 

[1BiGG1]

How do you go from "at least some of these men have had connections" to "Obama was getting large amounts of money"?

The links I provided clearly shows Obama and his cohorts in the democratic party were getting large amounts of money from Fannie/Freddie and demanding Fannie/Freddie back bad loans.

Again, false. McCain was a co-sponsor to S.190, a measure which had only Republican support, which had no chance of passing the Senate, which was trashed even by conservative writers, and which was killed in committee by a fellow Republican. Obama was a co-sponsor to S.98, which had bipartisan support, but which was opposed by Bush and eventually pulled by one of its own (Republican) sponsors.

And stop with the “false” horseshit. That bill could have been modified or another introduced but Obama and his democratic friends were afraid it would cost them votes if Fannie/Freddie pulled the subprime loans going to those who could not afford them so they never backed regulation like George Bush and John McCain were trying to do years ago. That’s the basic bottom line so please stop pretending its not.

And umm … don’t even go there with S.98 which has zero to do with anything here. Stick too how Obama and the democrats refused to do anything about Fannie/Freddie because Fannie/Freddie was giving them lots of money and it would cost them votes, and how they were not smart enough to see the disaster in the making that’s costing all of us huge money right now.

 

[1BiGG1]

Nope...you spoke for more than yourself:

"The gay thingy in this country is the very-least or close of our concerns "

Wow … maybe a short (or long whatever the case may be) course in basic critical thinking skills will show you how one can make the statement I made and only be stating ones own opinion.

 

[mindseye]

Proven false my ass! That bill was not dead if the democrats supported it at anytime.

buh-dee-buh-dee-buh-dee-buh-dee...

Let's go through this one more time: S.190 was introduced in the 109th Congress (Republican majority), not the 110th Congress (Democratic majority). The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs had 11 Republicans and 9 Democrats on it.

That committee met on July 28, 2005 in a markup session for the bill where two amendments were on the table. McCain was not even a sponsor of the bill at that time. One of the two amendments was a substitute amendment -- a procedural device that instead of amending the bill in a small way ("on line 18, strike must and insert may") says "strike the entire contents of the bill and insert the following".

The substitute amendment passed the Republican-led committee, though neither Thomas nor the CBHUA website reports the specific vote. The bill died after that point and never made it to the floor of the Senate for full consideration.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Proven false my ass! That bill was not dead if the democrats supported it at anytime.

Republicans were in control of the Senate at the time of the vote.
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs - Congresspedia

9 Democrats:
Paul S. Sarbanes (Md.), Ranking Member
Christopher Dodd (Conn.)
Tim Johnson (S.D.)
Jack Reed (R.I.)
Chuck Schumer (N.Y.)
Evan Bayh (Ind.)
Thomas R. Carper (Del.)
Debbie Stabenow (Mich.)
Robert Menendez (N.J.)

11 Republicans:
Richard Shelby (Ala.), Chairman
Robert Bennett (Utah)
Wayne Allard (Colo.)
Mike Enzi (Wyo.)
Chuck Hagel (Neb.)
Rick Santorum (Pa.)
Jim Bunning (Ky.)
Mike Crapo (Idaho)
John E. Sununu (N.H.)
Elizabeth Dole (N.C.)
Mel Martinez (Fla.)

Which means, if all Democrats voted no, the Republicans could STILL get the bill passed. Republicans were ALSO in control of the House as well when this bill was presented. So really, Democrats denying the Republicans in this case? ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT.

Also, something for you to ponder. McCain supported it even though it was nine months too late. But does that also explain how McCain failed to support it when the bill resurfaced in 2007?

Feel free to vote McCain all you want on November 4th. But seriously, stop with the Fannie Mae bullshit. Or are you practicing for your role as "raving lunatic" for Halloween tomorrow?

 

[mindseye]

And stop with the “false” horseshit.

Stop posting false horseshit and I'll stop with the "false" horseshit.

 

[tripod]

You damn gobtard conservatives better go and read these posts that Mindseye and Vinylboy typed out... they provide the serious smackdown that you all most desperately need.

 

[1BiGG1]

buh-dee-buh-dee-buh-dee-buh-dee...

Let's go through this one more time: S.190 was introduced in the 109th Congress (Republican majority), not the 110th Congress (Democratic majority). The Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs had 11 Republicans and 9 Democrats on it.

That committee met on July 28, 2005 in a markup session for the bill where two amendments were on the table. McCain was not even a sponsor of the bill at that time. One of the two amendments was a substitute amendment -- a procedural device that instead of amending the bill in a small way ("on line 18, strike must and insert may") says "strike the entire contents of the bill and insert the following".

The substitute amendment passed the Republican-led committee, though neither Thomas nor the CBHUA website reports the specific vote. The bill died after that point and never made it to the floor of the Senate for full consideration.

So wrap all this up in a neat little package you admit the democrats were taking large amounts of money from Fannie/Freddie and did nothing to reform them like George Bush and John McCain were trying to do years ago.

Thank you for finally stopping with the spin and admitting this if that is truly your stance. :wink:

 

[1BiGG1]

Republicans were in control of the Senate at the time of the vote.
Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs - Congresspedia

9 Democrats:
Paul S. Sarbanes (Md.), Ranking Member
Christopher Dodd (Conn.)
Tim Johnson (S.D.)
Jack Reed (R.I.)
Chuck Schumer (N.Y.)
Evan Bayh (Ind.)
Thomas R. Carper (Del.)
Debbie Stabenow (Mich.)
Robert Menendez (N.J.)

11 Republicans:
Richard Shelby (Ala.), Chairman
Robert Bennett (Utah)
Wayne Allard (Colo.)
Mike Enzi (Wyo.)
Chuck Hagel (Neb.)
Rick Santorum (Pa.)
Jim Bunning (Ky.)
Mike Crapo (Idaho)
John E. Sununu (N.H.)
Elizabeth Dole (N.C.)
Mel Martinez (Fla.)

Which means, if all Democrats voted no, the Republicans could STILL get the bill passed. Republicans were ALSO in control of the House as well when this bill was presented. So really, Democrats denying the Republicans in this case? ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT.

Also, something for you to ponder. McCain supported it even though it was nine months too late. But does that also explain how McCain failed to support it when the bill resurfaced in 2007?

Feel free to vote McCain all you want on November 4th. But seriously, stop with the Fannie Mae bullshit. Or are you practicing for your role as "raving lunatic" for Halloween tomorrow?

Why do you guys go on with this ignorant crap like ”McCain supported it even though it was nine months too late” … it was not allegedly too late in any way, shape or form. This bill with the backing of the democrats (or a modified one) was not dead but it was dead without. Please stick with reality in the future.


And tee-hee, love the personal attack, well not really but I maybe would if I was a little girl who appreciates personal attacks on a little girl level.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

So wrap all this up in a neat little package you admit the democrats were taking large amounts of money from Fannie/Freddie and did nothing to reform them like George Bush and John McCain were trying to do years ago.

Thank you for finally stopping with the spin and admitting this if that is truly your stance. :wink:

As if Republicans didn't get money from this as well.
OpenSecrets | Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Invest in Democrats - Capital Eye

Robert Bennett, a Republican from Utah received $61K.
Tom Davis, a Republican from Virginia received over $55K.
Christopher Bond, a Republican from Missouri also received over $55K.
Spencer Bachus & Richard Shelby, two Republicans from Alabama received over $55K.
Roy Blunt, Republican also from Missouri ... over $36K.
Deborah Pryce, Oklahoma Republican... over $34K.
Gary Miller... California Republican. $33K.

Funny how you just want to focus on Obama when in fact many REPUBLICANS also received contributions from Fannie Mae as well from 1989-2008. And if you look at the list of Senators who actually DID vote on the bill in 2005, NONE of the Democrats who receive the contributions were present.

Seriously... stop with the bullshit.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Why do you guys go on with this ignorant crap like ”McCain supported it even though it was nine months too late” … it was not allegedly too late in any way, shape or form. This bill with the backing of the democrats (or a modified one) was not dead but it was dead without. Please stick with reality in the future.

What part of "the bill was already voted down" do you NOT understand?
McCain supported a bill that could no longer be voted on. Where was HIS support when the bill needed it? And when the bill resurfaced under a different name in 2007, HE DIDN'T VOTE. Basically, it's another empty handed claim by your GOP.

Your reality is completely screwed. EVERYONE can look at the list of people who voted on this bill, REALIZE that Republicans didn't need a single Democratic vote to pass it, yet STILL try to blame Democrats for its demise. I'm sorry, but if you can't see that then you should go get your eyes as well as your head examined.