It's Not Bush's Fault You Idiot!

Off Topic Politics and World Issues
1

Geeeeeeezuzzzz. I am watching Washington Journal this morning and they are talking about this Wall Street scenario. People are calling in and almost everyone of them is blaming Bush for all of this:

“Well, this is all Bush’s fault because they didn’t have the OVERSIGHT.”

“This is all Bush’s fault because of the war!”

“This is all Bush’s fault because he hates blacks!”

“It’s all Bush’s fault because he caused it because he was the one in charge!”

GOD DAMN IT! I was shouting at my TV because of this shit. Does anyone bother doing any research anymore? Or is it just too easy to believe the bullshit that Obama and the Democrat party are shoveling down the throats of the American people?

2

[quote]skaz05 wrote:
Geeeeeeezuzzzz. I am watching Washington Journal this morning and they are talking about this Wall Street scenario. People are calling in and almost everyone of them is blaming Bush for all of this:

“Well, this is all Bush’s fault because they didn’t have the OVERSIGHT.”

“This is all Bush’s fault because of the war!”

“This is all Bush’s fault because he hates blacks!”

“It’s all Bush’s fault because he caused it because he was the one in charge!”

GOD DAMN IT! I was shouting at my TV because of this shit. Does anyone bother doing any research anymore? Or is it just too easy to believe the bullshit that Obama and the Democrat party are shoveling down the throats of the American people?[/quote]

People are too pussy to admit that they were the problem by over consuming.

1/2 these people calling in probably foreclosed and are looking for a scapegoat for being a FAILURE.

3

AOG nailed it.

Bush is the Jew of the 21st century :smiley: ! He caused a bit more damage on his own, but he isn’t nearly as bad as everyone says. I’d put him on the bottom ten Presidents list, but not the very bottom, I think.

Foreign Policy has a great article about Bush’s “legacy”. I highly recc it.

4

LOL @ Beowolf.
Ok I have no love for Bush or Obama or Mccain but I will say this: As far as I know Bush is the guy who deregulated Wall Street. In other words he made it ok to but stock on even more of a margin than in the past. So it is partially his fault.

He also wanted the housing market to get more black and hispanics into home ownership. Thats why there were so many no money down home loans. The people that got into these didnt read the fine print about the adjustable rate and got fucked because there own stupidity. They knew they couldnt afford it but ya know… fuck it.

5

[quote]jawara wrote:
LOL @ Beowolf.
Ok I have no love for Bush or Obama or Mccain but I will say this: As far as I know Bush is the guy who deregulated Wall Street. In other words he made it ok to but stock on even more of a margin than in the past. So it is partially his fault.

He also wanted the housing market to get more black and hispanics into home ownership. Thats why there were so many no money down home loans. The people that got into these didnt read the fine print about the adjustable rate and got fucked because there own stupidity. They knew they couldnt afford it but ya know… fuck it.[/quote]

The idea to get more minorities into home ownership actually started in the 90’s. The Whitehouse did warn congress in 2003 but they did not listen. Barney Frank said there was no problem with fannie or freddie.

6

[quote]AssOnGrass wrote:

People are too pussy to admit that they were the problem by over consuming.

1/2 these people calling in probably foreclosed and are looking for a scapegoat for being a FAILURE.[/quote]

I could not have said it better.

7

[quote]jawara wrote:
As far as I know Bush is the guy who deregulated Wall Street. In other words he made it ok to but stock on even more of a margin than in the past. So it is partially his fault.

He also wanted the housing market to get more black and hispanics into home ownership. [/quote]

Dude, how on earth did you arrive at this opinion? How, exactly, did Bush deregulate Wall Street? And, the mandate for getting more minorities into houses far precedes Bush. And that mandate was set by Congress.

8

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
AssOnGrass wrote:

People are too pussy to admit that they were the problem by over consuming.

1/2 these people calling in probably foreclosed and are looking for a scapegoat for being a FAILURE.

I could not have said it better.[/quote]

We agree on something. Who’d a thunk it?

9

[quote]bald eagle wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
AssOnGrass wrote:

People are too pussy to admit that they were the problem by over consuming.

1/2 these people calling in probably foreclosed and are looking for a scapegoat for being a FAILURE.

I could not have said it better.

We agree on something. Who’d a thunk it?[/quote]

Ya beat me to this one.

First Lixy and I agree on something and now this.

I keep saying that people want a king. They forget we fought a bloody revolutionary war to not have one, but they really do want one face they can pin on all their hopes AND blame on. I think it’s just simpler for them.

10

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I keep saying that people want a king. They forget we fought a bloody revolutionary war to not have one, but they really do want one face they can pin on all their hopes AND blame on. I think it’s just simpler for them.[/quote]

Quote of the fucking election.

11

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
bald eagle wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
AssOnGrass wrote:

People are too pussy to admit that they were the problem by over consuming.

1/2 these people calling in probably foreclosed and are looking for a scapegoat for being a FAILURE.

I could not have said it better.

We agree on something. Who’d a thunk it?

Ya beat me to this one.

First Lixy and I agree on something and now this.

I keep saying that people want a king. They forget we fought a bloody revolutionary war to not have one, but they really do want one face they can pin on all their hopes AND blame on. I think it’s just simpler for them.[/quote]

Right… just someone to blame when things go wrong so they don’t have to look in the mirror and realize who really fucked up the economy.

12

All this agreement makes for a short thread.

Seriously, who gets up in the morning and wonders what the fed gov or the President is going to do for them each day? WHO?

13

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
AssOnGrass wrote:

People are too pussy to admit that they were the problem by over consuming.

1/2 these people calling in probably foreclosed and are looking for a scapegoat for being a FAILURE.

I could not have said it better.[/quote]

Imagine a little monkey in appropriate garb riding a bucking bull, said monkey holding on for dear life. That’s GWB, and in fact, just about any politician today.

We’ve created an out-of-control monster that no one, no matter how eloquent or patriotic, can or will control. It will soon plunge off a cliff.

14

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

Right… just someone to blame when things go wrong so they don’t have to look in the mirror and realize who really fucked up the economy.[/quote]

“Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom.”

—de Tocqueville (1831) ‘Democracy in America’

15

Someone in 1831 thought Americans were enamored with equality???

Where…between Protestant white males?

Help me out here.

Mufasa

16

[quote]bald eagle wrote:
All this agreement makes for a short thread.

Seriously, who gets up in the morning and wonders what the fed gov or the President is going to do for them each day? WHO?[/quote]

Sophomoric liberals who yearn for someone come into authority over them to redeem themselves and the world?

17

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Someone in 1831 thought Americans were enamored with equality???

Where…between Protestant white males?

Help me out here.

Mufasa[/quote]

Taking him in historical context, and compared to the European societies with which he was familiar - yes, in his eyes America was obsessed with equality; he perceived this obsession as a kind of holy tenet to an unofficial civic religion.

Thus his concern that our disdain for any sort of hierarchy (in culture and elsewhere) would lead to a kind of celebration of the average, and thus a kind of lukewarm mediocrity. Which is what we have now.

18

[quote]bald eagle wrote:
jawara wrote:
LOL @ Beowolf.
Ok I have no love for Bush or Obama or Mccain but I will say this: As far as I know Bush is the guy who deregulated Wall Street. In other words he made it ok to but stock on even more of a margin than in the past. So it is partially his fault.

He also wanted the housing market to get more black and hispanics into home ownership. Thats why there were so many no money down home loans. The people that got into these didnt read the fine print about the adjustable rate and got fucked because there own stupidity. They knew they couldnt afford it but ya know… fuck it.

The idea to get more minorities into home ownership actually started in the 90’s. The Whitehouse did warn congress in 2003 but they did not listen. Barney Frank said there was no problem with fannie or freddie.

[/quote]

I think it started in the 70’s and it just has been building.

19

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Someone in 1831 thought Americans were enamored with equality???

Where…between Protestant white males?

Help me out here.

Mufasa

Taking him in historical context, and compared to the European societies with which he was familiar - yes, in his eyes America was obsessed with equality; he perceived this obsession as a kind of holy tenet to an unofficial civic religion.

Thus his concern that our disdain for any sort of hierarchy (in culture and elsewhere) would lead to a kind of celebration of the average, and thus a kind of lukewarm mediocrity. Which is what we have now. [/quote]

It seems to me that his eyes were deceived, mainly because while we may have been talking equality, we certainly were not practicing it for significant parts of the population.

Another set of questions:

Celebration of the average what? Man? Government? Other?

Has led to lukewarm mediocrity in what?

Mufasa

20

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
katzenjammer wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Someone in 1831 thought Americans were enamored with equality???

Where…between Protestant white males?

Help me out here.

Mufasa

Taking him in historical context, and compared to the European societies with which he was familiar - yes, in his eyes America was obsessed with equality; he perceived this obsession as a kind of holy tenet to an unofficial civic religion.

Thus his concern that our disdain for any sort of hierarchy (in culture and elsewhere) would lead to a kind of celebration of the average, and thus a kind of lukewarm mediocrity. Which is what we have now.

It seems to me that his eyes were deceived, mainly because while we may have been talking equality, we certainly were not practicing it for significant parts of the population.

Another set of questions:

Celebration of the average what? Man? Government? Other?

Has led to lukewarm mediocrity in what?

Mufasa

[/quote]

De Tocqueville believed that Americans want a big government just as long as they get to pop up their heads every few years and choose their leaders. As he puts it, they are ‘happy to accept leading strings’ because they get to vote on who holds those strings.

"Our contemporaries are constantly excited by two conflicting passions: they want to be led, and they wish to remain free. As they cannot destroy either the one or the other of these contrary propensities, they strive to satisfy them both at once.

They devise a sole, tutelary, and all-powerful form of government, but elected by the people. They combine the principle of centralization and that of popular sovereignty; this gives them a respite: they console themselves for being in tutelage by the reflection that they have chosen their own guardians.

Every man allows himself to be put in leading-strings, because he sees that it is not a person or a class of persons, but the people at large who hold the end of his chain."

http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/detoc/ch4_06.htm