BF2S Forums Want a fiscally conservative president? Vote Obama.

I really hope that ends up being the case.  About the only way he could do that though would be to veto a lot.

I was reading about that case against Obama, to do with his nationality.  Imagen the shit storm of him being striped of his presidency after he wins, or, even being disqualified before the big day. 

Martyn

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

I think it's time this image was posted again

http://bethesignal.org/wp-content/uploa … mccain.jpg

Saying and doing are two different things. You keep hot linking the same image. Someone is going to get pissed when they realize you're ganking their bandwidth. /liberal moochers

Kmarion wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

Bell wrote:

I was reading about that case against Obama, to do with his nationality.  Imagen the shit storm of him being striped of his presidency after he wins, or, even being disqualified before the big day. 

Martyn

What case? He was born in Hawaii, that's all that matters AFAIK.

Maybe this one?

I'll read that the now, I googled, and got to this one:

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/6524

There was another, specific article, that I can't quite remember, looking now.

Edit:

That's him:

Last edited by Bell (2008-10-26 16:00:11)

Bell wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ghettoperson wrote:

What case? He was born in Hawaii, that's all that matters AFAIK.

Maybe this one?

I'll read that the now, I googled, and got to this one:

http://www.clevelandleader.com/node/6524

There was another, specific article, that I can't quite remember, looking now.

Edit:

That's him:

Headcase Phil...  always amusing to watch...

Mek-Stizzle wrote:

I think it's time this image was posted again

http://bethesignal.org/wp-content/uploa … mccain.jpg

except clinton and greenspan LOVED de-regulation.  the credit swap which brought down the financial system was leglaized on their watch in 2000. 

So, since we like tin foil around here...... i say it was planted by the dems to go off at this time and date for a reason.

A president does not simply hire the Chairman of the Fed. He nominates him.. Clinton nominated him as well. Greenspan shifted policy after the 1987 crash.

It's all getting very confusing here. On the one hand you have disgruntled Republicans haranguing 'Liberals' for regulating markets and mortgages too much and on the other hand you have them haranguing the libs for too much deregulation. Which is it? And why do the Republicans get a pass? Minimisation of regulation is a long-propagated Libertarian/Republican ethos and it is very much part of the problem. The financial system became far too complex and needed a higher level of regulation. Even those who have continuously espoused the merits of free markets recognise the need for sensible and comprehensive regulation.

I love how some people are blindly giving the Republicans a pass on all responsibility despite their level of involvement in government over the past couple of decades and in particular in the last 8.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-26 17:40:11)

Kmarion wrote:

No one gets a pass. It's simply not that simple.

The democrats were calling for "affordable housing for all" regardless of ability to pay. They encouraged the idea of any loan for anyone by ensuring that they would be backed on the secondary market. The GOP was calling for more oversight (it's well documented).

The Republicans on the other hand were handing out tax incentives that did little to help support jobs at home. Corporations had no reason to keep the jobs local. If you are going to offer growth incentives at least make it conditional upon growing American jobs.. since it is the American tax payer that has to pick up the slack.

You should also mention the fact that the onus was on both parties to correct perceived errors in the others policies when the balance of power swung their way. They all share blame in every facet of this farce.