I don't see anyone I like but like most of my conservative friends we are all going to vote for the person who is the front runner for the GOP to ensure Obama's defeat.

Isn't that how Hitler got elected?

:nuke:WARNING: Godwin's Law Alert WARNING:nuke:

Actually, I'm waiting for Santorum to start pulling out the pink triangles any day now.

~~

Nice!

I don't think that he was elected like that. But hey, I know people that would vote for him over Obama. :lol:

For some strange reason, that doesn't really :eek: me.

Details are coming out on the Obama Administration's agreement with banks and
State's Attorneys General with regards to forgeries of documents relating to foreclosures...

This article puts for the idea that the nature of this agreement shifts the motivation
of banks from foreclosure/eviction over to mortage adjustments.

Below is a brief summary of the people who will be eligible for either $ payments
or re-adjustments of the conditions or principal of their mortages.


Northwest Herald (Illinois)
2/11/12
Our view: Mortgage pact will help
<snip>
Because of the complexities of the deal, it could be months before individuals know
for certain if they qualify and how. But generally, here’s who will be eligible to apply for relief:

• Anyone who lost their home between Jan. 1, 2008, and Dec. 31, 2011,
and made mortgage payments through Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Chase, CitiGroup or Ally Bank (formerly GMAC).

• Anyone who owes more than their home is worth, who is 30 days or more behind
on mortgage payments, or anyone who is at risk of falling behind on mortgage payments
and who makes payments to one of those five servicers.

• Anyone who owes more than their home is worth, is current on
their mortgage, and makes payments to one of those five servicers.

Homeowners who lost their home will be entitled to direct payments of $2,000.
Homeowners who still have their home have various refinancing and mortgage
reduction options through their servicers.

Those who are behind on payments are asked to contact the servicer or state attorney general’s office.
Those who are current will be contacted by their servicer if they are eligible for refinancing.
Only current homeowners with mortgage rates above 5.25 percent who
have been current for the past 12 months are eligible to be contacted.

For more information, call 866-544-7151, visit[your state's attorney general]
or visit www.nationalmortgagesettlement.com.

The Mortgage Deal: A Reality Check

Is it something - yes, but at best its barely a start.
This is a mere pittance of what people have lost. It will help approx 10% of those in need. The 2-3 year timetable is a farce.
I think this "deal" is more about election year posturing than anything else.

Am I missing something?

Dunno - different parts apparently have different timetables.
Under the agreement, mortgage servicers will be required to set aside $20 billion toward financial relief for borrowers.
*Bold - That's the only three years I see.
**Bold - I wonder what deal Oklahoma cut for itself.

"I Voted For Obama Because He is Black"
Just a lil levity - bold mine.

levity ?

Yes, levity. sarcasm, funny, humorous. The bold part was him joking around.

The Fact Checker

Jack Lew’s misleading claim about the Senate’s failure to pass a budget resolution


http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...1z8Q_blog.html

I give him props for coming out and saying the obvious. He obviously was not alone.

I voted for him because he isn't a fat pasty bald republican.

lol

View of the "Deal" from The Economist
Election year politicking or just business as usual?

Both, I would imagine, on one hand they don't want to appear giving in to the radicals who want everyone to get off scott free and on the other hand they are giving a small print break to the banks and lending institutions.

Federal funds flow to clean-energy firms with Obama administration ties

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...aER_story.html

Federal funds flow to clean-energy firms with Obama administration ties

I hope this blows up in his face....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...aER_story.html

The background for the agreement on foreclosure procedures is becoming apparent.
The first legal action was against the CEO of one company doing the "robo-signing"
Now the California and Nevada States' Attorney Generals have a basis for their involvement.

NY Times
By GRETCHEN MORGENSON
February 15, 2012
Audit Uncovers Extensive Flaws in Foreclosures
<snip>

This is somewhat misleading. It depends upon the interpretation of the deal as I posted earlier.

Gee really???

Obviously it will be up to interpretations, but in the courts.
The point is that a civil contract can not nullify a law.

If the banks knew about a "gap" they can not "knowlingly" a file false document.
The bank is still responsible (culpable ?) even if the Buyer signed the document,
because the bank is the party creating the contract and knowingly filiing the false document.

Again, it's whether someone's glass is half full or half empty.
I'm quit happy to see such events unfolding... as opposed to what ?

Prosecuting them - years ago.
instead of cutting them a deal at less than 25 cents on the dollar (not including punitive damages/pain & suffering etc etc etc)
during an election season and taking their money/campaign contributions.
Breaking up the too big to fail BEFORE they fail.
Separating the investments from lending. . .(dreaming)

The real unemployment rate is 15%. Obama continues to lie to the people....

http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/127xx/doc...employment.pdf

Bullshit. He is doing what EVERY other Administration has done.
They all use the same method. Nothing new here.

Bullshit on you.

Obama changed the way they measured unemployment midstream to make themselves look better.


http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/...aningless.html

I'm not even gonna bother with THAT link. Seriously?
C'mon, its only February. The R's haven't even chosen an opponent yet.
Chill... out.

You are the one that called it "Bullshit". At least defend your comment about the link.... GO!

CBO: Longest Period of High Unemployment Since Great Depression

CBO: U.S. enduring the longest period of high unemployment since the Great Depression

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/...eat-depression

That 15% is the U-6, every administration has used the U-3.
Although I personally believe the U-6is more accurate, it is less than dishonest to compare one with the other. Your link convieniently didn't share that inconvenient act. Therefore:I made it this far before abandoning ship
Bullshit I say again, extremist partisan Bullshit.

I am cool with your Take on it. I just don't agree. But it is far from "extremist partisan bullshit".

yup its Wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy past extreme partisan BS.
Kinda like taking a grain of truth and stretching it beyond infinity.

Ok....

finally. Damn man its like killing flies with a sledgehammer with you sometimes.

Actually I just don't care to argue with you about it anymore. Don't miss read that as if I agree, I don't.

Should I have put a :rolleyes: on it for you?
I have no expectation of you ever changing your mind,
we've known each other too long for that.

Good enough for me.... what a fucking waste of time talking about this shit....

Can lead a horse to water ...

And I can shoot him and let him drown in his own fantasy of truth.... ;) Later.

OK From your link: We'll use the U-3 (Official)Unemployment Rate
Bush started with 4.0% and when he left it was 7.3% -------+3.1%
Obama started with 7.8% (yep it went up a full 1/2% in one month!)
and continued to rise for 10 months.
and it is currently 8.3% ----------------------------------------+0.5%
Bush's unemployment increase was 6x worse than Obama

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Again from your link: We'll use the U-6 this time
Bush Start 7.1 --------- End 13.5 -----------------------------+6.4%
Obama Start 14.2 currently 15.1------------------------------+0.9%
And Again
Bush's unemployment increase was MORE THAN 6x worse than Obama

Now I ask you ... What is YOUR point?

Bush isn't running for re-election. No need for him to cook the books. It was a non-issue during the time Bush was in office.

Over the last few days, I've heard on the news that:

consumer spending is up
the stock market is up
GDP is up
employment is up
exports are up


The only thing not up is middle class buting power.

I'm sure we will be able to powerfully bute any day now

Meanwhile let's pretend the President has next to no ability to affect job creation or even the economy. It's a scary place to be, since we really want them to, and most of them promise improvement, but let's just pretend.

I'd say they have next to no ability to affect those things in a positive way.

They can always drive the bus off the road and over the cliff. You know, they could always declare martial law, and institute a daytime curfew. That would instantly stop the economy. (Just to throw out a ridiculous example to make my point.)

Doesn't matter. A big part of the election will be the economy, for which the current president is always held responsible, whether he is or not.

Plus, progressives argue (and vice-versa for conservatives, just an example) that the president with congress has the power to help the markets by intervening to strengthen the working class through infrastructure and small-business spending, and can hold him responsible for making the deal with congress. Plus, I've heard it fairly legitimately argued that if Obama wanted to risk the blowback from people like Merc accusing him of issuing edicts and declaring himself king, he actually COULD issue a host of stimulative executive orders. I'll try to find the link after I shower explaining the precedent for executive power for each of the measures proposed.

That's what we like to think. In reality, the economy is more powerful than all that, because it includes everything.

So often, well-intended and seemingly logical government measures wind up like pushing on a rope. The stimulus was like that. Hey let's have the government spend a huge amount, more than ever before, because economists tell us that government spending can take up the slack of less spending everywhere else.

And so they pushed that rope, but the economy failed to take up the slack. Why, well, that's a terrible and difficult question, because at the root of all economics is human behavior, and that's amazingly hard to predict.

All data shows that people, the economy, and the state of the nation improve when people are homeowners. Homeowners are stable, raise better families, are invested in their community, improve schools through local taxation, and have a future retirement plan in their home's equity.

So, let's have a government program to strengthen the working class by offering them mortgage deals!

Oops?! Well it was logical at the time.

I guess I misunderstood your argument. I assumed you meant that the president PERSONALLY couldn't do anything about it, not that government at all can't really do much about it. And that's really just a fundamental difference in beliefs, that it is hard to prove one way or the other because there's always a counterargument - because there's always a compromise. For example, I would say that it wasn't JUST the program to offer mortgage deals to the working class that "oops"ed, it was (more importantly, in my view) also a shortcoming on the financial side, with securitization and repackaging and all that fun stuff, that also encouraged banks to offer mortgages to people who REALLY couldn't afford it, etc.

So Fannie and Freddie supplied the wood, not the spark. The larger point is that Fannie and Freddie was government, intervening to strengthen the working class. And the economy said, well that outcome is going to be exactly the opposite of what was well-intended, because this is the economy, and everything's connected.

I see this all the time. How about college education. It works the same way. The government, with the best of intentions, announces that it will make available cheap money for people going to college. Thus several generations benefit from greater educations.

But over time, College, with all the best of intentions, finds a huge new market of people who can afford them, on top of the people who have enough to pay. Thus College increases its price by more than double the inflation rate. Now Government and all the people who can afford it are paying double (six figures at some places) for something with no additional worth.

Medicare part D. Government, with all the best of intentions, announces that they are going to pay for old people's drugs. The drug companies then double their prices to a marketplace that doesn't shop for value. Now Medicare has to pay even more and the drug companies get rich.

Grover Norquist controls the $ for all Republican re-election campaigns,
and for Republicans, re-election it is more important than anything.
His interview below has confirmed for me how the Republican hierarchy
views and actually intends to control the Presidency.

Thoughts about differences between Republican and Democratic presidents
first occurred to me when Ronald Regan slept through his term with a nice smile and movie-star personality.
George H.W.Bush was a single term President because he did not toe the Republican line on taxes.
But George W. Bush was exactly what the Republican hieracrchy wanted
... dumb but a "nice guy" who stayed in tow of Cheney and Rove.

Surprisingly, Norquist inadvertently complimented Obama, saying:
Charlottesville Libertarian Examiner
Richard Sincere
2/20/12

Grover Norquist surveys the 2012 political and legislative landscape

Good article, thanks for sharing. I do think Norquist lives in his own little world of understanding the process. I don't think Bush was that dumb and Obama certainly is not either.

You can't really believe that Lamp. That is a fantasy.

Completely true for both parties. And it is going to get much worse before it ever gets better.

Again, that is a stretch of the imagination.

Gosh Merc, I thought you were more attuned to the machinations of GOP politics.

Here's a link back to when the Republicans were, according to John Boehner,
going to come to agreement on the July, 2011 debt ceiling bill,
which included the lapse of the Bush Tax Cuts.

The press interviewed Norquist about the Norquist/ATR pledge,
and how he would respond if someone voted to allow the Bush Tax Cuts to lapse.

That link includes the "official ATR position statement",
and a recording of the interview in which Norquist says he
"... would denounce him as a tax raiser and a bad guy"
Within hours, Republicans got the message.

Boehner's agreement floundered, and he was embarrassed
time and again by the GOP sheep changing direction
and reneging on Boehner's previous agreements.

It's baaaaaack ! - If anyone but the 1% cares

The US Dow-Jones opened at a psychological level of 13,055 - best since mid-2007.

UG sure does...