Howard Stern on Romney
 

NSFW

Excellent.

When the stars align in the NY Times Editorials... ;)

I heard a story from a credible source yesterday, a frame salesman. It's the flip-side of the welfare queen story.

An ophthalmologist in South Jersey makes over a million dollars a year. He owns a rental property, which has 4 units, at $2,000 per month. Three years ago, he refinanced, taking out a significant portion of the equity. Two years ago, he decided to stop paying his mortgage. He's going to pocket $8,000 a month during the foreclosure process, and then he'll walk away, screwing the bank, the taxpayers, the tenants, and who knows who else?

Asshole.

Seriously?

We're supposed to choose our President from advice by a shock jock, who has become famous for saying things unwelcome in polite company?

And who is Mr. DJ beholding to? Let's see -- oh! the FCC, by golly! Who could yank Mr. DJ's license, and his job would be ALL GONE.

But I'm SURE Mr. DJ is COMPLETELY UNBIASED - oh sure! :rolleyes:

He knows about a Mormon, like he knows about the Higgs Bosun particle, and why it gives us mass.

I don't follow Howard Stern much at all, but I know enough that I know he made the jump to satellite radio a few years back. The hoopla at the time made a big point of saying that because it was a subscriber only service, the FCC had no jurisdiction. And oh boy what was Howard Stern going to do once there was nothing to hold him back?

Howard Stern doesn't remotely care about the FCC. Even when he was on the radio, he didn't care.

I'll tell you why he's doing it.

Three years ago, he refinanced, and was given a much higher interest rate than is currently available. Now, he wants to re-negotiate the interest rate (or refi), but the bank wants that higher interest, and won't budge. He can't refi, because now he doesn't have the equity in the property to do it.

So he's stuck, and he's VERY pissed at the bank - which has been given programs to help cases like this, but has chosen NOT to help him.

Yes, the bank will be screwed (but not terribly), the tenants will have no losses, and neither will the taxpayers. Property taxes must be caught up when the property reverts to the bank's ownership, or at least, not too far in arrears. Otherwise the property reverts to the local gov't which collects the property taxes.

I think I understand your logic here Adak.

Yes, just exactly as seriously as the legions of zombie dittoheads who get all they know from that other Mr DJ, El Rushbaugh, Rush Limbaugh. Because we all know he's not beholden to those who provide his "obscene profits", yeah. He's COMPLETELY UNBIASED.

Aren't you guilty of some kind of ideological miscegenation having even admitted to listening to Howard Stern? What's the penalty for that? Or are you looking for asylum?

Of course, he cared. That's his "shtick", that he doesn't care.

Howard's no dummy, and he knows the dear old President has an enemies list. If you get on it, you WILL have an IRS audit, and any other nuisance the fed's can give you - which is usually plenty.
Just like Joe the Plumber.

Howard does NOT want to be on the President's bad side - and he's a liberal (definitely!) anyway. So why would he have ANYTHING good to say about Romney?

Would Romney be a guest on Howard's show, or approve of it personally? No.
Would Romney supporters be subscribers to Howard's show? No.

Howard's an ass, but he's certainly not a stupid ass. He knows which side of the toast has the butter on it.

They will lose their homes within 3 months if they're month-to-month renters or if the new owner (the bank, initially) wants to occupy or re-purpose the property. The new owner has to follow eviction procedures and the tenants will have to deal with that, but in no way to they come out completely unscathed because this guy, for whatever reason, failed to pay the mortgage. That is certainly a loss, a financial, emotional and possibly social loss too, if they have no back-up plan. There doesn't even appear to be any stipulation to provide notice to tenants of a rental property, warning them the property they rent is in foreclosure.

Do you know this guy? Have actual knowledge of the circumstances in this specific case? If you do, say so, produce some kind of evidence for this narrative.

If not, then I'll give you my version that is equally made up but better supported by historical facts.

Three years ago mortgage interest rates were substantially higher than they are now. http://mortgage-x.com
Attachment 41285
Even assuming he'd financed before three years ago for a rate lower than the rate listed at Sep 08 (approx 6.25), the lowest rate would have been about 5.25%, one percent lower, maximum. So, your point about him getting a much higher rate three years ago is baloney.

As for refinancing now, he had his equity back in 08, right? Where did that equity go? Now, he had it in cash, which hasn't depreciated that much since inflation over the interim has been mild, and his property is likely worth LESS, making his cash in hand a greater percentage of the value of the property. Maybe he doesn't have that money anymore you say? Ok, fine, but he had his value, and he did with it whatever he wanted. He could put it into the property, or not.

Most likely what's happened is that he's making a strategic default. The building was the security for the mortgage, like practically all mortgages. But since he doesn't live there, he isn't as attached to the property as I am or as most other resident owners. *I* want to keep living in my house, but he doesn't have that motivation. Imagine if the value of the property declines, say he gets "upside down". Whose problem is that? Why shouldn't he walk away from the mortgage? You want the property for the price we agreed? Fine, take it.

I think it's a legal smart move.

Now, who pays for the money that wound up in his pocket? Who pays when any exchange takes place for money? I buy a house, I spend money, the money's gone. But look! I have a house. The seller, they get money, but they don't have the property. In this case, the bank has a house instead of their money. Just like they agreed.

What the former property owner did is no different than Bain Capital's modus operandii. Find a property, spend some money, make some changes, get yourself and your money out. The rest is not his problem. Now the tenants likely do have a problem. The bank has a problem, they don't want to be a property owner, but they made a contract and now they're paying the consequences. The costs they incur will be paid by the bank customers, you and me. Well, you actually, I fired banks long ago. The city will likely have trouble collecting the property taxes, ('cause who's gonna pay that?) and that impacts many people. But all these costs, they're spread out somewhat. The net value of what those costs cost wound up in the guy's pocket. He bet right. I still think he's a jerk though.

This shows you are a total idiot.

A complete and total idiot.

If Stern is trying to avoid getting on lists, why would he say anything at all? The election looks pretty close right now. Why would he risk getting on Romney's enemies list?

(I don't think either man has an enemies list, but I'm just throwing your own "logic" back in your face.)

WHY WOULD HOWARD STERN SAY ANYTHING AT ALL?

<Holy Molly!>

HOWARD is THE *MOUTH*. He talks endlessly about anything or anybody who is controversial!! Howard would LOVE to get acknowledged for being on Romney's enemies list (if Romney has one, which I seriously doubt). THAT is what makes Howard -- HOWARD! I'm not sure you understand Howard Stern's niche in life.

But Howard would NOT want to be on Obama's enemies list. Obama's people are the one's Howard wants to keep. They want to hear "crotch" and "snatch" and such, on the air. Mormons? Not nearly so much. I believe Howard would starve to death as a shock jock in Salt Lake City. Yeah, I'm sure he'd starve.

And when Howard was on regular radio and TV, it was difficult to always avoid the guy. I have to say he IS a smart guy, with a real talent - he's twisted it up, but it's still a talent.

Tell that to all the people who have been harassed by some federal agency, immediately after having a difference of opinion, with Obama.

Start with Joe the Plumber, and work your way on up through his term in office. IRS, SEC, FTC, ATF, Dept. of Justice, etc. They've all been used on different citizens who have not agreed with Obama.

Latest example was the whistle blower on the "Fast and Furious" guns to Mexico idiocy by the FBI and ATF. Although we have a law to protect whistle blowers, the agent who blew the whistle, has just been fired by the agency.

If you embarrass Obama's administration by telling the truth, you pay.

Oh my god, did you really just dig up joe the plumber??

I would love for you to come back in 6 months after the election and re-read the stuff you are writing. It's hysterical the knots you are tying yourself in.

With a perfectly straight face, Conservative John Sununu speaks his mind.

Washington Post
Aaron Blake
October 25, 2012

Top Romney aide Sununu suggests Powell endorsed Obama because he’s black

Sure, that must be it... race, not issues
... just as if some whites are not against Obama because he is black.

this falls into the same category as gaffes like

"corporations are people too"
"I don't know about Tebow, but some of my friends own nfl teams"
same as above "...NASCAR teams"
"do you want to bet $10,000?"
"Ann had it rough, only two Cadillacs"

Sometimes, people reveal what is really on their mind. It can be informative.

Ummm.... a "gaffe" implies it was unintentional.

Today on Fox News, Sununu stated that Obama's was the "... most racially divisive administration, ever"
Besides being absurd on it's face, this comment comes across to me as quite intentional.

Sununu is one of Romney's major advisors, and is not being called back.

But I agree with your comment:

I believe he believes what he said. I believe that revealing his true feelings was unintentional, hence "gaffe". He meant what he said, he just didn't mean to say it out loud.

Like the Chief Whip who recently had to resign after losing his temper with some police officers and shouting:

I'm not a statistician, but this doesn't look right, even if I'm reluctant to accept conspiracy theories.

What do you all think? Is this hogwash or possible? If it is real, I seriously doubt anything will be able to change it...too much money behind this.

Hacking the Vote

tw warned us about this years ago.

Ahhh...I stayed out of the politics forums until this year. Musta missed it.

It's still a serious problem, but after the election dust settles everybody but Karl Rove forgets about it until it rears it's ugly head again.

EXACTLY like that.

Debt & Deficit
 

I found this interesting.

That guy has a history series that I have been following. Extremely interesting.

I'm voting for Obama.













































twice.

Trilby--lulz!

xoB--yes very very good, very good . Likewise their (off topic) human sexuality

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mc...ug9go1_500.jpg
not in the "funny" thread because it isn't. It's damning and true.

It didn't click until I read this but kind of eerie:

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast....nfederacy.html


The election is literally split by geographic location besides a select few examples. I don't think this should be looked into too much but it seems the political polarization is turning more and more into a cultural issue (the best explanation I've heard/thought of).

???


I thought Ibby's post was predicting "back alley abortions"

What? My post has nothing to do with Ibby's. It has to do with the red and blue states being split geographically, at almost the same borders as in 1860.

Edit: I can see how that was confusing. My post wasn't a response to Ibby's.

right, ph was saying that what didn't click was the claim that Romney's winning the "confederacy", and that it only became clear when he clicked on the link to the story about the colors on the maps of the confederacy and today's likely electoral votes.

The geography of American culture is interesting stuff. Here is Colin Woodward's map.

reeeeeally not liking how appropriative it is to talk about "american nations" without meaning, yknow, the actual native american nations that we exterminated...

Do you recommend the book? It seems interesting.

Note the First Nation up North. This is a serious look at what actually exists not an exercise in political correctness.
I'd recommend it. The book is interesting, he shows some differences between Tidewater and the Deep South that I wouldn't have picked up on. He admits that folks can quibble with his counties, but he has historical reasons for his inclusions. He also talks about and takes into account our mobility as a nation. I'm only 1/4 into it but a couple hurricane days from now and I'll have a better idea about his ideas.

I'm really astounded at the size of their balls...

Hundreds of voter registrations flipped

Did they think people would not notice when they got to the polls? Was it so that these people would be disenfranchised, come voting time?

If no one does anything about these sorts of shennanigans, more and more people will attempt it, and eventually our election system will be unrecognizably corrupt...much like some third world country's are now.

Dear Americans,

Pretty much everyone would prefer you to keep Obama.

Everyone except Pakistan, that is, and I think that is an even stronger reason to like BHO.

Love,

Rest of the world.

Attachment 41423

Yes, Russia is notably absent. Maybe opinion polls are considered subversive or something.

Iran is missing too.

Iran went for Gary Johnson after this debate was broadcast on Al-Jeezera.

Here's the possible trouble spots...

I'm waiting for the gloves to come back off and Dems or 3rd party pro-Obama groups to run ads with Mitt and Paul talking about defunding or dismantling FEMA. That should play real well on the East Coast.

Already getting talked about...

http://wtop.com/1211/3100461/Romney-...in-storms-wake

Don't have time to look into it more right now since I think Huffington Post is pretty biased, but this is interesting:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2059156.html


Note that this assumes demand driven growth.

Also reported by the NY Times

It still seems to be a very new story might be a bit before other news outlets pick it up if they do.

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt...kewedpolls.jpg

All you brainwashed lib'ruls have it wrong, and the evil liberal media conspiracy to skew the polls is thoroughly debunked, gosh. Obviously.

In more sensical news, The Young Turks (Current TV, beats watching Chris Matthews or Top Gear reruns) just did a segment on the bookies' odds on the election, which are just about in line with Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight at 3:1 for Obama.

I do not buy that for a second.

Romney will not win New Mexico, they vote 2 to 1 democrat, their former republican governor Gary Johnson will be on the ballot as the libertarian party candidate and he was very popular there, he was re-elected unlike the other former republican governor who only served one term in Massachusetts.

Romney will not win in Ohio either, I live in the most republican county in Ohio and just put 100 Gary Johnson signs all over and if you came here you would think that the election was between Johnson and Romney, there are hardly any Obama signs here.

The GOP is in disarray, the way the Ron Paul people were treated in Tampa was deplorable and it is going to cost them big time. A year ago the sentiment was anyone but Romney, they were begging Chris Christie to run, they had one front runner after another, I still love you Herman Cain!

When I was young and stupid I was a republican, but after being royally disgusted by the first Bush I stopped misreading the problem and joined the libertarian party.

I only have two simple requests for our "Dear Leaders"

1. Be a good steward of our hard earned tax payers dollars. Spend my money as carefully as I have to

2. Stay the FUCK out of my personal life, I have a sterling character compared to you. (You = John Edwards and Arnold Schwarzenegger)

People get the government they deserve - deserve better!

yeah... neither does anybody else saner than Adak and Merc and UG. in other words, anybody sane.

I can't wait until election night just to see the repugs cry when they lose and I hope I did something to straighten them out.

Maybe they will lay off the whole legitimate rape pregnancy abortion, gay bashing, drug warrior, chicken hawk nonsense. That and all the lies will cost them control of the senate.

You may be underestimating the effectiveness of electoral shennanigans. Remember 2000.

Yeah Broward county, a predominately black, Democrat area, mysteriously lost 1000 votes the other day. Just poof'd.

The elections supervisor said it would be looked into, but short of comparing each electronic vote with each paper ballot, how the hell would they find it? I know a little about computers and hackers, and it would be a cakewalk to put a little backdoor program in there to allow access to play with the numbers. A little here, a little there, not enough to cause undue alarm, and you can do whatever....err...elect whomever you want.

I hadn't heard of Gary Johnson, but I wish he had run in the GOP primaries, with us. Would have been interesting!

Unfortunately, we have a two party system, so if you want a conservative, and you vote for Johnson, you're handing the election to Obama - because third party candidates never get any kind of a decent number of electoral votes.

The last 3rd party candidate that did well, was Ross Perot - who had a good platform - but his supporters handed the election to the democrat, on a silver platter.

Think twice about voting for a third party candidate, and look at the history of them, and their effect on candidates they are closest to in their platform, who are also in the race.

Don't hand the race to Obama, by voting for Johnson. Get Johnson to run as a Republican, perhaps for a Senate seat? (and President whenever he would like to run for that - but as a Republican, not a Libertarian).

I like the Libertarian platform, but we can't win elections with that party.