What would you do if crazed fundamentalist republicans took over the country

[gugaxamot]

What would you do if crazed fundamentalist republicans took over the country and outlawed T-girls and other people they considered "undesirable" and used them for medical and sexual experiments?

[EvaCassini]

that wouldn't happen nowadays because 99% American people were and still appalled by the Nazi regime which decimated lives in the 30's and 40's, not to mention the rest of the free-thinking reason based world.

the other 1% are sociopaths, religious fundamentalists, and hardcore Tea Baggers.

Science has prevailed substantially within the past few decades and will continue to. Science and reason will create a better world to live in, not religion or republican fundamentalism.

Humans are much more intelligent nowadays to understand that even if someone doesn't like certain people for petty reasons, doesn't mean that they have to throw them in concentration camp or even go to the horrific point of medical experiments.

[Ben]

What would you do if crazed fundamentalist republicans took over the country and outlawed T-girls and other people they considered "undesirable" and used them for medical and sexual experiments?

Leave the country -- :)
Anyway, I can't see that happening....
I mean, they're veering more and more to the right. The Party is inundated with religious crazies. Which should frighten us. And, too, the Republican Party simply serve the very rich. But the Dems, too, are moving in that direction.
So: we've a choice in this country: crazy or less crazy.
Wow! Profound choice -- ha ha! :)

[Ben]

Hitler's American Business Partners:

Hitler's American Business Partners - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMKnH2BlkBA)

[Merkurie]

that wouldn't happen nowadays because 99% American people were and still appalled by the Nazi regime which decimated lives in the 30's and 40's, not to mention the rest of the free-thinking reason based world.

the other 1% are sociopaths, religious fundamentalists, and hardcore Tea Baggers.

Science has prevailed substantially within the past few decades and will continue to. Science and reason will create a better world to live in, not religion or republican fundamentalism.

Humans are much more intelligent nowadays to understand that even if someone doesn't like certain people for petty reasons, doesn't mean that they have to throw them in concentration camp or even go to the horrific point of medical experiments.

I think you overestimate people.

Ignorance is the ever present partner to hate. And that is why fundamentalists and Right Wing Tea party types are always denigrating science and limiting education and reason.

Fundamentalists don't want education or a better world, because that would make their ambitions impossible.

[Ben]

Interesting book about how American big business backed Hitler.
It's not a secret about how the business community got behind Hitler.

[bluesoul]

What would you do if crazed fundamentalist republicans took over the country and outlawed T-girls and other people they considered "undesirable" and used them for medical and sexual experiments?

i'd start a thread here called "fuck- crazed fundamentalist republicans took over the country" and say things like "fuck crazed fundamentalist republicans" knowing fully well everyone here would agree with such commentary and thus: get liked #thumbsup

[EvaCassini]

No overestimation at all.

Think of just the percentage of people who are the "assholes" who embrace hate and inequality, and those who embrace freedom, justice, respect, reason, and science.

There are only a few unintelligent jagoffs that lead the blind unintelligent, which is sad, BUT the amount of people who use reason and science ARE intelligent and there are many.

We have great leaders and teachers, to include Lawrence Krauss, the late great Christopher Hitchens, the late great Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, Michael Shermer, Bill Maher, Penn Jillette, Raymond Teller, James Randi and many, many others.

And a good amount of the names I mentioned...are rich and do contribute ALOT to help guide the world to reason.

[bluesoul]

We have great leaders and teachers, to include Lawrence Krauss, the late great Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, Michael Shermer, Bill Maher, Penn Jillette, Raymond Teller, James Randi

http://i43.tinypic.com/b8l3bn.gif

[EvaCassini]

why the look?

You probably don't know much about those people I mentioned. You should look them up and see who they are, see what they do, and how they are helping humans become better.

Not knowing who these great people are who are people of reason and what they do, means you have some ignorance about you, sadly.

[Ben]

No overestimation at all.

Think of just the percentage of people who are the "assholes" who embrace hate and inequality, and those who embrace freedom, justice, respect, reason, and science.

There are only a few unintelligent jagoffs that lead the blind unintelligent, which is sad, BUT the amount of people who use reason and science ARE intelligent and there are many.

We have great leaders and teachers, to include Lawrence Krauss, the late great Christopher Hitchens, the late great Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, Michael Shermer, Bill Maher, Penn Jillette, Raymond Teller, James Randi and many, many others.

And a good amount of the names I mentioned...are rich and do contribute ALOT to help guide the world to reason.

[/QUOTE] We have great leaders and teachers, to include Lawrence Krauss, the late great Christopher Hitchens, the late great Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, Neil DeGrasse Tyson, Bill Nye, Michael Shermer, Bill Maher, Penn Jillette, Raymond Teller, James Randi and many, many others. [/QUOTE]

And an addendum: the American people... :)
Most people are decent and moral.... And all we need is for people to act on their moral and decent impulses.

[tsmirandameadows]

Not a particularly pressing concern for me. If it did happen I would emigrate.

[Ben]

Actually, in all honesty, I'm more worried about the Zombie Apocalypse:

Shaun of the Dead best scene! (HD) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQDMj2sZtNM)

[EvaCassini]

Why worry about zombies?

When we have Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. hehe

[dderek123]

Come to Canada!

[EvaCassini]

Exactly. The addendum of most of the world.

Humans are born with no sense of right and wrong, they have to be taught. As much as I am not a fan of babies ( because of the noises and smells lol ), they aren't born evil. There is no determination, that is why education of history, science, and sociology should be massively taught.

Santayana said, "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it".

The morally inept; conservative republicans, tea baggers, religious fanatics, and sociopaths are not educated well enough to be leaders, especially in history ( recent and old ). The only reason why they have high influence on dumb people is because they have lots of money and usually have unusually good speaking skills, and promoting conveyance. They are really analogous of high functioning autistic people.

[dderek123]

Language, common sense, our value system and natural intuition mostly comes from our social conditioning and indoctrination. That's why I believe the BS in the media is influencing the aging electorate in America.

Come to Canada though. Stuff is pretty neat up here.

[Ben in LA]

Just as long as those assholes stay out of California, I'm cool.

[Ben]

Language, common sense, our value system and natural intuition mostly comes from our social conditioning and indoctrination. That's why I believe the BS in the media is influencing the aging electorate in America.

Come to Canada though. Stuff is pretty neat up here.

One big downside -- :nervous:
Shame Shania Twain isn't the PM of Canada. Actually, I've no idea where she stands politically.
But her looks supersede anything she'd do with respect to public policy. ;)
Actually, I'd like Shania as PM of Canada and Madonna as President and then they can engage in some sexy cross-border cunnilingus -- ha ha! :)

[fivekatz]

Well the idea the fundamentalists could ever have so much influence on the party of the corporations is doubtful.

The next thing frankly is as a wedge issue "the gays" and "the lesbians" catch a lot more of the political thunder because the there are more of them and they are focal point for same sex marriage.

But if the rights of LGBT community are civil rights battle of this age the transgendered community is in terms of political bait for scared old white guys the same as the latino community was in the 1960's civil rights battle.

While the possibility of humans doing inhuman acts to other humans always exists the tide in the US in terms of tolerance in running counter to the "straights" cleansing the earth of those who aren't.

[BBaggins06]

why the look?

You probably don't know much about those people I mentioned. You should look them up and see who they are, see what they do, and how they are helping humans become better.

Not knowing who these great people are who are people of reason and what they do, means you have some ignorance about you, sadly.

I don't think Bill Maher belongs in that group. I don't find him that particularly intelligent or funny. IMO John Fugelsang is a much better political comedian ...

[robertlouis]

Not a particularly pressing concern for me. If it did happen I would emigrate.

The UK please Miranda!

[BellaBellucci]

Guns. That is all.

~BB~

[BellaBellucci]

Scratch that.

Warren Zevon - Lawyers, Guns & Money - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGhd53hV0Z0)

~BB~

[EvaCassini]

Bill Maher is the type of person you either really hate or really love, and the reason for that is because of his straight-forward, blatant personality. I find that quality attractive ( as a like, not sexual ).

I do believe he should be included on the list that I posted because he is a great figure and spokesperson for people of reason. He is actually quite intelligent. He's a graduate from Cornell with a B.A. in both History and English. I find his comedy quite funny.

Fugelsang... I am not a fan of him. His work isn't that great.

[BeardedOne]

that wouldn't happen nowadays because 99% American people were and still appalled by the Nazi regime which decimated lives in the 30's and 40's, not to mention the rest of the free-thinking reason based world.

How sweet. Certainly something I'd like to believe.

I live in a state that came dangerously close to putting one of these nutbags in the US Senate and it was only a split vote (Write-ins wasted on another conservative, though more balanced, candidate who chose not to run at the last minute) that saved us from ruin.

I've heard too many otherwise sane people go on about how horrible O is and how he "...is Hitler!" and similar, bagger-inspired rants. The number of people voicing this craziness is frightening and I can only imagine how many more there are that are not so vocal about it. Many of these same people will go on about how they 'support' our troops, 'honor' our vets, and abhor the atrocities of WWII Europe and in the same breath tell you about how the current administration is driving us down the road to socialism and a police state, etc.

It only takes twelve states to elect a President. That's far less than 99% of the population, but enough to cause some horrific damage.

[nysprod]

The definition of a conservative is someone who wants government out of your life except when it comes to regulating your sex/reproductive life...BTW, I've mentioned this before but super conservative Dallas and Houston have the highest per-capita population of TS escorts, based on BP ads.

[EvaCassini]

How sweet. Certainly something I'd like to believe.

I live in a state that came dangerously close to putting one of these nutbags in the US Senate and it was only a split vote (Write-ins wasted on another conservative, though more balanced, candidate who chose not to run at the last minute) that saved us from ruin.

I've heard too many otherwise sane people go on about how horrible O is and how he "...is Hitler!" and similar, bagger-inspired rants. The number of people voicing this craziness is frightening and I can only imagine how many more there are that are not so vocal about it. Many of these same people will go on about how they 'support' our troops, 'honor' our vets, and abhor the atrocities of WWII Europe and in the same breath tell you about how the current administration is driving us down the road to socialism and a police state, etc.

It only takes twelve states to elect a President. That's far less than 99% of the population, but enough to cause some horrific damage.

Those who make those arguments that "O" is Hitler are people who don't know history and disregard it as just some class one needs to "complete" ( cheat/ just get by ) in high school. Regardless of how the collegiate vote happens, the majority, "the American People" won't let that happen. Imagine if we ( America ) were to become a country just like Syria...LOTS of countries ( at least 192 ) would take action to combat the foolishness of said "crazed asshole republican", and help free-thinking Americans.

Also, I have served in the U.S. Navy and know many, many service members. A huge chunk of them are very free-thinking. This isn't Vietnam era. The "troops" today are mature enough to understand when to stand up against immoral orders. It's called integrity; "To do what is right when no one is taking notice and/or taking a stand against immoral actions/ideas." Honor.

I live in Texas. A state in which, has a senator who is a complete "crazy person"...Ted Fuckin Cruz AND a dumbass governor and previous presidential candidate, Rick Perry. I am a tranny who resides in this state. I am fine. Everyone here treats me like a normal person, a fellow human, even though I live a state where real crazies are from and live and hold some kind of office.




The definition of a conservative is someone who wants government out of your life except when it comes to regulating your sex/reproductive life...BTW, I've mentioned this before but super conservative Dallas and Houston have the highest per-capita population of TS escorts, based on BP ads.

My "sex life" isn't what one would call a "societal norm", let alone the current state of my body. So this is a big issue for me. That is why I learn as much as I can about these people and their politics and keep updated by many new outlets. ( Not MSM. That's where they brew bullshit. I listen to NPR, RT, Colbert, Stewart, and Bill Maher. )

And yes, you are right. Here in Dallas and also in Houston, there are lots of transgender people, oddly enough lol.

[Northof60]

Its pretty hard to deny that Ted Cruz & the Tea Baggers are a really messed up crew with some pretty fucked up ideals.

[trish]

What would you do if crazed fundamentalist republicans took over the country?No problem. I'd just wait for their base to croak from diabetes, arteriosclerosis and Alzheimer's disease...not to mention terminal stupidity.

[Jericho]

What would you do if crazed fundamentalist republicans took over the country

Shit son, I'm in the UK, they already have.
I'm going to get stoned and wait for the next bunch of bastards to come into power...Like last time! :shrug

[dderek123]

http://i.imgur.com/lZLFDUb.jpg

[ashymon]

Hate me if you will, but I believe in "constitutional fundamentalism." I believe in smaller Government and I don't believe the Government has the right to tell me what to do, when to do it, or how to do it. After a lot of self debate on this I found that politically my beliefs are in alignment with the Tea Party. There are so many misconceptions and with any label, I don't think it so right to generalize someone. I don't hate. I am not racist, I will fuck, drink with, or hang out with anyone of any race. I learned in the Marines we all bleed red anyhow. I obviously support people's individual rights to their own preference when it comes to sexuality. So, I find people's ill informed beliefs regarding the Tea Party to be offensive at best.

[martin48]

Shit son, I'm in the UK, they already have.
I'm going to get stoned and wait for the next bunch of bastards to come into power...Like last time! :shrug

Good to see that you have constructive appraisal of our political system and a well-thought through plan.

[BellaBellucci]

Hate me if you will, but I believe in "constitutional fundamentalism." I believe in smaller Government and I don't believe the Government has the right to tell me what to do, when to do it, or how to do it. After a lot of self debate on this I found that politically my beliefs are in alignment with the Tea Party. There are so many misconceptions and with any label, I don't think it so right to generalize someone. I don't hate. I am not racist, I will fuck, drink with, or hang out with anyone of any race. I learned in the Marines we all bleed red anyhow. I obviously support people's individual rights to their own preference when it comes to sexuality. So, I find people's ill informed beliefs regarding the Tea Party to be offensive at best.

It seems to me that you're Tea Party Classic, not New Tea Party. I left the moment Sarah Palin and the Koch brothers crashed it. These days, I think you might happier with the term 'libertarian' or even 'classical liberal.' The Tea Party is a Republican (bowel) movement now.

http://www.maximumpc.com/files/u69/no_new_coke.jpg

~BB~

[EvaCassini]

"Fun Nature Fact"
We all bleed "red"...because we have iron within hemoglobin packed in our blood, which carries oxygen throughout our body.

Not because we are "Murican".

I'll bet you my left tit and my cock that Bin Laden, Hitler, Polpot, Edward Snowden, and Lee Harvey Oswald...all bleed red.



BTW..."More Fun Nature Facts" ...

Horseshoe Crabs have haemocyanin, a copper-based protein. They bleed blue.

Also female kangaroos have 3 vaginas.

[trish]

...I believe in "constitutional fundamentalism." I don't believe the Government has the right to tell me what to do, when to do it, or how to do it.The Constitution literally grants the government the power to legislate laws and enforce them. In common parlance, the government has the right to tell you what to do (e.g. pay your taxes), when to do it (e.g. before the April 15 deadline) and how to do it (e.g. use the correct form and fill it out legibly). :D

[nysprod]

Hate me if you will, but I believe in "constitutional fundamentalism." I believe in smaller Government and I don't believe the Government has the right to tell me what to do, when to do it, or how to do it. After a lot of self debate on this I found that politically my beliefs are in alignment with the Tea Party. There are so many misconceptions and with any label, I don't think it so right to generalize someone. I don't hate. I am not racist, I will fuck, drink with, or hang out with anyone of any race. I learned in the Marines we all bleed red anyhow. I obviously support people's individual rights to their own preference when it comes to sexuality. So, I find people's ill informed beliefs regarding the Tea Party to be offensive at best.

Except for paying taxes, the U.S. government doesn't tell you what/when/how to do anything, rather, it's in the business of telling you what you CAN"T do, i.e. rob banks, drive drunk etc.

Have you looked into the Libertarians...it sounds as if you're more aligned with their thinking.

[Silcc69]

Except for paying taxes, the U.S. government doesn't tell you what/when/how to do anything, rather, it's in the business of telling you what you CAN"T do, i.e. rob banks, drive drunk etc.

Have you looked into the Libertarians...it sounds as if you're more aligned with their thinking.

How many of your folks are lining up to legalize weed and prostitution? The government tells these girls that they can't sell there body and I see no republicans campaigning for escort rights LOL. Granted I don't think any politician would.

[EvaCassini]

Only a matter of time. In Britain, escorting is legal and they are the US's biggest ally.

Black's rights, API's rights, women's rights, Gay's rights, Legal Marijuana...whats next?

It's almost 2014, and I know a at least 2 big things that could definitely be next...Transgender rights and Legalizing Escorting/Prostitution.

Old people die. Right wing fanatics aren't immortal, nor are their ideals.

[Erika1487]

:whistle:

[kmersh]

Where do I start?

One of my first jobs out of college I worked for a Federal Gov't Contractor and I began to realize very quickly why we are in the financial troubles we are today, simply put we do not do things right the first time.
Very often my employer would do something at the Federal Gov't request only to find out that it did not work and the Gov't would pay us more money to fix the issue.
It literally made my head spin as tax payer at the gobs of money the Federal Gov't wasted on a daily basis that could be put to better use elsewhere and was one of the reasons I left that job.

I remember one project my employer won was upgrading a certain piece of military hardware, the old piece came in and we would strip it down to its bare bones and rebuild it.
In the tear down process it was not uncommon to damage a certain part, in fact it was understood that it would occasionally happen and we would do our best to minimize it.
When we did damage that piece, we had two options, one was to repair it which cost around $2000 and the other was to replace it, which cost around $12,000.

Each time I would go to the on-site Gov't inspectors and request to repair the part and each time that request would be denied and I would be authorize to replace the part as he/she (the Federal Gov't Inspector) did not want to assume the risk that down the road the repair could fail, even though the repair met the same stringent standards as the replacement part and that was under a Republican Administration (supposed to be fiscally conservative).

The Federal Gov't does not reward doing the right things, instead we reward doing the wrong things, because nobody wants to take responsibility.

The funny part was that my employer also upgraded the same piece of military hardware for Foreign Gov't and when we damaged that part during the tear down process each and every time the Foreign Gov't would approve the repair and not the replacement as the repair was cheaper and just as good as the replacement in every way.

Another anecdote, we spend (read waste) all kinds of money on things that do not even serve the average US citizen. For example, the House of Representatives has a full fledged gym that requires money each years to maintain and upgrade. A good friend of mine is an aide to Rep. Ryan a fiscal conservative and my buddy told me a while ago how Rep. Ryan uses that Gym all the time and one would think that being fiscally conservative with the people's money would dictate closing the Gym and using the people's money in a more fiscally conservative fashion.

k

[trish]

Good argument for not contracting jobs to the private sector. Another example is Rumsfeld's partial privatization of the military: it used to be that soldiers on KP duty peeled potatoes and cooked, but now we spend a lot of money contracting that job out to the private sector. It requires extra personnel, extra accommodations and transport. On the bright side, you have a job and it pays better than combat duty does.

[nysprod]

How many of your folks are lining up to legalize weed and prostitution? The government tells these girls that they can't sell there body and I see no republicans campaigning for escort rights LOL. Granted I don't think any politician would.

Lol...not my folks, I'm about as far from being republican as you can get...

[SugaSweet]

Most of the GOP and many dem's are out of their minds.I would move full time instead of part time to Costa Rica.

[EvaCassini]

This is very interesting. A must listen. Check it out, just listened to it earlier this morning. Good comedy too.

http://www.cracked.com/podcast/the-mind-blowing-dick-waving-presidency-lyndon-johnson/

[mildcigar_2001]

I really can't believe some of the posts in this thread. The country is 17 TRILLION in debt and the Tea Party is the scariest thing you can imagine.

I consider myself a member of the Tea Party and I am for balanced budgets, decreased entitlements, free enterprise, and personal responsibility. I suppose I am naive, but I don't see anything all that controversial.

I would be willing to bet that if we put forward a list of Sarah Palin's beliefs without her name attached that a majority of people even on this board would agree with her. From all accounts she seemed to do a fairly good job as Alaska's governor, and fought Republican corruption while a member of Alaska' oil and gas commission.

I imagine that she has a lot more in common with all of us board members than we would like to admit. She worked her way through college, has worked on Alaskan fishing boats, and her husband worked in the oil fields. How many of us would have the patience to raise a Down's Syndrome baby. I think that some caricature on SNL is the truth and we do no independent investigation. I bring up Sarah Palin because she has become the new boogeyman to those on the Left, and was cited several times in the above thread.

[trish]

We are a government of, by and for the people. We believe in and enacted social insurance programs like social security, medicare etc. (things you call entitlements). It’s what government is supposed to do.

If you recall, Clinton was in fact balancing the budget (the deficit was zero). He was paying down on the debt. The big issue in the Bush vs Gore election was what to do with the "surplus". Gore’s proposal was continue to balance the budget, keep paying down on the debt and save what’s paid in for social security in a “lock box” for that specific purpose. Bush declared the surplus belonged to the people and proposed to give it back, mostly to the wealthy. Bush won. Do you remember how much of the surplus you got back?
Do you remember the president who doubled the debt, never balanced the budget and kept the cost of two wars off the budget? Hint: His middle initial is W.

Yes, we should balance the budget, which means each fiscal year we should make sure our revenues are greater than or equal to our costs; i.e. each fiscal year the deficit should be less than or equal to zero. (If the revenues exceed the cost, we put that remainder toward the debt). The current administration has fought to bring us out of the worst recession ever (inherited from the previous administration) and has cut the deficit in half. Not zero, but we’re going in the right direction. The debt is a long term woe. It’s no emergency. But we can’t keep running up deficits. Shutting the government down did not save us any money. In fact it cost us. Our credit rating goes down, we have to pay more interest on our debt. Interest on 17 trillion dollars is nothing to sneeze at. So thank you Tea Party for fucking us up the ass again.

We are the government. We need to balance our budget and pay on our debt. We also need to look after the health and the well being of our elderly and our poor. You want to cut a budget, cut the military. You want to cut an entitlement, cut the entitlements to big business and factory farmers. Food stamps aren’t the problem. Social security is not the problem (just raise the fuckin’ cap). The problem is whiny little assholes who selfishly refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of the legislative process and threaten to ruin our credit and our economy if they can’t get their way by ordinary democratic means.

[Gillian]

Bush declared the surplus belonged to the people and proposed to give it back, mostly to the wealthy. Bush won. Do you remember how much of the surplus you got back?
Keeping on the point of wealth inequality, this vid covers it nicely. The discrepancies between the perceived, actual and ideal scenarios are quite alarming. However, I suspect a survey in the UK would produce similar results ...

Wealth Inequality in America - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM)

[EvaCassini]

You do realize that Sarah Palin BELIEVES for a FACT that the reason the default scare and Gov't shutdown happened...is the blame of Obama for NOT taking military action on Syria.

Sarah Palin also does not know American history, clearly. Her words ---> ( "He who warned, uh, the British that they weren't gonna be takin' away our arms, uh, by ringing those bells, and um, makin' sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be sure and we were going to be free, and we were going to be armed." --Sarah Palin, botching the history of Paul Revere's midnight ride, June 3, 2011. )

She has a BA in communication with an emphasis in journalism. Attended 4 different colleges AND to finally attain her BA, she entered a beauty pageant, played the flute, finished 3rd, received the Miss Congeniality Award and a college scholarship. ( Yet people believe she is intelligent and the right person to have in Washington )

These are just a few of her ludicrous political positions...

- opposed to reformed healthcare. That it would lead to a bureaucratic rationing of care which, in her own words, described using the term "death panels". Her words ---> "The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil." –-Sarah Palin, in a message posted on Facebook about Obama's health care plan, Aug. 7, 2009 ...Another interesting quote ---> "We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada. And I think now, isn't that ironic?" --Sarah Palin, admitting that her family used to get treatment in Canada's single-payer health care system, despite having demonized such government-run programs as socialized medicine that will lead to death-panel-like rationing, March 6, 2010

- Opposes Same-sex marriage, and abortion to include rape, incest, and embryonic stem cells.

- For capital punishment
( Fact - For a single convict to be put to death costs more then to keep him/her in prison or even help them by putting them in rehab. )

- She supports creationism during lessons on evolution in public schools. ( Religion should not be a subject in the education system. I am all for math, sciences, history, and art, but not religion. Especially if she wants it taught "side by side" with factual sciences. )

She is a self described "Bible-Believing Christian". Also funny thing, she sincerely believes that we live in the "end times" and the "2nd Coming" is due soon ( within a year or two ). So with that known to all of us...why should she be elected for any office, and vote on important issues concerning WE AMERICANS, when it doesn't concern her if she believes her beliefs are true?

She knows they aren't true, that's why people like her should not hold public positions, let alone make important life changing decisions for all Americans including you and myself.

I leave you with these fun quotes by Sarah Palin...enjoy.

"'Refudiate,' 'misunderestimate,' 'wee-wee'd up.' English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!'" --a Tweet sent by Sarah Palin in response to being ridiculed for inventing the word "refudiate," proudly mistaking her illiteracy for literary genius, July 18, 2010

"But obviously, we've got to stand with our North Korean allies." --Sarah Palin, after being asked how she would handle the current hostilities between the two Koreas, interview on Glenn Beck's radio show, Nov. 24, 2010

"As Putin rears his head and comes into the air space of the United States of America, where– where do they go? It's Alaska. It's just right over the border." --Sarah Palin, explaining why Alaska's proximity to Russia gives her foreign policy experience, interview with CBS's Katie Couric, Sept. 24, 2008

"As we work and sightsee on America's largest island, we'll get to view more majestic bears, so now is a good time to draw attention to the political equivalent of the species." --Sarah Palin, referring to Kodiak Island in Alaska, even though Hawaii is America's biggest island, July 19, 2010

"Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn't it stab you in the heart, as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate." --a Tweet by Sarah Palin, which she quickly removed after being ridiculed for inventing the word "refudiate," July 18, 2010

"Peaceful New Yorkers, pls refute the Ground Zero mosque plan if you believe catastrophic pain caused @ Twin Towers site is too raw, too real." --a second Tweet by Sarah Palin, which she also removed after misusing the word "refute," July 18, 2010

"'Refudiate,' 'misunderestimate,' 'wee-wee'd up.' English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!'" --a follow-up Tweet by Sarah Palin, proudly mistaking her illiteracy for literary genius, July 18, 2010

This is what bothers me. Most of the American people are not well informed enough or even have people skills well enough to read people and LISTEN to what they say, not just "hear" but "listen". The "understanding" and "comprehension" of who these people really are.

Just so you all know...that if any of these pillocks attain any more political power...your beloved tranny porn ( of which I love making for you all and being a part of ) will go straight down the shitter. Not just porn itself, but because Transgender people will end up in camps, imprisoned, forced to change back by the power of a "god"...you name it, it could happen.

Just look back at history and you will see that this has happened to ANYONE who is NOT a rich, white person.

But I do believe that the American people know and understand the implications of this person and her cohorts gaining anymore power. As I said before, a few posts back, that this being a much more enlightened era in human history and that we have great leaders and teachers to guide us towards greater knowledge and truth through reason and science.

[martin48]

Enjoy this

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2013/oct/08/inequality-how-wealth-distributed-uk-animated-video





Keeping on the point of wealth inequality, this vid covers it nicely. The discrepancies between the perceived, actual and ideal scenarios are quite alarming. However, I suspect a survey in the UK would produce similar results ...

Wealth Inequality in America - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM)

[nysprod]

The last recession, which did explode during the Bush administration, had it's roots in the Clinton administration when the lackey of Wall St. and the big banks, then Treasury secretary Robert Rudin, talked Clinton into signing legislation to de-regulate the banks.

This allowed the banks, for the first time since the Great Depression, to trade financial instruments with their own money and the instruments most frequently traded were the mortgage bonds which ultimately brought the global economy to it's knees.

Please note that Rudin, after leaving his post as Treasury Secretary, went to work for Citi (the worst of the offenders and the bank which required the largest taxpayer bailout) for an annual salary of $20M/yr.

[Silcc69]

Sarah Palin ugh man everytime I hear her speak I loose brain cells. But she is a pretty hot bitch to look at as Michelle Bachman is too.

[mildcigar_2001]

The problem is whiny little assholes who selfishly refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of the legislative process and threaten to ruin our credit and our economy if they can’t get their way by ordinary democratic means.


It is truly ironic that you think going ever deeper into debt is not going to effect the USA's credit rating. At some not very distant point creditors are going to see that they won't ever be paid back.

Take a look at the City of Detroit to see our future.

[trish]

What's ironic is that you're blind to the evidence. Our credit rating was triple A even as the debt doubled under Bush. Our credit was lowered the minute it looked like we were going to default on a payment.


I never said we should go deeper into debt. If you can read, you'll find I said we should balance the budget and pay on the debt. But the debt is a long term problem, not an emergency. If you can achieve zero deficits, the debt won't grow. But at the moment recovering from the banking collapse and getting money flowing through the economy is much more important than the debt per se.

[Jonny29]

Based on the Fiscal year end of the US Government while President Clinton was in office, the US debt increased every year that he was in office, so he never actually reduced the debt on a fiscal year basis,but he came oh so close. His second term increase in debt on a percentage basis is what almost all Americans could live with.

[nysprod]

It is truly ironic that you think going ever deeper into debt is not going to effect the USA's credit rating. At some not very distant point creditors are going to see that they won't ever be paid back.

Take a look at the City of Detroit to see our future.

Did you ever stop to ask yourself why it is that the U.S. has unlimited credit?


Based on the Fiscal year end of the US Government while President Clinton was in office, the US debt increased every year that he was in office, so he never actually reduced the debt on a fiscal year basis,but he came oh so close. His second term increase in debt on a percentage basis is what almost all Americans could live with.

The national debt does not increase simply because the U.S. spends more than it takes in:

First, think of issuing new debt as injecting more money into the system, which essentially it is. Next, the dollar is the world's reserve currency, which means other central banks around the world need to hold a percentage of their reserves in dollars. So, every time a foreign central bank withdraws a dollar from the system (i.e. holds it in their reserve accounts) the U.S. must issue another dollar of debt, otherwise the money supply (and hence, the global economy) would shrink.

[maxpower]

Sarah Palin ugh man everytime I hear her speak I loose brain cells. But she is a pretty hot bitch to look at as Michelle Bachman is too.


You seriously think Bachmann is attractive? Yikes.

[Ben]

Sarah Palin ugh man everytime I hear her speak I loose brain cells. But she is a pretty hot bitch to look at as Michelle Bachman is too.

I, actually, like listening to her. I mean, it's understood that she's telegenic. I, for the most part, don't agree with her. But she's right with respect to President Obama....

Sarah Palin: "How's That Hopey-Changey Stuff Working Out For Ya?" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y02iZcTjHo)

[Ben]

You seriously think Bachmann is attractive? Yikes.

Not a fan of hers. But she is physically attractive. Much like Sarah Palin.

[EvaCassini]

I, actually, like listening to her. I mean, it's understood that she's telegenic. I, for the most part, don't agree with her. But she's right with respect to President Obama....

Sarah Palin: "How's That Hopey-Changey Stuff Working Out For Ya?" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Y02iZcTjHo)

You do realize that Obama got gay marriage legal in military, got the SCOTUS to deem legal to allow same-sex spouses to have the same equal marriage benefits, and he also got the ACA in place. Yes, the site and stuff are having troubles, but WTF, it just started.

Oh yeah...under his administration...Osama died at the hands of Seal Team 6.
And he avoided any military action involving Syria.

[mildcigar_2001]

What's ironic is that you're blind to the evidence. Our credit rating was triple A even as the debt doubled under Bush.

By the time Obama is out of office he will have run up more debt than all presidents that came before him combined. Just think about that. That includes all the money that was borrowed for the Civil War, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq. The sad fact is that we have nothing to show for his profligate spending. At least the money that was spent on the WPA during the Great Depression had some lasting impact. To this day there are still buildings and schools and bridges built by the WPA (and this is approx. 80 years later).

Yet we have nothing to show for Obama's massive debt (except a broken Obamacare website). The most recent news reports are saying that there was only a week of testing prior to its launch. Think about it more testing probably went into the Hungangels website than went in the the Obamacare site.

[Ben]

You do realize that Obama got gay marriage legal in military, got the SCOTUS to deem legal to allow same-sex spouses to have the same equal marriage benefits, and he also got the ACA in place. Yes, the site and stuff are having troubles, but WTF, it just started.

Oh yeah...under his administration...Osama died at the hands of Seal Team 6.
And he avoided any military action involving Syria.

I guess it hinges on what one expected from Obama.
I'm not a fan; I'm not a fan of any politician. As they serve a specific function -- in an overall system.
And, yes, one should praise him when he does good stuff. Like affirming his support for gay marriage.
I think that Osama bin Laden should've been arrested and detained. And put on trial. Just my opinion. (The British journalist Robert Fisk said that everything we know about the Osama raid is a lie.... Well, will the truth ever emerge? Who knows.)
I'm not a fan of Obama's drone wars, his war on the press, his overall treatment of Chelsea Manning etc, etc....
Our Founders wanted the President to do two simple tasks. Be the top commander in times of war. And to execute the will of Congress. And they wanted Congress to have the bulk of the power. I mean, we've gone astray from what the Founders envisioned for the U.S. government. Again, Congress is supposed to have the bulk of the power. But now the executive is almost King-like. And this isn't an attack on Obama. I mean, President Cheney -- :) -- concentrated more power in the executive. And of course Congress is letting this happen.
I merely see Obama as a continuation of Bush. Again, he's merely part of the system, the structure, as it were.
Liking Obama is fine. I can't change your mind. And wouldn't attempt to.
Again, I'm not a fan of any politician....
Politics is about power. And politicians are weary of other institutions, as it were, that minimize their power.

[trish]

Just think about that.Every thinking person knows that the debt means nothing unless it's compared to the relative wealth and the reliability of the debtor. In this case the relative wealth is measured by the GDP. (Perhaps you should actually take the time to consider nyprod's question, "Did you ever stop to ask yourself why it is that the U.S. has unlimited credit?") The pressing problem at present is that our reliability is being currently being undermined by the reckless antics of the Tea Party.

[EvaCassini]

I guess it hinges on what one expected from Obama.
I'm not a fan; I'm not a fan of any politician. As they serve a specific function -- in an overall system.
And, yes, one should praise him when he does good stuff. Like affirming his support for gay marriage.
I think that Osama bin Laden should've been arrested and detained. And put on trial. Just my opinion. (The British journalist Robert Fisk said that everything we know about the Osama raid is a lie.... Well, will the truth ever emerge? Who knows.)
I'm not a fan of Obama's drone wars, his war on the press, his overall treatment of Chelsea Manning etc, etc....
Our Founders wanted the President to do two simple tasks. Be the top commander in times of war. And to execute the will of Congress. And they wanted Congress to have the bulk of the power. I mean, we've gone astray from what the Founders envisioned for the U.S. government. Again, Congress is supposed to have the bulk of the power. But now the executive is almost King-like. And this isn't an attack on Obama. I mean, President Cheney -- :) -- concentrated more power in the executive. And of course Congress is letting this happen.
I merely see Obama as a continuation of Bush. Again, he's merely part of the system, the structure, as it were.
Liking Obama is fine. I can't change your mind. And wouldn't attempt to.
Again, I'm not a fan of any politician....
Politics is about power. And politicians are weary of other institutions, as it were, that minimize their power.


Keep in mind, I like Obama, I didn't vote for him, because I don't vote. I would've voted for him if I wanted to, to make sure that that dillfucker Chet Meatly?...damn what was his name...ughh, it's so hard to rememb...Biff Chutney? Spud Nutly?....MITT ROMNEY!! THAT Emmy Award winner!!!....I'd vote for Obama to keep Chuck Steakley out of office. But I knew Obama would've won.

Lesser of two evils, is what I'm sayin....

And, to give credit where credit is due. Obama, albeit has had some goofs ( which Prez hasn't? ) but he's done some good. He's also had the great opportunity to show the American people how infantile, brain-dead, and petty the right side is.

:)

[califorlife123]

aw yes hungangels is the place where I want see some political debate. haha ive been laughing my ass off reading this thread and the one sided bias coming from both sides.

[mildcigar_2001]

Keep in mind, I like Obama, I didn't vote for him, because I don't vote.:)


I'm just curious why you don't have a desire to vote?

Hell, up in Chicago even the dead are civic minded enough to vote, and some of the live ones are concerned enough to vote 2 or 3 times.

[EvaCassini]

That movie with Kevin Costner, something about voting and that voting counts...it's just a movie. Makes for a great story but popular vote really doesn't mean anything. The electoral votes are the ones that count and we have no real say with that.

I don't vote because as a TRANNY...what "real" rights do I have? Transgender people are really the last minority in this world ( unless a new lesser human sub-species comes outta the woodwork ) and we have no protective/supportive rights.

Yes, I am white, and I look female, but that's not enough in the eyes of state and federal gov't. I live in Texas because it's cheap to live here. If I could afford it, Jamie and I would absolutely live in California but alas, California, even in the shittiest parts of LA and Bakersfield costs too much just to live and try to survive.

[mildcigar_2001]

That movie with Kevin Costner, something about voting and that voting counts...it's just a movie. Makes for a great story but popular vote really doesn't mean anything. The electoral votes are the ones that count and we have no real say with that.

I don't vote because as a TRANNY...what "real" rights do I have? Transgender people are really the last minority in this world ( unless a new lesser human sub-species comes outta the woodwork ) and we have no protective/supportive rights.

Yes, I am white, and I look female, but that's not enough in the eyes of state and federal gov't. I live in Texas because it's cheap to live here. If I could afford it, Jamie and I would absolutely live in California but alas, California, even in the shittiest parts of LA and Bakersfield costs too much just to live and try to survive.

The above post is total silliness. I realize that some people are lazy, but this is too much.

LA is expensive but if two of you are sharing an apartment it should be doable. However, I suppose it would require one or both of you to have a job. And don't whine that you could not get a job. I dated two TS chicks out in LA and both had regular civilian employment (one girl even had two jobs).

As for voting (and I really should not encourage you to vote) whether the State or Federal government identifies you as a tranny or something else, who cares? If you don't like something at least try to change the system.

In my mind there is nothing worse than someone who sits on their hands and then complains how bad things are.

[EvaCassini]

The above post is total silliness. I realize that some people are lazy, but this is too much.

LA is expensive but if two of you are sharing an apartment it should be doable. However, I suppose it would require one or both of you to have a job. And don't whine that you could not get a job. I dated two TS chicks out in LA and both had regular civilian employment (one girl even had two jobs).

As for voting (and I really should not encourage you to vote) whether the State or Federal government identifies you as a tranny or something else, who cares? If you don't like something at least try to change the system.

In my mind there is nothing worse than someone who sits on their hands and then complains how bad things are.


You don't seem to understand where I am coming from good sir...

Jamie and I can barely afford the Texas apartment we currently live in. We just barely get by. Here in Texas, for a tranny like Jamie and myself ( who have a very public image ) would find it extremely hard, here in Texas, to obtain and maintain a "9-5". You really can't compare your 2 TS girls "you know" who live in LA with Jamie and I who live in Texas. Way different ballparks.

The voting issue, is not an issue of "not being able to" and/or "having trouble to" vote because "I r shemale". It's an issue with my personal stance. I can easily go to the booth and vote, not a problem. But with this past election, I chose not to vote because first of all, I know that it won't matter, and second, I had a really good feeling that Rip Scrotley wouldn't have won. He looked like a jackass in every debate. He really had no chance with the Democratic majority backing and vote playing against him.

You think I complain of how things are? HAHAHAHA

You think I sit on my hands? HAHAHAHA

Before you make assumptions and accusations, perhaps you should get to know me better.

I work my ass and cock off for your pleasure good sir, and everyone else.

I have already held several medial schmoe jobs, served in the U.S. Navy, drove 18 wheelers cross country, and NOW, I have the best career I have ever had. I really do enjoy my job, even though sometimes it's hard to get by, I still persevere everyday to provide you ( and all ) with quality porn and interactivity on cam. Since last winter, I have been busting my ass to build up a surplus of content to start up my own solo site through Grooby, and very soon ( like 1-3 wks ), my site will launch. Then, and only then ( if I get a good amount of members ) Jamie and I will be able to easily pay all bills each month and possibly ( hopefully ) have enough after to put aside for our future.

I really do not complain much except for the occasional trolls that pisses me off and maybe that I'm almost out of lube ( which makes for a difficult cam show ) ( and spit only lasts a short while... ). The thing about politics that I complain about is that not a lot of people LISTEN and UNDERSTAND enough to realize and comprehend what issues are at hand... BUT that's it... I really just work and keep myself busy and continue to be productive.

[thombergeron]

The last recession, which did explode during the Bush administration, had it's roots in the Clinton administration when the lackey of Wall St. and the big banks, then Treasury secretary Robert Rudin, talked Clinton into signing legislation to de-regulate the banks.

This allowed the banks, for the first time since the Great Depression, to trade financial instruments with their own money and the instruments most frequently traded were the mortgage bonds which ultimately brought the global economy to it's knees.

Please note that Rudin, after leaving his post as Treasury Secretary, went to work for Citi (the worst of the offenders and the bank which required the largest taxpayer bailout) for an annual salary of $20M/yr.

Um, not quite. First, his name is Robert Rubin.

Second, you’re talking about the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which repealed some important parts of the Glass-Steagall financial regulatory regime. The legislation was introduced by Republican Senator Phil Gramm and Republican Representative Jim Leach. Republican Representative Thomas Bliley signed on as a co-sponsor later. The Clinton White House actually threatened to veto early versions of the bill. It was passed by Congress along basically partisan lines. Clinton eventually signed the bill, but by the time he did, Lawrence Summers had been Treasury Secretary for more than six months.

Rubin couldn’t have talked Clinton into signing the bill, because by the time it was signed, Rubin was no longer a member of the Administration. Certainly Rubin advised Clinton as the GLB was making its way through Congress, but this was a Republican bill from start to finish.


By the time Obama is out of office he will have run up more debt than all presidents that came before him combined.

This, of course, is false, but even if it were true, it demonstrates a pretty profound misunderstanding of public finance and economics. The United States federal government has been accumulating programs, agencies, and assets for over 230 years. There is also prior debt that must be financed. Your implication is that Barack Obama personally conceived of and ordered every dime of current federal spending. That’s simply not how the federal budget works.

For instance, Congress passed Medicare Part D in 2003. The legislation was and is entirely debt-financed. Medicare Part D will add $727.3 billion dollars to the U.S. debt between 2009 and 2018. Please explain how the on-going program costs for legislation passed by a Republican Congress under a Republican President are an example of Barack Obama’s “profligate spending.”

But more fundamentally, you seem to completely misunderstand deficit spending and sovereign debt. Deficit spending is not a mistake; it’s a legitimate policy tool for managing public finance. There are virtually no nations currently in existence without public debt. Without deficit spending, the U.S. would have been unable to field troops and materiel during World War II. We would have been unable to keep pace with the Soviet Union during the nuclear arms race. We would have had no standing military to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan.

[serial138]

Nothing makes me laugh harder than Republicans lecturing on fiscal restraint or complaining about deficit spending. I seem to remember Reagan and Dubya where pretty big proponents of deficit spending. But lets not slander St. Reagan!

[surf4490]

The US national debt only increases because of WAR .Statistically Independence ,Revolutionary ,1812,ww1 and ww2 were the only time debt increased (minor increase during depression ).By 1974 debt to gdp was about 35% ,Reagan / Bush increased it to about 53% .Clinton with no war and big tax increases decreased it a bit .Then we have the WAR on a word TERROR !! The never ending war has corresponded to a never ending increase in debt ! Obama is about to blast through 110% of gdp ,with more debt in the pipeline .

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b8/US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg/800px-US_Federal_Debt_as_Percent_of_GDP_by_President.jpg

[trish]

Bush and Cheney kept a considerable portion of the cost of their two wars off budget. Obama put it back on the books.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/mar/11/us-public-defrauded-hidden-cost-iraq-war

[Ben]

"When the World Outlawed War"

"When the World Outlawed War" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7kpzT8Sr5E)

[bzzzay]

I'm a crazed fundamentalist republican and you guys have some pretty far out ideas about what people like me believe.

[Prospero]

well bzzay... why not offer enlightenment instead of merely being baffled.

[Prospero]

Misrepresented...

[martin48]

I'm a crazed fundamentalist republican and you guys have some pretty far out ideas about what people like me believe.


So what DO you believe?

[EvaCassini]

hahaha he(they) got nothing, because he knows that everything they do/say is nonsense.

[nysprod]

Um, not quite. First, his name is Robert Rubin.

Second, you’re talking about the Gram-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which repealed some important parts of the Glass-Steagall financial regulatory regime. The legislation was introduced by Republican Senator Phil Gramm and Republican Representative Jim Leach. Republican Representative Thomas Bliley signed on as a co-sponsor later. The Clinton White House actually threatened to veto early versions of the bill. It was passed by Congress along basically partisan lines. Clinton eventually signed the bill, but by the time he did, Lawrence Summers had been Treasury Secretary for more than six months.

Rubin couldn’t have talked Clinton into signing the bill, because by the time it was signed, Rubin was no longer a member of the Administration. Certainly Rubin advised Clinton as the GLB was making its way through Congress, but this was a Republican bill from start to finish.

I don't wish to turn this into a Democrat vs. Republican thing...I'm independent, I consider issues on their own merit and I've voted for democratic and republican candidates when I agreed with their ideas.

Yes, Gramm-Leach was a republican bill but the legislation garnered wide bipartisan support, with Dems voting 75% and 84% yes in the House and Senate respectively. There's no way Clinton would have vetoed the bill.

Rubin had been Chairman of Goldman Sachs (the major pusher of toxic securities in the post de-regulation years) prior to becoming Clinton's first director of the National Economic Council from January '93 to January '95. He then served as Treasury Secretary until July '99. Summers was Rubin's protege and assistant at Treasury before becoming secretary himself upon Rubin's departure.

Rubin was in an immense position of power after working with Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and the IMF to effectively combat and contain financial crises in Russian, Asian, and Latin American financial markets in '97 and '98. In '97, Rubin and Greenspan strongly opposed giving the Commodity Futures Trading Commission oversight of over-the-counter credit derivatives, which played a key role in the 2008 financial crisis, even though he later said in his autobiography that "derivatives could pose significant problems and that many people who used derivatives did not fully understand the risks they were taking."

In any event, de-regulation was something that Wall St. and the big banks had wanted for many years, there's no question that Rubin was absolutely in favor of it, he guided the language of the bill and advised Clinton that it would be a good thing. That Summers was secretary at the exact time of passage has no bearing, his thinking on the issue was exactly as Rubin's.

[thombergeron]

I'm sorry to have to be pedantic, but the distinction is important. The "both sides do it" argument is lazy and has the effect of pushing the debate further to the right.

In fact, the Financial Services Act of 1999 passed the Senate on May 6 by a vote of 54-44, receiving a single Democratic vote in favor. In fact, the Clinton Administration specifically threatened to veto any version of the legislation that would "scale back minority-lending requirements." A conference committee failed numerous times to reconcile House and Senate versions of the bill. Finally, on November 4, a scaled-back GLB passed the Senate with a vote of 90-8 and in the House by 362–57.

Again, I'm pretty familiar with Rubin's career and would not dispute that he favors scaled-back banking regulations. But you really have to work hard to weave a story in which the financial crisis had its roots in Rubin's machinations as Treasury Sec'y. For one thing, Phil Gramm wrote the bill. Not Robert Rubin, and not Bill Clinton. Arguably, banking deregulation was the central focus of Phil Gramm's Senate career, beginning with his election in 1984. At Gramm's request, the Congressional Research Service published a report examining the implications of repealing Glass-Steagall in 1987.

Further, as you offhandedly acknowledge here, Alan Greenspan's tenure at the Fed played an enormous role in both the pace of banking deregulation and in creating the conditions that resulted in 2008's financial crisis.

So, sure, the regulatory landscape in 2000 probably turned out the way Robert Rubin might have preferred. But if you're going to put up a post about the "roots" of the financial crisis, I'm not sure how you get to Rubin without so much as mentioning Gramm and Greenspan, both of whom played a far bigger role in actually establishing that landscape.

[bluesoul]

why the look?

You probably don't know much about those people I mentioned. You should look them up and see who they are, see what they do, and how they are helping humans become better.

Not knowing who these great people are who are people of reason and what they do, means you have some ignorance about you, sadly.

http://i.imgur.com/0reCv.gif

[EvaCassini]

....

[nysprod]

I'm sorry to have to be pedantic, but the distinction is important. The "both sides do it" argument is lazy and has the effect of pushing the debate further to the right.

It doesn't...or if it does, you're saying I can't have an opinion if it isn't political. In any event, it's important to be neutral when recounting history.


In fact, the Financial Services Act of 1999 passed the Senate on May 6 by a vote of 54-44, receiving a single Democratic vote in favor.

In fact, the Clinton Administration specifically threatened to veto any version of the legislation that would "scale back minority-lending requirements." A conference committee failed numerous times to reconcile House and Senate versions of the bill. Finally, on November 4, a scaled-back GLB passed the Senate with a vote of 90-8 and in the House by 362–57.

Exactly...Clinton's objection had to do with the minority lending requirement, not de-regulation per se. Clinton was all for de-regulation because his top economic guru (Rubin) was all for it.


Again, I'm pretty familiar with Rubin's career and would not dispute that he favors scaled-back banking regulations. But you really have to work hard to weave a story in which the financial crisis had its roots in Rubin's machinations as Treasury Sec'y. For one thing, Phil Gramm wrote the bill. Not Robert Rubin, and not Bill Clinton. Arguably, banking deregulation was the central focus of Phil Gramm's Senate career, beginning with his election in 1984. At Gramm's request, the Congressional Research Service published a report examining the implications of repealing Glass-Steagall in 1987.

What about the part Rubin played when, as Treasury Secretary, he worked (with Greenspan) to prevent derivatives from being regulated? And believing that Rubin had zero to do with influencing the bill is naive...this guy was a full-fledged member of the so-called "Committee To Save The World," along with Greenspan and Summers. The bill would never have seen the light of day without Rubin's approval. It was what the banks and Wall St. wanted all along and when I say "Wall St." I'm talking about Robert Rubin, Co-Chairman of Goldman Sachs.


Further, as you offhandedly acknowledge here, Alan Greenspan's tenure at the Fed played an enormous role in both the pace of banking deregulation and in creating the conditions that resulted in 2008's financial crisis.

So, sure, the regulatory landscape in 2000 probably turned out the way Robert Rubin might have preferred. But if you're going to put up a post about the "roots" of the financial crisis, I'm not sure how you get to Rubin without so much as mentioning Gramm and Greenspan, both of whom played a far bigger role in actually establishing that landscape.

I never said Rubin had full responsibility, no one person does, but the regulatory landscape turned out EXACTLY as Rubin wanted it to be. Greenspan's main contribution was to enable the crisis (in no small part) by keeping interest rates too low for too long.

Gramm was a puppet, a tool of the big banks and Wall St. who, finally, had the man they wanted (and needed) exactly in the right place at the right time-Robert Rubin, the architect (and profiteer) of the unregulated market for OTC derivatives and bank de-regulation.

[nysprod]

Robert Rubin, 26 year veteran of Wall St., co-chairman of Goldman Sachs, head of Clinton's economic policy think tank, Treasury Secretary, charter member of the committee to save the world, guardian of the unregulated market for credit derivatives, architect of bank de-regulation and $20M/yr employee of Citi, who when asked by Congress what the hell had happened at the bank to require it to receive the largest taxpayer bail-out in history, basically shrugged his shoulders and said something along the lines of "oh wow, not my department."

[Ben]

Keep in mind, I like Obama, I didn't vote for him, because I don't vote. I would've voted for him if I wanted to, to make sure that that dillfucker Chet Meatly?...damn what was his name...ughh, it's so hard to rememb...Biff Chutney? Spud Nutly?....MITT ROMNEY!! THAT Emmy Award winner!!!....I'd vote for Obama to keep Chuck Steakley out of office. But I knew Obama would've won.

Lesser of two evils, is what I'm sayin....

And, to give credit where credit is due. Obama, albeit has had some goofs ( which Prez hasn't? ) but he's done some good. He's also had the great opportunity to show the American people how infantile, brain-dead, and petty the right side is.

:)


Hey Eva,
I'm not a fan of any politician. Actually, I did like some of what Ron Paul stood for. Again, some of his ideas were good. Not all. But some.
And: it's understandable why 50 percent of the population don't vote.
There's an interesting book called Affluence and Influence. The author, Martin Gilens, points out that roughly 70 percent of the population have no influence on public policy. None. I mean, if we had a functioning democratic system, well, public policy would reflect public opinion.
So, roughly 70 percent have no influence.
The further you go up the income scale, well, you've more influence. And those at the very top -- think the 1 percent of the 1 percent -- get what they want.
Again, we should praise a President, as it were, when he -- or hopefully one day: she -- does good. And criticize him -- or her -- when they commit crimes (meaning: violating the constitution and also we should underscore: nobody is above the law) and commit wrongdoings.
Anyway, our goal should be to have a functioning and meaningful democratic society. Instead of focusing on which corporate servant wins the White House.
Anyway, enough of my rambling -- ha ha! :)

[BBaggins06]

It is truly ironic that you think going ever deeper into debt is not going to effect the USA's credit rating. At some not very distant point creditors are going to see that they won't ever be paid back.

Take a look at the City of Detroit to see our future.

The credit agencies are one the biggest scams on earth and are just a political tool of the Republican Party.

[mmolotov75]

You post under the premise that transgendered women have equal rights of citizenship already. If they had equal rights that were respected you wouldn't see so many transgendered women harassed, arrested, brutally beaten and murdered. Let's work towards getting transwomen full access to the benefits of citizenship before we start creating what if scenarios of them being stripped further.

[EvaCassini]

"You" post under the premise that transgendered women have equal rights of citizenship already. If they had equal rights that were respected you wouldn't see so many transgendered women harassed, arrested, brutally beaten and murdered. Let's work towards getting transwomen full access to the benefits of citizenship before we start creating what if scenarios of them being stripped further.


Who is "you"? The OP?

[dakota87]

This question reminds me of military basic training when our TI, in response to us recruits always asking stupid "what if" questions said, "What if a little green Martian flew down, landed on your shoulder, and began jacking off on you? What would you do?"

[You really had to be there to appreciate this anecdote]