GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, there are reports now that George H W Bush is supporting Hillary!

She is more conservative than he is.

Bush's really have never shown to be "conservative", they tow the party line.
George H. and even W. really never shown a core conservative line.

Im thinking for him to endorse Hilary is really calling out Trump the piece of shyt he is.
Don't forget, George H. and Bill Clinton relationship is very tight for many years. I thought for years George handed him the election and basically got to hand pick his successor.
Did Al Gore when W. was anointed a planned event? Did Gore not go along with the script?
Who knows, but George and Bill are as thick as thieves so its no surprise she gets a Bush endorsement. W. has a book about his paintings coming out. He is a far simple man.

Bill will a hand in a Hilary presidency. Is that a good thing? Maybe if the Republicans didn't have a clown running there would be a viable choice. I'll take "BillAry" over Donald and Melania.
Where is Melania? OUt campaigning? Or locked up as not to further embarrass her self?

True. Bill behind the scenes worries me as much as Hillary as president. If she ran openly as a conservative Democrat (which she is) her candidacy might be easier for me to handle. Its when she calls herself a progressive, that I have to change the channel.

Nixon did some progressive things in office, maybe more substantial than Bill Clinton, but no one would suggest that he was a progressive. Bill and Hillary Clinton have done very little to earn that label.
.

What can a president really do to enact change? Obama had 2 years where he had both houses until the tea party came in and did everything to make him look bad.
At this juncture we have a choice. Hilary is a gangster like most politicians and a women which is giving her big problems. Trump is a pure sociopath business man who only motivation is the accumulation of pleasure, money and power. A man who has flipped on most things I have now idea where he stands. I am disturbed by the apathy by the American public to his indiscretions where Hilary's have been blown out of proportion.
So I vote without enthusiasm not for Hilary, but to prevent a man I see not fit to represent and uphold the constitution that is the greatest document in the history of mankind to govern a nation. Its execution is not perfect but it is worth defending. This is my patriotic duty to honor all those who fought for our freedoms and many died for those basic rights.

Trump is motivated to be president for his selfish reasons which is why he has no dignity and is shamelessly pandering to the public.

You are assuming that Obama wanted to do anything but promote largely conservative policies while in office. His biggest hero by his own admission is Ronald Reagan. Obamacare was a Heritage foundation proposal from the 1990s.

Obama enacted very harsh austerity measures on govt workers. They talk about Obama and big govt, but he laid off more govt employees than any other president, maybe ever. This hurt the recovery.

He stocked a commission on "entitlements" with politicians and executives who wanted to gut social security and medicare. Guess what kind of a plan they came up with? Democrats and even some republicans pushed back hard.

He extended the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression, people who were much more able to bear the added expense in a time when tens of millions of people were losing their jobs, their homes.

Obama made a deal with the pharmaceutical industry to prevent the govt from negotiating drug prices which keep pharmaceutical drugs the most expensive in the world in spite of the fact that we create most of them here, often with govt subsidies.

He has prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers than all other presidents combined. People talk about how he is a secret Muslim, but Im curious to hear what kind of Muslim they think he is that would regularly bomb 7 Muslim countries, more than any other president?

You ask what a president can do? A lot when he sets his mind to it. FDR was facing a military coup engineered by the heads of some of America's largest corporations because of his anti-poverty programs. He told them that he "welcomed their hatred". Theodore Roosevelt was a trust buster. It all depends on how much you believe in what you say you represent.

Obama sold himself as a progressive, but he pushed mostly conservative policies. The only reason he didnt push through more of them was because the republicans didnt want to work with him on anything because he was black, not because their views were so divergent from his.

I understand the concern with Trump and I share it. Just dont believe any of us should believe that we will be less likely to get into more foreign entanglements with Hillary. She has an actual track record of militarism, unlike Trump. Dont believe either candidate should be taken lightly.

You are completely unrealistic of the possibilities given climate when Obama took office...Did we forget the global meltdown on hand..Saving Wall Street which saved our economy and the global finance as a whole might seem like a right wing thing to do...I'm sure that are a lot of socialist on the left whose 401k benefited as well...Maybe we should all be hunting for our food...

Maybe we should just let the largest gap between rich and poor in several thousand years (no exaggeration) get wider.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Obama did not get the outcome he wanted. You install and keep in place some same people who helped create this recession, when your proposed and enacted solutions are failed conservative policies, you are getting exactly what you want, and by enabling this type of behavior we are getting exactly what we deserve.

You are promoting rhetoric that is opposite of the right wing nuts...If you don't get all you want then you failed...He wasn't able to get the health care plan he wanted so he compromised and took what he could get..20 million more people have healthcare..Failure??..Obama says himself yu can let the good be the enemy of the great..If great can't be done then take the good...He tried to get a budget that struck a "Grand Bargain" and Boehner couldn't get his guys to sign off..It would have been a huge deal fiscally for this economy...The FED is now left to manage the economy alone with no help from legislators to implement any structural reforms and we will pay the price..Dodd Frank has had an enormous effect on Wall Steet...It has shut down businesses that weren't even involved in any wrong doing with it's overreaching approach...Casualty of war I guess right...Regular people work at these institutions too..

But you talk about conservatives policies, point to the socialist system the is working better than this system...Lord knows you have many to choose from...

Obamacare would have been great with price controls. Never entered the conversation. The price of these plans are getting more expensive by the year, and offering less coverage. The "Grand Bargain" you speak of would have resulted in deep cuts to SS and Medicare while offering corporate America more huge tax cuts they dont need. Thats no fing bargain.

Social Security is the most successful anti poverty program in the history of the world. Medicare is more efficient than the health care industry. If anything we should be making medicare available to everyone, and expanding social security.

You keep recycling that old tired "socialist" meme. I come from a long line of capitalists, I am a big proponent of capitalism, but I dont want everything privatized. Dont want a private police force, dont want a private firefighters, among other institutions. Hate to break it to you but those things as they are now is socialism. We saw what happened with private prisons Don't want everything socialized, but I dont want everything privatized either. Its about balance. Also dont want competition squashed which is happening right now with all this conglomeration and deregulation.

You are the first person Ive read who actually defended the fed. Let me tell you what the fed did for the economy. After the crash happened, the fed gave the big banks hundreds of billions of dollars in almost interest free loans without any strings attached. You know what they did with the money? They didnt use it to lend money, (they actually jacked up cc rates) they used the money to buy T-bills. They used the money meant to spur the economy they got at a lower interest rate and made money off the T bills. The fed did nothing about it. The banks in effect lended our taxpayer dollars back to us. Thank you fed. They continue to loan money to the banks interest free which is boosting the stock market, boosting the bank accounts of the one percent, but did almost nothing for anyone else. And you want to praise these people?

I used to think that republicans were the only ones who bought the party line whatever it is, but its clear that many democrats are just as bad.

For some reason, you seem to think that the gyrations of the stock market doesn't affect the 99%...Please see job losses 2008-09..That is a result of a slumping stock market..The FED loan the banks 370 billion and got back 42 billion in interest..Not exactly free...So the FED give the banks money and the banks do what banks do..Your prescription was to keep making the loans that got the banks in trouble in the first place??..I don't get it..Do you understand what would have happened if banks were allowed to go under???..

There are many more points I can touch upon but don't have the time now...The problem with social security is that we have made more promised payouts than the money we actually have in the coffers...It has to be addressed..

Of course I understand that. Do you understand that 95 percent of the gains from the stock market during the Obama administration went to the one percent? How many times do I have to explain to you that almost all the economic gains went to only one percent of the population? You seem to be taking that in stride, to put it mildly, as in you dont seem to give a ****.

As for the return on the investment. The amount the banks allegedly paid out, considering their role in the crash. The tens of millions of lives they shattered, the tens of thousands of people who were driven to suicide because their greed, without any jail time. They got off real easy.

Social Security doesnt add one cent to the national debt. It was actually running a big surplus but the surplus went into bonds by law which were spent. W spent a big chunk of it. The system itself works, if anything it should be reformed so that the surplus cant be spent.

Of course I understand that..But what are you going to do, wave a magic wand and have it go to the 99%??..The banks had to be saved so we don't end up like Venezuela...The banks aren't being saved to prop up the stock market, The banks are being saved to keep your supermarket open....These banks owe 100s of millions of dollars in forward contracts to each other...If one or two go down then we are all screwed...

You seem to be in the under the mistaken impression IMO that the only way this recovery was going to happen is if the people who were largely responsible for the crash would be the only ones to get bailed out, and everyone else would get the shaft. This was no accident.

Look at the charts for every recovery since and including the great depression, and you will find that this is the first recovery that almost entirely benefited the rich. You really think this was an accident? Ask yourself which economy does better long term, one that benefits most of the population or a very tiny sliver of it?

What happens when people are tired of getting the short of end of the stick? Too many put Trump signs in their yard and blame other races for problems brought on them mostly by white people.

I agree that the economy works better when the 99% is getting paid..Even more so than the 1%, but again, what choice did we have??

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, there are reports now that George H W Bush is supporting Hillary!

She is more conservative than he is.

Bush's really have never shown to be "conservative", they tow the party line.
George H. and even W. really never shown a core conservative line.

Im thinking for him to endorse Hilary is really calling out Trump the piece of shyt he is.
Don't forget, George H. and Bill Clinton relationship is very tight for many years. I thought for years George handed him the election and basically got to hand pick his successor.
Did Al Gore when W. was anointed a planned event? Did Gore not go along with the script?
Who knows, but George and Bill are as thick as thieves so its no surprise she gets a Bush endorsement. W. has a book about his paintings coming out. He is a far simple man.

Bill will a hand in a Hilary presidency. Is that a good thing? Maybe if the Republicans didn't have a clown running there would be a viable choice. I'll take "BillAry" over Donald and Melania.
Where is Melania? OUt campaigning? Or locked up as not to further embarrass her self?

True. Bill behind the scenes worries me as much as Hillary as president. If she ran openly as a conservative Democrat (which she is) her candidacy might be easier for me to handle. Its when she calls herself a progressive, that I have to change the channel.

Nixon did some progressive things in office, maybe more substantial than Bill Clinton, but no one would suggest that he was a progressive. Bill and Hillary Clinton have done very little to earn that label.
.

What can a president really do to enact change? Obama had 2 years where he had both houses until the tea party came in and did everything to make him look bad.
At this juncture we have a choice. Hilary is a gangster like most politicians and a women which is giving her big problems. Trump is a pure sociopath business man who only motivation is the accumulation of pleasure, money and power. A man who has flipped on most things I have now idea where he stands. I am disturbed by the apathy by the American public to his indiscretions where Hilary's have been blown out of proportion.
So I vote without enthusiasm not for Hilary, but to prevent a man I see not fit to represent and uphold the constitution that is the greatest document in the history of mankind to govern a nation. Its execution is not perfect but it is worth defending. This is my patriotic duty to honor all those who fought for our freedoms and many died for those basic rights.

Trump is motivated to be president for his selfish reasons which is why he has no dignity and is shamelessly pandering to the public.

You are assuming that Obama wanted to do anything but promote largely conservative policies while in office. His biggest hero by his own admission is Ronald Reagan. Obamacare was a Heritage foundation proposal from the 1990s.

Obama enacted very harsh austerity measures on govt workers. They talk about Obama and big govt, but he laid off more govt employees than any other president, maybe ever. This hurt the recovery.

He stocked a commission on "entitlements" with politicians and executives who wanted to gut social security and medicare. Guess what kind of a plan they came up with? Democrats and even some republicans pushed back hard.

He extended the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression, people who were much more able to bear the added expense in a time when tens of millions of people were losing their jobs, their homes.

Obama made a deal with the pharmaceutical industry to prevent the govt from negotiating drug prices which keep pharmaceutical drugs the most expensive in the world in spite of the fact that we create most of them here, often with govt subsidies.

He has prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers than all other presidents combined. People talk about how he is a secret Muslim, but Im curious to hear what kind of Muslim they think he is that would regularly bomb 7 Muslim countries, more than any other president?

You ask what a president can do? A lot when he sets his mind to it. FDR was facing a military coup engineered by the heads of some of America's largest corporations because of his anti-poverty programs. He told them that he "welcomed their hatred". Theodore Roosevelt was a trust buster. It all depends on how much you believe in what you say you represent.

Obama sold himself as a progressive, but he pushed mostly conservative policies. The only reason he didnt push through more of them was because the republicans didnt want to work with him on anything because he was black, not because their views were so divergent from his.

I understand the concern with Trump and I share it. Just dont believe any of us should believe that we will be less likely to get into more foreign entanglements with Hillary. She has an actual track record of militarism, unlike Trump. Dont believe either candidate should be taken lightly.

You are completely unrealistic of the possibilities given climate when Obama took office...Did we forget the global meltdown on hand..Saving Wall Street which saved our economy and the global finance as a whole might seem like a right wing thing to do...I'm sure that are a lot of socialist on the left whose 401k benefited as well...Maybe we should all be hunting for our food...

Maybe we should just let the largest gap between rich and poor in several thousand years (no exaggeration) get wider.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Obama did not get the outcome he wanted. You install and keep in place some same people who helped create this recession, when your proposed and enacted solutions are failed conservative policies, you are getting exactly what you want, and by enabling this type of behavior we are getting exactly what we deserve.

You are promoting rhetoric that is opposite of the right wing nuts...If you don't get all you want then you failed...He wasn't able to get the health care plan he wanted so he compromised and took what he could get..20 million more people have healthcare..Failure??..Obama says himself yu can let the good be the enemy of the great..If great can't be done then take the good...He tried to get a budget that struck a "Grand Bargain" and Boehner couldn't get his guys to sign off..It would have been a huge deal fiscally for this economy...The FED is now left to manage the economy alone with no help from legislators to implement any structural reforms and we will pay the price..Dodd Frank has had an enormous effect on Wall Steet...It has shut down businesses that weren't even involved in any wrong doing with it's overreaching approach...Casualty of war I guess right...Regular people work at these institutions too..

But you talk about conservatives policies, point to the socialist system the is working better than this system...Lord knows you have many to choose from...

Obamacare would have been great with price controls. Never entered the conversation. The price of these plans are getting more expensive by the year, and offering less coverage. The "Grand Bargain" you speak of would have resulted in deep cuts to SS and Medicare while offering corporate America more huge tax cuts they dont need. Thats no fing bargain.

Social Security is the most successful anti poverty program in the history of the world. Medicare is more efficient than the health care industry. If anything we should be making medicare available to everyone, and expanding social security.

You keep recycling that old tired "socialist" meme. I come from a long line of capitalists, I am a big proponent of capitalism, but I dont want everything privatized. Dont want a private police force, dont want a private firefighters, among other institutions. Hate to break it to you but those things as they are now is socialism. We saw what happened with private prisons Don't want everything socialized, but I dont want everything privatized either. Its about balance. Also dont want competition squashed which is happening right now with all this conglomeration and deregulation.

You are the first person Ive read who actually defended the fed. Let me tell you what the fed did for the economy. After the crash happened, the fed gave the big banks hundreds of billions of dollars in almost interest free loans without any strings attached. You know what they did with the money? They didnt use it to lend money, (they actually jacked up cc rates) they used the money to buy T-bills. They used the money meant to spur the economy they got at a lower interest rate and made money off the T bills. The fed did nothing about it. The banks in effect lended our taxpayer dollars back to us. Thank you fed. They continue to loan money to the banks interest free which is boosting the stock market, boosting the bank accounts of the one percent, but did almost nothing for anyone else. And you want to praise these people?

I used to think that republicans were the only ones who bought the party line whatever it is, but its clear that many democrats are just as bad.

For some reason, you seem to think that the gyrations of the stock market doesn't affect the 99%...Please see job losses 2008-09..That is a result of a slumping stock market..The FED loan the banks 370 billion and got back 42 billion in interest..Not exactly free...So the FED give the banks money and the banks do what banks do..Your prescription was to keep making the loans that got the banks in trouble in the first place??..I don't get it..Do you understand what would have happened if banks were allowed to go under???..

There are many more points I can touch upon but don't have the time now...The problem with social security is that we have made more promised payouts than the money we actually have in the coffers...It has to be addressed..

The stock market correctly predicted 9 of the last 6 recessions.

2008-9 job losses and stock market crash both resulted from the mortgage meltdown and a crisis of confidence. It's what happens when systematic betting on bad risks gets exposed. The market crash didn't lead to job losses it just happened at the same time for the same reasons.

The dot com crash was actually a stock market instigated event because stocks were so wildly overvalued. In that recession you can argue that the job losses resulted from the market crash.

The banks had to be bailed out to avoid a run on the banks and a complete meltdown. I think we can all agree to that. But what about the people that the banks systematically duped for years? Why couldn't they be bailed out? Why couldn't the Govt have put in place programs where mortgages taken out by people that were upside down based on asset values could be written off and the person wouldn't have to go through bankruptcy and have his life messed up for the next 7 years? The banks didn't have to pay a penalty for their bad decisions. Instead they took the bailout, booked their losses for one year and took incredible ongoing tax shelter from those losses. Do you realize they sold bad bonds for pennies on the dollar, bought them back for less and then sold them back again for even less? They recycled the same bonds to accumulate losses to completely offset their tax liabilities and this went on for years after the crash. But for the people that lost their jobs and couldn't pay mortgage, they just had to go through bankruptcy, lose everything they ever owned and will never get back to the level they were at before. This is why the bailout was completely fukked up. Most of the sweet deal for the banks was engineered by Paulson and the Fed during the last years of George W. But Obama govt didn't right the wrong, they didn't step in and say the banks couldn't use tax shelter for subprime losses.

gunsnewing wrote:Why is Hillary only now saying we need better getting and visa system? She was Sec of State? What has she and Obama been doing this entire time if she's admitting the system is broken?

We are suppose to trust her for the next 4yrs to keep us safe?

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, there are reports now that George H W Bush is supporting Hillary!

She is more conservative than he is.

Bush's really have never shown to be "conservative", they tow the party line.
George H. and even W. really never shown a core conservative line.

Im thinking for him to endorse Hilary is really calling out Trump the piece of shyt he is.
Don't forget, George H. and Bill Clinton relationship is very tight for many years. I thought for years George handed him the election and basically got to hand pick his successor.
Did Al Gore when W. was anointed a planned event? Did Gore not go along with the script?
Who knows, but George and Bill are as thick as thieves so its no surprise she gets a Bush endorsement. W. has a book about his paintings coming out. He is a far simple man.

Bill will a hand in a Hilary presidency. Is that a good thing? Maybe if the Republicans didn't have a clown running there would be a viable choice. I'll take "BillAry" over Donald and Melania.
Where is Melania? OUt campaigning? Or locked up as not to further embarrass her self?

True. Bill behind the scenes worries me as much as Hillary as president. If she ran openly as a conservative Democrat (which she is) her candidacy might be easier for me to handle. Its when she calls herself a progressive, that I have to change the channel.

Nixon did some progressive things in office, maybe more substantial than Bill Clinton, but no one would suggest that he was a progressive. Bill and Hillary Clinton have done very little to earn that label.
.

What can a president really do to enact change? Obama had 2 years where he had both houses until the tea party came in and did everything to make him look bad.
At this juncture we have a choice. Hilary is a gangster like most politicians and a women which is giving her big problems. Trump is a pure sociopath business man who only motivation is the accumulation of pleasure, money and power. A man who has flipped on most things I have now idea where he stands. I am disturbed by the apathy by the American public to his indiscretions where Hilary's have been blown out of proportion.
So I vote without enthusiasm not for Hilary, but to prevent a man I see not fit to represent and uphold the constitution that is the greatest document in the history of mankind to govern a nation. Its execution is not perfect but it is worth defending. This is my patriotic duty to honor all those who fought for our freedoms and many died for those basic rights.

Trump is motivated to be president for his selfish reasons which is why he has no dignity and is shamelessly pandering to the public.

You are assuming that Obama wanted to do anything but promote largely conservative policies while in office. His biggest hero by his own admission is Ronald Reagan. Obamacare was a Heritage foundation proposal from the 1990s.

Obama enacted very harsh austerity measures on govt workers. They talk about Obama and big govt, but he laid off more govt employees than any other president, maybe ever. This hurt the recovery.

He stocked a commission on "entitlements" with politicians and executives who wanted to gut social security and medicare. Guess what kind of a plan they came up with? Democrats and even some republicans pushed back hard.

He extended the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression, people who were much more able to bear the added expense in a time when tens of millions of people were losing their jobs, their homes.

Obama made a deal with the pharmaceutical industry to prevent the govt from negotiating drug prices which keep pharmaceutical drugs the most expensive in the world in spite of the fact that we create most of them here, often with govt subsidies.

He has prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers than all other presidents combined. People talk about how he is a secret Muslim, but Im curious to hear what kind of Muslim they think he is that would regularly bomb 7 Muslim countries, more than any other president?

You ask what a president can do? A lot when he sets his mind to it. FDR was facing a military coup engineered by the heads of some of America's largest corporations because of his anti-poverty programs. He told them that he "welcomed their hatred". Theodore Roosevelt was a trust buster. It all depends on how much you believe in what you say you represent.

Obama sold himself as a progressive, but he pushed mostly conservative policies. The only reason he didnt push through more of them was because the republicans didnt want to work with him on anything because he was black, not because their views were so divergent from his.

I understand the concern with Trump and I share it. Just dont believe any of us should believe that we will be less likely to get into more foreign entanglements with Hillary. She has an actual track record of militarism, unlike Trump. Dont believe either candidate should be taken lightly.

You are completely unrealistic of the possibilities given climate when Obama took office...Did we forget the global meltdown on hand..Saving Wall Street which saved our economy and the global finance as a whole might seem like a right wing thing to do...I'm sure that are a lot of socialist on the left whose 401k benefited as well...Maybe we should all be hunting for our food...

Maybe we should just let the largest gap between rich and poor in several thousand years (no exaggeration) get wider.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Obama did not get the outcome he wanted. You install and keep in place some same people who helped create this recession, when your proposed and enacted solutions are failed conservative policies, you are getting exactly what you want, and by enabling this type of behavior we are getting exactly what we deserve.

You are promoting rhetoric that is opposite of the right wing nuts...If you don't get all you want then you failed...He wasn't able to get the health care plan he wanted so he compromised and took what he could get..20 million more people have healthcare..Failure??..Obama says himself yu can let the good be the enemy of the great..If great can't be done then take the good...He tried to get a budget that struck a "Grand Bargain" and Boehner couldn't get his guys to sign off..It would have been a huge deal fiscally for this economy...The FED is now left to manage the economy alone with no help from legislators to implement any structural reforms and we will pay the price..Dodd Frank has had an enormous effect on Wall Steet...It has shut down businesses that weren't even involved in any wrong doing with it's overreaching approach...Casualty of war I guess right...Regular people work at these institutions too..

But you talk about conservatives policies, point to the socialist system the is working better than this system...Lord knows you have many to choose from...

Obamacare would have been great with price controls. Never entered the conversation. The price of these plans are getting more expensive by the year, and offering less coverage. The "Grand Bargain" you speak of would have resulted in deep cuts to SS and Medicare while offering corporate America more huge tax cuts they dont need. Thats no fing bargain.

Social Security is the most successful anti poverty program in the history of the world. Medicare is more efficient than the health care industry. If anything we should be making medicare available to everyone, and expanding social security.

You keep recycling that old tired "socialist" meme. I come from a long line of capitalists, I am a big proponent of capitalism, but I dont want everything privatized. Dont want a private police force, dont want a private firefighters, among other institutions. Hate to break it to you but those things as they are now is socialism. We saw what happened with private prisons Don't want everything socialized, but I dont want everything privatized either. Its about balance. Also dont want competition squashed which is happening right now with all this conglomeration and deregulation.

You are the first person Ive read who actually defended the fed. Let me tell you what the fed did for the economy. After the crash happened, the fed gave the big banks hundreds of billions of dollars in almost interest free loans without any strings attached. You know what they did with the money? They didnt use it to lend money, (they actually jacked up cc rates) they used the money to buy T-bills. They used the money meant to spur the economy they got at a lower interest rate and made money off the T bills. The fed did nothing about it. The banks in effect lended our taxpayer dollars back to us. Thank you fed. They continue to loan money to the banks interest free which is boosting the stock market, boosting the bank accounts of the one percent, but did almost nothing for anyone else. And you want to praise these people?

I used to think that republicans were the only ones who bought the party line whatever it is, but its clear that many democrats are just as bad.

For some reason, you seem to think that the gyrations of the stock market doesn't affect the 99%...Please see job losses 2008-09..That is a result of a slumping stock market..The FED loan the banks 370 billion and got back 42 billion in interest..Not exactly free...So the FED give the banks money and the banks do what banks do..Your prescription was to keep making the loans that got the banks in trouble in the first place??..I don't get it..Do you understand what would have happened if banks were allowed to go under???..

There are many more points I can touch upon but don't have the time now...The problem with social security is that we have made more promised payouts than the money we actually have in the coffers...It has to be addressed..

Of course I understand that. Do you understand that 95 percent of the gains from the stock market during the Obama administration went to the one percent? How many times do I have to explain to you that almost all the economic gains went to only one percent of the population? You seem to be taking that in stride, to put it mildly, as in you dont seem to give a ****.

As for the return on the investment. The amount the banks allegedly paid out, considering their role in the crash. The tens of millions of lives they shattered, the tens of thousands of people who were driven to suicide because their greed, without any jail time. They got off real easy.

Social Security doesnt add one cent to the national debt. It was actually running a big surplus but the surplus went into bonds by law which were spent. W spent a big chunk of it. The system itself works, if anything it should be reformed so that the surplus cant be spent.

Of course I understand that..But what are you going to do, wave a magic wand and have it go to the 99%??..The banks had to be saved so we don't end up like Venezuela...The banks aren't being saved to prop up the stock market, The banks are being saved to keep your supermarket open....These banks owe 100s of millions of dollars in forward contracts to each other...If one or two go down then we are all screwed...

You seem to be in the under the mistaken impression IMO that the only way this recovery was going to happen is if the people who were largely responsible for the crash would be the only ones to get bailed out, and everyone else would get the shaft. This was no accident.

Look at the charts for every recovery since and including the great depression, and you will find that this is the first recovery that almost entirely benefited the rich. You really think this was an accident? Ask yourself which economy does better long term, one that benefits most of the population or a very tiny sliver of it?

What happens when people are tired of getting the short of end of the stick? Too many put Trump signs in their yard and blame other races for problems brought on them mostly by white people.

I agree that the economy works better when the 99% is getting paid..Even more so than the 1%, but again, what choice did we have??

There was a lot we could do. During the S&L crisis of the 90s, hundreds of bankers were perp walked, prosecuted (by the HW Bush administration) which helped restore confidence in the banking system and put the word out that the govt wasnt tolerating criminal activity, not enabling them.

No high level exec has even been charged in the crash and there has been literally hundreds of billions in fraud commited by America's largest corporations since then which has resulted in zero jail time. Don't buy that these companies are too byzantine to prosecute. If they are, break them up.

Too use a well worn expression, Wall Street was bailed out but Main Street wasn't. There was no serious mortgage relief for those in danger of losing their homes, but the banks and firms who caused this crash got billions no strings attached and no caps on executive compensation.

The president didnt have to lay off hundreds of thousand of workers during what was for all intents and purposes a depression. Most of Obama's stimulus was tax cuts. This was almost entirely a neoliberal solution to this crisis. The IMF, who pushed austerity and neoliberalism like a drug dealer recently admitted that it was a bad idea.

Again, this is the first recovery to only benefit the rich. The solution was to promote policies that helped make everyone whole, not just people who still had many times more than everyone else after the crash, which many of them helped cause.

holfresh wrote:

meloshouldgo wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, there are reports now that George H W Bush is supporting Hillary!

She is more conservative than he is.

Bush's really have never shown to be "conservative", they tow the party line.
George H. and even W. really never shown a core conservative line.

Im thinking for him to endorse Hilary is really calling out Trump the piece of shyt he is.
Don't forget, George H. and Bill Clinton relationship is very tight for many years. I thought for years George handed him the election and basically got to hand pick his successor.
Did Al Gore when W. was anointed a planned event? Did Gore not go along with the script?
Who knows, but George and Bill are as thick as thieves so its no surprise she gets a Bush endorsement. W. has a book about his paintings coming out. He is a far simple man.

Bill will a hand in a Hilary presidency. Is that a good thing? Maybe if the Republicans didn't have a clown running there would be a viable choice. I'll take "BillAry" over Donald and Melania.
Where is Melania? OUt campaigning? Or locked up as not to further embarrass her self?

True. Bill behind the scenes worries me as much as Hillary as president. If she ran openly as a conservative Democrat (which she is) her candidacy might be easier for me to handle. Its when she calls herself a progressive, that I have to change the channel.

Nixon did some progressive things in office, maybe more substantial than Bill Clinton, but no one would suggest that he was a progressive. Bill and Hillary Clinton have done very little to earn that label.
.

What can a president really do to enact change? Obama had 2 years where he had both houses until the tea party came in and did everything to make him look bad.
At this juncture we have a choice. Hilary is a gangster like most politicians and a women which is giving her big problems. Trump is a pure sociopath business man who only motivation is the accumulation of pleasure, money and power. A man who has flipped on most things I have now idea where he stands. I am disturbed by the apathy by the American public to his indiscretions where Hilary's have been blown out of proportion.
So I vote without enthusiasm not for Hilary, but to prevent a man I see not fit to represent and uphold the constitution that is the greatest document in the history of mankind to govern a nation. Its execution is not perfect but it is worth defending. This is my patriotic duty to honor all those who fought for our freedoms and many died for those basic rights.

Trump is motivated to be president for his selfish reasons which is why he has no dignity and is shamelessly pandering to the public.

You are assuming that Obama wanted to do anything but promote largely conservative policies while in office. His biggest hero by his own admission is Ronald Reagan. Obamacare was a Heritage foundation proposal from the 1990s.

Obama enacted very harsh austerity measures on govt workers. They talk about Obama and big govt, but he laid off more govt employees than any other president, maybe ever. This hurt the recovery.

He stocked a commission on "entitlements" with politicians and executives who wanted to gut social security and medicare. Guess what kind of a plan they came up with? Democrats and even some republicans pushed back hard.

He extended the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression, people who were much more able to bear the added expense in a time when tens of millions of people were losing their jobs, their homes.

Obama made a deal with the pharmaceutical industry to prevent the govt from negotiating drug prices which keep pharmaceutical drugs the most expensive in the world in spite of the fact that we create most of them here, often with govt subsidies.

He has prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers than all other presidents combined. People talk about how he is a secret Muslim, but Im curious to hear what kind of Muslim they think he is that would regularly bomb 7 Muslim countries, more than any other president?

You ask what a president can do? A lot when he sets his mind to it. FDR was facing a military coup engineered by the heads of some of America's largest corporations because of his anti-poverty programs. He told them that he "welcomed their hatred". Theodore Roosevelt was a trust buster. It all depends on how much you believe in what you say you represent.

Obama sold himself as a progressive, but he pushed mostly conservative policies. The only reason he didnt push through more of them was because the republicans didnt want to work with him on anything because he was black, not because their views were so divergent from his.

I understand the concern with Trump and I share it. Just dont believe any of us should believe that we will be less likely to get into more foreign entanglements with Hillary. She has an actual track record of militarism, unlike Trump. Dont believe either candidate should be taken lightly.

You are completely unrealistic of the possibilities given climate when Obama took office...Did we forget the global meltdown on hand..Saving Wall Street which saved our economy and the global finance as a whole might seem like a right wing thing to do...I'm sure that are a lot of socialist on the left whose 401k benefited as well...Maybe we should all be hunting for our food...

Maybe we should just let the largest gap between rich and poor in several thousand years (no exaggeration) get wider.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Obama did not get the outcome he wanted. You install and keep in place some same people who helped create this recession, when your proposed and enacted solutions are failed conservative policies, you are getting exactly what you want, and by enabling this type of behavior we are getting exactly what we deserve.

You are promoting rhetoric that is opposite of the right wing nuts...If you don't get all you want then you failed...He wasn't able to get the health care plan he wanted so he compromised and took what he could get..20 million more people have healthcare..Failure??..Obama says himself yu can let the good be the enemy of the great..If great can't be done then take the good...He tried to get a budget that struck a "Grand Bargain" and Boehner couldn't get his guys to sign off..It would have been a huge deal fiscally for this economy...The FED is now left to manage the economy alone with no help from legislators to implement any structural reforms and we will pay the price..Dodd Frank has had an enormous effect on Wall Steet...It has shut down businesses that weren't even involved in any wrong doing with it's overreaching approach...Casualty of war I guess right...Regular people work at these institutions too..

But you talk about conservatives policies, point to the socialist system the is working better than this system...Lord knows you have many to choose from...

Obamacare would have been great with price controls. Never entered the conversation. The price of these plans are getting more expensive by the year, and offering less coverage. The "Grand Bargain" you speak of would have resulted in deep cuts to SS and Medicare while offering corporate America more huge tax cuts they dont need. Thats no fing bargain.

Social Security is the most successful anti poverty program in the history of the world. Medicare is more efficient than the health care industry. If anything we should be making medicare available to everyone, and expanding social security.

You keep recycling that old tired "socialist" meme. I come from a long line of capitalists, I am a big proponent of capitalism, but I dont want everything privatized. Dont want a private police force, dont want a private firefighters, among other institutions. Hate to break it to you but those things as they are now is socialism. We saw what happened with private prisons Don't want everything socialized, but I dont want everything privatized either. Its about balance. Also dont want competition squashed which is happening right now with all this conglomeration and deregulation.

You are the first person Ive read who actually defended the fed. Let me tell you what the fed did for the economy. After the crash happened, the fed gave the big banks hundreds of billions of dollars in almost interest free loans without any strings attached. You know what they did with the money? They didnt use it to lend money, (they actually jacked up cc rates) they used the money to buy T-bills. They used the money meant to spur the economy they got at a lower interest rate and made money off the T bills. The fed did nothing about it. The banks in effect lended our taxpayer dollars back to us. Thank you fed. They continue to loan money to the banks interest free which is boosting the stock market, boosting the bank accounts of the one percent, but did almost nothing for anyone else. And you want to praise these people?

I used to think that republicans were the only ones who bought the party line whatever it is, but its clear that many democrats are just as bad.

For some reason, you seem to think that the gyrations of the stock market doesn't affect the 99%...Please see job losses 2008-09..That is a result of a slumping stock market..The FED loan the banks 370 billion and got back 42 billion in interest..Not exactly free...So the FED give the banks money and the banks do what banks do..Your prescription was to keep making the loans that got the banks in trouble in the first place??..I don't get it..Do you understand what would have happened if banks were allowed to go under???..

There are many more points I can touch upon but don't have the time now...The problem with social security is that we have made more promised payouts than the money we actually have in the coffers...It has to be addressed..

The stock market correctly predicted 9 of the last 6 recessions.

2008-9 job losses and stock market crash both resulted from the mortgage meltdown and a crisis of confidence. It's what happens when systematic betting on bad risks gets exposed. The market crash didn't lead to job losses it just happened at the same time for the same reasons.

The dot com crash was actually a stock market instigated event because stocks were so wildly overvalued. In that recession you can argue that the job losses resulted from the market crash.

The banks had to be bailed out to avoid a run on the banks and a complete meltdown. I think we can all agree to that. But what about the people that the banks systematically duped for years? Why couldn't they be bailed out? Why couldn't the Govt have put in place programs where mortgages taken out by people that were upside down based on asset values could be written off and the person wouldn't have to go through bankruptcy and have his life messed up for the next 7 years? The banks didn't have to pay a penalty for their bad decisions. Instead they took the bailout, booked their losses for one year and took incredible ongoing tax shelter from those losses. Do you realize they sold bad bonds for pennies on the dollar, bought them back for less and then sold them back again for even less? They recycled the same bonds to accumulate losses to completely offset their tax liabilities and this went on for years after the crash. But for the people that lost their jobs and couldn't pay mortgage, they just had to go through bankruptcy, lose everything they ever owned and will never get back to the level they were at before. This is why the bailout was completely fukked up. Most of the sweet deal for the banks was engineered by Paulson and the Fed during the last years of George W. But Obama govt didn't right the wrong, they didn't step in and say the banks couldn't use tax shelter for subprime losses.

And I completely agree...I never said it was fair..But the bailout was necessary...Politicians aren't going to agree to bailout home owners..Republicans just won't do that...Democrats don't have the stones to hold them to it either...Obama took the only way he saw forward...Don't forget the Republicans wanted to bury the auto industry too and they are all lining up to vote for Trump in Michigan as we speak...Obama saved them...Did he win Michigan the second term??..It's some ugly shet...The banks have us over a barrel, no doubt...I can't get lost in idealism..I'll take what I can for today and fight that battle tomorrow...

I watch CNBC all day, it kills me to see CEO after CEO come on set and just talk about how much taxes they are paying and they need a tax cut..Jack Welch was on this morning, he just kills me...They are the only ones that have recovered in this economy and they don't care to feel the pain of the small guy..It just burns me...We are in debt up the wazuu, and the republican have convinced the working guy to vote against his own self interest...Trump is telling them Muslims and darkies are their problem and they believe it..Meanwhile Trump is trying to change the tax code to abolish estate tax so he could pass his kids his fortune with a minimal tax hit...You can't make this shet up...

Think we are aligned then. "Democrats not having the stones" - has been my key gripe for the last few years. Obama took a few risks in his lame duck years, but the Republicans have been monolithic in their opposition. Trump is doing exactly what I expect him to do. He is in the business of advancing the Trump empire.

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

holfresh wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Nalod wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Wow, there are reports now that George H W Bush is supporting Hillary!

She is more conservative than he is.

Bush's really have never shown to be "conservative", they tow the party line.
George H. and even W. really never shown a core conservative line.

Im thinking for him to endorse Hilary is really calling out Trump the piece of shyt he is.
Don't forget, George H. and Bill Clinton relationship is very tight for many years. I thought for years George handed him the election and basically got to hand pick his successor.
Did Al Gore when W. was anointed a planned event? Did Gore not go along with the script?
Who knows, but George and Bill are as thick as thieves so its no surprise she gets a Bush endorsement. W. has a book about his paintings coming out. He is a far simple man.

Bill will a hand in a Hilary presidency. Is that a good thing? Maybe if the Republicans didn't have a clown running there would be a viable choice. I'll take "BillAry" over Donald and Melania.
Where is Melania? OUt campaigning? Or locked up as not to further embarrass her self?

True. Bill behind the scenes worries me as much as Hillary as president. If she ran openly as a conservative Democrat (which she is) her candidacy might be easier for me to handle. Its when she calls herself a progressive, that I have to change the channel.

Nixon did some progressive things in office, maybe more substantial than Bill Clinton, but no one would suggest that he was a progressive. Bill and Hillary Clinton have done very little to earn that label.
.

What can a president really do to enact change? Obama had 2 years where he had both houses until the tea party came in and did everything to make him look bad.
At this juncture we have a choice. Hilary is a gangster like most politicians and a women which is giving her big problems. Trump is a pure sociopath business man who only motivation is the accumulation of pleasure, money and power. A man who has flipped on most things I have now idea where he stands. I am disturbed by the apathy by the American public to his indiscretions where Hilary's have been blown out of proportion.
So I vote without enthusiasm not for Hilary, but to prevent a man I see not fit to represent and uphold the constitution that is the greatest document in the history of mankind to govern a nation. Its execution is not perfect but it is worth defending. This is my patriotic duty to honor all those who fought for our freedoms and many died for those basic rights.

Trump is motivated to be president for his selfish reasons which is why he has no dignity and is shamelessly pandering to the public.

You are assuming that Obama wanted to do anything but promote largely conservative policies while in office. His biggest hero by his own admission is Ronald Reagan. Obamacare was a Heritage foundation proposal from the 1990s.

Obama enacted very harsh austerity measures on govt workers. They talk about Obama and big govt, but he laid off more govt employees than any other president, maybe ever. This hurt the recovery.

He stocked a commission on "entitlements" with politicians and executives who wanted to gut social security and medicare. Guess what kind of a plan they came up with? Democrats and even some republicans pushed back hard.

He extended the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest one percent in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression, people who were much more able to bear the added expense in a time when tens of millions of people were losing their jobs, their homes.

Obama made a deal with the pharmaceutical industry to prevent the govt from negotiating drug prices which keep pharmaceutical drugs the most expensive in the world in spite of the fact that we create most of them here, often with govt subsidies.

He has prosecuted more reporters and whistleblowers than all other presidents combined. People talk about how he is a secret Muslim, but Im curious to hear what kind of Muslim they think he is that would regularly bomb 7 Muslim countries, more than any other president?

You ask what a president can do? A lot when he sets his mind to it. FDR was facing a military coup engineered by the heads of some of America's largest corporations because of his anti-poverty programs. He told them that he "welcomed their hatred". Theodore Roosevelt was a trust buster. It all depends on how much you believe in what you say you represent.

Obama sold himself as a progressive, but he pushed mostly conservative policies. The only reason he didnt push through more of them was because the republicans didnt want to work with him on anything because he was black, not because their views were so divergent from his.

I understand the concern with Trump and I share it. Just dont believe any of us should believe that we will be less likely to get into more foreign entanglements with Hillary. She has an actual track record of militarism, unlike Trump. Dont believe either candidate should be taken lightly.

You are completely unrealistic of the possibilities given climate when Obama took office...Did we forget the global meltdown on hand..Saving Wall Street which saved our economy and the global finance as a whole might seem like a right wing thing to do...I'm sure that are a lot of socialist on the left whose 401k benefited as well...Maybe we should all be hunting for our food...

Maybe we should just let the largest gap between rich and poor in several thousand years (no exaggeration) get wider.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Obama did not get the outcome he wanted. You install and keep in place some same people who helped create this recession, when your proposed and enacted solutions are failed conservative policies, you are getting exactly what you want, and by enabling this type of behavior we are getting exactly what we deserve.

You are promoting rhetoric that is opposite of the right wing nuts...If you don't get all you want then you failed...He wasn't able to get the health care plan he wanted so he compromised and took what he could get..20 million more people have healthcare..Failure??..Obama says himself yu can let the good be the enemy of the great..If great can't be done then take the good...He tried to get a budget that struck a "Grand Bargain" and Boehner couldn't get his guys to sign off..It would have been a huge deal fiscally for this economy...The FED is now left to manage the economy alone with no help from legislators to implement any structural reforms and we will pay the price..Dodd Frank has had an enormous effect on Wall Steet...It has shut down businesses that weren't even involved in any wrong doing with it's overreaching approach...Casualty of war I guess right...Regular people work at these institutions too..

But you talk about conservatives policies, point to the socialist system the is working better than this system...Lord knows you have many to choose from...

Obamacare would have been great with price controls. Never entered the conversation. The price of these plans are getting more expensive by the year, and offering less coverage. The "Grand Bargain" you speak of would have resulted in deep cuts to SS and Medicare while offering corporate America more huge tax cuts they dont need. Thats no fing bargain.

Social Security is the most successful anti poverty program in the history of the world. Medicare is more efficient than the health care industry. If anything we should be making medicare available to everyone, and expanding social security.

You keep recycling that old tired "socialist" meme. I come from a long line of capitalists, I am a big proponent of capitalism, but I dont want everything privatized. Dont want a private police force, dont want a private firefighters, among other institutions. Hate to break it to you but those things as they are now is socialism. We saw what happened with private prisons Don't want everything socialized, but I dont want everything privatized either. Its about balance. Also dont want competition squashed which is happening right now with all this conglomeration and deregulation.

You are the first person Ive read who actually defended the fed. Let me tell you what the fed did for the economy. After the crash happened, the fed gave the big banks hundreds of billions of dollars in almost interest free loans without any strings attached. You know what they did with the money? They didnt use it to lend money, (they actually jacked up cc rates) they used the money to buy T-bills. They used the money meant to spur the economy they got at a lower interest rate and made money off the T bills. The fed did nothing about it. The banks in effect lended our taxpayer dollars back to us. Thank you fed. They continue to loan money to the banks interest free which is boosting the stock market, boosting the bank accounts of the one percent, but did almost nothing for anyone else. And you want to praise these people?

I used to think that republicans were the only ones who bought the party line whatever it is, but its clear that many democrats are just as bad.

For some reason, you seem to think that the gyrations of the stock market doesn't affect the 99%...Please see job losses 2008-09..That is a result of a slumping stock market..The FED loan the banks 370 billion and got back 42 billion in interest..Not exactly free...So the FED give the banks money and the banks do what banks do..Your prescription was to keep making the loans that got the banks in trouble in the first place??..I don't get it..Do you understand what would have happened if banks were allowed to go under???..

There are many more points I can touch upon but don't have the time now...The problem with social security is that we have made more promised payouts than the money we actually have in the coffers...It has to be addressed..

Of course I understand that. Do you understand that 95 percent of the gains from the stock market during the Obama administration went to the one percent? How many times do I have to explain to you that almost all the economic gains went to only one percent of the population? You seem to be taking that in stride, to put it mildly, as in you dont seem to give a ****.

As for the return on the investment. The amount the banks allegedly paid out, considering their role in the crash. The tens of millions of lives they shattered, the tens of thousands of people who were driven to suicide because their greed, without any jail time. They got off real easy.

Social Security doesnt add one cent to the national debt. It was actually running a big surplus but the surplus went into bonds by law which were spent. W spent a big chunk of it. The system itself works, if anything it should be reformed so that the surplus cant be spent.

Of course I understand that..But what are you going to do, wave a magic wand and have it go to the 99%??..The banks had to be saved so we don't end up like Venezuela...The banks aren't being saved to prop up the stock market, The banks are being saved to keep your supermarket open....These banks owe 100s of millions of dollars in forward contracts to each other...If one or two go down then we are all screwed...

You seem to be in the under the mistaken impression IMO that the only way this recovery was going to happen is if the people who were largely responsible for the crash would be the only ones to get bailed out, and everyone else would get the shaft. This was no accident.

Look at the charts for every recovery since and including the great depression, and you will find that this is the first recovery that almost entirely benefited the rich. You really think this was an accident? Ask yourself which economy does better long term, one that benefits most of the population or a very tiny sliver of it?

What happens when people are tired of getting the short of end of the stick? Too many put Trump signs in their yard and blame other races for problems brought on them mostly by white people.

I agree that the economy works better when the 99% is getting paid..Even more so than the 1%, but again, what choice did we have??

There was a lot we could do. During the S&L crisis of the 90s, hundreds of bankers were perp walked, prosecuted (by the HW Bush administration) which helped restore confidence in the banking system and put the word out that the govt wasnt tolerating criminal activity, not enabling them.

No high level exec has even been charged in the crash and there has been literally hundreds of billions in fraud commited by America's largest corporations since then which has resulted in zero jail time. Don't buy that these companies are too byzantine to prosecute. If they are, break them up.

Too use a well worn expression, Wall Street was bailed out but Main Street wasn't. There was no serious mortgage relief for those in danger of losing their homes, but the banks and firms who caused this crash got billions no strings attached and no caps on executive compensation.

The president didnt have to lay off hundreds of thousand of workers during what was for all intents and purposes a depression. Most of Obama's stimulus was tax cuts. This was almost entirely a neoliberal solution to this crisis. The IMF, who pushed austerity and neoliberalism like a drug dealer recently admitted that it was a bad idea.

Again, this is the first recovery to only benefit the rich. The solution was to promote policies that helped make everyone whole, not just people who still had many times more than everyone else after the crash, which many of them helped cause.

nixluva wrote:This fool Donald Trump just said this:

"We're going to rebuild our inner cities because our African American communities are absolutely in the worst shape they've ever been in before. Ever, ever, ever,” Trump said during a campaign event at the Duplin County Events Center, where thousands of supporters gathered.

The comments drew immediate criticism on social media from critics who accused him of failing to consider the United States’ history with slavery and North Carolina’s history with Jim Crow laws and segregation. Kenansville itself is named after a man whose family owned a slave plantation.

This is the kind of crap that just makes me hot with anger. Anyone who supports this man should be ashamed of themselves. There's just no justifying his insensitive remarks and outright bigotry. At some point people have to acknowledge what they see and hear from this man. Not to mention all of his illegal business dealings and illegal use of Charity funds. The list of lies goes on an on. How can anyone defend this man?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/20/african-americans-are-in-the-worst-shape-theyve-ever-been-trump-says-in-north-carolina/

It's really insulting to watch a candidate from a major party use African Americans to make whites feel good about voting for him and it's working...Look how this thread began...

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:This fool Donald Trump just said this:

"We're going to rebuild our inner cities because our African American communities are absolutely in the worst shape they've ever been in before. Ever, ever, ever,” Trump said during a campaign event at the Duplin County Events Center, where thousands of supporters gathered.

The comments drew immediate criticism on social media from critics who accused him of failing to consider the United States’ history with slavery and North Carolina’s history with Jim Crow laws and segregation. Kenansville itself is named after a man whose family owned a slave plantation.

This is the kind of crap that just makes me hot with anger. Anyone who supports this man should be ashamed of themselves. There's just no justifying his insensitive remarks and outright bigotry. At some point people have to acknowledge what they see and hear from this man. Not to mention all of his illegal business dealings and illegal use of Charity funds. The list of lies goes on an on. How can anyone defend this man?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/20/african-americans-are-in-the-worst-shape-theyve-ever-been-trump-says-in-north-carolina/

It's really insulting to watch a candidate from a major party use African Americans to make whites feel good about voting for him and it's working...Look how this thread began...

Funny how Trump instantly comments on everything else, but the shooting of unarmed Terence Crutcher in Tulsa, he has no comment at all. Instead he's shouting out a town named after a plantation owner.

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/778385212505989120

Also just so you know that NC flag is actually the Confederate Flag. People think the Rebel Flag is the Flag of the Confederacy but many Southern States still use variations of Confederate Flags other than that one in a defiant manner.

In the South when they're forced to change the flag from the most popular Confederate Flag they just switch to another one that people in the North don't know is still a Confederate Image.

nixluva wrote:

arkrud wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:This fool Donald Trump just said this:

"We're going to rebuild our inner cities because our African American communities are absolutely in the worst shape they've ever been in before. Ever, ever, ever,” Trump said during a campaign event at the Duplin County Events Center, where thousands of supporters gathered.

The comments drew immediate criticism on social media from critics who accused him of failing to consider the United States’ history with slavery and North Carolina’s history with Jim Crow laws and segregation. Kenansville itself is named after a man whose family owned a slave plantation.

This is the kind of crap that just makes me hot with anger. Anyone who supports this man should be ashamed of themselves. There's just no justifying his insensitive remarks and outright bigotry. At some point people have to acknowledge what they see and hear from this man. Not to mention all of his illegal business dealings and illegal use of Charity funds. The list of lies goes on an on. How can anyone defend this man?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/20/african-americans-are-in-the-worst-shape-theyve-ever-been-trump-says-in-north-carolina/

It's really insulting to watch a candidate from a major party use African Americans to make whites feel good about voting for him and it's working...Look how this thread began...

I agree - Trump is totally wrong.
Because our African American communities are absolutely in the best shape they've ever been in before. Ever, ever, ever.
What a punk...

You should refrain from commenting on this topic. If you aren't going to take the time to respectfully learn U.S. History and the deep nature of Race relations in this country then don't comment on it. I'm not going to let you get away with nonsense!!! This is something i'm VERY well informed on and I take it seriously, so don't mock the seriousness of this issue. My family members have fought and bled for this country over the last 258 years, despite not being treated with justice and fairness.

Hmmm... So to say the situation is bad is wrong and to say it is good is wrong.
So it is not about the facts of live but about who is talking.
If I am not African American I should shut up and never talk about any AA related issues.
I can call out Red Necks, Asians, and Latinos any time I want... because political correctness rules.
OK - I get it and will stay away. You doing excellent job to segregate yourself.

arkrud wrote:

nixluva wrote:

arkrud wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:This fool Donald Trump just said this:

"We're going to rebuild our inner cities because our African American communities are absolutely in the worst shape they've ever been in before. Ever, ever, ever,” Trump said during a campaign event at the Duplin County Events Center, where thousands of supporters gathered.

The comments drew immediate criticism on social media from critics who accused him of failing to consider the United States’ history with slavery and North Carolina’s history with Jim Crow laws and segregation. Kenansville itself is named after a man whose family owned a slave plantation.

This is the kind of crap that just makes me hot with anger. Anyone who supports this man should be ashamed of themselves. There's just no justifying his insensitive remarks and outright bigotry. At some point people have to acknowledge what they see and hear from this man. Not to mention all of his illegal business dealings and illegal use of Charity funds. The list of lies goes on an on. How can anyone defend this man?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/09/20/african-americans-are-in-the-worst-shape-theyve-ever-been-trump-says-in-north-carolina/

It's really insulting to watch a candidate from a major party use African Americans to make whites feel good about voting for him and it's working...Look how this thread began...

I agree - Trump is totally wrong.
Because our African American communities are absolutely in the best shape they've ever been in before. Ever, ever, ever.
What a punk...

You should refrain from commenting on this topic. If you aren't going to take the time to respectfully learn U.S. History and the deep nature of Race relations in this country then don't comment on it. I'm not going to let you get away with nonsense!!! This is something i'm VERY well informed on and I take it seriously, so don't mock the seriousness of this issue. My family members have fought and bled for this country over the last 258 years, despite not being treated with justice and fairness.

Hmmm... So to say the situation is bad is wrong and to say it is good is wrong.
So it is not about the facts of live but about who is talking.
If I am not African American I should shut up and never talk about any AA related issues.
I can call out Red Necks, Asians, and Latinos any time I want... because political correctness rules.
OK - I get it and will stay away. You doing excellent job to segregate yourself.