gosh, if only we could go back to the last 8 years, everything would be solved. doggone it
-
Comment -
Everything was just fine until the 2006 mid-term elections where the democrats took over control of congress.
Its been all downhill since then.
No matter what socialists like Ryan say, the financial markets are the biggest indicator of the current health of our financial system and they have ABSOLUTELY NO CONFIDENCE in Barack Obama and the liberal democrats in congress.
You can't blame Bush or the republicans for that AWFUL pork-filled stimulus package that Obama and the liberal democrats passed. The markets response to the stimulus package says it all.Comment -
yes, everything was fine and dandy till 06
you have an incredible grasp of the issues, of markets, and of where things were headed. its not like guys were moving 1's and 0's around to delay the inevitable? nooooo sir. things were a ok till the day the dems won the house!! yeehawwwwww. lets invade iraq again.Comment -
According to you then every bill for the rest of Obamas 4-8 years will be one that "the liberal democrats passed." and what kind of market response do you expect. Any bill to stimulate the economy will wake investors up, and scare a good % of them in to pulling some if not all of their investments. One can only hope this will be a temporary market fluxuation and slowly our market will rebuild. Over 14,000 in October 07 our market has dropped around 7,000 points in a year and five months. If it were not for this package then it would have dropped much, much more. This is the reason for the stimulus in the first place, to save our failing markets. So for one to blame a stimulus for the market failing is just plain ignorant. And for you to mention the democrats taking over the congress and mentioning that everything has been downhill ever since is stupid. Tell me 2 positive things the republicans did in congresss that were not bi-partisan. True, our economy is suffering. Where in history war has proven to help a countries economy it is proving to not repeat itself. Bush and his republican agenda has dug us in to a hole that we might not make it out of. To blame this on a brand new president who has been attempting to fix the republicans mistakes for the first 6 weeks of his term is so ignorant. The only people I feel may havea valid complaint are the rich who are going to be paying more taxes than they are used to. That is it,so if you want to go off all day about how you are paying a few percent more in taxes and you are in the top 1% than I can understand your frusteration. Then I would raise the argument that you were undertaxed in the first place...Thanks to Bush.Comment -
Who's Counting Bush's Mistakes?
May 22, 2008 ... Republican misfortunes caused by Bush mistakes ... Deficit-spending during the Bush years has put this country in a deep hole.
President Bush concedes mistakes during Katrina. by Bruce Alpert, The Times-Picayune Monday January 12, 2009, 9:26 PM
Official: Bush to Admit Iraq Mistakes
October 7, 2005
Since President Bush took office in 2000, Republicans have had control of both the House and Senate for all but a very brief period of time. During the time that Republicans have controlled Congress, there have been a number of highly questionable actions by the Bush Administration that have demanded congressional oversight. Unfortunately, the Republican-controlled Congress has refused to carry out its constitutional oversight duties, frequently working instead to provide excuses and political cover to the Administration.
One month after Obama took office, the downward economic trend of the previous year did not immediately reverse, which is clearly Obama's fault because regardless of what came before, he's president now, and he better watch himself if he wants to get reelected.
At some point I have to wonder if even the republicans believe what they say any more.
The republicans somehow never admit mistakes. They never ran up the national debt over $5 trillion while they controlled congress under bush.
Bush admits mistakes in Iraq, dispatches more troopsDemocrats say president is on wrong course
January 11th, 2007
Ralph Waldo Emerson said it best, "The louder he spoke of his honor, the faster we counted our spoons." And no administration in U.S. history has spoken louder, or as often, of its honor. So let us count our spoons.
Emergency Management: They completely failed to manage the first large-scale emergency since 9/11. Despite all their big talk and hundreds of billions of dollars spent on homeland security over the past four years, this administration proved itself stunningly incompetent when faced with an actual emergency. (Katrina Relief Funds Squandered)
Fiscal Management: America is broke. No wait, we're worse than broke. In less than five years these borrow and spend-thrifts have nearly doubled our national debt, to a stunning $8.2 trillion. These are not your father's Republicans who treated public dollars as though they were an endangered species. These Republicans waste money in ways and in quantities that make those old tax and spend liberals of yore look like tight-fisted Scots.
This administration is so incompetent that you can just throw a dart at the front page of your morning paper and whatever story of importance it hits will prove my point.
Katrina relief: Eleven thousand spanking new mobile homes sinking into the Arkansas mud. Seems no one in the administration knew there were federal and state laws prohibiting trailers in flood zones. Oops. That little mistake cost you $850 million -- and counting.
Medicare Drug Program: This $50 billion white elephant debuted by trampling many of those it was supposed to save. The mess forced states to step in and try to save its own citizens from being killed by the administration's poorly planned and executed attempt to privatize huge hunks of the federal health safety net.
Afghanistan: Good managers know that in order to pocket the gains of a project, you have to finish it. This administration started out fine in Afghanistan. They had the Taliban and al Queda on the run and Osama bin Laden trapped in a box canyon. Then they were distracted by a nearby shiney object -- Iraq. We are now $75 billion out of pocket in Afghanistan and its sitting president still rules only within the confines of the nation's capital. Tribal warlords, the growing remnants of the Taliban and al Qaeda call the shots in the rest of the county.
Iraq: This ill-begotten war was supposed to only cost us $65 billion. It has now cost us over $300 billion and continues to suck $6 billion a month out of our children's futures. Meanwhile the three warring tribes Bush "liberated" are using our money and soldiers' lives to partition the country. The Shiites and Kurds are carving out the prime cuts while treating the once-dominant Sunnis the same way the Israelis treat the Palestinians, forcing them onto Iraq's version of Death Valley. Meanwhile Iran is increasingly calling the shots in the Shiite region as mullahs loyal to Iran take charge. (More)
Iran: The administration not only jinxed its Afghanistan operations by attacking Iraq, but also provided Iran both the rationale for and time to move toward nuclear weapons. The Bush administration's neocons' threats to attack Syria next only provided more support for religious conservatives within Iran who argued U.S. intentions in the Middle East were clear, and that only the deterrent that comes with nuclear weapons could protect them.
North Korea: Ditto. Also add to all the above the example North Korea set for Iran. Clearly once a country possesses nukes, the U.S. drops the veiled threats and wants to talk.
Social Programs: It's easier to get affordable -- even free -- American-style medical care, paid for with American dollars, if you are injured in Iraq, Afghanistan or are victims of a Pakistani earthquake, than if you live and pay taxes in the good old U.S.A. Nearly 50 million Americans can't afford medical insurance. Nevertheless the administration has proposed a budget that will cut $40 billion from domestic social programs, including health care for the working poor. The administration is quick to say that those services will be replaced by its "faith-based" programs."Despite the Bush administration's rhetorical support for religious charities, the amount of direct federal grants to faith-based organizations declined from 2002 to 2004, according to a major new study released yesterday....The study released yesterday "is confirmation of the suspicion I've had all along, that what the faith-based initiative is really all about is de-funding social programs and dumping responsibility for the poor on the charitable sector," said Kay Guinane, director of the nonprofit advocacy program at OMB Watch.." (More)The Military: Overused and over-deployed.
Former Defense Secretary William Perry and former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright warned in a 15-page report that the Army and Marine Corps cannot sustain the current operational tempo without "doing real damage to their forces." ... Speaking at a news conference to release the study, Albright said she is "very troubled" the military will not be able to meet demands abroad. Perry warned that the strain, "if not relieved, can have highly corrosive and long-term effects on the military. (More)With military budgets gutted by the spiraling costs of operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the administration has requested funding for fewer National Guard troops in fiscal 2007 -- 17,000 fewer. Which boggles the sane mind since, if it weren't for reserve/National Guard, the administration would not have had enough troops to rotate forces in and out of Iraq and Afghanistan. Nearly 40 percent of the troops sent to those two countries were from the reserve and National Guard.
The Environment: Here's a little pop quiz: What happens if all the coral in the world's oceans dies? Answer: Coral is the first rung on the food-chain ladder; so when it goes, everything else in the ocean dies. And if the oceans die, we die.
The coral in the world's oceans are dying (called "bleaching") at an alarming and accelerating rate. Global warming is the culprit. Nevertheless, this administration continues as the world's leading global warming denier. Why? Because they seem to feel it's more cost effective to be dead than to force reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. How stupid is that? And time is running out.
Trade: We are approaching a $1 trillion annual trade deficit, most of it with Asia, $220 billion with just China -- just last year.
Energy: Record high energy prices. Record energy company profits. Dick Cheney's energy task force meetings remain secret. Need I say more?
Consumers: Americans finally did it last year -- they achieved a negative savings rate. (Folks in China save 10 percent, for contrast.) If the government can spend more than it makes and just say "charge it" when it runs out, so can we. The average American now owes $9,000 to credit card companies. Imagine that.
Human Rights: America now runs secret prisons and a secret judicial system that would give Kafka fits. And the U.S. has joined the list of nations that tortures prisioners of war. (Shut up George! We have pictures!)
I could go on for another 1,000 words listing the stunning incompetence of the Bush administration and its GOP sycophants in Congress. But what's the use? No seems to give a fig. The sun continues to shine in this fool's paradise. House starts were up in January. The stock market is finally back over 11,000.
But don't bother George W. Bush with any of this. While seldom right, he is never in doubt. Doubt is Bush's enemy. Worry? How can he worry when he has no doubts?
Me? Well, I worry about all the above, all the time. But in particular, I worry about coral.
shall I continue.....
Comment -
if any of these limpdick chickenhawk republicans had said shit about spending from 2001-2008, then that would be one thing, but they didnt say shit. they love to support made up wars, as long as they dont have to fight in them. they love veterans, as long as they dont have to pay for their healthcare when they return, and they love to honor veterans service, unless those vets run agains chickenshits (see mccain v bush 2000, gore v bush 2000, kerry v bush 04)
where was the outrage from 2001 till now? calling people socialists sounds kinda empty when the socialism you bellyache about started under the rule of the great gw.Comment -
Why do socialists like yourself say things like this without the slightest proof to back up your ridiculous claims?Originally posted by ryanXL977
You can live in your fantasy land and believe that "guys were moving 1's and 0's around to delay the inevitable" but the plain, simple truth is things were a whole lot better prior to the 2006 mid-term elections.
By the way, if republicans were moving 1's and 0's around, why didn't the democrats stop them or were they too stupid to realize it, LOL?Comment -
If the liberal democrats in congress keep coming up with bills like the recently passed stimulus package, then investors will continue to pull their money out of the stock market.Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaid
This recently passed stimulus package was nothing more than a 15 year wish list of every liberal democratic politician. The wish list made up about 80% of the stimulus with the remaining 20% to increase the number of jobs and improve the economy.
Are you so oblivious as to what is happening that you don't know the Dow hit its high of 14,000 in October 2007 NOT 2008?
Your comment that the market would have dropped much more without this pork-filled wasteful stimulus package is pure bull shit. As was the case with the TARP bailout, the market sold off severely as soon as the stimulus was passed.
The free-spending republicans who swelled the deficit from 2001-2006 were wrong and so is Obama and the democrats now. Unfortunately, useless socialists are so blinded by partisanship that they praise Obama even though he is spending money so foolishly.
Since I never made any jokes about the war, I assume the last part of your response was meant for someone else so I'll refrain from responding back about that.Comment -
Ok i admit my mistake in saying the market was 14000 in oct o8 dont know what the hell i was thinking and you can change that comment to a year and five months, not much better, but either way to be oblivious to the fact that the stimulus package will not help the markets in the long run is idiotic. Higly doubt you are educated in economics, or in any business field for that matter. Any economist would agree that to increase government spending is vital in this current recession. When you hear the phrase "there is no such thing as a free lunch" one is referring to the short run consequences that must be faced to achieve maximum long run benefits. For one to rant about the short run effects without looking at the "big picture" if very premature because u nor myself knows exactly how this stimulus will effect us in the long run. And where do you think this market would be right now if we were to let AIG and the number of banks we have saved fail? You dont think it would be dropping, so give me a # mr smart guy.Comment -
At least you admit Bushs spending was wrong, but his parties projects such as the famous bridge to nowhere, and his wastefull limitless spending have led us to these dire straights. In 8 years we may be able to place judgement on Obamas spending but I have to agree with your wife on this one, your a little premature.
odds andywend never graduated college +800
odds andywend never graduated high school +160Comment -
Both Democrats & Republicans are to blame. They are attached at the hip. It isn't fair to the U.S. citizens that there aren't legitimate 3rd parties to at least keep them honest. It's by design. Almost from the very beginning, politicians have been seeking to exploit power not inherently given by the Constitution. We're coming closer to that logical conclusion day by day. Both parties share the blame.Comment -
According to you, it is IDIOTIC to believe that the stimulus package won't help the financial markets in the long run and then you go on to say a few sentences later that you don't know how the stimulus will effect us in the long run. FUNNY, FUNNY STUFF.Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaid
Even a clean, pork-free stimulus package would have negative implications on the overall financial health of our country as we were almost $11 TRILLION in debt at the start of the Barack Obama administration and the federal government continues to spend money on programs that it can't afford. All Americans should be outraged at the $800 BILLION pork-infested atrocity passed by the democratic congress and signed into law by Barack Obama.
Unfortunately, liberal democrats are so blinded by party loyalty they will support ANYTHING their party does regardless of the long-term negative consequence it has on our country.
This stimulus package will NOT help financial markets in the short or long run. The only thing it will do is prolong the length and severity of this economic meltdown.
Liberals like yourself are in favor of increased government spending when times are good and when times are bad and you're foolish enough to believe that increasing taxes on the most productive members of society is the answer to everything.
What does saving the banks have to do with all that pork social spending in the stimulus package?
As far as your comments about my education, I am in my early 40's and if I never worked another day in my life, I would have more than enough to live very comfortably. Can you say the same?Comment -
I can as a matter of fact, but im 25 and have ran my business since I was 21. I could have quit at 22 put someone else in charge and lived very comfortable forever. Thing is I would never quit, but I have an education that far surpasses your own. Just like work I plan on furthering my education to obtain my law degree at one point, why you ask, because through education comess opportunity. I never want to be forty and arguing for a bunch of super rich bastards that wouldn't give me the time of day. I am very sure you don't fall into the top 1% of the population, nor the top 10% as myself. That being said, I am not a liberal democrat as you state but an independent. I still actually have empathy for those that were never offered the same opportunities as myself, and will do anything in my power to help them. That is where u republicans fall short. Always bitching about the less fortunate instead of trying to help them. I'm not going to argue the same points over and over with you because the answers are still not certain and it is a waste of both of our time. I just feel that before ranting about what your President has done in his first six weeks in office you can spend time helping others. This is why I have recently started a non-profit doing just this. You can check out some ideas at www.actrightnow.info (under construction currently)and if you ever feel the urge to help others instead of bitching about crap you cannot change I would love to hear from you.Comment -
so what UNIQUE opportunities were you offered that others cannot have?
sounds like you helped yourself
everybody wants to help those that help themselvesComment -
I wonder why left-wing nutcases like this guy are ashamed to call themselves democrats and always refer to themselves as independents?Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaid
Just so I get this straight, you're certain that you have an education that surpasses mine, have made enough money in your alleged business to live comfortably for the rest of your life and you're only 25 years old?
If it makes you feel better to write fairy tales, then have at it.
By the way, being in the top 10% of the population income wise is NOT enough to live very comfortably forever, especially when you're a snot-nosed 25 year old liberal democrat writing fairy tales.
As far as helping others, I would be willing to place a large wager that I gave more to charity in 2008 then your total annual income.
Wtf, pay no attention to this guy, he isn't worth a second of your time.Comment -
No, Obama is that paranoid.Originally posted by InTheHoleComment -
Originally posted by UntilTheNDofTimE
Comment -
Well we its all done with Bush and Obama, they will both be able to say,...
And for all the Republicans who are now in full flip out socialist mode, the hard core democrats are telling you that ain't payback a bitch.Comment -
the role of government?, gee i sure wish we had some guidelines or rules to tell us, oh wait that's right we doOriginally posted by MonkeyF0cker
, a little something written a couple centuries ago called the Constitution of the United States of America.
taxes? sure. but taxes are THE only source of revenue for the government. and they have a purpose. stealing from 4% of the electorate to buy votes from the other 96% is not a valid purpose. of course a government indoctrinated fool as yourself thinks the government has this right.
welfare of the economy? government's only role in the economy is to protect the rights of businesses and individuals. but of course if you want a government controlled economy, then you are flat out endorsing fascism. well no, because after all the private companies get squeezed out or bought out by the government, then it will be the loving utopia of a socialist society. but at least the welfare of the economy will be good, just there won't be much of one. in the mean time, some other country is going to seize the opportunity, welcome the wealthy into their country, and enjoy the prosperity that wealth brings, while we regress into a EU clone.
you honestly think the government is looking out for the economy? have you looked at the stock market lately? you ever notice how every time some bailout or stimulus gets passed through one house of congress, the market reacts negatively to it?
it must be just a coincidence. 
hey nice strawman, please if you can't defend your position, then don't bother replying.
again with the partisan high ground bullshit. where was i being partisan at again?
funny how i've yet to mention a political party or make reference to one, but somehow i'm posting "partisan banter".
youre right you are no expert, so if you going to be the partisan police you may want to find a dictionary. also i find it shocking that you have yet to inform the donkey dick riders in this thread like ryanxl that he's being partisan.
you only see partisan when someone says something about democrats or bo.
Comment -
call me partisan all you want. Im not. But ive seen the last 8 years and if thats not enough to get peoples heads out of their asses, then nothing is.
As long as the gop takes its cues from a far right radio host, it will never win another election.
peace outComment -
"Obviously, you have no clue how this situation came about. It's difficult to argue against ignorance."Originally posted by MonkeyF0cker
I couldn't have said it better myself.
First of all, youre changing your position. You originally said "There is no one to blame but the greedy banks and lenders who put us in this mess to begin with."
Now youre suggesting that it was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that government passed that caused it.
Secondly, "Prior to this bill, subprime loans accounted for approximately 5% of all mortgages. In 2005, they accounted for over 30%."
that is like saying wet streets cause rain. you don't seem to understand the concept of cause and effect.
whether or not the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, or Glass-Steagall Act is/was necessary regulation opens a whole other can of worms about fiat money and central banks. and there can be a *logical* argument that our money system was a contributing factor to the housing/credit crisis.
furthermore i do blame banks for their own failures and i acknowledge that their irresponsibility contributed to the end mess, but only because government is bailing them out. there are plenty of banks that weren't that badly hurt by the bad mortgages because they were RESPONSIBLE with their investments and diversified. who in their right mind is going to buy securities backed by sub prime mortgages? the banks that went belly up did so because they were foolish and least diversified, not because they were "greedy" (whatever that means).
however all this is irrelevant to the actual cause of the mess. which all boils down to people buying homes that had no business buying homes. buying homes because financial institutions were FORCED by the government to have Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) loans.
that is ultimately to blame.Comment -
andywend i like your u tube video seer posted. And don't be jealous that u have no formal eduction and an ugly wife. I can assure you however your right wing ass did not donate more money last year than I made. I can also assure you that bums as yourelf will die a miserable life at a young age most likely due to a heart condition or a stroke. You are an ignorant moron and to pick a fight with me is just stupid. You are forty and a republican. Bet you look back on your past and wish you were in my shoes you shmuck. Instead you spend your time gambling and starting online "arguments." I ask myself one question. Who is behaving more like a child. I will not leave another comment here because frankly, I am sick of hearing from your right wing liar ass. The fact that you say you donated more to charity than I made last year is stupid. And your wife is fat and ugly u bitch! I'll go bang myself a nice 20 year old now, have fun with your fat wife u homo!Comment -
why is it that nobody but right wingers post political threads on sbr
lets ask ourselves that.
can this shit just stop for gods sake
sports!Comment -
And I have yet to hear which wonderfull Jr High School u graduated from that surpasses my education. I am about a year away from my M.B.A. you ever heard of an MBA? They dont give em out at Oaklahoma City Jr High!Comment -
Originally posted by ryanXL977
agreed i am done giving these blind degenerates the time of day. Just gives em a platform, to bad they dont have one in any branch of government lol.
And i hope u have a stroke soon you high blood pressured shmuck.
Comment -
Happy we'll wear the Barreled in at the SBR bash shirts and we'll fit inOriginally posted by HAPPY BOY
Comment -
Where's your liberal compassion and love for other human beings?Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaid
The last thing I would want is to be in your shoes. YOU'RE AN ABSOLUTE LOSER and your post speaks for itself.
I'm thrilled that I upset you to the point that you felt the need to write a post like that. YOU LOSE!!!Comment -
Originally posted by andywend
Is that what the priest said when you were married, or what the scale says when ur wife hops on, or what your dad said to your mom before he walked out on u?Comment -
These pricks all dream that one day they'll be rich and get to exploit others. That's the American Dream baby. It's similar to the odds some of these hopelessly bad gamblers will make a million gambling.Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaid
Oh, and these investors, speculators we're so worried about. Maybe its time for them to do something worthwhile instead of sponging of the labor of others.bird bird da bird's da wordComment -
Sponging off the labor of others!!!!
RenoCool, thats the only thing you liberal democrats know how to do.Comment -
No, It's exactly what you support.
But, I understand that "the opposite of everything is true" is an adequate slogan for you.bird bird da bird's da wordComment -
Everyone on the planet thought Saddam had biological, chemical, and possibly nuclear weapons.Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaidIraq has weapons of mass destruction.....Or Not!,
Get a grip u stupid republican loving shmucks. Bush started a war that i have lost multiple friends in with false allegations. His dumb ass actions are the reason that Barack was elected to begin with. So go to ur stupid conferences and listen to your dumb oxy fiend spokesman, and remember 1 thing, your not in power anymore so learn to love this country or leave it. I dealt with Bush's cocaine sniffing ass for 8 years you better believe that I will give Obama a fair chance at digging us out of Bush's mess. The fact that he is goig to try to reduce the deficit 50% given what Bush did with his limitless spending should alone be a reason to support him for now. I sometimes forget though how naive people are when it comes to their children or neices or nephews having a chance at a good future, but I forget that some of you, if not most of you are self loathing pricks. 
Saddam's generals thought he had these weapons.
Saddam was playing a very risky game of leading the world to believe that he had weapons that he no longer had (they were moved to Syria). He did this to present a deterrent to his enemies.
It was not that unplausable to think Saddam had biological weapons, the french sold him the mobile laboratories needed to make the weapons. It was well known that the mobile labs were dispersed throughout the country. A large number of these labs were captured. True, their weapons grade materials had been removed, but if you have a lab capable of making such weapons then you can get the weapons back in a few days.
Same with nerve gas and other chemical weapons. Since the US gave Saddam these weapons during the Iran-Iraq war along with the ability to make more, believing that Saddam had these weapons was not implausible.
It is well known that Saddam was a major conduit in the Khan black market nuclear weapons ring that has supplied nuclear capability and knowhow to a large number of Islam countries. So, again, not implausible to believe that Saddam kept some of this material.
Saddam went to great lengths to make the world believe that he was armed to the teeth with horrific weapons. He didn't just fool the naive, he fooled groups like Massad (best intelligence agency in the history of the modern world), MI5 (second best), the KGB (and whatever replaced it (third best), the Iranian secret service, the CIA, the French intelligence, well EVERYBODY, hell even the Iraqi intelligence service believed this.
We know that the Iraqi generals believed that Iraq possessed such weapons because during the invasion (Gulf war II) the generals made repeated requests to have the weapons released to them so that they could defeat the invaders. They were shocked to learn that such weapons would not be forth coming because they were no longer in Iraq and what was in Iraq had deteriorated to the point that is was no longer weapons grade.
Bush was an idiot for using an excuse to invade Iraq. He had a mandate to take out the bad guys after 9/11, he should have just said "we go to kill those who killed us".
But this idea that the President knew that these weapons did not exist and lied about it is patently absurd. Because to tell that fairy tale you have to say that Massad, MI5, KGB, the Iranians and a whole host of others were in on the big lie and that is preposterous.Comment -
I thought it was Congress that put together the federal budget and wrote the laws that entitle the spending? true, Bush should have vetoed the budgets with the ridiculous items in them but Congress would just have overridden the veto.Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaid
Presidents don't authorize spending, Congress does that.Comment -
AIG needs to be disbanded. AIG controls, as a monopoly, some very important financial instruments that are vital to having a sound financial system. Unfortunately, AIG engaged in EXTREMELY risky business practices and they give ZERO transparency on what they do. AIG could single handedly drive the entire world into a very deep depression.Originally posted by ijustwant2bpaid
And you want to make it possible for those idiots to continue to wield that power?
AIG needs to be seized and its leadership arrested and all of its assets distributed among financially sound, smaller institutions so that so much risk and power are not in the hands of one company.Comment -
It is unthinkable that anybody with a basic understanding of Iraq, the first war, and the sanctions could believe that Iraq had the weapons or possessed any danger to the US.
What is likely, is that the Bush administration figured the public would be more eager to buy this lie than another one they can make up.bird bird da bird's da wordComment
