Reply With Quote
So, to recap....you were opposed to the trillion dollar TARP and still are, and
...you were opposed to the Trillion dollar Stimulus and still are,
And you feel a need to start a thread to reiterate this?
...plan worked.
TARP Repayments Surpass Loans
Hmmm....lesseee, who was president? Oh yeah, President George W. Bush.
Yeah, I know, I opposed the TARP fund and still do but, let me know when we ever see the Trillion dollar stimulus again...
So, to recap....you were opposed to the trillion dollar TARP and still are, and
...you were opposed to the Trillion dollar Stimulus and still are,
And you feel a need to start a thread to reiterate this?
Well, for what it's worth, Bush's TARP recouped it's money...Obama's Stimulus is going to bankrupt the country.
Just sayin'
So Yoni was wrong.
This is news?
That's because they only got republican votes by the stipulation that repaid and unused funds didn't get used for something else, but could only repay the debt.
Oh, come on, WC. The TARP was BEGGGED FOR by a Republican president and his republican administration, whose intial suggestion to congress was a one-page do ent that essentially said, "Whatever Paulson wants to do he can do and no one can ever ask questions about it."
The Democratic congressmen pointed out that the one-page do ent just MIGHT be uncons utional, and were criticized by Wall Streeters as hamstringing and delaying the needed fix to prevent a worldwide catastrophe.
The Republican leadership in Congress supported it.
Do you remember what happened to the markets worldwide when the first measure failed to pass the House?
There are lots of things that both parties have done to contribute to this debt in this country, and continually trying to paint the Republicans as the only voice of fiscal restraint is not merely erroneous, it is irritating.
All previous government spending -- Democrat and Republican alike -- pales in comparison to the amount of money this administration and this Congress have en bered, and plan to en ber, in just two years.
There has never been anything like it.
Hmmm... People continued to rail how he was a failed business man, and now when it suits their needs, forget it? He had bad advice and didn't know better on this issue. At least some republicans were smart enough to make sure the money was returned to the tax payers.
It was no more uncons utional than the other things I claim our government does uncons utionally.
Yes, in fact I was here making those points. What i didn't know at the time was the provision the money doesn't get used for anything else. I still would have been against it, but not so angry about it.
Well, you know the democrats. Always having to one-up the republicans.
They're ing 15-upping the Republicans...
True, but that's beside the point. All that matters is that they spend more money than any other administration did. They need to bankrupt America to take it over.
Frankly, anyone who one stood to win in 2008 would've faced an avalanche of running downhill in an epochal financial panic. I seriously doubt the tools in John McCain's toolbox would've been much different.True, but that's beside the point. All that matters is that they spend more money than any other administration did.
Who shrank the government again?
Ever?
Bill Clinton.
A fact no republican ever likes to acknowledge.
In hard fact, it was Gore's handling of the 'reorganization' of the government that led to the initial downsizing of government, supported by the Republican Congress in an effort to capitalize on the 'peace dividend' available from the end of the cold war.
I hate to admit this, myself, because I voted against Gore in 2000, a decision that I never really regretted, but came to be convinced was probably an error on my part.
I could never really stand the idea of Gore as president (still can't), but I didn't for Bush/Cheney to repeat, either, largely because of the combination of out-of-control spending and Iraq.
Clinton was amoral but competent.
Gore was as irritating as a Sunday Morning sermon, but competent.
Bush was incompetent.
So far, Obama seems pretty incompetent to me, too, although WH is correct in his observation that noone would have done well in this time period.
As per the conservative/Repug class war strategy, the federal deficit is just another false ugly stick to beat the Dems with, always distracting from the real criminals, the predatory, greedy, criminal financial sector which has taken over unchallengeable control of the US and the planet.
The Repugs/McLiar/pitbull would have continued/expanded TARP to bailout their financial owners, just like the Dems did.
The Repugs probably would have not done a stimulus in the same manner, letting 100s of municipalities go bankrupt, 1000s of schools closed, and generally ed up govts and infrastructure at all levels, as their well-known "philosophy" dictates, which is to over the poor/middle-class people, the poorer you are (It's Your Fault, Losers), the more you get ed up.
Don't you think he would have vetoed much of this spending congress is approving?
help me out here. Didn't he have a republican congress when that happened?
The calculus of 2009 favored stimlus bailout and reform regardless of the pres. McCain wouldn't have vetoed as much as you'd maybe like him to.
Wouldn't have been possible without a Republican Congress, for sure.
Your point?
Triangles? Triangulation? o?
Is there complete transparency on the $2T previously undisclosed for secret reasons TARP loans? That really would be news...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
