Do Republicans hate the constitution?

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Literally never tap the kong

Bro two people called you out.

Even when you're wrong you don't admit it.


Keep up your routine though. Your act is one of my favorites on this website.

 

[lfd0311]

This is a joke right.

Lending institutions couldn't give that money away fast enough. They borrowed from the fed at basically a 0 interest rate. Of course they're willing to lend the money out at 3-4-5% interest rates.

You're making it seem like they had their arms twisted.

You're right. Government housing policies probably had nothing to do with the way Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were operating

 

[SMEAC]

Bro two people called you out.

Even when you're wrong you don't admit it.


Keep up your routine though. Your act is one of my favorites on this website.

Oh the kong

He was so affected by most posts he used a smiley face

You're the only one having an issue, but that's you; narrow minded hater

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

You're right. Government housing policies probably had nothing to do with the way Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were operating

That was years after this entire thing started though.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Oh the kong

He was so affected by most posts he used a smiley face

You're the only one having an issue, but that's you; narrow minded hater

You blatantly lied. Denying is even more lying.

 

[lfd0311]

That was years after this entire thing started though.

No it wasn't

 

[spamking]

@oldshadow , regardless of what democrats may or may not have done, do you object to the possibility that republican lawmakers will avoid considering any candidate put forward by Obama? It's fine if a candidate is actually considered and not found appropriate but that's far different from what McConnell and others are saying.

Depending on who the POTUS puts forward the Pubs could be blasted for being racist, sexist or both . . . regardless, it's a no win situation for them IMO.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

No it wasn't

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marvin-meadors/fannie-mae-freddie_b_1549411.html

 

[SMEAC]

You blatantly lied. Denying is even more lying.

So its blatantly and lying on top of literally that you don't comprehend

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

So its blatantly and lying on top of literally that you don't comprehend

Lmao u lied. Clear as day hack.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I was aware. Are you aware that I said nothing about the worldwide housing bubble?

Of course you did. You just didn't know you did.

Are you aware that the Subprime housing crisis, something that occured exclusively in the US, and the world wide housing bubble, are two seperate issues?

How so?

You're right. Government housing policies probably had nothing to do with the way Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae were operating

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had nothing to do with the housing issues.

 

[SMEAC]

Lmao u lied. Clear as day hack.

The best part of all this is that you feel all victorious over the inane

 

[second sight]

So why make accusations "if you could be wrong"? Have some decency man.

I simply said that voter turn out was a major factor in 2014 and will be going forward. If that's baiting then wtf is anyone doing in these threads?

because I was 99% sure and don't feel like looking

you guys do that shit all the time, frame both sides of a debate and then get people to argue a point you made.

the last I read, you agreed with dochter that another poster should back up you low voter turn out conspiracy

 

[Jose Aldo]

Under the constitution the POTUS has the right and the duty to appoint justices to the SCOTUS. Nowhere in the constitution it says that this right ceases to exist in the last year of the presidency or when potential future candidates have started their race to become candidates in the next election.

And it's not last week of December, Obama's term goes for almost another year, that's 25% of the term he has been elected for.

Does it say in the constitution that certain rights or duties go only for 75% of the term? Do we want Obama to pull a Hendricks?

Should Senators whose seat will be up for grabs come November not vote on Obama's nominee then?

Only if it helps them

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

The best part of all this is that you feel all victorious over the inane

Stop right wing spinning this.

You blatantly lied and said you didn't. You're a liar. Plain as day

 

[Jack V Savage]

Sure you did. Yet you keep blaming the banks for selling the type of backed loans the the Government was forcing on them in the first place.

The gov't wasn't forcing loans on anyone, and entities not even subject to regulations on that were doing a lot more lending (including non-bank entities) and reducing lending standards. Plus, as you want to ignore, the housing bubble was worldwide. Freddie and Fannie's share of the market was plunging during the buildup.

I understand that you're just repeating something you heard, but if you look deeply into the issue, you'll see that the "gov't forcing banks to loan to undesirables" story of the bubble does not hold any water at all.

 

[UpaLoompa]

Slow down Jack, I didn't say the GOP was correct in threatening this; I just pointed out that the Democrats that are out of sorts today didn't seem to take issue when the shoe was on the other foot.

How is this sort of posting different than comments responded to with "All Obama does is blame Bush?"?
You're avoiding the point and muddying things up. Is McConnell wrong? Yes or no?

 

[lfd0311]

Of course you did. You just didn't know you did.

Would we have been affected by the collapse of the world wide housing bubble? Of course we would have. Would our own problems been a lot easier if not for also having to deal with the subprime mortgage crisis? Yes it would. If the Government hadn't been meddling in the affairs of banks for their own political reasons the impact on our country would have been much less

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had nothing to do with the housing issues.

Because that's what I said isn't it?

 

[UpaLoompa]

I like this narrative that banks had to do subprime mortgages because of liberals. It's a cute children's tale.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Would we have been affected by the collapse of the world wide housing bubble? Of course we would have. Would our own problems been a lot easier if not for also having to deal with the subprime mortgage crisis? Yes it would. If the Government hadn't been meddling in the affairs of banks for their own political reasons the impact on our country would have been much less

Not really sure what you're trying to say here. If there were no bubble in subprime, the bubble in the rest of the housing market wouldn't have been quite as bad, I guess. Not sure how that would have been possible, though. And the gov't wasn't meddling in the affairs of banks for political reasons. As I noted, unregulated entities were seeing lending standards fall faster than regulated ones. How can you possibly explain that with your framework? How do you explain the worldwide nature of the bubble?

Because that's what I said isn't it?

That's what I said. ???

I like this narrative that banks had to do subprime mortgages because of liberals. It's a cute children's tale.

Don't forget the other part of the tale: Those naive banks were getting fooled by devious poor people that the gov't was forcing them to lend to.