How Mitt Romney cheated his way to the GOP nomination

[likeitfast55]

Oh, I'm not really trying to interject myself in the argument between you two, I'm just calling out a dumbass post when I see it.

Nice to see that higher education taught you the difference of forgo/forego.

Want to snipe because of an omitted letter "e". WOW You have to do better than

that.


To refresh your 50 working IQ, Here is your post.

"Teach yourself something, if your dumbass can even comprehend above a fifth grade level."

You called me a dumbass.

Now you back peddle and post this------------" I'm just calling out a dumbass post when I see it." Be clear, Because that is what that defines you.

[Vertnut]

Oh, ok like Pres. Bush had, 6 count them 6 of his 8 years in office! And still the economy was in shambles!

"WASHINGTON — President Bush on Wednesday signed a multibillion-dollar economic rescue package on Wednesday"

Remember this? Is the Big spending you are talking about?

I would call this post a "comparison". Funny...what's your affiliation, or do you just like to bitch?

[Jimbo]

I'll agree with the "this thread is pointless", and this little bit:

you just like to bitch

[Trip McNeely]

I simply pointed out that a previous President (GOP)

started the ball rolling down hill.

O RLY? Seems to me that you are wrong. CLINTON (DEM) started the ball rolling downhill.

1995 - Democratic President Bill Clinton revises CRA by making banks meet a quota for a certain number of low income loans. He also increases punishment for banks that dont loan enough money to low income borrowers. This forces banks to write lots of loans that they would not otherwise have written, because the government is forcing them to.
1999 - Democratic President Bill Clinton signs and endorses the "Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act," or GLBA, designed to make banks profitable in good economic times, as well as poor economic times. The bill allows consumer banks (think checking accounts, savings accounts, etc..) to merge with insurance companies and investment companies, so they all can make money. BUT for a bank to qualify to be a part of the program, you had to have a high CRA score, meaning that you had to have a lot of loans written to low income people. The government was effectively telling banks that if they wanted to be allowed to make money off of the investments of the rich, that they had to also be lending money to the poor.

[Cooter]

solid boosh

O RLY? Seems to me that you are wrong. CLINTON (DEM) started the ball rolling downhill.

1995 - Democratic President Bill Clinton revises CRA by making banks meet a quota for a certain number of low income loans. He also increases punishment for banks that dont loan enough money to low income borrowers. This forces banks to write lots of loans that they would not otherwise have written, because the government is forcing them to.
1999 - Democratic President Bill Clinton signs and endorses the "Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act," or GLBA, designed to make banks profitable in good economic times, as well as poor economic times. The bill allows consumer banks (think checking accounts, savings accounts, etc..) to merge with insurance companies and investment companies, so they all can make money. BUT for a bank to qualify to be a part of the program, you had to have a high CRA score, meaning that you had to have a lot of loans written to low income people. The government was effectively telling banks that if they wanted to be allowed to make money off of the investments of the rich, that they had to also be lending money to the poor.

[GhostTX]

solid boosh

Don't forget Bush did try to reign in Freddie Mae and Mac but the Democratically controlled congress nixed him. Then you have the infamous Bawney Fwank saying everything was fine with the two government institutions.

[jw33]

Ron Paul 2016!!!

[Forever_frost]

Ron Paul 2016!!!

He disagrees with you

[Up0n0ne]

Only thing Romney has over Obama is he hasn't directly said to the American people that he would ban guns and do away with the 2nd Ammendment like Obama did.
No difference between the two parties behind closed doors. NDAA alone proved this. But somehow the neo-cons think if the guy with an (R) behind his name is "their" guy. Guesss what he's not and doesn't care one bit for you, sorry.
I'm no Paul bot, but I am for the Constitution.
Please show me where the Romney and Obama differ?




And to stick to the same theme as the OP.
Romney's bailout bananza. Romney makes millions from GM bailout.

http://www.thenation.com/article/170644/mitt-romneys-bailout-bonanza#

[Craizie]

Only thing Romney has over Obama is he hasn't directly said to the American people that he would ban guns and do away with the 2nd Ammendment like Obama did.
No difference between the two parties behind closed doors. NDAA alone proved this. But somehow the neo-cons think if the guy with an (R) behind his name is "their" guy. Guesss what he's not and doesn't care one bit for you, sorry.
I'm no Paul bot, but I am for the Constitution.
Please show me where the Romney and Obama differ?

And to stick to the same theme as the OP.
Romney's bailout bananza. Romney makes millions from GM bailout.
http://www.thenation.com/article/170...ilout-bonanza#

So, basically, they gambled all their money on the fact that GM would get bailed out and thus keeping Delphi alive.. and they won.

[Up0n0ne]

So, basically, they gambled all their money on the fact that GM would get bailed out and thus keeping Delphi alive.. and they won.

Not so much, this may explain it better. If you don't want to go through the story intro. Palast starts talking around the 6 min. mark.

[Tyron Shulaces]

I could have told you from the start that Paul wouldn't receive the republican ticket. Doesn't mean that you can't still vote for him. Vote for who you think should be president. Don't vote for "the other guy" because he has a better chance to win and you don't like the person he's mainly running against. Romney is a better choice than Obama, but I believe Paul is better than Romney for what this country needs. So I'll still vote for him, even if many would consider it a waste of a vote. A real waste of MY vote would be voting for somebody I don't want to be president.

Let me just say this...the truth will set YOU free...

If Ron Paul REALLY and TRULY cared about America and libertarian values, he would drop his b.s and endorse Romney. Thats it. Plain and simple. Ron Paul doesn't care about the country, he only cares about his own thwarted political agenda. And he's convinced you paulbots to elect Barry again to send some sort of "message"...sad, really.

After 4 more years, you'll ALL wish you had...

[Forever_frost]

Let me just say this...the truth will set YOU free...

If Ron Paul REALLY and TRULY cared about America and libertarian values, he would drop his b.s and endorse Romney. Thats it. Plain and simple. Ron Paul doesn't care about the country, he only cares about his own thwarted political agenda. And he's convinced you paulbots to elect Barry again to send some sort of "message"...sad, really.

After 4 more years, you'll ALL wish you had...

Or he'd, you know, run for governor where the 10th amendment states has the most power for change. Instead, he wants the big seat without proving any of his ideas work. Let's see how he runs a state first