Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > So much for change

So much for change (Page 2)
Thread Tools
Powerbook
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: München, Deutschland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by Doofy View Post
But I'm pretty fsking sure I have international politics and their influence on international finances sorted out.

Typically that's just one sentence away from "revelations" of the sort that the Jeeews secretly control the whole country!!! The Jews and Aliens!
Aut Caesar aut nihil.
     
TheWOAT
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:12 PM
 
I dont see the point of this thread.

When (not if) Obama ends up with a purely democratic cabinet with a couple token repubilcans, then we can start making these sort of threads... but his cheif of staff?
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by MindFad View Post
I was hoping for John Spencer, but I hear he's unavailable.
Chris Matthews is available
     
The Crook
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:15 PM
 
What's also galling is that for months Republicans were calling his platform "socialist" and "radical." Now all of a sudden, his policies aren't the "change" he would bring to Washington. So much for "change" indeed!

Crooked Member of the MacNN Atheist Clique.
     
paul w
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vente: Achat
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:17 PM
 
If nothing else it shows that Muslims and Jews can work together.

Otherwise - this doesn't even begin to approach GWB cronyism. It's cute to see everyone's kneejerk reactions.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:24 PM
 
Originally Posted by Powerbook View Post

Typically that's just one sentence away from "revelations" of the sort that the Jeeews secretly control the whole country!!! The Jews and Aliens!
Oh yeah, of course it is.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
finboy
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:41 PM
 
Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey View Post
Although it is counter-intuitive, this is actually a great pick if you are looking for a bipartisan Obama agenda. Emanuel will play the bad cop and be better able to bludgeon rank-and-file Democrats into falling in line, while Obama reaches across the aisle.


Sounds good though. I'm sure that's how some of the blogs will spin it.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by paul w View Post
If nothing else it shows that Muslims and Jews can work together.

Otherwise - this doesn't even begin to approach GWB cronyism. It's cute to see everyone's kneejerk reactions.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ed_party_lines
W appointed several (D)s, Including Lanny Davis

BTW, ABC is reporting Emanuel has accepted BO's offer.
     
MindFad
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 03:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Chris Matthews is available
Hmm, I don't get you posting the video, and maybe you missed the West Wing reference, but:

Chris: "I wanna do everything I can to make this thing work—this new Presidency work, and I think that a successful model is—"
Joe: "Is that your job? You just talked about being a journalist."
Chris: "Yea, that is my job."
Joe: "Your job—"
Chris: "My job is to help this country."
Joe: "—as a journalist is to make this Presidency work?"
Chris: "Uh, to make this work successfully, because this country needs a successful Presidency."
You know, removing the other 45 seconds of context from the transcript, not to mention the entire interview itself—what's the big deal? Rather, what's the point of the clip? I'm no big Chris Matthews fan, but I can't tell if Chris misunderstood Joe's original question or what, but the little patriotic tangent didn't rub me wrong. And removing all context, I'll agree with Chris that this country needs a successful Presidency. I haven't found the last 8 years to be rather successful.

Or wait. Is Chris Matthews a foreign agent? Is there something you're keeping from us? Should I put on my tinfoil hat before viewing any future MSNBC? Stop holding out.
     
paul w
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vente: Achat
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 04:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ed_party_lines
W appointed several (D)s, Including Lanny Davis

BTW, ABC is reporting Emanuel has accepted BO's offer.
Right and Andrew Card had closer ties to Bush than Rahm does to Barack.

We'll see how the rest of his picks go before we leap to conclusions.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 06:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by finboy View Post


Sounds good though. I'm sure that's how some of the blogs will spin it.
It's not spin. Every administration needs an enforcer.

Edit:

Specific names now being floated by members of the transition:

Richard Lugar (possible Sec. State, not that he'd take it)
Colin Powell (possible Sec. Ed.)
Chuck Hagel (possible Sec. Def.)
( Last edited by SpaceMonkey; Nov 6, 2008 at 06:21 PM. )

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 09:09 PM
 
Listen guys, even people on Obama's side (the AP in this instance) are noting that he's not putting together a "post partisan" White House. He's putting together a partisan, attack machine like they are used to in Chicago:

My Way News - Obama's choice of Emanuel shows switch in tone

You don't hire the meanest pitbull to be in charge when you claim you want all the puppies to get along. Just another piece of the Obama Marketing Facade™ showing cracks. At some point, people are just going to have to face up to the fact that pretty much his entire campaign was a load of spinning BS.

Neither "post partisan" or "change".
( Last edited by stupendousman; Nov 6, 2008 at 09:22 PM. )
     
gradient
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 09:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by MindFad View Post
I was hoping for John Spencer, but I hear he's unavailable.
If there's one thing the White House could use it's a little Blues Explosion, no doubt.
     
Gee-Man
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 10:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Listen guys, even people on Obama's side (the AP in this instance) are noting that he's not putting together a "post partisan" White House. He's putting together a partisan, attack machine like they are used to in Chicago:

My Way News - Obama's choice of Emanuel shows switch in tone

You don't hire the meanest pitbull to be in charge when you claim you want all the puppies to get along. Just another piece of the Obama Marketing Facade™ showing cracks. At some point, people are just going to have to face up to the fact that pretty much his entire campaign was a load of spinning BS.

Neither "post partisan" or "change".
First of all, the AP isn't "on Obama's side". In fact, multiple times during the campaign they were getting complaints that they were too critical of Obama because the new head of the AP was contemplating taking a paid position with the McCain campaign.

Second, you obviously didn't read the article you linked to, or you simply ignored the parts that don't agree with your pre-determined viewpoint. Emanuel is known as a very tough, "get things done" kind of guy, who even some Republicans are willing to admit is good at this kind of job:
"Rahm knows Capitol Hill and has great political skills," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. "He can be a tough partisan but also understands the need to work together."
Just like during the campaign itself, you guys try to twist and spin and contort everything to put Obama in a negative light. "Change" doesn't mean that Obama is going to replace every single Washington insider on Jan 20th. In fact, that would be absolutely counterproductive and stupid, and nothing would actually get done - if you've ever worked in any large organization, you would know that new managers that attempt to show up and impose their will on an institution without somebody on the "inside" to work the ropes always end up failing. A good manager knows this, and it's obvious that the Presidency requires a manager, not a dictator. Obama cannot do this solely by himself, he needs people who know Washington inside and out to help him.

This is exactly why Obama needs a person like Emanuel. Obama himself isn't a crackin'-heads kind of person (obviously), but somebody in his staff needs to be like that in order to move folks who may or may not want to be moved. That's politics. Velvet on one side of the glove, steel on the other side. Yeah, he's a pitbull - but in case you hadn't noticed, Washington isn't exactly full of puppies; you can't only wield soft power in a crowd like this.

All successful presidents, Republican and Democrat, had somebody tough as Chief of Staff who would be able to get their agenda pushed through the complex and sometimes messy world of Washington D.C. That you would criticize this pick as "partisan", within minutes of him accepting the job, tells us more about how "partisan" YOU are than it does about what the Obama Administration is going to do.

I suggest you chill out for a few months drinking the Obama Hatorade. Come back in February or so with something substantive to criticize, you know, when he's actually taken office and done something, and then you won't sound so crazy.
     
Captain Obvious
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Chicago
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 11:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by ort888 View Post

This just in, Obama woke up this morning and put his pants on one leg at a time. Is this really change?

What would have been change enough for you?
That Obama grows a pair and publicly speaks up for Lieberman.

Not only did Lieberman agree to be the Democrats posterboy for moderate liberalism when he ran with Gore but he also continued to chose to caucus with them after they abandoned him in the midterm elections and backed another candidate.

I am positive Obama isn't the sort of leader to stand up to his party's Senate elders. Also watch him advocate for his seat to be given to another AA.

Barack Obama: Four more years of the Carter Presidency
     
The Crook
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 6, 2008, 11:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Listen guys, even people on Obama's side (the AP in this instance) are noting that he's not putting together a "post partisan" White House. He's putting together a partisan, attack machine like they are used to in Chicago:

You don't hire the meanest pitbull to be in charge when you claim you want all the puppies to get along. Just another piece of the Obama Marketing Facade™ showing cracks. At some point, people are just going to have to face up to the fact that pretty much his entire campaign was a load of spinning BS.

Neither "post partisan" or "change".
(1) When did Obama claim he was "post-partisan?" Obama is a Democrat.

(2) Again, the change was chiefly his policies. His policies are the change from the last 8 years of failed Republican policies (including 2 years of a veto threat in the white house). Obama very early on in his campaign came out with a Blueprint for Change that outlines the policies that represent the change he's chiefly talking about.

Crooked Member of the MacNN Atheist Clique.
     
tie
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 01:01 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Neither "post partisan" or "change".
Um, why do you think a Democrat, who is in fact "the most liberal Democrat in the Senate" and who has strong terrorist sympathies, would put together a "post partisan" administration? I really don't understand you guys. Would McCain have appointed only Democrats in his administration? If he had appointed a Republican chief of staff, would you be whining that it wasn't "change"?
The 4 o'clock train will be a bus.
It will depart at 20 minutes to 5.
     
PaperNotes
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 06:04 AM
 
You guys have forgotten how dangerous the world "change" is to America. Your Bill of Rights and Constitution are the most perfectly formed documents every written in history. It's not change you want, it's conserving the values and beliefs set in writing by the Founding Fathers and a back to basics approach that you want. When someone says they are going to bring change, it sets you on a path away from the Founding Fathers. When big media chose that person when he had not even given you a clear political manifesto, then the change he talks about will be purely in favour of the elites.
( Last edited by PaperNotes; Jan 9, 2018 at 05:16 AM. )
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 06:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Listen guys, even people on Obama's side (the AP in this instance) are noting that he's not putting together a "post partisan" White House. He's putting together a partisan, attack machine like they are used to in Chicago:

My Way News - Obama's choice of Emanuel shows switch in tone

You don't hire the meanest pitbull to be in charge when you claim you want all the puppies to get along. Just another piece of the Obama Marketing Facade™ showing cracks. At some point, people are just going to have to face up to the fact that pretty much his entire campaign was a load of spinning BS.

Neither "post partisan" or "change".
My mother, former Hillary supporter, believes Jim Jones has been elected.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 06:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by Gee-Man View Post
First of all, the AP isn't "on Obama's side".
We'll agree to disagree.

Second, you obviously didn't read the article you linked to, or you simply ignored the parts that don't agree with your pre-determined viewpoint. Emanuel is known as a very tough, "get things done" kind of guy, who even some Republicans are willing to admit is good at this kind of job
There are a bunch of people who are "good at this kind of job". Obama decided to pick one of the most partisan people in politics, one who had previously said that the Republicans could go "f--- themselves". As the story explained, that sets a tone. Rahm makes Karl Rove look like new born kitten. AND, it's not just Rahm. It appears that he's going to take a lot of Clinton's heavy knee-cap slammers back to the White House with him.

Just like during the campaign itself, you guys try to twist and spin and contort everything to put Obama in a negative light. "Change" doesn't mean that Obama is going to replace every single Washington insider on Jan 20th. In fact, that would be absolutely counterproductive and stupid, and nothing would actually get done - if you've ever worked in any large organization, you would know that new managers that attempt to show up and impose their will on an institution without somebody on the "inside" to work the ropes always end up failing. A good manager knows this, and it's obvious that the Presidency requires a manager, not a dictator. Obama cannot do this solely by himself, he needs people who know Washington inside and out to help him.
Again, there are plenty of people with Washington experience who weren't a part of Clinton's attack machine. He's choosing to put into place a lot of the most partisan players from the Clinton administration. That's his prerogative, but it does send the message that the guy isn't really al that serious about doing things much different than they have been done in the past - any different than he did during his short time in the senate, and not much different in how his people deal with bi-partisanship. Remember, Obama never had a big reputation for that sort of thing. He just marketed himself as something he wasn't, and no one in the media really challenged him on it. It was much like someone who really wanted a job padding their resume, lying about their experience, and the employer not checking references and past employers.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 06:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Crook View Post
(1) When did Obama claim he was "post-partisan?" Obama is a Democrat.
Plenty of politicians have put into place staff and policies which give preference to getting things done over partisan one-upsmanship. McCain and Lieberman (amongst other people in Congress) where known for this. Obama, not so much, though that's how he and his people marketed him.

(2) Again, the change was chiefly his policies. His policies are the change from the last 8 years of failed Republican policies (including 2 years of a veto threat in the white house). Obama very early on in his campaign came out with a Blueprint for Change that outlines the policies that represent the change he's chiefly talking about.
Change back to the Clinton attack machines of the 90's, and the failed political policies of the Carter administration. Gotcha.
     
stupendousman
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Nov 2003
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 06:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by tie View Post
Um, why do you think a Democrat, who is in fact "the most liberal Democrat in the Senate" and who has strong terrorist sympathies, would put together a "post partisan" administration?
I never did. It was all the people speaking from the Obama talking points that assured America that Obama was "post partisan" yadda yadda yadda. I never believed it for a second. That simply wasn't what was in his past record.

I really don't understand you guys. Would McCain have appointed only Democrats in his administration? If he had appointed a Republican chief of staff, would you be whining that it wasn't "change"?
Word is that McCain really wanted the former Democrat VP candidate to be his own VP candidate. McCain has a long record of using common ground to solve issues rather than staff pitbulls who'll stab you in the back if you don't do what he wants. It wouldn't matter what party the chief of staff he choose would be from, he'd likely pick people who weren't known as political sh#t stirrers. But, McCain IS McCain. Obama claimed to be McCain, but a lot of us knew that was a bunch of BS.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 08:29 AM
 
It's too bad McCain didn't demonstrate his interest in finding common ground during his campaign.
     
Chuckit
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 11:29 AM
 
Originally Posted by PaperNotes View Post
You guys have forgotten how dangerous the world "change" is to America. Your Bill of Rights and Constitution are the most perfectly formed documents every written in history. It's not change you want, it's conserving the values and beliefs set in writing by the Founding Fathers and a back to basics approach that you want.
You can't conserve something that's been wholly chucked out the window by every president in recent memory. Getting it back would be change indeed.
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
     
PaperNotes
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 11:51 AM
 
( Last edited by PaperNotes; Jan 9, 2018 at 05:14 AM. )
     
Gee-Man
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 12:01 PM
 
Wow, that's freakin' hilarious. Obama has put together a web site with information on how he's going to accomplish what he promised during the campaign. What a nutcase.

You wanna explain the "joke" to all of us, or is this more of conservatives talking to themselves instead of the rest of the country? Because, if you wanna know, that's why you guys lost this time. Most of your "arguments" were ones that pretty much only other conservatives would relate to, while everybody else shrugged their shoulders and said "uh, right. Aaannnyway..."
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 12:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Word is that McCain really wanted the former Democrat VP candidate to be his own VP candidate.

So, your argument is if McCain had stuck to his principles, he'd be more principled than Obama?
     
Gee-Man
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 04:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by stupendousman View Post
Change back to the Clinton attack machines of the 90's, and the failed political policies of the Carter administration. Gotcha.
Funny you would mention this. One of the widely known things about Carter wasn't that his policies were all necessarily failures, but that he couldn't get much passed through Congress, even though it was controlled by a Democratic majority at the time. This is because he brought his own people with him, folks who were complete Washington outsiders, and many of them were incredibly naive and inexperienced and didn't do a good job of creating support for the president. See this article for more.

Although you claim that there are plenty of people who are experienced in Washington who weren't part of the Clinton team, this is simply false and doesn't even pass the common sense test. The last Democratic president was Bill Clinton, and the one prior to that was Jimmy Carter - 30 years ago! How likely is it there would there be a bunch of non-Clintonites with insider experience hanging around Washington to serve in an Obama administration? Almost none.

The only other Washington insiders Obama could choose from who could get things done are Republicans - but the likelihood of finding a Republican insider who would make a good Obama Chief of Staff yet NOT be connected with the Bush II Administration is nil. Would you expect Obama to pick a bunch of Bush staffers, when he ran for president and won on trying to create an administration that is completely different from Bush? Please.

So basically, your criticism of Obama is ridiculous on its face. Obama is far more likely to pick Clinton-era staffers who are smart and capable, and probably pick a few moderate Republicans here and there who would be willing to work to enact his agenda, or at least the portion that they are responsible for. He is NOT likely to pick random hard-core Republicans, nor is he apparently going to pick a bunch of newbies who don't know what they are doing, either.

Ironically enough, if Obama had started making picks just like Carter did, you'd probably have criticized that, too. It doesn't matter what he does, you will find a way to turn it into a bad thing.

So here's a challenge. If, as you claim, there are plenty of other qualified people he could have picked, then name one. Name a person, any person, who would be willing to enact Obama's agenda as Chief of Staff, and matches your so-called "post-partisan" criteria. So go ahead, prove your point. Or are you just throwing rocks for the sake of doing it, without any real point?
     
Rumor
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 04:25 PM
 
I heard that there will be a new cabinet position, that has yet to be named, and will be filled by Chuck Norris.
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
Dork.
Professional Poster
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Rochester, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 04:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by Rumor View Post
I heard that there will be a new cabinet position, that has yet to be named, and will be filled by Chuck Norris.
Chuck Norris will fill all cabinet positions... with his fist!
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 04:54 PM
 
     
tie
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 7, 2008, 06:30 PM
 
Originally Posted by PaperNotes View Post
Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable. What is Obama thinking?!!! He should know that all important government decisions should be made in secret, by secret panels of soon-to-be-indicted industry executives like Kenneth Lay.
The 4 o'clock train will be a bus.
It will depart at 20 minutes to 5.
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 01:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by tie View Post
Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable. What is Obama thinking?!!! He should know that all important government decisions should be made in secret, by secret panels of soon-to-be-indicted industry executives like Kenneth Lay.
I'm going to start sending him pictures of my dog.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 01:11 AM
 
Hopefully Obama's new dog won't bite reporters
     
SpaceMonkey
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Washington, DC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 02:15 AM
 
Maybe Barney can stay on to preserve continuity for a while, just like Robert Gates at DoD.

"One ticket to Washington, please. I have a date with destiny."
     
PaperNotes
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 05:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by tie View Post
Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable. What is Obama thinking?!!! He should know that all important government decisions should be made in secret, by secret panels of soon-to-be-indicted industry executives like Kenneth Lay.
Obama and all his friends who forced banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them should also be indicted. But we can't do that. It would be racist!
( Last edited by PaperNotes; Jan 9, 2018 at 05:14 AM. )
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 01:25 PM
 
Perhaps I should resurrect my GML so that I can add "Obama forced banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them"!

Really PaperNotes, does substantiating your wild claims ever cross your mind?
     
PaperNotes
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2006
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 01:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Perhaps I should resurrect my GML so that I can add "Obama forced banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them"!

Really PaperNotes, does substantiating your wild claims ever cross your mind?
It's not a wild claim, Comrade. You offend Our Dear Leader by not giving due credit! Major news channels reported the names of Democrats involved, of ACORN's court cases and grass roots campaigns, and Obama's involvement in suing and threatening banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them. Comrade Obama is also the third biggest recipient of donations from Freddie and Fannie. Now he will save us!
( Last edited by PaperNotes; Jan 9, 2018 at 05:12 AM. )
     
subego
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 01:50 PM
 
So, I hear Ari Gold from Entourage is based on Rahm's brother Ari.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 01:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Hopefully Obama's new dog won't bite reporters
In communist Amerika, reporter bites dog.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 02:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by PaperNotes View Post
It's not a wild claim, Comrade. You offend Our Dear Leader by not giving due credit! Major news channels reported the names of Democrats involved, of ACORN's court cases and grass roots campaigns, and Obama's involvement in suing and threatening banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them. Comrade Obama is also the third biggest recipient of donations from Freddie and Fannie. Now he will save us!
Care to provide a link?
     
RAILhead
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 02:14 PM
 
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 03:11 PM
 
     
The Crook
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 03:15 PM
 
I thought he ran on center-right policies?

Crooked Member of the MacNN Atheist Clique.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 03:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by PaperNotes View Post
It's not a wild claim, Comrade. You offend Our Dear Leader by not giving due credit! Major news channels reported the names of Democrats involved, of ACORN's court cases and grass roots campaigns, and Obama's involvement in suing and threatening banks to give mortgages to people who couldn't afford them. Comrade Obama is also the third biggest recipient of donations from Freddie and Fannie. Now he will save us!
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Care to provide a link?
ask and ye shall receive
Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance
Docket / Court 94 C 4094 ( N.D. Ill. ) FH-IL-0011


CASE DETAILS click to show/hide detail

Defendant(s) Citibank Federal Savings Bank
Plaintiff Description All persons who are: African-American; and who applied for a first mortgage or refinance loan with Citibank for property located in Cook, DuPage, Lake or McHenry County, IL; and whose loan request was turned down between 7/6/92 and 12/31/95
Indexed Lawyer Organizations None on record
Class action status sought Yes
Class action status granted Yes
Prevailing Party Plaintiff
Public Int. Lawyer No
Nature of Relief Damages
Injunction / Injunctive-like Private Settlement
Source of Relief Settlement
Form of Settlement Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration 1998 - n/a
Case Closing Year 1998
Case Ongoing No
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 03:42 PM
 
Are you kidding Chongo?

1) Obama was the lawyer of this case, not the plantiff
2) There was no mention of what kinds of loans were involved
3) The settlement:
The parties settled the case on May 12, 1998, with an agreement that provided for waiver of some fees for class members, should they reapply for a loan, and also for various procedures to ensure that Citibank followed its own loan policies in a race neutral way.
what evidence do you have that the people requesting loans couldn't afford them? My evidence to the contrary is the outcome of the case (i.e. changes to ensure loan policies were race neutral), what is yours?

So really, despite the outcome of this case, your argument is essentially your gut feeling that these people couldn't afford the loans, that Citibank was innocent of racial discrimination, and that these were mortgages and not car loans, business capital loans, or any other kind of loan.

Dude, you are very close to being considered just another Abe. I can't believe I wasted my time with this.
     
Rumor
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the verge of insanity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 03:47 PM
 
That is a bit of a stretch to blame Obama for working at a law firm and working on this particular case.

Other attorneys involved:

Plaintiff's Lawyers
Alexis, Hilary I. (Illinois) Detail
Childers, Michael Allen (Illinois) Detail
Clayton, Fay (Illinois) Detail
Cummings, Jeffrey Irvine (Illinois) Detail
Love, Sara Norris (Virginia) Detail
Miner, Judson Hirsch (Illinois) Detail
Obama, Barack H. (Illinois) Detail
Wickert, John Henry (Illinois) Detail
I like my water with hops, malt, hops, yeast, and hops.
     
Chongo  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 03:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Are you kidding Chongo?

1) Obama was the lawyer of this case, not the plantiff
2) There was no mention of what kinds of loans were involved
3) The settlement: what evidence do you have that the people requesting loans couldn't afford them? My evidence to the contrary is the outcome of the case (i.e. changes to ensure loan policies were race neutral), what is yours?

So really, despite the outcome of this case, your argument is essentially your gut feeling that these people couldn't afford the loans, that Citibank was innocent of racial discrimination, and that these were mortgages and not car loans, business capital loans, or any other kind of loan.

Dude, you are very close to being considered just another Abe. I can't believe I wasted my time with this.
You asked for a link, I provided it.
     
tie
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 04:43 PM
 
I think he wanted a link that gave evidence for your position, not just any link. I know that he just said "Care to provide a link?" as if any link would do, but it was implied that he wanted a link backing up your claims. Really, I agree that he should have been more specific---after all, how should you have known?
The 4 o'clock train will be a bus.
It will depart at 20 minutes to 5.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 8, 2008, 04:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by tie View Post
I think he wanted a link that gave evidence for your position, not just any link. I know that he just said "Care to provide a link?" as if any link would do, but it was implied that he wanted a link backing up your claims. Really, I agree that he should have been more specific---after all, how should you have known?
My paranoid side is thinking that both PaperNotes and Chongo are secret Abes.

Hey, that is no less viable than thinking that Obama is a secret Muslim/terrorist/Socialist/Communist/Marxist/Dictator/kitten killer! It is my gut feeling against his!
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:16 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,