Originally Posted by Weave

Actually Im hoping he continues down the hard left path he's on too, in fact I hope he doubles down. This will ensure a Republican winning the White House in '12......

Far left? he called those on the "far left" "Fucking Retarded" because we want Single Payer. He is a pro-Corporate slimebucket who can go to Hell.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

The only way you can possibly believe that is if you have somehow completely shut yourself off from any source of information that isn't from the outer fringes of the far left, or you're actively lying to yourself about what's happened over the last two years. Or maybe when the far left has no argument and no facts on its side, it just turns to reflexive, knee-jerk gainsaying out of spite. Where normal people might be forced to come to terms with their failure and the wrongness of their ideas, you dig in your heels even harder, and become more hateful and embittered, despite the fact that what you stand for has been fully, and finally, defeated and discredited, many times over.

Replace "left" with "right" and that describes YOU perfectly.

Originally Posted by Odin

Replace "left" with "right" and that describes YOU perfectly.

It would be nice for you if that was true, but it's not.

Originally Posted by Silifi

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

So you refute my statement that you're engaging in mindless gainsaying by responding with the equivalent of "I'm rubber, you're glue". Genius.

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

So you refute my statement that you're engaging in mindless gainsaying by responding with the equivalent of "I'm rubber, you're glue". Genius.

You see, I'd agree that using such retorts would be childish, if it weren't for the fact that it were true.

Every time someone corners you in a debate and gives you a statement you can't logically respond to without contradicting your previous dogma, you dig in your heels and yell, "Left-winger! I don't have to listen to you, you're CRAZY!"

As you might imagine, this is quite frustrating for many of us who wish to have adult conversations that aren't filled with name-calling.

But, when amongst Romans...

Originally Posted by Silifi

You see, I'd agree that using such retorts would be childish, if it weren't for the fact that it were true.

Every time someone corners you in a debate and gives you a statement you can't logically respond to without contradicting your previous dogma, you dig in your heels and yell, "Left-winger! I don't have to listen to you, you're CRAZY!"

As you might imagine, this is quite frustrating for many of us who wish to have adult conversations that aren't filled with name-calling.

But, when amongst Romans...

Once I've argued something through to its logical conclusion, I'm not going to keep doing it over and over just because somebody isn't convinced. I end up doing that enough that if I want to stop on a particular subject, I don't feel bad doing it. Although there are some other posters here who differ from the "prevailing view", I'm usually the only one who's willing to even try to argue with you people on the assumption that you do so in good faith, with an open mind.

No, JPT, Silifi is right. When you get into that position, it's always when someone has presented an argument that is new -- NOT one you've answered before.

You haven't "argued something through to its logical conclusion." For one thing, there's no such animal. It's always possible for new data to be presented, or arguments that haven't been considered before, and that's exactly what's done just prior to your erecting the stone wall and shutting up.

It's not the reasonable action you're presenting it as. It's a defense mechanism that shuts down discussion when you don't have an answer and might have to reconsider a cherished belief.

Very Boomer-like, actually.

One thing you might want to consider is your own unconscious motivations for participating here. I've wondered about that myself. You're not going to convince anyone of your own positions except very rarely, and probably never in terms of your core positions. So what are you doing here?

May I gently suggest that at least a part of you is here to learn something?

Originally Posted by JustPassingThrough

Not to people who actually listened to what [Barack Obama] was saying. Unfortunately most didn't listen, or didn't understand.

To the contrary. People understood exactly what he was saying, and they were listening closely. He made himself very clear, and he did not make legislative proposals that either contradicted themselves. He didn't say one thing in Detroit Michigan (rotting core city), another in Warren, Michigan (prosperous suburb by Michigan standards), and another in Ann Arbor, Michigan (college city) that contradicted each other. Those places are within fifty miles of each other, but demographically they are extremely different.

It is the Other Side that contradicted itself frequently, with John McCain having to correct a reckless statement by Sarah Palin frequently. That hurt. Places like Ann Arbor, Detroit, and Warren commonly get the same newspapers and the same TV channels, so one must be consistent -- or utterly vague -- to win.

He has shown himself anything but a radical. He has not made new legislative approvals that he didn't promise or that contradicted his promises. The only promise that he made was that unemployment wouldn't get as high as it did. The economy showed how wrong he could be. He could never have gotten away with radical chic.

Originally Posted by Odin

Far left? he called those on the "far left" "Fucking Retarded" because we want Single Payer. He is a pro-Corporate slimebucket who can go to Hell.

You mean Rahm Emmanuel?

Am I going to have to put this entire thread on "Ignore"?

I'm on two book-related lists that have banned discussions of U.S. politics on the grounds that they only lead to repetitive flame wars that tend to kill all actual discussion of any other topic than name-calling and "You're another."

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

Am I going to have to put this entire thread on "Ignore"?

Pat, I suspect your entire generation will want to put the entire 4T on ignore.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Pat, I suspect your entire generation will want to put the entire 4T on ignore.

I'm thinking that might not be such a bad idea for all of us...

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

You mean Rahm Emmanuel?

Yep. He really pissed a lot of us off when he said that.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Pat, I suspect your entire generation will want to put the entire 4T on ignore.

Now you're confusing me with this forum's most prolific Homelander. No - I don't intend to ignore the 4T and am taking what feeble steps I can t deal with it, individually and among my friends and family. However --

Ignoring flame wars and ignoring a real-world Crisis is not the same thing. Unless you imagine that the flame wars, or the subject of them, or the imperative need for your side to win because the other side is Eeevul, IS the Crisis rather than the imploding economy and the gods know what-else.

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

Ignoring flame wars and ignoring a real-world Crisis is not the same thing.

I don't see what went on just before you presented that post as a flame war. There were some insults flying around, but considerable substantial discussion, too.

Unfortunately, you've got to expect a bit of pontificating, finger-pointing and calling down of the curses of God when Boomers like JPT are involved.

Originally Posted by Odin

Yep. He really pissed a lot of us off when he said that.

I wasn't aware that Emmanuel had said that. Off to Chicago with him, indeed.

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

Now you're confusing me with this forum's most prolific Homelander. No - I don't intend to ignore the 4T and am taking what feeble steps I can t deal with it, individually and among my friends and family. However --

Ignoring flame wars and ignoring a real-world Crisis is not the same thing. Unless you imagine that the flame wars, or the subject of them, or the imperative need for your side to win because the other side is Eeevul, IS the Crisis rather than the imploding economy and the gods know what-else.

Boomers cannot face the fact they are the over 60 crowd now and its kicking them in the ass. A younger generation is coming into power and the fact is, the Silent Generation wants to see their children move into and make changes to the government now. That's progress.

Originally Posted by wtrg8

Boomers cannot face the fact they are the over 60 crowd now and its kicking them in the ass. A younger generation is coming into power and the fact is, the Silent Generation wants to see their children move into and make changes to the government now. That's progress.

Enjoy *your* turn, when it comes.

The issue of foreclosure fraud and related problems are almost certainly going to hit the American economy big next year and likely affect the election beyond.

Originally Posted by Net Net

An economic tsunami warning is being sounded but are bank investors listening?

Jim Rickards, Senior Managing Director of Market Intelligence, and Chris Whalen, Co-Founder and Managing Director of Institutional Risk Analytics tell me the sputtering real estate industry is brewing a cocktail of economic disaster and bank investors need to be on high alert.

Vector number one: strategic foreclosures. Now the idea is spreading with people who have homes that are down 50% or more and have no equity are strategiclly walking away from their homes. These homeowners have jobs. They are deciding to rent before their credit rating goes down and abandoning their monthly mortgage payments.

Second vector are the putbacks. There is a lot of toxic waste and now buyers are trying to scrub their mortgages to see if there is a defect in the loan file.

I have never seen a file without a defect. There are so many non performing loans that buyers can cherry pick all their loans — keep the ones they want to and put back the mortgages with the defects. Banks are fighting them, but this is a huge tsunami that will impact bank earnings on an on going basis.

The third vector are the legal defects themselves in the foreclosure process.

Put all this together and I would see an impact in late first quarter 2011. This is not going to affect the banks immediately. The banks are resisting this, They are not making provisions for this, they're putting up their defenses.

Its kind of a juggernaut that's going to drag them down and by the end of the first quarter in 2011 when they might have to own up to some of this stuff. One reason why this is coming on stream is the statue of limitations. Its been two years since the meltdown.

The article goes on but the political implecations are clear. The next Congress is likely to be facing another meltdown sometime after the first quarter of 2011.
We are likely to go into the 2012 election cycle in another economic free fall.

You read it here first.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

The issue of foreclosure fraud and related problems are almost certainly going to hit the American economy big next year and likely affect the election beyond.
The article goes on but the political implecations are clear. The next Congress is likely to be facing another meltdown sometime after the first quarter of 2011.
We are likely to go into the 2012 election cycle in another economic free fall.

You read it here first.

The Banks, individual home owner's and Politicians should look in the mirror; it was their mistake. Should people be allowed to walk away without their credit being affected, NO. Both parties enjoyed real estate this high and both should be held responsible for its low.

Originally Posted by wtrg8

The Banks, individual home owner's and Politicians should look in the mirror; it was their mistake. Should people be allowed to walk away without their credit being affected, NO.

Oh, people's credit will be affected. Repos of any kind aren't kind to ones credit score.
Me? I bought my house while Clinton was still president, long before the housing bubble.
The only personal problem I would have from all of this would if I needed to move and tried to sell. I'm would not be able to get the value that I should out of the property. I don't see that happening because of the how bad the housing market is. But because of this I've more or less made up my mind that if such a problem were to occur that I would use my good credit to fix up this place and rent it out.

Originally Posted by wtrg8

Both parties enjoyed real estate this high and both should be held responsible for its low.

And if the Republicans take the house this fall they will get part of the blame.
Otherwise we will go into 2012 with the Democrats in charge of everything but the unelected Supreme Court. This would put Obama in 2012 about where Hoover would have been in 1932 if the stock market crash of 1929 had not happened until 1931.

Originally Posted by herbal tee

Oh, people's credit will be affected. Repos of any kind aren't kind to ones credit score.
Me? I bought my house while Clinton was still president, long before the housing bubble.
The only personal problem I would have from all of this would if I needed to move and tried to sell. I'm would not be able to get the value that I should out of the property. I don't see that happening because of the how bad the housing market is. But because of this I've more or less made up my mind that if such a problem were to occur that I would use my good credit to fix up this place and rent it out.


And if the Republicans take the house this fall they will get part of the blame.
Otherwise we will go into 2012 with the Democrats in charge of everything but the unelected Supreme Court. This would put Obama in 2012 about where Hoover would have been in 1932 if the stock market crash of 1929 had not happened until 1931.

Clinton and Bush share equal responsibility in this Housing Crisis. I do not blame Obama for this mess we are in with the Real Estate Foreclosures.

GOP will be just as responsible as Obama/Democrats if this Country hasn't improved by 2012.

It a laugh when one says 'Unelected Supreme Court'. I do think its a solid 5-4 versus a tentative one. Well, don't put duds like Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry.

2012 will come down to one figure deciding so much that happens in the election..... that figure is the former governor of the Great Ice Box to the north. So much depends on what she decides to do. That was NOT the case at this time in 2006.

I realize we would rather discuss issues and concepts and trends and historical turnings and the such but Palin is the 500 pound gorilla in the room.

Originally Posted by haymarket martyr

2012 will come down to one figure deciding so much that happens in the election..... that figure is the former governor of the Great Ice Box to the north. So much depends on what she decides to do. That was NOT the case at this time in 2006.

I realize we would rather discuss issues and concepts and trends and historical turnings and the such but Palin is the 500 pound gorilla in the room.

Don't forget the Jersey Gov. He is the perfect storm if he decides to run. He would get my vote over Palin any day.

Originally Posted by wtrg8

Don't forget the Jersey Gov. He is the perfect storm if he decides to run. He would get my vote over Palin any day.

Gov Mitch Daniels from Indiana has a good track record as well.

James50