Gee, what was this thread about? Oh. I know a hissing contest twixt
Something Stinks and others. (entities smell)

Getting back to the original premise of this thread, I can't think of a better way to spend money than to give it to people to pay their mortgages. Who better to do that than a former director of ACORN? After all, he would be the best qualified to determine who's in need and where to dole out the taxpayer bucks. We could give him the title of Chief Regional Director of Doling Out Big Bucks to Folks That Didn't Earn Them. It's redistributing the money of others' finest hour.

Or what better way to re-distribute the average Joe's money than to give it to the Banksters, after all we all know that they have our best interests at heart. Or we could give the uber-wealthy and the 1%ers more tax breaks by eliminating health care and food subsidies for our elders, cause we all know that their years of hard work only needs to be rewarded if your super rich. Or we could eliminate SS and medicare and go to the Mexican system of taking care of our people in the richest country in the history of the world.

Cause its not like its headline news or anything that people have lost tons of equity in their homes while the banksters were rolling the dice with everyones money and assets.
And we could just call that the " GOP way of doing business".


Fishy

There's no doubt that we should instead just be giving the money to the "job creators"...that's worked really well over the last 30 years.

Fish on...

Todd

Sounds like you should vote for Obama.

It's not like it's headline news or anything that housing prices went up to begin with due to the easy money and coerced (and ACORN led the way in coercion) lending policies of the Dems. It's not headline news or anything that Fannie and Freddie sold the loans they knew were worthless and the directors cashed out with multi-million dollar bonuses.

We could just call that the "Dem way of doing business".

It's privatizing profits and socializing costs, and it's the way of doing business for both parties.

You fellas keep pretending your party is going to do something about it, though.

What we got don't work.
Term limits........don't let the crooks get entrenched.
Don't expect change without providing it.

Dan I agree wholeheartedly with you and have said that many times, sometimes I get caught up in trying to balance the scale back from getting pushed down too far by some of these guys.

Good call.


Fishy

With term limits they wouldn't be there long enough to get the "connections"...especially if combined with the other half of the solution, which is publicly funded campaigns.

No more money, no more lobbyists, no more Citizens United decision, and no more career politicians.

Until then we'll get the best that money can buy, and there ain't no one on this board that is even 1% of the way to being the ones with enough money to buy it.

Fish on...

Todd

With publicly funded campaigns there will be no corporate cash flowing, so there will be no corporate influence.

Fish on...

Todd

P.S. Revolution is probably required to get a handful of common sense, but good for the country and people and not the career politicians or corporations, reforms in place.

Lobbyists write most of the laws and hand them to our representitives.

This sad fact is most of the reason why we are in such dire straights.



Fishy

With both side finally agreeing on something, why can't we make it happen? Public funding and term limits......Those two things would not fix everything but would sure help the political system in this country.

We can't make it happen because someone will holler out "gun control" or "gay marriage" or "illegal war" and a bunch of fucktards will think that stuff is more important than the well-being of the Republic.

And we'll do the same thing expecting a different outcome.

Little typo fixed there.............

Bernie Sanders.

Go Sox,
cds

There's a few, and without naming names I can say that I haven't heard of a single one from the GOP or TeaBaggers who'd be for those reforms, but I'd be happy to hear of some if they exist.

The reason that it would be so difficult to change those laws is that the lawmakers are the ones who benefit from the laws being as they are...and there are lots and lots of folks out there who are just fine with our Democracy being bought and sold to the highest bidders...in any sane context we'd call that "bribery" and put them in jail...thanks to the SCOTUS, we call it "free speech"...

Fish on...

Todd

Need I remind you of McCain-Feingold/Shay-Meehan?

I'll also pose a question to you: Who in 2008 ran a publicly financed presidential campaign?

Bonus question: Who in 2008 promised to run a publicly financed presidential campaign but reneged on that promise?