“The irony for us old fogies with long memories is how Bill and Hillary Clinton used to be passionately idealistic antiwar baby boomers themselves. In George McGovern’s 1972 campaign, they opposed the old-school Democratic bosses in ‘smoke-filled rooms.’ Today the Clintons have become the old-school insiders fending off the insurgent antiwar campaign of the Illinois upstart, Sen. Barack Obama.†— Columnist Clarence Page, on the Clintons’ effort to change Democratic primary rules
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/4
- littlejohn on Abortion could still derail health reform bill
- okobserver on Open thread 11/4
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/4
- littlejohn on Abortion could still derail health reform bill
- littlejohn on Abortion could still derail health reform bill
- CapnAmerica on Abortion could still derail health reform bill
- CapnAmerica on Abortion could still derail health reform bill
- littlejohn on Abortion could still derail health reform bill
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/4
31 Comments
I think the photograph you posted with this thread is clear evidence of what phonies they both are.
It’s time we had some honesty and integrity in the White House again.
It was obvious Hillary couldn’t manage or satisfy her husband, and she wouldn’t be able to manage or satisfy the country either.
But I have to admit, she is a far more competent candidate that other DemLib Obama.
I never cared much for Bill. But Hillary I like. She’s a fighter.
I need a fighter. I’m just not good at bleating Ho oooh oooh oope! Chaa aaaa aaannge! Obaaa aaa aaa ma!
And WHY do we not have a thread about ANOTHER Obama favoring pastor with his foot in his mouth?
I am curious Boxlock, why would you say that? What is it about her that shows she is more competent?
I mean I watch her and all I see is the same “two cars in every pot and a chicken in every garage” with out every saying how. That or promises that she will not keep but can not keep! Obama is at least giving some meat with the bones he throws to the voters. Still somewhat pie in the sky, but there is some reasonable meat to what he said. McCain and Hillary both are the “no really that is rain on your leg” candidates.
“Hope” and “change” aint meat in my book writerdog.
No but a reasonable plan to assist mortgage owners by allowing them to have breathing room to either sale their homes. Or refinance the mortgage while paying what they can afford for a reasonable length of time.
The cost of the difference in the payments paid for by a government program, that way both the mortgage owner and the mortgage holder are not taking a total loss. It is not a total bail out nor simply setting back and hoping that everything does not fail. Is meat Bluejay….
writerdog,
Good question, I’m glad you called me on it.
I admit, I have a real bias against liberal socialists and she certainly falls into that category.
But some of the things she has said and done in the past, and her voting record, ‘lead me’ to believe she is not as far out in the ‘ether’ as Obama. He is a shallow ‘Cum-bay-ah’, ‘I will change America’ politician, with no real details of how that might actually come about except in vague generalities meant to be that way. He’s really clueless.
I think he is even more of a socialist than Hillary,and is truly dangerous to this country.
Let me make this clear, I don’t support, or have one nickels confidence, in either but of the two Hillary is maybe the more mature voters choice.
We have a crappy field to choose from in my opinion. The Democrat party has been hijacked by idiots.
Isn’t there a saying that says something like we don’t want to become like our fathers, but we do.
I understand Boxlock, it has been said that one of the greatest mistakes during the Bill Clinton years. Was that in Bill Clinton the Republicans had a Democrat that they could have worked with. He is more like a Republican that he is a Democrat. Hillary is the same way in that respect, though as I just pointed out to Bluejay. While Hillary is saying she would do a total bail out of everyone involved in the mortgage crisis.
Obama per posed only a partial bail out that would cost the taxpayers less and yet allow for a settling of the situation.
I am not sure how other then every citizen becoming involved in their government would it change.
Perhaps as McClellan described Bush when he first came to Washington being native in believing he could change Washington and ended up being changed by Washington. That might just be Obama’s fate too, its a toss of a coin. Perhaps McClellan was right in that the President can set the tone of the Government.
writerdog,
Bailing out either side of the mortgage deal sets a bad precedent and encourages more irresponsible borrowing and lending. And, it makes those of us that haven’t been that way pay for those who have and their mistakes.
What this country needs is returning to making people responsible for their own decisions and mistakes as well as having them realizing the benefits associated with good decisions without them also carrying the load of other’s bad decisions. The ONLY intervention should be to avoid a major, major economic disaster and I don’t think that will happen.
“It’s time we had some honesty and integrity in the White House again.”
And whom would you suggest?
I’ve been paying attention to politics since the early seventies and have yet to see anyone in the White House with honesty and integrity.
…in Bill Clinton the Republicans had a Democrat that they could have worked with. He is more like a Republican that he is a Democrat. Hillary is the same way in that respect…
writerdog,
I agree with your comment, but I’d have to add that, IMO, Hillary is even more Republican than Bill is.
When Bill took office in his first term, Cosmopolitan magazine carried part of a biography about Hillary. I can’t recall who wrote the book, but it was an interesting read and said a lot about who Hillary is and why. It definitely left an impression on me.
Ever see or read Primary Colors? Even taken with a large grain of salt (block lick size), it didn’t paint a pretty picture of her.
Unfortunately, I think Grateful_Dave is right.
And if it was only those that were involved in the mortgage crisis that might due. But once it becomes so big that it effects the economy across the board it becomes a national crisis. Not only the value of the house that is turned back and or abandoned is effected by every house on that block. The snowball effect of this carries over to banking, business and economic stability. This situation should never have been allowed to happen and closely watch for the possibility of it happening. Personal responsibility is something that most have forgotten in the rush to have more then they need. Keeping up with the Jones is the norm and it was allowed without forethought in this.
Financial lenders did not look at the outcome, they simply made the loans and then bundled them and passed the debt on to others. People having little of anything seeing only the better house and not the long term effect. Everyone counting on a brighter future and there is not assurances of a brighter future. There was a great deal of not thinking about responsibility personal or financially.
Predestined, no I have not seen or read it and have long consider Hillary to be one of those “Poor People” that hates poor people. Her upbringing was the classic middle class story. Not too hot and not too cold but just Luke warm, not having everything she wanted but everything she needed. Still hating that she does not have it all and vowing she will have it!
“Bailing out either side of the mortgage deal sets a bad precedent and encourages more irresponsible borrowing and lending.”
But $30 billion to bail out Bear-Stearns is okay?
In other words, bail out big business but screw the little guy that might have gotten in over his head.
Big business – gotta save ‘em.
The Little Guy – phuck ‘em.
Bear-Stearns employs about 11,000 little people.
“Bear-Stearns employs about 11,000 little people.”
They made a bad decision going to work for a company like that, got in over their heads, so they should just deal with the consequences.
Isn’t that the Republican mantra – you made your bed, now lay in it?
“Financial lenders did not look at the outcome, they simply made the loans and then bundled them and passed the debt on to others. People having little of anything seeing only the better house and not the long term effect. Everyone counting on a brighter future and there is not assurances of a brighter future. There was a great deal of not thinking about responsibility personal or financially.”
I totally agree, everyone looking for something ‘too good to be true’ and it was, and now we pay.
But I am still firmly convinced great care should be exercised in removing the consequences of peoples choices, or they have little to guide their choice in the right direction.
“But I am still firmly convinced great care should be exercised in removing the consequences of peoples choices, or they have little to guide their choice in the right direction.”
Are you referring to Bear-Stearns or subprime mortgages?
WS you missed the point of the entire BS bailout.
It was a loan and will be paid back. Not so the bailout Obama has proposed for mortage bailouts.
——————————
What Taxpayers Get From the Bear Stearns ‘Bailout’
March 25, 2008 05:26 PM ET | Rick Newman | Permanent Link
Is it a deft financial move? Or a nauseating corporate handout?
The Federal Reserve’s intervention in the collapse of investment bank Bear Stearns has clearly calmed financial markets that recently seemed on the verge of panic. Now comes the backlash. Some populist critics are asking why the feds can bail out Wall Street but not Main Street. And the die-hard free marketeers who run the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page have decried Fed policymakers as “pushovers,” arguing that the Fed’s action enriches JPMorgan Chase, which is buying Bear Stearns, at taxpayer expense.
How to characterize the Fed’s action is a matter of ideology more than anything else. But there’s certainly some benefit to the public from the Fed’s intervention. Here are some of the basic facts, which tend to get overlooked as the rhetoric heats up:
The Fed has extended a loan, not given away money. The central bank has agreed to lend JPMorgan $29 billion as an enticement to buy the troubled Bear and its liabilities. As collateral, JPMorgan is putting up $30 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities and other complex investments, which are basically the most problematic assets on Bear’s books. JPMorgan has to repay the Fed loan with interest at the “discount rate,” which is currently 2.5 percent.
“WS you missed the point of the entire BS bailout.”
No I didn’t – my recollection is that the risk lies primarily with the Feds.
“The Fed has promised Bear Stearns savior JP Morgan (JPM) that it will guarantee the value of whatever crap Bear has piled onto its balance sheet. In other words, the Fed is effectively assuming the liabilities of Bear Stearns. And the Fed’s source of capital, ultimately, is you.”
“http://www.alleyinsider.com/2008/3/pathetic_bear_stearns_bailout_who_to_blame”
JPM is shouldering very little risk. We are assuming the rest.
Whatever!
Man, the Dems can’t push Hillary over the cliff fast enough!
Can’t say I’m sorry to watch her fall.
I hope they duck tape her mouth shut first though, God knows how shrill she will sound screaming on the way down!
“Whatever!”
No, not whatever. If Bear Stearns balance sheet was WORTH $30 billion, they could have sold themselves. The fact that they could not sell themselves gives you a clue that in fact their worth is considerably less than $30 billion.
The American taxpayer will pick up the tab for the difference.
Bear Stearns f’ed up big time.
So did those that got in over their heads with adjustable rate and subprime mortgages.
The difference is that Uncle Sam is going to take care of Bear Stearns phuck up.
This is chilling.
“The rules meeting is a trap. Clinton wants the RBC to give Florida and Michigan not the full votes she is fruitlessly advocating for and which would in any case not translate to a win for her but the half-vote compromise she is publicly advocating against. When the committee does award half-votes, she will have cause to extend her campaign through the summer, guaranteeing a divided Convention and possibly killing Democrats’ chances of capturing the Oval Office in November (and of preventing pro-life , pro-Imperial Presidency Republicans from replacing the two remaining Democrats on the nine-member Supreme Court).
It’s a trap, and the Obama campaign and the Democratic Party are about to walk blindly into it. No one seems to be noticing that — let alone implementing the equally counterintuitive, Aikido strategy that would stop Clinton’s game: letting her have her way tomorrow, 100 percent, so that she lacks grounds to appeal, and Obama, instead, becomes the one holding the “I could appeal!” trump card.
It’s a trap. Will Obama and the DNC open their eyes in time?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/m.s.-bellows/the-trap-clintons-briarpa_b_104198.html
“What this country needs is returning to making people responsible for their own decisions and mistakes as well as having them realizing the benefits associated with good decisions without them also carrying the load of other’s bad decisions.”
Great post Boxlock! Allow people to receive the recompense of their decisions good and bad. This the only compassionate policy since it will motivate people to make better decisions.
Incentivizing bad behavior is not compassionate since it brings all of society down by the weight of everyone behaving badly.
Ultimately, everone shares the burden or benefits of the collective decisions everyone else makes. This is true socially and economically.
Noble idea.
Let’s start at the top.
No more bailing out those corporation that pollute the Earth and leave a mess. THEY clean it up abd on their dime.
No more companies dictating what they will and will not compensate their workers for exploting their labor either. Establish a living wage and force business to pay it.
“”"The Fed has extended a loan, not given away money. The central bank has agreed to lend JPMorgan $29 billion as an enticement to buy the troubled Bear and its liabilities. As collateral, JPMorgan is putting up $30 billion worth of mortgage-backed securities and other complex investments, which are basically the most problematic assets on Bear’s books. JPMorgan has to repay the Fed loan with interest at the “discount rate,” which is currently 2.5 percent.”"”"
Oh really. Then the Fed can take the same money and refinance sub prime mortages for home owners that live in their homes for the same 2.5%. They can be as generous to working people as they were to JP Morgan. In fact, I would be happy to see them do it at 5%!
I do not know why so many Democrats admire the Clintons. Like many I too was a supporter of Bill when he first ran and I thought we had finally turned the page. But it wasn’t to be. He turned out to be as big a slimeball as the rest of them. First he turned his back on the working folks with NAFTA, he was a complete hypocrit with the “war on drugs” (which is really a war on black men) when he said “I didn’t inhale” (doesn’t he know mere possession is enough for a ticket to prison? Oh, I forgot he is white and whites never go to jail for drugs!). Then there was the whole Monica fiasco. I really don’t care that he got his peter sucked by his intern. Probably something Hillary won’t do for him. But then he not only looked in the camera and LIED to us about it, he lied under OATH to a grand jury about it- another CRIME for which he escaped punishment. The man cannot tell the truth no matter what. Then we have his wife with her own bag full of tricks and scandles including Whitewater, the Rose Law firm billing records- found in her possession after she said she had no knowledge of them, the White House Travel Office fiasco and her miserable attempt at a heath care plan- which she dropped after the big insurance and drug companies paid her off with campaign contributions. The Clintons are why the Democrats lost the Congress, lost the Senate and finally lost the Presidency. There is absolutely NO friggin reason Al Gore should not have been able to beat The Idiot in a LANDSLIDE under normal circumstances! A good economy with low unemployment and things going well overseas and we still LOST. People can say what they want about it being “stolen” in Florida BUT the fact is that, were it not for Bill, Al Gore would have carried other states and we would have said “who gives a crap about Florida?” because we would have already won it.
And some of you folks actually long to return the Clinton to the White House again?
Birds of a feather….Hilary and Bill are one and the same.
I don’t think Bill was a bad president, in fact I think he was a good president…but his lack of common sense and the belief he could get away with anything because of who he was damaged our country. She’s no different than he is…she will deceive and lie just so she can hang onto her power.
I’m sick of the Bushes and the Clintons…enough is enough, let’s get some fresh blood in there and see if things can’t get better…because right now we’re heading in a downward spiral.