It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

S.F. Mayor, You want entitlements? We invent entitlements in San Francisco.

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 


Do you have a point? A policy defense maybe? Or are you merely going to make unfounded accusations that I somehow supported Bush and his economic policies?




posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by dodadoom
 


I limit my hate to child molesters and the like. Usually.

This Candidate has taken the cake and made me eat it, so now I am willing to fume.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:23 PM
link   
you might as well admit that your just as much to blame as the liberals...

I would say that hate is something that has destroyed this country more than ALL liberals or ALL of some group of people that you feel should shoulder the burden of your hate and those who agree with your reality tunnel.

We are all to blame, the sooner this is truly realized, the sooner we can all take action, however I fear that it will take the experience of consequences to create new leaders.


A compromise would be a good thing on the gas to green transition, however we do not know the full details of the future.



Liberalism appears in two broad forms: Classical liberalism, which emphasizes the importance of individual liberty, and social liberalism which emphasizes some kind of redistribution of wealth.[7] Those who identify themselves as classical liberals, to distinguish themselves from social liberals, oppose all government regulation of business and the economy, with the exception of laws against force and fraud, and support free market laissez-faire capitalism.

In Europe, the term "liberalism" is closer to the economic outlook of American economic conservatives.[8] In the United States, "liberalism" is most often used in the sense of social liberalism, which supports some regulation of business and other economic interventionism which they believe to be in the public interest.


Liberalism



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:24 PM
link   
That trio of damned librals - who let derivative products come to be again!
Danged GOP librals!



Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, also known as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act, Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted November 12, 1999, is an Act of the United States Congress which repealed part of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, opening up competition among banks, securities companies and insurance companies. The Glass-Steagall Act prohibited a bank from offering investment, commercial banking, and insurance services.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) allowed commercial and investment banks to consolidate. For example, Citibank merged with Travelers Group, an insurance company, and in 1998 formed the conglomerate Citigroup, a corporation combining banking and insurance underwriting services under brands including Smith-Barney, Shearson, Primerica and Travelers Insurance Corporation. This combination, announced in 1993 and finalized in 1994, would have violated the Glass-Steagall Act and the Bank Holding Company Act by combining insurance and securities companies, if not for a temporary waiver process [1]. The law was passed to legalize these mergers on a permanent basis. Historically, the combined industry has been known as the financial services industry.




The bills were introduced in the U.S. Senate by Phil Gramm (R-Texas) and in the U.S. House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa). The third lawmaker associated with the bill was Rep. Thomas J. Bliley, Jr. (R-Virginia), Chairman of the House Commerce Committee from 1995 to 2001. On May 6, 1999, the Senate passed the bills by a 54-44 vote along party lines (53 Republicans and one Democrat in favor; 44 Democrats opposed).


en.wikipedia.org...


SO you were alluding to REPUBLICANS being all for regulation...

???

DID YOU mean 0 Republicans were for regulation?



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 

I am happy for you. I wish I could go back in time
before I woke up and seen the real dream we live in.
No offense really, but you are better off not knowing and
believing saddam was the reason we went into iraq or
whatever the official story was, that watergate was just a book,
that the iran/contra thing was just a missunderstanding, our
fighter jets broke down and couldnt shoot on 9/11, whatever, etc, etc, etc.
I apologize.
Anyway, its just everything you brought up reminds me
of republican rule. Maybe we are ALL so deluded by now, who knows.
I just think they are pretty much ALL crooks and mobsters.


[edit on 23-3-2009 by dodadoom]



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:25 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 


See? Before I could even get a reply up, you went and quoted the usual ilk that defenders of Liberal Ideology believe to be an argument.

When did the housing crisis or republicans, or even democrats come into this?

Stay on topic...

Or can't you defend what he said?



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:28 PM
link   
reply to post by iiinvision
 


I accept part of the blame.

But read what the article says man. How can ANYONE defend his statements?



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
reply to post by mental modulator
 


Do you have a point? A policy defense maybe? Or are you merely going to make unfounded accusations that I somehow supported Bush and his economic policies?


Liberals tried to GROW government and try to instill federal supervision over the ELITE bankers....

I am addressing all the people who insist that the GOP took the liberal stance of regulation
pre crash - that BS



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
reply to post by mental modulator
 


See? Before I could even get a reply up, you went and quoted the usual ilk that defenders of Liberal Ideology believe to be an argument.

When did the housing crisis or republicans, or even democrats come into this?

Stay on topic...

Or can't you defend what he said?


HOW it not an argument sir?

Please?

YOU talk about liberal like we are a different race...

Do you think half of the population is evil...

BTW what per say is wrong with being liberal?



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:32 PM
link   
Honestly I do not find your post to be one bit intelligent, as you are injecting too much emotion into it and absolutely zero rational thought. You "hate" Liberals and those who agree with you are posting similar emotional and irrational agreements by saying that Liberals are for abortion, so therefore obviously are all for baby killing...same old song and dance to demonize someone you do not agree with.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:33 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 


I get you, man. And this is a conversation I would love to get into. but one, you are talking about republicans, a party I never mentioned, and two, about the economy, which I never mentioned in that context.

The argument is about the article, and from your previous posts in other threads, I expected a more on target argument from you.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:36 PM
link   
reply to post by jasonjnelson
 


Short term- obviously drilling in America is better than drilling elsewhere...
Long term- We need to break our nasty oil habit because it's not going to last forever.

Just to clarify.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by mkultraangel
Honestly I do not find your post to be one bit intelligent, as you are injecting too much emotion into it and absolutely zero rational thought. You "hate" Liberals and those who agree with you are posting similar emotional and irrational agreements by saying that Liberals are for abortion, so therefore obviously are all for baby killing...same old song and dance to demonize someone you do not agree with.


I wanted to copy your post, and paste it here.

Hmmmm.... you are, in a phrase, off topic.

Baby killing?
No rational thought?

What about the part where I said it is ridiculous to propose "creating Entitlements" and then use those same entitlements as a defense for a ludicrously in-the-red budget!?

And where did I mention Baby killing?????



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 

The (DE-)REGULATION that caused the housing crisis, which in turn led to the wider economic crisis, was the liberal action that forced mortgage lenders to give mortgages to people who they knew couldn't afford them in the first place.



WASHINGTON — Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefitted from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank’s efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s. So did Frank’s partner, a Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agency’s push to relax lending restrictions. Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie’s assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie. Both Frank and Moses assured the Wall Street Journal in 1992 that they took pains to avoid any conflicts of interest. Critics, however, remain skeptical. "It’s absolutely a conflict," said Dan Gainor, vice president of the Business & Media Institute. "He was voting on Fannie Mae at a time when he was involved with a Fannie Mae executive. How is that not germane? "If this had been his ex-wife and he was Republican, I would bet every penny I have - or at least what’s not in the stock market - that this would be considered germane," added Gainor, a T. Boone Pickens Fellow. "But everybody wants to avoid it because he’s gay. It’s the quintessential double standard."

www.foxnews.com...

Now, WHOSE deregulation caused the crisis?
Hint- look at the underlined text above.

[edit on 23-3-2009 by ProfEmeritus]



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


I agree. and the laws could be, and should be written to provide that.

But instead, we are caught up in a mess that will end with the death of our nation.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   
reply to post by AllexxisF1
 


First, please fix the quote so that it doesn't look like I used that language.

Second, ummmm...

Oh never mind, I was distracted by your immaturity.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thread locked.



posted on Mar, 23 2009 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by jasonjnelson
reply to post by mental modulator
 


I get you, man. And this is a conversation I would love to get into. but one, you are talking about republicans, a party I never mentioned, and two, about the economy, which I never mentioned in that context.

The argument is about the article, and from your previous posts in other threads, I expected a more on target argument from you.


OK... fair enough.

What is the point of stating I hate liberals???

Do you think that is not a mighty broad brush stroke? It assumes that every liberal has the same views, attitudes and habits. I jumped on here because I see this division growing and growing, fueled by generalizations and anger.I must admit it gets me going and I jump in like a rabid animal. Anyhow the MAYOR of SF often says stuff that is inflaming to conservatives - I'm sure you recall the prop 8 commercial - "wether you like it or not..."

For all you know you my like me and all my liberalness - the division is sad and most of us are just trying to live and get by.

I am not for the growing of entitlements if that makes anyone feel better.



posted on Mar, 27 2009 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Thread opened, because of title change.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join