Told ya so McBear. - Page 4 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #31 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-06-2009, 08:09 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
TNTRower's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2007
Vehicle: '98 E320 Wagon (non 4matic)
Location: Atlanta, GA & Malabo, Equatorial Guinea
Posts: 6,663
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to TNTRower
(Thread Starter)
Quote:
Originally Posted by edfreeman View Post
I blame them all, don't you? Bush had his rhetoric, nothing more. The Republicans in Congress did nothing. The Democrats in Congress did nothing. The Republicans had a chance to lead and failed. The Democrats had a chance to lead and failed. The majority was held by both parties in that period of time, both failed. I want to see a bill introduced to stop it. There were none.
Both sides failed, period. Nobody gets a pass. They were fat, dumb (especially that), and happy with the allegedly booming economy. I fail to see the point of debating it.
What is being debated is McBear's delusion that this crisis is Bush's fault.

The delusion is dangerous because that gives the real culprits, as you so eloquently put it, both parties in Congress, a pass.

The key to solving the crisis is identifying the true root cause of the crisis. McBear et al's position that this is created by Bush or even just by Republicans does not bear the weight of critical reason or the evidence.

What does bear the weight is the chronic grab for power by our government as it relates to making us dependent upon them for our survival. Much like the story of catching wild pigs, we are being penned in with free corn.

The danger in that free corn is the loss of our freedom. The loss of freedom to decide for ourselves what is best for ourselves. Instead, we are marching down a path towards being told by the State what is best for our country.

Who's John Galt.

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes" - Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 2

If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel. --Benjamin Netayahu
TNTRower is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #32 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-06-2009, 09:05 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
Dude, you are a sad, sad example of what the left has come to. Your methods of mischaracterization are laughable. How is what I said contradictory? I did not ignore it all if you actually take the time to read my post.

I already pointed out how those last few words of the sentence were a partisan swipe at Bush that rings hollow in the face of the VIDEO EVIDENCE.
What you said is contradictory because you provided "evidence" that the financial crisis was not Bush's fault with an op-ed piece that did not even support your argument. Analogy coming.

The video is not evidence of anything. It is a series of QUOTES put together over a period of four years. EVIDENCE would have been a SENATE or HOUSE BILL that was presented to Congress and VOTED. Otherwise it was empty rhetoric.

Quote:
How convenient that you do not wish to address at all, the simple fact that Bush was enforcing the regulations but that the mechanism for the enforcement (aka the laws) were not designed to help his administrative attempts. WHO MAKES THE LAWS? How wonderfully helpful of you to point out how it is the Congress who makes the laws. Oh wait, that's right, you didn't.
How many times have I asked WHY the Republican Congress did not introduce legislation, either on its own or at the request of the President to address these egregious voids you seem to think exist in the existing regulations? I counted 26 in a very simple search.

Quote:
The whole point of this is my disagreement with you when you say this is Bush's fault.
It is. He had at least two choices.
  • Fully enforce the regulations on the books. Even McCain, during the campaign repeatedly said the Administration failed to enforce the Regulations on the Books
  • If he thought there were insufficient regulations to responsibly do his job had the obligation to go to Congress and ask for new regulations to strengthen his ability. As the head of the Republican Party [behind Rush, of course] with a FULL Republican Congress they would have provided any legislation he requested from 2001-2006.

Those were his responsibilities as Chief EXECUTIVE of the ADMINISTRATIVE BRANCH.


I guess we will all have to be happy with your agreement with the statement that it wasn't his fault but he didn't jump in to fix anything. Of course that just ignores reality as supported by VIDEO EVIDENCE.

I guess your avatar should read:

"I refuse to accept reality, therefore I submit my own."[/QUOTE]At least you are starting to think. This is good. NOW, let's correct all those statements you seem to think I have been making.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #33 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-06-2009, 09:15 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
TNT,

Here is an analogy that might make a bit of sense to you. You will see the players as they show up.

Your Marine Company is in charge of SECURITY [Administration] for an entire forward base [financial sector]. You have a complete set of Rules of Engagement at your disposal but you have a CO [Bush] that likes to wing it and not really follow all the regulations and keep a tight ship. So, there were times that, instead of guarding the parameter your company was doing other things or resting or on leave or just kicking back, telling everybody that security had a few holes but was basically solid. He had the opportunity to have the Rules changed with a fully cooperating Chain of Command [Congress] but never did.

At some point in time your forward base is overrun by an enemy. Many people die, the base is in ruin. Your company did not plan the attack . Your company was not part of the attacking forces . Your company did not know that the attack was being planned . Your company did not expect an attack . Yet oddly your company gets the blame.

What excuses are you going to make when your CO gets busted for dereliction of duty for failure to provide ample security within the provided Rules of Engagement that you were provided?

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #34 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-06-2009, 09:24 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
I agree that Bashing Bush or Obama is not the solution.

The problem is Congress.

McBear et al on this forum want to keep puffing up that non-sensical myth that this is all Bush's fault.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
What is being debated is McBear's delusion that this crisis is Bush's fault.

The delusion is dangerous because that gives the real culprits, as you so eloquently put it, both parties in Congress, a pass.

The key to solving the crisis is identifying the true root cause of the crisis. McBear et al's position that this is created by Bush or even just by Republicans does not bear the weight of critical reason or the evidence.
As usual you lead with unsupported information. Why don't you do a little search and see just how many times I put the blame for this entire mess on Gramm Bliley or actually Gramm Leach Bliley or GLB. I believe most folks got tired of reading that phrase because I consider it the root cause of much of this problem.

If you look at the analysis that has been done, GLB, and then Lack of Enforcement by Bush Administration are the TWO things that I have always blamed this on. Your obsession that folks "just blame Bush" is fully incorrect and very easy to prove incorrect.

You need to start doing research on what people actually say before assuming you can speak to what they think. So far you have been very poor at that task. It parallels your critical thinking skills.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #35 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-07-2009, 06:36 AM
Moderately subtle
 
edfreeman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Dec 2003
Vehicle: 94 E500, 97 500SL
Location: Soddy Daisy, TN
Posts: 8,512
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Quoted: 80 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Send a message via AIM to edfreeman
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNTRower View Post
What is being debated is McBear's delusion that this crisis is Bush's fault.

The delusion is dangerous because that gives the real culprits, as you so eloquently put it, both parties in Congress, a pass.

The key to solving the crisis is identifying the true root cause of the crisis. McBear et al's position that this is created by Bush or even just by Republicans does not bear the weight of critical reason or the evidence.

What does bear the weight is the chronic grab for power by our government as it relates to making us dependent upon them for our survival. Much like the story of catching wild pigs, we are being penned in with free corn.

The danger in that free corn is the loss of our freedom. The loss of freedom to decide for ourselves what is best for ourselves. Instead, we are marching down a path towards being told by the State what is best for our country.
I think he is reading your posts and videos at their face value. They tend to suggest that GW and the GOP had nothing to do with the crisis, which is not true. They did not do their jobs. If you acknowledge that and add that the Dem's didn't either, Barney in particular, it will swallow much better.

And you know I loath the direction the current government is heading towards. We are chasing our tail and the tail is winning.

edfreeman is offline  
post #36 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-07-2009, 10:36 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Why did you ellipsis the quote? Afraid the ENTIRE quote might negate your weak point?

Let's repeat it in it's entirety:
What is true is that most Bush-era financial regulators were less than enthusiastic about the very act of regulating, and that Bush's "ownership society" push glossed over a lot of potential dangers. Bush didn't cause the financial regulatory breakdown, but he didn't jump in to fix it either.


You apparently don't understand the concept of NOT doing the job can have the same or worse consequence as doing something wrong. In this case, as the article very clearly states Bush regulators were very lax in doing their jobs and the Bush Administration did NOTHING to fix those problems that you keep trying to suggest that he kept warning folks about.

And you will also notice I DON'T MISDIRECT, using instead an interesting tactic of requiring you to provide facts and documentation to support your assertions and calling you on it when you can't. I also use a sneaky tactic of providing links to actual data from governing bodies instead of op-ed pieces when data and backup are required. I realize that can be confusing to those who only listen to Rush and Hannity and Beck.

Now I really like the part where you chose an article to PROVE YOUR POINT and then DISCOUNT that very article when it DISPROVES your perceptions. "And he did try to fix it regardless of what the second part of the quote says, as evidenced by his consistent prodding of Congress since 2002 to head off the problem!"

I am impressed, taking a 16 word sentence and trying to use half of the sentence to substantuate your point and disregarding the other half that contradicts it. This might go down in the BWOT Circlejerk Hall of Fame
That may be on some of your posts, but on the several threads on this topic of responsibility for forcing sub-prime lending, you have not provded any substantiation or proof that the Bush Admin did nothing. OTOH, I submitted several documents and sources to prove the exact opposite while you were left stuck in the mud, trying to prove the negative which, of course, is an exercise in logical futility.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton
bottomline1 is offline  
post #37 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-07-2009, 10:46 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
The timeline is correct. I have never argued with PUBLIC RECORD. Duh.

Now, let's go over this again.

At what point during the Republican Majority Congress and Republican White House was a BILL introduced to actually change regulations?

Which Branch of Government is responsible for Enforcing REGULATIONS ON THE BOOKS?

Which Branch of Government is responsible for Supervising GSEs?

Which PARTY had MAJORITY in SENATE and HOUSE in Congress during ALL of those warnings?

Has anyone EVER shown a filibuster by a single Democratic Senator that BLOCKED legislation to include any new Regulations?

Did the REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT VETO any REPUBLICAN CONGRESS passed laws regarding any new Regulations?

Other that providing a 10 minute sound bite what power did Barney Frank, in a MINORITY position have to stop ANY Regulation from being passed in CONGRESS?

Anyone got the BALLS to try and address ALL of those honestly?
These questions offer a prime lesson in rhetorical questions posed from the left's perspective. They are written in such a way as to imply a certain answer and favor the author with the impression that he know's what he is talking about without him having to provide any positive assertions backed up with facts. An additional impact is that many of them require so much research and study that the reader is overwhelmed and decides that it is not worth the effort, leaving the author in the position of unassailability without having done any of that research either. Who is going to determine all the bills introduced (not just passed) that have an effect on regulations?

Thus, the questions, deservedly, should go unanswered.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton

Last edited by bottomline1; 03-07-2009 at 10:49 AM.
bottomline1 is offline  
post #38 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-07-2009, 01:18 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by bottomline1 View Post
These questions offer a prime lesson in rhetorical questions posed from the left's perspective. They are written in such a way as to imply a certain answer and favor the author with the impression that he know's what he is talking about without him having to provide any positive assertions backed up with facts. An additional impact is that many of them require so much research and study that the reader is overwhelmed and decides that it is not worth the effort, leaving the author in the position of unassailability without having done any of that research either. Who is going to determine all the bills introduced (not just passed) that have an effect on regulations?

Thus, the questions, deservedly, should go unanswered.
I see. You don't have what it takes to answer them honestly. Why am I not surprised.

But I like the part about "taking so much research" and "would be overwhelmed". Most are, at best one sentence answers that should be on the tip of your tongue if denial were not in permanent residence there.

Again, much like the last four times you have been asked to back up your hypothesis you have avoided the questions, hid from them and tried to minimize them. Much like your idol, all hat, no cattle.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #39 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-07-2009, 01:25 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mcbear's Avatar
 
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Guys on the LEFT. It seems that the kids on the RIGHT [TNT, Bottom and RocketMan specifically] seem to think that these are very hard questions, that require excruciating research which would actually OVERWHELM the reader.

So, could the folks on the LEFT please help out the guys on the right with these mind puzzlers.
  • At what point during the Republican Majority Congress and Republican White House was a BILL introduced to actually change regulations?
  • Which Branch of Government is responsible for Enforcing REGULATIONS ON THE BOOKS?
  • Which Branch of Government is responsible for Supervising GSEs?
  • Which PARTY had MAJORITY in SENATE and HOUSE in Congress during ALL of those warnings?
  • Has anyone EVER shown a filibuster by a single Democratic Senator that BLOCKED legislation to include any new Regulations?
  • Did the REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT VETO any REPUBLICAN CONGRESS passed laws regarding any new Regulations?
  • Other that providing a 10 minute sound bite what power did Barney Frank, in a MINORITY position have to stop ANY Regulation from being passed in CONGRESS?

As usual, THOMAS (Library of Congress) the Library of Congress' extremely simply web search engine would be available to assist in any of those mean ol hard questions that require "research". There is a hint, however [there was one] but let them figure that out for themselves.

Enjoy.

McBear,
Kentucky

Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #40 of 71 (permalink) Old 03-07-2009, 01:30 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Jul 2007
Vehicle: 1973 450 SL
Location: Castle Rock, CO
Posts: 5,453
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcbear View Post
Guys on the LEFT. It seems that the kids on the RIGHT [TNT, Bottom and RocketMan specifically] seem to think that these are very hard questions, that require excruciating research which would actually OVERWHELM the reader.

So, could the folks on the LEFT please help out the guys on the right with these mind puzzlers.
  • At what point during the Republican Majority Congress and Republican White House was a BILL introduced to actually change regulations?
  • Which Branch of Government is responsible for Enforcing REGULATIONS ON THE BOOKS?
  • Which Branch of Government is responsible for Supervising GSEs?
  • Which PARTY had MAJORITY in SENATE and HOUSE in Congress during ALL of those warnings?
  • Has anyone EVER shown a filibuster by a single Democratic Senator that BLOCKED legislation to include any new Regulations?
  • Did the REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT VETO any REPUBLICAN CONGRESS passed laws regarding any new Regulations?
  • Other that providing a 10 minute sound bite what power did Barney Frank, in a MINORITY position have to stop ANY Regulation from being passed in CONGRESS?

As usual, THOMAS (Library of Congress) the Library of Congress' extremely simply web search engine would be available to assist in any of those mean ol hard questions that require "research". There is a hint, however [there was one] but let them figure that out for themselves.

Enjoy.
Oh, goodie, lefties on BWOT, go after that first question, survey all the bills that were introduced, scan them for any impact on any regulation. Then provide Bare with a one word answer. This is going to be either interesting or vacuous.

Charter member of the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy and proud of it.

God Bless the America we're trying to create.
--Hillary Rodham Clinton
bottomline1 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    mcbear JOE55 Off-Topic 28 04-26-2009 02:59 AM
    mcbear? Digmenow Off-Topic 22 12-18-2008 11:07 PM
    Not safe for mcbear Digmenow Off-Topic 7 08-30-2008 08:01 PM
    McBear? Digmenow Off-Topic 0 02-06-2007 10:06 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may 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
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome