Ass Hat
Home
News
Events
Bands
Labels
Venues
Pics
MP3s
Radio Show
Reviews
Releases
Buy$tuff
Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls
  
  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food
  
  New Thread
  New Poll
Miscellaneous
Links
E-mail
Search
End Ass Hat
login

New site? Maybe some day.
Posting Anonymously login: [Forgotten Password]
returntothepit >> discuss >> 9/11 was Clinton's fault by BobNOMAAMRooney nli on Sep 26,2008 6:51pm
Add To All Your Pages!
toggletoggle post by BobNOMAAMRooney nli at Sep 26,2008 6:51pm
j/k everyone knows Jews did 9/11










toggletoggle post by Seth at Sep 27,2008 3:01pm
Even if this was true for you stupid people. You did not care under Clinton for the good economy and money we had in our pockets.



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 27,2008 3:07pm
haven't you heard? all the problems facing this country are the delayed result of clinton's policies. who cares that the economy was the best it ever was and then one year after bush hit office everything went down the shitter. it was all clinton's fault! i thought everyone knew that!

not really though.



toggletoggle post by Conservationist  at Sep 27,2008 5:06pm



toggletoggle post by Conservationist  at Sep 27,2008 5:07pm
sacreligion said[orig][quote]
who cares that the economy was the best it ever was and then one year after bush hit office everything went down the shitter.


Yeah, cause if you build a castle made of sand in the 1990s, it collapses in the 00s.

DrKoop.com, worth $200 million? O RLY?



toggletoggle post by Conservationist  at Sep 27,2008 5:08pm



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 28,2008 2:11am
Conservationist said[orig][quote]
Yeah, cause if you build a castle made of sand in the 1990s, it collapses in the 00s.

DrKoop.com, worth $200 million? O RLY?


so you're saying because the internet became popular during clinton's time that the failed web enterprises are his fault?



toggletoggle post by Conservationist  at Sep 28,2008 5:44am
sacreligion said[orig][quote]
Conservationist said[orig][quote]
Yeah, cause if you build a castle made of sand in the 1990s, it collapses in the 00s.

DrKoop.com, worth $200 million? O RLY?


so you're saying because the internet became popular during clinton's time that the failed web enterprises are his fault?


No, I'm saying that he allowed completely stupid business plans to be overvalued, and encouraged that overvaluation, which required a re-adjustment through the 00s.



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 28,2008 6:08am
but that implies that he should be overseeing every business decision people make. the internet was a growing medium so naturally businesses would pop u p to take advantage of this unexplored fincancial terrain, and naturally some of these people wouldn't be suited for the job.

what did clinton do to really promote the overvaluation? wouldn't you say it was more the media and increasingly easier access to the internet that promoted it?



toggletoggle post by Conservationist  at Sep 28,2008 6:25am
sacreligion said[orig][quote]
but that implies that he should be overseeing every business decision people make.


LOL, no it doesn't.

It implies that businesses that run radically -- billions of dollars -- out of control should be watched.

No different than keeping an eye on airlines or Ma Bell.



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 28,2008 6:31am
or businesses like halliburton and jp morgan & chase who are gaining billions of dollars by taking advantage of bullshit decisions made by a bullshit president and the regime of people he appointed.

the way to fix a debt problem isn't to borrow more money, especially when by borrow they mean "take from the american people"



toggletoggle post by Conservationist  at Sep 28,2008 6:42am
sacreligion said[orig][quote]
or businesses like halliburton and jp morgan & chase who are gaining billions of dollars by taking advantage of bullshit decisions made by a bullshit president and the regime of people he appointed.

the way to fix a debt problem isn't to borrow more money, especially when by borrow they mean "take from the american people"


Haliburton, no comment.

The bailout is actually a good idea, I think. It allows the US gov't to suddenly own a lot of home loans for about 30 cents on the dollar, preventing a much worse financial catastrophe.

And as you saw, that catastrophe was brought on by ill-thought democratic policies under Clinton ;)



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 28,2008 6:45am
all this plan is going to do is consolidate financial power in our "free market" system. when the values of wall st. companies and banks fail, the overhead companies can buy them out for, like you said, 30 cents on the dollar.

also, what good does the government owning home loans do for us? and does this money go to the government or the fed reserve? they are the ones that proposed this bailout, correct?



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 28,2008 6:46am edited Sep 28,2008 6:47am
Mayer Amschel Rothschild - "Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws."



toggletoggle post by Conservationist  at Sep 28,2008 9:46am
sacreligion said[orig][quote]
all this plan is going to do is consolidate financial power in our "free market" system. when the values of wall st. companies and banks fail, the overhead companies can buy them out for, like you said, 30 cents on the dollar.

also, what good does the government owning home loans do for us? and does this money go to the government or the fed reserve? they are the ones that proposed this bailout, correct?


It's going to mean that the market does not have to equalize the difference in value a true bankruptcy would create. Also, the loans will now be administered, idiots kicked out and houses put back on the market. Otherwise, chaos might have delayed that indefinitely.



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 28,2008 4:56pm
but does that really "bail out" wall st. and smaller, independent banks?



toggletoggle post by ctB0rderpatrol at Sep 28,2008 10:24pm
Seth said[orig][quote]
Even if this was true for you stupid people. You did not care under Clinton for the good economy and money we had in our pockets.


at the expense of our manufacturing base and sovereignty



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 29,2008 2:55am
the downfall of the production industry was the lack of uniform wage, labor, and health care systems in the world. the fact that china, mexico, etc. were willing to produce the same product for cheaper costs is only a means of taking advantage of free market capitalism on a global scale. in a sense, it was forcing the ruthless business (lack of) ethics of the american financial system.

also, how was any of our sovereignty in jeopardy before the patriot act? pre-emptive strikes? are you fucking kidding me?



toggletoggle post by sacreligion at Sep 29,2008 2:55am edited Sep 29,2008 2:56am
*double post*



Enter a Quick Response (advanced response>>)
Username: (enter in a fake name if you want, login, or new user)SPAM Filter: re-type this (values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)
Message:  b i u  add: url  image  video(?)show icons
remember:today will turn for the worse
[default homepage] [print][6:57:57am Mar 28,2024
load time 0.01871 secs/12 queries]
[search][refresh page]