Can win Obama win a debate Against Newt ??

[cbirch2]

Excellent. They are currently obligations of the US government.

And i never claimed otherwise. Maybe you should understand the debate before you inject yourself into it. "Intense" said that mortgages held by fannie and freddie were insured by the government, i said they were not, and you somehow turned that into me saying that the government never decided to nationalize.

But, you were wrong a few posts back.

You'll have to show where you think I'm wrong.
Your track record with that claim isn't very good.

Sorry, i didnt realize you had rudely injected yourself into an argument you were never a part of. Intense made the claim about government insurance, i said he was wrong, and then you injected yourself into an argument you were never a part of by totally changing the topic of the debate.

Intense: "Their debt was insured by the government"
Me: "No it wasnt, the government just decided to nationalize, there was never any insurance policy or explicit guarantee.
You: "Their debt is an obligation on the US government"

See where the problem comes in? It happens when you start claiming ive said shit that i havent, or when you dont understand the difference between "insured by the government from the start" and "a decision to nationalize"

Fannie and Freddie MBS are guaranteed by the government. Their debt is an obligation of the government.
Taxpayers are on the hook. Get it?

Are you stupid? Can you read at all? Did i ever claim otherwise? Right now the government owns fannie and freddie. But that is a development that came about in september 2008. during the bubble the debt of fannie and freddie were not obligations of the US government. It is explicitly stated in their charter.

They were private companies with no guarantee, but the government considered them too important to fail and decided to nationalize them, faced with the prospect of letting them fail.

Starting to understand it yet?

They are obligations of the government now but in the past had no guarantee. Anyone that assumed a guarantee was trading on expectations.

 

[candycorn]

Newt can't help but being Newt

Threatening to dissolve the courts and arrest judges that he does not agree with

Go Newt!

Classic Gingrich.

 

[cbirch2]

Newt can't help but being Newt

Threatening to dissolve the courts and arrest judges that he does not agree with

Go Newt!

Classic Gingrich.

I couldn't believe it when saw it.

When i read George Wills column about Gingrich, i thought he was exaggerating a little. Other conservative pundits are all over time as well, I liked when he was called "a walking hand grenade going around with hand on the pin saying 'watch this'". That seemed a little hyperbolic to me at the time.

But in hindsight, dead on! He just keep delivering. Comedians thought the exit of herman cain was tragic, but the ushering in of gingrich has really been something amazing.

 

[SAT2]

Gingrich: Capitol Police Could Arrest

There’s “no reason the American people need to tolerate a judge that out of touch with American culture,” Gingrich said on CBS’ Face the Nation, referring to a case where a judge ruled that explicit references to religion were barred from a high school graduation ceremony. And Gingrich recently has said judges should have to explain some of their decisions before Congress.

Host Bob Schieffer asked Gingrich how he planned to enforce that. Would you call in the Capitol Police to apprehend a federal judge, he asked.

“If you had to,” Gingrich said. “Or you’d instruct the Justice Department to send the U.S. Marshall in.”

A judge should have to explain his or her radical decisions, Gingrich emphasized again. Gingrich’s tough words against the judiciary branch have drawn fire from even conservatives. Former attorney general under President George W. Bush, Michael Mukasey, told Fox News that Gingrich’s proposals were “dangerous” and “totally irresponsible.

 

[rightwinger]

Gingrich: Capitol Police Could Arrest

There’s “no reason the American people need to tolerate a judge that out of touch with American culture,” Gingrich said on CBS’ Face the Nation, referring to a case where a judge ruled that explicit references to religion were barred from a high school graduation ceremony. And Gingrich recently has said judges should have to explain some of their decisions before Congress.

Host Bob Schieffer asked Gingrich how he planned to enforce that. Would you call in the Capitol Police to apprehend a federal judge, he asked.

“If you had to,” Gingrich said. “Or you’d instruct the Justice Department to send the U.S. Marshall in.”

A judge should have to explain his or her radical decisions, Gingrich emphasized again. Gingrich’s tough words against the judiciary branch have drawn fire from even conservatives. Former attorney general under President George W. Bush, Michael Mukasey, told Fox News that Gingrich’s proposals were “dangerous” and “totally irresponsible.

So Gingrich thinks that as president, he gets to decide what American culture is and can suspend Constitutional checks and balances

I could not believe in the last debates that the Republicans believe the courts are a weak sister in the constitutional checks and balances and can be brushed aside

 

[SAT2]

The judicial branch has gotten in the way of many of their aims. So Newt suggests that we just drag them before the Congress to explain themselves. Which is totally like the founders.

Here's something interesting about Newt:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/t...ivilisation-to-the-dark-continent-of-america/

http://www.slate.com/slideshows/news_and_politics/gingrichs-doodles.html#slide_8

I like the one called "Newt Action"

http://www.slate.com/slideshows/news_and_politics/gingrichs-doodles.html#slide_6

 

[cbirch2]

Yea lets just throw out the separation of powers shall we?

How about we make the judiciary subject to oversight by the legislature, which of course gingrich imagines would be subservient to the executive.

Nice!

And nevermind that gingrich, like every recent president, will only get a slight majority of the popular vote. Its not like there is a single american culture. Actually, isnt the main idea of our country that it shouldnt be defined by just one culture or religion or race or whatever?

 

[Oddball]

Gingrich: Capitol Police Could Arrest

There’s “no reason the American people need to tolerate a judge that out of touch with American culture,” Gingrich said on CBS’ Face the Nation, referring to a case where a judge ruled that explicit references to religion were barred from a high school graduation ceremony. And Gingrich recently has said judges should have to explain some of their decisions before Congress.

Host Bob Schieffer asked Gingrich how he planned to enforce that. Would you call in the Capitol Police to apprehend a federal judge, he asked.

“If you had to,” Gingrich said. “Or you’d instruct the Justice Department to send the U.S. Marshall in.”

A judge should have to explain his or her radical decisions, Gingrich emphasized again. Gingrich’s tough words against the judiciary branch have drawn fire from even conservatives. Former attorney general under President George W. Bush, Michael Mukasey, told Fox News that Gingrich’s proposals were “dangerous” and “totally irresponsible.

So much for your absolutely absurd claim that progressivism isn't authoritarian in nature.

 

[SAT2]

Gingrich: Capitol Police Could Arrest

There’s “no reason the American people need to tolerate a judge that out of touch with American culture,” Gingrich said on CBS’ Face the Nation, referring to a case where a judge ruled that explicit references to religion were barred from a high school graduation ceremony. And Gingrich recently has said judges should have to explain some of their decisions before Congress.

Host Bob Schieffer asked Gingrich how he planned to enforce that. Would you call in the Capitol Police to apprehend a federal judge, he asked.

“If you had to,” Gingrich said. “Or you’d instruct the Justice Department to send the U.S. Marshall in.”

A judge should have to explain his or her radical decisions, Gingrich emphasized again. Gingrich’s tough words against the judiciary branch have drawn fire from even conservatives. Former attorney general under President George W. Bush, Michael Mukasey, told Fox News that Gingrich’s proposals were “dangerous” and “totally irresponsible.

So much for your absolutely absurd claim that progressivism isn't authoritarian in nature.

Newt is not a progressive. Please don't be silly.

 

[cbirch2]

Gingrich: Capitol Police Could Arrest

So much for your absolutely absurd claim that progressivism isn't authoritarian in nature.

Newt is not a progressive. Please don't be silly.

Lol i was thinking the same thing. It sounds like he was just calling republicans progressive.

regressive sounds more like it. They love our new gilded age. They just wish government would stop talking all their money to help poor people.