Newt Pimped Freddie Mac

[Luddly Neddite]

OP says, "Newt Pimped Freddie Mac"

Its really the other way around.

I'm not just being snarky. Newt is another name for a cold blooded reptile and this newt would sell his mother (or ex-wives and daughters!) for a buck. And, as we've so often seen over his long and very shameful career, he can flip flop at a rate that Romney can only watch and envy.

What are GObP/pub/bag's standards SO low?

Are these wannabes and has-beens an never-was' or will be's really the best they can come up with?

Why don't the pub/bag voters rise up and demand real candidates instead of being content with this awful and embarrassing clown show?

 

[AVG-JOE]

Why don't the pub/bag voters rise up and demand real candidates instead of being content with this awful and embarrassing clown show?

Would YOU want to try and please that base?!? Not me, Brother! Talk about your 'high maintenance' relationships!

 

[JoeB131]

Interesting thread. So how does this blue collar liberal see the role of financiers in this nation? Without people investing capital, you don't get new businesses started. However, when the investment capital is siphoned of in the type of schemes involved in the derivitives trading, then you get no new bussinesses, and a lot of rich people who essentially stole the nation's, or in this case, the world's, working capital.

In all the threads concerning this, all I have ever seen Toro post is condemnation of the type of practices that led to this debacle. Toro, by what I can tell by his posts, is a conservative, not a 'Conservative'.

In the present list of candidates for the GOP nomination, there are only two conservatives, Romney and Huntsman. Romney, unfortunetely, is flip-flopping, and denying some of his best work as governor. And Huntsman is just too damned honest and straightforward to gather even a small percentage of the vote in todays radicalized GOP.

Toto has gotten on here bragging about how he made a fortune "selling real estate short".

So frankly, he's kind of like the Claude Riens character in Casablanca...

Now. to the point. I think that the overall mentatlity that we should encourage investment and build businesses is a sound one. Sadly, that got lost somewhere along the line. About the time people like Toto got in the system and got off in their fancy suits about how it was sooooo much like gambling. But not really because you were losing someone else's money if you lost.

"Ooops, lost a bunch of money".
"Quick, go to the government for a bailout."

Just to clarify, I have told whiny über-RINO/Marxist-wannabe JoeB more than once that I did not make a fortune shorting real estate. I wish I had. Instead, I made a fair amount of money but not enough to retire on.

Just something to keep in mind when reading his blatherings.

YOu bragged about selling real estate short. Frankly, I'd be embarrassed about that, considering the disasterous effect it had on the country.

You made money helping bring about the Great Recession.

At least during the Great Depression, your sort had the common decency to throw themselves out windows when they screwed it up for the rest of us.

 

[Ravi]

How did Romney "help cause the mess?"

Soros hasn't sent you the talking points yet?

How did Romney "help cause the mess?"

 

[JoeB131]

How did Romney "help cause the mess?"

Soros hasn't sent you the talking points yet?

How did Romney "help cause the mess?"

Like I said, I'm sure you'll get your talking points after he gets the nomination.

But short version-

His company did a lot of the "pump and dump" leverage buyouts that gutted companies like AmPad.

His company moved a lot of American jobs overseas.

You see, there's a reason why Obamsky and the other libs are treating Mittens with kids gloves. Because they have this whole stack of stuff they can hit him with.

 

[Toro]

Soros hasn't sent you the talking points yet?

How did Romney "help cause the mess?"

Like I said, I'm sure you'll get your talking points after he gets the nomination.

But short version-

His company did a lot of the "pump and dump" leverage buyouts that gutted companies like AmPad.

His company moved a lot of American jobs overseas.

You see, there's a reason why Obamsky and the other libs are treating Mittens with kids gloves. Because they have this whole stack of stuff they can hit him with.

lol

Newt is a walking repository of scandal and you think the Dems want Romney because he's easier to set up? Are you stupid? The Dems don't have to say anything about Newt. They just have to play clips of Newt and others speaking about him on a continuous loop. Newt creates the attack ads all by himself! Romney is a more formidable candidate because his firm has funded companies which created thousands of jobs and he is a competent technocrat. Newt is a scandal-ridden bomb-throwing lobbyist. Romney appeals to the middle, Newt does not. Newt may get the Republican base fired up (as well as the occasional über-RINO posers) but he also gets the liberal base fired up as well.

And what's a "pump and dump" leverage buyout? I know what an LBO is, but I don't know what a "pump and dump" LBO is.

And BTW, offshoring jobs didn't cause the financial crisis and this mess. You should do your research.

 

[JoeB131]

lol

Newt is a walking repository of scandal and you think the Dems want Romney because he's easier to set up? Are you stupid? The Dems don't have to say anything about Newt. They just have to play clips of Newt and others speaking about him on a continuous loop. Newt creates the attack ads all by himself! Romney is a more formidable candidate because his firm has funded companies which created thousands of jobs and he is a competent technocrat. Newt is a scandal-ridden bomb-throwing lobbyist. Romney appeals to the middle, Newt does not. Newt may get the Republican base fired up (as well as the occasional über-RINO posers) but he also gets the liberal base fired up as well.

And what's a "pump and dump" leverage buyout? I know what an LBO is, but I don't know what a "pump and dump" LBO is.

And BTW, offshoring jobs didn't cause the financial crisis and this mess. You should do your research.

Oh, Tojo, you know very well what that is. It's like what you do with AmPad. You create an illusion of profitiably by firing people from good paying jobs, and then dump inflated stock off on the "suckers" before they figure out they've bought a pig in a poke.

You see, Mittens tried this, "I'm a great businessman" shit before against Teddy in 1994. And then Teddy brought out commercials with crying AmPad workers and he beat Mittens in a year where just about anyone with an "R" after his name won.

Most of us are pretty sick of "great businessmen", really.

People aren't going to care about Newt's divorces. Half of marriages end in divorce, anyway.

But they are going to have a lot less sympathy for a guy who laid a bunch of people off so he could buy another mansion.

The most stinging thing Huckabee said about Romney had nothing to do with Mormonism. It was "I look like the guy you work with. He looks like the guy who lays you off."

Mitt 2012 "He looks like the guy who lays you off".

Obama is smacking his lips at the prospect of that one.

 

[JoeB131]

And BTW, offshoring jobs didn't cause the financial crisis and this mess. You should do your research.

Actually, it's the MAIN reason why we've declined as an economy.

But let's say I go along with bloodsucker logic and buy into the "up is down" mentality that it isn't.

Perception is more important than reality.

Perception is calling for tech support and getting some guy who calls himself Bobby but whose real name is Pradip.

Perception is that you closed down a plant in the US and opened one in China, you stole American jobs.

Seriously, man, Romney is a great candidate for people like you who watch It's a Wonderful Life and cheer for Mr. Potter, but for those of us who work for a living, he's awful.

 

[Toro]

And BTW, offshoring jobs didn't cause the financial crisis and this mess. You should do your research.

Actually, it's the MAIN reason why we've declined as an economy.

But let's say I go along with bloodsucker logic and buy into the "up is down" mentality that it isn't.

Perception is more important than reality.

Perception is calling for tech support and getting some guy who calls himself Bobby but whose real name is Pradip.

Perception is that you closed down a plant in the US and opened one in China, you stole American jobs.

Seriously, man, Romney is a great candidate for people like you who watch It's a Wonderful Life and cheer for Mr. Potter, but for those of us who work for a living, he's awful.

The left thinks offshoring is bad. The right does not. Whether you agree with this or not, it had little to do with the Financial Crisis. Housing bubbles are not caused by offshoring. Stock market bubbles are not caused by offshoring. You can whine and bitch all you want about it, but it doesn't make it true.

What is a "pump and dump" leverage buyout?

 

[JoeB131]

The left thinks offshoring is bad. The right does not. Whether you agree with this or not, it had little to do with the Financial Crisis. Housing bubbles are not caused by offshoring. Stock market bubbles are not caused by offshoring. You can whine and bitch all you want about it, but it doesn't make it true.

No, EVERYBODY thinks Offshoring is bad. Except people who make huge gobs of money on it.

Of course it had everything to do with the financial crisis, because housing had replaced manufacturing as out number one industry. When that collapsed, we didn't have a second string to fall back to.

Without the massive offshoring that happened during the Oughts, the Housing Bubble would have been no more of a hiccup than the Tech Bubble was.

And again, what is the weird Mormon Robot going to answer the worker who lost his job because Mitt moved his job to China with?

The fact the left wants to run against Mitt should be a big warning flag.

 

[Toro]

The left thinks offshoring is bad. The right does not. Whether you agree with this or not, it had little to do with the Financial Crisis. Housing bubbles are not caused by offshoring. Stock market bubbles are not caused by offshoring. You can whine and bitch all you want about it, but it doesn't make it true.

No, EVERYBODY thinks Offshoring is bad. Except people who make huge gobs of money on it.

Of course it had everything to do with the financial crisis, because housing had replaced manufacturing as out number one industry. When that collapsed, we didn't have a second string to fall back to.

Without the massive offshoring that happened during the Oughts, the Housing Bubble would have been no more of a hiccup than the Tech Bubble was.

And again, what is the weird Mormon Robot going to answer the worker who lost his job because Mitt moved his job to China with?

The fact the left wants to run against Mitt should be a big warning flag.

Yeah, that's the standard left-wing, anti-capitalist talking point.

"Everybody" does not believe offshoring is bad. Anyone one believes in free market capitalism - which Republicans and conservatives usually do - believes that the economy is best served by companies acting in their own self-interest to maximize profits, and that government interference is bad for the economy and jobs. This is what we hear from Republicans ALL THE TIME!!

 

[JoeB131]

Yeah, that's the standard left-wing, anti-capitalist talking point.

"Everybody" does not believe offshoring is bad. Anyone one believes in free market capitalism - which Republicans and conservatives usually do - believes that the economy is best served by companies acting in their own self-interest to maximize profits, and that government interference is bad for the economy and jobs. This is what we hear from Republicans ALL THE TIME!!

And that's why Republicans have lost 4 of the last 5 popular presidential votes, and barely won the one they did.

Most common thing I've heard doing precinct work for the GOP over the years. "You're not rich. Why are you voting Republican?" The GOP has put the interests of Wall Street over Main street, and that's why they've lost as much ground as they did.

20 years ago, someone as far left as Obama NEVER could have gotten the nomination, much less won the presidency. And no one with his economic record would have a ghost of a chance at re-election.

You whine about anti-Capitialists, but frankly, the Capitalist have become their own worst enemy. Much like the French Nobility, you are oblivious to the pain around you.

Like I said, guy, you are the type of Republican who watches "It's a Wonderful Life" and cheers for Mr. Potter.

 

[Toro]

Yeah, that's the standard left-wing, anti-capitalist talking point.

"Everybody" does not believe offshoring is bad. Anyone one believes in free market capitalism - which Republicans and conservatives usually do - believes that the economy is best served by companies acting in their own self-interest to maximize profits, and that government interference is bad for the economy and jobs. This is what we hear from Republicans ALL THE TIME!!

And that's why Republicans have lost 4 of the last 5 popular presidential votes, and barely won the one they did.

Most common thing I've heard doing precinct work for the GOP over the years. "You're not rich. Why are you voting Republican?" The GOP has put the interests of Wall Street over Main street, and that's why they've lost as much ground as they did.

20 years ago, someone as far left as Obama NEVER could have gotten the nomination, much less won the presidency. And no one with his economic record would have a ghost of a chance at re-election.

You whine about anti-Capitialists, but frankly, the Capitalist have become their own worst enemy. Much like the French Nobility, you are oblivious to the pain around you.

Like I said, guy, you are the type of Republican who watches "It's a Wonderful Life" and cheers for Mr. Potter.

Well, given that most conservatives here think I'm a liberal or a moderate at best, that shows you where you are on the political spectrum. And I've slammed the hardcore right for deriding the RINOs in the party as Small Tent Republicans. So I guess that an über-RINO like yourself staying in the party is a good thing.

But I will give you the standard Republican response to your argument, one which I mostly agree with.

America was made great by freedom. America was made great by capitalism. America was made great by individuals making their own decisions and not having government interfere in their lives. It is free market capitalism which has made this country the greatest, richest, most powerful country the planet has ever seen. This country did not get rich and powerful because of government bureaucrats interfering in the lives of individual citizens. America is not rich and great because of Social Security and Medicare. Those are byproducts of a rich society. The wealth that was created in this country is due to free market capitalism.

Separating out Main Street and Wall Street is class warfare. The interests of Wall Street are the interests of Main Street because free market capitalism is the greatest job-creating machine the world has ever known. Free market capitalism creates the companies that supplies the jobs to Main Street and Wall Street funds those companies.​

Now, if I were to say that at a Republican gathering, and you were to say "Capitalism has to be saved from itself, investing is parasitic, companies are screwing the workers," - which is what you've been arguing on these boards - who do you think would get the bigger applause, me or you? Then if you took what you said to a Democrat gathering, do you think you'd get a better response than at the Republican meeting?

Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, et al would strenuously disagree with your argument. Just listen to them talk about how great American capitalism is, and how we've got to let companies be free to do what they want. The only guy I can think of in the GOP who argues what you do is Pat Buchanan, who is hardly a standard-bearer for the right these days.

 

[JoeB131]

Now, if I were to say that at a Republican gathering, and you were to say "Capitalism has to be saved from itself, investing is parasitic, companies are screwing the workers," - which is what you've been arguing on these boards - who do you think would get the bigger applause, me or you? Then if you took what you said to a Democrat gathering, do you think you'd get a better response than at the Republican meeting?

Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Herman Cain, et al would strenuously disagree with your argument. Just listen to them talk about how great American capitalism is, and how we've got to let companies be free to do what they want. The only guy I can think of in the GOP who argues what you do is Pat Buchanan, who is hardly a standard-bearer for the right these days.

And a pity we didn't listen to Pat when he warned us 20 years ago this was coming. (Although admittably, his outright xenophobia and homophobia probably drowned out his sensible message on trade.)

If you want to say, "Greed is Good" will get more applause at the GOP convention than, "Hey, maybe we should be looking out for the working guy", yup, you would get more applause. That's the problem with the modern GOP.

those guys don't see the problem. It's hard to get someone to see a problem when his paycheck depends on him not understanding it. They've put the interests of corporations- many of them not even AMERICAN corporations anymore- over the interests of American workers.

They've lost their way. That's why they lose elections.

Now, incidently, I think the Democrats are just as bad in the selling out. But they aren't obvious about it. Clinton signed NAFTA and all the other bad idea treaties. Obama has yet to indict a single bankster. But they can make it sound like they care about Joe working in a plant worrying about the next batch of jobs they are sending to Asia.

YOu might even get away with nominating Romney and getting more of the same. But that's just going to make things worse, not better. And in 2016, you'll get someone so far off to the left that he'll make you miss Obama... just like some people kind of miss Clinton now.

 

[Toro]

Obama has yet to indict a single bankster.

Well, first of all, the President doesn't indict anybody. The agencies such as the SEC charge people, not the White House.

Second, people have been charged. The problem - to you, I guess - is that no one that I can think has been found guilty.

NY Times Advertisement

 

[Full-Auto]

Obama has yet to indict a single bankster.

Well, first of all, the President doesn't indict anybody. The agencies such as the SEC charge people, not the White House.

Second, people have been charged. The problem - to you, I guess - is that no one that I can think has been found guilty.

NY Times Advertisement

How can you find guilt when democrats gave those same people large bonuses by law.....................

 

[Toro]

Obama has yet to indict a single bankster.

Well, first of all, the President doesn't indict anybody. The agencies such as the SEC charge people, not the White House.

Second, people have been charged. The problem - to you, I guess - is that no one that I can think has been found guilty.

NY Times Advertisement

How can you find guilt when democrats gave those same people large bonuses by law.....................

What are you talking about?

 

[JoeB131]

Obama has yet to indict a single bankster.

Well, first of all, the President doesn't indict anybody. The agencies such as the SEC charge people, not the White House.

Second, people have been charged. The problem - to you, I guess - is that no one that I can think has been found guilty.

NY Times Advertisement

Well, no, the JUSTICE department indicts people. But that's the point. He didn't go in and tell Eric Holder- "A lot of people suffered because of what these guys did. I want a thorough investigation, and I want people convicted."

He didn't do that. Probably because he took millions in campaign bribes from them.

The whole system is corrupt. You do understand this, don't you? Or does your paycheck depend on you not understanding that?

 

[Toro]

Obama has yet to indict a single bankster.

Well, first of all, the President doesn't indict anybody. The agencies such as the SEC charge people, not the White House.

Second, people have been charged. The problem - to you, I guess - is that no one that I can think has been found guilty.

NY Times Advertisement

Well, no, the JUSTICE department indicts people. But that's the point. He didn't go in and tell Eric Holder- "A lot of people suffered because of what these guys did. I want a thorough investigation, and I want people convicted."

He didn't do that. Probably because he took millions in campaign bribes from them.

The whole system is corrupt. You do understand this, don't you? Or does your paycheck depend on you not understanding that?

You do not believe in the rule of law. Instead, you bay for blood and want sacrificial lambs because you lost money. As you said before, you don't believe in "legal niceties." You don't care if there are actual laws. Somebody's got to pay. Because you lost money. Screw the law. String 'em all up and let God sort them out.

 

[Full-Auto]

Well, first of all, the President doesn't indict anybody. The agencies such as the SEC charge people, not the White House.

Second, people have been charged. The problem - to you, I guess - is that no one that I can think has been found guilty.

NY Times Advertisement

How can you find guilt when democrats gave those same people large bonuses by law.....................

What are you talking about?

Oh Brother............... the Dodd/ Frank reform, IE Lobbyist empowerment act. The one that gave large Bonuses by law. What was it?