The Civil War brewing among Democrats

[Charles_Main]

Here is another example of the stuff that goes on almost every day anymore and it does drive thinking Democrats, as well as thinking Americans everywhere, absolutely crazy.

The primary reason we are in the current financial mess is because the government for too long has urged banks and lending institutions to make loans to people who traditionally would not have been qualified for them. That was made possible by Freddie and Fannie underwriting those loans. The increase in property acquisitions then drove up property values to dizzying heights which generated all manner of economic activity. Life was good. It was fairly responsibly managed in the Carter and Reagan administrations, but then began getting out of hand. The bubble began seriously building in the Clinton administration and continued all through the Bush administration until it finally maxed out, too many folks started defaulting on loans, and ultimately the whole house of cards the process had created collapsed in mid 2008.

So have our fearless leaders learned that maybe folks who can't afford to scrape together a down payment for a house and don't have any investment in it probably won't put a lot of priority on paying a mortgage if finances get tight? Have they learned that folks who can't afford a house probably shouldn't be encouraged to buy one?

No they haven't learned that.

Wed., May 12, 2010 4:14 PM ET

The Senate today rejected a proposal by Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., to impose a minimum 5% down payment for virtually all home mortgages. The amendment to the broader financial regulatory overhaul bill, which failed 42-57, would have required income verification and an assessment of borrowers’ ability to repay as well.

Corker’s proposal also would have stripped out a provision that required financial firms securitizing loans to keep a 5% portfolio risk.

Democrats then passed their own amendment imposing some underwriting standards, but no minimum down payment. . . .
Democrats Reject 5% Down Payment Rule

You know I watch Beck every now and then to get laugh and usually I don't buy into his crazy theories. However more and more when I see them doing things like this in light of everything that has happened I am led to believe he may be right on one of his ideas. The idea that the Far leftest running the Dem party are trying to collapse the American Economy so the people will finally give up Capitalism and accept Socialism when all along it is mainly the more socialist like parts of our economy that are causing the problems in the first place.

I know now several Dems will start screaming about regulations but the fact is those dumb asses cant even show you 1 regulation that was actually removed under Bush. There were some the Dems wanted but didnt get but not one that was removed. Further more It was the Dems who resisted stricter Over site of Fanny and freddy. If you want one man to blame. Chris Dodd has to be your man lol.

Sometimes I have to wonder if Beck might not just be right lol.

 

[Oddball]

Yes you did, but your observations aren't that far off target. Let's face it. Obama is not a manager or an administrator. He's a crappy organizer. He simply has no common sense when it comes to getting things done and has no instincts about who to put in charge of something to get something done. . . . OR . . . .

He's dumb like a fox and is intentionally sabotaging the country and any solutions that might be available for the problems it has.

We seem to be down to those two choices. Incompetent. Or evil. Right now, I'm leaning to the incompetent side and hope with all my heart that I am right.

Or, he's incompetent and has surrounded himself with borderline evil people.

A good example would be Reagan and Iran-Contra...While he was asleep at the switch rather than out-and-out incompetent, it's pretty clear that those around him --up to and including Poppy "out of the loop" Bush-- were in on the scam, and Reagan just took one for the team in assuming responsibility.

But for the life of me, I can't see how anybody drinks enough kool-ade to be able to say that Obama is a centrist when you look at all the radical leftwing extremists with which he has surrounded himself and when you look at how he looks to government to accomplish everything and is willing to leave absolutely nothing to the private sector.

I think many of these people don't know what being 'left' means.

Forest for the trees.

 

[geauxtohell]

Sinatra is projecting the centrist portion of the GOP's angst at the Tea Party drones.

The Dems are in a happy place, the Pubs are not.

"But if we say the DEMs are in disarray enough, we might create the illusion that they are!"

In a happy place? LOL they are already running for cover for 2010 the see the writing on the wall, why can't you.

I actually thought the GOP was in good shape until the Tea Party showed up. We shall see what the outcome is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The GOP is in no shape at all to win any major victories right now. A lunatic fringe is pulling the party into deep waters, where it will drown in a sea of minority until it changes. Dump McConnell. Dump Boehner. Ignore Palin, Bachman, Rush, Sean, and Glenn.

But . . . none of that will happen, and I will point this message out the day after the November elections as Republicans are going to face another two years of a Democratic majority across the board.

 

[JimH52]

The GOP is in no shape at all to win any major victories right now. A lunatic fringe is pulling the party into deep waters, where it will drown in a sea of minority until it changes. Dump McConnell. Dump Boehner. Ignore Palin, Bachman, Rush, Sean, and Glenn.

But . . . none of that will happen, and I will point this message out the day after the November elections as Republicans are going to face another two years of a Democratic majority across the board.

Now that the Chairman has left, I wonder who will continue harassing the GOP.

Williams steps aside as chairman of Tea Party Express - CNN.com

 

[Charles_Main]

The GOP is in no shape at all to win any major victories right now. A lunatic fringe is pulling the party into deep waters, where it will drown in a sea of minority until it changes. Dump McConnell. Dump Boehner. Ignore Palin, Bachman, Rush, Sean, and Glenn.

But . . . none of that will happen, and I will point this message out the day after the November elections as Republicans are going to face another two years of a Democratic majority across the board.

Must be easier to live in a world of Delusion rather than Face the truth.

So basically you want us to Dump anyone who is actually talking about conservative ideas and just be the Democrat light party eh.

Now I know that for sure would assure the Democrats majorities for some time to come. The republicans are out of power precisely because they got away from their core conservative values. Running further away from them wont help, only a return to them can.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Charles_Main wrongly believes the far, far right embraces 'true' conservative values: birtherism, trutherism, defense of BP, "no"? No, Goldwater and Ford and Nixon would spit on the GOP leadership of today.

 

[Meister]

Charles_Main wrongly believes the far, far right embraces 'true' conservative values: birtherism, trutherism, defense of BP, "no"? No, Goldwater and Ford and Nixon would spit on the GOP leadership of today.

From a person who is far, far left.......you don't have to go too far to get to the far, far right, jake.

 

[Foxfyre]

Charles_Main wrongly believes the far, far right embraces 'true' conservative values: birtherism, trutherism, defense of BP, "no"? No, Goldwater and Ford and Nixon would spit on the GOP leadership of today.

From a person who is far, far left.......you don't have to go too far to get to the far, far right, jake.

You would have to be far far left, as Jake presumably is since I don't believe I've EVER seen him criticize anybody from that camp, to believe that birthers, truthers, defenders of BP have anything to do with conservative value or the 'far right' for that matter. And I don't believe any of the GOP leadership are birthers, truthers, or defenders of BP.

From what I read, BP was ready to sign onto Obama's cap and trade scheme. This is probably why Obama defended BP until it became too much of a political liability. That is probably why Obama refused to let anybody else help and supported BP's proposed attempts to plug the leak, all which failed. A great deal of the damage to the coast could have been prevented if Obama had just accepted the offers of all the experts who were ready to come to our aid. Conservative values are to find some way to fix the problem and mitigate damages using whatever resources are available.
Once a government pet, BP now a capitalist tool | Washington Examiner

Conservative values don't put ideology ahead of practical solutions. Conservative values don't put fuzzy feel good notions ahead of policy that produces real results. Conservative values don't include policy and programs that sound really good and compassionate and noble and all that but will ultimately produce unintended bad consequences.

And conservative values have absolutely nothing to do with birthers, truthers, or defending anybody who has not merited defense.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Ya' might want to ask the Tea Party Daddy about that.

Apparently, The DICK; Armey is somewhat embarrassed by his spawn!!



Better be careful, there, DICK!

Ya' don't wanna crimp your 'Bagger-buck$-flow.....you know.....seeing-as-how you've developed a serious shoe-polish-addiction!!!!!

Can you see that you're obsessed with dicks and homosexual acts? You see that now, don't you?

which refutes his post how?

You ask much-too-much o' the Summer School alumni, here.

​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Democrats are always bickering, that's what makes them Democrats.

....No doubt....that generates harmonic-vibrations, resulting in an environment that defends-against/sheds all mold & mildew typical of "conservative"-politics.

"Better luck, NEXT Life, Yuppies!!"

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I am not concerned with foxfyre's comments in terms of whether I believe what I write.

The proof will be in the pudding the day after the November election as the GOP settles once again into minority status.

The New Right and the Tea Party elements cannot muster a majority for the GOP, only pull it down instead.

Do you honestly believe that? No one actually believes the GOP will lose ground this election. They are going to make gains, the question is how many. I personally believe it will not be due to any campaign or issues but happiness. It seems voters vote based on who they are upset with at the time, not with who they believe in. That is a sad sad reality but seems to be the basic truth.

I believe it because it is true. The GOP, particularly with its Tea Party component, simply does not represent the needs of an increasingly younger and darker American population. Americans as a whole are more upset with the GOP and the Tea Party then any sadness about BHO who stepped us his game the last week.

Either the GOP faces and accepts reality, or it will remain in the minority, representing no more than 30 to 35% of America.

The majority of Americans still hate the GOP for what it did to our country under the Bush years, and there has been no apology for that.

The Reagan Years were no party, either....

​

"Anti-communism soon became his career. Reagan toured the U.S. for General Electric, giving speeches that promoted "free enterprise" capitalism and rightwing politics. Prominent ruling class forces saw Reagan could put a slick "aw shucks" face on rightwing politics. With their backing, he became governor in California in 1966, running as a rabid opponent of "unwashed kooks, campus malcontents and filthy speech advocates." He announced, "I would have voted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964."

And once in office, he launched a high-level vendetta against the rising radical currents--like the Black Panther Party and the youth movement in Berkeley.

In May 1969, police moved against the communal Peoples' Park in Berkeley that symbolized a rejection of capitalist property. Street fighting erupted. One man, James Rector, died of gunshot wounds as squads of police opened fire in the streets. Reagan sent his National Guard troops marching through the Berkeley campus with fixed bayonets as state helicopters gassed the crowds. Reagan personally defended the police decision to shoot people."

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The title of this thread is quite correct- though the column utilized to cite the issue is misguided.

There is indeed a division growing from within the Democrat Party - both at the state and national level. Moderate Dems are PISSED OFF, and running scared - and their anger is being increasingly directed at the far left wing of the party that has enjoyed far greater control in recent years. That control has come at great cost to the Democrat brand name though, returning it to the era of ridicule liberalism had to endure post-Carter.

Ya HEARD-about-that, did ya'??

​

"It was the winter of 1981 and the country was just beginning to feel the sharp edges of the Reagan revolution. Denis Hayes, head of the fledgling Solar Energy Research Institute, was walking through the halls of the Department of Energy when an acquaintance came up to him and said, "Has Frank lowered the boom on you yet?" The Frank in question was an acting assistant secretary, but the boom, it turned out, was falling from the top. President Reagan had once been General Electric's most camera-ready tout, and his administration viewed alternative energy with open scorn. "They're going to kill your study," the gray-suited informant warned Hayes, before slipping down the corridor.

The study, a yearlong investigation by some of the nation's leading scientists, provided a convincing blueprint for a solar future. Energy Secretary Jim Edwards killed the study, all right, but not before it had been published in the Congressional Record.

It was a bold gesture, but not enough to alter the outcome. The quashed study proved to be the beginning of the end. The budget for the solar institute -- which President Jimmy Carter had created to spearhead solar innovation -- was slashed from $124 million in 1980 to $59 million in 1982. Scientists who had left tenured university jobs to work under Hayes were given two weeks notice and no severance pay. The squelching of the institute -- later partly re-funded and renamed the National Renewable Energy Laboratory -- marked the start of Reagan's campaign against solar power. By the end of 1985, when Congress and the administration allowed tax credits for solar homes to lapse, the dream of a solar era had faded. The solar water heater President Carter had installed on the White House roof in 1979 was dismantled and junked. Solar water heating went from a billion-dollar industry to peanuts overnight; thousands of sun-minded businesses went bankrupt. "It died. It's dead," says Peter Barnes, whose San Francisco solar- installation business had 35 employees at its peak. "First the money dried up, then the spirit dried up," says Jim Benson, another solar activist of the day."

 

[Charles_Main]

Charles_Main wrongly believes the far, far right embraces 'true' conservative values: birtherism, trutherism, defense of BP, "no"? No, Goldwater and Ford and Nixon would spit on the GOP leadership of today.

From a person who is far, far left.......you don't have to go too far to get to the far, far right, jake.

You would have to be far far left, as Jake presumably is since I don't believe I've EVER seen him criticize anybody from that camp, to believe that birthers, truthers, defenders of BP have anything to do with conservative value or the 'far right' for that matter. And I don't believe any of the GOP leadership are birthers, truthers, or defenders of BP.

From what I read, BP was ready to sign onto Obama's cap and trade scheme. This is probably why Obama defended BP until it became too much of a political liability. That is probably why Obama refused to let anybody else help and supported BP's proposed attempts to plug the leak, all which failed. A great deal of the damage to the coast could have been prevented if Obama had just accepted the offers of all the experts who were ready to come to our aid. Conservative values are to find some way to fix the problem and mitigate damages using whatever resources are available.
Once a government pet, BP now a capitalist tool | Washington Examiner

Conservative values don't put ideology ahead of practical solutions. Conservative values don't put fuzzy feel good notions ahead of policy that produces real results. Conservative values don't include policy and programs that sound really good and compassionate and noble and all that but will ultimately produce unintended bad consequences.

And conservative values have absolutely nothing to do with birthers, truthers, or defending anybody who has not merited defense.

Please do not equate questioning the way Obama Demanded Money, or the Show trail nature of what went on in congress, as defending BP. I want BP to pay just like everyone else. I just don't like watching our Government behave like a Bunch of Bullies in the process. Those so called hearings in congress were nothing but photo Opps never Intended or expected to actually get answers. It looked like something the Soviets would have done, Not something a country that values the rule of Law and considers people innocent till proven guilty would do. Personally I have a problem anytime congress wants to have hearing and get to the bottom of something, because they are always politically motivated, and they never seem to want to hold hearing to get to the bottom of what they themselves do. Lets have some hearings on Fanny and Freddy and put Chris dodd and all the other Dems who stood in the way of reform answer some questions. Nah that will never happen, but we can have some nice show trials for those Evil BP people. What you have is a bunch of criminals holding hearings on other criminals.

So just because someone questions them does not me they Defend BP in anyway.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The title of this thread is quite correct- though the column utilized to cite the issue is misguided.

There is indeed a division growing from within the Democrat Party - both at the state and national level. Moderate Dems are PISSED OFF, and running scared - and their anger is being increasingly directed at the far left wing of the party that has enjoyed far greater control in recent years. That control has come at great cost to the Democrat brand name though, returning it to the era of ridicule liberalism had to endure post-Carter.

Ya HEARD-about-that, did ya'??

​

"It was the winter of 1981 and the country was just beginning to feel the sharp edges of the Reagan revolution. Denis Hayes, head of the fledgling Solar Energy Research Institute, was walking through the halls of the Department of Energy when an acquaintance came up to him and said, "Has Frank lowered the boom on you yet?" The Frank in question was an acting assistant secretary, but the boom, it turned out, was falling from the top. President Reagan had once been General Electric's most camera-ready tout, and his administration viewed alternative energy with open scorn. "They're going to kill your study," the gray-suited informant warned Hayes, before slipping down the corridor.

The study, a yearlong investigation by some of the nation's leading scientists, provided a convincing blueprint for a solar future. Energy Secretary Jim Edwards killed the study, all right, but not before it had been published in the Congressional Record.

It was a bold gesture, but not enough to alter the outcome. The quashed study proved to be the beginning of the end. The budget for the solar institute -- which President Jimmy Carter had created to spearhead solar innovation -- was slashed from $124 million in 1980 to $59 million in 1982. Scientists who had left tenured university jobs to work under Hayes were given two weeks notice and no severance pay. The squelching of the institute -- later partly re-funded and renamed the National Renewable Energy Laboratory -- marked the start of Reagan's campaign against solar power. By the end of 1985, when Congress and the administration allowed tax credits for solar homes to lapse, the dream of a solar era had faded. The solar water heater President Carter had installed on the White House roof in 1979 was dismantled and junked. Solar water heating went from a billion-dollar industry to peanuts overnight; thousands of sun-minded businesses went bankrupt. "It died. It's dead," says Peter Barnes, whose San Francisco solar- installation business had 35 employees at its peak. "First the money dried up, then the spirit dried up," says Jim Benson, another solar activist of the day."

How 'BOUT that Gulf O' Mexico??

​

 

[Foxfyre]

From a person who is far, far left.......you don't have to go too far to get to the far, far right, jake.

You would have to be far far left, as Jake presumably is since I don't believe I've EVER seen him criticize anybody from that camp, to believe that birthers, truthers, defenders of BP have anything to do with conservative value or the 'far right' for that matter. And I don't believe any of the GOP leadership are birthers, truthers, or defenders of BP.

From what I read, BP was ready to sign onto Obama's cap and trade scheme. This is probably why Obama defended BP until it became too much of a political liability. That is probably why Obama refused to let anybody else help and supported BP's proposed attempts to plug the leak, all which failed. A great deal of the damage to the coast could have been prevented if Obama had just accepted the offers of all the experts who were ready to come to our aid. Conservative values are to find some way to fix the problem and mitigate damages using whatever resources are available.
Once a government pet, BP now a capitalist tool | Washington Examiner

Conservative values don't put ideology ahead of practical solutions. Conservative values don't put fuzzy feel good notions ahead of policy that produces real results. Conservative values don't include policy and programs that sound really good and compassionate and noble and all that but will ultimately produce unintended bad consequences.

And conservative values have absolutely nothing to do with birthers, truthers, or defending anybody who has not merited defense.

Please do not equate questioning the way Obama Demanded Money, or the Show trail nature of what went on in congress, as defending BP. I want BP to pay just like everyone else. I just don't like watching our Government behave like a Bunch of Bullies in the process. Those so called hearings in congress were nothing but photo Opps never Intended or expected to actually get answers. It looked like something the Soviets would have done, Not something a country that values the rule of Law and considers people innocent till proven guilty would do. Personally I have a problem anytime congress wants to have hearing and get to the bottom of something, because they are always politically motivated, and they never seem to want to hold hearing to get to the bottom of what they themselves do. Lets have some hearings on Fanny and Freddy and put Chris dodd and all the other Dems who stood in the way of reform answer some questions. Nah that will never happen, but we can have some nice show trials for those Evil BP people. What you have is a bunch of criminals holding hearings on other criminals.

So just because someone questions them does not me they Defend BP in anyway.

I wasn't referring to the Congressional inquiry though I think that is really REALLY dumb to hold public hearings when we want BP to pay for the damages as it should. I started a thread a few days ago raising hell about the idiot protesters and Hollywood celebrities who are out to destroy BP financially. What kind of sense does that make when we need BP resources to cover the costs? They are hurting mostly independent station owners and therefore the entire economy plus all the targeting of BP has tanked their stock to the point that they may not survive. If they are forced into bankruptcy and can't pay, then we are stuck.

It's a classic case of cutting off one's nose to spite our face.

But what I was referring to in my post is that BP was 100% in bed with the Obama administration when this happened. And THAT is why Obama was so understanding and trusting and supportive of BP in the beginning. BP was one of the cornerstone mega corporations that was going to support the Cap & Trade bill. And I have no reason not to believe that was a factor in Obama refusing competent help from experts from the very beginning.

The fact that Obama has now thrown BP under the bus as he does with anybody and everybody who becomes a political liability to him does not change the situation that existed and exists.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Sinatra is projecting the centrist portion of the GOP's angst at the Tea Party drones.

The Dems are in a happy place, the Pubs are not.

"But if we say the DEMs are in disarray enough, we might create the illusion that they are!"

"....And, by-ALL-MEANS-NECESSARY....NEVER breach the security of each family's bunker!!! There's PROGRESS, RUN-AMUCK, OUT THERE!!!!!!"

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Here is another example of the stuff that goes on almost every day anymore and it does drive thinking Democrats, as well as thinking Americans everywhere, absolutely crazy.

The primary reason we are in the current financial mess is because the government for too long has urged banks and lending institutions to make loans to people who traditionally would not have been qualified for them. That was made possible by Freddie and Fannie underwriting those loans.

BZZZZZZZZZZZZT!!!!!

Sorry, contestant!

The answer was Phil Grammhttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9246.html!!!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VcJ4sjgtIR0]YouTube - American Casino[/ame]*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKKvMJeBBSA]YouTube - Q&A: Leslie & Andrew Cockburn[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Here is another example of the stuff that goes on almost every day anymore and it does drive thinking Democrats, as well as thinking Americans everywhere, absolutely crazy.

The primary reason we are in the current financial mess is because the government for too long has urged banks and lending institutions to make loans to people who traditionally would not have been qualified for them. That was made possible by Freddie and Fannie underwriting those loans. The increase in property acquisitions then drove up property values to dizzying heights which generated all manner of economic activity. Life was good. It was fairly responsibly managed in the Carter and Reagan administrations, but then began getting out of hand. The bubble began seriously building in the Clinton administration and continued all through the Bush administration until it finally maxed out, too many folks started defaulting on loans, and ultimately the whole house of cards the process had created collapsed in mid 2008.

So have our fearless leaders learned that maybe folks who can't afford to scrape together a down payment for a house and don't have any investment in it probably won't put a lot of priority on paying a mortgage if finances get tight? Have they learned that folks who can't afford a house probably shouldn't be encouraged to buy one?

No they haven't learned that.

Wed., May 12, 2010 4:14 PM ET

The Senate today rejected a proposal by Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., to impose a minimum 5% down payment for virtually all home mortgages. The amendment to the broader financial regulatory overhaul bill, which failed 42-57, would have required income verification and an assessment of borrowers’ ability to repay as well.

Corker’s proposal also would have stripped out a provision that required financial firms securitizing loans to keep a 5% portfolio risk.

Democrats then passed their own amendment imposing some underwriting standards, but no minimum down payment. . . .
Democrats Reject 5% Down Payment Rule

You know I watch Beck every now and then to get laugh and usually I don't buy into his crazy theories. However more and more when I see them doing things like this in light of everything that has happened I am led to believe he may be right on one of his ideas. The idea that the Far leftest running the Dem party are trying to collapse the American Economy so the people will finally give up Capitalism and accept Socialism when all along it is mainly the more socialist like parts of our economy that are causing the problems in the first place.

I know now several Dems will start screaming about regulations but the fact is those dumb asses cant even show you 1 regulation that was actually removed under Bush.

No....not removed (Ya' GOTTA quit listening to Beck! ).....just IGNORED.

​

 

[Charles_Main]

Here is another example of the stuff that goes on almost every day anymore and it does drive thinking Democrats, as well as thinking Americans everywhere, absolutely crazy.

The primary reason we are in the current financial mess is because the government for too long has urged banks and lending institutions to make loans to people who traditionally would not have been qualified for them. That was made possible by Freddie and Fannie underwriting those loans. The increase in property acquisitions then drove up property values to dizzying heights which generated all manner of economic activity. Life was good. It was fairly responsibly managed in the Carter and Reagan administrations, but then began getting out of hand. The bubble began seriously building in the Clinton administration and continued all through the Bush administration until it finally maxed out, too many folks started defaulting on loans, and ultimately the whole house of cards the process had created collapsed in mid 2008.

So have our fearless leaders learned that maybe folks who can't afford to scrape together a down payment for a house and don't have any investment in it probably won't put a lot of priority on paying a mortgage if finances get tight? Have they learned that folks who can't afford a house probably shouldn't be encouraged to buy one?

No they haven't learned that.

You know I watch Beck every now and then to get laugh and usually I don't buy into his crazy theories. However more and more when I see them doing things like this in light of everything that has happened I am led to believe he may be right on one of his ideas. The idea that the Far leftest running the Dem party are trying to collapse the American Economy so the people will finally give up Capitalism and accept Socialism when all along it is mainly the more socialist like parts of our economy that are causing the problems in the first place.

I know now several Dems will start screaming about regulations but the fact is those dumb asses cant even show you 1 regulation that was actually removed under Bush.

No....not removed (Ya' GOTTA quit listening to Beck! ).....just IGNORED.

​

Wait so now the claim is they just ignored regulations eh. I could have sworn the Democrat talking points were that "deregulation" led to these problems. Obama himself has said on more than one occasion that Bush "gutted" regulations. While he can not point to one single regulation that was repealed or "gutted" under bush. That's not listening to beck that's listening to Obama's own words. yet another example of him playing fast and loose with the facts.

Gonna have to do better than that bud.