Dinesh D’Souza’s "America"

[Moonglow]

Ali would have made a nice Congressman...

 

[2aguy]

Politicalchic...I really like your posts...keeping up the good fight....do you read anything by Kurt Schlichter...he doesn't take **** from the lefties either...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Politicalchic...I really like your posts...keeping up the good fight....do you read anything by Kurt Schlichter...he doesn't take **** from the lefties either...

Thank you, Billy

I see....no, but I do try to get to Townhall as often as I can....and I'll watch for the name.

 

[Dot Com]

so whats the current box office tally PC? If it does as bad as the Atlas Shrugged *cough* "films" it'll be a real dud

 

[PoliticalChic]

so whats the current box office tally PC? If it does as bad as the Atlas Shrugged *cough* "films" it'll be a real dud

So....what's your current IQ.....when it gets to 50 you should sell.

 

[rightwinger]

so whats the current box office tally PC? If it does as bad as the Atlas Shrugged *cough* "films" it'll be a real dud

Atlas Shrugged 1 made $4.6 million
Atlas Shrugged 2 made $3.3 million

Both were given rave reviews by rightwing posters trying to swamp movie rating sites. Just like "America"

 

[Dot Com]

so whats the current box office tally PC? If it does as bad as the Atlas Shrugged *cough* "films" it'll be a real dud

Atlas Shrugged 1 made $4.6 million
Atlas Shrugged 2 made $3.3 million

Both were given rave reviews by rightwing posters trying to swamp movie rating sites. Just like "America"

true. I notice the only sites that are copynpasting the "movie is a smash hit" meme are CNS, T3h Blaze, National Review & other rw sites like Stephanie & PC frequent

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why is it essential to the Leftists that a movie that supports the America of the founders be less than a success?


The only answer is that they desire the America of the founders be less than a success.

 

[rightwinger]

Why is it essential to the Leftists that a movie that supports the America of the founders be less than a success?


The only answer is that they desire the America of the founders be less than a success.

A movie that fantasizes about the killing of George Washington?
A movie that makes a lame attempt to justify slavery and the slaughter of native americans?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Why is it essential to the Leftists that a movie that supports the America of the founders be less than a success?


The only answer is that they desire the America of the founders be less than a success.

A movie that fantasizes about the killing of George Washington?
A movie that makes a lame attempt to justify slavery and the slaughter of native americans?

It did no such thing.


It used George Washington as the personification for the title of the film: "America: Imagine the World Without Her"


Nor did it justify slavery or the slaughter of anyone.



You are the result of an education via America-hating communists like Howard Zinn.


I see I will have to post some OPs on the real American history.
You continue to serve as my muse.

 

[edthecynic]

She never backs up what she says.

All bluff and bluster.

Everything is linked and sourced, you lying gutter rat.

"Please show even one bill that came to the floor of the Senate providing the Dems the opportunity to block the bill with the 60 vote threshold. You won't because it never happened, and YOU know it but are too dishonest a liar to admit it."

Do it - - or be be known as...a lying gutter rat.

Notice how PompousCheek has made several posts but has yet to show any bill coming to the Senate floor for a vote that the Dems required 60 votes to pass. As I pointed out, all the bills were killed by the GOP MAJORITY CONTROLLED committees without ever being brought to the floor for a vote.

 

[PoliticalChic]

They being the GOP because the Dems were powerless to block anything in committee and every bill got blocked in committee!!!

You are wearing out the dumb act pretending you are too stupid to know you lied when you said the Dems used the 60 vote threshold to block all the GOP bills. All it takes is a simple majority to move a bill out of committee and the GOP held a majority in every committee.

Get it now?????

Another lie.

On your part only!

Please show even one bill that came to the floor of the Senate providing the Dems the opportunity to block the bill with the 60 vote threshold. You won't because it never happened, and YOU know it but are too dishonest a liar to admit it.

Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

 

[edthecynic]

Another lie.

On your part only!

Please show even one bill that came to the floor of the Senate providing the Dems the opportunity to block the bill with the 60 vote threshold. You won't because it never happened, and YOU know it but are too dishonest a liar to admit it.

Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

Bottom bottom line: repeating your lie does not make it true!

You got caught lying about the Dems requiring a 60 vote threshold and as a CON$ervative you are not honest enough to admit it.

Thank you.

The fact remains that the GOP with a 2 vote majority in every committee did not have enough votes to get any reform bill out of committee, and the POWERLESS Dems in committee had nothing to do with the GOP's failure to get a reform bill passed.

 

[PoliticalChic]

On your part only!

Please show even one bill that came to the floor of the Senate providing the Dems the opportunity to block the bill with the 60 vote threshold. You won't because it never happened, and YOU know it but are too dishonest a liar to admit it.

Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

Bottom bottom line: repeating your lie does not make it true!

You got caught lying about the Dems requiring a 60 vote threshold and as a CON$ervative you are not honest enough to admit it.

Thank you.

The fact remains that the GOP with a 2 vote majority in every committee did not have enough votes to get any reform bill out of committee, and the POWERLESS Dems in committee had nothing to do with the GOP's failure to get a reform bill passed.

Not only is it true, but I have proven it so.

You've been waving some insignificant supposed point which does nothing to change reality.

FDR was the provenance....he created the GREs......

Democrat.


The key names are Clinton, Cisneros, Cuomo, Dodd, Frank.....all Democrats/Liberals/Progressives.


All are willing to break the limitations of the Constitution because there are dullard willing to accept what ever dolts like you claim.


Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

 

[Dot Com]

looking more & more that the movie is going to be a flop like the Atlas Farted movies

 

[edthecynic]

Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

Bottom bottom line: repeating your lie does not make it true!

You got caught lying about the Dems requiring a 60 vote threshold and as a CON$ervative you are not honest enough to admit it.

Thank you.

The fact remains that the GOP with a 2 vote majority in every committee did not have enough votes to get any reform bill out of committee, and the POWERLESS Dems in committee had nothing to do with the GOP's failure to get a reform bill passed.

Not only is it true, but I have proven it so.

You have only proven your dishonesty and ignorance.

Again, thank you.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

<cough>

"In June 2005, the U.S. Senate finally voted to issue a formal “apology for lynching.” This represented the first time in U.S. history that Congress had acknowledged, in a formal resolution, the historic crimes committed against people of African descent in the United States.



However, when the resolution came to the floor of the Senate for a final voice vote, only 85 U.S. Senators had co-signed as sponsors. Fifteen senators, all Republicans, had not. After the actual vote, seven Republican senators agreed to sign a large copy of the Senate’s “anti-lynching resolution,” for the purposes of public display. Eight Republicans steadfastly refused to endorse an apology for lynching: Trent Lott (R-Mississippi), Thad Cochran (R-Mississippi), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee), Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming), Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire), John Sununu (R-New Hampshire), and Craig Thomas (R-Wyoming).

In another unprecedented moment, the United States House apologized for both slavery and Jim Crow on July 29, 2008. In doing so, they acknowledged that slavery and Jim Crow continued to impact the African American community, long after the systems of oppression were formally abolished."

WAY too little.
WAY too late.

Needless to say, I wouldn't consider seeing or reading anything by D'souza but that's because I've seen him a couple of times on Bill Maher. He's just another anti-America traitor andd I don't think Maher should give him a platform from which to spew his sickness.

 

[Dad2three]

Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

Bottom bottom line: repeating your lie does not make it true!

You got caught lying about the Dems requiring a 60 vote threshold and as a CON$ervative you are not honest enough to admit it.

Thank you.

The fact remains that the GOP with a 2 vote majority in every committee did not have enough votes to get any reform bill out of committee, and the POWERLESS Dems in committee had nothing to do with the GOP's failure to get a reform bill passed.

Not only is it true, but I have proven it so.

You've been waving some insignificant supposed point which does nothing to change reality.

FDR was the provenance....he created the GREs......

Democrat.


The key names are Clinton, Cisneros, Cuomo, Dodd, Frank.....all Democrats/Liberals/Progressives.


All are willing to break the limitations of the Constitution because there are dullard willing to accept what ever dolts like you claim.


Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

IT'S GSE'S, AND ZERO TO DO WITH BUSH'S REGULATOR FAILURE

The "turmoil in financial markets clearly was triggered by a dramatic weakening of underwriting standards for U.S. subprime mortgages, beginning in late 2004 and extending into 2007," the President's Working Group on Financial Markets OCT 2008


The historical "originate and hold" mortgage model was replaced with the "originate and distribute" model. Incentives were such that you could get paid just to originate and sell the mortgages down the pipeline, passing the risk along.



Government has encouraged home ownership for decades; why suddenly in 2002-07 was it so important?



My simple retort to this GSEs-and-Congrees-did-it claim, which unbelievably I hardly ever see used is:

&#8220;Then what caused the housing bubble in Ireland? Fannie Mae caused that? Liberal U.S. Congressional reps? What about the housing bubble in Spain? Or the current one in China? Or England?&#8221;



No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data)


1. Private markets caused the shady mortgage boom


The first thing to point out is that the both the subprime mortgage boom and the subsequent crash are very much concentrated in the private market, especially the private label securitization channel (PLS) market. The Government-Sponsored Entities (GSEs, or Fannie and Freddie) were not behind them. The fly-by-night lending boom, slicing and dicing mortgage bonds, derivatives and CDOs, and all the other shadiness of the mortgage market in the 2000s were Wall Street creations, and they drove all those risky mortgages.

Here&#8217;s some data to back that up: &#8220;More than 84 percent of the subprime mortgages in 2006 were issued by private lending institutions&#8230; Private firms made nearly 83 percent of the subprime loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers that year.&#8221;



2. The government&#8217;s affordability mission didn&#8217;t cause the crisis



4. Conservatives sang a different tune before the crash: Conservative think tanks spent the 2000s saying the exact opposite of what they are saying now


Hey Mayor Bloomberg! No, the GSEs Did Not Cause the Financial Meltdown (but thats just according to the data) | The Big Picture

November 27, 2007

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding:

2007 $1.3 trillion

Dollar amount of subprime loans outstanding in 2003: $332 billion

Percentage increase from 2003: 292%


Proportion of subprime mortgages made from 2004 to 2006 that come with "exploding" adjustable interest rates: 89-93%


Proportion approved without fully documented income: 43-50%


Proportion with no escrow for taxes and insurance: 75%



Proportion of completed foreclosures attributable to adjustable rate loans out of all loans made in 2006 and bundled in subprime mortgage backed securities: 93%


Subprime share of all mortgage originations in 2006: 28%


Subprime share of all mortgage origination in 2003: 8%



Subprime share of all home loans outstanding:
14%


Subprime share of foreclosure filings in the 12 months ending June 30, 2007: 64%

The negative effects of subprime foreclosures are spreading.

Nearly 45 million homes NOT facing foreclosure will decline in value by an estimated $233 billion with most of the decline hitting in 2008 and 2009 as subprime foreclosures lower the prices of surrounding homes


Subprime foreclosures will rise even higher

A Snapshot of the Subprime Market


From 2001 to 2005, the dollar volume of subprime mortgages increased from $100 billion to $600 billion, while Alt - A mortgages grew from $25 billion to $400 billion over roughly the same period



The Myth of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Barney Frank, the Housing Bubble and the Recession



Start with the most basic fact of all: virtually none of the $1.5 trillion of cratering subprime mortgages were backed by Fannie or Freddie.


The Myth of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Barney Frank, the Housing Bubble and the Recession | The Long Goodbye



&#8220;The idea that they were leading this charge is just absurd,&#8221; said Guy Cecala, publisher of Inside Mortgage Finance, an authoritative trade publication. &#8220;Fannie and Freddie have always had the tightest underwriting on earth&#8230;They were opposite of subprime.&#8221;


WORLD WIDE CREDIT BUBBLE AND BUST. ONE DUBYA CHEERED ON IN THE US


Nonbank mortgage underwriting exploded from 2001 to 2007, along with the private label securitization market, which eclipsed Fannie and Freddie during the boom.

Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing laws overseen by either Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or the Community Reinvestment Act &#8212; Source: McClatchy


MUCH, MUCH MORE HERE


http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

 

[Dad2three]

On your part only!

Please show even one bill that came to the floor of the Senate providing the Dems the opportunity to block the bill with the 60 vote threshold. You won't because it never happened, and YOU know it but are too dishonest a liar to admit it.

Bottom line: "That the Democrats are the provenance of the problem.....and the bar to the solution."

Bottom bottom line: repeating your lie does not make it true!

You got caught lying about the Dems requiring a 60 vote threshold and as a CON$ervative you are not honest enough to admit it.

Thank you.

The fact remains that the GOP with a 2 vote majority in every committee did not have enough votes to get any reform bill out of committee, and the POWERLESS Dems in committee had nothing to do with the GOP's failure to get a reform bill passed.

"The fact remains that the GOP with a 2 vote majority in every committee did not have enough votes to get any reform bill out of committee, and the POWERLESS Dems in committee had nothing to do with the GOP's failure to get a reform bill passed."


LOL

Bush talked about reform. He talked and he talked. And then he stopped reform. (read that as many times as necessary. Bush stopped reform). And then he stopped it again

Testimony from W’s Treasury Secretary John Snow to the REPUBLICAN CONGRESS concerning the 'regulation’ of the GSE’s 2003

“Mr. Frank: ...Are we in a crisis now with these entities?

Secretary Snow. No, that is a fair characterization, Congressman Frank, of our position. We are not putting this proposal before you because of some concern over some imminent danger to the financial system for housing; far from it.“


October 26, 2005

STATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION POLICY

The Administration strongly believes that the housing GSEs should be focused on their core housing mission, particularly with respect to low-income Americans and first-time homebuyers. Instead, provisions of H.R. 1461 that expand mortgage purchasing authority would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers.

George W. Bush: Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 1461 - Federal Housing Finance Reform Act of 2005

Yes, he said he was against it because it "would lessen the housing GSEs' commitment to low-income homebuyers"


June 17, 2004

(CNN/Money) - Home builders, realtors and others are preparing to fight a Bush administration plan that would require Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase financing of homes for low-income people, a home builder group said Thursday.

Home builders fight Bush's low-income housing - Jun. 17, 2004


Freddie Mac secretly paid a Republican consulting firm $2 million to kill legislation that would have regulated and trimmed the mortgage finance giant and its sister company, Fannie Mae



In the cross hairs of the campaign carried out by DCI of Washington were Republican senators and a regulatory overhaul bill sponsored by Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Neb. DCI's chief executive is Doug Goodyear, whom John McCain's campaign later hired to manage the GOP convention in September.



Freddie Mac's payments to DCI began shortly after the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee sent Hagel's bill to the then GOP-run Senate on July 28, 2005. All GOP members of the committee supported it; all Democrats opposed it.

In the midst of DCI's yearlong effort, Hagel and 25 other Republican senators pleaded unsuccessfully with Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., to allow a vote.


Unknown to the senators, DCI was undermining support for the bill in a campaign targeting 17 Republican senators in 13 states, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. The states and the senators targeted changed over time, but always stayed on the Republican side.

Freddie Mac Tried to Kill Republican Regulatory Bill in 2005 | Fox News


The critics have forgotten that the House passed a GSE reform bill in 2005 that could well have prevented the current crisis, says Mr Oxley (R), now vice-chairman of Nasdaq.”

“What did we get from the White House? We got a one-finger salute.”


Oxley (R) was Chairman of the House Financial Services committee and sponsor of the only reform bill to pass any chamber of the republican controlled congress


Republican Congress Talked About Financial Reform, But Did Nothing


Right-wingers Want To Erase How George Bush's "Homeowner Society" Helped Cause The Economic Collapse

http://www.usmessageboard.com/economy/362889-facts-on-dubya-s-great-recession.html

 

[Dad2three]

<cough>

"In June 2005, the U.S. Senate finally voted to issue a formal “apology for lynching.” This represented the first time in U.S. history that Congress had acknowledged, in a formal resolution, the historic crimes committed against people of African descent in the United States.



However, when the resolution came to the floor of the Senate for a final voice vote, only 85 U.S. Senators had co-signed as sponsors. Fifteen senators, all Republicans, had not. After the actual vote, seven Republican senators agreed to sign a large copy of the Senate’s “anti-lynching resolution,” for the purposes of public display. Eight Republicans steadfastly refused to endorse an apology for lynching: Trent Lott (R-Mississippi), Thad Cochran (R-Mississippi), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Lamar Alexander (R-Tennessee), Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming), Judd Gregg (R-New Hampshire), John Sununu (R-New Hampshire), and Craig Thomas (R-Wyoming).

In another unprecedented moment, the United States House apologized for both slavery and Jim Crow on July 29, 2008. In doing so, they acknowledged that slavery and Jim Crow continued to impact the African American community, long after the systems of oppression were formally abolished."

1. Where is the link?
Are you trying to pretend that it was Republicans who were opposed to civil rights legislation?

You couldn't be that stupid....


2. "More than 200 anti —lynching bills were introduced in congress in the first part of the century and the House of Representatives passed anti-lynching bills three times. However, the legislation was repeatedly blocked by Senators from the South and almost 5,000 people -— mostly African-Americans — were lynched between 1882 and 1968."
Senate Apologizes For Not Enacting Anti-Lynching Legislation, A Look at Journalist and Anti-Lynching Crusader Ida B. Wells | Democracy Now!


3. Language is important, so in any discussion of who the segregationists were, liberals switch the word “Democrats” to “southerners.” Remember, the Civil Rights Act of 1957 was supported by all the Republicans in the Senate, but only 29 of 47 Democrats…and a number of the ‘segregationist’ Democrats were northern Dems (Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming). Not southerners: Democrats.

a. There were plenty of southern integrationists. They were Republicans.
Coulter, "Mugged"


4. Here’s what we’re up against: the Washington Post lies outright, describing Senator William Fulbright as “a progressive on racial issues.” Fulbright was a full-bore segregationist, voting against the 1957, 1960, 1964, and 1965 civil rights bills.
Ibid.


5. "On June 13, 2005, in a resolution sponsored by senators Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and George Allen of Virginia, together with 78 others, the US Senate formally apologized for its failure to enact this and other anti-lynching bills "when action was most needed."[3] From 1882-1968, "...nearly 200 anti-lynching bills were introduced in Congress, and three passed the House. Seven presidents between 1890 and 1952 petitioned Congress to pass a federal law."[3] None was approved by the Senate because of the powerful opposition of the Southern Democratic voting bloc"
Senate Apologizes for Not Passing Anti-Lynching Laws | Fox News


6. "Three years after Brown, President Eisenhower won passage of his landmark Civil Rights Act of 1957. Republican Senator Everett Dirksen authored and introduced the 1960 Civil Rights Act, and saw it through to passage. Republicans supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act overwhelmingly, and by much higher percentages in both House and Senate than the Democrats. Indeed, the 1964 Civil Rights Act became law only after overcoming a Democrat filibuster."
Everything I Know Is Wrong: History of the Republican Party

Are you trying to pretend that it was Republicans who were opposed to civil rights legislation?


NOPE IT WAS SOUTHERNERS, TODAY'S GOP BASE!

CONSERVATIVES were against it!

Conservatives Try to Rewrite Civil Rights History (Again)

You can see as much in his follow-up, where he hammers on Democratic opposition to the Civil Rights Act, ignoring its wide Democratic support in both chambers of Congress—46 of 67 Democrats voted for it in the Senate (69 percent) and 153 of 244 Democrats voted for it in the House (63 percent). The percentages were larger among Republicans, which owes itself to the fact that the chief divide on civil rights was sectional. Southern and border state state lawmakers voted against the law, Northern and Midwestern ones voted for it. And when Williamson dismisses the partisan shift of the South, he ignores the presidential vote, opting instead for congressional totals.

White Southerners jumped ship from Democratic presidential candidates in the 1960s, and this was followed by a similar shift on the congressional level, and eventually, the state legislative level.


Conservatives Try to Rewrite Civil Rights History (Again)