Stand up and take responsibility!!!

[JNR]

"...illegal immigrants receiving illegal mortgages..."??? Bubba, you gotta back that up or please don't even mention it.

didn't bubba already do that?

[Bubba136]

"...illegal immigrants receiveing illegal mortgages..."??? Bubba, you gotta back that up or please don't even mention it.

Regarding the alleged illegal alien who used a stolen SS# to rack up $800K in debt. Don't you think the mortgage originator(s) might possible be slightly culpable for not properly checking it out? How could an illegal show enough income/assets to qualify for such a loan?

Victor, the only thing I did is cite a report that made the allegations. I am not making them. Besides, I included a caveat that I haven't been able to locate the specific HUD report that is cited by the radio station. Therefore, I've no way of knowing for sure that the report is true. So, I am not able to independently verify that either the report, or any of the information in it, is true.

However, I will continue to attempt to find the HUD report. Likewise, if you should find it, perhaps you can either verify, or not, the information cited is really in the report.

[t-strap lover]

Bubba,

Yes, the Democrats have a hand in our current crisis, but don't forget that Dubya (Pres George Bush) and McCain promoted policies of relaxed regulation that definitely fueled this crisis.

Also, wasn't McCain one of the Keating five. Most of whom were indicted and found guilty of crimes related to the collapse of many banks. While he wasn't charged, he was formally scolded by congress for exercising "bad judgement". And now he's running for president. Mr. Bad Judgement???

See the link below for more info...

http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo

you need to get your facts straight before putting the blame on a certain party or person.

[t-strap lover]

"Since 2002, there has been little linking Obama and Ayers.[41] Obama says he has not visited Ayers during the presidential campaign. The senator said in September 2008 that he hadn't "seen him in a year-and-a-half."[42] In February 2008, Obama spokesman Bill Burton released a statement from the senator about the relationship between the two: "Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous."[40] CNN's review of project records found nothing to suggest anything inappropriate in the non-profit projects in which the two men were involved.[43] Internal reviews by The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time magazine, The Chicago Sun-Times, The New Yorker and The New Republic "have said that their reporting doesn't support the idea that Obama and Ayers had a close relationship."[44]"

Your judged by the company you keep, and if you think Obama is the answer to this countries problems then you have one.

[Bubba136]

"Since 2002, there has been little linking Obama and Ayers.[41] Obama says he has not visited Ayers during the presidential campaign. The senator said in September 2008 that he hadn't "seen him in a year-and-a-half."[42] In February 2008, Obama spokesman Bill Burton released a statement from the senator about the relationship between the two: "Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous."[40] CNN's review of project records found nothing to suggest anything inappropriate in the non-profit projects in which the two men were involved.[43] Internal reviews by The New York Times, The Washington Post, Time magazine, The Chicago Sun-Times, The New Yorker and The New Republic "have said that their reporting doesn't support the idea that Obama and Ayers had a close relationship."[44]"

Trolldeg:

1st off, there is a journalistic tradition, dating way, way back that newspapers report factual news (pure news without the interjection of reporter's opinion and personal feelings) in the "news" section of the paper and reserve political and personal opinions for the "Editorial" page.

Starting about 1988, journalistic license shifted and many reporters began letting their personal feelings and opinions creep into their factual reporting of the "news." That old tradition is totally dead. Today, you have to figure out what political views of the reporter and the news paper are before you evaluate what you are reading.

The news papers, magazines and TV networks you cite all support (if they haven't flat out endorsed, they are certainly in the tank for) Obama for President, liberal and leftest ideals and Democrat candidates. Therefore, it is only logical that all of the media entities you cite spin the Ayers situation to Obama's advantage. It is wise to take every bit of their reporting with a grain of salt because every word written and published in these newspapers and magazines, and every word spoken on these TV networks directly supports Obama's election.

Regardless of that, it isn't the fact that Ayres and his wife are known domestic terrorist and activitists, engaging in anti-American activities. Everyone knows of his past and of his comments about the success of the 9/11 terrorist. What really concerns a huge number of people is the advocating of the socialist revolutionary agenda that Ayers and Obama want to impose on our nation's public schools.

NBC news calls Ayres a "school reformer." Actually, that's true. He is. Obama and Ayers worked together in the 1990s, administrating a school "reform" project called the "Chicago Annenberg Challenge" which distributed $50 million amongst Chicago area schools with the purpose of implementing programs teaching students in grades K through 12 on "being aware of the social and moral universe we inhabit, capable of hope and struggle, outrage and action, for social justice and liberation." Additionally, teachers engaged in these programs are encouraged to teach students that "America is a racist, militarist country and that the capitalist system is inherently unfair and oppressive."

Obama was given the Annenberg board chirmanship by Ayers just a few months before his first run for office. Obama ran the fiscal arm that distributed grants to schools and raised matching funds.

Furthermore, in 2006, less than two years ago, Ayers was invited to attend "the World Education Forum in Carcaras, Venezuela by President Hugo Chavez -- Where Ayers is quoted as saying: "We share your (President Chaves's) beliefs that education is the motor-force of revolution. I look forward to seeing how...all of you continue to overcome the failures of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane."

You wonder why we believe this association is important? It is because of that form of socialist revolution that Ayers and Obama have worked to bring to America.

Furthermore, it is being reported that this association between Ayres and his wife and Obama and his wife, regardless of how much Obama says otherwise, is ongoing to this day.

Trolldeg, I don't really believe you'll to accept any of this because you are one of these people that knows so much that just isn't true and will never swerve from your beliefs. The saving grace for us is that you, and others like you, aren't allowed to vote in our elections. And, unless you've been registered to vote in Ohio by "ACORN" and have already contributed to Obama's campaign via the Internet, you won't be voting.

[heelma]

Thanks for the nice summary, Bubba. I only hear piece by piece, but never such a nice summary. It's very clear that there have been ties between Obama and Ayers.

SO?

I don't care what Ayers does, did years ago and does now. We won't elect him. I want to see what Obama does, not what people he ever had contact with.

Ever heard of former German foreign minister Joschka Fischer? In Germany, there was a domestic terrorist organization in the 1970s and 1980s, called "Red Army Fraction" (RAF). You can be certain that Fischer had contact with those people during his time in Frankfurt. He didn't participate in any terroristic activities, but he actively participated in violent demonstrations, and there are at least rumors that he might have knocked down a policeman. All of this happened in the 1970s. He was foreign minister from 1998 through 2005, and he did his job very well, was actually for a long time Germany's most popular politician.

SO ... let there be ties between Ayres and Obama - what matters is what Obama will actually do after he is elected. This entire topic should not be part of the campaign.

BUT - as you guys like to also draw ties between Obama and Saul Alinsky and his book "Rules for Radicals", out of which his wife Michele Obama apparently cited during her convention speech ("The world as it is and the world as is should be"). What about Alinsky's "rule of power tactics", no 9: "The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself."

That's exactly what this whole Obama/Ayers thing is about: drawing a really scary picture of Obama, as if he as president would do Weather Underground-type terrorist attacks once he is in office.

[Bubba136]

heelma:I don't care what Ayers does, did years ago and does now. We won't elect him. I want to see what Obama does, not what people he ever had contact with.[\quote]

Heelma!

I don't really care if you support Obama or not. No one would be able to change your mind. However, if you want this country to take on the philosophy that he supports, then go for it. However, I am a person that believes he's really not the person to lead this nation.

End of story.

[vector]

Trolldeg:

Starting about 1988, journalistic license shifted and many reporters began letting their personal feelings and opinions creep into their factual reporting of the "news." That old tradition is totally dead. Today, you have to figure out what political views of the reporter and the news paper are before you evaluate what you are reading.

The news papers, magazines and TV networks you cite all support (if they haven't flat out endorsed, they are certainly in the tank for) Obama for President, liberal and leftest ideals and Democrat candidates. Therefore, it is only logical that all of the media entities you cite spin the Ayers situation to Obama's advantage. It is wise to take every bit of their reporting with a grain of salt because every word written and published in these newspapers and magazines, and every word spoken on these TV networks directly supports Obama's election.......

......Trolldeg, I don't really believe you'll to accept any of this because you are one of these people that knows so much that just isn't true and will never swerve from your beliefs. The saving grace for us is that you, and others like you, aren't allowed to vote in our elections. And, unless you've been registered to vote in Ohio by "ACORN" and have already contributed to Obama's campaign via the Internet, you won't be voting.

Bubba, assuming what you say is true about the media, what makes your sources any less biased or any more true?

Lastly, I believe the first sentence of the last paragraph definitely applies to you.

"I wish I could see Russia from my house"

[Guy N. Heels]

Thanks for the history lesson, GNH. (Were you at the first meeting? No, not really - I just look old enough to have been at the first meeting.

No doubt there are a lot of crooks out there just looking for ways to make an easy buck. ...I believe there is a whole hell of a lot more to this fiasco than has surfaced thus far, GNH, and your information just adds to the growing pile. Who knows how far back into history the origin of these financial problems go...

The problem began years ago when banks were forced to give mortgages without confirming social security numbers or borrower identification. As a result, illegal immigrants were able to obtain home mortgages which they could not afford.

Lax immigration laws have also helped make this crime easy to perpetrate. In 1965 a Democrat Controlled Congress under President Lyndon Johnson passed the concept of "chain" immigration into law. A later commission named the Hesburgh Commission convened during Ronald Reagan's first term, found that this concept statistically allowed each single immigrant to bring into this country 84 of his family members. Of course, all these people have to live somewhere making such fraudulent mortgages quite attractive.

What illegal struggling to survive is going to pass up a free house that he can move into without having to present any identification, proof of employment, financial history or even a down payment?"

There was a paper that was developed by a British newspaper man named Marsden. It's been a long time, so I can't clearly remember if he specifically mentioned the financial summit conducted by the Rothschilds in the middle of the 19th century or not. Nevertheless, it was in that summit that the Rothschilds specifically outlined their scheme to control the world through finances. Their simple plan was to get the world "hooked on interest money" and then start controlling both individuals as well as nations through their usery money plan. The one major flaw in their plan is that it requires an ever expanding borrower base without ever having the banking assets recalled by investors. Except for the fact that it is impossible to create or maintain an ever expanding pool of debtors - their scheme would work. But if the supply of borrowers ever dries-up or if the basic assets of the banks are ever recalled - then failure is inevitable. When the housing loans were offered to people who lacked the ability to repay - that had the same effect of "drying-up the borrower base". Now there's much more to it, but that's the story in a nutshell.

[Bubba136]

Bubba, assuming what you say is true about the media, what makes your sources any less biased or any more true?

Lastly, I believe the first sentence of the last paragraph definitely applies to you.

"I wish I could see Russia from my house"

Victor, if you take the time, you can do your own research. Some of them are included in Obama's own writings. Others are confirmed through official government (not ours) records and news reports filed from the site of events.

Look Victor, I don't care what you believe. It's your vote and you can cast it anyway you want to. However, I don't want my country to become a secular or socialist nation. And, that's the direction it will take if Liberal Democrats win this election. I currently have a job (self-employed), earn a good living and pay a hell of a lot of what I earn in taxes -- even under the Bush tax structure. My ambition is to pay a lot more in taxes...but from making more money not from having some socialist politician thieving it from my pocket. It's that simple.

[shrimper]

Do any of you who want to make an issue of Obama/Ayers because of associations also want to talk about Palin/Alaska Independence Party? The associations of the latter are much more current and also much more threatening to the Republic.

[Bubba136]

Do any of you who want to make an issue of Obama/Ayers because of associations also want to talk about Palin/Alaska Independence Party?

The associations of the latter are much more current and also much more threatening to the Republic.

Shrimper, vote your conscience. Besides, Palin has one explanation for that incident but Obama has three or four different stories concerning his association with Ayers....and, Rev. Wright, Father Flagger, Calypso Louie Farahkan, et al. It doesn't matter how you try to spin it, people at the center of his "sphere of influence" are all anti-American and advocate rebellion, revolution and sedition.

[Trolldeg]

Calling Obama a socialist really says all about how warped your political views are.

What then would you call Ralph Nader? Communist? Satan!?

The Democratic party is a right wing party with right wing views, they just happen to be a bit less right wing than the Republicans.

[JNR]

Calling Obama a socialist really says all about how warped your political views are.

What then would you call Ralph Nader? Communist? Satan!?

The Democratic party is a right wing party with right wing views, they just happen to be a bit less right wing than the Republicans.

Just curious, Trolldeg - but isn't Sweden a socialist state?

[Trolldeg]

Just curious, Trolldeg - but isn't Sweden a socialist state?

Not by any real definition of the word.

[heelma]

"isn't Sweden a socialist state?"

Not by any real definition of the word.

"Socialism", according to conservatives in the US, is when the government redistributes large amounts of money from the wealthier to the poorer, through taxes. Also, when the government "heavily" interferes with individual liberty and freedom, where enforcing participation in government-driven health insurance is already enough to call this interference with individual liberty. List to be extended (Bubba?).

[BobHH]

Okay, let's work this out logically without a lot of emotion. If you vote for Obama --------------------- You get this: (See next message)

[BobHH]

But if you vote for McCain ------------------ You get this: Any questions?

[Bubba136]

:clap:Plus the old guy's wife buys the beer!

[roniheels]

But if you vote for McCain ------------------ You get this:

Any questions?

Is that his wife?????

[vector]

No, That's a photo shopped pic of Palin's head on another (very sexy) body.

[Trolldeg]

"Socialism", according to conservatives in the US,

well, I thought we already had established that conservatives in the US have a very thin grasp of reality when it comes to political definitions?

[Guy N. Heels]

Just curious, Trolldeg - but isn't Sweden a socialist state?

For anyone who truly wants the proper definition of socialism or a socialist, there was a man named Hayek who wrote a book titled "The Road to Serfdom". In my opinion, this should be required reading for anyone who ever has a chance to vote for a leader, or for anyone who ever handles any form of money.

[BobHH]

The candidate photos and message I received in an email from my brother.

[t-strap lover]

I think if anybody on the left wants to spew their hate for others then please go to another site and blog. This site is about Highheels.

[yozz]

I think if anybody on the left wants to spew their hate for others then please go to another site and blog. This site is about Highheels.

Why does it always become so emotional when it is about American politics, never when

it is about European politics?

I haven't seen anybody spew hate.

Please cool down, read carefully and wait a few hours with answering if there is the

slightest possibility that you didn't understand something. Or missed the tongue in cheek.

We want to have a discussion in which people with different opinions make contact

with each other. Not get into a fight.

Y.

[heelma]

I think if anybody on the left wants to spew their hate for others then please go to another site and blog. This site is about Highheels.

Anybody particular in mind? I can't see any.

Also, wasn't it a conservative who started this?

Why is it always the folks who propose "free speech" who are the first ones to shut up others? In talk radio, free speech ends when the talk show host doesn't agree with the caller's points of view.

Heelma!

I don't really care if you support Obama or not. No one would be able to change your mind. However, if you want this country to take on the philosophy that he supports, then go for it. However, I am a person that believes he's really not the person to lead this nation.

End of story.

Even though you think I support Obama no matter what, I have been seriously considering McCain for a long time. One reason was that the conservatives don't really like him, as he has his own mind and was more in the center than anybody else in the past. However, not only that has changed during election season, but he also moved away from what he calls being a "maverick" more and more.

[vector]

I think if anybody on the left wants to spew their hate for others then please go to another site and blog. This site is about Highheels.

Regarding the site, that's true, but this particular page is for anything we want to discuss..." HHPlace Cafe! - General chit chat Have you got something to say, a point to make, a cross to bear, a plea for help. Change the world here (Posting guidlines appply)"

[Guy N. Heels]

well, I thought we already had established that conservatives in the US have a very thin grasp of reality when it comes to political definitions?

Conservatives? Liberals? Believe it or not, the true definition of a liberal is exactly what most conservatives profess today. In the process of time all things change - including the words we use.

[Guy N. Heels]

..

The last word: most members here believe that when they make a comment to which no one responds, it is an indication that the point made is conceded. While not desiring to contest your arguments in this forum, I wouldn't want our other members to think that your comment was, in fact, the last word and that what you pointed out is in anyway truthful...

(Large portions deleted to conserve space)

A very wise man one said:"A person belongs to a political party. Therefore they believe things or rationally bend their logic to be consistant to their beliefs, no matter how illogical they may be or sound."...

...That being said, however, I don't really want to debate the political campaign here, I just want to register my disgust with all of those responsible for the current economic crisis and the harm it has done, and will ultimately do, to all of us.

Not only are your points well taken, but also I would like to point to the fact that many of us voters are involved with a particular party in name only. In my state, only voters who are actually registered as a particular party voter can vote in the primary elections. Now in some ways, the primaries are even more crucial than the general elections - after all, that's where we decide whose names appear on the ballot. Therefore my name appears on the rolls as a "red" voter. But I do not participate in party politics, I don't contribute to their causes, and I don't even attend their rallies and functions.

Now I would gladly go if they invited me to a very nice dinner where they paid for my meal and/or asked me to speak. But everyone knows that's not how party politics works. If you are ever invited to a dinner, they also expect you to bring along your bankbook (the one with the BIG figures in it) and you get to pay for the pain of being there. So to even classify a person who is registered with a political party as being "one of them" is a total misrepresentation. I'm sure that there are many other voters like me who are nominal party affiliates and really would never be found at any of the party functions. So I say that we need to be a little less dogmatic and judgemental of folks around here.