Frank...really? - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Botnst · #31 11-23-2011, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MTI

Botnst . . . remember those simple 10 laws that were carried down from a mountain . . . our lives and social interactions have advanced quite a bit from those days, such that even the subsequent scribes and "witnesses" have taken considerable liberty with the actual text, creating an entirely new testament . . . simplicity doesn't stand a chance.

It has a chance if we all work from the same first principles. For example: Reasonable people can disagree. If we agree on that principle then ad hominem takes a hike and compromise is possible. A democracy without compromise is a democracy on the edge of failure, IMO. And I would submit to you taht it doesn't matter which side we may find ourselves on. The net result is failure of liberal democracy.

American politics is become increasingly similar to the Cold War, in wich the sides struggle for supremacy at every juncture, never ceding ground for fear of losing the war. But the difference (thus far) is that the game doesn't end. There is another election and the rules shift. Unless both sides that intransigent cold war is better than compromise. That is where we are. In my opinion, that is why most parties must die an undignified wholly partisan, ignoble popular death. I see nobody of stature in either party willing to risk the the ire of their fellow party members to cross the barrier. Cowards.

MS Fowler · #32 11-23-2011, 07:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyRoger

As fortunate as we are to have Glenn Beck telling you what to think about Barney Frank and his role in this crisis.

Did I parrot Glenn Beck? I had no idea!

MS Fowler · #33 11-23-2011, 07:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honus

Unless you know something I don't, the other reason he was safe is that he told the truth as he believed it to be.

He may in a position completely analogous to GWB and the Weapons of mass destruction.

Both might have completely believed what they said at the time. Also both may have been partially, or more completely motivated and biased toward believing because it agreed with their larger world view.

So, are they both equally lying, or both equally excused? Or is the one you a agree with telling the truth, and the other is a lying scum bag?

jplinville · #34 11-23-2011, 08:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JollyRoger

Frank is gay, therefore he qualifies as a ready scapegoat, and attacks on him will be embraced by the RWNJ community. The real truth is that at that time in our political history, Frank was an ally of George Bush of all people, in the initiative Bush called "The Ownership Society", which was essentially Bush helping the banks sell their $hitty mortgage products that blew up in all our faces. Frank embraced this idea honestly, thinking it was a way to improve the lives of the poor, so I don't see how anyone but some political fanatic could claim he was being "dishonest". It was actually one of the big bi-partisan areas of cooperation between right and left, facilitated by the banking lobbies, back before the economy collapsed due the fact these same banking lobbies bought off the regulators to look the other way while they sold adjustable rate frauds to suckers knowing full well that if the loans adjusted upwards these suckers couldn't pay, all thanks to Bush's appointment of Christopher Cox, one of the greatest f***ing idiots to ever hold office in the US, to head the SEC. If you read this Bush White House document:

Fact Sheet: America's Ownership Society: Expanding Opportunities

you will see about half way down the initiative that was being promoted jointly by Frank and Bush in the areas of affordable housing. It was a big policy push, and Fannie and Freddie, due to overheated housing prices at the time, were indeed solvent in 2003, and only those who have little real information of those times would call it a "lie". Their insolvency came later when housing prices collapsed, and Fannie and Freddie got stuck with the bill, something the crooked bastard bankers planned on so that we would all get stuck with the bill. Instead of just being duped by the Right Wing Talk Show Propaganda meme "Barney Frank did it!", jpinville needs to face up to the fact that all of this due to the crooked banks who never did pay for what they did to us taxpayers, while Occupy protesters go to jail for protesting them, none of the bankers ever did, something we'll never hear the right wingers complain about as they pillory Frank, which is what the banking monopolies want people like jpinville to think so they won't see the real truth for what it is, something right out of the book "1984". Get a scapegoat. Get the un-informed all riled up about him. Lies become truth.

I doubt whether either Bush or Frank realized they were being used by the banking crooks in the scheme to sell pumped up mortgages so they could bundle them into crooked derivative and credit default swap schemes, and then insure them thru AIG, Fannie, and Freddie, and then watch us taxpayers pay their losses. Low information people like jpinville just think screaming "Fannie and Freddie and Frank!" somehow actually means anything, but the real truth is that Fannie and Freddie were as duped and defrauded as the rest of us were. Some of us have stayed duped. You want to see the real Fannie and Freddie crook, he's right here:

Newt: The ultimate Beltway swindler - Newt Gingrich - Salon.com

Salon?? Dismissed

Honus · #35 11-23-2011, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

...So, are they both equally lying, or both equally excused? Or is the one you a agree with telling the truth, and the other is a lying scum bag?

I have no idea what we're talking about here. There seems to be this implication that there is reason to think that Frank lied. I don't even know where that comes from. There is mountains of evidence that Bush and his people told specific lies, in addition to making several serious mistakes. You don't have to agree with that conclusion, but I think you have to admit that there is some evidence to support it. There is no such evidence against Frank, is there? What are we talking about?

Botnst · #36 11-24-2011, 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honus

I have no idea what we're talking about here....

Oh.

jplinville · #37 11-24-2011, 05:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honus

I have no idea what we're talking about here. There seems to be this implication that there is reason to think that Frank lied. I don't even know where that comes from. There is mountains of evidence that Bush and his people told specific lies, in addition to making several serious mistakes. You don't have to agree with that conclusion, but I think you have to admit that there is some evidence to support it. There is no such evidence against Frank, is there? What are we talking about?

So a little reading on the topic, then come back and tell us Barney didn't lie...

t walgamuth · #38 11-24-2011, 06:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jplinville

So a little reading on the topic, then come back and tell us Barney didn't lie...

This is not an answer. If you think he lied you should be able to say about what specifically in a heartbeat.

Just calling someone a liar does not cut it.

Honus · #39 11-24-2011, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jplinville

So a little reading on the topic, then come back and tell us Barney didn't lie...

OK, I'm back. I see no evidence that Barney lied.

Now, maybe one of you guys can offer us something that will shed some light on what the hell you're talking about.

MS Fowler · #40 11-24-2011, 09:38 AM

Depends on what you cal "evidence".
At the very least Frank was wrong when he said that Fanny and Freddie were secure and represented no danger.

see this article for a detailed presentation:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Democratic%20Coverup%20for%20Fannie%20and%20Freddie.html

Honus · #41 11-24-2011, 09:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Depends on what you cal "evidence".
At the very least Frank was wrong when he said that Fanny and Freddie were secure and represented no danger.

I think even he would agree with that. Still no evidence of a lie, though.

Quote:

see this article for a detailed presentation:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/Democratic%20Coverup%20for%20Fannie%20and%20Freddie.html

Thank you for posting that. No time to read it right now. I did, however, read the first sentence of the article:

Quote:

If anyone wants to find the people responsible for the current financial meltdown, they need to look no farther than the Democrats -- Maxine Waters, Barney Frank and their Fannie Mae pal Franklin Raines -- to indentify the culprits.

What a complete, utter load of crap. Even if Waters, Frank, and Raines were lying all along, Fannie Mae is not "responsible for the current financial meltdown." That's just complete fantasy.

MS Fowler · #42 11-24-2011, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Honus

I think even he would agree with that. Still no evidence of a lie, though.Thank you for posting that. No time to read it right now. I did, however, read the first sentence of the article:What a complete, utter load of crap. Even if Waters, Frank, and Raines were lying all along, Fannie Mae is not "responsible for the current financial meltdown." That's just complete fantasy.

And that gets to the crux of it. Its either "the truth", or "complete fantasy". It is sad that partisan politics prevents us from even agreeing as to what facts are facts, and which are "spin". I am acknowledging that the same bias exists on both sides--it is not strictly a repub failing, or a dem failing. Everyone is too afraid to look at the plain facts--everything must be spun to suit an agenda. Sorry, I blame the media for that, ever since the inception of "Advocacy Journalism" no one can have any confidence that what is presented is ever "The TRUTH, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."
I am as guilty as anyone---I reject anything from salon.com, or huffington post--much like others reject anything from Drudge or other sources.

The insidious part is that everyone uses just enough of "the TRUTH" as they need to, but then the rest is spun to "prove" a POV. There is more truth to the old adage "Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear" than in almost any "news" source today.

jplinville · #43 11-24-2011, 11:21 AM

I'm sure that members of both sides were wrong...no doubt. The story I originally posted was about Barney, who I don't trust.

Here's some documents on the Freddy and Fannie situation.

New Documents Uncovered by Judicial Watch Show Congress Ignored Corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for Years | Judicial Watch