$1,946.25 at a BDSM strip club

[bronzeage]

I refuse to engage our resident mouth foamer and his incessant bullshit.

But what I want to know...
What was that $.25 for?

Old joke:

A man has been out of work for so long the family is about to lose their house (this is a very old joke). The wife decides that since the only skill she has is giving blow jobs, she will become a prostitute. They are desperate, so the husband agrees. She comes back in the morning with $40.25. He asks, "Where did you get the $.25?

"From all of them," she answers.

 

[Boxlicker101]

You know Zeb, I never looked at it that way, but you do have a point. It was Obama's fault that the Bush administration decided not to enforce the financial regs that were on the books - the non-enforcement of which enabled Wall Street to crash the economy. And it was Obama's fault that 3 months before he took office, the Bush administration decided to run the deficit up even more by bailing out Wall Street. And when Obama took office and continued bailing out Bush's crashed economy in a frantic last-ditch effort to keep America functioning - rather than letting it collapse into a failed state - it's his fault that it cost taxpayer money to do so. He should have done it out of his own pocket - you know, in the interest of personal responsibility.

Thank you for you insight, Zeb. I know have a much clearer picture of who the scumbags are in the continuing drama that is American politics.

I have repeated this many times, but you and others seem to ignore the fact that the Dems had been the majority in Congress since Jan. 2007, almost a year before the onset of the current recession. The Dems, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd in particular, controlled the committees responsible for enforcing the laws you mention, but they failed to do so. Both Dems and Reps voted for the bailout you mention.

 

[DeeZire]

I have repeated this many times, but you and others seem to ignore the fact that the Dems had been the majority in Congress since Jan. 2007, almost a year before the onset of the current recession. The Dems, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd in particular, controlled the committees responsible for enforcing the laws you mention, but they failed to do so. Both Dems and Reps voted for the bailout you mention.

And I've told you over and over again that the regulators were not being managed by Congress, they were being managed by the Bush Administration. Plus, in 2005 the Bush administration blocked an attempt by the individual states to regulate predatory lending. As you may recall, predatory lending set the stage for the crash. If there had been no predatory lending, there would have been no huge housing bubble, and no credit default swaps on toxic assets that were made up of bad loans - the very same credit default swaps that were going to bankrupt AIG and cause the entire financial system to collapse. (As is customary with conservatives, they blame a government program - the Community Reinvestment Act - for the predatory lending, even though it was the mortgage brokers, not the government, that made the bad loans. It is estimated that over 80% of the foreclosures that precipitated the Bush Crash were illegal, in that the mortgage brokers did not follow the letter of the law when scamming their customers.)

But don't worry Box, it's complicated. It's much easier to blame the Dems for the failure of the market than to actually learn what happened, so we'll let you slide on this. (Actually, we have no choice but to let you slide, since no matter what the facts say, you'll find a reason to question the source and stick with what you prefer to believe.)

 

[IrezumiKiss]

And I've told you over and over again that the regulators were not being managed by Congress, they were being managed by the Bush Administration. Plus, in 2005 the Bush administration blocked an attempt by the individual states to regulate predatory lending. As you may recall, predatory lending set the stage for the crash. If there had been no predatory lending, there would have been no huge housing bubble, and no credit default swaps on toxic assets that were made up of bad loans - the very same credit default swaps that were going to bankrupt AIG and cause the entire financial system to collapse. (As is customary with conservatives, they blame a government program - the Community Reinvestment Act - for the predatory lending, even though it was the mortgage brokers, not the government, that made the bad loans. It is estimated that over 80% of the foreclosures that precipitated the Bush Crash were illegal, in that the mortgage brokers did not follow the letter of the law when scamming their customers.)

Very concise and thorough explanation of the happenings during those crazy years. When I look back at them, all I can remember is me trying to keep my head above water in an ever-increasing douchebag-enabling culture.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

And I've told you over and over again that the regulators were not being managed by Congress, they were being managed by the Bush Administration. Plus, in 2005 the Bush administration blocked an attempt by the individual states to regulate predatory lending. As you may recall, predatory lending set the stage for the crash. If there had been no predatory lending, there would have been no huge housing bubble, and no credit default swaps on toxic assets that were made up of bad loans - the very same credit default swaps that were going to bankrupt AIG and cause the entire financial system to collapse. (As is customary with conservatives, they blame a government program - the Community Reinvestment Act - for the predatory lending, even though it was the mortgage brokers, not the government, that made the bad loans. It is estimated that over 80% of the foreclosures that precipitated the Bush Crash were illegal, in that the mortgage brokers did not follow the letter of the law when scamming their customers.)

Which is to say that there was plenty of blame for all involved. Congress should have been engaged in the oversight but they were too busy preening and sound-biting to do so. The previous administration, in thrall to the ideological daydreams of the neo-cons, actually believed in the miracles of the Free Market so they let everything slide. The Clinton Administration encouraged the kind of dim loan policy through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that allowed the mortgage brokers to build up the scams that built and then knocked down the house of cards. (Call this the law of unexpected results!) The Regulators were the lapdogs of the industry they were supposed to watchdogs for and the banks were just plain stupid and self-deluded. Have I left anyone out? Oh yes, anyone who bought a house bigger than they could afford was an ass so they get kicked in this melee, too.

 

[Boxlicker101]

And I've told you over and over again that the regulators were not being managed by Congress, they were being managed by the Bush Administration. Plus, in 2005 the Bush administration blocked an attempt by the individual states to regulate predatory lending. As you may recall, predatory lending set the stage for the crash. If there had been no predatory lending, there would have been no huge housing bubble, and no credit default swaps on toxic assets that were made up of bad loans - the very same credit default swaps that were going to bankrupt AIG and cause the entire financial system to collapse. (As is customary with conservatives, they blame a government program - the Community Reinvestment Act - for the predatory lending, even though it was the mortgage brokers, not the government, that made the bad loans. It is estimated that over 80% of the foreclosures that precipitated the Bush Crash were illegal, in that the mortgage brokers did not follow the letter of the law when scamming their customers.)

But don't worry Box, it's complicated. It's much easier to blame the Dems for the failure of the market than to actually learn what happened, so we'll let you slide on this. (Actually, we have no choice but to let you slide, since no matter what the facts say, you'll find a reason to question the source and stick with what you prefer to believe.)

It's quite gratifying that you agree with what I said about the Dems in Congress shirking their responsibility in 2007 and even in 2008.

As I have also said many times, the debacle had its roots in 1977 when the Dems in Congressed passed this law that required banks to lend to home buyers in rundown neighborhoods: http://www.answers.com/topic/community-reinvestment-act-of-1977

This particular site portrays it as a good thing, and there were some positives, but it basically required lenders to make risky loans.

Predatory lending was certainly part of the problem too, but most such lenders would have kept the loans, so they could foreclose when the homeowners defaulted. That's the whole reason for predatory lending, so those loans would have rarely been part of the national problem. They would have been a problem to the victims, but not to anybody else.

 

[Dragonlipz]

So....two wrongs make a right? Is that your argument?

Funny about you Zeb, but that seems to be your only lame response when things like this happen. "They did it too!--Kinda!" As if just because the other side "did it also" (kinda) that absolves your side from taking any responsibility for doing something shameful, stupid, hypocritical, etc. Hint: someone else's wrong doings don't excuse yours.

It's also an odd defense for someone who otherwise argues and insists on people taking personal responsibility for their actions.

Don't confuse Mustapha Zebraheim with facts and otherwise factual comments: not his style....He's watching Beck and Hannity for a cue and a clue......

 

[DeeZire]

It's quite gratifying that you agree with what I said about the Dems in Congress shirking their responsibility in 2007 and even in 2008..

Where did I say that Box? I did say that we'd let you slide on your interpretation of the events, since you are incapable of accepting facts that don't fit into your worldview.

Here is part of an analysis that you will surely discount, since it comes from those commie liberals over at PBS. They don't blame the Community Reinvestment Act for the crash, they see Alan Greenspan and his anti-regulation ideology as the culprit, as do most reputable economists who aren't paid by Fox News to rewrite history.

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/412/housing-recession.html

Of course Greenspan not only deserves blame for fostering the housing bubble, he was also seriously negligent in his regulatory responsibilities at the Fed. The abusive mortgage practices that are now being reported so prominently were widely known years earlier. When millions of bad loans are being issued all over the country, it is not being done in secret. People did try to get the Fed to tighten up its regulations on bank lending practices, including Greenspan's fellow Fed governor Ned Gramlich. Greenspan ignored these urgings, and insisted on allowing the banks to continue their predatory lending without any check. This helped to sustain and the bubble and snare millions in loans that they could not pay.

Even if Greenspan is public enemy number 1 in the housing bubble story, he did have many accomplices. There are literally dozens of federal and state regulatory authorities that could have tried to crack down on the predatory lending practices under their jurisdiction. In fairness, several state regulators did try to crack down, but they were preempted in several cases by federal law. Still, as a group, one could have hoped for a more vigorous response to outrageous lending practices that were being carried through on a massive scale and hitting the most disadvantaged segments of society.

Along the same lines, one should add to the ranks of villains a long list of political leaders from President George W. Bush on down to neighborhood community leaders. Instead of cracking down on the predatory lending practices, these people celebrated the growth in homeownership, somehow failing to note that a very high percentage of the new homeowners would soon face foreclosure. The extent to which this celebration was due to a blind commitment to the ideology of homeownership or outright corruption would have to be determined on a case-by-case basis, but it was incredible failure of leadership at all levels.

 

[Zeb_Carter]

It's quite gratifying that you agree with what I said about the Dems in Congress shirking their responsibility in 2007 and even in 2008.

As I have also said many times, the debacle had its roots in 1977 when the Dems in Congressed passed this law that required banks to lend to home buyers in rundown neighborhoods: http://www.answers.com/topic/community-reinvestment-act-of-1977

This particular site portrays it as a good thing, and there were some positives, but it basically required lenders to make risky loans.

Predatory lending was certainly part of the problem too, but most such lenders would have kept the loans, so they could foreclose when the homeowners defaulted. That's the whole reason for predatory lending, so those loans would have rarely been part of the national problem. They would have been a problem to the victims, but not to anybody else.

Box they don't want to hear the truth because that would ruin their world view of it's the other guys fault.

 

[3113]

Well you response is always "It's Bush's fault!"

I, personally, said no such thing. You said that republicans get their money's worth, unlike Democrats--implying that "They spend money too!" (point finger at Democrats), and I agreed that Republicans got a good war for the money.

I didn't blame Bush for anything he didn't actually do, did I?

 

[Zeb_Carter]

I, personally, said no such thing. You said that republicans get their money's worth, unlike Democrats--implying that "They spend money too!" (point finger at Democrats), and I agreed that Republicans got a good war for the money.

I didn't blame Bush for anything he didn't actually do, did I?

Not directly...

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
It's quite gratifying that you agree with what I said about the Dems in Congress shirking their responsibility in 2007 and even in 2008..

Where did I say that Box? I did say that we'd let you slide on your interpretation of the events, since you are incapable of accepting facts that don't fit into your worldview.

Here is what you said:

Originally Posted by DeeZire
And I've told you over and over again that the regulators were not being managed by Congress, they were being managed by the Bush Administration.

When I read that, I said "WTF! Whey weren't they doing any regulating in Congress? That's why they have those committees, such as the banking committee, to keep an eye on the situation and prevent debacles such as happened in the summer of 2008, and is usually believed to have begun in Dec. 2007.

 

[DeeZire]

Box - you might want to do a little research on the power of Congress. Congress lays out a mandate for the regulators to follow, the Executive branch appoints the agency heads and those agency heads manage the regulators. It is the mismanagement of the regulators that allowed the financial crisis to unfold. Now, if you can find a source explaining how the Congress routinely bypasses the Executive branch and micro-manages the regulators, you'd have a point.

As it is now, Box Logic would excuse the 9/11 terrorists from responsibility for the 4,000 deaths they caused because the fault lies with the airline ticketing system that allowed the terrorists on the plane. While that logic does have merit, I have never seen the terrorists absolved of responsibility for their actions because of the ticketing process. Likewise, the crooked mortgage brokers and the Ayn Rand-inspired regulators don't get absolved of their responsibility for the financial meltdown because the Dems didn't usurp the power of the Executive branch and start micromanaging the regulators and mortgage brokers. It is not the job of Congress to do that. That's the job of the Executive branch.

 

[Chantilyvamp]

Do you know I smiled when Clinton got routed on his blow job and I'm smiling over this too. Not smug smile...smile as in it's nice to see them acting like real everyday humans. I bet they were a lot more relaxed after they left that club than when they went in! They should have called it a team building exercise. Politics clouds the eyes of people who get their panties in a wad every time one of these guys acts human on public money or public time. $2000 is nothing really compared to what has been spent on clothes and makeup and other such nonsense. So if they really want to get in a snit.. ask him to give the money back and leave it alone.

(And yes I know I might get my ass spanked over my opinion but hey what's a nice ass for if not for getting it spanked every now and again.)

And I'd really like to see that club

 

[3113]

Fired!

The vile offender of this lamentable travestry has been discovered and fired!

The staffer fired by the Republican National Committee for authorizing a $2,000 payment for a night out at a bondage-themed club was the head of the Young Eagles, a GOP program aimed at cultivating major donors under 45 years old, Republicans familiar with the details of the case said Tuesday.

Rest here. I dunno. Sounds like he was just thinking outside the box there in order to lure in the under 45 crowd....

 

[sr71plt]

I have repeated this many times, but you and others seem to ignore the fact that the Dems had been the majority in Congress since Jan. 2007, almost a year before the onset of the current recession. The Dems, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd in particular, controlled the committees responsible for enforcing the laws you mention, but they failed to do so. Both Dems and Reps voted for the bailout you mention.

Yep, you keep posting that, Box, but as DeeZire posts, that's because you don't understand how government works.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

The vile offender of this lamentable travestry has been discovered and fired!


Rest here. I dunno. Sounds like he was just thinking outside the box there in order to lure in the under 45 crowd....

I'd have been interested. http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii177/1volupturary_manque/sFun_drool21.gif

 

[3113]

I'd have been interested. http://i264.photobucket.com/albums/ii177/1volupturary_manque/sFun_drool21.gif

You're not the target, Bear. Under 45. In theory all the GOP has to do to get you interested in joining them is complain about the government. Under 45-ers require a bit more. Like simulated lesbian sex and bondage.

Kids. So demanding these days.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

You're not the target, Bear. Under 45. In theory all the GOP has to do to get you interested in joining them is complain about the government. Under 45-ers require a bit more. Like simulated lesbian sex and bondage.

Kids. So demanding these days.

Just because my body's old . . .

I don't need no stinking government to complain about. I can complain about anything--like a lack of lesbian sex and bondage, for instance.

 

[midwestyankee]

Just because my body's old . . .

I don't need no stinking government to complain about. I can complain about anything--like a lack of lesbian sex and bondage, for instance.

Bear, we'll keep this in mind for next time you visit the Windy City.

 

[Smarmy_and_Sappe]

And on the day this news broke, I just happened to get a letter from Michael "Show me your tits" Steele. Yep, I was one of the few, the very LUCKY few to receive a census for my republican district. Same crap as ever from Mr. Steele, a couple pages of leading questions to answer, and then the big hit-up-for-cash. I guess the trip to the titty bar has depleted the party funds. Well, I did my bit as a registered republican, filled out the questionairre, returned it, sans any funds, and a copy of the news article. I further advised them that if they expected me to pay for their hi jinx at the local naughty bar, the least they could do is invite me along for the fun...

 

[3113]

I further advised them that if they expected me to pay for their hi jinx at the local naughty bar, the least they could do is invite me along for the fun...

I agree! You should get what you pay for.