Trains

Bill C wrote:
On Oct 12, 5:21 pm, Fred Fredburger
wrote:

From this stream of uncritical acceptance of McCain talking points, I
can only conclude that you are attempting to prove JT correct in his
characterizations of you.

Point made.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

How are those not valid issues connected with Obama? Isn't it amazing
that all we hear about from a bunch of the folks is Republican thugs,
and vote fraud?

Unquestioning acceptance of Republican talking points destroys your
ability to claim independence. So stop. You're as independent as Sarah
Palin.

On Oct 13, 7:28*pm, Fred Fredburger
wrote:
Bill C wrote:
On Oct 12, 5:21 pm, Fred Fredburger
wrote:

*From this stream of uncritical acceptance of McCain talking points, I
can only conclude that you are attempting to prove JT correct in his
characterizations of you.

Point made.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

*How are those not valid issues connected with Obama? Isn't it amazing
that all we hear about from a bunch of the folks is Republican thugs,
and vote fraud?

Unquestioning acceptance of Republican talking points destroys your
ability to claim independence. So stop. You're as independent as Sarah
Palin.

Who's unquestioningly accepting them? Seems that raising these
questions is not allowed, but how about this one?:

http://www.washtimes.com/news/2008/o...-ghosts/print/

Sunday, October 12, 2008
HYMAN: Obama's Kenya ghosts
Mark Hyman
COMMENTARY:

About 50 parishioners were locked into the Assemblies of God church
before it was set ablaze. They were mostly women and children. Those
who tried to flee were hacked to death by machete-wielding members of
a mob numbering 2,000.

The 2008 New Year Day atrocity in the Kenyan village Eldoret, about
185 miles northwest of Nairobi, had all the markings of the Rwanda
genocide of a decade earlier.

snipped

This was not Mr. Odinga's first brush with notoriety. Like his father,
Jaramogi Oginga Odinga, the main opposition leader in the 1960s and
1970s, Raila Odinga is a Marxist He graduated from East Germany's
Magdeburg University in 1970 on a scholarship provided by the East
German government. He named his oldest son after Fidel Castro.

Raila Odinga was implicated in the bloody coup attempt in 1982 against
then-President Daniel Arap Moi, a close ally of the United States.
Kenya has been one of the most stable democracies in Africa since the
1960s. The ethnic cleansing earlier this year was the worst violence
in Kenya since that 1982 coup attempt.

Mr. Odinga spent eight years in prison. At the time, he denied guilt
but later detailed he was a coup leader in his 2006 biography. Statue
of limitations precluded further prosecution when the biography
appeared.

Initially, Mr. Odinga was not the favored opposition candidate to
stand in the 2007 election against President Mwai Kibaki, who was
seeking his second term. However, he received a tremendous boost when
Sen. Barack Obama arrived in Kenya in August 2006 to campaign on his
behalf. Mr. Obama denies that supporting Mr. Odinga was the intention
of his trip, but his actions and local media reports tell otherwise.

Mr. Odinga and Mr. Obama were nearly inseparable throughout Mr.
Obama's six-day stay. The two traveled together throughout Kenya and
Mr. Obama spoke on behalf of Mr. Odinga at numerous rallies. In
contrast, Mr. Obama had only criticism for Kibaki. He lashed out
against the Kenyan government shortly after meeting with the president
on Aug. 25. "The [Kenyan] people have to suffer over corruption
perpetrated by government officials," Mr. Obama announced.

"Kenyans are now yearning for change," he declared. The intent of Mr.
Obama's remarks and actions was transparent to Kenyans - he was firmly
behind Mr. Odinga.

More there, or can't these things be questioned?

Bill C

Bill C wrote:
On Oct 13, 7:28 pm, Fred Fredburger
wrote:
Bill C wrote:
On Oct 12, 5:21 pm, Fred Fredburger
wrote:
From this stream of uncritical acceptance of McCain talking points, I
can only conclude that you are attempting to prove JT correct in his
characterizations of you.
Point made.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
How are those not valid issues connected with Obama? Isn't it amazing
that all we hear about from a bunch of the folks is Republican thugs,
and vote fraud?
Unquestioning acceptance of Republican talking points destroys your
ability to claim independence. So stop. You're as independent as Sarah
Palin.

Who's unquestioningly accepting them? Seems that raising these
questions is not allowed, but how about this one?:

You misunderstand. I'm not arguing with you. JT already did that. I'm
just telling you that JT won.

On Oct 13, 7:55*pm, Fred Fredburger
wrote:

You misunderstand. I'm not arguing with you. JT already did that. I'm
just telling you that JT won.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

That's your judgement. Where, on facts, did JT, win? Just curious.
Bill C

In article ,
SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:

On Oct 11, 6:16*pm, Howard Kveck wrote:

* *Sorry, but the facts get in the way of your attempt to lay the blame for
the current economic crisis on blacks, hispanics and other minorities. (Not
racist much, are y'all?):

Oh, shut the **** up with the idiot-talk. It makes you sound like an
idiot.

Greg, what do you consider "idiot-talk," the part about right wing cretins trying
to blame it on minorities? Because that can be found with the quickness - the Great
Gazoogle works wonders. Or are you going to berate for not buying into your
one-size-fits-all "gubmint bad, smash gubmint" routine?

Reading on, yeah. Look at the bigger picture. RL, UM.

'Ow bow dat Krugman?

--
tanx,
Howard

Abandon the Creeping Meatball!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

Howard Kveck wrote:

Greg, what do you consider "idiot-talk," the part about right wing cretins trying
to blame it on minorities?

It certainly would be idiot talk if the blame has to do with being in
a "minority group." I suspect you are far too quick to throw that
card onto the table. You can always find a nut.

It would not be idiot talk if some bad loans were due to guvmint
policy coercing loans to individuals that were prima-facie bad risks.
If someone wants to say the individuals that were poor risk were
defined by that same someone to be in "minority groups," then I say
they should not even say that (and leftists do say that; in fact, they
make the definition). A bad risk is a bad risk. Period. Coercion
forcing loans to poor risks is "bad practice." So are uncoerced bad
risk loans that a later backed by coercive acts.

* *'Ow bow dat Krugman?

Hey, he proved Samuelson wrong, therefore, he can't be all bad. I
told you I have three of his books. (I like his little essay
collection book "the accidental theorist" the best, of those I have.)
In fact, I give a fair amount of partial credit to Krugman for turning
me against being a democrat, or voting that way. So in a sense, I
very much appreciate Dr. Krugman. Seriously though, note what he got
it for -- that is pretty good stuff. That is the only groundbreaking
work he did, that I know of. And I be checking to see if there is
prior art. Then see JFT howl. It was always thought he might well
win it someday, and there you go...

Arnold Kling on Krooooogman's win:
_Not as Bad as You Thought, Why Paul Krugman deserved the Nobel Prize_
"Paul Krugman received a Nobel Prize for his contributions to
international trade theory. Even for those of us who disagree with his
political views and see little value in his recent work as a
columnist, this award brings neither surprise nor disappointment."
http://www.reason.com/news/show/129435.html


Off-note:
Here's a book review of one of your favorite crank's books, including
a little video:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/128903.html

Note that Krugman never sez the ridiculous things about Friedman that
Klein Bottle sez. I bought Klein's book on your recommendation. You
jerk. What a waste of money. THe most I think Krugman said was
Friedman was "willing to cut a few corners in an argument."

Republicans with bongs?
http://all-left.net/

In article ,
SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:

Howard Kveck wrote:

Greg, what do you consider "idiot-talk," the part about right wing cretins
trying to blame it on minorities?

It certainly would be idiot talk if the blame has to do with being in
a "minority group." I suspect you are far too quick to throw that
card onto the table. You can always find a nut.

It would not be idiot talk if some bad loans were due to guvmint
policy coercing loans to individuals that were prima-facie bad risks.
If someone wants to say the individuals that were poor risk were
defined by that same someone to be in "minority groups," then I say
they should not even say that (and leftists do say that; in fact, they
make the definition). A bad risk is a bad risk. Period. Coercion
forcing loans to poor risks is "bad practice." So are uncoerced bad
risk loans that a later backed by coercive acts.

I'm not sure how that addresses what I was saying. Right wingers are explicitily
saying that programs like CRA and others are responsible for getting loans into the
hands of people who were high risks and then didn't pay them off. That is not backed
up by the facts. Even banks aren't blaming CRA for the problems. Here's a fairly good
and simple explanation:

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...prime_c risis

The Wall Street Journal reported in 2006 that 61% of all borrowers receiving
subprime loans had credit scores high enough to qualify for prime conventional loans.

* *'Ow bow dat Krugman?

Hey, he proved Samuelson wrong, therefore, he can't be all bad. I
told you I have three of his books. (I like his little essay
collection book "the accidental theorist" the best, of those I have.)
In fact, I give a fair amount of partial credit to Krugman for turning
me against being a democrat, or voting that way. So in a sense, I
very much appreciate Dr. Krugman. Seriously though, note what he got
it for -- that is pretty good stuff. That is the only groundbreaking
work he did, that I know of. And I be checking to see if there is
prior art. Then see JFT howl. It was always thought he might well
win it someday, and there you go...

Arnold Kling on Krooooogman's win:
_Not as Bad as You Thought, Why Paul Krugman deserved the Nobel Prize_
"Paul Krugman received a Nobel Prize for his contributions to
international trade theory. Even for those of us who disagree with his
political views and see little value in his recent work as a
columnist, this award brings neither surprise nor disappointment."
http://www.reason.com/news/show/129435.html


Off-note:
Here's a book review of one of your favorite crank's books, including
a little video:
http://www.reason.com/news/show/128903.html

Note that Krugman never sez the ridiculous things about Friedman that
Klein Bottle sez. I bought Klein's book on your recommendation. You
jerk. What a waste of money. THe most I think Krugman said was
Friedman was "willing to cut a few corners in an argument."

I'll have more on this later.

Republicans with bongs?
http://all-left.net/

Is there an organization for the Libertarian Right? Because sure as the Lib Left
exist, so do the Lib Right.

--
tanx,
Howard

Abandon the Creeping Meatball!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

In article ,
Howard Kveck wrote:

I'm not sure how that addresses what I was saying. Right wingers are
explicitily saying that programs like CRA and others are responsible for getting
loans into the hands of people who were high risks and then didn't pay them
off. That is not backed up by the facts. Even banks aren't blaming CRA for the
problems. Here's a fairly good and simple explanation:

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?..._subprime_c r
isis

The Wall Street Journal reported in 2006 that 61% of all borrowers
receiving subprime loans had credit scores high enough to qualify for prime
conventional loans.

I forgot this link (it's a pdf):

http://www.traigerlaw.com/publicatio...sure_study_1-7
-08.pdf

http://tinyurl.com/3rkftb

--
tanx,
Howard

Abandon the Creeping Meatball!

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

SLAVE of THE STATE wrote:
Note that Krugman never sez the ridiculous things about Friedman that
Klein Bottle sez. I bought Klein's book on your recommendation. You jerk.
What a waste of money.

You should have bought a frame pump on credit.

Fred Fredburger wrote:
You misunderstand. I'm not arguing with you. JT already did that. I'm just
telling you that JT won.

Nonsense. Fogel-bot won, even though he didn't post. He always wins
because no other bot can generate the positively Baileyesque quantity of
dump and drivel he does.

SchwartzSoft have fallen behind in the battle of the bots.