Yes, that was bad, indeed.

But frankly, I'm surprised to find Democrats spending ANY money on anti-Republican ads. Just let them eat each other up, and there will be plenty of soundbites available from that. The ads will write themselves, come August.

As soon as I saw the headline on the Frank thread, Feisty, I knew what would be posted from the right but even so I was surprised by the levels of hatred that I saw (as far as I could stand to read).

Glad to see the Democrats not spending too much on ads right now---I'm with Anna Molly--glad to see the Republicans spend all of their money fighting each other.

Anna,

And how will those ads read? Would they sound something like "Ignore the past 4 years and all my failures, concentrate on how bad this GOP candidate will be. After all it may be possible for you to be more miserable than you are now."?

Dont think that ad campaign will fly this time around..... Good luck with it.

ABO 2012

Agree, the DNC shouldn't spend a dime

.....just wait until the 'biggest loser' in the TeaPeople crowd is crowned the 'winner'!

Ann Coulter will then issue another 'our candidates flaws are better/bigger than your candidate'!

Anna, I would like to congraulate your Packers on their trashing of my Lions on Thanksgiving. You were right the best team did win... as usual.

BTW I hope Goodell slams Suh for his terrible conduct during the game, he should be suspended for as long as it takes him to grow up. Maybe Suh should try out for the Ultimate Fighting Championship.

Looks like someone needs a lesson in their ABC's. It is fun and easy and what is best for our country.

Every time you see ABC you will be reminded of this lesson.

Anybody

But

Conservatives

If you love America, vote ABC.

If you love your children, vote ABC.

If you love clean air to breath, vote ABC.

If you love clean water to drink, vote ABC.

If you love your social security, vote ABC.

If you love your ability to choose, including contraception, vote ABC.

If you believe in education, vote ABC.

If you believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, vote ABC.

If you believe that unions should have a say so in their safety, vote ABC.

If you believe that children should have a right to food, vote ABC.

If you believe that America is more than just for the rich, vote ABC.

The smarter people will be voting ABC, how about you?

Looks liek someone has the corner on bumper stickers and platitudes, but no substance.

What the heck does government have to do with "If you believe children should have a right to food"? If this is the best BHO and his supporters have, I feel for you and your wasted support for a failed president. So give your lessons on the ABCs. You need a lesson in reality. All these slogans are fine, but at the end of the day, the question will be:

Are you better off now than 4 years ago? Resoundingly the public will answer NO.

ABO 2012

Apparently all you have to do to set off a RWNJ firestorm is mention Barney Frank...

@ devie --

I hear Suh is going to get two games -- and I think one of them should be the Packer game on January 1. He shouldn't be allowed anywhere near Lambeau Field. But someone also needs to get a handle on the coach, who seems to encourage that sort of play.

@ dsdsherm --

What I meant was that all the Republicans have to do is open their mouths and the Democrats' ads write themselves.

They are the worst lot of candidates I have seen in my lifetime on either side, and in 2008, I had already said that I would have preferred ANY of the Democrats to any of the Republicans. Now I say I would prefer any of the 2008 Re[ublican candidates to any of the 2012 Republican candidates.

How low can you go?

But really, you shouldn't make too much fun. I'll bet it won't be all that satisfying to be -- as you will be -- on the side that loses the election when the only choice is which candidate is worse.

Come on Americans First say it with me :

$15 Trillion. Owed by us, to be paid for by our children and their children.

Bottom line AF, and you already know this - being broke sucks. But stealing more from our children is worse.

Now you tell me one time when you have heard any of the politicians say anything about paying down the DEBT.

Nope they can't even get their crap together to stop more DEFICITS.

I believe in solvency Americans First, how about you?

Man all the big wigs of team Blue are falling into the sea - First Weiner quits, now Frank won't run.

What a shame. But at least you all still got Biden.

I was surprised by the levels of hatred that I saw (as far as I could stand to read).

Me too Steeler Fan! ;o(

Had to go take a shower after reading some of that filth!

*toweling off*

Well Feisty and AM, I know you didn't like the Framk thread, but you may take a lesson from it.

Rather than dismissing the anger at Frank as a bunch of homophobes, which Feisty did and I think you agree with AM, you might note that out of over 600 comments, many are names, I don't see here very often. I don't spend as much time here as you all, but you might want to come out of your insulated room and realize their is a lot of anger at Barney Frank and Maxine Waters and the Dems for the housing bubble.

If you only listen to people who agree with you, you will always hear what you want to hear.

See, the electorate is not stupid, and they are not homophobes. They are angry. Frank either lied or was incompetent when he spoke of F&F's viabilty.

Blame others if you wish, there are plenty to blame. But the prism of history will place a large amount of the blame for the housing crisis square on Barney Franks shoulder's.

But someone also needs to get a handle on the coach, who seems to encourage that sort of play.

I totally agree. I like both Jim Schwartz and Gunther Cunningham but they need to hold themselves and their players to a higher standard. The Lions are good enough to beat anyone with out the "Clown Show".

Oh noooo WCA - that's why they have this shiny 'ignore' button.

Fiesty and CO. simply ignore all that disagree. Makes theie world so much easier.

Besides, not like they are particularly good at rebuttal.

Take Barney - he wrecked housing, which lead in very large part to the recent depression.

He needs to go.

But it will put the great people at MSNBC in a bind. Who will they have on their shows?

Weiner was a reliable progressive voice, as was Frank. Now big Ed is reduced to having Alan "I got the boot" Greyson on.

WCA:

Rather than dismissing the anger at Frank as a bunch of homophobes, which Feisty did and I think you agree with AM,

Just goes to show what you know.

But if I want a good stereotype, at least I always know where to turn.

Not all of it was homophobic. The rest of it was just plain delusional.

Spanky:

But the prism of history will place a large amount of the blame for the housing crisis square on Barney Franks shoulder's.

Who knew he had all that power? Last I heard, there were 535 people in Congress and a guy in the White House. What role, if any, did THEY all have?

And then tell me again about the role that Newt Gingrich and the other conservative lobbyists had in Congress's failure to pass Chuck Hagel's legislation to rein in Freddie and Fanny?

Of course, we could also blame it directly on Freddie and Fanny executives, who made they decisions that they did. No one held a gun to their heads. They could have quit in protest. But they didn't, did they?

The money was just too darned good, wasn't it?

And this, of course, is exactly why we need REAL regulation, not the phony-baloney regulation that wink-winks to this kind of situation.

Did the Democrats buy into it? Darned right they did, and they should take the fall for it. But they shouldn't take the fall alone for what every Congress let ride between 1996 and 2008.

Exactly how are they any less to blame than Barney Frank?

You may want to take your head out of the sand and read a little bit more about it ....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/barney-frank-didnt-cause-the-housing-crisis/2011/11/28/gIQANqLH5N_blog.html

Frank was one of those favored lawmakers — between 1989 and 2008 he received $42,350 in campaign contributions from Fannie and Freddie. Frank even helped get a former boyfriend a job at Fannie Mae. And yet, for the bulk of this period, Democrats in Congress were in the minority. Even if Frank wanted to help out Fannie and Freddie, he wasn’t in a position to lead these efforts until 2007. (In 2005, when Frank helped sponsor a bipartisan House bill to create an independent regulator for Fannie and Freddie, it died in the Senate.)

(emphasis added)

That would, of course, have been Chuck Hagel's bill, which died in the Senate because of the efforts of conservative lobbyists, including Newt -- the liar -- Gingrich.

The article goes on to describe -- with graphs and everything, which I know you will like -- how the housing bubble was actually global, which would have been even harder for Barney Frank to pull off on his own. In addition, it tells how Fannie and Freddie were actually very LATE into the game, and that by 2006, 84 percent of the bad mortgages were actually written by PRIVATE lenders.

Need I say more?

All right, then. How's this?

What’s more, only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was subject to affordable-housing laws. For the most part, private firms such as Countrywide Financial were issuing “nontraditional” mortgages in order to package them off to Wall Street and make money, not to please Barney Frank. Like most policymakers, Frank didn’t appear to see the housing bubble or looming subprime crisis before it was too late. But he didn’t cause them, either.

(emphasis added)

I'm betting that history will be kinder to Barney Frank than you think.

But YOU should hope that, after being part of a political group that deliberately spreads misinformation to the public, history will be kind to you.

The greedy and phony liars are their own worst enemy. Inexpensive ads is all it takes to show thier lack of integrity. Common folks know. Hopefully the common man will get off of their asses and vote. Can we take another year of these unamerican bastard republicans obstructing common sense? Guess we are fixing to find out as the unhonorable are going to continue to obstruct our families futures.

Do you seriously propose that Barney Frank passed banking laws on his own, Congress voted on those laws, and they won a majority of votes from both parties. To try and blame a single man is either foolish, or dishonest, or both.

The Barney Frank thread was over-run by right wing mental midgets, sporting their tin foil hats, while finger pointing & name calling...

But isn't that what you live and breath for girl, supporting the liberal agenda, finger pointing and name calling?

Fiesty & Steeler Fan,

The Barney Frank thread was over-run by right wing mental midgets, sporting their tin foil hats, while finger pointing & name calling...

even so I was surprised by the levels of hatred

Agreed. It was astonishing. To hate that much is almost incomprehensible. Who the hell were those people? I really disliked Bush, whose negative impact on this country was at least 1,000 times that of Barney Frank's, but I don't think my level of hatred rose to nearly the degree of what I read this morning.

Personally, I think it has a lot to do with fear--fear that Obama is going to be re-elected.

Who the hell were those people?

Please allow me to introduce you to today's Republican Party!

Sick & twisted...

I think it has a lot to do with fear--fear that Obama is going to be re-elected.

Bingo Jack!

winemaker-4308406

Nice to see you this afternoon safecracker! ;o)

tick...tock...

Anna : The article goes on to describe -- with graphs and everything, which I know you will like --

Well Anomaly , your condescension has finally jumped the shark.

Each day your posts get more and more desperate. More and more angry.

Your Hero has destroyed the Democrat party and you know it. Obama has set Liberalism back a generation. Something all the Limbaughs and Hannitys of the world could never have done.

So now, in your own snobby way, you have taken to supercilious jabs.

Well, doesn't that make you special. It's gonna be a long cold winter for you Libs. Better get in a big supply of popcorn.

You and your "bird of a feather" Feisty can validate each other on here all day long.

It is really, just sad.

Anna,

What I meant was that all the Republicans have to do is open their mouths and the Democrats' ads write themselves.

I didnt pretend that was not your original meaning, but my response was that this is the only thing BHO has to use. After all, he cannot run on his record. If he does, he loses.

I am most certain the Democrat ads will be nothing but negative campaigning tearing down the opposition. The economy still sucks, the unpopular Obamacare got rammed through, we have spent trillions we do not have, and by the way, the economy still sucks.

Yep, better stick to the negative stuff about the GOP candidate. No other material to use.

The historical numbers on presidents in bad economies do not bode well for BHO. The unemployment rate is not expected to improve prior to election day. The benefits for those unemployed have been extended as far as they can. We will more than likely be downgraded again. And you are dillusional to expect I will be on the side of the losing candidate?

What do you expect will turn the scales to his side? After all, there is a good portion of the Ameircan people that vote on nothing other than how the past 4 years have gone for them. How many do you think had a positive experience there?

I guess time will tell, but I sleep very well at night seeing the recent polls in the states that matter. BHO has all but given up on Florida already. Virginia continues to go red, as does North Carolina. And he is not faring well in Ohio, NH and Nevada. As a matter of fact, most swing states he is more unpopular than popular. In your area and in the circles you frequent, he may be doing well. Buut I suspect these are areas he is supposed to win anyway. In the ones that will decide his fate, it does not look good.

You are right though. The Dem party should not be spending any money now. There is no benefit. But doubt there will be any benefit later either.

Because you cannot change the past, and today versus 4 years ago is not a good comparison.

ABO 2012

"-- Cain $78,900" * low spending noted

Cain looking for a way way to transfer contributions to his campaign to his personal "Princess" account. "There must be some loophole, people!!"

[Take Barney - he wrecked housing...]

Awww...ain't that cute...giving Frank TOTAL credit for singlehandedly bringing down "housing"...

My, that ONE man is mighty powerful. And he's gay, to boot! So, you're saying a gay democrat has that much political power? If so, that makes you soooo screwed...

And I see we are not without our $15 trill "talking point" to set the week off right...

Gee AF, why not just keep it simple, like anna once said...

OMG!

Obama Must Go!

What caused the housing crisis is greed..The big banks took the Feds near interest free money and built way too many homes with the readily available slave labor by exploiting the immagrants...Now they will sit on that inventory until the prices go back up and fleece the public for a second go round..

And the reason the Dems ads are so cheap is because production costs are way down all they have to do is re-play the GOP debates and their stump speeches and the ads make themselves with the dumb racist hate the poor speech they use....Haaaaa

Yes anna you could indeed blame freddie and fanny, but wasn't it the government that said they would back the loans being made? So like alfred e newman, fanny and freddy just said "what, me worry"

Shame that both sides of the aisle promoted home ownership as being part of the American Dream. To bad for the fool consumers who also thought that their homes were just ATM's as well. Isn't government backing a wonderful thing? $15 trillion in debt and rising. I can hardly wait for the FED to increase interest rates, that should make the ol debt counter really ramp up! lol!

Sweet sw philly, now do us all a favor and look up the historical interest data from the FED which includes mortgage rates...

Then lets review the loan process shall we?

The greedy developers sees that the consumers want to own a home, because after all, the government says home ownership is part of the American Dream.

The greedy consumers see their homes as a low interest ATM borrowing machine or that their homes value will always increase in equity.

The loan originators (not to always be identified as the big banks) used a variety of tools allowed by law to make the home loans or to have them refinanced. From ARM's, conventional loans, stc.

The local banks bought the notes from the originators and repackaged the notes to the big banks who repackaged again and sold them as derivatives to investors saying that the derivative were backed by the real estate.

Then each packet was insured against financial loss by reinsurers (like AIG)

Rather than use due diligence fannie and freddy approved the loans because the federal government said that they would cover any potential loss.

My exact path of the greed you lay blame to only the big banks may be off, but the greed you want to attribute only to the big banks really covers everyone from the builder on up the line.

The real losers are the homeowners who didn't buy more than they could afford, but still lost their homes (or at least equity) when the bubble burst.

Then we have those trades and manufactures that lost jobs because of the oversupply of homes on the market. Quite the vicious circle, especially considering that with the exception of the great depression housing always had a "V" shaped recovery to lead a recovery. Like in the 30's housing demand has basically flatlined.

BTW - if a politician sponsers a bill that ultimately blows up they will get the blame as well.

www.federalreserve.gov/releases/H15/data.htm

"Occupy SoggyBottom !"

Or be a man of constant sorrow??

Have you helped the economy with Cyber Monday shopping Rick? I've done my part!

Classic Feisty: name-calling

Get back to me on that booby - when you clean up your own back-yard will ya?

Given your penchant for calling liberals moon-bat's, Soro-Monkey etc.. you have set off my bull@!$%# meter!

MSNBC is one big full time "ad buy" for the Democrats. An entire network, for free.

Even if that were true the GOP has FOX. What's your point?

$5 off Obama 2012 hoodies, regulary $55. The funny part, it's on Obama.com site to donate to the cause.

MSNBC is one big full time "ad buy" for the Democrats. An entire network, for free.

As opposed to Faux News and the Tea Party? Someone has to be there to point out just how wrong the crap they allege is "news" is worse than the National Enquirer. At least the Enquirer occasionally gets something right.

Of course MSNBC is on the up and up right mikek99?

Here's a fine gem from the Ed Show, just an example "Big Black Cloud", there's plenty more.

I do watch both MSNBC and Fox, but I like reading the Drudge Report. From what I seen on MSNBC, if there's two oppisites parties on a show, the Republican usually gets a beat down or is not allowed to give an opinion, Matthews is good at this.

Tell me Paul, do you think the out and out lies that Romney and Perry about words taken out of context by the President are good and honest?

I do admit that Ed sometimes get over zealous in his opinions, but I have never heard him tell an outright lie like they do repeatedly at faux and the faux repeaters here on this post all the time.

The new study that shows that you know about current events if you watch no news at all than if you watch faux. Interesting Paul that you find no fault in the way they report the news.

Bob-infinite-numbers ... Fox News is but the evil twin of the Comedy Channel. Up here in the hinterland we are not sure which one we are watching.

Ah, is Fox considered a public service announcement for political reporting?

Informative, unbiased, factual?

AF,

I agree he gets over zealous, but to edit video and sound bites to make Perry sound like a racist is out right wrong.

So were the words taken out of context or lies? I don't think they were lies, taken out of context, sure. But that comes from Romney and Perry.

As I stated earlier, I watch both. MSNBC lies on their stories too. What I find different about the two is that MSNBC is constantly saying Fox lies everyday and people believe it. If you're saying a bunch of times, people tend to believe.

Why Fox News Channel Is An Industry Joke

Relying on the Fox News Channel as your only source of news is like using MAD Magazine as a legitimate source of news. The Fox News Channel's reporting style is so biased and skewed that trying to obtain any real information from a news report is quite challenging. Fox News is a joke because it provides info-tainment rather than reality-based news coverage. Fox News Channel is a "news channel" in name only. The network is what L.A. Times Editor John S. Carroll calls "pseudojournalism."


Carroll's opinion of Fox News is that it is situated somewhere between journalism and propaganda -- but leans closer to straight ahead attack politics. The perversion of the Fox News Channel is that it is nothing more than a pulpit for the ultra-conservative wing of the Republican Party. The Fox News Channel presents sprinkles of news punctuated with interviews and commentary which promotes its own viewpoint. Sitting far away from objective fact-based journalism, Carroll comments that "if Fox News were a factory situated, say, in Minneapolis, it would be trailing a plume of rotting fish all the way to New Orleans."



http://www.turnoffyourtv.com/networks/foxnews/foxnews.html

Simply put for the simple-minded:

FOX "news" lies

Remember who owns FOX. It is his television tabloid. You will only see the material that Mr. Murdock wants you to see. It is to his advantage (and conservative friends) to air a far right wing political perspective; I have never heard Ann Coulter apologize for anything she has said, even if it is embarrassingly incorrect.

Amen!

Forrest Grump, good points!

Forrest . I think you have a ponit there even nobody wants to say it in the Republican social conservative, anti abortion, anti gay, personhood wing.

Good post, Forrest. I think the Founding Fathers were right in their insistence on the separation of church and state. The modern Republican party is just not able to accept that concept so they probably can't accept someone from a religion they view as a cult.

Forrest,

Romney hits a wall and is being surpassed not due to his Mormon belief, but his more moderate stance. While BHO has given us the opportunity to get a conservative elected, we do not wish to nominate another middle of the road guy.

Newt, Cain, Bachman and Perry have all enjoyed surges due to their more conservative credentials. This is the same reason Huntsman never will see the surge and why Romney cant surpass 25%.

It has nothing to do with religion. We live in fortunate times when BHO has made such a mess we have the ability to nominate conservative and get them elected. If it were not so, Romney would have already sewn it up. And the things you list as things we can deal with is actually the things we cannot deal with. His religion is something we could deal with. But he is a slightly right leaning John McCain. And we want better.

ABO 2012

I agree dsdsherm that Romney's more moderate stance is a problem for some republicans, but it is the very reason he is more electable, even Haley Barbour is advising his party of that. It's just my opinion and it will never be openly confirmed by republicans, but I believe he discounted by many because of his religion. I don't know what hurts Huntsmann more his religion or the fact that he worked for Obama, either way I can't believe he only gets 1%, behind candidates like Cain and Bachmann. In the end many republicans will never vote for someone who does not profess Jesus Christ as their lord and saviour, they have imposed that requirement on themselves.

Good post, Forrest. I think the Founding Fathers were right in their insistence on the separation of church and state.

Damn that pesky Constitution. The Republicans just can't stand that thing which is why they do everything they can to ignore it.

Mike K,

To hear the Republican presidential candidates tell it, the U.S. Constitution is the guiding light of democracy, a bedrock document so perfect and precise that it shouldn’t be challenged, interpreted or besmirched by modern-day judges.

Except for all the parts the GOP candidates themselves want to change.

A balanced budget amendment, measures banning abortion and gay marriage, and eliminating the income tax and birthright citizenship and limiting Supreme Court justices to 18-year terms.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1111/68720.html

(Forest Gump) he is a Mormon and that disqualifies him

* * *

Forest, That's crap. We are MORE THAN OVER the Mormon thing. It is NOT that, at all. NO. Romney is a flip flopper and this would be the same if he were Jerry Falwell's redheaded bastard son. Huntsman is a Mormon too, and I like him better than Romney -- but that's only two of us in the entire country, me and one other guy in Toledo.

Romney, in my book, would have a better chance running as a "moderate" (which he probably is). Come clean Mitt. Admit that you support a woman's right to choose and that you are not homophobic. It's O.K. Be comfortable in your own skin. You did not grow up in Alabama and you did not hunt deer at age 7. Tune in to your "inner moderate".

The founding fathers witnessed the Ill effects of mixing politics and governing with a particular religion, they were incredibly smart to provide a framework for government that proposed freedom of and freedom from religion as an individual citizen may so desire. We witness the ill effects of government and religion being intertwined in countries we are at war with, we propose to bring them the very system and freedoms we boast, but are slowly, but surely moving away from ourselves. Religion and politics go together like nitrogen and glycerin, the two should be kept separate for the good and preservation of both.

Hi Greg Parker, It's Grump not Gump, Romney's religion should matter not, but I think realistically it does with many republicans. I also agree that Romney should run as more of a moderate alternative to the rest of the republican field. I am a democrat and will vote that way in 2012, but I do in fact like Huntsmann better than Romney, so that makes three of us now, you, myself, and the guy from Toledo.

I also agree that Romney should embrace his inner Moderate and run as such. that way we can see him for what he truely is and eliminate him from the possibilities.

We need the strongest Conservative available and that is not Romney.

ABO 2012

One thing they can do is not spend huge time slot money, if they know the media will pick up on the ad.

Plus, think of it like a test drive. By airing it in limited markets a couple times, they can use it as a way of testing its effectiveness with focus groups and polling, etc. If they think it is an effective ad, it can be put back on the shelf until needed.

Shhh, it's a secret.

We are talking about a GOP nomination race, right? And if Republicans tend to watch Fox, then sounds like a good plan to me (assuming the national part makes sense, vice targeted local media buys).

Paul, I get what he's trying to do. I was being ironical.

Do you really think that Fox News is fair and balanced? Talk about infomercial, paided for by Rupert Murdoch and produced by Roger Ailes with voice overs by Hannity...

Do you think they bought from Rush? I'm always on the lookout for a dishonest dealer.

I heard he is sending most of his product to the White House these days.

Personally, I expect MSNBC to be liberal as hell and it is. I expect Fox to be conservative as hell and it is. Watch them both. Sift through the stories, gain a nugget here and a nugget there.

It is better for me that they are partisan than pretentious.

P.S. The most "unbiased news" that I watch is PBS and BBC.

NPR, PBS and BBC...agreed Greg Parker!

In the end, Republicans will vote for the anti-Obama.

If that's Mitt, so be it.

ABO.

sailcat: "....we will witness the self destruction of the GOP"

You are mistaken .

If Obama wins, we will witness "the self destruction" of the U.S. and the capitalist system.

Since your statement cannot be supported by facts, Leona, I can only say you are either under the mind-numbing influence of wishful thinking or a 40 oz. bottle of malt liquor. Either way, Obama will be reelected due to the GOP's incompetence and poor leadership and the US will publicly reject the hateful, bigoted, and selfish doctrines of the Tea Party.

Read 'em and weep, Leona. Yours is only a tiny, nasty voice crying out from the right wing lunatic fringe.

sailcat,

Ummmm, your opinion,well, that's in direct opposition to the polls.

"I can only say you (sailcat) are either under the mind-numbing influence of wishful thinking or a 40 oz. bottle of malt liquor."

LOL

So you think the American electorate is, according to the polls, in favor of the hateful, bigoted, and selfish doctrines of the Tea Party? They must have used a very narrow polling sample that only included you and your trailer park, Leona.

Sailcat-you are the one who sounds hateful and bigoted to me.

Given your utter lack of intellectual capacity, I am not surprised you would think that. Certainly, no one who has ever read one of your asinine posts would be surprised, either.