Let's have a tea party!

[Guest Patriot]

Most presidents don't ignore direct warnings of an impending attack on the country. I don't care how many rooms he had. He ignored a direct warning about an attack by Al Qaeda on US soil five weeks before it happened. That's inexcusable. He should have been impeached for it.

The people who STILL defend Bush (my God, can you believe it?!) point out that we weren't attacked again after 9/11. Well guess what, we haven't been atttacked at all under Obama.

And how many times do we have to remind you that the Democrats didn't have enough votes to override Bush's vetoes, or even get past a Republican filibuster in the Senate? You Republicans just pick little pieces of information that you think supports your point, but you don't look at the whole picture - which is how we got into an unnecessary war we can't get out of.

You guys practically ruined this country. If you had any sense of shame, you'd go crawl in a hole.

I'm sure this is perfectly understood by all clear thinking Americans, but for the benefit of those Loonies like "Guest" above, I'll repeat the obvious. In the months leading up to 9/11, there were several vague intelligence reports of an anticipated attack on the U.S. Intelligence here and among our allies were unable to determine where, when or how this attack was to take place. Without any specific information as to these details there was nothing Bush, our military, our intelligence services or our allies could do to prevent the attacks.

Now of course, the Loonies will never acknowledge these facts, they like the Rosie O'Donnell conspiracy theory better.

[Guest Guest]

Most, if not all, presidents vacation while in office. It would be safe to assume that they have "war rooms" at these locations. I'm not sure that Leno's green room had the same facilities or equipment; or for that matter Obama's ongoing campaign. By the way, you do know that the Democrats controlled BOTH houses for the last two years, right?

And YOU know who controlled Congress when the useless Iraq war was approved as well as during the formative years of the financial fiasco, right?

NICE work Resmuglicans!

[Guest Guest]

The USS Cole fiasco happened on Clinton's watch

With THREE MONTHS to investigate and avenge? Like THAT's realistic?

And Bush, the little pissant cowboy POS did NOTHING about the USS Cole bombing, he was too busy plotting his personal vendetta as well as allowing Libya to buy its way out of blame for terrorist murders.

[Guest RepublicansStill in Denial]

"small things" . Only a far left Loony could characterize throwing 160+ Billion (with no strings or guidelines) down AIG's rathole as a small thing. I'm still waiting for a Loony to admit that they make a mistake by voting for this inexperienced, naive, no work experience managing anything, tax and spend, solve everything by throwing money at it Socialist.

No it's not a small thing. The Bush administration orchestrated over $150 billion in taxpayer funds to AIG. The Obama administration added $30 billion to the AIG rescue on March 1, 2009. If that's Socialism, then Bush was the founding father. It was the Bush administration who bought the AIG "rathole". Now that we own it (80% shareholders), are you willing to call it quits and lose the $150 billion, or do you keep adding money to hopefully reach bottom??

In September 2008, the Federal Reserve lent A.I.G. $85 billion when the company suddenly found itself unable to meet a round of cash calls. To secure the emergency loan, A.I.G. issued the Fed warrants for slightly less than 80 percent of the company’s shares.

Officials said at the time that they thought the loan would provide A.I.G. all the cash it could possibly need. The government brought in a seasoned insurance executive, Edward M. Liddy, to sell off some of A.I.G.’s operating units to raise money, since the rescue loan had to be paid back within two years. Mr. Liddy drew up a plan, saying he expected a smaller, well-capitalized version of A.I.G. to remain after the restructuring.

But in just weeks it became clear that A.I.G.’s problems were so grave the $85 billion would not be enough. It was using up that money alarmingly fast, thus burdening itself with higher than expected debt-servicing costs, because it had to pay the Fed a higher rate of interest on the part of the loan that it drew down.

In October, the government cut A.I.G. some slack by creating a new $38 billion facility to shore up its securities lending business, and gave the company access to a new commercial paper program, which had a much lower interest rate than the rescue loan.

But that was not enough either. In mid-November, the government restructured its loans to A.I.G., raising its total commitment to $150 billion. The new arrangement reduced the rescue loan to $60 billion and stretched out its term to five years instead of two.

At the same time, it injected $40 billion into A.I.G. in exchange for preferred shares. And it created two special-purpose entities to take the most toxic assets then plaguing A.I.G. out of play.

Those arrangements kept the government’s stake in A.I.G. at just below 80 percent. The government has not wanted to go above 80 percent, because it would then have to consolidate all of A.I.G.’s assets and liabilities into its own finances, putting taxpayers on the hook for the claims of roughly 76 million insurance policyholders around the world.

While November’s restructuring did buy A.I.G. more time, it was not able to sell the operating units that Mr. Liddy put up for sale — or, when assets were sold, the prices were shockingly low.

[Guest Guest]

"small things" . Only a far left Loony could characterize throwing 160+ Billion (with no strings or guidelines) down AIG's rathole as a small thing. I'm still waiting for a Loony to admit that they make a mistake by voting for this inexperienced, naive, no work experience managing anything, tax and spend, solve everything by throwing money at it Socialist.

That's another thing you and your far-right wingnut comrades always do: you lie. The $160 billion is the big thing. That's the money spent to keep AIG from going under and the American economy with it, and the world economy too. The small thing, by comparison, is the $165 million that went to executive bonuses. Sure, it's real money, but it doesn't justify round-the-clock news coverage for a week to the exclusion of everything else. It's one-tenth of one percent of the money for the bailout. There isn't a person in America whose household spending doesn't waste a greater fraction than that.

Tell you what, genius, since you're so smart, tell us what you would have done about AIG.

We're still waiting for you to admit that you were wrong predicting that Guiliani would be president by now; or that Bush was a horrible president; or that Republican policies of deregulation tanked the economy; or that the Iraq war was a disastrous mistake - or anything else for that matter.

And of course you're not talking about the fact that the stock market seems to be headed up with Obama in office only two months. Or the fact that housing seems to be bouncing back. Apparently you have trouble seeing the world with a finger shoved that far up each nostriil of your nose.

You're like the second grader on the playground who spends all his time trying to put everyone else down. It's almost excusable at his age, but what's your excuse?

[Guest Guest]

- improving American education

- restoring the middle class

- rebuilding our manufacturing base

- addressing the threat of terrorism

You're starting to sound..... Republican!!!

You're kidding, right? The Republicans have killed the American middle class with Bush's tax giveaways to the rich, and they haven't done a thing for education either.

What you don't understand is that most people are not ideologues. Since that's all the Republican party has left, I can understand why you wouldn't get it.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

"small things" . Only a far left Loony could characterize throwing 160+ Billion (with no strings or guidelines) down AIG's rathole as a small thing. I'm still waiting for a Loony to admit that they make a mistake by voting for this inexperienced, naive, no work experience managing anything, tax and spend, solve everything by throwing money at it Socialist.

9/16/2008: The Federal Reserve creates a loan of 85 billion to AIG at the cost of the issuance of a stock warrant for nearly 80% of the company's stock.

Nov 2008-The government increases the amount to 152 billion.

Both of which happened before Obama took office. Only a far-right retard could make such an egregious claim.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

- improving American education

- restoring the middle class

- rebuilding our manufacturing base

- addressing the threat of terrorism

You're starting to sound..... Republican!!!

Except that we already know what the Republicans would have done in this crisis. As I already pointed out, the loan to AIG was a Republican end-run around the Democratic legislature. Every few years during Bush's administration a new economic stimulus package was passed-tax cuts for the rich, pork, and handouts to corporations in every one-along with a check to the hoi polloi to make it palatable. Each one provided a short-term boost that wasn't sustainable with the weakening of oversight of our economy by Republican-backed deregulation. Only a fool keeps trying something that failed miserably every other time it was tried.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Except that we already know what the Republicans would have done in this crisis. As I already pointed out, the loan to AIG was a Republican end-run around the Democratic legislature. Every few years during Bush's administration a new economic stimulus package was passed-tax cuts for the rich, pork, and handouts to corporations in every one-along with a check to the hoi polloi to make it palatable. Each one provided a short-term boost that wasn't sustainable with the weakening of oversight of our economy by Republican-backed deregulation. Only a fool keeps trying something that failed miserably every other time it was tried.

Then Obama must be the world's biggest fool since he gave AIG an additional 160 Billion with no strings attached, which created the "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire Bonus Giveaway Game". The Loonies will try and try to rewrite history to blame Bush for all Obama's screw-ups but Obama owns this one and

you can't spin it away.

[Guest Guest]

The USS Cole fiasco happened on Clinton's watch

You forgot the first WTC bombing, and TWO embassies.

[Guest Guest]

And YOU know who controlled Congress when the useless Iraq war was approved as well as during the formative years of the financial fiasco, right?

NICE work Resmuglicans!

And, just to be fair, you're going to implicate those Democrats that supported the war? Or were they all absent that day?

The formative years of the financial crisis was the late 90's, do some research, please. If you'd like to blame some of the Congressional Republicans, I think that would be fair, but I don't see laying this one at Bush's feet. He was the only one looking to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, you know the FIRST bailed out banks, back in 2004. To say he met resistance was an understatement. Personally, this is one where I thought a president should use the "bully pulpit" to make sure the message got out; he didn't.

[Guest Guest]

Except that we already know what the Republicans would have done in this crisis. As I already pointed out, the loan to AIG was a Republican end-run around the Democratic legislature. Every few years during Bush's administration a new economic stimulus package was passed-tax cuts for the rich, pork, and handouts to corporations in every one-along with a check to the hoi polloi to make it palatable. Each one provided a short-term boost that wasn't sustainable with the weakening of oversight of our economy by Republican-backed deregulation. Only a fool keeps trying something that failed miserably every other time it was tried.

This was less than six months ago. Your memory cannot possibly be this bad.

Yes, TARP was passed prior to election day, but the Republicans defeated it in its first form. In the second edition, I can guarantee more Dems than Republicans voted for this mess. Don't take my word for it though, I'm sure the Congressional Record or some other site could break down the votes for you.

My word though, talk about "cherry picking" your information.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

Then Obama must be the world's biggest fool since he gave AIG an additional 160 Billion with no strings attached, which created the "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire Bonus Giveaway Game". The Loonies will try and try to rewrite history to blame Bush for all Obama's screw-ups but Obama owns this one and

you can't spin it away.

Except for the whole "you're lying " bit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AIG

[Guest *Autonomous*]

This was less than six months ago. Your memory cannot possibly be this bad.

Yes, TARP was passed prior to election day, but the Republicans defeated it in its first form. In the second edition, I can guarantee more Dems than Republicans voted for this mess. Don't take my word for it though, I'm sure the Congressional Record or some other site could break down the votes for you.

My word though, talk about "cherry picking" your information.

It was proposed by Bush and SecTreas Paulson on 10/14/08. (Republicans, btw). It was passed with bipartisan support-34 Republicans, 1 Independent, and 39 Democrats voted for it in the Senate. Since Thomas.gov doesn't break down votes by party I'm not going to bother counting the House votes.

But hey-technically you're right. Especially if you ignore Bush's executive order modifications.

Thing is-what would you people do? AIG secures the loans of 180,000 businesses employing 1 out of every three Americans. If AIG were to fail, suddenly the credit cruch looks a lot worse. After this all settles down AIG should be broken up-no one company should have that much power. But that is in the future. Right now we need to get the money flowing again and for all your screaming that seems to be happening.

[Guest Guest]

And, just to be fair, you're going to implicate those Democrats that supported the war? Or were they all absent that day?

The formative years of the financial crisis was the late 90's, do some research, please. If you'd like to blame some of the Congressional Republicans, I think that would be fair, but I don't see laying this one at Bush's feet. He was the only one looking to reign in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, you know the FIRST bailed out banks, back in 2004. To say he met resistance was an understatement. Personally, this is one where I thought a president should use the "bully pulpit" to make sure the message got out; he didn't.

What matters is what they're going to do tomorrow. We got into this mess by deregulating nearly everything and allowing the markets to rise on unregulated speculation. That's more a Republican model than a Democratic model, but it doesn't matter who did it. It has to change. There are more Republicans resisting those changes than Democrats because more Republicans are "free market" ideologues than Democrats. I put it in quotes because these markets aren't really free anyway.

We need to rebuild the economic system so that it encourages productivity, not just speculation. That's what matters.

[Guest RepublicansStill in Denial]

You forgot the first WTC bombing, and TWO embassies.

You've forgotten the August 6, 2001 warning to Rice and Bush entitled, "Bin ladin Determined To Strike in US". Go to the George Washing Univ's site at http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB...pdb8-6-2001.pdf

for the now declassified memo.

[Guest Guest]

You've forgotten the August 6, 2001 warning to Rice and Bush entitled, "Bin ladin Determined To Strike in US". Go to the George Washing Univ's site at http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB...pdb8-6-2001.pdf

for the now declassified memo.

They don't forget, repressed little wankers that they are they just blame everything on Clinton getting a BJ.

[Guest Guest]

They don't forget, repressed little wankers that they are they just blame everything on Clinton getting a BJ.

They're just jealous - which is really sad. (Have you taken a good look at Lewinsky?)

[Guest Guest]

I'm sure this is perfectly understood by all clear thinking Americans, but for the benefit of those Loonies like "Guest" above, I'll repeat the obvious. In the months leading up to 9/11, there were several vague intelligence reports of an anticipated attack on the U.S. Intelligence here and among our allies were unable to determine where, when or how this attack was to take place. Without any specific information as to these details there was nothing Bush, our military, our intelligence services or our allies could do to prevent the attacks.

Now of course, the Loonies will never acknowledge these facts, they like the Rosie O'Donnell conspiracy theory better.

Kudos, Patriot. That is the absolute truth, and notice not one Bush hater dared to refute it. They do prefer the Rosie O'Donnell Kool-Aid theory.

[Guest Guest]

Kudos, Patriot. That is the absolute truth, and notice not one Bush hater dared to refute it. They do prefer the Rosie O'Donnell Kool-Aid theory.

You've got to be kidding me. The president gets a direct warning, several known terrorists suspects are in pilot training and these geniuses ignored it.

The point is, a direct warning was ignored. There's no excuse for that. If they didn't understand it, they should have asked for more information.

[Guest Radagast]

Kudos, Patriot. That is the absolute truth, and notice not one Bush hater dared to refute it. They do prefer the Rosie O'Donnell Kool-Aid theory.

So I guess we should praise Bush for not being the direct cause of 9/11?

I, for one, always thought it was silly to blame Bush or Clinton or any President for 9/11. Reminds me how some used to blame FDR for Pearl Harbor.

My problem with Bush is how after 9/11 he used the emotions of Americans to manipulate our government into an agenda that has done America far more harm than good.

[Guest Patriot]

So I guess we should praise Bush for not being the direct cause of 9/11?

I, for one, always thought it was silly to blame Bush or Clinton or any President for 9/11. Reminds me how some used to blame FDR for Pearl Harbor.

My problem with Bush is how after 9/11 he used the emotions of Americans to manipulate our government into an agenda that has done America far more harm than good.

And the democratic congress led by Pelosi and Reid gets a pass?

[Guest Guest]

And the democratic congress led by Pelosi and Reid gets a pass?

You are such a pathetically stupid moron! You defend the people who held power for eight years and brought the country to its knees, won't ever admit that they've done anything wrong, defend every decision they've made - until it becomes obvious even to a moron like you that they totally screwed up, at which point your response is:

Oh yeah! Well the Democrats s**k as bad as we do!

You freaking moron!

[Guest Guest]

And the democratic congress led by Pelosi and Reid gets a pass?

For playing on the emotions of America immediately after 9/11 to gain approval to pursue Bush's personal vendetta?

ABSOLUTELY!

[Guest Guest]

For playing on the emotions of America immediately after 9/11 to gain approval to pursue Bush's personal vendetta?

ABSOLUTELY!

Gobbledygook.