Added: 3 months ago
From: TonyKrvaric
Views: 20,617
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (185)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • This reminds me of the time when that Tea Party protester shot that...oh wait, nevermind.

  • THIS IS PROOF THAT WHOEVER POSTED THIS CRAP WANTS TO DEFAME A MOVEMENT AND CAN'T DETERMINE WHAT IS NEWS-SPIN AND WHAT IS REALITY. YOU REALLY THINK AN OCCUPIER IS GOING TO SHOOT AT THE WHITEHOUSE? HE'S BEING WRONGLY ACCUSED AND DEFAMED SO YOU WILL NOT FOCUS ON WHAT MATTERS. DUMMIES, IT ONLY HAPPENED AT THE SAME TIME AS A NATIONWIDE CRACKDOWN. I SWEAR TO GOD YOU'D PUPPET THE WORDS OF ASSAD OR ACHMEDINEJAD IF A FOX NEWS HOST TOLD YOU TO. PEOPLE LIKE YOU MAKE ME EXPECT THE WORST.

  • #OccupySD - I'm a local San Diegan blogger and I'd -love- to get an official statement or defense of this moment. I'd like to see you try to support a person who attacked the white house. These people are deserving of bi-partisan condemnation.

  • yeah not everyone is bright, and everyone speaks stupidly at times

  • give a moment of solidarity to someone that shot at the ws...what a moron with cheese on it ....... probably one of the most brain dead speeches in humankind

  • #1 The person speaking was calling for a moment of silence for the entire event in question. Not just the shooter. The speaker even says that it is for the white house AND the shooter in this video. Not JUST the shooter as your title implies.

    #2 This discussion was hours long. Where is the rest of it? Cutting and pasting what you think looks good or bad only is dishonest. It goes against the journalistic code of ethics. Think about that...

  • Lmao!!! Iknow this guy!! and i know he didnt mean to say it in a bad way, this is not surprising to me whatsoever... lol!!

  • The OWS idiots are showing their true colors here. The 0.099% of fringe radicals think they're re-enacting the Russian Revolution.

  • idiots. you will never get the respect you want nor the response you seek. get a job, a life, and grow the fuck up. dont blame america for your laziness and unopportunistic lifestyle. blame your own damn self you fucking bums. because of you occupy people, police stations are paying overtime, cleaning crews are doubling their money, and your filthy camps full of filthy people are ruining our parks. you will get nothing out of this and achieve epic failure.

  • This is just a stupid move any way you look at it. A guy attempts to assassinate the president and you give the media the opportunity to tie him to the occupy movement by observing a moment of silence for him? Someone should have spoken up in opposition to this dumb move.

  • @Dayoman10 Did you miss the part where the moment of silence was also for the white house too?

  • Last year Apple's profit margin was about 37%. Citigroup's was about 18%.

    That's why the occupiers were burning their iPhones and iPods last night in a protest bonfire. Oh, wait, they didn't...

    I'd bet that less than 1% of the 99% even knows what a bank actually does.

  • Long on "smell bad" short on " think good"

  • obvious fake protestors

  • Let me get this strait Obama is behind the OWS movement. Then one of these Obama fallowers trys to Shoot Obama by taken shots at the white house. OK!! that makes alot of since how Obama is behind the OWS protesters. This guy was just showing Obama that he could be a good Soldier in the military. By showing his aim with a rifle. Those evil socialist liberals will do anything for attention.

  • You can't make this shit up! More proof that these people are fucking insane! It's time for the 53% to put a stop to these degenerates enough is enough!

  • The guy in the video guy should be arrested and tried for treason! Ya can't support people that shoot at the White House or the President ,dumb ass. You can't fix stupid!

  • @BacktoAmerica Look up treason first. This does not qualify.

    Second the moment of silence was ALSO for the white house staff. Or did you just tune that part out?

  • To me he didn't sound like he was supporting the action of shooting at the WH, he simply seemed to be asking for prayers for everyone involved. It was very clumsy wording, but it still didn't seem to be in support of the shooting IMHO ...

  • @dontbepushy I think you're right.

  • @dontbepushy I agree and his later statement confirms it.

  • The moment of silence was for the white house, not the shooter. He even says "For the white house, and the shooter" which basically means, "For the events that took place at the white house". He was not supporting the shooting, we are all non-violent. The rest of the meeting we basically talked about how each of us feels about violence.

  • @PapMagick

    We heard what he said. Your attempt at spin can't change that.

  • @blue222blue Spin? I know what he meant, out discussion was not 1 min long. The GA lasted over two hours. This is the same thing Fox news does, let's just take a 1 minute segment and make them look bad. Again, the silence was for the entire event that happened. For the white house, and yes in a way, for the shooter too. We do not condone those types of actions, but we our thoughts are with all of those who are struggling. We even had a session thanking our police.

  • @PapMagick

    The speaker called for a moment of solidarity with a man charged with the attempted murder of the President.

    He also said "...and why did he feel he needed to shoot the White House window today?".

    That's wrong. And it's wrong not to admit it's wrong.

    He didn't call for sympathy for the mentally ill. He called for solidarity with a violent gunman, and raised the possibility that his act was in some way reasonable or justified.

  • @blue222blue The moment of silence also included 'the White House'.

    It's right there on the video.

  • Yeah then that makes everything better since he included the white house.

  • @wolfengheist No it doesn't 'make everything better'.

    It was an odd thing to do full stop, but  leaving the 'and the White House' out of it, drastically alters the meaning - and I would argue - intent behind his words and the 'moment' he proposed.

  • @Trafalgar1961

    Yes, the White House was mentioned too.

    I don't think man in this video would be happy if the president was shot, God forbid. But he shows a casual comfort with violent rhetoric that is everywhere in the Occupy movement.

    Even the word "occupy" implies using force to take possession of someone else's property.

    This is the loose thinking of the self-styled 60's "revolutionaries" . But it's fundamentally brutish, not peaceful.

  • @blue222blue Pretty much agreed.

    The guy has since tried to clarify what his intent was.

    While I disagree with the false equivocation (the same sympathy for the shooter and the WH staff) I kind of get it because the news that the shooter was suffering from religious delusions had already been reported.

    Hopefully most young people have no conception of how terrifying it must be to have your house/work place shot at. I'm giving him a break on that basis.

  • @blue222blue Just to add, I in no way think the violent act was reasonable or justified.

  • @PapMagick

    "solidarity" :

    1. union or fellowship arising from common responsibilities and interests, as between members of a group

    2. community of feelings, purposes, etc.

    You might be saying that the speaker didn't mean what he said. But it sounds to me that he meant exactly what he said.

    Can you tell us anything he said after this video segment to withdraw his horrible comment?

  • @blue222blue yes but solidarity does not mean to condone someone elses actions. we all hope for the same future, but other people use different means to achieve them. the moment of silence, again, was for the white house. and to SOME degree, the shooter as well. we do not condone shootings, or any violence, but we can understand ones frustration. that was the end of this speech. but we did go on for about an hour talking about violence and how we do not condone it, but still respect everyone.

  • @blue222blue we we're saying how the police are just doing their job, whether they like it or not, so respect them. people are left behind in our system, are have to learn how to survive, be it violent or non violent means, but either way we have to respect them. violence only breeds more violent, so we meet those types of actions with love. we were just extending our open arms to the white house and the shooter, both of them.

  • @PapMagick

    I don't mean to imply that you're a violent person. You certainly don't seem to be.

    But words have meanings. The man in the video did not call for sympathy for a deranged individual. He called for solidarity with an attacker of our president.

    If you're saying he didn't mean what he said, fine, though I think that's naive. But he did say it. And every occupier should renounce it, not try to explain it away.

  • @blue222blue Not the brightest light in the harbor.

  • @PapMagick

    By the way, can you imagine what the Occupiers and most of the news media would be saying if a gunman had been blending in with a Tea Party? And if Tea Partyers had called for solidarity after he shot at the White House?

  • The way I remember it Pap, MSNBC and the rest DID make much of a man at a Tea Party rally with a legal (unfired though) sidearm. In fact they "whitewashed" him. They made him out to be white when in fact he was a black man.

  • Bring out the water cannons and blast these muppet cunts all the way to Havana where they belong.

  • Hilarious! Not proof that the Occupy movement is filled with morons, but it adds to the growing mountain of evidence.

  • @tblake34: (1) Bank Affirmative Action (first 2.1 billion earmarked for low income families to qualify for home loand.

    (2): Community Reinvestment Oversight Act - during Clinton admin. as a result of ACORN protests and lawsuits (Obama as attorney and leader of protests)

  • @grannyramsey Are you giving examples of things that had nothing to do with the financial crisis?

    Seriously, with a straight face you're arguing that $2.1 billion earmarked for low income home loans (which again, had a better repayment rate than those from private institutions) are somehow responsible for the accumulation of junk assets in the trillions? Is it just the numbers that are giving you trouble.

    Again, the CRA was incredibly successful compared to private lenders. More nonsense.

  • The shooter lived at the OWS and rambled on about "wars for oil"

    Just like Obama rambled on about "wars for oil" since 2003

  • Is this supposed to be some kind of joke?

    One of not-so-Breitbart's little pranks?

    The shooter was a Glenn Beck conservative wackadoo. We're lucky he just shot at a bullet proof building, as he'd just as likely have shot at OWS protestors.

  • @cephal0p0d Sorry. he's hispanic, antiwar, progay, pro communism

    .....that's why he's on video AT the OWS rambling against Bush and Foxnews.

  • @cephal0p0d That is a FLAT OUT LIE. He was a OWS PARTICIPANT. But, UNLIKE you liberal ASSHOLES, I am willing to admit he was just nuts.

  • a moment of silence for the dood who punches out the meter maid's tires cuz he got a parking ticket... same logic. Flawed and ignorant logic.

    Get some ethics, folks!

  • How brave

  • UR A FUCKING IDIOT IF U THINK IT WAS A MOMENT IN SILENCE FOR AN ACT OF VIOLENCE THE WHOLE OCCUPY MOVEMENT IS MENT TO BE NON VIOLENT IF SOME MENTALLY ILL PERSON SHOOTS AT THE WHITE HOUSE ITS CUZ HE OR SHE IS A DERP PERIOD

  • @twojaek The 'moment of silence 'also included the White House in 'the moment', not just the poor crazy guy.

  • Cunts

    

  • obamaville IDIOTS!!!!

  • STUPID CUNTS. THE LOT OF THEM.

  • amazing, the media blamed the right for Jared Loughner, despite the fact that there wasn't a connection. Yet this guy, hernandez, participated with the Occupy DC crowd, and is given a moment of silence, and they make no mention of his leftist ideology?

  • @coliwood Jared Loughner is into all that Sovereign Citizen stuff. If that's not right wing, I don't know what is.

    There is no evidence whatsoever (yet) that this latest kook with a gun has anything to do with ANY political movement, right or left.

  • @Trafalgar1961 Wrong, Loughner was into the Zeitgeitst movement, which is a confused Communist/Marxist momvent ...all made modern by machines.

    Its a FAR LEFT movement.

  • @2002lees I'd not heard of that before. I had to look it up. Thank you for pointing it out to me. He got into that film in 2005/6. He was also into all sorts of other conspiracy stuff, too. between then and this year, including some of the basic tenets of Sov Cits. For instance, David Wynn Miller said about Loughner '“I expect he’s been on my website... He’s just repeating things I’ve had up on my site the past 11 years.'

    So it seems he was an equal opps nutter. 

  • Comment removed

  • watch?v=_c6FF2GgYfc

  • I know this guy and he is a Patriot...he didn't mean to say that we are in solidarity with the shooter. Thumbs up if you know this guy too and/or know that he is not supporting the whitehouse shooter.

  • @davidjabramson Oh please. Patriot? Hardly.

  • Comment removed

  • "Whoever shot at the White House is basically a terrorist," LoRusso tells CityBeat, "and I was holding a moment of silence for the White House and President Obama and everyone in the White House. I wasn't holding a moment of silence for the terrorist in any way. We're a peaceful movement, and we don't support people shooting at the White House."

    -Interview with San Diego CityBeat

  • @davidjabramson And yet, in the video, he said the exact OPPOSITE THING, and everyone joined in. You tell me: Am I missing someone there voicing opposition to what he said, ON THE VIDEO? Please. Give me a break. He's a moron, or he meant it. Take your pick.

  • @davidjabramson And so are those in the Occupy movement, basically terrorists.

  • @thejimmyzshow

    Ok, so sleeping in a park is the same as taking over a commercial airline and slamming into the Pentagon. I’ll have to keep that in mind the next time I get sleepy.

  • @slimepuke What? You don't think I watch the news? Hahahaha!!! That's funny. As if that's all the mob wanted to do - sleep in a park (breaking the law even doing that). ROTFL Moron.

  • correction, teaparty whitehouse shooter is from Idaho, not Iowa.

  • @feckdrinkgirls Sorry moron, that was NOT a teaparty member and it was NOT Fox that reported it. It was the Daily Mail - among others and their SOURCE??? The U.S. Park police - here is the quote from the London Daily Mail "U.S. Park Police said that before the shooting Ortega had been spending time with the Occupy D.C. protesters."

    dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2­062129/Obama-assassination-att­empt-Oscar-Ramiro-Ortega-Herna­ndez-believed-Jesus.html#ixzz1­e5oSiDii

  • White house shooter has an Israel tattoo, comes from Iowa and says Obama is a commie. If you think that sounds like a left wing liberal, that's because you don't think, you just listen to what fox TELLS you to think. You call that freedom? what a bunch of wingnut nazi retards.

    Google "Fox Falsely Dubs Alleged White House Attacker As "'Occupy' Shooter"

  • just FYI, you tea party types are the reason the US is targeted by terrorists. if you want a reason why someone flew jet planes into the side of your sky scrapers, ask the raging psychos who think they have a right to steal, kill and take anything off anyone anywhere in the world. If china DOESN'T nuke america it will be because OWS saved it from the fox nation, white trash, tea party terrorists.

  • @feckdrinkgirls Just FYI, you liberal douchebags are the first to be beheaded. Dur.

  • @thejimmyzshow ... oh just so we're clear - beheaded by the terrorist Islamic types.

  • @feckdrinkgirls YOU'RE ON DRUGS.

  • Comment removed

  • these people need to be dealt with and quickly before they up the violence.

  • It may just be me, but having a moment of silence for someone shooting at the President's office/home probably isn't the best way to be taken seriously or with respect.

  • I detest Obama as an enemy of the Constitution that he swore to uphold and defend. The damage he and the Progs have done is mind boggling. But the President needs to be removed by law, not some filthy wingnut anarchist.

    To take donations and a moment of silence - are they suggesting that GOD has anything to do with this filth, other than hoping to be able to forgive them - is a new low, even for these animals. SophosArchaeus has good info.

  • They did. They tried that Occupy crap in Phoenix and Tucson, were arrested the FIRST NIGHT for breaking the park curfew.

  • What a joke

  • so sick of seeing these leftist vermin and the bullshit they spew.

  • Come try and occupy a red state you blue Rock'em Sock'em Robots everyone know the blue head falls right off there's 10 of you here hahahahahaha

  • I like how they bow there heads in reverence for the Holy White House because Obama is there Lord and savior fucking losers occupy a morgue you like the guy who shot @and the guy that an illegal fucking mexican alien was try to kill an illegal kenyan makes no sense just like your whole bowel movement . ps fuck you Libs

  • The OWS movement is chocked full of these kinds of idiots...if you hate the Tea Party and support the OWS, then you are an idiot too!!!

  • @HUSTUSA1 I Don't hate the T Party. I Don't hate the OWS. I hate their few differences. Thats why Libs where apart of the T-party at first. Just know, for the last 2 months these young adults are sleeping on the ground in the cold, in the scary big cities streets...right next to crazy homeless people that fox news loves to interview to make Libs look crazy. Love 2 see a T-Party actually protest, instead of reserver 4hr perments 4 their 4hr puss parades. Y'all shame the real name of,"Tea Party!"

  • Big fan of Occupy in general, but what an idiot.

  • what a dope.

  • infiltrator... agitator... wow. San Diego get a fucking hold of yourselves... what on earth!

  • The guy asked for a moment of silence in solidarity for the White House...then for the shooter, after questioning why someone would want to shoot at the White House. You can't be supportive both of an attempt to kill or injure someone at the White House AND in solidarity with the White House...so it seems the more likely reason for including the shooter in the moment is that he get help.

  • @ozshark "they" is inaccurate. it's just one douchebag. dont be foxtarded, just stick to objective facts.

  • @erielhonan what the hell are you talking about? "they" all had a moment of silence to stand in solidarity with the guy who shot at Obama.

  • @erielhonan there is no official representative of the Occutard Movement, therefore, everyone's opinion and stance is a valid representation of the Occutard Movement.

    If some are peaceful and some are violent, it is still a violent movement - it cannot be a semi-violent movement.

  • No words to describe the idiocy, as John Malkovich said in 'Burn After Reading' "I know very well what you represent. You represent the idiocy of today...You're in league with that moronic woman [in this case man]. You're part of a league of morons."

  • Moronic.

    Way to win hearts and minds there buddy.

  • I didnt think it was possible but the OWS has become even more insane.

  • WTF?

  • Moment of silence for a man who tried to kill our president or who could have killed the two innocent girls that live in the White House, who were at home at the time? Moment of silence for those 8 shots he fired? OWS please do better. :(

  • “The urge to save humanity is almost always a false-front for the urge to rule it.” –H. L. Mencken

  • @InfraRedNeck So lets just let humanity die

  • Andddd your a moron.

  • Wow. A moment of silence for the guy who shot at the White House? Are you kidding me??? Who ARE these people?? Every time they open their mouths, stupid comes out.

  • While I support the Occupy movement, I don't support the douchebag who offered solidarity with the shooter. What kind of morality is that, douchebag? Isn't Occupy about improving America through some specific changes to the system? How the hell is shooting the White House relevant to that goal?

    You sir are an idiot. I'm glad your stupid face is on the internet saying your stupid words. Now I know who to ignore and deride. This is the kind of bullshit that will marginalize Occupy. GTFO jerk.

  • @erielhonan

    They are standing in solidarity for someone that wants to kill the US President. Amazing isn't it.

  • Comment removed

  • A great example of useful idiots trying to help the Obama re-election. Nothing but criminals, liberals, progressives, socialists, SEIU, union, ACORN, and general fools with idle time on their time since they get a free ride and want to insure Obama and Capitol Cronies keep stealing from people working for an honest dollar and give some of it to the slackers.

  • @tbenzadrine Okay, hold on, are you suggesting that these idiotic people supporting the guy who was trying to shoot Obama are actually in support of him? Also, why do you think that these protests started? It is because Obama didnt do anything to fix our countrys economic situation. How do you explain that the majority of the politicians looking to shut the protests down are democrats? How do you explain that the majority of the protesters are Ron Paul supporters?

  • "How do you explain that the majority of the protesters are Ron Paul supporters?"

    Can't explain it because the majority are NOT on Paul supporters

  • @wolfengheist Oh, hey! Its you again!

    Uh, yeah, a good number of them are.

  • There are some there misguided that they are but not a majority.. Most Paul supporters would be at Tea Party rallies. Most of the OWS protests consists of Socialists, Marxists, Progressives, and Violent Anarchists,

  • @wolfengheist Im sorry, but youre simply wrong about this. What you dont realize is that there are a number of issues that libertarians and liberals can agree on. A number of people have latched onto Paul's campaign due to his economic and foreign policy beliefs which many people believe will help end the crisis we are currently in. There have been no calls by them to support regular democratic politicians. This is because many Americans have lost faith in the democratic party.

  • If OWS was really concerned about crony Capitalism and if there are a majority of Ron Paul support there which I doubt because I have been to Occupy Chicago then they should be protesting the Obama government right now. They should all be at Washington DC. I haven't seen any of that. Most of them are crowing on and on about the 1%. But they are NOT protesting the 1% in the government.

  • @wolfengheist They havent necessarily been protesting the government per se, but they have been protesting the policies of the Obama administration. And dont forget, there is an Occupy movement in DC.

  • Children in adult bodies! OCCUPY A JOB or a real life!!!

  • Comment removed

  • this movement is so dumb. all they are is spoiled brats gathered in an angry mob trying bully tactics to get their way instead of earning it like American's should.

  • @Gatorkw No, that's a great point. They're the real villains, not the banks that receive hundreds of billions of dollars of interest free loans from the government then lend it to us at whatever rate they think will turn a profit.

    Socialize risk, capitalize profit.

    You may not agree with everything everyone at these rallies says (I have no idea what the guy in the video thought he meant), but fuck, at least stop carrying water for the people who are fucking you over. That guy isn't an enemy.

  • @TBlake34 So the government sets up rules for the bank, sets up a system to benefit the bank, then bails out the bank when it fails.

    How dare the BANK be a part of this, let's protest the BANK for this and go after ONLY the BANK... because they were following the rules and instructions of the government.

    But don't protest the government who controlled every shell in this shell game; because they're Dems and the Repubs might win and make government smaller and less corrupt.

    Can't have that.

  • @gekkobear They're at the scene of the crime. Their location does not imply that they don't think Washington is completely innocent. The banks spend millions of dollars bribing and influencing the electoral process, both sides of the aisle, they took advantage of the system and fucking ruined it.

    The banks are the villains, the government is the enabler. They are protesting the government, but if you'll study science, you'll notice it's difficult to be in two places at the exact same time.

  • "The banks are the villains, the government is the enabler."

    You have it backwards with the real problem of OWS and why I don't support them.

  • @wolfengheist Wrong. Study the financial crisis. Deregulation efforts of the past 30 years (financed by the banks and Wall Street investors, mind you) established a situation where criminally minded profiteers could run wild-the total lack of regulation of the derivatives markets, for example.

    But Washington didn't force the banks to create exotic financial instruments, the ratings agencies to give AAA status knowing it was junk, and then irresponsibly leverage the crap assets..

  • Dude I can go on and on with you about this whole mess and you clearly have it wrong. But i'm not going to get into a 9 paragraph discussion with you on this whole crisis here at work.

  • @wolfengheist Fair enough. I disagree, I've studied the whole shitpile, but this is a terrible forum to argue and I am at work as well.

  • @TBlake34 WRONG excessive regulations & government interferance CAUSED the financial crisis. The regulatory burden has INCREASED exponentially over the last 30 years. Yes the government DID in effect force banks to create those exotic financial instruments. Those instruments were created to act as an insurance policy to spread the risk that the government FORCED them to take on when they forced them to accept risky loans. Unfortunately they were not enough and actually made things worse.

  • @ToddAldrich This is literally the dumbest thing I've read in a while, and as you notice, I'm reading YouTube comments.

    "NO NO, please evil government, PLEASE don't make me create a credit default swap where I combine a car payment, a credit card bill, and a robo-signed mortgage then get a rating agency to call it AAA so I can use the essentially worthless instrument to generate leveraged return. Please, I just want to be honest."

    We are fucked if people really think like Todd.

  • @TBlake34 Sorry but YOU are the ignorant fuck. No one is excusing the real abuses - but most of those people that did indeed abuse the system are being investigated. Those that are NOT being investigated poses a Problem for you liberal idiots. MOST of them are in the Obama administration, are Democrat leaders in congress or are Friends of Democrats in power.

  • @ToddAldrich Yes, you actually are. You're busy conjuring up a completely false, transparently retarded narrative about the financial crisis in order to justify the continuation of the very policies that facilitated the mess in the first place.

    And the weakness of your position is evinced by your knee-jerk assumption that I'm defending Obama on this. He's been horrible. Not as bad as the people who caused the mess, but he's allowed them to get away with it.

  • @ToddAldrich Your position is wrong on so many levels, for example, name that new financial regulation, because I'm happy to discuss the elimination of Glass-Steagall and other severe deregulation efforts.

    But keep it simple:

    1) Name the government program or law that MADE banks give out risky loans. Quote it.

    2) Explain the foreclosure crisis included both non-subprime mortgages and commercial mortgages, neither of which any gov. program dealt with.

    Just total ignorance from you.

  • @TBlake34 1) Community Reinvestment Act: guaranteed loans and made them risk free; one provision allowed complaints about banks to hold up mergers etc.... this leverage was used by community groups (ACORN) to force more unwise lending. NO bank would loan to someone who can't pay it back.... *unless the loan had been guaranteed.* The banks were wrong to do so anyway. Canada never had this problem because there was no CRA, no loan guarantees. The coercion was, true, only enabled 2) to follow

  • @dangervich Holy shit, unreal.

    1) The CRA was not remotely the cause. It only applied to deposit taking institutions, 85% of subprime loans were generated by institutions not subject to the CRA. Those loans had a lower default rate than those not governed by the CRA. Zombie dumbassery.

    And when you mention ACORN as though they had any influence on anything, you reveal yourself to be an ignorant fear mongering dupe. Just embarassing.

  • @TBlake34 That just shows YOUR ignorance.The impact of the CRA was NOT just the DIRECT loans the the CRA was responsible for-it was the LAWSUITS that USED the CRA provisions and subsequent false "studies" to allege racism and redlining.Do i REALLY have to quote the multiple cases where banks WENT TO COURT to not make these risky loans-and then it would STILL underestimate the impact because banks ended up making them to avoid legal battles altogether. Ignorant morons like you forget those things

  • @ToddAldrich There's so much bullshit contained in that paragraph it's impressive. "False studies?"

    Now the truth becomes apparent. You're a fucking fanatic. ACORN was a bunch of well-meaning boobs that got homeless people jobs changing smoke detectors. It's like arguing that Charlie Brown was responsible for the Vietnam War. Just wide-eyed insanity.

    Yes, show me those cases. Show me the results of those lawsuits and show the link between that and the leveraging of CDS's.

  • @ToddAldrich Those lawsuits were a pittance compared with the trillions of dollars of toxic assets created by the banks. So:

    1) The CRA didn't apply to at least 85% of the subprime market. Those lenders were not and could not be sued under the CRA.

    2) The default rates were just as severe in the commercial real estate market, something that had no government involvement.

    3) The subprime loans were not the problem, it was the risky leveraging that generated the trillions of $ of toxic assets.

  • @TBlake34

    The banks didn't create toxic assets. They securitized and traded them. The assets were made toxic by the US government, mostly by Democrats.

  • @blue222blue This is dramatically incorrect. It's just fucking incredible. You guys are so intent on manipulating reality to fit your idiotic political ideas that you can't even grasp the simple aspects of the crisis.

    The banks and other financial institutions were the one WITHOUT INTERVENTION OF GOVERNMENT that decided to to bundle the subprime horseshit loans they were so eager to obtain that they would create fraudulent signers and lie about the credit checks and leverage those insturements.

  • @TBlake34 Forced by the government to make bad loans. CRA.

  • @1Makyo There's something almost admirable about the unified pig-headedness of the right. Once you guys get a dumb fucking idea in your heads, it never goes away.

    Again, the CRA was passed in 1977. 85% of lenders involved in the subprime market WERE NOT subject to the CRA. Loans made under the CRA had a lower default rate than those made by private institutions.

    Just amazing. It's really simple shit, why do you continue to buy such transparent bullshit?

  • @TBlake34

    because Blake, I read. I know how long it has been around. I know it didn't take off until the 90s. I know the banks are guilty of taking a lemon and turning it into a temporary lemonade. I know more than your average bear.I am a conservative,not a republican since Goldwater. It is much easier to be a bloviating demagogic democrat promising to protect the old, the young , the poor, the sick and giving everyone everything they need using tax money. I know , I know.

  • @1Makyo No matter how much you sputter and whine, you can't change reality. The CRA only affected 15% of lenders involved in the subprime market, and those CRA affected loans were MUCH more successful than those generated by private lenders.

    You're just wrong. Stop living in this bullshit fantasy world of your own creation. Why don't we 1) pay attention to reality and 2) hold the appropriate people (both private and government) responsible? Why is that so fucking hard for you people?

  • @TBlake34 "Methinks thou dost protesteth too much" Your answer is carbon copy for the liberal side. I have seen verbatum the exact same answer. Liberals don't want to be smeared with the truth on this one. Your research is an inch deep and a mile wide at best, and that is if you are earnestly seeking to discover the causes of the housing failure in this country. I remember when researching this matter I had to go through pages and pages of "bombed" google addresses to find the one that explains

  • @1Makyo Weak, that's not even an answer. Yes, people keep saying the same thing when it happens to be true. There is really only one way to say the Earth is a sphere, so yes, people arguing against flat Earthers will typically repeat the same set of facts.

    Economically speaking, you're advancing a flat-Earth argument. You're completely wrong, the simple facts I've offered here prove that easily, but you will do everything you can to hang on to long debunked bullshit. That's Republicanism.

  • @TBlake34 Keep on chugglin' dude.

  • @1Makyo Haha, well, we made through all of the denial stages necessary to maintain idiotic right wing viewpoints.

    Congratulations, you have proven yourself a true conservative: no amount of common sense, basic logic, and reasoned thinking will ever impact your political stance.

  • @TBlake34 You win. 

  • I think you might want to look into that one Blue. The government was totally involved with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. More and more is coming out each day about Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi's involvement!!

  • Got the name wrong, that was for TBlake. Sorry Blue.

  • @CavesWoman Perhaps I'm the only watching the news, but the only story coming out involving corruption and Fannie&Freddie involved Newt Gingrich.

    I know complicated ideas are difficult for right wingers, but these two facts are both true AT THE SAME TIME (I know, imposs-amazing):

    1) Fannie and Freddie were incredibly corrupt institutions.

    2) Fannie and Freddie were not responsible for the financial crisis.

  • @TBlake34 2) Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are government agencies. They did buy up bad debt. The derivatives were an insurance plan to hedge against a loss that was obviously coming: they were an outcome of the crisis, not the cause of it.

  • @dangervich Fannie and Freddie were:

    1) Completely corrupt institutions that both democrats and republicans fed from (Hi Newt).

    2) Not responsible for the financial crisis.

    Fannie and Freddie did not even enter the subprime market until very late in the game, and the default rate of F&F backed loans were lower than those of private institutions. F&F securitized almost no actual subprime loans. Private default rates were 6x as high.

    More nonsense. You guys gobble up this BS, amazing.

  • @TBlake34 Very amusing response. Keep making up your "facts." Weak-minded people may believe you. Use common sense. Why would a bank loan money to people who couldn't pay it back? Answer: because the government guaranteed the loans.

  • @dangervich It's honestly impressive how thoroughly you've deluded yourself.

    The banks gave out those loans under the misguided belief that property values would continue to rise. That's why they didn't remotely have cash on hand to cover their ventures when the collapse began.

    It is JUST FACTUALLY WRONG that the government backed those loans. Fannie and Freddie were minor players in the subprime market and only involved themselves very late in the game. You're just fucking wrong.

  • @gekkobear People are protesting the government. There is an occupy movement in DC. What you are getting confused over is, so why exactly would the government want to pay off these banks? It is because the banks have paid off our politicians and have assured them positions within these banks for when they get out of office. What other reason would they want to do this?

  • They aren't blaming the government enough which started the whole ball rolling with their "affordable housing schemes" with Fannie and Freddie begin with.

    "It is because the banks have paid off our politicians "

    Who's more at fault the whore or the john? The government has full responsibility here and didn't have to take lobbyists money.

  • @wolfengheist Okay look, do you want to know why the protest have been against Wall St and not congress? It is because there have been a number of other protests against the government and they havent gotten jack shit done. So then Adbusters and Anonymous decided to organize a protest on Wall St. When this was met by a ton of violence (completely unprovoked) other people got involved and it grew. It really showed who runs the country, the people who get most angry by people protesting them.

  • Comment removed

  • @wolfengheist OWS got more violent after the first few days. Look it up, they were met by violence at the time when they were doing literally nothing illegal.

  • I'll look it up. But even if the video shows the police hitting a protester usually the video doesn't tell the whole story. And the MSM has demonstrated time and time again that they are PRO OWS. Not the local media, I'm talking about the national media like CNN MSNBC, NYT, Washpost, etc

  • @wolfengheist Eh, they have been pretty mixed. There have been a number of both positive and negative reports from them, but actually the MSM had been completely silent through the first couple weeks. Youre not going to find anything on them from the MSM about when the movement actually started. Look up specific dates around september 14th and itll be mainly from protesters w/ cameras themselves.

  • "Eh, they have been pretty mixed."

    Compared to the TPM coverage which was attacked from the beginning for no real reason the OWS coverage was wildly positive from MSM.

  • "When this was met by a ton of violence (completely unprovoked) other people got involved and it grew."

    Not true. OWS is known for being a violent group as many news reports show. So I wouldn't be so quick and claim the police response was (completely unprovoked).

    Also protesting Wall St will really do nothing. You more likely to affect Wall st through the government. If you can't do that then OWS would probably use more violence.

  • @gekkobear If you really believe that the Dems set up the shell game to the exclusion of Repubs you must have been born within the last 18 months. Every politician in Washington is a shell master. That is what they do for a living. You think that putting in one "party" over another fixes anything? All we do is shuffle in one set of players for another. The goal of most is to come out with more money and power than when they went in.