Kamp Alinsky Crowd Represents Democrats

The crowd of Occupy Wall Street (and its many offshoots across the nation) is a mob. They are followers of Saul Alinsky and they are causing social unrest in hope of changing the way the nation does business but not for the best. They falsely claim they represent 99% of the country because they are not the 1% of our nation that is really wealthy. They do not represent the 99%. In fact, they represent only a small part of the 99% in this nation who are not wealthy.

But they do represent the Democrats, the Socialists, the Communists and the Islamic radicals, all of whom have endorsed their activities.

The occupy crowd around the country has been involved or implicated in a number of crimes including drug distribution, rape, and their presence seems to increase the crime rates of their occupied territory. They are supported by the aforementioned groups and that includes Democrats like Barack Obama, Barney Frank and Nancy Pelosi, all of whom have stated that support.

The Democrats support these people and dare not talk about the illegal activities, the public defecation, the violence, the vandalism and the assaults on police because they do not want to lose their support. This is their base.

Contrast the FLEA baggers with the TEA Party. There has never been an arrest of a TEA Party member at a TEA Party event. The TEA Party supporters leave places cleaner than when they arrived and there are no allegations of drug use or distribution, rape or any other crime. The only allegations ever made are that the TEA Party members are racist. These allegations are all false and have been proven so many times. The allegations of using the N word toward members of Congress have been shown false and yet, the left continues to harp this lie.

The members of the left who support the degenerates in the Occupy movement have called the TEA Party unpatriotic, racist and a number of names that allude to vulgar sexual activities.

Think about it for a moment. The Democrats openly deride the law abiding and peaceful TEA Party members as un-American and racist for following the law while openly praising and supporting the Occupy members who are breaking laws left and right. The left has yet to address the drug, rape and violence criminal acts by the Occupy crowd but jumps on a racist claim about the TEA Party the moment the word is uttered.

What does that tell you about the Democrats who support the Occupy crowd?

It tells me that they agree with the crimes, they agree with the goals (if anyone in the Occupy crowd could actually give a coherent statement about the goals) and that they agree with the tactics.

The Democrats agree because the tactics come right out of Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals.

This is how radicals try to affect social change. This is what they do to get what they want and what they want is a collapse of the system, the movement to Socialism, the forced redistribution of wealth and more government involvement.

The Democrats support these people because they want the unrest. They want it to escalate and evolve into widespread chaos so that people will clamor for government to do something, anything, to stop the insanity.

And Democrats are waiting for that moment to inject more government into our lives. They will be the saviors. They will stop the insanity by imposing more restrictive rules as they move us closer to Socialism.

They have created and supported a crisis because, as they openly told us, they do not let a crisis go to waste.

This is by design. This is what the Democrats want. This is how they have trained for decades and this is the closest they have come. They are following Alinsky’s script in order to affect change.

This is the Change part of the Hope and Change in Obama’s 2008 campaign.

They think they will succeed.

They are wrong. If this devolves into social unrest the overwhelming part of the 99% in this country who are not wealthy and are not part of this mob will stop them in their tracks. Alinsky said they had to work to get a reaction. Escalating violence will get a reaction they do not like.

I have heard those who support them claim these people are being peaceful and have a right to protest. They have every right to protest but their right ends when it infringes upon the rights of others and these people are doing just that. They are hurting businesses, they are committing acts of violence, and they are breaking the law.

If they want someone to listen to them then they need to obey the law.

And staying where you are not allowed, committing rape, using and distributing drugs, urinating and defecating in public, committing vandalism and being violent are not legal acts and do not constitute obeying the law.

Let me put it in simpler terms for the liberals. You have to obey the law when exercising your right to protest.

When you don’t, you lose your right.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Big Dog


If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

37 Responses to “Kamp Alinsky Crowd Represents Democrats”

  1. Adam says:

    I love watching you bend over backwards to defend the astroturf TEA Party and then slander the Occupy movement with any piece of outrage or bad press you can find.

    The Occupy movement is far from perfect but it’s also not backed by right wing money and right wing media that protects and coddles the movement and white washes all the negative press. In fact the same right wing press that fueled the TEA Party has gone out of it’s way to slander the Occupy movement just as you’re doing. I guess when it comes to the right wing noise machine each and every one of you have to do your part.

    • Big Dog says:

      I love how you continue to trumpet the lie that the TEA Party is astro turf and that big right wing money is involved. There is no proof of that because it is not true but you keep screaming it. Funny how you ignore the Soros, MoveOn, union asturf connections in the OWS movement.

      I also find it strange that you took every chance to disparage the TP and often repeat the lies about it while you support the OWS folks. You claim the media are covering for the TP but this is not true. What the media did is parrot lies and conjure up stories that the misinformed like you followed. The N word story is a big example. 100 thousand dollar reward for proof and none exists, the reward goes unclaimed.

      It is also funny how you are sidestepping the real issues. You see, if we put aside all your claims, just ignore who is or is not behind the groups, ignore my claims and look at the facts. The facts are not one TP person has been arrested at any of the events and the number of days of TP protests is 250 times more than OWS. 2500 people have been arrested in OWS in 40 days of protest. TP, nearly 1000 days of protest and no arrests. Number of rapes: TP=0, OWS=4. Cost to clean up and keep OWS from creating mayhem, over 2 million dollars, TP no cost. They clean up and extra police are not needed to keep them from rioting.

      So address the basic facts. The OWS is a mob that is engaged in illegal behavior. The TP is not.

      Let us look at your claim about right wing press slandering the OWS. First of all the only right wing media is FOX. The rest belings to the left (in fact, it is a wing of the Democrat Party). Slander is defined as:

      1.defamation; calumny: rumors full of slander. 2.a malicious, false, and defamatory statement or report: a slander against his good name. 3.Law. defamation by oral utterance rather than by writing, pictures, etc.

      What has been reported is the truth about what is going on. Therefore, no slander is involved, period.

      Now, look at the statements of Olbermann, Maddow, Matthews, and the entire left wing media and see how many actual slanders took place.

      The N word LIE, a slander. The white guy brings gun because he hates black president cropped picture of a BLACK guy with a gun, a lie and deliberate deceit, slander. The clipped video that shows people at a TP event with racist signs and language that ends before what really happened is discovered. The people were infiltrating and TP people were there and told them they had to leave, there was no tolerance for their views. That was deliberate, a lie, and slander.

      So while you are whining about slander, look at where it really takes place. before you throw out BS, address the truth. The Democrats disparaged the TP as unAmerican and unpatriotic but said they support the OWS. This shows what they support and how unAmerican THEY really are.

    • Big Dog says:

      OWS bad press is true and demonstrated as such.

      TP bad press was lies and demonstrated as such.

    • Big Dog says:

      I also like how you and your peeps called the TP racist because they lacked diversity (which involved you all ignoring the non white people) but uyou ignore the non diverse groups at the OWS. They must be, by your definition, racists because they lack black faces…

    • Blake says:

      At least the TEA Party hasn’t had to taste tear gas, or feel the cuffs as they are slapped on- the FLEA Party hasn’t had the luxury of being exempt from those feelings, simply because they act out, like surly children.
      Remember, what goes on youtube stays there forever-will a young boy or girl ask their daddy, “Was that you that was crapping on that police car?”
      Oh how is he going to answer?

  2. victoria says:

    Tea Party people and conservatives in general are so racist, you know. Never mind that the rising favorite right now all ac ross the nation is Herman Cain.

    • Adam says:

      Cain barely leads a few polls in a clown car primary. That’s hardly evidence that the White Christian Male party is ready to turn a corner. Cain has no money, no organization, and no clue. If there was even one single decent candidate in the race Cain would be so far down in polls he’d have dropped out by now. Nothing is certain in the primary until the voting starts but Cain needs a lot more than polls to get through it.

  3. Ferd Berfel says:

    “The Occupy movement is far from perfect…”wow. Is that an understatement or what.
    And the only thing you can find to blame on the Tea Party is that…it is backed by right-wings and their money? And the crime is?

    No one has to, “go out of (their) way to slander the Occupy movement.” It is far from perfect, just as you said. Far far far from perfect, and frankly, when it comes to politics, I prefer close to perfect. Like the Tea Party. As close to perfect as it gets.

  4. Adam says:

    “I love how you continue to trumpet the lie that the TEA Party is astro turf and that big right wing money is involved.”

    Considering you were calling OWS astroturf the day after it started I’d say you need to look the term up. Or maybe you’ve forgotten that the TEA Party was promoted by Fox News, funded by folks like the Koch brothers, had high ranking Republicans speaking for it early on, and was all propped up by lobbyists and special interests? Other than that it’s very grass roots.

    “The Democrats disparaged the TP as unAmerican and unpatriotic but said they support the OWS.”

    Sorry. In my book when your side does things like talking about secession and threatens to use the bullet if the ballot fails, I’d call that pretty unAmerican. Mix that in with views you personally hold like making poor people have less vote in government, making welfare recipients your personal slaves, etc., I’d say that’s pretty unAmerican.

    • Blake says:

      Adam, I would like to see proof that the Koch brothers funded the TEA Party- I know the Texas TEA Party draws its support (and donations) from its individual members, and have yet to see ANY proof that, unlike Soros and his ilk,who have unquestioningly paid some of the OWS protesters to stay there, the Koch brothers paid ANY money to the TEA Party.
      As for FOX news, they were the only real news group who did stories on the TEA Party- this doesn’t make them complicit in a conspiracy, it just makes them the only news network with the huevos to actually do real stories on this phenomenon- the rest of the lamestream media just, as Nanny Pelosi tried to do, was ignore and/or ridicule them.
      The OWS wants their student loans forgiven?
      Just because they can’t get a job in the real world after majoring in “Literary Arts” or “Ethnic Indian Studies”?
      Perhaps they should have taken their drooling lips off of the bong long enough to decide on a real world career, don’t ya think?

      • Adam says:

        You want proof? You only have to look for it. The TEA Party movement (like any major modern movement really) is driven by non-profits and political action committees. What sprang up as a supposedly “grassroots” movement was really the work of a network of groups like Freedom Works and Americans For Prosperity. The Tea Party Express is just one example though some in the movement moved to reject that particular finger of the movement due to funding concerns and partisanship.

        The same way that Soros gives money to movements by funding groups closely aligned with those movements, the Koch brothers do too. They are founders and have given major money to Americans for Prosperity for instance.

        As far as Fox News is concerned it goes far beyond merely covering the events. Fox hosts like Hannity headlined the events. Beck dedicated massive chunks of his airtime to promoting his own Tea Party events which were also in turn a web work event by Tea Party Patriots, Freedomworks, etc.

        This is not to say that every Tea Party event everywhere is funded by Koch or these groups or that they pay people to be there. No one is saying that. But if you think the movement would be strong without money and support from Koch brothers, and Rupert Murdoch and promoted by Fox News pundits you’re mistaken.

        As I said this is that makeup of modern movements. The Iraq war protests were not grass roots either for that matter. A network of groups moved on it’s key concerns and money flowed down from the top. The Occupy movement started out fairly grass roots but it didn’t take long for the money to start to flow from liberal groups.

        What I find so funny about how scared conservatives are of Soros is that they care little that 2 of the richest men in America are bankrolling conservative movements to an even greater degree than Soros.

        You can read more about the billionaires bankrolling groups that support the TEA Party movement and other conservative causes.

        • Blake says:

          Are you jealous that the TEA Party has been and continues to be REAL grassroots, as opposed to the FLEA Party?
          The fact that EDITORIAL and opinion people like Hannity and Beck have gone down and stood in solidarity with the TEA Party is not something to condemn them for- do ANY of your side publicly side with the FLEA Party? Hell no, because, 1)- they might actually have to brush up against some of their unwashed running dogs, and, 2)- If something went wrong, they would be tarred with the same brush that paints such a communistic picture of these poor, poor, street urchins, who have ipods, blackberries, and other smartphoness and live off of mommies dime.

          • Adam says:

            Yes, I’m jealous that the occupy movement isn’t made up of old white people who protest on the weekends at events set up by rich right wing groups and promoted by the right wing echo-chamber. Too bad.

            • Big Dog says:

              Of course the TEA Party is not made up of old white people. It includes people of all ages and all colors. I know Adam has trouble with this but he has been programmed by the MSM and his handlers in the Communist party of the left. TEA Party has all ages and all colors and that has been demonstrated time and again.

              Now I want Adam to address the OWS crowd which has no one of color in it. I want Adam to condem them as a white group of people and therefore (by implication like he does with the TP) call them racists.

            • Big Dog says:

              I also should point out that the TP protests on many days of the week. They just don’t spend a lot of consecutive days together because they have to get back tot heir jobs. They are the 53% that pays for the 47%. That small fraction of the 99% that are breaking the laws do not need to worry about getting back to their jobs.

              And is it not telling that Adam sides with law breakers rather than law abiders? And you know Adam’s agenda. He sees racists at the TP because the movement is allegedly lilly white (and old because Adam is a ageist) but the OWS is OK with him even though it is lilly white (and has a lot of old hippies in it as well). Adam is a mind numbed drone of the progressive/socialist/communist movement. He wants YOUR money because it should all be free.

      • Adam says:

        And by the way, I’m still waiting on your proof that unemployment insurance has anything to do with measuring unemployment. Are you just immune to the facts on that? I hate to see one of your talking points go up in flames but luckily you tend to ignore reality in favor of shoddy ideas.

        • Blake says:

          The US government uses the figures on first-time unemployment applications as one guage for determining how many people are out of work- do you not follow this? It’s on every network, even the brain-dead MSNBC. That is one metric the government uses, but if you choose to ignore this, that’s your fault, Kool-aid drinker.

          • Adam says:

            I can point to evidence to back up my claims on how unemployment is calculated. You can call names? Good job. Show me proof. You won’t find it because you’re wrong.

            • Big Dog says:

              Adam, you point to your evidence as a claim that they use a metric to determine such things. The self employed are counted by a metric, not physically counted. The self employed do not get some of the “benefits” (handouts) that others get so they are under represented. Blake is right, they do not count them. Your claim is they do count them because they use a metric. That is not the same as counting them.

              They use the metric because they do not count them.

            • Adam says:

              “Of course the TEA Party is not made up of old white people. It includes people of all ages and all colors.”

              Sure, it includes some just like the GOP. The TEA Party lines up with US demographics in some ways and not in others. The majority of the supporters are white conservative Republican men over the age of 50.

              “And is it not telling that Adam sides with law breakers rather than law abiders?”

              Nice try. I don’t side with the law breakers in OWS any more than you side with the racists in the TEA Party. It’s just that you think racists are rare in the TEA Party and law abiders are rare in OWS.

              “The self employed are counted by a metric, not physically counted. … They use the metric because they do not count them.”

              No one is physically counted. If you think that is some kind of argument you’re a bit confused. Because unemployment insurance figures are not complete and because physically counting everyone is not an option they use a survey (which you apparently call a “metric”) to examine the employment status of the population. Self-employed people are surveyed just like everyone else. Next time you come to Blake’s defense try bringing facts. That’s what he needs to win his argument.

  5. victoria says:

    You want to talk UnAmerican–well lets talk about the legalized theft called taxes anymore which is taking money from people who have earned it and giving it to someone who hasn’t which is what this country has become more and more. And let’s talk about the class warfare that has become the chant of the OWS crowd.
    This says it best:
    Mary Beth Hicks
    The Washington Times
    Oct 20, 2011

    Call it an occupational hazard, but I can’t look at the Occupy Wall Street protesters without thinking, “Who parented these people?”

    As a culture columnist, I’ve commented on the social and political ramifications of the “movement” – now known as “OWS” – whose fairyland agenda can be summarized by one of their placards: “Everything for everybody.

    Thanks to their pipe-dream platform, it’s clear there are people with serious designs on “transformational” change in America who are using the protesters like bedsprings in a brothel.
    Yet it’s not my role as a commentator that prompts my parenting question, but rather the fact that I’m the mother of four teens and young adults. There are some crucial life lessons that the protesters’ moms clearly have not passed along.

    Here, then, are five things the OWS protesters’ mothers should have taught their children but obviously didn’t, so I will:

    • Life isn’t fair. The concept of justice – that everyone should be treated fairly – is a worthy and worthwhile moral imperative on which our nation was founded. But justice and economic equality are not the same. Or, as Mick Jagger said, “You can’t always get what you want.”
    No matter how you try to “level the playing field,” some people have better luck, skills, talents or connections that land them in better places. Some seem to have all the advantages in life but squander them, others play the modest hand they’re dealt and make up the difference in hard work and perseverance, and some find jobs on Wall Street and eventually buy houses in the Hamptons. Is it fair? Stupid question.

    • Nothing is “free.” Protesting with signs that seek “free” college degrees and “free” health care make you look like idiots, because colleges and hospitals don’t operate on rainbows and sunshine. There is no magic money machine to tap for your meandering educational careers and “slow paths” to adulthood, and the 53 percent of taxpaying Americans owe you neither a degree nor an annual physical.
    While I’m pointing out this obvious fact, here are a few other things that are not free: overtime for police officers and municipal workers, trash hauling, repairs to fixtures and property, condoms, Band-Aids and the food that inexplicably appears on the tables in your makeshift protest kitchens. Real people with real dollars are underwriting your civic temper tantrum.

    • Your word is your bond. When you demonstrate to eliminate student loan debt, you are advocating precisely the lack of integrity you decry in others. Loans are made based on solemn promises to repay them. No one forces you to borrow money; you are free to choose educational pursuits that don’t require loans, or to seek technical or vocational training that allows you to support yourself and your ongoing educational goals. Also, for the record, being a college student is not a state of victimization. It’s a privilege that billions of young people around the globe would die for – literally.

    • A protest is not a party. On Saturday in New York, while making a mad dash from my cab to the door of my hotel to avoid you, I saw what isn’t evident in the newsreel footage of your demonstrations: Most of you are doing this only for attention and fun. Serious people in a sober pursuit of social and political change don’t dance jigs down Sixth Avenue like attendees of a Renaissance festival. You look foolish, you smell gross, you are clearly high and you don’t seem to realize that all around you are people who deem you irrelevant.

    • There are reasons you haven’t found jobs. The truth? Your tattooed necks, gauged ears, facial piercings and dirty dreadlocks are off-putting. Nonconformity for the sake of nonconformity isn’t a virtue. Occupy reality: Only 4 percent of college graduates are out of work. If you are among that 4 percent, find a mirror and face the problem. It’s not them. It’s you.

    • Adam says:

      There’s always been and always will be taxes. Taxes are lower now than they’ve been in a long, long time. We don’t take from those with money and give it to those who don’t simply because we think one group deserves it more or less than another. It’s simply that we no longer live in a country that let’s it’s people starve and struggle and bring down the rest of us in doing so.

      Let me add more to what I was saying about Cain: I think Cain is a smart business man and probably knows more about economics than any of the other candidates running. I would love to see Cain win a state primary and roll with it. The problem is the winners of the first few primaries have little to do with polls or popularity but simply it’s a matter of how much money they’ve poured into it and how much ground work they’ve done in those states. Cain’s campaign has series issues when it comes to that. I think Cain has a lot of crazy views but so do the rest of the candidates. He’s been better at articulating some views than the other candidates though and he’s obviously picked up a lot of support. I just seriously doubt Cain’s message can overcome his weak campaign.

      • victoria says:

        Spoken like a true elitist.

        • Adam says:

          Definition of elitist:

          A person who believes that a system or society should be ruled or dominated by an elite.

          And how does that apply to me?

      • Schatzee says:

        I think you’re missing the point a lot of people have been making – we didnt decide as a country to provide food and other services for starving and struggling people. The government has done that. Compassion is giving of yourself; extortion (spreading the wealth) is forcing others to give so that others can receive. If you as a person feel that people in this country should not be starving, then you as a person should donate the money you earn to helping those people. But allowing the government to force all taxpayers’ money to support programs that are not Constitutionally supported or permitted is a very different thing.

        This government has become too big and taken too great a role in our lives. There are places in this world with cradle-to-grave care; we’re just not one of them. That’s what makes us different and, at one time anyway, made us great.

        Although there are numerous causes and effects going into the making this catastrophe, in my humble opinion two of the largest ones are the government-created dependency of a large group of people (establishing people who feel they are “entitled” to something for nothing) and the raising of children in this “everyone gets a trophy just for showing up” era. No one learns the value of working hard to win because there are no winners and losers. Unfortunately that is not reality. Some people are better at things than others; some people are smarter; some people are luckier. Stuff happens and those that feel they deserve something just for showing up cannot seem to grasp that simple concept. In turn, they fail to thrive in society and become dependent on [parents, government, drugs, crime] to get by.

    • Schatzee says:

      Victoria – thanks for sharing that. It is incredibly well-said. I agree with the columnist that these “poor” kids did not learn the lessons above and should have. I remember hearing quite frequently growing up that “life isn’t fair – you do the best with what you got and make it the best you can.” This group of entitled miscreants does indeed seem to be a parenting experiment gone bad…

  6. Big Dog says:

    The racists you claim are in the TP are usually plants who are chased away by the real members. With thousands arrested in the OWS and their call for Socialism it is not surprising you side with them.

    I find it funny that when UE was at 5% for Clinton he was wonderful, when it was the same or lower under Bush the numbers were false and at >9% for Obama it is all good. The self employed are under counted by a great deal, point I made and a fact that stands.

    • Adam says:

      “The racists you claim are in the TP are usually plants who are chased away by the real members.”

      Same way with the occupy movement I’m sure.

      “I find it funny that when UE was at 5% for Clinton he was wonderful…”

      I hardly see your point. I think we agree anywhere under 5 is great. Bush never had lower unemployment than Clinton but he finally did have almost 2 years of great unemployment before it rose to 8% as he left office. The 9% under Obama is not his fault and would be higher without legislation he signed into law.

      “The self employed are under counted by a great deal, point I made and a fact that stands.”

      A fact needs evidence, you know? Where is it? Is this the Blake school of argument where you just keep saying over and over you are right because your gut tells you so? Now there’s two of you saying it so you’re doubly right? Let me know when you find facts.

      • Big Dog says:

        Yeah, except the TP chases the infiltrators away and the OWS welcomes them as they all get arrested.

      • Big Dog says:

        BTW, the UE under Bush never went above 6.0% for any year (it did on a monthly basis) and under Clinton the highest yearly UE was 6.9%. It was not 8 when he left office, it was in the 7% range which are monthly figures (and definitely under 8). The average for the 8 years under Clinton 5.2%. The average for the 8 years under Bush, 5.2% so how you can say bush was not as good as Clinton, hard to see. Important to note the years with the best UE numbers were when Republicans controlled Congress regardless of who was in WH. When you are defending Obama it would be best to come armed with facts (isn’t that how you put it).

        A fact needs evidence. how many reports do you need to see that discuss the undercounting or that unemployment numbers are misrepresented or not accurate or the methods are changed to sway the numbers do you need? The self employed are undercounted.

      • Big Dog says:

        Yes, Bush had lower unemployment than Clinton, look at the yearly numbers. The average was the same over 8 years.

        • Adam says:

          I agree if you average out over the years though counting the time in office itself instead of simply the years shows Bush never got lower than Clinton. You can see that from looking at the graph.

          What you’ll also notice is that Clinton’s trend is constantly down while Bush’s low point is sandwiched between two spikes in unemployment. The period between June 2003 and May 2007 is the only time of decline and unemployment. Exactly half the Bush years were spent under increasing unemployment.

          “How many reports do you need to see that discuss the undercounting or that unemployment numbers are misrepresented or not accurate or the methods are changed to sway the numbers do you need?”

          I’d settle for one report that suggests the survey of households either leaves our or even undercounts the self-employed. Blake suggests we can add to the unemployment percentage base on the faulty idea that self-employed are not counted. He’s wrong. You’re simply adding arguments in that are not relevant.

        • Adam says:

          “Important to note the years with the best UE numbers were when Republicans controlled Congress regardless of who was in WH.”

          Republicans controlled Congress from 1995 to 2007. They have the best and the worst. Plus you had a Republican Congerss and Republican White House for all the years when Wall Street lost it’s mind with mortages leading to a recession you blame on Democrats simply because they were in office a few months before unemployment began to rise.

          • Big Dog says:

            I am so glad I was able to draw you out in the mortgage arena. I blame the Democrats for the mortgage crisis that led to the meltdown because they were responsible. I have told you before that Clinton and the rest of the Democrats forced banks to make bad loans OR ELSE and that they encouraged Fannie and Freddie use to further underwrite the bad mortgages. You claim it is not so and it was the companies run wild, obvious by your talking point comment.

            Let us put this to bed now. The Clinton folks made the rules, had 10 agencies threatening banks and forcing them to do things. It encouraged the kind of lending it NOW calls predatory. You read the story and you will see.

            Your talking points are all over, it was the CRA and Clinton with his Democrats that caused it, period. Now you can no longer blame it on Bush, it was Clinton. The rules created caused it, period.

            You are no longer allowed to lie about it. I was right, have been right and will continue to be right. The words are there, the memos are there, the documents are there. Government meddling by Clinton and the Democrats caused it.

            The Republicans did not have complete control over Congress for all that time. You say they had the good and the bad but they had the good, the bad came when Dems took over (about a year after, not a few months) and as I have shown, it was Dem policies that caused the problems.

            However, if you want me to do it like you do, when the Dems were in the minority they were obstructionists. They blocked Bush’s agenda and that is what went wrong. That IS what you are trying to claim with Republicans when they were minority and now that they have one half of one third of the government…

            • Big Dog says:

              And my assertion is more accurate. Bush and his administration warned on 16 different occasions that Fannie and Freddie were a problem. Frank, Dodd, Waters, and the rest said it was not so and allowed it to continue. While Barney was having sex with the head of one of them (in more ways than one) he said all was well when it was not. Remember, it was all a racist attack according to you morons.

              As the linked article shows, it WAS your side and it WAS your obstruction and it WAS your guys fault. Yes, you can see it and there is no refuting it. No more lies from you.

  7. Big Dog says:

    Once again, the periods of low for both were when Republicans were in charge of Congress.

  8. Big Dog says:

    The Bush Clinton numbers were basically the same. Bush had a spike in th emiddle (came after 9/11) amd problems arose when Dems took charge. Look at the numbers for Obama, never will be as good as Bush. Clinton and Bush, nearly the same.