Originally Posted by hrp01

ritchie,ritchie,ritchie...Every time you open your mouth you bash someone with that almighty keystroke..

the truth is that if a moderate republican gets nominated then you will win..If the tea party candidates are nominated you will lose..big time...AGAIN..

Maybe you ought to actually go to a tea party meeting and talk with some of the folks there first hand before you run the flag up and wear the banner so proudly...I have and so have many other moderate democrats...

Democrats ran with boring,inferior candidates like Al bore and Kerry and they lost. So Republicans ran with a boring Mc Cain and they lost. What have we learned here?

If Republicans go with a middle of the road vanilla candidate, they will lose.

Republicans need somebody, like a Reagan to step up to the winner's circle.

Yeah, why not go with a real winning possibility like Michelle Bachmann or Pee Wee Herman?

Originally Posted by buggyone

As I said, they will not be voting for the candidates who are in a party who is not compasionate - and the Tea Party is anything but compassionate. Have one of the Tea Party candidates or Tea Party endorsed candidates on the ticket - and the Republicans lose again.

No added in quips from Village Golfer? What gives?

You are being too kind.
Typical Repub quotes regarding the poverty issue....
"There is no free lunch."
"It isn't the government's responsibility."


OK. Then who gets this going? Reduce regulations, cut taxes, sanction China on Currency, and weaken unions more to cut wages? How does that provide a pent and jelly sandwich for a 7 year old? Or pay the rent? There needs to be a demand for products and services. We need a healthy middle class.

Where are the banks who made out like bandits in the and businesses investing in our country?

Maybe it is weakening buying power of the shrinking middle class.
Take a visit to a local food pantry or soup kitchen and see the desperation people face to pay their rent and feed their families. Go to a store where there is an opening for a low paying job and have 100's of people apply.

In other words, a "compassionate conservative" stepping up isn't in the cards with this stable of candidates. Shouldn't the responsibility for the economic dilemma we face shared by both the current administration and Congress? The Party of NO who put politics ahead of our country are more concerned about pleasing big business.
What would Ronald Reagan do? He would be considered too liberal for this tea party. He reached across the aisle to comprise and get bills passed. That isn't a consideration for Tea Party leaning members of Congress.

Originally Posted by buggyone

Yeah, why not go with a real winning possibility like Michelle Bachmann or Pee Wee Herman?

Did you know that Mickey Mouse wears an Obama watch?

Originally Posted by mitchbr47

........OK. Then who gets this going? Reduce regulations, cut taxes, sanction China on Currency, and weaken unions more to cut wages? How does that provide a pent and jelly sandwich for a 7 year old? Or pay the rent? There needs to be a demand for products and services. We need a healthy middle class.

Where are the banks who made out like bandits in the and businesses investing in our country?...........

How "compassionate" was it for democrats to push for anybody--regardless of ability to pay--to buy a home and get a mortgage KNOWING they were unqualified and prone to default on the mortgage??

How "compassionate" was it to let Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac go on as they were, with democrats claiming there was no problem with them?!?!?

New York Times

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae
By STEPHEN LABATON

Published: September 11, 2003

WASHINGTON, Sept. 10 — The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac , the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt — is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.........

.......Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

"These two entities — Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac — are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed......"


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/11/bu...pagewanted=all