Lord, that cliche is getting old.

Old, but what the hey--the Force is strong with you, young one. Join with me on the Dark Side, and together we will rule the galaxy!

.

"When the financial system is threatened, only the federal government can fix it and that's what we've been doing," he said. "So even though I'm a conservative, I feel very strongly that we did the right thing by getting active and involved when we did."



If you abandon the principals of conservatism, then you are no longer conservative.

Now STFU and get lost.

Dick Wad

Bin Laden hates Dick Cheney.

I once saw a picture of Jesus hugging Dick Cheney.

Clearly, it is too soon to declare this the worst economic crisis since the Depression. Wait until the 20th.

He expects it to get worse.

Um, no. It is the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression.

We don't need to wait to see if it gets worse. It will get worse.

gopher321: Lord, that cliche is getting old.

what do you expect? We only get to use it for nine more days

gopher321: Lord, that cliche is getting old.

Can you actually state ANY real differences between Cheney and evil personified?

Hmmm?

I didn't think so.

So be quiet now.

We stopped believing a word Cheney says on any topic anyway.

Oblivious to the bitter end.

captain_heroic44: Can you actually state ANY real differences between Cheney and evil personified?


I think you are being a tad bit dramatic there, but I will say I am glad he is there, for the most part. He did what was necessary when the situation required it despite public opinion. Darth Vader was required.

captain_heroic44: Can you actually state ANY real differences between Cheney and evil personified?

I'm pretty sure that evil doesn't require shock paddles to wake up from a nap. And wouldn't look like an old guy who keeps crapping out shards of glass covered in hot sauce.

/seriously, Cheney is ugly as fark
//no wonder he's evil

But but but Bush is supposed to be the stupid one!

If cheney says it's too late to call it the worst, it is very likely not too late to call it the worst.

Weaver95: "When the financial system is threatened, only the federal government can fix it and that's what we've been doing," he said. "So even though I'm a conservative, I feel very strongly that we did the right thing by getting active and involved when we did."



If you abandon the principals of conservatism, then you are no longer conservative.

Now STFU and get lost.

Dude, please. He was never a conservative.

Weaver95: "When the financial system is threatened, only the federal government can fix it and that's what we've been doing," he said. "So even though I'm a conservative, I feel very strongly that we did the right thing by getting active and involved when we did."



If you abandon the principals of conservatism, then you are no longer conservative.

Now STFU and get lost.

One could take this as a tacit admission that one of the tenets of "Conservatism" is fundamentally flawed.

You need to either accept that individuals operating under an unregulated free-market system can bring it down for everyone - and be O.K. with that, or you need to admit that perhaps Government has a regulating role to play in the economy that is mutually beneficial to everyone.

Right now we are in "put up or shut up" land. Many Republicans and "Free Market Capitalists" ™ have been espousing the first view above for decades, all the while reaping the benefits of an economic system built on protectionism and regulation.

Now we'll get to see how popular their views are when the inevitable risk associated with them has finally happened. Will they back away from them? (Seems likely if Cheney is any barometer), or will they stick to their guns and say, "Yeah - ok everything is farked up now, but man I made a lot of money over the last ten years."

It will be interesting to see who sticks their necks out. Even more interesting to see if those necks are going to be hung from any trees.

Gated Community Organizer: captain_heroic44: Can you actually state ANY real differences between Cheney and evil personified?


I think you are being a tad bit dramatic there, but I will say I am glad he is there, for the most part. He did what was necessary when the situation required it despite public opinion. Darth Vader was required.

What a cowardly opinion.

Weaver95:
If you abandon the principals of conservatism, then you are no longer conservative.

Now STFU and get lost.

At this point you're just trolling. You've been on these forums enough to have had the market panic explained to you. There is only one entity with enough income and a big enough line of credit to end a market panic and that entity is the federal government. Getting involved to stop that panic and mitigate it's damage is by far in the best interest of the people. Ideology has NOTHING to do with that.

Renowned transvestite sexologist: Weaver95:
If you abandon the principals of conservatism, then you are no longer conservative.

Now STFU and get lost.

At this point you're just trolling. You've been on these forums enough to have had the market panic explained to you. There is only one entity with enough income and a big enough line of credit to end a market panic and that entity is the federal government. Getting involved to stop that panic and mitigate it's damage is by far in the best interest of the people. Ideology has NOTHING to do with that.

Well, as per my post, he could be making a clever point about "Conservatism" as a whole.

Probably not, but it's possible.

Ignore Weaver. Now that the Democrats are getting back into power and he can blame the other guys again, he's going back to his old ignorant ways. He's not going to change his opinions; like every other conservative, he'll declare anyone doing anything that causes problems to be a liberal (or "no true conservative").

I don't think the economic crisis is all that bad either. Yes, we are in serious trouble and need to get to work on solving the problem. Are we headed into another great depression? Nope.

Now, I know there are plenty of Repubs and pessimists out there that hope that we are about to tank- hard! But most of us really don't understand the overall way our economy works and the direction it's headed, nor do we think rationally about it even when intelligent people try to explain it. Instead, we just buy into whatever the media tells us. MSN homepage says we are facing a possible depression? That's good enough!

Seriously, we all need to chill the fark out on this stuff. My savings and 401k are way down too. But I am still not going to panic. At the end of the day I have a much better life than most people on this planet and I am not forgetting it any time soon.

/optimist
//either way, Fark Dick Cheney

Gated Community Organizer: I think you are being a tad bit dramatic there, but I will say I am glad he is there, for the most part. He did what was necessary when the situation required it despite public opinion. Darth Vader was required.

Simply stated, no he did not. He Bush over reacted to the threat from a guy on dialysis holed up in a cave. They then seized even more power by scaring and frightening America into a globe trotting imperialistic adventure and completely failed. When they should have been working to calm down a frightened country, they viewed it as their chance to call anyone who disagreed with them traitors and brow beat everyone for their own personal goals. Of course, this doesn't even broach the fact that if they weren't incompetent twits to begin with, [event redacted due to Giuliani's copyright] should have never happened. And in the process forfeited the moral high ground by changing Saddam's torture chambers with US ran torture chambers.

Renowned transvestite sexologist:
At this point you're just trolling. You've been on these forums enough to have had the market panic explained to you. There is only one entity with enough income and a big enough line of credit to end a market panic and that entity is the federal government. Getting involved to stop that panic and mitigate it's damage is by far in the best interest of the people. Ideology has NOTHING to do with that.

I have spoken to some conservatives who would take issue with this. I'm not one of them, but I know there are some right here on Fark.

Without speaking to the merits of the bailouts, I don't see how one can claim to be in favor of a free and unfettered market and still be in favor of the bailout. The government should never interfere, or sometimes it should. Free market conservatives are either opposed to government interference or they are not.

Were comparable measures taken to deal with these other crises, dick?

sonnyboy11: Seriously, we all need to chill the fark out on this stuff. My savings and 401k are way down too. But I am still not going to panic. At the end of the day I have a much better life than most people on this planet and I am not forgetting it any time soon.

Panic doesn't do anything anyway. To put it bluntly, we'll either fix this soon, or we'll fix it 10 years from now. During that time we'll all muddle along as best as we can.

The point, I think, that needs to be made, is that we need to correct the financial ideology of a certain segment of our population - possibly by beating them over the head with their failure, so that we can attempt to ensure that this doesn't happen again for another generation or two (by which time I'm sure everyone will have forgotten about this and then act really really surprised when they make the same mistakes we made).

gopher321: Lord, that cliche is getting old.

Apparently you have seen much of the "Duke Sucks" meme. I'm not a Duke fan but I would love to see it DIAF.

TwistedFark:
Now we'll get to see how popular their views are when the inevitable risk associated with them has finally happened. Will they back away from them? (Seems likely if Cheney is any barometer), or will they stick to their guns and say, "Yeah - ok everything is farked up now, but man I made a lot of money over the last ten years."

The impression I get, based off quotes from Greenspan, Bernake, Paulsen and the like is that they see the money market panic of 2008 has a fluke. "Once in a century" thing. These has been some tacit admission that the bipartisan wave of deregulation that swept through congress for the past 30 years had something to do with it. They don't see that SEC, on a functional level, now requiring congressional approval for all oversight as being a problem. The SEC still stands in the way of the market.

They haven't learned their lesson. The housing bubble, CDO, and securities fubar that lead to the money market panic of 2008 was NOT a problem with transparency (which seems to be what they seem the problem as being). Even if CDOs were regulated to force transparency, we'd still be in the mess. Every market graph in 2005 said we were in a major housing bubble, and yet they still fed the fire. Even Paulsen said that it was "market driven" while calling it a bubble. Everything that lead to the bankruptcies was NOT a surprise. The "credit shock" (as it was called in the months before it started) was predicted. Everything, with the exception of the Reserve fund/Lehmen brothers panic was predicted, usually years in advance.

We didn't get into this mess because the process wasn't transparent enough, we got into this mess because those in charge decided that the "markets" would solve it. If the Fed had began talking about an unhealthy housing market bubble in 2004, all of this would have been avoided. Those morons need a baby sitter and the baby sitter was handcuffed and blindfolded by congress.

This recession is in its final throes.

Basically, what happened in the markets this time was that people worked out a way to make money

That's great; But then more people wanted in; And that was great; But then more people wanted in; And so on

So what happens somewhere along the line is that there are too many people trying to make money in the same way

And the constant refining of the system to accommodate the growing need for returns reaches a point where, if the regulation is insufficient, the system becomes over-complicated

And then it breaks

jcooli09: I have spoken to some conservatives who would take issue with this. I'm not one of them, but I know there are some right here on Fark.

Without speaking to the merits of the bailouts, I don't see how one can claim to be in favor of a free and unfettered market and still be in favor of the bailout. The government should never interfere, or sometimes it should. Free market conservatives are either opposed to government interference or they are not.

Ideology is a fun thing. In my opinion, when one treats ideology as a series of talking points where you draw initiative from in all cases, you end up setting yourself on fire. This is true for all levels of political convictions. We already know, starting with the series of the depressions in the 19th century all the way up to Great Depression that a non-interventionist mentality is definitely NOT in the best interests of the people. Anyone who choses to ignore this fact and rely on a strict prohibitionist mentality when it comes to market intervention is a fool.

Here's the thing, the opposite is also false. If the government takes a strict policy towards regulation, the people also suffer. The trick is to find that happy place where you prevent market panics, while at the same time allowing people to invest so much money and lose it, the only they can ever do again is flip burgers at McDonalds. I think, it's entirely likely that happy place is a moving target that requires a level hand and watchful eye.

jcooli09: What a cowardly opinion.


To be fair. That is a cowardly answer.

gopher321: Lord, that cliche is getting old.

Too old.

/free basashi!

The crisis seems to be inflicting its damage at the higher financial echelons of the economy, and with people who are stretched far too thin with credit. The most effect I've seen of it is the string cheese I buy every day for lunch has gone from $.99 for three to $.88 for two, to $1.00 for two.

Gas is down, rent is the same, pay is normal. If there is to be a financial 'crisis' in my lifetime, I think that this stage of life is the best for it to happen. No dependents, no needs, and I can fit all of my belongings in a car trunk.

I guess he hasn't checked on his Haliburton stock lately

We're turning the corner on this recession.

At least the dickhead didn't say "So" again.

A Dark Evil Omen: Clearly, it is too soon to declare this the worst economic crisis since the Depression. Wait until the 20th.

I'd give you an internet for that but I'm fresh out.

No kidding, "it's too soon". The 20th is over a week away.

Who exactly gives two f*cks about what this war criminal thinks anymore?

He doesn't even get the broken clock free pass any more...

Outgoing President George W. Bush


"We may want to change our messaging. We definitly want to change messengers. We need new leaders. . .



...There will be uh you know leaders. There are a lot of bright young guys and women in our party that will emerge. And uh, parties go through cycles, part of the times in our political history when the democrats felt like there was no future for them, but I'm optimistic..."



Waaaaah haaaaa haaaaah!

Gated Community Organizer: captain_heroic44: Can you actually state ANY real differences between Cheney and evil personified?


I think you are being a tad bit dramatic there, but I will say I am glad he is there, for the most part. He did what was necessary when the situation required it despite public opinion. Darth Vader was required.

Darth Vader was required? For what? To combat the non-existant terrorists and invade two countries that never did anything to us?

I think modern Conservatism is kind of like Communism - a utopian ideology that sounds good on paper but that is so divorced from reality that any attempt to put it into practice just leads to disaster. And every time it fails, it's proponents claim it was because of a lack of adherence to it's true principles by the public, and outside interference.

ScubaDude1960: Darth Vader was required? For what? To combat the non-existant terrorists and invade two countries that never did anything to us?


Moonbat. You are one. Google it.

Gated Community Organizer: ScubaDude1960: Darth Vader was required? For what? To combat the non-existant terrorists and invade two countries that never did anything to us?


Moonbat. You are one. Google it.

Uh, no. And you need to address the points without the name-calling.

Renowned transvestite sexologist: Every market graph in 2005 said we were in a major housing bubble, and yet they still fed the fire.

Greenspan was in far too long in my opinion. He didn't want the tech bubble, his great legacy, to be remembered as a mere bubble. So, rather than let it unwind as it should have, in a more serious recession, he indeed poured gasoline on the fire with easy, easy credit. This money fueled speculative bubbles in housing, oil, etc, etc.

Gated Community Organizer: ScubaDude1960: Darth Vader was required? For what? To combat the non-existant terrorists and invade two countries that never did anything to us?


Moonbat. You are one. Google it.

Ah. I see you're a true-believer. Easily identified by a reddish tint of the skin due to excessive kool-aid consumption.

whidbey: Gated Community Organizer: ScubaDude1960: Darth Vader was required? For what? To combat the non-existant terrorists and invade two countries that never did anything to us?


Moonbat. You are one. Google it.

Uh, no. And you need to address the points without the name-calling.



Address what points? Non existent terrorists? Or the other one?

I don't need to do anything. What do you want me to address?