Kingwood Underground
the heart and soul of our Kingwood, Texas family
Login - Create Account - Help
Clean out your garage on Kingwood bookoo! Or find local garage sales on Yard Sale Search.com
KU Live!

Another Bush Bites the Dust

who's talking here?

SoupIsGoodFood 1
RiteWingKing 4
DVaz 1
Judas 2
a889324uu 2
Markster 2
AMDG 4
a4947438uu 1
Behold the pale horse 7

     » send to friend     » save in my favorites     » flag dangerous topic flag as a dangerous topic

Judas --- 3 years ago -

'Stuff Happens,' Jeb Bush Says, Answering Question About Gun Violence: Report

Newsweek
By Jac

Updated | Jeb Bush might have just committed another gaffe.

The often clunky candidate said "stuff happens" in the context of a question about gun violence during an event in Greenville, South Carolina, on Friday afternoon, according to a tweet posted by Ryan Lizza, a reporter for The New Yorker and CNN contributor.

Several left-leaning media outlets, including The Daily Beast and The Guardian, immediately picked up Lizza's Tweet. Another reporter posted what he said was a full account of the candidate's comment.

The Bush campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Speaking with reporters at the event, Bush said that the comment "wasn't a mistake."

"I don't even think I have to react to that one," said President Barack Obama when the comment was brought up to him at a press conference at 4:20 p.m. on Friday. He added that the American people should decide how they want to respond to mass shootings, and put the onus on the public to respond to Bush's stance.

One of the Democrats vying for the presidential nomination, Martin O'Malley, did have a reaction, tweeting: ?stuff happens?? That ?stuff? is innocent lives lost. These are preventable tragedies. We must act on gun safety now.

This article has been updated to include Bush's statement that the comment wasn't a mistake and O'Malley's reaction.
k Martinez 10/2/15 at 4:25 PM 

a889324uu --- 3 years ago -

I refuse to believe that our country is stupid enough to elect another Bush. 

Behold the pale horse --- 3 years ago -

I refuse to believe that our country is stupid enough to elect another Bush.

Its worse, we elected Obama twice. 

RiteWingKing --- 3 years ago -

Its worse, we elected Obama twice.

Worse yet. We elected GW twice. Two wars and a Great Recession. 

Behold the pale horse --- 3 years ago -

Two wars and a Great Recession.

At least the recession was caused by Congressional inaction to the housing bubble. Barney (The banking Queen) and his banking committee were warned of this before it happened. But, if you really want to lay blame for that, look no further than the CRA. 

AMDG --- 3 years ago -

Worse yet. We elected GW twice. Two wars and a Great Recession.

Have to say I have been surprised at how little has been done to evaluate and regulate derivative markets since the 2008 collapse.

Although I appreciate the ability to hedge for cash flow and to manage risk, and I also get the added liquidity to capital markets. On balance, I think the explosion in size of the derivative markets in the last 20 or so years has done more harm than good to the economy. 

RiteWingKing --- 3 years ago -

But, if you really want to lay blame for that, look no further than the CRA.

So the CRA caused Bear Sterns and Lehman to go under? They were forced to make loans to poor people.

Then why is Congress not voting to repeal it? 

RiteWingKing --- 3 years ago -

On balance, I think the explosion in size of the derivative markets in the last 20 or so years has done more harm than good to the economy.

Unregulated market...I think you are correct. 

DVaz --- 3 years ago -

At least the recession was caused by Congressional inaction to the housing bubble. Barney (The banking Queen) and his banking committee were warned of this before it happened.

Sorry, but liberals do not like facts. You can't win, even with the truth. 

AMDG --- 3 years ago -

IMO the ability to bundle the loans, sell them to the derivative market, and then allow the secondary buyers to insure them created a moral hazard, and separated the risk from the loans. All founded on the belief that the real estate market would never go down. 

Judas --- 3 years ago -

0undefined 

Behold the pale horse --- 3 years ago -

IMO the ability to bundle the loans, sell them to the derivative market, and then allow the secondary buyers to insure them created a moral hazard, and separated the risk from the loans. All founded on the belief that the real estate market would never go down.

Exactly. All the while jeopardizing the investments by increasing numbers of low quality loans pressured by the Clinton administration. 

a889324uu --- 3 years ago -

Sorry, but liberals do not like facts. You can't win, even with the truth.

Liberals may not like facts, but conservatives wouldn't know a fact if it bit them in the arse.
They rely on lies to feed their voracious base. 

Behold the pale horse --- 3 years ago -

They rely on lies to feed their voracious base.

What lie? 

AMDG --- 3 years ago -

Exactly. All the while jeopardizing the investments by increasing numbers of low quality loans pressured by the Clinton administration

I don't buy that was the drive, I think the big drive was it was a money machine for the banks, and their leaders cashed huge bonus checks. There was no downside for the original lenders and the even the derivative buyers, AIG/other insures were holding a bag they couldn't cover - 

a4947438uu --- 3 years ago -

Its worse, we elected Obama twice.

There you have it - say no more! 

Behold the pale horse --- 3 years ago -

AIG/other insures were holding a bag they couldn't cover -

Wasn't the insurance based on a default rate that was really higher? 

SoupIsGoodFood --- 3 years ago -

Judas. Honduras has the highest firearm related death rate in the world. Yet they have very strict gun laws.

Is theirs a gun issue? 

AMDG --- 3 years ago -

Horse, I am not sure at all how the risk of default at AIG was evaluated. But my best guess is, they convinced themselves there was a very limited risk of default on these bundled loans due to spreading individual risk over the bundle ( kind of the bundle self insuring ) and only a widespread collapse of the real estate market could force them into an untenable position.

What tick me, is AIG made give or take 175M on this product over 2 or 3 prior years, and the management got huge payouts based on that. Them 1 year later the get 80 something million tax dollars to keep them afloat.

I think the bail out had to happen, and too big to fail was true, It just turns my stomach that it was. 

Behold the pale horse --- 3 years ago -

What tick me, is AIG made give or take 175M on this product over 2 or 3 prior years, and the management got huge payouts based on that. Them 1 year later the get 80 something million tax dollars to keep them afloat.

I think the bail out had to happen, and too big to fail was true, It just turns my stomach that it was.


I agree with that. 

Markster --- 3 years ago -

I refuse to believe that our country is stupid enough to elect another Bush.

NEVER! Underestimate the power of stupid in large numbers. The GOP is desperate and want a win. That is partly why I am constantly pointing out the hypocrisy of the GOP. Sure, Jeb seems like a nice enough guy. But he's a Bush, and that's bad bad thing. 

Markster --- 3 years ago -

I think the bail out had to happen, and too big to fail was true, It just turns my stomach that it was.

This president signed into law, legislation that prevents "too big to fail"

"Unscrupulous lenders locked consumers into complex loans with hidden costs. Firms like AIG placed massive, risky bets with borrowed money. And while the rules left abuse and excess unchecked, they also left taxpayers on the hook if a big bank or financial institution ever failed. "

The presidents remarks, the signing of Dodd-Frank 

RiteWingKing --- 3 years ago -

I don't buy that was the drive, I think the big drive was it was a money machine for the banks, and their leaders cashed huge bonus checks. There was no downside for the original lenders and the even the derivative buyers, AIG/other insures were holding a bag they couldn't cover -


Investments Banks did not have to comply with the CRA since they were not depository institutions. That is all a myth. The Republicans didn't bring up a repeal of it since they know it had little bearing on all the MBS defaults.

Canada requires the Banks to own 10% of their originated loans. So they would have some skin in the game.

It was a big money game for the Bankers. Originate the loan. Package up a bunch of them into a MBS. Get a Credit default swap on it. Get a investment grade rating and then sell them around the world at a large profit.

You sold them and now have no risk. Very smart. 

Behold the pale horse --- 3 years ago -

Investments Banks did not have to comply with the CRA since they were not depository institutions

CRA is the community reinvestment act that directed Freddie and Fannie to underwrite increasing numbers of unqualified loans. 

page 1
Login to add your comments!

see more discussions about...

men
politics


Online now:
hit counters

Terms of Service - Privacy Policy - Ice Box

Kingwood Underground