Why is Clinton back on the Democratic pedestal?

[klaatu]

I'll tell you why .... because inside the Democratic Party they are starting to prepare for the recovery from the ass kicking they are about to recieve in November. The Message is ..Remember the Name Clinton and the Roaring 90's? Im sure you all have heard the pundits and their what if? scenarios on the prospect of Hillary challenging Obama in 2012. I dont believe its that far fetched...in fact I even made this prediction myself over a year ago. Its happened a couple of times before and there is no reason why it couldnt happen again. Everything has to be right. And this is why I believe Clinton is doing this road show and the far left media is embracing him. We are watching the foundation of a movement being laid for Hillary. After the elections I believe Hillary will step down as SoS ...and if the State of the Union is still like this next year ....there will be a Draft Hillary move and she will run. Just as Kennedy in 1979 and his Brother in '68.

The one thing they arnt reminding you of when they reminisce about the prosperous 90's
During the mid 90's when Clinton and the Republican Congress were bumping heads and putting together a balanced budget ... It was during this period of the Tech Boom and great prosperity that Clinton decided to push an initiative that had its heart in the right place but lacked monetary sense. In 1994 Clinton with his HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, devised the National Home ownership Strategy, a plan that called for near zero down payments and at its center piece was a goal to drastically increase Home ownership across America, regardless of income and credit history.

Sound familiar ... ?

[apple0154]

I'll tell you why .... because inside the Democratic Party they are starting to prepare for the recovering from the ass kicking they are about to get in November. The Message is ..Remember the Name Clinton and the Roaring 90's? Im sure you all have heard the pundits and their what if? scenarios on the prospect of Hillary challenging Obama in 2012. I dont believe its that far fetched...in fact I even made this prediction myself over a year ago. Its happened a couple of times before and there is no reason why it couldnt happen again. Everything has to be right. And this is why I believe Clinton is doing this road show and the far left media is embracing him. We are seeing ground work being laid for Hillary. After the elections I believe Hillary will resign as SoS ...if the State of the Union is still like this next year ....there will be a Draft Hillary move and she will run. Just as Kennedy in 1979 and his Brother in '68.

The one thing they arnt reminding you of when they reminisce about the prosperous 90's
During the mid 90's when Clinton and the Republican Congress were bumping heads and putting together a balanced budget ... It was during this period of the Tech Boom and great prosperity that Clinton decided to push an initiative that had its heart in the right place but lacked monetary sense. In 1994 Clinton with his HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, devised the National Home ownership Strategy, a plan that called for near zero down payments and at its center piece was a goal to drastically increase Home ownership across America, regardless of income and credit history.

Sound familiar ... ?

I'd like to see some statistics on how many people got their first break on home ownership. The percentage of defaults compared to those who bought a home and kept it.

We have to keep in mind many people already had a home, purchased others as an investment, then just walked away from their investment (defaulted) when they realized the investment was going bad.

The program should have been tailored to first time buyers only. Even if the value of a home decreases it might still be better than never having a home and paying rent all their life.

Sooner or later they will have equity. Even if it takes 20 years they'll have more than they would have if they rented.

[Socrtease]

I'd like to see some statistics on how many people got their first break on home ownership. The percentage of defaults compared to those who bought a home and kept it.

We have to keep in mind many people already had a home, purchased others as an investment, then just walked away from their investment (defaulted) when they realized the investment was going bad.

The program should have been tailored to first time buyers only. Even if the value of a home decreases it might still be better than never having a home and paying rent all their life.

Sooner or later they will have equity. Even if it takes 20 years they'll have more than they would have if they rented.

Equity ONLY matters if you are selling a house. Read Rich Dad Poor Dad. He explains that if the only house you own is the house you live in then it is not an asset, it is a liability. You have to pay for the upkeep and your bottom line does not benefit AT ALL.

[evince]

Equity ONLY matters if you are selling a house. Read Rich Dad Poor Dad. He explains that if the only house you own is the house you live in then it is not an asset, it is a liability. You have to pay for the upkeep and your bottom line does not benefit AT ALL.

This is how people used to think of a home.

If its cheaper than renting then you are doing good.

There is also the feeling of control over your surroundings with a home.

It will take years for people to shake the crazy idea of "House as Money to tap" will leave the American mind.

It should have never exsisted and should never exsist again.

The huge Boom of the 2000's should never exsist again because it is unsustainable and leads to a huge mess like we are now pulling out of.

The right will tout the numbers in the future and forget all about the downfall.

[Rana]

This is how people used to think of a home.

If its cheaper than renting then you are doing good.

There is also the feeling of control over your surroundings with a home.

It will take years for people to shake the crazy idea of "House as Money to tap" will leave the American mind.

It should have never exsisted and should never exsist again.

The huge Boom of the 2000's should never exsist again because it is unsustainable and leads to a huge mess like we are now pulling out of.

The right will tout the numbers in the future and forget all about the downfall.

I hate speculators, a phrase my contractor friend use to use all the time, and then he got greedy...

[evince]

I hate speculators, a phrase my contractor friend use to use all the time, and then he got greedy...

A small mount of speculators dont hurt anything.

The flipping crowd didnt cause this, it was the lack of policy to contain the emerging problem that caused this.

The Bush team just let it happen to keep their numbers high.

They actually believed the corprate CEOs were more Moral than the average person.

Criminals can wear three piece suits.

[Onceler]

People in general - and I'd wager many independents & even Republicans - are much more appreciative & nostalgic about the Clinton years at this point. Prosperity, relative peace, and a Prez who actually worked with Congress (and vice versa).

Like it or not, he'll go down as one of the better Presidents of the modern era.

[Superfreak]

People in general - and I'd wager many independents & even Republicans - are much more appreciative & nostalgic about the Clinton years at this point. Prosperity, relative peace, and a Prez who actually worked with Congress (and vice versa).

Like it or not, he'll go down as one of the better Presidents of the modern era.

Kind of a win by default....

Ike
Reagan
Clinton
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Kennedy
Bush Sr.
Ford
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Johnson
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Carter/Bush jr/Obama

[Rana]

Kind of a win by default....

Ike
Reagan
Clinton
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Kennedy
Bush Sr.
Ford
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Johnson
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Carter/Bush jr/Obama

I would put Reagan in the middle with Ford.

[Superfreak]

I would put Reagan in the middle with Ford.

everyone has their opinion... you have every right to hold the wrong one.

[Rana]

everyone has their opinion... you have every right to hold the wrong one.

Well, thank you kind sir, I appreciate that very much! You are very gracious this morning! here its morning, anyway, carry on!

[klaatu]

Kind of a win by default....

Ike
Reagan
Clinton
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Kennedy
Bush Sr.
Ford
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Johnson
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Carter/Bush jr/Obama

Hmm.. I believe Kennedy had the potential to be in the top rung. Johnson gave us the Great Societythat resulted in the Welfare Generation and he let VietNam get out of control .. I think Id put him down at the bottom with Obama and Carter ..with W slighly above them. The Jury is still out on IRAQ.. if Iraq turns into a Beacon of Liberty in the Middle East... lookout ..

[Rana]

Hmm.. I believe Kennedy had the potential to be in the top rung. Johnson gave us the Great Societythat resulted in the Welfare Generation and he let VietNam get out of control .. I think Id put him down at the bottom with Obama and Carter ..with W slighly above them. The Jury is still out on IRAQ.. if Iraq turns into a Beacon of Liberty in the Middle East... lookout ..

Yeah, I'll buy you dinner if that happens!

[Socrtease]

Hmm.. I believe Kennedy had the potential to be in the top rung. Johnson gave us the Great Societythat resulted in the Welfare Generation and he let VietNam get out of control .. I think Id put him down at the bottom with Obama and Carter ..with W slighly above them. The Jury is still out on IRAQ.. if Iraq turns into a Beacon of Liberty in the Middle East... lookout ..

Beacon of Liberty? Really? Not a chance. Sharia law, Shi'ite domination of Suni. In 15 years we will be lucky if Iraq has not dissolved it's border with Iran and they aren't one big United Islamic Republic. The money spent on the war in Iraq probably could have been just effective if not more fomenting revolution in Iran. Iraq was a boondoggle; an attempt to show that we did something about terrorism and that we "won". It was a waste of blood and treasure and no history will ever be kind to it. It is also the point in history where we lost our moral compass and thought that it was better to behave like barbarians and totalitarians than a country founded by the likes of Jefferson, Washington Adams and Franklin.

[klaatu]

Beacon of Liberty? Really? Not a chance. Sharia law, Shi'ite domination of Suni. In 15 years we will be lucky if Iraq has not dissolved it's border with Iran and they aren't one big United Islamic Republic. The money spent on the war in Iraq probably could have been just effective if not more fomenting revolution in Iran. Iraq was a boondoggle; an attempt to show that we did something about terrorism and that we "won". It was a waste of blood and treasure and no history will ever be kind to it. It is also the point in history where we lost our moral compass and thought that it was better to behave like barbarians and totalitarians than a country founded by the likes of Jefferson, Washington Adams and Franklin.

Im not going to argue any of this ... im just saying IF... which initself is a likely far out of range IF. I agree...I believe it was a huge misfire ...