Obama tells NAACP blacks must take responsibility

Abookamongstthemany

my2hands wrote:

no, i was just figuring while you had nader on the brain in this thread i would ask. the world is not out to get you.

Actually I was having an adult discussion about Iran and Obama til you showed up.

my2hands wrote:

and you do know that arguing about nader on the MT all day long is not going to change anyones mind or bring him 1 extra vote, or help change anything? you are wasting your time when you could be actually helping his campaign and causes you support

Wrong again. I have actually convinced a few here to support him. And every idea put out there makes a difference and plants seeds in people's minds for the better or the worse...that's all subjective. I do help his campaign in other ways than this board also such as petitioning for ballot access. Networking/use of the internet are huge parts of campaigning these days, though. You can reach FAR more people this way than you ever could in person.

Abookamongstthemany

RainDog wrote:

Actually, the 30% cap was an amendment to the 2005 bankruptcy bill. The overall bill, S.256, was voted against by only 24 Senators - all Democrats - of which Obama was one. It was a terrible bill, if you ask me, and Obama did the right thing by voting against it. The overall bill means more money for "them" and a 30% cap amendment wouldn't have done much to change that.

Funny you should bring up Hillary, though. She voted in favor of the amendment but was the only Senator to not vote at all on the bill itself.

I think it would have been at least some relief and I stand by that. With no ceiling, it still leaves people with no federal protection and the possibility of things getting even worse.

Rhinocerous Surprise

my2hands wrote:

and you do know that arguing about nader on the MT all day long is not going to change anyones mind or bring him 1 extra vote, or help change anything? you are wasting your time when you could be actually helping his campaign and causes you support

I recall people saying similar things to the Ron Paul contingent, and yet people are now talking about that as the greatest use of grassroots campaigning in recent memory.

RainDog

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

I think it would have been at least some relief and I stand by that. With no ceiling, it still leaves people with no federal protection and the possibility of things getting even worse.

So, ideally, he should have voted for the amendment but against the bill? I disagree. Even though the bill passed (i.e. Obama failed to stop it), I think voting against the bill and any attempt to make is seem better than it was was the right thing to do.

Abookamongstthemany

RainDog wrote:

So, ideally, he should have voted for the amendment but against the bill? I disagree. Even though the bill passed (i.e. Obama failed to stop it), I think voting against the bill and any attempt to make is seem better than it was was the right thing to do.

Yeah, I think that 30% is better than nothing, no protection. I think a lot of people in these predatory lending situations would agree.

RainDog

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Yeah, I think that 30% is better than nothing, no protection. I think a lot of people in these predatory lending situations would agree.

Actually, for people in predatory lending situations, nothing would have been the best thing of all - at least in my opinion. Prior to the bill passing, it was easier for an individual to declare bankruptcy. Now? Yeah, good luck. If you ask me, I don't think there was much wrong with the bankruptcy laws in this country before 2005. Focusing on one amendment that to me amounts to less than a band-aid is kind of a distraction, but we can disagree.

Now that we've covered the NAACP, Iran, and U.S. bankruptcy laws (you know, all the most important stuff in the world), I think it's time for me to go. Till the next time!

Abookamongstthemany

RainDog wrote:

Actually, for people in predatory lending situations, nothing would have been the best thing of all - at least in my opinion. Prior to the bill passing, it was easier for an individual to declare bankruptcy. Now? Yeah, good luck. If you ask me, I don't think there was much wrong with the bankruptcy laws in this country before 2005. Focusing on one amendment that to me amounts to less than a band-aid is kind of a distraction, but we can disagree.

Now that we've covered the NAACP, Iran, and U.S. bankruptcy laws (you know, all the most important stuff in the world), I think it's time for me to go. Till the next time!

I get what you are saying but something seems better than nothing to me still so why not?

Til then

angelica

what's with the ongoing personal baiting, my2hands?

Rhinocerous Surprise

angelica wrote:

what's with the ongoing personal baiting, my2hands?

I sincerely hope he's not capable of posting a reply. :mad: :(

angelica

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

I sincerely hope he's not capable of posting a reply. :mad: :(

ditto :mad: :mad: :(

Anon

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

I sincerely hope he's not capable of posting a reply. :mad: :(

not capable as in 'not willing'?
or not capable as in 'unable'?

what did you mean?

angelica

Pj_Gurl wrote:

not capable as in 'not willing'?
or not capable as in 'unable'?

what did you mean?

not capable as in banned...

Anon

they've been at it for months. and it's only just become unacceptable?

so now they are both banned? what a catastrophic success.

Rhinocerous Surprise

Pj_Gurl wrote:

they've been at it for months. and it's only just become unacceptable?

so now they are both banned? what a catastrophic success.

The personal attacks seemed to be intensifying a lot in the last few days, from a couple of posters in particular. Abook knows some of what she said was out of line, but she's become the accepted target for the pro-Obama/anti-Nader brigade.

angelica

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

The personal attacks seemed to be intensifying a lot in the last few days, from a couple of posters in particular. Abook knows some of what she said was out of line, but she's become the accepted target for the pro-Obama/anti-Nader brigade.

It looks like my2hands had one agenda in his questions in this thread today.

Rhinocerous Surprise

angelica wrote:

It looks like my2hands had one agenda in his questions in this thread today.

my2hands wrote:

i love how the nader supporters... aka abook... jump into a thread about his speech about self responsibility to the NAACP and try and turn it into a discussion about Iran and how they think Obama is a war monger that cant wait to nuke iran :rolleyes:


some folks seem to have a 1 track mind with blinders on

This just proves it. He came in the thread, and pinned the "blame" for the discussion on Abook, despite the fact that she was answering a question about a topic that was already broached. It's like he was champing at the bit to draw her into a fight.

angelica

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

This just proves it. He came in the thread, and pinned the "blame" for the discussion on Abook, despite the fact that she was answering a question about a topic that was already broached. It's like he was champing at the bit to draw her into a fight.

Totally.

I am honoured to know you and Abook, considering the conscientiousness and good intent you both display with your purposes in posting.

Rhinocerous Surprise

angelica wrote:

Totally.

I am honoured to know you and Abook, considering the conscientiousness and good intent you both display with your purposes in posting.

I might not always be relevant, but I don't think I'm ever malicious. There are good people on this board - and you and Abook are high among them - but that fact tends to get lost with all the pointless bickering, baiting and sloganeering that goes on.
Ironic that this shit should go down on a thread about responsibility, huh?

angelica

Rhinocerous Surprise wrote:

I might not always be relevant, but I don't think I'm ever malicious. There are good people on this board - and you and Abook are high among them - but that fact tends to get lost with all the pointless bickering, baiting and sloganeering that goes on.
Ironic that this shit should go down on a thread about responsibility, huh?

I agree...

even regarding my own irrelevance!

Rhinocerous Surprise

angelica wrote:

I agree...

even regarding my own irrelevance!

Bingo.