Granholm defends her leadership, says farewell.

[dnvn522]

but is forcing our best teachers into retirement.

Now that statement was a laugh riot!!!


Of the nine teachers in our school district that are taking the retirement plan, I would only call one of them one of "our best". Three of them were the absolute worst. They will not be missed.

[Bcscott]

"Like Obama her policies of raising taxes and relying on the spectre of "green jobs" have made the problem exponentially worse."

What taxes did Obama raise?

You got me, I should've said raise/going to raise but I'll give you one example. So far Obama raised the taxes on those who smoke. I don't, but I know once the revenue from smokers goes by the wayside taxes will be raised on another group, i.e. those who like fast food, bottled water, candy or anything else the government deems a "sin." I'm also willing to bet a lot of those smokers made a lot less than 200K or 250K or whatever the income ceiling was on a particular day Obama said they wouldn't see their taxes go up one dime.

As far as what taxes he's going to raise, here's the short list. Capitol gains taxes are going up, the death tax is going to be repealed, and the Bush tax cuts are set to expire. Reinstating a tax or allowing a tax break to expire is a tax increase no matter how the administration my spin it. How do you think Obamacare is going to be paid for? I've already read about employer based healthcare coverage being taxed as income next year. That's another 15K-20K to be taxed on top of your income. And what do you think Cap and Trade is going to do to the average American? Its going to make energy rates "skyrocket" to quote Obama. He's a classic tax and spend liberal. I don't see what's so hard to grasp about that?

[Novine]

"You got me, I should've said raise/going to raise".

I know it's been standard MO for Obama-haters to claim he's raised taxes before he even took office. At least you get a point for actually finding a tax that was raised versus the phony claims that most Obama-haters make.

"Reinstating a tax or allowing a tax break to expire is a tax increase no matter how the administration my spin it."

Standard conservative talking point. It's what is used to defend special interest tax breaks given for political favors at the expense of most taxpayers.

"How do you think Obamacare is going to be paid for?"

Were you the same guy asking "How are we going to pay for these wars?" when GWB wasn't budgeting for them?

I would rather see my tax dollars go to providing health coverage for all Americans than blowing people up half-way around the world. I love how you guys call him the "tax and spend liberal" when you spent 8 years defending a "tax and spend conservative".

[Bcscott]

Isn't it funny how a debate about Granholm's incompetence somehow reverts back to Bush? After 9/11 conservatives blamed Clinton for the recession and the sorry state of our military and intelligence. Liberals carped on and on about Clinton being out of office, he's been gone for eight months, this is all on President Bush, blah, blah, blah. Bush and Cheney have been gone for 18 months now but Granholm, Obama, and their supporters still love to talk about the mess they inherited, [[which is true to some extent.) However, is there ever a point these liberals are held culpable for their actions? I haven't seen it with Granholm, hopefully we will see it with Obama in November.

"Standard conservative talking point. It's what is used to defend special interest tax breaks given for political favors at the expense of most taxpayers." Kind of like the unions and their "Cadillac plans" being exempt from taxes to pay for this Obamacare fiasco? Or the democrat politicians who were completely bought off to support this nightmare. Good thing libs never engage in practices like that.

Bush started two wars, that's true. He also cut taxes and we enjoyed 52 consecutive months of economic growth. Remember, gas was $1.50 a gallon, the stock market crested 14,000, and unemployment was below 5% on election night 2006 when the dems took over. Obama has quadrupled spending, our national debt is now higher than GDP and he WILL raise taxes. Unsustainable doesn't even come close to describing the path Obama and the dems lead us down.

Lastly if you think Obamacare will insure everyone you are sadly mistaken. This entire disaster of national healthcare will cover 30,000,000 people or roughly 10% at the expense of the 80% who were happy with their insurance. You know how many companies are going to drop their insurance and just pay the fines and stick their employees on the government dole? This is going to be the biggest man made financial disaster in our history if it isn't repealed. I love summer but I can't wait for November to bounce these libs out of office.

[Novine]

"Bush started two wars, that's true. He also cut taxes and we enjoyed 52 consecutive months of economic growth. Remember, gas was $1.50 a gallon, the stock market crested 14,000, and unemployment was below 5% on election night 2006 when the dems took over."

Right, the two wars he didn't budget for and the tax cuts that weren't offset by spending cuts? Or the economy that started shedding jobs before his second term was up? If you want to give Bush credit for creating a massive bubble in the market and real estate prices, go for it.

[Bcscott]

Meanwhile in another thread about Granholm's incometence...

Actually if you go to http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOutputServlet which is the site for the Bureau of Labor Statistics you'll find unemployment from 2005 to 2006 dropped from 4.9% to 4.4% which is pretty remarkable. Then a funny thing happens, democrats are swept into office and by January 2007 we already see the upward trend in unemployment. By Arpil its off to the races to the current absymal situation we find ourselves in now.

So let me get this straight, you don't think the Democratic takeover of congress and their unfriendly attitudes towards business had anything to do with the sharp rise in unemployment? Higher tax rates, "green" agenda, pro-union stance, and all the other liberal sacred cows most definitely spooked businesses.

And are you really going to try and blame the housing bubble on Bush? Seriously? I guess Fannie and Freddie, and Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, and all the democrats protecting Harold Raines had nothing to do with it. Some republicans tried to bring attention to the growing problem of giving loans to people who couldn't afford them. Others stupidly went along with the dems for fear of being called racists because many of the loan holders were minorities. Either way there is blame to go around on both sides, just a lot more of it on the left.

Now can we please get back to what a crappy governor Granholm was.

[Novine]

"Then a funny thing happens, democrats are swept into office and by January 2007 we already see the upward trend in unemployment. By Arpil its off to the races to the current absymal situation we find ourselves in now."

That's pretty amazing cause-and-effect. Within 5 months of taking office, while there's still a Republican President, and with no actual legislation having been passed, the entire business establishment in the US collectively falls apart at the possibility that the Democrats might do something anti-business. If you believe your own BS, that's a sad commentary on the state of US business.

"Barney Frank caused the housing bubble" is more Republican myth-making. Go back and read the Republican party platform from 2004 where it explicitly states the goal of the party was to increase homeownership among all Americans. Doesn't sound like a party looking to put the lid on anything. The other problem with your fact-free argument is that it doesn't explain the bubble that took place in commercial loans. No one was forcing banks and lenders to lend to minorities to build strip malls. But commercial loans saw the same kind of excesses and abuse that residential loans experienced.

I know conservatives hate Paul Krugman but he lays out the numbers here and it makes it clear that the explosion in bad loans happened outside of Freddie and Fannie in the commercial market.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/201...chicago-knows/

[Awfavre]

Now that statement was a laugh riot!!!

I'm glad you think it's funny. Too bad for you. Everywhere else, administrators are freaking out over losing their best & most experienced teachers.

[bartock]

"Kids, kids. As far as Daddy's concerned, you're both potential murderers." - Homer Simpson

[37DOGG9]

I remember a quote from Gov. Granholm some time ago pertaining to cuts in Government Services. Gov. Granholm stated that she couldn't cut anymore services because her constituents wouldn't stand for it? That's one of the reasons our great State is in severe trouble right now!?

[Bcscott]

Well it wasn't exactly overnight, unemplyment fluctuated a bit four the first four months of the year then it took off in April 2007. So yeah I think businesses had time to evaluate the situation. Its not that far fetched, businesses are sitting on a ton of capitol right now. However they are uncertain what's going to happen with healthcare, corporate taxes, and spooked by the unfriendly business climate the dems have fostered over the last three years.

I like your "fact free" comment so I'll spell it out for you. In 2001 the Bush administration started raising red flags about the GSE's [[Government Sponsored Enterprises.) In the 2002 Budget Request Form the size of the GSE's was noted as a concern and a problem with either Fannie or Freddie could cause problems in the market. It was brought up again in 2003 and labeled a sestemic risk. In the fall of 2003 there was a push to create an oversite committee to look into the GSE's and guess who pushed back the hardest? Barney Frank, that's when he made his famous comment about Fannie and Freddie "not being in a crisis." In addition he encouraged the federal government to do more to get low income families into homes. He followed that up by blaming people for having a "sky is falling" mentality and capped it all by calling the GSE's "fundamentally sound."

Twice in 2005 Alan Greenspan called for oversite after Fannie Mae execs admitted to major accounting errors. And in 2006 John McCain co-sponsored legislation to immediately reform of the GSE's. Of course he was met with resistance from Frank, Dodd, Schumer, and a host of other dems. The bill went by the wayside as EVERY democrat voted against it, well except Obama who didn't bother to vote. The republicans stupidly let it go because they didn't think they had enough votes and that was it. The dems took over a few months later and the reform issue was dropped.

Look, this can go on Ad infinitum. You think Obama and Granholm are good leaders and I'm not going to change your mind. I think Obama and Granholm are incompetent and unfit to lead and you aren't going to change my mind. However the biggest difference between us is by November I'm going to be a lot happier and you and your ilk are going to be a lot less important.

[kryptonite]

This November I most likely will vote for a Republican governor for only the 2nd time in my life. In my opinion Granholm and the democrats have failed the state. They offered no new approach to much of anything.

[philm]

"While it is true that much of our state's poor economy can be attributed to Washington's inability to protect domestic manufacturers"

This certainly points up the idiocy coming from the right, and Retroit.
Tell me you don't see the hypocrisy in that comment!
Before you go insulting liberals, take a look at your own inabiklity to even see the obvious contradictions in the statements you make.

[Bearinabox]

This November I most likely will vote for a Republican governor for only the 2nd time in my life. In my opinion Granholm and the democrats have failed the state. They offered no new approach to much of anything.

Don't kid yourself, the Republicans have no clue how to fix this mess either. Hell, Mike Cox can't even remember the name of his own phone company.

[bartock]

This November I most likely will vote for a Republican governor for only the 2nd time in my life. In my opinion Granholm and the democrats have failed the state. They offered no new approach to much of anything.

I usually vote Republican more than Democrat, but I'm voting ABC [[anybody but Cox) this year. No more McNamara roots. Problem created [[and discussed before) for me and others like me is that I do not want Cox to get through the primary, nor do I want Carolyn Cheeks to get through the primary. Since I have to vote along party lines in the primary, it is a bit of a dilemma trying to figure out who will do more damage. I'm leaning towards the guv race, for obvious reasons, though I never want to underestimate the power of CCKs office. I don't think she even realizes what a big stick she carries [[but those around her do).

[Novine]

"However the biggest difference between us is by November I'm going to be a lot happier and you and your ilk are going to be a lot less important."

I agree we won't agree. I will note you glossed past the commercial lending meltdown. No villains with [[D) next to their name that you can blame that on?

I expect the Dems to lose seats in November. Some of them I won't mind seeing go home. When they are so ineffectual, they make Mike Bishop look competent, they don't deserve to be re-elected. But if the Republicans take control in November, we'll quickly see that their so-called solutions are nothing more than warmed-over retread policies that conservatives spew out whenever the economy goes south. They'll do nothing to bring business back to Michigan but likely will inflict a lot of pain on Michigan residents. I expect the Republican return to power will be short-lived.

[Bcscott]

Maybe, but relying on phantom "green" jobs and raising taxes on small businesses sure hasn't worked so I hope the Republicans get a chance to try some of their ideas. It couldn't possibly be worse than what's going on right now.

However my biggest hope is the Republicans don't make the same mistake three times in a row and nominate someone named Dick. The dems have proven themselves excellent Dickbeaters.

What? I was talking about Posthumus and DeVos

[Bearinabox]

However my biggest hope is the Republicans don't make the same mistake three times in a row and nominate someone named Dick. The dems have proven themselves excellent Dickbeaters.

What? I was talking about Posthumus and DeVos

With any luck, we can beat Cox as well as we can beat Dicks.

[Bcscott]

"However the biggest difference between us is by November I'm going to be a lot happier and you and your ilk are going to be a lot less important."

I agree we won't agree. I will note you glossed past the commercial lending meltdown. No villains with [[D) next to their name that you can blame that on?

I expect the Dems to lose seats in November. Some of them I won't mind seeing go home. When they are so ineffectual, they make Mike Bishop look competent, they don't deserve to be re-elected. But if the Republicans take control in November, we'll quickly see that their so-called solutions are nothing more than warmed-over retread policies that conservatives spew out whenever the economy goes south. They'll do nothing to bring business back to Michigan but likely will inflict a lot of pain on Michigan residents. I expect the Republican return to power will be short-lived.

And you totally ignored all the taxes I mentioned that Obama plans to raise which is what started this discussion in the first place. I never said this was a one sided deal I said there was enough blame to go around, just more of it on the left. Are there republican villians in commercial loans? I'm sure there are and I'll bet there are lots of dems too. The point is Republicans at least sounded the alarm on this problem but were thwarted by Democrats and they [[repubs) lacked the spine to press the issue.

I've gone over this a bunch of times especially on this board. Everyone on the left is quick to villify the banks but never even give any thought to the people who lied on their applications, exagerated their incomes, etc to get a loan for a house they could never afford. And when those teaser rates expire and the ARM goes up to 10% and they can no longer afford their home, that's not the bank's fault. The Community Reinvestment Act started by Dems and foolishly tolerated by Republicans was one of the worst ideas ever, and set this whole crisis into motion.

But all this is moot, Granholm is gone, Obama is pitted against the American people on immigration, trying terror suspects in NY, auto bailouts, healthcare, cap and trade, and the takeover of so much of the free market that he's down to 42% approval a year and a half into office. Democrats are going to get slaughtered in November and they deserve it. And so do any Republicans who went along with them.

[Bcscott]

With any luck, we can beat Cox as well as we can beat Dicks.

Haha. While I disagree, that's pretty funny.

[fryar]

Isn't it funny how a debate about Granholm's incompetence somehow reverts back to Bush?

Conspicuously enough, that happened right after I posted that an initiative to identify and drive factors that make for a desirable urban living experience does not seem like such a bad idea, only cheesily named and overdue.

[Novine]

"And you totally ignored all the taxes I mentioned that Obama plans to raise which is what started this discussion in the first place."

I ignored your spin that maintaining the Bush-era tax cuts and tax breaks equals a tax increase. You can hate Obama's programs but at least he's making an effort to pay for this changes in health care, unlike Bush. Bush pretended that you could cut taxes, increase benefits like Medicare Part D, fight two wars and that no one would have to pay for all those. A good size chunk of the deficit that conservatives claim Obama created is nothing more than acknowledging the spending that Bush refused to do by pushing it outside the budget. The deficit was always there but Bush refused to account for it.

"Are there republican villians in commercial loans? I'm sure there are and I'll bet there are lots of dems too. The point is Republicans at least sounded the alarm on this problem but were thwarted by Democrats and they [[repubs) lacked the spine to press the issue."

Wrong and you're missing the point. Commercial loans don't operate the same way as residential loans. But it's going through the same cycle of collapse. You can't blame that on poor minorities going out and building strip malls like you blame them for building million dollar mansions in Bloomfield Hills. So who's fault is that?

"Everyone on the left is quick to villify the banks but never even give any thought to the people who lied on their applications, exagerated their incomes, etc to get a loan for a house they could never afford."

I won't defend those who lied. But if the banks had done their jobs, it wouldn't have mattered. Show me where banks were forced to offer liar and ninja loans. The financial institutions are getting whacked because they caused the financial collapse through negligence, greed or criminal activity. I vote for all three. Some took taxpayer bailouts. Some benefited by playing both sides of their crooked behavior. Wall Street has profited handsomely while Main Street had suffered. Now, many of them are holding back a recovery by curtailing loans far beyond what is prudent for safe lending. Sounds like plenty of good reasons for the average person to be angry at the banks and other financial institutions.

"The Community Reinvestment Act started by Dems and foolishly tolerated by Republicans was one of the worst ideas ever, and set this whole crisis into motion."

Been around since 1977 and as I noted earlier, the 2004 Republican Party platform specifically endorsed the idea of increasing homeownership in the US. The reason that Republicans "tolerated it" is that they specifically endorsed the goals of CRA. Also, CRA doesn't affect commercial lending so how do you explain the practices in the commercial lending market when none of the reasons you blame the CRA for causing the housing bubble applied to commercial loans.

"Democrats are going to get slaughtered in November and they deserve it. And so do any Republicans who went along with them."

There will be Democrats in marginal districts who go down and I'm sure a big-name or two will also lose. But Republicans are largely running on a platform of "No!" and that's not going to carry them to a major victory in the fall.

[Bcscott]

Alright Novine, this is just getting ridiculous. "I ignored your spin that maintaining the Bush-era tax cuts and tax breaks equals a tax increase." What are you even talking about? I said Obama is letting those tax breaks expire next year, not maintaining them. That is a tax increase no matter how you or the administration may spin it. Obama is also planning on raising taxes on capitol gains, and repealing the death tax. Just those three things alone are going to raise taxes. That's why I called him a tax and spend liberal.

"You can hate Obama's programs but at least he's making an effort to pay for this changes in health care.." Like all libs I guess you're more concerned that someone tries, and cares. Even if the results are damaging or inconsequential at least they showed compassion. Guess what, its not just me hating healthcare. It never polled above the low to mid forties as far as support. Which is the exact range Obama finds himself in when it comes to approval. Its also just below the range of the forty-seven percent of Americans who don't pay income tax. So the only ones who actually wanted this healthcare reform mess were Obama's useless, entitlement driven base. I guess its easy to get behind policies when you're getting something for nothing.

Like I said before eighty percent of Americans including yours truly are happy with their insurance. Now, there's the very real possibility of my company and thousands of others ditching their coverage and placing their employees on the government dole and simply paying the fines which is way cheaper than actually providing insurance. "If you like your doctor, you'll be able to keep them." So said your messiah. Well if my company dumps its insurance I can't keep my doctor so that's just another lie Obama has told the country. And even if I'm lucky enough to keep my insurance next year its going to get taxed as additional income. So we get to pay taxes on an additional 15K-20K on top of annual income. Awesome, what a great deal.

Obamacare is screwing over the entire country to cover roughly ten percent of the population. But you know what, as a lib I bet you're saying "good, now you all know how the rest of us feel." You guys hate success and see it as something to punish. Obama and Pelosi promised the public sentiment would change in favor of healthcare reform after it was passed and people saw the benefits. That hasn't happened, in fact opposition to it has grown and over sixty percent want the GOP to continue the fight to repeal it. But hey, as long as Obama tries it doesn't matter if he destroys the world's best healthcare system. He's compassionate.

And as far as all this commercial loan stuff you keep carping on about, don't you think its partly due to the first wave of the economic meltdown, i.e. the residential market crash?
If the banks tightened the purse strings thanks to people defaulting on their mortgages it makes sense that commercial lending and lines of credit would dry up as well. "Show me where banks were forced to offer liar and ninja loans." Since you're an expert on the CRA I'm surprised you don't know this. If a bank wants to expand, add an ATM or merge, they need a good CRA rating. Thanks to the reform Bill Clinton implemented in 1995 outside, leftwing groups were allowed to influence that very rating. In other words, banks made risky loans or risked having Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson show up with a bunch of protesters.

"There will be Democrats in marginal districts who go down and I'm sure a big-name or two will also lose. But Republicans are largely running on a platform of "No!" and that's not going to carry them to a major victory in the fall." I'll remember this line the morning after election day in five short months from now. Its not looking too good for Obama's far left wing ideology. Face it, you guys voted for somebody who is woefully incompetent and only excelled at organizing protests and standing on the corner handing out leaflets. Dig the latest from Rasmussen.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...ssional_ballot

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...or_wrong_track

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ..._tracking_poll

But like I said before, none of this matters because I haven't swayed you and you're not going to change my mind. And thankfully Granholm is gone. Remember her, the original topic of this thread? I'll tell you what, you can have the last word because that's usually pretty important to you guys. Its been fun but this is my last day off and I really don't want to waste any more of it parked in front of a computer talking about stuff that doesn't even matter anymore.

[kryptonite]

"Everyone on the left is quick to villify the banks but never even give any thought to the people who lied on their applications, exagerated their incomes, etc to get a loan for a house they could never afford."

Whichever of you made that statement sure nailed it 100%.

[Novine]

"I'll tell you what, you can have the last word because that's usually pretty important to you guys."

It's all yours. You can come back here to gloat or whine the day after the November election.