The Debtor is Slave to the Lender

[Tim Elston]

Obama was elected. I am waiting for my check to help pay mortgage and monthly bills. Isn't that what was promised? "change" can be interpreted lots of ways.

You tell us. When did Obama say that someone in your economic situation would get checks from the government to pay mortgage and monthly bills?

[RamboPreacher]

Obama was elected. I am waiting for my check to help pay mortgage and monthly bills. Isn't that what was promised? "change" can be interpreted lots of ways.

You tell us. When did Obama say that someone in your economic situation would get checks from the government to pay mortgage and monthly bills?

[foghorn leghorn voice]
it was a joke timmy, a joke, I tell you
[/foghornleghorn voice]

you probably weren't around but there were a few threads about that, one in particular with a youtube video of a mother (apparently) that was commenting on her vote for obama and that he was going to pay her mortgage, or something like that.

humor, get some.

[kurt73]

Hence why the bible tells us to be a lender not a borrower. Christian people should have themselves in a good position to help in times like this as a witness for the Lord. Goes beyond titheing

[Tim Elston]

you probably weren't around but there were a few threads about that, one in particular with a youtube video of a mother (apparently) that was commenting on her vote for obama and that he was going to pay her mortgage, or something like that.

Got it. Reminds of the woman who said that Obama was an Arab, and McCain had to shut her up. SNL made fun of it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c-Ijky95dc

humor, get some.

I've got some, but people usually get mine as well as I got yours. Besides, most of the stuff said about Obama around here is a joke, but people are apparently serious when they are saying it. Kind of hard to tell the difference between when they are trying to be funny, if ever, and when they are just being ignorant.

[Tim Elston]

Money as Debt [Google video; length, 47 mins]

Okay, don't think I'm trying to pull anything on you, but the above video seemed right on topic to this thread. A Christian conservative sent it to me yesterday, and I watched it tonight.

This video messed with my categories. It is an animated presentation of money as debt and how inescapably catastrophic that is. It is a timely, penetrating analysis of our current global economic crisis at the most fundamental monetary level.

On the one hand it confirms my belief (in my mind, at least) that America is due for another armed revolution, absent monetary reform; on the other hand it challenges some of my notions about what the viable solutions are and within what political framework they might occur.

The knowledge gained from this video is well worth its forty-seven-minute duration. Anyone interested in the economics and politics of our current monetary crisis should watch it, to the end.

One caveat: at the very end is a brief insinuation of the possibility of a conspiracy. I disavow that conspiracy but think the analysis of our current monetary system throughout the video is sound and extremely timely.

[bibleguy]

I liked the things that Ron Paul said, but I think the Ross Perot after taste is still just too strong. And I think others may have had that same feeling.

I know he's not a third-party candidate, but he just has that aura about him.

Fiscally, he was probably the best candidate, but I think (as you seem to point out) in our tabloid age, we won't see a Ron Paul elected. It's American Idol, you have to have the looks. Mitt Romney was, in my opinion, the best Republican choice at the time, LDS notwithstanding. He was well-liked and successful as governor of MA (I moved to OK from there only a year ago), and he saved the Olympics from certain economic doom. Add to that his photogenic qualities, and I think he would have given the Dems a run for their money.

I was pleasantly surprised at how close this one actually was with McCain running, but I attribute a LOT of that to Palin. And face it, the same reasons apply: photogenic ranking high on the list.

It's too bad. Look at presidential portraits and it seems people could vote issues better before there was a TV in every house. But, for good or for bad, this is the new politics, and all sides have to play the looks card if they are to have any real shot at winning.

[Tim Elston]

I liked the things that Ron Paul said, but I think the Ross Perot after taste is still just too strong. And I think others may have had that same feeling.

I know he's not a third-party candidate, but he just has that aura about him.

Yeah, sometimes I wonder how he even gets elected in his congressional district. It must be an interesting district.

Mitt Romney was, in my opinion, the best Republican choice at the time, LDS notwithstanding. He was well-liked and successful as governor of MA (I moved to OK from there only a year ago), and he saved the Olympics from certain economic doom. Add to that his photogenic qualities, and I think he would have given the Dems a run for their money.

I hear what you are saying, and it is probably true, but he needs to work on not giving the impression that he's an empty suit who is trying to parlay his looks and demeanor as a resurrection of Ronald Reagan. The impression he gave to me was that he was trying to immitate Reagan and speak words that made people feel good. He came across as an empty suit to me, in spite of his record. He may have the opposite persona problem of Paul: the slick-talking, pretty-boy, empty suit image.

I was pleasantly surprised at how close this one actually was with McCain running, but I attribute a LOT of that to Palin. And face it, the same reasons apply: photogenic ranking high on the list.

I can appreciate that, but to me it's a tossup whether Palin helped or hurt. McCain needed to win the middle, and a combination of his acquiessence to his party's advisors to get mean and Palin's strident rhetoric alienated the middle. I have liked Palin as governor of Alaska, but I lost my taste for her on the VP campaign trail.

But the pundits are probably right that Obama won on the perception that the Republican party had screwed the economy up so badly.

It's too bad. Look at presidential portraits and it seems people could vote issues better before there was a TV in every house. But, for good or for bad, this is the new politics, and all sides have to play the looks card if they are to have any real shot at winning.

Yes, the new politics is really the old humanity. Animal behavior demonstrates a preference for the good-looking, and human behavior demonstrates the same. We're hard-wired for it.

[Dr. Ron]

I agree with Tim on the assessment of the financial responsbility issues.

However, we keep electing people (GW included) that seem to be caught up in the flow of the river and don't want to paddle up stream. I know they have great debts to pay their supporters, but we have to come to a realization some time and in some place.

As for "image" issues, most of our founding fathers and those after them would not have passed muster on this one. Read the history of some of these guys and you will wonder how in heck they got elected.

Ron Paul won't get elected, but someone else can be his "stand in" and he can then feed the information to them. That is what we have in Obama. ( Okay Tim, I know I screwed it up there for you).

I think we need to call in our loans from all the countries we have "loaned" money to for the last 100 years + interest and then we would have a pot full......just from Russia alone......

Oh well, what is money for if you can't abuse it......