AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President - Page 2

post #41 of 143
8/24/08 at 11:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

lundy:
No one called anyone a "liar".
I said he was lying, which is exactly what he was doing if you bother to look at what is being discussed.

You are claiming that saying someone is lying is not calling them a liar? Just say the quoted claims aren't true. No need to involve the person.
Quote:
He claimed Biden had "dozens of lines of credit" and his own information, which he ostensibly looked at, shows 5, 2 of which look to be expred. When someone knows one thing and then says something else that isn't the truth that is called "lying".

But what you are not getting is none of that is a posting violation. You and he and everyone else can claim whatever they want. Then you and he and everyone else can rebut it, without anybody calling anybody any names. Even if he posted that the earth was flat, you can't call him a name, EVEN IF IT WOULD FIT.
Quote:
It isn't a personal attack to point out that someone else is lying anymore than it is to point out that they are breathing. If I had called him a "liar" that would be a label on him as a person instead of an attack on his words, which are what I attacked.

Breathing isn't pejorative; lying is. And no, you did not attack the words by saying he is "lying" - that's a direct attack on his state of mind, his intent - which is not the topic. By claiming he is "lying", you propose to know whether he is intentionally misrepresenting facts. Nobody can know what his intentions were, and it isn't relevant. Biden's finances are the topic.
Quote:
If we can't attack lies, what the hell are we even doing here?

Who's saying you can't attack what you perceive as lies? Here's how you do it:

trumptman: "Biden has dozens of credit lines."
You: "Where? I didn't see any of those in the document you referenced."
trumptman: "Well, he has them - there are others not listed."
You: "Well, show us then - the document only lists 5. Where do you get the "dozens" from?"
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #42 of 143
8/24/08 at 11:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I've provided plenty. I'll let my words speak for themselves. The shouts of prove it over and over again are welcome to let their claims stand as well. I have no doubts which will be more persuasive to a reader.

So far you have provided one link with a lot of fuzzy math (+/- $300,000), and a whole lot of anecdotal conjectures.

This should be presented as it is in Accounting 101, precise numbers, that has not been done, shown, or proved.

The claims need to be substantiated beyond any reasonable doubt. That has not been done to date.

The onus is on those making unsubstantiated claims to provide proof of said claims.

Nothing more to discuss here except for further conjectures.

IBL
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #43 of 143
8/24/08 at 11:50am
Thread Starter 
Maybe this is why daddy still has to have the loans on his credit for his son.

Quote:
A son and a brother of Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.) are accused in two lawsuits of defrauding a former business partner and an investor of millions of dollars in a hedge fund deal that went sour, court records show.

The Democratic vice presidential candidate's son Hunter, 38, and brother James, 59, assert instead that their former partner defrauded them by misrepresenting his experience in the hedge fund industry and recommending that they hire a lawyer with felony convictions.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #44 of 143
8/24/08 at 11:55am
Why are you people responding to this partial-birth abortion of an attack line?

This wouldn't even garner a comment on the thirdest-rate right-wing blogs, nevermind amount to a meme.
Reply
Reply
post #45 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:05pm
trumptman:

Quote:
I've provided plenty.

No, you haven't. You've provided evidence for a maximum of 6 lines of credit, and not even all of those appear to actually be active.

"Dozens" means at least 24.

Reasonable supposition could add 4 to that (1 credit card per spouse, 1 car payment per spouse). So I'll even be generous and, despite lack of evidence, give you 10.

We're still 14 short, at least. In common usage "dozens" would likely mean 36 or more.


lundy:

Quote:
You are claiming that saying someone is lying is not calling them a liar?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. One can do something and not be labeled with it.

Lying is an action.
Liar is a person.

When you call someone a "liar" you are putting a label on them; making an accusation that lying is an integral part of their person such that they wear it as a label. Saying someone is lying is simply pointing out an action and doesn't stipulate it as a regular action; it could be the first and last time someone ever does it.

If a child steals a piece of candy from a store, and never steals anything again, is he still a "thief" at 40?
Is it a personal attack to tell him to "stop stealing" when he is 8 and you catch him?

Quote:
Even if he posted that the earth was flat, you can't call him a name, EVEN IF IT WOULD FIT.

I didn't call him a name. That's the whole point.
You can argue that I implied it, but that's all it is; your subjective inference.

re: "Stop lying" & "Start reading":
Why haven't you inferred a personal attack against me as you inferred a personal attack against trumpet?
If I am implying that he is a liar, is he not implying that I do not read?

Quote:
Breathing isn't pejorative; lying is.

Sure, but what does that matter? People should be allowed to lie without being called on it because having it called out is not nice? Shouldn't the impetus actually be on the one telling the lie, not on the one wanting to call it out for what it is? That's some fucked-up backwards values.

Quote:
By claiming he is "lying", you propose to know whether he is intentionally misrepresenting facts.

He provided a source of information and then made a claim that directly contradicted that source of evidence. One can't claim ignorance when one holds the actual source of evidence.

If I make a claim that a document says something and I know that the document doesn't say that... what is it if not a lie? What am I doing if not lying?

And if pointing out someone's actions is a personal attack, why the hell can I be told to "start reading"?
The double standard is glaring.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #46 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShawnJ View Post

Why are you people responding to this partial-birth abortion of an attack line?

This wouldn't even garner a comment on the thirdest-rate right-wing blogs, nevermind amount to a meme.

It must be done in triplicate;

Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President (PO)

Joe Biden, Subprime Vice President (Free Republic)

Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President (New Red Republic)

Now repeat after me, Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President, Joe Biden, Subprime Vice President, Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #47 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Joe Biden, Subprime Vice President (Free Republic)

Whoa.

Even those freepers aren't buying it.

Quote:
It seems to me that Biden has plenty of other major flaws, and to seize on this one borders on trivia.

Reply
Reply
post #48 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:16pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

trumptman:



No, you haven't. You've provided evidence for a maximum of 6 lines of credit, and not even all of those appear to actually be active.

"Dozens" means at least 24.

Reasonable supposition could add 4 to that (1 credit card per spouse, 1 car payment per spouse). So I'll even be generous and, despite lack of evidence, give you 10.

We're still 14 short, at least. In common usage "dozens" would likely mean 36 or more.

He keeps dozens of lines of credit, a new one opened every couple of years

Biden does have a mortgage. I cannot point to a source that has disclosed those items below $10,000. Part of that claim is the due to certain type of loan he has listed there and another is the nature of how people use credit from my observations dealing with credit reports.

Installment debt is different than revolving debt. The disclosures note that the loans are either restarted again at various time periods, or have been increased and restarted again at various time periods. In terms of installment debt, I consider the Sun National Bank loan to be 10 separate loans with two year terms. The U.S. Employees Federal Credit Union is three separate loans, each one increasing the amount due. Claiming this as one loan is akin to claiming that you only had one car loan when buying several cars from one dealership and tossing the balance of one onto the new loan. You may call it one, but I call that several loans and so do most people.

The reasoning has been explained. You can accept it or not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

It must be done in triplicate;

Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President (PO)

Joe Biden, Subprime Vice President (Free Republic)

Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President (New Red Republic)

Now repeat after me, Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President, Joe Biden, Subprime Vice President, Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President

Oh come now, if I wanted to really improve my point by doing it in triplicate, I would take another approach entirely.

Thanks for the free publicity though. Make sure to click on some adsense words for me while you are there.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #49 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

trumptman:



No, you haven't. You've provided evidence for a maximum of 6 lines of credit, and not even all of those appear to actually be active.

"Dozens" means at least 24.

Reasonable supposition could add 4 to that (1 credit card per spouse, 1 car payment per spouse). So I'll even be generous and, despite lack of evidence, give you 10.

We're still 14 short, at least. In common usage "dozens" would likely mean 36 or more.


lundy:



Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. One can do something and not be labeled with it.

Lying is an action.
Liar is a person.

When you call someone a "liar" you are putting a label on them; making an accusation that lying is an integral part of their person such that they wear it as a label. Saying someone is lying is simply pointing out an action and doesn't stipulate it as a regular action; it could be the first and last time someone ever does it.

If a child steals a piece of candy from a store, and never steals anything again, is he still a "thief" at 40?
Is it a personal attack to tell him to "stop stealing" when he is 8 and you catch him?



I didn't call him a name. That's the whole point.
You can argue that I implied it, but that's all it is; your subjective inference.

re: "Stop lying" & "Start reading":
Why haven't you inferred a personal attack against me as you inferred a personal attack against trumpet?
If I am implying that he is a liar, is he not implying that I do not read?



Sure, but what does that matter? People should be allowed to lie without being called on it because having it called out is not nice? Shouldn't the impetus actually be on the one telling the lie, not on the one wanting to call it out for what it is? That's some fucked-up backwards values.



He provided a source of information and then made a claim that directly contradicted that source of evidence. One can't claim ignorance when one holds the actual source of evidence.

If I make a claim that a document says something and I know that the document doesn't say that... what is it if not a lie? What am I doing if not lying?

And if pointing out someone's actions is a personal attack, why the hell can I be told to "start reading"?
The double standard is glaring.

groverat,

Trust me when I say that I understand your fustration. Been there, done that, via PM even.

Objective != Subjective \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #50 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:22pm
Quote:
I consider the Sun National Bank loan to be 10 separate loans with two year terms. The U.S. Employees Federal Credit Union is three separate loans, each one increasing the amount due.

You didn't say loans, you said "lines of credit".

"I consider every dollar to be a separate line of credit, meaning he has THOUSANDS OF LINES OF CREDIT! so there."
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #51 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:23pm
So, let's see here: an "elitist" is someone who earns their own money but may or may not do a great job of managing it-- just like the average American.

A "populist" is someone who inherited their money or married rich, and who works for policies that protect such money-- which is, I suppose, what we would call "sound fiscal management."

I think this would make a great companion piece to the Obama "celebrity" ads: "Joe Biden came from a working class background and made something of himself, but acquired debt. America can't afford a man like that! Vote for John McCain: he's rich and he has people to make sure he stays that way, and as president he'll make damn sure nobody fucks with his wife's money!"
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #52 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:26pm
Spamming multiple forums with this crap should probably be against the rules.

Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Oh come now, if I wanted to really improve my point by doing it in triplicate, I would take another approach entirely.

Hey, who is triplehorn?

That "noun, verb, and P.O.W." line sound awfully familiar.

Reply
Reply
post #53 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

He keeps dozens of lines of credit, a new one opened every couple of years

Biden does have a mortgage. I cannot point to a source that has disclosed those items below $10,000. Part of that claim is the due to certain type of loan he has listed there and another is the nature of how people use credit from my observations dealing with credit reports.

Installment debt is different than revolving debt. The disclosures note that the loans are either restarted again at various time periods, or have been increased and restarted again at various time periods. In terms of installment debt, I consider the Sun National Bank loan to be 10 separate loans with two year terms. The U.S. Employees Federal Credit Union is three separate loans, each one increasing the amount due. Claiming this as one loan is akin to claiming that you only had one car loan when buying several cars from one dealership and tossing the balance of one onto the new loan. You may call it one, but I call that several loans and so do most people.

The reasoning has been explained. You can accept it or not.



Oh come now, if I wanted to really improve my point by doing it in triplicate, I would take another approach entirely.

Thanks for the free publicity though. Make sure to click on some adsense words for me while you are there.


More fuzzy math? I wonder if Biden gets 10 seperate statements?

You like free publicity, I like reporting duplicitous sources.

BTW, I never, let me repeat that, I never, click on web ads.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #54 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:28pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

You didn't say loans, you said "lines of credit".

"I consider every dollar to be a separate line of credit, meaning he has THOUSANDS OF LINES OF CREDIT! so there."

You are welcome to your definition. I'll let others read it and determine for themselves whether they would agree with the characterization.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #55 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:29pm
Oh, and just as an aside: using "sub-prime" in this context is self-defeating since, a) it makes no sense, and, b) it reminds us of another economic clusterfuck on Bush's watch, which could lead to thoughts of McCain's status as one of the Keating 5 and how Republican deregulators seem to have a knack for allowing large financial institutions to piss away other people's money, and it does this while in no way linking Biden to anything remotely like that (see a).
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #56 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Oh, and just as an aside: using "sub-prime" in this context is self-defeating since, a) it makes no sense, and, b) it reminds us of another economic clusterfuck on Bush's watch, which could lead to thoughts of McCain's status as one of the Keating 5 and how Republican deregulators seem to have a knack for allowing large financial institutions to piss away other people's money, and it does this while in no way linking Biden to anything remotely like that (see a).

I already tried that tact via PM, that didn't work either. \

But if we try hard enough we all can blame Biden for 9-11, Iraq, crude oil prices, screwing MM, etceteras.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #57 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You are welcome to your definition. I'll let others read it and determine for themselves whether they would agree with the characterization.

What, so everything is a characterization? Good, great, now we can all move on to other trivial pursuits.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #58 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:48pm
Numbers aren't characterizations; they are hard and cold.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #59 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:57pm
Welcome to post-modernism, winger style: there is no such thing as a "fact", the world is made entirely of rhetorical characterizations, and getting other people to get hung up on disputed "facts" is how you "win" the argument.

This mode of discourse is highly frustrating to people who care about the world, rather than some pointlessly elaborated idea of "winning."
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #60 of 143
8/24/08 at 12:59pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

I can understand not wanting even implied personal attacks; that's fine. Judgment calls are mods' jobs. The issue here is the massive double standard in application of this subjective inference-personal attack rule.

(And hey, look, he's now dragging my participation in other forums into it, which is nothing but an attack on me personally and has nothing to do with the topic... let's watch that one go completely ignored as well.)

I can sense you getting very frustrated Grove so I will reiterate a few points. I will do this especially since the partial quote causes quite a bit of confusion around here.

I said start reading, but I didn't just leave it at that. I added the following information.

The disclosure doesn't include mortgages, loans for cars, any loans under $10,000, credit cards, etc.

That is noted on the disclosure and shows how large chunks of installment debt (mortgages, car loans, student loans) and most revolving debt (credit cards) is missing from that disclosure.

I haven't attacked you in any form.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Oh, and just as an aside: using "sub-prime" in this context is self-defeating since, a) it makes no sense, and, b) it reminds us of another economic clusterfuck on Bush's watch, which could lead to thoughts of McCain's status as one of the Keating 5 and how Republican deregulators seem to have a knack for allowing large financial institutions to piss away other people's money, and it does this while in no way linking Biden to anything remotely like that (see a).

Hello Adda. Prime and Sub-Prime are terms that describe credit worthiness. I don't consider a 65 year old man with such high debt to income ratios to be very credit worthy. The loans appear not to be paid down and the terms have been renewed or extended with more debt piled on multiple times.

The "clusterfuck" did occur on Bush's watch but relates mostly to trying to extend credit and home ownership to folks who were never creditworthy. Many of the "reforms" that helped extend this credit were related to claims of racial and sex prejudice among banks who would not lend to folks who had similar incomes, but different credit histories and little to no down payments. It is a classic example of legislative good intentions not being able to alter reality.

I'm sure Democrats are unlikely to bring up the Keating Five because four of the five were Democrats. It would also open the door to the very old plagiarism charges against Biden as well.

Finally this is the outcome of it for McCain...

Quote:
The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him.[17][16] McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising "poor judgment" when he met with the federal regulators on Keating's behalf.[6] The report also said that McCain's "actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him....Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate."[20]

I'm sure this would go over pretty good.

Quote:
Several accounts of the controversy contend that McCain was included in the investigation primarily so that there would be at least one Republican target.[21][22][23][9] Glenn's inclusion in the investigation has been attributed to Republicans who were angered by the inclusion of McCain, as well as committee members who thought that dropping Glenn (and McCain) would make it look bad for the remaining three Democratic Senators.[21][23] Democrat Robert S. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the scandal, suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee that it pursue charges against neither McCain nor Glenn, saying of McCain, "that there was no evidence against him."[22] The Vice Chairman of the Ethics Committee, Senator Warren Rudman of New Hampshire, agreed with Bennett, but the Chairman, Senator Howell Heflin of Alabama, did not agree.[9]

I'm hoping they bring it up. Biden's three failed presidential campaigns, finances and Obama and the Ayers and Rezko angles are great counter-punches.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #61 of 143
8/24/08 at 1:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Welcome to post-modernism, winger style: there is no such thing as a "fact", the world is made entirely of rhetorical characterizations, and getting other people to get hung up on disputed "facts" is how you "win" the argument.

This mode of discourse is highly frustrating to people who care about the world, rather than some pointlessly elaborated idea of "winning."

Intellectual ownership is what this is all about, to heck with the actual facts.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #62 of 143
8/24/08 at 1:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The disclosure doesn't include mortgages, loans for cars, any loans under $10,000, credit cards, etc.

So? And? Conjectures!

And how exactly does this make one judge and jury on someone else's credit worthiness? I thought bankers or such made those decisions?

Are you a banker or such or SME on all financial things Biden-wise? Or are you leaping to conclusions based on insufficient evidence via the logical fallacy embodied via conjectures?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #63 of 143
8/24/08 at 1:04pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by groverat View Post

What does my participation in other forums have to do with this thread and this topic? If that is not a personal attack against me what is it?

Don't worry about it, you are immune from the rules that are applied to me, but I'd like to know what you think that has to do with the issues at hand.

Replied via PM (where these sorts of things belong)

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #64 of 143
8/24/08 at 1:13pm
I just want to reiterate that Nick hasn't shown that Biden has a penny of debt from those lines of credit. The forms ask people to indicate the maximum debt they had during the period, not the amount of debt they retain at the end of the period. It could be that he has paid it all off, that he hasn't paid any of it, or that it's somewhere in between, i.e., they don't support Nick's conclusions.
Reply
Reply
post #65 of 143
8/24/08 at 1:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I can sense you getting very frustrated Grove so I will reiterate a few points. I will do this especially since the partial quote causes quite a bit of confusion around here.

I said start reading, but I didn't just leave it at that. I added the following information.

The disclosure doesn't include mortgages, loans for cars, any loans under $10,000, credit cards, etc.

That is noted on the disclosure and shows how large chunks of installment debt (mortgages, car loans, student loans) and most revolving debt (credit cards) is missing from that disclosure.

I haven't attacked you in any form.



Hello Adda. Prime and Sub-Prime are terms that describe credit worthiness. I don't consider a 65 year old man with such high debt to income ratios to be very credit worthy. The loans appear not to be paid down and the terms have been renewed or extended with more debt piled on multiple times.

The "clusterfuck" did occur on Bush's watch but relates mostly to trying to extend credit and home ownership to folks who were never creditworthy. Many of the "reforms" that helped extend this credit were related to claims of racial and sex prejudice among banks who would not lend to folks who had similar incomes, but different credit histories and little to no down payments. It is a classic example of legislative good intentions not being able to alter reality.

I'm sure Democrats are unlikely to bring up the Keating Five because four of the five were Democrats. It would also open the door to the very old plagiarism charges against Biden as well.

Finally this is the outcome of it for McCain...



I'm sure this would go over pretty good.



I'm hoping they bring it up. Biden's three failed presidential campaigns, finances and Obama and the Ayers and Rezko angles are great counter-punches.

Now we are making some forward motion. Or not!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #66 of 143
8/24/08 at 1:50pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

I just want to reiterate that Nick hasn't shown that Biden has a penny of debt from those lines of credit. The forms ask people to indicate the maximum debt they had during the period, not the amount of debt they retain at the end of the period. It could be that he has paid it all off, that he hasn't paid any of it, or that it's somewhere in between, i.e., they don't support Nick's conclusions.

I'll reiterate that they were disclosed across multiple years and the campaign has not released any information that would indicated a change in the previously disclosed state.

I'll look forward to the 2008 disclosure which will be more of the same. I'll trust the disclosure over "it could be." I'll do this even more when "it could be" could easily be made into "it is this now" with nothing more than a press release from Biden.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #67 of 143
8/24/08 at 1:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Hello Adda. Prime and Sub-Prime are terms that describe credit worthiness. I don't consider a 65 year old man with such high debt to income ratios to be very credit worthy. The loans appear not to be paid down and the terms have been renewed or extended with more debt piled on multiple times.

Uh huh. "Sub-prime", given recent events, inevitably conjures up the sub-prime mortgage debacle. Hey, I know, we can argue whether or not that's true. You can insist that it's a common enough financial term and no linkage was intended, and I can fix myself a sandwich.

Quote:
The "clusterfuck" did occur on Bush's watch but relates mostly to trying to extend credit and home ownership to folks who were never creditworthy. Many of the "reforms" that helped extend this credit were related to claims of racial and sex prejudice among banks who would not lend to folks who had similar incomes, but different credit histories and little to no down payments. It is a classic example of legislative good intentions not being able to alter reality.

Huh. That's a pretty, um, novel explanation for what happened. I think that would be a great campaign line for McCain, since, personally, I would enjoy seeing him get laughed off the stage.

Quote:
I'm sure Democrats are unlikely to bring up the Keating Five because four of the five were Democrats. It would also open the door to the very old plagiarism charges against Biden as well.

Finally this is the outcome of it for McCain...



I'm sure this would go over pretty good.

Probably. The guy who's running for president got off lightly for his involvement in a big financial institution scandal that we are reminded of today because of another big financial institution scandal, vs. some other guys who aren't running for president. And anyway, the big financial institution scandal that's happening now is due to the Fair Housing Act, so it's really the fault of black people and their liberal enablers.

Sounds like a slam-dunk for McCain. Any chance you could get hired on?



Quote:
I'm hoping they bring it up. Biden's three failed presidential campaigns, finances and Obama and the Ayers and Rezko angles are great counter-punches.

Well, that certainly puts the lie to my idea that calling Biden's finances "sub-prime" doesn't make any sense.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #68 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'll reiterate that they were disclosed across multiple years and the campaign has not released any information that would indicated a change in the previously disclosed state.

I'll look forward to the 2008 disclosure which will be more of the same. I'll trust the disclosure over "it could be." I'll do this even more when "it could be" could easily be made into "it is this now" with nothing more than a press release from Biden.

So what you are saying is that you don't know.

Thanks for clearing up that one.

I think.

I mean what exactly are you saying about the certainty of future events?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #69 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I'll reiterate that they were disclosed across multiple years and the campaign has not released any information that would indicated a change in the previously disclosed state.

I'll look forward to the 2008 disclosure which will be more of the same. I'll trust the disclosure over "it could be." I'll do this even more when "it could be" could easily be made into "it is this now" with nothing more than a press release from Biden.

What was disclosed across multiple years was that he has a line of credit that he uses. "Change in the previously disclosed state" doesn't mean anything. The only state that was disclosed was that he is a co-signer on his son's student loans and that he uses a line of credit. They don't say whether he pays off the line of credit after using them. Therefore your statement that he is in debt is not supported. I'm just wondering whether you'll admit this fact.
Reply
Reply
post #70 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:16pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Uh huh. "Sub-prime", given recent events, inevitably conjures up the sub-prime mortgage debacle. Hey, I know, we can argue whether or not that's true. You can insist that it's a common enough financial term and no linkage was intended, and I can fix myself a sandwich.

Um... while it is called the subprime housing debacle because those are the types of loans that drove the losses, subprime still describes the party to whom to money is being loaned.

I don't think people should run away from the linkage. The Democrats have a lot more happening here than Republicans. Dodd and Countrywide would be a nice issue to bring up along with the Democratic Do-Nothing(especially on energy) Congress

Put Tomato on that sandwich.

Quote:
Huh. That's a pretty, um, novel explanation for what happened. I think that would be a great campaign line for McCain, since, personally, I would enjoy seeing him get laughed off the stage.

I think it would be a perfect way of showing how legislation cannot change outcomes. Affirmative action recipients flunk out at disproportionate rates and guess what, people making loans to sub-prime borrowers suffer loses at disproportionate rates. Numbers are numbers and they are cold and hard.

Quote:
Probably. The guy who's running for president got off lightly for his involvement in a big financial institution scandal that we are reminded of today because of another big financial institution scandal, vs. some other guys who aren't running for president. And anyway, the big financial institution scandal that's happening now is due to the Fair Housing Act, so it's really the fault of black people and their liberal enablers.

Sounds like a slam-dunk for McCain. Any chance you could get hired on?

The guy couldn't afford me man.

Quote:
Well, that certainly puts the lie to my idea that calling Biden's finances "sub-prime" doesn't make any sense.

It make financial sense, but I can see your point that the Republicans might not think it would make political sense. I disagree but can see what you are getting at.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #71 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Um... while it is called the subprime housing debacle because those are the types of loans that drove the losses, subprime still describes the party to whom to money is being loaned.

Ok, so show us your proof that Biden is in fact subprime.

We're all still waiting for your bona fide proof.

Show us the money!
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #72 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:27pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post

What was disclosed across multiple years was that he has a line of credit that he uses. "Change in the previously disclosed state" doesn't mean anything. The only state that was disclosed was that he is a co-signer on his son's student loans and that he uses a line of credit. They don't say whether he pays off the line of credit after using them. Therefore your statement that he is in debt is not supported. I'm just wondering whether you'll admit this fact.

The term of the loans is also on the disclosures. I'm just wondering whether you'll admit this fact.

Is this some sort of new code I'm not familiar with? I see a disclosure for a loan and read the disclosed terms and believe them followed. You suggest it is something different with no proof but somehow I am supposed to admit I am wrong for reading the form.

These are personal disclosures. If they are loaning their campaign money or if their campaigns are taking out loans and fund raising those issues are entirely separate.

Do you have any support for your contention that these loans somehow do not follow the disclosed terms? Am I supposed to believe Biden a liar on his forms?

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #73 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:31pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Ok, so show us your proof that Biden is in fact subprime.

We're all still waiting for your bona fide proof.

Show us the money!

Debt to income. Both are disclosed on the forms.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #74 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Um... while it is called the subprime housing debacle because those are the types of loans that drove the losses, subprime still describes the party to whom to money is being loaned.

I don't think people should run away from the linkage. The Democrats have a lot more happening here than Republicans. Dodd and Countrywide would be a nice issue to bring up along with the Democratic Do-Nothing(especially on energy) Congress

Put Tomato on that sandwich.

So, you're contending that it would be politically expedient to rhetorically link Biden to the sub-prime meltdown, despite the fact that you don't have any evidence that he is a sub-prime borrower, his financial situation has nothing to do with fast and loose mortgage practices, and the actual crisis was incubating during full-on one party Republican rule, which of course hurts Democrats. Because they somehow managed to game the regulatory environment while being locked out of power.


Quote:
I think it would be a perfect way of showing how legislation cannot change outcomes. Affirmative action recipients flunk out at disproportionate rates and guess what, people making loans to sub-prime borrowers suffer loses at disproportionate rates. Numbers are numbers and they are cold and hard.

Numbers are indeed cold and hard. Specious equivalencies are not. You're saying that the steady erosion of lending standards, clearly following the surge in global capital looking for investment instruments, had something to do with affirmative action?

If so, how to account for the many years of fairly steady default rates? Perhaps I missed the amending of the Fair Housing Act which compelled financial institutions to extend mortgages to people with no assets or even a job?

You say tomato, I say holy fucking shit.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #75 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

The term of the loans is also on the disclosures. I'm just wondering whether you'll admit this fact.

Is this some sort of new code I'm not familiar with? I see a disclosure for a loan and read the disclosed terms and believe them followed. You suggest it is something different with no proof but somehow I am supposed to admit I am wrong for reading the form.

These are personal disclosures. If they are loaning their campaign money or if their campaigns are taking out loans and fund raising those issues are entirely separate.

Do you have any support for your contention that these loans somehow do not follow the disclosed terms? Am I supposed to believe Biden a liar on his forms?

I'm going to try to walk through this slowly again. The form says "Check the highest amount owed during the reporting period." So if he uses his line of credit to buy a car for $20,000, and then pays it off down to 0 after a few months, he would still have to check the box for that line of credit at $20,000. That doesn't mean he owed $20,000 at the end of the year, it just means that was the "highest amount owed during the reporting period."

Those are the terms stated on the form. Do you understand the terms of the form or not?
Reply
Reply
post #76 of 143
8/24/08 at 2:52pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

Debt to income. Both are disclosed on the forms.

I don't see either or the debt to income ratio. And what precisely defines when someone is in fact subprime?

Show us the money!

Now I don't know if Biden is under the FERS retirement plan, where on this financial report are these future payments located, including stock/bond funds which a portion of his salary is undoubtedly sent? I'll ask at work, but I'm dang near certain that even if he died, his spouse would still receive full benefits until their death. Didn't he have a kickass wife? Meaning ~8 years younger?

And if he's still under CSRS with 36 years of service his retirement will be ~80% of his high three year average, or say ~$120K/yr. So assuming normal life expectancies they'll get ~$120K for the next 30 years (in constant dollars, i. e. an annual COLA will be applied and adjustments made for local price/pay indexes). Guaranteed.

I stayed in the old CSRS system, and have been making out like a bandit.

You do understand how the FERS/CSRS and federal life insurance systems work?

TYVM
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #77 of 143
8/24/08 at 3:51pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

I don't see either or the debt to income ratio. And what precisely defines when someone is in fact subprime?

Show us the money!

Now I don't know if Biden is under the FERS retirement plan, where on this financial report are these future payments located, including stock/bond funds which a portion of his salary is undoubtedly sent? I'll ask at work, but I'm dang near certain that even if he died, his spouse would still receive full benefits until their death. Didn't he have a kickass wife? Meaning ~8 years younger?

And if he's still under CSRS with 36 years of service his retirement will be ~80% of his high three year average, or say ~$120K/yr. So assuming normal life expectancies they'll get ~$120K for the next 30 years (in constant dollars, i. e. an annual COLA will be applied and adjustments made for local price/pay indexes). Guaranteed.

I stayed in the old CSRS system, and have been making out like a bandit.

You do understand how the FERS/CSRS and federal life insurance systems work?

TYVM

I showed you. Do the thinking on it for yourself. Add up the debt. Add up the income. Add up his age. Go do the legwork yourself if you dispute someone having (fuzzy numbers) 90-100% of their income in personal loans is prime.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #78 of 143
8/24/08 at 4:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

I showed you. Do the thinking on it for yourself. Add up the debt. Add up the income. Add up his age. Go do the legwork yourself if you dispute someone having (fuzzy numbers) 90-100% of their income in personal loans is prime.

Either you show us all how exactly you arrived at your initial conjectures with insufficient information and suppositions and slight-of-hand or this thread needs to be locked.

I sense that someone here hasn't been forthright and refuses to provide full disclosure.

That's judge and jury enough for myself.

Until you can prove all your wild conjectures, don't post in this thread anymore.

It's time to put up, ..., it's time to crunch some munchies.

And seeing as I understand the federal retirement system orders of magnitude better than you ever will, I do know what I'm talking about.

We need some quantitative answers, not your opinion, on Biden being subprime, you have yet to provide conclusive proof.

Game over.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #79 of 143
8/24/08 at 4:25pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Either you show us all how exactly you arrived at your initial conjectures with insufficient information and suppositions and slight-of-hand or this thread needs to be locked.

You are welcome to show how conjectures are against the posting guidelines and report them appropriately. I welcome it.

Quote:
I sense that someone here hasn't been forthright and refuses to provide full disclosure

I can't force full disclosure. That is up to Biden. If someone like BRussell wants to contend that loans are magically paid off and originated year after year that is even fine, but the documents don't support that. So that sense you are getting is Biden hiding the fact that he is broke.

Quote:
That's judge and jury enough for myself.

Of course it is.

Quote:
Until you can prove all your wild conjectures, don't post in this thread anymore.

I'll post where I want thanks.

Quote:
It's time to put up, ..., it's time to crunch some munchies.

Something definitely makes me suspect your use of the word munchies.

Quote:
And seeing as I understand the federal retirement system orders of magnitude better than you ever will, I do know what I'm talking about.

We need some quantitative answers, not your opinion, on Biden being subprime, you have yet to provide conclusive proof.

Game over.

Your refusal to deal with my proof doesn't mean it isn't conclusive. I'm using the required disclosure forms for the Senate. I'm using the more recent forms. The supposed knocks on here appear to deal with the fact that I can't force Biden to disclose early in 2008 and also the fact that the numbers are there but I don't want to force you to understand them. That isnt my problem. Thanks for playing.

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply

"During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act." -George Orwell

Reply
post #80 of 143
8/24/08 at 4:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by trumptman View Post

You are welcome to show how conjectures are against the posting guidelines and report them appropriately. I welcome it.



I can't force full disclosure. That is up to Biden. If someone like BRussell wants to contend that loans are magically paid off and originated year after year that is even fine, but the documents don't support that. So that sense you are getting is Biden hiding the fact that he is broke.



Of course it is.



I'll post where I want thanks.



Something definitely makes me suspect your use of the word munchies.



Your refusal to deal with my proof doesn't mean it isn't conclusive. I'm using the required disclosure forms for the Senate. I'm using the more recent forms. The supposed knocks on here appear to deal with the fact that I can't force Biden to disclose early in 2008 and also the fact that the numbers are there but I don't want to force you to understand them. That isnt my problem. Thanks for playing.

... you have as of yet, not presented one piece of evidence that supports your supposition. You've given us all a link to something you claim what it definitely is not.

That being the truth. "Well isn't plus/minus $300K good enough evidence?" NO!

And since none of us know of Biden's retirement package this entire argument on your part is definitely and definitively, a moot point!

Sorry, if you lost the argument here but you have.

Next time, I'd suggest you look before you leap, to erroneous conjectures, incorrect suppositions, and unsubstantiated claims.

BTW, what exactly is your "proof" again? Stated in quantitative mathematical terms as is required of all mathematical proofs.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Joe Biden - Subprime Vice President