From Daddy-doofus:
Monti you need to read this article. It ain't Bush's fault with the financial crisis it is the damn Democrats. This goes back to slick Willie. Don't you know the congress is DEMOCRAT..............
My response:
You = crazy. Even if you believe this mess started under Clinton, where has the Bush administration been over the last 8 YEARS to correct it??? They have no responsibility? Good laws, man.
love ya,
your liberal daughter
I hang my head in shame that my own father used the phrase "slick willie." Ayayay.
ETA: Here's the article he linked to [link]
Slate article: The Sexy Puritan - Sarah Palin embodies a powerful new Christian right archetype. What could that mean for America? The article has a link to Christian Nymphos
We are women with excessive sexual desire for our husbands! There is absolutely nothing wrong with that. In fact, God wants us to be madly in love with our husbands. He wants us to keep that fire burning in our marriage beds! We have the Song of Solomon as a perfect example of a Christ honored union where the two people are obviously intoxicated with each other.
Slate says:
...offer candid how-to advice on anal sex, fisting, and "masturbating for your husband."
Looks like the debate is back on. McCain will show.
You know, people often say that those who live in Alaska by choice don't fit in to the Lower 48 some way or another. That doesn't mean that gives her license to BE A FUCKING OSTRICH-HEADED IDIOT.
You just
know
all those thinly-veild-racist urban legends about black people naming their babies Fee-mah-lee or Placenta are being re-written about Alaskans.
...offer candid how-to advice on anal sex, fisting, and "masturbating for your husband."
I'm curious. When did those become good clean Christian fun? Isn't that sowing your seed on the barren ground? I mean, don't get me wrong, I can see how "no sex before marriage" is an easier sell if you allow sex before marriage, I just find it... um... contradictory.
PS why no giving head? Where's the love?
Isn't that sowing your seed on the barren ground?
Ladies don't have seed, silly!
Monti you need to read this article. It ain't Bush's fault with the financial crisis it is the damn Democrats. This goes back to slick Willie. Don't you know the congress is DEMOCRAT..............
I think the crisis is bipartisan. There was democratic support of measures to help lower income people get mortgages. There was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which was largely a republican measure (though signed by Clinton) that removed the firewall between commercial banks and investment houses. There was also the Commodity Futures Modernization Act that helped make securities more opaque and probably directly set up the AIG failure. Again a largely republican measure signed by Clinton. Phil Gramm was behind that act as well. If you wanted to pin the blame on one person, Phil Gramm would be your man.
Of course a lot of the blame belongs in the private sector too. Probably most of it. But the Bush administration and republican congress did nothing about it for six years. The democratic congress did nothing about for two years.
You just know all those thinly-veild-racist urban legends about black people naming their babies Fee-mah-lee or Placenta are being re-written about Alaskans.
Seen 'em. Also, innumerable jokes about sleddogs, moose, hunting, etc.
As I understand it, the big government push to help lower income people get mortgages was in 1977, with the Community Reinvestment Act, which was modified under Clinton and weakened substantially under Bush II in 2004. The CRA didn't affect private mortgage companies, which offered about half the mortgages in the housing feeding frenzy, and made subprime loans at twice the rate of the CRA-affected institutions. Another third of the subprime lenders were regulated by the goverment, but had little CRA involvement.
So I'm laying this at the feed of greed, not government do-gooder efforts.
