Because we have no other choice, no alternative, given the fact he has chosen to ignore moderates and Republican's views on every single issue since the beginning of his Presidency. Something I believe was his administration's plan from the beginning. Obviously he never planned to have a more transparent Administration as that hasn't happened yet. Other promises not kept, but apparently never seen by the liberal media as news worthy: Foreclosure Prevention Fund He attempted it and spent 75 million dollars coming in part from TARP funds, problem is the program, for a myriad of reasons, has failed to deliver. As of January 2011, the program had helped only about 500,000 homeowners. (in my opinion, using federal income tax receipts and borrowing to pay down homeowners principle balances was unfair to those that were still paying their mortgage commitments. Over the term of a Mortgage Loan, the value of one's home goes up and down many times. It only becomes an issue if you have no job or means of income. This too has happened many times in the past. Especially with the huge stock market drop in the 80's and rise of interest rates that had a significant effect on those homeowners with adjustable rate mortgages in the 80's and early 90's. For the Federal Government to insinuate that these borrowers were "taken" by the Lenders and or Real Estate Agents and Builders is simply not true. I sold homes during this period of time, worked with lenders and Builders. I always first determined the price of home a buyer could afford, shopped lenders to get them the best rate on their loan, sat down with them and the lender and made sure they understood the terms of the loan, their monthly payment, including insurance and taxes. I explained it, the lender explained it and then again the title company closing and insuring the sale explained it. What more anyone expect? The reason for the massive number of foreclosures was, in order of importance, #1. massive loss of jobs and loss of ability to pay debts, #2. inability to sell the home due to decrease in value below the amount owed on the home, #3, buying a home to begin with in an overpriced market, such as California, New York to name the largest, and #4, the ease of filing bankruptcy to avoid continued monthly mortgage payments on a home you can't sell or don't or to take advantage of government assistance programs. If I had purchased a home in an over priced market for say, $200,000.00 with a 12% interest rate and due to massive foreclosures in my area my homes value decreased to $150,000.00. I would, 1. try to refinance at a lower rate. But that would have likely not have been possible given the loss in value. It would require paying of a huge amount of principle. 2. I would have tried to sell the property, again, likely not possible as it wouldn't appraise high enough for me to pay off the loan, 3. I would have considered leasing the home for monthly rent as close to my mortgage payment as possible. Probably the best alternative as the more people losing their homes or walking away would need to find rental housing. If you could get rental income equal or close to your mortgage payment you may have been able to ride it out. Prices have continued to increase and the housing market has stabilized in most regions. As far as the Government Programs that cost taxpayers billions, they did virtually nothing to help. Nor did the lenders. They took the position of foreclosing rather than helping homeowners hold on until the market turned. The winners were investors that bought up the low price homes and rented them for more than their mortgage payment, if they didn't pay cash. The first thing you learn when studying for a Real Estate License, home prices are based on "supply and demand". The more supply, the lower the price. Although I have to say that in some over priced areas this principle is derailed. Especially when there are so many wealthy people who are ready to over pay just to get a specific property they want. Second principle, a property is worth only what a buyer is willing to pay. As a buyer you should not buy in an over priced market. You would be better off renting and investing the amount you would have paid in interest and taxes by buying a home. Especially in a depressed market where the value of the home may increase little if at all over the next several years. If the market you are in has homes for sale under market price, then go for it, as you can write of the interest and taxes until the value increases. - - - Updated - - - Whoa.... sorry, I went of topic, guess I should go to bed.
That's not the way geopolitics works. Victory or defeat are determined by whether one's strategic objectives have been achieved by military action. Obama escalated the Afghan War, but failed to defeat the Taliban. The Taliban will win and return to power as soon as America ends its role in the Afghan War. Are you suggesting that America should remain in Afghanistan forever in order to wage endless war? America lost the Iraq War politically. America should never have invaded Iraq, but it did win temporarily on a military basis. However, the US lacks the heart to do whatever is necessary for victory and lacks the staying power to fight to a conclusion of a conflict. America is now reduced to flying ground support missions for its sworn enemies in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. How incoherent and pathetic is that? The US has no influence in Iraq despite all of those deaths and wounded soldiers. Obama should have known his escalation of the Afghan War would end in defeat with all the dead and wounded in vain. Two lost wars.
Just about all US phone data is processed in Israel. Don't ask me why, just know that Obama had nothing to do with it. I prefer secret American courts to Israel when it comes to monitoring my calls.
In retrospect the only one to accomplish his objective was Osama bin Laden. He accomplished his objective of triggering a war from Morocco to Afghanistan which would overextend the US and exhaust it. In fact, he was more successful than he could have imagined. He also set a series of events in motion resulting in the American people hating each other with a passion unseen since the end of the Civil War. All the planets converged for bin Laden.
Since you apparently didn't understand my question, let me ask it again. What do you think the objectives for the US invading Afghanistan and Iraq were?
The world has certainly changed since then. I think there were several objectives. Some conscious and some unconscious. If I had to be succinct I would say America attacked Afghanistan and Iraq in an attempt to demonstrate that an enervated postmodern society could deal effectively with primitive societies.
Why do Americans put up with Obama? Because the opposition party is pathetic, and I say that as a Republican.
Iran has just confirmed there will be no inspections of its military installations where nuclear activities are conducted. http://english.farsnews.com/newstext.aspx?nn=13940119001411
Instead of discussing your imagined objective, why don't we deal with the stated objectives of the US Government. Care to explain which of these objectives have not been met? Operation Enduring Freedom - Afghanistan: Operation Iraqi Freedom: - - - Updated - - - We'll see when the final agreement is reached.
There is no real outline of a final treaty because the parties aren't in agreement on the major terms on which such an agreement would be based. Obama announced an agreement out of hope and wishful thinking. All that is happening is negotiation continuing after Obama's self-imposed deadline. If Obama wants to reach agreement on nuclear arms control with the Iranians Obama will have to capitulate on each of the outstanding terms by acceding to the Iranians position.
Did you know that the current negotiations were started at Iran's request? They're the ones who stand to loose the most if an agreement isn't reached, regardless of any artificial deadlines.
The artificial deadlines were set by Obama. Now he's ignoring his own deadlines. It's Obama who is desperate for an agreement. Most of the middle east and north africa is on fire, and Obama has made misstep after misstep. He's looking for something that will permit him to claim a legacy in the realm of foreign policy. Obama's desperation for an agreement allows the Iranians to play him like a fool. The Iranians are calling Obama a liar. Don't you think that's humiliating for him? Once Obama capitulates by acceding to Iran's terms the Iranian economy will improve and they will have the financing they need to become the dominant power in the middle east. In order to avoid Iranian hegemony some of the states in the region will seek acquisition of nuclear weapons capability. That's how nuclear proliferation happens. Obama will end up fostering nuclear weapons proliferation. That will be his legacy.
That's the good thing about artificial deadlines, there's no consequences if you ignore them. Of all the things people have said about him over the last six years, being called a liar by the Iranians probably ranks pretty low on the humiliation scale. In some circles it may even be considered a complement. Obama has shown that he has a pretty thick skin and knows how to play the long game. I'm sorry, I though you were trying to argue against this administration, but here you've laid out exactly why we won't accede to Iran's terms. There's an old proverb that says you shouldn't count your chickens before they're hatched.
The fact that conservatives in both countries are upset about the deal negotiated in Lausanne tells me this is probably a very good deal for both sides. Iran: Republicans Blast Obama Nuclear Deal As 'Dangerous' And 'Naive' Iran's far right say nuclear negotiators 'loading the enemy’s weapons'
Ignoring a publicly announced self-imposed deadline gives the other side the impression that one isn't serious and can be pushed around. That's what has happened in these negotiations. It is counterproductive to be publicly disrespected by the other side in negotiations. It creates the impression of irresolution in negotiations. We won't accede to Iran's terms. Obama will. Reading the writing on the wall is not a matter of counting chickens. - - - Updated - - - Did you see that China has called Obama a hypocrite?
Because our country has lots its way-which is exactly why we need a Republican in the White House to restore America to its Biblical principles.
The respect of the others assists America in achieving its foreign policy objectives. The contempt of other powers makes them less likely to cooperate with America.
China has been calling American Presidents hypocrites for decades. I don't think the Iran deal is going to change that.
China used to call Americans "running dogs" and "paper tigers." However, those sobriquets stopped being used more than forty years ago. China and America developed very friendly relations. However, the amicable relations ended with Obama's Pivot to Asia. Now the relationship has become less than friendly. And that's entirely the fault of the Leftist Messiah.
