In 1995 Clinton loosened housing rules by rewriting the Community Reinvestment Act, which put added pressure on banks to lend in low-income neighborhoods. Do you see it now?
LMAO! I wouldn't be surprised to see one of our conservative friends starting a thread citing your post. It actually sounds similar to some of the ridiculous things we've seen posted lately.
It's in perfect line with this thread. Its rediculous to think Gallup is influenced or controlled by any administration.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444897304578046260406091012.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop Just say'en. These new numbers seem a little "unbelieveable".
The part where it doesn't support your claim, as demonstated in other threads. Since you apparently seem to thing that large colorful letters makes your post more persuasive. It seems to a conservative trait.
He does, don't worry. He went to the Dr. Righteous school of never conceding an argument. Don't expect a concession. Expect a litany of verbose obfuscations, redirections, and other dishonest tactics.
Could be. The pass the buck generation is a sucker for anyone who panders lower taxes, (*)(*)(*)(*) the consequences.
If you raise taxes to 100% on people making over 1 million, you still have a budget deficit of nearly 500 Billion.
Funny how it doesn't seem to matter which party needs to boost the unemployment statistics, it's the unemployed who are the subjects mysteriously missing from the equation. Why is there no statistic on the number of individuals between the ages of 18-65, who should be working but are not? Oh that's right, political propaganda doesn't, or more to the point cannot work like that.