Economic Crisis Overlays all Threats ...

Economic Crisis Overlays all Threats Facing U.S., Intel Chief Says

There are 23 comments on the www.defenselink.mil story from Feb 16, 2009, titled Economic Crisis Overlays all Threats Facing U.S., Intel Chief Says. In it, www.defenselink.mil reports that:

The global economic crisis colors all other threats confronting the United States, the new director of national intelligence told the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on Feb. 12.

Dennis C. Blair said the crisis raises the level of uncertainty in the world and places new areas of the globe in danger. Analysts are trying to understand the geopolitical implications of the crisis.

“The crisis has been ongoing for about a year, and economists are divided over whether and when we could hit bottom,” Blair said in prepared testimony. “Time is probably our greatest threat. The longer it takes for recovery to begin, the greater the likelihood of serious damage to U.S. strategic interests.”

Al-Qaida cells may grow in the United States, Blair said. “We remain concerned about the potential for homegrown extremists inspired by the al-Qaida militant ideology to plan attacks in the United States, Europe and elsewhere without operational direction from the group itself,” he said. U.S. agencies will focus on identifying ties between U.S.-based individuals and extremist networks overseas

.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.defenselink.mil.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Kiss Me You Fool!”

Since: Jan 08

Atlanta via Brooklyn NY

#1 Feb 16, 2009
Stories like this are too complicated for the average Bush apologists to understand.

Bush's trashing of our economy, with his record level spending (without means to pay for it) has made us more vulnerable, and not stronger as most Bush supporters claim.

But like I said, it's a huge leap of faith to expect a Bush supporter to understand how our economy has anything to do with our strength and security.

Osama said he wants to hit the U.S. in the pocket. And Bush connecting Iraq nation-building to 9/11 and Osama did just that.

Bush's taxcuts cost trillions. Iraq nation-building effort has cost over a trillion.

Both, by themselves, cost more than the current stimulus package, and yet not one Repub Senator or Representative asked how would we pay for them.

If they did, Bush's response would have been, "have kids so future generations can pay for it". For Bush, "freedom" was free. He paid for nothing.

And now we have to find a way to pay for it all. God help us.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

United States

#2 Feb 16, 2009
The global economic crisis colors all other threats confronting the United States, the new director of national intelligence told the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence... THAT IS UNTIL THERE'S A TERRORIST ATTACK ON US SOIL.

The gov better be protecting us from outside threats as well!

If this crooked Obama admin can't walk and chew gum at the same time, they need to be Impeached.

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

United States

#3 Feb 16, 2009
OneRyder wrote:
Stories like this are too complicated for the average Bush apologists to understand.
Bush's trashing of our economy, with his record level spending (without means to pay for it) has made us more vulnerable, and not stronger as most Bush supporters claim.
But like I said, it's a huge leap of faith to expect a Bush supporter to understand how our economy has anything to do with our strength and security.
Osama said he wants to hit the U.S. in the pocket. And Bush connecting Iraq nation-building to 9/11 and Osama did just that.
Bush's taxcuts cost trillions. Iraq nation-building effort has cost over a trillion.
Both, by themselves, cost more than the current stimulus package, and yet not one Repub Senator or Representative asked how would we pay for them.
If they did, Bush's response would have been, "have kids so future generations can pay for it". For Bush, "freedom" was free. He paid for nothing.
And now we have to find a way to pay for it all. God help us.
Bwahahaha! Lookie who is talkin'

Seems you aren't even smart enough to understand that bush/prez isn't responsible for Appropriations. It's the US Congress's job.

Now if you look at who voted for all these Appropriations or Spending packages, LOOKIE WHO WE FIND on the other side of the aisle:

Ted Kennedy
Hillary Clinton
Joe Biden
Hussein Obama
Nancy Pelosi
Hairy Reed, etc. etc. etc.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z... :

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z... :

Also, do we look at funding over & above for spending on Katrina and the Chocolate City rebuild as Overspending too?

“Truth to Power!”

Since: Apr 07

United States

#4 Feb 16, 2009
Obama's Rhetoric Is the Real 'Catastrophe'

President Barack Obama has turned Fear Mongering into an art form. He has repeatedly raised the specter of another Great Depression. First, he did so to win votes in the November election. He has done so again recently to sway congressional votes for his stimulus package.

In his remarks, every gloomy statistic on the economy becomes a harbinger of doom. As he tells it, today's economy is the worst since the Great Depression. Without his Recovery and Reinvestment Act, he says, the economy will fall back into that abyss and may never recover.

This Fear Mongering may be good politics, but it is bad history and bad economics. It is bad history because our current economic woes don't come close to those of the 1930s. At worst, a comparison to the 1981-82 recession might be appropriate.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1234573032443...

Consider the job losses that Mr. Obama always cites. In the last year, the U.S. economy shed 3.4 million jobs. That's a grim statistic for sure, but represents just 2.2% of the labor force.

Job losses in the Great Depression were of an entirely different magnitude. In 1930, the economy shed 4.8% of the labor force. In 1931, 6.5%. And then in 1932, another 7.1%.

The latest survey pegs U.S. unemployment at 7.6%. That's more than three percentage points below the 1982 peak (10.8%) and not even a third of the peak in 1932 (25.2%). You simply can't equate 7.6% unemployment with the Great Depression.

Real gross domestic product (GDP) rose in 2008, despite a bad fourth quarter. The Congressional Budget Office projects a GDP decline of 2% in 2009. That's comparable to 1982, when GDP contracted by 1.9%. It is nothing like 1930, when GDP fell by 9%, or 1931, when GDP contracted by another 8%, or 1932, when it fell yet another 13%.

Auto production last year declined by roughly 25%. That looks good compared to 1932, when production shriveled by 90%. The failure of a couple of dozen banks in 2008 just doesn't compare to over 10,000 bank failures in 1933, or even the 3,000-plus bank (Savings & Loan) failures in 1987-88. Stockholders can take some solace from the fact that the recent stock market debacle doesn't come close to the 90% devaluation of the early 1930s.

In other words, Barack Obama is a Fear Mongering Liar.
GhostOfCarter

Englewood, CO

#5 Feb 16, 2009
OneRyder wrote:
Stories like this are too complicated for the average Bush apologists to understand.
Bush's trashing of our economy, with his record level spending (without means to pay for it) has made us more vulnerable, and not stronger as most Bush supporters claim.
But like I said, it's a huge leap of faith to expect a Bush supporter to understand how our economy has anything to do with our strength and security.
Osama said he wants to hit the U.S. in the pocket. And Bush connecting Iraq nation-building to 9/11 and Osama did just that.
Bush's taxcuts cost trillions. Iraq nation-building effort has cost over a trillion.
Both, by themselves, cost more than the current stimulus package, and yet not one Repub Senator or Representative asked how would we pay for them.
If they did, Bush's response would have been, "have kids so future generations can pay for it". For Bush, "freedom" was free. He paid for nothing.
And now we have to find a way to pay for it all. God help us.
Interesting, YET DEMOCRATS are on VACATION right now as I right this

Stories like this are too complicated for the average DEMODUMB apologists to understand.
GhostOfCarter

Englewood, CO

#6 Feb 16, 2009
Correction

Interesting, YET DEMOCRATS are on VACATION right now as I write this

Stories like this are too complicated for the average DEMODUMB apologists to understand.

“Kiss Me You Fool!”

Since: Jan 08

Atlanta via Brooklyn NY

#7 Feb 16, 2009
Not on of you addressed the fact that Bush has bankrupted the U.S. with his "free ride" policies. NOTHING was paid for.

Hope you're enjoying the results, cause the rest of us Americans couldn't wait to see the man leave office.

Heads back in the sand Bush apologists. Keep acting as though record level debts to Communist China makes us stronger.

Meanwhile, the rest of us will support efforts to clean up this mess you Bush sheep think happened by accident, and was not the result of Bush policies for the last 8 years.
Just think

Englewood, CO

#8 Feb 16, 2009
OneRyder wrote:
Not on of you addressed the fact that Bush has bankrupted the U.S. with his "free ride" policies. NOTHING was paid for.
Hope you're enjoying the results, cause the rest of us Americans couldn't wait to see the man leave office.
Heads back in the sand Bush apologists. Keep acting as though record level debts to Communist China makes us stronger.
Meanwhile, the rest of us will support efforts to clean up this mess you Bush sheep think happened by accident, and was not the result of Bush policies for the last 8 years.
OneRyder address the fact that DEMOCRATS are on VACATION right now as I write this

Interesting, YET DEMOCRATS are on VACATION right now as I write this

Stories like this are too complicated for the average DEMODUMB apologists to understand.

I like how you give all you tax cheat buddies a free pass

I love how you refuse to blame Dodd and Frank for anything
LocalBoy

Indianapolis, IN

#9 Feb 16, 2009
OneRyder wrote:
Stories like this are too complicated for the average Bush apologists to understand.
Bush's trashing of our economy, with his record level spending (without means to pay for it) has made us more vulnerable, and not stronger as most Bush supporters claim.
But like I said, it's a huge leap of faith to expect a Bush supporter to understand how our economy has anything to do with our strength and security.
Osama said he wants to hit the U.S. in the pocket. And Bush connecting Iraq nation-building to 9/11 and Osama did just that.
Bush's taxcuts cost trillions. Iraq nation-building effort has cost over a trillion.
Both, by themselves, cost more than the current stimulus package, and yet not one Repub Senator or Representative asked how would we pay for them.
If they did, Bush's response would have been, "have kids so future generations can pay for it". For Bush, "freedom" was free. He paid for nothing.
And now we have to find a way to pay for it all. God help us.
Right, right, WRONG !
Bush and his neo cons are too arrogant to ever see the error of their ways - Right
Bush and his arrogant neo cons so called 'tax cuts" was a guise. They simply reduced a few taxes and promply inflated the citizens home values and fostered a bubble that recovered these revenues, and more. Tax cuts are a joke when the federal government increases its size three time, by borrowing instead of taxing.
Neo cons are too arrogant to admit mistakes - Right

Republicans did nothing while Bush and his neo con terrorist hijacked our nation - WRONG

We will start back in and quickly run through a few highlights of a real consrvative speaking unedited from the floor of the peoples house, in public and on record.
In the republicans words, for those who seek truth here it is.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2001...

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003...

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002...

Notice the dates

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2002...

http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003...

heres a great display of Bush and his cronyism
Its titled - NeoCONNED
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003...

September 10, 2003 A Republican wanting tighter restrictions of the bankruptcy twins, issueing warning these two were ticking time bombs.
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003...

And plenty more where that came from.

Seek truth or choke on the toxic perception
LocalBoy

Indianapolis, IN

#10 Feb 16, 2009
The mainstream neo conservative movement that bankrupted the nation was a bi-partisan effort.

First, consider this fact - neo cons are extremely liberal, hawkish and controlling.
This is not and never was a characteristic of conservative political ideas. Neo cons are liberal, very.
Secondly, both parties have continued down the path of three issues, all liberal - all expensive.
1) Foreign intervention
A) Socially - programs funded by our Treasury
B) Economically - Abusing the control of the
worlds transactional currency, making and
backing predatroy loans
C) Military - Both arming them and or their
neighbors while requireing all peace
agreements be "approved" by the US and
its cronies.
2) Domestic intervention
A) Violating the soverign rights of the states to govern social laws and welfare issues.
B) Restricting the choices of the citizen by controlling retail choices, food choices and drug choices
C)Coercively restricting the flow of savings into a system at the federal level that grossly distorts the purchasing power of the citizens savings to provide sound capital for the federals and their cronies to inflate into a fiat nightmare.

BOTH PARTIES ARE THE SAME

We have been duped
THe citizens are not represented and are lied to.

Face it - both parties represent wall street, themselves and those who want a one world government, at the cost of freedom and liberty for the individual - the citizens

They are all statist, with a corporate fascist slant.
Glasnos

Apopka, FL

#11 Feb 16, 2009
OneRyder wrote:
Not on of you addressed the fact that Bush has bankrupted the U.S. with his "free ride" policies. NOTHING was paid for.
Hope you're enjoying the results, cause the rest of us Americans couldn't wait to see the man leave office.
Heads back in the sand Bush apologists. Keep acting as though record level debts to Communist China makes us stronger.
Meanwhile, the rest of us will support efforts to clean up this mess you Bush sheep think happened by accident, and was not the result of Bush policies for the last 8 years.
Liberals... It is so easy for them eo conserve energy ... They barely have to think ... If there is a problem in the world or in their lives ... it is Bush's fault... and there is no need to strain their brains further. LOL

For the last time ... it was not Bush's idea, nor the bank's, to lower home loan standards so minorities could have "affordable" housing.

Congress designed Fannie and Freddie to serve both their investors and the political class. Demanding that Fannie and Freddie do more to increase home ownership among poor people allowed Congress and the White House to subsidize low-income housing outside of the budget, at least in the short run. It was a political free lunch.

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) did the same thing with traditional banks. It encouraged banks to serve two masters -- their bottom line and the so-called common good. First passed in 1977, the CRA was "strengthened" in 1995, causing an increase of 80% in the number of bank loans going to low- and moderate-income families.

Fannie and Freddie were part of the CRA story, too. In 1997, Bear Stearns did the first securitization of CRA loans, a $384 million offering guaranteed by Freddie Mac. Over the next 10 months, Bear Stearns issued $1.9 billion of CRA mortgages backed by Fannie or Freddie. Between 2000 and 2002 Fannie Mae securitized $394 billion in CRA loans with $20 billion going to securitized mortgages.

By pressuring banks to serve poor borrowers and poor regions of the country, politicians could push for increases in home ownership and urban development without having to commit budgetary dollars. Another political free lunch.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1222989825587...

I sugggest you read the entire article. It is one of the better articles of hundreds, and presents a good, overall view of just what happened.
Bush administration was complicit ... This is what happens when you try to be "bipartisan" with democrats as a "compassionate conservative" = liberal republican.... But make no mistake ... it was the liberal "fairness" agenda that was the engine behind this fiasco that us in the present financial mess.

Since: Jul 07

United States

#12 Feb 16, 2009
Don't you just really get tired of all the chicken littles - maybe it's time to eliminate the henhouse. Really pathetic when American's fear fear itself. And what is even more pathetic is the progagandists in here who promote that fear like a religion. Eh Bob?
LocalBoy

Indianapolis, IN

#13 Feb 16, 2009
Glasnos wrote:
<quoted text>
Liberals... It is so easy for them eo conserve energy ... They barely have to think ... If there is a problem in the world or in their lives ... it is Bush's fault... and there is no need to strain their brains further. LOL
For the last time ... it was not Bush's idea, nor the bank's, to lower home loan standards so minorities could have "affordable" housing.
Congress designed Fannie and Freddie to serve both their investors and the political class. Demanding that Fannie and Freddie do more to increase home ownership among poor people allowed Congress and the White House to subsidize low-income housing outside of the budget, at least in the short run. It was a political free lunch.
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) did the same thing with traditional banks. It encouraged banks to serve two masters -- their bottom line and the so-called common good. First passed in 1977, the CRA was "strengthened" in 1995, causing an increase of 80% in the number of bank loans going to low- and moderate-income families.
Fannie and Freddie were part of the CRA story, too. In 1997, Bear Stearns did the first securitization of CRA loans, a $384 million offering guaranteed by Freddie Mac. Over the next 10 months, Bear Stearns issued $1.9 billion of CRA mortgages backed by Fannie or Freddie. Between 2000 and 2002 Fannie Mae securitized $394 billion in CRA loans with $20 billion going to securitized mortgages.
By pressuring banks to serve poor borrowers and poor regions of the country, politicians could push for increases in home ownership and urban development without having to commit budgetary dollars. Another political free lunch.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1222989825587...
I sugggest you read the entire article. It is one of the better articles of hundreds, and presents a good, overall view of just what happened.
Bush administration was complicit ... This is what happens when you try to be "bipartisan" with democrats as a "compassionate conservative" = liberal republican.... But make no mistake ... it was the liberal "fairness" agenda that was the engine behind this fiasco that us in the present financial mess.
No, it was not Bush's idea to promote sub-prime loans.
It was the Bush doctrine that had the need for the securitized sub-prime loans, though.

Sure, it was welfare that promoted the sub-prime, it was the warfare state that sold them to China to promote democracy in Iraq while Rome burned.

Both parties are doing the same thing, stealing to promote big government without the courage to tax the citizens for all the government they give us.

Welfare created the bubble, warfare sold the over valued assets to China.

The one party welfare/warfare state.

And what pays the price, the dollar
What does the dollar buy ? Freedom and liberty, that what was sold to debase it.
LocalBoy

Indianapolis, IN

#14 Feb 16, 2009
wyojake wrote:
Don't you just really get tired of all the chicken littles - maybe it's time to eliminate the henhouse. Really pathetic when American's fear fear itself. And what is even more pathetic is the progagandists in here who promote that fear like a religion. Eh Bob?
They are just getting restless. Their minds are exploding with the rality of the world.

They will begin to eat each other soon, consumption at the expense of others is addictive.
What we see is the effects of arsonist who begins the slow crawl to the bottom by the visions of who and what is next, only to discover the pigeon in the mirror is next.

These are no longer cries of the chickenhawks, rather the cries of the falling domesticated chickens that was painted to look like hawks while standing high on a mountain of debt.

Soon we will hear the sounds of these chicken skeletons hitting the ground, stripped of any meat by the hawks they coveted, when the hawks were eating the mice. Mice are gone and the chickens are left with the hawks, wolves waiting on the ground.
Glasnos

Apopka, FL

#15 Feb 16, 2009
LocalBoy wrote:
<quoted text>No, it was not Bush's idea to promote sub-prime loans.
It was the Bush doctrine that had the need for the securitized sub-prime loans, though.
Sure, it was welfare that promoted the sub-prime, it was the warfare state that sold them to China to promote democracy in Iraq while Rome burned.
Both parties are doing the same thing, stealing to promote big government without the courage to tax the citizens for all the government they give us.
Welfare created the bubble, warfare sold the over valued assets to China.
The one party welfare/warfare state.
And what pays the price, the dollar
What does the dollar buy ? Freedom and liberty, that what was sold to debase it.
Bush ... Bush ... Bush ... it is always Bush's fault.

The Center for Responsible Lending estimates that between 1998 and 2006, about 1.4 million first-time home buyers purchased their homes using subprime loans.
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/4/4/subprime...

Wow!... It seems subprime loans were not Bush's evil scheme after all ... Not unless you have some consipiracy theory that Bush somehow controlled things in 1998 ...
I'm sure some of you BDS loons will buy into that.
you got it

Milledgeville, GA

#16 Feb 16, 2009
Liberals want open borders immigration and diversity in an interdependent world, this is the instability that comes with it.

dependence sucks, independence rules.
you got it

Milledgeville, GA

#17 Feb 16, 2009
OneRyder wrote:
Not on of you addressed the fact that Bush has bankrupted the U.S. with his "free ride" policies. NOTHING was paid for.
Hope you're enjoying the results, cause the rest of us Americans couldn't wait to see the man leave office.
Heads back in the sand Bush apologists. Keep acting as though record level debts to Communist China makes us stronger.
Meanwhile, the rest of us will support efforts to clean up this mess you Bush sheep think happened by accident, and was not the result of Bush policies for the last 8 years.
And what tune will you be singing if - when - Obama's spending spree, and other Liberal policies, send us into a REAL depression?
Plain Jane

Hayward, CA

#18 Feb 16, 2009
wyojake wrote:
Don't you just really get tired of all the chicken littles - maybe it's time to eliminate the henhouse. Really pathetic when American's fear fear itself. And what is even more pathetic is the progagandists in here who promote that fear like a religion. Eh Bob?
I think the point is that global economic crises can have severe destabilizing effects just about anywhere and there isn't much that can be done about it. And that's just in other countries. We already have frightwingers talking crazy on threads and things haven't gotten that bad yet.

I found it interesting that this editor would post anything which supported the need for massive and immediate stimulus.
Plain Jane

Hayward, CA

#19 Feb 16, 2009
Glasnos wrote:
<quoted text>
Bush ... Bush ... Bush ... it is always Bush's fault.
The Center for Responsible Lending estimates that between 1998 and 2006, about 1.4 million first-time home buyers purchased their homes using subprime loans.
http://www.democracynow.org/2007/4/4/subprime...
Wow!... It seems subprime loans were not Bush's evil scheme after all ... Not unless you have some consipiracy theory that Bush somehow controlled things in 1998 ...
I'm sure some of you BDS loons will buy into that.
Most of those loans were not FM's but private mortgage companies offering loans to anyone who would take one for high interest because they didn't have to worry about getting it back. They bundled those risky loans and resold them with ratings undeserved by the content of the bundle. They did cold calls offering equity lines of credit and 2nd mortgages. As the foreclosures started in this subprime group it snowballed, of course, and the artificially created housing bubble popped and even people who had standard loans owed more on their homes than they were worth which eventually impacted every region of the country, mortgage lenders and investors, and the FM's too, of course. The power of the banks is really what caused this. They were able to get Gramm-Leach-Bliley passed and then it was inevitable. That they got the lowest tax rates in recent history for this stolen money is just the icing on the cake.
Plain Jane

Hayward, CA

#20 Feb 16, 2009
But you can't really blame the bankers. They saw their fellows in the military industries raking in the dough with no-bid, cost-plus, cascading, contracts and it was only fair that they got a chunk of the treasury before Halliburton, Carlyle, Bechtol, et al got it all.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Africa Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Medicine for Africa' which can be made by ordi... Aug 9 andrew john langham 1
Zaragemca Top Experience (Apr '14) Aug 1 Gerry Zaragmca 3
News Cultural appropriation: when 'borrowing' become... Jun '16 Oh No You Di-nt 1
Boko Haram Allegedly Harvests And Sells Human O... (Jan '16) Jan '16 Shocking and True 1
News Migrants flock to EU door along Serbia's border... (Mar '15) Mar '15 Sterkfontein Swar... 1
News A German's View on Islam (Jan '15) Jan '15 Just a guy 6
News Sierra Leone's Ebola-hit Freetown is a city on ... (Aug '14) Aug '14 Hannah 1
More from around the web