Web Link

Stacey, StayCool, PosterBoy and others,

Are you not concerned at all with anything Obama has done or with the direction of his policies...either domestic or international? Please explain.

I certainly felt the same way when Bush was in office, but I didn't spend my time writing about it here.

Stacey, I do not know how you could think that Bush was against private business as I felt he went to far the other way and that was wrong but Obama seems to have declared war on business and capitalism in general. I have just returned from being in Europe for a few months and in the beginning the loved President Obama but now they are very uncertain of his capability or ability other than to give a nice rousing speech. Genuine concern.

Stacey,
I ask you about Obama and all you say is Bush was bad. I must have been mistaken in thinking that you were somewhat more cerebral than the typical leftist.

HAHA! Thanks for the laugh, guys. I was trying to answer Ben's question: "Are you not concerned at all with anything Obama has done or with the direction of his policies...either domestic or international? Please explain."

I don't know how you guys can think I said Bush was bad or that he was against private business. I can only suppose that Ben thinks Obama is bad and because I said "I felt the same" (without actually knowing what Ben thinks of Obama), Ben concludes that I think Bush was bad. But Ben was asking if I am or am not concerned. Bush did some things that made me concerned, yes. How is that saying that Bush was bad?

You guys really have a habit of reading too much into what people write.

Stacey,

What are you saying girl? This is what you said

"I certainly felt the same way when Bush was in office, but I didn't spend my time writing about it here."

We need to restore business and jobs in the US not chase them out and say bye bye. If we are not careful our President will make the entire US one big California and we all know what that is like. No revenue and no jobs and not a good outlook.

Now I'm hoping that Einstein's original post was meant ironically. If so, nice satire. If not, nice satire.

RE: " I never thought the President would consistently attack private industry. GM, Chrysler, AIG, Merrill Lynch, bondholders, investment firms, banks, and now he is going after the insurance companies. Truly beyond belief."

let's see. GM would be gone now if not for Obama. AIG, Merryl, etc made out like bandits because of Obama. The banks reported record profits last quarter, investment firms have had virtually no change in their regulatory structures. Bondholders for the most part recouped their money. To claim Obama is "attacking private industry" is beyond ridiculous.

Ben in the thread you asked the cadre of liberals on this forum if they're concerned about anything regarding obama. Sure, there's a ton of stuff I want him to do that he hasn't done yet. He rolled over for wall street (though i can understand why he did...in order to stabilize the financial system); Don't Ask Don't Tell should've been repealed the first week he was in office, not some unspecified date in the first term maybe; the healthcare reform we SHOULD be having is single-payer, but I can see why he pushed for a less radical (should I say revolutionary) type of reform; I'm cautiously holding out hope he won't buy into the garbage being pushed by the neo-cons that we need to double-down in Afghanistan and instead will shift the strategy to targeting al-qaeda in pakistan and will start down-shifting the support for the corrupt Karzai regime that Bush coddled for 7 years; I'm alarmed that rather than roll back some of the excesses of the bush's secret surveillance regime, he's continued to support those policies in court; I'm concerned that by going to such lengths to stabilize the financial system that he's incentivized the very people that got us into this mess to continue the very practices that led us to this mess. In other words, no, Obama isn't perfect.

HOWEVER, what I fight against in most cases on this forum is the belief some people seem to have that Obama is some sort of islamic/communist manchurian candidate who's secretly attempting to destroy our economy/constitution/country. This is simply not true. It's insulting not only to the president, but to the 70 million people who voted for him. Just because you disagree with the policies this man is pursuing (and the policies he campaigned on, so those 70 million also support implicitly) doesn't mean he's attempting to destroy the world. It's not your way or the highway. It's not the case that you're either with me or against me. Can you perhaps take a few minutes and actually contemplate the fact that maybe Obama is pursuing these policies because he thinks it will bring the greatest amount of good to the greatest amount of people? That maybe, just maybe, he's not a secret muslim/communist/fascist/anti-christ who's intentionally trying to ruin the world. And that if these plans don't pan out as he and his supporters expected, you have every right to replace him with someone else in 2012, but until then stop questioning his legitimacy (unless you have REAL ACTUAL proof) and stop claiming he's trying to destroy the world. Until then, there's no where to go and I'll keep plugging the holes to the dam of insanity that seem to be forming on this forum daily...

"GM, Chrysler, AIG, Merrill Lynch, ..."

Einstein, I can't tell if you're joking or trying to sound ironic. Obama continued the bailouts of those companies that were started by George Bush. Those companies would be long gone by now without the bailouts. In what way were the bailouts an attack on private industry? Do you mean to say that bailing out those companies was a kind of attack on their competitors, so in a way that was an attack on private industry? Please help me out, anyone, because I can't make sense of this.

At any rate, I wish Obama would pay attention to his advisor Paul Volker, and get tougher with some of these bailed out Wall Street firms. The "Too Big to Fail" doctrine espoused by George Bush and Henry Paulson is an attack on private industry.

Let's make sure we remember the facts here Bush was not going to give the money to the auto boys and neither was congress. Remember the private jets and queen nancys condeming them for doing the same as her? Obambi wanted them to get the money in the worst way to polish the unions apple. That said they should have all been cut loose. GM and Chrysler are still not selling anything and are pouring through our cash. Big mistake but Obambi was in it in both feet with Bush. All these politicans are dirty. Do a little research and you will find out that the Obama administration insisted that Nummi be included in old GM sealing their fate.

Bob,

RE: "Let's make sure we remember the facts here Bush was not going to give the money to the auto boys and neither was congress. "

You're amazing. It was only one year ago (September 30, 2008) that the auto bailout part 1 package was passed, with 25 billion dollars in loan guarantees to GM and Chrylser and Ford, and signed into law by Bush. So I guess your claim that bush was not going to give them any money is flatly wrong.

Web Link

Let's just make sure we remember the facts here...

And just for the record, if Obama had done nothing and just allowed GM to get completely liquidated, where would NUMMI be right now? Oh yeah, in exactly the same place...so you're mad at obama for a bailout plan that left NUMMI in the same position if not bailout had occurred....great argument...at least come up with an argument that makes sense...

Web Link