 | | 
05-06-2009, 04:18 PM
|  | Registered User Member #18985 | | Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Miami
Posts: 2,746
Thanks: 190
Thanked 83 Times in 66 Posts
Rep Power: 10 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by MaggieMae
Quote: Originally Posted by Iriemon
Quote: Originally Posted by Sinatra Interesting take on Obama's methods of DC-directed "compliant capitalism."
Is Obama really being this open regarding his desire to control all aspects of American business? Or is he simply bumbling about and being given direction by others?
At any rate, Morris makes a compelling case... HOW OBAMA’S SOCIALISM WORKS at DickMorris.com So Morris criticizes Obama for trying to save Chrylser from a complete shutdown.
What was Morris' counterproposal? Just close the doors because it is a victim of the recession?
Another politico whose only contribution is "no". You beat me to the punch, again.
True Socialism would have meant total government control over and operation of Chrysler and putting employees on the government payroll. Same with the bank bailouts (which is a misnomer because the TARP funds are loans, not cash thrown into their coffers with no accountability). If Socialism was the intent, the government would have taken over all the financial institutions. End of story. Obama is a Socialist would have been true.
Isn't it ironic, though, that the bailout of the S&L's by the Reagan administration isn't ever mentioned as being a "socialistic" maneuver? On a much smaller scale, it was the same kind of situation. I don't believe Obama ran for office with the plan of the Govt buying banks and auto manufactures or lending Wall Street billions. The economic fiasco was thrust upon him and he is doing the best he can to avoid a catastrophe. While folks can legitimately debate what the best course of action would be, the proposition that fiscal stimulus and intervention to unfreeze the credit markets can certainly be logically defended.
Good point about the S&Ls.
__________________ Matthew 5:9 | 
05-06-2009, 05:46 PM
| | Registered User Member #18427 | | Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,636
Thanks: 363
Thanked 687 Times in 500 Posts
Rep Power: 57 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by MaggieMae
Quote: Originally Posted by Iriemon
Quote: Originally Posted by Sinatra Interesting take on Obama's methods of DC-directed "compliant capitalism."
Is Obama really being this open regarding his desire to control all aspects of American business? Or is he simply bumbling about and being given direction by others?
At any rate, Morris makes a compelling case... HOW OBAMA’S SOCIALISM WORKS at DickMorris.com So Morris criticizes Obama for trying to save Chrylser from a complete shutdown.
What was Morris' counterproposal? Just close the doors because it is a victim of the recession?
Another politico whose only contribution is "no". You beat me to the punch, again.
True Socialism would have meant total government control over and operation of Chrysler and putting employees on the government payroll. Same with the bank bailouts (which is a misnomer because the TARP funds are loans, not cash thrown into their coffers with no accountability). If Socialism was the intent, the government would have taken over all the financial institutions. End of story. Obama is a Socialist would have been true.
Isn't it ironic, though, that the bailout of the S&L's by the Reagan administration isn't ever mentioned as being a "socialistic" maneuver? On a much smaller scale, it was the same kind of situation. Point of clarification...
The vast majority of the S&L bailouts occurred under Bush I and then extended well into the Clinton administration. The RTC was set up in 1989, and was not completed until 1995.
Also, Morris clearly stipulated that what Obama is doing would not fall under historical versions of socialism, so in essence, it appears you are both in agreement.
You did read his column, yes? | | The Following User Says Thank You to Sinatra For This Useful Post: | | 
05-06-2009, 07:04 PM
|  | Registered User Member #11687 | | Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Land Of Enchantment
Posts: 2,056
Thanks: 417
Thanked 181 Times in 163 Posts
Rep Power: 40 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Chris
Quote: Originally Posted by Sinatra Interesting take on Obama's methods of DC-directed "compliant capitalism."
Is Obama really being this open regarding his desire to control all aspects of American business? Or is he simply bumbling about and being given direction by others?
At any rate, Morris makes a compelling case... HOW OBAMA’S SOCIALISM WORKS at DickMorris.com Dick Morris?
The guy who goes to prostitutes? So does Obama...
right after he visits his crack dealer. | 
05-07-2009, 08:00 AM
|  | Steeler girl. Member #17441 | | Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,905
Thanks: 654
Thanked 119 Times in 88 Posts
Rep Power: 23 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Iriemon
Quote: Originally Posted by MaggieMae
Quote: Originally Posted by Iriemon
So Morris criticizes Obama for trying to save Chrylser from a complete shutdown.
What was Morris' counterproposal? Just close the doors because it is a victim of the recession?
Another politico whose only contribution is "no". You beat me to the punch, again.
True Socialism would have meant total government control over and operation of Chrysler and putting employees on the government payroll. Same with the bank bailouts (which is a misnomer because the TARP funds are loans, not cash thrown into their coffers with no accountability). If Socialism was the intent, the government would have taken over all the financial institutions. End of story. Obama is a Socialist would have been true.
Isn't it ironic, though, that the bailout of the S&L's by the Reagan administration isn't ever mentioned as being a "socialistic" maneuver? On a much smaller scale, it was the same kind of situation. I don't believe Obama ran for office with the plan of the Govt buying banks and auto manufactures or lending Wall Street billions. The economic fiasco was thrust upon him and he is doing the best he can to avoid a catastrophe. While folks can legitimately debate what the best course of action would be, the proposition that fiscal stimulus and intervention to unfreeze the credit markets can certainly be logically defended.
Good point about the S&Ls. No, he didn't plan it, but as we all know a good crisis is a horrible thing to waste. Too bad the flu pandemics didn't pan out as they would have liked. | 
05-07-2009, 11:27 AM
|  | Registered User Member #18985 | | Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Miami
Posts: 2,746
Thanks: 190
Thanked 83 Times in 66 Posts
Rep Power: 10 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Newby
Quote: Originally Posted by Iriemon
Quote: Originally Posted by MaggieMae
You beat me to the punch, again.
True Socialism would have meant total government control over and operation of Chrysler and putting employees on the government payroll. Same with the bank bailouts (which is a misnomer because the TARP funds are loans, not cash thrown into their coffers with no accountability). If Socialism was the intent, the government would have taken over all the financial institutions. End of story. Obama is a Socialist would have been true.
Isn't it ironic, though, that the bailout of the S&L's by the Reagan administration isn't ever mentioned as being a "socialistic" maneuver? On a much smaller scale, it was the same kind of situation. I don't believe Obama ran for office with the plan of the Govt buying banks and auto manufactures or lending Wall Street billions. The economic fiasco was thrust upon him and he is doing the best he can to avoid a catastrophe. While folks can legitimately debate what the best course of action would be, the proposition that fiscal stimulus and intervention to unfreeze the credit markets can certainly be logically defended.
Good point about the S&Ls. No, he didn't plan it, but as we all know a good crisis is a horrible thing to waste. Too bad the flu pandemics didn't pan out as they would have liked. In my perception it is the conservatives who seem to be hoping that the economy tanks and Obama's policies don't work.
__________________ Matthew 5:9 | 
05-07-2009, 11:39 AM
|  | Registered User Member #18867 | | Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,357
Thanks: 353
Thanked 221 Times in 188 Posts
Rep Power: 33 | | | What is it about losing an election you do not understand? The american people saw Obama for two years. He was clear about his goals for our country minus the last minute bullcrap heaped upon his administration as a result of Bush's deregulation and ignorance of the financial institutions.
You lost..now just STFU or offer up better solutions to what the majority voted for. | 
05-07-2009, 11:41 AM
| | The Truth is Hard to Find Member #18771 | | Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 640
Thanks: 87
Thanked 50 Times in 38 Posts
Rep Power: 6 | | A thread I posted a while ago which no one seemed much interested in [  ] was entitled: OTOBI (the Obama Theory Of Business Influence). My personal view is that OTOBI is his basic business approach and that he is deeply convinced that it is his duty and good right to profoundly change the US economically and socially. He said as much during his campaign. I never doubted it.
The problem with people like this, however, is the ideology is basically all they are capable of seeing or want to deal with. What The Prophet is up to will not by any stretch of the imagination stop at some end point and level off into something new. I am afraid that the citizenry is going to pay a heavy price. | | The Following User Says Thank You to Indiana Oracle For This Useful Post: | | 
05-07-2009, 12:00 PM
|  | Registered User Member #18867 | | Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Seattle
Posts: 4,357
Thanks: 353
Thanked 221 Times in 188 Posts
Rep Power: 33 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Indiana Oracle A thread I posted a while ago which no one seemed much interested in [  ] was entitled: OTOBI (the Obama Theory Of Business Influence). My personal view is that OTOBI is his basic business approach and that he is deeply convinced that it is his duty and good right to profoundly change the US economically and socially. He said as much during his campaign. I never doubted it.
The problem with people like this, however, is the ideology is basically all they are capable of seeing or want to deal with. What The Prophet is up to will not by any stretch of the imagination stop at some end point and level off into something new. I am afraid that the citizenry is going to pay a heavy price. Just the one item of health care for all will help this country more that can be explained to people that want the middle classed extinguished. | 
05-07-2009, 12:07 PM
| | Registered User Member #18427 | | Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 6,636
Thanks: 363
Thanked 687 Times in 500 Posts
Rep Power: 57 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Indiana Oracle A thread I posted a while ago which no one seemed much interested in [  ] was entitled: OTOBI (the Obama Theory Of Business Influence). My personal view is that OTOBI is his basic business approach and that he is deeply convinced that it is his duty and good right to profoundly change the US economically and socially. He said as much during his campaign. I never doubted it. The problem with people like this, however, is the ideology is basically all they are capable of seeing or want to deal with. What The Prophet is up to will not by any stretch of the imagination stop at some end point and level off into something new. I am afraid that the citizenry is going to pay a heavy price. Quite right - we are currently in an era where there is a significant disconnect between ideology and reality, and unfortunately, ideology is ruling the day. | | The Following User Says Thank You to Sinatra For This Useful Post: | | 
05-07-2009, 12:12 PM
|  | Steeler girl. Member #17441 | | Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,905
Thanks: 654
Thanked 119 Times in 88 Posts
Rep Power: 23 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Indiana Oracle A thread I posted a while ago which no one seemed much interested in [  ] was entitled: OTOBI (the Obama Theory Of Business Influence). My personal view is that OTOBI is his basic business approach and that he is deeply convinced that it is his duty and good right to profoundly change the US economically and socially. He said as much during his campaign. I never doubted it.
The problem with people like this, however, is the ideology is basically all they are capable of seeing or want to deal with. What The Prophet is up to will not by any stretch of the imagination stop at some end point and level off into something new. I am afraid that the citizenry is going to pay a heavy price.
Great observation, I couldn't agree more. He's said countless times exactly what he wants to do, no one is ever listening. | 
05-07-2009, 12:42 PM
|  | Services Rendered Member #13669 | | Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Just off to the side of wherever you are
Posts: 8,310
Thanks: 520
Thanked 935 Times in 704 Posts
Rep Power: 211 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Newby
Quote: Originally Posted by Indiana Oracle A thread I posted a while ago which no one seemed much interested in [  ] was entitled: OTOBI (the Obama Theory Of Business Influence). My personal view is that OTOBI is his basic business approach and that he is deeply convinced that it is his duty and good right to profoundly change the US economically and socially. He said as much during his campaign. I never doubted it.
The problem with people like this, however, is the ideology is basically all they are capable of seeing or want to deal with. What The Prophet is up to will not by any stretch of the imagination stop at some end point and level off into something new. I am afraid that the citizenry is going to pay a heavy price.
Great observation, I couldn't agree more. He's said countless times exactly what he wants to do, no one is ever listening. From the beginning his agenda has been obvious to those who are listening.
__________________  Talk is cheap, it's what you do that counts. "This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab."
Joe Biden, 2005 | 
05-07-2009, 03:28 PM
|  | Think less, feel better? Member #18998 | | Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,445
Thanks: 459
Thanked 415 Times in 360 Posts
Rep Power: 61 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Newby
Quote: Originally Posted by Iriemon
Quote: Originally Posted by MaggieMae
You beat me to the punch, again.
True Socialism would have meant total government control over and operation of Chrysler and putting employees on the government payroll. Same with the bank bailouts (which is a misnomer because the TARP funds are loans, not cash thrown into their coffers with no accountability). If Socialism was the intent, the government would have taken over all the financial institutions. End of story. Obama is a Socialist would have been true.
Isn't it ironic, though, that the bailout of the S&L's by the Reagan administration isn't ever mentioned as being a "socialistic" maneuver? On a much smaller scale, it was the same kind of situation. I don't believe Obama ran for office with the plan of the Govt buying banks and auto manufactures or lending Wall Street billions. The economic fiasco was thrust upon him and he is doing the best he can to avoid a catastrophe. While folks can legitimately debate what the best course of action would be, the proposition that fiscal stimulus and intervention to unfreeze the credit markets can certainly be logically defended.
Good point about the S&Ls. No, he didn't plan it, but as we all know a good crisis is a horrible thing to waste. Too bad the flu pandemics didn't pan out as they would have liked. Oh puleeze...I'm really trying to be nice for a change, but you people make it really really difficult when I see that shit.
The quick and highly publicized response to the swine flu was INTENDED to bring awareness to people. A few years ago when there were several cases of bird flu, nobody took it seriously, and had that developed into a full-fledged epidemic, we would have been in deep trouble, with hospitals unprepared and not enough proactive preparation for vaccine supplies. There would have been widespread panic.
It's high time the United States started being PROactive regarding potential catastrophic events instead of REactive once they've hit. And you can apply that to terrorist attacks, hurricanes, and fast-spreading flu viruses. | 
05-07-2009, 03:32 PM
|  | Think less, feel better? Member #18998 | | Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,445
Thanks: 459
Thanked 415 Times in 360 Posts
Rep Power: 61 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Shadow
Quote: Originally Posted by Chris
Quote: Originally Posted by Sinatra Interesting take on Obama's methods of DC-directed "compliant capitalism."
Is Obama really being this open regarding his desire to control all aspects of American business? Or is he simply bumbling about and being given direction by others?
At any rate, Morris makes a compelling case... HOW OBAMA’S SOCIALISM WORKS at DickMorris.com Dick Morris?
The guy who goes to prostitutes? So does Obama...
right after he visits his crack dealer. Grow up. | 
05-07-2009, 03:41 PM
|  | Registered User Member #18985 | | Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Miami
Posts: 2,746
Thanks: 190
Thanked 83 Times in 66 Posts
Rep Power: 10 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by Indiana Oracle A thread I posted a while ago which no one seemed much interested in [  ] was entitled: OTOBI (the Obama Theory Of Business Influence). My personal view is that OTOBI is his basic business approach and that he is deeply convinced that it is his duty and good right to profoundly change the US economically and socially. He said as much during his campaign. I never doubted it.
The problem with people like this, however, is the ideology is basically all they are capable of seeing or want to deal with. What The Prophet is up to will not by any stretch of the imagination stop at some end point and level off into something new. I am afraid that the citizenry is going to pay a heavy price. Depends upon what you mean by profoundly change. I think Obama's main goals were 1) create a system of health care that did a better job providing health care to poorer folks and a better job overall 2) Make the tax system a little more progressive; and 3) otherwise tinker with the budget.
Whether that is deemed a profound change is a matter for the beholder.
__________________ Matthew 5:9 | 
05-07-2009, 08:52 PM
| | Registered User Member #14666 | | Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 483
Thanks: 1
Thanked 39 Times in 29 Posts
Rep Power: 6 | |
Quote: Originally Posted by MaggieMae
Quote: Originally Posted by Iriemon
Quote: Originally Posted by Sinatra Interesting take on Obama's methods of DC-directed "compliant capitalism."
Is Obama really being this open regarding his desire to control all aspects of American business? Or is he simply bumbling about and being given direction by others?
At any rate, Morris makes a compelling case... HOW OBAMA’S SOCIALISM WORKS at DickMorris.com So Morris criticizes Obama for trying to save Chrylser from a complete shutdown.
What was Morris' counterproposal? Just close the doors because it is a victim of the recession?
Another politico whose only contribution is "no". You beat me to the punch, again.
True Socialism would have meant total government control over and operation of Chrysler and putting employees on the government payroll. Same with the bank bailouts (which is a misnomer because the TARP funds are loans, not cash thrown into their coffers with no accountability). If Socialism was the intent, the government would have taken over all the financial institutions. End of story. Obama is a Socialist would have been true.
Isn't it ironic, though, that the bailout of the S&L's by the Reagan administration isn't ever mentioned as being a "socialistic" maneuver? On a much smaller scale, it was the same kind of situation. Actually it is Fascism which is company owned and government controlled or supervised like AIG. |  | |
Lower Navigation
| | | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | | » Site Navigation | | | » Apple iPad Forum | | | |