Buffet Against Obama

[pete]

There is one "comparisan" between the two administrations. The left wanted Bush to fail and did everything in their power to see that it happened.

Isnt that always the case?

Except that's false. Everyone rooted for Bush after 9/11... regardless of where we were before.

He squandered everyone's good will.

The right shouldn't project. Just because the right wingnuts do something a certain way, doesn't mean the "left" (whatever that is) does.

When thinking about the democratic party, you should keep in mind Will Rogers comment "I don't belong to any organized politican party -- I'm a democrat".

I meant it more as the left wants the right to fail and the right the left ....

 

[jillian]

I meant it more as the left wants the right to fail and the right the left ....

I think you're wrong. Did those of us screaming about the fact that we had no business going into Iraq want Bush not to send troops there? Absolutely. But once he did, no one (at least none by the super freaks on the left) would ever have wanted the endeavor to fail. We wanted the troops out and we believed it was pointless, but no one wanted anyone dead. That was the whole point to objecting to sending troops in the first place.

The right wingers would rather see the enconomy crash and burn than see Obama succeed. And I find that absolutely incomprehensible.

 

[Care4all]

Buffet is one of Obama's financial advisers I thought? At least he was during Obama's campaign. Criticism is ok...if it is genuine and also if you know what perspective the person giving it, comes from....imho.

Care

 

[Sinatra]

Buffet is one of Obama's financial advisers I thought? At least he was during Obama's campaign. Criticism is ok...if it is genuine and also if you know what perspective the person giving it, comes from....imho.

Care

Basically, yes.

So Buffet's criticism is both legitimate, and quite appropriate, and therefor, deserving of considerable attention...

 

[Sarah G]

I meant it more as the left wants the right to fail and the right the left ....

I think you're wrong. Did those of us screaming about the fact that we had no business going into Iraq want Bush not to send troops there? Absolutely. But once he did, no one (at least none by the super freaks on the left) would ever have wanted the endeavor to fail. We wanted the troops out and we believed it was pointless, but no one wanted anyone dead. That was the whole point to objecting to sending troops in the first place.

The right wingers would rather see the enconomy crash and burn than see Obama succeed. And I find that absolutely incomprehensible.

You are exactly right here. If anyone on the Left would have said they wanted Bush to fail in Iraq, they would have been impeached, censured, jumped all over...

There is so much right wing hate out there, they can't even see that the economy crashing and burning might affect them and theirs as well. It is insanity.

 

[jillian]

Buffet is one of Obama's financial advisers I thought? At least he was during Obama's campaign. Criticism is ok...if it is genuine and also if you know what perspective the person giving it, comes from....imho.

Care

Basically, yes.

So Buffet's criticism is both legitimate, and quite appropriate, and therefor, deserving of considerable attention...

except that you disingenuously left out the part where he still said he agreed with him; supported him; and thought he was the right man to be president.

what a qwinkydink

 

[pete]

I meant it more as the left wants the right to fail and the right the left ....

I think you're wrong. Did those of us screaming about the fact that we had no business going into Iraq want Bush not to send troops there? Absolutely. But once he did, no one (at least none by the super freaks on the left) would ever have wanted the endeavor to fail. We wanted the troops out and we believed it was pointless, but no one wanted anyone dead. That was the whole point to objecting to sending troops in the first place.

The right wingers would rather see the enconomy crash and burn than see Obama succeed. And I find that absolutely incomprehensible.

Here
Most Democrats Wanted Bush to Fail in 2006 Poll, Will Media Care? | NewsBusters.org

 

[Sinatra]

I meant it more as the left wants the right to fail and the right the left ....

I think you're wrong. Did those of us screaming about the fact that we had no business going into Iraq want Bush not to send troops there? Absolutely. But once he did, no one (at least none by the super freaks on the left) would ever have wanted the endeavor to fail. We wanted the troops out and we believed it was pointless, but no one wanted anyone dead. That was the whole point to objecting to sending troops in the first place.

The right wingers would rather see the enconomy crash and burn than see Obama succeed. And I find that absolutely incomprehensible.

You are exactly right here. If anyone on the Left would have said they wanted Bush to fail in Iraq, they would have been impeached, censured, jumped all over...

There is so much right wing hate out there, they can't even see that the economy crashing and burning might affect them and theirs as well. It is insanity.

Careful now, history proves otherwise...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baTlGy0tBqs]YouTube - MilBlogs TV: The Surge[/ame]

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...ts-wanted-bush-fail-2006-poll-will-media-care

 

[Meister]

I meant it more as the left wants the right to fail and the right the left ....

I think you're wrong. Did those of us screaming about the fact that we had no business going into Iraq want Bush not to send troops there? Absolutely. But once he did, no one (at least none by the super freaks on the left) would ever have wanted the endeavor to fail. We wanted the troops out and we believed it was pointless, but no one wanted anyone dead. That was the whole point to objecting to sending troops in the first place.

The right wingers would rather see the enconomy crash and burn than see Obama succeed. And I find that absolutely incomprehensible.

You are exactly right here. If anyone on the Left would have said they wanted Bush to fail in Iraq, they would have been impeached, censured, jumped all over...

There is so much right wing hate out there, they can't even see that the economy crashing and burning might affect them and theirs as well. It is insanity.

Harry Reid excluded.... right, Sarah?

 

[Meister]

This is exactly what I'm talking about from the D's. The coined term "failed Bush presidency". I would agree that Bush spent too much, and the war in Iraq is questionable. But, we wouldn't have been there if the D's didn't vote for it....before they voted against it...then distanced themselves from it. Look... the economy and Wall Street were humming along until 2 years ago...get that through your head. I'm not here to defend Bush, but the D's did have control of the house and senate for the last 2 years. Can you maybe at least connect those dots? Could you show me anywhere in the world that spending borrowed money has gotten any nation out of a recession? Please point me to one. Who is on Obama's excellent economic team? My memory is failing me. Obama could spend this great nation into a depression, and it seems you will be there to defend him. No question in my mind. But...thanks for making my point for me.

There is one "comparisan" between the two administrations. The left wanted Bush to fail and did everything in their power to see that it happened.

The Left didn't want him to fail, they just knew that he would fail. See the difference?

Oh brother... I'm glad she is seeing through her bias
By the way, thanks for answering my questions to you, Sarah

 

[editec]

Buffet went on to share concern regarding the demonizing of Wall Street as well as openly opposing the Obama support for the union card-check legislation that would take away workers' right to a secret ballot.

Buffet's wrong about that.

 

[Pyrite]

See, there's this funny thing about the left, we don't expect everyone to march in lockstep. Warren Buffet has his own opinions about what Obama's priorities should be, and he's entitled to them. Perhaps he's right, and he should certainly be listened to. I hope Obama does take what Buffet says into account, and I'm sure he will, but I also hope he makes his own decisions.

It seems some of you have gotten too used to a culture where disagreeing with someone on a point was the same as denouncing them. See, in adult conversations we accept that even if other people disagree with us, what they say might still have value.

this is not "Buffet against Obama" and characterizing it as such is a lie. Buffet has some criticisms for Obama and some ideas for how he proceed, and he is expressing them. In a free and open society, that should be encouraged, because in the end it makes us all stronger.

Personally I don't think that taking care of these ancillary issues has really diluted Obama's focus on the economy, and I think that he needed to take care of them so as to avoid certain artifacts of the Bush presidency becoming a part of his legacy.

 

[Care4all]

Buffet went on to share concern regarding the demonizing of Wall Street as well as openly opposing the Obama support for the union card-check legislation that would take away workers' right to a secret ballot.

Buffet's wrong about that.

He's wrong on the part where he thinks the free choice act eliminates the secret ballot, because it doesn't, if employees want a secret ballot, they can still have one....from what i have heard.... is this what you are talking about Ed?

 

[Newby]

Buffet went on to share concern regarding the demonizing of Wall Street as well as openly opposing the Obama support for the union card-check legislation that would take away workers' right to a secret ballot.

Buffet's wrong about that.

He's wrong on the part where he thinks the free choice act eliminates the secret ballot, because it doesn't, if employees want a secret ballot, they can still have one....from what i have heard.... is this what you are talking about Ed?

I heard a US Congressmen from Minnesota speak this morning, and he said the absolute opposite. Once this passes, the employees will not be able to request or get a sercret ballot.

 

[DiveCon]

There is one "comparisan" between the two administrations. The left wanted Bush to fail and did everything in their power to see that it happened.

Isnt that always the case?

Except that's false. Everyone rooted for Bush after 9/11... regardless of where we were before.

He squandered everyone's good will.

The right shouldn't project. Just because the right wingnuts do something a certain way, doesn't mean the "left" (whatever that is) does.

When thinking about the democratic party, you should keep in mind Will Rogers comment "I don't belong to any organized politican party -- I'm a democrat".

that lasted about 6 months MAX

 

[DiveCon]

Buffet went on to share concern regarding the demonizing of Wall Street as well as openly opposing the Obama support for the union card-check legislation that would take away workers' right to a secret ballot.

Buffet's wrong about that.

He's wrong on the part where he thinks the free choice act eliminates the secret ballot, because it doesn't, if employees want a secret ballot, they can still have one....from what i have heard.... is this what you are talking about Ed?

WRONG
it totally eliminates the secret ballot

 

[Care4all]

no Dive, if 30% of card signers want to request a secret ballot they can...more than likely they would not, but in some cases they might and they do have the choice to request a secret ballot if they do feel strong enough about it....

there is an article on SLATE about it that i read recently that went in to it in more detail...

 

[DiveCon]

no Dive, if 30% of card signers want to request a secret ballot they can...more than likely they would not, but in some cases they might and they do have the choice to request a secret ballot if they do feel strong enough about it....

there is an article on SLATE about it that i read recently that went in to it in more detail...

even if that is the case
its not good enough
peer pressure will keep people from checking a box like that when the damned card has they NAME on it
this is a defacto way to get the unions in where they are NOT wanted
and quite frankly, cant you see how the unions have over stepped their bounds and fucked things up

 

[Sinatra]

Why would union leaders want to remove one of the great bastions of a free society - the secret ballot? What is the motivation?

 

[Care4all]

Why would union leaders want to remove one of the great bastions of a free society - the secret ballot? What is the motivation?

look it up...the people want to be able to have a union quicker...

the old process was getting more than 30% of all workers to sign the card to want a union, they would get a vote...the business would take a few months to schedule the vote and strong arm the workers , and illegally fired some of the workers promoting unionizing to intimidate the others in to not going for it, and took work time to have paid advocates tell all the employees why it was so terrible while those advocates showing the positives of unions were not allowed the same....and could only work one on one after work etc...then, more than 50% of the workers voting with a ballot, had to take place for the union to be formed...you were not required to vote, you could not vote, if you didn't care one way or the other....

it was all favored in the employer's advantage with his intimidation, not equal footing.

the new way is if you get more than 50% of all workers signing the card saying they want union representation, they get a union formed and the representatives meet with the owner.

the owner still gets to have his advocates against unions during work time etc during the period the workers are trying to recruit the 50%.

something like....if 30% of the workers sign the card, and want a ballot vote then the ballot vote can be called is my reading of it....?