Just Another Hypocrite?

[Care4all]

Furthermore, Bush's bailout was for the banks, Obama's was for the American people.

Bush's bailout? Obama's bailout?

Let's get real, folks. They were BOTH Pelosi/Reid's bailouts. Obama supported both. Bush supported the first, but I have no idea how he felt about this latest one (and don't care).

Also, Robert, "Bush's bailout" was to save people's homes, if you remember correctly. Yes, it was given without oversight, but do you remember who wanted oversight? It wasn't Democrats, it wasn't Obama. It was the Republicans who voted to stop that bill. Get your head out of your ass, and stop looking like a blind partisan fool.

surely you are not saying that President Bush did not create this bailout and beg congress for this bail out for the banks?

This first one was not created by pelosi...it was created by president Bush and his advisors.

The second stimulus for the country was created by pelosi with Obama's request.


that's how i have read it?

care

 

[DiveCon]

Furthermore, Bush's bailout was for the banks, Obama's was for the American people.

Bush's bailout? Obama's bailout?

Let's get real, folks. They were BOTH Pelosi/Reid's bailouts. Obama supported both. Bush supported the first, but I have no idea how he felt about this latest one (and don't care).

Also, Robert, "Bush's bailout" was to save people's homes, if you remember correctly. Yes, it was given without oversight, but do you remember who wanted oversight? It wasn't Democrats, it wasn't Obama. It was the Republicans who voted to stop that bill. Get your head out of your ass, and stop looking like a blind partisan fool.

surely you are not saying that President Bush did not create this bailout and beg congress for this bail out for the banks?

This first one was not created by pelosi...it was created by president Bush and his advisors.

The second stimulus for the country was created by pelosi with Obama's request.


that's how i have read it?

care

WRONG
POTUS do not write bills
thats done in congress
he may have asked for things in it, but it was done by congress
and Pelosi and Reid were in charge of it all
and remember the BS Pelosi pulled on the first vote
just too bad the republicans didnt keep their senses and vote no on it the last time

 

[Sinatra]

Good points - people are so easy to forget that the Democrats have been running Congress going on three years now - with large majorities that allow them near certainty of passing whatever the leadership wishes.

The bailout mentality was partly begun by the Bush administration to be sure - but it was the Dems who had to ok it - and since Bush, they have taken that ball and run with it to the tune of a nearly trillion dollar porkulus bill with repeated assurances that more is needed.

So give more American taxpayer - and yet more again.

 

[Jon]

Furthermore, Bush's bailout was for the banks, Obama's was for the American people.

Bush's bailout? Obama's bailout?

Let's get real, folks. They were BOTH Pelosi/Reid's bailouts. Obama supported both. Bush supported the first, but I have no idea how he felt about this latest one (and don't care).

Also, Robert, "Bush's bailout" was to save people's homes, if you remember correctly. Yes, it was given without oversight, but do you remember who wanted oversight? It wasn't Democrats, it wasn't Obama. It was the Republicans who voted to stop that bill. Get your head out of your ass, and stop looking like a blind partisan fool.

surely you are not saying that President Bush did not create this bailout and beg congress for this bail out for the banks?

This first one was not created by pelosi...it was created by president Bush and his advisors.

The second stimulus for the country was created by pelosi with Obama's request.


that's how i have read it?

care

Surely you realize that it WAS Democrats that voted that bill into law, not Republicans. And, as DiveCon said, Presidents don't write bills. Sure, he probably pushed for certain provisions to be included, but it was not his bill.

The second, again, was written by Senators, not the President. And, as I have clearly stated, it was Obama that supported both the bailout "to the banks" and the bailout "to the people." Anyone who says that Bush bailed out the banks, remember that Obama voted for it also.

 

[Munin]

Does anyone agree with the notion that Obama is, in fact, a hypocrite?

My reasons for believing so is do to various current events.

If I remember correctly, Obama (among other democrats) relentlessly barraged George Bush for his decision to increase troop levels. However, more recently, I've heard more and more talk about Obama intending on increasing troop levels.

Obama did not support the Iraq war and said that he did not think that the surge in Iraq would have much effect. He was wrong on that and he admitted that later.

He never opposed troop increases for Afghanistan, he even said multiple times in his campaign that he would concentrate the war effort on Afghanistan.

 

[Munin]

Bush's bailout? Obama's bailout?

Let's get real, folks. They were BOTH Pelosi/Reid's bailouts. Obama supported both. Bush supported the first, but I have no idea how he felt about this latest one (and don't care).

Also, Robert, "Bush's bailout" was to save people's homes, if you remember correctly. Yes, it was given without oversight, but do you remember who wanted oversight? It wasn't Democrats, it wasn't Obama. It was the Republicans who voted to stop that bill. Get your head out of your ass, and stop looking like a blind partisan fool.

surely you are not saying that President Bush did not create this bailout and beg congress for this bail out for the banks?

This first one was not created by pelosi...it was created by president Bush and his advisors.

The second stimulus for the country was created by pelosi with Obama's request.


that's how i have read it?

care

WRONG
POTUS do not write bills
thats done in congress
he may have asked for things in it, but it was done by congress
and Pelosi and Reid were in charge of it all
and remember the BS Pelosi pulled on the first vote
just too bad the republicans didnt keep their senses and vote no on it the last time

lol, it seems like we re doing the same discussion in that other thread ( http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/69999-more-racism-charges-in-the-obama-era-3.html )

 

[Care4all]

surely you are not saying that President Bush did not create this bailout and beg congress for this bail out for the banks?

This first one was not created by pelosi...it was created by president Bush and his advisors.

The second stimulus for the country was created by pelosi with Obama's request.


that's how i have read it?

care

WRONG
POTUS do not write bills
thats done in congress
he may have asked for things in it, but it was done by congress
and Pelosi and Reid were in charge of it all
and remember the BS Pelosi pulled on the first vote
just too bad the republicans didnt keep their senses and vote no on it the last time

I thoroughly understand our government and each role of each leg of it dive...?

I never said the president wrote the bill, paulsen presented his version of what he wanted to see in the Bill, as the President's representative, and the Congress mimicked that bill as close as possible but with additions...and it failed and did not pass the house... then the senate gave the president/Paulsen the key amount of money that they requested in their version which was added to another bill, and also the terms the president and Paulsen requested in this emergency bill, with some minor changes and then sweetened it up so that it would get the republicans and dems that had voted against it the first time in the house, on board with their version.

on the second bill, i did not see any blatant plan of President Obama's given to the house as we did see with President Bush/Paulsen, but there is no doubt in my mind that the obama administration was speaking to pelosi on what they wanted to see in this bill...thus...it is Obama's bill...besides the fact that he has been talking about it since his election in november.

the president leads the country through his Budget....it is the "President's Budget"....that goes to Congress and sets priorities. The Congress usually always follows the president's budget priorities, then they add and modify, and add and tweak, and add and add some more.... is what i have seen them do the last 8 years....

The president, if he is not happy with Congress's version of his budget can veto the bill and request congress change the parts he does not like in order for him to sign it...

and they can change it or

they can choose to over ride the president's veto with 2/3rd of their vote saying yea.

so, i beg to differ with you....i am not wrong....i just see things in their full spectrum and call it as I see it.

care

 

[JimH52]

Obama is preparing to send more troops ot Afghanistan. That is where our emphasis shoudl have been all along. Bush blew it when he took his eye off the real culprits.

GET OVER IT! YOU LOST Bush has all be ruined the republican party. It will take generations for the GOP to regain it once place in Government. Bush dupped you people not once, but twice. Now he has left the country in shambles and it suddenly is Obama's fault.

 

[DiveCon]

Obama is preparing to send more troops ot Afghanistan. That is where our emphasis shoudl have been all along. Bush blew it when he took his eye off the real culprits.

GET OVER IT! YOU LOST Bush has all be ruined the republican party. It will take generations for the GOP to regain it once place in Government. Bush dupped you people not once, but twice. Now he has left the country in shambles and it suddenly is Obama's fault.

yeah jim, keep dreaming
LOL

 

[Jon]

Obama is preparing to send more troops ot Afghanistan. That is where our emphasis shoudl have been all along. Bush blew it when he took his eye off the real culprits.

GET OVER IT! YOU LOST Bush has all be ruined the republican party. It will take generations for the GOP to regain it once place in Government. Bush dupped you people not once, but twice. Now he has left the country in shambles and it suddenly is Obama's fault.

Bush didn't dupe anyone. The people who voted for Bush knew what they were voting for. That's why I never voted for him.

It's you who has been duped by Obama. All those promises of change he preached during his campaign are quickly crumbling into corruption.

 

[Charles_Main]

It's good to know I'm not the only one noticing the hypocricy. I made up my mind, when Obama was elected, to give him a chance to see what good he can do. So far, in my honest opinion, I can't stand the decisions he's making, or allowing Congress to make.

Furthermore, Bush's bailout was for the banks, Obama's was for the American people.

That my friends is a bold faced lie. This bail out will help Union Construction workers, and Cooperations, and yes Also Gives Money to the banks. AGAIN. This Bail out will not help the most important thing to helping the people. It does not do one god damn thing for small business.

And now Obama's proposed Budget is about to raise taxes on those same small business.

Ignorance is Bliss for you Obama Supporters I guess.

Brain I feel your pain. Obama is just another Hypocrite, Lying, Fear mongering Politician. The only difference is he spends money faster.

 

[Care4all]

It's good to know I'm not the only one noticing the hypocricy. I made up my mind, when Obama was elected, to give him a chance to see what good he can do. So far, in my honest opinion, I can't stand the decisions he's making, or allowing Congress to make.

Furthermore, Bush's bailout was for the banks, Obama's was for the American people.

That my friends is a bold faced lie. This bail out will help Union Construction workers, and Cooperations, and yes Also Gives Money to the banks. AGAIN. This Bail out will not help the most important thing to helping the people. It does not do one god damn thing for small business.

And now Obama's proposed Budget is about to raise taxes on those same small business.

Ignorance is Bliss for you Obama Supporters I guess.

Brain I feel your pain. Obama is just another Hypocrite, Lying, Fear mongering Politician. The only difference is he spends money faster.

No Charlie it is not a lie on Chris's part... And I am not saying that this bill is perfect but it does do a few things "for the people".....

it extends unemployment benefits for those out of work

it increases Food Stamp monies for those hitting the threshold

it gives a $250 dollar check on Social Security Retirement

It gives $250 dollar check to those on disability

It reduces a couple's taxes by about $800 a year

It helps the unemployed pay for COBRA health insurance,

it offers rebates for various green technologies, solar/wind/geothermal, bought

it funds insulating millions of homes to reduce fossil fuel usage

It funded each and every strapped state gvt, which provides a great deal in benefits for their own citizens...from snow plowing to road repair to medicaid and jobs and schools...

it for one year eliminated the Alternative minimum tax that would have hit thousands of Americans, maybe even millions of Ameicans which was $70 billion of it.

It will help those close to foreclosure , and help those underwater on mortgages some.

It funds infrastructure projects throughout the united states.

And a kazillion other things....that may or may not create jobs and improve our economy for the long run.

It may be debatable whether this stimulus will do what they estimate it to do or how effective it truly is...only history will tell at this point...



But as far as you saying it is a lie that this was not stimulus money spent on the people living here in America, i would have to strenuously disagree.

care

 

[Jon]

LOL @ Care mistaking Robert's partisan bullshit for Chris. That made my day. Rep for her.

 

[reality bites]

It appears to me that many people, due to political partisanship; fail to see clearly what the consistent outcomes always tend to be for the majority of ordinary citizens no matter what the government and/or what the country objectively.

Obama is just another 'face' albeit a black one this time. Mr Obama is doing nothing more, or less than any other new 'face'.

The truth of the matter is, that no matter who is elevated to the highest position of power, the ordinary citizens are thrown a few crumbs, just enough to guarantee that the manipulated psychology of the people ensures equilibrium is kept and the people don't revolt, whilst at the same time it is business as usual.

The marked revolving door syndrome blatantly displayed once again; ensures that this is so and will remain so.

Mr Obama was elevated into such a position due almost entirely on his 'vision' of 'change', which appealed to the many disgruntled, the disenfranchised, the poor and those who believe(d) that he is not just another self serving politician; Oh Hollywood, the media, the stupid, the damage you do.

Well, I for one have no great illusions; it is going to be business as usual; there is no great difference between the main Bush and Obama policy, that being a continuance of a small minority of people being kept in the rapacious way in which they have become accustomed, at the expense of all the rest.

 

[Munin]

It appears to me that many people, due to political partisanship; fail to see clearly what the consistent outcomes always tend to be for the majority of ordinary citizens no matter what the government and/or what the country objectively.

Obama is just another 'face' albeit a black one this time. Mr Obama is doing nothing more, or less than any other new 'face'.

The truth of the matter is, that no matter who is elevated to the highest position of power, the ordinary citizens are thrown a few crumbs, just enough to guarantee that the manipulated psychology of the people ensures equilibrium is kept and the people don't revolt, whilst at the same time it is business as usual.

The marked revolving door syndrome blatantly displayed once again; ensures that this is so and will remain so.

Mr Obama was elevated into such a position due almost entirely on his 'vision' of 'change', which appealed to the many disgruntled, the disenfranchised, the poor and those who believe(d) that he is not just another self serving politician; Oh Hollywood, the media, the stupid, the damage you do.

Well, I for one have no great illusions; it is going to be business as usual; there is no great difference between the main Bush and Obama policy, that being a continuance of a small minority of people being kept in the rapacious way in which they have become accustomed, at the expense of all the rest.

Well it is an interesting point of view, but I don't share all of it. It is certainly true that one who comes to the highest ranks of power will loose touch with the common people, certainly if you compare him with for example a mayor.

But unlike many other presidents, Barack Obama did not come from a wealthy or high political position. Only a few years ago he was an unknown senator with who owned only 1 house. Compare that with for example with his political opponents during the elections John Mccain who doesn't know the exact number of houses he has because he owns so many then you get a picture of how less wealthy this guy was.

I do have the impression that he knows what he is talking about when he says "struggling with money", something that would be less credible if someone like Bush said it.


There is a big difference between the main Bush and Obama policy, the debates about Obama on this forum just prove that. If there really was no big difference then what are we discussing here on this forum all the time? How much Obama is just doing what Bush did? No that doesn't stick, when you look at the real main policy then you can definitely see some big points of difference. There are several websites that follow this "change" and made a change-o-meter like this one for example: Obama scores a 28 on the Change-o-Meter. - By Lindsey Hough - Slate Magazine

 

[reality bites]

Your link makes interesting reading.

Unfortunately, it does not in any way or form mention 'change' to the various systems that have been in place for many years, which dictate the unchanged position of the many minions. Until such systems are removed, or 'changed' everything will in fact remain the same.

It would be interesting to have a chat with you about this again in four years.

 

[rayboyusmc]

He has to be a hippo crypt, he's not an honest republiccrat.

Winers, winers, winers. When he gets 5000 killed for a worthless war like Bush's Iraq, they you will have something to bitch about.

What a BUNCH OF SORE LOSERS.

 

[Annie]

It appears to me that many people, due to political partisanship; fail to see clearly what the consistent outcomes always tend to be for the majority of ordinary citizens no matter what the government and/or what the country objectively.

Obama is just another 'face' albeit a black one this time. Mr Obama is doing nothing more, or less than any other new 'face'.

The truth of the matter is, that no matter who is elevated to the highest position of power, the ordinary citizens are thrown a few crumbs, just enough to guarantee that the manipulated psychology of the people ensures equilibrium is kept and the people don't revolt, whilst at the same time it is business as usual.

The marked revolving door syndrome blatantly displayed once again; ensures that this is so and will remain so.

Mr Obama was elevated into such a position due almost entirely on his 'vision' of 'change', which appealed to the many disgruntled, the disenfranchised, the poor and those who believe(d) that he is not just another self serving politician; Oh Hollywood, the media, the stupid, the damage you do.

Well, I for one have no great illusions; it is going to be business as usual; there is no great difference between the main Bush and Obama policy, that being a continuance of a small minority of people being kept in the rapacious way in which they have become accustomed, at the expense of all the rest.

Well it is an interesting point of view, but I don't share all of it. It is certainly true that one who comes to the highest ranks of power will loose touch with the common people, certainly if you compare him with for example a mayor.

But unlike many other presidents, Barack Obama did not come from a wealthy or high political position. Only a few years ago he was an unknown senator with who owned only 1 house. Compare that with for example with his political opponents during the elections John Mccain who doesn't know the exact number of houses he has because he owns so many then you get a picture of how less wealthy this guy was.

I do have the impression that he knows what he is talking about when he says "struggling with money", something that would be less credible if someone like Bush said it.


There is a big difference between the main Bush and Obama policy, the debates about Obama on this forum just prove that. If there really was no big difference then what are we discussing here on this forum all the time? How much Obama is just doing what Bush did? No that doesn't stick, when you look at the real main policy then you can definitely see some big points of difference. There are several websites that follow this "change" and made a change-o-meter like this one for example: Obama scores a 28 on the Change-o-Meter. - By Lindsey Hough - Slate Magazine

Your premise of 'coming from money' loses some of its allure when you study the past presidents, especially in modern times. Nixon came from a poor background, how did he relate to the people? Reagan came from a modest background, how'd he do? Roosevelt, Kennedy, Carter, Wilson all came from wealth.

 

[Munin]

Your link makes interesting reading.

Unfortunately, it does not in any way or form mention 'change' to the various systems that have been in place for many years, which dictate the unchanged position of the many minions. Until such systems are removed, or 'changed' everything will in fact remain the same.

It would be interesting to have a chat with you about this again in four years.

There is too much speculation on this subject, the effects of the actions of this administration have yet to be seen (both good and bad). Although the foreign reactions to his presidency could already be seen as something good. A funny thing in Europe, Israel, ... is that all politicians are copying his slogans & ... : something on a world scale like this is something that I have never seen in my life before, not even Kennedy/Reagan managed to do that. European politicians are battling each other to say that they are the Obama party of europe (trying to hijack his image), it is getting more and more ridiculous each month closer to the elections.

It s right what you say, we should first wait and see and then judge.

 

[midcan5]

A beautiful video - in so many ways - description of hypocrite. This could keep the boys attentive in school, even public school. But what do we do for the women and gay men? Hmmm, a real conundrum.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPGgl_P5EPw]YouTube - Hypocrite[/ame]

So since Obama discussed these things often, the real hypocrite is BrianH. Was Brian born yesterday, that could be, is Brian a corporate tool, that could be, or maybe Brian doesn't know what hypocrite means and just needs to listen to Marina. Good luck Brain, here's hoping words come to mean for you something more than partisan blather.