Sowell: Obama Win Would Be Historic Tragedy

[Skull Pilot]

Laissez-faire .. SEE: Robber Barons

Of course an unregulated system is to blame.

Don't be lazy.

We do NOT have a laissez faire system

The Myth that Laissez Faire Is Responsible for Our Present Crisis - George Reisman - Mises Institute


Did you even bother to read my post.

Clinton enacted the last big deregulatory move, GW did not deregulate anything.

Greenspans interest rate suppression that started in 1993 along with Clintons deregulation that removed the distinction between investment firms and banks are major factors in this mess.

So how did Clinton's deregulation help the economy as most Dimocrats seem to believe and the lack of GW's deregulation hurt the economy.

 

[editec]

Putting restrictions on international trade in order to save jobs at home? That was tried here with the Hawley-Smoot tariff during the Great Depression.

China puts a 17% tariff on American made goods.

What tariff do we put on theirs?

 

[cristal]

Possibly the most important qualification for president is intelligence. The president delegates responsibilities and manages those who actually do the work. Bush had gobernatorial experience, but was woefully short on intelligence .. thus republicans, who lacked the intelligence to stop him, will now pay the price for their miserable failures due to lack of intelligence.

"fucks up the presidency" .. you mean more fucked up than the worst administration in American history .. which it sounds like YOU voted for .. and a president who will leave office with the lowest approval ratings and the highest negatives in American history .. who it sounds like YOU voted for.

You mean worse than that?

Wrong! I did not vote for President Bush. I voted against him. I see the makings of a 2008 presidential disaster, in choosing Obama as our next President.

The reason why I did not vote for President Bush? I was able to recognize him as a poor presidential candidate during the 2004 elections. As I am now able to recognize Obama as a poor choice for President, in the 2008 elections.

Barack Obama is a fundamentally poor presidential candidate. Have you even bothered to look at his voting record? The number of times that he has voted present? He took NO stance on the issues. He is not even interested in them. He has only been interested in one thing. One thing alone and that is to become President.

And people such as you were not gifted with the ability to look further beyond the surface. You just cannot see this. I guess I cannot blame you. It is a flaw in your make-up.

Thankfully, people who were awarded with that special gift, are able to keep the Obamas of the world, out of the oval office.

 

[SwingVoter]

I have no problem whatsoever with Sarah Palin, and when she runs for president I'll vote for her.

Me too, and I'm not voting for her running mate this time around.

 

[SwingVoter]

Barack Obama is a fundamentally poor presidential candidate. Have you even bothered to look at his voting record? The number of times that he has voted present? He took NO stance on the issues. He is not even interested in them.

So which is it? Is Obama a socialist passionate about redistributing wealth or an apathetic opportunist? He can't be both. Never seen a campaign as bad as Mac's when it comes to making consistent arguments against the opposition.

 

[cristal]

So which is it? Is Obama a socialist passionate about redistributing wealth or an apathetic opportunist? He can't be both. Never seen a campaign as bad as Mac's when it comes to making consistent arguments against the opposition.

He is both a Marxist and an opportunist.

At least Mac is honest. Will take him any day over the dishonest candidate.

 

[greenpartyaz]

rational? like raising his kids in a racist church?

What does church have to do with Obama's political decisions? John McCain has some really disturbing character traits that make him a dangerous person to be in office. Obama has none of the above character traits that make him a danger. Whether you disagree with his policy or not. Oh by the way, open up your knowledge basket, cause here it comes... Just because you have the middle name "Hussein," does not make you automatically a terrorist! Now go convey that to your little buddies!

 

[greenpartyaz]

Actually I don't think it needs to be said. Everyone on here pretty much knows it. GreenPartyAZ is a sheep who is only capable of reciting libbie rhetoric/talking points. If you investigate his posts you'll find almost all of his material comes from daily Moveon/Kos/HuffPo talking points.

Kids like him are sad. You have to take them for what they're worth. GPAZ is a joke. Nothing more.

What are you a total fucking idiot Stoner, I don't even read any other post sites except this one. What is MoveOn/Kos/HuffPo? Unlike most of your little buddies I flip open a book. You know? Feel and touch the pages. Let the material swirl around in my head a bit.

 

[greenpartyaz]

Your exactly right Sarah Palin doesnt have to stoop to the tactics of Neo Nazi Nutters... What Sarah has going for her, is shes just an average Joe the Plumber like most common Americans and thereby has a massive audience of her own, she doesnt need a shadowy husband figuare to get it... get it???

Sarah Palin is on the border of insane. She is exactly as Lincoln Chafee framed her. A cocky wacko! That was a pretty brilliant fucking description of this lady.

 

[greenpartyaz]

Regardless of what you say or the sources thereof Sowell is doing the right thing by posting his article...Jesus said how can a house be divided?would Satan destroy evil or himself I should think not!!! Sowell saw the light and got the hell on the right track...Actually Sowells never been on the wrong side...

“The problem isn't that Johnny can't read. The problem isn't even that Johnny can't think. The problem is that Johnny doesn't know what thinking is; he confuses it with feeling.”
Thomas Sowell

Can God make a stone too heavy that he can't lift it?

 

[greenpartyaz]

Millions of people think George Bush is a great president.

Millions of people listen to Limbaugh and Hannity, both of whom have been wrong about every goddamn thing that has come out of their mouths.

What's your point?

Let me help you out .. you don't have one and you don't have anything to refute what I just said about Sowell.

Someone just got bitch slapped! Ha! Ha! Ha! Poor Lion!

 

[greenpartyaz]

Do you think that having a cool demeanor makes you qualified to become President of the United States?

I thought that having governmental experience, i.e., Senatorial, Gubernatorial and the Mayorship, qualifies you for the position of President.

It is beyond me, to see so called intelligent people, buying into the crap, regarding Obama's demeanor. His mantra for "hope and change" - which is nothing more than a sales pitch. People that has not bought into Obama's crap, are people like me. With the ability to discern. To separate the wheat from the chaff.

When he fucks up the presidency - if he were to win, just remember how your dumb asses got hood-winked, while he sits in the oval office laughing his ass off, at his ability to hoodwink 51% of the United States.

Actually to the contrary, I think a lot of people are going to be surprised that he is more of a capitalist that previously thought. I think he will escalate the war in Afghanistan and start military operations in Pakistan. I think most people will be surprised at what he will do. I think people have a very misguided idea of what he is up to.

 

[9 Volt]

BUMP

I really want an answer to this one, don't you?

Again: How can you blame it on Laissez-Faire, when we aren't, nor have we ever been anywhere close to it. We do not have it in this country...TOO MUCH REGULATION. I am , however, blaming it, at least partially, on Friedmanite idealouges. Clinton was on of the biggest de-regulators we've seen. His economic policies were as close to Reagan's as any President since. The lack of oversight that was initiated by Reagan and entrenched under Clinton has come home to roost..period. The piece by the guy laughing at anyone blaming this on Laissez-Faire is accurate but silly. Of course anyone blaming it on Laissez-faire is an idiot because we're nowhere near that stratoshpere....but believe me, if Sowell and others had their way, we'd be like Chile under Pinoche. They're all pissed at Pinoche for nationalizing Chile's copper industry, which in their eyes: "Through a wrench in the whole experiment".

 

[WhiteLion]

If you don't want opposing views to your threads, perhaps you shouldn't post any.

Maybe this is new to you, but questioning the credibility of someone you psot as an authority is relevent to the conversation. Sowell has been wrong as hell on damn near everything he's written, especially during the last 8 years .. yet, I'm not supposed to question why anyone should be listening to him?

I don't give a rat's shit if you like my posts or not. I post what is quantifiable truth .. as demonstrated by you who couldn't challenge what I said .. only challenge my right to say it.

You're right, you don't have to refute anything I say .. and you haven't.

You post your bullshit as you see it, not as everyone else sees it...

 

[WhiteLion]

Hmm. Interesting to me that we have guys like Thomas Sowell with his laissez-faire ideology to thank for this economic shitstorm. Sowell is a Milton Friedman fellow. Obama is also a Chicago School guy with Friedmanite roots. The problem with guys like Sowell is that any policy deviation from TOTAL unfettered capitalism sets them off and usually results in a smear piece like this. He's a radical, fundamentalist who believes that their should be ZERO oversight of the markets. I suspect he's pissed to see that Obama is actually taking a more cautious economic route by appointing economic advisors from both ideologies: Friedmanism and Keynesianism. If Austan Goolsbee and his team were the only economic advisors in the Obama camp, Sowell would be writing in support of Obama...NO QUESTION. The other issues he writes about are all complete fluff. Friedmanism has failed over and over again and has destroyed middle classes in countries around the globe. Friedman's name is even a liability at U Chicago these days. Having said all of this, I stand by my projection that Obama will turn out to be more of a capitalist than anyone expects.

Your economic shitstorm was brought on by Bill Clinton and Obama(Freddie and Fannie and Citibank) and the Democrats blocking Oil Drilling offshore(cause the sunami price spikes in crude oil)...

 

[WhiteLion]

Someone just got bitch slapped! Ha! Ha! Ha! Poor Lion!

STFU.. Black as Coal is a moronic idiot and so are you...

 

[9 Volt]

Your economic shitstorm was brought on by Bill Clinton and Obama(Freddie and Fannie and Citibank) and the Democrats blocking Oil Drilling offshore(cause the sunami price spikes in crude oil)...

I'm fully aware that Clinton was a bigtime de-regulator. His economic policies were a continuation of Reagan's. He is one of the guys I'm talking about.

 

[WhiteLion]

I'm fully aware that Clinton was a bigtime de-regulator. His economic policies were a continuation of Reagan's. He is one of the guys I'm talking about.

I can go with that 9 vote, but i served in the military under Ronnie Reagan i cant agree with dissing Reagan, I liked him alot and i felt he did America more good than bad, so we'll have to agree to disagree on Reagan........

 

[9 Volt]

I can go with that 9 vote, but i served in the military under Ronnie Reagan i cant agree with dissing Reagan, I liked him alot and i felt he did America more good than bad, so we'll have to agree to disagree on Reagan........

I like what Reagan did. He was the right Prez for the times. I'm just saying that his economic policies were carried on by Clinton. Clinton ran on a Democrat 101 campaign but the story is that Robert Rubin, then Chief of Goldman-Sachs, convinced Clinton to go Neo-liberal (Reaganomics) on his economic policy two weeks before his inauguration...and he did. He and Reagan were both huge deregulators.

 

[WhiteLion]

I like what Reagan did. He was the right Prez for the times. I'm just saying that his economic policies were carried on by Clinton. Clinton ran on a Democrat 101 campaign but the story is that Robert Rubin, then Chief of Goldman-Sachs, convinced Clinton to go Neo-liberal (Reaganomics) on his economic policy two weeks before his inauguration...and he did. He and Reagan were both huge deregulators.

Maybe so but the Gipper left such a impression of hope for me in a dark time in my life and i just dont feel that with Obama sorry