The Economist Calls the President "Obamateur"

Discussion in 'Politics' started by PoliticalChic, Mar 30, 2009.

  1. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,725
    Thanks Received:
    15,609
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,860
    First of all, I hate to say I told you so...

    If you'd like to see the new position taken by many who originally supported Obama, then read this article below.

    Barack Obama's progress | Coming down to earth | The Economist
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Does anyone but me question the timing of the meltdown?

    How odd that it happened immediately AFTER the election.
     
  3. Zoom-boing
    Offline

    Zoom-boing Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    25,062
    Thanks Received:
    7,260
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    East Japip
    Ratings:
    +10,122
    Odd? No. Planned? You decide . . .

    Massive agendas require massive planning . . . .

    Obama does not strike me as someone who is less than thorough and meticulous in planning. . . .

    Simply put, I don't trust Barack Obama as far as I can spit.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2009
  4. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,725
    Thanks Received:
    15,609
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,860
    I mean this in all seriousness: is it your suggestion that this administration orchestrated the meltdown as preamble to a huge, left-wing power grab?

    Now, don't force me to defend this administration.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    Seriously, it seems more than possible. Not only did he spend the campaign warning of 'collapse', he took office saying it was the worst economy since the Great Depression and getting worse. Only massive spending would save it, ignoring that prior to his taking office, 1/2 of nearly a trillion had been spent on financials, with the other 1/2 left to him, which he promptly spent. Then rammed through what made the previous money seem like peanuts, with no qualms at all. UNTIL the markets started to nose-dive. Then tried to talk it up a bit, when a bit of a plateau seemed to set in, started again...

    You don't see a pattern here?
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  6. WillowTree
    Online

    WillowTree Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    68,136
    Thanks Received:
    10,163
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +14,683



    Follow the money all the way back to George Soros!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
  7. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Well...no.

    That's not exactly what I am saying.

    But we have to admit that during the campaign we hadn't yet hit the wall, so the speeches of both candidates didn't in any way reflect the reality that we're facing now.

    Obama can no more follow through on his campaign promises than McCain could have.

    Does anyone here really think that McCain's puppet masters would have not make him do exactly what obama is doing as it regards the TARP bailout?

    And while I do NOT doubt that the $740 bailout would have been significantly different the only major difference would have been that different sets of gangsters would have gottne that money.

    Anyone disagree?

    Does anyone here really think McCain would have NOT given $ 9 TILLION to the banks?
     
  8. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    McCain, like Obama backed the first TARP, over the objections of many voters. I think it's become abundantly clear that that was the wrong way to go, though it seems many thought it right at the time. I would give the benefit of the doubt to those that did. At this point, no, seems insanity of so many fronts. They should fail if that's what they're going to do.
     
  9. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    Last edited: Mar 30, 2009
  10. PoliticalChic
    Online

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,725
    Thanks Received:
    15,609
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,860
    To be clear, I don't think that President Obama intended the huge meltdown for two reasons: the many missteps since he took over inveigh against his having the organizational ability to do so.

    Second, I think he is wise enough to realize that once you start the avalance, it may be impossible to stop it.

    That said, I think that he is a 'true-believer' in left-wing, socialist policies, and agrees with Rahm Emanuel: never let a good crisis go to waste. There was no basis for the huge spending, or 'stimulus,' since there is no historical proof that it works. In fact, it was shown not to work under FDR.

    Harding did the opposite and it worked in 1920-21.

    Canada is planning to drop corporate taxes, and there is growing resentment in Europe over the spending plans.

    I'm hoping that the electorate begins to demand results.
     

Share This Page