Obama To Wall Street: "I Do Think At A Certain Point You've Made Enough Money"

[007]

obama must really be unhappy with his Presidency at this point. He appears to be doing everything in his power to make certain he is NOT reelected.

Everything he say's and does is WRONG.

That attitude is a bit too complacent - and assumes that the Dems won't engage in voter fraud (ACORN) and creation (amnesty for illegal aliens) to manipulate the 2012 election results.

Ya all acorn did was change their name and morph into something else, but I doubt the dems will get amnesty. But regardless, obama has pissed off just about every sect in America at some point or another. I don't think little purple lips has an ice cubes chance in hell of being a two term President, especially now since Arizona won't even put him on the ballot unless he comes up with a REAL birth certificate.

 

[Immanuel]

The Kennedys weren't that rich. I think that's why Jackie married Onasis. The Kennedys were more influential than rich.

Wall street is different, they took bailouts and still the ceo of Goldman Sachs took a $9,000,000 bonus last year. They gave this to him for screwing their clients especially hard.

Nobody is worth that kind of bonus money and we know that isn't all they ever get.

It's obscene.

While I agree with you that no one is worth that kind of money, I will say that it is not President Obama's place to comment on it or to regulate it. The responsibility lies on the shareholders of Goldman Sachs and the other corporations that pay those kinds of bonuses and the salaries in general.

Immie

I actually agree with his opinion and he does have a place discussing too big to fail financial institutions. Not only should they be regulated, they should be broken up.

These people took bailout money.

It does not surprise me that you agree with him and that you and I disagree.

The Feds should not have offered that Bailout money in my opinion.

I don't have a problem with regulation, but I do have a problem with Nationalization.

What would breaking them up accomplish in your estimation?

Immie

 

[boedicca]

Ya all acorn did was change their name and morph into something else, but I doubt the dems will get amnesty. But regardless, obama has pissed off just about every sect in America at some point or another. I don't think little purple lips has an ice cubes chance in hell of being a two term President, especially now since Arizona won't even put him on the ballot unless he comes up with a REAL birth certificate.

They have Motor Voter - which enables a great deal of voter fraud.

 

[driveby]

RealClearPolitics - Video - Obama To Wall Street: "I Do Think At A Certain Point You've Made Enough Money"



None of your damn business you socialist pig.

All about his business you little faggot. He misspoke.. what he should have said is "At a certain point you have STOLEN enough money."

Jesus Christ, what a bitch statement .....

 

[driveby]

Golly Gee TM. You really oughta give two of your three houses to the poor and downtrodden.

You know. The poor and downtrodden that need the help of the taxpayer because they kinda sorta forgot to get a job.

While your at it. You and hubby could open up your bank account and spread YOUR wealth to all those folks who truly need a helping hand.

After all. Thats the Agenda the Dems and your glorious leader is pushing.

Just think. You could be on the ground floor. Willing to spread your wealth to help the poor and downtrodden.

Just think how good you will feel knowing your helping out.

God. Gag me. Jeeze.

I would think you would be glad I am making sure I dont need to suck off the tit of the government?


Now how many votes do you think this idiots tact will win you guys HUH?

Go ahead and pretend its good for the country to allow the wall street people to have this country by the throat and able to do what they just did to us at will.


Instead you idiots are insulting me for being a good capitalist and acting in a responsible way in my life.


I am a caplitalist and have always been one the fact that the right likes to live in the midst of a circle jerk of lies that any democrat is merely a socalist does not make it fact it just makes your face all slimey.


I am proud of my success and am proud of being a capitalist. Your LIES about me and my beliefs does not change my beliefs now does it.


Why dont you go sell everything you own and send it to a wall street banker if you are sooo concerned about these poor things having their incomes restained to protect the MILLIONS of other Americans who live here from getting fleeced every couple of years which is what happened historially in this country right up until we implemented Glass steagal?

You're a proud capitalist ?

No, you're either a compulsive liar or you're bi-polar .......

 

[Immanuel]

Golly Gee TM. You really oughta give two of your three houses to the poor and downtrodden.

You know. The poor and downtrodden that need the help of the taxpayer because they kinda sorta forgot to get a job.

While your at it. You and hubby could open up your bank account and spread YOUR wealth to all those folks who truly need a helping hand.

After all. Thats the Agenda the Dems and your glorious leader is pushing.

Just think. You could be on the ground floor. Willing to spread your wealth to help the poor and downtrodden.

Just think how good you will feel knowing your helping out.

God. Gag me. Jeeze.

I would think you would be glad I am making sure I dont need to suck off the tit of the government?


Now how many votes do you think this idiots tact will win you guys HUH?

Go ahead and pretend its good for the country to allow the wall street people to have this country by the throat and able to do what they just did to us at will.


Instead you idiots are insulting me for being a good capitalist and acting in a responsible way in my life.


I am a caplitalist and have always been one the fact that the right likes to live in the midst of a circle jerk of lies that any democrat is merely a socalist does not make it fact it just makes your face all slimey.


I am proud of my success and am proud of being a capitalist. Your LIES about me and my beliefs does not change my beliefs now does it.


Why dont you go sell everything you own and send it to a wall street banker if you are sooo concerned about these poor things having their incomes restained to protect the MILLIONS of other Americans who live here from getting fleeced every couple of years which is what happened historially in this country right up until we implemented Glass steagal?

You're a proud capitalist ?

No, you're either a compulsive liar or you're bi-polar .......

Schizophrenic?

Immie

 

[johnrocks]

He made 5 million last year...hypocrite.

 

[johnrocks]

Did he tell that to George Soros or the Kennedy's?

The Kennedys weren't that rich. I think that's why Jackie married Onasis. The Kennedys were more influential than rich.

Wall street is different, they took bailouts and still the ceo of Goldman Sachs took a $9,000,000 bonus last year. They gave this to him for screwing their clients especially hard.

Nobody is worth that kind of bonus money and we know that isn't all they ever get.

It's obscene.

How did Obama vote on the Wall Street bailouts as Senator?

 

[AllieBaba]

Why on earth didn't the Obama's give back the money Michelle took in order to send poor patients in her ER to another hospital?

$317,000 a year for dumping patients, and catering to those with more money at the University of Chicago Medical Center.

Why didn't Obama think that was too much?

 

[mudwhistle]

I wonder how many of Obama's friends and supporters have "made enough money".

Oprah is one of the riches women in the world.
James Cameron makes millions off of his pictures.
Warren Buffet...billions.
George Sorros...ditto.
Obama himself made over $5,000,000.00 last year that we know of.

It seems that Obama feels only he and his friends really deserve to make as much money as they want. Everyone else seems to have made enough.

It really seems strange for a man who lives so extravagantly to be talking about somebody else having enough or too much money to suit him, don't you think?

In the Marxist environment there are always exceptions to the rules that the state imposes on the general population. Obama would not be ruffling the feathers of the wealthy/elite/leftist Oprah because she fits into the Marxists' plan which promotes the equalizing of the masses (that is, all of them are poor) while allowing for uncapped profits by the rulers and cronies of the state.

To a thinking person, this whole affair of Obama and Oprah not being together and on message at first provokes confusion, but after some contemplation, the apparent dichotomy actually makes sense. The two big O's live split lives. Each has a public persona which varies from his or her private persona. The public persona is not culpable for the mistakes or misdeeds of the private persona, and vice versa.

Therefore, Obama will continue to make outrageous statements completely contrary to Americanism, and get away with it. Oprah will continue to make as much money as she wants, and rightly so, but continue to back her leftist president because he's good for business. The left hand could care less about what the right hand is doing as long as the dialectic doesn't require truth as an end result.

American Thinker Blog: Has Oprah 'made enough money' yet?

 

[Zoom-boing]

I wonder how many of Obama's friends and supporters have "made enough money".

Oprah is one of the riches women in the world.
James Cameron makes millions off of his pictures.
Warren Buffet...billions.
George Sorros...ditto.
Obama himself made over $5,000,000.00 last year that we know of.

It seems that Obama feels only he and his friends really deserve to make as much money as they want. Everyone else seems to have made enough.

It really seems strange for a man who lives so extravagantly to be talking about somebody else having enough or too much money to suit him, don't you think?

In the Marxist environment there are always exceptions to the rules that the state imposes on the general population. Obama would not be ruffling the feathers of the wealthy/elite/leftist Oprah because she fits into the Marxists' plan which promotes the equalizing of the masses (that is, all of them are poor) while allowing for uncapped profits by the rulers and cronies of the state.

To a thinking person, this whole affair of Obama and Oprah not being together and on message at first provokes confusion, but after some contemplation, the apparent dichotomy actually makes sense. The two big O's live split lives. Each has a public persona which varies from his or her private persona. The public persona is not culpable for the mistakes or misdeeds of the private persona, and vice versa.

Therefore, Obama will continue to make outrageous statements completely contrary to Americanism, and get away with it. Oprah will continue to make as much money as she wants, and rightly so, but continue to back her leftist president because he's good for business. The left hand could care less about what the right hand is doing as long as the dialectic doesn't require truth as an end result.

American Thinker Blog: Has Oprah 'made enough money' yet?

This is Obama's m.o, do as I say not as I do. To understand this guy's true ideology and mind-set on things all you have to do is get him to open his pie hole off-prompter.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

He should have said "I do think at some point, you are going to see through my charade."

 

[JBeukema]

Those who can generate wealth for themselves without exploiting and victimizing others should be able to enjoy their fruits of their labour.

Besides, look at it pragmatically: stifiling wealth creation aids noone, while encouraging the creation of greater wealth ensures a surplus that can be used to aid the most disadvantaged (old, disabled, infirm, etc) without causing detriment to others in the process. It's the same principle as encouraging practices that result in surplus crops, allowing you to aid the sick and elderly while those who helped generate the surplus can live comfortably as a result of their labour.

 

[mudwhistle]

Those who can generate wealth for themselves without exploiting and victimizing others should be able to enjoy their fruits of their labour.

Besides, look at it pragmatically: stifiling wealth creation aids noone, while encouraging the creation of greater wealth ensures a surplus that can be used to aid the most disadvantaged (old, disabled, infirm, etc) without causing detriment to others in the process. It's the same principle as encouraging practices that result in surplus crops, allowing you to aid the sick and elderly while those who helped generate the surplus can live comfortably as a result of their labour.

So what you're saying is anyone who lends money to people so they can buy things like homes, cars, whatever is victimizing everyone....but someone who has a talk-show that tells us a bunch of bogus shit about how we should live our lives isn't?

Anyone who sells us our gas for our cars and provides us with electricity is victimizing us but those who make a film that sucks yet makes millions isn't.

Then those who support Democrats who made billions in the last year off of betting that the market would fail aren't victimizing us. [George Soros and Warren Buffet]

It all really depends on whom they support, not what they really do. Right?

 

[QUENTIN]

I don't like Obama one bit, but I agree with him on this. America has the biggest wealth disparity gap in the industrialized world. To give a multi-billionaire a $100 million bonus while millions are without food, homes, or medicine is obscene.

Those mentioned as Obama's friends as well as many of his top donors, if they weren't disingenuous would recognize that they've made far more money than they need or could ever reasonably use and try to give back to the people whose work and patronage put them there.

Middle and lower class people defending the right of the super wealthy to exploit them is perhaps the most crystallized form of serf thinking we have in this country.

 

[Si modo]

.... America has the biggest wealth disparity gap in the industrialized world. ....

That simply isn't true.

 

[Paulie]

I don't like Obama one bit, but I agree with him on this. America has the biggest wealth disparity gap in the industrialized world. To give a multi-billionaire a $100 million bonus while millions are without food, homes, or medicine is obscene.

Those mentioned as Obama's friends as well as many of his top donors, if they weren't disingenuous would recognize that they've made far more money than they need or could ever reasonably use and try to give back to the people whose work and patronage put them there.

Middle and lower class people defending the right of the super wealthy to exploit them is perhaps the most crystallized form of serf thinking we have in this country.

Some of America's richest men are also some of the biggest philanthropists.

 

[code1211]

.... America has the biggest wealth disparity gap in the industrialized world. ....

That simply isn't true.

This is one of those truisms that the Left recklessly throws around. These things don't need to be true to gain popularity. They need only support the pardigm.

 

[mudwhistle]

I don't like Obama one bit, but I agree with him on this. America has the biggest wealth disparity gap in the industrialized world. To give a multi-billionaire a $100 million bonus while millions are without food, homes, or medicine is obscene.

Those mentioned as Obama's friends as well as many of his top donors, if they weren't disingenuous would recognize that they've made far more money than they need or could ever reasonably use and try to give back to the people whose work and patronage put them there.

Middle and lower class people defending the right of the super wealthy to exploit them is perhaps the most crystallized form of serf thinking we have in this country.

Wonder where you got this idea from?

Mexico has the haves and the have-nots.

Most Mexicans make about $500 a year while many of the wealthy have millions...even billions. Currently the richest man in the world is a Mexican.

Need I remind you the reason why folks from Mexico and Central America come here in the first place.

Yes...it's because of our standard of living. The same one you feel like bitching about.

 

[QUENTIN]

.... America has the biggest wealth disparity gap in the industrialized world. ....

That simply isn't true.

Wait, what's your argument? That Panama or Hong Kong or perhaps Namibia is a developed country? The list you provided demonstrates that America has the highest income inequality of any developed country, it proves my argument. Did you read it?

A strong enough case can be made for including Hong Kong in the "industrialized" or "developed" or "post-industrial" world that that would mean one tiny country partially ruled by China has an even higher degree of income inequality than we do, so okay, we're #2. Was that your point? We're #2 and not #1 so it renders the incredible disparity moot somehow?

This is one of those truisms that the Left recklessly throws around. These things don't need to be true to gain popularity. They need only support the pardigm.

Or for the facts to support it, as they do. America's income disparity on the Gini index is 45, higher than any other industrialized nation save perhaps Hong Kong.

mudwhistle,

Mexico is not an industrialized nation. Developed country - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia