PDA

View Full Version : Economics Obama is a fucking liar!!


petegz28
06-01-2009, 09:55 AM
This jackass just came on TV and said that the Auto Industry had been surviving on loans from the previous Administration and that he will not continue to give them money and make them "wards of the State".

WTF??? Who encouraged the Bush Admin to make the loans? Would it have been the already elected incoming Admin? Yes.

How many billions of $'s have we given the auto sector since Obama took office? Can we say $10+ billion?


Get the fuck out of here. This guys is a piece of dogshit. He points fingers at everyone else and has yet to take responsibility for anything he has ever had a part of.

Fuck him. I lost what little respect I had for the guy.

Direckshun
06-01-2009, 09:57 AM
I hate that he's lost your vote.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 09:58 AM
I hate that he's lost your vote.

You are such the Obama suckup. It makes him sleep well at night knowing people like you will excuse anything he says or does regardless.

Direckshun
06-01-2009, 10:00 AM
I haven't said shit excusing him, Dr. Thunder. Cool your jets.

Saggysack
06-01-2009, 10:01 AM
Yeah, and there was this one jackass on the internet had to come and tell everybody.

King_Chief_Fan
06-01-2009, 10:02 AM
I hate that he's lost your vote.

I hate that he has yours

Direckshun
06-01-2009, 10:02 AM
I hate that he has yours

I hate that you hate that.

Cannibal
06-01-2009, 10:06 AM
I hate that you hate that.

ROFL

petegz28
06-01-2009, 10:06 AM
Yeah, and there was this one jackass on the internet had to come and tell everybody.

Sorry, guess I was supposed to pretend he is the messiah and has had no part of the billions of tax payer $'s wasted.


My bad....

Mojo Jojo
06-01-2009, 10:09 AM
Harry Truman had the balls to stand up and take the blame...becuase he was the guy in charge. End of story. BHO is more worried about where is next "date night" is going to be than taking responsibility for his county.

Radar Chief
06-01-2009, 10:15 AM
The Teleprompter is a politician. Once you accept that, the liar part is assumed.

Saggysack
06-01-2009, 10:16 AM
Sorry, guess I was supposed to pretend he is the messiah and has had no part of the billions of tax payer $'s wasted.


My bad....

Thanks for the apology, Cletus.

King_Chief_Fan
06-01-2009, 10:20 AM
I hate that you hate that.

I hate that you hate that I hate that!

morphius
06-01-2009, 10:23 AM
We elected a guy from one of the lowest rated congresses ever, in which his party had control. Sort of takes failing upwards to almost a whole new level.

Don't ever mistake him for what he is, a used cars sales man smart enough to get a law degree.

InChiefsHell
06-01-2009, 10:42 AM
Yes, I should have seen all this coming. BHO is obviously a socialist. Owning the Banks, owning the car companies, soon it'll be health care...we are now and it can't be denied a socialist nation. Once those hooks are in, they don't come out.

His speech today said it all. He said he didn't want to own GM, but we have no choice because of the "inherited problem" (I can't believe this asshole still leans on that excuse). He said the decisions on what kind of cars they make etc. will be soley that of the Board of Directors...then later in the speech he talks about how GM will be making new, more fuel efficient greener vehicles...sounds like the Board of Directors is not directing the company anywhere.

Make no mistake. The government owns GM and Chrysler. They will begin to push that the American Consumer buy GM or Chrysler products...and so Ford will suffer. 10 years from now (maybe less) Ford goes away as well and becomes just another Government vehicle.

Call me paranoid, but this sucks about as badly as it can, and it's probably going to get worse.

...and people used to call Bush a Nazi...

Hog Farmer
06-01-2009, 10:49 AM
A LIAR !!!!!!

You ain't seen nothin yet!!!!!!

You dumbasses elected Osama Bin Laden to destroy our country!!!!

talastan
06-01-2009, 10:50 AM
We elected a guy from one of the lowest rated congresses ever, in which his party had control. Sort of takes failing upwards to almost a whole new level.

Don't ever mistake him for what he is, a used cars sales man smart enough to get a law degree.

QFT :clap:

BigRedChief
06-01-2009, 10:50 AM
<TABLE class=data><TBODY><TR><TH class=noCenter>Poll</TH><TH class=date>Date</TH><TH>Sample</TH><TH>Approve </TH><TH>Disapprove </TH><TH class=spread>Spread</TH></TR><TR class=rcpAvg><TD class=noCenter>RCP Average</TD><TD>05/06 - 05/30</TD><TD>--</TD><TD>60.8</TD><TD>32.5</TD><TD class=spread>+28.3</TD></TR><TR><TD class=noCenter>Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx)</TD><TD>05/28 - 05/30</TD><TD>1547 A</TD><TD>63</TD><TD>30</TD><TD class=spread>+33</TD></TR><TR class=alt><TD class=noCenter>Rasmussen Reports (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history)</TD><TD>05/28 - 05/30</TD><TD>1500 LV</TD><TD>58</TD><TD>41</TD><TD class=spread>+17</TD></TR><TR><TD class=noCenter>CNN/Opinion Research (http://www.cnn.com/)</TD><TD>05/14 - 05/17</TD><TD>1010 A</TD><TD>62</TD><TD>35</TD><TD class=spread>+27</TD></TR><TR class=alt><TD class=noCenter>FOX News (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/051409_release_web.pdf)</TD><TD>05/12 - 05/13</TD><TD>900 RV</TD><TD>60</TD><TD>30</TD><TD class=spread>+30</TD></TR><TR><TD class=noCenter>Democracy Corps (D) (http://www.gqrr.com/articles/2353/5306_dcor051209fq6_web.pdf)</TD><TD>05/10 - 05/12</TD><TD>1000 RV</TD><TD>59</TD><TD>33</TD><TD class=spread>+26</TD></TR><TR class=alt><TD class=noCenter>CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_obama_051309.pdf)</TD><TD>05/06 - 05/12</TD><TD>1874 A</TD><TD>63</TD><TD>26</TD><TD class=spread>+37</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


sucks to be in 30% minority for you guys, I know all too well that feeling.

KILLER_CLOWN
06-01-2009, 10:51 AM
Yes, I should have seen all this coming. BHO is obviously a socialist. Owning the Banks, owning the car companies, soon it'll be health care...we are now and it can't be denied a socialist nation. Once those hooks are in, they don't come out.

His speech today said it all. He said he didn't want to own GM, but we have no choice because of the "inherited problem" (I can't believe this asshole still leans on that excuse). He said the decisions on what kind of cars they make etc. will be soley that of the Board of Directors...then later in the speech he talks about how GM will be making new, more fuel efficient greener vehicles...sounds like the Board of Directors is not directing the company anywhere.

Make no mistake. The government owns GM and Chrysler. They will begin to push that the American Consumer buy GM or Chrysler products...and so Ford will suffer. 10 years from now (maybe less) Ford goes away as well and becomes just another Government vehicle.

Call me paranoid, but this sucks about as badly as it can, and it's probably going to get worse.

...and people used to call Bush a Nazi...

Bush and Obama are both Fascist/Communists as both are closely related, I dare say we could have had Ron Paul.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 10:51 AM
We elected a guy from one of the lowest rated congresses ever, in which his party had control. Sort of takes failing upwards to almost a whole new level.

Don't ever mistake him for what he is, a used cars sales man smart enough to get a law degree.... that just took over 2 car companies and large swaths of the banks.

Now he needs to take over Avis and Hertz, a couple of airline companies, toss in a rail and steel company and he will be vertically integrated.

Power to the union.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 10:54 AM
<TABLE class=data><TBODY><TR><TH class=noCenter>Poll</TH><TH class=date>Date</TH><TH>Sample</TH><TH>Approve </TH><TH>Disapprove </TH><TH class=spread>Spread</TH></TR><TR class=rcpAvg><TD class=noCenter>RCP Average</TD><TD>05/06 - 05/30</TD><TD>--</TD><TD>60.8</TD><TD>32.5</TD><TD class=spread>+28.3</TD></TR><TR><TD class=noCenter>Gallup (http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx)</TD><TD>05/28 - 05/30</TD><TD>1547 A</TD><TD>63</TD><TD>30</TD><TD class=spread>+33</TD></TR><TR class=alt><TD class=noCenter>Rasmussen Reports (http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/obama_approval_index_history)</TD><TD>05/28 - 05/30</TD><TD>1500 LV</TD><TD>58</TD><TD>41</TD><TD class=spread>+17</TD></TR><TR><TD class=noCenter>CNN/Opinion Research (http://www.cnn.com/)</TD><TD>05/14 - 05/17</TD><TD>1010 A</TD><TD>62</TD><TD>35</TD><TD class=spread>+27</TD></TR><TR class=alt><TD class=noCenter>FOX News (http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/051409_release_web.pdf)</TD><TD>05/12 - 05/13</TD><TD>900 RV</TD><TD>60</TD><TD>30</TD><TD class=spread>+30</TD></TR><TR><TD class=noCenter>Democracy Corps (D) (http://www.gqrr.com/articles/2353/5306_dcor051209fq6_web.pdf)</TD><TD>05/10 - 05/12</TD><TD>1000 RV</TD><TD>59</TD><TD>33</TD><TD class=spread>+26</TD></TR><TR class=alt><TD class=noCenter>CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/poll_obama_051309.pdf)</TD><TD>05/06 - 05/12</TD><TD>1874 A</TD><TD>63</TD><TD>26</TD><TD class=spread>+37</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


sucks to be in 30% minority for you guys, I know all too well that feeling.Once again, it is all about winning to you, isn't it? Being on the winning side and feeling good, that is all that matters for you?

Glad to see you in the majority, hope it makes you feel good.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 10:56 AM
Yes, I should have seen all this coming. BHO is obviously a socialist. Owning the Banks, owning the car companies, soon it'll be health care...we are now and it can't be denied a socialist nation. Once those hooks are in, they don't come out.

His speech today said it all. He said he didn't want to own GM, but we have no choice because of the "inherited problem" (I can't believe this asshole still leans on that excuse). He said the decisions on what kind of cars they make etc. will be soley that of the Board of Directors...then later in the speech he talks about how GM will be making new, more fuel efficient greener vehicles...sounds like the Board of Directors is not directing the company anywhere.

Make no mistake. The government owns GM and Chrysler. They will begin to push that the American Consumer buy GM or Chrysler products...and so Ford will suffer. 10 years from now (maybe less) Ford goes away as well and becomes just another Government vehicle.

Call me paranoid, but this sucks about as badly as it can, and it's probably going to get worse.

...and people used to call Bush a Nazi...


:clap: well said

KILLER_CLOWN
06-01-2009, 10:56 AM
GM = Government Motors

MINA
Monday, June 1, 2009

General Motors Corp. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy early Monday, marking the humbling of an American icon that once dominated the global car industry and setting up a high-stakes gamble for U.S. taxpayers.

The bankruptcy filing, made in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, marks the climax of a lengthy debate over the auto maker’s future after it sought a bailout from the U.S. government in December to stay alive. In the end, GM couldn’t complete its restructuring out of court and filed for bankruptcy-court protection to get billions more in aid from U.S. taxpayers.

The question now facing 56,000 auto workers, 3,600 GM dealers and the Obama administration: Will it work?

The U.S. government has agreed to provide GM with another $30 billion in aid, in addition to the $20 billion the auto maker has already borrowed, to see it through its restructuring and exit from bankruptcy protection. In return, the government will get a controlling stake in the company. The Canadian and Ontario governments are putting in $9.5 billion for a 12.5% stake.

The reorganization faces myriad risks, ranging from legal challenges to the uncertainty of when consumer demand for new cars will rebound. In becoming GM’s new owner, the government is also entering largely unexplored terrain filled with political minefields, notably the possibility of meddling by Congress in the company’s daily operations and business plans.

In bankruptcy, the auto maker will split apart into two companies: a leaner new GM and a so-called old GM, which will include the pieces that will be wound down. GM intends to accomplish the split through a Section 363 sale, which would transfer the new GM assets to an entity owned by the U.S. and Canadian governments, the United Auto Workers union and the company’s unsecured creditors.

Even if a new GM emerges swiftly from bankruptcy, the administration will face a thicket of challenges, including closing more than a dozen factories and shedding the Pontiac, Saturn, Saab and Hummer brands. Shepherding these unwanted parts of GM — the so-called Old GM — through liquidation in court could take years, with potential extra costs to taxpayers if the process bogs down.

Monday, GM said it will shutter 17 factories and parts centers by the end of 2011, including seven factories in Michigan and plants in Ohio, Indiana and Tennessee. Two of the closures had been previously announced, including a castings factory in Massena, N.Y., which closed May 1. Three of the facilities to close are parts centers and three factories could reopen if market demand rebounds.

GM’s restructuring has been carefully planned by the company itself and the Treasury Department, but it faces some uncertainty now that its fate is in the hands of a bankruptcy judge. The judge chosen to handle the case will have a major impact on the outcome of the case, especially if dissident bondholders mount a legal challenge to the restructuring. There’s also the risk that consumers will be scared off by the company’s Chapter 11 filing, causing sales to fall even further.

And unknown is how the cost of restructuring both GM and Chrysler LLC would have compared with the cost of letting both companies fail in terms of lost wages, disruptions among car-parts makers and the broader economic fallout. Chrysler, which could emerge from bankruptcy as soon as Monday, will be controlled by Italy’s Fiat SpA under its own risky revamping.

Bankruptcy should allow GM to pull off one of the most expedient downsizings in the industry’s 120-year history. Long hampered by laws, union strife and management practices that kept it from fast action to fix problems, GM plans to eliminate almost all of its debt, halve its U.S. brands, shutter 2,600 dealers and rewrite labor contracts almost overnight.

Emerging sometime this summer would be a GM with a cleaner balance sheet and slimmer operations than the company that has posted deep losses since 2005. GM has burned through $33.6 billion in cash the past four years. Under its restructuring plan, GM will shed more than $79 billion in debt, gain work-force savings worth billions of dollars a year, close unneeded facilities and reduce its dealer network by 40%.


http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/6957/2/

HonestChieffan
06-01-2009, 11:01 AM
This jackass just came on TV and said that the Auto Industry had been surviving on loans from the previous Administration and that he will not continue to give them money and make them "wards of the State".

WTF??? Who encouraged the Bush Admin to make the loans? Would it have been the already elected incoming Admin? Yes.

How many billions of $'s have we given the auto sector since Obama took office? Can we say $10+ billion?


Get the **** out of here. This guys is a piece of dogshit. He points fingers at everyone else and has yet to take responsibility for anything he has ever had a part of.

**** him. I lost what little respect I had for the guy.


Hey Pete, welcome back.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 11:01 AM
A LIAR !!!!!!

You ain't seen nothin yet!!!!!!

You dumbasses elected Osama Bin Laden to destroy our country!!!!I feel your pain. Are you still farming hogs? Tough business climate in the wake of these commodity swings and the dumb ass mentalities that avoid buying pork because of the swine flu.

CoMoChief
06-01-2009, 11:19 AM
GM = Government Motors

MINA
Monday, June 1, 2009

General Motors Corp. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy early Monday, marking the humbling of an American icon that once dominated the global car industry and setting up a high-stakes gamble for U.S. taxpayers.

The bankruptcy filing, made in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, marks the climax of a lengthy debate over the auto maker’s future after it sought a bailout from the U.S. government in December to stay alive. In the end, GM couldn’t complete its restructuring out of court and filed for bankruptcy-court protection to get billions more in aid from U.S. taxpayers.

The question now facing 56,000 auto workers, 3,600 GM dealers and the Obama administration: Will it work?

The U.S. government has agreed to provide GM with another $30 billion in aid, in addition to the $20 billion the auto maker has already borrowed, to see it through its restructuring and exit from bankruptcy protection. In return, the government will get a controlling stake in the company. The Canadian and Ontario governments are putting in $9.5 billion for a 12.5% stake.

The reorganization faces myriad risks, ranging from legal challenges to the uncertainty of when consumer demand for new cars will rebound. In becoming GM’s new owner, the government is also entering largely unexplored terrain filled with political minefields, notably the possibility of meddling by Congress in the company’s daily operations and business plans.

In bankruptcy, the auto maker will split apart into two companies: a leaner new GM and a so-called old GM, which will include the pieces that will be wound down. GM intends to accomplish the split through a Section 363 sale, which would transfer the new GM assets to an entity owned by the U.S. and Canadian governments, the United Auto Workers union and the company’s unsecured creditors.

Even if a new GM emerges swiftly from bankruptcy, the administration will face a thicket of challenges, including closing more than a dozen factories and shedding the Pontiac, Saturn, Saab and Hummer brands. Shepherding these unwanted parts of GM — the so-called Old GM — through liquidation in court could take years, with potential extra costs to taxpayers if the process bogs down.

Monday, GM said it will shutter 17 factories and parts centers by the end of 2011, including seven factories in Michigan and plants in Ohio, Indiana and Tennessee. Two of the closures had been previously announced, including a castings factory in Massena, N.Y., which closed May 1. Three of the facilities to close are parts centers and three factories could reopen if market demand rebounds.

GM’s restructuring has been carefully planned by the company itself and the Treasury Department, but it faces some uncertainty now that its fate is in the hands of a bankruptcy judge. The judge chosen to handle the case will have a major impact on the outcome of the case, especially if dissident bondholders mount a legal challenge to the restructuring. There’s also the risk that consumers will be scared off by the company’s Chapter 11 filing, causing sales to fall even further.

And unknown is how the cost of restructuring both GM and Chrysler LLC would have compared with the cost of letting both companies fail in terms of lost wages, disruptions among car-parts makers and the broader economic fallout. Chrysler, which could emerge from bankruptcy as soon as Monday, will be controlled by Italy’s Fiat SpA under its own risky revamping.

Bankruptcy should allow GM to pull off one of the most expedient downsizings in the industry’s 120-year history. Long hampered by laws, union strife and management practices that kept it from fast action to fix problems, GM plans to eliminate almost all of its debt, halve its U.S. brands, shutter 2,600 dealers and rewrite labor contracts almost overnight.

Emerging sometime this summer would be a GM with a cleaner balance sheet and slimmer operations than the company that has posted deep losses since 2005. GM has burned through $33.6 billion in cash the past four years. Under its restructuring plan, GM will shed more than $79 billion in debt, gain work-force savings worth billions of dollars a year, close unneeded facilities and reduce its dealer network by 40%.


http://macedoniaonline.eu/content/view/6957/2/

:eek: Jesus Christ...

Baby Lee
06-01-2009, 11:23 AM
I write this on the morning of the end of the once-mighty General Motors. By high noon, the President of the United States will have made it official: General Motors, as we know it, has been totaled.

As I sit here in GM's birthplace, Flint, Michigan, I am surrounded by friends and family who are filled with anxiety about what will happen to them and to the town. Forty percent of the homes and businesses in the city have been abandoned. Imagine what it would be like if you lived in a city where almost every other house is empty. What would be your state of mind?

It is with sad irony that the company which invented "planned obsolescence" -- the decision to build cars that would fall apart after a few years so that the customer would then have to buy a new one -- has now made itself obsolete. It refused to build automobiles that the public wanted, cars that got great gas mileage, were as safe as they could be, and were exceedingly comfortable to drive. Oh -- and that wouldn't start falling apart after two years. GM stubbornly fought environmental and safety regulations. Its executives arrogantly ignored the "inferior" Japanese and German cars, cars which would become the gold standard for automobile buyers. And it was hell-bent on punishing its unionized workforce, lopping off thousands of workers for no good reason other than to "improve" the short-term bottom line of the corporation. Beginning in the 1980s, when GM was posting record profits, it moved countless jobs to Mexico and elsewhere, thus destroying the lives of tens of thousands of hard-working Americans. The glaring stupidity of this policy was that, when they eliminated the income of so many middle class families, who did they think was going to be able to afford to buy their cars? History will record this blunder in the same way it now writes about the French building the Maginot Line or how the Romans cluelessly poisoned their own water system with lethal lead in its pipes.

So here we are at the deathbed of General Motors. The company's body not yet cold, and I find myself filled with -- dare I say it -- joy. It is not the joy of revenge against a corporation that ruined my hometown and brought misery, divorce, alcoholism, homelessness, physical and mental debilitation, and drug addiction to the people I grew up with. Nor do I, obviously, claim any joy in knowing that 21,000 more GM workers will be told that they, too, are without a job.

But you and I and the rest of America now own a car company! I know, I know -- who on earth wants to run a car company? Who among us wants $50 billion of our tax dollars thrown down the rat hole of still trying to save GM? Let's be clear about this: The only way to save GM is to kill GM. Saving our precious industrial infrastructure, though, is another matter and must be a top priority. If we allow the shutting down and tearing down of our auto plants, we will sorely wish we still had them when we realize that those factories could have built the alternative energy systems we now desperately need. And when we realize that the best way to transport ourselves is on light rail and bullet trains and cleaner buses, how will we do this if we've allowed our industrial capacity and its skilled workforce to disappear?

Thus, as GM is "reorganized" by the federal government and the bankruptcy court, here is the plan I am asking President Obama to implement for the good of the workers, the GM communities, and the nation as a whole. Twenty years ago when I made "Roger & Me," I tried to warn people about what was ahead for General Motors. Had the power structure and the punditocracy listened, maybe much of this could have been avoided. Based on my track record, I request an honest and sincere consideration of the following suggestions:

1. Just as President Roosevelt did after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the President must tell the nation that we are at war and we must immediately convert our auto factories to factories that build mass transit vehicles and alternative energy devices. Within months in Flint in 1942, GM halted all car production and immediately used the assembly lines to build planes, tanks and machine guns. The conversion took no time at all. Everyone pitched in. The fascists were defeated.

We are now in a different kind of war -- a war that we have conducted against the ecosystem and has been conducted by our very own corporate leaders. This current war has two fronts. One is headquartered in Detroit. The products built in the factories of GM, Ford and Chrysler are some of the greatest weapons of mass destruction responsible for global warming and the melting of our polar icecaps. The things we call "cars" may have been fun to drive, but they are like a million daggers into the heart of Mother Nature. To continue to build them would only lead to the ruin of our species and much of the planet.

The other front in this war is being waged by the oil companies against you and me. They are committed to fleecing us whenever they can, and they have been reckless stewards of the finite amount of oil that is located under the surface of the earth. They know they are sucking it bone dry. And like the lumber tycoons of the early 20th century who didn't give a damn about future generations as they tore down every forest they could get their hands on, these oil barons are not telling the public what they know to be true -- that there are only a few more decades of useable oil on this planet. And as the end days of oil approach us, get ready for some very desperate people willing to kill and be killed just to get their hands on a gallon can of gasoline.

President Obama, now that he has taken control of GM, needs to convert the factories to new and needed uses immediately.

2. Don't put another $30 billion into the coffers of GM to build cars. Instead, use that money to keep the current workforce -- and most of those who have been laid off -- employed so that they can build the new modes of 21st century transportation. Let them start the conversion work now.

3. Announce that we will have bullet trains criss-crossing this country in the next five years. Japan is celebrating the 45th anniversary of its first bullet train this year. Now they have dozens of them. Average speed: 165 mph. Average time a train is late: under 30 seconds. They have had these high speed trains for nearly five decades -- and we don't even have one! The fact that the technology already exists for us to go from New York to L.A. in 17 hours by train, and that we haven't used it, is criminal. Let's hire the unemployed to build the new high speed lines all over the country. Chicago to Detroit in less than two hours. Miami to DC in under 7 hours. Denver to Dallas in five and a half. This can be done and done now.

4. Initiate a program to put light rail mass transit lines in all our large and medium-sized cities. Build those trains in the GM factories. And hire local people everywhere to install and run this system.

5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses.

6. For the time being, have some factories build hybrid or all-electric cars (and batteries). It will take a few years for people to get used to the new ways to transport ourselves, so if we're going to have automobiles, let's have kinder, gentler ones. We can be building these next month (do not believe anyone who tells you it will take years to retool the factories -- that simply isn't true).

7. Transform some of the empty GM factories to facilities that build windmills, solar panels and other means of alternate forms of energy. We need tens of millions of solar panels right now. And there is an eager and skilled workforce who can build them.

8. Provide tax incentives for those who travel by hybrid car or bus or train. Also, credits for those who convert their home to alternative energy.

9. To help pay for this, impose a two-dollar tax on every gallon of gasoline. This will get people to switch to more energy saving cars or to use the new rail lines and rail cars the former autoworkers have built for them.

Well, that's a start. Please, please, please don't save GM so that a smaller version of it will simply do nothing more than build Chevys or Cadillacs. This is not a long-term solution. Don't throw bad money into a company whose tailpipe is malfunctioning, causing a strange odor to fill the car.

100 years ago this year, the founders of General Motors convinced the world to give up their horses and saddles and buggy whips to try a new form of transportation. Now it is time for us to say goodbye to the internal combustion engine. It seemed to serve us well for so long. We enjoyed the car hops at the A&W. We made out in the front -- and the back -- seat. We watched movies on large outdoor screens, went to the races at NASCAR tracks across the country, and saw the Pacific Ocean for the first time through the window down Hwy. 1. And now it's over. It's a new day and a new century. The President -- and the UAW -- must seize this moment and create a big batch of lemonade from this very sour and sad lemon.

Yesterday, the last surviving person from the Titanic disaster passed away. She escaped certain death that night and went on to live another 97 years.

So can we survive our own Titanic in all the Flint Michigans of this country. 60% of GM is ours. I think we can do a better job.

Yours,
Michael Moore
MMFlint@aol.com
MichaelMoore.com

BigRedChief
06-01-2009, 11:29 AM
Once again, it is all about winning to you, isn't it? Being on the winning side and feeling good, that is all that matters for you?

Glad to see you in the majority, hope it makes you feel good.
I'm happy with the changes and actions so far. Am I happy with everything? of course not. But, it's mMuch better than under Bush. And 60%+ of my fellow americans agree. Maybe we are all stupid and you are correct. We will see.

HonestChieffan
06-01-2009, 11:33 AM
I'm happy with the changes and actions so far. Am I happy with everything? of course not. But, it's mMuch better than under Bush. And 60%+ of my fellow americans agree. Maybe we are all stupid and you are correct. We will see.

Love to see that list of things he has done that you agree with...the explain what is better then under bush?

Brock
06-01-2009, 11:33 AM
I'm happy with the changes and actions so far. Am I happy with everything? of course not. But, it's mMuch better than under Bush. And 60%+ of my fellow americans agree. Maybe we are all stupid and you are correct. We will see.

What's changed?

FishingRod
06-01-2009, 11:36 AM
Michael Moore is a big bag of vinegar and water.

Radar Chief
06-01-2009, 11:38 AM
What's changed?

The letter next to the Presidents name? :shrug:

Radar Chief
06-01-2009, 11:42 AM
Michael Moore is a big bag of vinegar and water.

He's a lying POS. With all the bullshit spouted in the third paragraph I didn't bother to read the rest of the article.

KILLER_CLOWN
06-01-2009, 11:47 AM
http://www.obamadeception.net/

FishingRod
06-01-2009, 11:48 AM
"5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses."

That should work just fine. LMAO

BigRedChief
06-01-2009, 11:52 AM
Love to see that list of things he has done that you agree with...the explain what is better then under bush?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-kept/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/in-the-works/

SBK
06-01-2009, 12:04 PM
I heard a guy on the radio today state that we haven't seen change, we have just seen an accelration of Bush's policies.

He makes a good point.
Posted via Mobile Device

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 12:19 PM
What's changed?His guy won and he is happy now.

HonestChieffan
06-01-2009, 12:23 PM
"5. For people in rural areas not served by the train lines, have the GM plants produce energy efficient clean buses."

That should work just fine. LMAO

I cant wait for the new busses , the ride from Appelton City to Clinton should be super. We have needed a rural bus service ever since the wagon roads were abandoned. This is change!

HonestChieffan
06-01-2009, 12:24 PM
His guy won and he is happy now.

Even to Obots are showing signs of OboFatigue. When virtually everything he said in campaign has been tossed aside, even they cant find it in thier hearts and minds to define why they are happy....they can't, and they won't.

dirk digler
06-01-2009, 12:25 PM
Pete I think you mis heard what he said. Here is the link to the transcript and I will quote the relevant paragraph. What he is talking about is not giving them money after they did that the first time. That has been his position all along which was dependent on GM coming up with a sustainable plan which apparently they couldn't.

http://www.wbur.org/2009/06/01/obama-gm-transcript

Just over two months ago, I spoke with you in the same spot about the challenges facing our auto industry, and I laid out what needed to be done to save two of America’s most storied automakers, General Motors and Chrysler. These companies were facing a crisis decades in the making and, having relied on loans from the previous administration, were asking for more.

From the beginning, I made it clear that I would not put any more tax dollars on the line if it meant perpetuating the bad business decisions that had led these companies to seek help in the first place. I refuse to let these companies become permanent wards of the state, kept afloat on an endless supply of taxpayer money. In other words, I refuse to kick the can down the road.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 12:26 PM
Obama will deal the death blow to the middle class. If you don't work for the government, then you will be screwed.

They had a guy on the TV last night, that had his dealership closed without due process.

What, he didn't give Obama a campaign donation?

bkkcoh
06-01-2009, 12:28 PM
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/promise-kept/

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/rulings/in-the-works/

His guy won and he is happy now.

I heard a guy on the radio today state that we haven't seen change, we have just seen an accelration of Bush's policies.

He makes a good point.
Posted via Mobile Device


I think that goes to the point that it doesn't make any difference which party in in office, neither party is headed in to the right direction. There is a huge chasm between what the constituents seem to want and what the congressman seem to want. It almost seems as if the congressman are even more self-serving, and that is very hard to believe possible.

alanm
06-01-2009, 12:28 PM
Pete I think you mis heard what he said. Here is the link to the transcript and I will quote the relevant paragraph. What he is talking about is not giving them money after they did that the first time. That has been his position all along which was dependent on GM coming up with a sustainable plan which apparently they couldn't.When will you guys pull your head out of the sand and take a look at what's really happening?
Pete's 100% correct in his assessment.

alanm
06-01-2009, 12:33 PM
Yes, I should have seen all this coming. BHO is obviously a socialist. Owning the Banks, owning the car companies, soon it'll be health care...we are now and it can't be denied a socialist nation. Once those hooks are in, they don't come out.

His speech today said it all. He said he didn't want to own GM, but we have no choice because of the "inherited problem" (I can't believe this asshole still leans on that excuse). He said the decisions on what kind of cars they make etc. will be soley that of the Board of Directors...then later in the speech he talks about how GM will be making new, more fuel efficient greener vehicles...sounds like the Board of Directors is not directing the company anywhere.

Make no mistake. The government owns GM and Chrysler. They will begin to push that the American Consumer buy GM or Chrysler products...and so Ford will suffer. 10 years from now (maybe less) Ford goes away as well and becomes just another Government vehicle.

Call me paranoid, but this sucks about as badly as it can, and it's probably going to get worse.

...and people used to call Bush a Nazi...On the flip side Ford announced a 10% increase in profits today. Gee.. I wonder why?
Buy Ford stock now before it goes stratospheric. :thumb:

dirk digler
06-01-2009, 12:35 PM
When will you guys pull your head out of the sand and take a look at what's really happening?
Pete's 100% correct in his assessment.

The Obama Administration gave both GM and Chrysler money back in March and then set the 60-day deadline to come up with a plan or no longer receive any money.

That is what he is talking about here.

I will agree with Pete he shouldn't have said previous administration

The original restructuring plan submitted by GM and Chrysler earlier this year did not call for the sweeping changes these companies needed to survive, and I couldn’t in good conscience proceed on that basis. So we gave them a chance to develop a stronger plan that would put them on a path toward long-term viability.

The 60 days GM had to submit its revised plans have now elapsed.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 12:36 PM
Pete I think you mis heard what he said. Here is the link to the transcript and I will quote the relevant paragraph. What he is talking about is not giving them money after they did that the first time. That has been his position all along which was dependent on GM coming up with a sustainable plan which apparently they couldn't.

Yea well you left out his opening remarks where he said the companies were surviving on loans from the previous Admin. Loans he asked them to make.

Secondly he has dumped billions of $'s into them hisself so this is rather a contradictory statement by him. He just knows that most who voted for him will believe whatever he says. He has done nothing other than engineer the takeover of the american auto industry.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 12:39 PM
Obama will deal the death blow to the middle class. If you don't work for the government, then you will be screwed.

They had a guy on the TV last night, that had his dealership closed without due process.

What, he didn't give Obama a campaign donation?

That is another conspiracy brewing up. All the dealers that are getting seem to be owned by non-Obama supporters. And why on earth would you ever close a profitable dealership?

Deberg_1990
06-01-2009, 12:40 PM
with gas going up again, how much longer until Obama mandates we all drive boxy 4 bangers that get 40 miles to the gallon?

dirk digler
06-01-2009, 12:41 PM
Yea well you left out his opening remarks where he said the companies were surviving on loans from the previous Admin. Loans he asked them to make.

Secondly he has dumped billions of $'s into them hisself so this is rather a contradictory statement by him. He just knows that most who voted for him will believe whatever he says. He has done nothing other than engineer the takeover of the american auto industry.

Actually that was the first 2 paragraphs of his statements. I agree partially with you he shouldn't have stated previous administration.

Radar Chief
06-01-2009, 12:47 PM
with gas going up again, how much longer until Obama mandates we all drive boxy 4 bangers that get 40 miles to the gallon?

Why do you think he’s taken over the auto industry?
Before long the only choice in vehicles we’ll have is this in two or four door versions.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Trabant_P50.jpg

petegz28
06-01-2009, 12:50 PM
Actually that was the first 2 paragraphs of his statements. I agree partially with you he shouldn't have stated previous administration.

No, he should not have. It makes him look petty and in this case even moreso. He was the one who encouraged the loans. In fact the Bush Admin let him make the call since his was the incoming Admin.

On top of that the Dems who have controlled the Congress and Senate are going on 3 years now where everything is the fault of Bush. I am sick of it. Where is the media now to slam Obama for not admiting mistakes like they were with Bush?

They give Obama a free pass on everything he does and he is has literraly broken more laws and such when it comes to the goverment and private sectors, but he gets away with it. And now for a man who wants no permanent wards of the State, he is dictating policy in banks, now auto companies and if we don't watch it, healtchcare and energy companies.

For a man who is not a socialist he has socialised more parts of our economy in 4 months than any other President.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 12:52 PM
with gas going up again, how much longer until Obama mandates we all drive boxy 4 bangers that get 40 miles to the gallon?

Oh I am sure we will hear all about the "windfall profits tax" again. It will just be more rhetoric of course.

Deberg_1990
06-01-2009, 01:35 PM
Oh I am sure we will hear all about the "windfall profits tax" again. It will just be more rhetoric of course.

Which by the way, how come we dont hear any: "Its Obama's fault" about gas prices like we did with Bush????

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 01:44 PM
I think that goes to the point that it doesn't make any difference which party in in office, neither party is headed in to the right direction. There is a huge chasm between what the constituents seem to want and what the congressman seem to want. It almost seems as if the congressman are even more self-serving, and that is very hard to believe possible. If only you knew the power, they MUST obey their master.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 01:54 PM
On the flip side Ford announced a 10% increase in profits today. Gee.. I wonder why?
Buy Ford stock now before it goes stratospheric. :thumb:Just wait until Obama subsidizes his pieces of shit at Govt.M.

Just wait until Obama sicks the regulatory dogs on Ford.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 01:57 PM
Which by the way, how come we dont hear any: "Its Obama's fault" about gas prices like we did with Bush????

And we won't either. It will all be how Obama is going to fight the evil oil companies. Premium gas is up to around $2.58 a gal around me. I would bet by July we see $3 for regular. But since it won't be $4, cause I don't see oil going to $150 a barrel again, Obama will be praised for keeping the gas prices lower than they were.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 02:10 PM
with gas going up again, how much longer until Obama mandates we all drive boxy 4 bangers that get 40 miles to the gallon?I was in a merging lane with my 87 E150 vs one of those, and he was acting like I should lift. hehehh.

My ride may be old and a pos, but it is made of steel that will cut through that kite like a knife through butter you dumb ass.

He lifted.

lmao.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 02:11 PM
Why do you think he’s taken over the auto industry?
Before long the only choice in vehicles we’ll have is this in two or four door versions.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Trabant_P50.jpgThat's the change we need!

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 02:13 PM
No, he should not have. It makes him look petty and in this case even moreso. He was the one who encouraged the loans. In fact the Bush Admin let him make the call since his was the incoming Admin.

On top of that the Dems who have controlled the Congress and Senate are going on 3 years now where everything is the fault of Bush. I am sick of it. Where is the media now to slam Obama for not admiting mistakes like they were with Bush?

They give Obama a free pass on everything he does and he is has literraly broken more laws and such when it comes to the goverment and private sectors, but he gets away with it. And now for a man who wants no permanent wards of the State, he is dictating policy in banks, now auto companies and if we don't watch it, healtchcare and energy companies.

For a man who is not a socialist he has socialised more parts of our economy in 4 months than any other President.By the way, where is the media counting the deaths of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan lately? Forget about that? I haven't, this is Obama's war na.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 02:14 PM
For a man who is not a socialist he has socialised more parts of our economy in 4 months than any other President.You know you have it bad when Pravda is calling you a Marxist.

wild1
06-01-2009, 02:15 PM
"Water is ****ing wet!!"

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 02:19 PM
"Water is ****ing wet!!"Are you saying that Marxist do what Marsists do?

Well, the ends justify the means, we know that.

From each according to their means(bond holders taking hair cut), to each according to their needs(UAW keeping their jobs producing green cars).

Sounds like a win win for the gubment.

wild1
06-01-2009, 02:21 PM
Are you saying that Marxist do what Marsists do?

Well, the ends justify the means, we know that.

From each according to their means(bond holders taking hair cut), to each according to their needs(UAW keeping their jobs producing green cars).

Sounds like a win win for the gubment.

I was playing off the thread title.

Ebolapox
06-01-2009, 02:49 PM
I think that goes to the point that it doesn't make any difference which party in in office, neither party is headed in to the right direction. There is a huge chasm between what the constituents seem to want and what the congressman seem to want. It almost seems as if the congressman are even more self-serving, and that is very hard to believe possible.

I've been saying this and voting accordingly for a while now. 'none of the above.'

1) if you're an incumbent, I'm voting for your opponent (even if it's a guy I hate)
2) if neither are incumbent, I vote third party or write in.
3) if it's for a judge (up for reelection via the missouri process), I vote against unless I know his bench performance.

they're all fucking crooks (save a very select few), and none of them deserve my vote.

MadMax
06-01-2009, 04:15 PM
Once again, it is all about winning to you, isn't it? Being on the winning side and feeling good, that is all that matters for you?

Glad to see you in the majority, hope it makes you feel good.



When his master speaks it makes him feel all tingly in his " no no " spot. :)

BigChiefFan
06-01-2009, 04:23 PM
I have to say, so far, Obama hasn't done much that I approve of. Both parties are self-serving and the general public receives little for it's tax dollars. The system's broken. Time to give the states their rights back.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 04:32 PM
When his master speaks it makes him feel all tingly in his " no no " spot. :)

LMAO

sportsman1
06-01-2009, 04:34 PM
I have to say, so far, Obama hasn't done much that I approve of. Both parties are self-serving and the general public receives little for it's tax dollars. The system's broken. Time to give the states their rights back.

I agree with this. Except I have a lot of venom for Obama because his true marxist change is dirty as you can get. If WE see a National Sales Tax.. Its on. That is the last straw that I hope would end this crap.

Ebolapox
06-01-2009, 04:41 PM
as per the 'used car salesman with a law degree,' doesn't that describe roughly 95% of politicians in washington d.c.?

KILLER_CLOWN
06-01-2009, 04:45 PM
I have to say, so far, Obama hasn't done much that I approve of. Both parties are self-serving and the general public receives little for it's tax dollars. The system's broken. Time to give the states their rights back.

Spoken with truth and agreed 100%.

HonestChieffan
06-01-2009, 04:46 PM
as per the 'used car salesman with a law degree,' doesn't that describe roughly 95% of politicians in washington d.c.?

Not really, a lot of them couldn't sell a car. Used or otherwise. You will soon see as these government lackies try to do a actuall business plan. Or try to sell something. And find out that the real world is not cut from the same cloth as paper shuffling and taking madatory breaks, getting the department EEOC forms in and ordering supplies for the next weeks office birthday bash.

petegz28
06-01-2009, 04:46 PM
as per the 'used car salesman with a law degree,' doesn't that describe roughly 95% of politicians in washington d.c.?

Fuck yes. These people are so full of themselves. They are experts on the financial markets one day, the auto industry the next, the environment the next, foreign policy the next, civil rights the next, etc, etc, etc

Fish
06-01-2009, 04:47 PM
I agree with this. Except I have a lot of venom for Obama because his true marxist change is dirty as you can get. If WE see a National Sales Tax.. Its on. That is the last straw that I hope would end this crap.

It's on? Like revolution?

Ebolapox
06-01-2009, 04:49 PM
Not really, a lot of them couldn't sell a car. Used or otherwise. You will soon see as these government lackies try to do a actuall business plan. Or try to sell something. And find out that the real world is not cut from the same cloth as paper shuffling and taking madatory breaks, getting the department EEOC forms in and ordering supplies for the next weeks office birthday bash.

true enough in its own way. you have to have charisma to make it there in the first place, though, and that reeks of 'used car salesman.' regardless of how great they are at selling actual merchandise, they can all either sell themselves (heh, prostitute joke, possibly dead, waiting to be used) or are skillful at pandering to the masses.

either way, they're fucking worthless pieces of shit.

sportsman1
06-01-2009, 05:13 PM
It's on? Like revolution?

I have enough faith in the American people that if this were to happen they would quit taking it sideways from the federal government. It will take something to effect everyone bottom line, before they stand up to the empty rhetoric the blowhards in D.C keep offering.

Mr. Flopnuts
06-01-2009, 05:14 PM
I heard a guy on the radio today state that we haven't seen change, we have just seen an accelration of Bush's policies.

He makes a good point.
Posted via Mobile Device

If that's the case then why are Republicans so pissed?

Brock
06-01-2009, 05:18 PM
If that's the case then why are Republicans so pissed?

Are they, or are they just supposed to appear to be?

Radar Chief
06-01-2009, 05:19 PM
If that's the case then why are Republicans so pissed?

Maybe because we weren't happy with where things were headed under Bush either. Bush didn't get record low approval ratings without Republicans being unhappy with him also.

Ebolapox
06-01-2009, 05:21 PM
I have enough faith in the American people that if this were to happen they would quit taking it sideways from the federal government. It will take something to effect everyone bottom line, before they stand up to the empty rhetoric the blowhards in D.C keep offering.

see, I wish I were as optimistic as you are. I have ZERO faith in the american people to realize they're bleeding from the ass. we've been, as a people, assraped for so fucking long that it's inexcusable. the american people are so fucking soft and sheltered/cradled (or, I guess to be more accurate, stupid and content) to realize that they're being shafted on an epic scale. fuck, do you know how many people on a day to day basis I hear complaining about shit? almost nobody. it's as if their house is on fire (with their family inside it, dying), but they could care less because they're comfortably numb.

sportsman1
06-01-2009, 05:28 PM
see, I wish I were as optimistic as you are. I have ZERO faith in the american people to realize they're bleeding from the ass. we've been, as a people, assraped for so ****ing long that it's inexcusable. the american people are so ****ing soft and sheltered/cradled (or, I guess to be more accurate, stupid and content) to realize that they're being shafted on an epic scale. ****, do you know how many people on a day to day basis I hear complaining about shit? almost nobody. it's as if their house is on fire (with their family inside it, dying), but they could care less because they're comfortably numb.

Thats what I see too... but something of this scale I really believe effects their bottom line enough to where they would wisen up. People are greedy bastards at the soul.. and someone has to pay for this debt.. and I don't think they really want to pay it... even though they did vote for it (not me).

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 05:29 PM
I agree with this. Except I have a lot of venom for Obama because his true marxist change is dirty as you can get. If WE see a National Sales Tax.. Its on. That is the last straw that I hope would end this crap.If, what do you mean if?

They have the fillibuster dude. King Obama gets what King Obama wants, by the way, he is nakid.

sportsman1
06-01-2009, 05:33 PM
There is a line that obamessiah knows how to walk all to well. To not piss the sheeple off much.. but push his marxism with a smily face. The republicans have provided no leadership. If they had stood up against the bailouts... maybe they could talk, but thats something I haven't forgotten.

Bwana
06-01-2009, 05:35 PM
The sun sets in the west.

BucEyedPea
06-01-2009, 05:38 PM
There is a line that obamessiah knows how to walk all to well. To not piss the sheeple off much.. but push his marxism with a smily face. The republicans have provided no leadership. If they had stood up against the bailouts... maybe they could talk, but thats something I haven't forgotten.

There's very few true republicans left up in DC.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 05:39 PM
Maybe because we weren't happy with where things were headed under Bush either. Bush didn't get record low approval ratings without Republicans being unhappy with him also.This.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 05:40 PM
There is a line that obamessiah knows how to walk all to well. To not piss the sheeple off much.. but push his marxism with a smily face. The republicans have provided no leadership. If they had stood up against the bailouts... maybe they could talk, but thats something I haven't forgotten.Yeah, stick to the tele prompter.

Mr. Plow
06-01-2009, 05:40 PM
:eek: Jesus Christ...

Exactly what I was thinking.

Calcountry
06-01-2009, 05:45 PM
Not really, a lot of them couldn't sell a car. Used or otherwise. You will soon see as these government lackies try to do a actuall business plan. Or try to sell something. And find out that the real world is not cut from the same cloth as paper shuffling and taking madatory breaks, getting the department EEOC forms in and ordering supplies for the next weeks office birthday bash.For starters, there is no way in hell, I will EVER BY A GM car agian. As long as I live.

I will walk and ride a bycycle as long as Hussein owns that company.

alanm
06-01-2009, 10:29 PM
Why do you think he’s taken over the auto industry?
Before long the only choice in vehicles we’ll have is this in two or four door versions.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Trabant_P50.jpgYou forgot about this dandy. :thumb:

alanm
06-01-2009, 10:36 PM
I have enough faith in the American people that if this were to happen they would quit taking it sideways from the federal government. It will take something to effect everyone bottom line, before they stand up to the empty rhetoric the blowhards in D.C keep offering.Cap and Trade (Tax) anyone?

sportsman1
06-01-2009, 11:31 PM
I can't argue that. All I can do is pray (if were still allowed to) that people will wake up, and get mad as hell.

Count Zarth
06-02-2009, 01:49 AM
Presidents are fucking liars.

Welcome to the United States.

J Diddy
06-02-2009, 01:58 AM
For starters, there is no way in hell, I will EVER BY A GM car agian. As long as I live.

I will walk and ride a bycycle as long as Hussein owns that company.

Congratulations for stupid post of the day.

BucEyedPea
06-02-2009, 06:13 AM
I can't argue that. All I can do is pray (if were still allowed to) that people will wake up, and get mad as hell.

Oh, I think they are. That's what I'm seeing even with people who voted for Obama ( for his FP and the war).

What Obama meant by "change" and "redefining America" ( instead of letting the people do that) was he was going to communize America. Allende is here folks.

memyselfI
06-02-2009, 06:53 AM
We elected a guy from one of the lowest rated congresses ever, in which his party had control. Sort of takes failing upwards to almost a whole new level.

Don't ever mistake him for what he is, a used cars sales man smart enough to get a law degree.

I think that is an insult to used car salesmen everywhere...afterall they are losing jobs by the thousands.

He's simply a liar and a fraud. The warning signs were there and people ignored them. They were willing to suspend critical thinking and skepticism for the Hopeium he dealt.

memyselfI
06-02-2009, 06:55 AM
Presidents are ****ing liars.

Welcome to the United States.

Agreed. But this guy must have set some kind of record for so little time in office.

blaise
06-02-2009, 07:08 AM
Harry Truman had the balls to stand up and take the blame...becuase he was the guy in charge. End of story. BHO is more worried about where is next "date night" is going to be than taking responsibility for his county.

Obama: The buck stops somewhere else.

petegz28
06-02-2009, 07:28 AM
Obama: The buck stops somewhere else.

I get so tired of him saying "...we inherited...". He was part of the Dem controlled Senate and Congress for the last 2 years, was he not? He didn't inherit shit. He was part and parcel to it all.

BigRedChief
06-02-2009, 07:31 AM
JEEZZZ you guys have a nice Republican pat ourselfs on the back discussion going on here. This looks like a political discussion over on the Coaltion.

I know you guys are smarter than the rest of the U.S. but maybe you can just pause for a second and give a thought to the opinion shared by most americans that the "Bush" way was the wrong way and the American people wanted to try something else. Just a thought.

petegz28
06-02-2009, 07:42 AM
JEEZZZ you guys have a nice Republican pat ourselfs on the back discussion going on here. This looks like a political discussion over on the Coaltion.

I know you guys are smarter than the rest of the U.S. but maybe you can just pause for a second and give a thought to the opinion shared by most americans that the "Bush" way was the wrong way and the American people wanted to try something else. Just a thought.

Um, hello,McFly....just because the Bush way was the wrong way doesn't mean the Obama way is the right way.


Plain out man, do you champion socialism? Yes or no? Don't say shit until you answer that.

And most Americans can't tell you who their local Congressman is but they can tell you what is going on in the life of Brangelina.

Chief Faithful
06-02-2009, 07:49 AM
There's very few true republicans left up in DC.

There were few true Repulicans left up in DC even when they controled Congress under Bush.

BigRedChief
06-02-2009, 07:51 AM
Um, hello,McFly....just because the Bush way was the wrong way doesn't mean the Obama way is the right way.


Plain out man, do you champion socialism? Yes or no? Don't say shit until you answer that.

And most Americans can't tell you who their local Congressman is but they can tell you what is going on in the life of Brangelina.
I guess I'm going to believe him when he says he doesn't want to run/own a car company or bank.

There is no more socialism going on here than the type that exsists already like Social Security and Medicare. I've lived and seen "real" socialism when I have lived on a Kibbutz(google it). Socialism does work there because all the people are voluntarily on board with the concept. You have $60K to spend, do you buy a new tractor, or big new HD TV's for everyone? Vote and live with the results of the vote.

But socialism will never work on a large scale because you can't have that "buy-in" from millions that it would take for it to succeed. Same reason communism failed. The people stopped believing in the concept of all for one and one for all.

HonestChieffan
06-02-2009, 07:52 AM
JEEZZZ you guys have a nice Republican pat ourselfs on the back discussion going on here. This looks like a political discussion over on the Coaltion.

I know you guys are smarter than the rest of the U.S. but maybe you can just pause for a second and give a thought to the opinion shared by most americans that the "Bush" way was the wrong way and the American people wanted to try something else. Just a thought.

The real issue is did you get what you thought was behind door two? Or did a bait and switch take place?

You wanted Bush out....even though he was not running....did the magic happen? Or are we on a trip to someplace we don't want to go and no way to get off the train?

You wanted change...well you got it in a deficit our grandkids wont be able to pay. You are gonna get saddled with Cap and Trade and with it an increase in everything made with electricity or heated or cooled. And a health care slug that we neither need nor can afford but you will see if Im a betting man, a VAT tax set up that will rival Canada or Germany.

You wanted change. You got it in unemployment that is not changing with any ties to the huge waste stimulus bill...should be renamed the Bill of Goods.

Change you got. But was this the change you wanted?

Chief Faithful
06-02-2009, 07:54 AM
JEEZZZ you guys have a nice Republican pat ourselfs on the back discussion going on here. This looks like a political discussion over on the Coaltion.

I know you guys are smarter than the rest of the U.S. but maybe you can just pause for a second and give a thought to the opinion shared by most americans that the "Bush" way was the wrong way and the American people wanted to try something else. Just a thought.

What I don't understand is why so many people hated Bush, but love Obama when the only "change" Obama has made is to accelerate America down the Bush highway.

petegz28
06-02-2009, 07:54 AM
I guess I'm going to believe him when he says he doesn't want to run/own a car company or bank.

There is no more socialism going on here than the type that exsists already like Social Security and Medicare. I've lived and seen "real" socialism when I have lived on a Kibbutz(google it). Socialism does work there because all the people are voluntarily on board with the concept. You have $60K to spend, do you buy a new tractor, or big new HD TV's for everyone? Vote and live with the results of the vote.

But socialism will never work on a large scale because you can't have that "buy-in" from millions that it would take for it to succeed.


In other words you champion Socialism. You are a fool if you believe what he said yesterday. AS he says he doesn't want to own these companies yet he is dictacting policy, firing people, telling them what they will build, where they will build, who will buiuld it, who they will lend too, what bond holders will take despite the law, etc, etc etc.

petegz28
06-02-2009, 07:57 AM
What I don't understand is why so many people hated Bush, but love Obama when the only "change" Obama has made is to accelerate America down the Bush highway.

Exactly. It was Obama who asked Bush to make the loans to the autos in the first place. Bush wasn't going to do it. It was Obama who continued the lending to the financial sector. It was the Dermocrats who approved all of this shit.

BigRedChief
06-02-2009, 07:57 AM
In other words you champion Socialism. You are a fool if you believe what he said yesterday. AS he says he doesn't want to own these companies yet he is dictacting policy, firing people, telling them what they will build, where they will build, who will buiuld it, who they will lend too, what bond holders will take despite the law, etc, etc etc.
uhhh I just said it will never work on a large scale. The U.S. is what I would consider "large scale". Thats championing socialism?

socialism will never work in the U.S.

petegz28
06-02-2009, 08:02 AM
uhhh I just said it will never work on a large scale. The U.S. is what I would consider "large scale". Thats championing socialism?

socialism will never work in the U.S.

Yes. Cause as you say this you support all the socialist moves by the Obama Admin. I know it won't work. Maybe someday people like you who blindly support Obama will wake up and let him know that.

That being said you have not said you don't champion Socialism. You have skirted around that.

Baby Lee
06-02-2009, 08:14 AM
Socialism sucks, but reluctant socialism is what we've been waiting for for a decade!!!

petegz28
06-02-2009, 08:17 AM
Socialism sucks, but reluctant socialism is what we've been waiting for for a decade!!!

I'm a realist. I understand that in a civilised society a certain degree of socialism must exist. Such as medicare, and I guess social security.

But the line gets blatantly crossed when a President inside of 4 months in office starts taking over banks and automakers and insurance companies and has healtcare in their sights. And then of course you get the people who "trust" Obama on what he says and ignores what he does.

Karl Marx would be proud of Obama right now I am sure.

***SPRAYER
06-02-2009, 09:17 AM
Obama? A liar?

C'mon now. Gitout.

InChiefsHell
06-02-2009, 10:02 AM
Exactly. It was Obama who asked Bush to make the loans to the autos in the first place. Bush wasn't going to do it. It was Obama who continued the lending to the financial sector. It was the Dermocrats who approved all of this shit.

Dude, I've seen you say this a couple places, and sorry, but I gotta see a link. I personally recall Bush giving the o'l "This sucker's going down" and basically panicking everyone into going along with a 700 Billion bailout in September of '08.

Now, the Dems were greasing the skids along with Bush, but to say that Bush didn't want to do this is, well...

...I gotta see a link. Sorry, but as I recall, he fucked us before Obama started the anal rape-age...

KC Dan
06-02-2009, 10:15 AM
Dude, I've seen you say this a couple places, and sorry, but I gotta see a link. I personally recall Bush giving the o'l "This sucker's going down" and basically panicking everyone into going along with a 700 Billion bailout in September of '08.

Now, the Dems were greasing the skids along with Bush, but to say that Bush didn't want to do this is, well...

...I gotta see a link. Sorry, but as I recall, he ****ed us before Obama started the anal rape-age...
Both azz-raped us:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/19/auto.bailout/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/politics/11auto.html

"Obama had urged Bush in the meeting to grant a short-term loan to the auto industry on the condition that significant changes were made toward long-term viability, the aide said."

"Mr. Obama has been far more receptive than Mr. Bush to having the government intervene to rescue another major sector of the economy. He called automakers “the backbone of American manufacturing” in his first post-election press conference last Friday, and many thousands of their employees belong to unions that are part of the Democratic Party (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/d/democratic_party/index.html?inline=nyt-org)’s base."

KC Dan
06-02-2009, 10:20 AM
From the NYT article:

"Mr. Obama has called on the Bush administration to accelerate $25 billion in federal loans provided by a recent law specifically to help automakers retool. Late in his campaign, Mr. Obama proposed doubling that to $50 billion. But industry supporters say the automakers, squeezed both by the unavailability of credit and depressed sales, need unrestricted cash now, simply to meet payroll and other expenses.

On Friday, Mr. Obama said he would instruct his economic team, once he chooses it, to devise a long-range plan for helping the auto industry recover in a way that is part of an energy and environmental policy to reduce reliance on foreign oil and address climate change (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier)."

InChiefsHell
06-02-2009, 10:28 AM
Both azz-raped us:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/12/19/auto.bailout/index.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/11/us/politics/11auto.html

"Obama had urged Bush in the meeting to grant a short-term loan to the auto industry on the condition that significant changes were made toward long-term viability, the aide said."

"Mr. Obama has been far more receptive than Mr. Bush to having the government intervene to rescue another major sector of the economy. He called automakers “the backbone of American manufacturing” in his first post-election press conference last Friday, and many thousands of their employees belong to unions that are part of the Democratic Party (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/d/democratic_party/index.html?inline=nyt-org)’s base."

OK, thanks for the links.

I guess I still don't see where Bush didn't want to do it and then just did it for BO's sake. That doesn't make sense. He may have been reluctant, but he really thought it should be done.

He wouldn't have stopped the Obama-lanch of spending, but at least he could have said he stuck to some kind of damn principals.

KC Dan
06-02-2009, 10:40 AM
OK, thanks for the links.

I guess I still don't see where Bush didn't want to do it and then just did it for BO's sake. That doesn't make sense. He may have been reluctant, but he really thought it should be done.

He wouldn't have stopped the Obama-lanch of spending, but at least he could have said he stuck to some kind of damn principals.
Agreed. As I see it, the delay for bankruptcy cost the US taxpayer at least $20 billion and did not save jobs for the long term only for 6 months or so. The jobs loss, plant closings and all the rest is still going to occur. $20 billion split up for the number of jobs was expensive and a waste. If there were 100,000 jobs, thats $200,000 per job....

petegz28
06-02-2009, 10:44 AM
Dude, I've seen you say this a couple places, and sorry, but I gotta see a link. I personally recall Bush giving the o'l "This sucker's going down" and basically panicking everyone into going along with a 700 Billion bailout in September of '08.

Now, the Dems were greasing the skids along with Bush, but to say that Bush didn't want to do this is, well...

...I gotta see a link. Sorry, but as I recall, he ****ed us before Obama started the anal rape-age...


http://www.newser.com/story/42648/auto-bailout-unlikely-until-obama-takes-office.html
Auto Bailout Unlikely Until Obama Takes Office
Posted Nov 14, 08 2:55 AM CST in Politics | ShareThis
(Newser) – It’s looking unlikely that a new economic stimulus package and a Detroit bailout will happen this year, the Wall Street Journal reports. The proposals are facing stiff resistance from Republicans and may have to wait until the new, more heavily Democratic Congress convenes in January and Barack Obama takes office. Democrats are leery of introducing a proposal that may face a veto from Bush.

petegz28
06-02-2009, 10:46 AM
Dude, I've seen you say this a couple places, and sorry, but I gotta see a link. I personally recall Bush giving the o'l "This sucker's going down" and basically panicking everyone into going along with a 700 Billion bailout in September of '08.

Now, the Dems were greasing the skids along with Bush, but to say that Bush didn't want to do this is, well...

...I gotta see a link. Sorry, but as I recall, he ****ed us before Obama started the anal rape-age...

http://www.newser.com/story/42293/obama-urges-bush-to-help-automakers.html
Obama Urges Bush to Help Automakers
Posted Nov 11, 08 3:53 AM CST in Politics, Business |
(Newser) – Barack Obama urged President Bush during their White House meeting yesterday to extend emergency aid to the auto industry, the New York Times reports. The president indicated that he might be willing to approve Detroit aid and a broader economic stimulus package—but only on the condition that the president-elect and congressional Democrats drop their long-standing opposition to a free trade deal with Colombia.

InChiefsHell
06-02-2009, 10:56 AM
OK, so we're talking specifically about the auto industry. I guess I do remember Bush not wanting to go down that road. But I also remember thinking that the cat's already out of the bag George...

petegz28
06-02-2009, 10:58 AM
OK, so we're talking specifically about the auto industry. I guess I do remember Bush not wanting to go down that road. But I also remember thinking that the cat's already out of the bag George...

Bottom line is Obama pushed for the Auto bailouts. So to say the autos have been living off of bailouts from the previous Admin is a fucking lie. the guy does nothing but campaign everyday and point fingers at everyone else as he steals the cookies from the tax payer cookie jar.

Chief Faithful
06-02-2009, 11:22 AM
OK, so we're talking specifically about the auto industry. I guess I do remember Bush not wanting to go down that road. But I also remember thinking that the cat's already out of the bag George...

It was Obama that took things to a whole new level. Under Bush it was just loans with no conditions to be repaid and that was bad. With Obama the loans are now controling interest and he is deal making with the Unions, stock holders, and creditors.

petegz28
06-02-2009, 11:37 AM
It was Obama that took things to a whole new level. Under Bush it was just loans with no conditions to be repaid and that was bad. With Obama the loans are now controling interest and he is deal making with the Unions, stock holders, and creditors.

LMAO....so the Fed Gov owns GM and you say that is good?
I guess some of you will support Obama no matter what

Baby Lee
06-02-2009, 11:48 AM
LMAO....so the Fed Gov owns GM and you say that is good?
I guess some of you will support Obama no matter what

I don't think he's seeing this as a good thing, so you know before he cyber kicks your ass. ;)

alanm
06-02-2009, 12:16 PM
JEEZZZ you guys have a nice Republican pat ourselfs on the back discussion going on here. This looks like a political discussion over on the Coaltion.

I know you guys are smarter than the rest of the U.S. but maybe you can just pause for a second and give a thought to the opinion shared by most americans that the "Bush" way was the wrong way and the American people wanted to try something else. Just a thought.Boy were the American people who wanted change wrong.
Da Comrades?

InChiefsHell
06-02-2009, 12:42 PM
LMAO....so the Fed Gov owns GM and you say that is good?
I guess some of you will support Obama no matter what

I guarantee you are reading his response wrong...

petegz28
06-02-2009, 12:46 PM
I don't think he's seeing this as a good thing, so you know before he cyber kicks your ass. ;)

:eek:

I am shaking in my little cyber space boots

BigChiefFan
06-02-2009, 01:20 PM
"Read my lips, No new taxes."

Stewie
06-02-2009, 01:51 PM
Previous admin???

When your candle is burning dim or not burning at all, just blow out everyone else's candles.

Ebolapox
06-02-2009, 02:06 PM
...
But socialism will never work on a large scale because you can't have that "buy-in" from millions that it would take for it to succeed. Same reason communism failed. The people stopped believing in the concept of all for one and one for all.

you were on point until you stated the reason for communism's ultimate failure--in which you're 100% wrong.

I'm no economics prof, but after reading enough of the history and knowing even a bit of human nature, communism's ultimate downfall is rather obvious, and there are two main reasons:

1) power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. essentially, regardless of who is in power, it gets to a point where, regardless of how ideologically bent one is, one fancies one's self the most important link in the chain (and capitalism isn't immune to it, it's called Potomac fever... a senator goes to DC with completely sound goals and ideology, and after being surrounded by lackeys who tell him he's the most important person in washington, he begins to believe them and read his/her own press clippings. power is the ultimate drug), and no longer is it about proletariat.

2) lying. one of the ultimate reasons for the dissolving of the soviet union was their economy (although, in fairness, it's difficult to run ANY kind of economy in a country that big) was the quota system they ran. as a factory worker, for the good of the state, you have to keep up an ungodly quota (heh) or you're a traitor to the state. you can't maintain it, but you tell your superiors that you did, they tell their superiors that they're in line, and up the chain it goes. up until the fall of the USSR, there were many who believed (possibly up until the mid 80's) that communism had a much stronger economy and that 'the worker's paradise' was the wave of the future. low and behold, after the iron curtain collapsed, we found that things were much more droll than we were lead to believe. capitalism hasn't worked much better for them, but...

3) capitalism at least rewards those that work the hardest and those who bring innovation to the table. there's a reason that the politboro had the finest of west german made appliances--capitalist nations tend to churn out better products. in our system, it doesn't matter where you begin, it matters where you end... I can be born in poverty and work my ass off, and end up a millionaire with a few minor lucky strokes. give me ONE example of where that's possible in a communist or socialist system.

ugh. didn't mean to turn that into a bourgois/proletariat discussion. my apologies.

BigRedChief
06-02-2009, 02:15 PM
you were on point until you stated the reason for communism's ultimate failure--in which you're 100% wrong.

I'm no economics prof, but after reading enough of the history and knowing even a bit of human nature, communism's ultimate downfall is rather obvious, and there are two main reasons:

1) power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. essentially, regardless of who is in power, it gets to a point where, regardless of how ideologically bent one is, one fancies one's self the most important link in the chain (and capitalism isn't immune to it, it's called Potomac fever... a senator goes to DC with completely sound goals and ideology, and after being surrounded by lackeys who tell him he's the most important person in washington, he begins to believe them and read his/her own press clippings. power is the ultimate drug), and no longer is it about proletariat.

2) lying. one of the ultimate reasons for the dissolving of the soviet union was their economy (although, in fairness, it's difficult to run ANY kind of economy in a country that big) was the quota system they ran. as a factory worker, for the good of the state, you have to keep up an ungodly quota (heh) or you're a traitor to the state. you can't maintain it, but you tell your superiors that you did, they tell their superiors that they're in line, and up the chain it goes. up until the fall of the USSR, there were many who believed (possibly up until the mid 80's) that communism had a much stronger economy and that 'the worker's paradise' was the wave of the future. low and behold, after the iron curtain collapsed, we found that things were much more droll than we were lead to believe. capitalism hasn't worked much better for them, but...

3) capitalism at least rewards those that work the hardest and those who bring innovation to the table. there's a reason that the politboro had the finest of west german made appliances--capitalist nations tend to churn out better products. in our system, it doesn't matter where you begin, it matters where you end... I can be born in poverty and work my ass off, and end up a millionaire with a few minor lucky strokes. give me ONE example of where that's possible in a communist or socialist system.

ugh. didn't mean to turn that into a bourgois/proletariat discussion. my apologies.
I stand by my analysis/conclusion. All the factors you refer to are reprucussions of my orginal conclusion. My point comes first then the rest of your points follow. At least, IMO.

Ebolapox
06-02-2009, 02:33 PM
I stand by my analysis/conclusion. All the factors you refer to are reprucussions of my orginal conclusion. My point comes first then the rest of your points follow. At least, IMO.

to each his own, I guess. if you want to be technical, I guess I could make a case that they stopped believing in 'all for one/one for all' when they fell victim to the virus that is absolute power. however, it's all too easy to fall into a chicken/egg scenario... did the undiluted power make them stop believing in the ideology, or did they stop believing in the ideology BEFORE they had the power in the first place?

it's an interesting conundrum. I had a prof a few years ago who'd been to Moscow and toured Trotsky's apartment and a few high-ranking politboro member's houses... no doubt, there were more than we'd realize who kept the little red book of the party in their breast pockets and DID truly believe in the worker's paradise. however, many did not. I contend that the fact that they didn't buy into the 'one for all/all for one' because of basic human nature... why do I buy into a system of equality for all when clearly I'm better/more equipped/superior to the other people (as evidenced by the power I have)? it all goes back to animal farm, I guess. everybody's equal, some are just more equal.

Baby Lee
06-02-2009, 02:52 PM
you were on point until you stated the reason for communism's ultimate failure--in which you're 100% wrong.

I'm no economics prof, but after reading enough of the history and knowing even a bit of human nature, communism's ultimate downfall is rather obvious, and there are two main reasons:

1) power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. essentially, regardless of who is in power, it gets to a point where, regardless of how ideologically bent one is, one fancies one's self the most important link in the chain (and capitalism isn't immune to it, it's called Potomac fever... a senator goes to DC with completely sound goals and ideology, and after being surrounded by lackeys who tell him he's the most important person in washington, he begins to believe them and read his/her own press clippings. power is the ultimate drug), and no longer is it about proletariat.

2) lying. one of the ultimate reasons for the dissolving of the soviet union was their economy (although, in fairness, it's difficult to run ANY kind of economy in a country that big) was the quota system they ran. as a factory worker, for the good of the state, you have to keep up an ungodly quota (heh) or you're a traitor to the state. you can't maintain it, but you tell your superiors that you did, they tell their superiors that they're in line, and up the chain it goes. up until the fall of the USSR, there were many who believed (possibly up until the mid 80's) that communism had a much stronger economy and that 'the worker's paradise' was the wave of the future. low and behold, after the iron curtain collapsed, we found that things were much more droll than we were lead to believe. capitalism hasn't worked much better for them, but...

3) capitalism at least rewards those that work the hardest and those who bring innovation to the table. there's a reason that the politboro had the finest of west german made appliances--capitalist nations tend to churn out better products. in our system, it doesn't matter where you begin, it matters where you end... I can be born in poverty and work my ass off, and end up a millionaire with a few minor lucky strokes. give me ONE example of where that's possible in a communist or socialist system.

ugh. didn't mean to turn that into a bourgois/proletariat discussion. my apologies.


HBO has a documentary on 'China's Unnatural Disaster' that made me livid with sadness and rage as I watched. It was about the earthquake in the Sechuan province that took an extrordinary toll on children trapped in schools that were shoddily constructed. First off, China has a one child policy which meant that the thousands of children killed [8-12 yo] were that family's one chance at a legacy. Second, these people had nothing of their own, and no neighbors with anything of their own. That's one thing when everyone's a little poverty stricken, but these people were beholden to the government for so much as an ATV, let alone an entrepreneur with a bobcat or a bulldozer. So they sat for days hearing the cries of their kids under the rubble with nothing but their bare hands to try a rescue. And everyone who didn't lose someone in the village were disparaging them for talking bad about The Party on camera.
The schools were constructed with the mortar almost nonexistent, and what was there was a grey dust, either improperly mixed or composed of filler. Instead of rebar they had huge 3-4 foot slabs of concrete reinforced with baling wire. In places there was mud and straw and garbage in the concrete rubble where it had been mixed into the concrete mix.
Plus, The Party had closed a hardier structure, only to open it later to lease as warehouse space, it survived not a few yards from the rubble of the 'new' school.
And what struck me most was the utter helplessness of the group, crying and wailing for days on the site of their dead children, but what were they crying for . . . an honest explanation from 'their government.'
It was like Katrina on steriods, only in this case it was a populace who had actively been indoctrinated for generations to rely on the government for everything. There wasn't an ounce of initiative in them [and I don't blame them for that, I mourn it as a consequence of their situation] except to ask the government to explain it all away.

Ebolapox
06-02-2009, 02:55 PM
HBO has a documentary on 'China's Unnatural Disaster' that made me livid with sadness and rage as I watched. It was about the earthquake in the Sechuan province that took an extrordinary toll on children trapped in schools that were shoddily constructed. First off, China has a one child policy which meant that the thousands of children killed [8-12 yo] were that family's one chance at a legacy. Second, these people had nothing of their own, and no neighbors with anything of their own. That's one thing when everyone's a little poverty stricken, but these people were beholden to the government for so much as an ATV, let alone an entrepreneur with a bobcat or a bulldozer. So they sat for days hearing the cries of their kids under the rubble with nothing but their bare hands to try a rescue. And everyone who didn't lose someone in the village were disparaging them for talking bad about The Party on camera.
The schools were constructed with the mortar almost nonexistent, and what was there was a grey dust, either improperly mixed or composed of filler. Instead of rebar they had huge 3-4 foot slabs of concrete reinforced with baling wire. In places there was mud and straw and garbage in the concrete rubble where it had been mixed into the concrete mix.
Plus, The Party had closed a hardier structure, only to open it later to lease as warehouse space, it survived not a few yards from the rubble of the 'new' school.
And what struck me most was the utter helplessness of the group, crying and wailing for days on the site of their dead children, but what were they crying for . . . an honest explanation from 'their government.'
It was like Katrina on steriods, only in this case it was a populace who had actively been indoctrinated for generations to rely on the government for everything. There wasn't an ounce of initiative in them [and I don't blame them for that, I mourn it as a consequence of their situation] except to ask the government to explain it all away.

damn, that's beyond sad. at least there's outrage when something like that happens over here (let's face it, incompetence is common EVERYWHERE regardless of economic system). I can't even imagine being in their shoes in a situation like that.

Stewie
06-02-2009, 02:56 PM
HBO has a documentary on 'China's Unnatural Disaster' that made me livid with sadness and rage as I watched. It was about the earthquake in the Sechuan province that took an extrordinary toll on children trapped in schools that were shoddily constructed. First off, China has a one child policy which meant that the thousands of children killed [8-12 yo] were that family's one chance at a legacy. Second, these people had nothing of their own, and no neighbors with anything of their own. That's one thing when everyone's a little poverty stricken, but these people were beholden to the government for so much as an ATV, let alone an entrepreneur with a bobcat or a bulldozer. So they sat for days hearing the cries of their kids under the rubble with nothing but their bare hands to try a rescue. And everyone who didn't lose someone in the village were disparaging them for talking bad about The Party on camera.
The schools were constructed with the mortar almost nonexistent, and what was there was a grey dust, either improperly mixed or composed of filler. Instead of rebar they had huge 3-4 foot slabs of concrete reinforced with baling wire. In places there was mud and straw and garbage in the concrete rubble where it had been mixed into the concrete mix.
Plus, The Party had closed a hardier structure, only to open it later to lease as warehouse space, it survived not a few yards from the rubble of the 'new' school.
And what struck me most was the utter helplessness of the group, crying and wailing for days on the site of their dead children, but what were they crying for . . . an honest explanation from 'their government.'
It was like Katrina on steriods, only in this case it was a populace who had actively been indoctrinated for generations to rely on the government for everything. There wasn't an ounce of initiative in them [and I don't blame them for that, I mourn it as a consequence of their situation] except to ask the government to explain it all away.

Spot on, BL!

alpha_omega
06-02-2009, 02:59 PM
"Read my lips, No new taxes."

I am surprised that didn't come out earlier.

Baby Lee
06-02-2009, 03:04 PM
damn, that's beyond sad. at least there's outrage when something like that happens over here (let's face it, incompetence is common EVERYWHERE regardless of economic system). I can't even imagine being in their shoes in a situation like that.

There were myriad other little touches and nuances in the documentary, which I couldn't bring myself to jot down because I was so angry, that reinforced what I know with every fiber of my being about 'the evils of socialism.' For me it's not about this team or that team, a social contract is one thing, but socialism wherein you cede yourself, and your personal instincts about what is good and bad for you, to the communal good of the government is evil.
All those who disagree, or any who don't know what I'm saying to be right, watch this documentary, and ask yourself, how would I respond in this situation, given how I was raised and have developed? What is stopping these people from responding the way I think they should, or I would? And would I rather respond was these people are forced to?

Ebolapox
06-02-2009, 03:11 PM
There were myriad other little touches and nuances in the documentary, which I couldn't bring myself to jot down because I was so angry, that reinforced what I know with every fiber of my being about 'the evils of socialism.' For me it's not about this team or that team, a social contract is one thing, but socialism wherein you cede yourself, and your personal instincts about what is good and bad for you, to the communal good of the government is evil.
All those who disagree, or any who don't know what I'm saying to be right, watch this documentary, and ask yourself, how would I respond in this situation, given how I was raised and have developed? What is stopping these people from responding the way I think they should, or I would? And would I rather respond was these people are forced to?

exactly. well said, man.

one of the issues I have with the track we appear to be on (increasing the amount of socialism in our socioeconomic system) is that socialism goes against EVERYTHING that made this country great. hard work, innovation, and even a concept as abstract as 'the american spirit.' ingenuity. these are not concepts you find within the people of a socialist/communist country. is it any wonder we have issues with the chinese pirating our technology? they have some talented people (no doubt), but no true innovation has taken place in china since the days of marco polo (I'd be willing to take that back if anyone provides a link, it's just my off the cuff remark on chinese innovation).

I fear for the future of this country, honestly, and it's not even a democrat/republican situation. they're all crooks, and we've needed to do some major house cleaning for a while now. it won't happen, though, as the people out there could give a fuck less because they're too comfortable. whose fault is it? if you voted for an incumbent in any of the national races, part of the blame lies on you. just how long will it be until we're in the same position of the peasant chinese who can't even muster any outrage?

BigRedChief
06-02-2009, 03:13 PM
to each his own, I guess. if you want to be technical, I guess I could make a case that they stopped believing in 'all for one/one for all' when they fell victim to the virus that is absolute power. however, it's all too easy to fall into a chicken/egg scenario... did the undiluted power make them stop believing in the ideology, or did they stop believing in the ideology BEFORE they had the power in the first place?
There is a big difference in commuism and socialism. But for the sake of argument....

I understand it could be a chicken/egg scenerio. But I didn't see first hand the "powerful" socialists anywhere at any time. But I did see and live socialism in practice. Saw how others reacted in it and how others percieved it. And of course my experience was an outsider who could leave at any time so I wasn't a fully committed person in the community.

I don't think socialism will fail in this country because of the powerful being corrupted by power. It will fail because Americans are selfish bastages who don't want anyone telling them what to do as individuals.

Ebolapox
06-02-2009, 03:19 PM
There is a big difference in commuism and socialism. But for the sake of argument....

I understand it could be a chicken/egg scenerio. But I didn't see first hand the "powerful" socialists anywhere at any time. But I did see and live socialism in practice. Saw how others reacted in it and how others percieved it. And of course my experience was an outsider who could leave at any time so I wasn't a fully committed person in the community.

I don't think socialism will fail in this country because of the powerful being corrupted by power. It will fail because Americans are selfish bastages who don't want anyone telling them what to do as individuals.

yeah, I lumped socialism/communism in the same boat (I'm tired, sue me).

agree with your take on why socialism won't work in america, though. our society is too individualistic to take to socialism on a large-scale basis. let's face it, you have to give up a lot of the 'self' in a socialist system. I just don't see that ever working with the usa.

stevieray
06-02-2009, 03:19 PM
. It will fail because Americans are selfish bastages who don't want anyone telling them what to do as individuals.
that's called freedom...

BigRedChief
06-02-2009, 03:22 PM
yeah, I lumped socialism/communism in the same boat (I'm tired, sue me).

agree with your take on why socialism won't work in america, though. our society is too individualistic to take to socialism on a large-scale basis. let's face it, you have to give up a lot of the 'self' in a socialist system. I just don't see that ever working with the usa.
Thats why I left. They were just interested in building up the value of the community/increasing the "things" that they have not as individuals but as a whole group. I figured I could get ahead faster and better on my own.

KC Dan
06-02-2009, 05:37 PM
It will fail because Americans are selfish bastages who don't want anyone telling them what to do as individuals.
What? You mean Americans cherish FREEDOM! How absurd!

BigRedChief
06-02-2009, 05:39 PM
What? You mean Americans cherish FREEDOM! How absurd!
That was my point. No way in hell Americans will give up their individual freedom. Even for their fellow Americans.

KC Dan
06-02-2009, 05:42 PM
That was my point. No way in hell Americans will give up their individual freedom. Even for their fellow Americans.
And, I ask you - Why should they?

BigRedChief
06-03-2009, 06:37 AM
And, I ask you - Why should they?
huh? I think I've been clear about this. Americans are individuals. They want to succeed as individuals. That goes against the socialist principle of trying to succeed as a group. To try to change Americans would not work and why would you want to anyway?

HonestChieffan
06-03-2009, 07:02 AM
huh? I think I've been clear about this. Americans are individuals. They want to succeed as individuals. That goes against the socialist principle of trying to succeed as a group. To try to change Americans would not work and why would you want to anyway?


Then why oh why are you standing tall defending this man as we see him destroy the very individualism you seem to cherish?

BigRedChief
06-03-2009, 07:12 AM
Then why oh why are you standing tall defending this man as we see him destroy the very individualism you seem to cherish?
Because its only you and a small minority that think that is happening. The reality is that its not occuring. Your paranoid that it WILL happen.

petegz28
06-03-2009, 07:14 AM
Because its only you and a small minority that think that is happening. The reality is that its not occuring. Your paranoid that it WILL happen.

Except it is happening, regardless of how many people realize it or not. The majority of the people thought the world was flat at one point in time as well. Just because the majority thinks something, doesn't make it right.

BigRedChief
06-03-2009, 07:17 AM
Except it is happening, regardless of how many people realize it or not. The majority of the people thought the world was flat at one point in time as well. Just because the majority thinks something, doesn't make it right.
And just because you scream that you are right and the majority are stupid and your the only smart one left doesn't make you right.

petegz28
06-03-2009, 07:20 AM
And just because you scream that you are right and the majority are stupid and your the only smart one left doesn't make you right.

You're right. My screaming doesn't make it right. What makes me right is the recognition of the actions Obama has taken. As compared to your ignoring of them.

That would be the difference. And no matter how loud you scream, the facts are he has taken over the banks, the autos and now is gearing up for healthcare.

BigRedChief
06-03-2009, 07:22 AM
You're right. My screaming doesn't make it right. What makes me right is the recognition of the actions Obama has taken. As compared to your ignoring of them.

That would be the difference. And no matter how loud you scream, the facts are he has taken over the banks, the autos and now is gearing up for healthcare.
welll paronoid delusions are hard to overcome. Good luck with that.

petegz28
06-03-2009, 07:23 AM
welll paronoid delusions are hard to overcome. Good luck with that.

No dude, that is not a delusion. That is your problem.....you want to pretend the government hasn't taken over GM and Chrysler when anyone with half a brain knows they have.

HonestChieffan
06-03-2009, 07:25 AM
GM...a delusion?
Government health care..a delusion?
Increases in Income tax...a delusion?
The Debt, deficits and Huge growth in government..a delusion?
Bank takeovers...a delusion?

If these are delusions, what are we missing?

BigRedChief
06-03-2009, 07:26 AM
No dude, that is not a delusion. That is your problem.....you want to pretend the government hasn't taken over GM and Chrysler when anyone with half a brain knows they have.
Like I've said, I'm going to trust him when he says he has no interest in running a car company. You don't trust his words. We will disagree on the trust issue. Nothing wrong with your opinion. I'm not stupid for my opinion.

You need to develop an idea in your head that others that have a different opinion from your own are not stupid/ignorant etc because they don't see what you see.

Chief Henry
06-03-2009, 07:36 AM
Whats dilusional ? Having a president put a 31 year old man at the HEAD of GM. A 31 year old man that doesn't know the difference between a Charger and a Camero.

petegz28
06-03-2009, 08:02 AM
Like I've said, I'm going to trust him when he says he has no interest in running a car company. You don't trust his words. We will disagree on the trust issue. Nothing wrong with your opinion. I'm not stupid for my opinion.

You need to develop an idea in your head that others that have a different opinion from your own are not stupid/ignorant etc because they don't see what you see.

You're damn right I don't trust a politican's words. A man is judged by his actions, not his words. Politicans doubly so.

you need to develop an idea in your head that he is saying one thing and doing another.

***SPRAYER
06-03-2009, 03:35 PM
Are we a nation of citizens or are we a nation of muslims. Hopey Change™ is confusing.

Chief Faithful
06-03-2009, 03:38 PM
GM...a delusion?
Government health care..a delusion?
Increases in Income tax...a delusion?
The Debt, deficits and Huge growth in government..a delusion?
Bank takeovers...a delusion?

If these are delusions, what are we missing?

Just think of all the delusional things we will see in his next 6 months.

KcFanInGA
06-10-2009, 09:32 PM
It's on? Like revolution?

You know I'm down. I got revoloution WOOD baby!!

whoman69
06-11-2009, 10:30 AM
Harry Truman had the balls to stand up and take the blame...becuase he was the guy in charge. End of story. BHO is more worried about where is next "date night" is going to be than taking responsibility for his county.

Following Dubyah, no president again can be called for taking the responsibility. Dubyah was the Anti-Truman.

Radar Chief
06-11-2009, 10:56 AM
Following Clinton, no president again can be called for taking the responsibility. Clinton was the Anti-Truman.

Works just the same.

whoman69
06-11-2009, 09:10 PM
Works just the same.

Not even close to the same

SBK
06-11-2009, 09:39 PM
Not even close to the same

No kidding, one of them was a democrat!

LMAO

Nightwish
06-11-2009, 10:44 PM
we are now and it can't be denied a socialist nation. Once those hooks are in, they don't come out.
No, we aren't.

we are now and it can't be denied a socialist nation. Once those hooks are in, they don't come out.
Yes, it can.

we are now and it can't be denied a socialist nation. Once those hooks are in, they don't come out.

Make no mistake. The government owns GM and Chrysler.
Last I heard, Fiat now owns Chrysler. Is Fiat a department of the government? Permitting the sale of one company to another doesn't sound all that Socialist to me. So much for those hooks not coming out, huh?

He said the decisions on what kind of cars they make etc. will be soley that of the Board of Directors...then later in the speech he talks about how GM will be making new, more fuel efficient greener vehicles...sounds like the Board of Directors is not directing the company anywhere.
Uh, have you not been paying attention? GM has been promising to make more fuel-efficient, greener vehicles for years now. I wouldn't read Obama repeating a promise GM has made repeatedly over the years as "the Board of Directors not directing the company anywhere."

InChiefsHell
06-12-2009, 08:56 AM
No, we aren't.


Yes, it can.

Don't you mean "Yes WE can?" ;)


Last I heard, Fiat now owns Chrysler. Is Fiat a department of the government? Permitting the sale of one company to another doesn't sound all that Socialist to me. So much for those hooks not coming out, huh?


Uh, have you not been paying attention? GM has been promising to make more fuel-efficient, greener vehicles for years now. I wouldn't read Obama repeating a promise GM has made repeatedly over the years as "the Board of Directors not directing the company anywhere."

This is amazing to me. You seem to gloss over the fact that the Unions now have a controlling share over the car companies, the fact that the government basically gave them all this bailout money and they file bankruptcy anyway so now the government has pretty much all the say over what they do, who they are sold to, who their Execs will be, how much those execs will make and on and on and on. And did I mention that the Unions, who's job is to focus on the worker and not the business, have a controlling share? It is foolish to think that the government is going to relinquish control or let Chrysler and GM be a real capitalistic company. They are owned by the government, which has no damn business owning anything.

Look, we'll just have to watch this play out, unfortunately. Too many people are just OK with anything BO does without thinking long term consequences.

whoman69
06-12-2009, 11:15 AM
No, we aren't.


Yes, it can.


Last I heard, Fiat now owns Chrysler. Is Fiat a department of the government? Permitting the sale of one company to another doesn't sound all that Socialist to me. So much for those hooks not coming out, huh?


Uh, have you not been paying attention? GM has been promising to make more fuel-efficient, greener vehicles for years now. I wouldn't read Obama repeating a promise GM has made repeatedly over the years as "the Board of Directors not directing the company anywhere."

So what is the first new vehicle announced after the bankruptcy for their greener, more fuel-efficient company? That's right, an SUV. Granted the Equinox will have a four cylinder option that nobody will buy, giving it pretty good milage for an SUV, but an SUV none-the-less.

I looked at an article with the most fuel efficient cars around, and no surprise none of them are big three autos.