Political Discussions
Just listen to why this admin is destroying our country.
Posted by insideskinny • 6/01/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: conservative, obama
There are so many resons as to why this administration is going to destroy the future of this great nation. Listen to some resons why.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=_D1oDmf1OJY
User Comments
-
Republican deregulation along with enormous deficits has nearly destroyed our great nation. Most of what Obama is doing is trying to salvage what is left.
Name one thing Obama is doing that will "destroy" our country that isn't a reaction to the economic crisis. No? I didn't think so.-
CAN WE SPELL BAILOUT!!!! HELLO!!! WAKE UP!!!!
-
Name one thing Obama is doing that will "destroy" our country that isn't a reaction to the economic crisis. No? I didn't think so."
Not so fast there, sati. You have put your mouth in gear while your brain is in neutral yet once again.
Obama wants to "unilaterally disarm America." - www.newsmax.com/politics/obama_nuclear_/2009/04/08/200977.html
Obama pressuring Israel to give up Jerusalem to the Palestenians
Obama cutting our military in the years to come with increased nuclear proliferation in tyrannical regimes (Iran and North Korea)
Obama wanting to socialize healthcare in a plan that even the CBO admits is UNSUSTAINABLE!
There ya go, sati. None of those absurd actions that Obama wants to do or is already doing is in response to the "economic crisis."
-
-
You know what is really destroying our great nation? People who get their "facts" from YouTube propaganda videos.
-
Give it up.-
No i am not going to give it up. wasn't it persistance that got you the pres that we have now. i do not want to be a part of this destruction.
-
Well, then you should stop with the rhetoric and start with some constructive criticism. Most of your statements are full of sensationalism and misinformation.
-
-
I can name one thing, government controlled everything.-
"Government controlled everything" would be bad.... but that's not what is happening.
Step outside of your distortion field for some fresh air.
-
The government is taking over GM? what is that then? you not in reality are you?
-
GM is filing for bankruptcy, and then being taken over by Fiat.
The government - along with unions and bondholders have purchased stock in the company,not 'taken it over" -
The Gov't has bought a "controlling interest" in GM, however GM isn't "everything". There has been no action taken to nationalize Starbucks or McDonalds or Microsoft or even private healthcare providers. o_0 -
The government is a reluctant shareholder of General Motors. Company decisions will be made by the board of directors and not the government. Many more jobs would have been lost had they done nothing at all. Many economists agree that doing nothing would cost the government much more $$$ down the road.
-
I keep hearing many economists agree, to which economists are you referring to? Do you not think the government will infuse themselves, even by proxy, to insure this titanic stays afloat? -
Liberty - the government has already had it's hands in keeping the big three afloat for decades.
Where was the outrage over corporate welfare back then? -
ANOK! Don't you know! It is only acceptable to support GM through cash hand-outs and the military industrial complex.
*rolls eyes* -
Anok, to date, as far as I know the only car companies to take government money are Chrysler in the 70's and GM and Chrysler in 08 and 09. So for you to say "the government has already had it's hands in keeping the big three afloat for decades" is preposterous. Unless you can cite proof, then it is really only an opinion.
And this notion that 'it's been going on for years, where was the outrage then' is a convoluted argument. Why is outrage only acceptable if it has been occurring previously? Did I miss the memo that said you can only be upset if you have been upset since Bush, or Clinton, or Bush 41? Last I heard, this was America and we have the right be upset any old time we wanna be. Some are upset, others aren't, but that is not only one of the things that makes this country great, but it is good for society to have civil discourse.
-
-
Quite an interesting listen really. The guy is not boring.
There are four points polybore would make. The narrator in the video does say that the economy is stabilising but, in a notable omission, does not entrain the notion that the stimulus package has played a part in that.
The other thing is he makes a big play on the dangers of inflation. Of course high inflation can be a problem but with interest rates at effective zero the Fed has a lot of room to increase rates to control inflation.
He is worried about a decrease in value of the dollar. However a lower dollar will help the export industry.
Lastly he is not a fan of increased taxation. But the thing is as he says this has been one of the largest financial disasters ever. People who complain about the fact that they are going to have to pay higher taxes to fund the bailout have got things all backward.
The US Economy has been a false economy for a number of years with it's growth built on unsustainable loans. The bailout is in effect plugging the gap between the true level of the sustainable economy and the over inflated one that went pop. In effect the taxes are not paying for the bailout they are repaying the money that the US borrowed unsustainably.-
fannie and freddie were set up to fail. bush did spend like a drunken sailor so that should be a lesson that even more spending is not going to work.
-
And of course, Bush spent a lot during odd number years and this is an odd number year, so that's further proof that what Obama is doing is bad.
-
-
CAN WE SPELL BAILOUT!!!! HELLO!!! WAKE UP!!!!
The bailout is a response to the economic crisis that Obama inherited from Bush. And the bailouts began under the Bush administration.
WAKE UP!!!-
That is true, nobody is refuting that. But at some point you will have to take responsibility for the spending that occurs after. To infer and thereby maintain that there is only one complicit party and neglect all subsequent actions is quite obtuse.
-
The OP's talking point states the Obama administration is destroying our country. I was merely refuting that fallacy.
WAKE UP!!! -
you say that bush is responsible but obama is doing 100 times worse by all the spending. WAKE UP!!!
-
-
I'm growing very tired of all of the complaining about the - still new - Obama presidency "destroying the country".
Where was all the outrage over the destruction by the Bush administration? Where was the outrage over a false war started and propagandized with lies? Where was the outrage over the thousands of (US) lives lost in said war? Where was the outrage over the financial cost of said war? Where was the outrage over the Patriot act? The loss of Habeous Corpus? The over turning of Posse Comitatus?
Where was the outrage at the restriction of state's rights by federal bans? Over DHS compiling lists of "homegrown terrorists" who happen to be people who disagreed with Bush's policies?
Oh, I know. The outrage was strictly in the liberal/progressive camp, until Obama was elected, and/or the policies previously enacted began affecting conservatives personally. And even then, the outrage still resides moreso towards that which only affects them personally (taxes! DHS!) and everything else is either ignored, or blamed on Obama who had no hand in it.
I'm really, really, tired of it.
Obama has not done anything to "destroy the country". Bush did a lot to destroy the country. he had 8 years to do it, and he did it with a vengence.-
Obama has not done anything to "destroy the country". Bush did a lot to destroy the country. he had 8 years to do it, and he did it with a vengence.
Right-wingers have been complaining about all the bailouts and the resulting deficits and debt. The fact is, had our government not bailed out the financial sector (and to a lesser extent, GM), rather than being in a deep recession, we'd be heading for a depression. And the country probably wouldn't recover from it for at least a decade. So in effect, Obama is saving our country. -
Anok-We had to listen to left wingers bash Bush from the beginning and thus you whine when we do it? Your just going to have to get used to it because sooner or later people will wake up and realize that Obama is causing most of this. People are already starting to get off his bandwagon now. Can you say 250,000 dollar date night?
-
Bash Bush "from the beginning"? You weren't even old enough in the beginning to know what Bush bashing was.
No, people starting bashing Bush (in earnest) after his first three years in office. that's hardly "from the beginning". Bush had a decent rating in the polls for the first 9 months of his presidency, and then his ratings soared after 9/11. Then his consequent actions and fumbling about Iraq caused his popularity (nationally and internationally) to take a nose dive.
And it only got worse from there.
Obama was being blamed for the country's woes before he even took office for Christ's sake. it's a little pre-emptive, guys.
I still see no complaining about what Bush actually did. I see a lot of complaining about things Obama hasn't done but "might" and has done regardless of the actual outcome of said actions yet.
Sati - Yep.
-
-
Obama has implemented his own individual plans that should draw vast criticism.
-
Criticism, yes. Blaming him for the destruction of the country after just 5 months in office? Not so much.
I'll ask again, where is the outrage about all of the destructive actions and policies that actually occurred under the Bush administration? Where is it? -
the actions that actually have brought our country to the brink of destruction? Everywhere really... about 77% of the populace acknowledges this to some extent. (100 - 23% approval rating = 77% give or take)
-
Acknowledgement isn't outrage, though.
-
for some of us, it is :#
-
It takes time to destroy a country and Obama is just building a strong foundation for it now.
-
... and the spin continues.
-
-
Forgive me if I am wrong I am new to this blogging stuff, but, did not the ecomonic crisis begin nearly eight years before Obama took office.
If I am wrong, what role did Reagan, Bush, Clintion, George W(these are the only presidents in office during my lifetime)play to prevent it. And what role did they play to cause it; because as we all know they were in office well before Obama.
And another thing, he can not fix and will never beable to fix in a few days, months, years, or lifetime, what has taken more days, months, years, and lifetimes to destroy.-
Well, the S&L crisis occurred in the late 80's/Early 90's. Warning were not heeded then
"Perhaps still the largest corporate welfare expenditure of all time-ultimately set to cost taxpayers $500 billion in principal and interest-the S&L bailout is in large part a story of political corruption, the handiwork of the industry's legion of lobbyists and political payoffs to campaign contributors. The well-connected S&L industry successfully lobbied Congress for a deregulatory bill in the early 1980s, which freed the industry from historic constraints and paved the way for the speculative and corrupt failures that came soon after. Then more industry campaign contributions and lobbying led the Congress to delay addressing the problem - resulting in more S&L failures and skyrocketing costs for corrective measures. When Congress finally did address the problem, it put the bailout burden-totaling hundreds of billions of dollars-on the backs of taxpayers, rather than on the financial industry."
www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Nader/CutCorpWelfare_Nader.html
-
-
I know a lot of people in Jacksonville, Florida that lost their jobs as soon as the country learned, George W. Bush had won the 2000 elections.
In the state of Florida, they can fire you without any just reasons. And alot of those companys moved to India, has soon as Bush was elected.-
To be fair, the dot-com bubble burst not long after Bush took office, which is why many jobs were lost. Some jobs were outsourced to India because of the availability of skilled workers there and the fact that they were willing to work for much lower wages. That started during the time when there was a huge surplus of tech jobs in the U.S. that year after year went unfilled.
-
geeze sati, you posted 2 seconds after me a blocked my long nader blockquote
-
I did that intentionally.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
