Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Progressive case against Obama
8 views
Skip to first unread message
Dave the Clueless
Oct 30, 2012, 2:34:05 PM10/30/12
to
..Obama, and yes, he did this, officially enshrined rights for the elite
in our constitutional order and removed rights from everyone else...
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/the_progressive_case_against_obama/
--------
To a liberal, 'Need' means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means
wanting to keep your own money. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges
the transfer from a person who earned money to a person who didn't.
in our constitutional order and removed rights from everyone else...
http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/the_progressive_case_against_obama/
--------
To a liberal, 'Need' means wanting someone else's money. 'Greed' means
wanting to keep your own money. 'Compassion' is when a politician arranges
the transfer from a person who earned money to a person who didn't.
ChrisRobin
Oct 30, 2012, 4:45:11 PM10/30/12
to
On Oct 30 2012 2:34 PM, Dave the Clueless wrote:
> ...Obama, and yes, he did this, officially enshrined rights for the elite
of the crucial highlights (emphasis in last passage mine):
"Many will claim that Obama was stymied by a Republican Congress. But the
primary policy framework Obama put in place – the bailouts, took place
during the transition and the immediate months after the election, when
Obama had enormous leverage over the Bush administration and then a
dominant Democratic Party in Congress. In fact, during the transition
itself, Bush’s Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson offered a deal to Barney
Frank, to force banks to write down mortgages and stem foreclosures if
Barney would speed up the release of TARP money. Paulson demanded, as a
condition of the deal, that Obama sign off on it. Barney said fine, but to
his surprise, the incoming president vetoed the deal. Yup, you heard that
right — the Bush administration was willing to write down mortgages in
response to Democratic pressure, but it was Obama who said no, we want a
foreclosure crisis. And with Neil Barofsky’s book 'Bailout,' we see why.
Tim Geithner said, in private meetings, that the foreclosure mitigation
programs were not meant to mitigate foreclosures, but to spread out pain
for the banks, the famous 'foam the runway' comment. This central lie is
key to the entire Obama economic strategy. IT IS NOT THAT OBAMA WAS
STYMIED BY CONGRESS, OR WAS UP AGAINST A SYSTEM, OR FACED A MASSIVE
CRISIS, WHICH LED TO THE SHAPE OF THE ECONOMY WE SEE TODAY. RATHER, OBAMA
HAD A HANDSHAKE DEAL TO HELP THE MIDDLE CLASS OFFERED TO HIM BY PAULSON,
AND OBAMA SAID NO. HE WAS NOT CONSTRAINED BY ANYTHING BUT HIS OWN POLICY
INSTINCTS. AND THE REFLATION OF CORPORATE PROFITS AND FINANCIAL ASSETS AND
DEATH OF THE MIDDLE CLASS WERE THE PREDICTABLE RESULTS."
> ...Obama, and yes, he did this, officially enshrined rights for the elite
> in our constitutional order and removed rights from everyone else...
>
> http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/the_progressive_case_against_obama/
Finally, a dose of (brutal) reality from someone on the left. Here's one
>
> http://www.salon.com/2012/10/27/the_progressive_case_against_obama/
of the crucial highlights (emphasis in last passage mine):
"Many will claim that Obama was stymied by a Republican Congress. But the
primary policy framework Obama put in place – the bailouts, took place
during the transition and the immediate months after the election, when
Obama had enormous leverage over the Bush administration and then a
dominant Democratic Party in Congress. In fact, during the transition
itself, Bush’s Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson offered a deal to Barney
Frank, to force banks to write down mortgages and stem foreclosures if
Barney would speed up the release of TARP money. Paulson demanded, as a
condition of the deal, that Obama sign off on it. Barney said fine, but to
his surprise, the incoming president vetoed the deal. Yup, you heard that
right — the Bush administration was willing to write down mortgages in
response to Democratic pressure, but it was Obama who said no, we want a
foreclosure crisis. And with Neil Barofsky’s book 'Bailout,' we see why.
Tim Geithner said, in private meetings, that the foreclosure mitigation
programs were not meant to mitigate foreclosures, but to spread out pain
for the banks, the famous 'foam the runway' comment. This central lie is
key to the entire Obama economic strategy. IT IS NOT THAT OBAMA WAS
STYMIED BY CONGRESS, OR WAS UP AGAINST A SYSTEM, OR FACED A MASSIVE
CRISIS, WHICH LED TO THE SHAPE OF THE ECONOMY WE SEE TODAY. RATHER, OBAMA
HAD A HANDSHAKE DEAL TO HELP THE MIDDLE CLASS OFFERED TO HIM BY PAULSON,
AND OBAMA SAID NO. HE WAS NOT CONSTRAINED BY ANYTHING BUT HIS OWN POLICY
INSTINCTS. AND THE REFLATION OF CORPORATE PROFITS AND FINANCIAL ASSETS AND
DEATH OF THE MIDDLE CLASS WERE THE PREDICTABLE RESULTS."
phlash74
Oct 30, 2012, 5:02:39 PM10/30/12
to
against Dear Leader. Ask Dutch, Obama wanted single payer healthcare and
Wall Street regulation (chortle) but those mean Republicans just wouldn't
let him have his way.
Michael
-----------------
"You're his [Romney's] bitch, your vote doesn't count." - Dutch, to noted
right wing teabagger Chuck "halfpastdead" Jackson
Dutch
Oct 30, 2012, 5:41:51 PM10/30/12
to
brattt
Oct 30, 2012, 5:39:48 PM10/30/12
to
2007 NOT January 20,2008? More than a year earlier.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator, rec.gambling.poker
Whose stated mission is to call out the Asses on RGP
ChrisRobin
Oct 30, 2012, 6:31:47 PM10/30/12
to
brattt
Oct 30, 2012, 6:36:13 PM10/30/12
to
2009, it was actually January 3rd 2007, the day the Democrats took over
the House of Representatives and the Senate, at the very start of the
110th Congress. The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both
chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995.
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that
everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007, the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the
House:
the DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77,
the GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%,
the Unemployment rate was 4.6%.
0 new messages