Disgusted With Obama Administration.

• LJ

  

  
• Writerbuckeye

  

  LJ;922256 wrote:

  
  
• believer

  

  LJ;922256 wrote:

  
  Chinese Obama Fried Chicken. I think Michelle owns a franchise in Hunan province. It, of course, would be quite healthy and cooked in non-trans fatty acid sesame seed oil with fried rice instead of mashed potatoes on the side.
  
  In fact, she's worked up a deal with Target to market her new line of Obama Fried Chicken in their frozen foods section.
• I Wear Pants

  BGFalcons82;922232 wrote:FYI...neither one is a disgruntled commentator, working for a network, nor beating their chest looking for someone to point a camera their way. They are...ahem...2 of 535 elected Congressional officials. Even if they are partisan hacks, they both will likely want a majority of votes come next election, so for them to come out and state the regime is harming the economy on purpose is a high risk position. I don't think they'd go out on this limb without feeling pretty confident about their positions.

  I don't care how confident they are. The notion is insane. Hitler was really confident that Jews needed getting rid of and took a high risk position to say so.
  
  Someone being confident in their opinion has no effect over whether that opinion is fucking insane.
  
  No matter how hard you conservatives want this to be an "evil Obama is trying to ruin the country and WE have to protect 'murica" thing. It isn't.
• Footwedge

  BGFalcons82;921584 wrote:You are missing the point by delving into a wonkish answer about proposed legislation, what-ifs, and bringing Cleveland Buck into it. Dodge-duck-dip-dive-and dodge once again. At least you're becoming predictable.
  
  The point is that Barry believes that profits and what banks can charge to attain said buoyancy should be ordained by government, notably....HIMSELF!!! This is clearly socialistic pedigree if not fascist. But you don't see it because he doesn't clearly state the words, "I believe in socialism above all else". Just listen and you can hear them.
  
  You love to claim I have blinders on. Maybe I do get riled up by the audacity of this regime and see things out of conservative lenses. However, he's clearly in favor of big centralized governmental control over as much as he can get...either through the bully pulpit or administrative fiat. He is destroying the country we all grew up in all in the name of "fairness" and "social justice". All you have to do is read Rev Wright to know how Barry has thought for 20 years.

  If you think for one lousy minute that these bank fees being implemented under so called free market pressures, invisible hand control and laissez faire principles....you are so sadly mistaken. As BoatShoes succinctly put it....the federal as well as investment banks are no different that what OPEC was in the 70's. Boat calls them a cartel....I call them collusionist oligarchs.....which is ALWAYS the end product of unbridled capitalism.
  
  Adam Smith was very clear in pointing this out in several chapters of his book Wealth of Nations.
• believer

  

  Footwedge;923383 wrote:Boat calls them a cartel....I call them collusionist oligarchs.....which is ALWAYS the end product of unbridled capitalism.

  Dodd-Frank is an end product example of unbridled Big Government.
  
  Speaking of unbridled Big Government, I have no idea what world Wasserman Schultz lives in, but she's obviously completely out of touch with reality: http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/anyone-can-see-economys-improving-dnc-chair-insists
  
  Seriously?
• QuakerOats

  believer;923422 wrote:Speaking of unbridled Big Government, I have no idea what world Wasserman Schultz lives in, but she's obviously completely out of touch with reality: http://www.cnsnews.com/blog/craig-bannister/anyone-can-see-economys-improving-dnc-chair-insists
  
  Seriously?

  She is not only repugnant; she is dumber than a box of rocks.
  
  BTW, todays factoid: every household is now $36,000 deeper in national debt thanks to obama. Change we can believe in .......
• BGFalcons82

  

  I Wear Pants;923324 wrote:I don't care how confident they are. The notion is insane. Hitler was really confident that Jews needed getting rid of and took a high risk position to say so.
  
  Someone being confident in their opinion has no effect over whether that opinion is fucking insane.
  
  No matter how hard you conservatives want this to be an "evil Obama is trying to ruin the country and WE have to protect 'murica" thing. It isn't.

  Well, us clingers would like to keep 'murica what it was meant to be. Guns, God and religion all the way.
  
  Barry has said that he's going to fundamentally transform 'murica. His vision of 'murica...should you use your eyes and ears...is to redistribute wealth by any means necessary. In HIS mind, he's not ruining 'murica, he's providing social justice to those that have been punished by evil rotten scum rich types, corporations, and Republicans. The fact that you see his work as non-ruinous comes from the kool-aid he's serving.
• QuakerOats

  http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-occupy-wall-street-20111006,0,1992639.story
  
  
  obama now blaming the banks (I guess blaming Bush isn't working that well anymore). He is fomenting this stuff, he supports the "occupiers". And of course, why wouldn't he ---- he is an activist/agitator.
  
  Change we can believe in ........
• BGFalcons82

  

  Footwedge;923383 wrote:If you think for one lousy minute that these bank fees being implemented under so called free market pressures, invisible hand control and laissez faire principles....you are so sadly mistaken. As BoatShoes succinctly put it....the federal as well as investment banks are no different that what OPEC was in the 70's. Boat calls them a cartel....I call them collusionist oligarchs.....which is ALWAYS the end product of unbridled capitalism.
  
  Adam Smith was very clear in pointing this out in several chapters of his book Wealth of Nations.

  Clearly, I need to type slower. My apologies.
  
  The point is that he and his conspirators believe they should regulate, control, and deem "reasonable" profits for companies. The fact Bank of 'Murica is charging $5/month to use their services is NONE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES' BUSINESS. But, you and Boat want to obfuscate, deflect, and pivot away from this major point because you can't defend it. It's easier to paint Bank of 'Murica as the evil bogeyman who must be slayed to make 'Murica fairer for all.
  
  If a bank wants to charge a fee for services...IT'S THEIR RIGHT to charge whateverthefuck they feel is necessary to remain in business. There are literally dozens of other banks to consider should a consumer wish to not pay Bank of 'Murica's fees. If enough people choose to leave them, then they'd have to reconsider their fee-for-services position. Up until Jan 20, 2009, this is how business was supposed to be conducted in 'Murica.
• Writerbuckeye

  

  BGFalcons82;923642 wrote:Clearly, I need to type slower. My apologies.
  
  The point is that he and his conspirators believe they should regulate, control, and deem "reasonable" profits for companies. The fact Bank of 'Murica is charging $5/month to use their services is NONE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES' BUSINESS. But, you and Boat want to obfuscate, deflect, and pivot away from this major point because you can't defend it. It's easier to paint Bank of 'Murica as the evil bogeyman who must be slayed to make 'Murica fairer for all.
  
  If a bank wants to charge a fee for services...IT'S THEIR RIGHT to charge whateverthe**** they feel is necessary to remain in business. There are literally dozens of other banks to consider should a consumer wish to not pay Bank of 'Murica's fees. If enough people choose to leave them, then they'd have to reconsider their fee-for-services position. Up until Jan 20, 2009, this is how business was supposed to be conducted in 'Murica.

  FTW
• believer

  

  QuakerOats;923633 wrote:And of course, why wouldn't he ---- he is an activist/agitator.

  Now, now be nice. It's community agitator.
• I Wear Pants

  BGFalcons82;923642 wrote:Clearly, I need to type slower. My apologies.
  
  The point is that he and his conspirators believe they should regulate, control, and deem "reasonable" profits for companies. The fact Bank of 'Murica is charging $5/month to use their services is NONE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES' BUSINESS. But, you and Boat want to obfuscate, deflect, and pivot away from this major point because you can't defend it. It's easier to paint Bank of 'Murica as the evil bogeyman who must be slayed to make 'Murica fairer for all.
  
  If a bank wants to charge a fee for services...IT'S THEIR RIGHT to charge whateverthefuck they feel is necessary to remain in business. There are literally dozens of other banks to consider should a consumer wish to not pay Bank of 'Murica's fees. If enough people choose to leave them, then they'd have to reconsider their fee-for-services position. Up until Jan 20, 2009, this is how business was supposed to be conducted in 'Murica.

  Didn't the federal government invest a fuck ton of money in BOFA? I believe that would make it their business.
• I Wear Pants

  BGFalcons82;923632 wrote:Well, us clingers would like to keep 'murica what it was meant to be. Guns, God and religion all the way.
  
  Barry has said that he's going to fundamentally transform 'murica. His vision of 'murica...should you use your eyes and ears...is to redistribute wealth by any means necessary. In HIS mind, he's not ruining 'murica, he's providing social justice to those that have been punished by evil rotten scum rich types, corporations, and Republicans. The fact that you see his work as non-ruinous comes from the kool-aid he's serving.

  I didn't say I saw his work as non-ruinous. Merely that it takes an insane person to believe that he is purposely out to get America because he's an evil Kenyan Socialist Scum. Not insane to think that what he's doing is bad for the country, I would agree on some points of that and disagree on others. But it is insane to think that he's purposely trying to do bad for the country.
• believer

  

  I Wear Pants;924066 wrote:But it is insane to think that he's purposely trying to do bad for the country.

  In Obama's world he's attempting to mold America in his image. During his campaign he even told us what he would do:
  
  
  [video=youtube;xvJJP9AYgqU][/video]
  
  
  
  I realize BHO's view of America leans to the far left but I would agree he doesn't believe he's doing anything "bad for the country."
  
  The problem is enough "independent" Americans bought off on his hope & change view of how this country should be run that he has actually been given an opportunity to show his true political colors.
  
  Witness the Porkulus Sammich, ObamaKare, his desire for Porkulus Sammich II, etc. Unfortunately none of this has been good for Barry's Amerika.
• BGFalcons82

  

  This kind of news probably sends tingles up the legs of the "Occupy Wall Street" folks as well as their sponsors - http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/chavez-to-seize-homes-and-hotels-for-the-poor-on-idyllic-los-roques-2367385.html
  
  Seeing how Barry loves Chavez above all others, I wonder what his opinion is about a dictator confiscating private property "for the people"? Better yet, would any of his sycophant media even dare to bring it up?
• believer

  

  BGFalcons82;926134 wrote:Better yet, would any of his sycophant media even dare to bring it up?

  No because if the truth were to be known, the MSM agrees with it.
• QuakerOats

  http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/10/12/issa-issues-subpoena-to-holder-in-fast-and-furious-investigation/
  
  
  Holder must go.
• majorspark

  

  Biden threatens rape and murder if Obama's jobs bill is not passed.
  
  http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/biden-warns-more-rapes-and-murders-if-jobs-bill-not-passed_595784.html
• I Wear Pants

  "Look at these numbers: when we have more police there are less rapes and murders. When we have less there are more of those things. Not passing this legislation I want makes it likely that we will have less police." = Threatening rape and murder.
• gut

  Since when does the federal govt pick-up the tab for local law enforcement?
• tk421

  

  When's the last time a rape or murder was stopped in progress by the police? The police are REACTIONARY, they do not stop any crime.
  
  Unless you're putting a cop in every single home in America, there will always be rapes and there will always be murders.
• QuakerOats

  Let's talk about government rape of the taxpayers and the future generations .... would be a hell of a lot more appropriate right now.
• BGFalcons82

  

  tk421;931566 wrote:When's the last time a rape or murder was stopped in progress by the police? The police are REACTIONARY, they do not stop any crime.
  
  Unless you're putting a cop in every single home in America, there will always be rapes and there will always be murders.

  Careful what you wish for. I believe it will be here in my lifetime through the use of microchips innocently inserted under your skin...all in the name of security, safety and our personal protection.
  
  Orwell predicted it oh so many decades ago. He just got the exact year incorrect.
• I Wear Pants

  tk421;931566 wrote:When's the last time a rape or murder was stopped in progress by the police? The police are REACTIONARY, they do not stop any crime.
  
  Unless you're putting a cop in every single home in America, there will always be rapes and there will always be murders.

  Who said they stopped them in progress? They were merely saying that towns with more police tend to have less murders and rapes.