The Obama Deception

[JollyRoger]

Obama is the President of the entity that owns, what, 80% of AIG. Guys like that play games with the hired help right after the takeover. Busting contracts is expected of high level management in takeover situations. Guess people think they should be timid in exercising their newfound ownership rights.

 

[Rashiminos]

I was hoping Obama would break his word on things that would make him a real champion of the people, and especially on things like Iraq and FISA. I was hoping he was doing ti simply to fool the populace. Instead, just like W, he is breaking the promises I wish he had kept, and keeping the promises I wish he had broke, only this time from the left, but to the same ends.

Not only are you expecting him to be inconsistent, you're also expecting his inconsistency not to create disparities between what he says (which often tends to be meaningless waffle) and what he does (which gave as clear of a picture of what he was about before the election as it does now). You bought the rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Take this frustration as a lesson and return to rationality.

 

[Neomega]

Not only are you expecting him to be inconsistent, you're also expecting his inconsistency not to create disparities between what he says (which often tends to be meaningless waffle) and what he does (which gave as clear of a picture of what he was about before the election as it does now). You bought the rhetoric hook, line, and sinker. Take this frustration as a lesson and return to rationality.

whatever. There is no rationality. Yours is vote third party. Even if I could, it is as rational as being upset at Obama for being a tool.

 

[Rashiminos]

Well, since I guess you have missed my point completely, from the beginning in dealing with you, I think the link i posted in the OP, pretty much sums up my frustrations with Obama. And I am not going to repeat the entire 2 hour documentary in text, just so you can argue in a thread about a movie you didn't watch.

So you believe he's the puppet of a shadow regime bent on enslaving the world?

 

[.Shane.]

Stuff...

I do thank you for the sincere reply. I'll just say I disagree and that I definitely am disappointed in some things Obama has done, I'm not about to turn it into some massive conspiracy deal.

@FF: I might be conservative on fiscal policy and neocon on foreign policy, but I don't vote republican.

Let's assume you're right... Definitely costs him capital. Definitely looks bad, but doesn't equal what the OP is saying.

Side note: How do you reconcile your admiration w/ Palin for the probability that she would strip mine Alaska if she had free reign... Just askin'.

It hasn't been two months. What the bloody hell were you people expecting him to do? Part the Red Sea?

I think this is the most sensible thing I've read in this whole thread.

Are our attention spans that bad? That we're going to judge a president on less than 2 months? NUTS. I didn't vote for Bush and wasn't fond of him. But it was a long time before I actually would criticize him. He deserved a chance to prove me wrong or show his true colors.

 

[pau17]

So watch the move, and then beat up on it, and I will defend it, but right now, you are just trying to engage in a debate with me that I didn't even start.


So, Come back to me in a couple of hours.

I saw enough of it, and I asked you if you really believed in what it said, because the movie is much less about Obama than it is about the bankers and a supposed international conspiracy.

 

[Neomega]

So you believe he's the puppet of a shadow regime bent on enslaving the world?

I saw enough of it, and I asked you if you really believed in what it said, because the movie is much less about Obama than it is about the bankers and a supposed international conspiracy.

Yes. (and might I add, I was suspicious of him from the beginning, it's just that McCain and Clinton, I had no doubt)
taxes to pay debt to the federal reserve is a form of slavery, and I believe they want more. I also believe they are looking to Africa as the next big resource pool, and that there will be a crisis that will have us in Africa in the next eight years.

 

[Rashiminos]

Then as per that belief you should be talking about his "handlers" rather than blaming the "puppet." In trippy conspiracy-land, the President is nothing more than a hired gun. That would certainly banish all serious debate from the thread.

 

[Neomega]

Then as per that belief you should be talking about his "handlers" rather than blaming the "puppet." In trippy conspiracy-land, the President is nothing more than a hired gun. That would certainly banish all serious debate from the thread.

I could, but that would be exasperating. I tried to do so with Cheney here, because I felt Cheney was behind Bush. So, as I had to explain many times on this board when I was upset about Bush, when I say "Bush", I mean "the Bush administration and the neocons", when I say Obama, I mean "the Obama administration, and the financial corporate interests that back him"

I know the specifics of many things, I just don't feel like typing them out every time, just to avoid being hit by semantic snipers. Many things have to be generalized for the sake of time and discussion. I know you like to type in quick general statements, but you don't see me picking your statements apart, and telling you you are wrong because you weren't more specific.

And I really don't care for what you consider "serious" or not. There is no need for you to post here if you do not feel it is serious.

 

[yesboii]

To the OP:
There is a reason why everyone gives a new incoming president 100 days before they start judging him.

 

[pau17]

Yes. (and might I add, I was suspicious of him from the beginning, it's just that McCain and Clinton, I had no doubt)
taxes to pay debt to the federal reserve is a form of slavery, and I believe they want more.

Power to the people is nice, but there is a correlation between non-autonomous monetary policy-making and having huge printing binges and hyperinflation. There is a reason why the Fed is autonomous, so it can't be strong-armed into lending and hurting the stability of the currency too much.

I also believe they are looking to Africa as the next big resource pool, and that there will be a crisis that will have us in Africa in the next eight years.

We could be there right now, hello...Somalia, Darfur, Congo, the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline...

 

[Neomega]

To the OP:
There is a reason why everyone gives a new incoming president 100 days before they start judging him.

Did you watch the video.. or am I going to have to start all over again with you like I did gilder?

I think this is the most sensible thing I've read in this whole thread.

Are our attention spans that bad? That we're going to judge a president on less than 2 months? NUTS. I didn't vote for Bush and wasn't fond of him. But it was a long time before I actually would criticize him. He deserved a chance to prove me wrong or show his true colors.

Good for you. I have seen enough. I'll have a gin and tonic ready when you are ready to join the club after his official 100 days.

 

[Neomega]

Power to the people is nice, but there is a correlation between non-autonomous monetary policy-making and having huge printing binges and hyperinflation. There is a reason why the Fed is autonomous, so it can't be strong-armed into lending and hurting the stability of the currency too much.

Who is strong-arming who again?

Did congress try to strong-arm the fed, or visa-versa?

 

[Rashiminos]

Did you watch the video.. or am I going to have to start all over again with you like I did gilder?

The video is not intellectually stimulating... quite the opposite.

Good for you. I have seen enough. I'll have a gin and tonic ready when you are ready to join the club after his official 100 days.

Meh, try the February 5th, 2008 club. Today is Irish Coffee day.

 

[Neomega]

The video is not intellectually stimulating... quite the opposite.

This thread is about the video. If you haven't watched it, you shouldn't be posting here.

 

[Rashiminos]

This thread is about the video. If you haven't watched it, you shouldn't be posting here.

What's your point?

 

[pau17]

Who is strong-arming who again?

Did congress try to strong-arm the fed, or visa-versa?

I'm responding to the "the Fed is above the law zomg!" paranoia in the video. Of course it is autonomous, because it was proven historically that governments abused monetary policy, flirted with hyperinflation, and did a lot more to enslave their people than an institution whose sole responsibility was to maintain the stability of the currency.

And your response to the Africa part?

I also believe they are looking to Africa as the next big resource pool, and that there will be a crisis that will have us in Africa in the next eight years.

We could be there right now, hello...Somalia, Darfur, Congo, the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline...

 

[Neomega]

I'm responding to the "the Fed is above the law zomg!" paranoia in the video. Of course it is autonomous, because it was proven historically that governments abused monetary policy, flirted with hyperinflation, and did a lot more to enslave their people than an institution whose sole responsibility was to maintain the stability of the currency.

I don't care if it is autonomous or not, I care how it is acting right now. And the stability of the currency argument... 1929 stock market crash was after the Fed.... and again, this year, obviously was after the Fed was established... and it was the Fed this time strong arming congress into letting them print more money, not visa versa... so basically... yeah.

And your response to the Africa part?

What? I know we have interests there, I am sure we have advisers and special forces in Ethiopia right now. But I mean in a big way.

 

[pau17]

I dont care if it is autonomous or not, I care how it is acting right now.

Fine, but it is there for some fundamentally sound reasons, which the video seems to completely ignore.

What? I know we have interests there, I am sure we have advisors and special forces in Ethiopia right now. But I mean in a big way.

Any of those examples could have been used for "big" interventions. Plenty of neocons already want to be there.

 

[pau17]

I don't care if it is autonomous or not, I care how it is acting right now. And the stability of the currency argument... 1929 stock market crash was after the Fed.... and again, this year, obviously was after the Fed was established... and it was the Fed this time strong arming congress into letting them print more money, not visa versa... so basically... yeah.

Just because the Fed was established did not mean no crises would occur; monetary policy is but one part of the whole mess. The Fed worries about the currency, to make sure that it doesn't get into 50%, 100%, 1,000% inflation, which thankfully hasn't happened. Check out Latin American history to see what happens when you don't have strong and independent monetary authorities...