I do not believe in the two party by advertising system period.... Republican'ts or Democraps...The system is a fucking joke. Either you have a proper structure or you do not.... The structure is going to the left....a sure loser ....... There needs to be a lot less government and more individual freedoms .... If you think that this is just babbling.....then you would fit well in Cuba, or Venezuela....Chavez has babbled and the patriots sucked it up big time....and now they are sucking on it for real....just like you.... If one does not think that a more proper structure with regards to capitalism is required...then this is just typical of the fat, lazy, stupid American't........ ..................................................................................... The proper structure is to downsize government....and increase individual freedoms and wealth..... Under the current village idiot admin who had every tool as a child to do well has done nothing but fuck things up beyond recognition.... If the two anti babbling commentors think that the current structure favors capitalism.... Congratulations ....you have called yourself out to among one of the two party by advertising patriots....swimming in obvious stupidity....typical of the sit on the couch....do it to me hollywood style.....relax ...have another bag of chips, drink another beer, put on a few pounds, watch a movie....and hope somebody else pulls off what will make things better for me....ahem....patriots....
Forgive me, gnome, but what you have expressed thus far exceeds mere skepticism by a wide margin. Like you, I believe Volcker was a good Fed chairman and that Greenspan fell far short. No one is asking you to embrace Obama, but if Volcker readily approves of him, then at least give him the benefit of the doubt. Give him a chance. Now that he is going to get the job, let him screw up first before unloading on him. I think you're one of the smartest people here, except when it comes to your hard right edge. (No offense.) Like some others here, I think you occasionally view the world in absolutes -- in black and white. Therefore, I think you are sometimes exercising visceral aversion rather than judgment when it comes to political discourse. You will recall that this was GWB's favored approach. Whatever skepticism you may have about Obama, there is no denying the caliber of the advisory panel he has selected and the people who have endorsed him. This speaks to his intelligence, his vision and his resolve. Those are big pieces in a puzzle. At least give him that and then play it by ear. Thus far, Obama has largely been the antithesis of GWB, so he's already ahead of the game. Gnome, I know you think I'm daft, but mark my words. History is afoot.
I agree, "History is afoot"... I'm just afraid it's going to closely resemble 1930s Germany. And I am not "right" at all. I hated Bush, thought he is perhaps the WORST president in history... so far, that is.
Where is the proper proposed structure for "history afoot" that is more capitalistic ? Where was it mentioned ? Where was it mentioned that government was to get smaller and less impeding ? Where ?
History is "afoot" all right... a big swing toward Socialism. One of the biggest problems in the US is a Gummint which is too large and too costly. What we NEED is a dramatic REDUCTION in Gummint, so that we can afford it. What we'll GET is ever larger, more invasive, more expensive, more Big Brother Gummint. _______________________________ Here's an email I got about Peolsi... _______________________________ "....... When will the American people wake up???? This woman is costing way more than she is worth: The Speaker of the House... *Madame Pelosi wasn't happy with the small private jet that comes with the Speaker's job. No, Madame Pelosi was aggravated that this little jet had to stop to refuel, so she ordered a Big Fat 200 seat jet that could get her back to California without stopping! Many, many legislators walked by and grinned with glee as Joe informed everyone that Nancy 's Big Fat Jet costs us, the hard working American tax payers, thousands of gallons of fuel every week. Since she only works 3 days a week, this gas guzzling jet gets fueled and she flies home to California , cost to the taxpayers of about $60,000, one way!! As Joe put it, 'Unfortunately we have to pay to bring her back on Monday night.' Cost to us, another $60,000. Folks, that is $480,000 per month and that is an annual cost to the taxpayers of $5,760,000!!! No wonder she complains about the cost of this war, it might cramp her style and she is styling, on my back and yours! I think of the military families in this country doing without and this woman, who heads up the most do-nothing Congress in the history of this country, keeps fueling that jet while doing nothing! Madame Pelosi wants you and I to conserve our carbon footprint?! She wants us to buy smaller cars and Obama wants us to get a bicycle pump and air up our tires!!! These people are nuts!* _______________________________
Gnome wrote.... What we NEED is a dramatic REDUCTION in Gummint, so that we can afford it. What we'll GET is ever larger, more invasive, more expensive, more Big Brother Gummint... ...................................................................................... Finally !!!!!!!!!! Gnome is on the mark....as usual.... ............................................................................................. The first telling signal about what is going to happen in the Nobama admin....is that his most important right hand man...was on the board of FNM..... Hello ....Hello ......anybody home ? What do birds of a feather do ???? Hello....Hello.....I guess nobody's home..... Just no salt in the shaker....pal.....
"Here in the land of opportunity, we like to think upward mobility is what America is all about. We're fooling ourselves, says Eric Alterman. Me, too. According to a packet of reports just released from the Pew Charitable Trusts, âTwo out of three Americans have higher family income than their parents,â Isaacs said. âIndividuals can surpass the income of their parents either because economic growth has boosted all incomes or because individuals have moved to a higher step on the income ladder. So, there is considerable mobility but itâs also the case that a childâs economic position is heavily influenced by that of his or her parents.â This isn't the case in other countries. As Eric Alterman, citing The Economist, notes, Not only is every country in Scandinavia ahead of us in this respect [upward mobility], so even is hidebound, class-riven Britain. This is true at nearly every level of society. According to two separate studies based on a set of data collected over a period of five decades, the Nordic countries enjoy considerably greater degrees of social mobility than do Americans. In the United States, a son's earnings are more than twice as likely to be closely related to that of his father's than in most Nordic nations, and even Britain does a much better job at offering second-generation earners a higher probability of economic improvement than does the United States. This is true across the board, but it is at the bottom rung where the failure of the American system is most apparent. In the Nordic nations, for instance, three-quarters of those on welfare had moved up and out of the system by the time they reached their 40s, but barely more than half of their American counterparts had. As the editors of The Economist (subscription required) put it, "In other words, Nordic countries have almost completely snapped the link between the earnings of parents and children at and near the bottom. That is not at all true of America." In Britain, too, fully 70 percent of those enmeshed in the welfare system had moved out within a single generation, again--a higher percentage than in America. The magazine points to the generous tax and welfare provisions for families as "the obvious explanation for greater mobility in the Nordic countries ... especially when compared with America's."" http://granby01033.blogspot.com/2007/11/is-american-dream-more-possible-in.html For those of you who don't read it, The Economist is very, very far from a left-wing, anti-business magazine. -palinuro
And that's why he had Paul Volcker, Bob Rubin, Larry Summers, and other notable monetary officials standing behind him at Friday's press conference? You are so ignorant Mav. Get a freaking clue.
Even a proponent of smaller government cannot make a legitimate argument for smaller government at a time when the current government has created so many problems for the American people. There is a lot of cleaning up to do, and cleaning up costs money, like it or not. At least be a realist -- unlike GWB. Don't blame the guy who wants to clean it up. Blame the guy who made the mess.
You think "NObamanomics" is a CLEAN UP? Oh sure, there will be less money for war... that part we'll all see and applaud. But Socialism will cost us MULTIPLES of times what the Bush War cost...