What do you do when your left wing policies are getting you thrown out of office?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 11, 2010 8:32 PM GMT
    If you are Obama and Pelusi, you lie about your office.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 11, 2010 9:21 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidNo.... If (big if) the Democrats lose control of one or both houses of Congress in the November elections, what they will do (to answer your question) is pass as much of their radical socialist agenda as they can in the "lame duck" session of Congress.


    "Radical Socialist agenda???" icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 11, 2010 9:58 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    southbeach1500 saidNo.... If (big if) the Democrats lose control of one or both houses of Congress in the November elections, what they will do (to answer your question) is pass as much of their radical socialist agenda as they can in the "lame duck" session of Congress.


    "Radical Socialist agenda???" icon_lol.gif


    Yeah, you know, like forcing citizens to purchase goods or services from private companies.

    Like putting an entire sector of the financial industry out of business (student loans).

    Like taking ownership of car companies, banks and a certain insurance company.

    Just to name a few of the "accomplishments" already "achieved."


    SB - You don't even understand what "socialist" means.

    I'm not even getting into health care thing, because our positions are well-established, but the other examples are ludicrous.

    The government did not put a "sector of the financial industry out of business", it removed the middle men, the exorbitant fees and charges, associated with federal money. The banks and industry are still free to make any student loans they wish, with their own capital. For someone who is always railing against government waste, you should be all for this change because it saves tens of billions of tax payer dollars.

    And the government did "take ownership" of car companies, banks, etc. It received a stake in each of those companies equal to the amount of money the infused those companies with. That's hardly socialist.

    Socialist would have been to take over the companies and then give the property from the share holders to the unions or workers. (Which is what I would have done since the management long ago proved they can't run these companies) So, please stop conflating what are essentially pro-corporate policies and actions with socialism.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 11, 2010 10:04 PM GMT
    Christian73 saidAnd the government did "take ownership" of car companies, banks, etc. It received a stake in each of those companies equal to the amount of money the infused those companies with. That's hardly socialist.

    Socialist would have been to take over the companies and then give the property from the share holders to the unions or workers. (Which is what I would have done since the management long ago proved they can't run these companies) So, please stop conflating what are essentially pro-corporate policies and actions with socialism.


    They're being run at arm's length and will be renationalized. Most of the banks that received money from the TARP have repaid it due to the onerous restrictions it came with.

    Socialist? A word that in America is less well understood than Islam---and that's saying something!

    Also, enjoy this thread for just how dumb the apologists on this site really are.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 11, 2010 11:40 PM GMT
    Go play golf Obama. That means you have less time to push bad ideas.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 11, 2010 11:47 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said
    And the government did "take ownership" of car companies, banks, etc. It received a stake in each of those companies equal to the amount of money the infused those companies with. That's hardly socialist.

    Socialist would have been to take over the companies and then give the property from the share holders to the unions or workers. (Which is what I would have done since the management long ago proved they can't run these companies) So, please stop conflating what are essentially pro-corporate policies and actions with socialism.


    But they did exactly that. Bondholders, who had a much higher stake invested in GM got far less than the unions, who had a far smaller stake invested in the company:

    Union:

    General Motors' (GM) union will get a 17.5 per cent stake in the restructured automaker under a deal revealed today.

    The United Auto Workers (UAW) union will also receive $6.5 billion worth of preference shares in the reorganised company, warrants for 2.5 per cent of common shares and a $2.5 billion note that will pay out between 2013 and 2017.

    GM will put $10 billion into the union's retirees' healthcare trust as originally promised, according to reports.



    Bondholders:

    Bondholders are due to make a decision on the debt-for-equity swap, which would give them a 10 per cent stake in GM, today. They have complained that the union was being given a more generous stake for forgiving a smaller debt than bondholders.


    http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/engineering/article6367786.ece


    Another ridiculous comparison. The reasons the unions got a larger stake is because GM owed them more money. It's called a contract, which were being enforced for both the bondholders and the union workers.

    This is the same horrifying attempts to frame the contracts that management signed and shareholders agreed to as somehow suspect or unfair. If I tried to get you to give up your contractually owed retirement benefits, you'd haul my ass into court so fast our heads would spin.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 12, 2010 4:01 AM GMT
    aunty_jack saidIf you are Obama and Pelusi, you lie about your office.


    Who is "Pelusi?"

    Don't you have an empty Vegemite jar to choke on, AJ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 12, 2010 7:30 PM GMT
    FREE HEALTH CARE (just be sure to read the disclaimer).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 12, 2010 7:33 PM GMT
    Government Scientist wanted to tell the people how bad the oil spill was, but Obama White House blocked them from releasing the info.

    Would this story be buried if a republican administration had hidden the truth?

    We do know thats a NO.