Bail out

[JW Frogen]

If it does he will go down in history far better than most see him today.

Frayed knot. History will remember him as one of the worst.

The thought Truman would be considered a great President would have been hilarious in 1953.

History, that bitch Clio, had other ideas.

She usually does.

[Pastafarian]

Frogen must be depressed. No more Bush.

[Rainbow Moonlight]

Probably be a lot easier to defend the US with a democrat president.

[JW Frogen]

Frogen must be depressed. No more Bush.

I am getting enough bush.

Still, so far Obama is refreshingly hawkish.

He is going to put more troops in Afghanistan, and will unilaterally attack Pakistan (something Bush never did) and has now said he may leave a force in Iraq to deal with “security issues.”

His Chief of Staff, Ron Emmanuel was not only for the Iraq war, he stated he would have removed Saddam even if we knew there were no WMD.

Ron Emmanuel was also a captain in the Israeli army.

Obama is looking better all the time.

Sorry peace and appeasement crowd, I think you may have dreamed the impossible dream once again.

Obama is learning the art of reality.

[Rainbow Moonlight]

It will be interestign to see what he does. I hope he is not over run with bad advice by the well-intentioned but less principled.

[White Indigene]

Its a wonderous thing, Obamamans massive 'mandate' for change.

Whats the bet the Left will attempt to bail him out of this great historical position he/they have gained.

News flash:- the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Hoooroompa

[commonfaux]

The over all bail out is similar to Reagan’s bail out during the savings and loans crises, it did not give the government permanent control of any company but kept them afloat so that there was not a collapse of the economy at large and massive contraction or depression. In the end the government’s share of profit actually did produce a profit to the taxpayer.

This is not socialism this is the Keynsianism.

That Bush adopted it (Clinton is the one who deregulated the banking system) reveals what a pragmatic politician he is.

Where are you now with this Frogen? Keynsianism or Socialism?

[cynik]

Rahm Emmanuel (Ron if you are ignorant cocksucker) is a curious guy.

After leaving the ranks of professional democrats under Clinton, he made 16 million bucks as an investment banker, in a little under 2 years. That is the extent of his "honest work" in the market.

And, among other places, where did this economic wonder work? Freddie Mac.

Yeah, the same Freddie Mac that went bust not long afterwards, taking a large part of the US economy with it.

Now Obama's administration have blocked requests for details of Rahms' participation on the board of Freddie Mac, which were made under the freedom of information legislation in the USA. And Rahm was Obama's first appointment, being installed a mere two days after the Big O got the keys to the federal machine.

I find this fascinating, because Rahms' job as chief of staff is to effectively schedule access to the Big O. If you want the presidents time, you gotta go through Rahm.

What does this tell us about Obama? It tells us that Obama is a puppet and willing servant of the financial industry. He was paid for by the banks, and yet half of the US public believe he is a socialist.

I've been dealing with members of the US public recently, and what strikes me most profoundly about the people from that nation is not the depth of their ignorance, which is considerable, but rather the incapacity to reason, or to find information that conflicts with the TV news. There is something about Americans which is strangely ..... fanatical. They are not just stupid, but rather fanatically stupid.

I'm not just talking about frogwit not knowing Rahm's first name, although that is a typical example. What I mean is the way Frogwit doesn't know his first name, but nevertheless can talk for hours about the guy. Talk talk talk talk talk. All from a position of gross ignorance. Nevermind that you are not educated, and have not researched your facts. Just blurt out those opinions, and keep talking over the top of everybody. This seems to me to be the american way of discourse. All talk, no listening. All knowledge, no research. It is fanatical, and I'm sure it is rooted in the religious faith movements that Americans hold so dear.

Anyway, enough about Americans. They might be a profoundly stupid culture, but Australians are no better. Australians don't even have elections for their head of state, and they are ruled by political parties who select representatives for the people to vote for during stage managed "elections". How embarrassing is that?

And that seems to be the difference between Australians and Americans. Americans can talk about things, they just can't learn about them. Asutralian's can't even talk about things unless someone from the party tells them what the terms of reference are.

[Jovial Monk]

And in Switzerland the public are allwise and spend their time buying cuckoo clocks?