Yeah, Obama should have chosen someone who lost all their money on Wall St. or someone who has never worked on Wall St. at all. We need someone not well informed about how the real economy works.

Yeah, Obama should have chosen someone who lost all their money on Wall St. or someone who has never worked on Wall St. at all. We need someone not well informed about how the real economy works.
#1 | Posted by danni at 2012-01-10 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag: Fallacy of the False Choice

#1 | Posted by danni at 2012-01-10 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag: "Love the 1% Democrats, lovem lovem lovem."

Yeah, Obama should have chosen someone who lost all their money on Wall St. or someone who has never worked on Wall St. at all. We need someone not well informed about how the real economy works.

#1 | Posted by danni

Bad for wall street to keep the ones who caused the problem to keep their jobs but ok for the president to do so?

The guy may be on the up and up and it may be the irony of the best way to catch a thief is to use another thief but it seems pretty callous in light of everything that's going on.

Loh

"Bad for wall street to keep the ones who caused the problem to keep their jobs but ok for the president to do so?"

They were the only ones smart enough to know what the problems were, or so the argument goes.

What is funny is that BuffaloManDan(buffalo Bob) is on a thread talking about Bush... complaining how no one is worried about Bush and 9/11 all the while ignoring this thread about a current situation going on now with Wall Street cronies infesting the administration.

Hilarious.

Yeah, Obama should have chosen someone who lost all their money on Wall St. or someone who has never worked on Wall St. at all. We need someone not well informed about how the real economy works.

Then why didn't he just leave Paulson at the Helm for TS?
Or better yet, why not elect Hillary in 2008 instead of Obama since she already worked in the White House?

Just kidding. Let's give OBummer a pass for doing exactly the same thing Bush did, and then bash Bush for making bad decisions. It's all part of the Hope and Change initiative.

Shhh! Lets hope he stays there. Last time I checked in on that thread he was talking to himself.

Obama and Wall Street Bankers this week on "Will it blend".

"Obama is said to not mix well with wall street, today we will be testing the blendtec blender with Obama and Wall Street Bankers. Here we go. BZZZZZZZZZTTT TTTTZZZZZZZZZZ BBBBBRRRRRRRRPZZZZZZZZZZZZT. Pop. Oh, hypocrisy dust... don't breathe this... As we have found, it appears that Obama and Wall Street Bankers blend very well regardless of the claims made on Obama's flimsy packaging. Until next time. "

So now the socialist Kenyan Islamic president who wants to confiscate the wealth of the country from the Thurston Howell, III "Job Creators" and redistribute it to the unwashed masses is a stooge of Wall Street?

Please, kids, you can't have it both ways.

In the end, Obama's no more a threat to the pigs at the troughs - both public and private - than FDR was. He's a left-leaning centrist who's not going to up-end the system. A bit of tightening here, some stitching there, but, when push comes to shove, he never was anything less and he'll never be anything more.

You rightbot clowns should be delighted, since you can (and do) blame him for the mess you and your champions created without accepting any of the responsibility for your own irresponsiblities.

And given the way it's going, November's not going to change that an iota.

#11 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2012-01-11 07:38 AM | Reply | Flag:

From what you say, you make it seems as though you don't care that Obama is almost the complete antithesis to what he claimed to be during the campaign and what people like Danni voted for him in regard to...

Another... "he isn't that different than Bush" argument to try to make Obama look better. It is hilarious.

"Antithesis"?

What are you going for, the Rip Van Winkle Award so you can place it next to the Reading Incomprehension Award you garnered yesterday morning with your idiotic assertions about Lynn Sweet's column?

Obama is a slightly left-of-center politician. No more, no less.

Another... "he isn't that different than Bush" argument to try to make Obama look better.

No, he's quite a bit different from Bush, both in style and substance. I'll settle for half a loaf, hell a slice, over getting the prison-shower treatment from GOPiggies 24/7.

I used FDR in my statement above, so I'll use him again. FDR didn't go far enough, but he went about as far as he probably thought he could. Was what he did perfect? No. Was it better than Hoover? You betcha, kiddo.

Is Obama perfect? No. Do I agree with everything he does? Of course not. We are not perfectly aligned politically. I can live with that. When it comes to politics, you must take into consideration the realities of situations, the realistic possibilities. Do I like that? No. Do I recognize it? Yes. End of story.

Is Obama perfect? No. Do I agree with everything he does? Of course not. We are not perfectly aligned politically. I can live with that. When it comes to politics, you must take into consideration the realities of situations, the realistic possibilities. Do I like that? No. Do I recognize it? Yes. End of story.

#13 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2012-01-11 08:02 AM | Reply | Flag:

It's funny... your critiques of Obama tend to deal more with Bush than Obama. In regard to dealing with reality... I guess you don't support Obama's actions with the military decisions based on "hope" of a more peaceful time in the future in the face of the reality of a more hostile and dangerous time.

"your critiques of Obama tend to deal more with Bush than Obama."

Take a reading comprehension course, kiddo. It may help.