Despite a bipartisan effort...

I have a question for all you Obamite democrates. The republicans dident care one little bit about what the democrates thought about thier policies. When we objected they said screw you we won the government we will do what we want. Now mister change is wanting the repubs to back him and his government? This idiot isent able to see that the repubs are doing everything they can to make him and his government look like fools and succeding. Tell them to screw themselves the way they told the common people of the U.S. for eight years. That includes the repubs on this site also. If Obama dosent wake up I am going to work like hell to replace him with someone who has the welfare of the whole U.S. in mind in the next election and that goes for congress too. I am tired of politicians doing the bidding of the rich and powerful.

1 Reply

@rabel22,

rabel22 wrote:

The republicans dident care one little bit about what the democrates thought about thier policies. When we objected they said screw you we won the government we will do what we want. Now mister change is wanting the repubs to back him and his government? This idiot isent able to see that the repubs are doing everything they can to make him and his government look like fools and succeding.

Hey, there's a lot of libs and Dems agreeing with you on that one. Just cause people supported Obama and still think well of him doesnt mean they agree with everything he says or does. I like the guy and I'm very glad he is the US President, but I'm as frustrated as anyone when it comes to the point you're making here.

So call your Senator. Seriously. Write him. Tell him, for example, to support Barney Frank's "TARP Reform and Accountability Act", like I said - it's start, at least.

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT wrote:

Quote:
My great-grandfather was a hard left Socialist. Stalin sent him to the gulag!

Stalin too was a bit of a "hard left Socialist". Maybe it was simply because your GGF was a common criminal.

Thats a joke, right??

Yeah, Stalin was "hard left". But he was the kind who ruthlessly exterminated other hard-left socialists if they didn't accept his totalitarian power over everything, or didnt belong to exactly the same brand of hard left as he.

Lenin established the pattern. Among the very first people to go into the prisons, right after the Bolshevik take-over, were the Mensheviks, the anarchists, the supporters of the Socialist Revolutionary party -- in short, anyone who was also hard left, but not Bolshevik. They were among the first to go.

Under Stalin, anyone who had used to be active for those alternative, non-Bolshevik hard left movements was a marked man, and would be among the first to be sent to the Gulag if a conspiracy needed to be "uncovered" somewhere.

Then came the Bolsheviks themselves. Stalin never trusted the old school Bolsheviks - the ones older and more educated than him, the ones who had lived and learned in exile, the ones who had worked for the party out of sheer idealism. All of those, independent-minded and emotionally invested as they were, formed a threat to his take-over of the party, to his work to turn the party into a machine to worship and obey him.

So in wave after wave of cleansings, the old school was sent to the Gulag on drummed up charges of Trotskyism or Bukharinism. And replaced with more pliable career bureaucrats, ruthless Chekists and a new generation of men whose only loyalty was to Stalin. (Sample technique: recruit boys from orphanages, who'd have no ties and no loyalties except to the man who took them out of those.)

Then came the cannibalism within the new system. As show trials and cleansings spiralled into a self-expanding rage, by 1937, anyone was at risk. Any slight to a colleague or superior; any threat you might be seen to pose to the career or position of a fellow bureaucrat; any random way someone like you just happened to be needed within the logic of some show trial or other to feature as guilty cog in some drummed-up, byzantine conspiracy - it could all end you up in the Gulag.

The end result was that the higher up you were in the party, bureaucracy or NKVD, the bigger the chance was that you ended up in the Gulag. There was some bitter justice about this - the same Stalinists who'd started off making life hell for peasants, intellectuals and many workers, ended up cannibalising each other and dying in the largest numbers of all.

Add all the above up and you have many, a great many on the revolutionary left - from principled Mensheviks, Socialist-Revolutionaries and anarchists who never joined the communist coup d'etat of October 1917, to old school Bolsheviks, to cogs in the Stalinist machine themselves, who perished in the Gulag.

1 Reply

@Cycloptichorn,

Here's part of an email I got from Obama today...

The only piece of the stimulus he felt the need to point out was creating 4MM jobs.

Host a House Meeting
President Obama and members of Congress have a plan to put nearly four million Americans back to work, but they need your help.

The economic crisis can seem overwhelming and complex to many, but you can help the people you know connect the recovery plan to their lives and learn more about why it's so important by hosting a house meeting.

You can submit a question about how the plan will impact your community. Governor Tim Kaine will record a video for meeting attendees that will outline the plan and answer as many of your questions as possible. Share your question about the Economic Recovery Plan now.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Well, it is apparently what everyone has their panties in a twist over in the media - and some here on A2K apparently. So is it that surprising that they are focusing the PR efforts on the aspects of the plan that people seemed most worried about?

Imagine getting an email stating:

"President Obama and members of Congress have a plan to put nearly 100 billion dollars into welfare and unemployment benefits, but they need your help."

Yeah, just doesn't have that same zing to it.

---

About the whole issue, what can I say? I'm not happy that the house is wrecked up this bad. The problems we are facing are real and while I have nothing to lose personally - no kids, less than 50k in savings - many others have lives and responsibility, and they don't want some Hooverite gamble on doing nothing at all when doing something could help.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Cyclops, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on this post of mine.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Which post?

Cycloptichorn

1 Reply

Well President Obama just ran up against one of those realities that torpedo high minded rhetoric as well as juicy bones thrown to the unions. I suspect before it is over, we will see more back pedaling as more good intentions threaten to produce unintended negative consequences:

Quote:

The European Union warned the US yesterday against plunging the world into depression by adopting a planned “Buy American” policy, intensifying fears of a trade war.

The EU threatened to retaliate if the US Congress went ahead with sweeping measures in its $800 billion (£554 billion) stimulus plan to restrict spending to American goods and services.

Gordon Brown was caught in the crossfire as John Bruton, the EU Ambassador to Washington, said that “history has shown us” where the closing of markets leads " a clear reference to the Depression of the 1930s, triggered by US protectionist laws.

Last night Mr Obama gave a strong signal that he would remove the most provocative passages from the Bill.

“I agree that we can’t send a protectionist message,” he said in an interview with Fox TV. “I want to see what kind of language we can work on this issue. I think it would be a mistake, though, at a time when worldwide trade is declining, for us to start sending a message that somehow we’re just looking after ourselves and not concerned with world trade.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5655115.ece

2 Replies

@nimh,

That it was, Nimh.

0 Replies

@Cycloptichorn,

The one that I had replied to...here it is http://able2know.org/topic/128652-5#post-3560598

1 Reply

And now Glen Thrush at Politico is reporting that Blue Dog Democrats in the House were urged to vote no to the porkulus bill by the Obama Administration. While it's encouraging that the Obama administration recognizes the bill for what it is, it is disturbing that this administration appears to be saying one thing to the American public (Support the Stimulus Bill! Save millions of jobs!) but in closed circles they want something entirely different (This bill needs work; vote against it!). I think during the Bush administration this was called lying...

1 Reply

@slkshock7,

Thanks slkshock, here's the full article for those who hate to click on links.

Good for Obama if he's is doing this, but yeah I'm concerned about the message he's giving to the public too, especially if he doesn't support this bill.

I'm sure some on this board will find a way to rationalize/justify anything that Obama and the Democrats do, however.

Quote:

Cooper: Obama staff encouraged defiance of Pelosi

Rep. Jim Cooper (D-TN) -- one of the lead Blue Dogs -- made a startling admission to lefty Liberadio on Sunday, suggesting the White House quietly encouraged him to buck House leadership on the stimulus.

Cooper was one of 11 Dems to vote no -- joining every GOP House member.

"Well, I probably shouldn’t tell you this, but I actually got some quiet encouragement from the Obama folks for what I’m doing," said Cooper, one of about 55 House Democrats to sign a letter criticizing Speaker Nancy Pelosi for suspending normal debate and committee rules on the $819 billion package.

He went on -- and on:

"They know its a messy bill and they wanted a clean bill. Now, I got in terrible trouble with our leadership because they don’t care what’s in the bill, they just want it pass and they want it to be unanimous. They don’t mind the partisan fighting cause that’s what they are used to. In fact, they’re really good at it. And they’re a little bit worried about what a post-partisan future might look like. If members actually had to read the bills and figure out whether they are any good or not. We’re just told how to vote. We’re treated like mushrooms most of the time."

The White House press office and Pelosi's spokesman didn't immediately return requests for comment.

Cooper, an early supporter of Obama's, referred to the House leadership repeatedly as "old bulls" and the president as "Barack," said House leaders had "pinned" Obama down by jamming pork into the bill, and expressed hope the Senate would radically revise the package.

And I have to add that every time I see your avatar I immediately think 'pineapple'. My computer monitor's resolution is so high, and your avatar so small that it looks a lot like a pineapple on my monitor; until I clicked on your name I had no idea that it was a seal of some sort. What does it represent (I'll extremely embarrassed for no knowing).

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Maporsche,
It's the seal for the US Military Academy at West Point...I'm an "ol grad" from that institution.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Okay, good post laying out your concerns.

maporsche wrote:

Diest TKO wrote:

maporsche - You may be proven right, you may be proven wrong. I can't help but feel however that you've become cynical to the degree that you may need ot challenge yourself to have an open mind.

I'm sure you have your reasons for feeling cynical. I have similar feelings often, but I think if it's all you've got, then you've lost touch. I hear a lot of criticism, but what are your ideas? You don't think the economy needs a stimulus package. Do you understand why others thin that it does?

I think it's important to create jobs, to the extent that this bill will accomplish that I'm thankful. I wish it strived to create jobs w/o pushing the democratic agenda, but that's just me I guess (I say this, even though I agree with much of the democratic agenda, I just think those policies deserve to be discussed and voted upon seperate from this stimulus package; it stinks of fear mongering to me)

I suppose from the politician's point of view, creating jobs while advancing your agenda is the name of the game. I understand why you would be concerned about this, but I'm not sure that the 'agenda' items in the bill will be any less effective at creating jobs than the non-agenda ones. Someone has to be paid to do all the work that is called for, no matter what it is for; a lot of it is construction work even though it's not labeled as that in the bill. For example, the 'renovate DHS headquarters' line item; I'm not a fan of homeland security, but the headquarters aren't going to renovate themselves. It will take a large crew of unskilled or semi-skilled labor to do so, and that's the group which needs jobs the worst right now.

Quote:

Why I'm thinking that this package might not even be needed is that I truly fear that it will not be effective. I can tell you that almost no amount of tax breaks for example will get me to spend more money right now. I think most people are with me on this one. I'm $50,000 upside down on my home right now, getting an extra $500 this year in tax breaks will not push me to spend ANYTHING. Additionally, we're all preparing for the shoe to drop at all of our jobs. Knowing that I could lose my job tomorrow, what could possibly propel me to begin spending more money (certainly not an extra $20/week tax break)?

Truthfully, you're not anywhere near as bad off as many who will receive stimulus in this bill. While I'm sorry to hear you're upside down on your house, you still seem to be paying your bills and making ends meet; you've lost money on paper but - and this is just a guess of mine, not presuming to know your situation - you're likely not having to choose between which bills to pay, or worrying about your kids getting new clothes.

That's why the payroll tax cuts will put more into the economy; much of that money goes to people for whom 20 bucks a week makes a difference. To people who own no houses or have no real savings. I think it's likely that a great deal of that money will be spent.

Food stamps are even more effective for this program, that money definitely will be spent.

Quote:

I think this all goes back to houses and jobs. If I weren't upside down on my home I would feel more comfortable. If I weren't fearful of losing my job tomorrow I would feel more comfortable.

What in Obama's plan will increase the value of my home or help ensure that I will keep my job?

Almost nothing Obama could do will increase the value of your home, I'm sorry to say. The housing market doesn't work that way. But it is cyclical, and as long as you don't lose it, you should see the paper value rise within a few years.

What might help is increased protection for those who are on the edge of losing their homes; and setting up the 'bad bank' and the US buying up some of these toxic assets, so the banks will actually start lending again. As a taxpayer who doesn't own a home, I don't want either of those to happen really but I can see why you would.

As for your job, once again there's a limited number of options that any prez can do. The market can be shored up with Infrastructure and construction projects and the like, but there's a limit to how much of that is effective, and you don't sound much like ya work construction anyway.

I guess I'd have to know more about what you do before I could say what Obama could do to help.

The Republicans would argue that giving business tax cuts grows jobs, but I think that's plainly bullshit and just another way to put higher profits in the pockets of the rich. Just examine recent behavior of companies which have been given monies from the government; have they, as a whole, spent that money frugally and wisely, with an eye towards growing their job force?

Nope. The opposite in fact.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@maporsche,

Cyclopitchorn wrote:

Almost nothing Obama could do will increase the value of your home, I'm sorry to say. The housing market doesn't work that way. But it is cyclical, and as long as you don't lose it, you should see the paper value rise within a few years.

What Cyclopitchorn won't tell you is that the Democrats under Slick Willie pressed hard to remove all the so-called "redlining" they railed against. They encourage every moth-eaten insolvent illiterate to buy a home. They encouraged no money down schemes. They encouraged agents NOT to check financial backgrounds. That is why the ROOT of the problem with our present downturn occurred. The Democrats,always populists, encouraged the vast mass of illiterates to buy homes with no money down and threatened agents who would not cooperate.

0 Replies

@Foxfyre,

You may be aware, Foxfyre, that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, passed in 1930 was a large contributor to the Depression of the thirties.

GM's European Director was prescient. He sent the following telegram--

"PASSAGE BILL WOULD SPELL ECONOMIC ISOLATION AND MOST SEVERE DEPRESSION EVER EXPERIENCED.
***********************************************************

But the left wing will mistakenly continue to press this issue.

1 Reply

@Foxfyre,

Foxfyre wrote:

Well President Obama just ran up against one of those realities that torpedo high minded rhetoric as well as juicy bones thrown to the unions. I suspect before it is over, we will see more back pedaling as more good intentions threaten to produce unintended negative consequences:

Quote:
The European Union warned the US yesterday against plunging the world into depression by adopting a planned “Buy American” policy, intensifying fears of a trade war.

The EU threatened to retaliate if the US Congress went ahead

The EU is all wet on this one, as John Judis points out today:

Quote:

Officials from Canada and European Union have complained loudly that a provision in the House stimulus bill that requires American steel and iron for infrastructure projects violates the World Trade Organization rules. But guess what? They don't. The treaty allowed countries to make exceptions for government procurement for specific industries. The U.S. stipulated iron and steel. The EU--not to be outdone--stipulated drinking water, transportation, telecommunications, and energy. Canada stipulated steel, motor vehicles, and coal. So these complaints--and the similar outcry among corporate lobbyists in Washington--is base hypocrisy. And it's too bad that President Barack Obama is listening to them. Todd Tucker of Public Citizen gives the details in "Eyes on Trade." Read it.

0 Replies

@genoves,

genoves wrote:

You may be aware, Foxfyre, that the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, passed in 1930 was a large contributor to the Depression of the thirties.

The proposed Buy-American stipulation now is a far cry from the Smoot-Hawley Tariff, as Judis, again, pointed out already last month. It doesn't have anywhere near the same reach, and the economic context now is very different:

Quote:

But isn't this Smoot-Hawley all over again? Not exactly. Smoot-Hawley put a tariff on broad classes of imports. This only affects government procurement. The U.S. also passed Smoot-Hawley at a time that it was running trade surpluses. It was truly a beggar-they-neighbor measure. This provision, if successful, might help the U.S. revive and even reduce its yawning trade deficit--which would have a favorable effect on the world economy that depends on a healthy American economy.

The question at hand is really pretty simple, as he explains:

Quote:

Suppose the government spends, say, $100 billion on bridges and buildings, and that $500 million of that is used to buy steel. If it is used to buy imported steel, and if that $500 million doesn't come back to the United States in the form of demand for its exports, then you can subtract $500 million from the stimulus. And you can be pretty sure--given our current trade deficit--that something like that would happen. So, without a requirement that these government projects use domestic steel (with mills currently running at 43 percent capacity!), there is a very great possibility that the government would be throwing away money rather than doing anything about the problem.

So there's your question. If the US government is going to pump in a massive amount of hundreds of billions of $$, in order to stimulate the domestic economy, do you want hundreds of billions of that to be directly spent on steel imports from China that won't have any stimulus effect in the US? Are the Republicans really planning on pressing that point? I bet their constituents will just love them for that...

1 Reply

@nimh,

Nimh, they aren't pressing it. I don't know where you picked that up.

Obama QUICKLY caved in though.

2 Replies

Even looking past the Marxist tinged socialism that Obama has proposed, so far there is no reason to believe his heart isn't in the right place. But each time he has to admit that he was wrong, he erodes confidence that he knows what he is doing. And each time he 'caves' on some issue, the more the impression will build that he is not leading and is being used as a pawn by an out-of-touch, out-of-control and morally bankrupt Congress.

The public is not happy. It is my impression that the majority of Americans do not believe this massive 'stimulus' bill is a stimulus bill at all. It is a huge spending bill of pet projects of members of Congress, a way for them to pay back political debts and to curry favor with pet constituencies. I'm seeing reports that e-mail boxes are clogged in Washington, the phone is ringing off the hook, and Western Union is seeing a booming business. And the message they are getting is not one of approval.

But they don't seem to care.

Even as they feign outrage over lending institutions who received bailout money using it for bonuses and trips and parties, Congress is hypocritically headed out to a enormously expensive Congressional retreat in a fancy resort to 'plan' etc.

Like this is evidence that any of them are 'in touch'?

In the face of a trillion dollar deficit in 2009, if we want new legislation to address putting people back to work in real, permanent jobs at this time and address nothing else, I suggest we all add to the emails, telegrams, and phone calls and stop this ridiculous train before it is unstoppable.

1 Reply

Despite a bipartisan effort...

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know