Comments for OBAMA = CARTER-SQUARED »
Posted By pc25 8 months ago in Political NewsEVIDENCE MOUNTING: OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS NOT MERELY RUN BY LEFTIST THUGS; IT'S INCOMPETENT
Read Full Story at astuteblogger.blogspot.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 63
-
58%
pc258 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
100 DAYS OF CHANGE YOU CAN BEREAVE IN
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fir2JM5HByM&eur...-
56%
hyperbola8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You know PC, you are being suckered by the "political theater" designed to keep you dumb, docile and easy to fleece. The fact is that there is rather little difference between the Bush/Cheney and Obama administrations. After all, our corrupt oligarchs and corrupt corporations that run the country haven't changed. They have just given us a new "brand" to get "excited" about. I didn't think you were so gullible.
Reply
Buying Brand Obama
Barack Obama is a brand. And the Obama brand is designed to make us feel good about our government while corporate overlords loot the Treasury, our elected officials continue to have their palms greased by armies of corporate lobbyists, our corporate media diverts us with gossip and trivia and our imperial wars expand in the Middle East. Brand Obama is about being happy consumers. We are entertained. We feel hopeful. We like our president. We believe he is like us. But like all branded products spun out from the manipulative world of corporate advertising, we are being duped into doing and supporting a lot of things that are not in our interest.
What, for all our faith and hope, has the Obama brand given us? His administration has spent, lent or guaranteed $12.8 trillion in taxpayer dollars to Wall Street and insolvent banks in a doomed effort to reinflate the bubble economy, a tactic that at best forestalls catastrophe and will leave us broke in a time of profound crisis. Brand Obama has allocated nearly $1 trillion in defense-related spending and the continuation of our doomed imperial projects in Iraq, where military planners now estimate that 70,000 troops will remain for the next 15 to 20 years. Brand Obama has expanded the war in Afghanistan, including the use of drones sent on cross-border bombing runs into Pakistan that have doubled the number of civilians killed over the past three months. Brand Obama has refused to ease restrictions so workers can organize and will not consider single-payer, not-for-profit health care for all Americans. And Brand Obama will not prosecute the Bush administration for war crimes, including the use of torture, and has refused to dismantle Bush’s secrecy laws or restore habeas corpus.
Brand Obama offers us an image that appears radically individualistic and new. It inoculates us from seeing that the old engines of corporate power and the vast military-industrial complex continue to plunder the country. Corporations, which control our politics, no longer produce products that are essentially different, but brands that are different. Brand Obama does not threaten the core of the corporate state any more than did Brand George W. Bush. The Bush brand collapsed. We became immune to its studied folksiness. We saw through its artifice. This is a common deflation in the world of advertising. So we have been given a new Obama brand with an exciting and faintly erotic appeal....-
67%
hyperbola8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
.... The junk politics practiced by Obama is a consumer fraud. It is about performance. It is about lies. It is about keeping us in a perpetual state of childishness. But the longer we live in illusion, the worse reality will be when it finally shatters our fantasies. Those who do not understand what is happening around them and who are overwhelmed by a brutal reality they did not expect or foresee search desperately for saviors. They beg demagogues to come to their rescue. This is the ultimate danger of the Obama Brand. It effectively masks the wanton internal destruction and theft being carried out by our corporate state. These corporations, once they have stolen trillions in taxpayer wealth, will leave tens of millions of Americans bereft, bewildered and yearning for even more potent and deadly illusions, ones that could swiftly snuff out what is left of our diminished open society.
Reply
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/05/buying-b...
-
-
-
53%
pc258 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
A ChangeWatch 100 Day Edition: Change You Can Bereave In - UPDATED
Reply
http://www.thecloakroomblog.com/2009/04/a-changewa...
time line of his first 100 days............-
50%
hyperbola8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well PC, you really don't understand much about how the "system" in America works. Why do you fritter your time, energy and thought processes away in "proselytizing" for one side of the political theater designed to keep you from asking real questions?
Reply
You didn't imagine that Obama would change the torture / military / imperialism practices of both our political parties did you?
Torture? Rudman to the Rescue
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/06/torture-...
The announcement in mid-March that CIA Director Leon Panetta had picked former Sen. Warren Rudman to act as CIA “liaison” with the Senate Intelligence Committee during its “review” of interrogation and detention practices has drawn virtually no criticism from the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM).
Yet, it is a dead give-away as to how congressional leaders plan to go through the motions for a year or so, and then let everyone off the hook.
Why let everyone off the hook? Because congressional leaders, Republican and Democratic alike, were informed of the Bush/Cheney administration plans for torture — perhaps not chapter and verse, but enough to be complicit in their silence. Both parties have amply soiled the dirty linen that could be hung out.....
...Senate team managers Reid and Rockefeller have gone to their bench for an ace utility infielder — quintessential practitioner of “thorough” investigations, Warren Rudman. They are eager to bring Rudman on as liaison with the Senate Intelligence Committee led by Dianne Feinstein with Rockefeller sitting at her right hand, so to speak.
The FCM, whether from indolence or timidity, have completely missed the boat on Rudman, calling him a “respected” veteran of investigations of national security issues. Does no one do due diligence — or simple homework — anymore?...
...In the 1980s, Rudman earned his spurs by working hand in glove with then-Rep. Dick Cheney to limit the scope of the Iran-Contra investigation. Rudman was essentially the good cop to Cheney’s bad.
Rudman was one of three “moderate” Republican senators who collaborated with “moderate” Democratic co-chairman Lee Hamilton in soft-peddling the roles of President Ronald Reagan and Vice President George H.W. Bush in authorizing and overseeing the Iran-Contra law violations....-
hyperbolaComment removed: Spam
-
-
-
56%
pc258 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Obama to Break Campaign Promise, Sign Earmark-Laden Spending Bill
Reply
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/03/02/obama-to-b...-
50%
hyperbola8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You don't think that Obama would challenge the vast corruption associated with the Pentagon did you? Are you angry because it is not "your side" that is now directing the corruption?
Reply
Obama's Defense Budget - $1 Trillion Of Pork and Baloney
This week, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is set to roll out the final details of the defense budget for 2010. Beware the articles and commentary you read; many will be factually inaccurate or misleading - mostly both.
This will be the third round of revelations about the 2010 Pentagon budget. On Feb. 26, we got the bare bones - just the total amount. On April 6, we got Gates' decisions on 50 weapons programs. This week, we get all the rest - how much he seeks for every single other program and policy in the Pentagon.
The press will have a field day. The budget amounts will be spelled out with great precision in the national papers. Politicians will agonize over how much they think Gates has cut their own local just desserts or gush over the largesse for their home state. Think-tank pooh-bahs will bless us with their deep thoughts over how these details effectuate Gates' "sweeping reforms" of the Pentagon - first announced on April 6.
I will try to restrain my irritation as I read this baloney.
For decades, the media have taken their descriptions of the size of the defense budget straight from the Pentagon's annual press release - without even rudimentary double-checking. This year, they will cite the top-line dollar amount at $534 billion - the amount they reported on Feb. 26. ...
Wrong. That number ignores an additional $6 billion the Pentagon will get in "mandatory" appropriations, mostly for personnel-related expenses. ..
Some, but not all, of the news articles will also ignore the additional $130 billion sought to finance the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Barring last-minute changes to the numbers by Gates and OMB, the correct amount for the president's request for the Pentagon in 2010 will be $670 billion.
The articles will also leave out the money being sought by the Department of Energy for nuclear weapons and other appropriations, such as for the Selective Service and the National Defense Stockpile. Again, not in the DOD press release. Add another $22 billion.
Consider the human costs of current and previous wars in the Department of Veterans Affairs - surely, a legitimate defense cost. Add $106 billion....-
60%
hyperbola8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Also consider the Department of Homeland Security: Add $43 billion.
Reply
What about the military and economic aid to Iraq and Afghanistan, gifts and loans to Israel and others, U.N. peacekeeping costs, and all the rest from the State Department? Add $49 billion.
Also, there is an account buried in the Department of the Treasury to help pay for military retirement. Add about $28 billion.
Each year, we pay interest on the national debt. People disagree, sometimes strenuously, on how much is DOD's share. About 20 percent of federal spending goes to the Pentagon: That's another $57 billion.
Add it all together, and you get $974 billion - almost $1 trillion.
If you want to know how much we spend for defense in a generic sense, you can about double the $534 billion many articles will report.
... Finally, what about all those "sweeping changes" the think-tank pooh-bahs will declare they see in the Pentagon budget - well, actually, in its press release?
Didn't happen.
...When you read the news articles later this week on the defense budget, consider it all an opportunity to assess the competence of journalism in the U.S. these days.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/06/obama39s...
-
-
-
62%
pc258 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2009/05/verdict-...
Reply -
64%
pc258 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
White House Accuser Is A Big Time Democratic Donor
Reply
http://www.businessinsider.com/white-house-accuser...-
67%
nostalgia8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Tom Lauria is the MOST respected bankruptcy attorney in the US
Reply
He is the Global Practice Head of the Financial Restructuring and Insolvency Group at White & Case
I've caught several of his interviews and he is stunned by the behavior he is seeing from Obama's car czar to Obama himself
Did you see what was reported from the Chrysler bankruptcy hearings??
Chrysler won't repay bailout money
An administration official confirms that a $4 billion bridge loan and $3.2 billion in bankruptcy financing won't be paid back by Chrysler following bankruptcy.
Chrysler LLC will not repay U.S. taxpayers more than $7 billion in bailout money it received earlier this year and as part of its bankruptcy filing.
This revelation was buried within Chrysler's bankruptcy filings last week and confirmed by the Obama administration Tuesday. The filings included a list of business assumptions from one of the company's key financial advisors in the bankruptcy case.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/05/news/companies/chr...
$7 billion down the rat hole
This is a pay off to the union who will own 55% of the new company-
-
-
-
100%
wtagg8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Didn't stop you from bringing it up and attempting to use those alleged funds when the accusation that my calculations were off, did it? Spinning and manipulating. Try using a little more of what is and not so much of what might be. When that *up to 8 billion* is signed for and spent, then we can talk about how wrong it is and who is to blame, because they will be valid subjects with definable data. That is completely different than attempting to trump up the figures I used. You know they are valid and did not warrant any manipulation from you.
Reply
If you want to say you don't want them to spend the *up to 8 billion*, that is perfectly justified and I would agree. Why should the US citizenry pay for a bankruptcy?
So, let's get back to the 55% going to the unions. Where did the majority of the money currently allocated and signed for come from, Obama or Bush?
-
-
-
-
33%
hyperbola8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Laurie donated $10,000 to democrats? And you call that "big time"? Either you are incredibly desperate for "smoke" to fool the gullible or you are incredibly gullible yourself. This is chicken feed to the corrupt oligarchs that run both our political parties. Is it that you want your "group" in power so you can share in the corruption spoils?
Reply
Top Senate Democrat: Bankers 'Own' the US Congress
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/04/top-sena...
Sen. Dick Durbin, on a local Chicago radio station this week, blurted out an obvious truth about Congress that, despite being blindingly obvious, is rarely spoken: "And the banks -- hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created -- are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place." The blunt acknowledgment that the same banks that caused the financial crisis "own" the U.S. Congress -- according to one of that institution's most powerful members -- demonstrates just how extreme this institutional corruption is.
The ownership of the federal government by banks and other large corporations is effectuated in literally countless ways, none more effective than the endless and increasingly sleazy overlap between government and corporate officials. Here is just one random item this week announcing a couple of standard personnel moves:
Former Barney Frank staffer now top Goldman Sachs lobbyist ....
...So: Paese went from Chairman Frank's office to be the top lobbyist at Goldman, and shortly before that, Goldman dispatched Paese's predecessor, close Tom Daschle associate Mark Patterson, to be Chief of Staff to Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, himself a protege of former Goldman CEO Robert Rubin and a virtually wholly owned subsidiary of the banking industry. That's all part of what Desmond Lachman -- American Enterprise Institute fellow, former chief emerging market strategist at Salomon Smith Barney and top IMF official (no socialist he) -- recently described as "Goldman Sachs's seeming lock on high-level U.S. Treasury jobs."-
50%
hyperbola8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Meanwhile, the above-linked Huffington Post article which reported on Durbin's comments also notes Sen. Evan Bayh's previously-reported central role on behalf of the bankers in blocking legislation, hated by the banking industry, to allow bankruptcy judges to alter the terms of mortgages so that families can stay in their homes. Bayh is up for re-election in 2010, and here -- according to the indispensable Open Secrets site -- is Bayh's top donor:.....
Reply
.... Goldman shares, which have surged more than 70% during the past month, continued rising late Monday, gaining about 4.7% for the day. Nobody even tries to hide this any longer. The only way they could make it more blatant is if they hung a huge Goldman Sachs logo on the Capitol dome and then branded it onto the foreheads of leading members of Congress and executive branch officials...
...One might think it would be a big news story for the second most-powerful member of the U.S. Senate to baldly state that the Congress is "owned" by the bankers who spawned the financial crisis and continue to dictate the government's actions. But it won't be. The leading members of the media work for the very corporations that benefit most from this process. Establishment journalists are integral and well-rewarded members of the same system and thus cannot and will not see it as inherently corrupt (instead, as Newsweek's Evan Thomas said, their role, as "members of the ruling class," is to "prop up the existing order," "protect traditional institutions" and "safeguard the status quo").
That Congress is fully owned and controlled by a tiny sliver of narrow, oligarchical, deeply corrupted interests is simultaneously so obvious yet so demonized (only Unserious Shrill Fringe radicals, such as the IMF's former chief economist, use that sort of language) that even Durbin's explicit admission will be largely ignored. Even that extreme of a confession (Durbin elaborated on it with Ed Schultz last night) hardly causes a ripple.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2009/05/04/top-sena...
-
-
-
58%
Wolfie20078 months ago
-
65%
nostalgia8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Words mean nothing to Obama - he said what he needed to to get elected
Reply
His cult followers believed every word and never actually checked his record or real background
There is a very interesting psychological profile of Obama here:
THE MASK OF BARACK OBAMA A PSYCHOLOGICAL PROFILE
A review of Obama’s public speeches, campaign materials and especially his writings reflect that Obama’s personality has been remarkably consistent from childhood through adulthood.
In his book “Dreams From my Father,” Obama lays out the foundation for an examination of his character and personality. That seminal work reveals much, and almost all of what it reveals is truthful and applicable to his presidential prospects.
Obama’s life began with loss, hurt, confusion, alienation, frustration. Out of these he constructed a psychological "mask" that still endures.
Every individual wears a mask. It is a part of reality and a part of a healthy personality and psyche.
But Obama’s pain still controls his personality. Like Dr. Strangelove’s arm, that can’t help rising, Obama's sense of loss, exclusion, frustration and fantasy still overarch his personality. He authored a book “Dreams From My Father,” when in reality he got no dreams from his father. Obama created his father’s “dreams” in his own fantasy world. The fantasies associated with the “missing parent” are among the most powerful, the most enduring and occasionally the most devastating in human experience.
http://www.contrariancommentary.com/community/Home...-
63%
nostalgia8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The short version is on YouTube
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjvxtUGa_4w -
-
-
-
60%
skyking2p8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
wow a right wing hate fest. A wonder to behold. Obama must be doing something right. I love it. The economy is starting to come back and they know there party of Oxy cottonballs (thanks anti) will be out of power for many years to come.
Reply-
53%
dBergeron8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What a difference a few months make. Wow! How about the left-wing hate fests that were being laid upon the doorstep of the Bush Whitehouse, eh? Do you recall all of that BS that was flying around only a few short months ago? Or, do you have the same strain of amnesia from which Nancy Pelosi suffers? Your boy in the Whitehouse is doing nothing but putting this country in a dangerous postitions. It seems as if you lefties have been sold a bunk bill of goods. Why not report back to us all in another 3 years and let's see where we are? You guys are the liberal mindless masses. The mid-term elections will confirm my position as the Dems loose as few as 8 seats or as many as 14. That is the reality that your liberal agenda has created.
Reply-
-
67%
dBergeron8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hey meso, so are you saying that there was no hateful talk going around about Bush??? Hmmm. Perhaps you are exactly what I am talking about. And, just what about my post leads you to believe that I am bitter and little? And, just what makes you think that I am a sore loser, eh? It seems as if I may have hit upon a sore subject. You guys got what you thought you wanted. Now, it seems as if you are suffering from buyer's remorse! Some of us tried to tell you that he was not to be trusted. But, oh no!!! No one would listen. So, that now translates as me being a "bitter little con and a sore loser". Wow! You know, the entertainment value of this is going to get better and better as this thing continues. You guys hated Bush and made no bones about it. Well, what makes it wrong for me to have my feelings and opinions about Obama? I make no apologies for my beliefs. If you don't like it, then perhaps that makes you a bed-wetting liberal, Meso. So, what do you think about that, eh?
Reply-
50%
Pecossam8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
dBergeron,
Reply
No doubt mesodude and his ilk are so "sour" due to the fact their Obama votes aren't covered under the "LEMON LAWS".
But, mesodude and company, relax. There's always the IMPEACHMENT option. We Conservatives will even help you; surprise, surprise!
-
-
-
all2funComment removed: Hard Banned
-
100%
wtagg8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
So, how is that different than what the republicans experienced in the past 5 years?
Reply
The only thing you have managed to do is equate the two parties and demonstrate the American voter needs something better than what the republicans and democrats can offer.
I suspect that was not your intent.
-
-
-
-
-
libsRfunnyComment removed: Hard Banned
-
-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
73%
skyking2p8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
dBergeron
Reply
I may be mistaken but didn't your "boy" George W. Bush leave the whitehouse with astronomical 23% approval rating? So it would seem that it was not only the liberals that thought he was the worst president in the history of the USA but most independents and a lot of your republican friends. He lied about torture and you still support him ? Oh that's right he didn't lie about sex so it's ok.-
73%
BB648 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I think history will remember Bush more positively then communists like yourself. Many of those polls are poorly run. How you word the question or read the question can effect the out come of every poll. We're seeing that with Obama. You call Kenosha this week and you will find the former engine plant workers of Chrysler very unhappy with the UAW and the President. It was clear he had made the deal with the UAW so those jobs could shift to Mexico in a screw the employees, save the UAW inc. Janesville, is another union town very unhappy with Obama. Again, they made deals with GM and the UAW that do not benefit the workers but help preserve the UAW. A time is coming when union members will through off the union and DNC yoke and think for themselves.
Reply -
-
71%
dBergeron8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
skyking2p,
Reply
Now, just what makes you think that GWB is my "boy"? I am a Republican. I make no apologies for it. However, I am not one who was a Bush fan. In fact, there were a lot of things with which I disagreed during his presidency. So, I could, perhaps, be one of those who did not completely support his policies. But, the worst president in history? No. I am not one of those who thinks that he was the "worst president in the history of the USA". I am not certain that he lied about torture. That is up to each of us to believe what we choose. I, for one, believes that Obama is a liar. I don't believe a word that comes from his mouth. I don't think that he is truthful about anything that he does or says. So, what does that say about me? Obama lied to America about the stimulus. Obama lied about the auto bailouts and the ties to the UAW. Obama lied about Caterpillar and their layoffs. Obama lied about the financial bailouts and AIG's bonuses.
Lying about all of these things is not ok with me. He has purposefully deceived the public on these and countless other issues of which we may never know. So, skyking2p, what do you think about your "boy"? I am sure that you think that Obama did not lie, right?
-
-
29%
antibrainwasher8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hup two three four, who do cons bend over for?
Reply
Well, lets examine who PC is servicing today. Why, its none other than the astuteblogger, what a marvelous source of right wing whankerous handlube.
The first 5 posts were a PC circle jerk for one, wait, I guess that would technically be just masturbation. But, soon the dil-doheads joined in as usual, and started a 3 way. How sweet, to find in this lonely world somebody to share your wood/hate.
On the lonely stage, a spotlight into which steps PC, in a tearful voice:
"there's a somebody I'm longing to see,
I hope that he, turns out to be,
Oxylimpballs to watch over me......"
Hey folks, the cons are here, they're queer (for each other), get over it. -
67%
Justice4All8 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What a cheesy web site.
Reply
Do you think maybe all of Bush's lies and war mongering might have had something to do with it?
Bush had the highest approval rating of any president a year after he stole the election in 2000. Nearly everybody gave him a chance and now he is without a doubt the worst president ever.
Why can't you narrow ninded con's give Obamma a chance? At least he is trying to fix the mess Bush made. -
60%
djn3nunez38 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Hahahaha. More funny stuff.
Reply
Um GFR, not only is the Obama Administration much more competent that the previous one but they are clearly have a great deal more integrity.
What could be more thugish than the invasion and occupation of an oil rich Arab nation that did not attack us or pose a significant threat to their neighbors nor to the security of the worlds remaining superpower. -
-
-
-
-
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.