RkFast Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 So when will Obama unleash his thugs on Fineman and Newsweek? http://www.newsweek.com/id/188565?GT1=43002 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 So when will Obama unleash his thugs on Fineman and Newsweek? http://www.newsweek.com/id/188565?GT1=43002 Did you bother to read this? Other than all that, in the eyes of the big shots, he is doing fine. The American people remain on his side, but he has to be careful that the gathering judgment of the Bigs doesn't trickle down to the rest of us. Fineman asserts that those on the extremes aren't satisfied. Yeah, no sh-t. Anybody that's been paying attention has expected nothing BUT centrist governing from Obama. How come you didn't start a thread about today's stock market activity? Is Pinko Obama only responsible when it tanks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Did you bother to read this? Fineman asserts that those on the extremes aren't satisfied. Yeah, no sh-t. Anybody that's been paying attention has expected nothing BUT centrist governing from Obama. How come you didn't start a thread about today's stock market activity? Is Pinko Obama only responsible when it tanks? Looks like you read it. But did you understand it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Big Cat Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Looks like you read it. But did you understand it? You know, there's a popular belief here that I'm one of the 20 something Obama apologists/disciples/lemmings/worshippers/et al--that I'll fall all over myself to avoid criticizing the guy--but I've said since the day he was inaugurated that this is no time for centrist policies, that drastic times call for drastic measures. I've also been critical of his reluctance to steer Congress rather than vice a versa. So yes, I understood it fully given its lack of originality, and given the fact that--contrary to popular belief--I'm able to filter information sans blinders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 Did you bother to read this? Fineman asserts that those on the extremes aren't satisfied. Yeah, no sh-t. Anybody that's been paying attention has expected nothing BUT centrist governing from Obama. How come you didn't start a thread about today's stock market activity? Is Pinko Obama only responsible when it tanks? No. We'll absolutely give him and Citigroup credit for one of the few days (since he was elected) that the stock market actually went up. That was a change I can actually believe in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 No. We'll absolutely give him and Citigroup credit for one of the few days (since he was elected) that the stock market actually went up. That was a change I can actually believe in. What the hell did he do? And BTW we're set up for a big crash tomorrow. Citigroup: We had a profit the first two months of 2009. First since 2007 Investors: REJOICE! BUY, BUY, BUY! Citigroup (Wednesday's announcement): Well the profit was only tree-fitty. Investors: BOOOOO! SELL, SELL, SELL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 10, 2009 Share Posted March 10, 2009 What the hell did he do? And BTW we're set up for a big crash tomorrow. Citigroup: We had a profit the first two months of 2009. First since 2007 Investors: REJOICE! BUY, BUY, BUY! Citigroup (Wednesday's announcement): Well the profit was only tree-fitty. Investors: BOOOOO! SELL, SELL, SELL! He, uhhhh, he, uhhh...he said he'd support firing teachers who don't perform. That made the market happy. No, wait. That wasn't it. I'll have to get back to you on this. Let's wait for his next campaign speech, sometime tomorrow morning, and then I'll let you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 So when will Obama unleash his thugs on Fineman and Newsweek? http://www.newsweek.com/id/188565?GT1=43002 Your Obama Derangement Syndrome has hit the level of blzrul's Bush Derangement Syndrome. But whereas it took her years to become that nuts, you've gone completely out of your gourd in some seven weeks. And without PMS as an excuse, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Your Obama Derangement Syndrome has hit the level of blzrul's Bush Derangement Syndrome. But whereas it took her years to become that nuts, you've gone completely out of your gourd in some seven weeks. And without PMS as an excuse, too. You're being far too kind. Are you okay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 You're being far too kind. Are you okay? Upped my meds. I'm feeling pretty good recently. But if my kinder, gentler mood makes you uncomfortable, I can call you a moron. If you prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Your Obama Derangement Syndrome has hit the level of blzrul's Bush Derangement Syndrome. But whereas it took her years to become that nuts, you've gone completely out of your gourd in some seven weeks. And without PMS as an excuse, too. C'mon, he thinks he's rush limbaugh now. He's just happy people are responding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Things that happened today: 1. Significant resistance from both parties to issues being forced to through that not only have nothing to do with economic stimulus, but are just bad ideas = getting rid of union secret ballots, etc. 2. Significant resistance to earmarks and other stupid crap that, once again is not economic stimulus, but rather, stupid crap, on it's own merits or bunched with other stupid crap. 3. The stock market saw this and rallied. 4. Citigroup made money. Yeah, but the rally started in earnest BEFORE that announcement. What else can you say but: Another bad day for Obama? So far, every time he opens his mouth, the market goes down. Every time people resist his policies the market goes up. His agenda simply cannot survive the retaliation, not when there are clear, causal, and drastic swings that are created on the stock market, in direct proportion to its failure/abandonment. I mean what else can you isolate that wasn't their yesterday. The only new things are this resistance(can't say rejection yet) of Obama and Citigroup, and this was well underway before Citigroup. Obama needs to get rid of his old game plan quick. Time to face facts: blaming the guy before doesn't last very long when you have promised to be the "messiah". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Things that happened today:1. Significant resistance from both parties to issues being forced to through that not only have nothing to do with economic stimulus, but are just bad ideas = getting rid of union secret ballots, etc. 2. Significant resistance to earmarks and other stupid crap that, once again is not economic stimulus, but rather, stupid crap, on it's own merits or bunched with other stupid crap. 3. The stock market saw this and rallied. 4. Citigroup made money. Yeah, but the rally started in earnest BEFORE that announcement. Citi's news broke at seven this morning, two and a half hours BEFORE the market even opened. Your contention is basically that the market rallied in response to news that hadn't even occurred yet, then some time in to the rally every one said "Oh, look, Citi says they're earning money." That seems just a little retarded, even for you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Citi's news broke at seven this morning, two and a half hours BEFORE the market even opened. Your contention is basically that the market rallied in response to news that hadn't even occurred yet, then some time in to the rally every one said "Oh, look, Citi says they're earning money." That seems just a little retarded, even for you. Based on yesterday's rally, we should finish off March up more than 5000 more points. (This is a softball.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted March 11, 2009 Author Share Posted March 11, 2009 Your Obama Derangement Syndrome has hit the level of blzrul's Bush Derangement Syndrome. But whereas it took her years to become that nuts, you've gone completely out of your gourd in some seven weeks. And without PMS as an excuse, too. Ive only just begun, my friend...only just begun. Its not that its "OBS" as much as its "Lets show liberals how full of schitt they are now that they are excusing behavior they would go batschitt about if a Republican was doing it." And as a bonus, Im pissing them all off to high hell. When they think youre a "racist" , you know youve hit the "gold standard" of a libtard's ire. But then again, anybody with a buck in their pocket and an ounce of personal accountability does that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Ive only just begun, my friend...only just begun. Its not that its "OBS" as much as its "Lets show liberals how full of schitt they are now that they are excusing behavior they would go batschitt about if a Republican was doing it." And as a bonus, Im pissing them all off to high hell. When they think youre a "racist" , you know youve hit the "gold standard" of a libtard's ire. But then again, anybody with a buck in their pocket and an ounce of personal accountability does that. While I tend to agree with Tom, the irony here is that folks like yourself (and even folks like myself) have something of a bizarre symmetry with Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Franks/et.al. For the past eight years we've had to completely put up with the other side's shiiit, so now that the tables are turned, we can barely contain ourselves as we thoughtlessly, recklessly and randomly push through one embarrassing, critical, moronic concept after another in hopes of getting under the skin of the other side. Of course, the difference is that ours are just political topics on a football message board and the Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Franks/et.al group are actually getting ready to take what should be a quick recession and turn it into a decade-long test of suffering in hopes of nationalizing everything, killing the spirit of both the consitution and capitalism, and sending us into an economic tailspin that will have people BEGGING for Jimmy Carter days. So there is that. But otherwise, I think there's definitely some symmetry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 While I tend to agree with Tom, the irony here is that folks like yourself (and even folks like myself) have something of a bizarre symmetry with Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Franks/et.al. For the past eight years we've had to completely put up with the other side's shiiit, so now that the tables are turned, we can barely contain ourselves as we thoughtlessly, recklessly and randomly push through one embarrassing, critical, moronic concept after another in hopes of getting under the skin of the other side. Of course, the difference is that ours are just political topics on a football message board and the Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Franks/et.al group are actually getting ready to take what should be a quick recession and turn it into a decade-long test of suffering in hopes of nationalizing everything, killing the spirit of both the consitution and capitalism, and sending us into an economic tailspin that will have people BEGGING for Jimmy Carter days. So there is that. But otherwise, I think there's definitely some symmetry. Exactly, because starting wars by choice and losing 4000 American lives and torture are trivial compared to the seriousness of earmarks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Exactly, because starting wars by choice and losing 4000 American lives and torture are trivial compared to the seriousness of earmarks. I wish people would stop bringing that up. That casualty rate makes this one of the most benign wars in history, even by imperialistic standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 Exactly, because starting wars by choice and losing 4000 American lives and torture are trivial compared to the seriousness of earmarks. The Iraq war was a war started as a choice by both sides. Hillary Clinton herself said we must go to war with Iraq. I'm not sure why the left consistently feels like the GOP is single-handedly responsible for approving the war with Iraq. I respect the fact that the war took place on Bush's watch, but to keep implying that it was done ONLY by Bush and that no one on the left supported it is the kind of thing I expect more from someone like Blzrul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted March 11, 2009 Share Posted March 11, 2009 I wish people would stop bringing that up. That casualty rate makes this one of the most benign wars in history, even by imperialistic standards. I wish they would bring it up more. The entire (false) idea was to stop another 9/11, which killed 3000 people. I'm sorry, but 4000 killed, 10,000 hurt and hundreds of thousands affected in serious ways psychologically, hundreds of billions of dollars, and the trashing of American ideals all over the world for no friggin' reason is a big friggin' deal in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts