The question, in my opinion, is more properly:
Have the citizens had their power over government reduced under Mr. Obama ?
Liberals Betrayed: What has Obama Done for the Liberal Who Elected Him?
- Thread starter schizo
- Start date
The question, in my opinion, is more properly:
Have the citizens had their power over government reduced under Mr. Obama ?
Actually Obama and his "Thug-Ocracy and Czars" has done more for
the conservative party and values than any event in modern times.
I just hope the pendulum swings towards smaller government and moral uprightness versus
nationalism or fascism (under the guise of conservatism.)
I am hoping that this bad taste of socialism and fascism under this narcissistic regime
should inoculate against Hegelian reactionism or synthesis.
Hoping
the conservative party and values than any event in modern times.
I just hope the pendulum swings towards smaller government and moral uprightness versus
nationalism or fascism (under the guise of conservatism.)
I am hoping that this bad taste of socialism and fascism under this narcissistic regime
should inoculate against Hegelian reactionism or synthesis.
Hoping
Quote from schizo:
The seething angst among the liberals is about to explode, myself included. This dude is all talk and no action. Everything bears the same loathing stamp of bygone Bush era than a real change we can believe in. Even the lukewarm democratic constituents within his own "centrist" beltway is crumbling. What the hell has Obama done for the liberals who went all out to have him elected?
I'm afraid this will not turn out very pretty.
Divided party? Itâs not just GOP, but also Dems:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35852110/ns/politics/
...and the answer is no.
Now, which corporations have had their power and influence reduced under our President.
Now, which corporations have had their power and influence reduced under our President.
A liberal and progressive would not have increased troops in Afghanistan, would not have bailed out corporations, etc.
which is why socialists fail.
When their utopian rhetoric comes up against a battlefield , if they are reflective, they realize they were idiots.
The same goes for the large majority of socialists economic beliefs.
But with respect to health care... Obama could have made reform which suited his socialist goals.
The country may have accepted it - had he put together a useful program. Instead he hands us this abortion of a bill.
Corporate cronyism. They got em elected this is how he pays them back.
When their utopian rhetoric comes up against a battlefield , if they are reflective, they realize they were idiots.
The same goes for the large majority of socialists economic beliefs.
But with respect to health care... Obama could have made reform which suited his socialist goals.
The country may have accepted it - had he put together a useful program. Instead he hands us this abortion of a bill.
Corporate cronyism. They got em elected this is how he pays them back.
I don't know where you have come to the conclusion the 'socialists fail' !?!?!
First of all, ALL 1st world industrialized countries are 'socialist'. Including the USA.
Note the position of the USA in the Human Development Index, a measure of standard of living, and the 'socialists' countries that are ranked above us.
Imagine the standard of living we would enjoy if the gov't, and that means the PEOPLE in our country, were to extract maximum profit from resources OWNED the gov't !!! Instead, we sell off rights to the corporations welding the most power.
Gov't backed mortgages: why do we need the middleman bankers ??
Gov't backed Student Loans: why do we the middleman bankers ??
Oil, Gas, Timber: why don't we simply contract Exxon, Weyerhauser, etc. to extract the products and WE, ther people, get the profits ?? (There's your 'tax cut' btw.)
You REALLY need to get some perspective on history and reality before spouting off about 'socialism'.
A new index was released on December 18, 2008. This so-called "statistical update" covers the period up to 2006 and was published without an accompanying report on human development. The update is relevant due to newly released estimates of purchasing power parities (PPP), implying substantial adjustments for many countries, resulting in changes in HDI values and, in many cases, HDI ranks.[6]
1. Iceland 0.968 (▬
2. Norway 0.968 (▬
3. Canada 0.967 (£ 1)
4. Australia 0.965 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
5. Ireland 0.960 (▬
6. Netherlands 0.958 (£ 3)
7. Sweden 0.958 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
8. Japan 0.956 (▬
9. Luxembourg 0.956 (£ 9)
10. Switzerland 0.955 (ÂÂ¥ 3)
11. France 0.955 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
12. Finland 0.954 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
13. Denmark 0.952 (£ 1)
14. Austria 0.951 (£ 1)
15. United States 0.950 (ÂÂ¥ 3)
16. Spain 0.949 (ÂÂ¥ 3)
17. Belgium 0.948 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
18. Greece 0.947 (£ 6)
19. Italy 0.945 (£ 1)
20. New Zealand 0.944 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
21. United Kingdom 0.942 (ÂÂ¥ 4)
22. Hong Kong 0.942 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
23. Germany 0.940 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
24. Israel 0.930 (ÂÂ¥ 1)
25. South Korea 0.928 (£ 1)
26. Slovenia 0.923 (£ 1)
27. Brunei 0.919 (£ 3)
28. Singapore 0.918 (ÂÂ¥ 3)
29. Kuwait 0.912 (£ 4)
30. Cyprus 0.912 (ÂÂ¥ 2)
31. United Arab Emirates 0.903 (£ 8)
32. Bahrain 0.902 (£ 9)
33. Portugal 0.900 (ÂÂ¥ 4)
Actually he's TRYING to get passed a "huge expansion of government, power grab" bill... cloaked in the guise of "health care"... THIS is the bill he REALLY wants. If it can't pass, THEN he will get to work on "health care reform".
I do agree with have far to much socialism in the U.S.
had there been no government interference and no government backing - people would have charged 4 -8 extra points for hard money loans on the last 20% of the home value. .... as they had been doing before the government started back stopping investors with fannie, freedie and a host of other socialist programs.
Stupid loans were rarely made by non government backed lenders.
Prices would not have exploded... we would have been far better off.
Regarding arbitrary surveys ---- those rankings usually over weight factors which promote silly results.
Do a regression analysis on the weightings you will see.
A year or tow ago some Sweedish professor broke this info down and showed that the people who supposed live at the poverty line in the U.S. have a stadard of living at the 60th percent tile in Sweeden.
For instance you might find that there will be higher weightings given to countries who have a low rate of infant mortality.
But there is no question we have multimillion dollar machines, better drugs, better doctors etc.
But it is because those doctors can keep premature babies alive we wind up with a worse score.
Babies in those other countries never get to the infant mortality tables because they are not kept alive after birth.
had there been no government interference and no government backing - people would have charged 4 -8 extra points for hard money loans on the last 20% of the home value. .... as they had been doing before the government started back stopping investors with fannie, freedie and a host of other socialist programs.
Stupid loans were rarely made by non government backed lenders.
Prices would not have exploded... we would have been far better off.
Regarding arbitrary surveys ---- those rankings usually over weight factors which promote silly results.
Do a regression analysis on the weightings you will see.
A year or tow ago some Sweedish professor broke this info down and showed that the people who supposed live at the poverty line in the U.S. have a stadard of living at the 60th percent tile in Sweeden.
For instance you might find that there will be higher weightings given to countries who have a low rate of infant mortality.
But there is no question we have multimillion dollar machines, better drugs, better doctors etc.
But it is because those doctors can keep premature babies alive we wind up with a worse score.
Babies in those other countries never get to the infant mortality tables because they are not kept alive after birth.