Subscribe by RSS
Seeming to be the day after President-elect Obama met with President Bush at the White House, the relationship between the two men has become a bit contention over leaks originating from Obama’s circle of advisers over what went down in the private meeting.
Video report from CBS News:
Report from Yahoo News:
WASHINGTON – President-elect Obama suggested to President Bush that the administration immediately provide extra help to struggling U.S. automakers, aides to the Democrat say, in their first face-to-face meeting since Election Day.
Obama’s aides said the president-elect brought up the issue with Bush during their two-hour White House talks on Monday, expressing his view that action is needed now, not just to help the U.S. companies but also the broader economy, because of their enormous reach. Obama raised the idea of an administration point person on autos with a portfolio aimed at improving the long-term health of the companies.
Bush repeated his position, recently stated by staff, that he is open to helping the automakers.
In addition, amid discussions in Washington over whether new economic stimulus spending is needed, Obama focused in his meeting with Bush on his desire for it while the president stressed that his main priority for any postelection action out of Congress is approval of a long-stalled free trade agreement with Colombia, said people familiar with the conversation between the two men. The sources declined to be named publicly because of the private nature of the talks.
The outlines of the conversation between the 43rd and soon-to-be 44th presidents shows just how starkly different are policy and philosophical approaches of the two men, one Democrat and one Republican. Obama has opposed the Colombia free trade agreement while Bush has remained skeptical of the need for additional stimulus.
Reflecting the delicate dance of a meeting between outgoing and incoming presidents — one still in charge and one about to be — neither man made the kind of direct requests of nor dealmaking commitments to the other that could violate unspoken protocols covering the transfer of power in American history. But each made sure the other knew what they want.
“In no way did the president suggest that there was a quid pro quo,” said White House press secretary Dana Perino. But, she added, “he did talk about the merits of free trade.”
Obama transition chief John Podesta also said “there was no quid pro quo in the conversation” between the two men and called news reports to that effect “not accurate.”
Perino said Bush described the meeting as “constructive, relaxed and friendly,” covering problems at home and abroad and his personal pledge for a smooth transition.
Some news reports are making it out to sound as if Obama is acting like he’s President already and demanding Bush to make policy changes. Who knows the truth since leaks from anonymous sources are questionable, at best.
For the record, Obama’s presidential transition team is denying any reports of tension between President Bush and President-elect Obama.
Meanwhile, President-elect Obama has continued appointing positions and naming names, the report from Yahoo News:
WASHINGTON – President-elect Obama has hired former Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Sam Nunn to help shepherd his Pentagon transition, a spokeswoman said Tuesday.
Nunn, a former Georgia senator and veteran Democratic defense adviser, was once rumored as a potential running mate for Obama. Transition spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter said Nunn will perform “an informal senior adviser role throughout the defense transition process.”
Nunn’s role has been described by others, speaking anonymously because the transition teams have not been announced, as the leader of Obama’s defense transition. Similarly, a senior administration official said former Secretary of State Warren Christopher would advise Obama on his State Department transition.
Obama’s national security transition offices will work with the outgoing Bush administration to hand off management of two wars and complex diplomacy with North Korea, Russia and other nations. Obama has not announced his choices to be defense secretary and secretary of state.
Nunn and Christopher would be part of a national security brain trust for Obama that is heavy on former Clinton administration officials, including possible national security adviser James Steinberg, a former State Department official.
At the Pentagon, the large transition office would likely include former Clinton Navy Secretary Richard Danzig and former Clinton-era Pentagon comptroller Bill Lynn, officials said. The announcements are expected later this week.
“There’s a lot of disinformation out there,” Cutter said. “We’re working hard to put the agenda review teams together and expect they’ll be announced and inside the agencies by the end of the week.”
Clinton Pentagon officials turned think tankers Michele Flournoy and Kurt Campbell are also mentioned as part of the Obama transition office at the Pentagon. Clinton-era State Department officials Wendy Sherman and Tom Donilon are mentioned in similar roles at State.
For the most part, things seem to be going very smooth since President Bush has assured the nation that he wants a smooth transition. I think the debates are stemming simply from the fact that Obama and Bush may currently have differing policy stances and the press is, perhaps, taking sides on those issues. Just an observation.
Visit the You Decide Politics Store »
Loading ...
Nate, I think eventually the transition will go smoothly.
Two things to note. Pres. Bush’s admonishment to obama that he should learn to keep private meetings private.
And secondly, it’s interesting to see that while the goverment furnishes obama with money to hire a transition team, it speaks volumes that obama considers that not enough and is again raising funds to go “bigger”, three times bigger. That doesn’t bode well for his spending habits once he takes office.
Babs…………The new administration has a habit of not keeping PRIVATE meetings PRIVATE.Joe Biden guarenteed Obama will be tested right after their security meeting.
It would be a no lose situation for the Messiah if Bush gives a bailout to the auto industry. If it works “O” can say see I did it and if it fails he could say Bush didn’t give enough or made to many demands.
Agreed, I think obama’s playing a poker game with Bush and us. I don’t think he holds many cards.
D.D. Mao
I AGREE. FOREIGN CAR MAKERS IN AMERICA HAS LOWER COST. Labor and benefits must be lowered for Detroit to live. Not something Democrats and Obama want to bring up. They want to use Bush again to be the bad guy
Bush has passed the buck back concerning Car makers woes to Congress.
Heard on news, Congress may change chapter 11. Would include ability to change wages, etc.. Would this have occured if Bush agreed to Car makers bail-out ?
I never heard Democrats say this before. Just as Citi Bank is helping 500,000 home-owers, perhaps Congress is learning. I about fainted hearing Frank say bail-out would not help home owners who should have never bought a home.
If these things come to pass, I have hope Obama will not be as bad as I expect, with reservations. Behavior of Speaker and Reid is critical.
This appearance of change occurred after election. Wonder why ? Would we now have a different President elect ? I think so
Bill…………….It seems many things are changing with the Dali-Bama as they go along.I just read where their web page change.gov has changed many items that were on the “Agenda” page.
D.D. MAO
I will have to go to change.gov…I have not gone to his site or watched him speak. The Flem Flam Man said all the things he had to, to get elected. Now we must wait and see. I think many of his flock will be mad.
Saw on news he wants more donations. Get out and vote put him in th hole. He received all time record for contributions I understand.
Government decided not to audit Obama’s contribution. He did not take matching funds. Of course McCain is receiving full audit. He has money set aside for that.
D.D. MOA
I will have to wait to go to site. It is off being re-tooled
I have no idea why Americans see this as acceptable, to have an upcoming President spending hours with the incumbent and without accountability to the American people. I don’t think this has ever been done before. Can someone point to an earlier instance of this?
Christopher…….I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “without accountability to the American people”.The Dali-Bama was elected and EVERY new administration has private meetings with the incumbert to be brought up to speed on events.The American people don’t need to be briefed about these high level meetings contrary to the current belief and Joe Biden.
This doesn’t really apply to this thread, but this is a very interesting article about an 8th grade girl who wore both a McCain and Obama T-shirt to school and the resulting reactions. The link between tolerance and liberalism has grown very weak this past election cycle:
http://www.chicagotribune.....384.column
Stalin
What a lesson in life that little girl had to learn. How worse would it had been if Obama had lost ?
So this girl in Chicago goes into her school where X is extremely popular and Y is extremely unpopular, and she wears a shirt advertising her love of Y. She gets nasty comments.
Gee, couldn’t have seen that one coming. Be sure and let us know as this story develops Stalin.
You can tell you’re not a parent, Indi. This is an excellent study in what we’re doing to our children. If you bothered to read the article, you would have read that a class discussion and good lesson ensued about the tolerance of others – something obama preached.
The “stupid” comments doesn’t bother me so much as the “die” comments. Such hate comes to our children through us, and it would seem – at least in that school – those parents have done a fine job of teaching their children intolerance and hate.
The child having parents that are both liberal and conservative, I’m sure she has learned to respect others beliefs, otherwise her parents marriage would have never survived this election. She has some pretty awesome parents, if you ask me. Too bad the same can’t be said for the other parents.
By the way, Stalin, I enjoyed some of the comments after the article. Especially this:
Marcus Aurelius: “The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”
Speaking of intolerance……Senate Democrats on the Intelligence and Judiciary Committee last week told the White House to preserve your records produced by the Bush Administration and especially Vice Pres.Cheney.The letter was sent by Sen Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island,Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont Sen. John D Rockefeller of West Virginia and Sen Dianne Feinstein of California.It looks like The Messiah is giving second thought about “those who didn’t vote for me”and we are now in a banana republic where you dispose of the prior government.
Aw, D.D.Mao, the partisanship was evident in obama’s choice of chief of staff. That had nothing to do with foreign policy swings, it had everything to do with choosing the most liberal and abusive pitbull he could find. Somebody might as well say it. Even when he says he is sending a “bi-partisan” pair to the G20 meetings this weekend, he’s only kidding himself. I guess he considers an EX-republican bi-partisan? I think not. And an EXrepublican is probably about as close to bipartisanship as we’ll see out of obama.
Babs…………I hope the Messiah and the Democrats do go after Bush/Cheney.It would be a wakeup call for those moderates who voted for “O” and for the conservative wing of Republicans.It would tell them that like terrorist you can’t bargain with either of them and the only verison of bi-partisanship is to do it their way.It may mean a long bloody political war fighting for the hearts and minds of America but so be it.
You got me there babs, I’m not a father, but I have studied psychology and worked with kids extensively in my professional life and while I think that that girl’s experience is awful, I also think it reflects more on the social dynamics of the school than on politics.
If any person goes anywhere advertising to the world that they endorse an extremely unpopular opinion, they’ll get the attention they were probably seeking. This is doubly true in high schools.
In this case it was a girl in Chicago who wanted to test just how strongly pro-Obama her Chicago school was. Turns out, some kids in Chicago had very strong opinions indeed. The comments are dismaying but not all that surprising – I hear they feel strongly about Obama in that city.
This story illustrates plenty about how intolerant people are when someone goes against a strongly supported status quo, but I think using it to characterize Obama supporters would be just seeing what you want to see.
This example is vicious, and it’s disturbing. I just don’t think it had much to do with politics. It’s part of a much bigger picture and a far greater pattern that dwarfs our 2008 election, and it would be a mistake not to see that for what it is. This is our society, and we have a problem that was here before Obama was born and it will be here long after. It’s in our blood and in our bones. Don’t blame it on elections.
Ind
“It’s part of a much bigger picture and a far greater pattern that dwarfs our 2008 election”
What pshcological or Sociology term fits this situation ?
Indy,
So the story is vicious and disturbing yet you sarcastically explain it away.
“Gee, couldn’t have seen that one coming. Be sure and let us know as this story develops Stalin.”
This doesn’t just go on in 8th grade but it also happens in the adult world. I couldn’t put out a McCain sign on my front lawn because my wife and daughter would have been ostracized from the community…I’m not kidding. There was one other person on the block who was for McCain and we had to talk in secret. If it was just me, I could care less, but my daughter has to go to school with these people, so I keep my politics close to the vest these days. I need to move.
Ind
I tried to look up social dynamics. To learn more of your view point. I could not find social dynamics except as a classification. I did find group dynamics.
D. D. Mao, why isn’t Congress more vigilant about what’s going on? Congress represents the American people (er, it SHOULD), and it’s very easy for an incumbent President to pass on secrets to the next President, teach the tricks of the trade about how to cover up scandals, etc., if they’re together a lot between November and January. It breeds trouble.
Stalin, I’m sorry for the sarcasm, it’s not usually my style. But as I said, while it’s a nasty story, I don’t think it has much to tell us about politics, except that it has strongly polarized our society at the moment. The story is that a girl who wears a McCain shirt to her school in Chicago (as in Chicago Illinois, Obama’s surest base of support) gets derided and ostrasized for it.
And my point is that this absolutely should not happen, but let’s face it – the nail that sticks out is the one that gets hammered in. It’s not because Obama supporters are evil and wicked, she probably wouldn’t get the same reactions if she went to school in Phoenix, Arizona. Why? Because even though there are plenty of Obama supporters there, die-hard Obama support is not the established status quo there, and Obama supporters are probably not acting the same way.
And if you went to Montgomery, Alabama, where McCain was very popular, and wore an Obama shirt around school, do you think you could expect to hear all the same compliments that the girl in this story heard when she put on HER Obama shirt? Or do you think maybe you might get a few nasty comments? Maybe someone might mention the word ’socialist’ or ‘terrorist’ within your earshot?
You’d probably get a worse reaction – and that’s not because Obama supporters are nicer in Mongomery, Alabama, or that McCain supporters are meaner. It’s because McCain supporters are in the majority there, and you would be undermining the status quo.
Mind you, none of these experiments have been tried, it’s just my theory that this girl would get a different reaction wearing her shirt in Mongtomery, Alabama than she did in Chicago, Illinois. Could be Obama supporters are universally angry and rotten.
I just think you’re taking partisan examples and trying to look at them as if they’re universally true. They’re not. Groups act to silence dissent. Depending on what part of the country he’s in, a flamboyantly gay man may find himself quite welcome or feeling in physical danger.
Conversely, depending on what part of the country he’s in, a man wearing a pin that says “it was adam and eve, not adam and steve” could meet with approving compliments, or feel completely shut out of the community. And that’s not because there aren’t people who disapprove of homosexuality in both places, or who approve. It’s not even because the people who approve of homosexuality are meaner people in one area than in another.
It’s because when one person acts against the status quo, he is not well-received. Society just doesn’t appreciate acts of dissension.
Sorry Bill, I didn’t mean to imply that social dynamics is the term for what I was describing. I’m not sure if there’s a specific term, but if you want a better idea of what I’m talking about there’s some good basic writing about how larger groups think and act differently from individuals here:
http://www.psypress.com/s.....ch09-tp-04
Ind
The type of campaign Obama ran I believe has lead to situation this young lady uncovered. I do not believe McCain supporters, with a few exceptions, would be so angry. I personal have not heard of any.
I would compare it to mob rule-control of a political situation by those outside the conventional realm, invoving violence and intimidation.
Since you weren’t very specific about what you mean when you say ‘the type of campaign obama ran’, it’s hard for me to assess the truth in it. But I can’t think of many ways that you could mean it. McCain’s campaign did their best to make Obama look like a criminal, a terrorist, a socialist, etc. True or not, they were sure nasty, emotionally packed accusations.
What did Obama’s campaign do so much worse than that, which would have his supporters frothing at the mouth with hatred so much more than McCain’s?
And in any case, whether or not what you say is true, Bill, Chicago is hardly the most representative of areas to take an anecdote from. In fact, if you’re looking to see what the general political climate of the country is like, that may be the worst place in the country to look at.
Jd
I was vague in order not to turn discussion into something else. I wanted to stick to subject. If Obama had lost, things might not be calm. No protest when McCain lost. Yet this young lady had this problem after elections. Class mates should be laughing at her especially in Obama’s home area. What treat is that shirt ? Election is over. He won. Not rational.
My point in bringing it up, is high hopes his voters have. Of speading the wealth. And fear it is just a dream. Parents give the children this sense. Only reason I can think of for this illogicical behaviour when Obama is President elect
Sorry, I meant Ind.
Ind
I re-read the article. She did it before election. My error. Sorry
Bill, I really think it’s futile to speculate on what might have happened if Obama had lost. He didn’t lose, he won by a great margin of victory.
I also think high schoolers probably aren’t focusing on the long term dreams Obama offers or feeling fearful that he can’t deliver, or rectify our economic situation. I think that high schoolers tend not to think much about that, so long as they’re living above the poverty line. I know I didn’t back then.
Certainly their heads aren’t full of Obama’s promise to spread the wealth – Obama didn’t run promising to do that, ’spreading the wealth’ was a phrase his critics used to denigrate him. If his opponents thought that ’spreading the wealth’ excited Obama supporters, they wouldn’t have used the phrase so often, and Obama would have used it more. Don’t you think?
I really think this is an unfortunate case of a girl trying to rock the boat and getting splashed. But I’m ok if we have a difference of opinion.
Indi, I wasn’t referring much to the politics of the girl’s study, more the human reaction side, and if I was blaming anyone, it was the parents.
I agree the 8th graders didn’t have much invested in obama’s policies, as you will have to agree that the “American Idol” mentality followed obama throughout his campaign. Teenagers marching in the streets for him, but couldn’t even recognize a photo of his running mate, or name him for that matter. We all have to concede that obama’s popularity in this age group was a rock star mentality, and McCain had no such thing surrounding him. So whether she was in Chicago doing her little study, or Montgomery, or Tim Buck Two, the reaction wouldn’t have been much different. Obama Girl and the internet made sure of that, I think.
I feel bad for this young girl but I am glad that the teacher used it as a lesson in class. I don’t believe the majority of McCain supporters would be that cruel. Look at what happened on election day. The Black Panthers at voting sites if for nothing else to put fear into people if they didn’t vote for Obama. I didn’t hear anything like that from McCain followers.
Christopher…I don’t think Obama will learn anything from Bush. He is more likely to listen to Bill Clinton, who probably was the one who told him to lie about everything, and how to cover up any scandal you may appear to be involved in.
I agree, there are already some media noting the fact that while obama touts a new world kind of political rhetoric, 31 of his key people on his transition team are ex-Clinton workers. What’s new about that?
I think it’s great the girl did the study, and she knew what she was getting herself into when she approached her teacher about doing it. I saw an interview with her on Fox News. Very intelligent 14 year old. She behaved better than most of the pundits I see interviewed – from either side.
Ind
Staying with just the little girl story. You have studied
“I’m not a father, but I have studied psychology and worked with kids extensively in my professional life”
””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””’
As such IndiMind, I wish your educated,,term,, for this behavior. There are terms, many, and these describt behavior. Neurobiotaxsis is a term that desccribs a process. Mob rule describes a behavior. As a professional you must use terms each day and have from educational background. You must of brought up these things to show you have some expert knowledge.
Seitting yourself up as such, I just want the term so I may study it.
Well Bill, I think you probably would have been better off browsing around the social psychology site I gave you before than listening to me yammer on about it. I’m definitely not an expert in group psychology, and I’m sorry if I gave you that impression. But I’ll help you out how I can.
There are a few key aspects involved here that you might want to look into to better understand what I’ve said.
‘Conformity’ and specifically ‘Public conformity’ play an important role, as they address how a group unites around some issues and pressures everyone in it to adopt the groups. Peer pressure is mostly spoken about in regards to drugs, but the same basic pressures to be in sync with the larger group apply socially.
The whole phenomenon of consensus is probably centered around the fact that people like to think that their beliefs are correct, and when other people agree with those beliefs, we feel reassured – yes, they all believe what I believe, so it’s probably true!
When people disagree with your beliefs, it is the opposite of reassuring. It makes you question if you are correct. No one likes thinking that they’re wrong, so naturally it’s much less disturbing to believe that the person challenging your beliefs is wrong.
When there are 30 people with you, and they all say they believe the same thing you believe, this is just so much easier! You can’t be wrong, everyone knows you’re right! This other person who believes something different, they must be wrong! What’s their problem, anyway?!
In these situations, the anger people express is a defense mechanism. Really, they are uneasy being questioned, and so they feel a need to silence the questioner. Also, ridiculing the person everyone agrees is wrong-headed is a great way to gain status in your group, because it makes everyone feel reassured that the group is correct when you humiliate the dissenter.
So I hope something in there helps you Bill. I’m sorry, I just don’t know of a term that encapsulates it all. But again, don’t mistake me for an expert in group psychology – the point I was making in that quote you mentioned was simply that even if I’m not a father, I DO know something about children.
Ind
I appreciate your explaination. I find it much more helpful to me than your earlier one.
Being a older person I may not realize the violence that now exist in schools. I would never had got upset in 8th grade over politics. Especially in big cities
indiminded………….Yes Obama used the phrase “spread the wealth” during his initial conversation with Joe the plumber.
D.D. Mao, stop being silly. He has used the phrase, but rarely. His opponents used it frequently. Do you believe this is because his opponents thought that the phrase excited his supporters?
So, just read through a good bit of the posts above about the little girl. Seriously though, they are teenagers…
And overwhelming majority of teenagers are irrational beings…
Thats why they are called teenagers… you know. Why the big fuss about it?
Jeremy,
I don’t have to read one comment to know that there is a bunch of people shouting off about how horrible this incident was simply because they grew up in perfect little towns. I am with you. I grew up in a city where teenager did things just as horrible as middle eastern terrorist do everyday. There is absolutely NOTHING and teenager can do that can possibly surprise me. I have seen teens nearly murder each other simply for a laugh.
I don’t even know the story, I have not even read the posting. All I know is some teen wore a shirt with a presidential candidate on it, and some other kids did something bad to that person. I know some people on this site grew up in the 50’s and 60’s, or at least know about them. I still see teens beating other teens to near death for their skin color, their gang affiliation, their support of a rival high school football team, so doing something bad to a team for rooting for a rival political affiliation is hardly something to raise an eyebrow over.
Well to help bolster Indiminded’s point.
Cross Burned On Lawn Of N.J. Obama Supporter
Family’s Obama Banner Went Missing The Night Before; Police Believe It Was Draped On 6-Foot Cross
Incident Follows Alleged Bat Attack On Staten Island Teen
http://wcbstv.com/local/o.....58391.html
“This followed an incident on Tuesday night when a black Staten Island teen was viciously assaulted in what police believe was a bias attack sparked by Obama’s presidential victory.”
Some bad stories in there. So it all depends on where you are at. IF the same teen was wearing that McCain shirt in the area where the cross was burned or the teen was beaten with bats i’m sure this would not have happened.
And I am not completely against what Indi posted. I am actually leaning more toward what he initially said then against him. Mind you, I start leaning away in his follow up posts but that’s a different story.
My comment was more towards Stalin and his decision to link liberalism and shrinking intolerance to a story about irrational teenagers and then tries to magnify it by calling it vicious and disturbing. It was also directed towards Babs as she is trying to link it to what our parents are doing to us as if she never went to school and taken part in the hazing, been hazed, or been a witness to hazing like this. Both reactions leading me to believe that they either forgot what it was like during the days that they were in school or that they are just pissed because McCain lost and they are trying to grasp at straws to vent their anger.
There is a word for what happened, it’s called bullying and it has happened since the beginning of time and it will continue to happen regardless of how loving and caring the parents are. There is a reason they are teenagers, more then half of them are not allowed to drive, not allowed to drink alcohol, and the majority of them are not allowed to smoke, etc. Their brain has not matured/fully developed yet and are still learning the divide between right and wrong.
Now, with everything said, should it be ignored? Not at all, but it doesn’t deserve this type of reaction. For someone to somehow compare it to an entire societies link between liberalism and tolerance is pretty ridiculous. To call it vicious and disturbing leads me to believe that this person grew up in a bubble during their sub 20 years.
Shoot, up until about ten years ago, my definition of fun was to go out with friends, get plowed, beat the piss out of some idiot(s) in the bars (or get the piss beat out of me), drink some more, get into another fight, drink some more, and wake up the next late afternoon to drink some more to get rid of the hangover… is it a rational definition of having fun, heck no, but it sure did seem rational to me while I was still a teenager and a few years past 21. Did my parents teach me to go out and attempt to physically harm others? Hell no, in fact, I never saw my father drink one drop and only saw my mother go out on the evening once or twice. Neither of them were physically abusing to me, my brothers or themselves.
This is simply what children do… we are here to teach them differently as the situation arises, but not to try and link it to a failing of political acceptance amongst liberals or to totally blow it out of proportion.
indiminded………Stop being naive. Don’t you think the Messiah used this phrase to ignite his supporters? Why do you think he is trying to tramp down expectations now.Spin it however you want but he has been using class envy to devide people throughout this racr.
No, I don’t think he really used the phrase “spread the wealth” to ignite his supporters DD, I don’t recall him doing so. In fact, I know of only a few incidences of him using it. I only know of those incidences because Obama detractors have pointed it out, not because Obama supporters have excitedly talked about it.
Whether or not that is a fair rephrasing of his policies is a different issue, just as the issue of whether he’s been using class envy to divide the people. But it’s clear to me that the phrase “spread the wealth” is a phrase republicans are holding onto, not democrats.
I honestly don’t think Obama intends to divide the country, on the contrary I feel as though he’d rather unite the country. Is he calling on a certain class to man up for another, yes. You can love it or hate it, that’s your problem.
Calling him the Messiah is name calling, and childish. Grow up. You don’t have to like him, but he will be your president for four years.
Don’t like it, move out of the US. 
Kendale………No we are going to hold his feet to the fire and let him live up to his campaign promises or point them out. Defining The Messiah for who he is because the liberal left media abdicated the responsibility to do so. Even this morning he is giving second thought about closing Gitmo.
No we are taking a lesson from the left”DISSENT IS PATRIOTIC” Now you live with it.
indiminded…..No I really didn’t expect you to own up about why he used the phrase “Spread the Wealth”.We aren’t re-phrasing his words but using his own qoutes agianst him. The liberal media would never do this they have to much invested in him.As I said why do you think he and hie administration are trying to tramp down expectations now?
D.D. Mao
Liberal news has much invested in Messiah is true. Democrat Congress, in bail-out, gave money to the owners of those news medias. Or did Congress get unannouced advertisement for Flem Flam Man on Jay Leno, etc, ?
Bill…….. Don’t get me wrong I hold the Republicans and Bush as responsible as the Democrats when it comes to spending and bailout money.There is nothing wrong with conservatism.In big government conservatism Bush tried to do something it wasn’t intended to do.
D.D.Mao
Adding Bush is all right with me. I was against the purposed bail-out as well. Chapter 11 was my choice. Take car makers for example. Wages, benefits, etc, could have been altered to make car companies competitive with foreign car makers in America. Congress too afraid of losing votes to ask for that. I understand foreign car makers here are doing fine. Our car makers could re-tool with that $25 billion government gave them.
D.D., I think you’ve missed my point entirely. It’s not about ‘owning up’. My point was not that he doesn’t use the phrase, it was that it isn’t one that excites his supporters.
You’ve confirmed that you agree with my point when you say “We aren’t re-phrasing his words but using his own qoutes agianst him.”
Exactly. You’re using the quote against him – and you can only use it against him because A) he has said it and B) it does NOT excite people.
I think it’s possible you’ve misunderstood my point from the start. But either way I’m getting tired of this back and forth. You go ahead and believe Obama supporters go wild and throw parties when someone says “spread the wealth” if you want.
Ind
Do you think Obama is going to give money to lower economic people, as he says he will ? If he is, where is the money coming from ? Is Obama not saying he is going to pay for what he spends. As Democrats said in previous election ? Is this basically what DD Mao is saying. RaIse rich taxes to give to lower income group.. Definition of spread the wealth- Raising rich taxes, not for government function, but to give to lower income group of people. America has no money to give to a group of people. What Bush gave was to near all people.
Bill…….. Thank you for following up on indi’s post.If “Spread the Wealth “didn’t excite Democrat voters it wouldn’t have been used extensivly throughout the campaign by The Messiah and John Edwards.
D.D. Mao
Thanks. But Flem Flam Man did not use that term until that day. He promised all, then added McCain’s promises if well received. You can’t out promise someone who will promise anything to get elected. I believe he will give to lower income because it is his …I can’t say it.
Fox is hated by Obama. Now it has come out Fox news is hated by Bill Ayers. Fox news rules..
Well, personally, I think “spreading the wealth” is a long time coming for the lower income people. First, obama is determined to “spread the wealth” to the Big 3, and then spread the rest of the $700B bailout to whomever he sees fit. And I doubt seriously that will be to lower income people.
The thing that’s beginning to bother me here is that people are tending to argue yesterday’s news and campaign promises, not what is going on today. And what is going on today and everyday is having a major impact on everything from the stock market (down over 2000 points) to small businesses, and individuals ability to remain employed. These are the things that we should be discussing here. Not dissecting the campaign that is over.
So, let me see if I can turn things a bit. I’m still waiting on anyone here to present an opinion on the Big 3 issue. Are you in favor of bailing them out, or not? Are you in favor of them, instead, filing for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection while they clean up their contracts to the union?
It’s my opinion that they should file chapter 11, that’s the only way to cleanse themselves of the ridiculous union contracts and excess dealerships. I don’t think that the actual product building is what is hurting them, nor do many experts. What do you think?
Babs
Chapter 11. AIG was told by Congress no more week-end parties. So 2nd happened. Promises seems to mean nothing after company gets the money. And Congress doen’t have the guts to demand lower wages and benefits. To do that, plus all you mentioned, only a judge in charge can be trusted. Congress giving money would be the never ending story. To them and future companies to ask.
Bill, I agree that Congress giving the bailout would be neverending. Here’s why:
1) GM management will not accept “strings” to the money, and they will not agree to step down.
2) Nothing but a chapter 11 will allow for union and dealership contracts to be nullified, and that’s where the companies are bleeding. The union is the one who is really pushing this bailout on the media, and have no defense when asked if they will concede anything on their contracts with the Big 3. In fact, they say no, they won’t.
That being said, we can throw billions at them every quarter, and the bleeding will continue, because the over the top union contracts will continue.
In my view, this boils down to the argument of unions – which, in this case, have ruined the Big 3. American automakers for Toyota and Honda are non-union, and spend one third on labor that the Big 3 does. Even at that, their employees average $28.50 per hour, and in Alabama, that’s up the scale and into very good pay, as the cost of living in Alabama is not near the cost of living in other areas.
Babs
I meant to mention Foreign car makers in America. I understand they are doing fine. One thing I heard on Fox was joining 2 car makers together and cutting number of types of car was a possible option. They are losing $ 2 billion a month I just heard..
Remember McCain dropped out of Michigan early. Am afraid Democrats will give them money. And Bush will sign under certain conditions. I fear there will be no chapter 11. I hope I am wrong. I see Frank is chair with committee today in talks with Paulson and Bernanke.
Babs………..The reason no one was discussing the bailout or economy was the title of this thread is “As the transition turns,relations grow sour.”
I’m sure Nate will post news on the bailout and economy which we can discuss.
*LOL* D.D.Mao, the title of any thread on this site has never stopped us from changing the subject in comments. If you don’t believe me, re-read the comments here.
Babs
Speaker has taken banruptcy off the table for the Big 3. ha-ha. Maybe yes and maybe no. Fox said radio talk shows was squarely against bail-out.
Speaker wants Big 3 to come back with re-organization plan first of December.. She said if acceptable plan is developed, then she will call the House back. She pick her best 2 Democrats to study the plan. Dodd and Frank.
Yeah, I heard her speech. Trouble is, she’s over stepping her authority with her statement on the bankruptcy being not acceptable. I don’t believe the Big 3 will get a bail out this year. But many will get one, and we’ll all pay for it, after Jan. 20. Batten down the hatches.
Babs
If true that audiances on talk shows are aganinst it, maybe Democrats will back down. Along with yes Obama. McCain left Michigan early and Sarah did not go back to Michigan. Democrats are bought and paid for there. I thought I saw tears in Speaker’s eyes that she could not give Big 3 money then.
Although Obama is in major magazines depicted as Abe Lincoln and F.D.R., market is down 10% in a few days is not helping sell money give-a-way. Market is down to like 2002 low levels. oil under $ 50
We can only hope the people say, enough is enough
If you notice they are not blaming Bush, its Congress. That is what I hear.
In a Rasmuessen poll out today 48% of people polled are against bailing out the Big 3, but don’t you remember the opposition to the first big bailout? Nobody listened to the people then, and they aren’t going to now.
Congress is gleefully running down the Socialism path, and when the damage starts rolling, it will roll down hill to all of us.
The market is reacting to the new administration, and it doesn’t like it at all.
Frank thinks going through Judge will be union busting. Frank is a socialist. My opionion.
I heard V.P. for libertarian party. He was for bankruptcy. He wrote a book about failure. I would rather have him as Pres.-elect than Obama
I remember the first bail-out. I was so disappointed in McCain. We could of bought all of AIG cheaper than the money we put into it