Obama’s Bailout Bunch Brings Us More of the Same

[urbanrealtor]

partypup:

Would that be the same Andrea Mitchell who is married to Alan Greenspan (whom I suspect is actually Allan from Fallbrook)?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Dan: Dude! For shame! Now you’re just being plain nasty! Alan Greenspan? What’s up with that?

[TheBreeze]

Compare the intelligence and thoughtfulness in this one TGO interview vs. the simple-minded BS we’ve gotten from the Bush administration for the last 8 years:

Mr. Obama: Yeah. Well, let’s see how this thing plays itself out. For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment, not just for individual families but the repercussions across the economy would be dire. So it’s my belief that we need to provide assistance to the auto industry. But I think that it can’t be a blank check.

So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all the stakeholders coming together with a plan what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like? So that we are creating a bridge loan to somewhere as opposed to a bridge loan to nowhere. And that’s, I think, what you haven’t yet seen. That’s something that I think we’re gonna have to come up with.

Kroft: Are there a lot of people that think that the country would probably be better off and General Motors might be better off if it was allowed to go into bankruptcy?

Mr. Obama: Well, you know, under normal circumstances that might be the case in the sense that you’d go to a restructuring like the airlines had to do in some cases. And then they come out and they’re still a viable operation. And they’re operating even during the course of bankruptcy. In this situation, you could see the spigot completely shut off so that it would not potentially permit GM to get back on its feet. And I think that what we have to do is to recognize that these are extraordinary circumstances. Banks aren’t lending as it is. They’re not even lending to businesses that are doing well, much less businesses that are doing poorly. And in that circumstance, the usual options may not be available.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/60minutes/main4607893_page2.shtml

vs.

Bush (or McSame): “The fundamentals of the economy are sound.” (WTF does that mean?)

Bush (or McSame): “If we pull out of Iraq the terrorists win.”

Bush: “This thaw — took a while to thaw, it’s going to take a while to unthaw.” Bush on liquidity in the markets.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm

It’s going to be refreshing to finally have an intelligent, thoughtful person as POTUS again. There’s been an 8-year dearth of thoughtfulness in the White House ever since Clinton left.

BTW, you may disagree with Obama’s plan for the automakers, but you have to acknowledge that he has put some thought into the situation. As opposed to Bush who has trouble stringing two coherent sentences together.

[TheBreeze]

Compare the intelligence and thoughtfulness in this one TGO interview vs. the simple-minded BS we’ve gotten from the Bush administration for the last 8 years:

Mr. Obama: Yeah. Well, let’s see how this thing plays itself out. For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment, not just for individual families but the repercussions across the economy would be dire. So it’s my belief that we need to provide assistance to the auto industry. But I think that it can’t be a blank check.

So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all the stakeholders coming together with a plan what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like? So that we are creating a bridge loan to somewhere as opposed to a bridge loan to nowhere. And that’s, I think, what you haven’t yet seen. That’s something that I think we’re gonna have to come up with.

Kroft: Are there a lot of people that think that the country would probably be better off and General Motors might be better off if it was allowed to go into bankruptcy?

Mr. Obama: Well, you know, under normal circumstances that might be the case in the sense that you’d go to a restructuring like the airlines had to do in some cases. And then they come out and they’re still a viable operation. And they’re operating even during the course of bankruptcy. In this situation, you could see the spigot completely shut off so that it would not potentially permit GM to get back on its feet. And I think that what we have to do is to recognize that these are extraordinary circumstances. Banks aren’t lending as it is. They’re not even lending to businesses that are doing well, much less businesses that are doing poorly. And in that circumstance, the usual options may not be available.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/60minutes/main4607893_page2.shtml

vs.

Bush (or McSame): “The fundamentals of the economy are sound.” (WTF does that mean?)

Bush (or McSame): “If we pull out of Iraq the terrorists win.”

Bush: “This thaw — took a while to thaw, it’s going to take a while to unthaw.” Bush on liquidity in the markets.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm

It’s going to be refreshing to finally have an intelligent, thoughtful person as POTUS again. There’s been an 8-year dearth of thoughtfulness in the White House ever since Clinton left.

BTW, you may disagree with Obama’s plan for the automakers, but you have to acknowledge that he has put some thought into the situation. As opposed to Bush who has trouble stringing two coherent sentences together.

[TheBreeze]

Compare the intelligence and thoughtfulness in this one TGO interview vs. the simple-minded BS we’ve gotten from the Bush administration for the last 8 years:

Mr. Obama: Yeah. Well, let’s see how this thing plays itself out. For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment, not just for individual families but the repercussions across the economy would be dire. So it’s my belief that we need to provide assistance to the auto industry. But I think that it can’t be a blank check.

So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all the stakeholders coming together with a plan what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like? So that we are creating a bridge loan to somewhere as opposed to a bridge loan to nowhere. And that’s, I think, what you haven’t yet seen. That’s something that I think we’re gonna have to come up with.

Kroft: Are there a lot of people that think that the country would probably be better off and General Motors might be better off if it was allowed to go into bankruptcy?

Mr. Obama: Well, you know, under normal circumstances that might be the case in the sense that you’d go to a restructuring like the airlines had to do in some cases. And then they come out and they’re still a viable operation. And they’re operating even during the course of bankruptcy. In this situation, you could see the spigot completely shut off so that it would not potentially permit GM to get back on its feet. And I think that what we have to do is to recognize that these are extraordinary circumstances. Banks aren’t lending as it is. They’re not even lending to businesses that are doing well, much less businesses that are doing poorly. And in that circumstance, the usual options may not be available.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/60minutes/main4607893_page2.shtml

vs.

Bush (or McSame): “The fundamentals of the economy are sound.” (WTF does that mean?)

Bush (or McSame): “If we pull out of Iraq the terrorists win.”

Bush: “This thaw — took a while to thaw, it’s going to take a while to unthaw.” Bush on liquidity in the markets.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm

It’s going to be refreshing to finally have an intelligent, thoughtful person as POTUS again. There’s been an 8-year dearth of thoughtfulness in the White House ever since Clinton left.

BTW, you may disagree with Obama’s plan for the automakers, but you have to acknowledge that he has put some thought into the situation. As opposed to Bush who has trouble stringing two coherent sentences together.

[TheBreeze]

Compare the intelligence and thoughtfulness in this one TGO interview vs. the simple-minded BS we’ve gotten from the Bush administration for the last 8 years:

Mr. Obama: Yeah. Well, let’s see how this thing plays itself out. For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment, not just for individual families but the repercussions across the economy would be dire. So it’s my belief that we need to provide assistance to the auto industry. But I think that it can’t be a blank check.

So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all the stakeholders coming together with a plan what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like? So that we are creating a bridge loan to somewhere as opposed to a bridge loan to nowhere. And that’s, I think, what you haven’t yet seen. That’s something that I think we’re gonna have to come up with.

Kroft: Are there a lot of people that think that the country would probably be better off and General Motors might be better off if it was allowed to go into bankruptcy?

Mr. Obama: Well, you know, under normal circumstances that might be the case in the sense that you’d go to a restructuring like the airlines had to do in some cases. And then they come out and they’re still a viable operation. And they’re operating even during the course of bankruptcy. In this situation, you could see the spigot completely shut off so that it would not potentially permit GM to get back on its feet. And I think that what we have to do is to recognize that these are extraordinary circumstances. Banks aren’t lending as it is. They’re not even lending to businesses that are doing well, much less businesses that are doing poorly. And in that circumstance, the usual options may not be available.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/60minutes/main4607893_page2.shtml

vs.

Bush (or McSame): “The fundamentals of the economy are sound.” (WTF does that mean?)

Bush (or McSame): “If we pull out of Iraq the terrorists win.”

Bush: “This thaw — took a while to thaw, it’s going to take a while to unthaw.” Bush on liquidity in the markets.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm

It’s going to be refreshing to finally have an intelligent, thoughtful person as POTUS again. There’s been an 8-year dearth of thoughtfulness in the White House ever since Clinton left.

BTW, you may disagree with Obama’s plan for the automakers, but you have to acknowledge that he has put some thought into the situation. As opposed to Bush who has trouble stringing two coherent sentences together.

[TheBreeze]

Compare the intelligence and thoughtfulness in this one TGO interview vs. the simple-minded BS we’ve gotten from the Bush administration for the last 8 years:

Mr. Obama: Yeah. Well, let’s see how this thing plays itself out. For the auto industry to completely collapse would be a disaster in this kind of environment, not just for individual families but the repercussions across the economy would be dire. So it’s my belief that we need to provide assistance to the auto industry. But I think that it can’t be a blank check.

So my hope is that over the course of the next week, between the White House and Congress, the discussions are shaped around providing assistance but making sure that that assistance is conditioned on labor, management, suppliers, lenders, all the stakeholders coming together with a plan what does a sustainable U.S. auto industry look like? So that we are creating a bridge loan to somewhere as opposed to a bridge loan to nowhere. And that’s, I think, what you haven’t yet seen. That’s something that I think we’re gonna have to come up with.

Kroft: Are there a lot of people that think that the country would probably be better off and General Motors might be better off if it was allowed to go into bankruptcy?

Mr. Obama: Well, you know, under normal circumstances that might be the case in the sense that you’d go to a restructuring like the airlines had to do in some cases. And then they come out and they’re still a viable operation. And they’re operating even during the course of bankruptcy. In this situation, you could see the spigot completely shut off so that it would not potentially permit GM to get back on its feet. And I think that what we have to do is to recognize that these are extraordinary circumstances. Banks aren’t lending as it is. They’re not even lending to businesses that are doing well, much less businesses that are doing poorly. And in that circumstance, the usual options may not be available.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/16/60minutes/main4607893_page2.shtml

vs.

Bush (or McSame): “The fundamentals of the economy are sound.” (WTF does that mean?)

Bush (or McSame): “If we pull out of Iraq the terrorists win.”

Bush: “This thaw — took a while to thaw, it’s going to take a while to unthaw.” Bush on liquidity in the markets.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/library/blbushisms.htm

It’s going to be refreshing to finally have an intelligent, thoughtful person as POTUS again. There’s been an 8-year dearth of thoughtfulness in the White House ever since Clinton left.

BTW, you may disagree with Obama’s plan for the automakers, but you have to acknowledge that he has put some thought into the situation. As opposed to Bush who has trouble stringing two coherent sentences together.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: No question that Obama brings considerable intellectual horsepower to the equation, and his academic record speaks for itself.

The unanswered question is the one posed by the article that started this thread: Where is the “change” and the break with the status quo ante we’ve been promised? His appointments, starting with Rahm Emanuel, look to be more of the same and many of them are intimately tied to the very mess they’ve been tasked to fix.

Also, most true conservatives loath Bush as much as you do.

I’d be curious to hear your thoughts about Rubin, Emanuel, et al.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: No question that Obama brings considerable intellectual horsepower to the equation, and his academic record speaks for itself.

The unanswered question is the one posed by the article that started this thread: Where is the “change” and the break with the status quo ante we’ve been promised? His appointments, starting with Rahm Emanuel, look to be more of the same and many of them are intimately tied to the very mess they’ve been tasked to fix.

Also, most true conservatives loath Bush as much as you do.

I’d be curious to hear your thoughts about Rubin, Emanuel, et al.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: No question that Obama brings considerable intellectual horsepower to the equation, and his academic record speaks for itself.

The unanswered question is the one posed by the article that started this thread: Where is the “change” and the break with the status quo ante we’ve been promised? His appointments, starting with Rahm Emanuel, look to be more of the same and many of them are intimately tied to the very mess they’ve been tasked to fix.

Also, most true conservatives loath Bush as much as you do.

I’d be curious to hear your thoughts about Rubin, Emanuel, et al.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Breeze: No question that Obama brings considerable intellectual horsepower to the equation, and his academic record speaks for itself.

The unanswered question is the one posed by the article that started this thread: Where is the “change” and the break with the status quo ante we’ve been promised? His appointments, starting with Rahm Emanuel, look to be more of the same and many of them are intimately tied to the very mess they’ve been tasked to fix.

Also, most true conservatives loath Bush as much as you do.

I’d be curious to hear your thoughts about Rubin, Emanuel, et al.

[Author]

Posts