Why So Bourgeois?

[Del-Toro]

If I had to make that poster I would have made it red and white and given Obama a Stalin Moustache, everyone loves (or loves to hate) a little bit of senstationalism now and then. And maybe with some red army style grunts wearing berets.

Anyway, socialism isn't really all that bad, the rules are more or less the same but taxes are a tad higher. It's just that you might actually see some return from your taxes instead of it all going to the king's vault for him to horribly misspend.

 

[Low Key]

snip

Sounds like you are a fiscal conservative, maybe even a libertarian i can respect that. Lets just agree to disagree. The cars plan though is working on what it said it would do, god knows the people with failing dealerships are loving it. No administration is perfect, this one inherited a mess and its doing the best it can with what it has.

Agreed. I'm glad we could end this respectfully. It's hard finding good competition for a political debate. Kudos.

 

[A big red rooster]

I'd say the key difference is that FDR's New Deal dragged us out of a great depression, while the Republican's spending dragged us most of the way into one.

If that is true, would you mind explaining a few of the things that the Republican presidents have spent so much on?

Good question. If the Republicans have been so good at avoiding spending, why did out national debt start skyrocketing - right away, before 9/11, before the housing crash?

Hmmm... where did all that money go?

Oh, there it is [http://dangerousintersection.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/bush%20class%20warfare%20chart-small.JPG].

And how's Obama going to change that?

 

[geldonyetich]

Do you know what happened when Jimmy Carter was president? He was charging the top money earners in this country 75%. So, guess what they did. They stopped spending, which almost ruined this country. He may not have spent as much as some, but it's hard to spend money when no taxes are coming in. It's also the reason why the inflation rate by the last year of his presidency was 13%. Ronald Reagan was able to reduce it to single digit numbers in only a year, and after two years, it was hovering around 2-3%.

Barack is actually doing better than I imagined, but he is still a politician. Don't act like he's the good guy.

There's been good Republican presidents in the past, but the Neocons have so thoroughly moved in and ruined the party that you can't look back that many years and say anything that applied then applies now. Regan opened the door to them. (Either that, or JFK's assassination did.)

 

[Low Key]

EDIT: i forgot to be OT. can anyone explain this to me? if the caption actually was "why so bourgeois?" that would at least make some sense; otherwise obama as the joker just seems like a non sequitur.

yay

Well aside form the mismanagement of money, which is not handed out by hand to dealerships by obama. It has been reported that the majority of dealers have really enjoyed and profited from this plan. The only thing slowling it down now is the confusion on the senate for more money. Say what you want about the plan, the people and industry that it was made to help are all for it, its hard to argue against that.

What about the reconstituted vehicles being placed back on the road that are actaully supposed to be going to the junkyard?

How is that political? Its left as the responsibility of each dealer ship to do the right thing with the trade in cars. If some greedy dealership wants to make a dollar out of those cars its hardly something to blame the government for.

Of course it's political. In theory "Cash for Clunkers" was a great idea, but the evil that men do always seems to fuck up a good thing. I don't get paid to have great ideas about how it should be handled, but the program obviously was whisked out the door with a seal of approval before anyone put any real thought into it. Give me $50K a year and I'll tell everyone how to fix it.

Edit: And another thing...why is it that all it took was $4,500 to get people to go into a dealership and buy a brand new, more fuel effecient car, that will require a loan anyways? People see free money and pounce, whether they need it or not.

because people still need to buy cars sometimes, and they might as well save $4.5K doing it.

honestly i have no idea why the scrapping requirement is even in there in the first place. what we should be doing is exporting the clunkers and defraying the costs of the program.

But no one wants old, rusty, inefficent cars. I say we recycle them instead of smashing them into little cubes and tossing them into a landfill, platinum bearing cadilidic converter and all.

Do you know what happened when Jimmy Carter was president? He was charging the top money earners in this country 75%. So, guess what they did. They stopped spending, which almost ruined this country. He may not have spent as much as some, but it's hard to spend money when no taxes are coming in. It's also the reason why the inflation rate by the last year of his presidency was 13%. Ronald Reagan was able to reduce it to single digit numbers in only a year, and after two years, it was hovering around 2-3%.

Barack is actually doing better than I imagined, but he is still a politician. Don't act like he's the good guy.

There's been good Republican presidents in the past, but the Neocons have so thoroughly moved in and ruined the party that you can't look back that many years and say anything that applied then applies now. Regan opened the door to them. (Either that, or JFK's assassination did.)

I personally blame the lobbyists. They are the reason why so many politicians these days are corrupt. Why pay attention to the little guy when a massive corporation is willing to pay huge sums of money just to buy a vote?

 

[geldonyetich]

Hmmm... where did all that money go?

Oh, there it is [http://dangerousintersection.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/bush%20class%20warfare%20chart-small.JPG].

And how's Obama going to change that?

He's already started [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/politics/26budget.html].

The response was to start fake protests [http://zekesaysso.blogspot.com/2009/04/fake-tea-party-nice.html].

 

[geldonyetich]

I personally blame the lobbyists. They are the reason why so many politicians these days are corrupt. Why pay attention to the little guy when a massive corporation is willing to pay huge sums of money just to buy a vote?

True that. I guess the real question is who's more on the take.

I just got done watching Hardball on MBNBC. Apparently the entire Republican party is on the take from health insurance companies... but more than one Democratic representative is as well. Mostly the Blue Dogs [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition], of course.

 

[Emphraim]

Honestly, it just sounds like a bunch of /b/tards got bored.

I agree with this. I highly doubt it was anything like those "Hope" posters, just a bunch of idiots got bored.

Off topic question to the person I'm quoting, Why does everyone use "/b/tards"? Will you get banned if you put "re" infront of the tard part?

Surely you know of the horrors of the /b/ sectiion of 4chan?

Ontopic: A group of people have used popular images to distort a political figures message or plans. Nothing new to see here.

 

[A big red rooster]

Hmmm... where did all that money go?

Oh, there it is [http://dangerousintersection.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/bush%20class%20warfare%20chart-small.JPG].

And how's Obama going to change that?

He's already started [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/politics/26budget.html].

The response was to start fake protests [http://zekesaysso.blogspot.com/2009/04/fake-tea-party-nice.html].

That's not what I was hinting at:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5575883.ece

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29898698/

Obama is not saving any money by ending the war in Iraq. When it ends, there will still be loose ends in Afgahnistan. And now, the Obama administration is setting thier sights on Pakistan. Right now, he isn't doing much to end war in the Middle East. Spending even more to reforom health care won't help the defecit situation.

 

[riskroWe]

Obviously, our President was elected by America

It's cute that people still think that.
Your president was elected only by a majority of those of you who felt strongly enough to take time out of their day to vote. It's what we in statistics call 'non-response bias'.

 

[geldonyetich]

Obama is not saving any money by ending the war in Iraq. When it ends, there will still be loose ends in Afgahnistan. And now, the Obama administration is setting thier sights on Pakistan. Right now, he isn't doing much to end war in the Middle East. Spending even more to reforom health care won't help the defecit situation.

If you were paying attention, you'd notice where I indicated the war was actually only a very small part of where our debt came from under Bush II.

The main reason we're ending the war in Iraq is because it's a pointless quagmire. An exit strategy was never devised. We weren't stopping terrorism there, we were actually creating it by fostering anti-American sentiment. We will save a lot money but not dumping it on a war we can't afford, but getting out of debt has a lot more to do with reversing the decisions that got us here.

Also, this health care reform is actually much less than has been getting bandied about. You've been getting flat out lied to by representatives who are in health insurance company's pockets. The supposed astronomical costs of it are as much a lie as suggesting you're being deprived of quality care or choice.

 

[TMAN10112]

OMG guyz, Obama's tryin to give us teh socialismz!

I really thought that we were past this sort of thing, but (as always) someone has proved to me that stupidity will concour ll.

Besides, if I was to attempt a smear campaign against Obama, I would have compared him to Mao Zedong, or one of the other infamous faces of communism.

 

[Zand88]

He's just a dog. If he ever got his hands on free healthcare, he wouldn't know what to do with it!

 

[Nutcase]

I'd say the key difference is that FDR's New Deal dragged us out of a great depression, while the Republican's spending dragged us most of the way into one.

If that is true, would you mind explaining a few of the things that the Republican presidents have spent so much on?

Good question. If the Republicans have been so good at avoiding spending, why did out national debt start skyrocketing - right away, before 9/11, before the housing crash?

Hmmm... where did all that money go?

Oh, there it is [http://dangerousintersection.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/bush%20class%20warfare%20chart-small.JPG].

But hey, he did give us all $300 to look the other way as he picked our pocket.

First of all, that chart is sensationalist bullshit since it doesn't take into account how much taxes were being paid by each income group in the first place. It's impossible to cut the taxes of people who don't pay any taxes to begin with.

And second, tax cuts do not cause money to "go" anywhere. Exactly the opposite: they let people keep more of their own money instead of ripping it off them. A tax cut does not pick anyone's pocket. The government spending which forces either debt, inflation or higher taxes does.

 

[Yoshi-Pop]

If I were Barack, I'd be flatterd, but then again, I love the Joker. BTW, OP, I speak French, the word Bourgeoisie means "middle class".

 

[cobra_ky]

I personally blame the lobbyists. They are the reason why so many politicians these days are corrupt. Why pay attention to the little guy when a massive corporation is willing to pay huge sums of money just to buy a vote?

True that. I guess the real question is who's more on the take.

I just got done watching Hardball on MBNBC. Apparently the entire Republican party is on the take from health insurance companies... but more than one Democratic representative is as well. Mostly the Blue Dogs [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition], of course.

you were watching countdown, not hardball. olbermann is full of shit, incidentally. he even admitted that plenty of other democrats accept donations from the healthcare industry, but that's ok because Olbermann agrees with them.

Hmmm... where did all that money go?

Oh, there it is [http://dangerousintersection.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/bush%20class%20warfare%20chart-small.JPG].

And how's Obama going to change that?

He's already started [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/politics/26budget.html].

The response was to start fake protests [http://zekesaysso.blogspot.com/2009/04/fake-tea-party-nice.html].

That's not what I was hinting at:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article5575883.ece

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29898698/

Obama is not saving any money by ending the war in Iraq. When it ends, there will still be loose ends in Afgahnistan. And now, the Obama administration is setting thier sights on Pakistan. Right now, he isn't doing much to end war in the Middle East. Spending even more to reforom health care won't help the defecit situation.

uh, two wars cost more than one. and effective health care reform WILL stimulate the economy, guaranteed.

 

[AkJay]

Honestly, it just sounds like a bunch of /b/tards got bored.

I agree with this. I highly doubt it was anything like those "Hope" posters, just a bunch of idiots got bored.

Off topic question to the person I'm quoting, Why does everyone use "/b/tards"? Will you get banned if you put "re" infront of the tard part?

that made me laugh so hard i damn-near shot water out of my nose. NO. /b/tards refers to the 4chans random image board, also known as /b/, which are filled by a bunch of random people who like to commit rather dumb acts in real life, such as making copies of Obama in Joker make-up with the words "Socialist" under it.

 

[Lord Beautiful]

If I were Barack, I'd be flatterd, but then again, I love the Joker. BTW, OP, I speak French, the word Bourgeoisie means "middle class".

It can also mean "overly concerned with things of a monetary nature" when used as an adjective.

 

[SilentHunter7]

True that. I guess the real question is who's more on the take.

I just got done watching Hardball on MBNBC. Apparently the entire Republican party is on the take from health insurance companies... but more than one Democratic representative is as well. Mostly the Blue Dogs [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition], of course.

Did you also catch Olbermann's special comment?

 

[Rolling Thunder]

So, by the logic, Obama wishes to set America on fire from end to end? If so...why hasn't he? He's got the launch codes.


Oh, wait, I forgot, this is another case of moronic people, being moronic. Look, America - Obama is the first President you've had for a while that the rest of the world hasn't had a good chance to laugh at. Try and hold onto that state.