My wife just texted me from Virginia - "Democrats have gone full socialist, never go full socialist" (obviously making a pun from Tropic Thunder)

I find the irony hilarious that Obama and Biden both bring up how Romney/Ryan don't have the courage to tell the American people their plan while Obama and Biden are doing the same thing. Such a joke.

HitsRus;1263417 wrote:What control have they lost?? Did someone take something away from them that they had before?

My wife texted about that as well. "I feel in control." The DEMs are just the party of stupid and they think these scare tactics work, but it only convinces the young and equally stupid. Professional women aren't going to be swayed by this, just the moon bat Sandra Fluke's of society. Unfortunately in the U.S. we've let the inmates run the asylum.

This speech is not good. It's a reboot of what he's said many times before. He has no plan, he has no new ideas. Just another over ambitious list of empty goals and promises. I don't think that plays well, at all, with people hugely disappointed with the economy. That's the take away - stay the course, it's starting to work.

He actually had the gall to promise to reduce the debt. A fair number of other whoppers, and he isn't done yet.

I remember watching his State of the Union speech back in Jan., and I remember thinking "This sounds like a campaign speech". Same thing tonight- he acts like he hasn't been president for 3 and a half years.

Wow...just wow. SMFH. I might put on MSDNC just to hear how delusional/and/or how much smoke they are going to blow up the viewers ass.

"Hard, necessary work of self-government . . . that's what we believe"

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Manhattan Buckeye;1263399 wrote:Apparently while Obama was Prez. It is truly shocking how far off the mainstream the DEMs have gone, it isn't even left-wing. It is just plain stupid.

The ding-bat from Massachusetts last night (or maybe it was Fluke) mentioned how women should get equal pay for equal work. I swear, the Dems are running a campaign for the 80's. Really fits well with "forward".

But he's the great uniter and he killed Bin Laden. Awful, awful speech. LOL at well you can earn it but just give it back. Easy to say for someone that's never earned a damn thing in his life. If nothing else this should fire up the GOP base. Go Ohio, I'll work on Virginia.

When he kept saying "You did that" I wanted a freudian slip of "You didn't build that!" LOL

Here comes the narcissism...

"I'm no longer just a candidate, I'm the President"

HitsRus;1263435 wrote:Wow...just wow. SMFH. I might put on MSDNC just to hear how delusional/and/or how much smoke they are going to blow up the viewers ass.

The only person creaming himself more than them right now is Rush Limbaugh.

Clinton was great last night. Michelle Obama was fantastic. Biden and Obama are falling completely flat. Obama's speech completely fails to inspire hope or confidence (heck, just compare the audience reaction with other speakers), Basically it all is working and we're going to double down. I keep warning people what 4 more years has in store. He has to be fired.

How do you brag about GM while simultaneously pissing on bailouts?

How do you attack Romney for outsourcing when you brag about companies bringing back production because American workers are better? What's the implication of companies that haven't and won't bring back jobs?

I also love how he had to get the line about God in there.

Everyone plays by the same rules, but the successful pay much much more?


There was one unbelievable statement, but I can't quite recall it right now.

Personally didn't think it was very good. A rehash of everything we've heard before. Bill Clinton is great because he talks to the American people like they're adults. Obama talks to the people like he's talking to his little girls.

I really felt like the charisma that defined Obama in 2008 was almost completely lacking. Maybe it's because the more times you hear a speech, the more ordinary it becomes.

And so, after removing God from the platform, they close the convention with a benediction?!? SMH

gut;1263444 wrote:How do you brag about GM while simultaneously pissing on bailouts?

THIS X1000.

sleeper;1263459 wrote:THIS X1000.

I guess because he'd classify GM not as corporate welfare, but union welfare. And he's all for that.

What makes GM such a success is he stole from the investors and gave it to his consituents.

gut;1263462 wrote:I guess because he'd classify GM not as corporate welfare, but union welfare. And he's all for that.

What makes GM such a success is he stole from the investors and gave it to his consituents.

Tell me if I'm wrong here. If we let GM fail, does that really end the American auto industry? I mean those companies still have assets that perhaps a leaner, stronger, more innovative company can buy on the cheap and rebuild; bringing back those jobs that were lost anyway. Why save GM with piss poor management and overpaid inefficient unionized labor?

Such a joke.

sleeper;1263464 wrote:Tell me if I'm wrong here. If we let GM fail, does that really end the American auto industry? I mean those companies still have assets that perhaps a leaner, stronger, more innovative company can buy on the cheap and rebuild; bringing back those jobs that were lost anyway. Why save GM with piss poor management and overpaid inefficient unionized labor?

Such a joke.

Of course not, if GM failed someone would have picked up the pieces, it is damn expensive to import a car from Japan, South Korea or Germany into the U.S., it is far more efficient to build from within. The GM bailout was a screw you to bondholders, billions of taxpayer money spent, and a reward for an organization that was so terrible it was too big to fail. They can continue to make crappy cars.

BTW, radio silence from all of my DEM friends on Facebook. Normally they post stuff about what Michelle is wearing and how awesome Obama is (I get these many times a day). Absolute silence.

sleeper;1263464 wrote:Tell me if I'm wrong here. If we let GM fail, does that really end the American auto industry? I mean those companies still have assets that perhaps a leaner, stronger, more innovative company can buy on the cheap and rebuild; bringing back those jobs that were lost anyway. Why save GM with piss poor management and overpaid inefficient unionized labor?

Such a joke.

Well, to be fair they did restructure wages, and the pensions were the big one, to be more competitive.

It's also a really tough question on whether GM would have been bought. At the time, credit markets were frozen. Yes, someone would eventually have stepped in but it may have very likely been a foreign company. I'm not sure that's a horrible outcome, but when you are dealing with a company the size of GM - and the hundreds of thousands of suppliers and their workers - every day lost is devastating to an already extremely fragile economy. The latter would have been devastating to Ford, as well, which didn't receive bailout money (but still benefited from the new CBA).

Now I've said the govt has or will get all its money back from the bank bailouts. It's making money on the toxic mortgages (this was given with unlimited liquidity able to ride out return to fair value). But on the surface, we've lost a boatload of money on GM. However, it was actually the lower cost alternative. First, the PBGC would have assumed that massive pension liability at about 60 cents on the dollar. That is BILLIONS (probably going to get it one day anyway, but oh well). But then consider the tax revenues on workers wages, sales and profits - not just at GM, but all those suppliers. Finally, think about the massive increase on the unemployment/welfare/SNAP programs.

"Now I've said the govt has or will get all its money back from the bank bailouts."

I'm not sure, they made money off the big guys but a lot of the community banks haven't paid back a single cent. The 5-7% return is worthless if they aren't making payments, and having a government board member isn't worth much.

You could hear the cash register going "cha ching" in the background as Obama rattled off all his lofty goals...and then he promises to reduce the DEBT (which would require first balancing the budget). I still can't get over that one.

Manhattan Buckeye;1263470 wrote:"Now I've said the govt has or will get all its money back from the bank bailouts."

I'm not sure, they made money off the big guys but a lot of the community banks haven't paid back a single cent. The 5-7% return is worthless if they aren't making payments, and having a government board member isn't worth much.

Without diving into the details, 88% ($419B) of the TARP money to banks/financial institutions ($475B) has been paid back. The tally thus far is $33B in profit and $5B in losses.

AIG has paid back about 2/3 of $67B and appears to be making its payments.

Fannie/Freddie are on the hook for $187B and will probably never pay it back (but have paid $46B in dividends thus far, but they are still in trouble).

I forget where I saw it, but read not long ago the Treasury was moving the toxic assets swiftly, and at a profit. The big losses are going to be Fannie/Freddie and GM. I find it difficult to quibble over $200B in taxpayer money when so much more has been flushed down the toilet. That's the best $200B Obama has spent (of course, it was all teed-up for him, the extent of his "rescue" and "prevention" was signing his name).

https://projects.propublica.org/bailout/