Concerning Obama's support of the bailout: PUT 2 AND 2 TOGETHER

[LBJDemocrat]

Presidential candidates of the major parties ALWAYS must support the standard, neoliberal centrist policies.

His advisers? Warren Buffett. Paul Volcker. Robert Rubin.
His contributers? Lehman, Goldman, et. al.
Why? To FUND HIS CAMPAIGN.

Kucinich is against it; Obama is for it. How come? Because one has nothing to lose.

Now, I support Barack Obama for the simple reason that it would be immoral to allow a violent nutcase like McCain become president. But please don't forsake your intellectual faculties just because you "trust" Obama. That scares me, because then that means we would let him get away with anything as president. Keep the pressure on him, for God's sake.

*cough*

Goldman Sachs: $748,880
JPMorgan: $493,469
Citigroup: $467, 849
UBS: $423, 045
Lehman Brothers: $393,324
Morgan Stanley: $338,677

[GetTheRightVote]

1. I agree with you, he is no saint simply a man lead in the wrong direction...

and it is against the American public period. We as a public group must stand up and protect ourselves against this type of major lie which will rob us and our children of what is rightfully theirs to claim, the American Dream. Obama should not be supporting the Bailout Bill because there is just to many unknowns about it yet, way to many of them. He still needs to make it into the White House but he must be held to higher standards then that of falling in line with these liers.

:grr::grr:

[lib2DaBone]

33. What if McCain throws Obama under the bus like last week?

What if McCain says he is going to vote for it.. then turns around and votes against it? (Like McCain did last week when he told Obama to wait for him and they would make a Media statement together concerning the first vote. McCain then ran to the media and made Obama look foolish)
Is tonight's vote going to be just like Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown one more time?

[defendandprotect]

35. Why would Obama agree to a joint statement at McCain's bidding?

[defendandprotect]

34. We're bailing out elites -- 5% of this foreclosures/95% derivatives-

and no provisions re hedge no derivatives ...

[sandnsea]

2. This Is A Capitalist Country

Most people do not have the means to survive off the land.

That is why he supported this bill. It takes money to live. Pretty damn simple.

[natrat]

5. capitalist tending toward plutocracy

[brentspeak]

18. Was the U.S. communist under TR and FDR and Truman?

How about under Eisenhower and JFK? Were Americans calling each other "comrade" back then?

How is it that the United States under those Presidents was very much of a capitalist society despite none of them being under the beck-and-call of corporate lobbyists and wealthy interests?

[leftofcool]

25. Yes but, now the government will own WS, the banks

and where else might this lead? We made need a rescue but not this bail out

[sandnsea]

32. You'd think the left would be thrilled

Unregulated free market capitalism has been proven to be a complete failure. The government steps in - and holy cow, there are still rich people. It's shocking!!

Except to anybody who ever paid attention to other socialist and communist countries.

[defendandprotect]

40. "Thrilled" ... that our Treasury has been bankrupted -- ???

Coincidentally, a great way to destroy democracy/people's government --

[sandnsea]

49. Enjoy putting words in people's mouths? Where'd I say that? n/t

[defendandprotect]

59. If I've misunderstood your comment ..

my apology --

but no one is thrilled at yet another failure of capitalism ...

[defendandprotect]

36. Obama is supporting the blank check bail-out because of his corp backers ...

and his advisers ---

[happydreams]

52. And that is why I don't give a shit whether he or McCain wins. It is the same

old fucking neo-liberal shit.
"A bailout I can live with". :eyes:

[defendandprotect]

70. Obama is a break in the fascist chain ---

voted for him today --

tho I'm not expecting much but more Pelosi/Reid BS ---

[happydreams]

81. Or a sugarcoated version of McCain. The old saying: "Follow the Money"

is all you need do.
I know it sickening and I don't like repeating it, but I cannot deny what is right in front of me.

[defendandprotect]

37. It's TOTALITARIAN capitalism --

[Dr Fate]

51. It's apparently a socialist welfare state if you are millionare or billionare banker.

But yeah, "the market" makes or breaks you if you are a regular guy...

[femmedem]

3. He is where he is today largely because he didn't take the safe, centrist position

for the war, back when he had less to lose. If he and the other Dems are doing this for political purposes, I think they're miscalculating. I think we've reached a tipping point where people of every party and no party are so angry about economic injustice that the safest thing would be something closer to Bernie Sanders' amendment.

[chimpymustgo]

23. He ALWAYS takes the safe position. He was against the war in a VERY BLUE state. Tell me ONE time

in his Senate career that he's taken a BRAVE stand??? FISA??? Iran a terrorist state? Ending the war??? Sorry people, your savior ain't.

[AntiFascist]

4. Great post and I will K&R... I've been wondering about how to explain Obama n/t

[lostnotforgotten]

6. Obama Has Proven Once Again That He Is Merely Another Politician

eom

[Baltoman991]

17. You

going to post this on every thread now?

Obama is far from being "merely another politician". Obama cares about the country. Obama said we're not going to like everything he does and he doesn't expect everyone to agree with everything he does.

Near as I can tell, there hasn't been a politician say those things to the people.

We bellyached about the FISA vote, it didn't hurt him. This one isn't going to hurt him either when people finally wake up and see this is needed.

[LBJDemocrat]

19. He cares about us.

Just like Bill Clinton. We should just close down this forum and let him make his decisions without our input from now on.

:eyes:

This isn't a kitchen table debate. Obama has the right to believe whatever he wants, but we elected him as our nominee so he could represent OUR interests. He's not my debate team partner. He's the representative of the Democratic PEOPLE and has a duty to represent US adequately.

[Baltoman991]

21. Wow

you got out of my post that I'm telling people to just shut up? Hardly. He wants to hear the input from people. I'm just saying that Obama is not your typical politician as was being said in the post I responded to. No need for the eye rolling. Input is a great thing.

[lostnotforgotten]

27. I Got The Same Message - No Debate, No Criticism Of The Anointed One

eom

[defendandprotect]

41. THAT needs to be repeated more often ... !!

This isn't a kitchen table debate. Obama has the right to believe whatever he wants, but we elected him as our nominee so he could represent OUR interests. He's not my debate team partner. He's the representative of the Democratic PEOPLE and has a duty to represent US adequately.

[leftofcool]

24. No the FISA bill didn't hurt him but is does hurt us

and US is what I care about

[lostnotforgotten]

28. Us Is What I Care About And More Debt Is Not What We Need

eom

[lostnotforgotten]

26. If He Cares So Much Why Is He Incapable Of Being A Leader

On this issue?

[moodforaday]

60. "It didn't hurt him"

We bellyached about the FISA vote, it didn't hurt him.

Nor did it hurt Bush. It just hurt everyone who ever uses a phone in the US.

[Pastiche423]

75. Obama has proven time and time again

since he got the nom that he doesn't give a shit about We, the People.

Furthermore, I don't give a fuck whether his FISA bill vote hurt him or not. It hurt US.


This vote has already hurt him and I am damn glad it has.

[bean fidhleir]

82. "Obama has proven time and time again that he doesn't give a shit about We, the People"

Pity you can't write this in letters of fire at the top of every DU political page.

[Ashy Larry]

7. Maybe Obama just disagrees with Kucinich.

Sometimes its that simple. He seems to be really concerned about the effects that a credit freeze could have on the economy.

I don't think it makes sense to assume that Obama secretly agrees with you but is lying to the country because he needs Wall Street money.

[LBJDemocrat]

8. Sarcasm?

I think you forgot the :sarcasm: emoticon.

[Ashy Larry]

9. No.

Why do you assume Obama doesn't really believe what he is saying? Do you have psychic abilities?

[LBJDemocrat]

10. Because money talks. nt

[Ashy Larry]

11. You would lie for money?

That is terrible.

[Selatius]

31. A lot of people have. It's apparent when one reads the pages of history.

If they're not lying for money, they're lying for power, and if they're not lying for that, then they're lying to save themselves. Am I justifying it? No.

[Ashy Larry]

63. Do you think Paul Krugman is lying for money and power?

He has the same position as Obama on this issue. Of course people lie all the time. My point is that whenever Obama or some other Democrat takes a position that isn't populist or progressive enough, they get accused of corruption without any evidence backing it up. Sometimes a disagreement is just a disagreement.

[Selatius]

78. I favor a rescue package. I just want it to have some common fucking sense.

Like a cap clause on CEO compensation for companies that have been bought or bailed out by the fucking government, not some word by a politician that he's gonna do that after the bill passes. Or an amendment that adds a surtax on America's wealthiest 1 percent to pay for the bailout.

[defendandprotect]

47. Did you miss the last 30 years or so of our politics...?

Or MOST of our political history --???

[Ashy Larry]

64. Yeah. Wha happened?

[defendandprotect]

67. Corporate Fascists are winning .. again --

[defendandprotect]

44. Any chance Obama asgrees with Goldman S ... a major contributor -- ???

[depakid]

12. Kucinich has nothing to lose- and everything to gain

After a crash- he likely reckons that with double digit unemployment people will be more inclined to support his views.

Our loss = his political gain.

Much as I support many of those views- that's not wise way to acheive them.

[anigbrowl]

62. And how. I don't think he could get elected without his national audience

As his opponent in the Democratic primary said 'he's not a congressman, but a showman'. I agree...and I speak as a former Kucinich volunteer who has met the guy. He is a lightning rod, not a foundation stone.

[Geek_Girl]

13. Kick

:dem:

[IsItJustMe]

14. K&R

I am with you on this one. This is a very bad bill and from my understanding many of the companies that this bill is designed to bail out are now lobbying and jockeying for position to be in control of the bail out money. This is just more of the same. We need to go another way.

[TexasObserver]

15. I love Obama. He's great. But I disagree with his position on the bailout.

I do understand why he supports it. And you're absolutely correct about that.

[happydreams]

53. Which simply happens to be the most important thing he will ever

have a position on!

[TexasObserver]

69. No, not even close.

[happydreams]

80. Name another.

[bdamomma]

16. DeFazio has a good plan doesn't he?

[LBJDemocrat]

20. Yes. nt

[defendandprotect]

46. Yes..and we need more attention on the OTHER plans ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4142729&mesg_id=4142729

[happydreams]

56. Defazio, Kaptur, Kucinich are true patriots. Most of the rest of these political

scumbags are just out tooting their own fucking horn under a limelight they don't want to share with anybody else. I'm so fucking sick and tired of these goddamn Bonapartist assholes I could :puke:

Pelosi is a Mafia princess who is as flaky as a knat!

[Naturyl]

22. K&R for critical thinking (n/t)

[PM Martin]

29. The corporations do have too much influence.

in both parties.

[endthewar]

30. 2 points: The funding is not a factor and Kucinich's reasoning is more complicated.

First, those campaign contributions come from employees of those companies. Also, it's really not that much money considering how much in total he has raised. He can make up this amount with just 1 extra campaign fundraiser in California.

Concerning Kucinich, you really should listen to some of his reasoning. He gave a house floor speech that should be entitled, "And this is the system we're saving?" It seems to me that Kucinich would be okay with our system collapsing because he believes that we could rebuild a better economic system. Agree with this point or not, but this seems like a little too much of a revolutionary change.

[LBJDemocrat]

42. Who works at Goldman Sachs?

Tiny Tim?

[endthewar]

45. Even big companies have secretaries

:crazy:

Plus you missed the main point. What percentage of Obama's total contributions come from these companies? I'll wait while you get your calculator. :eyes:

[Telly Savalas]

65. Percentage?

If a percentage was provided, then it wouldn't be very effective innuendo, now would it?

[endthewar]

66. Hehe, just calling people out on their BS.

They trump out a million or so dollars of campaign contributions when Obama just last month alone raised over $60 million. Yeah, those companies really have control over Obama's vote. :eyes: A more credible argument could be made about some of his advisors though, both in their ideology (Rubin) and potential monetary conflicts of interest (Buffett).

[ProSense]

38. This post is BS

This is money from people who work at those companies.

Bullshit. No frigging better than the RW.

[rebel with a cause]

74. I will second that emotion and opinion also.

I have been staying out of this conversation but I am getting sick of this side of it and their verbal abuse of those that don't agree. In my opinion they are not Obama supporters no matter how many times they claim to be. And I recognize some of the names and I remember who they supported in the primaries. :eyes:

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rebel with a cause]

77. that is your choice.

Not a wise one, but yours to make. Bye bye.

[Fuzz]

39. I understand his position, but I disagree with him. Will still vote for him.

[karynnj]

43. What happened in Cleveland when Kuchinich was mayor?

What are his economic credentials? Obama has been speaking to a VARIETY of economic experts and there are few economists, even those who hated (for good reason) the Paulson plan - who now support it - including Krugman, hardly a "neoliberal".

There are already signs that doing nothing could destroy small businesses leading to job loss.

As to the numbers - I assume they are the contributions of those companies EMPLOYEES. People work for companies - and they have the right to contribute to campaigns.

[Joe Fields]

48. Kucinich was vindicated for what happened to Cleveland.

I suggest you read about it. In fact, if he had gone along with the utilities, who were holding the city hostage, the mess would have been much worse.

I trust Kucinich. He is watching out for our tax dollars, just as he should. I DON'T trust anyone who is so willing to throw good money after bad. There are better ways.

[defendandprotect]

54. dupe

[defendandprotect]

57. Let's just stick with views against no restrictions/blank check bail outs...

and why you think that's a bad idea ... ???

McDonald's franchises ... main street -- ???

Self-lenders...?

No one has the right to more than the INDIVIDUAL power of their vote --

We have to move to public financing of campaigns ... limit them severely --

have the public make the rules for campaigns --

And as Teddy Roosevelt said 100 years ago ...

"BAR CORPORATIONS FROM ANY PARTICIPATION IN OUR ELECTIONS" --- !!!

[eridani]

72. What happened in Cleveland taught him that banks withhold credit for strictly POLITICAL reasons

Cleveland was not uncreditworthy, nor was there anything remotely like credit liquidity problem. The banks told him he must sell Muny Light or the city's loans wouldn't get rolled over. No rational justification at all; just political blackmail.

He said no, and Cleveland went into default. NOT bankruptcy, you may notice. No credit meant he ran the city on a cash only basis, which was hard to do and made him very unpopular at the time.

However, when Muny Light expanded a lot in the 90s (after saving consumers hundreds of millions of dollars), he was able to resurrect his career on the slogan "Because he was right."

[Joe Fields]

50. Exactly! 'Nuff said. K&R

[Sebastian Doyle]

55. This thread needs a big litterbox

...for all the PUMA shit stinking it up.

[LBJDemocrat]

58. What's PUMA?

[moodforaday]

61. It used to mean something else

but now, according to Sebastian, it means whoever doesn't let Obama do their thinking for them.

[Munchy]

68. For a campaign that has raised $300 million, those amounts are chump change...

..and not likely to buy much influence at all.

[defendandprotect]

71. You can bet they are sitting on his shoulder ...

STRINGS attached to their money -- not ours ..

DU handing over $100,000 to Obama -- with what provisions...????

How many meetings, lunches with Obama and his advisers -- and DLC-r-w Dems?

You know anyone who has had a meeting with Obama --

[LSK]

73. I see you have NEVER donated to a campaign before

Because on EVERY donate piece of literature I have ever recieved or sent in it says:

"Federal law requires us to use our best efforts to collect and report the name, mailing address, occupation, and employer of individuals whose contributions exceed $200 in an election cycle."

Below that is a box for your Employer and your Occupation.

[mike_c]

79. horseshit....

Spin it any way you want. Kucinich is right. Obama is wrong. Which do YOU think is showing how to lead, and where?