Obama using OWS language in speeches

[occupyeverywhere]

Chesterfield, Virginia October 18, 2011

"Their plan says let’s go back to a system on Wall Street where there were the kinds of rules that allowed people to take reckless bets that ended up affecting all of Main Street. My attitude is, to strengthen this economy we’ve got to make sure that those rules are actually enforced, not watered down, and in the meantime, let’s work to make sure that we’re keeping taxes low for middle-class families who are still struggling to get by.

I just want to repeat: dirtier air, dirtier water, fewer people on health care, less accountability on Wall Street — that is not a jobs plan."

"So when you hear that, well, the reason we’re not supporting it, we like the ideas but we don’t want to see higher taxes — if we don’t pass this bill, taxes for the average family will go up, because the payroll tax cut that we passed in December will lapse. If we do pass this bill, for 97, 98 percent of Americans, your taxes will stay low. My taxes will go up a little bit, but I can afford it."

Too bad he didn't actually say 99%, but he would certainly have been torn apart by the likes of Foxnews if had actually said 99%.

[LWolf]

1. While he signs 3 new "free" trade bills into law. nt

[ThomWV]

5. Yep ... nt.

[GreenPartyVoter]

16. Ayuh

[Coyote_Bandit]

2. Talk is cheap

and his track record as President is that he is a friend of Wall Street.

He certainly has not been my champion.

I'll judge him by his actions - not his frickin stump speech.

[JTFrog]

3. No that's not his track record.

If that were true, he'd be raking in far more money from them than Romney is. Seems most just want to judge him by the new DU standards of Obama bad...Obama bad...Obama bad...

If he doesn't say anything he isn't using the bully pulpit. If he says something he's just all talk. You can try, but you can't have it both ways. :shrug:

[polmaven]

8. ++++++++

Can't win for losing!

[xiamiam]

15. it is just talk..and you know it..nt

[JTFrog]

24. Thanks for proving my point. n/t

[Coyote_Bandit]

23. Actually I'm judging Obama

by the same standards I did before I held my nose voted for him in 2008. Unlike many others, I never had high expectations for his administration. While he and his administration had the opportunity to be transformative there was very little to suggest he was a progressive.

I don't really much care what he does or does not say. I am far more interested in what he does and he has failed to follow through on his past stated positions. That means I don't believe or trust his words.

Need an example? Obama was a proponent of a single universal healthcare plan. Here's a link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpAyan1fXCE
But he didn't ask COngress to consider such a plan or even complain that Congress refused to consider any evidence regarding the viability of such a plan. That's not the behavior of a principled advocate. It's the stuff of cheap talk to bait voters which is followed by whatever actions are deemed to be politically expedient.

The so-called healthcare reform legislation largely served the interests of the insurance companies, the pharmaceutical companies and the for-profit healhcare corporations. Then there were that Wall Street bailouts of the banksters - and a stimulus plan designed to create jobs through a trickle down theory. And let's not forget that there was a big frickin oil spill in the Gulf and the negligence of the corporatoions was largely overlooked whilst everyday hardworking folks lost their livlihoods and their life savings. Obama has been a friend of big business.

[Amonester]

25. Don't worry. Most of DU will not be able to defeat him.

Nor will the teaRoarist$ and asshat$ on the daRk $ide.

[Better Believe It]

4. Wall Street: “it probably helps from a political perspective if he’s not seen as a Wall Street guy."

That's how a top Wall Street banking executive who raises money for Obama's election campaign explained the Wall Street rhetoric.

[Myrina]

6. ... and with his other hand ...

He's taken in more money from Wall Street than all of the GOP candidates combined.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-has-more-cash-from-financial-sector-than-gop-hopefuls-combined-data-show/2011/10/18/gIQAX4rAyL_story.html

[JTFrog]

7. Holy perpetuating the bullshit batman.

"This fundraising edge might seem counterintuitive in light of Obama’s thorny relations with business groups and Wall Street executives, who strongly opposed his financial reform law and have bristled at proposals to close corporate tax loopholes and raise income taxes on millionaires. In fact, he has raised just $3.9 million from the finance sector for his campaign committee itself, aside from the DNC, compared with Romney’s $7.5 million."

That paragraph was conveniently misplaced somewhere in the link you and BBI are flashing around here this morning.

Not to mention the numbers used lump money taken in by DNC without lumping money taken in by RNC.

Not only misleading but dishonest to boot.

[polmaven]

9. And yet again ....-+++++++++!

getting very, very old, isn't it?

[JTFrog]

10. I actually just sent a letter to the editor of the Wapo

asking wtf happened to the paragraph. Did they think that the meaning would change by editing that out and changing it to:

"Even so, Obama clearly has trouble appealing to Wall Street fundraisers, who have emerged in recent years as among the most important sources of campaign cash for major national politicians.

Put aside the DNC money, for example, and Obama’s numbers look much worse: just $3.9 million from the financial sector, compared with Romney’s $7.5 million."

And burying that info on the second page instead of the paragraph that was originally in the front of the article.

Mind boggling....

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[dionysus]

19. you can do better, toss out a "cult" or "rezko"

:eyes:

[JTFrog]

21. You obviously didn't even read the article you posted.

Those darn facts:

"Put aside the DNC money, for example, and Obama’s numbers look much worse: just $3.9 million from the financial sector, compared with Romney’s $7.5 million."

Even tho they edited the original article, they still had to include one of those real facts.

[AngkorWot]

11. He's been talking like this for awhile, actually.

Well before OWS.

[AngkorWot]

12. He's been talking like this for awhile, actually.

Well before OWS.

[phleshdef]

13. Obama has been using that kind of language way, way, way before there was ever an OWS movement.

[MH1]

14. income-wise, I seriously doubt that Obama is in the "1%"

and I certainly am not, and I can afford for my taxes to go up a little.

So I'm glad he's looking at 97, 98 % not seeing their taxes rise, rather than 99%. I'd be fine if it were 90%. Anyone doing better than the 90th percentile who can't afford a couple hundred bucks a year more in taxes, REALLY needs to take a money management course.

[coalition_unwilling]

18. After July 4, 2012, Obama will be little more than a footnote to history. - n/t

[dionysus]

20. ROFL.. because if you have anything to say about, by 2016 the dems will be

finished...


:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[JTFrog]

22. At least you make your agenda here obvious. n/t