PDA

View Full Version : The Obama Deception (Released 03/15/09) (Important View)



Akamu
Mar 20, 2009, 05:11
We're already falling head first into the hole, and Obama isn't doing anything to dampen the fall, only everything his superiors wish.

[Updated March, 26th, 2009]

This film exposes Obama and explains the people who pull his strings as well as his surrounding anti-liberty cabinet-

Google Video: = Obama Deception Full Flick (http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=obama+deception&emb=0#)

Alex Jones on the Obama Deception:
VNnhL78ASWM

YouTube HQ FULL Film:
eAaQNACwaLw


Obama Deception PART 2 coming out July 4th (usually earlier then stated) Part 2 will go further into depth and what The Obama Administration/controllers have been doing in these recent months.Legislation He Signed and Passed:

(_1_/-Signed Stimulus Bill (Taking more from tax payers & their children's children's future while also drawing the dollar closer to inflation)

(_2_/-Authorization of FEMA camps Bill passed:
tevCNjgxnhs

jeqjykY5wPk

(_3_/-National Service Bill...pending (Give Act) (Youth will be forced to serve which is unconstitutional):
fB-mgzo1ZZI

6_9naY3o9rg


====================/================

-Is Sending 40,000 more troops to Afganistan and is considering to extend it to 400,000.

There is more & more to come, I didn't even mention everything.


Immortal Technique Telling it like it is:
rGx-_URdcBk

Dead Prez:
c3prqLLFuio

KBlack25
Mar 20, 2009, 10:58
I'm glad someone had the balls to post this, in a world that is so blindly pro-Obama. Where minorities identify with him because of the color of his skin and not his policies. I will preface my statements by saying I sit pretty far to the left and that I did vote for Obama.

As someone on the left, I have felt isolated and left in the dust by Obama's presidency thus far. Everyone celebrated when Obama got into office, like their job was done. The fact is we as the American People MUST hold our leaders accountable for their actions. What made me upset is, I stood behind Obama because I felt him most capable to get us out of Iraq immediately. Then he announced that we would be in Iraq until at least 2011. This, to me, is unacceptable. I feel, as an American voter, and a Democrat Party Member, betrayed by Obama. He promised to get us out of this war that has claimed so many young lives, and stands to claim more, to get us out of this unjustified war, in a place we never should have been in in the first place. To end a war that was founded on lies and deception of the American Public. Fact is, we're in Iraq for much longer, even with Obama in office, than we ever should be.

Then to further our efforts in Afghanistan is yet another flexing of our military muscle that is both uncalled for and unneccessary. Fact is terrorism exists in this world, the best we can do is arm ourselves for it. Smoking out Bin Laden from whatever bum**** cave he is hiding in won't end hatred of American policy, there will always be someone willing to blow themselves up to further a radical cause. It's a fact of life. I'll quote one of my favorite TV Shows ever, The Wire, when they talk about the War on Drugs, because it relates so well to our "War on Terror, "You can't call it a war...Wars end."

I'm not saying we should QUIT the war on terror, but we should realize that if people are so desperate to prove a point they will blow themselve up, there's nothing we can do to truly prevent that. The best we can do is protect ourselves, but we also can't live our lives in fear. Fact is, this country is SO ****ed up, little kids starving worse than in 3rd World African countries, single mothers feeding their kids popcorn for dinner, drug addicts giving birth to babies in poverty, there's so much we need to fix here. I thought with Obama in office maybe we'd have someone who cared about OUR people more than some Iraqis, but I guess I was wrong.

LeFlume
Mar 20, 2009, 13:18
George W. Spent 2 billion dollars a day on the war in Irak alone, Afganistan not included in that amount. Now we have to pay for that. He destroyed our economy while he filled his and his homies pockets, by making sure their companies got all government contracts to rebuild Irak. He went to war on lie and the congress bought it out of fear. GWB had smart people around him. They knew how affraid the Americans were after 9/11 and they played that fear card to get what they wanted. Obama was dealt a losing hand. It will take years to get this **** together.

pat
Mar 21, 2009, 16:49
Signed Stimulus Bill (Taking more from tax payers & their children's children's future while also drawing the dollar closer to inflation)

Do you have any idea what to do? It wasn't Obama who sold those sub-prime mortgages. But greedy brokers. All major pension funds -- not only in the US but world wide -- invested in those derivatives. If you let AIG go bankrupt, the insurances that protect those pension funds will vanish into thin air. This would mean an absolute catastrophe for current and future pensioners. OF course I hate to see those ridiculous bonuses just as much as the next man, but from a regulative point of view taxing those bonuses is a delicate matter, to say the least.

However I have the feeling that president Obama has the awareness that there are situations -- and we seem to be in such a situation right now -- in which you can only do wrong, both by acting and by not acting. Still I have the impression that the moral imperative is his guiding principle, which is something I did not have in the last eight years.

In an ideal world I would do many things differently and I am sure this is true for President Obama as well, but I think I don't have to tell you how to end this sentence, right?

Oh yeah, and that comment on inflation: In a situation like this, when economy almost comes to a halt, inflation is the lesser of two evils (cf. deflation). I am sure you have read about Hooverville, Hoover-plaids and how the cuts in Great Depression Germany led to the rise of the NS-regime. Stopping the bail-outs and a policy of tight money just will not do the trick. As much as I believe that it is almost impossible to learn from history, this is an economic lesson rulers have obviously learned (thank God).

Paul1355
Mar 23, 2009, 01:24
I'm glad someone had the balls to post this, in a world that is so blindly pro-Obama. Where minorities identify with him because of the color of his skin and not his policies. I will preface my statements by saying I sit pretty far to the left and that I did vote for Obama.

As someone on the left, I have felt isolated and left in the dust by Obama's presidency thus far. Everyone celebrated when Obama got into office, like their job was done. The fact is we as the American People MUST hold our leaders accountable for their actions. What made me upset is, I stood behind Obama because I felt him most capable to get us out of Iraq immediately. Then he announced that we would be in Iraq until at least 2011. This, to me, is unacceptable. I feel, as an American voter, and a Democrat Party Member, betrayed by Obama. He promised to get us out of this war that has claimed so many young lives, and stands to claim more, to get us out of this unjustified war, in a place we never should have been in in the first place. To end a war that was founded on lies and deception of the American Public. Fact is, we're in Iraq for much longer, even with Obama in office, than we ever should be.

Then to further our efforts in Afghanistan is yet another flexing of our military muscle that is both uncalled for and unneccessary. Fact is terrorism exists in this world, the best we can do is arm ourselves for it. Smoking out Bin Laden from whatever bum**** cave he is hiding in won't end hatred of American policy, there will always be someone willing to blow themselves up to further a radical cause. It's a fact of life. I'll quote one of my favorite TV Shows ever, The Wire, when they talk about the War on Drugs, because it relates so well to our "War on Terror, "You can't call it a war...Wars end."

I'm not saying we should QUIT the war on terror, but we should realize that if people are so desperate to prove a point they will blow themselve up, there's nothing we can do to truly prevent that. The best we can do is protect ourselves, but we also can't live our lives in fear. Fact is, this country is SO ****ed up, little kids starving worse than in 3rd World African countries, single mothers feeding their kids popcorn for dinner, drug addicts giving birth to babies in poverty, there's so much we need to fix here. I thought with Obama in office maybe we'd have someone who cared about OUR people more than some Iraqis, but I guess I was wrong.

I thought your testimony as a betrayed democrat is interesting. I hope most demorats feel the way you do because your 100% right about Obama making promises he clearly can't keep.

People did warn the public about this. many republicans explained during the Presidential race that it's clearly impossible to do what Obama is saying. He promised things left and right from 95% tax cuts to ending the Iraq War.

Now that people are seeing Obama going through a spending frenzy.....the American public is going to hopefully investigate "change".

We need change people.....yea like spending the most money any president has spent within his first months of office.

Two stimulus bills that add up to over a trillion dollars with about 9,000 pork spending in each bill (that means useless spending).


Think about it people.....Democrats voted to pass these bills without knowing anything about them or reading them.

Obama finished the bill and then passed it a few days later....has anyone seen the size of this bill....it's like reading The Bible in a few days....no one accomplshied this so these bills are clearly a blind decision.

Obama is going to have an apporval rating of 30% this year...

He is going to be worse than Bush, sounds crazy at first...maybe....but look what Obama has already done in a matter of a couple weeks.

pat
Mar 23, 2009, 10:05
Obama finished the bill and then passed it a few days later....has anyone seen the size of this bill....it's like reading The Bible in a few days....no one accomplshied this so these bills are clearly a blind decision.


The magic words here are "staff", "excerpt" and "outline" Easier said than done.

We all saw what happened when Lehman brothers went bust. Unfortunately, the Bush government failed to save some money when they should have (in a prosperous period). This is exactly the money the USA should have kept to spend it now in a time of economic crisis.

What is your alternative?

KBlack25
Mar 23, 2009, 10:36
The magic words here are "staff", "excerpt" and "outline" Easier said than done.

We all saw what happened when Lehman brothers went bust. Unfortunately, the Bush government failed to save some money when they should have (in a prosperous period). This is exactly the money the USA should have kept to spend it now in a time of economic crisis.

What is your alternative?

Rather than give money to the companies, have the government cut that same check divided amongst every Tax Paying American citizen. HOWEVER, make it contingent on the fact that they use the said $ to pay off their mortgages and credit card debt. It'd work out to about 400K per person. That way, the housing companies, credit card companies and banks all get their money back. There would be significantly reduced debt for the American public. If, after you pay off your Mortgage and Credit Card debt, you have money to spend at the end, you can use it for whatever you like. This helps the economy by pumping more money back into the system.

pat
Mar 23, 2009, 11:30
But that doesn't give you the same kind of influence on banks. Bailing them out directly gives you a far better chance to righten what is wrong in the system. It gives you a moral basis to bring the financial market under a control system. Another problem with you plan is that this isn't an American crisis anymore. Since those derivatives (with expected interest earnings) have been resold again and again the amount of money due has been blown out of proportion as well. That is the main problem: the money was never really their. Therefore giving consumers the money to pay back their loans will only cover a fractional amount of money banks owe each other.

KBlack25
Mar 23, 2009, 12:26
But that doesn't give you the same kind of influence on banks. Bailing them out directly gives you a far better chance to righten what is wrong in the system. It gives you a moral basis to bring the financial market under a control system. Another problem with you plan is that this isn't an American crisis anymore. Since those derivatives (with expected interest earnings) have been resold again and again the amount of money due has been blown out of proportion as well. That is the main problem: the money was never really their. Therefore giving consumers the money to pay back their loans will only cover a fractional amount of money banks owe each other.

Yeah but if people are able to pay off their mortgage, pay off their debt, and increase their 401(K) they will be more likely to spend more of their earnings, thereby improving the economy. Small business owners will have less debt and will be more likely to take on new employees (creating jobs), and the businesses will do well because people are going to spend more. This includes spending in foreign markets (buying foreign cars) and tourism both intra- and internationally. If mortgages are paid off, banks will have that money to pay back what they owe each other, and if mortgages are paid off people will be more likely to go ahead and indebt themselves to the banks again.

Ultimately there's no perfect solution at all, there are flaws in both plans. I personally just believe that increasing consumer spending by helping erase personal debt will do this country better, it's two sides of an ongoing debate.

Paul1355
Mar 23, 2009, 13:27
The magic words here are "staff", "excerpt" and "outline" Easier said than done.

We all saw what happened when Lehman brothers went bust. Unfortunately, the Bush government failed to save some money when they should have (in a prosperous period). This is exactly the money the USA should have kept to spend it now in a time of economic crisis.

What is your alternative?

So your basically blaming Bush for everything again and saying that the only alternative is to spend over a trillion dollars in two bills that no one even knows the specifics about???

OGKnickfan
Mar 23, 2009, 18:31
I watched this film, and I saw the part about the meetings at hotels, etc. But, I didn't see any evidence, other than the words of the conspiracy people, proving the claims made, about Obama being a puppet for "NWO." I also didn't understand what it was all about, it jumped from... oil prices to secret meetings. The Hispanic guy who claimed that oil prices would go up until the NWO could take power said that when the film was made, during the oil crisis, a crisis which subsequently ended.

I do agree that secret meetings are unfair, and that's an issue that needs to be addressed. Obviously, the president is going to be advised by people, especially the powerful and connected. It's always existed. I don't see how you can easily get around it. Maybe some sort of direct democracy would solve that, but that's something that raises other problems, because sometimes the majority would seek to violate the rights of others: majority opinion doesn't make the opinion made the right one.

Anyway, there's just not that much here.

pat
Mar 24, 2009, 07:40
Small business owners will have less debt and will be more likely to take on new employees (creating jobs), and the businesses will do well because people are going to spend more. Wasn't overspending the biggest problem in the first place (and still is)? Remortgage your house to buy a new flat screen TV? This is exactly how the American gross national product was artificially bloated. And why? Because economic growth is the golden calf of this type of economy. Global resources are limited, population growth has become a real problem, however we still try to generate more growth. Even though we should focus on a new, more sustainable form of market based economy. Economic principles are no laws of physics. They are man made and can be changed. A first step would be: people only spend what they really have. Otherwise the next bubble is going to burst soon.


So your basically blaming Bush for everything again and saying that the only alternative is to spend over a trillion dollars in two bills that no one even knows the specifics about???

Well not him personally, but you'd definitely have to walk around blindfolded to miss that,
... it is every governments obligation to save money in prosperous times, something the Bush administration failed to do.
... the Bush administrations laissez faire policies concerning the financial markets have led to financial products that are non-transparent and now turn out to be mere Ponzi schemes. With some form of financial market supervision, a lot of this would not have been possible.
... the first shock waves of this crisis could already be felt in summer 2007.

So yeah, Obama being in office a mere 70 days now and this crisis has been going on for at least 1 1/2 years now, reaching its peak (let us hope so) last autumn, I would definitely say that the Bush administration isn't exactly what I would call innocent.

KBlack25
Mar 24, 2009, 09:23
Wasn't overspending the biggest problem in the first place (and still is)? Remortgage your house to buy a new flat screen TV? This is exactly how the American gross national product was artificially bloated. And why? Because economic growth is the golden calf of this type of economy. Global resources are limited, population growth has become a real problem, however we still try to generate more growth. Even though we should focus on a new, more sustainable form of market based economy. Economic principles are no laws of physics. They are man made and can be changed. A first step would be: people only spend what they really have. Otherwise the next bubble is going to burst soon.


I agree, and if people are going to spend money they don't have to buy a new flatscreen there's no helping them anyway. The problem lies partially in contract law as well. I recently read a case where a woman on welfare decided to buy a new stereo system. Then, when she couldn't pay, she was bailed out by the law because the contract was unconscionable, and the company (not the woman) should have known she couldn't pay. Things like that really bother me.

My point is, if we decrease the debt of small business owners, they will have more money to take on employees and create jobs for people to start earning a decent living. By decreasing unemployment, people will be earning money, and will begin saving and investing, bolstering the economy and aiding banks in trouble. The problem is, people don't want to be told what to buy, and how to spend. You will never get people to agree to only spend what they "really" have, because people just don't want to be told what to do.

pat
Mar 24, 2009, 11:58
You will never get people to agree to only spend what they "really" have, because people just don't want to be told what to do.

But -- and that is the role of government -- you can provide a framework and incentives that foster a certain development.

Paul1355
Mar 24, 2009, 12:38
Wasn't overspending the biggest problem in the first place (and still is)? Remortgage your house to buy a new flat screen TV? This is exactly how the American gross national product was artificially bloated. And why? Because economic growth is the golden calf of this type of economy. Global resources are limited, population growth has become a real problem, however we still try to generate more growth. Even though we should focus on a new, more sustainable form of market based economy. Economic principles are no laws of physics. They are man made and can be changed. A first step would be: people only spend what they really have. Otherwise the next bubble is going to burst soon.



Well not him personally, but you'd definitely have to walk around blindfolded to miss that,
... it is every governments obligation to save money in prosperous times, something the Bush administration failed to do.
... the Bush administrations laissez faire policies concerning the financial markets have led to financial products that are non-transparent and now turn out to be mere Ponzi schemes. With some form of financial market supervision, a lot of this would not have been possible.
... the first shock waves of this crisis could already be felt in summer 2007.

So yeah, Obama being in office a mere 70 days now and this crisis has been going on for at least 1 1/2 years now, reaching its peak (let us hope so) last autumn, I would definitely say that the Bush administration isn't exactly what I would call innocent.

What I'm saying is that Obama is doing the opposite of saving and spending money in ridiculous amounts. Obvious things can generate economic growth like for example, getting out of Iraq...which won't happen any time soon.

Basically Obama is winging this presidency. He passed two bills without any bi partisanship that he promised to bring. He isn't doing anything he said he'd do during his race. Once again, Obama qualifies as a lying politician. Every republican radio or tv host predicted what Obama would do. Spend, spend, and spend and now we are in 10 trillion dollars of debt. Jiabo from China said that he is worried about his investments with the U.S, if anyone saw that on tv recently. No one in the world trust our market or our country's stability.

And why is every cabinet memeber nominee or whoever he picks winds up having some problem and can't be a cabinet member?

People are turning down the offers to be part of a presidential cabinet! That's bad, everyone in politics wants more power and their avoiding it with Obama.

Doesn't look good people.

Some analyst like Dick Morris have Obama with a 30% approval rating by the end of 2009, which is highly possible if the market stays at a stalemate or worse all year. Others say that the economy will begin to grow by the end of the year or start of next year.

Still Obama is not addressing or resolving any of these big issues...
The War in iraq- he is more focused on Afghanistan than Iraq at this point after deploying 17,000 troops to Afghanistan recently.

Illegal Immigration- one of the scariest dangers out there when you think about how easy it is for any enemy of this country to go into Mexico and cross the border like millions have done.

Prisoners from Guantanamo- These prisoners are being watched by the entire world to see how the U.S is going to respond to the closing of Guantanamo Bay. Obama keeps doing all of these actions to please the liberal public but he is facing with matters of national security. If you put these inmates with other prisoners, either the prisoners will kill easily kill them or the inmates from Guantanamo will spread their hateful Jihad beliefs on American prisoners. Either way it is a lose, lose situation for Obama.

Bailouts- AIG, GM, the list goes on for big company CEO's getting huge bailouts and money that they don't deserve. As the American public watches this and suffers at home financialy, the public order becomes more unrest. Obama is going to dig himself in a deep hole if he keeps bailing out companies that helped trigger the financial collapse. Enough with the bailouts and fire the CEO's and leaders of the companies going bankrupt because 99% of the time it's them putting the money in their own pockets.

The American Dollar- Our currency is now nothing compared the Euro. Businesses are being moved to Europe due to high taxes on small business and because our currency is becoming less valuable every year. Obama has to address this issue and fix it.

KBlack25
Mar 24, 2009, 13:10
But -- and that is the role of government -- you can provide a framework and incentives that foster a certain development.

Yes, and the incentive is self perpetuating. People want to make money, they make money by running a successful business, if you encourage spending (by giving people more money), business does well, if business does well more jobs will be created, when more jobs are created, more people make money, when more people make money more money will be spent and invested, when more money is invested, banks do better.

pat
Mar 24, 2009, 14:12
Yes, and the incentive is self perpetuating. People want to make money, they make money by running a successful business, if you encourage spending (by giving people more money), business does well, if business does well more jobs will be created, when more jobs are created, more people make money, when more people make money more money will be spent and invested, when more money is invested, banks do better.

But all this is still based on the concept of growth and maintaining the status quo which put us into this mess. What would change? My point is: by saving the banks you can hold the proverbial pistol to their heads, because they are actually toying around with your (aka the American people's) money. That could give the government some leverage to instigate change. Now my opinion on this administration will very much depend on what they'll do with that leverage. It is just that it is hard to tell after seventy days and taking over in the middle of a mess like this. My hope is that they force banks to finance projects that actually make a difference. For example finding materials that are capable of storing hydrogen. Having tankers that could transport liquid hydrogen would allow mankind to plaster deserts with solar panels, create huge off-shore turbine parks, which intern would lead to clean energy. That is just one example, there are just so many project which have such a hard time, not because they are not promising, but because they'll only make sense ins the long run. Banks however -- over the last two decades were almost exclusively interested in short term profits. Therefore, just allowing consumers to return to their pre-crash-overspending habits won't do the trick in the long run.

TunerAddict
Mar 24, 2009, 18:20
****, I learned in highschool that banks closing and seizing assets was a fasttrack to a depression as it was a contributor to the Great Depression.

Akamu
Mar 26, 2009, 18:50
Do you have any idea what to do? It wasn't Obama who sold those sub-prime mortgages. But greedy brokers. All major pension funds -- not only in the US but world wide -- invested in those derivatives. If you let AIG go bankrupt, the insurances that protect those pension funds will vanish into thin air. This would mean an absolute catastrophe for current and future pensioners. OF course I hate to see those ridiculous bonuses just as much as the next man, but from a regulative point of view taxing those bonuses is a delicate matter, to say the least.

However I have the feeling that president Obama has the awareness that there are situations -- and we seem to be in such a situation right now -- in which you can only do wrong, both by acting and by not acting. Still I have the impression that the moral imperative is his guiding principle, which is something I did not have in the last eight years.

In an ideal world I would do many things differently and I am sure this is true for President Obama as well, but I think I don't have to tell you how to end this sentence, right?

Oh yeah, and that comment on inflation: In a situation like this, when economy almost comes to a halt, inflation is the lesser of two evils (cf. deflation). I am sure you have read about Hooverville, Hoover-plaids and how the cuts in Great Depression Germany led to the rise of the NS-regime. Stopping the bail-outs and a policy of tight money just will not do the trick. As much as I believe that it is almost impossible to learn from history, this is an economic lesson rulers have obviously learned (thank God).


Did you really post this? :boohoo:

"Obama wasn't blah blah blah"....Really? no shyt, but your brainwashed listening to the media puppets about "sub-prime mortgages" (sub-prime lending) being the "main" cause of the financial problem. The main cause of the economy "crisis" revolves around the credit derivatives.

The subprime-mortagage is just another front, a scam by scam artists, the bankers want to place the blame on citizens of this country to cover their tracks.

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/1681/4rqo8l.gif


What has Obama done to actually help this country? .......nothing, nothing but help take away more our liberties, is slowly increasing the size of government and helping to further push us into hyperinflation.

He's doing what he's being told to do by his advisors and people that control him.



OF course I hate to see those ridiculous bonuses just as much as the next man, but from a regulative point of view taxing those bonuses is a delicate matter, to say the least. This is why I don't waste a lot of time here, "taxing those bonuses is a delicate matter"?? smh

Why would you even post this under your name? This is just straight out stupid to say that giving bonuses to crooks and then taxing them is important. Good job, you passed the logical class with flying colors.

This is like me saying, "It's important for me to reward the guy that just robbed my house but let's just take away a very tiny percentage of what he has taken from ME"

...really? lol I can't waste more of my time replying to shyt like this. I'm not gonna even bother going into other issues, just think before you type at least.

I'm gonna update my first post with some additional stuff-

pat
Mar 27, 2009, 07:18
The subprime-mortagage is just another front, a scam by scam artists, the bankers want to place the blame on citizens of this country to cover their tracks.


You should have read my other posts before starting your rant. Repackaging those subprime-mortgages and reselling them as a part of different non-transparent financial products is the big issue here. This is somethingbank managers did.

Nevertheless, any sane person has to agree that it is problematic to buy house if you don't have the money and there is little to no chance to actually earn it in the next couple of years. The only hope people had, was that the bloated "value" of their houses will allow them to sell their house at a higher price, pay-off their mortgages, and buy something they could afford. How unlikely is that? I know that there were other formats as well. But the main problem is that it was a Ponzi scheme and the bucket has to stop somewhere.

I am only saying that consumers are not entirely guilt-free. This is a question of a state of mind, that has advanced certain unfavourable tendencies. I could write a cultural history of what went wrong only using commercials in magazines, newspapers and the advertisements I've seen during the 2007 and 2008 Allstar games.




What has Obama done to actually help this country?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Not bad for 80 days, I think.


smh
This is like me saying, "It's important for me to reward the guy that just robbed my house but let's just take away a very tiny percentage of what he has taken from ME"


Obviously you got the whole thing wrong. They actually taxed those bonuses by 90%. This is not about a tiny percentage. As much as I hate the idea that --under current regulations -- the same people who screwed up badly can give each other straight up immoral bonuses, there still is no law that can prevent them from doing so. But that is a question of lacking regulation by the Bush administration.
This whole taxing business is a work-around. However, it essentially means that everybody's income could be taxed by 90% in a coup de main. I thought this would be something you -- as our prime conspiracy theorist --can't approve of.



...really? lol I can't waste more of my time replying to shyt like this.

No need to insult me. I thought this was a place where we can have a debate over issues we may disagree about without losing our temper.

But please: stop that "brainwashed by the media" conspiracy stuff. Your youTube videos are just another type of media output. Who actually owns youTube? Oh wait, its Google, the biggest collector of personal information. Furthermore, I don't even have a TV, because I can't be bothered to watch all this pointless bull.
I read several Newspapers, including, The New York Times, The Guardian (GB), the Independent (GB), and Die Zeit (Germany). I think I have a rather multi-perspective approach, which is the basis of a more balanced point of view on things. And please: STOP fiddling around with those bold print/font-colour options. Making your post more colourful (literally) doesn't make it more convincing.

KBlack25
Mar 27, 2009, 08:42
No need to insult me. I thought this was a place where we can have a debate over issues we may disagree about without losing our temper.

But please: stop that "brainwashed by the media" conspiracy stuff. Your youTube videos are just another type of media output. Who actually owns youTube? Oh wait, its Google, the biggest collector of personal information. Furthermore, I don't even have a TV, because I can't be bothered to watch all this pointless bull.
I read several Newspapers, including, The New York Times, The Guardian (GB), the Independent (GB), and Die Zeit (Germany). I think I have a rather multi-perspective approach, which is the basis of a more balanced point of view on things. And please: STOP fiddling around with those bold print/font-colour options. Making your post more colourful (literally) doesn't make it more convincing.

NOPE! Haven't you seen this board? You don't agree with Akamu or one of his buddies, they just attack you, call you stupid and say all your facts are wrong and from skewed sources and all their sources are gold. Come on pat, stop trying to have a reasonable discussion, they are always right no matter what, and even if they aren't right, they'll just talk the loudest!

TunerAddict
Mar 27, 2009, 09:32
Did you guys know that there have been more filibusters this term than ever before? 90ish I think it is. That is a crazy amount of filibusters...

Republican party is just refusing to do anything...So when bills don't get passed for weeks Obama gets the blame because the Republican party refuses to work with anyone...

LeFlume
Mar 27, 2009, 10:59
It's always funny when people without a clue are telling us how to fix the economy and what is wrong. Internet economy 101

Akamu
Mar 27, 2009, 20:42
You should have read my other posts before starting your rant. Repackaging those subprime-mortgages and reselling them as a part of different non-transparent financial products is the big issue here. This is somethingbank managers did.

Nevertheless, any sane person has to agree that it is problematic to buy house if you don't have the money and there is little to no chance to actually earn it in the next couple of years. The only hope people had, was that the bloated "value" of their houses will allow them to sell their house at a higher price, pay-off their mortgages, and buy something they could afford. How unlikely is that? I know that there were other formats as well. But the main problem is that it was a Ponzi scheme and the bucket has to stop somewhere.

I am only saying that consumers are not entirely guilt-free. This is a question of a state of mind, that has advanced certain unfavourable tendencies. I could write a cultural history of what went wrong only using commercials in magazines, newspapers and the advertisements I've seen during the 2007 and 2008 Allstar games.



http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
Not bad for 80 days, I think.



Obviously you got the whole thing wrong. They actually taxed those bonuses by 90%. This is not about a tiny percentage. As much as I hate the idea that --under current regulations -- the same people who screwed up badly can give each other straight up immoral bonuses, there still is no law that can prevent them from doing so. But that is a question of lacking regulation by the Bush administration.
This whole taxing business is a work-around. However, it essentially means that everybody's income could be taxed by 90% in a coup de main. I thought this would be something you -- as our prime conspiracy theorist --can't approve of.



No need to insult me. I thought this was a place where we can have a debate over issues we may disagree about without losing our temper.

But please: stop that "brainwashed by the media" conspiracy stuff. Your youTube videos are just another type of media output. Who actually owns youTube? Oh wait, its Google, the biggest collector of personal information. Furthermore, I don't even have a TV, because I can't be bothered to watch all this pointless bull.
I read several Newspapers, including, The New York Times, The Guardian (GB), the Independent (GB), and Die Zeit (Germany). I think I have a rather multi-perspective approach, which is the basis of a more balanced point of view on things. And please: STOP fiddling around with those bold print/font-colour options. Making your post more colourful (literally) doesn't make it more convincing.

Consumers are not "guilt-free" but you can't blame them for getting caught up in this over complicated system our government/federal reserve has set in place for us. Our system is designed to drive us in debt and keep us there while they profit. The system needs to be changed completely.

They could have found alternative ways to help home owners keep their houses and uplift the economy instead of borrowing & spending more on our behalf. The stimulus bill helps stunt our economies growth, and will make the great depression even worse for us in the future. It was apparent that the economy was going to collapse with or without the bill, but the bill will only make the implosion that much greater.

I didn't get it wrong because that's how it originally was, I don't remember you mentioning this new 90% tax bill that was released a day before your post. There's a new bill every week, the senate just past that5 page bill H.R. 1586 (I'm sure without any review) just a few days ago, based off of pressure. There's a lot to keep track of and I don't catch every single little thing they slip under the rug. Besides there's things on a larger scale to keep up with. The banks should have never been given tax payer bonuses in the first place.

If they can take away our liberties and money then why can't they take back bonuses, prosecute and put these crooks in jail? Because doing what's right isn't part of the goal, and I'm 100% positive that there are loop-holes/exceptions that they will find to get around it. It's another unwanted bill, they can't get it right the first time and just keep plastering bullshyt together.

Likewise, and I never lost my temper, that's just part of my style, if it bothers you then that's a personal problem that you have to deal with.

I brought up "brainwashed by the media" (I meant mainstream media and thought you would have figure that out) is because that's all they kept talking about. Blaming our economic disaster extravaganza on this subprime lending crap when that was meant to derive focus on the bigger factor, which is the credit derivatives fabricated by the bankers.

Youtube is a mix of alternative & mainstream media, my information comes heavily from alternative media sources. It's a shame that google, yahoo, facebook etc. makes it part of their business to collect and distribute your information. Big brother is everywhere, watching and waiting-

pat
Mar 28, 2009, 05:10
Likewise, and I never lost my temper, that's just part of my style, if it bothers you then that's a personal problem that you have to deal with.

SMHID

You do realize, don't you?

Akamu
Mar 28, 2009, 15:47
Do you really expect me to change something I do just because it bothers you? Never in a thousand years Like I said, it sounds like a personal problem, and it's not something newspaper articles, magazines, or Obama your messiah can help you with-

pat
Mar 29, 2009, 05:31
Do you really expect me to change something I do just because it bothers you? Never in a thousand years.

See: that is your major misconception. You got the whole concept of freedom of speech wrong. Everybody's freedom of speech stops where it affects other people's integrity. Since I give you the respect you -- as a human being -- deserve I expect you to do the same. As long as I keep the discussion subject-oriented, you should do the same. Trust me, I will do the same. Nothing more, nothing less.


Like I said, it sounds like a personal problem,
I hope I made myself that there is no personal.


Obama your messiah can help you with-
As an agnostic, I am not that fond of the general idea of a messiah. As my favourite publicist once said: "Those who have visions should go and see a doctor." However, I think that politics is the art of doing what is possible. Some things can be done right away by a scratch of a pen, other can't. Nevertheless I see things moving in a more favourable direction than over the last 8 years.

Akamu
Mar 30, 2009, 06:50
Mr. I'm nice, calm and intellectually collective.... ok, who gives a shyt? you attack me just as much as I snap back at you, no need to lecture about gibberish.

Anyhow...

About the 5 page 90% tax bill on bonuses. You cannot target and tax one group, that is unconstitutional. The piece of legislation known as H.R. 1586 is technically illegal. Instead of taking away entirely something that should have never been granted, they go on and do something that goes against our constitution. Just like other bills that are circulating.

This:



As an agnostic, I am not that fond of the general idea of a messiah. As my favourite publicist once said: "Those who have visions should go and see a doctor." However, I think that politics is the art of doing what is possible. Some things can be done right away by a scratch of a pen, other can't. Nevertheless I see things moving in a more favourable direction than over the last 8 years.


This right here is one reason why I decided to post the Obama Deception.

How are things moving in a favorable direction? You need to really contribute attention to what is unraveling around you.

Things are going down hill quickly, and Obama is not going to save us.
He is continuing things Bush has been doing. Bush dropped the ball and Obama picked it up and is just "going with the flow" and listening to Bush's bosses which are now his.

Barack is furthering the INCREASE in size of government right where Bush left off when he should be doing the opposite. He told everyone he would go against the illegal wiretapping and spying but then does the complete reverse like a snake and continued the patriot act.

I hope you love taxes because Obama is showering you with them.

Did you pay attention when you (if you) watched the documentary? or at least research what has been said for yourself?

They have Obama in the office because he had/has the support of the un-informed population of this country. Whether it was hate for Bush, hope for some form of "change" or just having a brand new face never before seen as the commander and chief. Obama has a mass of supporters by the balls and they buy into all he says and does. No other candidate could possibly achieve as much as Obama.

All the endorsements, Oprah saying "He is the one" people fainting during his speeches, newspapers, mainstream media, magazines, advertisements portraying this man....Obama as the savior of mankind.

His approval rating has been dropping and it will continue to dwindle due to his actions. Obama is a compulsive liar and a straight up poverty pimp. He clearly understands his "role" in government and understands that he has to be a snake and produce false hope to the masses that feast off his every word.

It's obvious that we were and are in bad times and he had inherited this tight situation, but he is being "used" by his superiors to portray false hope and to take advantage of the people and these critical times.

38I55mZuSOY

Barack is a very good speaker, he has swagger, he's part black which represents "change" which is allowing him to get away with a lot.

How ironic that the "(1st)" Black president (half black whatever) is trying to RE-instate slavery with the Mandatory Service act H.R. 1388/H.R. 1444.

Tt2yGzHfy7s

H.R. 1388:

GIVE (up your rights) will conscript millions of young people, put them in uniforms and send them packing to 4-year “public service” academies where they will be indoctrinated and trained to become “public sector leaders.”

GIVE was passed by the House on March 18 by an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 321 to 105. “At this moment of economic crisis, when so many people are in need of help and so much needs to be done, this could not be more urgent,” said Obama (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/19/us/politics/19cong.html?_r=1). “It is up to every one of us to do his or her small part to make the world a better place.”

Under section 6104 of the bill, entitled “Duties,” in subsection B6, the legislation states that a commission will be set up to investigate, “Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.”

Section 120 of the bill addresses the “Youth Engagement Zone Program” and states that “service learning” will be “a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency.”

H.R. 1388 not only reauthorizes programs under the National and Community Service Act of 1990 and the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973, but also includes “new programs and studies” and is expected to be funded with an allocation of $6 billion over the next five years, explains Bob Unruh (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92288) for WND. “Many, however, are raising concerns that the program, which is intended to include 250,000 ‘volunteers,’ is the beginning of what President Obama called his ‘National Civilian Security Force’ in a a speech last year in which he urged creating an organization as big and well-funded as the U.S. military. He has declined since then to elaborate,” Unruh adds.

It appears Miller’s amendment is designed to strip members of this emerging “National Civilian Security Force” of their constitutional rights under the First Amendment.

The First Amendment reads as follows: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
It was passed but then removed, and now back again.

H.R. 1444:

It seemed like a victory, of sorts. Last week the Senate approved a bill to radically expand the AmeriCorps program. The bill initially contained language that proposed a study for mandatory service for all young people in the United States, but this language was removed as the bill moved through the Senate and did not appear in the final version.

Well, it’s baaaaaaack. The language was stripped from one bill, but it suddenly appeared in another. It is now contained in HR 1444, due to crawl across the House floor this week. HR 1444 is sponsored by Rep. Jim McDermott, a Washington state Democrat, and is assigned to the House Committee on Labor and Education.
The bill, under Section 4 (b)6, states:
Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed, and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the Nation and overcome civic challenges by bringing together people from diverse economic, ethnic, and educational backgrounds.
How “mandatory service,” i.e. servitude, strengthens the “social fabric of the Nation” is not explained.


HR 1444, like its earlier parent 1388, includes the prospect of a “public service academy, a four-year institution that offers a federally funded undergraduate education with a focus on training future public sector leaders” and reaches all the way down to primary school, requiring a review of “the means to develop awareness of national service and volunteer opportunities at a young age by creating, expanding and promoting service options for primary and secondary school students and by raising awareness of existing incentives.”


That is, “existing incentives” as determined by the government.
In addition to Obama’s election campaign pledge to create a 250,000 strong national security force as big, powerful and well-funded as our combined U.S. military forces, Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel has authored a book (The Plan: Big Ideas for America) that calls for three months of compulsory civil service for all Americans aged 18 to 25.
So it looks like the goblin of compulsory national service has not gone away, it has simply morphed into another bill, soon to be considered by the House.


One thing is for certain: the federal government considers you and your children little more than ciphers to be press ganged into mandatory “service” to a government addicted to wars waged in the name of international bankers.

Both Articles located @: Infowars.com
This has NOT passed yet (well it was but then later taken out) but they are trying hard to pass this, that is why it is showing up and multiple bills circulating around the senate. This is illegal, strictly unconstitutional.

Wn5P8iY0Mho

Your looking at the small part of the puzzle. The small part being Obama, having him in office convincing "you" the typical average American, individual, democrat or whatever that everything is going to be ok because you have someone you "think" you can "trust" in the white house. Thus letting the person in "trust" to take full advantage of your lowered defenses-

pat
Mar 30, 2009, 08:23
I hope you love taxes because Obama is showering you with them.


Yup. I love them because I observed that high-tax countries are doing fine. Just have a look at Scandinavia. There is less criminality, a better educational system, and a better health-care system. Financially speaking I am considerably well off and I am willing to contribute my share to make life easier for those people who were less fortunate. Do you know why Germany is doing better right now in a time of global economic crisis? Because they have a very expensive unemployment insurance system. Although it is still bad to lose your jo, it isn't such a nightmare as in the US. Furthermore this system has a stabilizing effect on the overall economy, since people can still spend some money.