Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by classicman

Only the strong survive - isn't that how it is in the real world? Perhaps we are cleaning up a bloated mess and will be left with only those that should have been around.
Hell lets get rid of GM too while we're at it.

I'd support that. Let's close them out and go with Ford. They make a diesel that gets 60mpg in the UK. But we can't get that here becasue they don't think there is a market for it? Someone please give them a call because I would gladly pay $5/gallon for gas if my car got 60mpg.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine..._top%20stories

[tw]

Apparently the outcry about George Jr's administration doing socialism for rich companies struck a nerve last week. From the Wall Street Journal of 15 Sep 2008:

When Paulson called Wall Street CEOs Tuesday and Wednesday to inform them at his no-bailout stance, some argued to him that the government needed to structure a rescue like that of Bear Stearns Cos., according to people familiar with t he matter. To prevent Bear's collapse in March, the fed agreed to put up $30 billion to J P Morgan Chase & Co, the acquiring bank. The government also took on some of Bear's riskier assets. ...

Mr Paulson was also irked that Wall Street saw him as someone who would always ride to the rescue. And because Lehman's troubles have been known for a while, Mr Paulson felt the market had had time to prepare. Also, on Friday, federal officials monitoring talks to sell Lehman to Bank of America, which had started the day before, realized the big Charlotte NC bank would likely balk without federal backing. ...

Mr Paulson told the group it was in their interest to find a solution. "Everybody is exposed" to Lehman, Mr Paulson said ...

Why? Why would everyone do business with a firm that had financial statements that read like a black box? Nobody knew whether Lehman (and others) was fiscally stable for years. The same mentality that made home loans routinely to NINJA (no income, no job apparent) applicants also did business with anyone under the new philosophy of profit without considering risk; that the spread sheets need not be honest.

GM is worth $5billion. AIG (whose accounting has been speculated a black hole for maybe 5 years) attempted to raise capital through private sources. AIG could not. Nobody could trust AIG's financial reports. Despite the public outcry against corporate socialism and Paulson's warning, last weekend, AIG went begging to the government for $40billion. When will it end? When corporate executive start being removed in mass number for being so incompetent.

Merrill Lynch's CEO Stanley O'Neal was warned by his senior VP that O'Neal had created a massive subprime loan problem. Instead, the VP was fired. One year later, those financial myths became a threat to Merrill's existence almost 100 year existence. O'Neal was fired (with $hundreds of millions in bonuses). New CEO John Thain is credited with doing so much so quickly to save enough of Merrill as to make Merrill a useful purchase for Bank of America. By replacing the only problem in Merrill (Stanley O'Neal) with a responsible CEO, then Merrill Lynch account holders are not stuck in the mess that Lehman Bros clients are now suffering. Just another example of what had to be removed to fix the problem - top management.

Meanwhile, those who are the problem have finally heard the word. They, not the government, must fix the problem. In many cases, that means the CEO must be removed by overt threats of bankruptcy. Otherwise the employees lose their jobs. Merrill is a perfect example of what must be done to save those jobs and customer investments. Lehman and AIG are perfect examples of how ignorant and myopic CEOs are.

How did we save NYC? The New York Post said it on the front page. Ford to NY - drop dead. That is the only way to get the attention of narcissist and corrupt people.

[tw]

Cheney cannot stop hyping hidden enemies everywhere. Fear still promotes loyalty from poorly educated wacko extremists. From the Washington Post of 8 Jan 2009:

The White House yesterday raised anew the possibility that North Korea has an active program to enrich uranium, an issue the administration had played down in recent years as it sought to persuade Pyongyang to give up its nuclear programs.

With just 12 days left in the Bush administration, national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley made the allegation in a speech reviewing the president's foreign policy legacy. ...

Administration officials said the new concerns were largely based on in-depth scientific analysis of enriched uranium traces that were discovered on smelted aluminum tubes and reactor documents that had been provided by North Korea in an effort to rebut allegations that it had a uranium program. The Defense Intelligence Agency in particular has pressed this case, backed by the vice president's office and some parts of the CIA, but the Energy Department has opposed it, officials said.

It reads like a list of the usual suspects. Those who *know* are the same liars who said Saddam had WMDs and that are politically allied to Cheney and other wacko extremists. The Energy Department was one source for facts that strongly disputed the 'Saddam WMD' myths. Also opposing those myths were many parts of the CIA that do not support the Cheney alarmism. The same Cheney supporters are still trying to incite war with North Korea. Instead look deeper at the facts.

David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector and president of the Institute for Science and International Security, said he had been briefed recently on the findings by government officials. He said "very few particles" had actually been discovered on the documents and the tubes, and that the DIA was basing its analysis on a single particle that, through age-dating techniques, was believed to be about 3 1/2 years old.

UN weapons inspectors were also a responsible agency that provided facts disputing George Jr's Saddam WMD intentional lies. But TheMercenary and other wackos will now use this to blame fails on Obama - as soon as Rush Limbaugh and Hannity tell him to.

Most important fact is not N Korea uranium. The most important fact is how pathetic American White House credibility has fallen. They keep inventing bogeymen while making no serious attempt to get bin Laden. Protect bin Laden and wacko extremists with low education will believe enemies are hiding everywhere waiting to destroy us. Wacko extremism is still alive and well; complete with hyping fears based only on a single particle.

Wacko extremists need lies to revive fears of the mythical axis of evil. Such lies get the least educated among us to vote for wacko extremists. N Korea is planning the destruction of America because a single particle was found. Same reasoning also proved Saddam had WMDs.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

Cheney.....wacko extremists. ....Saddam had WMDs .....Cheney.....wacko extremists.....'Saddam WMD'....CIA .....Cheney .....Cheney....weapons inspectors....George Jr's .....TheMercenary......wackos......Rush Limbaugh.........American White House.......bin Laden......bin Laden......wacko extremists.......Wacko extremism......Wacko extremists......wacko extremists. .......Saddam had WMDs.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Wacko extremists need lies to revive fears of the mythical axis of evil. Such lies get the least educated among us to vote for wacko extremists.

Obama got an overwhelming percentage of this vote.
Do you really have a point here?

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Obama got an overwhelming percentage of this vote.
Do you really have a point here?

Cite?

Or should I just post as you do - nothing to support your claims?

Did you joing the large numbers of higher educated Americans who voted for Obama?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

Did you joing the large numbers of higher educated Americans who voted for Obama?

Is that a sentance?

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Is that a sentance?

How would you know what a sentance is? That requires learning something other than Limbaugh insult techniques.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Cite?
Or should I just post as you do - nothing to support your claims?

Did you joing the large numbers of higher educated Americans who voted for Obama?

Based upon the exit polls. . .

[classicman]

Now before we go off on another tangent what was your original point? Because this one was flatly refuted.

Note* I don't think it matters either way, as we all have the right to vote and they are all counted irrespective of ones education.

[xoxoxoBruce]

they are all counted

Maybe.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Now before we go off on another tangent what was your original point? Because this one was flatly refuted.

And you completely ignored the question. Did you join the larger numbers of more intelligent people who voted for Obama? Why did you post irrelevant percentages. The question was whether you joined the more intelligent people who voted for Obama.

Meanwhile the original fact you have obfuscated was "Cheney cannot stop hyping hidden enemies everywhere." and then demonstrated by example. How strange that a factual post results in mocker by a scumbag like you.

[classicman]

Originally Posted by tw

Wacko extremists need lies to revive fears of the mythical axis of evil. Such lies get the least educated among us to vote for wacko extremists.

Your claim

Originally Posted by classicman

Obama got an overwhelming percentage of this vote.
Do you really have a point here?

My response

Originally Posted by tw

Cite?

Or should I just post as you do - nothing to support your claims?
Did you joing the large numbers of higher educated Americans who voted for Obama?

Your rebuttal - **Note that there is no citation for your claim.**

Originally Posted by classicman

Based upon the exit polls. . .

Originally Posted by classicman

Now before we go off on another tangent what was your original point? Because this one was flatly refuted.

Note* I don't think it matters either way, as we all have the right to vote and they are all counted irrespective of ones education.

My response, with cites and even a chart.

Originally Posted by tw

And you completely ignored the question. Did you join the larger numbers of more intelligent people who voted for Obama? Why did you post irrelevant percentages. The question was whether you joined the more intelligent people who voted for Obama.

An attempt at diverting the real subject. and then as usual....

Meanwhile the original fact you have obfuscated was "Cheney cannot stop hyping hidden enemies everywhere." and then demonstrated by example. How strange that a factual post results in mocker by a scumbag like you.

...a personal attack.

Is it me? Is it really? Where in any of that is a personal attack on a poster? I repeatedly attack unsubstantiated claims, but not the poster. Nowhere in there is a personal attack - except by tw.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

Your claim
My response

Then where is the answer to the question. Did you join the intelligent people in voting for Obama. Oh. You need to avoid that question with more nonsense?

Meanwhile the original fact you again obfuscate was "Cheney cannot stop hyping hidden enemies everywhere.". How strange that a factual post results in mockery. How strange that you avoid admiting that reality by instead accusing me. Why is your wife so ugly? Fair is fair. You don't want to stay on topic. Then I don't either.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

Then where is the answer to the question. Did you join the intelligent people in voting for Obama. Oh. You need to avoid that question with more nonsense?

Meanwhile the original fact you again obfuscate was "Cheney cannot stop hyping hidden enemies everywhere.". How strange that a factual post results in mockery. How strange that you avoid admiting that reality by instead accusing me. Why is your wife so ugly? Fair is fair. You don't want to stay on topic. Then I don't either.

So now you are going to attack Classics wife. Nice.