Obamacare

There He Goes Again

|

Now that the world is belatedly waking up to the fact that President Obama lied his face off about the fiscal impacts of health care reform, maybe it's an appropriate time to point out that he's lying his face off about financial reform as well:

(NY Daily News/Xanthos) He just called you a liar.

The goal is to make certain that taxpayers are never again on the hook because a firm is deemed "too big to fail."

Now, there's a legitimate debate taking place about how best to ensure taxpayers are held harmless in this process. And that's a legitimate debate, and I encourage that debate. But what's not legitimate is to suggest that somehow the legislation being proposed is going to encourage future taxpayer bailouts, as some have claimed. That makes for a good sound bite, but it's not factually accurate. It is not true.

Not legitimate, not factually accurate, not true. Those are pretty strong words to describe National Public Radio, Mr. President!

Take, for example, "too big to fail"—the idea that if one of the largest banks in the country gets into trouble, the government will save it with taxpayer money.

"A vote for reform is a vote to put a stop to taxpayer-funded bailouts," Obama said in his speech in New York on Thursday.

I cannot find any experts—of any party—who are willing to agree with Obama on this one.

In your heart you know this is AWESOME

"We're not seeing a very forceful step on the too-big-to-fail-problem," said Carmen Reinhart, an economist at the University of Maryland. "If there's any doubt that the crisis may be systemic, we will bail out again."

So, if a major bank says, "Hey, save us or the economy will go under," the government's going to save the bank. Full stop.

We did find one expert, Doug Elliott of the Brookings Institution, who is actually a huge fan of the regulatory reform bills. He says they bring a bunch of changes that make our economy safer.

But they don't end too big to fail, he said. The only way to do that is to break them up so that "they're so small that we don't care" if they fail.

Note: This report is from NPR's Adam Davidson, who has done some of the most thorough reporting out there on the financial crisis.

Link via Tim Carney's great Twitter feed.

Advertisement

NEXT: School Sucks: The Movie

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Glares at NPR and the Brookings Institute with his best jaw jutting scowl.

  2. Good for Reason. Don’t go after this nightmare of a president with pillow. Beat his ass with a Louisville Slugger like he just stole your TV.

      1. Air Force One went down in a farmer’s field one afternoon. By the time rescue agencies reached the site, the farmer had buried all the victims in his field.

        The first rescuer at the scene asked what happened with the president. The farmer replied that he had buried Obama. The rescurer asked if the farmer made sure if the president was really dead first. He replied, “Well, Obama said he was alive, but you can’t trust a single word out of the man’s mouth.”

        1. Edited to preserve the innocence of tender libertarian ears.

        2. I could swear that the first time I heard that joke it was about Richard Nixon.

          -jcr

    1. Or your watermelon.

      1. “I know ya got a license but ya cain’t hunt ’em on a baited field!”

  3. There he goes again, always trying to delegitimize his opponents.

    I suppose he could argue that it won’t encourage too-big-to-fail bailouts, it just sets up a process to regularize them and pay for him.

    But considering that he’s going around claiming that it will end the bailouts, he’s no less “lying.”

  4. I’m not sure he understands that there is a objective, verifiable reality and that certain words describe that while others don’t.

    1. You would be surprised at how many people – often people with advanced degrees who work in academia – will argue that there literally is no objective, verifiable reality and that truth is just what you make of it.

      I have no doubts that Barack Obama is one of those people.

      1. post-modernism, right? I hardly keep up anymore 🙂

        1. Post-modernism is on it’s last legs, so you’re really far behind. But then again so are they.

          1. Obama is one of those people who claims, without skipping a beat, that Rashomon is his favorite movie.

      2. So you think language offers unmediated, unambiguous purchase on objects, and that reality is made up exclusively of such things? Fascinating. I’m guessing you’ve never met a metaphor or experienced consciousness.

        1. False choice fallacy at its finest!

        2. No, but regardless of perception the sun was still a fucking thing before there were people and language around to call it the sun. It will still be a thing after we are gone. That is objective reality.

      3. The operative mnemonic is “TOMP.” Truth is now Opinion.
        Morality is now Preference.

      4. All that arguing about the Constitution is just a parlor game, I suppose.

  5. The way Obama argues a point and tries to delegitimize his opponents, it is as if Joe Boyle were elected President. Come to think of it Boyle did disappear right after the Secret Service took away Obama’s blackberry. Could it be? Nahh. Couldn’t be.

    1. All hail Episiarch!

      1. BOW DOWN BEFORE ME

        1. This subthread, while having a good thesis and theme, breaks down due to a lack of transition from one concept to another.

          1. Don’t make me punish you, ProL.

            1. Also, the use of “all caps” is deprecated in polite society. Emphasis should be used sparingly, generally limited to italics or, in the Internet world, the blink tag.

            2. He’s Pro’L Dib. The Super-Tarian being.

              He can look where you fear to go.

              1. He’s a lawyer, so his name is a billing word.

                1. “Stop! You don’t know what you’re doing! He bills at $350/hour! Nothing can stand up to that force!”

                  1. “The slow voir dire penetrates the jurors.”

                    1. “Not in the mood? Moods are for closings and subpoenas! Now, pad that bill!”

                    2. Where’s ProL? He’d be loving this.

                    3. Off sexually harassing some young paralegal, no doubt.

                    4. I must not lose my case.
                      Losing a case is the mind-killer.
                      Losing a case is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
                      I will face my jury.
                      I will permit the verdict to pass over me and through me.
                      And when it has been read I will turn the exculpatory evidence to see its path.
                      Where the verdict has gone there will be nothing.
                      Only billing will remain.

                    5. Holy crap this has got to be the best subthread in at least a month.

                      He who CONTROLS THE SPICE, CONTROLS THE UNIVERSE!

                    6. I’m sorry, but you are NO Frank Herbert.

                    7. If he is ProL’ Dib, can I be his son?

                      I always wanted to be Leto, God Emperor of Poon.

                    8. Friggin’ meetings.

                      Let us not rail about justice as long as we have lawyers and the freedom to use them.

                2. Funny, yet annoying, given that you’re citing the movie. Again.

                  1. That’s directed at Episiarch.

                    Love the subthread; sorry I missed it.

                  2. Cut him some slack ProL. You know Epi can’t read.

                  3. Remember Pro’L Dib:

                    “Laws to suppress tend to strengthen what they would prohibit”

                    1. The power to destroy a thing is the absolute control over it.

                    2. “When an associate has developed into in-house, he will choose death rather than change into his briefs.”

                    3. “Wild Paralegals said it well: ‘Four things cannot be hidden — probate, pre-nuptials, a pillar of motions and an attorney striding across an open blouse.'”

  6. I was just reading Huffington Post and they’re all gushing about Obama standing up for the little guy, fighting the good fight against overwhelming odds, and taking on the banksters. The term “corporate fascists” was on prominent display, describing opponents of the bill, of course.

    1. vince|4.23.10 @ 12:24PM|#
      “….The term “corporate fascists” was on prominent display, describing opponents of the bill, of course.”

      And of course all of these folks make their livings collecting and selling colorful pebbles at the town plaza…
      The hypocrisy is laughable.

    2. What a hoot! Obama is America’s banker-in-chief.

      1. And car designer-in-chief
        and doctor-in-chief
        and mortgage lender-in-chief
        and….we still have two and a half years to go. He can still add several titles.

        1. He’s a man of many hats. Our milliner-in-chief, if you will.

          1. +10 for using the term milliner!

      2. Canker in Thief more like it.

        For treason from an elected official he is surely the poster child of res ipsa loquitur.

    3. I was just reading Huffington Post…

      I, um, I’m sorry?

  7. Here’s the question nobody asks: “Why does the government have to be involved in the ‘dissolution’ of a bank in the first place?”

    A government resolution authority is idiotic and unnecessary.

    1. A government resolution authority is idiotic and unnecessary.

      Exactly. The TBTFs only exist in the first place because of repeated use of the resolution authorities that have already been created (namely the Fed and Depression-era institutions like the FDIC). If there had been no one to do the bailing after the ’87 crash, the Latin American debt debacle, LTCM, and the dot-com bubble, these monstrosities would not exist.

  8. “”The way Obama argues a point and tries to delegitimize his opponents, it is as if Joe Boyle were elected President””

    Isn’t that a common tactic in politics? The last administration was big on doing it. It seems to be pretty effective on the citizenry. Look how many people use the MSM term to delegitimize media sources other than Fox News. Appeal to personal attack seems to work pretty well on the masses.

    1. Yes it is. But the current President seems to be an all-pro at it. It is the only thing he seems to be able to do.

    2. Fox News is not a legitimate news organization.

      1. It was Gibbs who said that, not Obama.

        1. Ah-hem!

        2. Gibbs is not capable of independent thought.

          1. Gibbs is not capable of independent thought.

            FIFY

          2. Really? How come he said the VAT had no support in the White House, and then a few hours later you’re talking in flowery prose about how it’s a “novel” idea that has worked for countries around the world?

  9. From the link to Obama’s Cooper Union speech –

    Some — and let me be clear, not all — but some on Wall Street forgot that behind every dollar traded or leveraged there’s family looking to buy a house, or pay for an education, open a business, save for retirement.

    From this classic Jacob Sullum post –

    For connoisseurs of Obama-speak, the address featured a trifecta, combining three of his favorite rhetorical tropes. There was the vague reference to “those who” question his agenda, the “false choice” they use to deceive the public, and the determination to “be clear” and forthright, in contrast with those dishonest naysayers. These devices are useful as signals that the president is about to mislead us.

    As the sage Meatloaf once noted – Two out of three ain’t bad.

    1. “Let me make this perfectly clear…”
      Tricky Dick

      “Let me be clear…”
      Hmmm…the only question is, what is the most catchy moniker???
      Thesarasus fails…to find word…that starts with “b” that means lying.
      duplcity dude?
      obfuscation O?

      1. What, do you mean something like “Bullshittin’ Barrack”? It doesn’t have really good flow.

        “The Barrack No Fact Attack” might be a good name for these speeches of his, though.

        1. Almost…
          Bullshit Barry.

      2. I’m going with “The Obamfuscator.”

  10. Words have no meanings, whether they’re written in a constitution or spoken by Obama, right MNG?

  11. The goal is to make certain that taxpayers are never again on the hook because a firm is deemed “too big to fail.”

    Here’s a novel idea: Stop fucking bailing them out, you lying corporatist piece of shit!

  12. “But what’s not legitimate is to suggest that somehow the legislation being proposed is going to encourage future taxpayer bailouts, as some have claimed. That makes for a good sound bite, but it’s not factually accurate. It is not true.”

    There’s another lie in the midst of that, he’s actually contradicting himself and lying at the same time when you consider what he said just before that…

    “The goal is to make certain that taxpayers are never again on the hook because a firm is deemed “too big to fail.”

    That’s a lie in a lie.

    The goal is to make sure our politicians never squander the taxpayer’s future earnings on bad Wall Street investments, and the solution to is to punish every politician who advocated squandering our earnings, voted for to squander my earnings or actually administered the program…

    And that means you, President Obama. Not Wall Street. My future earnings weren’t squandered because Wall Street was too big to fail; my future earnings were squandered because you chose to squander them!

    Barak Obama fought hard in January of ’09 to squander $350 billion of our future earnings on Wall Street’s bad investments and the UAW–and that is Barak Obama’s fault–not Wall Streets!

    You are responsible for what you choose to do–and that means Barak Obama too. Obama can talk himself in circles, but none of it changes the facts of what he did.

    Wall Street is not responsible for what Barak Obama did, no matter what he says, and the solution to making sure our politicians don’t squander any more of our money is not to reform Wall Street in Barak Obama’s image.

    The solution is getting rid of the politicians like Barak Obama who squandered our money.

  13. The WSJ had an interesting point about this this morning in regards to the idea that Obamas new Financial regulations will somehow reduce corporate influence in the regulation itself.

    The irony is that this may, or may not, reduce the risk of future financial meltdowns and taxpayer bailouts. A new super council of regulators will be created with vast new powers to determine which firms pose a “systemic” financial risk, to set high capital and margin levels, to veto certain kinds of business for certain firms, and even to set guidelines for banker compensation?or maybe not. The point is that these crucial questions will be settled not by statute, but by regulatory discretion after the law passes.

    If you think Wall Street beats a path to the Beltway now, wait until the banks seek to influence how regulators will define, say, “proprietary trading.” Whatever its flaws, the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932 clearly defined the difference between a commercial and investment bank. This time, the rules will be written by regulators at Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the CFTC, SEC and FDIC, among others. As he so often does, Mr. Obama yesterday denounced “the furious efforts of industry lobbyists to shape” the bill “to their special interests.” But if his reform passes, this lobbying is certain to continue, more furiously.

    This is the same as when the bigger health care companies supported Obamas reform proposals; because they were allowed enormous influence in how the laws would be written, as long as they supported the bill. Besides the fact that this went against Obamas promise of openly televised, non-corporatist law making, the larger insurers were able to push language in the bill that would effectively neutralize their smaller competitors, which means that we tax payers will get less choice and the market will have less competition.

    I’m already sick of this bullshit artist and we are barely through a years worth of his tenure.

    1. Yup. I keep realizing that unless this fuck gets impeached somehow, we have to deal with three more years of his bullshit. My brain has this tendency to say “he’s a one-termer, he’ll be gone soon”, and then think that’s somehow actually “soon”, rather than three goddamn years away.

      1. It’s like a REALLY bad marriage where the honeymoon ends weeks after the wedding, and one morning you realize “My God, what have I done?”

        1. GET OUT OF MY HEAD!

          I’ve stopped hoping that the light at the end of the tunnel *isn’t* a train.

          1. No, it’s the flames of hell.

            1. Can’t be. Those are at my house.

              1. Now now, I thought we agreed that hell was at my house?

        2. A friend of mine’s divorce was final before his 1st anniversary. I should ask him about that realization.

          BTW, his 2nd marriage seems to be doing just fine. I think its gonna stick.

    2. I’m not so much sick of him as I’m sick of NO ONE in the media — outside FoxNews, which has its own bias issues — calling him on his bullshit, even when it’s glaringly obvious.

      1. The WSJ Op-ed pages have also been doing a good job of exposing Obama’s hypocrisy. But they get about as much respect as FoxNews when it comes to mainstream opinion.

        I never understood why people are surprised that a newspaper called THE WALL STREET JOURNAL has a bias towards markets and business. At least they admit it. The NYT pretends to be unbiased because they let that twit Brooks write a few sob stories every now and then. The WSJ should get hazard pay for allowing Thomas Frank to pollute their ink every Wednesday, in comparison. That idiot isn’t a “token” liberal, he’s buddies with Ayers for chrissakes.

        1. “”The WSJ Op-ed pages have also been doing a good job of exposing Obama’s hypocrisy. But they get about as much respect as FoxNews when it comes to mainstream opinion.””

          They are owned by the same guy.

          I’m curious as to when it became hip to side with the establishment.

          1. They are owned by the same guy.

            And….so…..this is relevant why?

            My point was that both of them are pretty much alone in reporting non-liberally biased news. And since the vast majority of establishment news organizations have a liberal agenda and are pro-Obama policies, the WSJ is by default anti-establishment.

            1. “”And….so…..this is relevant why?””

              They have roughly the same flavor of bias.

              Don’t confuse Anti-Obama with anti-establishment. News corp was pretty pro-establishment when Bush was in office.

              1. True, but that doesn’t mean that obama isn’t “the establishment.” When you have the presidency and majorities in both houses of the congress, and the other major party is almost completely outnumbered by independents, we can go ahead and call you “the establishment.” No?

                1. “”and the other major party is almost completely outnumbered by independents, we can go ahead and call you “the establishment.” No?””

                  Sure. But true anti-establishment is blind to political parties, and current office holders.

                  But a media outlet that supports one party and condems another isn’t really anti-establishment. They support the establishment when it’s in there favor to do so. One could make an argument that Fox News and WSJ is pro-establishment, just not while a democrat is in office.

                  1. “”True, but that doesn’t mean that obama isn’t “the establishment.” “”

                    To be more specific. Obama isn’t the establishment. He temporarily holds an office in the establishment. The term is much bigger than the people in office.

      2. I agree wholeheartedly.They swallow everything the guy puts out.

        1. Well all you ladies gather ’round
          That good sweet candy man’s in town
          It’s the candy man
          It’s the candy man

          He likes a stick of candy just nine inch long
          He sells as fast a hog can chew his corn
          It’s the candy man
          It’s the candy man

          All heard what sister Johnson said
          She always takes a candy stick to bed
          It’s the candy man
          It’s the candy man

          Don’t stand close to the candy man
          He’ll leave a big candy stick in your hand
          It’s the candy man
          It’s the candy man

          He sold some candy to sister Bad
          The very next day she took all he had
          It’s the candy man
          It’s the candy man

          If you try his candy, good friend of mine,
          you sure will want it for a long long time
          It’s the candy man
          It’s the candy man

          His stick candy don’t melt away
          It just gets better, so the ladies say
          It’s the candy man
          It’s the candy man

      3. I like how every piece of bad economic news is “unexpected”. Unemployment claims “unexpectedly rise” for the tenth month in a row. Retail sales “unexpectedly decline” and so forth. Think about all of the gloom and doom stories that were done during the last two relatively mild recessions in 91 and 2001. And then contrast them to the coverage over the last year given to the worst economy in 70 years.

        1. “”I like how every piece of bad economic news is “unexpected”. “”

          Generalization aside, it’s not so much if it truly was expected or not, but “unexpected” has somehow morphed in to a bad word. I’m pretty sure it will morph into an excuse once Obama’s change has kicked in.

          1. “Unexpected” is just another way of saying “we don’t know why this happened”. It is a way of subtly divorcing the event from any cause and thus absolving Obama of any responsibility for it.

            1. Unexpected has been used in economic news way before Obama.

              “”It is a way of subtly divorcing the event from any cause and thus absolving Obama of any responsibility for it.””

              In many cases he wouldn’t be responsible, nor would we want the President to be.

      4. We libertarians really, really, really need our own news outlet. Picture a news web site like CNN.com, staffed by reporters, editors, and videographers in bureaus all over the country, and covering both hard news and politics.

        It seems to me that there’s a business model for such a thing. With a good business plan, capital could be raised over the Internet, moneybomb style.

        1. I agree. Reason.tv is not nearly enough.

        2. One day, the Market will provide one, my son. TRUST IN THE MARKET!

    3. But if his reform passes, this lobbying is certain to continue, more furiously.

      The big O’s words to the otherwise, the Won sees this as a feature, not a bug. The Democrats get every bit as much of the lobbyists’ attention, if not more, because the Dems control the majority of the population centers, as the Republicans. The Dems tithe the unions to boot.

    4. Well, I am just glad we have such wise and prescient Federal regulators, like “subprime is contained” Bernanke and “I’ve got a bazooka in my pocket” Paulson. Without these wise and insightful gentlemen, we could have gotten our selves in the greatest real estate bubble ever, with unemployment rising to the highest rate since the depression, and gubermint debt EXPLODING!… O yeah…

      I’ve got a bazooka in my pants, but I digress.

  14. This is turning into the 2009-2012 Make Bush look good tour.

    Now that is just plain fucking scary.

    1. There was an election?

      1. I thought Bush just got a perm and a suntan and was embarking on his third term…

        1. Have you ever seen Obama and Bush in the same room?

          1. One can clearly throw a baseball while the other trows like a girls scout with Downs Syndrome.

          2. One can clearly throw a baseball while the other throws like a girls scout with Downs Syndrome.

  15. Now that the world is belatedly waking up to the fact that President Obama lied his face off about the fiscal impacts of health care reform…

    Are they really? OK, some blogs and news sources have run pieces to that effect, but is the public at large hearing this message or are the politically apathetic and his supporters just uncritically accepting anything that comes on his teleprompter at face value?

    I see the latter far more than I see reality dawning on these people.

    1. I think there’s a lag in the public’s reaction.

      The rest of the world is catching up, but I still think reasonoids are ahead of the curve.

      1. I have complete faith that the usual suspects of the TV yammering heads and thus, the Democrat prole voter-base, will continue to loyally and loudly parrot the narrative.

        Nothing will change.

        1. Oh, their base will still be their base. Still, they’ve gotten their worst poll numbers in years out of it right now.

          1. This is the *only* reason that I have *some* hope for the GOP. Yes, they have their core base of yahoos that bleed TEAM RED 24×7, your core Fox newser, but there seems to be a sizable portion of the voter base that won’t put up with GOP bullshit for too long before calling shenanigans and sending them back off into the wilderness.

            The Dems, OTOH, just seem to be a crazy fuck-quilt of the same shrieking twits year in and year out. The only criticism I’ve heard is that the nationalization and socialization programs don’t go far *enough* and that Obama needs to double-down on the power-expansion and fear-mongering. Crushing the opposition is the ends and the means.

            1. The Dems have always had an edge in core supporters and self-identifiers. By “always” I mean at least 70 years.

              The GOP only wins when it wins independents. That said, there’s a larger group of independents who usually vote Republican but refuse to call themselves one.

  16. LOL, why should he be any different than any of those before him?

    Lou
    http://www.anonymous-vpn.tk

    1. Sometimes you make a lotta sense, Lou.

  17. Obama voted for TARP. Since there’s really no such thing as “too big to fail” and the world wouldn’t have ended, had the government let them fail, he is as responsible as everyone else who voted for TARP and President Bush who signed it into law.

    Also, USAA sent me and every other member an email yesterday telling us to contact our senators immediately to oppose this legislation because, paraphrasing their words, it would make it impossible for them to continue to offer the products and services to our members that we’ve done since 1937. USAA didn’t take a penny of TARP money, doesn’t engage in the risky endeavors that caused the economic problems, and serves military members and their families.

    Feel free to contact your senators even if you’re not USAA members and spread this true information to them. They may not give a shit about you and me or USAA, but if it gets out that they are screwing the military in any way, it’ll be hell to pay for each and every one of them.

  18. Well, last night on NPR they were talking about the projected increased costs in Insurance premiums (because of the evil insurance companies)and “debating” whether the best solution was a national health care service.

    So, it looks like the Libertarians were right about where this is headed.

    1. Yeah, we’re regular goddammed Cassandras.

      Not much fuckin’ consolation is it?

      1. The first few times you have the Cassandra experience, you glow with self-satisfaction. After a decade or two, not so much.

      2. The first few times you have the Cassandra experience, you glow with self-satisfaction. After a decade or two, not so much.

    2. “Well, last night on NPR they were talking about the projected increased costs in Insurance premiums (because of the evil insurance companies)and “debating” whether the best solution was a national health care service.”

      I don’t want to see that anymore than the next person, but I don’t think those commentators realized how powerful the AMA and various medical professional associations are…

      If you think the teachers and public employees unions are powerful…

      There’s no way they’d let people compete for work hours with nurses and lab techs for less money.

  19. My brain has this tendency to say “he’s a one-termer, he’ll be gone soon”, and then think that’s somehow actually “soon”, rather than three goddamn years away.

    God. Damn. It does feel like we’ve already had three years of that goon in the White House, huh? Thanks for the reminder that i need to drink heavily tonight.

    Bush II is still the worst president of my lifetime, but i’m not happy that Obama seems determined to wrest that position from him.

    1. Yes, I am going to HopScotch tonight, myself. Must drink away the Obama.

      1. That looks way too fucking awesome. Bastard.

        But you can never drink away the Obama. It clings to you like the odor of smoke does to your coat the morning after a bar bender.

        1. I know, but it won’t stop me from trying.

          And yes, HopScotch is very cool. I went last year and it was really fun.

        2. In my city, one can no longer smoke in bars. I like that I don’t come home from a night of drinking and band watching smelling like an ashtray.

          1. “”I like that I don’t come home from a night of drinking and band watching smelling like an ashtray.””

            I do too. But I would prefer if establishments could make their own choice. It’s not the governments place to dictate such things.

      2. Friends of mine used to hold an annual bourbon tasting, but it hasnt been held in a few years. I may have to reinstitute it.

        Simple premise, invite 20 of so people, everyone brings a different bourbon, drink way too much of them.

      3. That looks delicious. Just mind you don’t wander into the tequila section at the end of the night.

      4. When I was in Law School, we did that with single malts. Didn’t have any money of our own, of course, so its a good thing we had the Lincoln’s Inn Society checking account to use.

    2. Bush II is still the worst president of my lifetime

      1. That was supposed to say,

        You are 42 or younger, then?

        1. I’m 54 (Truman) and have repetedly made the same statement.

          He was worse than both Johnson and Nixon who vie for second place.

          1. Yeah, well Obama does have 3 more years to impress.

      2. Obama has already wrested that away from Bush the Lesser in 1 year. He’s better at *everything* he does.

        1. It’s a peak versus career value thing.

          1. Oh, I don’t think he’s peaked yet. :::sobs:::

        2. Yeah, I’m amazed. It took a couple years to really find out what a total shit GWB was. While I knew Obama would suck, I thought it’d take longer than 10 months to equal the suck.

          I just didn’t realize how audacious he was.

          1. He has absolutely crushed Bush for speed to absolute awfulness. It’s not a good sign, dudes.

            1. Unless you’re talking about the speed in which his approval ratings have tanked.

              They really can’t go down much farther. The base is pretty solid, and I’m pretty sure that (for entirely understandable reasons) his approval rating among blacks isn’t going to decline much below its current 94%.

              1. Which gives BHO a bottom of 12% (.94 of 13%) or an adjusted approval rating of roughly 20% among people capable of having a negative opinion of him.

            2. The Audacity of Suck

          2. “”It took a couple years to really find out what a total shit GWB was. “”

            A couple of years? You mean America knew he was total shit when he was re-elected? Some people saw it. But not a critical mass that would cause him to lose his re-election attempt. While I heard some republicans say they didn’t want to change Presidents in the middle of a war(s), I very much doubt they will extend that philosophy to a democrat they don’t like.

    3. I’m 28, and I would like for once in my lifetime, to say a President didn’t suck as badly as the guy before him.

      1. Obama is doing his best to set such a record of suckatude that the next guy might have a chance to remedy that for you.

        1. I thought Bush was bad enough that the next guy would be better.

          Lesson learned. No matter how bad you think it is, it can get worse.

          1. Unless the next guy starts putting people in ovens, he will have a hard time surpassing Obama.

            1. Stop giving them fucking ideas!

            2. You’re kidding yourself.

            3. You realize that this calls for a Downfall Parody before Constantin Films AG files another copyright infringement request with You Tube.

              Better hurry.

      2. Ain’t.
        Gonna.
        Happen.

      3. I started with Eisenhower. I’m still waiting too.

        1. Reagan was better than Carter. And Ford was better than Nixon.

          1. There’s a legitimate debate taking place about whether Kennedy was better than Eisenhower. And that’s a legitimate debate, and I encourage that debate. But what’s not legitimate is to suggest that somehow Obama is not the worst chief executive on the North American continent dating back at least to Montezuma, as some have claimed. That makes for a good sound bite, but it’s not factually accurate. It is not true.

            1. Ike may have had him some high taxes, but for non-interventionism, the man kept us out of overseas combat.

              “No land wars in Asia” was Ike’s motto. Did he cut cap gains? Nope. But he started the Interstate Highway system and built the Strategic Air Command. Kruschchev banged that shoe some.

              Someone once wrote that Ike lost not one soldier in combat after fighting ended in Korea. I’m sorry, but Jack can’t equal that record.

    4. Were you born after Jan 21st 1980?

      1. 1-21-81, not 80.

    5. worst president of my lifetime

      Tricky Dick Nixon would be mine.

      -jcr

  20. Always with the “folks.”

    But it’s an irregular “folks” in that speech. There are “folks who took on mortgages and credit cards and auto loans” and “folks with the most to lose, stock and pension holders.” That’s the Morgan Freeman “folks.”

    Obama “folks” are usually the “not legitimate” voices raining false consciousnesses on the ‘tards in Jesusland. But those guys have been promoted to “some.”

    Is “folks” headed for the bitter clingers? Tune in next week, some!

  21. I’ve figured ol’ Barry out. He doesn’t believe anything that hasn’t occured to him can be true. “Unintended consequences? But if I don’t intend them, they won’t happen.”

  22. Pfft. NPR. Just another notorious bunch of right-wing, neo-con, Republican shills. Am I right?

  23. Fuck you, Obama, you autofelching mulatto dickmutilator, you don’t get to decide what debates are legitimate.

    Also: kitties!!!

    1. What about The Pox?

      1. His thumb is all fucked up from the hammer on his Glock 19, dude.

      2. Mmmmm…Himalayan. Gamy, but tender.

    2. I had to look up felch in google.

      Arrgh! I feel so dirty now.

    3. Son of a BITCH! Nothing like a Warty rant – I thought I was good, but…

      “…autofelching mulatto dickmutilator…” tee hee!!

      **bows to the master**

      1. If I’m the master of anything, it’s not of insults. SugarFree is far mightier than me in that regard.

        1. Are you the one responsible for The Ultimate Flame of Usenet fame?

          If so, I bow to you and kiss your warty ass.

  24. ZeroHedge: Alan Grayson Discloses That Dodd Bill Covertly Eliminates Already Passed Legislation Requiring Full Fed Audit

  25. I have never bought into the “too big to fail” line.

    While it is true that failure of certain large enterprises will cause immediate disruptions and losses, refusing to recognize the losses just drags out the inevitable, usually with a compounding effect and longer-term misery.

    1. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me to assume that the people who were best prepared to take the losses were the people who put their money at risk.

      1. It doesn’t seem unreasonable to me to assume demand that the people who were best prepared to take the losses were the people who put their money at risk.

    2. But I’m too big to fail, right?

      RIGHT???

      ***crickets***

      1. I doubt China is going to bail out the USA when the time comes.

      2. the Roman Empire wasnt too big to fail, why should you be.

      3. Too big to fail, not too big to be Argentina.

        Someone cue Madonna to sing her awful rendition of “Don’t Cry for me, Argentina”.

        Someone has to….

  26. He lies about everything. This is nothing new. Didn’t you listed to his speech at KSC he said Tang was created for Space which is a LIE.

    1. Tang was created for ME

  27. I haven’t read through the entire Bill, but what I have, is total bullshit. I wish I could find it now, but Bill Black had a list of 8 reforms that would take care of a lot of the problems. But Bill Black, being the pit bull that he is, is throwing the entire kitchen sink into it. Sort of like letting a cop write the criminal code. But it was interesting, it definitely had teeth, and should at least be considered. This shit from Dodd and Frank is nothing but smoke and mirrors. WTF good is new regulations if there’s nobody to properly enforce them, and the old ones, for that matter??

    Here’s something else that’s being floated, worth a look see:

    http://www.zerohedge.com/artic…..iabilities

    There are so many “enablers” in the system, and so much incompetence, it’s difficult to see how any regulations will actually help.

    1. Too Big to fail manage

      Too Big to fail regulate

      Too Big to fail exist

      1. Hey, once we ban added sugar, they won’t be too big.

        1. And salt!

          And hamburgers!

          And HFCS soft drinks!

          You peasants will be much happier on your bean curd and tofu diet.

          1. We get bean curd? Oh thank you, master! Thank you! [grovels away]

            1. Bean curd is people!!!

              1. I can haz legumes?

  28. When are people going to wake up to the fact that this “Administration” is built on an original misrepresentation that this person, with absolutely no business, hiring, managing experience for which he or his assets were on the line, (a) knows what he is doing in, (b) is transparent in his dealings and (c) is forthcoming in his statements to the American people.

    1. When are you going to wake up to the fact that almost all political candidates are built in misrepresentations.

      With Obama, I think two things are in effect. 1. Robin Hood 2. cognitive dissonance.

      Obama ran on the Robin Hood campaign. He will take from the rich and give to the poor. Many bought into it and those who did will have a hard time being conviced otherwise regardless of the new information in front of them. That’s where the cognitive dissonance kicks in.

  29. This is off-topic, but I just recalled a conversation I had the other night with a friend of a friend. Apparently he and his friends all have different side-hobbies such as zines, crafts and the like that requires them to spend a large portion of their extra money. He said that the insurance mandate will eat into these hobbies enough to end a lot of them. He publishes a zine, and he’ll probably have to stop now that most of the little he is able to save each month will have to be spent on the mandate.
    Thanks for the Hope, Barry!

  30. A vote for reform is a vote to put a stop to taxpayer-funded bailouts,” Obama said in his speech in New York on Thursday.

    A flat-out lie. The bill contains provisions for loan guarantees when a financial institution poses a systemic risk. Those guarantees are backed with taxpayer funding, and don’t even have to be approved by Congress.

    This isn’t just a bail-out bill. Its a fast-track bail-out bill.

    1. fast-track

      Otherwise known as the ‘express elevator to hell.’

      1. It’s the high speed train built by Seimens to hell.

  31. “”This isn’t just a bail-out bill. Its a fast-track bail-out bill.””

    Yeah. Sadly we are living in times when much of the nation thinks government should be a safety net.

  32. I’m all for high capital requirements… 100%.

  33. “Now, there’s a legitimate debate taking place about how best to ensure taxpayers are held harmless in this process. But what it is not legitimate, and what I will not accept, is the suggestion that the result of debate has any bearing on the policies of my administration.”

  34. When it comes to bailing out banks and politics, lets not forget this.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis

    1. Wow Tricky, after that one I am sold. Obama is right on this and never lies, even when court documents that had been redacted show he does he doesn’t.

    2. Plus your use of Leftypedia is such a nice touch that it clinches the sale.

  35. NPR hu? Wow… don’t know what to say…

    But to your point, yes. Obama runs the same gamem plan with every intitiative and people are catching on.

  36. I’m not sure how on topic this is, but someone pointed out this section of the Senate Finance Reform Bill to me…
    secton 1071

    …they want to geo-code transactions?

    1. SugarFreed teh link, guy.

  37. If we must eliminate financial institutions that are “too big to fail” or place them under special constraints, what does that tell us about the federal govt?

    Regulation is systemic risk.

  38. Excellent reporting by Adam Davidson. I wonder how long he’s going to last at NPR.

  39. We have seen this before in “The Music Man.” Starts out “We got trouble, right here in ___________”

    on an on it goes through the whole con until we get to the point where we are all supposed to play Seventy Six Trombones from learning music on the “think system.”

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.