*OFFICIAL* The President Barack Obama Thead (25 Viewers)

Vinman

2013 Prediction Cup Champ
Jul 16, 2002
11,481
Reagan implemented outsourcing... ie Reagan is responsible for India's success and the US failure. So maybe Reagan was a good president after all... for Indians.

Oh and about his tax cuts... he made one in his entire term. But he cut taxes so much he had to raise taxes three times.
lets not forget that he tried to fix the mess that the "peanut-man" created.....or were you too young to remember those days ?

"peanut man" was punked off by both the Soviets and Iran, and the economy and fuel situation were in shambles. I remember my parents having to go to Canada to get fuel, because we couldnt get it on the "odd" letter days of our license plates, or some crap like that

good ol' dem, that peanut man :melayyanandmessi:
 

Buy on AliExpress.com

GordoDeCentral

Diez
Moderator
Apr 14, 2005
69,399
why? coz he didnt want to set a whole region ablaze and steal other people's resources? yes that's abhorrent behavior indeed we need more reagans and nixons as for reaganomics Swag decorticated that web pretty effectively and an answer, if any, to it is still due.
 
Apr 12, 2004
77,165
a democratic congress thats been in charge the past 4 years couldnt possibly be at all to blame either....:rolleyes:
2 years
The most overrated President in history.
Without doubt.
:D

Nice response, Vin. You know Reagan was a vastly overrated President.
:agree:
we elected someone who we know zilch about, and with little experience

he better do some studying about the second amendment, and its nice to know he's already signed a bill that lessens restrictions on abortions :tdown:

Reagan was the best president we've had in a long while....I wonder what Barack is gonna do as the Soviet Union becomes more powerful, and begins to assert itself again. Oh, I know what he will do, he'll just cut the military funding, as he's already planned to do

and lets remember one thing, we were only attacked once on W's watch (with most of the planning done on Billy-boys timex), but how many times were we, or our interests attacked on Billy-boys ??

dont think for a second that the terrorists dont see a weak individual in Barack, and plan on testing him
The greatest thing about Reagan was the fact that he knew he fucked up when cutting mad taxes, so he had to cut some programs to attempt to stop the bleeding. One of his first cuts was to Alzheimers research, the best part, the mother fucker died from Alzheimers.

The irony could be cut with a mediocre acting career.
 

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,252
ßüякε;1894469 said:
The greatest thing about Reagan was the fact that he knew he fucked up when cutting mad taxes, so he had to cut some programs to attempt to stop the bleeding. One of his first cuts was to Alzheimers research, the best part, the mother fucker died from Alzheimers.

The irony could be cut with a mediocre acting career.
He actually raised taxes three times to cutting them only once.
 

swag

L'autista
Administrator
Sep 23, 2003
83,481
I guess you forgot about Reaganomics
Nearly tripling the national debt and bloating the federal government? Yes, I remember Reaganomics.

If you're going to praise the guy, I would only hope it's for things he did -- not for imaginary things he didn't do (or worse: did the opposite) nor nostalgic wishful thinking.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
111,601
I never understood why Republicans claim they are the party of minimal government spending when their last three Presidents only increased spending from previous years. Hypocrites, I say.

But lets not forget that Republicans and Democrats are essentially the same anyway.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
111,601
Geithner Channels His Inner Paulson - Unfortunately
Gary Weiss
February 10, 2009

The market giving Tim Geithner the Bronx cheer

The New York Times this morning described how the Treasury's new bailout plan is shaping up to be a complete sellout to Wall Street, a kind of Paulson Lite with absolutely zero requirements for banks to lend and zero restrictions on executive pay.

Kind of makes sense. The Washington P0st reported today that Geithner walked away from the New York Fed with more than $500K in severance, unused vacation time and other goodies. I guess he'd have a hard time talking about stuff like executive comp with a straight face when he's getting a nice little golden parachute himself.

No, strike that. In his speech he did talk about executive comp with a straight face. He's just not going to do anything about it, according to the Times.

As for that swell gelt, the Post says:

According to an official at the New York Fed, Geithner's severance is from a supplementary retirement plan that would have begun paying out when Geithner turned 55. Geithner is 47, and the board decided to give him the cash equivalent, the official said.

How nice! Say, who is on that board anyway? Here is a link to a list of the members of the board of the New York Fed. Let's see... Jamie Dimon, Jeff Immelt.... some guy from Adirondack Trust ... some guy from Banco Popular. Steve Friedman of Stone Point Capital, the CEO of Pepsico. Well, I'm glad there's no conflict of interest involved, no one who could ever, possibly need the assistance of the Treasury for any reason whatsoever.

Am I being harsh? Maybe. But I am sorely disappointed with what I've seen so far from the Treasury. Sweet severance packages just don't make it seem any better.

According to the Post, by the way, new SEC chairman Mary Schapiro gets an even more magnificent chunk of change from FINRA, Kraft Foods (KFT) and Duke Energy (DUK).

Maybe now Geithner can afford a competent accountant to prepare his tax returns. Schapiro, of course, now has "f. you" money, and I think we can confidently expect that unless she amazes all of us, she is going to give the finger to investors during her tenure.

The market sold off sharply while Tim Geithner was in the middle of his flat, vague, specifics-bereft and uninspiring televised presentation. I guess that makes it unanimous. You'd think that at least bank stocks would appreciate the unwarranted gift their shareholders are about to get from Uncle Sam, but that didn't happen either. Stocks like Citigroup (C) led the selloff. :lol2:

Why? Here's my guess: The market, like the rest of us, wanted something new, something different, some leadership, and didn't get it. We expected transparency, and instead we got zero details. As a matter of fact we (and that includes Obama himself) expected a press conference and we got a speech to Treasury employees.
 

Bjerknes

"Top Economist"
Mar 16, 2004
111,601
Sen. Gregg Withdraws as Obama Commerce Pick

By: AP | 12 Feb 2009 | 04:29 PM ET

Republican Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire has withdrawn his nomination to become President Barack Obama's commerce secretary.

In a statement released by his office, the New Hampshire senator cites "irresolvable conflicts" on issues including the economic stimulus package.

Gregg was named the Commerce nominee a week ago after the withdrawal of former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson.

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29166271

_________________________

:lol2: This is becoming a joke. :lol:
 
OP
.zero

.zero

★ ★ ★
Aug 8, 2006
80,658
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #553
    no one wants that shit on their resume

    its like taking over as head coach of the lions
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    111,601
    no one wants that shit on their resume

    its like taking over as head coach of the lions
    Not really. Just look at people such as Matt Millen and Alexei Lalas. They fucked up their previous jobs, then went on to more high profile jobs on television.

    A lot of people would want to be Secretary of Commerce. So what is going on here is something extremely fishy; either people don't want to be part of this administration or they all have something to hide.
     

    Martin

    Senior Member
    Dec 31, 2000
    56,913
    Not really. Just look at people such as Matt Millen and Alexei Lalas. They fucked up their previous jobs, then went on to more high profile jobs on television.

    A lot of people would want to be Secretary of Commerce. So what is going on here is something extremely fishy; either people don't want to be part of this administration or they all have something to hide.
    I would take it but "secretary" is such a demeaning title.
     

    Martin

    Senior Member
    Dec 31, 2000
    56,913
    Yeah, I prefer czar. Not only is it a statement of colossal power, it also gives me the moral flexibility to enact the necessary policies that will ultimately bring me enormous wealth.
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    111,601
    Come on, the government has to know everything is going to collapse, don't they? They try to hedge their risk just like any other major firm. Shit is going down, big time.
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 23)