Latest baseball scores, trades, talk, ideas, opinions, and standings

Archive for the ‘spend on banks’ Category

>Fight For Freedom: Read My Brouhaha at Hub

>This Democrat bgpappa excoriated Republicans on Hub pages about the fact there seems to be a solid NO front to Obama’s outlandish spending. And rightly so. Obama’s out of control and must be stood up to with a solid no, elsewise how will our kids pay back those huge sums of money. And if all he does is print money to pay for his excesses, then all of us suffer, especially those of us on fixed incomes. If for example, you have ten thousand dollars in the bank and hyperinflation follows, which it will, your money may buy only a third of the groceries as before. So that’s like saying Obama has in 100 days robbed you of $6,666. And that’s how he will pay for it. All that hard-earned savings almost wiped out!

There are Democrats and Republicans in food lines over Obama’s spending. I feel that’s exactly what he wants — Americans begging for food, so we can know what it feels like to be hungry again. I was born in the depression so I know what that is like and it isn’t pretty. Following are some comments of people at Hub, including mine, regarding socialism, freedom, saying no to socialism, and other:


Keep on Hubbing!

bgpappa profile image
bgpappa says:
32 hours ago

Thanks for the comment.

However, Obama gave the Republicans every chance to negotiate. He went to Congress to meet with them. He invited them to the White House. After every meeting the Republican leaders said no. No compromise, no negotiation. Obama still seeks their comments.

Yes, he doesn’t have to but he does. You may be referring to Nancy Pelosi, who I agree, is horrible. But Obama has tried and has been rebuffed.

Wanting to end the war is different than wanting us to lose. Reasonable minds can differ on policy, but no Democrat wanted us to lose the war. But how can we win the war if the original objectives can never be met.

I don’t think Rush was misquoted. To be fair and allow people to make up their own minds, I included the entirety of the speech. He also said it on his radio show. Hannitty is the same.

Also, no recognition from either than there are signs that things are improving. At least Obama gives Bush recogntion for the few things right he did. (I am referring to creating anti-biotics stockpile, which Bush did do and deserves credit for)

Thanks for the comment

Blackberry profile image
Blackberry says:
24 hours ago

Have you noticed what’s going on with Acorn this morning on the news!!!!!!!

Another news story “Strong arming” that’s low.

‘”there can be no dipsute that the President has accomplished much in his first 100 days.” Oh, yes there can!

“Bring a plan, an idea, a solution.” Your asking us to bring a plan or idea we’re not running the country. Our own President doesn’t even have solutions.

I wish he would get off my tv.

dusanotes profile image
dusanotes says: 21 hours ago
Interesting blog: but you, J. Kumm, and others who say Rush Limbaugh said I hope the president fails, and ended his sentence, are wrong. What he did say was I hope he fails in transforming the U.S. into a socialistic country. I, too, hope he fails at that because that means government ownership of means of production. The Brits were not doing well under socialism and then Margaret Thatcher came along.She started a program of privatizing government owned trains, manufacturing and other businesses. It worked. She turned their economy around so that today it’s in better shape than many western countries. But with a socialist back in power, Gordon Brown, it is going down fast. Recently they had to raise taxes on people making 214 pounds per year ($150,000) from 40% to 50%. It will probably have to go higher and those more heavily taxed will be down in the category of ordinary people making an 100,000 pounds a year — all because of excessive spending in the UK.
Look around, isn’t Obama headed in that direction? Already, he and we own most of AIG and GM. Had Chrysler come up with a plan and not declared bankruptcy, the government would have owned them too. We are quickly transforming ourselves into a government-ownership nation. Watch closely in the next few weeks and months to see if Obama divests himself of all of the companies he now controls. By controlling I mean he can name the president, fire the board of directors and put pressure on how the company is managed.
The taking over of companies is supposed to be to prop them up and it must be temporary. But I’m against even propping up a company — let them fail. Let them declare bankruptcy as Chrysler has. If they can pay their creditors 30 cents on the dollar maybe they can survive…and maybe they can’t. That’s what has made this country great, the opportunity to fail. Take that away and all you have is a “Nanny State” with companies unable to compete with the world because they don’t have to be excellent to survive. There are companies out there still making money in this recession. One is Amazon. When people can’t go on expensive trips they visualize the trip in a book they buy from Amazon, Barnes and Nobel and others.
Free enterprise is supposed to be “free to fail.” One business goes out and another pops up to replace it, and the new one has a better idea, more ambitious workers, or something else that keeps it afloat. Did we prop up Thomas Edison when he failed 1,000 times trying to invent the incadescent light bulb? Did we prop up Henry Ford when he tried to get a car company started? No, he went out and got private subscriptions of money and struggled.
Struggle is good. In his case, for months he struggled with the question of how he could make his new company financially successful. Then he discovered he could cut costs by having one employee install fenders, another install windshields, another the engine — in a conveyer belt assembly line routine called mass production. It takes new ideas to succeed.
Government has no business meddling with car companies. My view is to let GM and Chrysler have the chance to fail. Obama, in a recent speech, mentioned the fact that it is tougher for American automakers to succeed and compete with Japan because of “Legacy costs.” He didn’t spell it out for fear of offending the unions, but that’s what he meant. Including benefits, American union auto workers make as much as $140,000 per year as opposed to Honda and Toyota in America where they make half that. Figuring an average of 2,000 hours of productive work per year, that boils down to a salary of about $70 per hour for assembly line workers. I believe the only reason Obama and the Demos gave GM and Chrysler all that money was to bail out or save the unions and their workers in Detroit and all over. Obama has loosened up the requirements to form unions because those are Democrat voters. Again, it boils down to passing special benefit laws and spending taxpayer money to garner votes. If you study Obama, you see that this is his MO, he’s always looking toward the next election. Why does he go to Missouri and speak before a group of Democrats at a cost of $350,000 to operate Airforce One, then return the same night? Why did he spend twice that much of our money on a “date” on Valentines to Chicago, return that night and go back there the same week to be with his wife — all on the national largass? That Missouri trip, like many he takes, was a 2012 election campaign trip. Though the country is awakening to his excesses during a recession because of Shawn Hanity, Rush Limbaugh, and independent Glen Beck, since arriving at the White House he’s been like a drunken sailor on one continual party, more concerned about his own popularity than the country (as proven by his dismal performance at the G20 meetings where he was afraid to offend even a known U.S. enemy Hugo Chavez by using the dictator’s proffered book as a photo op. What did that say to our allies in South and Central America, like Columbia? Meanwhile Chavez is entertaining Russia as they do joint Naval maneuvers a hundred miles from Key West). Read my conservative solution to paying back Obama’s excessive spending to get America right.
You said Republicans seem to lack a real leader, but they do appear united to an idea. Read my blog above. Voting no is not a sin. What is a shameful is the trillions of dollars Obama and Congress have authorized to spend on banks, car companies, and insurers. That money will have to be paid back by our kids and theirs. We tried to get Chinese money again, but they’re not playing that game. They see how bad our economy really is. So all we’ve got left is Obama’s printing press. But when you flood the market with money, what little we old timers have left in the bank quickly diminishes. Our retirements are going to be worth practically nothing. Is this part of Obama’s big plan? Humble us to the point we have to all become socialists and wards of the state to survive?
bgpappa profile image
bgpappa says:
20 hours ago

Thanks for the comments, althought I don’t agree with everything you have said.

Common ground: I agree, AIG and GM and others should have been let fail. See my other blog re my plan to fix the economy.

I don’t think Obama wants socialism, but I don’t agree with giving trillions to failing companies.

Republicans have no plan, no ideas and no solutions, just no.

Acorn is bad this morning, but Acorn is not Obama. Just more guilty by association. But Obama should insist they get nothing if the allegaitons are true. If he doesn’t, then he has a real problem and will deservedly lose support.

Rush said it. I put the entire clip there, but he said it. If it wasn’t what he meant, then choose words more closely.

eovery profile image
eovery says:
14 hours ago

I agree the Republicans are sucking bad right now. The need to pull thier head out of their !@#$!@#$. But I cannot agree to the direction Obama and the gang is taking us.

We need some help.

As for negotiating with the Republicans, Obama invited a select few modarate republicans to try to win them over — not to negotiate. This is was all a ploy for the media and the American public. “Obama tried, but the Republican resisted.” It worked for some people who cannot think for themselves and see past the deception.

Keep on hubbing.

Writer Rider profile image
Writer Rider says:
14 hours ago

Ok, I’m a dem and I’m not going to mention my opinion but do you think “Just say no” is the right strategy when people are tired of the word and want to hear “yes.”

Sufidreamer profile image
Sufidreamer says:
13 hours ago

Dusanotes – the socialism experiment of the seventies failed. No argument – Conservatism was needed to repair some of the damage.

However, please do not hold Thatcher up as a guiding light – she destroyed the country. The rail privatization was a shambles and is still an ongoing mess. The national infrastructure was completely destroyed under Thatcher, and she sold off the industries for much less than they were worth.

Even modern Conservatives distance themselves from Thatcherism – it did not work and went too far. Greed is good failed.

bgpappa profile image
bgpappa says:
13 hours ago

Thanks for the comments. Apparently this fight crosses oceans.

eovery says:
12 hours ago

The three sold out the Republican party. The Republicans were totally against the WHOLE big spending bill and most of the items congress is currently doing. The Republicans were doing the will of the people who voted them in. A lot of people were against the big spending bill and saying no. The ones that said no represented them well. The three that were traitors to the party, sold the part out. The bill needed 60% passing, and would not have passed if they had not sold the party out. This is part of the checks and balance of our republic. We are not a democracy, but a republic.

This was their job. And to hear people crying, “they said no.” This is senseless. 45% of the the U.S.A. should not have a voice and can’t say no?

Just because this is different than some people want to hear. It is still what a lot of people want. Remember Obama only got 55% percent of the vote. There is still 45% opposed. They have a voice. And they say no to big spending.

I tired of people crying because they are saying no. And calling the republicans cry babies, when they are crying louder about the Republicans, who doing what they think is right. This is actual comical now that I think of it. LOL comical.

This is the second or third hub on this. And it is getting funny.

Keep on Hubbing.

bgpappa profile image

bgpappa says:
12 hours ago

Well, your recent comment proves my point. I didn’t call them crybabies. Obstructionist. Genuine disagreement with a policy a no vote is fair, needed and patriotic. A no vote just because the other side thought of it, obstructionist.

But, if we are going to go down this road, at least you don’t hear President Obama calling the Republicans unpatriotic because they don’t agree with them. President Bush did not give the same respect.

Republicans who say no for good reasons I have respect for. Republican leader who mandate that their members say no not out of principal but because Obama introduced it I have none. Republicans who just howl at the moon and offer nothing to solve the problems of the day except for insults and propaganda are the ones I am talking about.

dusanotes profile image

dusanotes says:
55 minutes ago

Sufidreamer, you’re right about one thing. The socialist experiment of the seventies failed, and it will fail every time. Why don’t people learn? America’s founding fathers and both Democrats and Republicans today don’t want to water down the American economy with socialism. You have your problems in the UK and will suffer even more with Gordon Brown at the helm. But we here in America do not need to suffer over socialism, I think we’ve watched your experiment and shuddered; we know personally Canadians who come to America for health care because their socialistic medical care isn’t performing — they have long lines up there for care and our hospitals and doctors are better than theirs. It’s a fact, socialism doesn’t work. I had my appendix out in a socialist country in 1958, Finland. The doctors were adequate and I survived. But there was a lot to be desired in the way of facilities and nursing care that we have here in America. While I love Finland and their wonderful people, I wouldn’t want to go back there for another operation. That was when I was very young and the circumstances were such that I couldn’t return to the states for the operation — it was get operated on or die — so I had no choice.

We all know it, so why take us down that road again? My progenitors came from Britain — people from Scotland, Wales, Ireland and England. Why did they come? Many came because in America they saw a better life. America in the seventeenth and eighteenth century held out an offer of land and freedom impossible at that time in Europe and England. Freedom . . .free agency . . . God didn’t put us on earth to be slaves to any man . . . that is a God-given gift. We call it an “inalienable right” here in America to be free. In England was born our desire to be free and the document signed at Runnymede, the Magna Carta. We in America feed off that document just as you do there in England. It was inspired of God, just as our Constitution and Bill of Rights was inspired. The showdown of Earls opposing the king came about because of oppression. A king was heavy handed, putting down the people at every opportunity. Obama is scarry. He is living like a king and if he has his way he will become a tyrant. Down with tyrants in this country. We conservatives believe for man to be truly free he must be free to start up a business without threat of government taking it over or taxing it to death, which the Obama boys want to do.

We sincerely hope and pray that the takeovers of industry by the Obama administration will be temporary. That the U.S. will get out of industry and get back to doing what good governments do, making laws that pave the way for the common citizenry to go out and make a living without threat of reprisals which we are seeing right now as Obama, Patrick Gaithner, and Rattner bully the big auto makers, insurers, and banks around. It’s downright disgraceful. I can’t wait for the day when Obama starts keeping his promise to relent, to get out of the way and let business leaders run their own companies. But my fear is that meanwhile he will wreck what it took us almost 300 years to build up here in America. To all of this intimidation and outright socialism, I join with Rush Limbaugh and the Republicans in saying NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

Don White

dusanotes profile image

dusanotes says:

This Democrat who wrote the “NO” article above is talented, but not right, I’ll give him that. He started a controversy that won’t end. bgpappa is his name. He excoriated Republicans on Hub pages about the fact there seems to be a solid NO front to Obama’s outlandish spending. And rightly so. Obama’s out of control and must be stood up to with a solid no, if it isn’t too late; Obama’s already bankrupted our country and somehow his actions need to be reversed. Fat chance. Elsewise how will our kids pay back those huge sums of money. And if all he does is dilute the money supply, printing new money to pay for his excesses, then all of us suffer, especially those of us on fixed incomes. If for example, you have ten thousand dollars in the bank and hyperinflation follows when the recession is over, which it will, your money may buy only a third of the groceries as before. So that’s like saying Obama has in 100 days robbed you of $6,666. And that’s how he will pay for it. All that hard-earned savings almost wiped out in three months, and the “best” and most expensive from Obama is still to come, health care! Then we’ll get free doggie wipes, autographed basketballs for every family signed by BHO, excerpts from a new book he’ll write, “My Popularity Never Wanes,” or is it “How I Skinned America The Chicago Way.”

Mark my words, if Obama has his way there will be ordinary Democrats and Republicans in food lines over his deficit spending. I feel that’s exactly what he wants — Americans begging for food, so we can know what it feels like to be hungry again. I was born in the depression so I know what that is like and it isn’t pretty.