The Obama deception documentary

[metalheaddude]

I think this video has some fantastic valid points. Obama will be no different from George W or any other president that has gone before him. They are ALL PUPPETS.

If you have not seen this documentary I encourage to watch it. It is not pro bush or anti obama. It just states the facts that they are puppets to the real people in control the "shadow government" which is behind the scenes. They are the ones calling all the shots. Although all of this may not be 100% true there is certainly elements of it that are VERY real. Such as the federal bank being a private organization and a law onto themselves. Obama is powerless (just as George Bush was) to do anything about the economy. It's totally out of their hands!!


[youtube:27wzay9i]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw[/youtube:27wzay9i]

 

[HughJass]

retarded video has already been posted.

 

[CCS]

There was no deception. Obama told us exactly what he planned to do. He did not elaborate on just how much he'd do it, but he was very clear that he'd take the country way to the left. People voted for him anyway for two reasons:
1. They were upset at Bush.
2. Some are unware just how bad socialism is.
3. McCain voted for the bailout too.

I talked to many people, and most did not want either president. Many said they'd stay home. Those who did vote did so while holding their noses.

 

[metalheaddude]

retarded video has already been posted.

Ur such a pathetic Obama worshipper. Ur just like those people crying in that video thinking that he is some kind of savior. Stand back and take a look at the bigger picture. He has broken EVERY single election promise he made because he is not the one calling the shots, he is loyal to his masters which are the banking elite in the federal reserve, they own his ***! They are the ones who funded Obamas campaign.

 

[oni]

metalheaddude..............................at it again! :gay:

 

[decro435]

Can America ever get anything right?

Never satisfied with anything. Always trying to be the best even if that means war.

By the looks of it Obama is a sign of hope for a change in the country.

 

[Bryan]

Can America ever get anything right?

Never satisfied with anything. Always trying to be the best even if that means war.

You've completely lost me. Please give me some examples of what you're talking about.

 

[The Gardener]

Obama will be no different from George W or any other president that has gone before him. They are ALL PUPPETS.

It just states the facts that they are puppets to the real people in control the "shadow government" which is behind the scenes. They are the ones calling all the shots. Although all of this may not be 100% true there is certainly elements of it that are VERY real. Such as the federal bank being a private organization and a law onto themselves. Obama is powerless (just as George Bush was) to do anything about the economy. It's totally out of their hands!!

By the looks of it Obama is a sign of hope for a change in the country.

As contradictory as it sounds, I actually agree with both of the views expressed above.

I was a fervent Obama supporter, and 100+ days into his administration I give him a split report card. For his tone and approach to foreign affairs, and domestic social policies, I give him an A+. LOVED the Guantanamo closure. LOVED the end of torture. LOVED the Cairo speech... FINALLY a President who understands statesmanship.

In economic matters, I give him an F... Obama is like a Bush the Third administration. What happened to all his talk about it being unfair for government to pander and bailout big business, and leave ordinary Americans to pick up the tab? I was expecting someone who would END the Republican corporate welfare state, and also someone who would curb our interventionist foreign policy (which is, in effect, another manifestation of corporate welfare). He's slipping in his rhetoric on an Iraq withdrawl date... finding it increasingly hard to distinguish his evolving position on this from that of Bush. Quite obviously, Obama is not someone who is seeking to amend the unwritten "contract" that working class Americans have with their oligarchical overseers as he implied in his rhetoric... just like his predecessors, he's firmly in their pocket. What a dissapointment, but I can't say I'm surprised.

So, I'm 50/50 on him. Would I re-elect him? Yes... the Republicans are FAR worse. I would only vote GOP if they eschew the neo-cons and instead adopt more of a Libertarian Ron Paul-type platform.

 

[optimus prime]

A president obviously has powers, but you cannot expect the US or any other country to give a single man complete control.

It is impossible for one man to know enough about military, economy, public relations, security, business..etc.

There are areas where a president will listen to his advisers and accept what they say. Military generals will know far more than a president would about what military action needs to be taken.

Obama can try and use a more diplomatic approach, but if the US military, counter-terrorists and whoever your equivalent of MI6 is, says they need to strike and they need to strike now, he will agree to it.

This is why when he says change is here, it's not really. The set up for the united states and most other countries take years to build and it would take years to change.

 

[Bryan]

In economic matters, I give him an F... Obama is like a Bush the Third administration. What happened to all his talk about it being unfair for government to pander and bailout big business, and leave ordinary Americans to pick up the tab? I was expecting someone who would END the Republican corporate welfare state...

I find it a bit odd that so many people of all political persuasions are second-guessing the President and his team on the way they're handling this economic mess. This is a virtually unprecedented situation we're in, so who are _we_ to decry the use of the stimulus package to fight it? If a smart man with proven liberal credentials like Obama thinks it's the way to go, how can we challenge that? And Ben Bernanke is smart as hell, too: he's from a working-class family, but scored 1590 out of 1600 on his SATs.

I would only vote GOP if they eschew the neo-cons...

I want somebody to CHEW the neo-cons!

 

[The Gardener]

I find it a bit odd that so many people of all political persuasions are second-guessing the President and his team on the way they're handling this economic mess. This is a virtually unprecedented situation we're in, so who are _we_ to decry the use of the stimulus package to fight it?

I'm actually okay with the stimulus. I have my beef, specifically, with the bailing out of Merrill, JPM (via Bear Stearns), Citi, B of A, and most egregiously, AIG. There is AMPLE evidence that these banks took actions KNOWINGLY that involved risk they had NO collateral for, KNOWING FULL WELL that their friends (and former co-workers) at the Fed and Treasury would get the US taxpayer to cover their losses.

These banks are not nameless, faceless entities... like the electric company, or the transit district. There are humans behind them who raked in trillions on the risks when they were money good, and are now raking in trillions more on the bailouts after the risks went money bad. These folks really should be given the Enron treatment, instead of being pandered to and subsidized.

And Ben Bernanke is smart as hell, too

Agreed. But, per my para above, It's just a shame he's not using his smarts for the benefit of the broader country, instead of just protecting his own interests, but I guess that is the nature of government nowadays? "Capture theory" run amok. There was a Congressman recently, can't think of his name but he was a Democrat, who was quoted "The banks own this place". Well, I don't think its just the banks, but, I DO think that everyone in DC is "owned".

 

[Petchsky]

And you'd be right, but I guess they are just playing the game. Read a really good article about the financial crisis, thought you might like it, it's not too long and to the point.

http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22775.htm

Called "Securitzation: The Biggest Rip Off Ever"

 

[JayBear]

There was no deception. Obama told us exactly what he planned to do. He did not elaborate on just how much he'd do it, but he was very clear that he'd take the country way to the left. People voted for him anyway for two reasons:
1. They were upset at Bush.
2. Some are unware just how bad socialism is.
3. McCain voted for the bailout too.

I talked to many people, and most did not want either president. Many said they'd stay home. Those who did vote did so while holding their noses.

I have to say, I am constantly amazed by the juxtaposition of your complete lack of insight or information and the authoritative tone you take with so many political topics. I hope that in your personal and professional life you refrain from making statements like this based on such extensive research as 'talking to many people.' You, sir, are an idiot.

 

[Cassin]

http://www.motorauthority.com/dick-chen ... on-gm.html

During an interview on Fox News last Tuesday, Cheney revealed that during his presidency George W. Bush did not want to be the one who “pulled the plugâ€￾ on GM.

“I thought that, eventually, the right outcome was going to be bankruptcy,â€￾ Cheney said, referring to GM. “It had to go through such a dramatic restructuring to have any chance of survival that they had to be able to renegotiate labor contracts and so forth, and the president decided that he did not want to be the one who pulled the plug just before he left office.â€￾

Cheney said that rather than acting on GM, the Bush administration “put together a package that tided GM over until the new administration had a chance to look at it.â€￾ This included the original $17.4 billion auto industry bailout package signed in by the Bush administration late last year, which was designed to give the incoming Obama administration some time to adjust and make preparations for the inevitable GM bankruptcy.

 

[Old Baldy]

Even though I'm a rabid right-winger we have to give Obama a little more time guys. It's too early to judge in a fair and impartial manner yet IMHO.

Obviously I agree with Gardener that we shouldn't bail out companies who fail through no fault but their own, however people in power disagree with me.

We'll get through this just like the rest of the capitalist world and not so capitalist world will get through this.

People still need to buy stuff but WHAT they buy, how much they NEED to buy, and CAN honestly pay for, will become more rational IMHO.

My main complaints with Obama and Bush were their dramatic increases in spending and increasing the deficit. But apparently they both disagree with me.

I also worry that Obama is letting the Federal government get WAY too much control over the private business sector, etc. But the people in power disagree with me. I'm not sure why they feel this way but it ain't good IMHO.

But I do know that the dishonest and disreputable business practices of many "evil" business people and selfish, stupid "customers" caused this dramatic increase in Federal control over private enterprises.

Plus, ALL OF YOU should have known Obama would not cut and run in the Middle East theaters of war. I wouldn't be surprised if he ultimately threatens North Korea with military action if that lunatic in power doesn't change his ways.

(I told all of you liberals that Obama wouldn't leave the Middle Eastern theaters of war before the election but you were so giddy with his political election talk that you wouldn't listen to Old Baldy. )

Obama will not let another country threaten our physical safety. He's the President now and he just won't allow it IMHO. Oh, he might do it too late for someone like me, or too early for someone like Aussie but, eventually, he will protect America with force if he feels it is necessary.

If he can take over banks and auto companies, you da** well better be sure he will go after regimes who physically threaten us.

 

[ClayShaw]

There was no deception. Obama told us exactly what he planned to do. He did not elaborate on just how much he'd do it, but he was very clear that he'd take the country way to the left. People voted for him anyway for two reasons:
1. They were upset at Bush.
2. Some are unware just how bad socialism is.
3. McCain voted for the bailout too.

I talked to many people, and most did not want either president. Many said they'd stay home. Those who did vote did so while holding their noses.

Obama is NOT a socialist. You cannot be a capitalist and a socialist.
CCS, you forgot to add a fourth option for your reasons: 4) Sarah Palin and the crap that came out of her mouth ("In what respect, Charlie").

 

[ClayShaw]

Even though I'm a rabid right-winger we have to give Obama a little more time guys. It's too early to judge in a fair and impartial manner yet IMHO.

Obviously I agree with Gardener that we shouldn't bail out companies who fail through no fault but their own, however people in power disagree with me.

We'll get through this just like the rest of the capitalist world and not so capitalist world will get through this.

People still need to buy stuff but WHAT they buy, how much they NEED to buy, and CAN honestly pay for, will become more rational IMHO.

My main complaints with Obama and Bush were their dramatic increases in spending and increasing the deficit. But apparently they both disagree with me.

I also worry that Obama is letting the Federal government get WAY too much control over the private business sector, etc. But the people in power disagree with me. I'm not sure why they feel this way but it ain't good IMHO.

But I do know that the dishonest and disreputable business practices of many "evil" business people and selfish, stupid "customers" caused this dramatic increase in Federal control over private enterprises.

Plus, ALL OF YOU should have known Obama would not cut and run in the Middle East theaters of war. I wouldn't be surprised if he ultimately threatens North Korea with military action if that lunatic in power doesn't change his ways.

(I told all of you liberals that Obama wouldn't leave the Middle Eastern theaters of war before the election but you were so giddy with his political election talk that you wouldn't listen to Old Baldy. )

Obama will not let another country threaten our physical safety. He's the President now and he just won't allow it IMHO. Oh, he might do it too late for someone like me, or too early for someone like Aussie but, eventually, he will protect America with force if he feels it is necessary.

If he can take over banks and auto companies, you da** well better be sure he will go after regimes who physically threaten us.

He's supposedly going to have all combat troops out of Iraq by 2011.
I don't think he ever said he'd leave Afghanistan. I saw Richard Haas on Bill Maher's show last week, and he made an interesting point. He termed the initial Afghan war a war of necessity (Iraq being an obvious war of choice), because the US was attacking al-Qaeda. He said it became a war of choice when we decided to go after the Taliban as well. Not sure I agree, but an interesting point. He said similar things about the Korean War.
The lunatic in N. Korea won't provoke a war. He doesn't want a war, he wants cash.

 

[Old Baldy]

If that's true Clay then Obama won't attack N. Korea IMHO. No President would. (However, you state N. Korea wants only cash as if it is a hard fact. I don't know how you know that with such certainty and I bet Obama doesn't know how you know that with such certainty either.)

Yesterday I heard on a national news channel that Obama wants funding approved for the military and favors the amendment stating none of the interrogation pictures will ever be released to the public.

Only the radical fringe of the Democratic Party object to that prohibition (i.e., and they are holding up passage of the military funding bill), but Obama does not want those pictures released because it will endanger American soldiers.

Obama is President now and will not abide by the looney fringe of his party any longer IMHO. Those loons are apparently mad at Obama now but he won't cave in.

That's a good thing. Obama will not satisfy or cow tow to the looney left and I think that is wonderful!!

(And yes Clay, Obama says we'll be out of Iraq in 2011. We'll see but, either way, that ain't cutting and running IMHO.)

 

[ClayShaw]

OldBaldy,
I don't think Obama ever was part of the looney fringe on the left. Certainly not the Kucinich fringe.
The North Korean thing about cash isn't my idea. I've read/heard that in a number of places, although I can't provide links. I read an article saying they've been doing this for decades. They need money for food, mostly.
Where in MI are you? My family is from there. Spent a lot of time there. Mostly in the Detroit suburbs, but some in the northern part of the state, kind of by Traverse City. Love it up there. Plymouth/Livonia/Northfield, not so much.

 

[Old Baldy]

I grew up in the middle of Detroit and moved out at about 30 years old. Went to Lincoln Park then just outside of Monroe where I now live. (I worked in downtown Detroit for 32 years and retired last October, 2008.)

I live in a subdivision but it is in an area which is very close to rural towns/farms, etc.

Like you, I stayed away from Livonia, Plymouth and Northville. Too crowded IMHO. But I have friends who live in the Plymouth and Northville area who love it. Not much crime in those suburbs. Fairly affluent.

I got sick of living with so many people nearby. My subdivision is still a typical subdivision but rural areas are extremely close by. Alot of metro-parks and wide open spaces are near me.

It's been paradise compared to my years in Detroit. IMHO, for all intents and purposes, Detroit is a cesspool. You couldn't give me a home for free to live there again.

Way too much crime and people who do nothing but ask for handouts and hustle for a living.

If feel very bad for the honest, decent people who live in Detroit and have to put up with such a large population of useless jacka**es.