Recent Example of Transformation.....

[Pudfark]

President Barack Obama has selected Amanda Simpson as a senior technical adviser to the Department of Commerce, making her the first transgender appointment of his administration.

Damn...I thought Pelosi had that all "sewed up"......as the first.... .

Old Pudfark sez: "Geeez, whut's next....Bobcat Goldwaithe in charge of Homeland Security".....?????

[Tolwyn]

Obama hasn't the intelligence or ability to be president. He's an utter tool.

[callmeslick]

Tolwyn,
care to give an example of how anyone, given what he's been facing could do better? Your statement, on the surface, is idiotic. Let me elaborate: clearly the man has both the intellect and skill set to handle the job, but to do really well, the whole nation has to be on board. We ain't there yet(see Pudfark, and yourownself).
Hell, it would help if he had a Congress willing to work together in problem-solving, instead of a bunch of grandstanding fools. I'm not sitting here saying that Obama is the greatest President since Lincoln, but he might be the best suited to his times since Kennedy(and, on that one, I'm going on hearsay....the dude was
dead before I was 8 years old). At the one-year mark, it's entirely too soon to judge his term in office, but in that short time, he has moved us away from an economic abyss, gotten investors investing again, put the US in a position to actually work with other nations rather than alienate them, and tried(so far, in vain) to reset the tone of political discourse. From a purely political view, he is, and has been, brilliant. He is, as I've stated repeatedly, pushing the extremes slowly to the margins, and watch him as he builds a centrist coalition sometime before the 2012 election. How you can make the blanket statement above eludes me. You always seemed bright enough to avoid such a moronic generalization.

[ruggbutt]

I'm not sitting here saying that Obama is the greatest President since Lincoln

Lincoln was a terrible president. He suspended Habeas Corpus for one. And the out of control Federal Government that we have today is a direct result of how he expanded the Government's powers after Reconstruction. IMHO he was a traitor and deserved what Booth gave him. In fact, Lincoln was responsible for his own assassination. Before and during the first part of the Civil War there had always been gentlemen's agreements to not assassinate the other guy. Jefferson Davis only made plans during the war to assassinate Lincoln because one of the runners for a Union General (don't recall his name ATM) was caught with notes and plans to kill Davis. Lincoln was a dishonorable fucker in a time where there was still honor in war.

At the one-year mark, it's entirely too soon to judge his term in office, but in that short time, he has moved us away from an economic abyss, gotten investors investing again, put the US in a position to actually work with other nations rather than alienate them, and tried(so far, in vain) to reset the tone of political discourse.

He's done nothing to keep the banks from doing what they did to cause this economic problem in the first place and he's done nothing to stop speculation on fuel oil futures, etc. Only when he starts regulating the stock market and the banks will he be doing 1) what needs to be done 2) what may earn him a place in history on a positive note. Cuz as of now he's put this country in the worst debt it's ever seen and he did it on a gamble. He also needs to get rid of Barnake. That dude is the worst excuse for Chairman of the Federal Reserve that this country has ever seen.

[callmeslick]

I'm not sitting here saying that Obama is the greatest President since Lincoln

Lincoln was a terrible president. He suspended Habeas Corpus for one. And the out of control Federal Government that we have today is a direct result of how he expanded the Government's powers after Reconstruction. IMHO he was a traitor and deserved what Booth gave him. In fact, Lincoln was responsible for his own assassination. Before and during the first part of the Civil War there had always been gentlemen's agreements to not assassinate the other guy. Jefferson Davis only made plans during the war to assassinate Lincoln because one of the runners for a Union General (don't recall his name ATM) was caught with notes and plans to kill Davis. Lincoln was a dishonorable fucker in a time where there was still honor in war.

ok, here you illustrate why I call you a classic Libertarian. I think your analysis is whacked, but have to admire the consistency of your thinking........but then, on the other hand, you write:

Only when he starts regulating the stock market and the banks will he be doing 1) what needs to be done 2) what may earn him a place in history on a positive note.

WTF, you support Lincoln being shot because of expansion of government powers during a Civil War, and, in the next paragraph want Obama to regulate the Commercial markets and banking system, after a recession?
That makes no consistent sense, whatsoever. Now, I'll agree that there needs to be a bit of oversight over the investment and banking sectors, despite the fact that greed and stupidity led to the vast bulk of the problems. But, then again, I'm a moderate progressive, with a tendency toward wanting a security blanket for the weakest members of society. A truly consistent approach, in a capitalist system, was to let the damned institutions fail, and fail miserably. Yes, the whole nation would have suffered, and far worse than they did, but it would have 1) served as fair warning the next time the greedy fuckheads got a bright idea and 2) maybe led an increasingly dimwitted public to wise up over investing in things they don't understand, coupled with crushing a sense of entitlement to goods and services they can't pay for.

[ruggbutt]

Now, I'll agree that there needs to be a bit of oversight over the investment and banking sectors

That's what I meant. They can't be allowed to operate as they have.

A truly consistent approach, in a capitalist system, was to let the damned institutions fail, and fail miserably. Yes, the whole nation would have suffered, and far worse than they did, but it would have 1) served as fair warning the next time the greedy fuckheads got a bright idea and 2) maybe led an increasingly dimwitted public to wise up over investing in things they don't understand, coupled with crushing a sense of entitlement to goods and services they can't pay for.

I agree, but if you're letting institutions like AIG fail and you're pumping money into a fix why not pick an institution that acted responsible. Back that institution on buying the notes from the banks that failed. Unions also need to have the reins yanked. The one problem that put GM in dire straits was unions and their practices. Yeah, it's a free market economy but there comes a point where the unions were extorting GM legally.

Look, I'm all about less government all the way around but in this situtation you can't go from point A to point D by skipping B and C. If we're gonna fix shit let's fix it. Regulate banking, we've all see what happens when we leave them to their devices. Regulate the stock market. Let's not allow these fucktards to artificially inflate oil prices again. Get things back to a workable situation that benefits the country as a whole then make the Feds step back on stuff that's just ridiculous. I can name a dozen government agencies that just don't need to exist.

[callmeslick]

ruggie....one of the great fallacies about the car business is the Union thing. It was bad(really, really bad) management. Management signed those union contracts, and wouldn't have done so if it ensured a loss. What doomed GM and Chrysler is that they made shitty cars and they made car types that were not in demand. Hell, Ford operates under the same contract and makes money. Toyota, Honda, etc all operate on the same pay scale, albeit with some different rules. Don't blame union workers for negotiating the best contract they can.
As for the rest of that last post, some parts I agree with, others I don't. Still, any suggestion by you that government step in and control private capital markets sort of violates any consistency in your usual point of view.

[ruggbutt]

Still, any suggestion by you that government step in and control private capital markets sort of violates any consistency in your usual point of view.

We're at the point where it's necessary. History has proven that banking and the stock market need to be regulated heavily. It's not now and look what we got. Trillions in debt. And while I love to point out that Bill and Hillary escalated what was going on ultimately greed was responsible. Government intervention can be a good thing. It worked real well stopping abuse of child labor.

[callmeslick]

and, what Lincoln did wasn't necessary in the middle of a civil war?? Oh, and he had nothing to do with the clusterfuck that was Reconstruction. That one falls to Johnson, and Grant....the latter being one of the most incompetent fools to ever grace the office of President.

Oh, and that child labor stuff. You can thank the Unions for that one.

[ruggbutt]

and, what Lincoln did wasn't necessary in the middle of a civil war?

I think he did what he felt like doing regardless of the rights of the states.