Don't let the door hit in you in the a$$ on the way out...

NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
[quote author="trrenter" date=1232510767][quote author="bltserv" date=1232509277][quote author=trrenter

When can we actually judge Obama by his actions without justifying it by what others have done?</blockquote>


You mean when is it PC for YOU to Judge Obama ?

Lets see. He has been President all of 3 Hours now.

You think we should maybe give him a little more time in office ?



How about a 90 day Honeymoon ?</blockquote>


<strong><em>No Obama has been POTUS since November 4th</em></strong>. He has been actively pushing for policy since he won the election.



Today is day one to hear that Bail out recepients donated 7 million and get invited to special events is not a change for the better.



Are you happy to hear that.



Kinda makes me question why Obama kept pushing to fast track the second installment of TARP.</blockquote>


Congrats. You just became the most recent member of the n_v "ignore" club. You're either so blinded by idology you ignore facts that are inconvient, or you are a moron.



Certainly I'll enjoy your silence.
 
[quote author="no_vaseline" date=1232514590][quote author="trrenter" date=1232510767][quote author="bltserv" date=1232509277][quote author=trrenter

When can we actually judge Obama by his actions without justifying it by what others have done?</blockquote>


You mean when is it PC for YOU to Judge Obama ?

Lets see. He has been President all of 3 Hours now.

You think we should maybe give him a little more time in office ?



How about a 90 day Honeymoon ?</blockquote>


<strong><em>No Obama has been POTUS since November 4th</em></strong>. He has been actively pushing for policy since he won the election.



Today is day one to hear that Bail out recepients donated 7 million and get invited to special events is not a change for the better.



Are you happy to hear that.



Kinda makes me question why Obama kept pushing to fast track the second installment of TARP.</blockquote>


Congrats. You just became the most recent member of the n_v "ignore" club. You're either so blinded by idology you ignore facts that are inconvient, or you are a moron.



Certainly I'll enjoy your silence.</blockquote>


That certainly won't kill me. I find that you are very condescending with many of your answers. You seem to have this air to you that suggests that what you say is fact and anyone that may disagree with you must be a moron. You have your pithy little comments like wash-rinse-repeat sour grapes that dismisses others statements like they are a nuisance to your superior intelect.



You seem to gloss over any fact and then call names or make condescending statments.



I detest that our government run by both Democrats and Republicans agreed to the bail out.



<strong>I now detest that our new President saw fit to take donations totaling over 7 million to fund his inaguration from the same people we are bailing out. </strong>



You chose to ignore that statement so whose ideology is blinding them, or who is the moron. Did you not read that statement? Or did you ignore it. Why did you chose to ignore what was one of the main points in my original post?????



I will enjoy my banshment to your ignore list.
 
trrenter



I think you have lost your perspective.

Today is the inauguration of the 44th President.



Yet you jump into a thread that mentions "Bush Dont let the door hit you in the azz"

and jump on Obama about donations and TARP. Your timing sucks.



Kind of like spilling wine on a new bride at a wedding after you drink too much.
 
[quote author="trrenter" date=1232517163]



<strong>I now detest that our new President saw fit to take donations totaling over 7 million to fund his inaguration from the same people we are bailing out. </strong>



</blockquote>


I don't get your complaint ... are you saying that the corporations that are getting TARP money are using those same dollars and kicking them back to Obama for a lavish celebration? If so, can you point me to a reference. Or are you saying that people who happen to work for a corporation that is getting TARP money are donating some of their <strong>own</strong> money to Obama? Isn't it their prerogative to do with their own money as they see fit?
 
[quote author="green_cactus" date=1232526569][quote author="trrenter" date=1232517163]



<strong>I now detest that our new President saw fit to take donations totaling over 7 million to fund his inaguration from the same people we are bailing out. </strong>



</blockquote>


I don't get your complaint ... are you saying that the corporations that are getting TARP money are using those same dollars and kicking them back to Obama for a lavish celebration? If so, can you point me to a reference. Or are you saying that people who happen to work for a corporation that is getting TARP money are donating some of their <strong>own</strong> money to Obama? Isn't it their prerogative to do with their own money as they see fit?</blockquote>
I think what he is saying is that people, who work for corporations that are getting TARP money, are using money from bonuses paid to them that were only made possible by the infusion of TARP money, which would be an indirect donation of future tax dollars to fund an largely superfluous celebration. That you, in particular, are attempting to spin this as "personal choice" is comical; if this had been McCain, you'd have spent all day posting links to the Keating Five and random blogs that claimed certain corruption.
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1232529928][quote author="green_cactus" date=1232526569][quote author="trrenter" date=1232517163]



<strong>I now detest that our new President saw fit to take donations totaling over 7 million to fund his inaguration from the same people we are bailing out. </strong>



</blockquote>


I don't get your complaint ... are you saying that the corporations that are getting TARP money are using those same dollars and kicking them back to Obama for a lavish celebration? If so, can you point me to a reference. Or are you saying that people who happen to work for a corporation that is getting TARP money are donating some of their <strong>own</strong> money to Obama? Isn't it their prerogative to do with their own money as they see fit?</blockquote>
I think what he is saying is that people, who work for corporations that are getting TARP money, are using money from bonuses paid to them that were only made possible by the infusion of TARP money, which would be an indirect donation of future tax dollars to fund an largely superfluous celebration. That you, in particular, are attempting to spin this as "personal choice" is comical; if this had been McCain, you'd have spent all day posting links to the Keating Five and random blogs that claimed certain corruption.</blockquote>


Fine. Let's follow your claim that they are <em>using money from bonuses paid to them that were only made possible by the infusion of TARP money</em>. Would you kindly point me to reference you used to make this accusation? I would also need to look at the financial circumstances of these donors. According to you, they would not have had the $50K were it not for the TARP funded bonus. I find that hard to believe. You must surely know more about their financial hardship than I do to make these claims.
 
<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123146096981566339.html">Wall Street Journal article</a>



<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Inauguration/Story?id=6665946&page=2">ABC News Article</a>



<a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama?s-inauguration-has-been-financed-partially-by-bailed-out-wall-street-executives.html">Another article</a>



BLT I see your point. I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade.
 
[quote author="green_cactus" date=1232530700]Fine. Let's follow your claim that they are <em>using money from bonuses paid to them that were only made possible by the infusion of TARP money</em>. Would you kindly point me to reference you used to make this accusation? I would also need to look at the financial circumstances of these donors. According to you, they would not have had the $50K were it not for the TARP funded bonus. I find that hard to believe. You must surely know more about their financial hardship than I do to make these claims.</blockquote>
Go read the links provided by trrenter. This isn't some conspiracy, the donations are a matter of public record. If the banks had not gotten capital infusions from the TARP funds, they would have all suffered Lehman's fate. So it would follow that if the banks were under FDIC control (post-failure), they would not have been paying any employee bonuses last year, and would not be contributing money to his Inaugural events because they would be unemployed. Are you arguing that unemployed executives are going to shell out $50k each for the priviledge of seeing Obama across a crowded room?
 
[quote author="trrenter" date=1232531423]<a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123146096981566339.html">Wall Street Journal article</a>



<a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Inauguration/Story?id=6665946&page=2">ABC News Article</a>



<a href="http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama?s-inauguration-has-been-financed-partially-by-bailed-out-wall-street-executives.html">Another article</a>



BLT I see your point. I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade.</blockquote>


I got my info from a <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/14/bailed-out-banks-donating_n_157960.html">Huffington Post Article</a> and it's not that different from those links. I just don't see how you can convincingly argue that the TARP dollars are the ones that made it through; that if it weren't for TARP funds, those donations wouldn't have happened.
 
[quote author="Oscar" date=1232533239][quote author="green_cactus" date=1232530700]Fine. Let's follow your claim that they are <em>using money from bonuses paid to them that were only made possible by the infusion of TARP money</em>. Would you kindly point me to reference you used to make this accusation? I would also need to look at the financial circumstances of these donors. According to you, they would not have had the $50K were it not for the TARP funded bonus. I find that hard to believe. You must surely know more about their financial hardship than I do to make these claims.</blockquote>
Go read the links provided by trrenter. This isn't some conspiracy, the donations are a matter of public record. If the banks had not gotten capital infusions from the TARP funds, they would have all suffered Lehman's fate. So it would follow that if the banks were under FDIC control (post-failure), they would not have been paying any employee bonuses last year, and would not be contributing money to his Inaugural events because they would be unemployed. Are you arguing that unemployed executives are going to shell out $50k each for the priviledge of seeing Obama across a crowded room?</blockquote>


You mean "unemployed guys" like Louis Susman.



[...] and $50,000 from Louis Susman, the recently-retired vice chairman of Citigroup. [...]
 
[quote author="green_cactus" date=1232533460]

You mean "unemployed guys" like Louis Susman.



[...] and $50,000 from Louis Susman, the recently-retired vice chairman of Citigroup. [...]</blockquote>
No, I mean employed guys like Citigroup Managing Director Raymond J. McGuire. Honestly, you remind me of the Bush supporters who still think Iraq had WMDs hiding somewhere.
 
Funny thing, according to OpenSecrets.org (by no means a left leaning wingnut blog I tend to reference to). Number 2 and 3 of top donor categories are: unemployed and retired. Number 1 is self-employed.



Donor list by organization:



<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/inaug_allorgs.php">Donor List</a>.



But I guess if you happen to work for a company AND donate money you guys claim that it becomes an institutional donation. That is where we differ in opinion.
 
[quote author="bltserv" date=1232523283]trrenter



I think you have lost your perspective.

Today is the inauguration of the 44th President.



Yet you jump into a thread that mentions "Bush Dont let the door hit you in the azz"

and jump on Obama about donations and TARP. Your timing sucks.



Kind of like spilling wine on a new bride at a wedding after you drink too much.</blockquote>


That's kind of what I was thinking.... I believe TRRenter has a valid discussion to debate, but it really should be in its own thread.



I had the countdown clock since they first came out in early '05. While I believe that Obama has the leadership and decision making skills that we need right now, this thread was really about W going away, which made me feel incredibly jubilant.



Will I argue that Obama is going to be our savior and is perfect? No. Will I argue that W was the WORST president in history? YES! I really really really think that the 20 odd percent that were still approving of Bush are not NORMAL people... so idealogical that they aren't capable of being rational or are just plain stupid. One of my favorite bumper stickers that came out of this last administration (love it, it's now in the past) said "if you aren't outraged, you aren't paying attention." Shrub and Cheney did so damage to this country and I am so glad that they are finally out of power.
 
[quote author="green_cactus" date=1232534109]Funny thing, according to OpenSecrets.org (by no means a left leaning wingnut blog I tend to reference to). Number 2 and 3 of top donor categories are: unemployed and retired. Number 1 is self-employed.



Donor list by organization:



<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/inaug_allorgs.php">Donor List</a>.



But I guess if you happen to work for a company AND donate money you guys claim that it becomes an institutional donation. That is where we differ in opinion.</blockquote>
Here's a link to <a href="http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/release.cfm?ID=2799">Public Citizen</a>. Now, I'm stepping back out of this discussion because I clarified trrenter's point and that was my only goal. There is the water, whether you drink or not is up to you.
 
I never said the TARP money went to Obama. I said "I now detest that our new President saw fit to take donations totaling over 7 million to fund his inaguration from the same people we are bailing out."



You can try to candy coat it and wrap it up any way you would like. This is bundling pure and simple, they are hoping to buy some face time. IMHO Obama should have politly declined the donations. Sorry but we cannot take money from an employee or a bundler that has ties to a company that is receiving bail out money.



Not a hard thing to do. Plus with all of the economic problems and unemployment Partying like it is 1999 is a little offensive to me.



Just my two cents.
 
[quote author="trrenter" date=1232535593]I never said the TARP money went to Obama. I said "I now detest that our new President saw fit to take donations totaling over 7 million to fund his inaguration from the same people we are bailing out."



You can try to candy coat it and wrap it up any way you would like. This is bundling pure and simple, they are hoping to buy some face time. IMHO Obama should have politly declined the donations. Sorry but we cannot take money from an employee or a bundler that has ties to a company that is receiving bail out money.



Not a hard thing to do. Plus with all of the economic problems and unemployment Partying like it is 1999 is a little offensive to me.



Just my two cents.</blockquote>


ummm... in '99 UE was the lowest in history. UE is partying like it was ~1936, which was a party compared to 1932.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top