Iran Election was it legit?

Such big words as you fail to address the fact that according to your own ideology Obama is infringing upon peoples rights and killing troops and foreigners throughout the world. But your do busy suckling the teat of Obama to notice.

Good once Smurf.

 

Such big words as you fail to address the fact that according to your own ideology Bush was infringing upon peoples rights and killing troops and foreigners throughout the world. But your do busy suckling the teat of Bush to notice.

Good once Joe.

 

Well at least Obama can find solace in the fact that at least you respect him Smurf.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHEposwhovk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XoVWw-MCMHw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLQSLwqVq30

 

We don't know what they're thinking. I'm not doubting that they snubbed him, but were they snubbing him as a man or him as the president of the United States? My guess is that they hate stupid, fat Americans with an over-inflated ego and sense of self-importance.

One such person comes to mind while I peruse these forums...

You just have to get over it, Joe. The world has been turning against the US faster since the start of the Iraq/Afghanistan wars. The rest of the world thought it was a bad idea, our European allies got swept up in the fervor but we never found WMD's and the simple fasct is that two entire nations didn't need to get bombed to oblivion for the actions of twelve terrorists on 9/11.

Now we're going bankrupt and asking the rest of the world to give us more money, and we're asking them to not mind the fact that we're overprinting the dollars that they have into worthlessness. By the way the first bailout was Bush's, so you can see that the trend started there. Don't forget that that doesn't include the bailouts many of the banks were ALREADY getting, the Fanny Mae/Freddy Mac bailout, as well as many others before it started hitting the news. This is just something that has to happen or else everything will come crashing down now. Every nation and government faced with this problem decided to make more money because they knew they would collapse right away if they declared bankruptcy instead.

This was all going on during Bush's presidency, but you're such a big fucking idiot you can't see that everything was already fucked BEFORE Obama took office and that there wasn't a damn thing he could do to fix any of it. The world hates the United States because our nation is filled with a bunch of fucking idiots that beat the drums of war and love to see their government spend as much of everyone's money as possible trying to conquer the world. We love to kill hundreds of thousands of people in a totally uneven retaliation because "we can."

I hope that it gets your blood pressure up thinking about how your hero was actually a miserable failure. I know you're probably on meds for it.

 

Well they did shake Bush's hand they had respect for the man.

Those videos speak for themselves.

Bush was a fiscal liberal I said it long ago and disagreed with it. All the actions you speak of happening on Bush's watch that were detrimental were liberal/socialist policy. Not conservative policy So you rally behind a guy further left then Lenin and blather about talking of impending Bush caused doom and try to protect your boy but it does not work.

Title of thread "Iran election was it legit?" Answer is no.
Honduran election was it legit?
Venezuelan election was it legit?

All over South America the Obama administration is attempting to legitimize socialism and prop up Socialist dictators.

Nuclear powers hostile to the U.S. are openly threatening the U.S.because the world knows we have a weak pussy Socialist president.

The world watched state run socialist television and read socialist propaganda and were told to hate America. But they respected Bush and they shook his hand.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJx-uGRsiNU

 

They are against the US because they know we're in a financial meltdown but we won't go down without trying to rob a few people first.

 

Your public schooling by the liberal establishment is working against you Smurf. The last depression was a world depression also and it was extended a decade for the U.S. while the rest of the world had already recovered thanks to your pal Roosevelt and his big government big tax policies.

With Obama at the helm the rest of the world will recover before we do that is unless their policies are more Socialist than ours. Other countries who do not try to spend their way out and tax the people to death will see the bottom and already be recovered before we hit bottom.

 

FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate

FDR's Folly: How Roosevelt and His New Deal Prolonged the Great Depression | Book Reviews

Wall Street, the Great Depression, Hoover, Roosevelt, and the Unintended Consequences of Presidential Action

Hoover and FDR acted, writes Amity Shlaes, but not always for the better
By Amity Shlaes
Posted October 2, 2008

Across the political spectrum, leaders have been evoking Franklin Roosevelt lately. It's not distinct legislation that he and Congress
generated that interests them. It is Roosevelt's leadership—his ability to consolidate political power and anchor the nation in a crisis. Vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin sought to sound presidential when she told Katie Couric that "there has to be action, bipartisan action." Joe Biden tried so hard to convey Roosevelt's power that he actually fell into anachronism, telling listeners that FDR "went on TV" to talk to a panicked electorate—when FDR's medium was the radio.

But it's also possible that the very act of shifting power to the executive contributes to depressions rather than prevents them. Evidence old and new suggests that's what happened in the 1930s.

It started when FDR was still a governor in Albany, and Herbert Hoover occupied the White House. Hoover had initially made his name steering populations through crises, feeding starving Belgians during the First World War and, later, stewarding the South through the great flood of the Mississippi. As commerce secretary, Hoover always criticized his president, Calvin Coolidge, for using his office too sparingly. When the crash hit on his own watch, Hoover therefore jumped to act, using the office, or doing what he could to undermine Congress. Hoover signed off on a Republican tariff and created the Reconstruction Finance Corp. Around about the equivalent of now in the 1929 crisis—the autumn of that year—he summoned business leaders to Washington and persuaded them not to drop wages, the traditional next step during a downturn.

Some Hoover measures helped, in minor ways. The RFC supplied liquidity to a cash-short banking system. But other Hoover steps hurt. As I write this, the spotlight of concern is shifting to Europe and its flailing markets. Hoover's tariff seemed to confirm to Europe precisely what Mussolini and Hitler were telling it—the United States will shut you out. The condition upon which Hoover agreed to Smoot-Hawley was to take away power from Congress, with a new tariff commission calibrating rates. In exchange for hurting Congress and lobbyists, he hurt the world. Hoover also tended to blame to stock market. Like the Bush administration's own Chris Cox of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Hoover sought to stop short selling and berated traders as traitors to stability. This may have halted such sales, but it depressed regular stocks. In losing shorts, owners lost a crucial markets barometer.

It is the perversity of Hoover's wage policy, however, that Depression scholars have been warning about lately. Hoover insisted that industrial leaders keep wages high. Business complied—real average hourly earnings in manufacturing actually increased from 1929 in 1931, even as production dropped by nearly half. The action at the time seemed counterintuitive to business—in the last downturn, 1920 and 1921, wages had dropped. Now, however, companies pushed those wages higher partly because they believed, as Henry Ford was preaching, that wage increases might generate productivity gains to make the move worth it. But corporate leaders also acted, as UCLA's Lee Ohanian has shown, out of fear, because Hoover made it clear he was the only thing between them and unionization. In 1932, Hoover also signed the Davis-Bacon Act, which increased upward pressure on wages by insisting that public-sector jobs receive prevailing wages. Hoover bullied industrial America into a corner where it could do nothing but lay people off. Hence, there were 2 in 10 unemployed instead of 1 in 10. Ohanian concludes that Hoover's wage policy "accounts for much of the depth of the Depression."

Where Hoover used suasion, Roosevelt tended simply to snatch power. In his first inaugural address, FDR explained that he would use "broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given to me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe." When it came to labor prices, FDR and the New Dealers formalized Hoover's error in the form of the National Recovery Administration. The NRA gave big firms advantage over small fry and applied its own upward pressure through a minimum wage. In the previous depression, unemployment had lasted under two years. This time, 2 in 10 were still unemployed five years post-crash.

Roosevelt was even more aggressive on the monetary side. Before FDR, executives tended to stay away from questions like the gold price—J. P. Morgan, the young Federal Reserve, or the Treasury, at the very most, handled that. But in 1933, FDR took the country off the gold standard and even nullified promises to pay in gold in private contracts. He also launched a special executive program through which he would steer the gold price personally—from his bed, at breakfast time, while his advisers watched. One morning, FDR told his group he was thinking of raising the gold price by 21 cents. Why that figure, his entourage asked. "It's a lucky number," Roosevelt said, "because it's three times seven." As Henry Morgenthau later wrote, "If anybody knew how we really set the gold price through a combination of lucky numbers, etc., I think they would be frightened."

FDR was right in a global sense—there wasn't enough money in the economy. But Morgenthau was even righter—the manner in which FDR acted mattered as much as or more than the action. Wall Streeters such as James Warburg tried to explain to the White House that the inability to estimate exactly how far a president would go in a crisis was itself a problem. Warburg also explained that even bad market news was better than none. Another observer reported Roosevelt's reaction: "J. W. wants me to fix a definite price of gold, etc., as people now can't make future contracts," Roosevelt had said. "That's poppycock. The bankers want to know everything beforehand and I've told them to go to h—-," transcribed the economist Irving Fisher. In the end it was not the crash of 1929 or even the sharpness of the economic contraction of the early 1930s that made the depression so great. It was the duration.

What matters in the context of today is simply awareness that there's a tradeoff. When Henry Paulson, or for that matter President Bush, takes emergency action, the first reaction of markets will tend to be applause. But upon consideration, markets will drop, out of concern that the number of unknowns has widened. The scope of the $700 billion bailout package is a case in point. A chief executive can talk about reducing fear—Roosevelt's famous statement that "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." But the same executive can also generate such fear.