I had high hopes for this Administration, I really did!

[William769]

But how many times do I have to be kicked in the face?

AIG director named to Obama tax task force

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- One of the people named this week to President Obama's new Task Force on Tax Reform is a member of the AIG board of directors.

Martin Feldstein, a professor of economics at Harvard University, has been on the board of American International Group since 1988. He also was a prominent economic adviser to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.

Asked about the AIG connection, a senior administration official said Friday that the White House declined to comment on the story.

Like the others named to the tax reform task force, Feldstein also serves on Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, which is headed by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/27/aig.taskforce/index.html

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. I have mixed feelings about these guys. Apparently there are only

a few experts & they keep getting recycled/reused all the time. Sort of like movie actors.

I remember that Jimmy Carter was beaten up by the left all the time because of his associations & appointments. There was that whole Trilateral Commission conspiracy business for example, that was played endlessly on Pacifica radio.

[William769]

2. With the fiasco of the bonus's for top AIG execs

This stinks to high heaven.

I have been pleased with President Obama so far, but I have kept quiet on the economic recovery effort. I have been watching it very closely and I do not like what I am seeing.

The Treasury Secretary scares the hebejebes out of me to begin with.

[butterfly77]

66. So is it time to impeach yet?

[KakistocracyHater]

106. we need Stiglitz

he's the one, or was there a Stiglitz in the 1930s who helped us get out of that Great Depression? I'm not very good at remembering names-anyone here know?

[butterfly77]

67. So is it time to impeach yet?

[genna]

108. Can you say more on that?

It seems as if there is an apparent few number of experts and when they are used there are conspiracies discussed.

Who is able to discuss what happens within these affected companies if it isn't either the insiders or the regulators who have access to their books and decision making?


What conspiracy explains the lack of useful information on what these companies did and how Congress helped them do it?

[sandnsea]

3. He advised McCain

That is a bafflement for sure. AIG had problems during the accounting scandal too.

All I can figure is they need people who know everything that was done to keep it from happening again.

[pnwmom]

4. Maybe it's because he knows where the skeletons are buried. n/t

[billyoc]

5. I LOVE this guy!

...

Exactly how much responsibility can be attributed to Feldstein for the AIG disaster remains to be determined. That could be a topic for Sen. McCain's investigative commission to explore -- except that Feldstein is billed as an advisor to the McCain campaign, where he symbolizes, along with Phil Gramm, the precise opposite of the changes that are imperative if we are to avoid yet another cycle of ruin and bailout.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/09/19/market/index.html

[William769]

8. Thanks for the article.

[w4rma]

65. This guy helped cause our economic problems. He's going to help make them worse. (nt)

[Life Long Dem]

6. Yes CNN does stink.

[William769]

7. Yes I realize some people here can't see the forest because of the trees.

Sticking your head in the sand is what happened to America for the past 8 years. I guess some people never learn. :shrug:

[Life Long Dem]

9. And anyone who compares Obama to the last 8 years is on the wrong side.

Good luck with that attitude.

[William769]

11. Where did I compare President Obama to the last 8 years?

I believe I compared people with their head stuck in the sand then and now.

It would be nice if you would address the issue instead of deflecting. But then most times when people deflect it's because they don't have a leg to stand on.

[Life Long Dem]

40. I hope I wasn't too bitter in my deflecting.

[Political Heretic]

17. You need to learn to read

He compared your attitude to the attitude that was predominant over the last 8 years. Yours. Obama never comes up.

And he's right by the way.

[Hansel]

103. Self delete.

[depakid]

10. I don't get why long time Republicans like Feldstein continue to be appointed to these boards

This goes way beyond AIG.

For those unfamiliar with Feldstein:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Feldstein

[elizm]

12. Oh please. You NEVER liked Obama. nt

[Name removed]

13. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Political Heretic]

14. So you're telling me that there's no other way to fix the economy other than appointing this guy?

Yeah... I didn't think so.

I don't care if some of you can squint and look at it sideways and come up with some rationale as to why this isnt' the end of the world. I'm sure it isn't the end of the world, but that doesn't excuse Feldstein's appointment.

Are people here so anti-populist that the actually believe the wall street elitist nonsense that only "they" have the intelligence to understand whats "best" for us and how to "fix" what's wrong? There are economists and business persons all over the world speaking and writing of a different way with plenty of expertise - the only difference is they're not endorsed by the mainstream elite.

Sometimes it feels like Obama goes out of his way to make controversial appointments for no reason. Why piss people like me off on this one? How about just appointing someone who isn't DIRECTLY LINKED to AIG? Even if you only avoid it for how it looks - why not?

[biopowertoday]

55. Its part of the they are too big (fill in other words such as smart) to fail.

[rasputin1952]

15. There are times when one wishes to keep people on a short leash,

this may be one of those times. Keeping your adversaries close, keeps them from doing more damage. I get the impression that a close eye is being kept on a slew of these people...and it's easier to keep track of them.

I'd rather have some of these people in my camp, where I can keep track of them, as opposed to outside, where they can do more damage...just a thought.

[Political Heretic]

16. That sounds all lovely and frilly. what does it actually mean.

How does this "keep him in camp?" What can he now not do that he would otherwise be free to do? This is a one-way street.

I don't see how this puts the guy in a position where he can somehow do less damage. Respectfully (and I mean that rasputin1952)this sounds more like one of those explanations someone comes up with after the fact to try to interpret events they way one wants to see them. :(

[rasputin1952]

20. Remember Johnson's thoughts...

"I'd rather have them in the tent pissing outside, instead of outside the tent pissing in."

I don't know precisely "why" the president has done this, but I do know that this man is not stupid. I think the reasoning will become apparent in the future. I am not a seer, but I know that if I were president, I'd weight the options before making a decision on who to put where. I figure the president did that as well.

At a little over 2 months in office, I am not in the mindset to criticize everything that has been done, (although I think that increasing troop strength in Afghanistan is a big mistake). After 8 years of complete disaster, I am willing to take a chance on an intelligent individual taking the reins. I don't have to agree w/everything he has done or plans to do, but I'm not about to pillory the man either, at least not at this point.

[Political Heretic]

24. Well that's fair. Although I feel like I've taking an extra lot of chances lately

If we could get past this financial crisis I think I'd be in so much more agreement. I really am at strong odds with the direction of the handling of things economically so far. And it was one of those things where there wasn't a lot you could gauge during the campaign. Obama (smartly) wouldn't get pinned down on what he would do about this mess, so little of what I know and love about the guy had much to do with handling a Wall Street meltdown.

So I sincerely hope the President's plan works. Because I want this out of the way. I'm so at odds with the administration on this and I'd much rather be able to return focus to campaign promises and the broader agenda.

[rasputin1952]

26. I can certainly understand your thoughts on this...

FDR's plans during the Great Depression were not all that solid either, many of them had never been tried before, and quite a few of them failed. But the thing was, FDR and his crew kept trying different approaches until things worked, even if they didn't have a dramatic effect.

One of the things the president could do, almost immediately, is wind down the combat in the ME. It would be a major coup on finances, international relations and show he really is a man of vision. We shall see where that goes, hopefully soon. The thought of more war is never going to be taken well, except by a few that see bloodshed as the first alternative, not the last.

[mvd]

45. Hi, ras!

I agree - Afghanistan policy is my main concern - I'd also like to have a faster timetable on Iraq. It's an interesting theory that the cabinet/appointments are on the conservative side because he's watching them. That would fit into my Obama is being shrewd theory. I think he's a little to the left of what he has shown.

[rasputin1952]

76. How's it going!!!

:D

I think we'll see more as time goes by, but after the screw ups of the last administration, I would use caution at this point as well. It will be interesting to see if these goomers can actually do something worthwhile. The president might also want to keep them around for a bit just to find out how they really screwed up. Just because these people "advise" the president, there is nothing binding in their advisements.

He can also get rid of them at any time...I think he will, once he's milked them for info. :hi:

[Hippo_Tron]

80. It means that you give them a position and then they can't go on TV and trash you

Also, for what it's worth, the economic recovery advisory board hasn't done jack shit. Supposedly Volcker is being shut out by Summers.

[northernlights]

19. I go with that, except for one thing that seriously worries me

why don't we see *any* appointments such as Robert Reich or others from the left? Can anybody name even a single one?

Obama welcomes their criticism...from the outside. But why aren't they invited into the inner circle where they actually can influence policy?

The full saying is "keep your friends close and your enemies closer."

I don't see anybody that I trust being kept close. The good guys are all outside the circling wagons.

This is what truly worries me, and I suspect the others who are freaking out. :(

[rasputin1952]

23. What I am more worried about, is the infrastructure that bush

left in the bureaucracy. it is one thing to have the "head" of a bureau "in charge", but almost everyone knows that the real work is done by nameless faces we never see. Those are the people that have to weeded out, and from what I have seen, that is happening, albeit at a relatively slow pace.

So far, I am pretty satisfied w/what has been done on several levels. The EPA is being bolstered, as is OSHA, the FDA, and other areas where public health and safety have been ignored during the bush disaster. If the president can figure out a way to get out of the military incursions, we will be doing MUCH better in many areas, from financial to political and beyond.

All things take time, unfortunately, I'm willing to give the president some time...but certainly not an "undue" amount of time...after all, results are what is going to get this nation back on track.

[Nay]

35. Agree--why aren't true Dem appointments happening? They

are really on the "outside" -- which is where Geithner, et al, should be. If you have only the opposition in your inner circle and have no strong Dems in that inner circle, one could easily come to the conclusion that Obama is a Republican! I mean, honestly, these are ppl who BUSH would have advising him....

[rasputin1952]

79. There are a lot of D appointments...

I give the president the benefit of a doubt at this time. For all we know, he may be getting to those who were placed in under the radar, the one's who really do the work, those are the one's we should really be worried about. The clerks in the EPA that tried to shut down the whole thing, and many other agencies...these are the real hazards that have to be dealt with.

Let's see what happens...I'd be surprised if any of these people hold their jobs beyond 9 mos to a year...:)

[northernlights]

104. I was referring to D appointments in the economic team

All I see is Summers and Geithner...both rethug corporatists. And now this. An AIG exec and former bush advisor on the tax team. Effing great, if you are worth a gazillion. Not so great if you're at the bottom of the heap.

I've been giving the benefit of the doubt and giving the benefit of the doubt. But now I just feel like we're getting totally shat upon.

Can you name a dem or a liberal or anybody on the left on the economic team? The tax advisory team? Anybody?

As far as I can see, the corporatists have circled their wagons.

I didn't expect to see any results any time soon. But I also didn't expect to see a team made up entirely of greedy rethug corporatist pigs. And in my mind, that is what they are.

I'm really, really disappointed by this. :( :cry: I just don't see any hope any more, at all.

[rasputin1952]

105. I understand where you're coming from...

I'm not fond of this either, but I'm also thinking we may get his rationale on this soon...at least I hope so...:hi:

[zulchzulu]

18. I didn't get the memo that we executed all AIG employees in firing squads

Yep. ALL people who worked for AIG are... EVIL! It's a conspiracy wrapped inside of an enigma! Run. For. Your. LIVES!!!

:puke:

[alcibiades_mystery]

28. Lying in Wait Crowd

Any little thing will set them off...

They don't have solutions. They have nits to pick.

[biopowertoday]

58. And the 'wait and see' crowd just rolls over and gets moldy.

[irislake]

21. I agree with Chomsky.

The Democratic party is just the lesser of two evils.

He also says it does make a difference which party is in power. Life for Americans is better under Democratic presidents but the party is way to the right of the American people.

I will be surprised if you eliminate private insurance companies from your health care. It's possible because some of the large corporations see they would save money under a Canadian system. However, I think Obama isn't going to do it unless there is TREMENDOUS public pressure.

Too bad he won't live up to so many American's expectations but the family is gorgeous and he's a vast improvement on GWB. The Obamas are as glamorous as the Kennedy's and it is hard not to believe he will transform America for the better. Good luck!

[Political Heretic]

25. Here's one of his exact quotes on this:

“Anyone who says ‘I don’t care if Bush gets elected’ is basically telling poor and working people in the country, ‘I don’t care if your lives are destroyed’. . .despite the limited differences both domestically and internationally, there are differences. In a system of immense power, small differences can translate into large outcomes.” - Noam Chomsky

This is how I felt about Obama, although I had the added benefit of personally liking and respecting the man - and I voted for him for the exact reasons that Chomsky described here.

However, sometimes its so difficult to watch a good man as President capitulate to the same status quo interests that have driving our society and our working class into the ground for so long.... its because I like Obama so much that I want him to be more radical than he is. :)

[avaistheone1]

31. I am atone with your sentiments. I don't understand how Obama

can go along with the special interests and lobbyists so much when he hold the White House, the Congress, and pretty much the Senate. He also seem too smart a person to capitulate to the special interests. I think we all want to him succeed, but when Obama aligns himself with the big corporations and lobbyists he is setting himself up for failure.

[SoxFan]

107. Please feel free to fo to GreenUnderground or SWPUnderground

[genna]

109. Where is the ground swell for this single payer tax system?

Also, why doesn't the public get up in arms when Republicans are in power if we fundamentally disagree with their policies?

[BeyondGeography]

22. William?

:rofl:

[ProSense]

38. Exactly.

:rofl:

[JTFrog]

27. Yea, you got high and then you hoped everyone else here was high enough to believe you.

Not fucking happening.

[Two Americas]

73. personal attack

Personal attacks degrade the discussion and do everyone here a grave disservice.

[jefferson_dem]

29. I wanted to read the text of the post but couldn't get past the bs in your subject line.

Sorry, William. There was no greater Obama-hater on DU than you.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[smoogatz]

32. Yeah--they're worse than Bush/Cheney!!1!1!!

Jeebus.

[OwnedByFerrets]

33. Anyone who isnt at least concerned about this

is drinking Kool-aid.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

34. I will reiterate my post because I want you to read it

babylonsister caught you calling for Obama's head on February 5th. You were against Obama from the beginning so how can I take anything you say from here on out in regards to our President seriously. EPIC FAIL

[spoony]

48. You know you've called JTFrog babylonsister twice now

Do you know something we don't?

[spiritual_gunfighter]

62. My apologies to JT Frog

The candle avatar threw me off. She has the same one. My bad.

[JTFrog]

77. No worries. One of the hazards of my avatar.

:)

[Two Americas]

74. that is a lie

The other member did NOT "call for Obama's head" in the post "discovered" and linked to here.

Asking people to not take anything a person said seriously because they at one time expressed criticism about something the administration did is highly suppressive, and has no place in any progressive thinking or intelligence discussion.

Criticizing public officials does not mean being "against Obama from the beginning" and it is shameful that people are claiming this in an obvious effort at shutting down free and open discussion.


...

[marshall]

36. Washington is one big daisy chain

Nobody cares who's doing the reach around, as long as it gets done.

[ProSense]

37. Wow, did you have high hopes for Hillary when you supported her?

Senator Sanders Blocking Key Obama Nomination

While Mr. Gensler is clearly an intelligent and knowledgeable person, I cannot support his nomination. Mr. Gensler worked with Sen. Phil Gramm and Alan Greenspan to exempt credit default swaps from regulation, which led to the collapse of A.I.G. and has resulted in the largest taxpayer bailout in U.S. history. He supported Gramm-Leach-Bliley, which allowed banks like Citigroup to become “too big to fail.” He worked to deregulate electronic energy trading, which led to the downfall of Enron and the spike in energy prices. At this moment in our history, we need an independent leader who will help create a new culture in the financial marketplace and move us away from the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior which has caused so much harm to our economy.

Mr. Gensler was also a senior adviser to the Hillary Clinton campaign and after the Democratic Primary the Obama campaign.

link

"But how many times do I have to be kicked in the face?"

Does it only hurt when it relates to Obama?

[firedupdem]

42. Whoa......how hypocritical. Thanks for this. n/t

[Tarheel_Dem]

82. Another great find. Thanks Pro..........(nt)

[Zynx]

39. Feldstein is one of the most prominent economists in the country.

He's a right-winger, but the fact is that his membership on the AIG board is not particularly important.

[lostnotforgotten]

54. Then How Did This Important Economist Miss the Meltdown?

eom

[Zynx]

97. I don't happen to know if he missed it or not, but if he did that has little to do about

tax reform. It could be that he is not an expert on financial markets. Most academic economists have one narrow field of specialty. You can be a pretty sound macro-economist in terms of being a good model-maker and have an exceptional grasp of theory, but know little about finance. The fields should be more connected than they are, but in the academic setting they really are not. Most of the economists who had a good record forecasting this cycle had a fairly strong grasp of financial markets.

[omega minimo]

41. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5345808

[Deja Q]

43. Let's see what happens.

[Yavin4]

44. Wow, Talk About Overreaction

Feldstein is on a "task force" overseeing tax reform. He's not an economic advisor. My guess is that his presence there is to add experience to the task force.

Geesh, to go all Henny Penny on the Obama admin for something like this is hysterical and ludicrous.

[LWolf]

46. I only needed once. About 18 months ago.

Before I knew better.

There have been more kicks than I can count since then.

This is just one of the more recent.

[mvd]

47. Hi, LWolf

There may definitely come a time I get disappointed and put him with Clinton (I know he had a good economy, but it had cracks in the armor.) But personally, I'd still support him - anything but a Repuke in office.

I admire your fight for progressive issues. On most of those issues, we certainly agree! :hi:

[LWolf]

49. Hi, right back.

Of course I'm glad not to have McCain/Palin in office, lol.

Obama is, by his own admission, not exactly teacher friendly. I've had perhaps more reason than some to rank him poorly from the outset.

Still, I'll support everything he does that I think is a positive step.

Meanwhile, the best thing I've seen so far, the thing that I really love, is the first lady's work to put in the garden at the WH.

[Hello_Kitty]

53. Well I like things like overturning the global gag rule on family planning

And the reversal of Bush's policy on stem cell research.

Millions of lives will be saved and improved by those changes alone but you go ahead tell yourself that nothing good is coming out of this administration.

[LWolf]

56. Do you have something against

the first lady's garden, that you feel the need to come in and criticize my positive post?

Are you stalking me, looking for a fight?

Do you have reading comprehension problems, being unable to recognize that the superlative "best" is not synonymous with "only?"

Or does it just bug you that your opinion is irrelevant to me?

Or you just like to have the last word?

What?

[Hello_Kitty]

59. Cracks me up when someone responds to me to tell me my opinion is irrelevant

:rofl:

Sure was relevant enough for you to take the time to type out that pissy post you just did, wasn't it?

Now you go ahead and respond to this because I suspect that having the "last word" is as important to you as you think it is to me. :)

[LWolf]

61. word. nt

[Political Tiger]

50. I guess being a professor of economics at Harvard University

doesn't count. But because he sat on a board of directors he's suddenly scum.

Hmmmm, where have I heard that "logic" before? Oh, that's right! That's the same "logic" the Reich used against Obama, saying he was "palling around with terrorists" because Obama sat on the same board of directors as William Ayers.

I guess the GUILT BY ASSOCIATION game is not just for right-wingers anymore.

[FrenchieCat]

51. That's about the size of it.....

and shows were the arc of the extremes on both sides often meet.

[Two Americas]

75. that is not it at all

It is perfectly legitimate to question the appointments pf people who have built their careers on promoting the very industries that we are now asking them to oversee and regulate and benefiting from those actions and participating in the revolving door between government, private industry and think tanks.

That is not an attack on them at all, let alone "guilt by association." It is more like "healthy suspicion and questions because of past actions."

Ironic that you would talk about "guilt by association" when these threads are full of people claiming that any and all critics are "PUMAs" or "Naderites" or saying they are suspect because they at one time supported a different candidate during the primaries.



...

[lostnotforgotten]

52. Bush Lowered My Expectations - Obama Has Not Raised Them

eom

[specimenfred1984]

57. Just ignore it and be happy happy joy joy

So the U.S. is a criminal nation soon to be bankrupt and in a world depression for 10 years, the new camaro looks great!

[treestar]

60. Many people have worked for AIG

Why should they all be individually condemned?

This is absurd.

[Hello_Kitty]

63. I don't like the fact that he advised McCain

Doesn't de facto make him a bad guy, but it makes me uneasy.

[Fire1]

64. The only rationale for this appointment that I can think of that

MAY make some sense is, 'it takes one to know one.' Meaning, the best person to catch a crook or plug all possible holes in any plan of regulation would come from a master mind of corruption.

[leftofthedial]

68. American people!

Screw you!

And the hope you rode in on.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[AZBlue]

70. I'm getting sick of those who are still bitter that Obama was the Dem nominee.

Get over it already.

[rockymountaindem]

71. All of you who are shooting the messenger here need to read the post

"He also was a prominent economic adviser to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush."

Don't any of you hear alarm bells? Would you be comfortable with letting someone like Perle advise Obama on foreign policy?

[QC]

72. "Would you be comfortable with letting someone like Perle ..."

The True Believers here would not only be perfectly comfortable with that, but would loudly proclaim it a Very Good Thing.

[JTFrog]

78. Too much bullshit to get through to even get to the article.

Skinner warned folks not to try to come in and act like their shit hasn't stunk up this board for months and pretend play like they are trying to constructively criticize Obama. This OP got called on his bullshit.

Want to discuss the article? Start a new thread that might be taken seriously.

[Two Americas]

83. you admit it, then

You are admitting that you are posting on this thread for the sole purpose of attacking the messenger, and carrying on a long-standing feud with them, and not to discuss the message.

Management here may or may not have said that people should "not to try to come in and act like their shit hasn't stunk up this board for months and pretend play like they are trying to constructively criticize Obama." Nevertheless, I doubt very much that you were appointed the arbiter and authoritative voice as to who is or who is not doing that.



...

[JTFrog]

85. No, I'm not the arbiter. I just posted information that allows others to form their own opinion.

There is nothing against DU rules in doing so.

The OP brought it on himself by making a claim that was highly dubious.

[Two Americas]

86. good

So am I, and I am not going anywhere and would be happy to discuss this indefinitely and in greater depth.

You are using the age-old defense of the abuser here - "they bought it on themselves" so "they had it coming" used as a justification for mistreating the other person.

even of the other member "made a claim that was highly dubious" that does not justify personal attacks. You have made no effort to refute the supposed "highly dubious claims." That makes me wonder if they are actually dubious, or merely are ideas you wish to have people not see or not consider.

You posted no "information" other than information about your personal feelings and judgments about the character and motives of another member. That is talking about the messenger and not the message. That makes it an ad hominem attack. You do not dispute that - you instead offer excuses and justifications for doing it.



...

[JTFrog]

89. I addressed the title (thereby the subject) of the OP. If the OP didn't want that debated

they should have chosen another intro. To say that refuting an OP's subject line is abuse is ridiculous.

There only abuse I see going on is the OP abusing the truth by using false subject lines and statements to try to create a cover for his Obama bashing.

[Two Americas]

93. right

We have no way to know whether or not the OP had high hopes for the adminstration.

I don't know that the title is true - and am not claiming that it is. We cannot know. Yet you claim that it is false, and then claim that therefore the other member and anything they post is to be dismissed on that basis.


...

[JTFrog]

81. You said the same thing on February 5, 2009.

You couldn't even give him 2 weeks!?!? And you want us to take you seriously?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=8169816#8169824

Anticipating the attempt to get my prior post deleted, I just thought I'd re-iterate this point here. (*edit - right on cue!!!!)

Your attempt to establish some sort of credibility at the beginning of this OP is a complete sham.

Good day, sir.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..






I Said Good Day!!!!

[Tarheel_Dem]

84. Damn JT, you must be psychic. (nt)

[Two Americas]

87. false

That old post you dredged up does not contradict or invalidate the OP here.

Implying that it does contradict or invalidate anything said in the OP is misleading and false.


...

[JTFrog]

90. Not false. How can a link to the OP saying the same thing on February 5, be considered false?

Opinions will vary.

Get used to it.

The OP has a history of bashing Obama and posting statements that do not support his subject line. Pointing this out is in no way making false claims or lying. You don't have to agree that it refutes his subject line. That's your right.

Just as I have the right to my opinion. And my opinion is based on the OP's own words that I linked. Others are free to come to their own conclusions.

[Two Americas]

91. the burden of proof is on you

You are making the charge, and the burden of proof is on you and not on me.

I am not claiming that the OP is innocent - I have no way to know that. I am saying that there is no basis for your claim that they are guilty of anything.


..

[JTFrog]

92. The proof is in the Link. My post said the OP said the same thing Feb 5. Proof served. n/t

[Two Americas]

94. no, it's not

There is nothing in the post you linked to that denies that the OP had high hopes for the administration. It merely shows that the OP was disappointed then, as they are now.

A link is not proof of anything in and of itself.

In any case, you demanded proof from me and that was what I was responding to.



...

[JTFrog]

95. ROFLMAO. What exactly are you demanding proof of?

I said the OP said the same thing on February 5, 2009. Are you disputing that?

I'm assuming the only thing from my post that you could be requiring "proof" of is this:

"Your attempt to establish some sort of credibility at the beginning of this OP is a complete sham."

That is my opinion. You are free to form your own. As are all DUers.

[Two Americas]

98. back it up then, or withdraw it

You say that the OP's statement that they "had high hopes for the administration" is a sham, used to falsely "establish some sort of credibility."

That statement goes to the OP's integrity and honesty, challenges them on that, and you have not supported your accusation. The previous post saying that the OP was at that time "disappointed" about something the administration did does not by any stretch of the imagination support your charges against the OP. If you think that it does, it should be a simple matter to explain that to the rest of us.


...

[JTFrog]

99. I don't have to withdraw my opinion. Whether you like it or not.

Nor am I demanding you adopt or accept my opinion.

I suggest you find some other tree to bark up now.

[Two Americas]

100. not an "opinion"

Personal attacks and accusations are not merely "opinions."

[JTFrog]

101. You're starting to seem a bit stalkish to me.

Should I be worried?

[spiritual_gunfighter]

110. You can infer from the Feb 5th post

that the OP had problems with Obama long before then. Stating that he thought "the kool-aid would have been diluted by now", shows what he thought of the Obama supporters and Obama himself long before Feb 5th. Which is why any subsequent post concerning Obama by this poster is suspect.

[Scooterliberal]

88. we're screwed

this is scary

[Thrill]

96. YAWN. Sounds like he is putting a Task Force together with different viewpoints

How dare he.

[Hansel]

102. Exactly what he said he was going to do like a gazillion times

during the campaign. Wow, shocking. Not.