Bring back Dubya

[Thumb]

But it was okay to bailout Wall Street and run the longest war in US history with taxpayer money, but it's a waste to support a major industry?

dumb dumb we gave them billions knowing they would go bankrupt. so basically we blew $80 bill for nothing

Dumb dumb, how much did the war cost us? after we knew there were no WMD's in Iraq?

We gave Wall Street $700 billion, and they gave their executives huge raises with it.

And the Automotive loans are being paid back, with interest.

 

[tsmith7559]

dumb dumb we gave them billions knowing they would go bankrupt. so basically we blew $80 bill for nothing

Dumb dumb, how much did the war cost us? after we knew there were no WMD's in Iraq?
"The Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions."

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

We gave Wall Street $700 billion, and they gave their executives huge raises with it.

And the Automotive loans are being paid back, with interest.

The Iraq War resolution was a bi-partisan piece of legislation....so what's your point?

Most banks paid back there loans with interest, many didnt want the money but were basically forced to take it. There is around $80 B owing by banks. plus AIG, Fannie & Freddie make up another $200 B(+) along with the car companies

 

[Thumb]

Dumb dumb, how much did the war cost us? after we knew there were no WMD's in Iraq?
"The Senate early Friday voted 77-23 to authorize President Bush to attack Iraq if Saddam Hussein refuses to give up weapons of mass destruction as required by U.N. resolutions."

Hours earlier, the House approved an identical resolution, 296-133.

We gave Wall Street $700 billion, and they gave their executives huge raises with it.

And the Automotive loans are being paid back, with interest.

The Iraq War resolution was a bi-partisan piece of legislation....so what's your point?

Most banks paid back there loans with interest, many didnt want the money but were basically forced to take it. There is around $80 B owing by banks. plus AIG, Fannie & Freddie make up another $200 B(+) along with the car companies

My point is you're a cherry picking little bastard.

You cry about the money Obama spent, but make excuses for Bush, if your going to bitch about spending and the deficit, fine, but don't pretend the Obama administration was the only contributor.

And the war resolution stems from Bush telling everyone he had "proof" of WMD's in Iraq, something he never had, because they didn't have any.

 

[tsmith7559]

The Iraq War resolution was a bi-partisan piece of legislation....so what's your point?

Most banks paid back there loans with interest, many didnt want the money but were basically forced to take it. There is around $80 B owing by banks. plus AIG, Fannie & Freddie make up another $200 B(+) along with the car companies

My point is you're a cherry picking little bastard.

You cry about the money Obama spent, but make excuses for Bush, if your going to bitch about spending and the deficit, fine, but don't pretend the Obama administration was the only contributor.

And the war resolution stems from Bush telling everyone he had "proof" of WMD's in Iraq, something he never had, because they didn't have any.

Cherry pick? Obama has created over $4 T in new debt in less than 2.5 years with $1 T plus/year for the next several years, ALL with NO SUPPORT from the republicans. His spending is unprecedented. He works with the same revenues Bush did.

By the Way, Bill Clinton agreed with the assessment Saddam had WMD's as well as ALL our allies. "Slam Dunk" George Tenet was one of Clinton's holdovers. Hillary stood at the podium acknowledging Saddam's WMD's and cast a vote in favor of the resolution.

 

[Thumb]

My point is you're a cherry picking little bastard.

You cry about the money Obama spent, but make excuses for Bush, if your going to bitch about spending and the deficit, fine, but don't pretend the Obama administration was the only contributor.

And the war resolution stems from Bush telling everyone he had "proof" of WMD's in Iraq, something he never had, because they didn't have any.

Cherry pick? Obama has created over $4 T in new debt in less than 2.5 years with $1 T plus/year for the next several years, ALL with NO SUPPORT from the republicans. His spending is unprecedented. He works with the same revenues Bush did.

By the Way, Bill Clinton agreed with the assessment Saddam had WMD's as well as ALL our allies. "Slam Dunk" George Tenet was one of Clinton's holdovers. Hillary stood at the podium acknowledging Saddam's WMD's and cast a vote in favor of the resolution.

Everyone agreed, because all the information was coming from the Bush administration, which claimed they had PROOF.

They even ignored reports that the evidence they had was false:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17211-2005Mar31.html

And did not believe the UN Inspectors, and even wanted them replaced because they would not find what the Bush Administration wanted them to find:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21854-2005Apr2.html

When the smoke cleared they shrugged it off like it was just a little oopsie, destabilizing the region for several years, creating insurgency, a major war lasting over 8 years, and over 4400 dead, and over 30,000 wounded, and cost over a Trillion dollars:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/business/17leonhardt.html


Now you want to deflect by saying, "oh but the Clintons and Tenet (who was a Clinton holdover, but worked for Bush during this time) also agreed.

Lots of people thought Iraq had WMD's, that's what tends to happen when your president goes on TV and says: "I have PROOF".

So let me ask you tsmith, why aren't you bitching about the wasted trillion dollars as much as the $80 billion which the automakers are paying back, early and with interest?

 

[tsmith7559]

Cherry pick? Obama has created over $4 T in new debt in less than 2.5 years with $1 T plus/year for the next several years, ALL with NO SUPPORT from the republicans. His spending is unprecedented. He works with the same revenues Bush did.

By the Way, Bill Clinton agreed with the assessment Saddam had WMD's as well as ALL our allies. "Slam Dunk" George Tenet was one of Clinton's holdovers. Hillary stood at the podium acknowledging Saddam's WMD's and cast a vote in favor of the resolution.

Everyone agreed, because all the information was coming from the Bush administration, which claimed they had PROOF.

They even ignored reports that the evidence they had was false:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17211-2005Mar31.html

And did not believe the UN Inspectors, and even wanted them replaced because they would not find what the Bush Administration wanted them to find:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21854-2005Apr2.html

When the smoke cleared they shrugged it off like it was just a little oopsie, destabilizing the region for several years, creating insurgency, a major war lasting over 8 years, and over 4400 dead, and over 30,000 wounded, and cost over a Trillion dollars:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/17/business/17leonhardt.html


Now you want to deflect by saying, "oh but the Clintons and Tenet (who was a Clinton holdover, but worked for Bush during this time) also agreed.

Lots of people thought Iraq had WMD's, that's what tends to happen when your president goes on TV and says: "I have PROOF".

So let me ask you tsmith, why aren't you bitching about the wasted trillion dollars as much as the $80 billion which the automakers are paying back, early and with interest?

Because we couldn't take the risk...National Security is the most important part of our country...leading up to 9-11 we find the following

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force

 

[Thumb]

Saddam was a bad guy.

But so are lots of guys, and we never invaded them.

All the people who thought Saddam was in bed with AL Qaeda, were wrong.

All the people who thought he had WMD's were wrong.

At the time, the right decision? NO

We never invaded Iran, or N. Korea.

We never went to the Sudan where dictators and warlords were killing their own people.

We never went a dozen other places which fit most of the claims made against Iraq.

We went because Bush wanted to, he even said "This guy tried to kill my dad".

We were wrong.

We went to war, and spent over a Trillion dollars doing it, and a lot of lives, and we can't sit back and say it was still the right thing to do.

And then say bailing out our auto industry was wrong, after spending a trillion dollars on that war, and $700 billion on wall street, and complain about $80 billion (a financial drop in the bucket in comparison) which saved jobs, and is being paid back, as I have stated, early, and with interest.

 

[tsmith7559]

Saddam was a bad guy.

But so are lots of guys, and we never invaded them.

All the people who thought Saddam was in bed with AL Qaeda, were wrong.

All the people who thought he had WMD's were wrong.

At the time, the right decision? NO

We never invaded Iran, or N. Korea.

We never went to the Sudan where dictators and warlords were killing their own people.

We never went a dozen other places which fit most of the claims made against Iraq.

We went because Bush wanted to, he even said "This guy tried to kill my dad".

We were wrong.

We went to war, and spent over a Trillion dollars doing it, and a lot of lives, and we can't sit back and say it was still the right thing to do.

And then say bailing out our auto industry was wrong, after spending a trillion dollars on that war, and $700 billion on wall street, and complain about $80 billion (a financial drop in the bucket in comparison) which saved jobs, and is being paid back, as I have stated, early, and with interest.

the government has a constitution responsibility for the defense of this country, its not a perfect science. The don't have a constitutional authority to pick winners and losers in business. Bankruptcy was certain for GM & Chrysler, why spend the money. Its apples and oranges when arguing the defense of the country and the intelligence that goes with it.

 

[biggunsbob]

Saddam was a bad guy.

But so are lots of guys, and we never invaded them.

All the people who thought Saddam was in bed with AL Qaeda, were wrong.

All the people who thought he had WMD's were wrong.

At the time, the right decision? NO

We never invaded Iran, or N. Korea.

We never went to the Sudan where dictators and warlords were killing their own people.

We never went a dozen other places which fit most of the claims made against Iraq.

We went because Bush wanted to, he even said "This guy tried to kill my dad".

We were wrong.

We went to war, and spent over a Trillion dollars doing it, and a lot of lives, and we can't sit back and say it was still the right thing to do.

And then say bailing out our auto industry was wrong, after spending a trillion dollars on that war, and $700 billion on wall street, and complain about $80 billion (a financial drop in the bucket in comparison) which saved jobs, and is being paid back, as I have stated, early, and with interest.

the government has a constitution responsibility for the defense of this country, its not a perfect science. The don't have a constitutional authority to pick winners and losers in business. Bankruptcy was certain for GM & Chrysler, why spend the money. Its apples and oranges when arguing the defense of the country and the intelligence that goes with it.

Your such a hypocrite... Popping off about how construction jobs would create over 100,00 jobs in other areas when in effect if we had not given the Auto bail outs the same thing would have happened in reverse with not just the people working in the auto industry losing their job's.... Do me a favor and get that chip removed from the back of you head so maybe when you are scrolling through the TV channels you won't gravitate to the Fox propaganda channel for all you talking points... Fact is the republicans do not and have not wanted to work with Obama since he was elected.. That is a fact.. Party of No... And No to the American people..

 

[Thumb]

Saddam was a bad guy.

But so are lots of guys, and we never invaded them.

All the people who thought Saddam was in bed with AL Qaeda, were wrong.

All the people who thought he had WMD's were wrong.

At the time, the right decision? NO

We never invaded Iran, or N. Korea.

We never went to the Sudan where dictators and warlords were killing their own people.

We never went a dozen other places which fit most of the claims made against Iraq.

We went because Bush wanted to, he even said "This guy tried to kill my dad".

We were wrong.

We went to war, and spent over a Trillion dollars doing it, and a lot of lives, and we can't sit back and say it was still the right thing to do.

And then say bailing out our auto industry was wrong, after spending a trillion dollars on that war, and $700 billion on wall street, and complain about $80 billion (a financial drop in the bucket in comparison) which saved jobs, and is being paid back, as I have stated, early, and with interest.

the government has a constitution responsibility for the defense of this country, its not a perfect science. The don't have a constitutional authority to pick winners and losers in business. Bankruptcy was certain for GM & Chrysler, why spend the money. Its apples and oranges when arguing the defense of the country and the intelligence that goes with it.

It has a responsibility to protect our country yes, but does anyone now or then, really think Iraq was ever going to attack us?

N. Korea was far more likely to attack us, and we did not go proactive there, so explain that one.

And the government also has a responsibility for the well being of it's citizens, you're complaining about the pipeline and the Automotive bailout....which side of the fence are you on?

Like Bob said, the pipeline would have/will create jobs, but probably far less then would have been lost if GM and Chrysler did not get the bailout, bankruptcy alone would not have saved them from cutting a lot of jobs and closing several factories, which trickle down like you mentioned about the pipeline jobs, to tier 2 and 3 automotive manufacturing suppliers.

You may be too thick to get it, but the Automotive Industry is the backbone of our manufacturing jobs, yet you seem to think it's inconsequential compared to a War that netted us absolutely nothing but dead soldiers and debt.

The biggest difference between me and you is I can admit the guy I will vote for has not done as good a job as I wanted him to, not even close really......while you are incapable of saying the same about the republicans, you're willing to go feet to the fire and deflect all the time rather than admit GWB was a horrible president.

 

[tsmith7559]

biggunsbob[/color]]

the government has a constitution responsibility for the defense of this country, its not a perfect science. The don't have a constitutional authority to pick winners and losers in business. Bankruptcy was certain for GM & Chrysler, why spend the money. Its apples and oranges when arguing the defense of the country and the intelligence that goes with it.

Your such a hypocrite... Popping off about how construction jobs would create over 100,00 jobs in other areas when in effect if we had not given the Auto bail outs the same thing would have happened in reverse with not just the people working in the auto industry losing their job's.... Do me a favor and get that chip removed from the back of you head so maybe when you are scrolling through the TV channels you won't gravitate to the Fox propaganda channel for all you talking points... Fact is the republicans do not and have not wanted to work with Obama since he was elected.. That is a fact.. Party of No... And No to the American people..

Apparently you dont understand how bankruptcy works??
Both GM & Chrysler were bleeding money and heading for bankruptcy, but yet we gave them over $80,000 B knowing so when a common sense business man knows, just let them go through the process..It happens, see the Airline Industry...It will come out the same whether you gave them money or not. BTW, GM is a fraction(employees) of what they were before bankruptcy and Chrysler is now a foreign company.

Why would Fox News be a source for common sense business? When losing an argument revert to Fox News for some reason?

 

[Thumb]

biggunsbob[/color]]


Your such a hypocrite... Popping off about how construction jobs would create over 100,00 jobs in other areas when in effect if we had not given the Auto bail outs the same thing would have happened in reverse with not just the people working in the auto industry losing their job's.... Do me a favor and get that chip removed from the back of you head so maybe when you are scrolling through the TV channels you won't gravitate to the Fox propaganda channel for all you talking points... Fact is the republicans do not and have not wanted to work with Obama since he was elected.. That is a fact.. Party of No... And No to the American people..

Apparently you dont understand how bankruptcy works??
Both GM & Chrysler were bleeding money and heading for bankruptcy, but yet we gave them over $80,000 B knowing so when a common sense business man knows, just let them go through the process..It happens, see the Airline Industry...It will come out the same whether you gave them money or not. BTW, GM is a fraction(employees) of what they were before bankruptcy and Chrysler is now a foreign company.

Why would Fox News be a source for common sense business? When losing an argument revert to Fox News for some reason?

The large type is pure bullshit.

I work in the auto industry, and believe me pre-bailout we were told we may close (tier 2 supplier) if GM did not get bailout money because they said (GM, Chrysler) that they would have to cut production way back and limit the models available, which weather you want to see it or not means people were going to lose jobs.

But, it's the little guy who would get hurt, so why would you even consider that right?

BIG BUSINESS!!

 

[tsmith7559]

Apparently you dont understand how bankruptcy works??
Both GM & Chrysler were bleeding money and heading for bankruptcy, but yet we gave them over $80,000 B knowing so when a common sense business man knows, just let them go through the process..It happens, see the Airline Industry...It will come out the same whether you gave them money or not. BTW, GM is a fraction(employees) of what they were before bankruptcy and Chrysler is now a foreign company.

Why would Fox News be a source for common sense business? When losing an argument revert to Fox News for some reason?

The large type is pure bullshit.

I work in the auto industry, and believe me pre-bailout we were told we may close (tier 2 supplier) if GM did not get bailout money because they said (GM, Chrysler) that they would have to cut production way back and limit the models available, which weather you want to see it or not means people were going to lose jobs.

But, it's the little guy who would get hurt, so why would you even consider that right?

BIG BUSINESS!!

GM alone went from about a workforce of 90,000(1/2009) to around 60,000 currently
forced closure of over 1000 dealerships....

a large chunk of the bailout went to the UAW so they can funnel it back to Obama for his re-election...yep, all for the little guy

 

[Thumb]

The large type is pure bullshit.

I work in the auto industry, and believe me pre-bailout we were told we may close (tier 2 supplier) if GM did not get bailout money because they said (GM, Chrysler) that they would have to cut production way back and limit the models available, which weather you want to see it or not means people were going to lose jobs.

But, it's the little guy who would get hurt, so why would you even consider that right?

BIG BUSINESS!!

GM alone went from about a workforce of 90,000(1/2009) to around 60,000 currently
forced closure of over 1000 dealerships....

a large chunk of the bailout went to the UAW so they can funnel it back to Obama for his re-election...yep, all for the little guy

LOL

It'z all a conzperacy to help the black people take over teh worldz!!!!1

 

[tsmith7559]

GM alone went from about a workforce of 90,000(1/2009) to around 60,000 currently
forced closure of over 1000 dealerships....

a large chunk of the bailout went to the UAW so they can funnel it back to Obama for his re-election...yep, all for the little guy

LOL

It'z all a conzperacy to help the black people take over teh worldz!!!!1

So you're in favor of the car bailouts, but not the Banks, how come? The bailout saved thousand's of jobs and peoples money, why not the bank bailout? After all, they provided people with basically free money to purchase a home... and then those people stopped making payments on their promissory note and the bank was left holding the bag??? I'm sure the hundred of thousands of people working in the financial sector were happy with there bailout......why didn't we bailout real estate developers, they didn't do anything wrong and lost money

 

[Thumb]

LOL

It'z all a conzperacy to help the black people take over teh worldz!!!!1

So you're in favor of the car bailouts, but not the Banks, how come? The bailout saved thousand's of jobs and peoples money, why not the bank bailout? After all, they provided people with basically free money to purchase a home... and then those people stopped making payments on their promissory note and the bank was left holding the bag??? I'm sure the hundred of thousands of people working in the financial sector were happy with there bailout......why didn't we bailout real estate developers, they didn't do anything wrong and lost money

Learn to read.

I never said I was not in favor of any bailouts.

I said you were a cherry-picking little bastard because you whine and cry about the Automotive bailout, but turn a blind eye to the wall street bailout and the money wasted in Iraq.

You're upset about $80 billion, but not about $700 billion + $1 Trillion, and for all your bitching, the American people are getting their $80 billion back, with interest.

You have a problem with money spent only when it suits your opinions, or more likely the opinions that are given to you by FOX news and the GOP.

Then you complain about the pipeline jobs, but say you don't give a fuck about the Automotive jobs, you have so many faces you don't know which mouth is doing the talking most of the time.

 

[tsmith7559]

So you're in favor of the car bailouts, but not the Banks, how come? The bailout saved thousand's of jobs and peoples money, why not the bank bailout? After all, they provided people with basically free money to purchase a home... and then those people stopped making payments on their promissory note and the bank was left holding the bag??? I'm sure the hundred of thousands of people working in the financial sector were happy with there bailout......why didn't we bailout real estate developers, they didn't do anything wrong and lost money

Learn to read.

I never said I was not in favor of any bailouts.

I said you were a cherry-picking little bastard because you whine and cry about the Automotive bailout, but turn a blind eye to the wall street bailout and the money wasted in Iraq.

You're upset about $80 billion, but not about $700 billion + $1 Trillion, and for all your bitching, the American people are getting their $80 billion back, with interest.

You have a problem with money spent only when it suits your opinions, or more likely the opinions that are given to you by FOX news and the GOP.

Then you complain about the pipeline jobs, but say you don't give a fuck about the Automotive jobs, you have so many faces you don't know which mouth is doing the talking most of the time.

Fox News has nothing to do with my opinions...get real. Automotive jobs were never at risk.

I'm really pissed about Obama's stimulus and I'm against ALL bailouts, I thought that was clear. I'm also pissed at Bernacke QE policy.

GM still owes almost $30 B....you will be dead by the time they pay that back with interest.

 

[lions2011]

Learn to read.

I never said I was not in favor of any bailouts.

I said you were a cherry-picking little bastard because you whine and cry about the Automotive bailout, but turn a blind eye to the wall street bailout and the money wasted in Iraq.

You're upset about $80 billion, but not about $700 billion + $1 Trillion, and for all your bitching, the American people are getting their $80 billion back, with interest.

You have a problem with money spent only when it suits your opinions, or more likely the opinions that are given to you by FOX news and the GOP.

Then you complain about the pipeline jobs, but say you don't give a fuck about the Automotive jobs, you have so many faces you don't know which mouth is doing the talking most of the time.

Fox News has nothing to do with my opinions...get real. Automotive jobs were never at risk.

I'm really pissed about Obama's stimulus and I'm against ALL bailouts, I thought that was clear. I'm also pissed at Bernacke QE policy.

GM still owes almost $30 B....you will be dead by the time they pay that back with interest.

you'll be dead..., we'll be in our late 30's early 40's

 

[Thumb]

Learn to read.

I never said I was not in favor of any bailouts.

I said you were a cherry-picking little bastard because you whine and cry about the Automotive bailout, but turn a blind eye to the wall street bailout and the money wasted in Iraq.

You're upset about $80 billion, but not about $700 billion + $1 Trillion, and for all your bitching, the American people are getting their $80 billion back, with interest.

You have a problem with money spent only when it suits your opinions, or more likely the opinions that are given to you by FOX news and the GOP.

Then you complain about the pipeline jobs, but say you don't give a fuck about the Automotive jobs, you have so many faces you don't know which mouth is doing the talking most of the time.

Fox News has nothing to do with my opinions...get real. Automotive jobs were never at risk.

I'm really pissed about Obama's stimulus and I'm against ALL bailouts, I thought that was clear. I'm also pissed at Bernacke QE policy.

GM still owes almost $30 B....you will be dead by the time they pay that back with interest.

Automotive jobs were never at risk.

Pipeline jobs were never at risk.

See, I can say pure bullshit myself.

You say you don't get your opinions from Fox News.....yet you sound just like them.

You need to wake up, because Automotive jobs were and still are at risk, the bailout saved many jobs, but who knows for how long.

And I doubt it will be very long at all by the time that remaining bailout money is paid back, but you keep sweating over that $30 billion, I'm kinda glad it keeps you awake nights.

 

[tsmith7559]

Fox News has nothing to do with my opinions...get real. Automotive jobs were never at risk.

I'm really pissed about Obama's stimulus and I'm against ALL bailouts, I thought that was clear. I'm also pissed at Bernacke QE policy.

GM still owes almost $30 B....you will be dead by the time they pay that back with interest.

Automotive jobs were never at risk.

Pipeline jobs were never at risk.

See, I can say pure bullshit myself.

You say you don't get your opinions from Fox News.....yet you sound just like them.

You need to wake up, because Automotive jobs were and still are at risk, the bailout saved many jobs, but who knows for how long.

And I doubt it will be very long at all by the time that remaining bailout money is paid back, but you keep sweating over that $30 billion, I'm kinda glad it keeps you awake nights.

Of course any job is at risk with the goof in the white house. you're right there