Blaming Obama Is Easy and Irresponsible
President Obama is briefed on the BP oil spill relief efforts in the Gulf Coast region earlier in June. (photo: AP)
Reader Supported News | Perspective
his victory alone is not the change we seek. It is only the chance for us to make that change. And that cannot happen if we go back to the way things were.
It can't happen without you, without a new spirit of service, a new spirit of sacrifice.
So let us summon a new spirit of patriotism, of responsibility, where each of us resolves to pitch in and work harder and look after not only ourselves but each other. - President-Elect Barack Obama
When President Obama accepted victory in Grant Park, he called on all of us to join him in ushering in the change we all were seeking. Did we answer the call? Have we rolled up our sleeves and fought for real change?
I would argue that very few did. Most of us celebrated and waited for Obama to do the heavy lifting. The country was facing a devastating financial crisis while conducting two wars. We were celebrating the victory, but not looking at the overwhelming challenges our new leader was facing. We expected sweeping change, but for the most part we left the battlefield and expected Obama to bring us that change.
The Economy
Immediately, Obama took steps that did save us from economic collapse. I am no economist, but I will accept the opinion of Paul Krugman and others that without the bailouts things would have been much worse.
In addition to having this "automatic" stabilizing effect, the government has stepped in to rescue the financial sector. You can argue (and I would) that the bailouts of financial firms could and should have been handled better, that taxpayers have paid too much and received too little. Yet it's possible to be dissatisfied, even angry, about the way the financial bailouts have worked while acknowledging that without these bailouts things would have been much worse. - Paul Krugman (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/10/opinion/10krugman.html)
Ok, not a ringing endorsement, but nonetheless even critics of the bailouts acknowledge that they slowed the decline. That brings us to the present time - where is our anger? The corporations are flush with cash but they are not hiring. Why are we not out in the streets demanding jobs from the institutions that got the bailout money? Instead, we are letting the fringe Tea Party movement blame Obama for the mess that the previous administration left him with. It wasn't just the previous administration, but the greed of corporate America that has put us in this mess, and instead of fighting we have conceded the playing field to birthers, racists, and people who are inspired by Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.
We can criticize the bailouts all we want, but if more banks and financial institutions had failed, Main Street would have been hurt as much as Wall Street, probably more. It was a decision that no one wanted to face, but Obama was forced to act or be blamed for a depression.
Should the stimulus have been bigger? Probably, but was the political will there? Did we go fight for it and send a message to the deficit hawks that they would pay the price for opposing a bigger stimulus? Obama erred in thinking that the bank bailout would free up capital for small businesses and create more jobs. The administration didn't foresee the sustained job losses, and they low-balled the stimulus package. It was a mistake, and while we should call him on it, the way to do that is to demand more. Giving up and pointing fingers will not solve anything.
There is spending in the energy bill that will help. While we may not want more offshore drilling, more nuclear power and more coal, we must fight for the good in the energy bill. No legislation ever gives us everything we want, but no energy bill will be devastating to our economy.
The Wars
Why are we silent? Other than Cindy Sheehan and other dedicated activists, the rest of us have gone silent. We marched and made noise when we had a president that could care less what we said. Now we have a president who needs our support to win, why not let him know what we want? A hundred thousand people in Washington would have a much larger impact on Obama than it had on Bush. We always make the mistake of thinking our job is over after we elect a Democrat. The truth is, with a Democrat in the White House we should increase the pressure since there is a chance they might just listen.
Many are mistaken that believe Obama pledged to get out of Afghanistan. He campaigned on finishing the job there. There has never been a mass movement around getting out of Afghanistan, so the Obama administration believes they are doing what their constituents elected them to do. The war in Afghanistan will continue until it becomes political suicide to support it. Again, if Liberals and Progressives stood up and demanded an exit from Afghanistan Obama would be forced to listen, we are his base.
While the war in Iraq is winding down, many of us would like it to end faster. We should call for a faster withdrawal of troops. We need a movement that creates a political climate for what we are for, not one that focuses on what we are against. Barack Obama can be an agent of change if we unite and call for the change we want. Calling Obama a war criminal and tearing him down accomplishes nothing. We need to unite around themes that we agree on: money for jobs, not for war; build homes, not bombs. We need to create a climate for the change we seek.
Environment
The disaster in the Gulf should be used to create a climate for green energy. We must demand an end to offshore drilling. The tragedy in the Gulf should also be a call to act against other potentially dangerous forms of energy. Are we prepared for a nuclear disaster? Wind farms and solar energy will not result in the destruction that fossil fuels and nuclear power can lead to.
Obama's support for offshore drilling, nuclear energy and "clean" coal is not ideological; it is political, and can be reversed. He would rather pass an energy bill that does not include increases in any of those options. In the current political climate Obama must compromise to get anything. While it is true that the Republicans still say no, the lobbyists make the deal and the Democrats in their pockets go along.
That has to change.
On that historic night in Grant Park, Obama also said:
The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term. But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there.
I promise you, we as a people will get there.
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president.
He was right, many liberals and progressives disagree with many of Obama's policies, but let us focus on what we agree on.
While it isn't a perfect bill, millions of Americans will have access to health care that didn't before, and millions more will not lose their health care coverage if they get sick.
Did you know that Obama signed legislation that forces banks to honor your lease if your landlord goes into foreclosure? I wonder if McCain or Bush would have done that?
While the financial reform legislation isn't as strong as we wanted, it is more than we would have gotten from "Keating Five" McCain.
Then there is the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 that moves us closer to pay equity for women.
The list goes on, but too often we forget the gains and focus on the areas that we disagree on with the president.
Obama always said he couldn't do it alone; the entrenched powerful interests in Washington are not going to just surrender. We need to support him when he is doing the right thing, and create a new political climate that allows him to change his policies when we think he is wrong.
I believe that he believes in the right things, but he can only achieve what the political climate allows. We have failed to provide the political climate for the change we believe in. It is time for us to organize and seize back the momentum for change.
I hope I haven't offended any of you, if you are active and fighting for change keep going, many of you are doing more than I am. I am speaking to those who went and voted for Obama and expected him to change everything on his own. I am speaking to the people who only criticize him, and are doing nothing to help. And I guess I am asking everyone not to give up.
Scott Galindez was formerly the co-founder of Truthout, and is now the Political Director of Reader Supported News.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
 01 February 2012
|
 01 February 2012
|
 30 January 2012
|
 31 January 2012
|
 02 February 2012
|
 02 February 2012
|
 31 January 2012
|
 02 February 2012
|
 03 February 2012
|
Comments
As far as BP is concerned and the Gulf oil disaster, to let a criminally negligent Corp. handle the clean up is criminally negligent as well. Why not declare a national emergency? Why not seize their assets? Why not seal this thing off before it destroys everything in the region? That would happen if my company had done this...
Finally, why take an indictment of Bush off the table? Why are we still in IRAQ and Afghanistan? Why are we guarding the poppy fields for the war lords? Why bail out Wall Street? Because Obama is not what we were led to believe, he is a corporatist, he was not for change, he is promoting the same criminal policies of the Bush Administration.....and all I've gotten so far is "chump change"...
It seems you are kidding yourself that we are not slaves to multi-national agendas with Obama as the front man. To think Obama and the right are not working for the same team like pro wrestlers pretending to fight, is a lack of discernment and keeps us all squabbling. In this way, the puppeteers are playing an endless game of good-cop-bad-cop with us.
He could stand firm on principles and get nothing done, or sacrifice some ideals and make progress. He has chosen progress. To help Obama do more of what he promised, we need to fight corporate influence over our government.
was trying appeal to people of your mind set. I think he was trying appeal to people like Art Cribbs and others who, want the president and the country to succeed. You on the other hand are on a fault finding mission. I'm not saying that you shouldn't be, seek and you shall find. Pointing fingers and finding fault is something that's easy for all of us. It's finding the solutions that presents the challenges, obviously you're not up to meet that challenge!
Out of desperation both presidents were elected by the people for change and they betrayed that change from the start. No amount of prayers, hope or dreaming will solve the difference between the GOP and Democrats.
I have a 4th grade great-grand child that could have told Mr. Obama not to trust Republicans.
The question is, will he be a one term president like Jimmy Carter was?
We'll see in November of 2012. The one thing all Americans better realize is that if the GOP gets in control of the Executive and Legislature branches of Government, the USA will cease to exist!
The bailout was a "heist" but it was also "more." The collapse of the financial institutions would have led to a more severe crash. Krugman's complete view is that Obama should have used the crisis to institute regulatory reforms. Scott's short excerpt gave the wrong impression.
I agree Obama is a "kinder, gentler Bush." Scott is too apologetic of him. I think it is important for us to develop a clearsighted analysis of Obama which does not over-react, as you do, or blind us to Obama's centrist nature, as Scott does. I have seen few analysts able to attain that balance.
A list of major university economists who DID support the bailout - I don't believe one of them is an "idiot".
I fear the real reason we don't see the drive to sweeping change out of Obama is that he isn't the "radical change-minded Progressive" many of us hoped, but at best just a centrist and one more D.C. corporatist. He allowed HC to be turned into a corporate handout (instead of "Medicare for All"), Wall Street reform to be watered down into insignificance, and still maintains that we should be drilling our way to energy independance.
Sure, this is better than McCain ever would have done, but we need better than this...
Well the organizers of public sentiment in the Depression were the communists on the left, the unions and Heuy Long. None of theme surrrender their independence to FDR. FDR, for his part, BLASTED the "Economic Royalists," the superwealthy and stirred up puclic sentiment against them. Obama is unwilling to do this, because he still believes the reasonable rich kids he met at Punahou and Harvard, can be convinced to follow their "rational self-interest and accept a small amount of regulation, a small cut in their profits in exchange for the overall good of the capitalist system and US world dominance.
The MOST he wants is a "kinder, gentler" system than Bush.
Obama was elected to bring about change. The coalition his campaign brought together to elect him stood ready to march as soon as Obama gave the orders. Instead, they were dismissed as Obama reneged on promises, changed direction, cozied up to the established order, and generally made clear that change we can believe in is no change at all or, at the very least, that found between the cushions of the family couch.
It wasn't up to the electorate, organized and marshaled by Obama's election team to lead Obama. It was up to Obama to lead the army he had founded. Instead he rode away and left the army hungry in the field.
The people did not leave Obama; Obama left the people.
Sadly, that hope is vanishing with the comments from an "unknown" White House source that labor unions wasted millions of dollars in supporting Halter over Lincoln in Arkansas.
Would it have destroyed his presidency if the White House "unknown" or even Obama, himself, could have acknowledged the voice of the people on the Left to have a voice in government?
Now what excuse can I make for this corporate President?
None of us should feel a need to make excuses for Obama, but nor should we get too pissed at him for looking out for the interests of the corporate interests and for maintaining the US empire. If we feel betrayed, maybe we had foolishly suspended our critical judgment and independence a bit too much during the election?
I think voting for Obama was correct. Unfortunately, since the election, progressives have had difficulty coming up with a useful orientation towards him. Some are too angry, some too uncritical. We gotta clear our brains. And chose our words carefully.
Teabaggers speak to frustrations real world people are feeling. Most of us ARE taxed too much. The Feds DO look out for the super rich more than for "work a day" Americans. We need to offer a more consistent, progressive alt message to compete for their loyalty. Tailing after Obama won't cut it, but neither will denouncing him.
He is still too much in love with Obama. Or, thinks we are. It is not helpful, IMO, to be either too hard on Obama or to be too forgiving. He is what he is. He is, by nature, an accommodationis t. He hopes to get all the "responsible" "stakeholders" to the table and reach a compromise. Even if he gets NO CONCESSIONS from the GOP or corporate side, he then pushes a "solution" which he thinks is the reasonable compromise.
Progressive voices are not allowed in that negotiation.
Therefore, we DO need to be in the streets. Not to support (or oppose) Obama's agenda, but our own.
We have replaced a Caligula with a Marcus Aurelius, but we are still an empire. And Roman legions are still working to dominate the world. We need to build institutions of popular empowerment, of democratic decisionmaking. We need to move towards a republic.
What is undeniable is that if we want to take back our country and our planet, we need to change our 'operating system'. We boycott BP, we support local food energy production, we spend our money with local folks and get involved with our communities.
We could also really use a rallying point, a banner to coalesce around, a statement of reality, which is the totality of this moment [try to leave!].
World 5.0 provides such a rallying point. Check out the declaration video, and the site.
http://world5.org/section/declaration/
peace and love
Obama caved in to the GOP on healthcare--and still got not one GOP vote. So he didn't need to cave.
Obama lifted the offshore drilling moratorium to please the GOP and they still spit on him. In doing so, he backstabbed the entire environmental movement and lost most of our support. He and his advisors also failed to foresee that any future spill would be an Obama spill. And now the chickens have come home to roost.
We want the guy to succeed--we want every president and our nation to succeed. But caving in, ignoring the future, and simply weighing political possibilities don't cut it.
Please don't say we are blaming him. We are just showing him a mirror.
I mostly agree, but would phrase it slightly different. FIrst, let me suggest we speak of "the Obama administration." Because we are talking about an ensemble in the WH, not just the individual man. If instead of Obama, I were to say "Rahm Emanuel," people would immediately give the WH less sympathy because people don't trust Rahm. And because we don't feel "betrayed " by him.
The Obama group gave in on HCR & Oil NOT to please the GOP, but to woo Big Oil, Big Pharma, Big Insurance, etc. They want to co-opt these funding sources for the next campaign cycle. Rahm thinks this is the REAL game of politics, lock up all the funding, reward special interests.
Listening to the people is "naive." It was not an accident Obama chose Rahm, Geithner, Summers, etc
He had to cave to get traitor Joe and Ben Arnold Nelson...forget the Republican vote, its the blue dogs that made him cave.
When we see who Democratic leaders are supporting for the next legislature, its more than clear that Blue Dogs remain their preferred candidates.
Who saved Sen. Lincoln from herself? Who tried to save Sen. Spector from himself? White House, DNC, et. al.
The most important quality the DNC cares about in a candidate is how much money they can raise. What a surprise that we get candidates who sold themselves out before they ever got in office.
Beyond the cash-cow mentality, the DNC has been promoting ideological consistency:
1. trickle-down, supply-side economics
2. corporatist social policy
3. unrepentant support for the War industry and its 'American Empire' delusions
The rest of us are just a nuisance.
However, the breaking-point for me was when President Obama made his tasteless joke at the White House Correspondents' Dinner about Predator drones.
We are allowed to criticize but cannot "join the conservative chorus of failure"?
Not sure how to remain within those boundaries.
We can only change the "political landscape" if we are independent from Obama. Anyone who has tried to work with OFA realizes they are not interested in empowering us, but to support whatever he decides.
I agree with Scott we need to build a social movement to affect policy.
The March that United For Peace and Justice organized in New York against the Iraq war that included Woman's, environmental, and labor groups, is the coalition that if built, Obama Can't ignore.
So let's not "join the conservative chorus," but form our own. We cannot rely upon Obama to articulate "liberal policies". If we expect that kind of leadership, we will wait a long time.
We need to mobile and articulate realworld progressive alternative solutions to the major problems facing Americans & NOT worry whether Obama agrees or not. Demand what we need and, hopefully, BHO & the Dems will align themselves with us IF we build a strong movement able to reward or punish them.
Obama IS too compromised with the corporate interests. We need a movement to exert a gravitational pull to overcome what they are offering him. If he comes along, good. If not, we create conditions for a better compromise.
Obama's interests & goals are not the same as progressives. Can we win him over a bit? Only if we pull.
I am not calling for parades in support of Obamas agenda. I'm saying if we just sit back and watch while the tea party movement sets the dialogue we can not expect Obama to deliver what we want.
We do this every-time a Democrat is in the White House. We sit back and watch.
The Anti-choice movement was not silent during the Bush years, they saw an opportunity to influence a President that would listen to them.
The Anti-war movement should be turning up the heat. Some are trying but their numbers are small.
Perhaps a better title would have been, "Blaming Obama is Easy. And Inadequate."
I agree blaming Obama is an emotional response, immature and inadequate. It reminds me of the Stages of Grief. Obama supporters need help in processing their disillusionment with the man to arrive at a calm, balanced assessment of his role and our responsibilitie s.
Feel free to use the "Stages of Grief" framework to riff upon. I have not seen that used elsewhere and think it can provide helpful insights.
You are clearly younger than I. I started marching against LBJ's war in Vietnam.
Quoting
I agree, but it is hard to agree on the message. I think Obama agrees with the US desire for permanent bases in Iraq. Our presence in Af-Pak is making things worse, but how to disengage with the support of a sizable chunk of American popular opinion?
BTW, I disagree with your formulation that Obama escalated in Afghanistan because he thinks he was elected to do so by his constituents. He wanted to appear tough while campaigning against our presence in Iraq. He now wants to win SOMETHING in order to pull out. But he is stuck. No "honorable" way out. The situation will go to hell and the Dems fear being blamed for "losing Afghanistan."
It's worth noting how effective the propaganda machine we know as media in distracting and reframing our problems.
The problem is money concentrated at the the top, hence so is control. If not now when, if not us who?
We should especially blame the people who voted for Obama instead of giving life to 3rd party candidates who would have upset the system.
Obama is a very conservative person. That's something none of you who support him seem to understand. He's pro war, pro capitalist, pro military...he's sending assassins out all over the globe and THEY ARE assassinating people left and right, he's continuing Guantamo and the bailout is theft by corporation of American and even European peoples money.
When do people like YOU realize YOU ARE CONSERVATIVE and you are a DUPE.
Never....
I have rationalized my reluctance to oppose Obama's policies -- not wanting to add fuel to those who vilify him -- but I also understand that Obama needs to be pushed by progressives to do the right thing. He is, after all, a politician -- and he will act if he sees support for an issue.
Obama's successes -- passing a long-awaited healthcare bill, appointing the first Hispanic to the Supreme Court, making progress towards reducing nuclear proliferation, as well as steering the country through an historic economic crisis -- all are important. I shudder to think how McCain/Palin would have governed so far.
Thank you, Scott, for reminding us that Obama can't do it alone.
"Change will not come if we wait for some other person... We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek." President-elect Obama
If McCain and Palin were in power, half the country, perhaps more, would be mobilized against their pro-corporate policies. But most policies would be about the same. Not sure that Kagan and Sotomayor should count as "pluses" for Obama. Sotomayor appears fairly centrist, Kagan, center-right on many issues.
I agree with Obama's quote, except he tended to conflate his election with a triumph for the people. And his OFA is clearly not interested in mobilizing his former supporters EXCEPT to the extent they will take orders from the White House. SO the "empowerment" contained in his speech has been lost. But we should still "be the change we have waited for" and STOP waiting for him to give us permission.
Multicultural, hip, stylish, eloquent(but what does he really say?). Brilliant servant of the elite, Friend and employer of Summers, Bernanke, Emmanuel, Clinton, Arne Duncan(privatiz er of US public school system), etc, etc.
Unions dead. Public health privatized. Community advocacy organizations gone(see ya, ACORN). Walmart sets the global tone(thanks, Clintons!)And how about that coup in Honduras? Pretty slick. American occupation of Haiti(again)? Done deal. Endless war? No problem. Single-payer medical care? Arrest those doctors with the temerity to try to attend the hearing of their elective representatives !(And they were arrested, at least twice).
Give me a break about "blaming Obama". He's the new henchman for the privatization of the earth, that's all.
No, the question is, what has he done? We cannot make a signing statement and undo years of work. He can. We cannot get on TV and speak to an audience of millions. He can.
Millions spoke out and stopped the bailout -- until we were neutralized in an instant. We are censored and filtered out of the mainstream. He is not.
Yet.
Yes, it's unreasonable for us to expect Obama to undo everything Bush (and Clinton) did in 15 years. But there are so many things he has the power to do immediately that he has failed to do.
Things like fire all the crooked attorneys in the Justice Department that Rove installed to sabotage the government.
(All the honest ones were fired by Rove, remember?)
Things like guaranteeing human rights, as he promised, to all detainees of the US Government.
Things like ceasing all unconstitutiona l behavior, as any good constitutional lawyer would, but which he has not. (He's got a drone with your name on it... ha ha ha.)
Things like adhering to international law and treaties, as he is by law compelled to do.
Have we heard any more about the Geneva Convention since he was elected? About excessive executive power? About protecting US industry? What about the illegal coup in Honduras and illegal election in Afghanistan, both of which Obama apparently supports, contrary to our professed beliefs and laws? How about his support of Geitner and Bernanke, the co-architects of our financial disaster?
This is just scratching the surface. I'm so disappointed. I feel a disgusting acknowledgment that those who told me that voting was futile may have been right.
If you do try to exercise your obligation to dissent(and I do, weekly, and more), you will be harrassed in big and small ways, even if you're white. The growing Homeland police state is very far-reaching, and extremely effective. New technologies are being developed all the time to decrease the possibility of gathering together. Increasingly,ma ximum capacity rules at meetings are enforced, authorities citing "safety(fire) concerns". There are far fewer public venues for meetings. Media deliberately berate and diminish important protest events, if they cover them at all, always suggesting violence.
Obama's just the new boss of the failing Empire. Let's stop being plebes.
Even the health plan will be repealed in 2012 when we get a GOP President and a GOP Congress. Obama should run for Pope.
After 18 months in office, its more than clear Obama and Congress don't give a damn about anybody below the investor class. If they started with a public works project and a moratorium on primary home foreclosures, he'd have a lot more support to work with.
Instead, they saved the banks, brokers, insurance companies, auto industry, defense industry and - of course - our insane, bankrupting and unwinnable wars, but left the victims of our pro-corporate polices to drown.
From 'Bankruptcy Joe' Biden to that oil salesman, Salazar, there's not a single progressive in his cabinet, just the same crew of corporate bagmen whose policies created these disasters to begin with.
With Democrats like these, who needs republicans?
What a creep........
Those of us who share his dreams should all volunteer some time to help Organizing For America make sure that Obama retains the political support he needs to get the job done in this year's election.
All politics is local so you need to put Democrats in office who support the vision. My Congressman Patrick Murphy is up for re-election so I have promised to work on his campaign and do what I can to insure that his seat is not lost.
Get involved if you want to see things happen! Be mindful that you can't reap the benefits without making an investment!
I believe that liberals and progressives too often get complacent when the Democrats are in power. We just expect them to deliver on our agenda without pressuring them to do so.
What that leads to in my opinion is the blue dogs are able to make the case that Democrats are better off supporting corporate interests...screw the left they say, we will win their votes in November.
He and the other centrist Democrats are doing similar things with the problem of global warming. Many of us have been fighting hard for meaningful legislation, while these Democrats compromise everything away in order to give more favors to the very corporations at the root of the problem. The bills being considered now don't even do a quarter of the MINIMUM scientists say is necessary. This is a consistent pattern in this administration, favoring corporations above people.
NOT to blame Obama for the many things he has done like this is irresponsible.
Being an apologist for more killing of our children, their mothers and fathers is no more acceptable under the current administration than it was in the last.
A policy based in finding the middle ground between two factions (democrats and republicans) bought and paid for by wealth will lead us to ruin.
As Lewis Carol said "If you don't know where you are going any road will get you there."
Do not waste time on the Punch and Judy shows of mass media politics.
As an 78 year old activist/realist intellectual I have watched many generations fire-up and then burn out in the disillusionment of unreal expectations from very co-optable narcissistic leaders like Obama.
I voted for Kucinich in the primary and the lesser of dangers in the general.
If the realistic progressives ever hope to have any strong influence on saving the environment, controlling unrestrained global resource plundering, and unsafe global proliferation of thousands of doomsday nuclear weapons, They must build a strong third party devoted to educating our disengaged fellow Americans. Eliminating all nuclear weapons is the most important challenge. And our nation must take the lead because it is the only one that can lead the process most persuasively.
As a historian, I remind you that huge wars usually start with small wars in unstable fault-line areas.
www.psycho-imperialism.com
Here in the urban deep South at my local discussion group of the UU Church I am regularly and very resentfully denounced for "undermining Obama" when I just deliver the messages that thousands of American evangelical crusaders have become the most powerful spiritual/emotional crusade promoters and culture-war winners as they use our many global holy wars to train thousands of military personnel and Chaplains to be an army of "government paid missionaries for Christ."
Obama has promoted and funded the convergence of highly organized fantasy-religions and government more than any previous president.
The evangelical crusader-proselityzer enthusiasts are the most well organzied cultural imperialists, and they have turned many of our armed forces personnel into "government-paid missionaries for Christ."
Is the bailout needed? Many economists say 'no'
President Bush and his Treasury secretary, former Goldman Sachs chief executive Henry Paulson, have warned of imminent economic collapse and another Great Depression if their rescue plan isn't passed immediately.
Is that true?
"It's more hype than real risk," said James K. Galbraith, a University of Texas economist and son of the late economic historian John Kenneth Galbraith. "A nasty recession is possible, but the bailout will not cure that. So it's mainly relevant to the financial industry."
The Paulson plan will get some bad assets off the balance sheets ....But it wouldn't reduce the crush of homes in or near foreclosure, said Simon Johnson, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2008/09/25/53107/is-the-bailout-needed-many-economists.html#ixzz0vIpbocv8
RSS feed for comments to this post.