Glenn is a great guy, but he's where he belongs. The guy services us through media, but I can't see him making decisions about nuclear sanctions, and so on.

This is an early example of how easily Obama can take extremely corrupt actions and get away with them. We'll see more in the future. Im sure of it. And he'll keep on getting away with it, because he's the great BO.

People continue to compare Obama to Carter. But was Carter anywhere near this damaging and disheartening? I wasn't alive in the 70's, but I get the feeling that Obama is affecting this country in a far greater sense... in the wrong direction.

bump

While in China promoting Cap and Trade, Nancy Pelosi was quoted to have said that in order to make sure that people follow new environmental policies, "every aspect of our lives should be subject for inventory."
Does ANYBODY on this site think this is acceptable? Anybody? And Why? I just don't understand.

Let's also not forget, the government is (and will) artificially bolster failed companies. Companies that fail in the recession for a REASON. If the government continues to expand these bailouts, they will hollow out the American economy. Or rather, bring on a second gilded-age. The country seems ok, but under is a very weak financial and major business foundation. Sometimes thinking "THE INDIVIDUAL FIRST" will turn its ugly head and hurt the individual far worse in the long run.

The bill Obama is introducing tomorrow absolutely horrifies me. The fact that the government can buy up any financial company that it deems "failing" can result in possibly the largest case of government corruption in the past century. I mean, once the government gets ahold of these nose-diving companies, it'll never leave go. A public financial district isn't something I would look forward to. (As a side note, the problem with the AIG fiasco is that it wasn't monitored after taking government money, public money should be monitored by the government, but monitoring of private money in private enterprises should be minimal, if a business fails due to poor ethical decisions, the unemployed will eventually find a job with an ethical, long lasting company.) Another question, why are small businesses always ignored? do you believe small businesses should be regulated as well?

Now, a PASSIVE watchdog to prevent companies from taking advantage of the weak is an OK idea with me, but still, the qualms of corruption and over-expansion make me uneasy. The Richmond incident is something that is typical, and why people INDIVIDUALLY need to be more careful. The use of this watchdog would need to be VERY limited to only the worst of things, things almost impossible to avoid or pick up on. And everyone knows Obama will likely overstep these boundaries.

Which leads me too another point, with government becoming powerful enough to keep all businesses in check all the time, who will keep the government from overstepping its boundaries within the private sector? You can say we can vote those who violate out, but a solid 2 years of corrupt and powerful movement could result in terrible repercussions in the future.

The problem with us being "too wealthy" to have homeless argument is simply idealistic. No country anywhere has a 0% homeless or 0% squalor. Nobody in the EU, not China, and by GOD not India. It's a sad reality that people will be poor, and while I agree that things should ALWAYS be done to reduce homelessness and squalor, my distrust with the government's ability to run smoothly, especially without transparency (see Obama not releasing who has visited the White House), makes me skeptical.

Plus, from a purely economical standpoint, putting pressure on the wealthy really hurts the diversity and strength of the economy as a whole. As much as many Americans hate to admit it, the rich are who keep this country going, not the poor. And with the rich prospering, the poor will also in the long run.

The problem, really then, resides in patience. In the case of a recession, immediate government damage control is ALWAYS taken. Why such a drastic response? It just doesn't make sense to me sometimes.

Perhaps the safety net healthcare system will be a great thing in the future, maybe it'll keep me from developing pneumonia if I'm ever unemployed. But the pressure it puts on "higher society" (for lack of a better term... sorry) really angers and worries me for now.

2010. 2010.2010. Just hope that the new bill Obama is trying to get through allowing him to virtually buy up the entire financial sector and businesses surrounding it isn't too abused by then. Or his watchdog agency doesn't flag hundreds of businesses for "not acting in the consumer's interest." Hopefully, also, more people
1. CARE about what's going on.
2. Become fed up with an out of control government.
Get some balance back into our government at the very least.

The Nazi Party is something that should be determined only on a non- 2 dimensional scale. As it supported govt. run business (socialism) and government run morality (conservative theocracy). So it comes from very different sides.

The federal reserve was a bad example. IT is a good example, however, of how easily govt can become corrupt.