Next Generation Emulation banner
1 - 20 of 37 Posts

· Premium Member
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
This is something that’s been bothering me for a while, and it’s something that I’d like to share. Note that this is strictly an opinion piece.

President Barack Obama has been in office for about three months now and although we've seen some encouraging signs of change (especially in international relations) I've also noticed some disturbing trends in his administration, particularly his handling of the economic crisis and the torture legacy of the former administration. It has gradually dawned on me (and this is just my own opinion) that the current President's sense of responsibility is a little bit skewed. I'll list two primary examples.

The first is his handling of the economic crisis. Some time ago Obama forced GM's president Rick Wagoner to resign due to his failure to provide acceptable plans for GM's viability. Many people saw it as an abuse of power (to which I agree) but it goes much further than that. Although Obama was willing to put his foot down and be tough with GM he was, at the same time, treating the big banks with kid gloves. This strikes me as rather ironic. Although GM wasn't the best company around they were not responsible for the current crisis. In many ways GM was actually the biggest victim of this crisis. On the other hand, the big banks actually were responsible for the crisis. They are the villains here, the ones who single-handedly brought down the world economy and put companies like GM into the dire situation that they're in. And so here we have Obama punishing the main victim of the crisis while giving the villains a free pass. Is this responsible behavior? Am I the only one who seems to think that something’s gone terribly wrong here?

When Wagoner was ousted I thought, well what about Bank of America’s Ken Lewis or Citigroup’s Vikram Pandit? What about any of the other bankers who have brought America’s economy to its knees? Where’s their punishment? If Obama cared about responsibility he would punish the big banks and the executives who head them. Furthermore, he would force the executives, shareholders, and bondholders to pay for the company’s mistakes, not the American public. At the very least he should not be trampling on the victims.

The second example I point to is his seeming indifference to torture prosecutions. When he released the Bush torture memos he promised that those who carried out the torture would not be prosecuted, despite the fact that it has now been determined beyond a shadow of a doubt that war crimes have been committed. Even worse he doesn’t seem particularly interested in prosecuting those who created the torture policies. President Obama has stated that he wishes to move on and look to the future but that's not going to happen unless he addresses the injustices of the past. The torture issue needs to be addressed in order to move on, and that means prosecuting ALL those who were responsible, from the lower ranks to those at the top (including former president George W. Bush and former vice-president **** Cheney). At the very least some sort of trial should be held, whether someone's found guilty or not. As chief executive of the USA he has at least a moral duty to do so and so far, he has skirted that duty.

When Obama ran for office he promised that he would bring change to America. When the electoral results from the west coast came in I was one of those people who were overjoyed. And so it is particularly disturbing to me to see Obama side-stepping the issue of torture and continuing the same failed policies of the Bush administration in terms of the economic crisis. Instead of looking out for the American public he’s looking out for Wall Street, backing more bailouts and giving his blessings to the PPIP (which is just a sneaky way for banks to cover their losses with public money). His administration is still young and I still hope that he’ll eventually do the right thing (in terms of the economy he’ll pretty much have to when the banks are declared insolvent) but it’s still disturbing nonetheless.

Feel free to add your comments and opinions.
 

· The one and only
Joined
·
4,074 Posts
Better than anything mccain could do as president.
Nuff said.
 

· Your resident reaper...
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
I also remember him saying change won't happen for a good while.

I agree that the heads of banks should be punished, as with the other top heads. But cutting them off right now, with no viable replacement in place would just cause more confusion and headaches. I believe he's just waiting for viable candidates to take their places.

I also view him as the starter of a long baton race to a stable economy and good international relations. He'll get stuff done, but it'll take him the rest of his career in office and his successors to clean up the mess brought on by the previous administrations. The real critiques will start after a year in office. Right now he's just poking and prodding and judging the reactions. Don't think we'll see a big decision from him for at least another few months. And he'll definitely make mistakes which he sees as needed, but no the public.
 

· Tushy :3
Joined
·
7,315 Posts
True skore, but he hasn't exactly gotten the ball running. It also kinda pisses me off that he lied about the dog thing. He said he was going to be picking out a mutt nobody wanted from some shelter/pound. But instead he comes out with this high pedigree water dog thing that had been living in two homes before settling with Obama...that isn't exactly some poor abused mutt that you could get from the pound.
 

· The one and only
Joined
·
4,074 Posts
because his daughter is allergic to dogs, or something of the sort.

I think hes doing a very good job. He's an extremely intelligent man and i respect that. I trust he will get things done.
 

· Your resident reaper...
Joined
·
7,319 Posts
True skore, but he hasn't exactly gotten the ball running. It also kinda pisses me off that he lied about the dog thing. He said he was going to be picking out a mutt nobody wanted from some shelter/pound. But instead he comes out with this high pedigree water dog thing that had been living in two homes before settling with Obama...that isn't exactly some poor abused mutt that you could get from the pound.
His youngest daughter is allergic to most canines I believe.

He only had a choice between 2 breeds that wouldn't make his daughter go into a sneeze fest. And a Kennedy offered their pup I believe...and who in the USA can refuse a gift from a Kennedy. They're like royalty down there :lol:
 

· Tushy :3
Joined
·
7,315 Posts
Then he shouldn't have said one thing and then done the other. That really bothers me. I wouldn't have even been too bothered if he got the water dog from a shelter. But he got it from the Kennedy's...it's like a big "OMG LOOK AT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" publicity stunt.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
10,973 Posts
I'm bothered by a few things, getting jiggy with Hugo Cavez, providing top secret information to Al Queda, calling our returning military a potential threat to the country while calling terrorists enemy combatants, inviting terrorists who have American blood on their hands refuge and money in the US, "stimulating" the economy while we're deep in debt, poor relations with the world, bowing to the Saudis, yeah this is change I can believe in...NOT...

'K Don't blame me, I vote McCain McLiberal...

:)
 

· Opensource-spice
Joined
·
1,704 Posts
I hate my government. I truely do. I don't have any faith that any action I make as one singular individual makes any impact on any issue within my country. Why? Because it doesn't matter; a man in a suit that has a lot more money than I do who could care less because as president; he's set for life. Besides; every president I've ever had the chance to say yes or no to has been a goddamned idiot; Obama included.

1. Stimulus Bill was done before Job Reformation

Why would he give small businesses money if every dime spent in this country goes overseas anyway? It's like giving them a tax return; they'll have it spent in a month and then it will be gone. Listen; white-house *******. If nobody is buying merchandise from small businesses then why would giving the businesses money help anyone? This is about the people; not the businesses. People run the businesses.

I thought Democrats were above the trickle-down bull****. Apparently not.
 

· Tushy :3
Joined
·
7,315 Posts
It's so freakin' messed up. He's digging the hole deeper when he should be helping us dig it out. We're in a whole lot of trouble. If he did that, then his whole medical plan won't fall through. However, if he does his medical plan right now with the shape this country is in, it's going to hurt us more than help...And I'm really praying for his medical plan to happen...but I don't see how it's going to help us at all...It will only make us worse.

It really pisses me off that he is getting all chummy with Al-Quieda and telling him all of the top secret stuff. He should be protecting us, dammit, not setting up a trap.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
10,973 Posts
I'm afraid the US and/or Israel will be nuked by Al Queda, it wouldn't surprise me to see that happen in the next four years...
 

· Registered
Joined
·
421 Posts
He could have done things with the banks, but he didn't make what he did to them publicly known probably. Imo he should have reprimanded them very seriously. And also the fact that one of the polls that the white house had about legalizing marijuana(it got the most votes) all he did was wipe the table and practically ignored it. I bet he will end up pissing a powerful ******* off somewhere and get shot in the head like Kennedy(I hope not though).
 

· Knowledge is the solution
Joined
·
7,484 Posts
Wow, apparently save for our resident republican everyone here was enveloping the poor guy in a messiah aura, and expected him to be a miracle maker in... what? 100 days?

Anyway, at least from someone who has recently come to live for a while in the USA, I've found her international policing to be a big step forward to be 'har har, I'm bigger than you' tactic his predecesor was using on everyone that did not agree with him, maybe the people here feel he is bowing his head too much, but at least the people everywhere outside the USA see this as a big step forward for the USA to make in terms of foreign relationships.

About domestic policies... where I haven't been here long enough to criticize anything, but at least I have seen they are well received among the people I know here.

Then he shouldn't have said one thing and then done the other. That really bothers me. I wouldn't have even been too bothered if he got the water dog from a shelter. But he got it from the Kennedy's...it's like a big "OMG LOOK AT ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" publicity stunt.
You know, I feel you are worrying about the least important issue America has right now. It reminds me of a similar episode we had in Mexico when Vicente Fox (our previous president, the one who shared the same cowboy look as Bush :p) was attacked by every newspaper journalist and their mother because he had dared to buy some expensive towels for the bathrooms of our equivalent of the White House. Oh my gosh.
 

· Foundry/Foundation
Joined
·
11,824 Posts
Did you people honestly think he'd turn the world around? I'd say that if he simply "does well", it'd be a huge improvement. That's just from what a Dutch guy (very small insignificant country filled with smartasses) sees on the news, though. We didn't like Bush (in the end), anyway (our government apparantly kind of did, though).
 

· Premium Member
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
I didn't expect him to be a miracle worker, but he has to at least realize the situation that the US is in and try to fix it as quickly as possible.

One of the most frustrating things about the Obama administration is their slow response to the financial crisis. Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of Canada has recently criticized the Obama administration for this, and I believe his criticism is just. Many prominent economists (such as Paul Krugman and Joseph Stiglitz, two nobel prize-winning economists) have proposed much better solutions to fixing the problems, yet they've been ignored by the administration, who continues to see only one solution: propping up the big banks (as an aside, the Japanese tried that during the 90s and it led to a decade of loss).

The US economy is in a precarious situation. What's needed is bold action to fix the problem, like when Paul Volcker stamped out inflation in the 80s (it was painful for the economy in the short-term but it successfully fixed the problem). The lack of progress means the situation will get worse and more American families and businesses will suffer. Bank of America's CEO Ken Lewis himself admitted that credit is getting worse. The problem with the banks is now beginning to spread to other areas, such as credit cards and the commercial retail. The economy is rotting away because of the delays in fixing the financial mess. This problem HAS TO BE SOLVED NOW!

Obama's approach seems to be one of compromise. He doesn't want to rock the boat too much and he tries to appease all parties. Although that may win him some friends it won't do much for solving problems. The banks (who were bailed out with taxpayer money) spent some $100 million lobbying the government in the first three months of this year (so they're using taxpayer money to influence governments to give them even more taxpayer money). Obama needs to put his foot down on the banks and get tough with them, not appease them.
 

· The one and only
Joined
·
4,074 Posts
I hate how everyone is already judging hime on being bad, because he hasnt really fixed anything in the last 100 days. ITS ONLY BEEN 100 DAYS, DAMN. back the eff off and let him breath and ****ing work.
 

· An old lady.
Joined
·
413 Posts
Consider this: it is not the president's duty to, for lack of a better word, lead America.

Let me repeat that: the president, and more generally, the government, is not responsible for parenting, nannying, or looking after the people.

That may be the case in Europe, but not in America. Study the g0ddamn constitution. The president, along with his or her administration, executes the laws of the country. No where does it say that he's responsible for "creating jobs" or "ousting CEOs" or "stripping executives of their bonuses."

Just a few comments from my "crazy" libertarian perspective.
 
1 - 20 of 37 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top