Path:
eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september
.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-septemb
er.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!n
peer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media
.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!novia!posts.news.sonic.net!nnrp
1.nntp.sonic.net!not-for-mail
From: Billy 
Newsgroups: misc.survivalism,az.politics,ca.politics,dfw.politics
Subject: Re: Obama's "accomplishments"
Organization: Camp Runamuck
References:  
 
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.2 (Intel Mac OS X)
Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2012 21:44:35 -0700
Message-ID:

Lines: 214
NNTP-Posting-Date: 05 Aug 2012 04:44:36 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: f94c1a3d.news.sonic.net
X-Trace:
DXC=_>?EFHU]_c:;W\gdhn On 8/3/2012 9:34 AM, Harold@angels.not wrote:
> > On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:34:34 -0600, propinquity  wrote:
> >
> >> On 8/2/2012 8:48 PM, azjohn wrote:
> >>>
> >>> A very impressive list that grows longer with each passing day during
> >>> his final year in office!!!
> >>
> >>> How is this "CHANGE" working out for you?
> >>
> > How is your criticizm working for you?
The Dems, and the Reps are only the stooges. The bankers are only the 
tools. The problem is the top 0.0001%, the 400 that control this country 
for their own benefit. Once they just sheared the sheep, but now they 
want to skin us.

<http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/bank-of-america-too-crooked-to
-fail-20120314>
Bank of America: Too Crooked to Fail
The bank has defrauded everyone from investors and insurers to 
homeowners and the unemployed. So why does the government keep bailing 
it out?

At least Bank of America got its name right. The ultimate Too Big to 
Fail bank really is America, a hypergluttonous ward of the state whose 
limitless fraud and criminal conspiracies we'll all be paying for until 
the end of time. Did you hear about the plot to rig global interest 
rates? The $137 million fine for bilking needy schools and cities? The 
ingenious plan to suck multiple fees out of the unemployment checks of 
jobless workers? Take your eyes off them for 10 seconds and guaranteed, 
they'll be into some shit again: This bank is like the world's 
worst-behaved teenager, taking your car and running over kittens and 
fire hydrants on the way to Vegas for the weekend, maxing out your 
credit cards in the three days you spend at your aunt's funeral. They're 
out of control, yet they'll never do time or go out of business, because 
the government remains creepily committed to their survival, like 
overindulgent parents who refuse to believe their 40-year-old 
live-at-home son could possibly be responsible for those dead hookers in 
the backyard.

It's been four years since the government, in the name of preventing a 
depression, saved this megabank from ruin by pumping $45 billion of 
taxpayer money into its arm. Since then, the Obama administration has 
looked the other way as the bank committed an astonishing variety of 
crimes ­ some elaborate and brilliant in their conception, some so crude 
that they'd be beneath your average street thug. Bank of America has 
systematically ripped off almost everyone with whom it has a significant 
business relationship, cheating investors, insurers, depositors, 
homeowners, shareholders, pensioners and taxpayers. It brought tens of 
thousands of Americans to foreclosure court using bogus, "robo-signed" 
evidence ­ a type of mass perjury that it helped pioneer. It hawked 
worthless mortgages to dozens of unions and state pension funds, 
draining them of hundreds of millions in value. And when it wasn't 
ripping off workers and pensioners, it was helping to push insurance 
giants like AMBAC into bankruptcy by fraudulently inducing them to spend 
hundreds of millions insuring those same worthless mortgages.

But despite being the very definition of an unaccountable corporate 
villain, Bank of America is now bigger and more dangerous than ever. 
(cont.)
> 
> 
> Briliantly, and all Obama has to do is open his yap and feed me more ops:
> 
> 
> 
>
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443931404577551344018773450.html
> 
> What's the difference between a calm and cool Barack Obama, and a 
> rattled and worried Barack Obama? Four words, it turns out.
> 
> "You didn't build that" is swelling to such heights that it has the 
> president somewhere unprecedented: on defense. Mr. Obama has felt 
> compelled‹for the first time in this campaign‹to cut an ad in which he 
> directly responds to the criticisms of his now-infamous speech, 
> complaining his opponents took his words "out of context."
> 
> Related Video
> 
> Columnist Kim Strassel on Scott Brown's new ad contrasting Elizabeth 
> Warren and President Obama to Presidents Clinton, Reagan, Kennedy, and 
> Johnson. Photo: Getty Images
> .
> .That ad follows two separate ones from his campaign attempting damage 
> control. His campaign appearances are now about backpedaling and 
> proclaiming his love for small business. And the Democratic National 
> Committee produced its own panicked memo, which vowed to "turn the page" 
> on Mr. Romney's "out of context . . . BS"‹thereby acknowledging that 
> Chicago has lost control of the message.
> 
> The Obama campaign has elevated poll-testing and focus-grouping to 
> near-clinical heights, and the results drive the president's every 
> action: his policies, his campaign venues, his targeted demographics, 
> his messaging. That Mr. Obama felt required‹teeth-gritted‹to address the 
> "you didn't build that" meme means his vaunted focus groups are sounding 
> alarms.
> 
> The obsession with tested messages is precisely why the president's rare 
> moments of candor‹on free enterprise, on those who "cling to their guns 
> and religion," on the need to "spread the wealth around"‹are so 
> revealing. They are a look at the real man. It turns out Mr. Obama's 
> dismissive words toward free enterprise closely mirror a speech that 
> liberal Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren gave last August.
> 
> Ms. Warren's argument‹that government is the real source of all business 
> success‹went viral and made a profound impression among the liberal 
> elite, who have been pushing for its wider adoption. Mr. Obama chose to 
> road-test it on the national stage, presumably thinking it would 
> underline his argument for why the wealthy should pay more. It was a big 
> political misstep, and now has the Obama team seriously worried.
> 
> .
> And no wonder. The immediate effect was to suck away the president's 
> momentum. Mr. Obama has little positive to brag about, and his campaign 
> hinges on keeping negative attention on his opponent. For months, the 
> president's team hammered on Mr. Romney's time at Bain, his 
> Massachusetts tenure, his tax returns. "You didn't build that" shifted 
> the focus to the president, and his decision to respond to the 
> criticisms has only legitimized them and guaranteed they continue.
> 
> The Obama campaign's bigger problem, both sides are now realizing, is 
> that his words go beyond politics and are more devastating than the 
> Romney complaints that Mr. Obama is too big-government oriented or has 
> mishandled the economy. They raise the far more potent issue of national 
> identity and feed the suspicion that Mr. Obama is actively hostile to 
> American ideals and aspirations. Republicans are doing their own voter 
> surveys, and they note that Mr. Obama's problem is that his words cause 
> an emotional response, and that they disturb voters in nearly every 
> demographic.
> >>
> >> I think you're giving him way too much credit, he didn't build those
> >> accomplishments by himself, other Dem traitors helped out...
> >>
> > You could make a point without denigrating anyone, or could you?
> 
> I could, but liars like you so earn it that well... you know...
> 
> > Did your tactics help your position in 2008?
> 
> Did useless candidates and an anti-Bush backlash make that a moot one 
> regardless?
> 
> Lol.
> 
> 
> 
>
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443931404577551344018773450.html
> 
> What's the difference between a calm and cool Barack Obama, and a 
> rattled and worried Barack Obama? Four words, it turns out.
> 
> "You didn't build that" is swelling to such heights that it has the 
> president somewhere unprecedented: on defense. Mr. Obama has felt 
> compelled‹for the first time in this campaign‹to cut an ad in which he 
> directly responds to the criticisms of his now-infamous speech, 
> complaining his opponents took his words "out of context."
> 
> .That ad follows two separate ones from his campaign attempting damage 
> control. His campaign appearances are now about backpedaling and 
> proclaiming his love for small business. And the Democratic National 
> Committee produced its own panicked memo, which vowed to "turn the page" 
> on Mr. Romney's "out of context . . . BS"‹thereby acknowledging that 
> Chicago has lost control of the message.
> 
> The Obama campaign has elevated poll-testing and focus-grouping to 
> near-clinical heights, and the results drive the president's every 
> action: his policies, his campaign venues, his targeted demographics, 
> his messaging. That Mr. Obama felt required‹teeth-gritted‹to address the 
> "you didn't build that" meme means his vaunted focus groups are sounding 
> alarms.
> 
> The obsession with tested messages is precisely why the president's rare 
> moments of candor‹on free enterprise, on those who "cling to their guns 
> and religion," on the need to "spread the wealth around"‹are so 
> revealing. They are a look at the real man. It turns out Mr. Obama's 
> dismissive words toward free enterprise closely mirror a speech that 
> liberal Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren gave last August.
> 
> Ms. Warren's argument‹that government is the real source of all business 
> success‹went viral and made a profound impression among the liberal 
> elite, who have been pushing for its wider adoption. Mr. Obama chose to 
> road-test it on the national stage, presumably thinking it would 
> underline his argument for why the wealthy should pay more. It was a big 
> political misstep, and now has the Obama team seriously worried.
> 
> .
> And no wonder. The immediate effect was to suck away the president's 
> momentum. Mr. Obama has little positive to brag about, and his campaign 
> hinges on keeping negative attention on his opponent. For months, the 
> president's team hammered on Mr. Romney's time at Bain, his 
> Massachusetts tenure, his tax returns. "You didn't build that" shifted 
> the focus to the president, and his decision to respond to the 
> criticisms has only legitimized them and guaranteed they continue.
> 
> The Obama campaign's bigger problem, both sides are now realizing, is 
> that his words go beyond politics and are more devastating than the 
> Romney complaints that Mr. Obama is too big-government oriented or has 
> mishandled the economy. They raise the far more potent issue of national 
> identity and feed the suspicion that Mr. Obama is actively hostile to 
> American ideals and aspirations. Republicans are doing their own voter 
> surveys, and they note that Mr. Obama's problem is that his words cause 
> an emotional response, and that they disturb voters in nearly every 
> demographic.

-- 
Welcome to the New America.

or
E Pluribus Unum
Green Party Nominee Jill Stein & Running Mate, Cheri Honkala

--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.1