I believe I said I was more successful than I ever dreamed I'd be. Can you show me where I said I worked very hard to get where I'm at?
As to Obama, he is indeed working very hard....at all the wrong things. He is working very hard at turning this country in a liberal socialistic European state. But no worries, the American people are above all that, and will rise up and boot his worthless a$$ from office before he can accomplish his agenda. Every generation or so we have to re-learn this lesson. Same thing happened with Carter.
.... actually we've already had 8 years of corporatist govt, with zero accountability, egregious illegal cronyism at the tax payers expense and the nations future security ..... coupled with un-precedented anti-american secrecy in governance, and utter contempt for the constitution/ bill of rights.....
with bush as a fake figure-head, the nwo neocon-nazi junta saw to it that socialism for the rich.....a.k.a privitize the profits, socialise the risk on the backs of true-blue hard working American citizens___ was the order of the day...to hell with fiscal restraint, to hell with SHARED SACRIFICE, the spirit of which lies at the heart of the u.s. constitution/ bill of rights /decl' of Independence ...... and which our founding fathers envisaged when laying the foundations of a govt OF THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE.
Ahhhhhh, the old anti-capitalist "socialism for the rich" rant. I don't think the founding fathers intended that a government of the people, by the people, and for the people intended a socialistic government....they were all some pretty hard working capitalists themselves....those were the visions of Karl Marx and Mao.
As to those "true blue hard working American citizens", I'm quite certain you'll find most of those to be moderates and conservatives residing in the Republican party. Have you ever looked at a Dem/Repub demographics map? Please report back to this site where you find all those concentrations of "true-blue hard working" Democrats, and where you find those "corportist" Republicans. Hint: Obamaland in the south side of Chicago didn't hold a tea party. I didn't see any tea partty broadcasts from Detroit, Harlem or the Watts either......hmmmmmm. (However, I did see a TV broadcast that night from inner-city Washington DC of some lady still asking for her Obama check to help her with her apartment and car payments. She seemed very impatient.)
I think a more fitting analogy would be the 1923-1933 period, which is the last time the Republicans ran the economy into the ground.
Your party managed to do the same thing to us once again, and just like last time you folks will be doomed to wander in the wilderness for a great while until you can get your heads screwed on straight.
After the Coolidge/Hoover fiasco, America succeeded in keeping the Republicans out of the White House for almost 36 years (1933 to 1969)*, and the nation prospered greatly as a result. We're still running on the fumes from that era.
*there was one lonely exception during that period--the moderate Dwight Eisenhower (who you folks would probably call a socialist and fascist today because of his "big government" projects that led to the interstate highway system, satellite communications, and the Internet).
Until you guys shake the know-nothing radicals and do-nothing ivory tower ideologues loose from the Reublican party and run another common-sense centrist in Eisenhower's mold, your party is most likely doomed to irrelevance for at least another generation, if not longer.
FDR certainly isn’t off the hook on matters economic: his own theory for the cause of the Great Depression - underconsumption - has been roundly dismissed. MIT economist Peter Temin stated, “The concept of underconsumption has been abandoned in modern discussions of macroeconomics.” And as a result, FDR’s solutions to a phantom problem would be utterly doomed to fail. FDR’s policies actually prolonged the Great Depression by seven years.
Lee E. Ohanian, the vice chair of UCLA’s Department of Economics, said:
”Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump. We found that a relapse isn’t likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies.”
Fellow UCLA professor of economics Harold L. Cole said:
“The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes. Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened.”
So much for Obama’s “It is only government that can break the vicious cycle where lost jobs lead to people spending less money which leads to even more layoffs.” hypothesis. Rather, it is Reagan, who said, “Government is not the solution to our problems; government IS the problem,” who had it right.
Barack Obama seems to be the worst possible combination of Herbert Hoover and Franklin Roosevelt.