Barack The Savior?

NEWSWEEK

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: vstillwell @ 11/13/2008 10:35:13 PM

    You know, I keep hearing all the bad news and watching my friends loose jobs. It just makes me want to cave a Republicans face in. Thanks for two terms of George Bush.

    • Posted By: noneyas @ 11/13/2008 10:55:55 PM

      Hey vstillwell - save your violence for the people's army Obama has proposed :) - Really, though, sorry to hear some of your friends have lost jobs. I happen to be lucky and get job offers at least twice a week. I have put myself in a high-demand position for now. That, of course, could change overnight if I don't keep up since I am in a technical position. With any luck, we will pull out of this hole we are all in and the job market can turn around.

      To blame just Republicans, however, is a little naive since Democrats have had the most power over the government for the past few years. Both sides deserve a kick in the teeth for sending the average American into the crapper.

      • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 2:20:58 PM

        "save your violence for the people's army Obama has proposed "

        He proposed no such thing. Why are republicans so habitually dishonest?

        • Posted By: noneyas @ 11/14/2008 7:18:55 PM

          His own words are that we have to have an army of the people - Wait, was that Obama or Hitler - No, it was both...

      • Posted By: ginamlaster @ 11/14/2008 3:44:16 AM

        Gawd, could somebody PLEASE change this broken record?!! Republicans had control of the House, Senate and White House from 2000 to 2006. If their Contract On America was going all that great, how is they lost control? I'll give you a hint: It's the same reason they lost the presidential election by a LANDSLIDE

    • Posted By: marley07 @ 11/13/2008 10:46:43 PM

      If you want your friends to stop losing jobs then you better hope Obama does not carry out the plan he outlined during his campaign.

      • Posted By: 40YearR @ 11/14/2008 2:11:32 PM



        "Marley": Are you suggesting that Obama allowing the Bush tax giveaway to the rich that McC voted against and called "irresponsible" will cause those problems? Or will it be Obama defeating McC's proposal to give billions more of tax give aways to oil?

      • Posted By: Romero @ 11/14/2008 12:06:09 AM

        What Univerisity did you get your Phd. in Economics from? I have a degree in business and I certainly do not profess to have the answers. If you have a better plan contact the government and or the media, and let the rest of us know what it is. Please!

        • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 9:24:34 AM

          Rush Limbaugh told him, so it must be true.

  • Posted By: vstillwell @ 11/13/2008 10:32:27 PM

    Hey,noneyas, wake up and smell the roses chief. Our financial markets are in tatters, our production economy is ground to a hault, our deficit's astronomical, we need other countries to keep buying our bonds or we'll go broke, our bond rating is about to slip, our interest payments for our debt is astronomical, we're stuck in two wars. Wake up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! God dang man.
    Obama will bring common sense back to government. Republicans left common sense at the door step a long long time ago.

    • Posted By: noneyas @ 11/13/2008 10:40:13 PM

      Hey vstillwell - Ok, you got a deal. You give your money to a deadbeat, I'll keep mine and we'll both be happy :) - Seriously, though, yep, we are in a mess. I hope Obama can do something but capitalism is a system based on people succeeding and keeping what they earned. Most people who have made tons and tons of money made it by working just a little harder (yes, we all know people who just got lucky and got loaded overnight). Taking from those who work harder is not only wrong, it is theft, which, last time I checked, is criminal. The only thing I want to see is a politician on either side who can take what we have and cut expenses instead of taking the easy road and raising more taxes or making a bigger government. So far, I have not seen anybody real impressive from either side.

      • Posted By: Romero @ 11/14/2008 12:12:01 AM

        I will have to disagree with you. Most of the wealthy people of the world have made their money by investing and reaping the rewards from the sweat of those that work hard. Very few if any make their wealth by working on their own. Get real. Apparently you are not aware on how capitalism works. The vast majority of us who work for someone else can work 24 hours a day seven days a week and we will never be multi-millioniers. GET REAL AND SMELL THE COFFEE. WE ARE JUST FORTUNATE TO HAVE A NATION WITH A VERY LARGE WORKING MIDDLE CLASS THAT JUST SURVIVES.

        • Posted By: noneyas @ 11/14/2008 7:16:57 PM

          One more quick comment: Quit complaining. Even the poorest American looks rich to people in a lot of other countries.

        • Posted By: noneyas @ 11/14/2008 7:16:02 PM

          Um, you made my point for me. The people who made the money knew how to make capitalism work. Yes, you and I (I am assuming you are not rich by your comment) could work 24 hours a day 7 days a week in a capitalistic society and potentially never get rich. The rich people are those who took that extra step. People who came up with an idea and actually did something about the idea. I can almost guarantee (nope, don't have statistics for this but just a good guess) that pretty much everybody in this room has had an idea, sat on it, then seen somebody else take that same idea or invention and make money. It has happened to me several times and that is why I am not rich. I didn't pursue the vision. Rich people generally took the extra step. Of course some inherited the wealth, of course some were just crooks who basically stole the wealth, but the rich people of the world, like it or not, are those who employ us and allow us to succeed even if in a small way in the USA.

      • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 9:26:09 AM

        "I hope Obama can do something but capitalism is a system based on people succeeding and keeping what they earned. "

        No, that's free enterprise. Capitalism is a system based on investment.

  • Posted By: Republican Mouse @ 11/14/2008 6:55:33 PM

    First, he will eliminate secret ballots, first for unions, then for everyone.
    Next, he nationalizes business.
    Then, he creates his "security force"
    You sheep will follow him all the way.
    Get used to your new salute: "Heil Obama"

    • Posted By: The "O" Team @ 11/14/2008 7:10:15 PM

      It has been said that, "the best form of government is a DICTATORSHIP..."

      I am not in agreement with that, oppressive form but I would rather have the likes of an ENLIGHTENED OBAMA than a dim-witted W, any day...

      HAIL AMERICA!!!

  • Posted By: Republican Mouse @ 11/14/2008 5:18:37 PM

    Sarah Palin for President - 2012!!!!

    • Posted By: The "O" Team @ 11/14/2008 6:56:43 PM

      YOU ONLY HAVE TO WAIT, 8 MORE YEARS (why are all of these idiots screaming 2012... Try 2016, if their are no amendments to the Constitution... that was a joke of course... OR... WAS IT?)

      Just think... YOU'LL HAVE ANOTHER COUPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES TO VOTE FOR:

      SARAH PHAL'IN... That NEW beacon of HOPE for the vanquished-PARTY-FORMERLY-KNOWN-AS-REPUBLICAN:)

      In ALL honesty, I do hope that the REPUB's RUN, SARAH, year after year, after YEAR... NOTHING LIKE AN EASY WIN:)

      GOD Bless America
      GOD Bless President-Elect Obama and Family
      And
      GOD Bless you... and me to.

      :)

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 6:37:08 PM

      Please, PLEASE run Palin in 2012.

      I'm beggin ya.

      • Posted By: Vypurr @ 11/14/2008 6:39:09 PM

        Be careful what you wish for... especially if Obama is upside down like Bush was in this election....

        • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 6:42:08 PM

          Palin is a joke. She's about as electable as Mondale was.

          The dems could run Teddy Kennedy against her and win, for Chrissakes.

  • Posted By: tiredoflies @ 11/14/2008 4:55:18 PM

    Right now the Bush Administration is pillaging America transferring as much wealth as possible to Wall Street.

    I hope you ignorant republicans who elected Bush for his second term are happy because you share direct responsibility in the current financial meltdown.

    I' am certain however you will try to pass the blame elsewhere.

    Sorry, it wont wash. Bushes second term is what got us here. Period.

    • Posted By: valark @ 11/14/2008 5:06:49 PM

      No, what got us here was everyone's inability to live within their means and general greediness. Making Bush your surrogate parent and responsible for bringing home the bacon to everyone won't wash. Your finances are your responsibility.

      • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 5:11:09 PM

        Why, yes, it's our fault Bush gave away hundreds of billions in no-bid contracts for companies (Halliburton, etc) that didn't even do the work contracted for.

        And it's our fault Bush "re-allocated" the banking bail out bill so that it all disappeared into "executive compensation".

        • Posted By: valark @ 11/14/2008 6:16:32 PM

          That doesn't even make sense...the contracts had to go to someone, does it matter to you which company they go to? Are you one of the companies? If they had gone to another company the economy would not be in a recession?

          If "you" don't want to accept responsibility for spending outside your means and the effect that credit has on our economy, that is your own issue. Its common sense. China is our American Express or our Citibank. The debt is there to leverage and market and sell off for investment on return....how did this debt create itself? Bush bought all the houses and failed the ARM?

          Again, another person who wants government to be a surrogate parent and take care of everything for you.

          • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 6:40:24 PM

            ": That doesn't even make sense...the contracts had to go to someone, does it matter to you which company they go to? "

            No, they didn't have to go to anyone, because there was no reason to go into Iraq...except to hand over the treasury to these "recovery" companies.

  • Posted By: Republican Mouse @ 11/14/2008 5:12:19 PM

    So why talk about Barack as saving Capitalism? He doesn't want Capitalism, doesn't believe in it, never will. The American people just stepped into their own hole, giving the Democrats total and ultimate power. We will see efforts to turn the US into a Socialist state, if not Marxist. And with your "savior" Obama promising an Executive Branch security force equal in strength to the Armed Forces - hmmm....Sounds like Germany in the 30's to me. Well, this is what you asked for. Lucky for me I can afford to leave the country if it gets too bad.

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 6:39:25 PM

      Har! More hilarious fear tactics.

      Keep it up! That will get you lots of votes in 2012! No, really!

  • Posted By: dmorris@cebridge.net @ 11/14/2008 5:12:30 PM

    Obama saves capitalism! Obama saves the world! How absurd...

    This is comical.

    It sounds like "John Maynard Keynes saved by Karl Marx"...

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 6:38:35 PM

      I think Newsweek is trolling us.

  • Posted By: running on empty @ 11/14/2008 5:51:45 PM

    I am waiting for Obama to take on the job. So far all he has done is prepare for a job interview for a job he finally won. Media was on his side in presenting him as the best candidate for presidency...but now he has to do the work and show results. I will wait for results before proclaiming Obama a savior.

    Just like a company gets a new CEO to turn it around, now Obama needs to put his vision to action and show us positive results.

    Talk time is over...time to get back to work now.

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 6:38:03 PM

      Actually, it will be time for him to get on the job in 67 days.

  • Posted By: SeaHabit49 @ 11/14/2008 2:32:33 PM

    Doc Howl, I'm not a Republican, I didn't vote for McCain.
    C. McClean: Right you are about spending it on productive investments like healthcare and infrastructure. Thats what we did in 1946 and the post war boom and raising of standards of living were the result.

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 2:46:09 PM

      My bad. I read you wrong.

      • Posted By: valark @ 11/14/2008 6:19:11 PM

        How nice, now that you are not a republican, you are a-ok by Doc's standards.

        • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 6:35:43 PM

          Correct. I'd rather have him inside the tent peeing out, than outside peeing in, as the man said.

  • Posted By: tristen @ 11/14/2008 1:02:04 AM

    We need to let certain buisness fail...if they go under so be it...if one of the Bgi 3 go under so be it....if unions go under all the better bassically speaking...where is it written that poorly run buisness where employees are clearly over paid...where Management steals off the profits...if promised to be bailed out by our Constitution....bailing out > becoming part owners of badly run or non needed buisnesses is a beginning blueprint for the economic system of the Old Soviet Union...Germany of the 30's and so on...

    • Posted By: DoctorDavid @ 11/14/2008 1:14:14 AM

      Tristen, quit blaming everything on the Unions. No question that the Union charters need to be re-written, but the companies that caused this problem are not Unionized. Unions protect workers, a good thing judging from the greed of management, although they can certainly become greedy as well. Giving more enforcement power to the Mediation Board is one step.
      The Unions have become a favorite scapegoat for people like you, but they are only a small part of the problem.

      • Posted By: TheVigil @ 11/14/2008 6:32:05 AM

        The unions are a huge part of Detroit's problem. The pension demands could bankrupt the Big Three by themselves. I fully believe that the tendency of unregulated capitalism to eat out the larger economy and become cancerous is the major problem here, but don't underestimate the contribution of the unions to the auto industry crisis. I have family in Detroit, and I've heard a lot of local discussions about the problem from people I respect who think that unions are a wonderful thing but that the auto industry's relationship with its own unions is no longer healthy. Unions are rather less involved with the other crises, I think - not sure if the Teamsters figure into the subprime crisis or not.

        In the interest of full disclosure here, I have to say I've been very wary of unions ever since I stopped in a deli once, ordered a piece of cake, and had to wait for the server on duty to go get the cook because union regulations prevent the store from allowing anyone but a cook to handle a sharp knife.

        ANY ideology can go too far. What we need is a balance between labor and management. History's rife with corrupt businesses and corrupt guilds as well (guilds being a historical counterpart to the modern union). To put it bluntly, any time any one group gets too powerful, there are going to be abuses, enabling, etc.

        I keep almost mistyping "Detriot". Might be more accurate, though.

        • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 9:14:19 AM

          " The unions are a huge part of Detroit's problem."

          No, the problem is that they make crappy cars. And last time I heard, the unions weren't on the design team.

          • Posted By: valark @ 11/14/2008 6:22:29 PM

            The unions are an issue. A huge one as far as where the money goes.

    • Posted By: nimodahooligan @ 11/14/2008 12:06:47 PM

      do you actually KNOW anything about what you speak of? or just what you HEAR and take as facts... delve into some history books, some economics books, and sociological books and come back next semester ready for the test...

    • Posted By: Doc Howl @ 11/14/2008 9:13:36 AM

      "....if unions go under all the better bassically speaking"

      Could you repeat that in English, please?

  • Posted By: RO in Reno @ 11/14/2008 5:41:25 PM

    Well if we leave wages, health care and pensions up to the Republicans, everyone would be working for minimum wage or less, and those who did not die early from some job related accident I suppose we euthanize at 65 or earlier if for some reason they can no longer work?
    That should take care of a lot of problems.
    Health care? We don't need it
    Retirement, now obsolete
    Housing we don't need it no one can afford a house anyway.
    These people who think the problems in America are caused by a decent wage, health care and retirement are themselves the real problem.
    So tell me again you are a compassionate what?

  • Posted By: Republican Mouse @ 11/14/2008 5:12:36 PM

    So why talk about Barack as saving Capitalism? He doesn't want Capitalism, doesn't believe in it, never will. The American people just stepped into their own hole, giving the Democrats total and ultimate power. We will see efforts to turn the US into a Socialist state, if not Marxist. And with your "savior" Obama promising an Executive Branch security force equal in strength to the Armed Forces - hmmm....Sounds like Germany in the 30's to me. Well, this is what you asked for. Lucky for me I can afford to leave the country if it gets too bad.

  • Posted By: dmorris@cebridge.net @ 11/14/2008 5:10:09 PM

    How absurd is the title? Obama to save capitalism. Obama to save the environment. Obama saves the world! This is comical.

  • Posted By: cbohanon @ 11/14/2008 4:53:22 PM

    Hirsch is apparently unaware that in 1931 the federal government increased the maximum marginal tax rate from 25% to 63%. The Hoover Administration was certainly not taking advice from the "free market absolutist" playbook!

  • Posted By: PhocHew @ 11/14/2008 4:47:12 PM

    Obama can fix anything.

    All HE has to do is say it and it is done.

    Isn't that why HE got elected?

  • Posted By: PhocHew @ 11/14/2008 4:46:02 PM

    Obama can save anything!!!

    All HE has to do is say it and it is done.

    Isn't that why HE got elected?

  • Posted By: jefyuaz @ 11/14/2008 4:44:20 PM

    first 100 days saved the nation? Hardly. We had 17% unemployment in 1940. The New Deal did enact some worthwhile social programs, such as social security, but it did not bring back the economy.

  • Posted By: wilsan @ 11/14/2008 4:35:06 PM

    This is the usual Newsweek liberal spin & bias. Mr. Hirsh is his usual, Bombastic clueless self, and between the two of them are trying to 'spin' everything to make Obama "the Great Savior".

    Doesn't this rag have any self respect.? It should go out of print... and get off the net.

    Obama is not going to 'save' Capitalism. Obama is going to be doing good to 'save' himself. The entire lineup of Obama/Pelosi/Reid/Frank/Rangel/Dodd are corrupt leftovers from the 1980's... And don't have a clue as to how to save Capitalism. Watch how they want to bailout Detroit.

    Their answers so far are to raise income taxes on some "guess amount" income, drive up the cost of oil by not drilling, drive up the cost of american cars by supporting $80/hr UAW wages & benefits, get rid of the 401K savings program, and bail out "their friends".

    And as for Michael Hirsh... This disgraced 'journalist' is the one that still thinks that there were no consequences to Losing Vietnam... Absolutely useless, clueless, disgraceful hack Democratic writer.

  • Posted By: sieg6529 @ 11/14/2008 4:12:46 PM

    Everyone stop pretending that we ever lived in a pure capitalist society. It has always been mixed market and it always will be.

  • Posted By: outpostus @ 11/14/2008 4:05:06 PM

    Capitalism is a formula for human economic growth. To ask if it can be saved is like asking if the rule of Pythagoras can be saved. As the Scarecrow said upon receiving his diploma from the Wizard of Oz, "The sum of the square roots of any two sides of an isosceles triangle is equal to the square root of the remaining side." Can Obama save that?

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse