'Directly Threatened My Client' Over Chrysler Bankruptcy Plan

[barackwards]

wheres the birth certificate?

You promised transparency

Make your records tranparent.

Every other pres had to..you must show proof..make it happen.

[dodgechryslersucks]

A multi-billion dollar corporation purchased Chrysler (Cerberus) and they have REFUSED to invest any of THEIR OWN BILLIONS into Chrysler, THE COMPANY THEY PURCHASED. How is that possible?

[SucceedsAtWill]

greed=success....only poor people who don't get it think it is a bad thing

[DW8814]

The new Government does'nt need to follow the law because you know its doing what is right for the people...even if that means destroying people and the contracts that people who invested money into companies.....imagine if Bush did this.

[toldyousohaha]

Hey assholes. Get it straight. UAW is not going to be fucked out of what they have coming just to further line the pockets of the greedy rich. You dumb fucks LOST in Nov, and to the victors go the spoils.

And anybody who wants to make an issue of that can take it up with those we'll send to adjust your attitude. That's how it works, so quit crying like babies and accept the way things are. There is NOTHING you ca do; be glad to get anything at all.

HAHAHAHAHA Eat Shit!

[GTnumber1]

It's people like you that eventually reveal yourselves to be what you really are..Onetracked, closed-minded yobbos..What this entire fuss boils down to is that most of the yobbos in this world simply can't handle the fact that a smart,"COLOURED" individual is now in charge of the greatest nation on this planet.. So all you yobbos will try your best to tarnish the "coloured" leader's image..I KNOW AND ALL YOU YOBBOS HERE KNOW THAT'S THE HONEST TRUTH AND DON'T YOU DENY IT.

[OverlordShamala]

Wrong, you want to limit the issue to a racial thing. That way you can scream "Racism!" if someone disagree with President Obama ideas. You don't want no dialoged, just ramyour ideas down peoples throat AND THAT IS THE HONEST TRUTH.

He is smart but he sounds too socialist to me. Like "Social Justice" & "Fair Economy", words used by communist dictators.

The way he plans to shackle the US economy will bring the greates nation to its knees.

[OverlordShamala]

Realize this, the "Onetracked, closed-minded yobbos" fits you just perfectly. The only rebuttal you have to refute our opposition or difference of opinion to the President Obama is to accuse scream racsim. Thats all you got and nothing else.

[rickinnev]

If this doesn't open your eyes to this total rogue prez..that is so stricken with his power and control..wake the hell up people, this bastard is the number one enemy of the United States.

[chick5581]

I heard about this video! my friends were talking about it for some reason. haha I finally decided to watch this youtube pretty cool

[hawanja]

The Government controls 8% of Chrysler.

Total Bullshit.

[daddiosgarage]

the government should not have been involved until chrysler was in bankruptcy court, its that simple

the bush administration had no respect for human rights or civil liberties

the obama administration has no respect for the rule of law and contracts

[hawanja]

The contracts are unjust, and should be renegotiated. This is within the power of the Federal government to do so. So far no laws have been broken.

Not like, you know, telling lies to start a war or anything, like some president's I could name.

[daddiosgarage]

that is what a bankruptcy court sorts out

it is unlawful to break a contract just because it is unjust

it is against the unlawful and unjust to threaten investors with actions by the federal government just because they don't do what they are told by the WH

i am not an investor in the stock market, but i think it is in our best interest to see the rule of law remain

and btw, bush is ancient history

[OverlordShamala]

Thanks, you stole my thunder. But you did a better job of explaining it.

I own stocks, not much. But it is something.

What Obama did is scary. Using the press core to destroy the reputation of an organization? I always assumed Limbaugh is a blow-hard but that he's right. The press is

I lost lots of money in the chrisler stock, now I'm been told I'm greedy?

I'm Cuban descent & I know communism.

[hawanja]

5 months ago is ancient history, yeah ok. Too bad we're still dealing with that "ancient history." Just don't forget why everything's so fucked up now, and who's fault it really is.

BTW, I didn't say the contracts should be "broken," I said "renegotiated," which is perfectly legal, and as the arbitrator when megaconglomerates such as these declare bankruptcy it is within the federal governments power to do so. So far I don't see how exactly the rule of law is not being respected.

[daddiosgarage]

here is an analogy of my understanding of this situation:

you are my neighbor and in financial trouble, i offer to loan you $1000 as long as i'm the first one to get paid when you get a job, we sign a contract so i'm not lumped in with everyone else if you file BK

you file BK, i offer to take $500 to wipe out the debt and your uncle calls to tell me he'll call the newspaper and tell everyone i'm an asshole unless i reduce the debt to $200

as a result, i don't help out our other neighbor

[hawanja]

Take your situation, and instead let's pretend you employ 50,000 people, and your going out of business would affect 3 million jobs. Then someone sells credit default contracts for billions of dollars more than what your company is worth, so that a slight downturn in the economy has a rippling affect that threatens to put you out of business.

That's what's going on, This isn't a "contract" like you describe. It's a whole industry in crisis. Not as simple as the Radio assholes tell you it is.

[holder2k]

What you stated was true "I didn't say the contracts should be "broken," I said "renegotiated," which is perfectly legal, and as the arbitrator when megaconglomerates such as these declare bankruptcy it is within the federal governments power to do so."

The renegotiation should be mutual between the two parties. However, they are one sided only, WH is doing what ever they wish through threats and humiliation. People are being strong armed, without respect for law. I don't call this true renegot

[hawanja]

Well, I don't feel so bad about a bunch of speculators buying inflated credit default swaps, who would force 50,000 jobs to go down the toilet so they can collect on investments anyone with a brain could have told you were bad. Not getting much sympathy from me.

But anyway, true there may be some strongarming going on, but I still don't see how the law is being broken. This is within the Federal government's power, and in fact is what they are there for.

[SucceedsAtWill]

defamation of character IS AGAINST THE LAW, BLACKMAIL is against the law...you want me to go further? fuckin idiot

[hawanja]

Sorry, it's not defamation of character when it's true. This situation is not blackmail either. It's called "strong arming," as in negotiating, twisting someone's arm, etc. Shrewd? Yes. But not illegal.

[hawanja]

And by the way, you sue someone for defamation of character. It's not "against the law." I can't go to prision for calling you a fucking retarded inbred mutant nincompoop in public. You can try to sue me for it, if you think you have a case.

[SucceedsAtWill]

defamation of character is a harassment and harassment is against the law. its not a criminal law its a civil law

[hawanja]

You can't be "against" civil law, numbnuts. You can "violate" civil law, but then it is up to you to enforce that violation through the courts, by suing someone.

Thus, I am still correct when I say "No Laws have been broken."

QED, bitch.

[SucceedsAtWill]

harassment is a charge in any court jack ass. you don't know shit and your president is a terrorist, traitor and a liar

[hawanja]

He's also democratically elected, for the first time in a decade. So far he hasn't broken any laws whatsoever, unlike our last president.

BTW, in this case, which is alerting the media as to how a group of investors would rather see Chrysler go bankrupt and for 50,000 people to lose their jobs rather than take a hit, that's not "harassment" nor "Defamation of character." It's not even libel, becasue it's TRUE.

And FYI, harassment is a charge in a CIVIL court, you stupid fuck.

[OverlordShamala]

Can you explain what civil liberties we have lost under the Bush administration? Always been told that Bush violated my rights, so which ones?

I can buy a gun... I no longer go to the airport because of long lines, so I rent a car & i'm gone. Best thing I ever done driving to my destination. Things you miss when you fly over the states.

Now violation of human rights... for terrorists? The hell with them. We were too nice with them. You want to know torture? Get lock up in a Cuban prison.

[daddiosgarage]

yes, i appreciate a good question

you can google "bush civil rights" and read about it for yourself

i don't believe in the laundry list of rights violations, most of it is a stretch in my view

but its clear that bush subverted the fourth amendment because it is inconvenient, it is not difficult for the government to get a search warrant and they should do that

[OverlordShamala]

I've already googled "Bush Civil Rights" or "Bush Civil Rights violations". The sites I visited are very general and can easiy fit any presidident.

You may be referring when some groups were upset that Bush was after Arab terrorist here & abroad. For many of these human-right activist considered it is racial profiling, but ignoring the fact or rejecting the fact most terrorists are young or middle age male Arabs.

[OverlordShamala]

Bush subverting the 4th amendment? No, the part unreasonable searches and seizures if you notice the word unreasonable and it has been used to tap phone line of middle easterns making call to certain countries suspected of harboring terrorists. Whats more Obama has not shut down the program, rumors is his going to use it to spy his detractors.

[OverlordShamala]

Now that Janet Napolitano has declared people like me ARE terrorists, even thou she refused to declare terrorist these Arab extremist groups and has come up with a new term Man-made-disasters for a terrorist act.

[hawanja]

Sure thing. Since the president has the power to declare anyone an enemy combatant, including American citizens, like Jose Padilla for instance, conceivably you could lose ALL of your rights.

And now Obama has this power, as in if one of these stupid brainless teaparty rallies gets too uppity for his tastes, he can declare them all enemy combatants and throw them into the gulag. No lawyers, no trials, no nothing, and it's perfectly legal.

Now isn't that comforting to know...

[OverlordShamala]

Jose Padilla was arrested for being for working with Al-qaeda. Still I have to research it again to discuss about him.

Now about Obama... Hmmm... Who knows what he will do. But Obama has insinuated too many of times that he views the Bill of Rights & the constitution antiquated, & has professed his desire to change them.

In one of the many speaches during his run, he said that the Constitution will get in his way to "help the people".

GO figure what he really meant by that!

[hawanja]

Yes, he was working with Al Queda. He is also an American citizen. Remember all that bullshit about the Patriot act only applying to foreigners? Guess they lied to us, huh? Doesn't matter how despicable you are, if you're a citizen then you get those rights automatically. Except now the President, by himself, has the power to take them away.

We told you people about this shit when Bush was president, but you were all too busy waving yellow fucking flags to notice.

[OverlordShamala]

Here's one on YouTube:v=11OhmY1obS4. That's the 9/6/91 interview with Chicago radio station WBEZ/FM.

He has also stated that he will select judges that "ought to decide cases in light of the empathy they ought to feel for the little guy in any lawsuit". He has also said courts didn't break free from the constraints that were placed by the constitution.

Empathy & not justice or constitutional law, should be the mission of the federal courts, along with the redistribution of wealth.

[hawanja]

Thanks for the link. The "Fundamental Flaw" he's referring to is social and economic justice, which he's right about. The Constitution doesn't correct for that.

For your second point, I totally agree with him too. I would like judges to decide in favor of the little guy also. Like say, when someone goes up against large corporations.

These are the reasons I and others voted for him, sorry if you don't like it. But they don't make him a traitor or dictator.

[hawanja]

Btw, can you tell me when exactly Obama has said the bill of rights are antiquated? Like post a link somewhere? Because I want to check that out.

[OverlordShamala]

Yes, Padilla is an american citizen, still wonder why they haven't charged him also for treason yet. Strange don't you think? Or is it because we're too nice... I guess.

So... the Patric Act? Never saw that they lied other that many UCLA complained bcause the govnmt tap phone lines to communication to certain countries.

Supposedly the Patriot Act violates our right. I ask always, and they are?

[hawanja]

Argh... Jose Padilla is an American Citizen. His rights were taken away - All of them. Doesn't that matter? Does that at all in the slightest bit worry you?

Yet you're more worried that they might make some radio assholes tell the other side of the story in their stupid fucking brainwashing "shows?" Do you actually think that the fairness doctrine is an abuse of power but the Patriot Act is A-OK?

Please tell me this isn't so, if it is I cannot continue this conversation. Too fucking stupid.

[OverlordShamala]

No, it doesn't. His a traitor & I'm surprised that he hasn't been charged for treason. He hasn't lost any rights. He was charged, a lawyer represents him and had his day in court. That he lost his rights is a fantasy made up by some people.

The Fairness Doctrine is an abuse of power. They don't like what they are saying int the radio so to control it, pass a law that makes it hard to practice that right. I bet that is okay for you isn't it?

[hawanja]

He was held for 3 1/2 years without being charged. All of his rights were taken away, becasue he was classified as an enemy combatant. They finally put him to trial thanks to the ACLU. Funny how I didn't see no conservative groups making any noise about that. If it was not for them Padilla would still be rotting in a navy brig right now.

The fairness doctrine was formerly a law. Funny how Eisenhower, Kennedy, or any of the other presidents in the 20th century didn't have a problem with it.

[OverlordShamala]

Go cry me a river about Padilla.

I'm still surprised why he wasn't charged for treason. He was an enemy combatant, like the NAZI & Japanese POWs captured during WW2, they were held for the duration of the war without trial. ( Unless they commited some war-crime.)

[OverlordShamala]

And what about the Patriot Act. No one has explained the rights we lost under it. Beside the so called telephone tapping thing. No one can clearly define and neither have you: What rights have we lost?

About being to fucking stupid, your talking to yourself. Here you are, running out what to say & quickly resorting to insults. That's being smart for you isn't it?

[hawanja]

All rights were lost under the Patriot act. Know why? Because the President, at his sole discretion without any input from anyone, can declare anybody an enemy combatant. That means you lose all your rights.

And I was saying this conversation is fucking stupid, becasue you think making radio morons tell both sides of the story is more important than LOSING THE ENTIRE BILL OF RIGHTS. What is the matter with you people?

Maybe I'll make a video and try to explain it to you, real slow.

[OverlordShamala]

President, at his sole discretion without any input from anyone... That is what you said. Which is quite different from reality, come back down to Earth buddy. it never happened but I know it sounds good for a mantra.

The stupid morons own their stations, if you want to here morons tell your side of the story. Well... support those radios stations. Like the one Al Fraken had in Air America Radio's. Or how about Alan Colmes, or Howard Stern, great liberals.

[hawanja]

Yes, at the President' sole discretion. That's what the law says. You can download it and read it. The president gets to declare anyone he wants, including American citizens, as enemy combatants, for any reason whatsoever. And don't say it didn't happen, becasue it did - to Jose Padilla. Yeah big whoop you say, but he's an American citizen. Doesn't matter if he's a terrorist, he is entitled to a trail - the Constitution says he gets one. Yet none of the conservatives seemed to give a shit.

[OverlordShamala]

Why so much emphasis with Padilla? He was proven to be an enemy combatant & a terrorist, reason he was detained. Held as a POW, as it has happened before during WW1 & WW2. My opinion he should've been charge with treason also... my opinionon that last one.

The president can't declare anyone he want as an enemy combatant. THAT is a lie. It never happened. You read that law wrong. Unless you read a twisted version in some conpsiracy peddling website like Alex Jones or David Icke.

[hawanja]

I'm emphasizing him becasue he was an American citizen who's rights were taken away. He was held for 3 1/2 years without being charged. They never would have charged him at all if the the ACLU didn't sue. Doesn't matter that he was a terrorist. Charles fucking Manson gets a trial, but this guy doesn't?

You asked which rights were taken away, I told you all of them and used Padilla as an example. The president can legally do this to anyone he wants to. Does this not matter to you at all?

[hawanja]

The president CAN declare anyone an enemy combatant. Yes he can. The Patriot act specifically expands the definition of terrorism to include domestic terrorism - which basically means any type of civil disturbance that they don't like. I suggest you read up on the 2006 Detainee Bill and do some googles on Unlawful enemy combatants, specifically American citizens which have been declared thus. Jose Padilla is not the only one you know.

Remember Obama has this power now.

[OverlordShamala]

The best way to get both side of the issue is watching FoxNews; which is more conservative, and CNN, NBC, ABC, which is more liberal, while CBS seems to be more in the middle. I also watch, thanks that I know a little Spanish, Mexican news station & BBC, & English version of France24, which you can get a good idea what the world think of us. Thats how you can get a good balance. Now what is the agenda of the American news station? I hope you dont come back its Jewish controlled.

[OverlordShamala]

Boy, why shouldn't the president include domestic terrorism? Is domestic terrorsim not as bad as foreign terroristism? Hope you don't belone to some KKK or ALF/ELF group that think what they do is okay.

Civic distrubance? Boy there have been a lot since the bush presidency. Even had a scuffle with one of these snot-nose-know-nothing-brats after they heaviy damaged my car. They get arrested by the police when caught.

Civic distrubance isn't terrorism, it is a criminal offence, alway been.

[OverlordShamala]

Obama has the power now. Well that woman Janet Napolitano did catch my attention after her report what is terrorism. I fit some of her categories: I believe in gun-rights, not totally there with abortion(but I am flexible), immigration (I'm hispanic decent, go figure), & I don't agree with some of Obama's policies!

Yeah, I can see that it raised some eye-browse.

[OverlordShamala]

You don't make morons tell both side of the story. THAT IS A VIOLATION OF THEIR RIGHTS. THE GOVERNMENT TELLING YOU WHAT YOU CAN & CAN'T SAY IS A VIOLATION.

Exlpain what? That you have no understaning of the bill but so good of repeating old overused clishes?

Eisenhower, Kennedy, & other presidts didn't have any problem with it because their was no such thing of talk radio to begin with. It wasn't noticed it was a violation until the mid70s when the 1st talk radio. Stern was affected by it

[hawanja]

When you run a mass media institution, your right to free speech is tempered with the public good. This is why the FCC can fine you for swearing, or showing Janet Jackson's titties, or whatever.

Until recently (like 4 years ago or so) corporations were not allowed to "lie," as in they were not allowed to use PR to present information they knew not to be true. Now they can, thanks to the Bush Supreme court.

to be continued...

[OverlordShamala]

What determines what is a lie? Yet the radio talk show host aren't reporting. Like you said, it is not news. Who ever said that an opinion is news. Where did you get that? They have their shows to give their opinion, if it's wrong or right doesn't matter. The reason it is called an opinion & the governemnt violating the right to express your opinion IS unconstitutional.

[hawanja]

Look man, obviously you really have no idea about any of this stuff. I suggest you stop watching TV and stop trusting cable TV news stations, who obviously have an agenda, and obviously are feeding you bullshit. If you really can't tell that Fox, CNN, NBC, and the like have agendas, if you really can't see the reason why it is in yours and the public's best interest to get both sides of an issue, then I really can't help you.

And read up on Unlawful enemy combatants.

[OverlordShamala]

How do U consider a report bullshit, if you don't like what's being reported, it's bullshit? The report of a plane crashing with casualty is that bullshit?

I have "no idea" of what stuff? Please elaborate, I have the time.

Now the president arresting american civilian without cause is a myth I read the report more then once. You are either seeing something that's not there or you read a mangled version of the report in some conspiracy peddling website like Alex Jones or David Icke

[hawanja]

It is the president's sole discretion to declare who is an enemy combatant. I said go read up on the Detainee act of 2006. You obviously didn't do that else you wouldn't be asking this question.

You know why "liberals" always resort to insults? Because you people make it so easy. I've already told you what to look up, can't help you any further.

[OverlordShamala]

Promise to read it up.

[OverlordShamala]

So basically, it really doesn't matter if the opinion is wrong. You can counter it, by calling them & surprise they do accept callers that don't agree with say Rush. More then once, one caller has made the host blow a gasket. Quite funny.

Or you can counter their opinion by listening with Colmes & he does his job. Are you going to have Al Franken, Colms, Stern for that matter, forcing them to give "both side", or is it going to be limited only to the shows YOU DON'T like? That's fairness?

[hawanja]

... continued

A news program however is under an ethical imperative to tell the truth. They don't have the luxury of lying to the general public under the guise of "free speech." That's why newspapers print retractions when they're wrong. They have journalistic integrity to uphold. The Editorial section is where they get "Free speech," however it is in the public's best interest to get both sides of the story, else you get people like William Randolf Hearst and the like.

[hawanja]

Last comment, becasue this has gone on for far too long.

Anyway, it was understood in the 1930s, which was when the fairness doctrine was passed, that those companies which own the media may have their own agendas, and such agendas needed to be tempered for the public good.

What we have today is the exact opposite of what it used to be like. I really suggest you read up on this issue, and don't just believe what some fat drug addicted loud mouth says about it.

[OverlordShamala]

Finally, how are you going to determine if the host is "telling the truth"? Or is the truth going to be based solely that their opinion a host express is the truth as long as you agree with it?

Clear channel i know has drop some liberal talk show host. But likewise HBO always give only liberal opinions in documentaries. So to who are you going to enforce the law? Both or just on only one?

[hawanja]

Arrrghhh... These people would not be affected at all, becasue the law would only affect NEWS PROGRAMS. Rush Limbaugh would not be affected, but the Fox News channel would. They would essentially be forced to stop spouting bullshit and like, rely on journalistic integrity instead of inflaming hatred. That's a much better example than Rush of a News program which lies to people. It is in the public interest for a news program to provide both sides of an issue.

[OverlordShamala]

Finally... What is economic justice, what is social justice?

Is economic justice about taking away more from the ones that work more? Communism has never worked.

Social justice is about punishing someone because he had an ancestor that did a wrong in the past?

What is the point of having a constitution if it will be violated because the judge decides to make a decision that will violate the right of one group because he felt sorry for another group? Is that social justice?

[hawanja]

No, it's about honest people doing an honest day's work getting a fair wage and not having their job shipped to another country, house foreclosed, or bank shut down becasue of some greedy speculator. It's about not starting wars to enrich a small group of thieves. It's about all groups being treated equally. Why do you think all these hateful laws get struck down? Could it be becasue they're unconstitutional in the first place?

Republicans used to care about this shit, what the hell happened?

[OverlordShamala]

Can you explain the so called small group of thieves that got rich in a war? Is it some straw man you invented so you can knock it down? What hateful laws got struck down. Another cliche?

When you try to bring fairness to people, it usually means crushing & destroying other people. History is chuck full of government trying to bring "fairness" by fiat to one group of people, with the terrible result of punishing & destroying another group of people.

[OverlordShamala]

Individual has succesfully gone against large corporation & judges making ruling against the corporations because the corporation has violated laws. Not because the judge felt sorry for the little guy.

Using power of the government (that's what makes a dictator) to take away money & "redistribute" it. Killing inovation, killing motivation & killing to do better. One of the reason socialism has failed & history to back it up.

Instead of a rebuttal, what insult are you going to hurl at me?

[OverlordShamala]

Either way, you have redefine "Fairness" to be: If it isn't ONLY MY WAY, then it should me silenced or forced into change by governmental fiat.

The constitution doesn't not guaranty to hear "both sides of the story" nor does it protects you from being offended. The 1st amendment protects the right of the individual of the freedom of free expression.

But then again, you may have conviniently redefined what IS freedom of free expression... My way or the HIghway...

[hawanja]

First off, what would be wrong with reinstituting the Fairness Doctrine exactly the way it was before Regan took it away? Is there something wrong with requiring news programs from telling both sides?

FYI, people like Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Rielly are not "News," and thus their programs would not be affected. Rush would not be forced to tell the liberal side. The station he is on would be required to host a liberal talk show.

Now, how exactly is that not in the public interest?

[OverlordShamala]

I've heard Rush, I agree with some of his opinions, lets say 60% and disagree with others, especially in regards in science. He doesn't understand science so he has no respect for it so he is wrong. But it is still his opinion. Not news. Or you can't tell the difference between news & an opinion?

[OverlordShamala]

He has been making hints about the constitution during some of his speeches. But I have to look these up.

So we have examples of the so called "Fair Doctrine" to silence radio stations & their hard stance against the 2nd amendment. Or the 10 amendment.

Having the book Communist Manifesto slapped across my face by my teacher when I didn't agree with some of the tenants, I don't like what Obama is doing at all.

[OverlordShamala]

I know that Bush has done some pretty stupid thing and has done questionable things but the Democrats have always worried me.

Example: Their so called Fair Doctrine, many attempts of gun control. And the control they have on the media like CNN, NBC, ABC, HBO many documentary specials. And all of them are afraind of one station: FoxNews.

Go figure!

[lsmdesign]

This is criminal. You can't threaten a company...I don't care WHO you are. Someone better investigate who delivered this message to this guy's client.

[ecmcomichael]

NObama is such a liar and hypocrite.During the presidential campaign at the Saddleback Church interviews,NObama said he felt one purpose of the supreme court was to "reign in" the (renegade Bush) presidency.How interesting, now that he's president (it pains me to say those words),he's been more of a renegade than Bush ever thought about being.And will the left-leaning supreme court ever reign this bastard back in?Repeal of the 22nd Amendment?When will you sleepers awaken?This nightmare must end!

[ecmcomichael]

Remember, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. You Kool-Aid drinking NObama fools, in corroboration with the leftist media, the vast majority of Hollywood, and the leftist education system in our nation, have empowered this no-good crook to feel brazen enough to do anything he wants. And you fools sit back and say, "well, it doesn't affect me. He's just trying to do his job." That's what many German citizens said about Hitler as well. Wake up, you NObama fools!

[ecmcomichael]

Wow! Love the comments!Remember, the government big enough to give you everything you want is also big enough to take everything you have. The leftist media thugs have swept this under the carpet and, like the so-called "training mission" (what bull ****) of Air Force One over NYC, they continue to show their hypocrisy. And for you citizens who don't see the hypocrisy, you're part of the problem and you've consumed way too much NObama Kool-Aid.You'd better be very afraid of what's coming, fools.

[lynxlea]

Why our American investors have to use their pension funds, have to use their tax to support those lazy bones in UAW to earn $78/hour?

[elijah5791]

Frightening!

For all the critics who, for the past eight years, were so vocal in their opposition to the Bush/Cheney administration; who were relentless in their efforts to magnify every perceived infraction to the status of a Watergate style cover-up; who were so quick to highlight every instance where there was a perceived abuse of executive power; to them I say, "Where are you now?"

Here we have a clear cut abuse, by President Obama, of his power, and very REAL grounds for impeachment!

[pattipage12]

If I were in your position I would never accept the state in my busines full stop. . Once you do business with the tyrant ...

[jcomd]

Just read "Atlas Shrugged"..... and ...shrug! Remember, when americans have a bad year...they lose their 401(k). When others in the world have a bad day, they starve. The present administration wants us to "starve" so as to increase our dependency. (and their power)

[siuwahchan]

The corporations need to break their bank no matter what. If the corporations can no longer survive, could the working men and women survive on their own?

[BostonTPartyagain]

seems the Obama regime has been FORCING every corp. they target to "take the cash" and shut up. The banks, like Wells Fargo, were FORCED to accept the $, and then 'cooperate' with Bush and now Obama! They DON'T WANT IT, and yet are not even allowed to return it? You are witnessing a government takeover of private banks and corporations! In other words: COMMUNISM! "Change You can not stop -if you know what's good for you-"??!!

[timetoregroup2008]

I am a small potatoe in the big pot of mashed potatoes. But I cannot afford to lose what I have, not even 50%, because this is part of my nest egg. But this maniacal "administration" is killing investment in this country, and soon I will not be alone. And the investments that do survive will be taxed away. I have never been so afraid. I hope everyone who listens to this passes this on. This president is horrific.

[32271q]

This is precisely in accord with the "principles of Propaganda" formulated by Joseph Goebbels for Hitler's rise to absolute power. The only question is, "who is really pulling the strings for Obama with our Civil Ministry of Propaganda (the mainstream broadcast, print, and cable media)" ?

The fascist Marxist must go - the sooner the better, before he totally destroys the US.

[behonest47]

George Soros

[kennyp23]

Petty Chicago thugs like the Union thugs they represent...why would you expect them to act any differently

Obama Lied and Freedom Died