What honeymoon?

[YouJudgeTV]

Is this company really a conservative plant, pretending to be "progressive?" Or is Obama's criticism so dead on true that even when someone tried to ridicule it, the critics are proven over and over and over again. I've I were a conservative, I'd do it this way. Kind of like the weather balloon in Roswell.

[dmp079]

Yeah I would divorce that spouse, because that honeymoon already let the president know the right-wing and uninformative media was too much to marry.

[Sharpe3884]

Dude, that honeymoon sucked - Obama should get a refund for that shit.

[alexgomez2]

Great to see that the roles are turning as predicted! Obama has a blunderful VP, a House Speaker who is a liar, a democratic revolt that won't support his closing of Gitmo and a Senate Majority leader that is down in every poll. Thank heavens the Democrats are so inept and twice corrupt to be noticed this soon!

[migo53333]

and what did bush have?? youve got to be kidding!!!!

[alexgomez2]

He had a nation behind him, a congress that passed every bill he proposed and a VP who knew what he was talking about. Pres. Obama is taking two weeks to decide what to do with Afganistan, Pres. Bush knew that Bin Laden was in Afganistan and reacted immediately. Bush had something Obama doesn't have: GUTS!

[migo53333]

Bush had a nation behind him????? Thats pretty funny...are you talking about the same Bush who got elected because of the fixed electorals in Florida and Ohio?? or the guy who created the largest deicit in USA history and you guys blamed Obama the minute he was sworn in??

[migo53333]

Bush had a nation behind him??? Obama had a landslide victory Mr. alexgomez........

[migo53333]

maybe your talking about the Bush who was a cocaine and alcohol addict and got out of going to viet nam because of daddy......

[alexgomez2]

Yes, I'm talking of Bush the former alcoholic who changed his life over the corrupt Chicago politician who always speaks about everything and accomplishes nothing. The one who represented ACORN, and his mafia buddies.

[migo53333]

wow your pretty lame, after all the things i mentioned abouy junior you just comment on former alchoholic, he was the worst prez in US history.......and He is the reason for the mess we have today.....sorry, the truth hurts, the things you say about obama are only speculation amigo...

[alexgomez2]

I sound lame and you sound like Obama (and that to me would be a worse offense). You say Pres. Bush was the worse US President. #1. You must know very little of history, because the worse has been Carter with the worse hyperinflation in history, his poor handling of the Iran crisis which now Obama doesn't know how to face. In terms of mess you sound like Obama in the sense that you don't tell what you mean by mess. I wish you'd elaborate Mr. Obama (Mr. Ambiguity).

[migo53333]

Bush was the worst, he won by thrown elections...Florida and Ohio, and his list of corrupt situations overshadows all presidents combined.....i am not a democrat, i would have voted for ron paul, but they spun him (corruption) if you r going to compare character traits between the two including intelligence, obama wipes the floor with junior, who was only put in place to carry out the mideast agenda.....

[frymastermeat]

@alexgomez2 Someone says that Bush, who is hated the world over, is the worst president ever. This is a bold statement, yes, but your response is: "the worse has been Carter". Maybe Bush is not the worst ever, but saying Carter is just unbearably retarded.

[alexgomez2]

@frymastermeat - What's your point? You mean that Carter wasn't the worst president in last half of last century? If that's what you mean I'd love to explain in what sense referring to Carter is "unbearable retarded."

[kola04]

Most of these clips are from Fox News, though.

[alexgomez2]

Right! But there are political commentators from far left MSNBC actually agreeing with the right oriented FOX commentators. Guys, even Pres. Clinton was unhappy with Obama´s initial handling of the ëconomic catastrophe", that should tell you enough. Funny that the billions he injected into GM won´t save it from bankrupcy. Every economist advised to let that and othre companies go bankrupt but he wanted to protect unions and create a "Robin Hood-like" legacy. Didn´t work!!

[jayhawker53]

there was never a honeymoon.

[01017400]

people whats really wrong with socialism?actually its better then where America now...if u don't believe just come to any scandinavian country...opps that was foxxxxxxxxxx!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[alexgomez2]

What;s wrong with socialism? See Cuba my friend and by the way this is also for you.

"I'm affraid you need to watch again this video as several clips in it come from pro-liberal networks MSNBC and CNN. It's curious that even commentators in the left are realizing the way Pres. Obama is taking this country. Document yourself and see the light my friend."

[01017400]

yea i have seen Cuba,its not a bad country..hospital and medicine r almost free.. women educated rate more then USA,yes they r poor....don't forget 45 years of sanctions by us!!and most good thing about Cuba is it have never attack any other country so fur. what u say my friend... document yourself...

[alexgomez2]

I have been to Cuba too and the high rate of education hasn't solved any of their problems. The embargo is a US embargo, not even the oil from Venezuela or the help from EVERY Latin American country and European allies have improved that impoverished nation. Free medicine hasn't turned Cubans into the healthiest people in the world and exporting doctors to Venezuela is not very good business. I'm affraid you don't know what you're talking about. You must live in limbo not to realize it!

[danielconlincumnock]

why the fuck are these cunts alive?

[schnips074]

Hell ya!! (but take "ONLY AMERICA" out cuz if other countries want to be just like America then they should be blessed too)

[nbk247]

Fox News rocks! why do you think CNN and MSNBC are in the shitter?! Cuz the only crap liberals watch are Bill Maher & Jon Stewart, and if you call that news then you are joke...just like the liberal media.

[Product1999]

how do you reconcile Fox news' high ratings vs Obama's national high favorability and the fact that he won the presidency

[dayingyang0]

People watch Faux News because it is fun to watch nut jobs. It's like gawking at accidents, people don't want to do it but they can't help themselves. Nothing on Faux News is actually presented in a journalist fashion, it's all propaganda and what makes it worse is that they constantly advertise that they're fair and balanced. Count the number of talking heads that are democrats on Faux News, and then tell me they're balanced reporting. O'Riely, Beck, Dick Morris, etc. No balance whatsoever.

[alexgomez2]

I'm affraid you need to watch again this video as several clips in it come from pro-liberal networks MSNBC and CNN. It's curious that even commentators in the left are realizing the way Pres. Obama is taking this country. Document yourself and see the light my friend.

[dayingyang0]

alex gomez, My comment had nothing to do with this clip. It was in response to a post by nbk247 that said Faux News rocks. You'll note however that none of the commentators on the left said anything about Obama going in the wrong direction. It was your right-wing nut jobs and Faux News that were making all the propaganda statements. Watching Faux News is like watching news in communist countries, it's so full of propaganda that you have to laugh, then you cry because so many people are fooled.

[m64h]

CNN: "Is the president of the US trying to brazenly deceive the American people?"

Well, if you mean by

- fixing false intel to justify invading Iraq

- claiming Iraq had WMDs

- wiretapping his own citizens without warrants

I'd have to say "yes" . . .

[FuckMcCainPalin]

I fucking hate FOX NEWS!

[ericmcbride]

SOCIALISM, COMMUNISM, RRRA RARARARAARAAA

WEALTH DESTRUCTION, FASCISM....

Seriously, why the hell do people watch FOX *ahem* "News"?

[7halffloppy]

American media is completely nuts. There was no outrage, in the meida, over Bush and certainly plenty to be outraged over. IF I'm outraged at anything its that President Obama is SO MODERATE.

The guy clearly favors incremental progress over time, rather than major changes.

[HateAllNazis]

o Israel has killed Americans (eg. Sailors on USS Liberty, Rachel Corrie, etc...)

o Israel spies on this country.

o Israel blackmails our corrupt politicians.

o Israel steals our taxes.

o Israel uses our country as their toilet.

For more info, click my UsedID then browse my informative Israel playlist.

Please distribute this post and tell your Senator and/or Representative about Israel's killing Americans, heinous crimes, stealing our taxes, and its spying on USA. Peace!

[kendrickdk]

I've noticed the rhetoric of corporate media get worse everyday. I wonder why they fear Obama so much?

[UTBESUX]

It's amazing to see CORPORATIONS DISGUISED as the Media spreading lies, talking points and deception. And attacks on people and race, groups etc. The part that even worse is dumb hate filled. brainwashed SHEEP like "3rdworldinvasion2" eat it up like a dick sucking Republican in a public men's room stall!

[renijohn012270]

Conservative Republi-con's NEED GOVERMENT= to give them the right to carry AK47's to church, to take away a womens right to choose what to do with her own body, to take away minority rights and affarmitive action, to poor billions of dollars into the military industrial complex, to deny marrige to gay people, to build fences to keep away illegal pot washers, to start wars and invade & occupy foreign lands, to elect right wing conservative judges to the supreme court. CONSERVATIVE HYPOCRISY?????

[bgh1338]

I think you need to learn a little bit more about the Constitutional Republic we live in. The GOVERNMENT doesn't give people the right to do anything. That would be this document called the CONSTITUTION.

[dudefrufru]

Damn..... if a republican believes all that then hell I guess I am one defending our freedons and our homes doesnt sound to bad for me. and neither does protecting our jobs but hey if you dont care I say get the hell out of america and go to china and see how you like it there

[3rdworldinvasion2]

Obama is an

I

D

I

O

T

[fjaos633]

Hyperinflation is coming to America just like in Zimbabwe. The Federal Reserve just can't keep printing trillions forever without a collapse in the US Dollar. Prepare your family and friends by having them visit: Inflation . us

[ahhmedx]

This is why I hate Republicans. They will not cooperate or work with democrats. All they do is screams "COMMUNIST, COMMUNIST!" Whenever a policy considered liberal is passed. They care more about preserving absolute and 100% capitalism - which is important yes, but every government has some socialist programs - then helping the american people.

[Joe402]

The liberal media does not exist if anything conservatives are lucky living in a country with an incompetent media.

[B4TT3RY]

Truth

[beatleapostle]

Great video!

[iron1215]

Oh don't worry. The majority of the media still gets a tingle down their leg when Obama speaks.

[reginacucina]

This reminds me of my first honeymoon - our jeep engine blew up in the middle of Kansas. Then after paying a small fortune for a new engine - five weeks later - a semi hit us on I-40 and it was totalled. True story. Maybe the metaphor is that we were both fine!

[flang]

Deregulation is a myth in the eyes of Republicans

[Girolahozz]

OH BILLY....

[Superplatanoman]

Honeymoon is over, and the aura has disappeared. That's what the media has been saying since March 2008.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

When you plan to spend over 2 trillion in 2 weeks, you don't get a honeymoon.

[flang]

When you make up numbers, you don't get paid attention to.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

Barack Obama will have a 2 Trillion deficit. He is already promising to spend over 4 Trillion not including Universal Healthcare.

[flang]

It's an estimated 1.8 trillion and it isn't in 2 weeks.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

What do you mean it isn't in two weeks. He signed all this in his first two weeks, and that doesn't even include Universal Healthcare.

[flang]

So by your logic, he plans on spending 3.6 trillion in 1 day once his budget is passed.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

You start from the day he took office, which is why he doesn't get a honeymoon.

[degraves2003]

Tell that to Bush 43. LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!

[jkrame3]

Sort of like how Bush's budgets didn't actually include the Iraq war or war in Afghanistan...

[bobhardball]

Do not wonder if the Liberals describe us as sore losers, HowTheWorldWorks. ´Cause your comments are stupid and moronic!!!

[degraves2003]

First of all the root cause is Bush's inability to manage the economy. His treasury department allowed all of theese bubbles to turn into a crisis and now someone has to pay for it. It is not Obama's fault he had to get a stimulus bill pass that many said was too small.

But I guess you support Republicans who like to rewrite history (especially Roosevelts). Did you see how fast they changed votes on that tax seizure bill. They are voting like short term traders which is not in U.S. interest.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

Look genius, this entire economic collapse was caused by government backed loans and loose credit, non of which had anything to do with Bush.

You're an economic illiterate.

[degraves2003]

LMAO... You know nothing about what happen. The collapse was cause by banks on wallstreet, the severity of the crisis was caused by deregulation and the repealation of the Glass-Steagal act. What happen was banks was given out bad loans (such as subprime mortages) and then selling them to a host of institutions often times borrowing over 16 times the amount of money they actually had. So when the bubble burse they were sitting on all those toxic loans and asset that they couldn't get rid of and.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

You ever stop and think why any Bank would want to borrow over 16 times the amount of money and take so much risk.

The answer is that the mortgages were guaranteed by the government genius.

[degraves2003]

Your definitely wrong becuase they borrowed that money against themselves. None of those loans were back by the government. The government didn't issue subprime loans, I know I'm in construction. Plus the government was talking about regulating subprime loans before the crisis.

Some banks even borrowed up to 32 times what they had on hand.

The reason they did it was because they were thinking short term profits. Eventually the market corrected it self and all those banks became worthless.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

You're not asking yourself the right questions, nor following the trail.

The question is on what basis would any sane person borrow up to 32 times what they had on hand? Normally, risk prevents this because the loss potential is so high.

Even if they were thinking short-term profits, you're still ignoring why was everyone doing the same insane thing all at once.

The reason is government backed loans guaranteeing the mortgaged backed securities and the Fed window at 1% making the loans cheap.

[degraves2003]

Because high risk means more money. The Financial sector was basically playing roullette with shareholders and investors money to gain a short term profits. The Fed reduce the interest rates so that the banks would still give out loans to businesses. None of the government back mortgages or loans are affected by the crisis just the majority of the ones in the financial sector.

Plus the Fed cuts and increase their rates to affect the economy. That has nothing to do w/ gov't back loans.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

What you are describing is like everyone in a Casino leaving the safer games they were playing and all of the sudden moving to the Roulette table to bet on 00 at once, and then you claiming that the problem is that there were no rules making betting on 00 illegal.

The question is why in the world did everyone at once move to Roulette and start betting on 00.

The Fed is what pushed everyone to the Roulette table because it was less expensive, and then the Casino guaranteed anyone betting on 00.

[degraves2003]

What the hell are you talking about. First of all your analogy doesn't make sense. All the banks move there because they thought they can make the most money there. An your absolutely right it was stupid to make that move which is why we need to regulate the market. Now nobody has money but the execs. If the Fed kept the rate flat then the market crisis would have just happen earlier because no one would've been giving out loans.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

Okay, you've just disqualified yourself from being taken seriously. Making money also has risk genius. You don't need to regulate businesses to prevent them from making their own companies collapse.

These were smart decisions they made, however, because the government backed the loans.

[degraves2003]

First of all saying that all money has risk is a copt out. Theese derivaties is like playing russian roullette. You need regulation to prevent crisis from coming to a point where you need to put trillions of dollars into the economy. If you considered rakeing in so much debt that millions of people are out of jobs, lost their pensions, retirement plans, and wealth. You don't even know what a government back loan is or what the Fed does or how the world works.

[degraves2003]

the institutions and people who invested in the banks lost all of their money.

AIG covered all of these bad loans and enable allot of these financial derivatives. - They lost big also. Your response shows how little you actually know about the economy.

Regulations could have prevented banks from over borrowing. And the G-S act would have prevented any bank from getting too big.

Don't give me anymore BS about backed loans and loose credit because that had nothing to do with the crisis.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

No they didn't lose all their money...the government bailed out Freddie / Fannie Bear Stearns etc.

No Act could have prevented any of this.

[degraves2003]

Yes they did. The Glass-Steagal Act would have prevented banks from becoming to big so that we wouldn't have to bail them out.

Freddi/ Fannie - subprime loans

Bear Stearns - toxic assets and derivatives.

Read your own post, why would we bail out a bank with money.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

If GSA was still in place, that wouldn't explain why all the mortgages were in the system. It also wouldn't have done anything to Freddie and Fannie nor Bear Stearns.

Your argument is like blaming a Plane crash on Gravity.

Without the Fed window at 1%, nobody makes these loans.

Without Freddie and Fannie essentially cosigning mortgages for people who could never pay it back, it gave the original incentive to repackage the mortgages.

[degraves2003]

Freddi/Fannie put the mortages in the system to make money because they have low teaser rates and when they rates increase they pretty much make more money then if they gave out regular mortages. M

My argument is not blaming the Plane Crash on Gravity (even thought that actually causes the plane to crash) I am blameing it on the pilot (the banks). And the Fed only reduce to 1% when the crisis hit not before. They were makeing theese loans well before then.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

You do realize that all mortgages essentially "cosigned" by Freddie and Fannie were backed by the government right?

[degraves2003]

Feddie and Fannie Mac carry no guarenttee that the government will repay or make up for bad loans. Look at the fine print. It is like saying the government put out bad milk because the FDA approves Dairy.

[degraves2003]

I realized that you don't know what you are talking about. The Government has no legal obligation to Freddie or Fannie Mac

[HowTheWorldWorks]

Okay, if you do not acknowledge that FM and FM were created by FDR, and have all their loans backed by the government, we cannot move forward in this discussion.

I refuse to debate someone as hopelessly uninformed as you.

[degraves2003]

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are founded by government but their loans and securities are not financially backed by government. Fannie Mae receives no direct government funding or backing; Fannie Mae securities carry no government guarantee of being repaid. This is explicitly stated in the law that authorizes GSEs, on the securities themselves, and in many public communications issued by Fannie and Freddie. Anymore questions.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

Yes they are, which is why you evidently have no idea how we got here.

[degraves2003]

Go and read the law. Just saying they are does not mean they are.

Freddie and Fannie only bought and package the loans anyway. You should be looking at real estate agencies and banks such as Citi and Country Wide Home Loans.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

Bye.

[degraves2003]

I think your confusion is comeing from not knowing what a sponsorship is. For example government sponsored and chartered Fannie and Freddi but the corporation themselves are publicly own. Freddie and Fannie are traded companies. Federal agencies like the Fed aren't traded institutions. I would encourage you to research or study up on some economics and FDR a little more before commenting on the current one. Bye.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

Oh just stop.

You're an intellectual lightweight who doesn't even understand the basic workings of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae.

These are basic facts genus; never did I say they weren't publicly owned. Not once. But, the government backed their loans genius.

You have no business even talking to me about this because you are hopelessly uniformed about the basic foundation of these entities.

[degraves2003]

Okay, tell me how much money did the government lose when Freddie and Fannie went under and the government didn't bail them out.?

Stop pretending that you know something.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

What?! By your very question your demonstrating your own ignorance.

FM and FM are publicly traded companies backed by the government.

If the government didn't bail them out, the government doesn't lose anything. The point was that the government DID bail them out.

[degraves2003]

Okay You Just prove my point.

HowTheWorldWorks "If the government didn't bail them out, the government doesn't lose anything. The point was that the government DID bail them out." This your acknowledgment that government had no direct interest in the mortgages and loans. If the government did it would have to pay money to backup the failed loans even w/o the bailout.

They bailout Freddie and Fannie because they are present in 50% of the housing market. Hince TOO BIG TO FAIL.

[HowTheWorldWorks]

The bailout WAS the ultimate backing of the mortgages genius.

[degraves2003]

I love how you are trying to backpedal out of what you meant. Your language was clear has day government backed loans, now it is the loans are government backed because government intervened. So I guess now AIG bonds are Federally back bonds now. LMAO...

[HowTheWorldWorks]

You don't even understand what backing means genius!

Backing means, if there is a default I pay!

[degraves2003]

I know what backing means. You don't and that is ok just don't pretend like you do. The bailout has to be paid back so it is essentially a loan meaning your not on the hook. Now your doing ad hominem arguments, I guess you are out of talking points.

But you haven't even touch on the alternative to the bailout which is amazing considering your profess knowledge of how the world works. ROFLMAO...

[HowTheWorldWorks]

No, you clearly don't understand it genius form your.  Now, I'm done.

[degraves2003]

Educate me. So far I don't see why your still here you said bye like 10 post ago.