Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
So why EXACTLY was Obama preceived to be..; presidental material????
Topic Started: Feb 6 2010, 01:20 PM (2,157 Views)
chatham
Member Avatar

The 0bama election was never anything more than making the 60's radical agenda real. Just look at who is in the 0bama background and just listen to how the MSM denied 0bama's involvement with any of those radicals. 0bama ran a campaign of lies that worked. he was a novelty that the PC crowd correctly predicted would allow people to feel guilty enough to vote for the man. Now 0bama keeps telling us, "I won". How insecure are those words? The Tea Party protesters are genuine real people who are fighting the radical agenda being run behind the scene and out of the public's eye.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

Obama and McCain were both weak candidates, but McCain has a strong allegiance to the military and I would have to assume that he would have taken the terror threat more seriously than Obama appears to be.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

Truth Detector
Feb 7 2010, 10:27 AM
Obama and McCain were both weak candidates, but McCain has a strong allegiance to the military and I would have to assume that he would have taken the terror threat more seriously than Obama appears to be.
That, I think for many, was a deciding factor in voting for McCain - even though he was in all other aspects one of the weakest candidate the republicans have fielded in recent years.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Texas Mom

Don't forget, McCain's numbers were climbing and he and Obama were relatively close in the polls UNTIL September 25 (plus or minus) when there was a "run" on the banks (as I recall, enormous sums were electronically transferred and there has been no investigation about what caused it- Bill A. can you elaborate? I'm a mental midget on financial affairs.). McCain was seen as erratic on financial affairs, suspending his campaign and returning to DC to vote on TARP.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

Texas Mom
Feb 7 2010, 11:44 AM
Don't forget, McCain's numbers were climbing and he and Obama were relatively close in the polls UNTIL September 25 (plus or minus) when there was a "run" on the banks (as I recall, enormous sums were electronically transferred and there has been no investigation about what caused it- Bill A. can you elaborate? I'm a mental midget on financial affairs.). McCain was seen as erratic on financial affairs, suspending his campaign and returning to DC to vote on TARP.
While his numbers were rising, I do not think that they would have risen enough to have won the election. His rush back to Washington was a whopper of a political mistake - it looked to be political opportunism. If he had managed to bring about some piece of meaningful legislation, perhaps then it would have been regarded as presidential - and Obama's failure to come back to DC would have redounded negatively for him. However, when McCain suspended his campaigning and made the trip to DC, both Mr. cks and I felt that any chance he had of winning the election flew out the window. The only question was going to be how badly was he going to lose and to what extent Republican candidates for the Congress would go down in flames with him.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

Texas Mom
Feb 7 2010, 11:44 AM
Don't forget, McCain's numbers were climbing and he and Obama were relatively close in the polls UNTIL September 25 (plus or minus) when there was a "run" on the banks (as I recall, enormous sums were electronically transferred and there has been no investigation about what caused it- Bill A. can you elaborate? I'm a mental midget on financial affairs.). McCain was seen as erratic on financial affairs, suspending his campaign and returning to DC to vote on TARP.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/15/the-electronic-run-on-banks-nobody-seemed-to-notice/

Mary Claire Kendall 01/15/10 at 12:09 am

Sixteen months after the 11 a.m. simultaneous withdrawal of billions of dollars out of money market accounts in the aftermath of Lehman’s demise a few days earlier, no one seems to care about the dimensions of this event.

After all, this catastrophic event did not have quite the physicality of say an actual bank run.

There were no investors standing in line waiting to take their money out for Americans to see just who they were—from what country, wearing what kind of clothes, honest or squirrelly looking, working in tandem with each other? Just computer generated orders simultaneously withdrawing billions of dollars adding up to $550 billion within about an hour.

And, certainly, if it were an act of economic terrorism, which no one seems to have the imagination or cojones to raise, the visual is not there. No Boeing 737 ramming into the Twin Towers, bursting into flames, innocent victims burning alive jumping out the windows to their death, prior to the buildings’ collapse into rubble.

But, make no mistake, this electronic run on the banks of Sept. 18, 2008, was every bit as catastrophic, with numerous victims.

Sure, it could be pure coincidence that exactly at 11 a.m. a wave of concerned investors all decided it was time to electronically withdraw their funds thus creating this crescendo drawdown effect setting in motion a worldwide panic.
It could be coincidence. But, it’s doubtful.

The fact that the identities of those who simultaneously decided to withdraw their money at 11 a.m. on Sep. 18, precipitating this panic, were never released, does lead one to question whether or not something sinister was at work.

--snip--
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

jewelcove
Feb 7 2010, 12:04 PM
Texas Mom
Feb 7 2010, 11:44 AM
Don't forget, McCain's numbers were climbing and he and Obama were relatively close in the polls UNTIL September 25 (plus or minus) when there was a "run" on the banks (as I recall, enormous sums were electronically transferred and there has been no investigation about what caused it- Bill A. can you elaborate? I'm a mental midget on financial affairs.). McCain was seen as erratic on financial affairs, suspending his campaign and returning to DC to vote on TARP.
http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/15/the-electronic-run-on-banks-nobody-seemed-to-notice/

Mary Claire Kendall 01/15/10 at 12:09 am

Sixteen months after the 11 a.m. simultaneous withdrawal of billions of dollars out of money market accounts in the aftermath of Lehman’s demise a few days earlier, no one seems to care about the dimensions of this event.

After all, this catastrophic event did not have quite the physicality of say an actual bank run.

There were no investors standing in line waiting to take their money out for Americans to see just who they were—from what country, wearing what kind of clothes, honest or squirrelly looking, working in tandem with each other? Just computer generated orders simultaneously withdrawing billions of dollars adding up to $550 billion within about an hour.

And, certainly, if it were an act of economic terrorism, which no one seems to have the imagination or cojones to raise, the visual is not there. No Boeing 737 ramming into the Twin Towers, bursting into flames, innocent victims burning alive jumping out the windows to their death, prior to the buildings’ collapse into rubble.

But, make no mistake, this electronic run on the banks of Sept. 18, 2008, was every bit as catastrophic, with numerous victims.

Sure, it could be pure coincidence that exactly at 11 a.m. a wave of concerned investors all decided it was time to electronically withdraw their funds thus creating this crescendo drawdown effect setting in motion a worldwide panic.
It could be coincidence. But, it’s doubtful.

The fact that the identities of those who simultaneously decided to withdraw their money at 11 a.m. on Sep. 18, precipitating this panic, were never released, does lead one to question whether or not something sinister was at work.

--snip--
Good find - extremely interesting. Coincidence - I would find that difficult to believe in this day and age.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Deleted User
Deleted User

"The fact that the identities of those who simultaneously decided to withdraw their money at 11 a.m. on Sep. 18, precipitating this panic, were never released, does lead one to question whether or not something sinister was at work."

Does the name George Soros come to mind?
Quote Post Goto Top
 
Texas Mom

cks, I supported McCain because he seemed the lesser of two bad choices at that point- and he had Palin on the ticket- but I kept thinking that we were going to have to DRAG the man over the finish line to win the election. (I honor his service to our country, but I continually slap my forehead over McCain's positions that don't relate to the military.)

Great find, Jewelcove! For some strange reason, I have been unable to access DailyCaller since registering there. I keep getting an error message and don't know if it's because I use Safari as a browser. Odd... So, thanks for posting this.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

Texas Mom
Feb 7 2010, 12:47 PM
cks, I supported McCain because he seemed the lesser of two bad choices at that point- and he had Palin on the ticket- but I kept thinking that we were going to have to DRAG the man over the finish line to win the election. (I honor his service to our country, but I continually slap my forehead over McCain's positions that don't relate to the military.)

Great find, Jewelcove! For some strange reason, I have been unable to access DailyCaller since registering there. I keep getting an error message and don't know if it's because I use Safari as a browser. Odd... So, thanks for posting this.
Here's the whole article since you had trouble accessing is:
http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/15/the-electronic-run-on-banks-nobody-seemed-to-notice/

Sixteen months after the 11 a.m. simultaneous withdrawal of billions of dollars out of money market accounts in the aftermath of Lehman’s demise a few days earlier, no one seems to care about the dimensions of this event.

After all, this catastrophic event did not have quite the physicality of say an actual bank run.

There were no investors standing in line waiting to take their money out for Americans to see just who they were—from what country, wearing what kind of clothes, honest or squirrelly looking, working in tandem with each other? Just computer generated orders simultaneously withdrawing billions of dollars adding up to $550 billion within about an hour.

And, certainly, if it were an act of economic terrorism, which no one seems to have the imagination or cojones to raise, the visual is not there. No Boeing 737 ramming into the Twin Towers, bursting into flames, innocent victims burning alive jumping out the windows to their death, prior to the buildings’ collapse into rubble.

But, make no mistake, this electronic run on the banks of Sept. 18, 2008, was every bit as catastrophic, with numerous victims.

Sure, it could be pure coincidence that exactly at 11 a.m. a wave of concerned investors all decided it was time to electronically withdraw their funds thus creating this crescendo drawdown effect setting in motion a worldwide panic.
It could be coincidence. But, it’s doubtful.

The fact that the identities of those who simultaneously decided to withdraw their money at 11 a.m. on Sep. 18, precipitating this panic, were never released, does lead one to question whether or not something sinister was at work.

Is there no one else with even the vaguest curiosity to ask if it was a coincidence or not? And, to suggest maybe an investigation is in order to deliver that vaunted “transparency” that voters seemed to believe they would get after the 2008 elections.

If nothing sinister was at work, then why so much secrecy concerning the destination of this $550 billion in money withdrawn on Thursday, Sept. 18, and those responsible for redirecting these funds out of the U.S. money markets.

Surely the money didn’t go back into the American economy.

No, $550 billion was drained away from the American economy, the consequences of which we suffer to this day.

The exact contours of this event were described by Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) on C-SPAN on Wednesday, Feb. 11, two days after the 200th anniversary of Abe Lincoln’s birth.

An enraged caller had just erupted over the ill-advised $700 billion bailout a few months earlier and Rep. Kanjorski felt pressed to reveal what Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke had told Congress behind closed doors, which so shocked them into supporting this mind-bogglingly huge bailout.

“On Thursday [Sept. 18, 2008] at about 11 o’clock in the morning,” Kanjorski began, “the Federal Reserve noticed the tremendous drawdown of money market accounts in the United States to the tune of $550 billion dollars being drawn out in a matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help. It pumped $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide.”

At that point, officials realized, Kanjorski relates, “We were having an electronic run on the banks.”

In response, Kanjorski continued, “They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn’t be further panic out there and that’s what actually happened.”

And, if nothing had been done, Kanjorski revealed, “their estimation was that by two o’clock that afternoon, five and 1/2 trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed (which would have meant) … the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it.”

Kanjorski concluded, “Someone threw us in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean without a life raft. And, we’re trying to determine which is the closest shore, and whether there’s any chance in the world to swim that far. We don’t know.”

But why is no one in the least bit curious to know who that “someone” is who “threw us in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean without a life raft”—the consequences of which have so damaged our economy’s job-creating engine?

This writer, for one, would like to know.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carolyn says
Member Avatar


Jewel - that is THE scariest article!

I can't believe that. For over a year I've been reading tons of books and blogs on the subject of this meltdown in September 2008 - and this is the FIRST time I've heard that half-trillion withdrawal in one hour mentioned. Swear to God.

Yet again the media is caught with its pants down on a story that the public desperately needs to know.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

jewelcove
Feb 7 2010, 01:19 PM
Texas Mom
Feb 7 2010, 12:47 PM
cks, I supported McCain because he seemed the lesser of two bad choices at that point- and he had Palin on the ticket- but I kept thinking that we were going to have to DRAG the man over the finish line to win the election. (I honor his service to our country, but I continually slap my forehead over McCain's positions that don't relate to the military.)

Great find, Jewelcove! For some strange reason, I have been unable to access DailyCaller since registering there. I keep getting an error message and don't know if it's because I use Safari as a browser. Odd... So, thanks for posting this.
Here's the whole article since you had trouble accessing is:
http://dailycaller.com/2010/01/15/the-electronic-run-on-banks-nobody-seemed-to-notice/

Sixteen months after the 11 a.m. simultaneous withdrawal of billions of dollars out of money market accounts in the aftermath of Lehman’s demise a few days earlier, no one seems to care about the dimensions of this event.

After all, this catastrophic event did not have quite the physicality of say an actual bank run.

There were no investors standing in line waiting to take their money out for Americans to see just who they were—from what country, wearing what kind of clothes, honest or squirrelly looking, working in tandem with each other? Just computer generated orders simultaneously withdrawing billions of dollars adding up to $550 billion within about an hour.

And, certainly, if it were an act of economic terrorism, which no one seems to have the imagination or cojones to raise, the visual is not there. No Boeing 737 ramming into the Twin Towers, bursting into flames, innocent victims burning alive jumping out the windows to their death, prior to the buildings’ collapse into rubble.

But, make no mistake, this electronic run on the banks of Sept. 18, 2008, was every bit as catastrophic, with numerous victims.

Sure, it could be pure coincidence that exactly at 11 a.m. a wave of concerned investors all decided it was time to electronically withdraw their funds thus creating this crescendo drawdown effect setting in motion a worldwide panic.
It could be coincidence. But, it’s doubtful.

The fact that the identities of those who simultaneously decided to withdraw their money at 11 a.m. on Sep. 18, precipitating this panic, were never released, does lead one to question whether or not something sinister was at work.

Is there no one else with even the vaguest curiosity to ask if it was a coincidence or not? And, to suggest maybe an investigation is in order to deliver that vaunted “transparency” that voters seemed to believe they would get after the 2008 elections.

If nothing sinister was at work, then why so much secrecy concerning the destination of this $550 billion in money withdrawn on Thursday, Sept. 18, and those responsible for redirecting these funds out of the U.S. money markets.

Surely the money didn’t go back into the American economy.

No, $550 billion was drained away from the American economy, the consequences of which we suffer to this day.

The exact contours of this event were described by Rep. Paul Kanjorski (D-Pa.) on C-SPAN on Wednesday, Feb. 11, two days after the 200th anniversary of Abe Lincoln’s birth.

An enraged caller had just erupted over the ill-advised $700 billion bailout a few months earlier and Rep. Kanjorski felt pressed to reveal what Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke had told Congress behind closed doors, which so shocked them into supporting this mind-bogglingly huge bailout.

“On Thursday [Sept. 18, 2008] at about 11 o’clock in the morning,” Kanjorski began, “the Federal Reserve noticed the tremendous drawdown of money market accounts in the United States to the tune of $550 billion dollars being drawn out in a matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help. It pumped $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide.”

At that point, officials realized, Kanjorski relates, “We were having an electronic run on the banks.”

In response, Kanjorski continued, “They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn’t be further panic out there and that’s what actually happened.”

And, if nothing had been done, Kanjorski revealed, “their estimation was that by two o’clock that afternoon, five and 1/2 trillion dollars would have been drawn out of the money market system of the United States, would have collapsed the entire economy of the United States and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed (which would have meant) … the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it.”

Kanjorski concluded, “Someone threw us in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean without a life raft. And, we’re trying to determine which is the closest shore, and whether there’s any chance in the world to swim that far. We don’t know.”

But why is no one in the least bit curious to know who that “someone” is who “threw us in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean without a life raft”—the consequences of which have so damaged our economy’s job-creating engine?

This writer, for one, would like to know.

Bill A. would definitely be the best candidate for details on this problem.

It ties to all we have now that the Federal Reserve system brought with it, mainly, IMO, that the money is just PAPER ...just a product of and by authority. Zero is an influence with that "authority" of making PAPER now, mainly as a result of spending. Add to it the fact all nations in the world have to work to figure out how much value their PAPER has when trading for PAPER of other nations (International Monetary Fund).

The PAPER is of no value without a central authority establishing that value and then maintaining it. They can be very selective of WHO they maintain it for (addressing USA here).

The "they" I suspect in the "run", if we ever know, are the "they" that attributed to it, directly and indirectly.

Your Federal Reserve has "JP Morgan" written all over it from the start, and the BIG BANKS are the "they".

Luckily the International Monetary Fund can't just print PAPER ...yet!

Edited by kbp, Feb 7 2010, 02:51 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Rusty Dog
Member Avatar

I remember Chuck Shumer publishing a letter that caused a run on IndyMac Bank, and it's coming under the control of Federal regulators, timed just right to occur as the Democratic Convention was to begin.

This has always seemed very fishy to me.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jewelcove

Rusty Dog
Feb 7 2010, 04:52 PM
I remember Chuck Shumer publishing a letter that caused a run on IndyMac Bank, and it's coming under the control of Federal regulators, timed just right to occur as the Democratic Convention was to begin.

This has always seemed very fishy to me.
IIRC that was in June. It's interesting to note the timing. BO got the nod that he would be the Democratic nominee at the end of May '08 (a couple of months before the Convention). A couple of weeks later Shumer accidently caused a run on IndyMac, which caused jitters throughout the banking and brokerage industries just a few months before the election. Then in mid Sept, this strange sudden withdrawl of huge amounts of money from a fund. All these jitters led to a financial CRISIS, which increased the feeling of changing the government leadership.

(BTW, Soros later bought IndyMac for a bargain price that included special govt "guarantees" to limit his down side from forclosures)
Edited by jewelcove, Feb 7 2010, 05:11 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

The emergency White House meeting during the crash that included Obama, McCain, and other Congressional leaders should have given us warning about Obama ability. I know this is just anecdotal but anonymous sources that attended say Obama was out of his element and it was apparent to all, that he couldn't run a meeting. However he was their Presidential candidate! IMHO He is incompetent and that is why he let Reid & Pelosi have their way. He is a legend in his own mind.

As for CBS thanks for given Obama a 20 minute commercial on the pre-game Super Bowl show being interviewed by Couric. What homers! The MSM will never learn



Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · LIESTOPPERS UNDERGROUND · Next Topic »
Add Reply