Tuesday, June 16, 2009

How does Obama Differ from Chavez Again?

I'm sure they're different. I just can't seem to remember how at the moment. Apparently Obama not wanting to be out done by his friend in the southern hemisphere is seeking more power to seize the companies that he has deemed necessary for the American Economy. Here is more from the story written in the LA Times.

Under the plan, expected to be released Wednesday, the government would
have new powers to seize key companies -- such as insurance giant American
International Group Inc. -- whose failure jeopardizes the financial system.
Currently, the government's authority to seize companies is mostly limited to

So, just to clarify. Chavez bad for seizing privately held companies. Obama good. Hmmm. So I guess Obama gets to decide which companies would jeopardize the financial system if they fail. Or maybe we should appoint a czar for this task. After all Senate approval and over site of something of this magnitude is not really necessary. No, as with all the czars he will answer directly to Obama. I guess we didn't really need the separation of powers, as dictated in our constitution.


Mookie said...

Um, yeah, about this blog...Being the good little liberal that I am (WOW, I'm getting good at this lying stuff), Obama has personally assigned me as the new Blog Czar...we have issued you 10 demerits today, if you receive any more demerits in your life, we will seize your blog, its readership, and a host of other yet to be named entities and decide later what to do with them. We are allocating ourself somewhere in the 45 Trillionish dollar range for all projects..heavy on the ISH, past present and future....you'll see a retroactive taxation on your future 1040s. Thank you for your non-compliance.

All In said...

Ha, Deciding what to do with my multitude of readership will certainly keep him busy.

Mookie said...

Wellupon further review, we see your readership consists of Upstanding communists and socialists. For this we are proud. What troubles us the most is some certain capitalistic and free-market supporting readers. We'll be sending you a subpoena soon to appear before the Anti-McCarthy Commission. Be prepared to answer this questions: Are you now, or have you ever been a supporter of capitalism, or associated with those who have?

We'll return to our research to make sure you havent been subscribing to any propagandist publications!

Shawnna said...

Ummm....could someone please tell me if I am accidenatlly living in Russia? Just got confused there for a minute.

Anonymous said...

Ah, but do not forget that this started during the Bush adminstration.

The Democrats are now unadulterated socialists. The Republicans are socialist lites.

All In said...

rguy - Yes this did start under Bush. He granted the first bailouts, and did it without the approval of congress in some cases. While it started under Bush it continues now with reckless abandon.

It will serve no purpose to condemn the previous administration except to remember this when mid term elections roll around next year. In the mean time I must voice my displeasure with those who insist on pushing us further into government ownership of private corporations.