On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 6:01 PM, geoff <[email protected]> wrote:
> || Well here we are, and having nationalized most of the auto and banking
> industry, Obama's going for a whole sixth of the US economy next.||
>
> Of course the fact that they were all bankrupt and heading under doesn’t
> form part of your argument. There were two choices NO car or banking
> industry or  heavily nationalised industries. Its not like he nationalised
> Microsoft or one of you actual profitable industries!  CONTEXT BOB.... try
> it...

BS, Geoff. There was another alternative, besides the false dichotomy
you pose. Ask Ford, which is the only US auto firm doing well right
now. Perhaps not coincidentally, it's the one that DIDN'T take Obama's
ball-and-chain money in exchange for its soul.

Who is going to nationalize the government when Obama bankrupts it, too?

Not IF, but WHEN. Indeed, he already has.

- Publius


-- 

"It ought never to be forgotten, that a firm union of this country,
under an efficient government, will probably be an increasing object
of jealousy to more than one nation of Europe; and that enterprises to
subvert it will sometimes originate in the intrigues of foreign
powers, and will seldom fail to be patronized and abetted by some of
them. Its preservation, therefore ought in no case that can be
avoided, to be committed to the guardianship of any but those whose
situation will uniformly beget an immediate interest in the faithful
and vigilant performance of the trust." [Federalist Papers #59]

_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox
OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech
Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox
This message: 
http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected]
** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the 
author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added 
to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.

Reply via email to