Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[HandBall]

Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America’s true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in  America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate  America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see  America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame  America ' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change  America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do..

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp
"I did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the ‘experts’ has had over 500,000 hits."

[juggles]

You can't be SERIOUS printing drivel and nonsense like this....oh wait...perhaps you are....what a joke

[HandBall]

You can't be SERIOUS printing drivel and nonsense like this....oh wait...perhaps you are....what a joke

Typical liberal arrogance. No rebuttal, no argument, just more sarcasm.

[EWSoccer64]

juggles, please respong point by point.  If you dare.

[Crystal Ball]

I'm scared, scared for my own short term future and that of my kids and grandkids.  Unless middle America, who swings the vote stands up and realizes that they made a mistake by voting someone in based on fluff and nonsense, we are in deep trouble.  Obama's real problem is his ego.  He wants to make so much happen, to get the history credit that he doesn't care what the eventual results are.  It takes a strong person to admit their short comings and mistakes.
I find it interesting that so many people that I know who supported him during the election and shortly afterward are awfully silent now.  They're getting their change, but most of them didn't know or care what that was going to be and are now faced with the reality of being bamboozled. 

[basketballdad]

I could not resist since this was out there. The letter was interesting yet I found myself substituting Bill Clinton for Obama.

1. After months of exposure most people only knew about Clintons sex life. Granted that is more than the author is suggesting for Obama but nevertheless not exactly a lot more.

2.How did Clinton pay for his Ivy League schooling. Yes, both became lawyers.

3. Can't remember the early years but not sure Clinton met a payroll before he entered public office and doubt he ran a company.

4.Clinton was not in the military either.

5.People threw the "no class" and " no humility" at Clinton as well as some who suggested he did not accept responsibility.

6. Clinton grew the size of government, attempted health care reform, etc.

7. Clinton, along with Gore loved the ideal of alternative energy, (in some ways more than Obama given the time)

I have to run but you get the picture. Sounds like there have been two scary presidents recently. We got through the first one okay. If these are the criteria  for being scared then maybe we should have been more scared during the greatest period of prosperity under the scary president Clinton. Main difference was he economy. Clinton had it right, "it's the economy stupid."

[HandBall]

I could not resist since this was out there. The letter was interesting yet I found myself substituting Bill Clinton for Obama.

1. After months of exposure most people only knew about Clintons sex life. Granted that is more than the author is suggesting for Obama but nevertheless not exactly a lot more.

2.How did Clinton pay for his Ivy League schooling. Yes, both became lawyers.

3. Can't remember the early years but not sure Clinton met a payroll before he entered public office and doubt he ran a company.

4.Clinton was not in the military either.

5.People threw the "no class" and " no humility" at Clinton as well as some who suggested he did not accept responsibility.

6. Clinton grew the size of government, attempted health care reform, etc.

7. Clinton, along with Gore loved the ideal of alternative energy, (in some ways more than Obama given the time)

I have to run but you get the picture. Sounds like there have been two scary presidents recently. We got through the first one okay. If these are the criteria  for being scared then maybe we should have been more scared during the greatest period of prosperity under the scary president Clinton. Main difference was he economy. Clinton had it right, "it's the economy stupid."

Republicans took control of Congress just 2 years into Clinton's administration. Clinton was also not an ideologue, instead focused on personal gratification. He was happy to take credit for Republican initiatives he signed and claimed credit for as long as people loved him. On the other hand, I doubt that Obama cares what people think. He is far more an ideologue than Clinton and you need to look back to FDR for a president with ideas as radical and on the extreme left side of the political spectrum.  It alleged that he has told advisers that this health care single payer victory is more important to him that reelection. The question is whether he has enough Democrats that feel the same way?

Clinton was scary, but he was also held in check. First by the American people, then by a Republican Congress. There are no such restraints on Obama, except the handful of Democrats in the Senate and House he'll need to press is radical plan to "fundamentally remake America" - his words.

[basketballdad]

Just curious which of the following radical ideas was the worst under FDR.

Social Security--that horrible idea
Medicare----that horrible idea
Various Actions that he took fighting WW2-
Building all those dams

Also by your definition of who controls Congress then Reagan did not do very much since the Republicans only had the Senate for a couple of years. Those Democrats accomplished a lot under Reagon most of which he took credit for. The analysis goes both ways.

Comments by Obama's administration don't back up your analysis as to his lack of caring of what people thinks. If it was then he would do what the New York Times suggests and ignore Republicans and just pass it. However, in the last few days members of his own administration have backed away from a government option as a must have, spokespeople and allies have talked about co-ops, more talk about alternatives. For a guy who doesn't care what others think he is sure throwing out mixed messages. Obama is similiar to most every other President. It is better to have something with a little compromise than nothing. Or better to have other people to share the blame if it goes wrong.

[EWSoccer64]

OK, I will take a swing at this.

Social Security -  As originally implemented, perhaps not a bad idea, under the circumstances.  But how it has metamorphed into SSI is rediculous. 
Medicare -  That was LBJ and the Great Society rather than FDR, as I recall.
Fighting WW2 - ?  Giving away Eastern Europe to the Soviet Empire?  Giving half of Korea and Manchuria to the Soviet Empire?    Giving the French a seat on the UN Security Council?    Those were political decisions that he made, and which I have always found fault with.  Putting the war in Europe in first, and the war against Japan second was also a political decision, and one that I agree with.
Every other decision seems to be straight forward.  Unless one is a conspiracy theorist and believes that FDR knew about the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor before hand and deliberately let Pearl Harbor happen to get the US into the war.  (An idea that I find to be laughable and have never seen any evidence for).
The American Infrastructure / Make Work projects have been shown to be less impactful than previously thought of, through modern economic studies.   However, I still believe that they were worthwhile.

FDR ideas like packing the supreme court, reverting to the Lincolnesque procedure of locking people up under "mental incompetence" because they were percieved to be dangerous to the state,  packing off Americans of Japanese descent into internment camps, crushing the incipient market rally of 1936 through bad economic policy, and violating the "unwritten law" of only serving two terms (can you say "cult of personality" - Chavez, Putin, et al as recent examples?)  and such were not good.

Radical?   FDR was probably the most radical President that the USA has ever had.   He also was president when America had one of its toughest challenges, and some radical actions were neccessary.   

There is an old political axiom, that no country is more than 3 meals away from a revolution.   FDR helped to prevent a revolution, although he likely lengthened the Great Depression.   And the Republicans of the time would not have done any better, much likely much worse.


2)   In terms of your point about "who controls Congress" vis a vis Reagan and Clinton, it is clear that when Reagan was President, he set the agenda.   And when Clinton was President, after 1994, the Republican dominated house set the agenda.   So your arguement there falls flat, and is wrong.


3)   Obama and the quest for eternal popularity?  I personally have no idea - from everything that has been said and written - if he is more an ideologue or (like Clinton) in it for personal power.    Quite frankly, it really does not matter to me as long as he makes decisions that beneficial to the country.  It is obvious that he is an incredibly skilled politician, he rose to the top fo the Chicado Political machine without getting stained by it, and is still viewed as "Mr. Clean" by the great majority of Americans despite mistakes and gaffes that would have led to riots in the streets if done by his predecessor.

Comments by some in the administration that he is backing away from mandatory coverage of all Americans by the government in the health insurance debate is to be expected.    Once a comprehensive package is passed, whatever additions are wanted can be added later.   We have seen that game played in DC time and again.

Just curious which of the following radical ideas was the worst under FDR.

Social Security--that horrible idea
Medicare----that horrible idea
Various Actions that he took fighting WW2-
Building all those dams

Also by your definition of who controls Congress then Reagan did not do very much since the Republicans only had the Senate for a couple of years. Those Democrats accomplished a lot under Reagon most of which he took credit for. The analysis goes both ways.

Comments by Obama's administration don't back up your analysis as to his lack of caring of what people thinks. If it was then he would do what the New York Times suggests and ignore Republicans and just pass it. However, in the last few days members of his own administration have backed away from a government option as a must have, spokespeople and allies have talked about co-ops, more talk about alternatives. For a guy who doesn't care what others think he is sure throwing out mixed messages. Obama is similiar to most every other President. It is better to have something with a little compromise than nothing. Or better to have other people to share the blame if it goes wrong.

[goldengoal]

Just curious which of the following radical ideas was the worst under FDR.

Social Security--that horrible idea
Medicare----that horrible idea
Various Actions that he took fighting WW2-
Building all those dams

Also by your definition of who controls Congress then Reagan did not do very much since the Republicans only had the Senate for a couple of years. Those Democrats accomplished a lot under Reagon most of which he took credit for. The analysis goes both ways.

Comments by Obama's administration don't back up your analysis as to his lack of caring of what people thinks. If it was then he would do what the New York Times suggests and ignore Republicans and just pass it. However, in the last few days members of his own administration have backed away from a government option as a must have, spokespeople and allies have talked about co-ops, more talk about alternatives. For a guy who doesn't care what others think he is sure throwing out mixed messages. Obama is similiar to most every other President. It is better to have something with a little compromise than nothing. Or better to have other people to share the blame if it goes wrong.

So SS and Medicare are in the black again? I thought they were broke? Those darn Republicans and Centrist magazines told me they were broke

[On-the-road-again]

Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America’s true living legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world's highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as "partnering." Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me. You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in  America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don't understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and 'class', always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate  America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see  America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the 'blame  America ' crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change  America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer 'wind mills' to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use 'extortion' tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do..

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O'Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.

Lou Pritchett

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp
"I did write the 'you scare me' letter. I sent it to the NY Times but they never acknowledged or published it. However, it hit the internet and according to the ‘experts’ has had over 500,000 hits."

LOL!!

I don't believe these reasons are why he "scares" SOME Americans...but I'll keep my opinions to myself!!

I must say, it was entertaining though!! 

[HandBall]

So SS and Medicare are in the black again? I thought they were broke? Those darn Republicans and Centrist magazines told me they were broke

The truth.

Medicare had a $1 billion surplus last year before the recession knocked us on our butts. This year Medicare taxes will fall well short of expenditures, while the Medicare Trust Fund has been plundered and spent. It will be refunded with Social Security surpluses that have a couple more years in the black before they go into the red.

Yes, Social Security is still in the black with annual surpluses in the $50 billion range, but only for a couple more years as the surpluses shrink and disappear. The $2.3 Trillion in the Social Security Trust Fund has been borrowed by the government and spent on other government spending.  Depending on impacts on revenues, jobs, etc., when Social Security expenditures exceed revenue, there is no other entitlement in surplus for the Treasury to rob to repay the Social Security Trust Fund that has been plundered and spent. When Social Security goes into the red, the government will be forced to make massive tax increases and/or massive benefits cuts, or simply borrow and print money to repay the accounts. That last option, the most likely if the Dems continue to prevent any real entitlement reform, is going to worsen the already-inevitable period of hyperinflation that is coming.

Estimates place the current unfunded obligations for Social Security and Medicare at somewhere between $65 Trillion and $1.2 Quadrillion out to 2075, primarily the result of the shifting age demographic. The wide gap is the result of unknowns, such as the rate of cost growth and revenues impacted by economic health, unemployment, and inflationary effects not offset with income increases. These are not right-wing numbers, but taken directly from Social Security website maintained by the US Government.

The social engineering crutch of Social Security and Medicare, evolved by the Progressive movement, along with newbies like Prescription Drugs, have evolved the self-reliance of Americans into a belief that government must save for our future and pay for everything once we retire. That mentality has led us to this point in time where the bankruptcy of America is virtually guaranteed, since tens of millions of Americans are now incapable of surviving without the money from others. Now it's just a question of how long government can extend the facade until the collapse.

[basketballdad]

Conservative and liberals are the same when it comes to sacrifice. Handball makes some good points about the deficit and future obligations. Where I would disagree is the blame. Seniors vote in the highest percentage by far. Neither party has the courage now, or ever, to take on the senior citizen lobby and explain the facts of life. Everyone who can read and do simple math understands that either there will be substantial increase in taxes or cuts in benefits to Social Security. Handball is correct the time is coming sooner than we want to admit. However, which party or political leader is going to stand up and say it. That would be no one.  The longer we wait the more massive the cuts or tax increases will be. Medicare same thing. This same thinking applies to other areas of the budget. Defense is the third highest expenditure I believe. Whether you support our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan or not it has to be paid for. We are indirectly borrowing to pay for it. What about a war tax. If it is that important shouldn't we willingly pay more to fund it. Often we argue about the theoritical, philosophical, or hyperthetical merits of various defense actions but don't even mention there is an opportunity cost to whatever we do.

If you look at the overall budget just a handful of items make up most of the spending. That is why all the railing about this program or that program doesn't amount to a hill of beans if our leaders refuse to address the big ticket items. It is like worrying about a scab on your arm while your leg has a huge gash and you are bleeding out. Doesn't make sense.  (interest on the debt which was top four and climbing now--not sure where it is now but it is going up, defense spending, medicare and social security spending) These items amount to most of the budget. Something has to be done or Handball is more right than I would have thought.

[EWSoccer64]

>>>
Karma: +462/-382
[Wonderful] [Wicked]
Posts: 911


    Re: Why Obama scares many Americans
« Reply #12 on: October 09, 2009, 02:16:43 PM » Quote 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conservative and liberals are the same when it comes to sacrifice <<,


Err,  wrong.   Many studies have shown that Conservatives give much more to charity than Liberals do.   Heck, I spent today going out and shopping to provide care packages to an Army platoon stuck on an outpost that has apparently been eating MREs for the last two months.

And the biggest tax cheats in Congress are Liberals.  Rangle, Jefferson and so on.   So are the ones that take "special loans" and try to wrangle government money to special interests and family connected companies - Waters, Dodd and Frank.

[Big Youth]

This kind of drivel isn't even worth the time needed for a point to point rebuttal.  And it doesn't deserve one because the diatribe itself doesn't contain citations or other support for its conclusory statements.  Just starting from the top, the Obamas had student loans, and have discussed that fact many times. 

Obama's years outside of the US aren't different than the years spent by a number of military brats or children of expat executives.  And neither the notion that the years Obama spent out of the US were the formative years, as opposed to his teenage and college years in the US, nor the conclusion that Obama isn't culturally American have any basis other than the author wants you to accept it as true.

One needn't have served in the military to understand it enough to serve as commander-in-chief.  Note that most of Reagan's miltary service was perfoming radio production duties.  Many Republicans like Mitt Romney, who has no military experience, and others like ex-governor Palin, who has no military experience.

It doesn't get better, or more persuasive, as it goes on, so it isn't worth any more time.

[basketballdad]

EW you should know better than to trot out Democrats as scapegoats and try to comare. For every Rangle there is a Delay. For every Jefferson there is a Cunningham. For every Bill Clinton there is a Mark Sanford. It is ridiculous to try and see which party has a few more. My point wasn't even on that. It was that most conservatives want the government to do certain things just like liberals and  neither is willing to stand up to their constituencies.

[EWSoccer64]

EW you should know better than to trot out Democrats as scapegoats and try to comare. For every Rangle there is a Delay. For every Jefferson there is a Cunningham. For every Bill Clinton there is a Mark Sanford. It is ridiculous to try and see which party has a few more. My point wasn't even on that. It was that most conservatives want the government to do certain things just like liberals and  neither is willing to stand up to their constituencies.

1.   Rangle and Delay are very, very different situations.   Look it up.  Tax Cheat for personal gain (Doesn't that strike a familar chord with the Democrats!) versus being caught on a campaign finnance violation.
2.  Jefferson and Cunningham is a very apt comparison.  But then, you also have to compare how they were treated by Congress.  There is the discrepency.
3.  Let's play clue.   Clinton, in the Oval office with a cigar and a blow job?   Or Sanford, outside his office, not on public time?   Which is the more egregious offense?   
And as far as I know, Sanford has only had a single mistress.  Not even the most fervent Clintonistas try to make that claim..........
And of course, no one is trying to demonise the Sanford mistress.   Unlike those of Clinton who came to light.