Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sam Zell is on a roll on CNBC !!!
CNBC ^ | 3/3/11 | Squawk Box

Posted on 03/03/2011 4:56:36 AM PST by Daisyjane69

Here's something he said earlier:

The topic (in advance of today's phony unemployment numbers) was how to get companies to hire workers. Lots of back & forth. But here is the kicker: Zell mentions that while Obamacare was about to come up for the final, miserable vote he went to Capitol Hill to "lobby" a couple of lawmakers. Reminding them that this kind of bill with so much uncertainty built into it, was guaranteed to put a chill on employment.

Here is the exchange he relayed to the host.

Zell to lawmaker: This bill gives only 6 years of services, based on 10 years of revenue. What happens in Year 11 ????

Lawmaker: I'm 80 years old.

Folks, if that is the mindset on the Hill, we're DOOMED


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cnbc; ecomony; zell
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last
He just let loose on the unions, Wisconsin, etc. One more segment to go.
1 posted on 03/03/2011 4:56:38 AM PST by Daisyjane69
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

Senators’ term of 6 years is too long. It needs to be shortened to four, or less.


2 posted on 03/03/2011 4:58:48 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Repeal the 17th amendment, and we shouldn’t have to worry about the term of a Senator.


3 posted on 03/03/2011 5:00:11 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Huck
It needs to be shortened to four, or less.

hours

4 posted on 03/03/2011 5:00:54 AM PST by InvisibleChurch (The great American prostate exam continues.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

I’m gonna write myself a note to remember to see if I can dig up the entire video of his appearance and post it here.

I still can’t believe a lawmaker replied to him in that way.
I’m nonplussed.


5 posted on 03/03/2011 5:02:24 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

unemployment numbers come out today or tomorrow?


6 posted on 03/03/2011 5:04:46 AM PST by God luvs America (When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

AND — He let loose on public sector unions and on the UAW, saying that they destroyed the auto industry just like the teachers unions are destroying education. He got semi liberal Andrew Ross Sorkin to say “I can’t disagree with any of that...”


7 posted on 03/03/2011 5:06:28 AM PST by C. Edmund Wright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America

CNBC is running a “clock” on the lower right hand corner of the screen that is now displaying:

00 28 50 (and this is counting down in seconds)

Looks like it’s today.

We’ll find out soon enough!


8 posted on 03/03/2011 5:06:55 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch

lol


9 posted on 03/03/2011 5:07:28 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

Can we get a vid of this.


10 posted on 03/03/2011 5:07:45 AM PST by GlockThe Vote (Who needs Al Queda to worry about when we have Obama?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

YES HE DID!

Which is why this thing needs to be posted here on FR, I do believe!


11 posted on 03/03/2011 5:07:55 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

Obamacare and all of the uncertainty surrounding his taxes and arbitrary regulation, means the American businessman has no idea what his cost of doing business will be tomorrow.
THAT is what is suppressing the economy.
When congress demonstrates an ability to reign in Obama’s policies and spending, or when Obama leaves, then, and ONLY THEN, will the U.S. economy take confident strides toward recovery.


12 posted on 03/03/2011 5:08:02 AM PST by G Larry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
That's fine, but it's not enough, and it's not even the main problem. What we need are a)shorter terms b)US senate PAY controlled by state legislatures c)state right of recall at any time d)rotation in office.

Basically, all the things we had BEFORE the Constitution loused things up.

13 posted on 03/03/2011 5:10:29 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

That’s not the monthly employment report. What happens on Thursdays is “jobless claims,” which indicates how many ppl are applying for unemployment.


14 posted on 03/03/2011 5:11:05 AM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote

Oh Lord, he’s actually mentioning the US losing Reserve Currency status...on CNBC.

Holy craptards.


15 posted on 03/03/2011 5:12:20 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Before the Constitution loused things up? Talking from an anti-Federalist perspective, right?


16 posted on 03/03/2011 5:13:21 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

its usually on a Friday- couldn’t find anything in advance as to what the expected job creation number is....


17 posted on 03/03/2011 5:13:21 AM PST by God luvs America (When the silent majority speaks the earth trembles!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

He brought up tort reform. AMEN TO THAT!


18 posted on 03/03/2011 5:13:37 AM PST by abb ("What ISN'T in the news is often more important than what IS." Ed Biersmith, 1942 -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

Yes. Though I try not to complain about it so much anymore (what’s the point?), many of our problems, imo, are structural. Madison tried to split the baby, when Hamilton knew all along they were killing it.


19 posted on 03/03/2011 5:16:02 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

Yes the gravedancer was smoking this am. The best was when he said “Bullshit” live on the air. They missed bleeping it so it went out on the air. Next best was when he asked Sorkin if he (Sorkin) believed in the toothfairy and then proceeded to trash the NY Times who Sorkin now writes. Zell was taking no prisoners this morning and leaving the CNBC airheads for the dead.


20 posted on 03/03/2011 5:17:26 AM PST by tomd2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: God luvs America; abb

Thanks, both of you. I misunderstood the report they are waiting for and I appreciate you for correcting me.

Now he’s talking about how the world hated Bush and how they wanna kill themselves to come to the U.S.

LOL


21 posted on 03/03/2011 5:17:26 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Just checking. I thought the Anti-Federalist Papers were some left-wing hack job, but I’ve since grown curious. I am going to pick up a copy and read it. Seems we need to consider removing the Fed from the equation and go back to independent, sovereign states with very loose unity.


22 posted on 03/03/2011 5:19:26 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

worse occurence: ‘loss of dollar as world reserve currency...a 25% immediate drop in the standard of living for Americans’

PBoC announcement is far more serious than the amount of airtime allotted to it by the mainstream media, is the just released article in Spiegel “China Attacked the Dollar” (google translated):

The Chinese central bank surprised with a spectacular announcement: The would-be superpower wants to handle their entire future foreign trade in yuan, not in dollars. Beijing shakes America’s claim to represent the key currency - with serious consequences for the U.S..

The announcement was inconspicuous , but it has the potential, to permanently change the balance of power on the world currency market: China strengthens the international role of the yuan


23 posted on 03/03/2011 5:19:37 AM PST by griswold3 (The wolves are howling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

On the night obama won, how did you feel in your gut deep down?


24 posted on 03/03/2011 5:19:44 AM PST by GlockThe Vote (Who needs Al Queda to worry about when we have Obama?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tomd2

I thought I was the only one that heard it !!!!

LOL :)

We definitely need to get the whole thing and post it here. If someone else finds it before my lousy searching skills kick into gear, please ping me.

I stumbled on it by accident and I’m sure I missed a good chunk of it.


25 posted on 03/03/2011 5:20:49 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote

Are you asking me, or Mr. Zell?


26 posted on 03/03/2011 5:23:02 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
By all means get a copy of the Anti-Federalist Papers. Those folks really wanted limited government and they saw clearly that the proposed Constitution could lead to a large, powerful, intrusive federal government. We only got the Bill of Rights because the Anti-Federalists pushed for it. Think what this country would be without the 1st or 2nd Amendments (and the other 8).

We really do have structural problems in this country, and they go all the way back. I do love the Constitution, but it carried seeds of our destruction.

27 posted on 03/03/2011 5:26:08 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Senators’ term of 6 years is too long. It needs to be shortened to four, or less.

Short of ridding ourselves of the seventeenth amendment.

I absolutely agree! The amendment gave the people two more representatives, instead of Senators representing the States. for whatever reasons, they had to make the change, the time of reelection should have been changed as well, to the same as representatives.


28 posted on 03/03/2011 5:27:58 AM PST by wita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

Who was the lawmaker?


29 posted on 03/03/2011 5:28:28 AM PST by GoCards (Why me? Why not me?o)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

they may edit it down on the reply video. I run closed caption while I listen because of I process text better than audio so the CC was just ‘Bull.’ but I know what I heard.


30 posted on 03/03/2011 5:31:13 AM PST by tomd2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Huck

senate pay controls are nice PR, but congressional members make the vast bulk of their income off the books, just like every representative body in the world. It is the nature of the beast. It always has been - the point of getting into government is to enrich yourself. What it ‘should’ be is kind of like arguing how communism ‘should’ work - it ignores human nature.

The idea is to get people who will represent your interests at the same time while making sure their nest is feathered. Looking for any other outcome is hopeless optimism, unless you believe candidate speeches.


31 posted on 03/03/2011 5:31:19 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: tomd2

Ha ha ha 60 pages of TP is what he said. I loved it.


32 posted on 03/03/2011 5:31:23 AM PST by smaug6 (We can't afford to be innocent!! Stand up and face the enemy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote

I assume you weren’t talking to your TV to Mr. Zell and were asking me. heh

Well, I was on the phone with my sweetie on election night. He now teaches in Obama’s old stomping grounds in Chicago and is a reformed lib, because I straightened his ass out. He was able to find a job at a Catholic school, earning 1/2 of his former salary.

On that night I told him the following:

We’re about to enter the darkest hours this nation has had in my lifetime. We are going to have a stupid, lazy, but idealogical president foisted upon us.

Start stocking up on food, get your expenses down, and buy some gold and silver. Because this character has NO history of wise money management.

That’s exactly what I told him.

Then I did something I rarely do. I made sure I got drunk.


33 posted on 03/03/2011 5:31:50 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

I’m beginning to appreciate your way of thinking, and I will definitely get on board with it. Being a product of public schools, we were taught that the Constitution was a benevolent document, but as I’ve grown into an independent thinker, I’m beginning to understand the insidious nature of what our Federal government has become.


34 posted on 03/03/2011 5:32:06 AM PST by rarestia (It's time to water the Tree of Liberty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: rarestia
The thing that gets me about Brutus' essays is how much he got right. It's like science. If you make a hypothesis, test it, and it comes back true, then that proves your hypothesis.

He wasn't right on every last detail. But he was spot-on regarding the Judiciary, and Implied Powers, and the general tendencies of the national government. It's really incredible how much he deduced just from reading the drafted Constitution.

If you want to have your mind blown, I highly recommend:

Brutus on Implied Powers 1

Brutus on Implied Powers 2

And most especially, his brilliant writings on the federal judiciary:

Brutus on Judiciary 1

Brutus on Judiciary 2

Brutus on Judiciary 3

Brutus on Judiciary 4

35 posted on 03/03/2011 5:32:12 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: GoCards

I’d love to know, wouldn’t you?


36 posted on 03/03/2011 5:32:55 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69
Vid here:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232/?video=3000008420&play=1

37 posted on 03/03/2011 5:33:49 AM PST by deadrock (Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle. Philo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

I had a sick, dark, empty, and feeling of doom that has not in any way subsided.


38 posted on 03/03/2011 5:36:01 AM PST by GlockThe Vote (Who needs Al Queda to worry about when we have Obama?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy
We only got the Bill of Rights because the Anti-Federalists pushed for it.

That's a good point. The radio talkers always credit our "brilliant Framers" for giving us a bill of rights. Really? Then why were they amendments? Because the draft that came out of convention did not have a bill of rights. The framers didn't want a bill of rights.

And it's not as if it was some sort of new fangled idea. Most if not all of the state constitutions contained a bill of rights. It was an intentional omission.

The political argument broke down like this:

Big government federalists: Wanted a strong, consolidated, centralized gubmint, supported the unamended Constitution.

Small gubmint antifederalists: Wanted a limited, central government, opposed the constitution.

Moderates: Wanted the promise of a bill of rights added in exchange for a yes vote.

So they promised a bill of rights to get their new government passed.

39 posted on 03/03/2011 5:36:33 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

I’m sure it will be great news.... only 416,000 people filed instead of 420,000.


40 posted on 03/03/2011 5:36:38 AM PST by jersey117
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rarestia

Also, read Patrick Henry’s brilliant speech from June 5th, 1788, at the beginning of the VA ratification debates.

http://www.constitution.org/rc/rat_va_04.htm

scroll down a little. it’s long but WORTH it. here’s a teaser:

The American spirit has fled from hence: it has gone to regions where it has never been expected; it has gone to the people of France, in search of a splendid government — a strong, energetic government. Shall we imitate the example of those nations who have gone from a simple to a splendid government? Are those nations more worthy of our imitation? What can make an adequate satisfaction to them for the loss they have suffered in attaining such a government — for the loss of their liberty?

If we admit this consolidated government, it will be because we like a great, splendid one. Some way or other we must be a great and mighty empire; we must have an army, and a navy, and a number of things. When the American spirit was in its youth, the language of America was different: liberty, sir, was then the primary object. We are descended from a people whose government was founded on liberty: our glorious forefathers of Great Britain made liberty the foundation {54} of every thing. That country is become a great, mighty, and splendid nation; not because their government is strong and energetic, but, sir, because liberty is its direct end and foundation.

We drew the spirit of liberty from our British ancestors: by that spirit we have triumphed over every difficulty. But now, sir, the American spirit, assisted by the ropes and chains of consolidation, is about to convert this country into a powerful and mighty empire. If you make the citizens of this country agree to become the subjects of one great consolidated empire of America, your government will not have sufficient energy to keep them together.

Such a government is incompatible with the genius of republicanism. There will be no checks, no real balances, in this government. What can avail your specious, imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances?


41 posted on 03/03/2011 5:39:37 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Don’t forget that some of the Federalists believed that such a bill was unnecessary as the states were to ensure individual rights through their own state constitutions. They were, of course, WRONG, but...


42 posted on 03/03/2011 5:41:56 AM PST by Spktyr (Overwhelmingly superior firepower and the willingness to use it is the only proven peace solution.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Daisyjane69

I heard Sam say he loved Chicago Mayor Daily, supported Rahm Emanuel and thinks Rahm will be great for Chicago.

I think Sam is only interested in what’s good for Sam, not the country.


43 posted on 03/03/2011 5:42:53 AM PST by Walleye_Walter (Not all Libs are stupid, but all stupid people are Libs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Huck

mark


44 posted on 03/03/2011 5:44:35 AM PST by wolf24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote

Ditto....squared


45 posted on 03/03/2011 5:46:55 AM PST by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Spktyr
Don’t forget that some of the Federalists believed that such a bill was unnecessary

Most especially Madison. Of course, to me, the Bill of Rights is a double edged sword, too. It has been used to protect liberty. It has also been used to justify national power. The power of the judiciary is so massive--basically infinite--and at the same time completely unaccountable. They have used the bill of rights for good and ill.

46 posted on 03/03/2011 5:51:13 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Walleye_Walter

if he wants to do business in chicago, he has to watch what he says, and he knows it. His more general comments on the dollar and healthcare don’t specifically make him a target to a particular local government.


47 posted on 03/03/2011 5:53:23 AM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GlockThe Vote
I had a sick, dark, empty, and feeling of doom that has not in any way subsided.

Me too, and it has grown stronger every day since.

48 posted on 03/03/2011 6:04:39 AM PST by houeto (Government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: wita
I don't think the mode of election is that big a deal. The original mode of electing Senators was a sham anyway, intended to give a federal appearance to what was in fact a national system.

Here in NJ, the statewide-elected Senators are BLUE. They are elected by a state with a population of over 8 million. That would not change if the legislature were appointing the senators.

Meanwhile, here in NJ-5, with a population of about 650K, we easily elect and re-elect Rep. Scott Garrett, with a 100 ACU rating. So no, senators are not the same as representatives.

States don't lack power because of the way senators are elected. They lack power because it is the tendency of the national government created by the Constitution to take their power, and leave them very little.

49 posted on 03/03/2011 6:09:27 AM PST by Huck (No Palin; No Romney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: houeto

I actually volunteered on my own dime for a week in PA for McCain just so I could say I did my part because I knew what a catastrophe was looming with this muslim marxist sleeper cell.


50 posted on 03/03/2011 6:12:07 AM PST by GlockThe Vote (Who needs Al Queda to worry about when we have Obama?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson