About one year into his tenure as US President, Obama seems to be doing just as poorly on the international front as he is on the domestic front. Oslo (Nobel Prize) and Copenhagen (Environment Conference) were both disastrous in terms of public relations, if nothing else.
On the home front, the health care bill seems to be mired again, unemployment is increasing, prices are rising, terrorism - or allegation of terrorism - is once again an occurrence and ordinary civil liberties are being eroded further.
Obama's key economic and military policies are little different from that of Bush. And, though Obama speaks more
coherently than his predecessor, the content of his speeches is comparably inane and his conduct with others is comparably tactless.
At this rate, how long will it be before he makes Bush look good.
With you on this one main street. There is just something about him that isn't right. His whole talk about ending the war was complete b.s. The U.S will be over there for decades. He hasn't changed one thing since coming into power.
He inherited a country that was run into the groud financially and entrenched in 2 unwinnable wars.
It didnt matter who took power, turning things around considerably will take them decades, regardless of statesmanlike ability.
Secondly the more republicans can f*ck things up for him, the greater the chance of them making him look worse than Bush expecially if they can shift the blame for some matters from GW to Obama.
http://www.pp2g.tv/vZnB6YnY_.aspx
He's not like that at all
nah, but seriously, It's like he hasn't changed a thing, but he was the right person at the right time, the perfect anti-dote to 8 years of Bush. Obama's making Alex Jones look like he's on to something unless Obama can actually live up to some of his promises.
Quote from: thejuice on January 08, 2010, 02:37:10 PM
http://www.pp2g.tv/vZnB6YnY_.aspx
He's not like that at all
nah, but seriously, It's like he hasn't changed a thing, but he was the right person at the right time, the perfect anti-dote to 8 years of Bush. Obama's making Alex Jones look like he's on to something unless Obama can actually live up to some of his promises.
The country is well on it's way to bankruptcy, Bush was a nightmare on that score and this bollocks seems hell bent on screwing the Country for decades to come.
I still think he is better than W tho. >:(
I can't honestly believe that the CIA expect us to believe the line that they "knew" yer man was on board that plane and were waiting to arrest him in the USA when he landed. FFS, he wasn't intending to land. It is clear that Obama is saying that the intelligence crowd fcuked up but now they are turning it around and indirectly blaming the Euro authorities (Holland?) for allowing him to board.
Quote from: Aerlik on January 08, 2010, 04:16:45 PM
I can't honestly believe that the CIA expect us to believe the line that they "knew" yer man was on board that plane and were waiting to arrest him in the USA when he landed. FFS, he wasn't intending to land. It is clear that Obama is saying that the intelligence crowd fcuked up but now they are turning it around and indirectly blaming the Euro authorities (Holland?) for allowing him to board.
America is to blame here, specifically the CIA.
If Obama gets 8 years America will be in a far better state than now or when he took it over. I hope and pray that enough encouraging signs will be in place to make sure he is re-elected. Then in the second term the US peope will reap the benefits.
I don't think a lot of people realise exactly how big a hole the USA was in when Obamam took over. The guy is good but it'll take more than 1 year to reverse the effects of 8 years of hat clown Bush.
To refer to Obama as in the thread title is patently ridiculous.
Quote from: Main Street on January 08, 2010, 02:20:27 PM
About one year into his tenure as US President, Obama seems to be doing just as poorly on the international front as he is on the domestic front. Oslo (Nobel Prize) and Copenhagen (Environment Conference) were both disastrous in terms of public relations, if nothing else.
On the home front, the health care bill seems to be mired again, unemployment is increasing, prices are rising, terrorism - or allegation of terrorism - is once again an occurrence and ordinary civil liberties are being eroded further.
Obama's key economic and military policies are little different from that of Bush. And, though Obama speaks more
coherently than his predecessor, the content of his speeches is comparably inane and his conduct with others is comparably tactless.
At this rate, how long will it be before he makes Bush look good.
Fair analysis there MS but you'd have to give a lot of credit to the teleprompter for his speaking capabilities...he's as big a fumbling baboon as the last last gobshite when it fcuks up on him :-[
Joe Wilson had it bang on..... he's a lying piece of shite but then only some of us bought it ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxxxGUeZtno
George W revisited or what :o :D
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 08, 2010, 05:34:26 PM
If Obama gets 8 years America will be in a far better state than now or when he took it over. I hope and pray that enough encouraging signs will be in place to make sure he is re-elected. Then in the second term the US peope will reap the benefits.
I don't think a lot of people realise exactly how big a hole the USA was in when Obamam took over. The guy is good but it'll take more than 1 year to reverse the effects of 8 years of hat clown Bush.
To refer to Obama as in the thread title is patently ridiculous.
On the evidence of his first year, the thread title is appropriate.
The honeymoon is over. Even if one just examined his effect on the issues that he has total control over, his performance has been dismal. Blaming Bush for Obama's lack of effect/progress does not hold water.
Quote from: Main Street on January 08, 2010, 06:04:47 PM
Even if one just examined his effect on the issues that he has total control over, his performance has been dismal. Blaming Bush for Obama's lack of effect/progress does not hold water.
which issues has he got total control over?
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 08, 2010, 05:34:26 PM
If Obama gets 8 years America will be in a far better state than now or when he took it over. I hope and pray that enough encouraging signs will be in place to make sure he is re-elected. Then in the second term the US peope will reap the benefits.
I don't think a lot of people realise exactly how big a hole the USA was in when Obamam took over. The guy is good but it'll take more than 1 year to reverse the effects of 8 years of hat clown Bush.
To refer to Obama as in the thread title is patently ridiculous.
What makes you think the Country will be in a much better state 8 years down the road if he gets re-elected than it was when he took over? what has he done to make you think he can improve the situation to that extent?
From what I can see all he has done is to add to americas incredible debt problems, which by the way will be paid of by future generations not us and also to prance around the world, showing up to influence this or influence that without accomplishing much of anything.
He was dealt a terrible hand to beging with, all he has done so far is pick up an award he had no business even being considered for and he has further burdened a weakened economy with this health reform bill.
Oh yeah, he is sending tens of thousands of troops to the middle east, so much for the man of peace and for the man who said he was going to get the troops out of there. :o
The only thing that I can see that he has done that he said he would do is health reform, everything else he has failed miserably.
One last thing, I agree with Seany, the title on here is ridiculous and wrong.
Quote from: heganboy on January 08, 2010, 06:16:54 PM
Quote from: Main Street on January 08, 2010, 06:04:47 PM
Even if one just examined his effect on the issues that he has total control over, his performance has been dismal. Blaming Bush for Obama's lack of effect/progress does not hold water.
which issues has he got total control over?
He has by now total control over most issues outside the economic arena which was falling apart in the year before he took over.
His policies cannot be blamed for the chronic nature of that fiasco but he has the responsibilities for economic decisions taken since. Other issues I have already mentioned briefly.
It was not the intention to offend anyones sensitivities with the thread name.
Many people at the time seemed to put significance in that Obama is Afro American, the first non white president of the USA. What is the big deal about a partially Afro-American... or even a female President? So the USA has not yet had a woman as head of state, whereas so many other countries have had. Israel had Golda Meir. India had Indira Gandhi. And England had Thatcher. Many countries - both developed and underdeveloped - have had women as their highest political leader, whereas the USA has not yet had a woman as President or even as Vice-President.
If there were a great significance to such matters, then we would have to conclude that in terms of women's rights, the United States is lagging behind India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, France, Germany, England,
Liberia, Siberia, Iceland, Chile, Philippines and Israel... just to mention a few... and I really doubt that.
The same logic applies with respect to a non-white President.
Quote from: stew on January 08, 2010, 06:54:02 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 08, 2010, 05:34:26 PM
If Obama gets 8 years America will be in a far better state than now or when he took it over. I hope and pray that enough encouraging signs will be in place to make sure he is re-elected. Then in the second term the US peope will reap the benefits.
I don't think a lot of people realise exactly how big a hole the USA was in when Obamam took over. The guy is good but it'll take more than 1 year to reverse the effects of 8 years of hat clown Bush.
To refer to Obama as in the thread title is patently ridiculous.
What makes you think the Country will be in a much better state 8 years down the road if he gets re-elected than it was when he took over? what has he done to make you think he can improve the situation to that extent?
From what I can see all he has done is to add to americas incredible debt problems, which by the way will be paid of by future generations not us and also to prance around the world, showing up to influence this or influence that without accomplishing much of anything.
He was dealt a terrible hand to beging with, all he has done so far is pick up an award he had no business even being considered for and he has further burdened a weakened economy with this health reform bill.
Oh yeah, he is sending tens of thousands of troops to the middle east, so much for the man of peace and for the man who said he was going to get the troops out of there. :o
The only thing that I can see that he has done that he said he would do is health reform, everything else he has failed miserably.
One last thing, I agree with Seany, the title on here is ridiculous and wrong.
I agree with much of your sentiment but there is a point I would like to make that you may or may not agree with.
Bush was not to blame. He was a scapegoat for failed American policies that stretch back to Reagan and some before. Yes he was in a certain manner, incompetent but I think his laziness was worst.
Before I get completely shot down here, I'm in no way agreeing with Bush but consider this for a moment. Who told you that Obama was a great speaker, a true reformer and a perfect antidote to the Bush years? Obama created the fabric of lies and illusion that surrounds his political career but the media took and built him up to almost Jesus like status in his run up to election and the honeymoon period after. Hence his ridiculous nomination for the nobel prize. The same media also blamed the whole Iraqi affair and economic collapse on Bush, when all he was doing at the time was pursuing american policy that had been used for the past 3 decades.
Quote from: Main Street on January 08, 2010, 09:56:38 PM
It was not the intention to offend anyones sensitivities with the thread name.
Many people at the time seemed to put significance in that Obama is Afro American, the first non white president of the USA. What is the big deal about a partially Afro-American... or even a female President? So the USA has not yet had a woman as head of state, whereas so many other countries have had. Israel had Golda Meir. India had Indira Gandhi. And England had Thatcher. Many countries - both developed and underdeveloped - have had women as their highest political leader, whereas the USA has not yet had a woman as President or even as Vice-President.
If there were a great significance to such matters, then we would have to conclude that in terms of women's rights, the United States is lagging behind India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, France, Germany, England,
Liberia, Siberia, Iceland, Chile, Philippines and Israel... just to mention a few... and I really doubt that.
The same logic applies with respect to a non-white President.
Come on - its only just over 40 years since George Wallace ran for president to end desegregation and the Republicans' took the south from the Democrats in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act. For most of the history of the country, blacks, as you well know, were an extremely persecuted minority, for much of it legally so. To deny that Obama's election was significant in terms of being the first black president is ridiculous given America's racial history (and even present - some of the rhetoric and so-called humour coming out of the more extreme elements of the right wing were utterly racist). And living in NYC, I work with loads of African Americans - their joy was very real and heartfelt, particularly among the older ones, who'd felt they'd never see the day. Was very choked up myself on election night!
Quote from: stew on January 08, 2010, 06:54:02 PM
Quote from: magpie seanie on January 08, 2010, 05:34:26 PM
If Obama gets 8 years America will be in a far better state than now or when he took it over. I hope and pray that enough encouraging signs will be in place to make sure he is re-elected. Then in the second term the US peope will reap the benefits.
I don't think a lot of people realise exactly how big a hole the USA was in when Obamam took over. The guy is good but it'll take more than 1 year to reverse the effects of 8 years of hat clown Bush.
To refer to Obama as in the thread title is patently ridiculous.
What makes you think the Country will be in a much better state 8 years down the road if he gets re-elected than it was when he took over? what has he done to make you think he can improve the situation to that extent?
From what I can see all he has done is to add to americas incredible debt problems, which by the way will be paid of by future generations not us and also to prance around the world, showing up to influence this or influence that without accomplishing much of anything.
He was dealt a terrible hand to beging with, all he has done so far is pick up an award he had no business even being considered for and he has further burdened a weakened economy with this health reform bill.
Oh yeah, he is sending tens of thousands of troops to the middle east, so much for the man of peace and for the man who said he was going to get the troops out of there. :o
The only thing that I can see that he has done that he said he would do is health reform, everything else he has failed miserably.
One last thing, I agree with Seany, the title on here is ridiculous and wrong.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but did Obama not run on Afghanistan being the correct and just war? It was always on the cards that he was going to rachet things up there, given that he campaigned on the fact that Bush/Cheney had neglected it in favour of Iraq. From what I remember, anyone who is shocked by the fact that he has increased the involvement in Afghanistan simply wasn't listening during the campaign.
As for other broken promises, did he not also run on the promise of a huge stimulus package? Wasn't that passed very quickly? Did he not push for the cap and trade legislation in congress? Yes, it hasn't passed, but that is not the same as saying he promised it and then forgot about it - he's president, not king. Did he not promise to rescue the Detroit car companies? You may think all those things were terrible policies, but he did what he said he was going to do. Maybe he erred in placing too much of the power over his initiatives in the hands of congress and being far too passive, which is certainly a legitimate criticism.
If I were a believer however, I would still get down on my knees every day and thank the gods that the Republicans aren't in power. The Democrats are certainly a mess, but that right wing rabble are just terrifying!
Quotedid he not also run on the promise of a huge stimulus package? Wasn't that passed very quickly?
Oh He sure did....but here tell me, what the fcuk has it done bar dig an even deeper hole with unprecedented
wasteful spending, and passing it very quickly would be an understatement...for fear there'd be time to look in to
it and what it would mean to the country should it fail..... Remember the "unemployment would reach 10% if we didn't act quickly"
fear mongering horse shit!
Quotehe's president, not king
Fcuk... finally!...... He just bows to them :o
QuoteDid he not promise to rescue the Detroit car companies? You may think all those things were terrible policies, but he did what he said he was going to do.
Yes he sure did..... A complete march towards socialism with a massive power grab..."Never let a good crisis go to waste" and all that :o
Quote
If I were a believer however, I would still get down on my knees every day and thank the gods that the Republicans aren't in power. The Democrats are certainly a mess, but that right wing rabble are just terrifying!
See that right there is the type of mind numbed, blinkered hatred of America and all she stands for that validates the fact
that Liberalism is indeed a mental disorder..... How the Fcuk anyone could listen to thon auld despicable cnut Pelosi ranting and raving and honestly
believe that what she represents is whats best for America is beyond me.... But then nothing you say surprises me anymore ::)
To give him credit though, he has decided to Air the Health care debate on Cspan ..........................for all of
one hour,
Wasn't that another of his promises J ::)
Ah sure keep throwing it up there..we'll keep on wading through the lipstick and perfume for ye.....those blinkers have got to slip here at some point
Oliver Stone warns that the same military industrial complex forces that he's explored in movies such as "JFK" and in "Secret History," are now corrupting Barack Obama.
"You can understand why Obama is following in Bush's footsteps in Afghanistan," he said.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 09, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
Quotedid he not also run on the promise of a huge stimulus package? Wasn't that passed very quickly?
Oh He sure did....but here tell me, what the fcuk has it done bar dig an even deeper hole with unprecedented
wasteful spending, and passing it very quickly would be an understatement...for fear there'd be time to look in to
it and what it would mean to the country should it fail..... Remember the "unemployment would reach 10% if we didn't act quickly"
fear mongering horse shit!
Yes, always the evil, ulterior motives for the Democrats. Passing it quickly was all about hiding shit, not about not wasting time. As for fear mongering, that is rather ironic coming from someone from the right after the past decade.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 09, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
Quotehe's president, not king
Fcuk... finally!
Er... yes, whatever... ::)
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 09, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
QuoteDid he not promise to rescue the Detroit car companies? You may think all those things were terrible policies, but he did what he said he was going to do.
Yes he sure did..... A complete march towards socialism with a massive power grab..."Never let a good crisis go to waste" and all that :o
Yes, you better watch out TO, soon his evil forces are going to be coming to stick you in a government re-education camp.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 09, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
Quote
If I were a believer however, I would still get down on my knees every day and thank the gods that the Republicans aren't in power. The Democrats are certainly a mess, but that right wing rabble are just terrifying!
See that right there is the type of mind numbed, blinkered hatred of America and all she stands for that validates the fact
that Liberalism is indeed a mental disorder..... How the Fcuk anyone could listen to thon auld despicable cnut Pelosi ranting and raving and honestly
believe that what she represents is whats best for America is beyond me.... But then nothing you say surprises me anymore ::)
Says the boy who only ever crawls out of the woodwork when there's some abuse to be thrown at Obama.
I didn't say I like or admire Pelosi. I just fear and abhorr the bitter bigotry of much of the right wing more. If the likes of Palin, Bachmann, Coburn, DeMint and the rest of their ilk on the Republican right represent your vision of what America should be, you're just as deluded as you arrogantly proclaim liberals to be.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 09, 2010, 11:28:51 PM
To give him credit though, he has decided to Air the Health care debate on Cspan ..........................for all of one hour,
Wasn't that another of his promises J ::)
Ah sure keep throwing it up there..we'll keep on wading through the lipstick and perfume for ye.....those blinkers have got to slip here at some point
I did not comment on whether or not Obama has been successful or not to date (I have found him quite underwhelming). I was merely replying to Stew about whether he was doing what he said he would do in the campaign. No doubt he isn't doing everything he said he was, but what politician ever does? (Cue the ridiculous messiah argument)
And you accusing others of being blinkered! If only we were all so enlightened as you TO. I have yet to see you ever make a positive argument about why we should vote like you do. All you ever give is arrogant, snide, condescending commentary about Democrats, choosing to cast everything in the worst possible light. I vote Democrat because I agree with some of what they represent, and the stuff I dislike about them is far less distasteful to me than the bad points of the Republican agenda. If that means I am one of your hero Savage's mentaly disordered liberals, I am perfectly fine with that.
QuoteAs for fear mongering, that is rather ironic coming from someone from the right after the past decade.
So if I have this right..... you have suddenly become Ok with what has gone on the last eight years ... ;D
could the blinkers be slipping?
QuoteYes, you better watch out TO, soon his evil forces are going to be coming to stick you in a government re-education camp.
You mean like the ignorance factories otherwise known here as schools?
QuoteSays the boy who only ever crawls out of the woodwork when there's some abuse to be thrown at Obama.
FFS I left you all to it here for a couple of months and not surprisingly it went awfully quiet ::) .... might I add, it's not like there wasn't
shit to throw at him in that time :o
QuoteIf the likes of Palin, Bachmann, Coburn, DeMint and the rest of their ilk on the Republican right represent your vision of what America should be, you're just as deluded as you arrogantly proclaim liberals to be.
Yes heaven's forbid I might lean in the direction of people who would be seen to value the importance of the Constitution....
you should google it sometime !
QuoteI didn't say I like or admire Pelosi
Wha?..... FFS sure she epitomizes what the Democrats stand for, after all she is the spokes mouth for your "Ilk"
QuoteIf that means I am one of your hero Savage's mentaly disordered liberals, I am perfectly fine with that.
Ach sure I know you are... it was more for the others to understand where I'm coming from when I use the Term
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 10, 2010, 06:48:24 PM
QuoteAs for fear mongering, that is rather ironic coming from someone from the right after the past decade.
So if I have this right..... you have suddenly become Ok with what has gone on the last eight years ... ;D
could the blinkers be slipping?
QuoteYes, you better watch out TO, soon his evil forces are going to be coming to stick you in a government re-education camp.
You mean like the ignorance factories otherwise known here as schools?
QuoteSays the boy who only ever crawls out of the woodwork when there's some abuse to be thrown at Obama.
FFS I left you all to it here for a couple of months and not surprisingly it went awfully quiet ::) .... might I add, it's not like there wasn't
shit to throw at him in that time :o
QuoteIf the likes of Palin, Bachmann, Coburn, DeMint and the rest of their ilk on the Republican right represent your vision of what America should be, you're just as deluded as you arrogantly proclaim liberals to be.
Yes heaven's forbid I might lean in the direction of people who would be seen to value the importance of the Constitution....
you should google it sometime !
QuoteI didn't say I like or admire Pelosi
Wha?..... FFS sure she epitomizes what the Democrats stand for, after all she is the spokes mouth for your "Ilk"
QuoteIf that means I am one of your hero Savage's mentaly disordered liberals, I am perfectly fine with that.
Ach sure I know you are... it was more for the others to understand where I'm coming from when I use the Term
We obviously have very different ideas about what "valuing the importance of the constitution" means.
But anyway, I am not particularly interested in another endless back and forth with you that achieves nothing, unless you have something to offer other than insults and "Obama/Pelosi/Democrats/Liberals are evil/idiots/mentally disordered".
QuoteWe obviously have very different ideas about what "valuing the importance of the constitution" means.
Nothing would make me happier than to hear your ideas of it sometime... ::) in fact i was unaware it even existed in your circles,
if by how it's thrashed and completely disregarded on a daily basis by Liberal America is anything to go by :-\
QuoteBut anyway, I am not particularly interested in another endless back and forth with you that achieves nothing
Sure it does...drawing you out with your support of ruinous ideas and doomed policies from crooked politicians highlights perfectly
to the neutral here all that is wrong with this Country.
Quoteunless you have something to offer other than insults and "Obama/Pelosi/Democrats/Liberals are evil/idiots/mentally disordered".
When they start to act like they work for and care to listen to the people and not ram destructive polices down our throats, I'll stop with the
insults and calling them on it.... it really is very simple!
QuoteCome on - its only just over 40 years since George Wallace ran for president to end desegregation and the Republicans' took the south from the Democrats in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act. For most of the history of the country, blacks, as you well know, were an extremely persecuted minority, for much of it legally so. To deny that Obama's election was significant in terms of being the first black president is ridiculous given America's racial history (and even present - some of the rhetoric and so-called humour coming out of the more extreme elements of the right wing were utterly racist). And living in NYC, I work with loads of African Americans - their joy was very real and heartfelt, particularly among the older ones, who'd felt they'd never see the day. Was very choked up myself on election night!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/04/reid-defends-himself-from_n_155080.html
:D :D Don't let the truth get in way of a good opportunity to sling mud there J
Hypocrisy anyone? :-[
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 10, 2010, 08:03:33 PM
QuoteWe obviously have very different ideas about what "valuing the importance of the constitution" means.
Nothing would make me happier than to hear your ideas of it sometime... ::) in fact i was unaware it even existed in your circles,
if by how it's thrashed and completely disregarded on a daily basis by Liberal America is anything to go by :-\
QuoteBut anyway, I am not particularly interested in another endless back and forth with you that achieves nothing
Sure it does...drawing you out with your support of ruinous ideas and doomed policies from crooked politicians highlights perfectly
to the neutral here all that is wrong with this Country.
Quoteunless you have something to offer other than insults and "Obama/Pelosi/Democrats/Liberals are evil/idiots/mentally disordered".
When they start to act like they work for and care to listen to the people and not ram destructive polices down our throats, I'll stop with the
insults and calling them on it.... it really is very simple!
Yes TO, you and the US right wing are the paragon to everyone on the board here of all this is right and just.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 10, 2010, 08:37:49 PM
QuoteCome on - its only just over 40 years since George Wallace ran for president to end desegregation and the Republicans' took the south from the Democrats in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act. For most of the history of the country, blacks, as you well know, were an extremely persecuted minority, for much of it legally so. To deny that Obama's election was significant in terms of being the first black president is ridiculous given America's racial history (and even present - some of the rhetoric and so-called humour coming out of the more extreme elements of the right wing were utterly racist). And living in NYC, I work with loads of African Americans - their joy was very real and heartfelt, particularly among the older ones, who'd felt they'd never see the day. Was very choked up myself on election night!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/04/reid-defends-himself-from_n_155080.html
:D :D Don't let the truth get in way of a good opportunity to sling mud there J
Hypocrisy anyone? :-[
If anyone here quoted Blagovich as a witness to something like this against Republicans, you'd be dismissing it as nonsense given his alleged character. But regardless, if Reid is guilty as the former governor says, then he should be finished. But if you think that the Democrats are somehow more racist than the party who built their success of recent decades on their embracement of southern white conservatives, including men like Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms, and who still have little support among minorities, particularly African Americans, suit yourself. I doubt if many others agree. Maybe the textbook accusations of class warfare and welfare queens driving cadillacs around Harlem will convince people though.
Quote
Yes TO, you and the US right wing are the paragon to everyone on the board here of all this is right and just.
Thank you..even if you did lay it on a bit thick ;)
Na, merely have an expectation whether they're Demican or Republicrat to simply adhere to the constitution and not look as though they're doing all in their power to collapse the country, with policies that are absolutely unsustainable not to mention being done while giving the majority the finger and doing it all with a smile >:(
There is an undeniable disconnect on the hill with the American people ....how anyone that's paying any attention isn't pissed
with these crooks is beyond me!!!!
Roll on November!!
http://blogs.investors.com/capitalhill/index.php/home/35-politics/1136-obamas-green-jobs-program-135294-per-job
Green job initiative to cost the tax payer $135,294 per job created..... now even with this willingness to spend massive amounts of money to create jobs...unemployment remains at 10% ( actually closer to 17% if truth be told)
WTF incentive is there out there for business' to hire anybody when we've no idea what it's going to cost to keep
an employee with all this crap he's pushing, health care and cap and trade to name a couple that is solely designed
to fcuk small business >:(
Yep, way to go Barrack.....Genius ::)
Obama did not bail out anyone..the Chinese did. America is borrowing heavily from them.
Exactly and that's why this inept fraud has got to be stopped!
This madness he's ramming through cannot be sustained,
we simply can't afford it...FFS how hard is this to understand >:(
p.s..... The double standards on the wire today on Racism is some craic :D
QuoteCorrect me if I'm wrong, but did Obama not run on Afghanistan being the correct and just war?
Does the bombing of
innocents with Drones in Pakistan fall into that category...is that suddenly
OK now too with the liberal war machine ::)
Quote from: ziggysego on January 10, 2010, 01:38:50 AM
Oliver Stone warns that the same military industrial complex forces that he's explored in movies such as "JFK" and in "Secret History," are now corrupting Barack Obama.
"You can understand why Obama is following in Bush's footsteps in Afghanistan," he said.
Does anyone actually give a damn Zig what an idiot that empathizes with Stalin, Mao and Hitler thinks
about anything ???
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 01:58:53 AM
QuoteCorrect me if I'm wrong, but did Obama not run on Afghanistan being the correct and just war?
Does the bombing of innocents with Drones in Pakistan fall into that category...is that suddenly
OK now too with the liberal war machine ::)
As if you give a f**k. You'd be the first one calling him weak if he called off the drone campaign, which the likes of McCain came out in full support of a few days ago while the Pakistanis themselves are looking for the technology so they can use it themselves instead of allowing the US forces in. Besides, the left has been pretty much against the escalation anyway, while the Democrats in general are evenly split. Its among Republicans where a large majority support it.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 03:21:20 AM
Quote from: ziggysego on January 10, 2010, 01:38:50 AM
Oliver Stone warns that the same military industrial complex forces that he's explored in movies such as "JFK" and in "Secret History," are now corrupting Barack Obama.
"You can understand why Obama is following in Bush's footsteps in Afghanistan," he said.
Does anyone actually give a damn Zig what an idiot that empathizes with Stalin, Mao and Hitler thinks
about anything ???
Are you not to going to use Stone's stick to beat Obama with?
As for Stone himself, its "empathize", not "sympathize" i.e. (when comparing it to his movie on Bush) "I'm trying to understand somebody I thoroughly despised." Mainly, he's probably trying to hype his new series, and I'm sure he will be very successful once the backlash from all directions begins!
It may turn out to be utter bollocks (would it really have been that easy to just take Hitler out, as he suggested in the press conference, seemingly suggesting that companies like GM and IBM were funding the Nazis), but Stone is nothing if not interesting.
QuoteAs if you give a f**k. You'd be the first one calling him weak if he called off the drone campaign, which the likes of McCain came out in full support of a few days ago while the Pakistanis themselves are looking for the technology so they can use it themselves instead of allowing the US forces in. Besides, the left has been pretty much against the escalation anyway, while the Democrats in general are evenly split. Its among Republicans where a large majority support it.
Ah but I'm not a patty cake playing lefty who were out in there droves across the country with their anti war rhetoric
when W was in charge when these type of attacks were going on...Maybe you'll remember they were labeled war crimes back then by people like yourself........Hypocrites ::)
Seriously though, where are the anti war brigade now ???
QuoteIts among Republicans where a large majority support it.
I'm not one of the young lads here on the board that knows no better...WTF say have the republicans
got in all of this :-X
You questioned the validity of Blag's statement last night..... :-[
What's your thoughts on the double standards now ;)
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 04:44:20 AM
QuoteAs if you give a f**k. You'd be the first one calling him weak if he called off the drone campaign, which the likes of McCain came out in full support of a few days ago while the Pakistanis themselves are looking for the technology so they can use it themselves instead of allowing the US forces in. Besides, the left has been pretty much against the escalation anyway, while the Democrats in general are evenly split. Its among Republicans where a large majority support it.
Ah but I'm not a patty cake playing lefty who were out in there droves across the country with their anti war rhetoric
when W was in charge when these type of attacks were going on...Maybe you'll remember they were labeled war crimes back then by people like yourself........Hypocrites ::)
Seriously though, where are the anti war brigade now ???
When did I ever scream about war crimes to you? I wasn't out marching with the antiwar brigade, so what the f**k has it got to do with me? I had/have mixed feelings about the war and abhorr the deceitful build-up, but my problems with Bush and the Republicans in general lie mainly elsewhere.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 04:44:20 AM
QuoteIts among Republicans where a large majority support it.
I'm not one of the young lads here on the board that knows no better...WTF say have the republicans
got in all of this :-X
Well with plenty of the Democrats against it, he would have had a hard time proceeding without their support, wouldn't he?
If I had the time, I could do exactly what you think you're so f**king clever at, and go searching for the latest hypocrisy/outrage from the Republicans and right wing and go "see, here, defend that, hypocrite". Fortunately, I've got better things to do. But hammer away.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 04:49:34 AM
You questioned the validity of Blag's statement last night..... :-[
What's your thoughts on the double standards now ;)
I didn't question the validity of it. I said that you would question it if I presented him as a witness against a Republican. I then proceeded to say that if Reid had said what Blago said and didn't want an African American replacement for Obama, he should be finished. That clear enough for you?
And before you start on his other gaffe, it was an idiotic thing to say, even if quite a few are now saying (and have said e.g. Colin Powell) that his basic premise is true i.e. lighter-skinned African Americans are less prone to prejudice. Do I think it compares to George Allen making fun of an Indian kid by calling him "macaca" or Trent Lott wishing that the odious Strom Thurmond had won the presidency on a segregation platform in '48? Absolutely not, but if its going to be very damaging, he should do the decent thing and step aside as senate leader. 'Tis ironic how the right wing isn't too upset with Michael Steele referring to Native Americans as "injuns" on Hannity last week though.
QuoteIf I had the time, I could do exactly what you think you're so f**king clever at, and go searching for the latest hypocrisy/outrage from the Republicans and right wing and go "see, here, defend that, hypocrite". Fortunately, I've got better things to do. But hammer away.
Oh Please..spare me the pity party, Obama has turned out exactly to a word what I've warned and argued back and forth
with your good self and the other playground bullies here for 18 months.... I know your a very busy man but if you
ever find the time, go back and read over some of that material.
"Searching for stuff" Baa :D FFS if you'd pull your head outa your hole and were paying even the slightest bit of attention
you'd know and admit that this Administration is so far out of control it's beyond belief :o
Quote from: J70 on January 12, 2010, 05:10:52 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 04:49:34 AM
You questioned the validity of Blag's statement last night..... :-[
What's your thoughts on the double standards now ;)
I didn't question the validity of it. I said that you would question it if I presented him as a witness against a Republican. I then proceeded to say that if Reid had said what Blago said and didn't want an African American replacement for Obama, he should be finished. That clear enough for you?
But what about the fact that the no morals bastard Dems are circling the wagons in defense of him.... yes the same fcuks that were delirious and couldn't see straight from their moral high ground in getting rid of Lott!!
What about Your hero Clintons "Coffee boy" remarks... :-[
Cut the bullshit J and admit that if it had of been anybody but a liberal Democrat that made those comments, his feet wouldn't have touched the floor on the way out of office........A complete double standard here!
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 05:23:57 AM
QuoteIf I had the time, I could do exactly what you think you're so f**king clever at, and go searching for the latest hypocrisy/outrage from the Republicans and right wing and go "see, here, defend that, hypocrite". Fortunately, I've got better things to do. But hammer away.
Oh Please..spare me the pity party, Obama has turned out exactly to a word what I've warned and argued back and forth
with your good self and the other playground bullies here for 18 months.... I know your a very busy man but if you
ever find the time, go back and read over some of that material.
"Searching for stuff" Baa :D FFS if you'd pull your head outa your hole and were paying even the slightest bit of attention
you'd know and admit that this Administration is so far out of control it's beyond belief :o
Looking for pity from you? Yes, that's it. ::)
I am merely pointing out that two can play your game, pull up the stories and throw insults at anyone who doesn't think like you do.
As I'm pretty positive I've said to you before on several occasions, I take it as a given that most politicians are weasels. So I'm not sure what you are trying to prove with this endless list of this, that and the other that apparently outrages you. And I have also said to you a number of times, I don't agree with the Democrats on everything - they merely piss me off and scare me less than the Republicans do. Do I think Obama has done a great job? Absolutely not. But I still do not regret him winning the election, given the road McCain went down.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 05:33:15 AM
Quote from: J70 on January 12, 2010, 05:10:52 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 04:49:34 AM
You questioned the validity of Blag's statement last night..... :-[
What's your thoughts on the double standards now ;)
I didn't question the validity of it. I said that you would question it if I presented him as a witness against a Republican. I then proceeded to say that if Reid had said what Blago said and didn't want an African American replacement for Obama, he should be finished. That clear enough for you?
But what about the fact that the no morals b**tard Dems are circling the wagons in defense of him.... yes the same fcuks that were delirious and couldn't see straight from their moral high ground in getting rid of Lott!!
What about Your hero Clintons "Coffee boy" remarks... :-[
Cut the bullshit J and admit that if it had of been anybody but a liberal Democrat that made those comments, his feet wouldn't have touched the floor on the way out of office........A complete double standard here!
That's what politicians do. The right wing circled the wagons around Lott at first as well. Christ we had to listen to the pundits say he was only trying to flatter an old man. Until his associations with some questionable ultraconservative groups suggested that there might have been a bit more sympathy to Thurmond's former cause than that. Had it been a Democrat like Byrd (who should never have been there in the first place), he'd be gone too.
I will agree that African Americans in general will give a Democrat a more sympathetic reception to this kind of thing, purely because Democrats in general are more sympathetic to their political causes. Double standard for sure, but understandable.
A few Republicans seem to have brazened out their various sexual and corruption difficulties, so you can't say that they don't get away with these things. Even if its only three years since the sleaze was a large contributor to their loss of congress!
Quote
Looking for pity from you? Yes, that's it. ::)
Me...Fcuk no, It's obvious to me and I'm sure others that you're merely playing to crowd here in consistently
defending in indefensible
Quote
I am merely pointing out that two can play your game, pull up the stories and throw insults at anyone who doesn't think like you do.
I'm not playing any games here, simply pointing out the obvious disastrous and destructive policies that are
undoubtedly going to bankrupt this country..... And anyway even if I were to engage in petty mud slinging
surely you wouldn't have a leg to stand on in calling me on it ???
QuoteBut I still do not regret him winning the election, given the road McCain went down.
Well if a direct march towards Marxism is your thing and you honestly believe that spending us into oblivion is the best way to get there then so be it....I certainly won't be on that bus!
Quote from: J70 on January 12, 2010, 06:00:34 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 05:33:15 AM
Quote from: J70 on January 12, 2010, 05:10:52 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 04:49:34 AM
You questioned the validity of Blag's statement last night..... :-[
What's your thoughts on the double standards now ;)
I didn't question the validity of it. I said that you would question it if I presented him as a witness against a Republican. I then proceeded to say that if Reid had said what Blago said and didn't want an African American replacement for Obama, he should be finished. That clear enough for you?
But what about the fact that the no morals b**tard Dems are circling the wagons in defense of him.... yes the same fcuks that were delirious and couldn't see straight from their moral high ground in getting rid of Lott!!
What about Your hero Clintons "Coffee boy" remarks... :-[
Cut the bullshit J and admit that if it had of been anybody but a liberal Democrat that made those comments, his feet wouldn't have touched the floor on the way out of office........A complete double standard here!
That's what politicians do. The right wing circled the wagons around Lott at first as well. Christ we had to listen to the pundits say he was only trying to flatter an old man. Until his associations with some questionable ultraconservative groups suggested that there might have been a bit more sympathy to Thurmond's former cause than that. Had it been a Democrat like Byrd (who should never have been there in the first place), he'd be gone too.
I will agree that African Americans in general will give a Democrat a more sympathetic reception to this kind of thing, purely because Democrats in general are more sympathetic to their political causes. Double standard for sure, but understandable.
A few Republicans seem to have brazened out their various sexual and corruption difficulties, so you can't say that they don't get away with these things. Even if its only three years since the sleaze was a large contributor to their loss of congress!
Right so they're all as corrupt as the next, I'm with you on this..... So will you be all on for voting the whole shoot out come Nov, start a clean slate that puts power back with the people where it belongs?
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 06:11:58 AM
Quote
Looking for pity from you? Yes, that's it. ::)
Me...Fcuk no, It's obvious to me and I'm sure others that you're merely playing to crowd here in consistently
defending in indefensible
You may think its indefensible. I don't. If others agree or disagree, no one is stopping them chiming in. And why would I care about "playing to the crowd"? Its an internet board - I don't know anyone here and I am hardly one of the more noted contributors.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 06:11:58 AM
Quote
I am merely pointing out that two can play your game, pull up the stories and throw insults at anyone who doesn't think like you do.
I'm not playing any games here, simply pointing out the obvious disastrous and destructive policies that are
undoubtedly going to bankrupt this country..... And anyway even if I were to engage in petty mud slinging
surely you wouldn't have a leg to stand on in calling me on it ???
So if McCain had won and had extended Bush's late-term fiscal policies, even if not to the extent Obama has, you'd be coming on here pointing out how bad things were?
And if I do engage in mud slinging, then call me on it.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 06:11:58 AM
QuoteBut I still do not regret him winning the election, given the road McCain went down.
Well if a direct march towards Marxism is your thing and you honestly believe that spending us into oblivion is the best way to get there then so be it....I certainly won't be on that bus!
Its not that I believe that massive borrowing is a good thing. Just not sure that we'd be any better off under McCain (remember, the Republicans have also been terrible in recent years and he was hardly awe-inspiring on economics during the campaign) and the fact that he sold out to the religious/social conservatives completely alienated me. I can find common cause with Republicans on some things, but that is not one of them. Had McCain gone with someone like Lieberman or Graham and taken his chances with a fairly moderate ticket, I would seriously have considered him, as I would someone like Giuliani, assuming he ran as he did in NYC. But I will never vote for a ticket with someone like Palin on it. If things are fucked in 2012 and someone like her is on the Republican ticket, I will just abstain.
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 06:16:29 AM
Quote from: J70 on January 12, 2010, 06:00:34 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 05:33:15 AM
Quote from: J70 on January 12, 2010, 05:10:52 AM
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 04:49:34 AM
You questioned the validity of Blag's statement last night..... :-[
What's your thoughts on the double standards now ;)
I didn't question the validity of it. I said that you would question it if I presented him as a witness against a Republican. I then proceeded to say that if Reid had said what Blago said and didn't want an African American replacement for Obama, he should be finished. That clear enough for you?
But what about the fact that the no morals b**tard Dems are circling the wagons in defense of him.... yes the same fcuks that were delirious and couldn't see straight from their moral high ground in getting rid of Lott!!
What about Your hero Clintons "Coffee boy" remarks... :-[
Cut the bullshit J and admit that if it had of been anybody but a liberal Democrat that made those comments, his feet wouldn't have touched the floor on the way out of office........A complete double standard here!
That's what politicians do. The right wing circled the wagons around Lott at first as well. Christ we had to listen to the pundits say he was only trying to flatter an old man. Until his associations with some questionable ultraconservative groups suggested that there might have been a bit more sympathy to Thurmond's former cause than that. Had it been a Democrat like Byrd (who should never have been there in the first place), he'd be gone too.
I will agree that African Americans in general will give a Democrat a more sympathetic reception to this kind of thing, purely because Democrats in general are more sympathetic to their political causes. Double standard for sure, but understandable.
A few Republicans seem to have brazened out their various sexual and corruption difficulties, so you can't say that they don't get away with these things. Even if its only three years since the sleaze was a large contributor to their loss of congress!
Right so they're all as corrupt as the next, I'm with you on this..... So will you be all on for voting the whole shoot out come Nov, start a clean slate that puts power back with the people where it belongs?
Term limits would be nice.
Quote from: J70 on January 09, 2010, 04:54:19 AM
Quote from: Main Street on January 08, 2010, 09:56:38 PM
It was not the intention to offend anyones sensitivities with the thread name.
Many people at the time seemed to put significance in that Obama is Afro American, the first non white president of the USA. What is the big deal about a partially Afro-American... or even a female President? So the USA has not yet had a woman as head of state, whereas so many other countries have had. Israel had Golda Meir. India had Indira Gandhi. And England had Thatcher. Many countries - both developed and underdeveloped - have had women as their highest political leader, whereas the USA has not yet had a woman as President or even as Vice-President.
If there were a great significance to such matters, then we would have to conclude that in terms of women's rights, the United States is lagging behind India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, France, Germany, England,
Liberia, Siberia, Iceland, Chile, Philippines and Israel... just to mention a few... and I really doubt that.
The same logic applies with respect to a non-white President.
Come on - its only just over 40 years since George Wallace ran for president to end desegregation and the Republicans' took the south from the Democrats in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act. For most of the history of the country, blacks, as you well know, were an extremely persecuted minority, for much of it legally so. To deny that Obama's election was significant in terms of being the first black president is ridiculous given America's racial history (and even present - some of the rhetoric and so-called humour coming out of the more extreme elements of the right wing were utterly racist). And living in NYC, I work with loads of African Americans - their joy was very real and heartfelt, particularly among the older ones, who'd felt they'd never see the day. Was very choked up myself on election night!
The American news media proclaimed his election as historic. I don't see it that way. The historic event was not the Democrats coming into power (and just happening to have a Black man as their candidate). A periodic switch in the dominant political party is really nothing unexpected and nothing unusual.
A historic event is the collapse of capitalism :)
We have to distance ourselves from sentiment when analysing the performance of the first Black president of the USA.
In the US, I understand that over the last few decades, there has been little or no progress - possibly regress - in reducing the gap between Blacks and Whites in respect to education and income. I have not got the statistics to hand. It is in this regard that we can get some measure of progress.
I would not endorse a "lesser of two evils" approach when it comes to Republican or Democrat..
I judge merit on seeing the performance.
How much change and bipartisanship has been experienced from Obama when he himself is a DC partisan insider
and he surrounded himself with DC partisan insiders?
I have already mentioned foreign policy, diplomacy and policy in substance and rhetoric has been a continuation of what was experienced under Bush.
A long read but some interesting points:
There's Plenty of Good News, But Will the US Ever Hear it?
by David Swanson
Whenever I write about U.S. politics, people ask me "Don't you have any good news?" (Unless the Republicans are in power, in which case people ask me "Who are you going to vote for?") But I do have good news, boatloads of good news, if Americans want to hear it.
If a city or state next to yours were to achieve a dramatic breakthrough for democratic representation, environmental sustainability, healthcare, education, peace, or justice, wouldn't that be good news? Wouldn't you trumpet that news where you live and demand the same of your elected officials?
When the United States gets something right nationally, and even when we don't, we're happy to assume that others around the world would like to imitate it. Some of us think bombs are the best way to help them do so. Others prefer diplomacy. But we all pretty much believe in sharing our wisdom.
But what if another country, or a large block of other countries, were to solve the most vexing problems facing the United States? What if they were to show us a general outline of how we could fix all the troubles that most trouble us?
Well, that would, of course, be an affront to denounce, ignore, and avoid. Unless our pining after good news were to outweigh our xenophobic pride and we were to become open to accepting the gifts of some of that non-American 95 percent of humanity.
If that happens, the first place we should look is Europe, and our guide should be Steven Hill's brilliant and comprehensive new book "Europe's Promise: Why the European Way Is the Best Hope in an Insecure Age."
The European Union (EU) is the world's largest and most competitive economy, and most of those living in it are wealthier, healthier, and happier than most Americans. Europeans work shorter hours, have a greater say in how their employers behave, receive lengthy paid vacations and paid parental leave, can rely on guaranteed paid pensions, have free or extremely inexpensive comprehensive and preventative healthcare, enjoy free or extremely inexpensive educations from preschool through college, impose half the per-capita environmental damage of Americans, endure a fraction of the violence found in the United States, imprison a fraction of the prisoners locked up here, and benefit from democratic representation, engagement, and civil liberties unimagined in the land where we're teased that the world hates our rather mediocre "freedoms." Europe even offers a model foreign policy, bringing neighboring nations toward democracy by holding out the prospect of EU membership, while we drive other nations away from good governance at great expense of blood and treasure.
What wonderful news! And yet, how many times during the Great Health Insurance Reform Debate did anyone take a look at the wheels already invented in Europe, where single-payer systems and systems built around non-profit insurance companies and price controls out-perform the for-profit U.S. system in every way? We would rather suffer more and die sooner than learn from people who live across an ocean, even if they learned a lot from us, even if we imposed structures on them a half-century ago that would have benefitted us as well.
Of course, this WOULD all be good news, if not for the extreme and horrible danger of higher taxes! Working less and living longer with less illness, a cleaner environment, a better education, more cultural enjoyments, paid vacations, and governments that respond better to the public -- that all SOUNDS nice, but the reality involves the ultimate evil of higher taxes! Or does it?
As Hill points out, Europeans do pay higher income taxes, but they generally pay lower state, local, property, and social security taxes. (They also pay those higher income taxes out of a larger paycheck.) And what Europeans keep in earned income they do not have to spend on healthcare or college or job training or numerous other expenses that are hardly optional but that we seem intent on celebrating our privilege to personally pay for.
If we pay roughly as much as Europeans in taxes, why do we have to pay for everything we need on our own, in addition? Why don't our taxes pay for our needs? The primary reason is that so much of our taxes goes to wars and the military. Recently much of it also goes to Wall Street and corporate bailouts. And this is not entirely new. In a given year, our government gives roughly $300 billion in tax breaks to businesses for their employee health benefits. That's enough to actually pay for everyone in this country to have healthcare, but it's just a fraction of what we dump into the for profit system that, as its name suggests, exists primarily to generate profits. Most of what we waste on this madness does not go through the government, a fact of which we are inordinately proud.
Europe is not perfection, and indeed has much to learn from us. Notably, we are ahead of Europe in confronting the endless menace of racism and nativism. Europe faces many dangers, but any lamented little steps its nations take in an American direction on taxes and benefits are relative to the great distance that separates us. Even were Europe to implode tomorrow, which seems far less likely than the United States doing so, it would have shown us the basic model for a more just and sustainable capitalist society in which wealth is more equitably distributed and most people are happier, less stressed, and less prone to severe frustration or violence.
The key to this, as Hill demonstrates, is a deeper and richer democracy in which workers share seats with owners on councils overseeing corporations, children's assemblies propose new laws to legislatures, everyone is automatically registered to vote, proportional representation allows more voices to be heard, free media is provided to campaigns (and newspapers and independent public media subsidized), and campaigns are financed by the public -- using some of those hated taxes that we prefer to bestow on weapons makers and bankers.
Of course, when I say "we prefer" I'm being tongue-in-cheek. The point is that Americans, in polls and surveys, would prefer to move much of our money from the military and bailouts to human needs. The problem is primarily that our views are not represented in our government, as this anecdote from "Europe's Promise" suggests:
"A few years ago, an American acquaintance of mine who lives in Sweden told me that he and his Swedish wife were in New York City and, quite by chance, ended up sharing a limousine to the theatre district with then-U.S. Senator John Breaux from Louisiana and his wife. Breaux, a conservative, anti-tax Democrat, asked my acquaintance about Sweden and swaggeringly commented about 'all those taxes the Swedes pay,' to which this American replied, 'The problem with Americans and their taxes is that we get nothing for them.' He then went on to tell Breaux about the comprehensive level of services and benefits that Swedes receive in return for their taxes. 'If Americans knew what Swedes receive for their taxes, we would probably riot," he told the senator. The rest of the ride to the theater district was unsurprisingly quiet."
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 06:11:58 AM
Quote
Looking for pity from you? Yes, that's it. ::)
Me...Fcuk no, It's obvious to me and I'm sure others that you're merely playing to crowd here in consistently
defending in indefensible
Quote
I am merely pointing out that two can play your game, pull up the stories and throw insults at anyone who doesn't think like you do.
I'm not playing any games here, simply pointing out the obvious disastrous and destructive policies that are
undoubtedly going to bankrupt this country..... And anyway even if I were to engage in petty mud slinging
surely you wouldn't have a leg to stand on in calling me on it ???
QuoteBut I still do not regret him winning the election, given the road McCain went down.
Well if a direct march towards Marxism is your thing and you honestly believe that spending us into oblivion is the best way to get there then so be it....I certainly won't be on that bus!
Having thought about it, you're probably right in terms of my complaints about insults being hypocritical. I've been disparaging of certain views on certain topics at times and probably will be so in the future, so I've probably got no right to whine when you or anyone else is disrespectful or patronizing. For that, I apologize!
Quote from: Main Street on January 12, 2010, 01:16:48 PM
Quote from: J70 on January 09, 2010, 04:54:19 AM
Quote from: Main Street on January 08, 2010, 09:56:38 PM
It was not the intention to offend anyones sensitivities with the thread name.
Many people at the time seemed to put significance in that Obama is Afro American, the first non white president of the USA. What is the big deal about a partially Afro-American... or even a female President? So the USA has not yet had a woman as head of state, whereas so many other countries have had. Israel had Golda Meir. India had Indira Gandhi. And England had Thatcher. Many countries - both developed and underdeveloped - have had women as their highest political leader, whereas the USA has not yet had a woman as President or even as Vice-President.
If there were a great significance to such matters, then we would have to conclude that in terms of women's rights, the United States is lagging behind India, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, France, Germany, England,
Liberia, Siberia, Iceland, Chile, Philippines and Israel... just to mention a few... and I really doubt that.
The same logic applies with respect to a non-white President.
Come on - its only just over 40 years since George Wallace ran for president to end desegregation and the Republicans' took the south from the Democrats in the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act. For most of the history of the country, blacks, as you well know, were an extremely persecuted minority, for much of it legally so. To deny that Obama's election was significant in terms of being the first black president is ridiculous given America's racial history (and even present - some of the rhetoric and so-called humour coming out of the more extreme elements of the right wing were utterly racist). And living in NYC, I work with loads of African Americans - their joy was very real and heartfelt, particularly among the older ones, who'd felt they'd never see the day. Was very choked up myself on election night!
The American news media proclaimed his election as historic. I don't see it that way. The historic event was not the Democrats coming into power (and just happening to have a Black man as their candidate). A periodic switch in the dominant political party is really nothing unexpected and nothing unusual.
A historic event is the collapse of capitalism :)
We have to distance ourselves from sentiment when analysing the performance of the first Black president of the USA.
In the US, I understand that over the last few decades, there has been little or no progress - possibly regress - in reducing the gap between Blacks and Whites in respect to education and income. I have not got the statistics to hand. It is in this regard that we can get some measure of progress.
I would not endorse a "lesser of two evils" approach when it comes to Republican or Democrat..
I judge merit on seeing the performance.
How much change and bipartisanship has been experienced from Obama when he himself is a DC partisan insider
and he surrounded himself with DC partisan insiders?
I have already mentioned foreign policy, diplomacy and policy in substance and rhetoric has been a continuation of what was experienced under Bush.
Not disagreeing with much of what you wrote, but believe me, had you been in NYC and plenty of other places in the US that night, you would have seen that it was not just another swing in power! As for the lesser of two evils approach, if only there were more choices!
Quote from: Declan on January 12, 2010, 01:49:13 PM
A long read but some interesting points:
There's Plenty of Good News, But Will the US Ever Hear it?
by David Swanson
Whenever I write about U.S. politics, people ask me "Don't you have any good news?" (Unless the Republicans are in power, in which case people ask me "Who are you going to vote for?") But I do have good news, boatloads of good news, if Americans want to hear it.
If a city or state next to yours were to achieve a dramatic breakthrough for democratic representation, environmental sustainability, healthcare, education, peace, or justice, wouldn't that be good news? Wouldn't you trumpet that news where you live and demand the same of your elected officials?
When the United States gets something right nationally, and even when we don't, we're happy to assume that others around the world would like to imitate it. Some of us think bombs are the best way to help them do so. Others prefer diplomacy. But we all pretty much believe in sharing our wisdom.
But what if another country, or a large block of other countries, were to solve the most vexing problems facing the United States? What if they were to show us a general outline of how we could fix all the troubles that most trouble us?
Well, that would, of course, be an affront to denounce, ignore, and avoid. Unless our pining after good news were to outweigh our xenophobic pride and we were to become open to accepting the gifts of some of that non-American 95 percent of humanity.
If that happens, the first place we should look is Europe, and our guide should be Steven Hill's brilliant and comprehensive new book "Europe's Promise: Why the European Way Is the Best Hope in an Insecure Age."
The European Union (EU) is the world's largest and most competitive economy, and most of those living in it are wealthier, healthier, and happier than most Americans. Europeans work shorter hours, have a greater say in how their employers behave, receive lengthy paid vacations and paid parental leave, can rely on guaranteed paid pensions, have free or extremely inexpensive comprehensive and preventative healthcare, enjoy free or extremely inexpensive educations from preschool through college, impose half the per-capita environmental damage of Americans, endure a fraction of the violence found in the United States, imprison a fraction of the prisoners locked up here, and benefit from democratic representation, engagement, and civil liberties unimagined in the land where we're teased that the world hates our rather mediocre "freedoms." Europe even offers a model foreign policy, bringing neighboring nations toward democracy by holding out the prospect of EU membership, while we drive other nations away from good governance at great expense of blood and treasure.
What wonderful news! And yet, how many times during the Great Health Insurance Reform Debate did anyone take a look at the wheels already invented in Europe, where single-payer systems and systems built around non-profit insurance companies and price controls out-perform the for-profit U.S. system in every way? We would rather suffer more and die sooner than learn from people who live across an ocean, even if they learned a lot from us, even if we imposed structures on them a half-century ago that would have benefitted us as well.
Of course, this WOULD all be good news, if not for the extreme and horrible danger of higher taxes! Working less and living longer with less illness, a cleaner environment, a better education, more cultural enjoyments, paid vacations, and governments that respond better to the public -- that all SOUNDS nice, but the reality involves the ultimate evil of higher taxes! Or does it?
As Hill points out, Europeans do pay higher income taxes, but they generally pay lower state, local, property, and social security taxes. (They also pay those higher income taxes out of a larger paycheck.) And what Europeans keep in earned income they do not have to spend on healthcare or college or job training or numerous other expenses that are hardly optional but that we seem intent on celebrating our privilege to personally pay for.
If we pay roughly as much as Europeans in taxes, why do we have to pay for everything we need on our own, in addition? Why don't our taxes pay for our needs? The primary reason is that so much of our taxes goes to wars and the military. Recently much of it also goes to Wall Street and corporate bailouts. And this is not entirely new. In a given year, our government gives roughly $300 billion in tax breaks to businesses for their employee health benefits. That's enough to actually pay for everyone in this country to have healthcare, but it's just a fraction of what we dump into the for profit system that, as its name suggests, exists primarily to generate profits. Most of what we waste on this madness does not go through the government, a fact of which we are inordinately proud.
Europe is not perfection, and indeed has much to learn from us. Notably, we are ahead of Europe in confronting the endless menace of racism and nativism. Europe faces many dangers, but any lamented little steps its nations take in an American direction on taxes and benefits are relative to the great distance that separates us. Even were Europe to implode tomorrow, which seems far less likely than the United States doing so, it would have shown us the basic model for a more just and sustainable capitalist society in which wealth is more equitably distributed and most people are happier, less stressed, and less prone to severe frustration or violence.
The key to this, as Hill demonstrates, is a deeper and richer democracy in which workers share seats with owners on councils overseeing corporations, children's assemblies propose new laws to legislatures, everyone is automatically registered to vote, proportional representation allows more voices to be heard, free media is provided to campaigns (and newspapers and independent public media subsidized), and campaigns are financed by the public -- using some of those hated taxes that we prefer to bestow on weapons makers and bankers.
Of course, when I say "we prefer" I'm being tongue-in-cheek. The point is that Americans, in polls and surveys, would prefer to move much of our money from the military and bailouts to human needs. The problem is primarily that our views are not represented in our government, as this anecdote from "Europe's Promise" suggests:
"A few years ago, an American acquaintance of mine who lives in Sweden told me that he and his Swedish wife were in New York City and, quite by chance, ended up sharing a limousine to the theatre district with then-U.S. Senator John Breaux from Louisiana and his wife. Breaux, a conservative, anti-tax Democrat, asked my acquaintance about Sweden and swaggeringly commented about 'all those taxes the Swedes pay,' to which this American replied, 'The problem with Americans and their taxes is that we get nothing for them.' He then went on to tell Breaux about the comprehensive level of services and benefits that Swedes receive in return for their taxes. 'If Americans knew what Swedes receive for their taxes, we would probably riot," he told the senator. The rest of the ride to the theater district was unsurprisingly quiet."
All you ever hear about the EU over here is that it is about to be taken over by Muslims and the euroweenies are effete poofs who are happy to be taxed to death, work half a week, get government handouts and rely on the US for military protection.
QuoteAll you ever hear about the EU over here is that it is about to be taken over by Muslims and the euroweenies are effete poofs who are happy to be taxed to death, work half a week, get government handouts and rely on the US for military protection.
Is it only what you hear or do you see a certain amount of truth in it ?... I was about to reply to Declan with...Sounds great on paper but how's that system actually working out for ye over there, it's exactly what I don't want to happen to this country but I'm afraid we're well on our way towards it!
QuoteI was about to reply to Declan with...Sounds great on paper but how's that system actually working out for ye over
Well because were literally halfway between Boston and Berlin we have the worst of both!!!
Not so good then so....at least you're honest!
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 12, 2010, 05:59:20 PM
QuoteAll you ever hear about the EU over here is that it is about to be taken over by Muslims and the euroweenies are effete poofs who are happy to be taxed to death, work half a week, get government handouts and rely on the US for military protection.
Is it only what you hear or do you see a certain amount of truth in it ?... I was about to reply to Declan with...Sounds great on paper but how's that system actually working out for ye over there, it's exactly what I don't want to happen to this country but I'm afraid we're well on our way towards it!
I'm sure plenty of Europeans are happy with their larger government support system, while others would be of the same mind as yourself. If it works for the likes of the Swedes, good luck to them. As to which school of thought in America to believe with regard to US-European comparisons, I don't know, but I do think there have to be some safety nets. I am not an economist (and they can't even come to any agreement themselves).
QuoteI'm sure plenty of Europeans are happy with their larger government support system, while others would be of the same mind as yourself. If it works for the likes of the Swedes, good luck to them. As to which school of thought in America to believe with regard to US-European comparisons, I don't know, but I do think there have to be some safety nets. I am not an economist (and they can't even come to any agreement themselves).
Kind of reminds me of one of my many signatures though;
"A Government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always rely on the support of Paul"
Every country has it's fair share of welfare recipients who'll always go for the easy way out no matter the cost but all that eventually does
is drag the whole system and the rest down with them... at least that's what history teaches us and you know the auld saying.......................
Quote from: Tyrones own on January 13, 2010, 01:22:53 AM
QuoteI'm sure plenty of Europeans are happy with their larger government support system, while others would be of the same mind as yourself. If it works for the likes of the Swedes, good luck to them. As to which school of thought in America to believe with regard to US-European comparisons, I don't know, but I do think there have to be some safety nets. I am not an economist (and they can't even come to any agreement themselves).
Kind of reminds me of one of my many signatures though;
"A Government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always rely on the support of Paul"
Every country has it's fair share of welfare recipients who'll always go for the easy way out no matter the cost but all that eventually does
is drag the whole system and the rest down with them... at least that's what history teaches us and you know the auld saying.......................
I think quite a few apart from welfare recipients are grateful for social safety nets, and if they weren't in the recent past I'm sure most of them are now after the past 18 months. I don't ever plan to be on the dole/welfare, but it is somewhat reassuring to know you or your friends and loved ones will at least have something to fall back on if anyone is unfortunate enough to lose their job, and, in most places, know you can at least be guaranteed treatment for serious medical problems without losing your house. As for the abusers, every endeavor or scheme in the history of man has had those who tried to abuse the system. That doesn't mean you throw the whole thing out.
No I hear you with the safety net thing but let me give another way that maybe best explains what I'm getting at
..maybe you've read this before;
An economics professor at a local college made a statement that he had never failed a single student before,
but had once failed an entire class.
--------------------------------------------
That class had insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no one would be rich, a great equalizer.
The professor then said, "OK,
we will have an experiment in this class on this plan".
All grades would be averaged and everyone would receive the same grade so no one would fail and no one would receive an A.
After the first test, the grades were averaged and everyone got a B.
The students who studied hard were upset and the students who studied little were happy.
As the second test rolled around, the students who studied little had studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted a free ride too so they studied little.
The second test average was a D!
No one was happy.
When the 3rd test rolled around, the average was an F.
The scores never increased as bickering,
blame and name-calling all resulted in hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
All failed, to their great surprise, and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is great but when government takes all the reward away, no one will try or want to succeed.
That's kinda sorta where I'm at :-\
Eatin' their own..... Bound to happen sooner or later ;D
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=A6_xgKWzhRw
This is out a good few months now . I'm not sure if it's been about here already but what the hey , enjoy it , it's interesting .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31648.html
Could someone tell me how this Horrible Cnut gets to keep his job
at MSNBC let alone his sports gig ???
Hes up against it now that the Democrats lost Ted Kennedy's seat.
Is that the Healthcare bill scuppered?
And I don't think that Obama is the Black Bush, hes just the president of the US of A.
What's Obama now...0 for 5 on campaigning for Dems, the Olympics
and who could forget Copenhagen ;D ;D
Someone should tell him that the campaigns over, no ones buying his
bullshit anymore......ah fcuk it I tried to warn ye, now look at us :-\