Can We Fix The Bush Years?

[Moby]

OK, no one seems to be able to discuss the challenges of the next President. We know in 2001 that Dubya stepped into office while the economy was moving downward but we had 8 years of massive economic growth, job creation and a surplus of cash. We had lots of room to maneuver.

Now after 8 years it seems that the next President has to fix all the things that started in 2000 and we've had much less growth in the economy.

Iraq and Afghanistan war.
Economic Crisis.
Home Foreclosures.
Doubling of Health Care costs.
Massive Budget Deficits.

Will the next President be successful if he can just fix the problems created by the Bush policies?

Or are there some other pressing issues then need to be addressed?

[Kanadesaga]

Think of rebuilding a sand castle with the same sand and the waves beating against it. we have hard times coming people. I hear the uber rich are hording gold.

[Moby]

With people being more concerned about Biden shouting instead of fixing America's problems I guess a large percentage of Americans don't really care if we fix the problems or not.

I wonder if they have any children that they care for.

[stefan segal]

With people being more concerned about Biden shouting instead of fixing America's problems I guess a large percentage of Americans don't really care if we fix the problems or not.

I wonder if they have any children that they care for.

Moby...If you deconstruct Obama's campaing design and execution, I believe you will be stunned by this man's comprehensive attention to detail...this should give you heart.

If you combine this information with the exacting balance of the first Black man with a shot of the presidency, carrying somewhere around 90% of the Black vote, walk the Black/White tightrope successfully with swiftboaters and lying repugs insessently taking shots at ewverything he does or says...then, this should give you heart.

If you listen to his innitial first days schedule in the oval office...(which could mean an indetermanent length of time...as there is a lot to do), he plans to go through the butch signings and laws to check their Constitutionality. As a professor of Contitutional law at a law college, I believe he is qualified for this action...this should give you heart.

And if you arfe not deaf, dumb, and blind, you hould have realized by now, that Obama is a superior person who has dedicated his whole life fron his early collegs days toward improving society...at the cost of his finacial career and concerns of prestige...both of which were his undenyably by merit and accoplishment...this also should give you heart.

Stefan

[Mr. Blue]

It goes beyond the Bush Years...America's foreign policy, economic policy, etc, has been in shambles for decades now and I don't see putting the genie back in the bottle anytime soon.

The founding fathers believed in small government, not getting into foreign entanglements, and as a country we would be a lot better off if we listened to the framers of our constitution.

[BlackAsCoal]

Moby...If you deconstruct Obama's campaing design and execution, I believe you will be stunned by this man's comprehensive attention to detail...this should give you heart.

If you combine this information with the exacting balance of the first Black man with a shot of the presidency, carrying somewhere around 90% of the Black vote, walk the Black/White tightrope successfully with swiftboaters and lying repugs insessently taking shots at ewverything he does or says...then, this should give you heart.

If you listen to his innitial first days schedule in the oval office...(which could mean an indetermanent length of time...as there is a lot to do), he plans to go through the butch signings and laws to check their Constitutionality. As a professor of Contitutional law at a law college, I believe he is qualified for this action...this should give you heart.

And if you arfe not deaf, dumb, and blind, you hould have realized by now, that Obama is a superior person who has dedicated his whole life fron his early collegs days toward improving society...at the cost of his finacial career and concerns of prestige...both of which were his undenyably by merit and accoplishment...this also should give you heart.

Stefan

You are in for a serious letdown my brother.

Obama is a plutocrat and a centrist. Bush may be gone, but the same puppetmasters who pulled his strings are still in control of the country. Look no further than the bailout. Where is the "change" Obama promised you. Have you researched who got the most money from Wall Street in this campaign?

Answer: Obama .. by far.

Are you of the belief that corporations throw money away to candidates who act against their interests?

As far as black support goes .. Obama will get 90% of the black vote at the end of the day .. question is, how big a number will that be. In case you aren't aware, there is a growing number of African-Americans who now recognize Obama is a fraud. This is not to say he won't win the election, after all, he's running against the worst candidate for president in American history who turned his ticket into a Saturday Night Live joke.

His war plans for Afghanistan and Pakistan are mindless and could produce more tragic results for America than the fraud of Iraq.

Obama is a self-invented character and he did a brilliant job of doing it. He traded instant wealth for ambition and it has paid off for him. Good job Obama.

But this isn't about the personal journey of an ambitious character, it's about the future of this nation .. and once again, we are going to elect another plutocrat who believes in the American empirium and who has proven he will give the keys to the government and the military over to the corporate interests he works for.

[BlackAsCoal]

It goes beyond the Bush Years...America's foreign policy, economic policy, etc, has been in shambles for decades now and I don't see putting the genie back in the bottle anytime soon.

The founding fathers believed in small government, not getting into foreign entanglements, and as a country we would be a lot better off if we listened to the framers of our constitution.

Thomas Jefferson believed that freedom from corporations was a basic human right.

It is that freedom Americans do not understand.

[stefan segal]

You are in for a serious letdown my brother.

Obama is a plutocrat and a centrist. Bush may be gone, but the same puppetmasters who pulled his strings are still in control of the country. Look no further than the bailout. Where is the "change" Obama promised you. Have you researched who got the most money from Wall Street in this campaign?

Answer: Obama .. by far.

Are you of the belief that corporations throw money away to candidates who act against their interests?

As far as black support goes .. Obama will get 90% of the black vote at the end of the day .. question is, how big a number will that be. In case you aren't aware, there is a growing number of African-Americans who now recognize Obama is a fraud. This is not to say he won't win the election, after all, he's running against the worst candidate for president in American history who turned his ticket into a Saturday Night Live joke.

His war plans for Afghanistan and Pakistan are mindless and could produce more tragic results for America than the fraud of Iraq.

Obama is a self-invented character and he did a brilliant job of doing it. He traded instant wealth for ambition and it has paid off for him. Good job Obama.

But this isn't about the personal journey of an ambitious character, it's about the future of this nation .. and once again, we are going to elect another plutocrat who believes in the American empirium and who has proven he will give the keys to the government and the military over to the corporate interests he works for.


Black As Coal...I found your assessment refreshingly comprehensive, but sadly, youiu carry too much baggage to into each faction of interest to come up with anything like reality.

I am aware of my own baggage massively stacked on the opposite side to yours, but I, unlike yourself, didn't fall back on labels...like plutocrat for my means of identifying Obama.

My method of reaching the conclusion that Obama is a superior individual is/was not simply a measure of his intelligence...as many of us have intelligence and actually put it to use, but a definition of what Obama's "good" looks like. and this description I assembled using his entire life.

To understand what a person is saying in any depth, you must first understand their in-house values..ie: "what good looks like." When this is understood, then a general statement of "improving education" makes sense, but makes a very different sense when Paln make the identical statement. When Palin talks about her view of "what is good" for education, it would include a heavy dose of religiosity and preclude free access to all but a select menue of literature and pseudo science...definately not even recognizeable to the effect that Obama described with the identical verbage.

So rather than paste a label onto a candidate, ten rail against the behavior and limits contained within the description of that (your ) label... you might profit by reaccessing the abilities of the man, but in particular, note the personal costs to himself and his family to pursue his single ambition to make make life better for those who need help and those of us who live a less rewarding life in society than his understanding of society can and should provide.

Stefan

[hdmarketing]

Well I can tell you this much...

Obama won't be fixing a fucking thing...

And if we keep approving bills with all this pork in it, we won't be fixing anything.

[Mr. Blue]

You are in for a serious letdown my brother.

Obama is a plutocrat and a centrist. Bush may be gone, but the same puppetmasters who pulled his strings are still in control of the country. Look no further than the bailout. Where is the "change" Obama promised you. Have you researched who got the most money from Wall Street in this campaign?

Answer: Obama .. by far.

Are you of the belief that corporations throw money away to candidates who act against their interests?

As far as black support goes .. Obama will get 90% of the black vote at the end of the day .. question is, how big a number will that be. In case you aren't aware, there is a growing number of African-Americans who now recognize Obama is a fraud. This is not to say he won't win the election, after all, he's running against the worst candidate for president in American history who turned his ticket into a Saturday Night Live joke.

His war plans for Afghanistan and Pakistan are mindless and could produce more tragic results for America than the fraud of Iraq.

Obama is a self-invented character and he did a brilliant job of doing it. He traded instant wealth for ambition and it has paid off for him. Good job Obama.

But this isn't about the personal journey of an ambitious character, it's about the future of this nation .. and once again, we are going to elect another plutocrat who believes in the American empirium and who has proven he will give the keys to the government and the military over to the corporate interests he works for.

Excellent post. I think at the end of Obama's first term people will be wondering what happened to all the change, however, Americans are easily tricked and almost all grasp onto feelings rather than actual fact.

Obama has that going for him...he's able to inspire that "feeling" but I think the facts will pan out that he's just another bought politician.

[SeedyROM]

You are in for a serious letdown my brother.

Obama is a plutocrat and a centrist. Bush may be gone, but the same puppetmasters who pulled his strings are still in control of the country. Look no further than the bailout. Where is the "change" Obama promised you. Have you researched who got the most money from Wall Street in this campaign?

Answer: Obama .. by far.

Are you of the belief that corporations throw money away to candidates who act against their interests?

As far as black support goes .. Obama will get 90% of the black vote at the end of the day .. question is, how big a number will that be. In case you aren't aware, there is a growing number of African-Americans who now recognize Obama is a fraud. This is not to say he won't win the election, after all, he's running against the worst candidate for president in American history who turned his ticket into a Saturday Night Live joke.

His war plans for Afghanistan and Pakistan are mindless and could produce more tragic results for America than the fraud of Iraq.

Obama is a self-invented character and he did a brilliant job of doing it. He traded instant wealth for ambition and it has paid off for him. Good job Obama.

But this isn't about the personal journey of an ambitious character, it's about the future of this nation .. and once again, we are going to elect another plutocrat who believes in the American empirium and who has proven he will give the keys to the government and the military over to the corporate interests he works for.

Well said...........Obama is not what he appears to be! As for the percentage of blacks who actually vote for Obama, I will bet 65% will support him. Blacks are far smarter than democrats give them credit for. Blacks still remember all the hate from the South where the Dem party rose up from. Little has changed history and the hate has not been fogotten.

Obama is partly self-invented, the party dressed him up and built up the mantra that some will vote for only to find out how wrong they were. Obama will be remembered as the next Jimmy Carter.

[BlackAsCoal]

Black As Coal...I found your assessment refreshingly comprehensive, but sadly, youiu carry too much baggage to into each faction of interest to come up with anything like reality.

I am aware of my own baggage massively stacked on the opposite side to yours, but I, unlike yourself, didn't fall back on labels...like plutocrat for my means of identifying Obama.

My method of reaching the conclusion that Obama is a superior individual is/was not simply a measure of his intelligence...as many of us have intelligence and actually put it to use, but a definition of what Obama's "good" looks like. and this description I assembled using his entire life.

To understand what a person is saying in any depth, you must first understand their in-house values..ie: "what good looks like." When this is understood, then a general statement of "improving education" makes sense, but makes a very different sense when Paln make the identical statement. When Palin talks about her view of "what is good" for education, it would include a heavy dose of religiosity and preclude free access to all but a select menue of literature and pseudo science...definately not even recognizeable to the effect that Obama described with the identical verbage.

So rather than paste a label onto a candidate, ten rail against the behavior and limits contained within the description of that (your ) label... you might profit by reaccessing the abilities of the man, but in particular, note the personal costs to himself and his family to pursue his single ambition to make make life better for those who need help and those of us who live a less rewarding life in society than his understanding of society can and should provide.

Stefan

I'm impressed .. good analysis .. although you assume that we're looking at the same thing and consider the same things vital in judgement.

Plutocrat is an apt term and correctly identifies what I see as the threat that is destroying this nation. It's also an apt term for politicians who vote for Wall Street bailouts and promote wars and policies that benefit the corporate interest at the peril further denigrating the lives of ordinary Americans and further alienating the rest of the world. Obama fits the mold.

You may not like the label and you're certainly free to challenge it, but your not using it or anyother "label" is hardly an argument, nor does it strengthen one. Labels are useful in political discourse.

You may have the power to look into Obama's soul and ascertain his "good." I however, do not have that ability, nor do I find it useful in politics. I listen to what comes out of one's mouth, the policies one promotes and supports, and the votes one takes while in office. By that measureable measure, not the subjective view of "good", I can more correctly determine who and what a politician is.

I see no "good" in voting for government spying of American citizens.

I see no "good" in indiscriminately bombing innocent people in Pakistan against the demands of the Pakistani government.

I see no "good" in threatening Iran .. especially given that US idiot foreign policy empowered Iran with our foolish attack on Iraq.

I see no "good" in further enflaming the ME by declaring Israel owns Jeruselum.

I see no "good" in a lot of things Obama says and does these days, thus I don't support him.

Here's a label for you .. flip-flopper. Is that label useful in political discourse? .. of course it is, because it identifies a belief that a politician frequently changes position based on audience. Obama fits that mold .. do you disagree? If not .. here's where you get to defend what you believe. Nothing wrong with the label .. the question is .. does it fit.

Flip-flopper also identifies another question .. which Obama is it?

The Obama BEFORE he won the nomination on the strength of his antiwar stance and the mantra of "changing the way they do business in Washington" .. or is it the Obama who has followed the exact same footprints of the previous administration SINCE he got the nomination?

To understand what a person is DOING you don't have to look into their soul or make yourself believe anything. Look at the words that come out of their mouths and the actions they take.

AS for the "personal costs to him and his family" .. I've already acknowledged Obama's ambition .. but at what cost to the country? He has to threaten Pakistan to look presidential .. what do you think the costs are for that?

He has to agree with a bailout for Wall Street so he doesn't make waves .. what are the costs for that one?

I appreciate your perspective, I really do, but you and I aren't looking at the same thing my brother.

[BlackAsCoal]

Well said...........Obama is not what he appears to be! As for the percentage of blacks who actually vote for Obama, I will bet 65% will support him. Blacks are far smarter than democrats give them credit for. Blacks still remember all the hate from the South where the Dem party rose up from. Little has changed history and the hate has not been fogotten.

Obama is partly self-invented, the party dressed him up and built up the mantra that some will vote for only to find out how wrong they were. Obama will be remembered as the next Jimmy Carter.

Obama will get 90% of the black vote no doubt .. but 90% of what number? He's alienatiing more evryday as he continues to give African-Americans the finger. Nader was right about him. He'll need an energized and overwhelming black vote to win Georgia and other southern states.

I wouldn't go so far as to say blacks excersise politics TODAY any better than anyone else. TODAY, our politics are stuck somewhere between incredibly immature and amazingly dumb. TODAY, symbolism replaces demand. The symbolism of Obama is enough for far too many of us.

The comparison with Obama and Carter is valid when considering they are both very smart people. But Carter has more balls than Obama and is a far more honest politician.

[Cat slave]

Listen to the melodious sounds coming from the flute...I can just smell the
salt in the air....I can hear it too....ooops...its the ocean...damn, how could
we have been so easy? Glub, glub...gasp!

Did I take my meds this morning? Maybe not.:D

[Moby]

Well I can tell you this much...

Obama won't be fixing a fucking thing...

And if we keep approving bills with all this pork in it, we won't be fixing anything.
Under what administration did pork barrel spending increase by %1,000?

[Moby]

The question still remains, does any President have a chance of fixing 8 years of Bush Presidency? Are there any pressing issues that exist today that existed before Bush took office?

It seems that the next President is only being asked to correct the past 8 years.

[SeedyROM]

In 8 sure but only if the housing bet pays off and the investments in corporations pan out as predicted. I expect 60% to pay off but some will require mergers or more time to payoff. In order to cut the debt in half we need a stable economy with no new taxes so small and medium businesses can survive. I see the next 4 years with a flat to moderately positive growth.

Look around your city, there are far more businesses that exceed the $250,000 in annual revenue tax threshold than most people realize. Those businesses need flat or lower taxes and more deductibles or many will be laying off workers. We have far more private companies with less than 75 employees than we have publically traded and or private investor owned corporations. Obama wants to tax and spend, something American cannot afford. Tire shops, restaurants, car dealers, wood shops, telemarketing services, clothing, the list of small and medium is vast and Obama wants to raise taxes and cut deductions! Not wise!!!

Pressing issues before W. SSI has never been resolved! The continue to borrow from SSI and loot it for healthcare.

[Moby]

Look around your city, there are far more businesses that exceed the $250,000 in annual revenue tax threshold than most people realize.
What does the $250k have to do with businesses? I know that one proposed tax plan uses the $250k threshold for salary. Most business owners will take large portions of revenue as dividends and you know that those are taxed at 15% which is the lowest in the history of your nation. Most people creating jobs get the bulk of their income through capital gains. Warren Buffet even mentioned that he was being taxed at the lowest rate of any one in his business and that something was very wrong with our tax system.

You also know that with the tax laws written the way they are that many companies show no profits for years because everything is considered an expense and goes against profits. Company cars, Vegas hookers and Island business meetings all go against profits.

In my business I'd be pocketing well over $1,000,000 before the $250k salary mark would effect me in any way.

[BlackAsCoal]

The question still remains, does any President have a chance of fixing 8 years of Bush Presidency? Are there any pressing issues that exist today that existed before Bush took office?

It seems that the next President is only being asked to correct the past 8 years.

The next president, Obama, will not be able to fix the Bush years, but if the economy does much better, that's all he'll need to run on in 2012 .. that is unless he starts more war, which is quite possible.

[Moby]

The next president, Obama, will not be able to fix the Bush years, but if the economy does much better, that's all he'll need to run on in 2012 .. that is unless he starts more war, which is quite possible.
The economy is going to tank for another year or more and this time we are strapped with massive debt, huge deficits, high costs of energy and a week dollar. We don't have the maneuverability that we did when Bush took office.

Yes, I've been stating for years that Bush will follow his father's foot steps and start new conflicts between the election and him leaving office.

[BlackAsCoal]

The economy is going to tank for another year or more and this time we are strapped with massive debt, huge deficits, high costs of energy and a week dollar. We don't have the maneuverability that we did when Bush took office.

Yes, I've been stating for years that Bush will follow his father's foot steps and start new conflicts between the election and him leaving office.

The economy may recover somewhat by the end of Obama's first term.

But I meant if OBAMA starts another war .. which is quite possible.

Hopefully no one mentions "draft" and "national security" in the same sentence because Obambi will feel compelled to support it.

[bairdi]

The economy may recover somewhat by the end of Obama's first term.

But I meant if OBAMA starts another war .. which is quite possible.

Hopefully no one mentions "draft" and "national security" in the same sentence because Obambi will feel compelled to support it.
If the economy was not being propped up by war spending in Iraq, we would be in much more dire straights right now. If Obama were to end the war and direct the spending into rebuilding this country's infrastructure, I believe it would better serve this country. It would put more people back into the workforce, more money back into our economy and more revenue into the treasury.

It is going to take a monumental effort to reverse the effects of the Bush economy. This government has to make it painful for US companies that ship jobs overseas in order to avoid taxes and easier for small businesses that operate within the confines of this country.

[BlackAsCoal]

If the economy was not being propped up by war spending in Iraq, we would be in much more dire straights right now. If Obama were to end the war and direct the spending into rebuilding this country's infrastructure, I believe it would better serve this country. It would put more people back into the workforce, more money back into our economy and more revenue into the treasury.

It is going to take a monumental effort to reverse the effects of the Bush economy. This government has to make it painful for US companies that ship jobs overseas in order to avoid taxes and easier for small businesses that operate within the confines of this country.

Obama says he's going to clamp down on tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas. We'll see if he actually comes through with that, or is it just more of his words for the moment only.

He may also seek to prop up the economy with war .. it's the American way. We believe that war IS business.

[stefan segal]

I'm impressed .. good analysis .. although you assume that we're looking at the same thing and consider the same things vital in judgement.

Plutocrat is an apt term and correctly identifies what I see as the threat that is destroying this nation. It's also an apt term for politicians who vote for Wall Street bailouts and promote wars and policies that benefit the corporate interest at the peril further denigrating the lives of ordinary Americans and further alienating the rest of the world. Obama fits the mold.

You may not like the label and you're certainly free to challenge it, but your not using it or anyother "label" is hardly an argument, nor does it strengthen one. Labels are useful in political discourse.

You may have the power to look into Obama's soul and ascertain his "good." I however, do not have that ability, nor do I find it useful in politics. I listen to what comes out of one's mouth, the policies one promotes and supports, and the votes one takes while in office. By that measureable measure, not the subjective view of "good", I can more correctly determine who and what a politician is.

I see no "good" in voting for government spying of American citizens.

I see no "good" in indiscriminately bombing innocent people in Pakistan against the demands of the Pakistani government.

I see no "good" in threatening Iran .. especially given that US idiot foreign policy empowered Iran with our foolish attack on Iraq.

I see no "good" in further enflaming the ME by declaring Israel owns Jeruselum.

I see no "good" in a lot of things Obama says and does these days, thus I don't support him.

Here's a label for you .. flip-flopper. Is that label useful in political discourse? .. of course it is, because it identifies a belief that a politician frequently changes position based on audience. Obama fits that mold .. do you disagree? If not .. here's where you get to defend what you believe. Nothing wrong with the label .. the question is .. does it fit.

Flip-flopper also identifies another question .. which Obama is it?

The Obama BEFORE he won the nomination on the strength of his antiwar stance and the mantra of "changing the way they do business in Washington" .. or is it the Obama who has followed the exact same footprints of the previous administration SINCE he got the nomination?

To understand what a person is DOING you don't have to look into their soul or make yourself believe anything. Look at the words that come out of their mouths and the actions they take.

AS for the "personal costs to him and his family" .. I've already acknowledged Obama's ambition .. but at what cost to the country? He has to threaten Pakistan to look presidential .. what do you think the costs are for that?

He has to agree with a bailout for Wall Street so he doesn't make waves .. what are the costs for that one?

I appreciate your perspective, I really do, but you and I aren't looking at the same thing my brother.

Black As Coal...I appreciate your comprehensive response, although I see we are experiencing difficulty between delivery of a concept and the reception of that concept unalterd.

The most prominent instance of that fumbled understanding is that of my statement pertaining to the "good". I wasn't referring to what I believed to be 'good', but what "good looks like to Obama".

I also noted, and I believe pivotally, that to understand the words and actions of Obama (in this instance), that one must be conversant with what the speaker believes "what good looks like".

All Obama's efforts and energy will be wasted if he doesn't win the presidency.

Like all candidates who win election, Obama must move toward center...where the votes are.

Unlike all candidates, he has charges against his being too cerebral to protect us from terrorism, too elete to fight a war, too inexperienced to deal with diplomacy, too naieve to be head of state, and finally, too dark to be white.

The hurdles before Obama have been higher and more resistant than to other candidates, but Obama has surmounted them one after the other, by being more and better than those who preceeded him. (mccain is not worth mentioning in this scenerio, as there is no common measure that could include both of them)

I'm not sure where you got your information about Obama's tendancies toward war, as he is against war on principle, and has great faith in his diplomatic early steps to avoid wars in general.

We are at war in Afghanistan, and have a real objective which doesn't include oil (but may include a pipeline previously engineered by Enron), but will improve the conditions for Afghanistan and the world. None of these conditions can be said about Iraq...as Iraq is about oil and petro-dollars remaining in US currency.

Obama's beating of the war drums concerning Afghanistan is to conduct an effecient war to it's conclusion...which I, for one, feel is the most humane and financially limiting mode of pursuing a war we can't walk away from.

You cite Obama wanting to spy on US citizens...another mystery as to where you glean your information. It might hearten you to know that Obama, along with picking through our budget, is also promised to pick through, line by line, the butch changes in law for Constitutional infractions upon citizen's rights...which I am certain generalized spying is one.

Obama was a professor of Constitutional law in law school...this array of specialixed knowlege is a great plus in his venture to restore America to it's historic promise.

I'm sorry you can't enjoy Obama's run and mccain's fall as I am experiencing at present. My joy is expanded realizing that the house ans senate will be locked into the mix with the presidency...as it takes such power to undue the harm butch's lock on our government has induced/produced.

Of course Democrats fall far lower on the liar and thief scale that do the repugs...in fact, I am of the mind that all that corruption is history..that Obama is ringing in a new era of good government.

Stefan

[BlackAsCoal]

Black As Coal...I appreciate your comprehensive response, although I see we are experiencing difficulty between delivery of a concept and the reception of that concept unalterd.

The most prominent instance of that fumbled understanding is that of my statement pertaining to the "good". I wasn't referring to what I believed to be 'good', but what "good looks like to Obama".

I also noted, and I believe pivotally, that to understand the words and actions of Obama (in this instance), that one must be conversant with what the speaker believes "what good looks like".

All Obama's efforts and energy will be wasted if he doesn't win the presidency.

Like all candidates who win election, Obama must move toward center...where the votes are.

Unlike all candidates, he has charges against his being too cerebral to protect us from terrorism, too elete to fight a war, too inexperienced to deal with diplomacy, too naieve to be head of state, and finally, too dark to be white.

The hurdles before Obama have been higher and more resistant than to other candidates, but Obama has surmounted them one after the other, by being more and better than those who preceeded him. (mccain is not worth mentioning in this scenerio, as there is no common measure that could include both of them)

I'm not sure where you got your information about Obama's tendancies toward war, as he is against war on principle, and has great faith in his diplomatic early steps to avoid wars in general.

We are at war in Afghanistan, and have a real objective which doesn't include oil (but may include a pipeline previously engineered by Enron), but will improve the conditions for Afghanistan and the world. None of these conditions can be said about Iraq...as Iraq is about oil and petro-dollars remaining in US currency.

Obama's beating of the war drums concerning Afghanistan is to conduct an effecient war to it's conclusion...which I, for one, feel is the most humane and financially limiting mode of pursuing a war we can't walk away from.

You cite Obama wanting to spy on US citizens...another mystery as to where you glean your information. It might hearten you to know that Obama, along with picking through our budget, is also promised to pick through, line by line, the butch changes in law for Constitutional infractions upon citizen's rights...which I am certain generalized spying is one.

Obama was a professor of Constitutional law in law school...this array of specialixed knowlege is a great plus in his venture to restore America to it's historic promise.

I'm sorry you can't enjoy Obama's run and mccain's fall as I am experiencing at present. My joy is expanded realizing that the house ans senate will be locked into the mix with the presidency...as it takes such power to undue the harm butch's lock on our government has induced/produced.

Of course Democrats fall far lower on the liar and thief scale that do the repugs...in fact, I am of the mind that all that corruption is history..that Obama is ringing in a new era of good government.

Stefan

I like you my brother. Thoughtful critical thinker. I almost hate to disagree with you.

Like you, during the primaries I also supported Obama. Witnessing the rise of an African-American to the highest office was almost too good to be true. I lived the 60's and such a thing was not considered possible within my lifetime. But it wasn't just because he is black .. there are lots of black people like Colin Powell whom I would never support. I supported Obama because he spoke of changing the way America does business and he took the position of being against needless war and deaths of innocent people.

The moment I began to support him is when he said "We must not only bring the troops home from Iraq, we must change the mindset that put them there." .. I have a daughter in the military and that was all I needed to hear, I'm sold. He was swept into the nomination by the antiwar forces and the left over the powerful Clinton Clan. Had he not been against the invasion of Iraq, he would not be the nominee, Hilary Clinton would be.

Since he won the nomination he's had to "refine" his comments about Iraq. He now wants to leave a couple of brigades there .. which is not bringing the troops home or ending the war. The Iraqi government doesn't want us there and have said we need to set a timeline to get the hell out of THEIR country. Additionally, most of the troops leaving Iraq wouldn't be coming home, they'll be going to Afghanistan to do more ghost hunting .. killing innocent civilians along the way.

You cannot defeat terrorism by using it .. and, according to the Rand Corporation and other think tanks on terrorism, terrorism is best fought by law enforcement and that use of the military is ineffective and often counter-productive to fighting terrorism. The Rand report said that the use of military force by the United States or other countries should be reserved for quelling large, well-armed and well-organized insurgencies and that American officials should stop using the term "war on terror" and replace it with "counterterrorism."

I was looking for a leader smart enough to figure that out. What Obama is proposing is the exact same mindset that got us Iraq, and Pakistan may turn out to be his Iraqistan. That is a lose-lose situation and it takes no genius to figure that out. Just read history. We risk catastrophic defeat in Pakistan.

He flipped on the Georgia/Russia conflict and now agrees with McCain. In fact, it was Joe Biden's idea to payoff the Georgian president with ONE BILLION DOLLARS of US taxpayer money for his treachery and Obama agrees with that as well.

One question for you .. Why did the Georgian president start a conflict with Russia he knew he would lose in about 5 minutes .. and get many of his own people killed in the process? .. I was looking for a leader smart enough to ask that question .. not throw away a billion dollars protecting and following the Bush doctrine on putting ABM's next to Russia.

His agreeing on illegal spying on US citizens .. look no further than his support for Bush's FISA legislation.

His appearance before AIPAC was a disgusting and embarassing display of weakness. I'm looking for a leader who wants to end the ME crisis, not just kiss Israeli ass.

And, I challenge the notion that democrats have to move to the center to win. Democratic presidents have served a grand total of 3 terms in the White House in the last 40 years .. and if one uses the "Nader did it" logic, without Perot there would be no Clinton years to speak of.

The surprising victories in 2006 came because democratic voters rejected the centrisim of the DLC and the antiwar forces and the left returned democrats to the majority in Congress. It was those same forces that swept Obama into the nomination, attracting republicans and independents along the way .. then he abandoned them and ran to the center.

Universal healthcare is not a centrist idea .. but a majority of Americans want it.

Ending the war in Iraq is not a centrist idea .. but most of the country agress with it.

I was looking for a leader bold enough to take a stand, not bend over everytime the wind blows.

What I think about him and his disdain of black issues, I think Ralph Nader was right, but you appear to "get it" with the issue of race in America .. this may make interesting reading for you .. in fact, you should subscribe and read this site often if for nothing more than just the perspectives ..
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=787&Itemid=1

Also, I'd like to reccommend a piece by General Smedley Butler, "War is a Racket" .. written in 1939, but just as pointedly correct today as then .. excerpt ..

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

In short my brother .. I was looking for a leader, not an ambitioius individual who will say and do anything to get elected. That's not leadership and that's not change.

Sorry that I can't join in the Obama fun, but as I said, I have a daughter in the militray who has served three tours in Iraq. I wouldn't wish my nightmares while she was in Iraq on anyone.

[SeedyROM]

Under what administration did pork barrel spending increase by %1,000?


ummmmm which presidential candidate spent more in pork barrel spending to pander, bribe and deceive all taxpayers for votes?

[SeedyROM]

What does the $250k have to do with businesses? I know that one proposed tax plan uses the $250k threshold for salary. Most business owners will take large portions of revenue as dividends and you know that those are taxed at 15% which is the lowest in the history of your nation. Most people creating jobs get the bulk of their income through capital gains. Warren Buffet even mentioned that he was being taxed at the lowest rate of any one in his business and that something was very wrong with our tax system.

You also know that with the tax laws written the way they are that many companies show no profits for years because everything is considered an expense and goes against profits. Company cars, Vegas hookers and Island business meetings all go against profits.

In my business I'd be pocketing well over $1,000,000 before the $250k salary mark would effect me in any way.

You are mixing big corporate with small biz taxes, two entirely different animals. The big boys wrote the tax code to favor them and stiffle competition from small biz. Look at how retailers like Wal-Mart killed the Mom and Pop retail stores, corporate gas stations versus the average joe, or even Starbuck's versus the local coffee shop or Bistro. Big biz can get away with paying 12% in taxes or less, small biz is more easily regulated.

You said you own a business, what do you sell? Most small biz owners fear the IRS and will not cheat nor dance the line like big biz does. Big can fight the IRS and not care about the costs using OPM Other Peoples Money. The $250K mark is a death sentence unless the small biz owner is willing to gamble with the Fed. There may be deductions allowed, but nothing like they deserve. The line should be $2 Million for raising biz taxes.

[SeedyROM]

Obama says he's going to clamp down on tax breaks for companies shipping jobs overseas. We'll see if he actually comes through with that, or is it just more of his words for the moment only.

He may also seek to prop up the economy with war .. it's the American way. We believe that war IS business.

Obami will flip flopp on jobs going overseas too. He plans to send jobs to poverty strickened areas. To get those jobs, no doubt he'll have to cave in on the tax breaks, executives never cave in when it comes to incentives.

Obama's world poverty plan is to send American jobs to the middle east and more to latin countries. Obama wants American to think the same thing Bush and Clinton did. Obama wants us to think jobs will raise the living standard in the countries that get those jobs. But we all know how that worked in Mexico and central america. Politicians create a vaccum effect, moving our money out of the country along with those jobs, not just tax money, but income, revenue for commerce and future savings. Those countries would rather receive a handout and IMF money than build a country up and work to get it out of poverty.

Obama is going to agree with job layoffs and send more people to the unemployment line, more lost savings and retirement and those jobs will go to countries that will side with US corporations desires to continue sweatshop labor standards. 2nd and 3rd world countries keep the people in poverty regardless of IMF funds and job creation.

Tax breaks or not, Americans lose on Super Tuesday.

[disrupter]

War spending is about the worst economic return of all,

it just goes up in flames & creates long term hatred of your nation.

It doesn't improve infrastructure making it easier to do business or just live.
It doesn't accumulate hard or soft assets for the nation.

We could be spending & investing in water projects; building, rehabilitating & replacing highways, roads & bridges. We could be building nationwide fiberoptics so you would get broadband for free.
We could be investing in science & alternate energy.

Instead we burn up lives, resources & goodwill up in the deserts of Iraq.
Where we are creating vast legions of terrorists rather than leaving these people alone in their own nations.
Instead we simply prop up criminal looters & thieves of wall street.

If there isn't a sweeping out of incumbents next election due to this bankrupt bailout, then i will simply give up on American democracy as hopeless.

[SeedyROM]

War, religion, banking and prostitution, 4 of the worlds oldest professions.

[stefan segal]

I like you my brother. Thoughtful critical thinker. I almost hate to disagree with you.

Like you, during the primaries I also supported Obama. Witnessing the rise of an African-American to the highest office was almost too good to be true. I lived the 60's and such a thing was not considered possible within my lifetime. But it wasn't just because he is black .. there are lots of black people like Colin Powell whom I would never support. I supported Obama because he spoke of changing the way America does business and he took the position of being against needless war and deaths of innocent people.

The moment I began to support him is when he said "We must not only bring the troops home from Iraq, we must change the mindset that put them there." .. I have a daughter in the military and that was all I needed to hear, I'm sold. He was swept into the nomination by the antiwar forces and the left over the powerful Clinton Clan. Had he not been against the invasion of Iraq, he would not be the nominee, Hilary Clinton would be.

Since he won the nomination he's had to "refine" his comments about Iraq. He now wants to leave a couple of brigades there .. which is not bringing the troops home or ending the war. The Iraqi government doesn't want us there and have said we need to set a timeline to get the hell out of THEIR country. Additionally, most of the troops leaving Iraq wouldn't be coming home, they'll be going to Afghanistan to do more ghost hunting .. killing innocent civilians along the way.

You cannot defeat terrorism by using it .. and, according to the Rand Corporation and other think tanks on terrorism, terrorism is best fought by law enforcement and that use of the military is ineffective and often counter-productive to fighting terrorism. The Rand report said that the use of military force by the United States or other countries should be reserved for quelling large, well-armed and well-organized insurgencies and that American officials should stop using the term "war on terror" and replace it with "counterterrorism."

I was looking for a leader smart enough to figure that out. What Obama is proposing is the exact same mindset that got us Iraq, and Pakistan may turn out to be his Iraqistan. That is a lose-lose situation and it takes no genius to figure that out. Just read history. We risk catastrophic defeat in Pakistan.

He flipped on the Georgia/Russia conflict and now agrees with McCain. In fact, it was Joe Biden's idea to payoff the Georgian president with ONE BILLION DOLLARS of US taxpayer money for his treachery and Obama agrees with that as well.

One question for you .. Why did the Georgian president start a conflict with Russia he knew he would lose in about 5 minutes .. and get many of his own people killed in the process? .. I was looking for a leader smart enough to ask that question .. not throw away a billion dollars protecting and following the Bush doctrine on putting ABM's next to Russia.

His agreeing on illegal spying on US citizens .. look no further than his support for Bush's FISA legislation.

His appearance before AIPAC was a disgusting and embarassing display of weakness. I'm looking for a leader who wants to end the ME crisis, not just kiss Israeli ass.

And, I challenge the notion that democrats have to move to the center to win. Democratic presidents have served a grand total of 3 terms in the White House in the last 40 years .. and if one uses the "Nader did it" logic, without Perot there would be no Clinton years to speak of.

The surprising victories in 2006 came because democratic voters rejected the centrisim of the DLC and the antiwar forces and the left returned democrats to the majority in Congress. It was those same forces that swept Obama into the nomination, attracting republicans and independents along the way .. then he abandoned them and ran to the center.

Universal healthcare is not a centrist idea .. but a majority of Americans want it.

Ending the war in Iraq is not a centrist idea .. but most of the country agress with it.

I was looking for a leader bold enough to take a stand, not bend over everytime the wind blows.

What I think about him and his disdain of black issues, I think Ralph Nader was right, but you appear to "get it" with the issue of race in America .. this may make interesting reading for you .. in fact, you should subscribe and read this site often if for nothing more than just the perspectives ..
http://www.blackagendareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=787&Itemid=1

Also, I'd like to reccommend a piece by General Smedley Butler, "War is a Racket" .. written in 1939, but just as pointedly correct today as then .. excerpt ..

WAR is a racket. It always has been.

It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives.

A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small "inside" group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/warisaracket.html

In short my brother .. I was looking for a leader, not an ambitioius individual who will say and do anything to get elected. That's not leadership and that's not change.

Sorry that I can't join in the Obama fun, but as I said, I have a daughter in the militray who has served three tours in Iraq. I wouldn't wish my nightmares while she was in Iraq on anyone.


Black As Coal, I enjoy the fullness of your responses, but as you find in my responses answers that don't that don't meet the truth test, I still am having trouble with some of your assertions...although I am understanding more where you are comming from...so to speak.

My overview of your reaction to Obama is that your pattern is that of a jilted lover. To my ear, you appear to leap toward the worst possible motivations for Obama's choices without much or ahy cause to do so.

You speak of Obama's lack of fighting for the Black interests. Obama is in a campaign that requires him to be race-neutral. Obama can't beat the drum for Black interests and become president...but as president, he can...for Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, and ALL Americans who live under our Constitution.

B.A.C., Obama must first gain the presidency to make the changes he has proposed. You feel cheated from what his stance was in the primaries, and how he has changed his focus in his presidential race. I am confident that he believes in and plans to act upon every position that he has taken, then and now.

Obama is not a liar. I am making these presumptions from the choices, actions, and activities Obama has made and done from his college day onward.

Obama is a long term planner who draws from his core beliefs and values when making life choices. His values are of a maturity few notables ever reach. He is a superior example of humanity.

That he sees the need to win his election to accomplish his aims for putting america back together, is expected...that he needs voted to win the elected, is also a no brainer, but does he lie to achieve these elements? The answer is NO...he does not lie. I think you don't appreciate the degree of the complexity of factors that go into all the elements of government.

Obama, has almost never been stuck no knowing the facts of any and all the questions thrown at him, no matter the subject.

I also feel that you are somehow making a composit of butch/Obama acts in your mind. I don't understand how a deep thinker such as yourself could charge a first term Senator with the horrors of war...especially a Senator who is against any warring from his gut...but you made such ascertations above.

This is how/why I leaped to the jilted lover pattern...it seems to fit.

I am certain that you are not as bitter toward Obama as your (venting) statements imply.

I am sorry that your daughter is in Iraq. I too believe that none of our children should be there, but in real life, if you invest a trillion dollars and the blood of our youth in a place...you don't leave without at least oil contracts and some guns around to protect your investments.

Global gamesmanship plays differently from the gamesmanship we as private citizens are familiar with. There are rules and contracts and threats and trade and the obstruction of trade...it's just different..,so different that whatever opinions we arrive at in our ignorance, have no bearing or value in a game where ignorance is not only no excuse, but an invitation to get oneself mauled.

Stefan

[Moby]

You said you own a business, what do you sell? Most small biz owners fear the IRS and will not cheat nor dance the line like big biz does. Big can fight the IRS and not care about the costs using OPM Other Peoples Money. The $250K mark is a death sentence unless the small biz owner is willing to gamble with the Fed. There may be deductions allowed, but nothing like they deserve. The line should be $2 Million for raising biz taxes.
I don't push the line at all. I've taken my returns to the local IRS office and even had them review it for me and verify all of my business expenses. A business owner can make $10 of millions and only be taxed on his own salary, some capital gains and a small profit. I know people that pocket close to a $ million and claim they only pay about $50k in taxes.

Me I don't push the line. I communicate with them because I'd much rather pay a few thousand more and be left alone.

[BlackAsCoal]

Black As Coal, I enjoy the fullness of your responses, but as you find in my responses answers that don't that don't meet the truth test, I still am having trouble with some of your assertions...although I am understanding more where you are comming from...so to speak.

My overview of your reaction to Obama is that your pattern is that of a jilted lover. To my ear, you appear to leap toward the worst possible motivations for Obama's choices without much or ahy cause to do so.

You speak of Obama's lack of fighting for the Black interests. Obama is in a campaign that requires him to be race-neutral. Obama can't beat the drum for Black interests and become president...but as president, he can...for Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians, and ALL Americans who live under our Constitution.

B.A.C., Obama must first gain the presidency to make the changes he has proposed. You feel cheated from what his stance was in the primaries, and how he has changed his focus in his presidential race. I am confident that he believes in and plans to act upon every position that he has taken, then and now.

Obama is not a liar. I am making these presumptions from the choices, actions, and activities Obama has made and done from his college day onward.

Obama is a long term planner who draws from his core beliefs and values when making life choices. His values are of a maturity few notables ever reach. He is a superior example of humanity.

That he sees the need to win his election to accomplish his aims for putting america back together, is expected...that he needs voted to win the elected, is also a no brainer, but does he lie to achieve these elements? The answer is NO...he does not lie. I think you don't appreciate the degree of the complexity of factors that go into all the elements of government.

Obama, has almost never been stuck no knowing the facts of any and all the questions thrown at him, no matter the subject.

I also feel that you are somehow making a composit of butch/Obama acts in your mind. I don't understand how a deep thinker such as yourself could charge a first term Senator with the horrors of war...especially a Senator who is against any warring from his gut...but you made such ascertations above.

This is how/why I leaped to the jilted lover pattern...it seems to fit.

I am certain that you are not as bitter toward Obama as your (venting) statements imply.

I am sorry that your daughter is in Iraq. I too believe that none of our children should be there, but in real life, if you invest a trillion dollars and the blood of our youth in a place...you don't leave without at least oil contracts and some guns around to protect your investments.

Global gamesmanship plays differently from the gamesmanship we as private citizens are familiar with. There are rules and contracts and threats and trade and the obstruction of trade...it's just different..,so different that whatever opinions we arrive at in our ignorance, have no bearing or value in a game where ignorance is not only no excuse, but an invitation to get oneself mauled.

Stefan

I fully understand your "jilted lover" comparison, although change that a bit to "jilted supporter" and you'd be much closer to the truth. If I was looking from your perspective, I might arrive at the same conclusions you have .. however, I'm don't see the world through your eyes my brother and I don't play the game of politics as you do.

I'm a socialist, democratic socialist to be exact. Neither democrat nor republican. I'm unencumbered by things I'm supposed believe .. just because I'm supposed to believe them. I get to see the world with much more clarity without the encumberance of rose-colored glasses.

At the core of your argument is that Obama knows best. He knows what he's doing, doing what he has to do, so I should be satisfied and kinda shut up. I know that isn't what you're literally saying and likely not even what you mean .. but that's what I'm hearing. .. AND, the urgency of black issues aside, they aren't as important as Obama becoming the president ..

Here's my problem with both those arguments .. they don't work. They never have, they never will. Allowing a politician, any politician to steer the course not only doesn't work, it isn't what politics was even designed to be.

I've been up close and personal with politics and activism most of my life. There is one thing that I've learned to be undeniably true in America .. rights are determined by what you can demand, not based on what is just, fair, humane, honest, or what Jesus would do. If you can't demand it, then it is not your right. African-Americans have been in America since 1619 and "civility" didn't become a right until 1965 .. not until we demanded it. Waiting on the "good" people to stop the horror didn't work.

America didn't come to the crisis it now faces by accident. The American people didn't lose control of their government by mistake. We demand nothing, we allow politicians to do whatever the hell they say they need to do .. and we say nothing. No outrage, no nothing. The politicians we say nothing to just stole almost a trillion dollars right before our eyes .. and gave it to their friends who buy them dinner and contribute large sums to their campaigns .. like Obama. You say he's doing what he has to do .. I say perhaps, but the American people sure the fuck aren't. Pardon my language.

Only 30% of Americans supported the bailout, but they did it anyway .. and they don't really care what Americans have to say about it because .. what are you going to do about it? NOTHING, not a goddamn thing. We'll make excuses for them .. and my good brother .. question the motivations of those who don't swallow those excuses.

When Obama flipped on FISA .. you mean supporters weren't supposed to say anything?

He not only supported the bailout, but he's led reluctant politicians to change their mind .. don't criticize .. just go along? .. Is that a plan?

My favorite cherised document of our history is not the Constitution, but rather the Declaration of Independence because it defines the difference between a citizen and a subject. Citizens have responsibilites and duties, subjects swallow. Don't get me wrong, I am not talking about you .. I'm defining my view of what is American and why allowing politicans to be actors and clowns does not work.

Take a look back at my comments and you'll find I never suggested Obama should be the black president. I said he should address the issues of the black community .. no differently than I would expect of a white politician. Politics is quid-pro-quo, if you want my vote, what are you going to do for my community. When Obama visits hispanics he talks about immigration, driver's licenses, small business and things that concern hispanics. No one is asking him to be the hispanic president. When he visits the jewish community he talks about Israel and things they want to hear. Gays, women, veterans, and every demographic he visits. No one is asking him to be the gay president.

When he visits the black community he comes to scold, talk about absent fathers, responsibility. You suggest there should be no problem with that. We should understand. Get in line. ..

The war on drugs is nothing more than a war on black people. There isn't even a sane argument against that truth. Nor is there a sane argument against the truth of racial motivated disparities in arrests, sentencing, and probation. Up to 70% of all illegal drug users in the US are white. Blacks make up about 14%, about proportionate with our population. Yet. we are overwhelming the majority of those locked up for drugs in what has now become the biggest prison nation in the history of Man. We lock up more people than every totalitarian nation we look down our noses at .. and it has become a business.

Know who that happened under .. Bill Clinton, the incarceration president.

The injustice of the JUST-US criminal system is devastating the black community and it gives license to the police to murder at will .. including a 92 year-old woman sitting alone at home. Kicked her door in and shot her dead, right in the wheelchair she was sitting in. Claimed she shot all three officers who kicked her door in .. Annie Oakley style .. and she was selling drugs .. all proven lies .. but this good, now dead, old lady was no anomaly.

Get in line .. make no demands .. hope he'll get around to it.

Joe Lieberman had no problem addressing the needs of the jewish comminity when he ran with Gore. Did you vote for him?

I don't have your luxury to wait in line while my community is being ignored. I have children, and some of them have children. Question .. If the black community can't ask and demand that our critical issues be addressed by Obama .. what do I say to the white politician who may be in a position to correct an injustice? Wouldn't that politician correctly say, "why didn't you ask Obama?"

Simply stated my wise friend, I don't do lessor of two evils. Look around America today .. what has that gotten us? The "lessor" strategy does not work. Remaing trapped in this two party quagmire of tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum does not work. You don't like the word plutocracy, but that is exactly what we are. You and I joust about who we should vote for, but neither of our votes may even be counted. American elections are privately owned .. and Americans allowed that to happen because we don't demand anything.

I prefer to work to build the importance of 3rd parties, in my case the Greens.

Don't worry, Obama will win ..mostly because he's running against the worst candidate in a long ass time. Then after he wins .. you and I get to have this conversation again.

Dissent IS American my brother.

[Cat slave]

I don't push the line at all. I've taken my returns to the local IRS office and even had them review it for me and verify all of my business expenses. A business owner can make $10 of millions and only be taxed on his own salary, some capital gains and a small profit. I know people that pocket close to a $ million and claim they only pay about $50k in taxes.

Me I don't push the line. I communicate with them because I'd much rather pay a few thousand more and be left alone.

Sounds like protection money to me.

[stefan segal]

I fully understand your "jilted lover" comparison, although change that a bit to "jilted supporter" and you'd be much closer to the truth. If I was looking from your perspective, I might arrive at the same conclusions you have .. however, I'm don't see the world through your eyes my brother and I don't play the game of politics as you do.

I'm a socialist, democratic socialist to be exact. Neither democrat nor republican. I'm unencumbered by things I'm supposed believe .. just because I'm supposed to believe them. I get to see the world with much more clarity without the encumberance of rose-colored glasses.

At the core of your argument is that Obama knows best. He knows what he's doing, doing what he has to do, so I should be satisfied and kinda shut up. I know that isn't what you're literally saying and likely not even what you mean .. but that's what I'm hearing. .. AND, the urgency of black issues aside, they aren't as important as Obama becoming the president ..

Here's my problem with both those arguments .. they don't work. They never have, they never will. Allowing a politician, any politician to steer the course not only doesn't work, it isn't what politics was even designed to be.

I've been up close and personal with politics and activism most of my life. There is one thing that I've learned to be undeniably true in America .. rights are determined by what you can demand, not based on what is just, fair, humane, honest, or what Jesus would do. If you can't demand it, then it is not your right. African-Americans have been in America since 1619 and "civility" didn't become a right until 1965 .. not until we demanded it. Waiting on the "good" people to stop the horror didn't work.

America didn't come to the crisis it now faces by accident. The American people didn't lose control of their government by mistake. We demand nothing, we allow politicians to do whatever the hell they say they need to do .. and we say nothing. No outrage, no nothing. The politicians we say nothing to just stole almost a trillion dollars right before our eyes .. and gave it to their friends who buy them dinner and contribute large sums to their campaigns .. like Obama. You say he's doing what he has to do .. I say perhaps, but the American people sure the fuck aren't. Pardon my language.

Only 30% of Americans supported the bailout, but they did it anyway .. and they don't really care what Americans have to say about it because .. what are you going to do about it? NOTHING, not a goddamn thing. We'll make excuses for them .. and my good brother .. question the motivations of those who don't swallow those excuses.

When Obama flipped on FISA .. you mean supporters weren't supposed to say anything?

He not only supported the bailout, but he's led reluctant politicians to change their mind .. don't criticize .. just go along? .. Is that a plan?

My favorite cherised document of our history is not the Constitution, but rather the Declaration of Independence because it defines the difference between a citizen and a subject. Citizens have responsibilites and duties, subjects swallow. Don't get me wrong, I am not talking about you .. I'm defining my view of what is American and why allowing politicans to be actors and clowns does not work.

Take a look back at my comments and you'll find I never suggested Obama should be the black president. I said he should address the issues of the black community .. no differently than I would expect of a white politician. Politics is quid-pro-quo, if you want my vote, what are you going to do for my community. When Obama visits hispanics he talks about immigration, driver's licenses, small business and things that concern hispanics. No one is asking him to be the hispanic president. When he visits the jewish community he talks about Israel and things they want to hear. Gays, women, veterans, and every demographic he visits. No one is asking him to be the gay president.

When he visits the black community he comes to scold, talk about absent fathers, responsibility. You suggest there should be no problem with that. We should understand. Get in line. ..

The war on drugs is nothing more than a war on black people. There isn't even a sane argument against that truth. Nor is there a sane argument against the truth of racial motivated disparities in arrests, sentencing, and probation. Up to 70% of all illegal drug users in the US are white. Blacks make up about 14%, about proportionate with our population. Yet. we are overwhelming the majority of those locked up for drugs in what has now become the biggest prison nation in the history of Man. We lock up more people than every totalitarian nation we look down our noses at .. and it has become a business.

Know who that happened under .. Bill Clinton, the incarceration president.

The injustice of the JUST-US criminal system is devastating the black community and it gives license to the police to murder at will .. including a 92 year-old woman sitting alone at home. Kicked her door in and shot her dead, right in the wheelchair she was sitting in. Claimed she shot all three officers who kicked her door in .. Annie Oakley style .. and she was selling drugs .. all proven lies .. but this good, now dead, old lady was no anomaly.

Get in line .. make no demands .. hope he'll get around to it.

Joe Lieberman had no problem addressing the needs of the jewish comminity when he ran with Gore. Did you vote for him?

I don't have your luxury to wait in line while my community is being ignored. I have children, and some of them have children. Question .. If the black community can't ask and demand that our critical issues be addressed by Obama .. what do I say to the white politician who may be in a position to correct an injustice? Wouldn't that politician correctly say, "why didn't you ask Obama?"

Simply stated my wise friend, I don't do lessor of two evils. Look around America today .. what has that gotten us? The "lessor" strategy does not work. Remaing trapped in this two party quagmire of tweedle-dee and tweedle-dum does not work. You don't like the word plutocracy, but that is exactly what we are. You and I joust about who we should vote for, but neither of our votes may even be counted. American elections are privately owned .. and Americans allowed that to happen because we don't demand anything.

I prefer to work to build the importance of 3rd parties, in my case the Greens.

Don't worry, Obama will win ..mostly because he's running against the worst candidate in a long ass time. Then after he wins .. you and I get to have this conversation again.

Dissent IS American my brother.


Black As Coal...I understand, as much as you've told me, and your reasoning is sound. I haven't lived in a society where juris prudence is a terrorist organization on a daily basis, so my understanding is flawed.

Third parties are composed by men, and men grow corrupt...although I can see why the attraction, but I don't believe they can ever get into the presidency. I do believe they can shape the agenda while running, but they also function as spoilers...Florida race went to butch because of nader...and jeb.

I can see that I have the luxury of betting on a belief, whereas you have a singular history of being targeted for double dealing and have used up your good will and that's nothing I can debate.

I have always backed my own bets and I still comfortable with my assessment of Obama. He is NOT stiffing the Black community. I said it before...Obama need to be race-neutral to get into office. He is ten times the person that anyone else in politics is.

Think of Kucinich. A strong right-minded politician. He could never get elected...he has no political sense...he pisses everyone off he needs to vote with him to get anything done. He always goes for the whole loaf and gets nowhere.

I would wish for you the capacity to withhold your judgement of Obama until he is president. Politics for Obama is his means to accomplish his community work on a national/global scale.

The politics of becomming the first Black president is mind boggling. You can see that the contest is too much for mccain to handle...think how fine a line Obama must walk while playing a winning game.

You don't seem to be the type to cry before being bit, but your presented facts seem a thin excuse to damn him. I don't know why or if he voted as you said, but I trust hs reasoning was acceptable.

As far as the bailout goes...the whole world is holding our currency and if we didn't act to protect it from dropping, then the world would dump our money back within our borders while cherry picking industries and real estate that comprise our wealth, while the influx of of dollars would crash our curency to the level of Confederate dollars. We had to made that gesture...Obama acted responsibly.

Stefan

[Dale escondido]

I don't push the line at all. I've taken my returns to the local IRS office and even had them review it for me and verify all of my business expenses. A business owner can make $10 of millions and only be taxed on his own salary, some capital gains and a small profit. I know people that pocket close to a $ million and claim they only pay about $50k in taxes.

Me I don't push the line. I communicate with them because I'd much rather pay a few thousand more and be left alone.

If you are strictly a us entity you can cut taxes in half incorporating.
But global entities can end up with refund from tax payers if they charge their us divisions more and allow the profits to go where taxes are lower or in some countries where payouts make them go away.
Walking into an irs office??, get a good cpa and stay home.

[BlackAsCoal]

Black As Coal...I understand, as much as you've told me, and your reasoning is sound. I haven't lived in a society where juris prudence is a terrorist organization on a daily basis, so my understanding is flawed.

Third parties are composed by men, and men grow corrupt...although I can see why the attraction, but I don't believe they can ever get into the presidency. I do believe they can shape the agenda while running, but they also function as spoilers...Florida race went to butch because of nader...and jeb.

I can see that I have the luxury of betting on a belief, whereas you have a singular history of being targeted for double dealing and have used up your good will and that's nothing I can debate.

I have always backed my own bets and I still comfortable with my assessment of Obama. He is NOT stiffing the Black community. I said it before...Obama need to be race-neutral to get into office. He is ten times the person that anyone else in politics is.

Think of Kucinich. A strong right-minded politician. He could never get elected...he has no political sense...he pisses everyone off he needs to vote with him to get anything done. He always goes for the whole loaf and gets nowhere.

I would wish for you the capacity to withhold your judgement of Obama until he is president. Politics for Obama is his means to accomplish his community work on a national/global scale.

The politics of becomming the first Black president is mind boggling. You can see that the contest is too much for mccain to handle...think how fine a line Obama must walk while playing a winning game.

You don't seem to be the type to cry before being bit, but your presented facts seem a thin excuse to damn him. I don't know why or if he voted as you said, but I trust hs reasoning was acceptable.

As far as the bailout goes...the whole world is holding our currency and if we didn't act to protect it from dropping, then the world would dump our money back within our borders while cherry picking industries and real estate that comprise our wealth, while the influx of of dollars would crash our curency to the level of Confederate dollars. We had to made that gesture...Obama acted responsibly.

Stefan

First thing my brother .. let's assume that I'm your older brother .. and as your older brother, I get to tell you what I think and pop you upside yo' head if you disagree. As you read this next sentence, imagine my cyber hand right next to yoir head.

Never, ever, let me hear you say that Nader cost Gore the election ever again.

:)

Seriously, that is such a tortured logic. If you don't vote for the person I support then you're voting for my opposition. C'mon brother, that is not how it works, and it doesn't factor voters who use their vote for other reasons than winning, and it doesn't factor voters who don't vote. How many voters who didn't vote might have voted for your opposition had they voted?

If you use that twisted logic, then if not for Perot, there would be no Clinton era to talk about, and democrats would have served exactly one term in the White House in the last 40 years. That mindfuck keeps Americans trapped in the two-party quagmire.

Nader didn't lose Gore the election, Gore did .. starting with his pick of the now utterly repugnant Joe Lieberman. Did Nader pick Lieberman for Gore? Gore ran away from the political successes of Clinton. Gore transformed himself into some kind of metrosexual who needed to take a poll to determine what color shirt to wear. No offense to metrosexuals, but I'm real sure America isn't ready to elect one as president. .. Gore didn't fight for Florida as he should, and he didn't even win his own home state. Had Gore shown the balls he's shown since he's been out of politics he would have won .. He didn't lose because many Americans were excersising their right to vote for an alternative to the two-party trap.

In my opinion, I carry neither the weight or fate of America with my one vote .. which may or may not be counted. I carry the weight of my convictions and conscience with my vote. It does not belong to democrats.

I agree with you about Kucinich, but I also respect the right of those who support him. Sometimes winning isn't the goal. Kucinich, Nader, and Cynthia McKinney bring issues to the table that democrats will completely ignore otherwise .. because The Democratic Party is the party for centrists, not liberals or the left. The right has the Republican Party, centrists own the Democratic Party .. the left needs it's own party and that's what my vote and voice are working to do. Why should the left be beholden to a party that ignores it?

Among my too many hats that make my wife crazy, I'm a writer, activist, and political consultant. My voice is committed to building an alternative to the Democratic Party for the left. In my opinion, it's what's best for America.

The first black president .. who then ignores issues critical to the black community is symbolism over substance my good brother. It doesn't matter to me one iota the race or political party of a leader who will address truth and justice AND reject the horrors of needless war. One of my favorite Civil Rights heroes is Republican Senator Everett Dirksen. He deserves more credit than he got.

The REPUBLICAN Governor of Illinois took the bold and courageous step of suspending the death penalty in his state because he knew the racially motivated injustices of the criminal system .. make that the proven. studied, and documented injustices, put more African-Americans to death than should be. When running for the Senate, Obama was against the death penalty .. now, as you say, doing what he has to do, he's FOR the death penalty. Either you're suggesting that Obama, when president, is going to flip-flop again and the be against the proven, studied, and documented racially motivated injustice of the death penalty, OR, once again, blacks should endure injustice and just be happy with the symbolism.

Again, I'm a socialist. The thought of handing a trillion dollars to wealthy bankers who caused a disaster of their own making while ordinary Americans are losing everything .. and we're spending 10 billion dollars a month in Iraq, billions more in Afghanistan, looking for ways to spend more in Pakistan .. can't find money for education, infrastructure, and job creation .. while we give away a billion to Georgia for starting a war .. is simply mindboggling nonsensical to me.

I stand with over 200 economists and Bernie Sanders, I believe corporations should be allowed to fail. I stand with Thomas Jefferson and believe that freedom from corporations is a basic human right.

Believe me brother, you have NOT used up my goodwill or respect for your opinion and good analysis. I like you.

[stefan segal]

Again, I'm a socialist. The thought of handing a trillion dollars to wealthy bankers who caused a disaster of their own making while ordinary Americans are losing everything ..

Black As Coal, I enjoy and am impressed with the scope of the elements factoring into your conclusions. This being so, it becomes more and more obvious that we are using different rulers to measure our personal realities. This is obviously true of all individuals when paced side by side, but as our conversation expands into detail and depth, I am experiencing our value differences more and more sharply.

I find this experience as unsettling as being caught in a revival meeting and attempting to deconstruct their logic train that brings them to uttering such statements without condition or benifit of reality.

I am not sufficiently informed by the statement: "I am a socialist.". We all are socialist to one degree or another...it is the degree that defines, and I haven't that information from you.

I just listened to Obama give a speak about health care, which I am certain will be spun by repugs into socialized medicine. I have no problem with the term or the actuality of socialized medicine, only that it should work effectively for everyone. I also believe that some social maintenence should not be handled by the private sector, as profit should not be a factor.

The bailout mechanics, is not a giveaway to big business. It is more a unblocking of the credit stream. I know this sounds prescripted by the barons of finance, but bundled mortages of unnown and mixed ratings is bloing the credit flow between banks and ultimately to small businesses and private citizens.

The cessation of credit flow is financial death to our nation...the whole of our nation, and MUST be freed up.

Personally, I would like to see all the thieves and long strings of skimmers suffer retribution, but this moment is not 'the' moment for that endeavor.

Business encourages opportunism, and if congress opens opportunity to steal, lie and mislead and misdirect, then one can be assured lying and theivery will grow to be the new norm...we are all just people who are measured by our response to our own appetites.



I stand with over 200 economists and Bernie Sanders, I believe corporations should be allowed to fail. I stand with Thomas Jefferson and believe that freedom from corporations is a basic human right.


Black As Coal, don't you think it would be better than to allow corporations to fall, as only a corporation-sized entity could produce an automobile or a computor that any normal person could afford, while also supplying first rate design and craftsmanship, but instead, restructure corporations by changing laws which allow them to be anti-national tax thieves?

My focus would be to jail international lobbyists, as their status is ALEIN and they are influencing our government lawmakers. If international corporations choose to function as internationalists when it suits them, then they should be jailed for attempting to bribe "our" representatives.


Believe me brother, you have NOT used up my goodwill or respect for your opinion and good analysis. I like you.[/QUOTE]

Thank you for your goodwill, but I assume you must be tired of hearing my particular rant, as in this case it mirrors the establishment.

Obama does not mirror the establishment...although the establishment is established precisely because it fulfills a social function... no Obama is focused on the people...the ones socialists spend their time on. I'm surprised yet again, that you refuse to see what is possible and what will take more time to effect in our existing society, and instead damn Obama for not committing political suicide to meet your agenda. This, to me, is a repug response...repugs are all for getting through the next hour/day, without a thought for the effect of their action in the future. In other words they don't see the forrest for the trees. I don't believe this describes your limits, but it continues to confound me how you string your logic to produce your conclusions.

Peace...

Stefan

[bairdi]

Stefan and BlackAsCoal..........it has been like a breath of fresh air to read the back and forth discussion you two have engaged in. Finally, an intelligent discussion without the bitterness and name calling that usually goes on here. I applaud both of you.

[BlackAsCoal]

Stefan and BlackAsCoal..........it has been like a breath of fresh air to read the back and forth discussion you two have engaged in. Finally, an intelligent discussion without the bitterness and name calling that usually goes on here. I applaud both of you.

Thank you brother .. I enjoy conversations with you as well.

[BlackAsCoal]

Again, I'm a socialist. The thought of handing a trillion dollars to wealthy bankers who caused a disaster of their own making while ordinary Americans are losing everything ..

Black As Coal, I enjoy and am impressed with the scope of the elements factoring into your conclusions. This being so, it becomes more and more obvious that we are using different rulers to measure our personal realities. This is obviously true of all individuals when paced side by side, but as our conversation expands into detail and depth, I am experiencing our value differences more and more sharply.

I find this experience as unsettling as being caught in a revival meeting and attempting to deconstruct their logic train that brings them to uttering such statements without condition or benifit of reality.

I am not sufficiently informed by the statement: "I am a socialist.". We all are socialist to one degree or another...it is the degree that defines, and I haven't that information from you.

I just listened to Obama give a speak about health care, which I am certain will be spun by repugs into socialized medicine. I have no problem with the term or the actuality of socialized medicine, only that it should work effectively for everyone. I also believe that some social maintenence should not be handled by the private sector, as profit should not be a factor.

The bailout mechanics, is not a giveaway to big business. It is more a unblocking of the credit stream. I know this sounds prescripted by the barons of finance, but bundled mortages of unnown and mixed ratings is bloing the credit flow between banks and ultimately to small businesses and private citizens.

The cessation of credit flow is financial death to our nation...the whole of our nation, and MUST be freed up.

Personally, I would like to see all the thieves and long strings of skimmers suffer retribution, but this moment is not 'the' moment for that endeavor.

Business encourages opportunism, and if congress opens opportunity to steal, lie and mislead and misdirect, then one can be assured lying and theivery will grow to be the new norm...we are all just people who are measured by our response to our own appetites.



I stand with over 200 economists and Bernie Sanders, I believe corporations should be allowed to fail. I stand with Thomas Jefferson and believe that freedom from corporations is a basic human right.


Black As Coal, don't you think it would be better than to allow corporations to fall, as only a corporation-sized entity could produce an automobile or a computor that any normal person could afford, while also supplying first rate design and craftsmanship, but instead, restructure corporations by changing laws which allow them to be anti-national tax thieves?

My focus would be to jail international lobbyists, as their status is ALEIN and they are influencing our government lawmakers. If international corporations choose to function as internationalists when it suits them, then they should be jailed for attempting to bribe "our" representatives.


Believe me brother, you have NOT used up my goodwill or respect for your opinion and good analysis. I like you.

Thank you for your goodwill, but I assume you must be tired of hearing my particular rant, as in this case it mirrors the establishment.

Obama does not mirror the establishment...although the establishment is established precisely because it fulfills a social function... no Obama is focused on the people...the ones socialists spend their time on. I'm surprised yet again, that you refuse to see what is possible and what will take more time to effect in our existing society, and instead damn Obama for not committing political suicide to meet your agenda. This, to me, is a repug response...repugs are all for getting through the next hour/day, without a thought for the effect of their action in the future. In other words they don't see the forrest for the trees. I don't believe this describes your limits, but it continues to confound me how you string your logic to produce your conclusions.

Peace...

Stefan[/QUOTE]

Not tired of hearing "your particular rant" at all brother.

My father always told me, "If you can't defend what you believe .. why do you believe it." Good conversation provides that opportunity.

My only question is that I'm not understanding why you think I should be so enamored by Barack Obama. I've listed issue after issue where I have serious disagreements with his policies and stance. I vehemently disagree with his stance on war .. not what the flowery stuff he says on his website, but the stance and positions he's taking.

How do you reconcile the continued mass-murder of innocent civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan? Honestly, I don't get that.

Obama agrees with this mass-murder of innocents and you can't figure out why I don't support him? Are democrats now the ones to use "collateral damage" to justify their war mongering?

... gotta run .. client calling .. will finish this post later