The Cellar - The Obamanation

Page 22 of 28

« First

Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page

The Cellar (http://cellar.org/index.php)

- Politics (http://cellar.org/forumdisplay.php?f=5)

- - The Obamanation (http://cellar.org/showthread.php?t=19310)

morethanpretty

10-15-2010 05:23 PM

He secretly rages about bagging Muslim tea.

classicman

10-19-2010 12:23 PM

Obama's Lost Magic

Quote:

Two years on from his historic election victory, US President Barack Obama is trying to recover his lost magic as defeat for the Democrats looms in the midterm elections. But he is no longer the man he used to be, and his window of opportunity has passed.

He wants everything to be as it was before. He wants it to be as innocent and passionate, as honest and boundless. He wants it to be as full of promises and the conviction that everything is possible in the Land of Opportunity. Because, as he told his supporters back then, "We are the ones we've been waiting for." It was a rallying cry so powerful and romantic it sounded like a line from a good song.

Today, Barack Obama is the first black president of the United States. Back then, in 2008, he was probably the best election campaigner of all time. And now he is on the campaign trail again. This fall he is speaking in Philadelphia, Chicago and Columbus, Ohio, spreading the message that "they" (the Republicans and their donors) want to rob "us" (open-minded, young Americans) of our future.

At the Crossroads

It is like a grown-up going back to the places of his youth: the public swimming pool where he learned to swim, the intersection where he had his first kiss. It's a sentimental journey, and at the same time an admission that youth doesn't last forever.

There are crossroads in every life, decisive moments. Afterwards, what was reality until a moment ago is just a memory, and the present has changed. The politician who once embodied a brave new alternative with his iconic slogan "Yes, we can" would probably love to be able to preserve his triumph as it was and hang on to the ease of those early, naive years. But that's not possible. Political careers succeed or fail - but they do not stop.

continues here

I just finished reading this and thought it was a very insightful piece from a perspective outside the confines of the USA.

TheMercenary

10-19-2010 01:41 PM

I think it was way off base in it's assessment of the country in general terms. Insightful only of his assessment of the current state of the political nation but to call the NYT as the only source of rational thought, please....

Quote:

Only the major newspapers still provide intelligent analysis, by people like the New York Times' insightful and levelheaded columnist David Brooks.

or statements like:

Quote:

They are the descendants of immigrants, and proud of it, and they oppose immigration.

What utter BS...

He clearly does not understand the US.

classicman

10-19-2010 02:38 PM

I was referring to the perception from the outside looking in. Accuracy was not part of that. I was thinking of it in terms of what we here in America think when we look at other countries.
Are our views as skewed, if you will, as theirs?

Oh and welcome back ya prick. How ya feeling?

TheMercenary

10-19-2010 08:07 PM

First good day. Thanks for asking.

You know, the more I read the article the more I realized that this guy who wrote the bit know less about us than he think he does. He obviously never lived here. I would be more interested in having our EU participants read it and hear their take on it. But alas I am not holding my breath...

Urbane Guerrilla

10-30-2010 12:36 AM

More on all that: Charles Krauthammer, Oct 22

classicman

11-15-2010 02:58 PM

Obama to Switch Party

Quote:

(Washington) President Barack Obama has confided his plans to become a registered Republican some time before the end of the lame-duck session of the 111th Congress. Speaking to his inner circle, he lamented failing to bring the two major parties together. One of his confidants reported Obama saying, "It's really just one party anyway and clearly the Republicans have the confidence of the people. I can finish my original mission much easier within the GOP." Sources wouldn't elaborate on what that mission is.

Obama clearly signaled his intentions through two recent tactical moves. He relented on ending the Bush-era tax breaks for the top 1% of income earners. The 3% reduction in the top rate accounts for over $1.0 trillion in lost revenues. Prior to the 2010 midterm elections, Obama hinted that he opposed a renewal of the tax breaks. It looked like the president might win this one with speculation that the tax breaks would likely die due to the post midterm atmosphere.

more here

TheMercenary

11-15-2010 07:49 PM

Where is Carlos?

TheMercenary

12-15-2010 08:26 PM

Well, the beat goes on....

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=174&load=3751

TheMercenary

12-15-2010 10:08 PM

It just doesn't get any better than this, Obamy in his own words.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/achenblog/

TheMercenary

01-23-2011 02:43 PM

Great article.

Backdoor Big Government
Americans sent a small-government message in November, but Obama isn’t listening.

http://city-journal.com/2011/21_1_sn...overnment.html

TheMercenary

02-03-2011 07:12 PM

ACLU and Eric Holder in Bed together.... Imagine that.

http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/...veal-collusion

Happy Monkey

02-04-2011 11:02 AM

It's always encouraging when the ACLU and the government are on the same side.

Pico and ME

02-04-2011 11:18 AM

OH Noes!

TheMercenary

02-04-2011 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey (Post 709754)

It's always encouraging when the ACLU and the government are on the same side.

I don't think so....

Quote:

“It is one thing to share the ACLU’s disrespect for the rule of law but it is quite another to collude with the organization on a prosecutorial strategy against the State of Arizona. Frankly, these new documents show it is hard to tell where the ACLU ends and the Justice Department begins,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The Obama Justice Department is supposed to be an independent, nonpartisan law enforcement agency. Many Americans will be disturbed, though maybe not surprised, to find that Eric Holder’s Justice Department is colluding with one of the most leftist organizations in the nation. We know whose ‘side’ this Justice Department in on when it comes to the enforcement of our immigration laws."

But hey Eric Holder and the Justice Department have made no bones about the fact that they are a racist organization.

TheMercenary

02-04-2011 02:16 PM

Quote:

Members of the commission issued what should be regarded as a stinging indictment of AG Holder and the Justice Department in one paragraph of a news release issued today about the investigation trying to answer the question of whether DOJ practiced race-neutral enforcement of the law:
Although such testimony supported the need for thorough investigation, DOJ continued to withhold relevant documents and preclude relevant officials and supervisors from testifying. The Commission was thus limited in its ability to complete a final report. As a result, the Commission has issued an interim report that describes the evidence that has been collected up to this point and the lack of cooperation by the Department of Justice.
In a separate paragraph, appearing on page iii of the interim report addressed to President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio), Commission members highlighted the dilemma they face as a result of the DOJ’s obstruction:
The Commission, by a separate 5-2 vote breaking down along the same lines, found that although its statute authorizes the Commission to subpoena witnesses and written material and requires federal agencies to cooperate fully with its investigations, its authority to seek legal recourse when the Attorney General refuses to enforce Commission subpoenas, as has occurred repeatedly during this investigation, is unclear.

http://biggovernment.com/bmccarty/20...ation-charges/

BigV	02-08-2011 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 700277)

Well, the beat goes on....

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=174&load=3751

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 700288)

It just doesn't get any better than this, Obamy in his own words.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/achenblog/

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 707499)

Great article.

Backdoor Big Government
Americans sent a small-government message in November, but Obama isn’t listening.

http://city-journal.com/2011/21_1_sn...overnment.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 709649)

ACLU and Eric Holder in Bed together.... Imagine that.

http://www.patriotactionnetwork.com/...veal-collusion

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 709796)

http://biggovernment.com/bmccarty/20...ation-charges/

so mercy, I looked through these links, and thought of your comments in a different thread... I have a question for you. Do you consider these examples of news or commentary?

TheMercenary

02-08-2011 03:07 PM

All commentary. Esp if from a Blog.

But what is important to remember that it also includes news. And if you are careful it is pretty easy to extract the news bits that is being commented on and how it is presented. Let me show an example....

TheMercenary

02-08-2011 03:15 PM

Last link....

News:

Quote:

Attorney General Eric Holder and others within the U.S. Department of Justice prevented members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights from conducting a complete and thorough investigation of the department’s decision to drop charges against members of the New Black Panther Party for their 2008 election day actions in Philadelphia.

Commentary:

Quote:

News:

Quote:

Although such testimony supported the need for thorough investigation, DOJ continued to withhold relevant documents and preclude relevant officials and supervisors from testifying. The Commission was thus limited in its ability to complete a final report. As a result, the Commission has issued an interim report that describes the evidence that has been collected up to this point and the lack of cooperation by the Department of Justice.
In a separate paragraph, appearing on page iii of the interim report addressed to President Barack Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio), Commission members highlighted the dilemma they face as a result of the DOJ’s obstruction:
The Commission, by a separate 5-2 vote breaking down along the same lines, found that although its statute authorizes the Commission to subpoena witnesses and written material and requires federal agencies to cooperate fully with its investigations, its authority to seek legal recourse when the Attorney General refuses to enforce Commission subpoenas, as has occurred repeatedly during this investigation, is unclear.

Commentary: Black
News: Red

Quote:

Video of the Nov. 4, 2008, incident that triggered public outcry is clear to any objective viewer: Billy club-carrying members of the New Black Panther Party were intimidating voters outside a Philadelphia polling place.
It will be interesting to see whether any state-run media outlets report AG Holder’s obstruction of justice and apparent racist enforcement of the law.

Pretty easy...

Fair&Balanced

02-08-2011 09:21 PM

Another perspective:

Quote:

As voter-intimidation exercises go, it wasn’t much. In 2008, a lone white voter reported he had encountered two black men dressed all in black, one carrying a nightstick, at his Philadelphia polling place in a predominantly black neighborhood. The armed man was escorted away by police, and no one reported the incident to the local district attorney. But the incident was caught on camera, making it great fodder for cable news because political campaigns were actively scouting for voter-intimidation cases they could use against opponents.

Several months after the 2008 Election Day incident (and 13 days before President Obama was sworn in) the Department of Justice filed a civil lawsuit against the NBPP under the Voting Rights Act, alleging voter intimidation. In May 2009, Justice—now led by Attorney General Eric Holder, Obama's appointee—successfully obtained an injunction against King Samir Shabazz, the man who carried the nightstick, then dropped the suit, Fox News reported. A spokeswoman at Justice says a career attorney made the call, which was then affirmed by an appointee, because "the facts and the law did not support pursuing claims against the other defendants in the case. A federal judge determined that the relief requested by the Department was appropriate."

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/07/14/t...ew-acorn0.html

Voter intimidation cases are exceedingly hard to prove which is why there have so few in the 40+ years of the Voting Rights Act.

To have any chance of success, at the very least, there was be claims by voters that they were intimidated and at least some evidence to support it. This case had neither, which perhaps explains why the DoJ took the option of a civil injunction against the one guy rather than commit resources to a case they felt they could not win.

One final thought or question for The Mercinary:
Why is this case any different than the circumstances at a Arizona polling place where an avowed anti-immigrant Minuteman was at a poll place in 2006 armed with a 9mm Glock and questioning Hispanic voters to determine if they spoke English? The Bush DoJ chose not to pursue it.

Fair&Balanced

02-09-2011 07:59 AM

IMO, it is a stretch to describe as factual that "billy club carrying members of the New Black Panther Party were intimidating voters" given that no voters filed any complaint about voter intimation.

As to the US Civil Rights Commission, the conservative Vice Chair would disagree with the assessment in your links:

Quote:

A scholar whom President George W. Bush appointed as vice chairwoman of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Abigail Thernstrom has a reputation as a tough conservative critic of affirmative action and politically correct positions on race.

But when it comes to the investigation that the Republican-dominated commission is now conducting into the Justice Department’s handling of an alleged incident of voter intimidation involving the New Black Panther Party — a controversy that has consumed conservative media in recent months — Thernstrom has made a dramatic break from her usual allies.

“This doesn’t have to do with the Black Panthers; this has to do with their fantasies about how they could use this issue to topple the [Obama] administration,” said Thernstrom, who said members of the commission voiced their political aims “in the initial discussions” of the Panther case last year.

“My fellow conservatives on the commission had this wild notion they could bring Eric Holder down and really damage the president,” Thernstrom said in an interview with POLITICO....

...Three Republican poll monitors filed complaints of intimidation — itself a federal crime — but no voters attested to being turned away. The Justice Department, while Bush was still president, investigated the incident and later, after Obama took office, decided that "the facts and the law did not support pursuing" the claims against the party and against a second, unarmed man, Justice spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said....

...And other conservatives have weighed in on her side.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39861.html

A column from the Vice Chair herself in the conservative National Review:

Quote:

Forget about the New Black Panther Party case; it is very small potatoes. Perhaps the Panthers should have been prosecuted under section 11 (b) of the Voting Rights Act for their actions of November 2008, but the legal standards that must be met to prove voter intimidation — the charge — are very high.

In the 45 years since the act was passed, there have been a total of three successful prosecutions. The incident involved only two Panthers at a single majority-black precinct in Philadelphia. So far — after months of hearings, testimony and investigation — no one has produced actual evidence that any voters were too scared to cast their ballots. Too much overheated rhetoric filled with insinuations and unsubstantiated charges has been devoted to this case....

...There are plenty of grounds on which to sharply criticize the attorney general — his handling of terrorism questions, just for starters — but this particular overblown attack threatens to undermine the credibility of his conservative critics

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ail-thernstrom

IMO, the Commission "investigation" is partisan political theater conducted by the conservative majority. Much like the investigation of voter intimidation in Florida in 2000 conducted by the liberal majority on the Commission at the time.

As a critic of political theater on both sides, I would give this one a :lame: - highly partisan, boring and predictable.

Undertoad

02-09-2011 09:33 AM

Well investigated and stated F&B. (welcome)

TheMercenary

02-09-2011 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced (Post 710546)

One final thought or question for The Mercenary:
Why is this case any different than the circumstances at a Arizona polling place where an avowed anti-immigrant Minuteman was at a poll place in 2006 armed with a 9mm Glock and questioning Hispanic voters to determine if they spoke English? The Bush DoJ chose not to pursue it.

Never heard of it....

TheMercenary

02-09-2011 12:14 PM

[quote=Fair&Balanced;710610][size="2"]IMO, it is a stretch to describe as factual that "billy club carrying members of the New Black Panther Party were intimidating voters" given that no voters filed any complaint about voter intimation.[quote]DOJ didn't think so at the time. But hey, we have a racist DOJ now so I guess anything is possible.

TheMercenary

02-09-2011 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fair&Balanced (Post 710610)

[size="2"]IMO, the Commission "investigation" is partisan political theater conducted by the conservative majority. Much like the investigation of voter intimidation in Florida in 2000 conducted by the liberal majority on the Commission at the time.

I would give this one a :lame: - highly partisan, boring and predictable.

Right out of the Media Matters website.

Fair&Balanced

02-09-2011 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad (Post 710629)

Well investigated and stated F&B. (welcome)

Thanks.

I'll be browsing around the place when I have more time.

Fair&Balanced

02-09-2011 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 710676)

Never heard of it....

Here is an article from the Tucson paper:

http://tucsoncitizen.com/morgue/2006...er-harassment/

So whats the difference?

In Philly, you have a Black man, affiliated with the New Black Panther Party, carrying a billy club at a predominately Black polling station but not approaching anyone directly.

In Tucson, you have a White man, affiliated with the Minutemen, carrying a gun at a predominately Hispanic polling station and questioning voters to determine if they spoke English.

I have issues with both of the groups (NBP Party and Minutemen) and their actions but in neither case did the acts reach the level of voter intimidation, but if I had to chose, getting in the face of voters and questioning them comes closer to intimidation.

TheMercenary

09-02-2011 08:14 PM

How's that Hopey Changey thing working out for ya?

Job Growth Grinds to a Halt

Quote:

The U.S. economy slammed into a wall in August, failing to add any jobs for the first time in nearly a year and ratcheting up pressure on President Barack Obama to find a way to kick-start the sputtering recovery.

Underscoring the political problem posed by the dearth of hiring, Mr. Obama on Friday asked the Environmental Protection Agency to withdraw an air-quality proposal that Republicans and business groups said could kill thousands of jobs and cost hundreds of billions of dollars a year.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...157206548.html

SO how did that work out fer ya???? :lol:

BigV	09-02-2011 08:56 PM

those fucking greedy capitalist blood sucking corporations!! they have record amounts of money and they're just hoarding it. I hope the fucking choke on their gold. spend any of that money on hiring people--no fucking way. just keep it, keep piling it up.

Soon though, your customer base will erode to the point where your accumulation of will slow, then stop, then you'll cry to the government that you're being crippled by all those regulations. mother fucking liars.

Fuck you.

TheMercenary

09-02-2011 08:56 PM

:lol2:

BigV	09-02-2011 09:03 PM

Why you find the truth funny is a mystery to me.

The government shed some 17,000 jobs last month, "stimulus" money soaked up by businesses. Held by them in record amounts. I'll say it again -- corporations, "Fuck you".

TheMercenary

09-02-2011 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigV (Post 754201)

And I will repeat it as well, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Obama have destroyed this nation. Anyone but Obama in 2012. Fuck all of them.

TheMercenary

09-02-2011 09:16 PM

The first Seven Lies....

DanaC

09-03-2011 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 754205)

And I will repeat it as well, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Obama have destroyed this nation. Anyone but Obama in 2012. Fuck all of them.

yeah, 'cause everything was fucking peachy before Obama came in.

ZenGum

09-03-2011 10:10 AM

What she said.

Trilby

09-03-2011 10:13 AM

ah, merc has the answers. merc can fix society. merc has no beam in his eye to cloud his vision. If we would only listen to merc - we would be healed..

thus endeth merc's lesson and every lesson he ever gave unto us, the unclean masses: just do what merc says to do and all will be sunshine up your ass. :D

Trilby

09-03-2011 10:15 AM

also - the more I read merc's posts the more I am convinced he is a fourteen year old boy. there really is no other explanation for his shrieking hostilities and hysterical fears.

TheMercenary

09-04-2011 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenGum (Post 754272)

What she said.

Nope. But it sure the fuck has gone done hill since. And fast.

Anyone but Obamy in 2012!:D

ZenGum

09-05-2011 06:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMercenary (Post 754477)

Nope. But it sure the fuck has gone done hill since. And fast.

Anyone but Obamy in 2012!:D

Even if Obama was as bad as you say he is, at least half of the republican potentials I've seen so far are such utter dingbats that they would almost certainly be even more harmful.

Given that there is a realistic chances of Obama losing, I really really hope the republicans can come up with someone better. Please.

tw	09-05-2011 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenGum (Post 754513)

Even if Obama was as bad as you say he is, at least half of the republican potentials I've seen so far are such utter dingbats that they would almost certainly be even more harmful.

McCain was a moderate. Nominated mostly by moderate Republicans and independents. Therefore the wackos needed to subvert McCain. Even threatened him in his own State during his Senate reelection. Moderates inside the Republican party have little power due to wackos told by Limbaugh, et al how to vote.

Even Boehner had to repeatedly withdraw from his compromises with Obama due to these wackos. Specifically defined is Cantor - a wacko favorite - who literally undid every compromise. Because of the wacko attitude - 'my way or the highway'.

Those outside of America have little idea how wacko dumb these extremists are even in public conversations. Propaganda promoted by political handlers is that powerful TheMercenary demonstrates what is found especially in venues where education (and therefore intelligence) is lowest.

All America allies should be quite concerned. The wackos created massive debts. Then are told to blame Obama. They are so dumb as to believe what they are told. To ignore what is obvious. America’s financial disasters are created by wacko extremists in the Republican party who believe, “Reagan proved that deficits don’t matter.”

classicman

09-05-2011 08:07 PM

Quote:

America’s financial disasters are created by wacko extremists in BOTH parties

ftfy
As any honest moderate would know.

Stormieweather

09-06-2011 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw (Post 754535)

I'd pay a lot more attention to your political writings if you didn't use the word "wacko" in every sentence. It's a one-note song and hurts my head.

If it weren't for that, I'd agree with most of what you write on this subject.

DanaC

09-06-2011 07:03 PM

Totally agree with that Stormie.

TheMercenary

09-06-2011 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenGum (Post 754513)

Couldn't give a shit. I would support Obamy being re-elected as long as they lose the majority in the Senate. Otherwise, Anyone but Obama 2012!! :D

classicman

09-06-2011 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZenGum (Post 754513)

I really really hope the republicans can come up with someone, anyone. Please.

ftfy

Urbane Guerrilla

09-13-2011 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 754264)

yeah, 'cause everything was fucking peachy before Obama came in.

We liked it. When we turn Obama out, we'll have more to like again.

Politically, though, this will make you sad, Dana, as another socialist leader gets the sack.

There's a whole lotta peachy we're getting static about instead of just getting it. The Democratic Party has fallen a long way since JFK. We'll prosper better when they are sidelined, and the Machine Radicals shipped back to Chicago -- and hopefully kept from office there also. We're annoyed because we have better values than this non-capitalist that got elected with no help from yours truly.

DanaC

09-13-2011 05:14 AM

*chuckles*

Another socialist leader?

To quote Jon Stewart:

'You haven't got a fucking clue what socialism is have you?'

BigV	09-14-2011 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla (Post 755962)

Look, man.

This is a perfect example of telling a lie. President Obama, my President, *YOUR* President is a capitalist, not a socialist. Your remarks like this are subject to the same political speech reality check I described recently when I revealed Michele Bachmann's crap.

When I hear something like this I ask myself, "why is this person telling this lie?"

Quote:

They're clumsy. This is bad.

You're not clumsy, I don't think you're stupid (though you hold fast to some stupid positions). I don't think this applies in this case.

Quote:

They're pandering. This is worse.

You're not pandering since you're not running for office, but there's a complimentary category of political proselytizing, and you do it all the time. This qualifies, but only incidentally since we're not being asked to do something, you're only indirectly supporting your position by portraying your opponent negatively. This negative campaigning is successful, but vile and foul and leaves a permanent stain on those who persist in it. Not to mention the damage to our society, which is significant.

Quote:

They're uninformed. This is worse still.

I'm undecided here, you may be uninformed but I doubt it. I think you know what socialism is, I think you know what you were saying, and you said it anyway.

Quote:

They believe. This is the worst.

Again, I am undecided, but don't think this is the case. I think you know better.

Which brings us to the new category: They lie. This is just as bad as belief, but with extra-crunchy evil craven malice. Smears like this pollute our conversation. You are responsible for this toxic spill, though the clean up work falls to others, like me, like DanaC. Inevitably, there will be traces of this poison left behind as some will remember the association. You, sir, should be ashamed of your behavior.

Quote:

I don't want my leaders *or my fellow members of the electorate* to be clumsy, or pandering or uninformed or worst of all, true believers of false ideas. I will not tolerate lying and the destruction it causes. I deserve better and so do you. I demand better. And so should you.

glatt

09-14-2011 09:53 AM

Thanks BigV. You have much more energy than I do.

DanaC

09-14-2011 09:56 AM

*applauds*

Bloody hell. Well said.

DanaC

09-14-2011 10:09 AM

Y'know, there are plenty of sensible and coherent arguments against socialism, without having to reinterpret it in order to smash it down.

To be fair though, there's been something of a reinterpretation on the left as well. I call myself a 'socialist' but that doesn't mean I believe in a fully communal society. I believe in a mixed economy. At no point during the history of trade and markets has there ever been any evidence to suggest that the free market, or the people and businesses that operate within it, can be relied upon to act entirely in ways that add to, rather than detract from, the common good. There have to be controls. There is also absolutely no evidence throughout that time that left to its own devices the market acts as an equaliser of opportunity, or that all of a civilised society's needs can be filtered through the free market.

Even Adam Smith believed that where the market failed to adequately meet the needs of the nation the government had a duty to step in. Particularly with regards education. These days, most nations include basic healthcare alongside education as a necessity that cannot be trusted entirely to the market.

Really, the main difference between a modern 'socialist' and the right, is where we all draw the lines. Frankly, if you don't believe there should be any lines, then you're not dealing with political or economic realities.

But even on those definitions, the notion that Barack Obama and Warren Buffett are socialists is laughable to anybody with an ounce of political insight.

classicman

09-14-2011 10:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DanaC (Post 756238)

the notion that Barack Obama and Warren Buffett are socialists is laughable to anybody with an ounce of political insight.

like that part :)

TheMercenary

09-14-2011 01:01 PM

Quote:

What then is Obama's dream? We don't have to speculate because the President tells us himself in his autobiography, Dreams from My Father. According to Obama, his dream is his father's dream. Notice that his title is not Dreams of My Father but rather Dreams from My Father. Obama isn't writing about his father's dreams; he is writing about the dreams he received from his father.

So who was Barack Obama Sr.? He was a Luo tribesman who grew up in Kenya and studied at Harvard. He was a polygamist who had, over the course of his lifetime, four wives and eight children. One of his sons, Mark Obama, has accused him of abuse and wife-beating. He was also a regular drunk driver who got into numerous accidents, killing a man in one and causing his own legs to be amputated due to injury in another. In 1982 he got drunk at a bar in Nairobi and drove into a tree, killing himself.

An odd choice, certainly, as an inspirational hero. But to his son, the elder Obama represented a great and noble cause, the cause of anticolonialism. Obama Sr. grew up during Africa's struggle to be free of European rule, and he was one of the early generation of Africans chosen to study in America and then to shape his country's future.

I know a great deal about anticolonialism, because I am a native of Mumbai, India. I am part of the first Indian generation to be born after my country's independence from the British. Anticolonialism was the rallying cry of Third World politics for much of the second half of the 20th century. To most Americans, however, anticolonialism is an unfamiliar idea, so let me explain it.

Anticolonialism is the doctrine that rich countries of the West got rich by invading, occupying and looting poor countries of Asia, Africa and South America. As one of Obama's acknowledged intellectual influences, Frantz Fanon, wrote in The Wretched of the Earth, "The well-being and progress of Europe have been built up with the sweat and the dead bodies of Negroes, Arabs, Indians and the yellow races."

Anticolonialists hold that even when countries secure political independence they remain economically dependent on their former captors. This dependence is called neocolonialism, a term defined by the African statesman Kwame Nkrumah (1909--72) in his book Neocolonialism: The Last Stage of Imperialism. Nkrumah, Ghana's first president, writes that poor countries may be nominally free, but they continue to be manipulated from abroad by powerful corporate and plutocratic elites. These forces of neocolonialism oppress not only Third World people but also citizens in their own countries. Obviously the solution is to resist and overthrow the oppressors. This was the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. and many in his generation, including many of my own relatives in India.

Obama Sr. was an economist, and in 1965 he published an important article in the East Africa Journal called "Problems Facing Our Socialism." Obama Sr. wasn't a doctrinaire socialist; rather, he saw state appropriation of wealth as a necessary means to achieve the anticolonial objective of taking resources away from the foreign looters and restoring them to the people of Africa. For Obama Sr. this was an issue of national autonomy. "Is it the African who owns this country? If he does, then why should he not control the economic means of growth in this country?"

As he put it, "We need to eliminate power structures that have been built through excessive accumulation so that not only a few individuals shall control a vast magnitude of resources as is the case now." The senior Obama proposed that the state confiscate private land and raise taxes with no upper limit. In fact, he insisted that "theoretically there is nothing that can stop the government from taxing 100% of income so long as the people get benefits from the government commensurate with their income which is taxed."

Remarkably, President Obama, who knows his father's history very well, has never mentioned his father's article. Even more remarkably, there has been virtually no reporting on a document that seems directly relevant to what the junior Obama is doing in the White House.

While the senior Obama called for Africa to free itself from the neocolonial influence of Europe and specifically Britain, he knew when he came to America in 1959 that the global balance of power was shifting. Even then, he recognized what has become a new tenet of anticolonialist ideology: Today's neocolonial leader is not Europe but America. As the late Palestinian scholar Edward Said--who was one of Obama's teachers at Columbia University--wrote in Culture and Imperialism, "The United States has replaced the earlier great empires and is the dominant outside force."

From the anticolonial perspective, American imperialism is on a rampage. For a while, U.S. power was checked by the Soviet Union, but since the end of the Cold War, America has been the sole superpower. Moreover, 9/11 provided the occasion for America to invade and occupy two countries, Iraq and Afghanistan, and also to seek political and economic domination in the same way the French and the British empires once did. So in the anticolonial view, America is now the rogue elephant that subjugates and tramples the people of the world.

It may seem incredible to suggest that the anticolonial ideology of Barack Obama Sr. is espoused by his son, the President of the United States. That is what I am saying. From a very young age and through his formative years, Obama learned to see America as a force for global domination and destruction. He came to view America's military as an instrument of neocolonial occupation. He adopted his father's position that capitalism and free markets are code words for economic plunder. Obama grew to perceive the rich as an oppressive class, a kind of neocolonial power within America. In his worldview, profits are a measure of how effectively you have ripped off the rest of society, and America's power in the world is a measure of how selfishly it consumes the globe's resources and how ruthlessly it bullies and dominates the rest of the planet.

For Obama, the solutions are simple. He must work to wring the neocolonialism out of America and the West. And here is where our anticolonial understanding of Obama really takes off, because it provides a vital key to explaining not only his major policy actions but also the little details that no other theory can adequately account for.

TheMercenary

09-14-2011 01:07 PM

Quote:

Why support oil drilling off the coast of Brazil but not in America? Obama believes that the West uses a disproportionate share of the world's energy resources, so he wants neocolonial America to have less and the former colonized countries to have more. More broadly, his proposal for carbon taxes has little to do with whether the planet is getting warmer or colder; it is simply a way to penalize, and therefore reduce, America's carbon consumption. Both as a U.S. Senator and in his speech, as President, to the United Nations, Obama has proposed that the West massively subsidize energy production in the developing world.

Rejecting the socialist formula, Obama has shown no intention to nationalize the investment banks or the health sector. Rather, he seeks to decolonize these institutions, and this means bringing them under the government's leash. That's why Obama retains the right to refuse bailout paybacks--so that he can maintain his control. For Obama, health insurance companies on their own are oppressive racketeers, but once they submitted to federal oversight he was happy to do business with them. He even promised them expanded business as a result of his law forcing every American to buy health insurance.

If Obama shares his father's anticolonial crusade, that would explain why he wants people who are already paying close to 50% of their income in overall taxes to pay even more. The anticolonialist believes that since the rich have prospered at the expense of others, their wealth doesn't really belong to them; therefore whatever can be extracted from them is automatically just. Recall what Obama Sr. said in his 1965 paper: There is no tax rate too high, and even a 100% rate is justified under certain circumstances.

In his own writings Obama stresses the centrality of his father not only to his beliefs and values but to his very identity. He calls his memoir "the record of a personal, interior journey--a boy's search for his father and through that search a workable meaning for his life as a black American." And again, "It was into my father's image, the black man, son of Africa, that I'd packed all the attributes I sought in myself." Even though his father was absent for virtually all his life, Obama writes, "My father's voice had nevertheless remained untainted, inspiring, rebuking, granting or withholding approval. You do not work hard enough, Barry. You must help in your people's struggle. Wake up, black man!"

The climax of Obama's narrative is when he goes to Kenya and weeps at his father's grave. It is riveting: "When my tears were finally spent," he writes, "I felt a calmness wash over me. I felt the circle finally close. I realized that who I was, what I cared about, was no longer just a matter of intellect or obligation, no longer a construct of words. I saw that my life in America--the black life, the white life, the sense of abandonment I'd felt as a boy, the frustration and hope I'd witnessed in Chicago--all of it was connected with this small piece of earth an ocean away, connected by more than the accident of a name or the color of my skin. The pain that I felt was my father's pain."

In an eerie conclusion, Obama writes that "I sat at my father's grave and spoke to him through Africa's red soil." In a sense, through the earth itself, he communes with his father and receives his father's spirit. Obama takes on his father's struggle, not by recovering his body but by embracing his cause. He decides that where Obama Sr. failed, he will succeed. Obama Sr.'s hatred of the colonial system becomes Obama Jr.'s hatred; his botched attempt to set the world right defines his son's objective. Through a kind of sacramental rite at the family tomb, the father's struggle becomes the son's birthright.

Colonialism today is a dead issue. No one cares about it except the man in the White House. He is the last anticolonial. Emerging market economies such as China, India, Chile and Indonesia have solved the problem of backwardness; they are exploiting their labor advantage and growing much faster than the U.S. If America is going to remain on top, we have to compete in an increasingly tough environment.

But instead of readying us for the challenge, our President is trapped in his father's time machine. Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation's agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father's dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is governed by a ghost.

http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/09...s-problem.html

TheMercenary

09-14-2011 01:09 PM

Quote:

D'Souza says that the socialist label doesn't entirely fit Obama. The case is much worse. Obama is not merely a social democrat in multicultural clothes. He is, according to D'Souza, a follower of his African father's anti-colonial ideology, which D'Souza describes as containing "noticeable strains of Marxism and socialism," but essentially signifying hostility to European civilization and to its neo-colonial spawn, the United States of America. In this view, American power is essentially racist. Overall, Western civilization did not achieve anything special, except to enrich itself by looting and enslaving Africans and Asians and native Americans. According to D'Souza, Obama's anti-colonial ideology sees the United States as a racial despotism, built on the denial of human rights, extreme exploitation and minority extirpation. If D'Souza is right, then we have in the White House someone who is much more dangerous than a socialist. If D'Souza is right, we have a man in the White House who is animated by hatred of the very thing entrusted to his care. "It may seem shocking to suggest that this is Obama's core ideology," says D'Souza. "I am saying nothing more than what Obama himself says: that his father's dream has become his dream. It is a dream that, as president, he is imposing with a vengeance on America and the world."

http://www.financialsense.com/contri...er-in-the-dark

TheMercenary

09-14-2011 01:14 PM

Quote:

So, is Mr. Obama trying to form The Socialist Republic of America? Or are the accusations mainly a political weapon, meant to stick Obama with a label that is poison to many voters and thus make him a one-term president?

As is often the case in politics, the answer is in the eye of the beholder. Some people feel genuinely certain that Obama aims to make America into a workers' paradise – a land where government-appointed pay czars tell Wall Street tycoons how much they can make and where the feds take large ownership positions in companies like General Motors (GM) and insurance giant American International Group (AIG). Even if Obama is not a card-carrying Socialist, they say, he displays a disdain of the private sector.

"You start with his apparent acceptance that there are major segments of the US economy for which it is reasonable for the US government to own or manage," says Michael Johns, Heritage Foundation policy analyst, "tea party" movement leader, and former speechwriter for President Bush. "Look at the auto industry, mortgage industry, the health-care industry to some extent, and, obviously, banking."

Others just as assuredly refute the idea that government involvement in failing industries defines a president as socialist – or that wealth is being redistributed from the Forbes 500 richest Americans to the nation's "Joe the plumbers."

What Mr. Johns, Mr. Gingrich, and others brandishing the "socialist" s-word are really complaining of is a return to the policies of John Maynard Keynes, the English economist who advocated vigorous government involvement in the economy, from regulation to pump priming, says labor historian Peter Rachleff of Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn.

"Socialism suggests getting rid of capitalism altogether," says Dr. Rachleff. "Mr. Obama is not within a million miles of an ideology like that."

For what it's worth, socialists deny that Obama is one of them – and even seem a bit insulted by the suggestion.

"I have been making a living telling people Obama is not a socialist," says Frank Llewellyn, national director of the Democratic Socialists of America. "It's frustrating to see people using our brand to criticize programs that have nothing to do with our brand and are not even working."

Adds Billy Wharton,co-chair of the Socialist Party USA: "I am not even sure he's a liberal. I call him a hedge fund Democrat."

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...e-evidence-say

BigV	09-14-2011 01:19 PM

Quote:

Obama Africa, America sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Integer vitae tellus dui. Mauris iaculis mi ac magna aliquet a tempor magna mattis. Cras a sem accumsan massa posuere blandit. Cras posuere nisi ut nibh malesuada id aliquet nisi feugiat. Vestibulum ornare eros a enim imperdiet et ultrices purus lobortis. Nunc in metus est, et lacinia nulla. Suspendisse Socialist potenti. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Aliquam Africa pellentesque arcu nec scelerisque. Duis fermentum dui massa. Vivamus laoreet volutpat magna, id ultricies quam suscipit ullamcorper. Sed varius scelerisque aliquam. Mauris faucibus Socialist est non augue rhoncus bibendum. Duis euismod America interdum Obama sed volutpat. Vivamus pellentesque commodo lectus vitae euismod.

Suspendisse elit Africa, dapibus ut commodo quis, faucibus id orci. Ut tellus risus, faucibus eget mattis quis, ultricies sit amet velit. Pellentesque nec America Africa. Aliquam dictum blandit erat eu consectetur. Fusce tincidunt, nisl at luctus porta, Obama mauris lacinia Socialist odio, sit amet dignissim velit turpis sit amet arcu. Vestibulum fermentum erat at erat lobortis ornare. Sed aliquet, tellus ac pulvinar America dignissim, lacus nunc venenatis arcu, sed tincidunt arcu odio id Obama. Aenean semper laoreet odio tincidunt interdum. Donec sit amet turpis dui.

Vestibulum ante Africa primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Etiam pulvinar, tellus quis dignissim rhoncus, tortor magna volutpat neque, id feugiat nulla lectus sit amet lacus. Obama vitae sem America at Socialist dui aliquet eleifend at ac magna. Pellentesque interdum quam viverra Africa adipiscing ac iaculis tortor rhoncus. Praesent non lectus nec lacus sodales lobortis eget at nulla. Curabitur odio arcu, adipiscing in auctor rhoncus, vehicula sed Africa. Integer eu purus lacus, at cursus erat. Donec sodales erat Socialist odio. Maecenas augue massa, elementum id commodo lobortis, consectetur sit amet orci. Aenean consectetur, neque quis rutrum tincidunt, nulla Africa mollis tellus, sit amet porttitor lectus sem sed turpis. Sed fermentum mi vel metus porttitor quis pulvinar felis ornare. Integer vel enim risus, eget tempor Obama. Duis non orci nec neque consectetur dignissim.

Mauris eget America nulla Socialist ligula, at sodales elit. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Duis sit amet Africa sed Obama euismod feugiat quis et tellus. Proin sodales auctor metus, in iaculis felis scelerisque vitae. Donec porttitor dapibus nisl sed pellentesque. Vivamus laoreet gravida quam at porttitor. Etiam lacus augue, rhoncus congue rhoncus sed, fringilla sed Obama. Mauris sit amet magna massa, a suscipit neque.

Obama non America non Obama vehicula placerat. Vivamus ut sem sit amet dui elementum condimentum. Morbi est augue, vestibulum sit amet scelerisque vitae, dapibus vitae Africa. Obama congue eleifend ligula, pellentesque Africa massa mattis sed. Aenean vulputate mollis tortor, sed America Socialist suscipit eros vestibulum non. Quisque id condimentum eros. Ut et massa ligula. Sed congue condimentum diam, non vulputate massa posuere nec. Pellentesque dui Obama, tincidunt at malesuada quis, bibendum in eros. Duis adipiscing adipiscing augue sed facilisis.

In nec felis nisl, ut gravida risus. Praesent sollicitudin pulvinar Obama ac convallis. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Duis elit massa, commodo id venenatis Socialist volutpat, tincidunt et augue. Aliquam posuere iaculis neque ut accumsan. Suspendisse interdum laoreet Africa molestie hendrerit. Obama Africa Africa sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Fusce vel eros ac odio iaculis ullamcorper. Obama pellentesque viverra enim. Maecenas sit amet cursus tortor. Vivamus at risus odio.

Pellentesque eget felis ac elit viverra Socialist dapibus sit amet quis augue. Nunc volutpat mauris id sem tincidunt eu mollis justo accumsan. Duis lectus neque, porta eu tincidunt nec, hendrerit quis felis. Morbi placerat odio et leo commodo porttitor. Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora torquent per conubia nostra, per inceptos himenaeos. Nam tristique America vehicula orci sodales fringilla. Nam vestibulum purus eget metus condimentum imperdiet. Nunc vitae ante massa. Donec a ornare ante. Sed nec odio quam, et commodo massa.

Integer eu dui vitae massa semper aliquam vitae at Obama. Morbi lobortis tellus quis velit suscipit tincidunt. Nulla laoreet sollicitudin metus id imperdiet. Curabitur fringilla sollicitudin ante, sodales tincidunt enim semper quis. Vestibulum et metus in enim interdum elementum. Curabitur posuere nisi nulla. Etiam eu ullamcorper lectus. Quisque sed enim lectus, eu porta turpis. Nulla facilisi.

Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Phasellus massa velit, suscipit ut pharetra id, ornare at diam. Suspendisse rutrum consectetur aliquam. Suspendisse potenti. Obama id dui et lectus malesuada imperdiet. Duis mi purus, feugiat ut condimentum at, consequat eget magna. Quisque neque Obama, cursus id lobortis quis, rutrum non lectus. Nulla ac arcu ut mauris lobortis tincidunt et et enim.

Donec nec nunc vitae America vehicula iaculis vel in orci. Duis eget volutpat Obama. Donec eget turpis vitae nulla molestie hendrerit. Vestibulum congue pellentesque enim, id adipiscing Obama eleifend ac. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Obama at erat nec

infinite monkey

09-14-2011 01:20 PM

*nods knowingly, pensively even*

Yes, V...I see what you're saying.

;)

infinite monkey

09-14-2011 01:22 PM

I like this TOTALLY RAD SCIENTIFIC JARGON:

Quote:

Originally Posted by that one article

"Socialism suggests getting rid of capitalism altogether," says Dr. Rachleff. "Mr. Obama is not within a million miles of an ideology like that."

Not within a MILLION miles? Not a MILLION? Wow. How about within a THOUSAND miles, Doctor Nonsensical Hyperbole? Huh? A thousand?

BigV	09-14-2011 01:24 PM

Quote:

So, is Mr. Obama trying to form The Socialist Republic of America?

mercy, what is your answer to this question?

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:24 PM.

Page 22 of 28

« First

Show 60 post(s) from this thread on one page