Why Nobama

[thewhiterabbit]

"Why Nobama?" WHY are we still talking about this? He's our president now. Bush had his term now Obama has his. No point in debating that now- he hasn't even been here a month yet for crying out loud.

[mkemse]

"Why Nobama?" WHY are we still talking about this? He's our president now. Bush had his term now Obama has his. No point in debating that now- he hasn't even been here a month yet for crying out loud.

That is what I have been trying to say, it is over a month til he even takes over, give him a chance
Not everyone he chooses for his ADm will be liked, but give him a chance to show what he will actualy do
even he said to his critics "We only have 1 President at a time" his does not start til Jan 20, 2009

[denuseri]

You have serious hate issues apparently with Bush, who by the way has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

Nor does any other political leader unless it's a direct corrolation or in relation to Obama in a dipolmatic capacity(which kennedy certianly is not other than lack of experience, at least lets hope he is not as i will explain in a side bar)

One of which ( a foriegn religious leader) that was so eager to get him elected has now called him a rather derogative term refering to negro house servant/slave from the civil war era in a public challenge for him to surrender becuase he is seen as being "weak" by our enemies abroad.

As for Obama he certianly can be worse. Way way worse infact. Though that does remain to be seen, just as it does with every newly elected official.

If he really was so bold his selections for his running mate and cabinet positions etc would reflect that; alas they do not.

On a side bar:

As for Kennedy, oh my lets see, Mr flip flop, too scared to actually take on the Russians directly (hence the consolation prizes he offered the soviets to back down in cuba and his ability to get us going in Vietnam as overcompensation for past mistakes, disregarding the lessons of history so recent we allready learned them in Korea). I certianly hope Obama doesnt do anything like Kennedy did other than looking and speaking pretty that is, we allways want a pretty leader right?

Kennedy continued the cold war policies of his rivals administration inherited from the Truman and Eisenhower. (Sounds suspiciously like what Obama is planning to do now in the middle east, unless he actually plans on invading Pakistan as he suggested during the election; probably becuase he really doesnt have a better idea other than surrender but thats beside the point.)

In 1961, the USA had 50,000 troops based in Korea, and Kennedy faced a three-part crisis—the failure of the Bay of Pigs invasion, the construction of the Berlin Wall, and a negotiated settlement between the pro-Western government of Laos and the Pathet Lao communist movement.

These made Kennedy believe that another failure on the part of the United States to gain control and stop communist expansion would fatally damage U.S. credibility with its allies and his own reputation.

Kennedy determined to "draw a line in the sand" and prevent a communist victory in Vietnam, said to James Reston of The New York Times immediately after meeting Khrushchev in Vienna:

"Now we have a problem making our power credible and Vietnam looks like the place,"

Kennedy then increased the number of U.S. military in Vietnam from 800 to 16,300. Begining a failed policey of increasing troop levels to contain the esculating situation. Dont be surprised when Obama has this done in Afganistan and later Pakistan.

Which didnt ultimately work becuase it didnt enfranchise the local population with any real authority as General David Howell Petraeus stratagy has successfully done in Iraq (looks like Petraeus does study history). So mabey there is hope for Obama, alltough I doubt that America can afford to keep invading one country over there after another for long.

Doesnt sound like a successful administration for Kennedy by any account to me and if Obama's is anything like it it doesnt look promising for his.

Back to the actual topic of Obama and to address the election results you seem to claim give him such broad support:

The electoral college hardly reflects the voting publics endorsment or full support.

Where as the popular vote is much more indicative of opinion.

52% does not a mandate from heaven make by any ones count.

It means allmost half of the voting public has been dis-enfanchised.

Not the first time such a thing has happened in American history, nor the last, of that I am sure.

[mkemse]

sorry for hijacking the thread

enoy the test of the posts

[denuseri]

There is going to be a test of the posts?

Seriously:

Assuming the above about a test is not a typo. Like a poll? That might actually be funny I think.

I do enjoy debating with you mkemse despite our differences of opinion on different issues and would like to thank you and everyone else that has participated.

[mkemse]

no proble, will do more a bit later

[DesertDom]

Maybe but he won the Electoral College vote by a 3-1 margin and 52% of the Popular Vote, someone wanted him in Office

Correction on your statement: current electoral results are 365 to 173, slightly more than a 2 to 1 margin. 28 to 22 states with the liberal bastions of California and New York accounting for 86 of the 365 electoral votes.

Yeah your guy won, but try to keep the statements close to the facts.

[mkemse]

Correction on your statement: current electoral results are 365 to 173, slightly more than a 2 to 1 margin. 28 to 22 states with the liberal bastions of California and New York accounting for 86 of the 365 electoral votes.

Yeah your guy won, but try to keep the statements close to the facts.

sorry i was off on th margin of victory my point is that it was not a close victory

Also i never said I support him but simply said the margins he won by
People just need to give him a chance everyone is saying this and that, he won't even take office til Jan 2oth. give him a chance see what he does before everyone comes down on him, no he will not make 100% of the peole all the time, but who has or will?

[DesertDom]

sorry i was off on th margin of victory my point is that it was not a close victory

Also i never said I support him but simply said the margins he won by
People just need to give him a chance everyone is saying this and that, he won't even take office til Jan 2oth. give him a chance see what he does before everyone comes down on him, no he will not make 100% of the peole all the time, but who has or will?

Yeah, your guy won and by quite a bit. Given the economic situation, the ghost of Ted Kennedy could have won in that climate. It was a perfect storm situation made for an opposition party candidate to win.

I don't see many people dogging him yet. Most are simply sitting back and watching and hoping that he has enough sense to be pragmatic about his socialist instincts and attempt to remain centrist. Time will tell.

Surprised about some of his choices so far.

Clinton for State. During the campaign, he routinely villified her as unqualified to be president, not experienced enough as a leader, no foreign policy experience, etc. Why now all of a sudden is she qualified enough to be SOS and the leader of the Nat Sec Team? Could it be that Limbaugh is right on this? Keep your enemies close so that you can watch and control them. Why is no one asking him about this turnaround? The media honeymoon is not yet over.

Janet Napolitano for Homeland Security. I do have to laugh at this one. She is Gov of Arizona where 10% of the people in Maricopa County ( Phoenix area) are illegal and the cause of our high crime stats: shootouts between coyotes, kidnapping of Mexican nationals, crime between the Mexican drug cartels warring here and illegal drunk drivers. She has failed miserably at even planning anything to secure the Arizona border with Mexico over the last 6 years. And now she is going to head the agency tasked with protecting our borders? Lord help us all now, she was a horrible choice given what she has done so far. This choice was a blatant political payoff. Napolitano was one of the first ones to break ranks with the Clintons and endorse obama, so she gets a plum job.

But this sort of thing happens at the beginning of every administration, so just gonna sit back and watch and evaluate. We'll know after a year or so if 'change' is happening or just more of the same ole thing.

[denuseri]

Quote:
Originally Posted by gothichippiechick
"Why Nobama?" WHY are we still talking about this? He's our president now. Bush had his term now Obama has his. No point in debating that now- he hasn't even been here a month yet for crying out loud.

Quote:
Originally posted in response to gothichippiechick by mkemse
"That is what I have been trying to say..."



Complaining about this thread still being alive is kinda funny mkemse, I would have stopped participating in it back on post 194 back on ellection day, I asumed it was an obvious stopping point.

But: as you can see if you look back that is You mkemse decided to keep posting, You decided to keep debating and keep the thread alive, lol

Which is just fine with me as there are serious conserns over these issues.

Also as for election results yet again, I fail to see how 52% is a "Large" margin of victory by any stretch of the word.

And I will say again, allmost half of the people in the United States have yet again been dis-enfranchised by a narrow margin of the popular vote.

I also agree that Hillary Clinton alltough much more qualified than Obama for the office of President is not a good choice for Sec. of State and it is really just further proof that Obama is just trying to secure "POWER" and render his political enemies like Bieden and Clinton into submissive positions that they can be obscured out of condition.

Next we will see Obama pull another "Kennedy" and appoint a family member to a high post like attornry general or something.

[Matin]

bobby kennedy was a way better guy than his brother... should've been a president. a genuine idealist, not like jack.

lol has obama got a great younger brother?

the one thing i will say about him, tho, is that his ability to get my generation out and voting seems, to me, unprecedented in my lifetime.

so many inspired kids... man can you imagine the havoc if he fails us?

here's to political serenity *crossed fingers and a stiff drink*

[DesertDom]

bobby kennedy was a way better guy than his brother... should've been a president. a genuine idealist, not like jack.

lol has obama got a great younger brother?

the one thing i will say about him, tho, is that his ability to get my generation out and voting seems, to me, unprecedented in my lifetime.

so many inspired kids... man can you imagine the havoc if he fails us?

here's to political serenity *crossed fingers and a stiff drink*

Matin,

whats scares me about this past election: in 1992, Clinton campaigned on a platform of 'change' and the young ( at that time) mobilized for him. We all are now aware about how nothing really changed during his administration. Sometime a platform of 'change' is nothing more than a campaign strategy that is used to excite naive voters.

I have my opinion on how this administration is going to play out, but am willing to wait and see what happens over the next year.

[mkemse]

Matin,

whats scares me about this past election: in 1992, Clinton campaigned on a platform of 'change' and the young ( at that time) mobilized for him. We all are now aware about how nothing really changed during his administration. Sometime a platform of 'change' is nothing more than a campaign strategy that is used to excite naive voters.

I have my opinion on how this administration is going to play out, but am willing to wait and see what happens over the next year.

Thanks, let's all just give Obama a chance,remember alot has happenend since the campaign, yes he dropped his call for a Windfall Profits Tax on Oil Companies, but Oil is now $45.00 when he called for it, it was $145.00 a Barrel many changed havetaken place since the campaign and he may need to change some of his plages because of this

If you see a neighbor buliding a house, let's not critisize what i looks like basedo n a "Blue PrinT' but rather on the Finished Project
Give Obama a chance to prove who he is, what he WILL DO ect
he won't be in officefor another 50+ days so nobody has anyidea what will or will not happen, and eveh he said as situations change so will his plans

[denuseri]

PULLEEZE...............

When you see a nieghbor building a house and from the blueprints alone realize that the very foundation is all meesed up and his house if built is going to ruin the neighborhoods water and power supply not to mention allow the whole kit and caboodle go to pot do you still let him build it without saying a word?

Bobby Kennedy great?? PFFFFFT and allmost spits up my coffee, he was marginally less incompetent than his brother the president at the time mabye (and thats a big mabey).

Thank god Obama doesnt have a bunch of family member to inundate the white house cabinet with.

Next thing he will be putting his wife in charge of Health care reform and claim thats she is experienced and ready to handle it too.

Oh wait some other actually impeached President allready did that one.

[mkemse]

PULLEEZE...............

When you see a nieghbor building a house and from the blueprints alone realize that the very foundation is all meesed up and his house if built is going to ruin the neighborhoods water and power supply not to mention allow the whole kit and caboodle go to pot do you still let him build it without saying a word?

Bobby Kennedy great?? PFFFFFT and allmost spits up my coffee, he was marginally less incompetent than his brother the president at the time mabye (and thats a big mabey).

Thank god Obama doesnt have a bunch of family member to inundate the white house cabinet with.

Next thing he will be putting his wife in charge of Health care reform and claim thats she is experienced and ready to handle it too.

Oh wait some other actually impeached President allready did that one.

No i was talking about what the house itself would look like


why can't everyone simply give the guy a chance, he isn't even in office for another 50 some odd days

[denuseri]

He has his chance, four years of chance ahead of him unless he has a majior illegal screw up and even then as Clinton proved it is all too easy to weasel ones way out of it.

The reality of that is in no way shape or form reduced becuase conserned individuals exsercise thier 1st amendment rights to express an opinion on how successfl that chance may be.

Drawing such an analogy betwen housebuilding and political endeavors would be great if political masiations at all resembled construction. Far better that they were so organized. And yes for anyone experienced in such things one can tell exactly how a house will look from its bluprints.

However what is actually going to result from the blueprints of a house is much more easy to predict than the precarious and often volatile whims of statecraft. But it doesnt mean that one is totally blind when ascertaining the hand writing on the wall.

In fact every single leader has had his detractors and they begin challenging his authority from the get go, look at the Bush and Gore election if you need a recent example.

So is it a crime to speculate on such matters?

I think not.

[mkemse]

He has his chance, four years of chance ahead of him unless he has a majior illegal screw up and even then as Clinton proved it is all too easy to weasel ones way out of it.

The reality of that is in no way shape or form reduced becuase conserned individuals exsercise thier 1st amendment rights to express an opinion on how successfl that chance may be.

Drawing such an analogy betwen housebuilding and political endeavors would be great if political masiations at all resembled construction. Far better that they were so organized. And yes for anyone experienced in such things one can tell exactly how a house will look from its bluprints.

However what is actually going to result from the blueprints of a house is much more easy to predict than the precarious and often volatile whims of statecraft. But it doesnt mean that one is totally blind when ascertaining the hand writing on the wall.

In fact every single leader has had his detractors and they begin challenging his authority from the get go, look at the Bush and Gore election if you need a recent example.

So is it a crime to speculate on such matters?

I think not.

Nope not at all and thanks for your posts

where is Ron Paul when you need him??

[Dr_BuzzCzar]

Thats funny the majority of college history textbooks state that it was our entry into WW2 with the full comitment of our industrial capacity that actually brought us out of the depression. (Something that won't very likely happen in this day and age) They also stated the ineffectiveness of the many programs instituted by FDR.

If Obama really wanted to unify his party he would have at least offered the VP to Clinton.

If he was truely serious about reaching accross the aisle he would have offered McCain and Palin cabinet positions.

Instead he chose a watchdog that said he had no leadship potential and was naive during the primaries.

Of course a move like that however popular it would have been with the people as a whole would alienate his ideological base and required far bigger balls than his wife or democratic handelers would ever let him have.

1. Please cite your source for stating what is in the majority of all college history textbooks, thanks. There is no doubt that our entry into WW II was a tremendous boost to the U.S. economy through deficit spending (about 140% of GDP in 1943, as I recall but not certain on the precise amount) by necessity instead of by choice. That doesn't mean FDR's policies had not stopped the slide and headed the economy in the right direction prior to 12/7/41. I agree that the horrible state of our current manufacturing sector would not allow it to be utilized to pull us up by our boot straps. I've worked in manufacturing all of my adult life (post-Army service, that is) and the short-sighted actions by management and labor that I have witnessed enrage me still.

2. The Democratic party has not been unified in my lifetime and probably never will. There are significant differences between the fiscally conservative "Blue Dog" Dems and the much more liberal "Yellow Dog" Dems. They get together in varying degrees to fight Republicans but that's about it. Personally, I think that adding Sen. Clinton to the ticket as VP candidate would have played directly into the right-wing's hands. They have been salivating since 2000 for a chance at going after her. I think Pres-Elect Obama made a smart, political decision in how he's using Sen. Clinton.

3. I would love to have seen Sen McCain as Sec Def for instance, but doubt it would have been accepted or offered. He's a good man that I respect a great deal. I wish him well and much success. Offer a cabinet post to Gov Palin... that might be the single funniest thing I've read on these forums yet. Wow, that is truly mind-boggling.

[Matin]

Matin,

whats scares me about this past election: in 1992, Clinton campaigned on a platform of 'change' and the young ( at that time) mobilized for him. We all are now aware about how nothing really changed during his administration. Sometime a platform of 'change' is nothing more than a campaign strategy that is used to excite naive voters.

I have my opinion on how this administration is going to play out, but am willing to wait and see what happens over the next year.

i remember - vaguely - the clinton elections. they had nothing on the obama campaign.

he is the first candidate in recent history to effectively use a grass roots strategy to win.

its hard to explain but in the colleges and the coffee shops and malls it was just hard to not see someone young talking about it. and i swear these were all people who couldn't have previously been considered disenfranchised, because they'd never been so to begin with!

i'm nervous because hope is such a fragile thing.

sometimes hope and change are used to play on naive people. sometimes it's nice to try to believe in something.

senator mccain said something i very tremendously impressed by during the concession speech, about how we need to try to be together in this thing.

i think america is in too much shit for partisan politics. i want to try to let that go for a while. can anybody deny that we spend too much of our time and energy on this issue?

[denuseri]

[QUOTE=Dr_BuzzCzar;773477]1. Please cite your source for stating what is in the majority of all college history textbooks, thanks. There is no doubt that our entry into WW II was a tremendous boost to the U.S. economy through deficit spending (about 140% of GDP in 1943, as I recall but not certain on the precise amount) by necessity instead of by choice. That doesn't mean FDR's policies had not stopped the slide and headed the economy in the right direction prior to 12/7/41. I agree that the horrible state of our current manufacturing sector would not allow it to be utilized to pull us up by our boot straps. I've worked in manufacturing all of my adult life (post-Army service, that is) and the short-sighted actions by management and labor that I have witnessed enrage me still.

Oh indeed I was exagerating to some degree, alltough it is not only from my own observations I have heard this said by many a Proffessor in the lounge (and come accross it numerous times while doing other reaserch ) during our various discussions on history. Though it is not the war itself but what happened imediatey after in combination with it that brought us out ( all of FDR's efforts were more likened by my constituents and mentors to be likened to that of the dutch boy with his finger in the dam). I am not about to do a term paper to satify your curiousity on the issue however , you can look yourself if you dont believe me, I reccomend doing a boolean search as wiki is rather unreliable for its scource material.

2. The Democratic party has not been unified in my lifetime and probably never will. There are significant differences between the fiscally conservative "Blue Dog" Dems and the much more liberal "Yellow Dog" Dems. They get together in varying degrees to fight Republicans but that's about it. Personally, I think that adding Sen. Clinton to the ticket as VP candidate would have played directly into the right-wing's hands. They have been salivating since 2000 for a chance at going after her. I think Pres-Elect Obama made a smart, political decision in how he's using Sen. Clinton.

He was affriad to have her as his VP plain and simple. I aggree democrates just like republicans and other political parties are much more fluid on the inside than most people think.

3. I would love to have seen Sen McCain as Sec Def for instance, but doubt it would have been accepted or offered. He's a good man that I respect a great deal. I wish him well and much success. Offer a cabinet post to Gov Palin... that might be the single funniest thing I've read on these forums yet. Wow, that is truly mind-boggling.

I see Palin is to be somehow demonized or made to be silly?

As silly perhaps as putting ones wife in charge of health care?

It still doesnt change the fact the Obama is adhearing to "politics as ussuall" instead of following through with any really bold changes that would re-define how our two party system opperates.[/QUOTE]

[Dr_BuzzCzar]

"Though it is not the war itself but what happened imediatey(sic) after in combination with it that brought us out." If I read your earlier comments correctly you have access to university level professors. Good. Go find one that teaches Macroeconomics (and doesn't have a political axe to grind, which is always interesting) and ask him/her if the U.S economy was expanding in 1938? It was and continued to expand until 1945 or 1946, as I recall. Over 20% of the workforce that had lost their jobs had gone back to work by 1940. Unemployment was still at 11% before the war but was dramatically better than the mid-30's.

"I am not about to do a term paper to satify(sic) your curiousity(sic) on the issue however , you can look yourself if you dont(sic) believe me, I reccomend(sic) doing a boolean(sic) search as wiki is rather unreliable for its scource(sic) material."
I am not curious, I satisfied my curiosity about FDR policies many years ago so I don't require a term paper on the subject. I've researched the pros and cons and believe that overall his policies were successful in alleviating human misery and leading us out of a horrible economic situation.
I started using Boolean logic in 1971 while studying for my first degree (Computer Science) but I do appreciate your trying to help this old gray haired bumbler to find truth beyond wikki.


He was affriad(sic) to have her as his VP plain and simple. I aggree(sic) democrates(sic) just like republicans and other political parties are much more fluid on the inside than most people think.
You see fear where I see political acumen.



[B]I see Palin is to be somehow demonized or made to be silly?
As silly perhaps as putting ones wife in charge of health care?
It still doesnt change the fact the Obama is adhearing to "politics as ussuall(sic)" instead of following through with any really bold changes that would re-define how our two party system opperates.[/

Gov. Palin made herself look silly over and over and over, I just commented on it. I hope to all the gods and goddesses that she stays in the public eye as she is loads of fun. Also I've never once defended Pres.Clinton's health care plans but that is not germane to the discussion.

Let's at least let President-Elect Obama make it to January 21st before characterizing his policies as not being bold.

[denuseri]

(oooo sic a grammer nazi how wonderful) Thanks so much for resorting to that tactic I think I just might cry. Smh.

I will take your advice and go talk to one of the economics teachers to see if cross disiplinary studies match. Alltough based on our conversation here something tells me they do not.

As for political bias in the education system we might need a seperate thread.

Every single one of the history teachers in our department (out side of one lonely soul that cant rear his head lest it be chopped off) is a loudly self proffessed liberal.

I also have found with the execption of perhaps the math department (mainly becuase I dont hang with them) the vast majority of the teachers seem to have political axes to grind which they do with verve every chance they get?

In fact:

What the F does the war in Iraq have to do with "Latin" or public speaking or anatomy and physiology class?

Well if your opinion differs too much from the teachers its the difference between an A and sometimes an F thats what.

Guess they missed the ethical boat when they went through the peering system known as college.

Why do I even address it?

Well in my opinion it is one of the majior factors used to influence the younger voters and a grand political ploy that the other side (conservatives) have been losing for decades.

The educational peering system is also in part a liberal indoctronation proccess.

Not that some conservatives don't manage to slip through.

To bad most of the students blindly come out of it spouting dogma like so many medevil sicophants from the churches of old that they were taught to hate in there.

This is somthing I am sure did not go without notice by Obama as he experienced the proccess first hand.

I will give you that Obama is indeed a "politician" to the core.

Bold leader of change that he prophesied in his bid for office, I think not.

After all the only reason we are still having this discussion after the election is becuase some people (as previously stated in an earlier post) wanted it to continue for reasons beyond my comprehension.

I believe however so long as people wish to keep participating in this thread that I will continue to characterise in response all I want despite any derogatory comments made or infered about me.

Thank You.