Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Obama in 08'
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wkmac" data-source="post: 150004" data-attributes="member: 2189"><p>Let's see, I got Any and Big Arrow screaming at me about being way to liberal and Slothrop screaming about my utopian dreams of a wild west "Libertarian" society. It's really libertarian (lowcase L) put that's really a insignificant point. What I see as a very good thing as these 3 so very far apart in view but each authoritarian non the less are at the same time in complete opposition to my views or at least what they percieve as my views.</p><p> </p><p>This is excellent! Fantastic! That is "EXACTLY" the effect I was looking for. Keep it up folks. <img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/thumbup1.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":thumbup1:" title="Thumbup1 :thumbup1:" data-shortname=":thumbup1:" /> </p><p> </p><p>08' will now get interesting as Joe Biden will announce next month of his intent to run. Biden is considered by many across numerous political camps of being a real expert in the area of foreign policy. I saw Biden on one of the Sunday shows a few weeks back and I was impressed with the fact that he seemed to understand the factious nature of the situation in Iraq and across the Mideast region and the significance tracing back to the days of the Ottoman empire. He also asked the all important question of "how can you bring democracy to a people who not only have no history of it, politically or culturally, but have no real desire for it?" And his point to which he is correct is "you can't!"</p><p> </p><p>I also found it of interest late last night watching Larry King where Bob Woodward played tape of a recent interview with the late President Ford where he said he would not have gone into Iraq either. I think that Jimmy Carter and George Bush have a lot in common in that their failures as President have more to do with having the wrong people around them but then again, it also depends on how much autonomy they have in picking their people and in either case I'm not convinced they did. GW in any case should have listened to his father who at the time had global support and didn't go into Baghdad because Bush 1 had people around him who like Biden understood the dynamics and nature of the region and maybe moreso now having the hindsight of seeing their own failures at the times through present day eyes.</p><p> </p><p>As for Obama being a liar, slicker than Willie, etc. Look. all politicians to some degree lie and play the slick game, it's how the damn system works to begin with. Washington is a big hog waller and it's driven by blotted self important hogs who's only real desire is to be the big man on campus and call the shots to their own self designed religion called "my societal plan for a greater America!" Why else would anyone spends millions and millions of dollars for a job with so many headaches and where in the private sector they could likely earn far more and enjoy a more private life? It's all about the power!</p><p> </p><p>Yesterday on C-Span I watched the 08/28/74 first press conference for then President Ford and it was so amazing to hear him speak on some of the problems that 32 years later we still have and worse. He talked about the need for more energy independence and the need for more domestic gas and oil drilling. He also spoke of nuclear energy and the need for more in the area of solar power which at that time was a very infant industry but showing lots of promise. </p><p> </p><p>Now fast forward 32 years and look at us. Our dependency on foreign energy has grown vastly worse and even though solar power has leeped by light years from what it was in 74', we still see little broad use of it especially in the sunny clims of the southern US whether that be eastern or western. In other words, with all this gov't of both political parties as the dems contolled the Congress etc. but for a brief period of the Senate in the early 80's and then of course after the 94' election the repubs. had control but as for the Presidency the dems have held a total of 3 terms and the repubs a total of 5 if you count the current term and not the term of Ford at the time and barring some radical change over the next 2 years I'd be willing to bet the White House could go back democratic meaning a good chance the executive and legislative bodies are controlled by one party again. But the point in 32 years where both parties have had their shots, neither has in any way solved a very important national issue and in fact it's been allowed to get worse and even worse now contary to Bush's grand energy plan. </p><p> </p><p>Tell me, on that track record alone why should I or anyone else have any faith in a gov't that has been a total failure on such an important issue? Any122, you scream to high heaven about the failures of the IBT and rightly so but then you champion a gov't political entity (repubs.) who are involved in a far greater failure. Big Arrow I think has championed more to the IBT side and warns of the eminent disaster if APWA comes to bat. Again Big at the same times supports the disasters of energy policy of his cherished conservative horde with the "Liberalism is a mental disorder!" Hey Big, come here a minute man, let's talk. Did you know back in the day that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin and Patrick Henry were actually called politically speaking "LIBERALS!" Yeah the "L" word man. Now today we call that Classical liberalism but they were called liberals none the less. Now if Liberalism is a mental disorder the the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and other documents like the Mechlenburg Accords were drawn up by mental idiots. Is that what you mean?</p><p> </p><p>And now we come to Slothrop who I haven't seen say much on the union/pension fraciuos, in fact I can't remember a comment at all but in some causes on the war in Iraq Slothrop was correct (I know some of you will just hate me for saying that, deal with it!) but I say some because I consider Slothrop's opposition more out of dislike for GW and repubs. than any real principled opposition to "Empire" as Slothrop would then turn around and hand that same gov' the same amount of power it takes to be an empire. I guess the empire Slothrop wants is the one made in his/her image (sorry Slothrop but I've never heard you declare your gender so out of respect I don't want to offend in case I got it wrong) and what the rest of us want for our own lives is really irrelevant now isn't it. </p><p> </p><p>But again I would ask Slothrop the same question I posed to the other 2 and that is why should I believe or support the political factions you champion (democrats) when they have been such a total failure with such an all important issue? Oh God, don't tell me because they oppose GW because that's only become vogue of late. 3 years ago they walked lock step with him.</p><p> </p><p>Sometimes I agree with repub issues and other times I agree with the dems and in the most recent election I actually voted for the democrat running for our Congresssional seat not because I supported his positions but to divide Washington as much as I could and to send a message to the repubs. who do control the local seat and still do. Hmm! Did I throw my vote away in voting for the dem like some say when I vote for a "LIBERTARIAN" or other independent party candidate? Watching the response from the pavlovian dogs on this one should be fun.</p><p> <img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/lol.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Lol :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> </p><p> </p><p>Why should I support the status quo of the 2 political parties when with issue after issue the problems only grow worse and the only solution is to increase the size and scope of gov't to implement some new and improved plan only to see the problem continue to worsen and the entire solution cycle begin again followed by the failure cycle. Tell me you 3, why should have thrown down my entire support behind a system with this kind of track record? You want more gov't then solve the damn problem and be done with it. Even Marx and Engels at the end of their grand experiment would have dissolved gov't because in their view all problems would have been solved and gov't no longer needed. Hell, at least at the end of the day they got it more right than Washington does now or will in the future based on track record!</p><p> </p><p>Oh, here's something to consider. Howard Dean, when he ran for President raised the bulk of his funds via direct donations from people on the internet. I think Dean scared the elitist and they jumped on him like sink on -----, yeah you smell it! IMO, they made him party chair much to the dislike of the Clintonistas to make sure this maverick did take his ideas to the next level. I would have loved to see the "Dean" model of political activism taken out for a spin against the old guard of the republican and democrat parties. May not agree with the platform but the battle would be oh so refreshing! Or the fact that Pat Buchannan actually did an excellent interview of Ralph Nader which ended up is a good discussion of ideas and the 2 of them had a surprising number of issues they agreed on which cause some speculation that the 2 of them could form a political alliance and shoot for the White House. Not certain this could ever happen but the discussion of ideasthese 2 could bring to the national kitchen table for discussion IMO would be awesome! Love to see that as well.</p><p> </p><p>OK, get ya guns out and kill me so you can shut me up!</p><p><img src="/community/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/group1/tongue_smilie.gif" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":tongue_sm" title="Tongue Smilie :tongue_sm" data-shortname=":tongue_sm" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wkmac, post: 150004, member: 2189"] Let's see, I got Any and Big Arrow screaming at me about being way to liberal and Slothrop screaming about my utopian dreams of a wild west "Libertarian" society. It's really libertarian (lowcase L) put that's really a insignificant point. What I see as a very good thing as these 3 so very far apart in view but each authoritarian non the less are at the same time in complete opposition to my views or at least what they percieve as my views. This is excellent! Fantastic! That is "EXACTLY" the effect I was looking for. Keep it up folks. :thumbup1: 08' will now get interesting as Joe Biden will announce next month of his intent to run. Biden is considered by many across numerous political camps of being a real expert in the area of foreign policy. I saw Biden on one of the Sunday shows a few weeks back and I was impressed with the fact that he seemed to understand the factious nature of the situation in Iraq and across the Mideast region and the significance tracing back to the days of the Ottoman empire. He also asked the all important question of "how can you bring democracy to a people who not only have no history of it, politically or culturally, but have no real desire for it?" And his point to which he is correct is "you can't!" I also found it of interest late last night watching Larry King where Bob Woodward played tape of a recent interview with the late President Ford where he said he would not have gone into Iraq either. I think that Jimmy Carter and George Bush have a lot in common in that their failures as President have more to do with having the wrong people around them but then again, it also depends on how much autonomy they have in picking their people and in either case I'm not convinced they did. GW in any case should have listened to his father who at the time had global support and didn't go into Baghdad because Bush 1 had people around him who like Biden understood the dynamics and nature of the region and maybe moreso now having the hindsight of seeing their own failures at the times through present day eyes. As for Obama being a liar, slicker than Willie, etc. Look. all politicians to some degree lie and play the slick game, it's how the damn system works to begin with. Washington is a big hog waller and it's driven by blotted self important hogs who's only real desire is to be the big man on campus and call the shots to their own self designed religion called "my societal plan for a greater America!" Why else would anyone spends millions and millions of dollars for a job with so many headaches and where in the private sector they could likely earn far more and enjoy a more private life? It's all about the power! Yesterday on C-Span I watched the 08/28/74 first press conference for then President Ford and it was so amazing to hear him speak on some of the problems that 32 years later we still have and worse. He talked about the need for more energy independence and the need for more domestic gas and oil drilling. He also spoke of nuclear energy and the need for more in the area of solar power which at that time was a very infant industry but showing lots of promise. Now fast forward 32 years and look at us. Our dependency on foreign energy has grown vastly worse and even though solar power has leeped by light years from what it was in 74', we still see little broad use of it especially in the sunny clims of the southern US whether that be eastern or western. In other words, with all this gov't of both political parties as the dems contolled the Congress etc. but for a brief period of the Senate in the early 80's and then of course after the 94' election the repubs. had control but as for the Presidency the dems have held a total of 3 terms and the repubs a total of 5 if you count the current term and not the term of Ford at the time and barring some radical change over the next 2 years I'd be willing to bet the White House could go back democratic meaning a good chance the executive and legislative bodies are controlled by one party again. But the point in 32 years where both parties have had their shots, neither has in any way solved a very important national issue and in fact it's been allowed to get worse and even worse now contary to Bush's grand energy plan. Tell me, on that track record alone why should I or anyone else have any faith in a gov't that has been a total failure on such an important issue? Any122, you scream to high heaven about the failures of the IBT and rightly so but then you champion a gov't political entity (repubs.) who are involved in a far greater failure. Big Arrow I think has championed more to the IBT side and warns of the eminent disaster if APWA comes to bat. Again Big at the same times supports the disasters of energy policy of his cherished conservative horde with the "Liberalism is a mental disorder!" Hey Big, come here a minute man, let's talk. Did you know back in the day that George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin and Patrick Henry were actually called politically speaking "LIBERALS!" Yeah the "L" word man. Now today we call that Classical liberalism but they were called liberals none the less. Now if Liberalism is a mental disorder the the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and other documents like the Mechlenburg Accords were drawn up by mental idiots. Is that what you mean? And now we come to Slothrop who I haven't seen say much on the union/pension fraciuos, in fact I can't remember a comment at all but in some causes on the war in Iraq Slothrop was correct (I know some of you will just hate me for saying that, deal with it!) but I say some because I consider Slothrop's opposition more out of dislike for GW and repubs. than any real principled opposition to "Empire" as Slothrop would then turn around and hand that same gov' the same amount of power it takes to be an empire. I guess the empire Slothrop wants is the one made in his/her image (sorry Slothrop but I've never heard you declare your gender so out of respect I don't want to offend in case I got it wrong) and what the rest of us want for our own lives is really irrelevant now isn't it. But again I would ask Slothrop the same question I posed to the other 2 and that is why should I believe or support the political factions you champion (democrats) when they have been such a total failure with such an all important issue? Oh God, don't tell me because they oppose GW because that's only become vogue of late. 3 years ago they walked lock step with him. Sometimes I agree with repub issues and other times I agree with the dems and in the most recent election I actually voted for the democrat running for our Congresssional seat not because I supported his positions but to divide Washington as much as I could and to send a message to the repubs. who do control the local seat and still do. Hmm! Did I throw my vote away in voting for the dem like some say when I vote for a "LIBERTARIAN" or other independent party candidate? Watching the response from the pavlovian dogs on this one should be fun. :lol: Why should I support the status quo of the 2 political parties when with issue after issue the problems only grow worse and the only solution is to increase the size and scope of gov't to implement some new and improved plan only to see the problem continue to worsen and the entire solution cycle begin again followed by the failure cycle. Tell me you 3, why should have thrown down my entire support behind a system with this kind of track record? You want more gov't then solve the damn problem and be done with it. Even Marx and Engels at the end of their grand experiment would have dissolved gov't because in their view all problems would have been solved and gov't no longer needed. Hell, at least at the end of the day they got it more right than Washington does now or will in the future based on track record! Oh, here's something to consider. Howard Dean, when he ran for President raised the bulk of his funds via direct donations from people on the internet. I think Dean scared the elitist and they jumped on him like sink on -----, yeah you smell it! IMO, they made him party chair much to the dislike of the Clintonistas to make sure this maverick did take his ideas to the next level. I would have loved to see the "Dean" model of political activism taken out for a spin against the old guard of the republican and democrat parties. May not agree with the platform but the battle would be oh so refreshing! Or the fact that Pat Buchannan actually did an excellent interview of Ralph Nader which ended up is a good discussion of ideas and the 2 of them had a surprising number of issues they agreed on which cause some speculation that the 2 of them could form a political alliance and shoot for the White House. Not certain this could ever happen but the discussion of ideasthese 2 could bring to the national kitchen table for discussion IMO would be awesome! Love to see that as well. OK, get ya guns out and kill me so you can shut me up! :tongue_sm [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Obama in 08'
Top