Why Nobama

[mkemse]

During my 3 hours in line there were few young people or blackes heavy hispanic, seniors,small business people, and Islamics. From those I talked to McCain may not have Texas so locked up. Thirty people I spoke with were republicans voting fer Obama.

In my area we have no seen this kind of early voting before but this is the first time our State (Il) has allowed early voting outside of primaries)
I was lucky i livei n asmall town and got in and out in 15 minutes during thre week right before 12pm byt they said their lines had dissapeared about a week ago
Ill is projecting a state wide turnout of 75-80%, which may be a bit to high but they said it will be the biggest we have had in years if ever

[X]

surely political policies should be the reason to vote for the new leader of the free world. during an economic chrisis that is only going to get much much worse. your vote should be cast on who is best equiped to lead us all out of a recession. who did "this and that" should be put to one side in this very hard and extremely taxing time. again wich will only get worse. vote for the man with the best policies not the man who can give the best speach or tell the best jokes. use your heads dont be sheep. do whats right. end of rant

[skp2bear]

The final totals in Harris County, Texas were just ynder 800,00 the largset in history and they expect another 700,00 on Tuesday! If nothing else They've got the voters motivated. I'll bet the ratings on election returns Tuesday night will be sky high.

[mkemse]

The final totals in Harris County, Texas were just ynder 800,00 the largset in history and they expect another 700,00 on Tuesday! If nothing else They've got the voters motivated. I'll bet the ratings on election returns Tuesday night will be sky high.

As I underastand it Nation Wide, they say the National Turn Out this year could be the biggest in History or if not the biggest in many decades
No one seems to recall voters regeristing in as large numbers nation wide as they are or have this year

Who ever wins, this will be an Historic Election, either the First Female VP or the First Black President

[denuseri]

With the election day finally here I figured I would leave the thread with a parting view written by someone else. I got this in an email from a friend and alltough I dont agree with all of it, far far too much of it rings true.

I also got a disturbing email from another friend with a clip from the howard stern show were they were interviewing people on the street that said they were going to vote for Obama, The interviewer then proceeded to ask them questions representing McCain and Palins views as those of Obamas instead, it was rather shocking when the people claimed to be deciding thier votes based on the issues yet they all sat there and betrayed thier total ignorance of the actual issues and aggreeded that they were for the (Republican way of doing things) if Obamas name was on it.
(i couldnt get the media clip to load here)

They said yeah sure they supported the war in iraq, were against abortion and thought Palin would make a great VP etc etc, (all the time thinking that Obama was the man, smh they didnt even know who his vp pick was)

Pretty sad

This election is making the founding fathers roll over in thier graves of that much I am sure.


The following 'speech' was written recently by an ordinary Maine-iac [a resident of the People's Republic of Maine. While satirical in nature, all satire must have a basis in fact to be effective. This is an excellent piece by a person who does not write for a living.


The speech George W. Bush might give:



Normally, I start these things out by saying 'My Fellow Americans.' Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.

I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: There's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.



The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people. I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.

Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media.



Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beachfront property than your economic security.

We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this 'blood for oil' thing. If I were trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq 's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. And don't give me this 'Bush Lied...People Died' crap either. If I were the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty.



Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named ' Clinton ' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you?

Now some of you morons want to be led by a junior senator with no understanding of foreign policy or economics, and this nitwit says we should attack Pakistan , a nuclear ally. And then he wants to go to Iran and make peace with a terrorist who says he's going to destroy us. While he's doing that, he wants to give Iraq to al Qaeda, Afghanistan to the Taliban, Israel to the Palestinians, and your money to the IRS so the government can give welfare to illegal aliens, who he will make into citizens, so they can vote to re-elect him. He also thinks it's okay for Iran to have nuclear weapons, and we should stop our foreign aid to Israel. Did you sleep through high school?

You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to out spend and out-tech them.



That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you, and the bastards are all over the globe.

You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement, and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor.'



Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.

Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dang it, you might just as well Fed Ex a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.

In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times, USA Today, or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol or Dancing with Stars.

I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.



I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads.

So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient for years. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.



Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there are just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.

So that's it. God bless what's left of America.

Some of you know what I mean. The rest of you, kiss off.


PS - You might want to start learning Farsi, and buy a Koran.



I would just like to say it has been nice talking politics with you all and I hope despite everyones differeing viewpoints we can all be friends after the election no matter who wins.

Despite how things may be going in Washington and the rest of the world I scincerly desire that all of you can be safe and happy during the upcoming holiday season.

I also pray that God will grant our law makers and leaders the wisdom nessesary to protect and guide us in the coming years ahead.





Ps: Again Thank You all so much for the interesting debates.

[mkemse]

With the election day finally here I figured I would leave the thread with a parting view written by someone else. I got this in an email from a friend and alltough I dont agree with all of it, far far too much of it rings true.

I also got a disturbing email from another friend with a clip from the howard stern show were they were interviewing people on the street that said they were going to vote for Obama, The interviewer then proceeded to ask them questions representing McCain and Palins views as those of Obamas instead, it was rather shocking when the people claimed to be deciding thier votes based on the issues yet they all sat there and betrayed thier total ignorance of the actual issues and aggreeded that they were for the (Republican way of doing things) if Obamas name was on it.
(i couldnt get the media clip to load here)

They said yeah sure they supported the war in iraq, were against abortion and thought Palin would make a great VP etc etc, (all the time thinking that Obama was the man, smh they didnt even know who his vp pick was)

Pretty sad

This election is making the founding fathers roll over in thier graves of that much I am sure.


The following 'speech' was written recently by an ordinary Maine-iac [a resident of the People's Republic of Maine. While satirical in nature, all satire must have a basis in fact to be effective. This is an excellent piece by a person who does not write for a living.


The speech George W. Bush might give:



Normally, I start these things out by saying 'My Fellow Americans.' Not doing it this time. If the polls are any indication, I don't know who more than half of you are anymore. I do know something terrible has happened, and that you're really not fellow Americans any longer.

I'll cut right to the chase here: I quit. Now before anyone gets all in a lather about me quitting to avoid impeachment, or to avoid prosecution or something, let me assure you: There's been no breaking of laws or impeachable offenses in this office.



The reason I'm quitting is simple. I'm fed up with you people. I'm fed up because you have no understanding of what's really going on in the world. Or of what's going on in this once-great nation of ours. And the majority of you are too damned lazy to do your homework and figure it out.

Let's start local. You've been sold a bill of goods by politicians and the news media.



Meanwhile, all you can do is whine about gas prices, and most of you are too damn stupid to realize that gas prices are high because there's increased demand in other parts of the world, and because a small handful of noisy idiots are more worried about polar bears and beachfront property than your economic security.

We face real threats in the world. Don't give me this 'blood for oil' thing. If I were trading blood for oil I would've already seized Iraq 's oil fields and let the rest of the country go to hell. And don't give me this 'Bush Lied...People Died' crap either. If I were the liar you morons take me for, I could've easily had chemical weapons planted in Iraq so they could be 'discovered.' Instead, I owned up to the fact that the intelligence was faulty.



Let me remind you that the rest of the world thought Saddam had the goods, same as me. Let me also remind you that regime change in Iraq was official US policy before I came into office. Some guy named ' Clinton ' established that policy. Bet you didn't know that, did you?

Now some of you morons want to be led by a junior senator with no understanding of foreign policy or economics, and this nitwit says we should attack Pakistan , a nuclear ally. And then he wants to go to Iran and make peace with a terrorist who says he's going to destroy us. While he's doing that, he wants to give Iraq to al Qaeda, Afghanistan to the Taliban, Israel to the Palestinians, and your money to the IRS so the government can give welfare to illegal aliens, who he will make into citizens, so they can vote to re-elect him. He also thinks it's okay for Iran to have nuclear weapons, and we should stop our foreign aid to Israel. Did you sleep through high school?

You idiots need to understand that we face a unique enemy. Back during the cold war, there were two major competing political and economic models squaring off. We won that war, but we did so because fundamentally, the Communists wanted to survive, just as we do. We were simply able to out spend and out-tech them.



That's not the case this time. The soldiers of our new enemy don't care if they survive. In fact, they want to die. That'd be fine, as long as they weren't also committed to taking as many of you with them as they can. But they are. They want to kill you, and the bastards are all over the globe.

You should be grateful that they haven't gotten any more of us here in the United States since September 11. But you're not. That's because you've got no idea how hard a small number of intelligence, military, law enforcement, and homeland security people have worked to make sure of that. When this whole mess started, I warned you that this would be a long and difficult fight. I'm disappointed how many of you people think a long and difficult fight amounts to a single season of 'Survivor.'



Instead, you've grown impatient. You're incapable of seeing things through the long lens of history, the way our enemies do. You think that wars should last a few months, a few years, tops.

Making matters worse, you actively support those who help the enemy Every time you buy the New York Times, every time you send a donation to a cut-and-run Democrat's political campaign, well, dang it, you might just as well Fed Ex a grenade launcher to a Jihadist. It amounts to the same thing.

In this day and age, it's easy enough to find the truth. It's all over the Internet. It just isn't on the pages of the New York Times, USA Today, or on NBC News. But even if it were, I doubt you'd be any smarter. Most of you would rather watch American Idol or Dancing with Stars.

I could say more about your expectations that the government will always be there to bail you out, even if you're too stupid to leave a city that's below sea level and has a hurricane approaching.



I could say more about your insane belief that government, not your own wallet, is where the money comes from. But I've come to the conclusion that were I to do so, it would sail right over your heads.

So I quit. I'm going back to Crawford. I've got an energy-efficient house down there (Al Gore could only dream) and the capability to be fully self-sufficient for years. No one ever heard of Crawford before I got elected, and as soon as I'm done here pretty much no one will ever hear of it again. Maybe I'll be lucky enough to die of old age before the last pillars of America fall.



Oh, and by the way, Cheney's quitting too. That means Pelosi is your new President. You asked for it. Watch what she does carefully, because I still have a glimmer of hope that there are just enough of you remaining who are smart enough to turn this thing around in 2008.

So that's it. God bless what's left of America.

Some of you know what I mean. The rest of you, kiss off.


PS - You might want to start learning Farsi, and buy a Koran.



I would just like to say it has been nice talking politics with you all and I hope despite everyones differeing viewpoints we can all be friends after the election no matter who wins.

Despite how things may be going in Washington and the rest of the world I scincerly desire that all of you can be safe and happy during the upcoming holiday season.

I also pray that God will grant our law makers and leaders the wisdom nessesary to protect and guide us in the coming years ahead.





Ps: Again Thank You all so much for the interesting debates.

Thank you for your comment here, I apprciate, altho i do not agree with most of the letter you recieived from your friend, i will defend with my life their right o type what they did, why you may ask, very simple, this is America where people can agree to disagree, but all disagree without concenr of beingthrown in Jail for their views

I also hope you have a Happy and Joyous Holiday Season 2008

And if NOTHING else comes out of tonight, all the TV Ads, Radio Ads ect ARE FINAL DONE AND GONE for 2 years anyway (til then ext Mid term electionsi n 2010) thanksfor your contributions to this thread

[mkemse]

some of the results are in, since Obama has started to announce who will be on his Economic Team and work on the Issues we face now with the Economy, since he started and finished his annocments last week, the stock mark over that period of time asi understand it went up 1,500 points this has never happenend before in that short a period a time and Sen. Joe LIberman and even Sen Lindsey Grahman have both said "He selections and appoitments were as close to being exact or perfect as they could be" which means to me he knows what he is doing ans had a good head on his shoulders and has choosesen his Economic Advisers well
Let's wee what ha does next
It was also mention on CNN today (Nov 28) that 58% of the public nowbelieve and feel hewill keep us safer the McCain would have
Seems to to be chaging for the better and he isn't een in office yet, even Obama said "Til Jan 20, we still only have one President at a time"
I am beingi mpressed witrh in Transition moves and annoucements so far

[denuseri]

All we can do is hope.

I am sure the media and general public will give him all the credit as well as the blame (abiet softened becuase of his party affiliation) for everything that occurs under his adminsitration just as they have for all his predecessors.

Clinton took credit for the upswing in the economy that was started before he was in office too, though as I understand it outside of minor stock fluctuations cuased by having the tresury department F with the value of the dollar; the market truely turns on much more long term instigations instituted from a variety of sources often beyound the direct power of any president.

Unfortunately most of the economic proposals I have heard Obama make have been all too simular to those introduced by FDR, which as history shows had little if any benifical effect for getting us out of the great drepression compared to our involvment in WW2. (which would not work today due to the way the military industrial support system functions)

[mkemse]

All we can do is hope.

I am sure the media and general public will give him all the credit as well as the blame (abiet softened becuase of his party affiliation) for everything that occurs under his adminsitration just as they have for all his predecessors.

Clinton took credit for the upswing in the economy that was started before he was in office too, though as I understand it outside of minor stock fluctuations cuased by having the tresury department F with the value of the dollar; the market truely turns on much more long term instigations instituted from a variety of sources often beyound the direct power of any president.

Unfortunately most of the economic proposals I have heard Obama make have been all too simular to those introduced by FDR, which as history shows had little if any benifical effect for getting us out of the great drepression compared to our involvment in WW2. (which would not work today due to the way the military industrial support system functions)

Yes, but if they work successfully who cares where they originated

And as far as other issues go with him as he enter office in Jan I love the JFK quote he has used

"Never Negotiate Out Of Fear
But Never Fear To Negotiate"

something that Bush never would did or would do

As someone said, i believe it was former Sen. James Baker "There are times,
when even if you do not want to, you have to sit down with your Enemies and Negotiate"

To bad Bush did not follow this advice, he had the chance and simply refused to

[denuseri]

"Yes, but if they work successfully who cares where they originated" by mkemse

The programs FDR established didnt work successfully the first time around what makes you think they are going to work again?

I wish more politicians would actually study history then they might not keep trying to make the same mistakes.

Also what does your dislike of the previous organization have to do with this at all?

We are pretty much stuck with Obama now aren't we.

Now that he is elected, I hope he finds the wisdom to lead effectivly as opposed to only amassing enough power to solitify his tenure and or ruin the country in the proccess as allmost half of the voteing population fears.

[mkemse]

"Yes, but if they work successfully who cares where they originated" by mkemse

The programs FDR established didnt work successfully the first time around what makes you think they are going to work again?

I wish more politicians would actually study history then they might not keep trying to make the same mistakes.

Also what does your dislike of the previous organization have to do with this at all?

We are pretty much stuck with Obama now aren't we.

Now that he is elected, I hope he finds the wisdom to lead effectivly as opposed to only amassing enough power to solitify his tenure and or ruin the country in the proccess as allmost half of the voteing population fears.

I i am still very much with Obama, I can't wait til Jan 20, i was reply to those who critizised the fact that he has used "insiders" to set up his Economic Plan ect
All I was sayting is that if his plans work, and hopefully they will, who cares where they came from, what difference does it make who come up with plans he may use, if they work that is what is most important, sorry ifi was not clear
btw as I understand it, this will be the first Adminstraioin n years if not the first in History that has 2 Consitutional Scholars in the White Houes, Obama and Binden, coreect me if this is wrong

[Dr_BuzzCzar]

The programs FDR established didnt work successfully the first time around what makes you think they are going to work again?

I wish more politicians would actually study history then they might not keep trying to make the same mistakes.

A

A minority of economists feel that FDR's programs extended the depression, a majority of economists feel that his programs stopped the slide and started the U.S economy back in the right direction. (Robert J Samuelson, The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics)

Most of the criticism of FDR's policies come from the far left and the far right, so by my admittedly simple analysis that means it was probably about right.

[denuseri]

I fail to see how using a plan that failed in the past or was ineffectual is going to work now without a change of some kind having taken place that would alter the conditions of the economy.

My guess is that they will have to formulate the standards of which ever plan they do eventually come up with the realities of thier parties influence as opposed to the realities of the actual economic situation.

Constitutional Scholars?, oh my that is rich, and it is relevant how? Its going to change something about politics? I seriously doubt it.

I too was initially with Obama before he showed his true colors.

But I shouldn't have expected much he is afterall a politician to begin with.

[mkemse]

I fail to see how using a plan that failed in the past or was ineffectual is going to work now without a change of some kind having taken place that would alter the conditions of the economy.

My guess is that they will have to formulate the standards of which ever plan they do eventually come up with the realities of thier parties influence as opposed to the realities of the actual economic situation.

C
onstitutional Scholars?, oh my that is rich, and it is relevant how? Its going to change something about politics? I seriously doubt it.

I too was initially with Obama before he showed his true colors.

But I shouldn't have expected much he is afterall a politician to begin with.

Yes he is ,but as I hace said let's give him a chance he has 8 years of Garbadge and Mess to clean up

A Consitutional Scholar to make sure that Bush's Law WAter Boardingv ect do not continue they I presume would know what is Constitutional and what isn't, with Bush it made no difference he did what he wanted to

After 8 years of Busg Obama still to me desrves a chace to show what he WILL do not what he can do, what he will do is what will determine his true term in office
If we do not like him in 2012 we replace him
By Constitional Scholar I mean maybe for once we will have a President and VP who actual function within the Law, within the Constitution rather then just doing it "their way"

[denuseri]

You seem to have several presumtions that the current administration somehow opperated further outside the law than any of its predesessaors or making more mistakes. Yet I don't see any impeachment proceedings forthcomming and other than the ussual rumors of such during his term I dont believe thier was sufficient merit to wiegh any unlike some of our former presidents who so clearly did break the law and eaither resigned or wiggeled out from under impeachment.

It is the Surpreme Court that will make any Constitutional judgments.

As for garbage, some would argue that Obama is just going to take the two steps forward one back analogy to the next step.

It is like a tug of war over power in our country, and very many people are getting sick of no real progress being made, while at the same time a few of us are starting to realize the two sides are still only pulling on the rope so they can stay in the field and in the game, lest we come down from the stands and replace them.

[mkemse]

You seem to have several presumtions that the current administration somehow opperated further outside the law than any of its predesessaors or making more mistakes. Yet I don't see any impeachment proceedings forthcomming and other than the ussual rumors of such during his term I dont believe thier was sufficient merit to wiegh any unlike some of our former presidents who so clearly did break the law and eaither resigned or wiggeled out from under impeachment.

It is the Surpreme Court that will make any Constitutional judgments.

As for garbage, some would argue that Obama is just going to take the two steps forward one back analogy to the next step.

It is like a tug of war over power in our country, and very many people are getting sick of no real progress being made, while at the same time a few of us are starting to realize the two sides are still only pulling on the rope so they can stay in the field and in the game, lest we come down from the stands and replace them.

They were going to start Impeachment Proceeding but it was to close to the Nov election for it make any difference they said if they procceded by the time all wassaid and done one way or the other Bush would have been gonefrom office
I know it is the Supremem Court, but I believe that Biden and Obama both being ConsituionalLayerswhich neither Bush or Cheney are havea better grasp of what is with in the Contitutioon and what isn't. they i both havedegrees as I understand it in Constitutional Law which neither our current Prsident or VP do

Constitutional law attorneys are well versed with the law and the application of court decisions that interpret the Constitution and its amendments in areas such as affirmative action and discrimination; freedom of speech, press, and religion; search and seizure protections; eminent domain; voting rights; prisoners' rights; freedom of information; and grand jury proceedings. If you feel your Constitutional rights have been violated (whether or not you are criminal defendant) or you've been accused of violating someone's Constitutional rights, use the form on this page to find a Constitutional law attorney that's best for you and your legal situation.

Obama is a Consitutional Layer there are question if Biden is
Neither Bush or Cheney are, neither Bush or Cheney are Lawyers at all, at leasr Biden and Obama are lawyers
Thishelps interpret the Consitution and dcsionsm ade by the supremem court and Constitutional Layers are taught and trained to now only know he Constitution but to know and Interpret how Suprmem Court Decsions effect the Consitution, what is legal, what is not legal withinthe document
Both Obama and Biden have a much beeter understandong of The Constitution according to what I have heard then Bush or Cheny because both have law degree in Contitutional Law

[denuseri]

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.

[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.

[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.

[mkemse]

Based on their differences Palin would not exisists in an Obama Adm, McCain might make it, but Palin and Obama are to far different to co exist in the same Adm.
Palin to m is far more Consercative then McCain is

[denuseri]

So what if she is, I am sure she is for America and would work well, far more so then Hillary who would and still harbors much resentment.

Misdirect all you want, it doenst change that he lacks the boldness and or capability to be such a leader that he could truely bring the country together.

[mkemse]

So what if she is, I am sure she is for America and would work well, far more so then Hillary who would and still harbors much resentment.

Misdirect all you want, it doenst change that he lacks the boldness and or capability to be such a leader that he could truely bring the country together.

How do you know he lacks the Boldness or Capabiltiy to be a good leader, he hasn't been in Office yet, they accused JFK of the same
And he certainly can't be ANY worse then the last eight years

It may also be noted the George Bush is the ONLY Presient in US History to enter Office with a Criminal Record, granite, it is a was a MinorOffensive, but none the less a Criminal Record which he pleased guilty to

[mkemse]

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

[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.

[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.