The ..2012.... Political thread
-
I think Obama will be a great president. I think maybe the lesson here with Bush adminstration and this one is a Karmic one. Perhaps we as a nation are being taught to look beyond the amount of melanin in the skin as to what the person's ability is and judge based on the merit of the individual as they present them selves. I look at society now it seems as if we are going through what is kNown as Group karma. love doris.
-
seems to me that some people dont want brand new start
Maybe they want more of the 'good old days' ARMAGEDDON DAYS (are here again) They're 5 miles high As the crow flies Leavin' vapour trails Across a blood red sky Movin' in from the East Towards the West With balaclava helmets Over their heads YES! But if you think that Jesus Christ is coming Honey, you've got another thing coming If he ever finds out who's hijacked his name He'll cut out his heart and turn in his grave Islam is rising The Christians mobilising The world is on it's elbows and knees It's forgotten the message And worships the creeds "It's War" she cried "It's War" she cried "This is War!" Drop your possessions All you simple folk You will fight them on the beaches in your underclothes You will thank the good lord For raising the Union Jack You'll watch the ships sail out of harbour And the bodies come floating back Watch the ships sail out of harbour And the bodies come floating back If the real Jesus Christ were to stand up today He'd be gunned down cold by the C.I.A. Oh, the lights that now burn brightest Behind stained glass Will cast the darkest shadows Upon the human heart But God didn't build himself that throne God doesn't live in Israel or Rome God doesn't belong to the Yankee dollar God doesn't plant the bombs for Hezbollah God doesn't even go to church And God won't send us down to Allah to burn God will remind us what we already know That the human race is about to reap what it's sown Islam is rising The Christians mobilising The world is on it's elbows and knees It's forgotten the message And worships the creeds The world is on it's elbows and knees It's forgotten the message And worships the creeds Armageddon days are here again Armageddon days are here again Armageddon days are here again Armageddon Days Are HERE!!! Half wits -
Bill:
Matt, you're arguing semantics. The world does look up to America when America is worth looking up to. Until today, there wasn't a lot of that going on. I've made my prediction about a new level of friendliness towards the US from the international community and time will tell if I'm right. The truth is, America needs the international community as much as the international community needs America. Having a leader free from the stains of the Bush administration is going to help you a lot whether you agree with his policies or not. So to address the more zen-like aspect of your question, being popular is naturally going to mean more co-operation, and that's something you're going to need at a time like this. Popularity is an effect, not a cause. If someone is popular, there must be a reason for that popularity. Many countries see in Obama, a man they can work with. Whether that's a good thing or not, I will leave up to you. After all, he's your president-elect.
I think we're on different wavelengths here, so I think I need to be a bit more clear. Of course popularity is an effect, I never implied otherwise. But from what you're saying, it does sound like you think it's a cause: a cause of friendliness toward the U.S. And I think we need to keep in mind the fact that world hostility towards the U.S. isn't something that is or has been unique to the Bush Administration. That has been going on long before Bush took office in 2001 and, despite some of the savior qualities some people have attached to Obama, I don't see that entirely changing. But if we do want to go down that path, then we also need to note the fact that, since Bush has been in office, Europe has elected its most conservative leaders in decades. So that point about popularity is a bit debatable. This isn't to say that Bush is popular amongst those on the left, hardly, but the left hardly encompasses the world. But this is where I think we're going off in different directions. You're talking in terms of descriptive, while I am speaking in terms of prescriptive. Yeah, of course we can talk about the relationship between world opinion and policy all day (descriptive), but that's quite a difference from saying what it SHOULD be (prescriptive). In other words: leaving aside what you mean by "need," I never said that the U.S doesn't "need" the international community. My point is that just because Obama won to the delight of at least some of the world, and therefore more respect or "goodwill" might be thrown towards the U.S. tomorrow, that alone doesn't justify its goodness (or conversely, the badness) of the decision. I don't say this because my guy lost, (I'd say the same thing) but my point, and what I asked you on, is that popularity does not always equal goodness; the heard is not always right or good. So when someone says "Well, you should be happy about Obama winning, because now the U.S. is respected in the world again!," it means nothing to me. Perhaps, indeed, when one is smilin', "the whole world smiles at you," but that ultimately tells me nothing on the solutions to the problems this country does face, for again, popularity or goodwill towards it does not always point towards what's right or wrong. Therefore, considering world opinion, or popularity in general, is not always correct, it shouldn't be the barometer of whether policy or election decisions are good or not. That's all I'm trying to say; not that I don't welcome goodwill from other countries, of course I do, but just merely that when it comes to policies and decisions, the top priority for the U.S. should be to make policies based on what will help improve the U.S. and the policies should be based on how effective they can be; not appease in order to do well in some arbitrary popularity contest in which other countries in the world approve (or disapprove) of them.
-
moggy:
david mitchelson:
Thatcher WAS a calamity for the UK. The biggest mistake this country ever made.
Too right...the country will NEVER recover IMO from that bitch. The lack of spirit , manners and optimism shows through the nation ....greed , selfishness and ignorance have taken over....and the evils that go with it. Having said that bLiar and co have just carried on where she left off. Where is our Obama ?
That is your opinion where the hell were you in the 70's.
-
moggy:
seems to me that some people dont want brand new start
Maybe they want more of the 'good old days'So what your post implies is that either we accept and embrace Obama's policies or approve of the current problems in America. Isn't that quite the dichotomy... If you define "brand new start" as the President wanting to "fundamentally change" America then, no, I guess not. I'm much more interested in restoring it in areas that need fixing, such as the economy and other important issues that are going on in the U.S. If President-elect Obama can do that, great; I'm highly doubtful, but I truly hope he does. But that's a far cry from completely changing it or giving it this "brand new start." Other than some of the problems it faces, I'm quite happy with the U.S. as it is. And I sure as hell don't want this "New World Order," if your link is any indication...
-
I give up i really do Have your thatchers and bushes you halfwits
-
BandontheRun:
What a sad day for America and our forefathers and citizens who fought for our country. Obama will be the worst President yet. He is just as naive as most of his voters. Most of the votes this year came from people under age 29. This is the group that grew up with hip hop and Britney Spears. The group that grew up "coddled" also known as Generation "Me" where their parents ship them from place to place and never let them out on their own. Well, they've got their President. Putting aside Obama as Hitler.. I believe he will be more like Hoover. (look it up if you don't know about Hoover) Obama ran a popularity contest and won. America has greatly disappointed me.
I am presuming you mean the President and not the god fearing transvestite of FBI fame. Wasn't he a Republican! He can hardly be blamed for the 1929 crash he hadnt been in office more than ten months. Many things he did wrong or rather his administration did but really that could be put down to they really didnt understand the depth of the problem. And, anyway did'nt Roosevelt bugger up the economy and basically was saved by the massive infusion of French and British money, for defence contracts and materials. I am rather annoyed at you for making me aggreement with Moggy but only on the unbelievable bit and not all the hyperbole.
-
Matthew_Montoya:
I think we're on different wavelengths here, so I think I need to be a bit more clear. Of course popularity is an effect, I never implied otherwise. But from what you're saying, it does sound like you think it's a cause: a cause of friendliness toward the U.S. And I think we need to keep in mind the fact that world hostility towards the U.S. isn't something that is or has been unique to the Bush Administration. That has been going on long before Bush took office in 2001 and, despite some of the savior qualities some people have attached to Obama, I don't see that entirely changing. But if we do want to go down that path, then we also need to note the fact that, since Bush has been in office, Europe has elected its most conservative leaders in decades. So that point about popularity is a bit debatable. This isn't to say that Bush is popular amongst those on the left, hardly, but the left hardly encompasses the world. But this is where I think we're going off in different directions. You're talking in terms of descriptive, while I am speaking in terms of prescriptive. Yeah, of course we can talk about the relationship between world opinion and policy all day (descriptive), but that's quite a difference from saying what it SHOULD be (prescriptive). In other words: leaving aside what you mean by "need," I never said that the U.S doesn't "need" the international community. My point is that just because Obama won to the delight of at least some of the world, and therefore more respect or "goodwill" might be thrown towards the U.S. tomorrow, that alone doesn't justify its goodness (or conversely, the badness) of the decision. I don't say this because my guy lost, (I'd say the same thing) but my point, and what I asked you on, is that popularity does not always equal goodness; the heard is not always right or good. So when someone says "Well, you should be happy about Obama winning, because now the U.S. is respected in the world again!," it means nothing to me. Perhaps, indeed, when one is smilin', "the whole world smiles at you," but that ultimately tells me nothing on the solutions to the problems this country does face, for again, popularity or goodwill towards it does not always point towards what's right or wrong. Therefore, considering world opinion, or popularity in general, is not always correct, it shouldn't be the barometer of whether policy or election decisions are good or not. That's all I'm trying to say; not that I don't welcome goodwill from other countries, of course I do, but just merely that when it comes to policies and decisions, the top priority for the U.S. should be to make policies based on what will help improve the U.S. and the policies should be based on how effective they can be; not appease in order to do well in some arbitrary popularity contest in which other countries in the world approve (or disapprove) of them.
Well firstly, it's drawing a bit of a long bow to talk about the "heard" not always being right when I seem to remember that you were one of the ones who spun my criticism of Bush to mean I was being disrespectful to all Americans because the American people (now referred to as "the heard" apparently) had elected him. Correct me if I'm wrong about that. You can't have it both ways. You can't talk of the will of the people when it goes your way and "the heard," when it doesn't. Most of the goodwill is going to come not from electing a likable guy but from showing a willingness to move away from a discredited ideology that has alienated so much of the world. I said that in my original post. If it helps, I'll break it down for you: Popularity does not equal goodness, Goodness equals popularity. Beyond that, I refer you to my signature.
-
Any goodwill will disappear in 3 months, the USA national interests do not change with their Presidents. And, as such conflict with other countries is inevitable. The 3 months is the period with other governments, with the public of other nations, most notably the western ones any good will is irrevelant.
-
I'm under no illusions, the honeymoon will not last. But during that time - and I'm inclined to agree on the timeframe - Obama has the opportunity to restore some of the trust that has been lost through the incumbent administration's general dickishness when it comes to diplomacy. (irony intended) Maintaining a reasonable approval rating with the populace of other countries does come into the equation. Governments that have expressed an eagerness to fall in line with Bush policies have generally suffered for it in their own elections which, in turn, reduces co-operation between America and her allies.
-
If there is to be peace in the world, There must be peace in the nations. If there is to be peace in the nations, There must be peace in the cities. If there is to be peace in the cities, There must be peace between neighbors. If there is to be peace between neighbors, There must be peace in the home. If there is to be peace in the home, There must be peace in the heart. chinese philospher - lao-tse - 6th century bce Looks like we are all responsible, not just any president.
-
moggy:
I give up i really do Have your thatchers and bushes you halfwits
I love how she just throughly pissed the Queen off by making her wait. The Queen waits for no one. Baroness Thatcher insisted on taking the stairs. :
-
It took America 40 years to get an black president. I do congratulate the USA for this historical fact, I'm also glad Barack did mentioning Martin Luther King , who did was assasinate and the other black leaders. The Netherlands was for 90% backing Barack Obama and we as a country are delight with the unique fact.
-
Barack got in the high 80%'s for polls over here in the UK. So he seems popular then. Give the guy a chance, if he fails.......and he has some mighty hurdles to overcome.......then you can start to complain but until I suggest you let him get on with the job. Like I said before was there any real alternative to Barack? McCain, Palin, Hilary etc......I'm sorry to those of republican persuasion but NO CONTEST! Can you imagine if there had been no monarchy here in the UK?........'milk snatcher' Thatcher would have been even more unbearable........President Thatcher..... : .......she'd still be in office now, her jackboots firmly under the desk at number 10. Made old Queenie wait while she took the stairs.......shame 'god bless her and all who sail in her' hadn't kicked the divisive, sleazy, toad troll back down the stairs. The UK we have today is down to Thatcher......and I don't mean that as a compliment. Broken, souless, selfish, greedy, downtrodden, cold, humourless, lacking in manners, disrespectful, full of businesses who've lined their pockets and then go cap in hand to line their pockets again with the tax payers hard earned cash after their incompetence has almost bankrupted the world economy.....on and on I could go. This is the nation our fathers and grandfathers fought and died for.......they gave us our freedom and how do we repay them?....... by becoming an apathetic rabble rasing kids who don't have a clue and don't care to. I commend those who sacrificed their lives for our freedom but still have to ask.....looking at us now, what we've become, did we deserve that ultimate sacrifice? Thatcher?......PAH!!..... Now let Barack get on with it and see how far he goes.
-
david mitchelson:
Barack got in the high 80%'s for polls over here in the UK. So he seems popular then. Give the guy a chance, if he fails.......and he has some mighty hurdles to overcome.......then you can start to complain but until I suggest you let him get on with the job. Like I said before was there any real alternative to Barack? McCain, Palin, Hilary etc......I'm sorry to those of republican persuasion but NO CONTEST! Can you imagine if there had been no monarchy here in the UK?........'milk snatcher' Thatcher would have been even more unbearable........President Thatcher..... : .......she'd still be in office now, her jackboots firmly under the desk at number 10. Made old Queenie wait while she took the stairs.......shame 'god bless her and all who sail in her' hadn't kicked the divisive, sleazy, toad troll back down the stairs. The UK we have today is down to Thatcher......and I don't mean that as a compliment. Broken, souless, selfish, greedy, downtrodden, cold, humourless, lacking in manners, disrespectful, full of businesses who've lined their pockets and then go cap in hand to line their pockets again with the tax payers hard earned cash after their incompetence has almost bankrupted the world economy.....on and on I could go. This is the nation our fathers and grandfathers fought and died for.......they gave us our freedom and how do we repay them?....... by becoming an apathetic rabble rasing kids who don't have a clue and don't care to. I commend those who sacrificed their lives for our freedom but still have to ask.....looking at us now, what we've become, did we deserve that ultimate sacrifice? Thatcher?......PAH!!..... Now let Barack get on with it and see how far he goes.
Hi David Yes, it's a beautiful morning and we have a fantastic opportunity. I think Blairs major problem was bush....he just could not quit him. Somehow from what I've seen I think Obama is his own man I don't think he would have that problem. I think this election has the chance of being very positive for the UK and the world. Whats left of the repubs has been marginalized and thats a great thing Peace update: I think Brown must be quite relieved. Working with Obama will help him greatly...could change his standing with the people...you think? Excuse my fussy thinking I did some major celebrating thoughout the night
-
I'm glad so many people participated in this election. That's good no matter who they voted for. I supported Obama but I think McCain is also a good and honorable man. McCain's concession speech was excellent, and struck just the right note: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27545964#27545964
-
Kahlessa:
I'm glad so many people participated in this election. That's good no matter who they voted for. I supported Obama but I think McCain is also a good and honorable man. McCain's concession speech was excellent, and struck just the right note: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/27545964#27545964
The only thing I argue against here is that when it came to the actual number of votes, this was a close race...however, because we work on an electoral system, the final results were a landslide. This makes me feel like my vote means nothing.
-
rich n:
The only thing I argue against here is that when it came to the actual number of votes, this was a close race...however, because we work on an electoral system, the final results were a landslide. This makes me feel like my vote means nothing.
I've been saying this for a long time. Nice to see that someone gets it. The electoral college is a gross distortion of the people's will. There was no landslide. Obama's mandate is slim.
-
I agree that the electoral college should be abolished. But, now the campaigns are structured to win the electoral college not the popular vote. Believe me, if the election was decided by the popular vote Obamas stellar campaign would have campaigned in every state. Just as in the primary his campaign was very smart to concentrate on winning state caucas. I think this is a large mandate election because that is the system we currently have.
-
Bill:
rich n:
The only thing I argue against here is that when it came to the actual number of votes, this was a close race...however, because we work on an electoral system, the final results were a landslide. This makes me feel like my vote means nothing.
I've been saying this for a long time. Nice to see that someone gets it. The electoral college is a gross distortion of the people's will. There was no landslide. Obama's mandate is slim.
The democrats win was overwhelming, not slim. I think it is clear the people were sick of 8 years of Bush. They won more seats in the House and the Senate. But Obama knows it's going to take a lot more than party politics to solve the problems his administration will face. The election may be over, but the hard work is just beginning. These are very challenging, but exciting times.