Obama '08?

As much as the libs hate to face it, Bush is a good man, a great guy, and he did his level best to serve the country. I will not say he made every decision perfectly, and I opposed many of his policies such as the prescription drug plan and No Child Left Behind, things like that, and I am not going to claim Iraq has turned out to be easy, but face it the Congress voted for the war after they had all the same information. Don't give me the crap and spin that has been built and concocted for years now by Democrats for their own political expediency that Bush made it all up and lied us into war, that is a total and absolute crock. All of that had to be one of the biggest cases of political stabbing somebody in the back that I have ever witnessed in my entire life of watching politics. It was all because the Democrats are politicians first, and cowards, rather than taking responsibility for their own decisions.

If nothing else, the election of Obama gives us a good opportunity for everyone to see exactly what I just described in the above, the inability of Democrats to take responsibility. We had Obama speak loftily virtually in every debate and speech about how Bush had taken his eye off the ball and he should have been in Afghanistan tracking down Bin Laden instead of going to Iraq. Well now, we will see if it was only rhetoric, which I think it was, or whether the man has any honesty or force of character to have any convictions beyond his own political ambitions. In contrast, Bush had force of character, whether you agreed with him or not. Bush could be trusted, thats the point. Obama, no I doubt it.

I can agree with you, because both parties have out-done the other in increasing our deficit.

When they get to Washington DC, they seem to forget fiscal responsibility, and spend taxpayer money without any regard to the economy or that this deficit will have to be paid by our children and grandchildren. They also ignore the simple principle of inflation when too much money is spent without it being backed by goods and services.

They're all bums!

Any time you think logic is 'simple,' Okie, you're probably making a dumb argument.



The question and point MM raises is not totally correct, for it ignores what we have experienced, regarding racial dynamics and the history of our nation.

Cycloptichorn

i'm sure a lot of folks believe that, others will and do feel the same way about obama

as for me, i have little or no faith in any politician

i vote for individual candidates and eschew any type of party politics

What okie said is really funny! Bush served two terms, got us into an unnecessary war in Iraq, and put the world economy into the biggest recession since the great depression, and he was a "good guy."

Who needs "good guys" in the white house?

This notion that a 3rd Party is the salvation of American governance is nonsense.

First of all, it is highly unlikely (and I would argue impossible) for a potentially viable 3rd Party to arise without complete dependence on an individual candidate.

Do we really want a cult of personality party?

Secondly, the only way a 3rd Party will be consistently viable is when it replaces one of the current two. We are not England.

Finally, the only way a 3rd Party becomes viable and replaces one of the big Two is to emulate and execute upon the very means and ways reformers want to avoid.

We shouldn't abandon reform, but the fantasy of a 3rd Party is not the answer.

Well, it looks like the republican party is now split into two factions. The democrats are broken when they can't get enough votes to do anything. I believe a third party has great potential.

The way around that is to start two new parties at the same time, one on the left (maybe a new green party) and one on the right. They would agree to work together, prob not even caucusing with either the Dems or the GOP. They would first push reforms in both chambers, and when the DEMs and the GOP use their power to kill reform both of the new parties would use this behaviour to sell the idea that to vote for either DEMS or GOP is a betrayal of the nation. Once D's and R's together lose a majority the two new parties would enact law that replaces them as the two parties of our two party system. At that point they are finished, even thought a few individuals from either party may hold on to their seats for a time. Most of those remaining would switch parties, would renounce their former party.

I also believe this is about the best time for a third party to establish itself; both the republicans and democrats are divided on too many issues, and people are getting tired of the in-fighting in congress. The republicans as the "no" party, and the democrats who can't seem to lead as Obama promised during his campaign.

Obama seems wedded to the war in Afghanistan that will not increase our security or help protect our military or treasure. The way you make our country more secure is to help our country's economy with more jobs and security. Let the Middle East and European countries worry about the war in Afghanistan; it's in their neighborhood, and it's about their security.

We need to bring home our troops from most foreign countries; that old practice of our country protecting other countries security is foolish; it's costing us billions every year that should be spent at home. World security is the responsibility of the world community.

Our give-away programs of billions of dollars to foreign countries must also cease. Our economy can't afford it.

Without economic and terrorist security at home, we only make our situation worse by getting involved with the world's security. Our increasing deficit will only hurt us in the long term.

I am also REALLY liking the revolt idea, which is to try to get a groundswell of support for Americans all across this land to vote out the incumbent, no matter how well or poorly they have done in our opinion, no matter who the challenger is. For us to say that we will continue to swap out people until we get a group who will get their heads out of their asses and take care of America's business. When we finally get to a Congress that is competent then we will stop, or when we finally get the parties replaced we will stop. Till then it does not matter who you are, if you are part of a failed Congress you get a boot in your ass.

I'm ready; I wonder how many others are?

MM: Re-write what YOU think is my opinion, give it a spin and what have you got? SPIN! Get a life!
Okie:
You wrote:

"teeny, you cannot show with evidence that the opposition to Obama is due to racism. There may be a very very small percentage, insignificant I believe, that is due to racism, but it would be from Democrats in this country as much or more than Republicans. Republicans have historically been at the forefront of individual rights ....."

Can you decipher the above? What are you saying? I didn't say any such thing! Since you brought up opposition is due to racism, there's a grain of truth there because for SOME people, they can't stomach a Black in the White House. You tell ME that that, isn't a true statement! You brought it up, remember. I heard on TV yesterday, that Pat Boone, the singer, is calling for people to storm the White House and get all of the "usurpers" out of Our House, so is he calling for a coup of a duly elected President? He didn't name Obama, so who is he talking about? He, (Obama), is the person living there, temporarily. He's serving because the voters put him there.

Remember, YOU brought up the "R" word! I spoke from MY experience as a person of color. This has become a declaration that there IS some racism in this country, simply because it has been a mantra of those who think minorities in general, are taking over YOUR country! People of Hispanic and Native ancestry have been on the North American continent for thousands of years. Who are you, for that matter, to decide that THEY have no right to be here?

Africans were forcibly brought to this country to toil in the fields, build expansive mansions, be blacksmiths and skilled artisans while the women also worked the fields, tended to their masters offspring, cook their meals and being laundresses and any role slave owners chose for them and the men.
All for no wages, spanning from 1619 to 1865, then sharecropping in the south during Jim Crow, for little or nothing. It wasn't until 1954, when Brown vs. The Board of Education, under the Eisenhower Administration, that the Supreme Court found for minorities that the schools were separate and unequal, catapaulting an unknown Black Lawyer named Thurgood Marshall who was the attorney in this case into the Supreme Court.

If you think that the only Black lawyer in the Supreme Court replacing Justice Marshall is an equal equivalent, you are mistaken. Justice Thomas is a self absorbed, who hates his blackness, has an inferiority complex, thinks he got to the Supreme Court with no help from the Civil Rights movement and is a sad commentary to ALL Black People in America, seeking justice. We'll never get any from him!

See, now you got me started. Again, visit your library, if you were born after 1970 and borrow a history book on the Civil Rights era of the 1950's - 1975.
It was a gruesome reality for me, because I had no idea how deep racism was/is because I lived in a City. For those living in the rural South, it was a living nightmare of the Klan and Southern law officials, taking the law in their hands, for whatever purpose they felt like. Blacks were beaten on the steps of one courthouse in Alabama, just for trying to register to vote. There is a Parish/County in Louisiana, I never step foot in to this day, where the ruling Judge, a Roman Catholic and confirmed racist fought the Federal Government "tooth and nail" against the integration of the schools.

Just Google the name, "Leander Perez", and read up on the treachery and crimes he committed while wearing the black robes of a justice. If there is a God, he's burning in Hell! Please stop accusing me of bringing up the "R" word, because hate and racism is as alive and well, as it ever was.

Ready for what? What exactly are you proposing?

I'm ready, well, at least to seriously consider the 3rd party candidate. The Democrat/Republican thing is too inbred.

I heard Michael Steele on C-Span talking about the governors victories and it's the same old crap. Howard Dean did the same posturing about a mandate for change. Once they get into office they fall into line with the excessive culture of Washington and forget.

I don't agree with the opinion sections of the conservative newspapers, but I do believe them when they report Obama meets with Lobbyists, for example.

As far as I can see, Obama is good at spin, capturing the charming moments. I appreciate his going to Dover when the caskets arrived, or his push for education, or how he's opened up the dialogue to include regular people. It's an improvement over Bush, any day, but president Obama has some catching up to do with candidate Obama.

okie, I read your long post about the trials in boot camp and in Vietnam. What if someone told you to "get over it", how would you like it? You'd find it to be ridiculous.

It seems to me if you're not the center of the discussion then there's no discussion worth having. You, big strong man.

I must say Gala that you have a sweet innocent approach to these matters not that far short of the charming and intensely determined young lady who once rattled a tin under my nose so that I could help her to save the earth. I still titter about it from time to time.

The "culture of Washington" is an altogther more daunting task I think.

the only sort of culture in washington grows in petri dishes

As did penicillin.

true

but let's not forget, it works if used properly, but overused it loses it effectiveness

You've ignored my post about sticking your arse in the display window at Bloomingdales.