BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:19 AM

LOS ANGELES (KNX 1070 NEWSRADIO) -- A poll out today says support for the Afghanistan war, and President Obama's handling of it, is up.

57 percent of Americans say fighting the war is the right thing to do, compared to 35 percent who say it isn't, according to the latest Quinnipiac survey. That's up 9 percentage points in three weeks.

Approval of President Obama's handling of the war is now evenly split -- at 45 percent yes and 45 percent no. That's a gain for him of seven percentage points since last month.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 12:21 PM

"any moron can do" Quite aptly stated.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 12:36 PM

Yes, well, Sawzaw, I said that because I personally witnessed in the 1970s that people who were so damn lazy and disorganized that they could not get a job, maintain a relationship, wash themselves, clean their kitchen, or basically do anything.....those people could STILL get it together to grow and harvest their own dope, roll their own joints, and they could do it quite well.

Why? Well, it was their religion, you see, and people can become remarkably focused when they are motivated by great religious faith! ;-)

I kid you not.

However, I've also known some quite intelligent, well-organized, hard-working and responsible people who have grown their own dope strictly for their own use. So I wouldn't want to characterize ALL home dope growers as "morons"...and I thought I'd better make that 100% clear. ;-) You never know who may be reading this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 06:28 PM

Hey, Amos, I resemble those thoughts...

But nevermind trying to get anything across to Sawz about those of us who do grow our own, toke a little and get up and go to work every day and are, for the most part, model citizens in our communities...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 06:40 PM

Yo, Bobert! ;-) I was thinkin' about you when I typed that last paragraph.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 12:06 AM

"57 percent of Americans say fighting the war is the right thing to do"

whether it be Obama's war, or Bush's war it's still WAR.

Peace,
biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 08:31 AM

Well thankee, LH... Nice to have a few folks 'round here that don't have me firmly in the moron column....

(Cough)

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 11:08 AM

"I personally witnessed in the 1970s that people who were so damn lazy and disorganized that they could not get a job, maintain a relationship, wash themselves, clean their kitchen, or basically do anything.....those people could STILL get it together to grow and harvest their own dope, roll their own joints, and they could do it quite well."

I too have witnessed the 1970's and now I'm personally witnessing the new millennium ... things have gotten a whole lot worse

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 12:33 PM

This ain't about weed... It's about a failed educational and economic system that has produced way too many epsilons and not enought alphas and betas...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Donuel
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 10:52 AM

In Oslo, Obama was applauded only once for not being Bush.


silence


silence

Then...
One more more round of applause was heard for a MLK quote and that was it.

He was snubbed as effectively as they did George at the end.

IT was a tough crowd. Afterall it was only 9 days ago that Obama vowed to escalate the war.

Pete Seegar should have won the Peace prize. HE has EARNED it.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 11:23 AM

Business leaders, Bay Area officials praise Obama's jobs plan

By Steve Johnson

[e-mail]
Posted: 12/09/2009 01:00:00 AM PST
Updated: 12/09/2009 08:54:47 AM PST

Business leaders and Bay Area public officials praised President Barack Obama's call Tuesday to reduce the nation's persistent double-digit unemployment through a major federal spending effort to improve roads, bolster small businesses and make homes more energy-efficient.

Under intense political pressure because more than 7 million Americans have lost jobs over the past two years and despite Republican criticism over the rising deficit, Obama called the nation's 10 percent jobless rate "staggering" and said the U.S. must continue to "spend our way out of the recession."

Although Obama didn't specify how much the plan would cost, experts said it would doubtless involve tens of billions of dollars, which local government officials said was sorely needed.

"I'm euphoric about it," said Dan Collen, Santa Clara County's deputy director for roads and airports, who said the county has $160 million of high-priority road needs, including improvements to its extensive network of expressways. And if the state tries to grab some county money to ease its own budget woes, "we may need all of the stimulus-for-jobs or whatever money is available just to keep the routine baseline operations going," said Collen.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 11:25 AM

This is from antiwar.com.

Neocons Get Warm and Fuzzy Over 'War President'

by Eli Clifton, December 05, 2009

.... a small group of hawkish foreign policy experts - who have lobbied the White House since August to escalate U.S. involvement in Afghanistan - are christening Obama the new "War President."

....foreign policy hawks who have accused the president of "dithering" in making a decision on Afghanistan are praising the administration's willingness to make the "tough" commitment to escalate the U.S. commitment in the war in Afghanistan.

Indeed, their approval of the White House's decision to commit 30,000 troops is the culmination of a campaign led by the newly formed Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI).

...The newly formed group is headed up by the Weekly Standard's editor Bill Kristol; foreign policy adviser to the McCain presidential campaign Robert Kagan; and former policy adviser in the GeorgeGeorge W. Bush administration Dan Senor.

Kagan and Kristol were also co-founders and directors of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a number of whose 1997 charter members, including the elder Cheney, former Pentagon chief Donald RumsfeldDonald Rumsfeld, and their two top aides, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby and Paul WolfowitzPaul Wolfowitz, respectively, played key roles in promoting the 2003 invasion of Iraq and Bush's other first-term policies when the hawks exercised their greatest influence.

The core leadership of FPI has waged their campaign in countless editorials and columns published in the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and the Weekly Standard.

...Senor described himself as "pleasantly surprised" and "quite encouraged by the president's decision" in a Republican National Committee sponsored conference call.

"It seems to me that Obama deserves even more credit for courage than Bush did, for he has risked much more. By the time Bush decided to support the surge in Iraq in early 2007, his presidency was over and discredited, brought down in large part by his own disastrous decision not to send the right number of troops in 2003, 2004, 2005, or 2006," wrote Kagan in the Washington Post on Wednesday.

..The theme of heralding Obama as a stoic decision-maker in the face of an administration and Congress that seek to "manage American decline" - as Kagan wrote - was also echoed by Bill Kristol in the Washington Post on Wednesday.

"By mid-2010, Obama will have more than doubled the number of American troops in Afghanistan since he became president; he will have empowered his general, Stanley McChrystal, to fight the war pretty much as he thinks necessary to in order to win; and he will have retroactively, as it were, acknowledged that he and his party were wrong about the Iraq surge in 2007 - after all, the rationale for this surge is identical to Bush's, and the hope is for a similar success. He will also have embraced the use of military force as a key instrument of national power," wrote Kristol.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 11:26 AM

U.S. Mayors Praise President Obama for Supporting Fiscal Relief for Local Governments and States, Targeted Infrastructure Investment, Small Business Capital

WASHINGTON, Dec. 8 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The following statement from Tom Cochran, USCM CEO and Executive Director, was released today:

"The President and his advisors have been meeting with U.S. mayors. The President understands the jobs and fiscal crisis happening in America's cities, and he is calling for action," Conference of Mayors CEO and Executive Director Tom Cochran said today following President Obama's jobs address.

The U.S. Conference of Mayors has developed A Call to Action which highlights the ongoing jobs crisis in America's cities -- predicted to last for years -- and the need for more targeted investments in cities and local infrastructure to create jobs.

One of the key action items called for by mayors is "Targeted Fiscal Relief for High Unemployment Cities and Metro Areas." Cities all across the country have faced significant layoffs and budgetary cutbacks this summer, with dire local revenue projections in the coming years. ARRA provided significant fiscal assistance to states, but none to local governments. The recession is now having drastic effects at the local level. Therefore, mayors are calling on the Administration and Congress to develop a fiscal assistance program targeted to cities with high rates of unemployment and budget shortfalls. This is needed to prevent even deeper layoffs in critical areas such as public safety and public works, and help cities promote private sector job creation through local infrastructure projects.

In his address today, the President said, Congress should extend "relief to states and localities to prevent layoffs." And during the recent White House Jobs Summit on December 3 -- attended by five mayors -- the President said, "As tough as this financial crisis or recession has been on the federal budget, it has in some cases been worse on state and local government budgets... Usually, state and local government revenues lag the recovery as a whole. They may need some more help from the federal government... If you see a complete collapse in state and local government spending on basic needs, that could create a very bad business climate for all of you."

The President also called for more targeted infrastructure investment in programs such as TIGER grants and public transit, as well as support for small business lending -- all strongly supported by mayors.

The Conference of Mayors is working closely with both the Administration and Congress to ensure that in this jobs bill, more resources and infrastructure projects go directly to cities and local areas -- ensuring they are not stalled in state bureaucracies - so that more jobs can be created now.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 11:28 AM

"There will be times when nations -acting individually or in concert - will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified."

At least he thinks weed is not morally justified.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 12:07 PM

Sooner or later the MSM will pick up on this and this guy will get rolled under da bus:

    Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings was the founder, and for many years, Executive Director of an organization called the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN). GLSEN started essentially as Jennings' personal project and grew to become the culmination of his life's work. And he was chosen by President Obama to be the nation's Safe Schools Czar primarily because he had founded and led GLSEN.

    GLSEN's stated mission is to empower gay youth in the schools and to stop harassment by other students. It encourages the formation of Gay Student Alliances and condemns the use of hateful words. GLSEN also strives to influence the educational curriculum to include materials which the group believes will increase tolerance of gay students and decrease bullying. To that end, GLSEN maintains a recommended reading list of books that it claims "furthers our mission to ensure safe schools for all students." In other words, these are the books that GLSEN's directors think all kids should be reading: gay kids should read them to raise their self-esteem, and straight kids should read them in order to become more aware and tolerant and stop bullying gay kids.

    We were unprepared for what we encountered. Book after book after book contained stories and anecdotes that weren't merely X-rated and pornographic, but which featured explicit descriptions of sex acts between pre-schoolers; stories that seemed to promote and recommend child-adult sexual relationships; stories of public masturbation, anal sex in restrooms, affairs between students and teachers, five-year-olds playing sex games, semen flying through the air. One memoir even praised becoming a prostitute as a way to increase one's self-esteem.

http://www.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/all/news/record/1294.html

"Late one night, Troy sneaked into Michael's basement bedroom while his parents and sister slept upstairs. For hours, they lay together in Michael's bed, hugging, kissing, and touching each other. Usually it was the park or Michael's car where they would make out, masturbating each other and having oral sex. They didn't use condoms, and instead abstained from sex that they thought would be unsafe, Troy says."

(Kevin Jennings recounts another early sexual experience.)
When we got back to my house, we went to bed and a conversation started. Maybe it was the alcohol, maybe it was our teenage hormones, but soon we were admitting our attraction to guys, then our attraction to each other and, soon after that, we were acting on that attraction. Peter rolled over and kissed me passionately (something I had never let Mike do) and said, "Well, I guess we've both screwed up our lives now," and then we went at it. But it didn't feel like I was screwing anything up. The old cliché "it felt so right" was true: for the first time, I was having a sexual experience with someone I was both attracted to and cared about. This was no one-way street. Peter was so cute and I was so turned on, soon all of our clothes were off and we "did it all," in a night that I can honestly say, twenty-five years later, was one of the most exciting ones of my life.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 01:47 PM

""There will be times when nations -acting individually or in concert - will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified."



Sawzaw, all governments and leaders make such utterances when they go to war....and their people and their soldiers mostly believe them. The same statement might just as well have been made by Hitler, Goebbels, Mao Zedong, Stalin, Napoleon, Mussolini, Frederick the Great, Julius Caesar....

They always believe that their use of force is both necessary and morally justified.

That might be true. It might not. But they always believe it is true.

I have a healthy skepticism for such notions.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 02:35 PM

LH

"I have a healthy skepticism for such notions. "


By the present administration's direct comments, that makes you racist, in favour of slavery, and totally evil. So maybe you need to rethink and accept the double-plus right-think that you have been told is true.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:11 PM

Oh, don't be silly, BB. Skepticism regarding government statements does not equate to absolute belief that ALL government statements are completely untrue nor does it equate to believing in the diametrical opposite extreme of some stated proposition. Skepticism is not an absolutist position, it's a position of expressing some measure of doubt about something.

Perhaps I should accuse you of some similarly heinous views as you have attributed to me, based on some fragment of something you once said? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:24 PM

Furthermore, no one is "totally evil". Even Hitler loved his dog. Even the neighbour's dog, Major, which is a nasty, thieving, smelly, rotten little bastard, loves his owner.

Try to avoid engaging in this sort of exaggerated personal hyperbole in the future, would you? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 04:29 PM

By the present administration's direct comments, that makes you racist, in favour of slavery, and totally evil. So maybe you need to rethink and accept the double-plus right-think that you have been told is true.

That is pretty silly, all right, BB. Do you actually have a reference lending itself (without distortion) to such an interpretation of an administration policy or statement??


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 04:45 PM

Settle down, folks... After all, it *is* BB and he does tend to be very dogmatic in his stances... No gray in his world... Black or white... No middle... Nothin' new here...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 05:24 PM

Left and right, pundits applaud Obama Nobel Peace Prize speech
Liberal and conservative pundits both approve of Obama's Nobel Peace Prize speech. They like his humility and his realism.

By Linda Feldmann | (Chr. Science. Monitor Staff writer)/ December 10, 2009 edition

WASHINGTON

If nothing else, the American punditocracy largely agreed on one aspect of President Obama's Nobel Peace Prize speech: that it was eloquent.

In offering a tutorial on just war theory, laid out in clear prose and compellingly delivered, Mr. Obama and his speechwriters showed once again that they know how to knock one out of the park.

But more noteworthy is the largely positive, or at least hopeful, tone of reaction across the political spectrum. From conservative former House speaker Newt Gingrich to writers at the liberal Nation magazine, the insta-analyses found hope in Obama's words, either in his justification for the war in Afghanistan or in his ultimate aspiration: to replace war with peace.

"I thought the speech was actually very good," Mr. Gingrich said on the WNYC radio's The Takeaway. "And he clearly understood that he had been given the prize prematurely, but he used it as an occasion to remind people, first of all, as he said, that there is evil in the world."

Sometimes a need for force

Gingrich also applauded Obama for reminding the Nobel committee that there would be no peace prize without the use of force. "A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies," Obama said.

Progressives upset by Obama's decision to escalate US involvement in Afghanistan may not have given the president the A grades that some conservatives and others offered. But at the Nation.com, a reliable gauge of liberal thought, the reaction was not wholly negative — a sign, perhaps, that Obama still enjoys a reserve of goodwill among his base.

Nation writer John Nichols called the address "exceptionally well-reasoned and appropriately humble." He then recommended the reaction of the Dalai Lama, who opted for a positive outlook: "I think the Nobel Peace Prize gives him more encouragement and also gives him more moral personal responsibility," the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader told Sky News.

Nichols also commended the reaction of Paul Kawika Martin, the policy and political director of the group Peace Action, who said: "Although Peace Action applauds him for stating a vision of a world without nuclear weapons and increasing diplomacy with Iran, we believe he has missed opportunities to advance nonmilitary solutions to conflict by dramatically increasing troop levels in Afghanistan and continuing the growth of the military budget. We challenge him to live up to the honor of being a Nobel laureate."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 06:42 PM

A few points here....

A non-violent movement in Germany during the 30's, had it been of sufficient determination and had it involved enough people, could have prevented Hitler's rise to power in the first place.

A similar non-violent movement in America could have prevented America from going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

911 was not an act of war, it was a criminal act by a small group of people who did not represent a government or a sovereign nation.

To attack Afghanistan and Iraq over 911 (and over fictional WMDs in the case of Iraq) was not a rational response to such a criminal attack.

The governments of Afghanistan and Iraq presented no real threat whatsoever to the survival and security of the United States, whereas Hitler's Germany in the late 30's and the 40's did represent a very real threat to the survival of the governments of a great many other nations who ended up fighting him.

Therefore, it is disingenuous to use the example of fighting Hitler for some quasi-justification for invading Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a red herring. To put it less generously, it's doubletalk. There is no real correlation between the one and the other. It is, in fact, America that is presently taking up the role Hitler once did...in this sense: America is practicing imperial aggression by a great power upon smaller nations and with imperial intentions in so doing. Like Hitler in 1939, America has pretended to be defending itself against an outside attack or the threat of an attack. (Hitler claimed that the Poles had attacked Germany first and had committed atrocities against Germans in Poland, and most Germans at the time believed him. They also believed that Communist saboteurs had burned down the Reichstag...their version of a 911 attack. This enabled Hitler to establish emergency powers which were never rescinded, paving the way to a dictatorship.) The Patriot Act was a somewhat similar American government response to 911, but to a lesser extent.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 08:15 PM

I'm not too sure how many more folks would have had to been in the streets prior to the Iraq invasion to stop it... All I know is that I was at the Moritorium march during the Vietnam war and at the January march on DC prior to the Iraq invasion and there were at least as many people at the Jnauary march as there were at the Moritorium...

Millions of people took to the streets that day across the country and the world and Bush couldn't have cared less... He was going to order up this war come hell or high water...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 08:20 PM

Yes, unfortunately that is so. Once a government is in place that is absolutely bent on having a war, there is little that a population can do to stop it. The military will follow the orders once they are given...and after that, Pandora's box has been opened.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 08:50 PM

The myth:

"turn around the divisions and bitternesses that have poisoned our nation for the last many years, and start healing its Union, and its economy, and its repute, and its political framework"

The reality:

AP: WASHINGTON – Black lawmakers who have largely held their tongues during President Barack Obama's first year in office are stepping up their demands that the nation's first black president do more for minority communities hit hardest by the recession.

While still careful about criticizing Obama publicly, they appear to be losing their patience after watching him dedicate more than $1 trillion to prop up banks and corporations and fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while double-digit unemployment among blacks crept even higher.

"Obama has tried desperately to stay away from race, and all of us understand what he's doing," said Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo. "But when you have such a disproportionate number of African-Americans unemployed, it would be irresponsible not to direct attention and resources to the people who are receiving the greatest level of pain."

Dating back to Obama's campaign, many black leaders have pressed him to take more of a stand on the challenges facing minorities. Most voiced criticisms privately for fear of jeopardizing his candidacy or undercutting his popularity after his election. They also have tread lightly so as not to be at odds with their own majority-black constituencies, who strongly support Obama.

But frustration has been building.

The 42-member Congressional Black Caucus flexed its influence last week when 10 of its members held up a financial regulation bill backed by the administration until leaders agreed to add about $3 billion in foreclosure relief for struggling homeowners. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., the House Financial Services Committee chairman, later added $1 billion for neighborhood revitalization programs.

During the stalemate, the lawmakers issued a statement saying they would no longer support public policy "defined by the world view of Wall Street."

"Policy for the least of these must be integrated into everything that we do," they said.

And earlier this week, the all-Democratic caucus responded to Obama's proposal for a new jobs package by saying it would insist on initiatives targeted to minorities. Pointing to outsized percentages of African-Americans losing their jobs and homes, caucus Chairwoman Barbara Lee, D-Calif., said Obama must live up to his campaign talk that racial disparities cannot be ignored.

"The facts speak for themselves," Lee said. "The gaps are very real."

Some have sought to pin blame on the president's advisers.

"It's not the president. It's his economic team," said Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla. "I don't think they're doing their job."

The unemployment rate among African-Americans is nearly 16 percent, almost double the 9 percent rate for whites. Roughly one in four blacks lives in poverty, compared with about 11 percent of whites.

Obama was a black caucus member in the Senate before winning the White House last year, but he has never had a close relationship with the group. In recent interviews, he has addressed their criticisms by saying he must represent the entire country, not any one population, and the best way to help low-income communities is to improve the overall economy.

"I think it's a mistake to start thinking in terms of particular ethnic segments of the United States rather than to think that we are all in this together and we are all going to get out of this together," he said.

Many blacks in Congress take exception to that view, arguing that decades of neglect and discrimination warrant particular attention to minority concerns. Veteran black lawmakers such as Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., and House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers, D-Mich., have been among the most vocal.

Conyers told The Hill newspaper that Obama called last month to ask why Conyers was "demeaning" him so much. Conyers has since declined to discuss the call, and Lee wouldn't say whether she has had a similar conversation with the president.

Black lawmakers say the differences are not new and Obama shouldn't take them personally. The caucus has had similar disputes with most recent presidents, including in 1993 when it spurned an invitation to meet with President Bill Clinton over potential budget cuts to domestic programs such as Medicare.

"What I think the CBC is saying is that our voices have to be raised on behalf of our constituents, just as the Blue Dogs or any other caucus does," said Rep. Chaka Fattah, D-Pa., referring to the conservative Democratic group that has leverage because it often holds swing votes. "In politics, what happens is the squeaky wheel gets the oil."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 09:43 PM

I agree... Obama needs to address the realities that black folks in America are still getting shafted... Lower wages, higher incarceration rates, more poverty and homelessness, disporportonate numbers getting killed in wars, disporportunate being shot down in our streets...

Doesn't matter that Obama is also black here... What matters is that these sad statsitcs are hard to acdept when the country could be doing much better job at leveling the playing field...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 09:56 PM

"Mr. Obama and his speechwriters showed once again that they know how to knock one out of the park."

Gag, Puke, Gag. Bush could have written it. "wagers of peace" ?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 10:09 PM

Watch out for wolves who speak with the tongues of lambs and shepherds...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 10:35 PM

"Obama needs to address the realities that black folks in America are still getting shafted..."

            Black folks aren't the only ones getting shafted. Obama doesn't care; his priorities lie elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 10:53 PM

Attacks on the messanger are proof of the bankruptcy of the attacker's arguement.


LH,

"it's a position of expressing some measure of doubt about something."

And THAT is what this administration, as stated by Al Gore, Harry Reid, Pelosi, and Barack Obama, does not welcome nor allow without attack.




"Perhaps I should accuse you of some similarly heinous views as you have attributed to me, based on some fragment of something you once said? ;-) "

** I ** accuse you of nothing- those stated above have classed all those who do not actively support them and their agendas as such. Go talk to them, and stop attacking those who bring truth to your attention.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 07:02 AM

That, Rigs, is also true... Unfortunately it is still truer for black Americans... But no argument on the overall agenda... Alot better than the Repubs but still very much lacking...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 01:31 PM

BB, I am not a vociferous defender of Barack Obama, Al Gore or any of those other politicians you mentioned. In fact, I have been quite critical of Obama on a number of points...and I don't buy Al Gore's Global Warming agenda either.

By the way, I recall you made a confident prediction back in 2008 that if Obama were elected, we'd be in a major war (in addition to Afghanistan and Iraq) by no later than the summer of 2009. You seemed quite sure of that. Well, it didn't happen, did it?

I'm not saying that to defend Obama....I disagree radically with his foreign policy decisions so far....but I'm saying it to say that you tend to go to a bit of an extreme in your negative assessments of Obama. He's not the AntiChrist, you know. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 06:26 PM

LH,

Your statement "By the way, I recall you made a confident prediction back in 2008 that if Obama were elected, we'd be in a major war (in addition to Afghanistan and Iraq) by no later than the summer of 2009. You seemed quite sure of that. Well, it didn't happen, did it?"

Is basically correct. I did predict a large PROBABILITY of a war with both sides using WMD, and involving the US or a US ally, by August of 2009.

1. I was wrong: Obama continued enough of the Bush policies to keep this from happening YET. That, or those in the rest of the world have figured out they can get their goals by just waiting until Obama gives those goals to them. Pick one.

2. I would NOT be surprised to see such a war in the next year- after all, the Obama administration needs a war in order to have any hope of keeping support in Congress after the next election. What did Clinton do, when he was being pressed for his activities? Blow up an asprin plant!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 07:42 PM

I suspect you will be wrong again, and for the same reason, Bruce.

Barack Obama has not proved to be Superman, but he sure has hell proved to be a thoughtful and intelligent American leader. And about time we had one of those.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 07:44 PM

I wouldn't be surprised to see it either, BB...if the recipient of the attack is Iran. The other strong possibility is Pakistan (depending on what happens there in a domestic sense).

You wish to see Bush's war policies continued? I think that is precisely what will make further wars almost inevitable, because it is those policies which provoke further wars.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 07:46 PM

Better to blow up an asprin plant trying to get some bad guys than blowing up two countries killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people...

Plus, had the US had the technology in the 90's that it has now then Clinton would more than likely gotten bin Laden... The bad guys have adapted very well to the older technology...

But alot of this has nothin' to do with technology but the wrong-headedness of blowin' folks up in the first place... The US is in a unique position to act as a model of pluralism where folks get along... I thought we did a purdy good job after the Shah was ousted in accepting Iranians into the country as our neigbors and citizens... Since then I don't think we have done as well and alot of that is because the right wing has used immigrants as whippin' boys to lather up their base and not only set back our little pluralistic experiement but also piss off alot of other folks around the world... This is one area that the right cannot blame the left for the left has been far more tolerant...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: GUEST,beardedbruce
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 08:58 PM

LH,

You state:"You wish to see Bush's war policies continued? "

Whther I do or not, I have NOT stated that- Just because I can see likely outcomes to probable actions does NOT indicate my approval of either those actions, or my desire for the resultant actions.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 09:04 PM

Umm-hmm. I see.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 11:19 AM

"a thoughtful and intelligent American leader"

Dear Amos: In my opinion Obama has been a weak, ineffective and disappointing leader that has done nothing but plunge the nation deeper in debt.

If you have any knowledge of any accomplishments, Let's have a list.

I can only find broken promises. Surely anybody that is thoughtful and intelligent wouldn't say one thing and do another would they?

Obama campaign speech:

Tomorrow, you can turn the page on policies that have put the greed and irresponsibility of Wall Street before the hard work and sacrifice of folks on Main Street.

Tomorrow, you can choose policies that invest in our middle-class, create new jobs, and grow this economy so that everyone has a chance to succeed; from the CEO to the secretary and the janitor; from the factory owner to the men and women who work on its floor.

Tomorrow, you can put an end to the politics that would divide a nation just to win an election; that tries to pit region against region, city against town, Republican against Democrat; that asks us to fear at a time when we need hope.

Tomorrow, at this defining moment in history, you can give this country the change we need.

I hoped for a change. Where is the change?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Little Hawk
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 11:29 AM

The change is in the pockets of the corporate lobbyists who control Congress and the Presidency.

Basically, nothing has changed except the face you see on your TV screen when the president meets the press.

Read this article from Eric Margolis:

THE BIG CHILL IN OSLO
December 14, 2009

I guess President Barack Obama has never read Benjamin Franklin's maxim, "there never was a good war, or a bad peace."
Obama's speech in Oslo proclaiming Afghanistan a "good" war and trying to justify US global military operations echoes to America's detriment around Europe and, more important, the Muslim world.

The president's address dismayed many who foolishly hoped the "anti-war" president might curb or even end his wars because of a highly politicized and leftish Swedish award. Not so. America's military-industrial-financial juggernaut continues to roll on.   

But what could Obama do? Unwilling to turn down the award he did not solicit, the president had to turn up in Oslo and accept a peace prize as he was widening and deepening the Afghanistan war. In retrospect, he probably should have turned the prize down, saying, as he did at Oslo, that he has not yet done enough to merit such an award.

Instead, President Obama delivered an oration that at times sounded as if it had been lifted from George Orwell's prescient novel, "1984."

War is peace, explained the president. Conflict, he asserted, had to be relentlessly waged by the west ("Oceana" to Orwell, the union of the United States and Britain) in the Muslim world (Orwell called it "Eurasia") until the dire threat of al-Qaida is eliminated. Of course, the threat never ends and low-grade war becomes permanent, justifying dictatorship and endless arms contracts for industry.

Al-Qaida barely exists as an organization, though its philosophy of driving the US from the Muslim world continues to motivate a scattering of tiny, anti-American groups in Asia and Africa who are a minor, if occasionally spectacular, nuisance rather than a major threat.

So here was a major untruth from the president who had vowed to tell Americans the true after eight years of lies and prevarications from the previous administration.

The "New York Times," an ardent liberal backer of wars in the Muslim world, arrogantly editorialized on 14 December that Europe was delinquent in supporting the Afghan War. The "Times" hectored Europe's leaders to "educate" their citizens in the need for war in Afghanistan. But the problem is that Europeans are too well educated. A majority see Afghanistan as a traditional colonial war being waged for energy resources and imperial strategy in which their continent has no business at all.   

The political big chill that came from Oslo left many Americans and Europeans wondering just who was really in charge of US foreign policy. Readers of George Orwell might suspect that real power in Washington is wielded by the same kind of hidden oligarchy he described in "1984" that conjured fear of foreigners and drove permanent war policy.

Could the former civil rights worker from Chicago's roughest section really be speaking with the same voice as Wall Street's money barons, pro-war neocons, and the military-industrial complex about which the foresighted President Dwight Eisenhower warned the nation?   What happened to the man only lately denounced by Republicans as a "socialist" and "appeaser?"

Are Americans victims of a presidential bait and switch? Obama is maintaining or advancing so many of Bush's hard right domestic and foreign policies that one indeed wonders of we are seeing Bush's third term.   

If President Obama ended the futile, eight-year war in Afghanistan against Pashtun tribesmen, he would of course face Republican charges of defeatism, appeasement and "losing Afghanistan." Republicans are already battering him with spurious claims of "their" victory in Iraq thanks to the "surge" advocated by Senator John McCain.   American soldiers and Afghan civilians will pay the price for this lack of political courage in Washington – to say nothing of US relations with the Muslim world which sees Afghanistan as a martyr nation ravaged by western forces.

Adding to this miasma of untruth, the US commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, just proclaimed that the US had "won" the war in Iraq, and was now about to work the same military magic in Afghanistan. The notion of a US victory in Iraq has become common currency in Washington and the media, justifying another "surge' in Afghanistan.

To quote the great Roman historian Tactius, "they make a desert, and call it peace."   Such is the US supposed US victory in Iraq that now looms over Afghanistan. Let's look at this Carthaginian Peace:

*Iraq effectively sundered into three de facto independent parts: a Shia region; Sunni region; and Kurdistan. The US vowed never to do this – but did, turning it into a weak, obedient Petrolistan.   

*The world's biggest refugee problem. Four million Iraq refugees created during the US occupation. Two million in neighboring Arab nations; two million internal refugees, victims of ethnic cleansing.   Massive flight of intellectuals and trained personnel. Over 2,300 Iraqi doctors murdered.   

*After rightly bombing Serbia to stop its attempted genocide against Balkan Muslims, the US closed its eyes to massive atrocities and ethnic cleansing of Sunni civilians committed by Shia death squads, run by the US-installed Shia regime.   

*Iraq is now in worse shape then it was before the US invasion, terrorized by criminal gangs, death squads and local warlords. What was in 2000 the Arab world's most advanced nation in terms of education, technology, public health and industry, today lies in ruins.   Its rich oil field are about to be exploited by foreign firms, many from the US and Britain.   

No one knows how many Iraqis have been killed or maimed. Estimates run from 100,000 to one million. What is a known, to use Rummy's delightful phrase, is that the Iraq War has cost the US $1 trillion to date. Important numbers of US troops and tens of thousands of US-paid mercenaries look likely to remain in Iraq for many years on "training" and oilfield protection missions.

Such is Gen. Chrystal and Sen. John McCain's "victory." This is what awaits Afghanistan in President Obama's version of a "good" war.

Copyright Eric S. Margolis 2009

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 11:30 AM

"the wrong-headedness of blowin' folks up in the first place"

U.S. Missiles Kill 15 People Near Border in Pakistan
NYT December 17, 2009:

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — In an exceptionally heavy barrage by American drones in Pakistan, five Predator aircraft fired 10 missiles at suspected militant compounds along the border with Afghanistan on Thursday. Along with an earlier attack, at least 15 people, including 7 foreigners, were killed, Pakistani security officials said.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Amos
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 03:01 PM

Sawz:

I am acutely aware of the differences since the election; despite having the world's worst economic catastrophe since the Depression handed tohim by the Paulon gang; despite having two screaming confused wars handed to him by the CHeny gang; despite having the worst PR situation inthehistory of the United States handed tohim as the personal legacy of GWB, Obama has dug in and worked on digging the country out. Despite being blockaded, harangued, obstreperously and illogically harassed at every corner by the party of "No" he has managed to move ahead, bringing us out of the worst of the Bush recession, although not all the way out of it, bringing us closer to the end of Bush's war in Iraq, and working to end his war in Afghanistan. In all these actions he has brought to bear dialogue, a greater degree of openness, intelligent curiousity and many other qualities that were completely missing from the arrogant abrasion that was the signature of the Bush Cheny axis.

That you cannot perceive the differences or the changes speaks ill of your capacity for simple observation. For Little Hawk on his part to assert it is just a face change is to advertise the fixidity of his own self-generated notion of things, not the ground truth.

Year 1 of the Obama administration was largely spent trying to repair the ruination of the previous eight years of hard neocon government and start the ground work for major improvements. I look forward to year two. Despite the continuous effort of the LImbaugh axis of inanity, the PResident marches ahead making things better, one step at a time.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 10:26 PM

Amos:

He asked for it and he said he would fix it.

When is he going to take on the job he applied for?

His focus is on ideological bullshit that does not put bread on the table for the American people. It just runs up the deficit that the american people owe.

Out of work? Sure, here is some extended unemployment beneifts that you will eventually have to pay back with interest.

His chosen Treasury Secretary, head of the IRS [who does not have the brains to fill out an income tax form] was part of the Paulson Gang.

How about a list of the members of this gang?

---

The Myth:

Larry Summers: "everybody agrees the recession is over"

The reality:

AP December 18, 2009:

WASHINGTON (AP) -- In a reversal of earlier gains, more states lost jobs than added them in November, signaling that hiring is occurring only sporadically around the country.

Unemployment rates dropped in 36 states and the District of Columbia, but that trend appeared to reflect more people leaving the work force. Unemployed people who stop looking for jobs out of frustration aren't counted in the labor force.

Friday's Labor Department report underscored that employers have yet to ramp up hiring, and many Americans can't find work. The number of people jobless for at least six months rose last month to 5.9 million, according to a separate report released earlier this month. And the average length of unemployment exceeds 28 weeks, the longest on records dating to 1948.

It was the first time since April that more states' unemployment rates fell than rose. But two states, South Carolina and Florida, saw joblessness reach its highest point in 25 years. And economists say most states' unemployment rates will rise as the stimulus programs wind down and seasonal jobs taper off.

"Even though things are getting better, they're not getting better fast enough to keep unemployment from rising in the next six to nine months," said Mark Vitner, senior economist at Wells Fargo & Co.

Vitner said he expects unemployment nationally and in most states to continue inching up before cresting in about nine months. He predicts it will be six more months before there are any consistent job gains.

In all, 19 states added jobs in November, down from 28 in October. Thirty-one states and the District of Columbia suffered a net loss of jobs.....

The Democrat solution for rising unempyment is to extend unemployment benefits.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 10:35 PM

"handed tohim by the Paulon gang"

In Crucible of Crisis, Paulson, Bernanke, Geithner Forge a Committee of Three

Washington Post September 19, 2008

From the rescue of Bear Stearns to the takeovers of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and American International Group, all the key decisions have been made by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Timothy F. Geithner, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

It is this unusual collaboration among a consummate dealmaker, a professor and a seasoned public servant that could determine how the nation weathers the most profound threat to its economy in modern times. Despite their disparate backgrounds, the three men have formed a close, informal partnership built on rapid-fire phone calls and open debate that breaks the mold of Washington policymaking.

As they chart a government response to the crisis, the stakes could hardly be higher. If they succeed, they could tame the economic downturn and orchestrate a restructuring of Wall Street with minimal collateral damage. If they fail, the toll could be millions of jobs, trillions of dollars in lost wealth and a crisis of confidence in global capitalism.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 10:47 PM

PS Amos:

Maybe Larry Summers is a member of the gang that handed the big turd to Obama.

"Geithner, 47, was a career staff member at the Treasury Department when Lawrence Summers, then a Treasury undersecretary, plucked him from obscurity in the early 1990s."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 12:58 AM

"making things better, one step at a time."

Name one of these steps that has made things better for the American people.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 09:11 AM

"despite having the worst PR situation inthehistory of the United States"

Courtesy of Amos types who's mental capabilities limit them to echoing anything anti Bush.


One step at a time:

Congress raises debt ceiling to $12.4 trillion - AP - 27 minutes ago
The Senate voted Thursday to raise the ceiling on the government debt to $12.4 trillion, a massive increase over the current limit and a political problem that President Barack Obama has promised to address next year.

SO he is finally going to take on the job he applied, for got and said he was capable of next year? But first a big, fat pork barrel spending package on health care thet does nothing to reduce the cost.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Sawzaw
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 09:51 AM

"bringing us closer to the end of Bush's war in Iraq"

By following Bush's plan and now He takes credit for it. How is his ending of the Afghan war doing? Not a peep out of Amos so He must be another warmonger.

Where is the shrill, whiny, crybaby liberals' criticism of Obama's handling of the Swine Flu vaccine?

ABC News, "Avian Flu: Is the Government Ready for an Epidemic?" by Brian Ross, September 15, 2006: "According to Dr. Irwin Redlener, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health, Bush's call to remain on the offensive has come too late. 'If we had a significant worldwide epidemic of this particular avian flu, and it hit the United States and the world, because it would be everywhere at once, I think we would see outcomes that would be virtually impossible to imagine,"he warns."

New York Times, "Fear of avian flu Outbreak Rattles Washington," by Gardiner Harris, October 5, 2005: "Thirty-two Democratic senators sent a letter to President Bush on Tuesday expressing "grave concern that the nation is dangerously unprepared for the serious threat of avian influenza."

We can realistically hope that our current federal government will improve upon the bungled effort made by the Bush Administration to prepare for the onslaught of avian flu—which fortunately didn't materialize. But certain aspects of the crisis are likely to be repeated, and profiteers will waste no time in gathering at the trough.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views: the Obama Administration
From: Bobert
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 10:12 AM

Danged, Amos... Look at Sawz go... BTW,...

...ain't it up to 1300???

B~