BS: The Democratic Mandate

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Sawzaw
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 10:50 AM

I am glad Obama won the election fair and square.

Now I want to see some results.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Amos
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 10:46 AM

A very reasoned list, Jimmy!!

A

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: jimmyt
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 10:40 AM

Let me start out and congratulate the Obama Campaign for a resounding win, and seeming to zone in on what the majority of people are concerned about. Here are some things I would like to see:

1 Keeping the balance on the Supreme Court to make sure the Right to Choice is safe.

2 Development of the right to same-sex marriages, unions, whatever, to protect coupoules and allow the spouse to the same benefits of insurance and estates as are given to heterosexual couples.

3 Shutting down all prisoners ie Gitmo, where prisoners are not treated with the same legal system as are given to all American citizens. RIght to a fair trial

4 Making healthcare affordable. This means a means of controling liability of healthcare workers from frivilous lawsuits and trying to eliminate the CYA tests that are a part of healthcare on every patient every day. Government regulation of insurance companies so theat they provide the services they should. I daily deal with a dozen or more insurance companies who are simply trying to screw the insured patient out of benefits either by loophole or simply swamping the patient with a sea of unnecessary paperwork.

5 A new opportunity to reeastablish our friendships with other nations that we have lost during the cowboy years of George W Bush.

6 MOving toward total energency independence in a 10 year period. Solar, WInd, Tide, Oil Shale, Offshore and anwar drilling,clean coal,nuclear,etc. And an incentive to consumers to learn to conserve. Putting a tax on vehicles that get less than 20 MPG unless they are used totally for commercial use.

7 more utilization of shipping and railroad. Developing a network of passenger trains throughout AMerica.


8 totally rethinking our public assistance programs to force people to seek and keep gainful employment to qualify. I would like to see foodstamps and medicaide given to young families with small children and the families are working hard to better themselves. If we do not get this under control, we will soon have a welfare state.

9 Legalize marajuana. Stop burdening the police depts and courts with this and let them spend their time on better things. Make enforcement and penalties for other drugs more aggressive than they are now.

10 Fair Tax   Do away with the income tax system totally. Tax only on consumption. Fair across the board

Well, THis is a good start on what I would like to see. COming from a social conservative, I hope some of you can agree on some issues.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 10:13 AM

(Recent US slang has tagged them as "Banksters.")

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Paul Burke
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 09:22 AM

(4) We want to foster a meritocracy, not a redistribution of wealth.


Use every man after his desert, and who should 'scape whipping?

Two problems with "meritocracy":

- who decides who merits?
- who decides what different merits are worth?

Or why is a banker* worth 10000 nurses, policemen or teachers?

What's needed is not a "redistribution of wealth" but a "redefinition of merit".


* UK slang, as in total banker.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Cluin
Date: 05 Nov 08 - 08:51 AM

I'm glad to eat my earlier words in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Sawzaw
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 11:12 PM

A necessity for the new regime ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 10:13 PM

Oh, how could I have forgotten?? No Torture!!

I am ashamed of myself.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 04:22 PM

Well, considering that Terrorism Central in the world today is located in the Pentagon and the offices of the CIA, that would put Mr Obama in a difficult spot, wouldn't it? Perhaps it is better if he doesn't know everything.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Sawzaw
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 03:46 PM

Obama Wins Now What?

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 02:38 PM

People who "win" elections by committing election fraud haven't won anything.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Cluin
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 02:12 PM

Eight years and 2 elections... funny definition of knee-jerk.

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Sawzaw
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 02:07 PM

Knee jerk reaction from people with no personal responsibility when they lose something:

Somebody stole it!

Subject: RE: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: Alice
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 01:15 PM

Today the CNN poll moved Montana from leaning McCain to a toss up state.
Listening to Montana Public Radio news last week, I heard a program from representatives of the Native American reservations in Montana speaking about new voter involvement in this election. Obama set up offices and did voter registration on the reservations. He visited Native Americans in the state, which is unusual for a presidential candidate. Populations that have been ignored in the past have been given attention by the Obama campaign. And Palin made fun of community organizing experience.... he who laughs last, laughs best.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 11:28 AM

I, personally, want a president and an administration who together will be aware of the 'hard' issues of our times and our world, and be honest about them AS issues, whether they are immediately solvable or not! There are far too many topics which are flatly not addressed because they are too 'PC' or considered too 'hot'.

One of these is the details of the environmental/population problems. Another is immigration.
Others are... the right of humans to FREELY choose sexual orientation, marriage configuration, abortion, when necessary, religious preference or LACK thereof, and, in relation to these, the issue of having the law swing wildly according to whether the Supreme Court is left or right! That is, I want these 'freedoms' to be either mandated clearly in Constitutional amendments or stare decisis ..."settled law".
   Yes, I am QUITE aware that I am asking a lot and that these things would be fought over: what I want is an intelligent, ongoing attempt to clarify the issues and quit ignoring them because they are 'hard'.

This world has some real problems, and I would hope a 'mandate' would give the next administration the guts to confront them with honest dialogue and the beginnings of a sane attempt to deal with them.


Oh, yeah... I'd also like 'product dating' reinstated on our foods.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: CarolC
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 10:21 AM

I agree that this election could be stolen by the Republicans. However, to answer the question - if the Democrats get a mandate, I think one of the most important things that this mandate will enable will be government investment in the country's infrastructure and more importantly (mostly in the form of tax incentives), in the green economy. All of our future growth will be a result of our investment in the green economy, and that's what will bring our economy back up out of the pits that it's in right now.

I do expect some kind of universal health care to come out of a Democratic administration. I also expect some kind of universal health care even if McCain gets elected, if the Democrats get a filibuster and veto proof majority in both houses. There's just too many millions of people who either don't have health care at all, or who are underinsured and aren't getting adequate care through their insurance carriers. But I don't see it as being socialized medicine, but rather, government administered health insurance for those who don't currently have any, or whose current insurance is denying them care. I see this as being an improvement for people who are currently insured as well as those who don't have insurance, because with such a program available to everyone, the existing insurance companies will have to compete with this new program in order to survive. I see that as having the effect of lowering everyone's premiums, and improving the delivery of care.

The reason a totally free market approach to health care won't work is because health care is not something people can do without, so the insurance industry can get away with doing whatever it wants to. But a little bit of government involvement can make the industry competitive. If there is a health insurance program that people can choose that is required to treat people right and to be affordable, the rest of the market will have to compete with that.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 09:33 AM

But that would surely be a demerotic man date, Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 09:15 AM

Chinga, Chongo's little sister, says Amos is one of the best men to ever grace the corridors of manly competence in the two houses she runs in Milawaukee and Chicago. ANd, she says, all her girls agree with this assessment.

So, LH, I think you are outvoted.


A

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Cluin
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 02:35 AM

More like wishful thinking. The Republican machine will steal the election again out of the collection plate again. Third time's a (c)harm.

"You won't get it!"

"By hook or by crook, we will!"

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Sawzaw
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 01:01 AM

Don't you folks know it is bad luck as well as arrogance to announce victory in advance? Hubris.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 01:27 AM

Good point, Janie. After all, Chongo is running for president and I'm not, right?

BB, I'm glad you have a full appreciation of all that Chongo has done for his country, and is yet to do. The New York Times has given him very little coverage. It's disgraceful.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: beardedbruce
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 01:21 AM

LH,

Chongo should remember that Amos also makes such attacks on Bush, any Republican officials, and those that disagree with the NYT.


Chongo should be honored.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Janie
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 01:01 AM

Surely, LH, you meant to write, "...slurs on Chongo and me...."?

Let us not forget what is really important.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Little Hawk
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 12:11 AM

Plus...we need a government that restrains Amos from launching scurrilous attacks and unwarranted character slurs on me and Chongo.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Amos
Date: 02 Nov 08 - 12:06 AM

I think, at some level, we want a reversion to a Bretton Woods style economic baseline such that speculation cannot run away with the national currency.

And we need a government that checks greed rather than fostering it.

And a government buy-and-pay system that is answerable for every million it spends.

And a voting system we can rely on.

And an ethics system that will constrain governmental malfeasance.

And a restoration and refurbishment of the code of individual rights under the law such that neither fanaticism nor government convenience can erode them.


A

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Rapparee
Date: 01 Nov 08 - 11:56 PM

I think that there will an attempt at a minimal health care system.

Personally, I'd like to see "indigent wards" -- safety nets where decent health care is provided but not television, telephones, and the other things hospital in the US also provide these days. I've been in hospital rooms where the TV is blasting all day because another patient is watching -- I don't see how that helps healing!

Medical costs in the US are out of control and must be reined in.

Also, there will have to be re-regulation of several industries, including the airlines.

Basically, folks in the US are going to have re-learn to work together for the greater good.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 01 Nov 08 - 11:43 PM

That's how you spell Democratic when you are using your kid's keyboard with the keys all covered with little cartoon stickers.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Alice
Date: 01 Nov 08 - 11:14 PM

what is "Demoratic"?

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Charley Noble
Date: 01 Nov 08 - 11:11 PM

Probably a good faith attempt for comprehensive health insurance and energy independence. They are major goals of the Obama Campaign and have a potential for bipartisan support.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 01 Nov 08 - 11:10 PM

I think we may see that those numbers have improved themeselves by "natural" mechanisms this year, too.

Subject: RE: BS: The Demoratic Mandate
From: Rapparee
Date: 01 Nov 08 - 11:02 PM

I fail to see any merit in the "redistribution of wealth" arguments. Wealth will redistribute itself naturally -- always has, always will. Roughly speaking, wealth (as in a wealthy family) only last until the third or fourth generation. Corporate wealth also redistributes itself, but it can be slower to do so.

How many of the super-wealthy families from the 19th Century are still that way today (I exclude Britain's royal family, whose wealth is that of the State)? The Astors? Rockefellers? Carnegies? Vanderbilts?

Rich, perhaps, but not wealthy by today's standards.

Subject: BS: The Democratic Mandate
From: GUEST,heric
Date: 01 Nov 08 - 10:51 PM

We each have our individual hopes for the coming federal Government. But I have been wondering what lessons the Democrats SHOULD take from a landslide win in all three branches of government.

I can only think of four, and as I pondered them I had to water them down.

(1) We don't want to be told egregious lies.

(This started as we don't want to receive any lies - but I am sure the nature of the system is built around knowing that we do want to be told sweet little lies that could could be enumerated and elaborated upon.)

(2) We do not want to be occupiers in foreign lands, regardless of legalities.

(This started as "We do not want to embark on wars of choice.")

(3) We do not want unchecked, laissez faire business and finance.

(4) We want to foster a meritocracy, not a redistribution of wealth.

(Maybe I'm getting a little subjective with that one.)

Should an incoming Democratic government objectively perceive any more mandates if given a landslide victory? Social safety nets? (Really?) Fiscal restraint? (Really?) Civility and cooperation across the aisle? - No. I suspect that one will blow away with the autumn leaves.