Hey Paul I think the American people have already been learning it, at least economically for quite a while now. There are many lessons yet to be learned, not just for the average citizen but for the oppressive ruling class who have not yet realized oppression begets resentment, resentment turns to frustration, frustration turns to anger and anger turns to revolution.

Maani peace back at ya and I see you are keeping tabs on the candidates. That’s a good thing and right you are!

There was an interesting article by Chalmers Johnson in Truthout recently about that new movie with Tom Hanks aka Richard Clark, the so called sole success story where covert CIA action actually did some “good.” He mentions Brzezinski starting Russia’s Vietnam 5 full months before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan….And who did we supply with weapons and money? Osama Bin Laden, Al Qeada and the Taliban. Success story my ass! Brzezinski’s actions, inadvertently or not, are what ultimately led to the attacks on 9/11!

I’m not much of an Albright fan either since her containment policy on Iraq caused the deaths of a half million people. It seems nearly all of the leading candidates on both sides of the party line are being advised or supported by people who don’t mind ignoring humans rights and international laws to promote their policies. In some cases, even if that means the deaths of millions.

Michael:

Thanks for the response.  One comment.  You say, “And who wants Kissinger back as a cabinet member?”

I find this interesting because many Obama supporters (and others) are attacking Hillary because Madeleine Albright is supporting her.  And though we do not know that Albright is actually advising Hillary, these same people are ignoring the fact that Obama’s foreign policy advisor is none other than Kissinger’s protege, Zbigniew Brzezinski!  Do we want HIM back in the administration?

Peace.

Well thank you Maani and of course I agree.

As for McCain, when he proposed the anti torture bill he made me believe he wasn’t that bad of a guy, until he caved in to Bush and basically shot his own bill in the foot. He also destroyed the McCain-Feingold bill that could have given us real campaign finance reform, simply to appease Bush who in turn made campaign finance even more farcical. His most recent statements concerning a forever presence in Iraq is the icing on the cake.

He obviously tows the perpetual war line and of course no doubt with it, the far fetched unitary executive theory created by that group of kooks from Yale, the Federalist Society. Now here’s a group who embroidered James Madison on their logo who himself was an anti federalist, anti Hamilton and pro Jefferson. Talk about wolves in sheep’s clothing!  And who wants Kissinger back as a cabinet member? Might as well bring Pinochet back from the dead!

Michael Shaw:

Ditto!  Very well put.

Re McCain, although he is more to the center than the other GOP candidates on many issues (particularly health care and immigration), he is to the right of them (and perhaps even to the right of Ghengis Khan) on Iraq: he is actually ENJOYING the war!  And, of course, ALL of the Republican candidates (except Paul) are for continuing it.

But if you thought Giuliani was bad before, he said something today that made the skin crawl on most of those he was talking to - and they were mostly right of center people.  Here is his exact statement, made at a forum sponsored by The New York Post:

“What we don’t see is that freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be…Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do.”

Get that?  Freedom is about authority!  This is not just “Orwellian,” it IS Orwell!

I would hope that even the most diehard Hillary-haters here would vote for her over him!  LOL.

Peace.

You mean its the only way to insure a pro war candidate wins.

Well CY, I don’t see her as the lying greedy criminal you do. In fact I’ve seen enough of that in the last 7 years by this current administration, the same group who has been raking Hillary through the mud for decades. Also McCain is as bad if not worse than Bush and make no mistake the neocons are running his campaign.

As an opponent to George W. Bush and also an opponent to the war in Iraq, McCain will never get my support. Beyond Guliani, he’s the last guy on earth who would gain my support. I am still voting for Kucinich in the primary. He has been my top choice from the beginning. But if Hillary wins the nomination(she’s leading in California), she’ll get my vote because all of this right wing nonsense must stop and it will never stop if a republican gains the white house.

Please do not confuse these terms.  Healthcare, or health insurance, does not and never should mean “someone pay my bills, I don’t want to”

health care.
–noun
1.  the field concerned with the maintenance or restoration of the health of the body or mind.
2.  any of the procedures or methods employed in this field.

health insurance
–noun
insurance that compensates the insured for expenses or loss incurred for medical reasons, as through illness or hospitalization.

in•sur•ance  
–noun
1.  the act, system, or business of insuring property, life, one’s person, etc., against loss or harm arising in specified contingencies, as fire, accident, death, disablement, or the like, in consideration of a payment proportionate to the risk involved.
2.  coverage by contract in which one party agrees to indemnify or reimburse another for loss that occurs under the terms of the contract.
3.  the contract itself, set forth in a written or printed agreement or policy.
4.  the amount for which anything is insured.
5.  an insurance premium.
6.  any means of guaranteeing against loss or harm: Taking vitamin C is viewed as an insurance against catching colds.

I think Hilary won because this nation got a wake up call in Iowa and lots of white, upper middle class hicks from New Hampshire had the midnight oils burning. The truth is America is not ready for a black president no matter how much soft soaking they did over Iowa’s results about white rural America supporting a black candidate. When a black man from Chicago whose name rhymes with Osama takes the white house, it will be the day pigs fly.

What we’re seeing here is politicking. We don’t know for a fact that any of the democratic candidates once elected president will not end this war any more than we know they will keep it going or escalate it.

Personally I don’t have Hilary as my first choice. I tend to go with Kucinich. But at least Hilary is saying she’ll get out boys out a brigade at a time. That’s a far better message than is coming from McCain and the neocons which now seems to be, “Forever ain’t that bad!”

The cost of the war is tremendous. So is the cost of the biggest form of big government in history, the department of homeland security, which is essentially a multi-billion dollar business for private security contractors. Neither can go on indefinitely. Especially with tax breaks to the rich.

I believe the American people will soon learn a difficult truth: you can have a Welfare State or a Warfare State, but you can’t have both. One will almost certainly triumph over the other, and until this country utterly exhausts itself in these useless and futile overseas wars, the Warfare State will prevail.

And eventually we’ll have neither, if we do reach national exhaustion (which I fear we will; no country can do it all, not even the USA).

“Iron This Shirt.”...

By troublesum, January 8: ”...repeal of the 19th amendment (except in Iowa).  We shall start a movement and it shall be called “Iron This Shirt.”

Oh, well, at least it sounds better than Condi Rice’s “I will beat Maliki’s brains out”, ha ha.

Now, whose “shirt” will need ironing in 2009??? Or maybe we can change it to mistress of “iron-shirt qigong”?!?! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXzNhztyGXo&feature=related

Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote? They shoudn’t need to. They should be running the country anyway, uhh. The boys’ club is a terminal failure. Do you want it explained to you???

The nominees will likely be decided before I get to vote.  Why should I vote for a pro-war candidate?  I would be endorsing the war.

troublesum:

If you weren’t so annoying, I think I might even like you…LOL.

Peace.

The results of the NH primary call for the repeal of the 19th amendment (except in Iowa).  We shall start a movement and it shall be called “Iron This Shirt.”

troublesum:

“Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.  The guys who founded this country had it right.”

Are you familiar with the term “agent provocateur?”  It is clear you simply like to stir up trouble for trouble’s sake.

P.T.:

Kucinich is anti-war, as is Paul.  You can always vote for either of them.  At least it won’t give us another Bush, as Nader’s run did by siphoning votes from the Democrats.

Peace.

Yes PT, and it may be the only way to keep Hillary out of the white house.

Ralph Nader may need to run again.  He cannot win, but it may be the only way to vote for an anti-war candidate.

Clinton won amoung women and they made their decision in the last two or three days acording to exit polls, i.e. after she cried for the camaras.  Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.  The guys who founded this country had it right.

One always wonders if something like that is just another con job by the Clintons because everybody is so used to being conned by the Clintons.  I actually don’t thing it was a con.

troublesum:

You really are hopeless.  Hillary did not win because women voted for her out of sympathy.  In fact, while she did do better with women in NH than in Iowa, she also took some of the youth vote from Obama, as well as taking a significant amount more of the independent voters.

Her victory was real; not the result of a single situation.

Peace.

Obama nearly carried another state that is almost totally white.

The media’s recent spin that we are winning the Iraq War is working.

Excuse me…. she’ll give Bill a cigar.

Cry baby won because women switched sides in the last two days and voted for her after seeing her blubbering on tv.  Bill will probably give her a cigar tonight.

So Hillary wins, despite all the punditry and pre-vote polls.

And I watched both Obama’s speech and Hillary’s, and you know something?  Obama did not seem any more “authentic” or “genuine” than Hillary, or any less “calculating” or “political” than she did.  (And after almost a year, he still has trouble reading from teleprompters…)

And once again, he used lots of inspiring rhetoric - “change,” “yes we can” - without ONCE articulating what any of it actually means in terms of raw, real, on the ground political change.

He is campaigning on fumes - and when the fumes start dissipating, alot of people are going to be EXTREMELY surprised and disappointed.

Peace.

Update.  9:40pm.  Just less than 50% of precincts reporting.  Clinton still leads ~40% to 36%.  If Obama does not take the three college towns still to report and/or Clinton hits big in the two large cities still to report, Clinton may just squeak by here.

Peace.

Douglas Chalmers I will indeed give you a break and say
that you are right. What in the world do I know about the twisted world of American politics? I am the beer doctor, not the politics doctor.
I do feel sorry for you though. To humiliate Mr. Obama’s supporters by saying “they can vote and then sit back back for the rest of their pathetic lazy lazy lives”, I think says more about you than them.
I am truly sorry that my stupidity troubled you.

As I write this (9pm), Clinton is ahead 40% to Obama’s 35%, with just over 1/4 of all precincts reporting.  And while there is admittedly still some way to go, it is clearly going to be FAR closer than anyone guessed.

Peace.

Doug:

We haven’t seemed to agree on much through many threads (LOL), but we seem to be very much on the same page re this election.  Keep fighting the good fight - and providing facts and substance in place of smoke and mirrors!

Peace.

They Got Big Plans, But They Do Not Include You

By thebeerdoctor, January 8: ” Obama has a general appeal because he is a fresh face and voice, who was serious about his presidential bid from the very beginning….”

Oh, give me a break, thebeerdoctor. Obama hasn’t heard of power-sharing (he has heard of crawling and the concomitant deception, though). He has no idea about a vice-president or where he will get one from. Nor does he care because he thinks he doesn’t need one and nor does he want one.

Strangely, neither do his supporters. They think that he will solve all their problems for them and that they can vote and then sit back for the rest of their pathetic lazy lives whilst “freedom and change” are conveniently delivered to them. In doing so, they are willing to smear and berate other Democrats candidates for their own very short -term perceived adavntage.

The Republicans sit back and laugh. It can still be their game in the end once the Democrats have first destroyed each other and secondly shot themselves in the foot. Dukakis campaign! There is one thing for sure and that is that the established order in Washington will NOT change under Obama - if he ever makes it there.

Jacks:

Saying Obama will be “likely the next president” is jumping the gun a bit; there is a great deal that can happen between now and the “super” primary.  But you are correct about the war.  In fact, Obama’s plan is not THAT much different than Hillary’s.  As well, his health care proposal is weaker: he would leave over 15 million uninsured AND allow Big Pharma to continue to dictate terms.  Bad news.

Beer Doctor:

Hillary may have underestimated Obama’s “appeal,” but she also knows that his candidacy is largely smoke and mirrors.  Lots of pretty words (hope, change, turn the page, the sweetly inclusive “we”) - none of which mean very much in reality: they are great rallying cries, but have little or no substance.

Indeed, Obama has not given any clear, succinct and substantive details about all this “hope,” “change” and “turning the page.”  And not ONE SINGLE Obama supporter on this entire site - in over half a dozen threads - has been able to state clearly what Obama means by ANY of this.

I wonder when all these people will wake up from the heady haze of the Obama “rock star” moment and realize that the wannabe emperor - sorry, president - has no clothes.

Peace.

I think what happened with the Clinton campaign is that they totally underestimated Barack Obama’s appeal. They thought that with all of their money and Democratic Leadership Council credentials that no one could seriously contest an inevitable conclusion. But they were wrong. Obama has a general appeal because he is a fresh face and voice, who was serious about his presidential bid from the very beginning. Very few were paying attention as he did the work that made him something more than just viable.
How strange that the Clintons in their zeal to hold on to power that is evaporating, decide to attack the one candidate who more than likely will become the president.
It reminds me of a chess game where the opponent is literally taking you off the board, piece after piece. But instead of turning your king over, you continue… until you throw the entire board across the room,

Yesterday Senator Obama stated: “I will change our country and I will change the world”. Every psychiatrist will recognize the affliction as megalomania. The man is dangerous.

As another poster pointed out Edwards outlined a detailed plan to bring the troops home in a year.

If America keeps this war going, soon we won’t be able to afford to keep troops anywhere, we’re broke.

And when our revenue streams are owned by Asia, and the Saudi’s American’s will be working for other countries, and the money that we make will be going abroad.

Do I have to point out what happens to countries that have economic systems like this? They can never recover, what’s been called the Ottoman Empire Syndrome.

Considering Obama will be the nominee and likely the next president, I hope he has the personal conviction to end this war as quickly as possible, not only for the sake of our domestic concerns but the lives of the Iraqi people.

Our presence is the cause of that violence.  They’re attacking what they (rightly) believe to be an occupying force.  Look at Basra, which was formerly occupied by the British: once the Brits left, violence dropped significantly.  We must leave—quickly.

However, I can’t help but fear he won’t do that.  We’ll likely stay there past 2012 and even longer.  How we’ll be able to manage a colossal disaster that drains of blood and treasure and deal with the recession headed our way is beyond me.  I honestly can’t see that happening, let alone with policies that “unify” a country under the banner of “hope.”  This will require tremendous sacrifice.

Uh, check your bigotry at the door please.  You’re projecting (What the press sets as a narrative does mean Clinton set it up).  Let me guess: mother issues.

Quit killing Americans overseas as well!!!!

Health care you morons!!!!  Take care of your people and quit killing non-Americans over seas!!!!!

We still don’t get it.  What would you do if you had a valuable asset?  Like a winning race horse.  If it gets sick you get a Vet to take care of it; cost, no problem.  How about a business, race car, child, or a worker who made you money?  So what’s the problem with American business?  It’s really quite simple; they have gone overseas and no longer need us.  If you are not highly educated/trained/skilled then you are an expendable entity….....very impersonal and inhuman policy. Welcome to the 21st century Amerika. Zieg heil!  Get it now?  You/we don’t count!

I am sick and disgusted by Clinton’s poor little girl act. What a princess she is-back when her throne was inevitable, she always had that smug, self-satisfied look after she responded to every softball tossed her way. How dare anyone roll up the red carpet of the Bush-Clinton dynasty!!!! Recall how they manipulated “Dean’s scream” (something the pundits still sneer at as if it was credible rather than manufactured)by replaying it endlessly and reinforcing the common perception that he was somehow off his nut—when he was holding a pep rally for his supporters. This poor widdle Hillary piece—a continuation of those-bad-boys-are-picking-on-me is cynically used for the sympathy vote and it stinks of Nixon-you-won’t-have-me-to-kick-around-anymore whining. On the one hand Clinton claims she has all this experience—and then she wails about the country going backwards. Ahh—excuse me, Senator Clinton, but the reason the rallying cry of “change” is so inspiring is because folks are sick of the enabling trend promoted by the DLC brand of new Democrat that done brought us to the brink of the abyss. Instinctively they grasp at the concept-without realizing Obama’s happy talk of bi-partisanship and unity employed as triangulation strategy ultimately leads to capitulation.The problem is Obama is a slicker operator than Hillary. the last thing we need in these times is a weepy woman—-gees could you make it any worse for the rest of us, Hillary?

The idea of permanent U.S. military bases helps prevent a political solution to the war, since so many Iraqis find such an idea unacceptable.

The Times of London reports the living standards in Britain are set to rise above those in the United States for the first time since the 19th century.

Nixon claimed the right to “impound” funds approved by congress for social service programs when he didn’t have the votes to uphold a veto.  When the supreme court ruled against him, it became republican policy to find other means to prevent spending federal money on human services.  War is a way of “impounding” social service spending.  It is republican policy to always insure the upward redistribution of wealth and to oppose any in the opposite direction.

A single-payer system would save a lot of money, war or no war.  Looking at the examples of other industrialized countries, per capita health care expeditures likely would be cut by about half.