Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 17, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


For the Love of Scotland




On the Run


Truthdig Bazaar
Beyond Bogotá

Beyond Bogotá

By Garry Leech
$17.13

Act of Congress

Act of Congress

By Robert G. Kaiser
$20.84

more items

 
Report

Morning Again in America

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Nov 4, 2008
Obama
AP photo / Morry Gash

President-elect Barack Obama smiles as he gives his acceptance speech at Grant Park in Chicago on Tuesday night.

By Robert Scheer

It’s time to gush! Later for the analysis of all the hard choices faced by our next president, Barack Obama, but for now, let’s just thrill, unabashedly, to the sound of those words. Heck, both he and we deserve a honeymoon, at least for a few paragraphs of this column.

It is “Morning Again in America,” to reclaim and revise the slogan from the 1984 campaign of President Ronald Reagan, only this time the promise of an American renewal is in the hands of a moderate post-Cold War leader who embraces, rather than denies, the diversity and complexity of the modern world. It is difficult to imagine Obama ever asserting the arrogant jingoism that has come to mark Republican stewardship of this nation in the eyes of the world.

How refreshing for Americans to have elected a leader who was among the first to reject the imperial hubris that led this nation to invade Iraq over the objection of most of our allies. A leader who had the courage in the midst of a hotly contested primary election campaign to refuse to play the inveterate hawk in order to qualify as commander in chief, and instead had the audacity to advocate efforts at dialogue even with those we despise. The dead hand of Joe Lieberman has been lifted from the party that he betrayed. It is hoped it is also the end of the road for the neoconservatives who had rallied around John McCain as their last best hope for establishing a Pax Americana.

On the all-important domestic front, with our economy crumbling, it is reassuring that the man whom what’s-her-name from Alaska derided as a “community organizer” does indeed have that background. It is not a guarantee that he will be mindful of those suffering most in this economic downturn as he turns to deal with the banking mess, but it is a start.

The Reagan Revolution of rampant deregulation of the economy in the interest of big business is over. Not because Obama has anything to do with the “socialist” label that the Republicans attempted to stick on him, but rather because a decisive role for the federal government is at the heart of the Bush bailout and the vastly expanded military economy a President Obama will inherit.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
Big government is now officially a partial owner of big banks, and although we might bemoan that state of affairs, our collective credit card has already been swiped. The pressing issue is: What do we taxpayers get in return for bailing out Wall Street? Will the goal be to make the financial swindlers whole at the expense of ordinary homeowners? Or will it be the reverse of what the Bush administration has been doing? What is not in doubt, after the banking meltdown, is that the state will play a decisive role in the economy; what must be decided is: Whose interests will it serve?

If Obama turns to the Wall Street Democrats like Robert Rubin, the Clinton-era treasury secretary who led the crusade for deregulation, then he will betray his own fervently expressed concern for the fate of ordinary folks. The change we need is a divorce from the financial moguls who have dominated both parties. That’s what progressive politics is all about.

We have a chance to move in that direction, thanks to the election of Obama. Not because the man himself is the second coming—he, like all politicians, will have to be watched—but because of the movement he created around his candidacy, which I believe will hold him accountable.

The word of his victory came as I was making a brave effort to try to teach my large class at the University of Southern California, and from the cheering of students throughout our building as Obama reached the Electoral College delegate number needed to become president, you would have thought USC was just picked No. 1 in the BCS poll. Make no mistake about it, this is a victory of these students’ generation—a generation that is no longer mired in the divisiveness and arrogance that had come to dominate the lives of their elders.

Politics will never be the same. The fat cats and back-office politicos are out, and grass roots—youthful and Internet-connected—will dominate in the future, as they did on Tuesday. President-elect Obama knows that, and, at least on this night, I fully expect him to be true to those who took him on this journey.

It is a night also to remember the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., the man who did so much to make that journey possible, along with the other heroes of the civil rights movement like John Lewis and Jesse Jackson, who did so much to keep hope alive.

Click here to check out Robert Scheer’s book,
“The Great American Stickup: How Reagan Republicans and Clinton Democrats Enriched Wall Street While Mugging Main Street.”


Keep up with Robert Scheer’s latest columns, interviews, tour dates and more at www.truthdig.com/robert_scheer.



Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: The Red Is Fading in a Virginia Bellwether

Next item: A New Era of Hope



New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, November 9, 2008 at 8:01 am Link to this comment

Paracelsus: ’.... Calling your opponents mentally ill is a very nasty tactic, Cyrena. I recommend that you drop it!! My moral contempt for you only grows every time you use it. ...’

Isn’t this somewhat self-contradictory?  Attacks on a person’s morals are not very far from attacks on their mental health.  Abusive language usually indicates that the speaker has run out of things to say; it’s a sign of temporary frustration and defeat.  There is no need to read it, much less reply to it or diagnose it.

In any case, all this, including the tedious impostures previously discussed, is just a bunch of words on a computer screen.  Don’t get too upset.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, November 9, 2008 at 7:48 am Link to this comment

jackpine savage: ’... As an aside, the strangest facet of this election cycle is that the most level-headed, interesting political conversations seem to be found at republicansforobama.com…go figure.’

In other words, people who have the same view of the world as you do are the sensible people, and those whose views differ from yours (e.g. “progressives”) are silly, fanatical, or worse, depending on the degree of difference between their view and your (correct) view.

Hm, where have I heard that before?

Incidentally, self-styled “progressives” are generally not what anyone interested in leftist politics calls “the hard Left”.  But maybe it doesn’t matter from your point of view.  After all, they’re all bad, and that’s what counts, eh?

Report this

By jackpine savage, November 9, 2008 at 7:23 am Link to this comment

I’d like to step up to the plate and defend Jimmy Carter. He certainly wasn’t the greatest of presidents, or at least he found out that trying to change DC from the outside was bound to fail, but at least the man had the guts to tell the American people some truths. Would that we had listened to his lecture on energy issues 30 years ago…

I’m rather enjoying the hard left (or “progressives” as they like to call themselves without defining what the word means) get into a tizzy so soon after the election.

The fringes are never satisfied unless their ideas are adopted wholesale, regardless of whether the majority of the people agree with them. The fringes have a special relationship with truth, i.e. they own it…just ask ‘em.

The neo-cons hated Reagan for negotiating with Gorbachev; he was too moderate. See what i’m getting at here? Radical “progressives” have more in common with the nuts of the right than they’re likely to admit. Neither group will admit the similarity because the problem isn’t with them, it’s with us…we are just to stupid to see the TRUTH.

As an aside, the strangest facet of this election cycle is that the most level-headed, interesting political conversations seem to be found at republicansforobama.com…go figure.

Report this

By Allan Gurfinkle, November 9, 2008 at 6:50 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Obama, or his aides, have at last hinted at a significant ‘change’ that he may make.  And, if he does it will be ... INCREDIBLE.

I’ve read, and now heard on the TV, that the US will proceed with the plan to install missiles in Poland IF THEY CAN BE PROVED TO WORK.  That is, Obama is providing a way out of this total insanity.

The significance of this cannot be overestimated.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 9, 2008 at 2:20 am Link to this comment

Most of the time though, it all gets garbled in the radically twisted ideology. Could be a mental health issue, or just a jacked-up personality. Maybe both and more. I dunno.

Calling your opponents mentally ill is a very nasty tactic, Cyrena. I recommend that you drop it!! My moral contempt for you only grows every time you use it. It is the equivalent to groin kicking in a bar room brawl between two equally strong men. You can never respect a man that would kick you in the balls
in a fair fist fight. I suppose on an intellectual level in the debate format you are a groin kicker. I have no respect for you. I lost any respect for you a long time ago, and I find you morally revolting. Every time I read a post of yours where you dive to the gutter, I feel I need to take a bath. I hope Obama discourages the sorts like yourself from attaching to his cause, because it can only color his reputation with such associations to such as you.


http://www.bariumblues.com/invisible_third_world_war.htm

Institutionalized Psychiatry has become an instrument of civilian control in the Modern State. Mind control police tactics have replaced the criminal justice system in the Soviet Union. Behind the Iron Curtain, where intolerable conditions Would otherwise spark revolt, psychiatric techniques have turned the Soviet population into a herd of terrified and apathetic atomatons (22). High technology Soviet mind control has been employed against political dissidents. In the United States the American Mental Health Industry holds Soviet-style plans to replace the American justice system with mind control operations (23). The late Congressman Leo Ryan’s aide, Joe Holsinger, describing the CIA’s involvement in Jonestown poses the question: What role did mind control technology play in the Jonestown massacre? Through the CIA’s mind control technology, 98% of the U.S. population is susceptible to covert control. At that success rate, America might be turned into a nation of obedient, suicidal zombies heralded by those who died in Jonestown,

Report this

By cyrena, November 9, 2008 at 1:54 am Link to this comment

Tony Wicher writes:

Folktruther

I would just like to say that I think ITW and cyrena are both deep wells of political insignt compared with your superficial, stereoptypical, twisted left-wing ideology.

~~~

Thanks Tony, if only because I’m partial to sanity. But, I’m not sure that Folktruther’s ideology is left-wing. It’s DEFINITELY twisted, and I could conjure up a few pretty decent comparisons except that most folks probably wouldn’t have read them or otherwise investigated them much. Then again…maybe so for several of you, now that I think about it.

It’s probably not important, but I don’t think it’s left wing as much as it is radically twisted. That’s why the Thug regime has changed or eliminated the previous interpretation of so many things. When the Dick Bush et al Cable first kicked in, people were still describing them as far right, because of how they coopted the religious right to gain enough power to steal election in the Coup of 2000.

BUT, they turned out not to be so easily defined to the ‘right’ because they’re just too flippin’ RADICAL. (like where the extremes of either direction meet, and they’re just the same - RADICAL)! And, this is something that I actually agreed with Folktruther on, at a different thread.,,in terms of what the Thugs have done to our form of governance, and the fact that most Americans haven’t really become aware of that yet.

So on the rare occasions when he actually says something without the heavy lacing of hate and cynicism, based on the truth being the truth, minus all of the histrionic spewing and misdirected blame, he actually makes the occasional useful point.

Most of the time though, it all gets garbled in the radically twisted ideology. Could be a mental health issue, or just a jacked-up personality. Maybe both and more. I dunno.

Report this

By cyrena, November 9, 2008 at 1:22 am Link to this comment

I thought this was sort of funny Inherit..

“Hey, Girl! Somebody’s actually comparing us!  I’ve had TONS of criticisms of you, Cyrena.  But none of them fit this character’s!”

I agree you’ve had lots of criticisms for me, but we actually think more alike than I realized way back. Now of course we still differ on the 9/11 thing, because I’m confident they were involved in the alleged crashes at least. The anthrax part throws me, and I don’t have any formulated scenario for how that was managed. But the thing with the planes, and those towers blowing up? Oh no. I don’t believe any of what the Thugs wanna tell us. I mean, the LEAST they could have done was admit that the towers were blown up, and just blame that on the alleged terrorists as well. It’s just insulting our intelligence to expect us to believe that those airplanes caused that damage, and they’ve yet to show a single solitary piece of physical evidence that any of those four airplanes actually did what they claim they did. I’m not buying it.

Otherwise, we generally agree on lots of stuff, at least as much as we don’t. Kind of comical that Folktruther thinks I’m smarter than you. I doubt that’s the case, but I suspect we can each manage to hold our own.

This is a good example…

“...Hey, Volks: Here’s a tip, genius: Don’t take a yardstick to bed to measure how long you sleep.  I tell you this out of pure compassion since I don’t think you’re bright enough to figure it you for yourself, and I wouldn’t want you to hurt yourself getting splinters up your wazoo…”

This was kind of you. Most people think I’m kind as well. But in the case of folktruther, and the fact that he consistently attacks me with what are clearly vicious remarks like accusing me of being cynical and dishonest, and spewing poison, I wouldn’t have told him diddly squat. Let him get the splinter up his wazoo. I don’t know how much will really stick there though, since he appears to already have a bunch of splinters up his wazoo.

I guess it’s an example of how the bigger the orifice is, (in this case, any given asshole) the more shit they can hold. Still, I keep wanting to believe in limits for that. Meantime, I think my brother-in-law the gastroenterologist charges these types like Folktruther more for the services. Extra time, energy and expertise involved in cleaning out those putrid systems of splinters and other crap.

Louise had mentioned this negative energy (and how powerful it can be) in terms of something else a little earlier on another thread. But, I think it works here as well. Volker is just a really hateful person. Some call them anti-social, but that can include psychopaths as well. Maybe there’s some sort of ‘measure’ there, depending on how dangerous the psychosis is. I think the more intelligent the psychopath is, (like Ted Bundy or a few others) the more dangerous they are. Volker’s pretty smart. Just really hateful. Very bad combination.

One thing I can give him though is that he’s pretty much an equal opportunity hater. He doesn’t discriminate all that much. He basically hates everybody, even though he has favorites that he hates most among them.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 9, 2008 at 12:59 am Link to this comment

Yeah, I still remember all the so-called “progressives” piling-on to help the Right destroy Jimmy Carter’s Presidency—the last President with a sane vision for America’s future.  It’s not even 5 days after the election and they are already plotting the path and opening wounds for the Right Wing to exploit.

I think Carter’s failure as President is more involved than the Right wing of this country applying a propaganda campaign against him. Is this what you implied? I do not want to go into a straw man argument. I’ll just say that many people thought Carter lacked courage, vision and spine. I think this an unfair argument, because the President has no real power. He acts as a figurehead, which is more polite than saying he acts as a puppet. I think that if you want to know where the country is going to go in the next few years, you should search out the cabinet and advisors, and their connections to various think tanks and research centers. I know that conspiracy is an unacceptable word to most Americans, but conspiracy is accepted as a fact of life in Europe.
I do not know if you remember this, but there was a foiled assassination plot on May 5, 1979. The conspirators were strangely enough named Raymond Lee Harvey and Osvaldo Ortiz. There were guns and blank bullets found on them. I suppose they were there as a diversion while the professionals did the actual wet work. Sirhan Sirhan served as a diversion while the actual perps killed RFK. Incidents such as these inform my cynicism on Barak Obama. Anyhow Carter promised sweeping changes in government, which he was going to announce in LA on Cinco de Mayo day. He even promised to release classified documents of the JFK assassination. After the failed plot, he had been witnessed to say, “I have lost control of my government.”

And yes I do believe that 9-11 was a conspiracy to terrorize the American people in order to gain their acquiescence to a martial state. The objections I hear is that such an operation would take thousands of people to keep quiet. I would only point out the JFK assassination also took thousands of people to coordinate and too keep mum. The closest we have gotten to revelations of an inside job on that are the recorded interviews of Ethan Howard Hunt by his son Saint John Hunt. Refer to http://piratenews-tv.blogspot.com/2008/10/e-howard-hunt-jfk-confession-video.html E.H. Hunt claimed to be the bench warmer on a CIA assassination team.

As Jimmy Carter, I think he wanted to do good, but the system had threatened him away from such naive sentiments. Had he been more ruthless, sadistic, and cunning he could have very had a second term. As the devil in his ear I would have told him to conquer some Middle Eastern country, Kuwait perhaps, and use the service of the CIA to concoct a casus belli to go to war. Then I would have resurrected some LBJ Great Society castoff as a sop to liberals. I don’t know how practical this would have been as we still had our “Vietnam syndrome” as the establishment called it in the public at large. But I am sure we could have given away some large enlistment bonuses to encourage recruitment. As to the Soviets we could have negotiated some sort of secret non-agression treaty where they could have taken over a mineral rich country of their choice. But I am only impersonating Satan, not that I would want to be him or make any deals with him. I make this proviso for a certain loudmouthed fishwoman who delights in defaming and slandering me.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 9, 2008 at 12:20 am Link to this comment

ITW—If my posts sounded circular, it was because I was tryng to figure THIS out:

“Why pretend to be “Outraged”..post stupid stuff…not “Outraged”. If you are GOING to post…”

I was just trying to figure out what the hell you were talking about. I guess the fake posting has worked itself out.

As for people criticizing Obama—I think it is still classified under free speech. HOnestly , you guys are not helping the Democratic cause with this stuff.Answer policy criticisms with policy backed answers

Obama’s record—and policies =will defend themselves—or not.

I dont remember any “progerssives” trying to “destroy” Carter. Except for teh “born again stuff—I thought he handled some situation about as well as coudl be exepcted.

The Right Wing already has their made up stuff on Obama—I dont think most regulars here are using stuff like that. Policy issues are stil ok, to debate, right?

They have to be. Some if the questions and criticisms being “complained about” are jsut bizzare to me.I honestly have never seen the Democrats so defensive. When did people get the idea that others werent allowed to question or criticize?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 8, 2008 at 10:04 pm Link to this comment

MAR, November 8 at 8:55 pm #

Looks like now that the election is over there is nothing to talk about but yourselves!
*****************************************

Yeah, I still remember all the so-called “progressives” piling-on to help the Right destroy Jimmy Carter’s Presidency—the last President with a sane vision for America’s future.  It’s not even 5 days after the election and they are already plotting the path and opening wounds for the Right Wing to exploit.

Thankfully, at least now, they don’t have much influence.

Report this

By MAR, November 8, 2008 at 9:55 pm Link to this comment

Looks like now that the election is over there is nothing to talk about but yourselves!

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 8, 2008 at 9:49 pm Link to this comment

Folktruther, November 8 at 6:21 pm #

The basic problem KDelphi, is that Inherit has never been in a left organization so he just doesn’t understand the problems or worldviews.  He has never encountered certain aspects of political thought so he thinks it all nonsense.  Like the Bushites being complicit in the 9/11-antrax homicides.
******************************************

Never assume, Folk. It just makes an ASS out U but not ME.  I’m perfectly comfortable with the concept that Bush and his thugs are a bunch of criminals who deserve to be tried on thousands of counts, including treason.  The evidence is clear as the waters around the Greek Islands.  Woodward wrote a STACK of books documenting them as did Richard Clarke.

But that doesn’t mean I fall for the hare-brained conspiracy fantasies that have him or his buds behind 9/11 or the anthrax scare.  They don’t have the brains or creativity—as their f.ups in Afghanistan, Iraq, Israel/Palestine, Katrina, and the financial mess demonstrate so vividly.

I haven’t been naive for a long time.  I just don’t let anyone do my thinking for me, either from the right, the center, the left, or the super-crackpot-ultra-nutty-left! (sound familiar?)

******************************************
He is quite sincere in his beliefs, just limited by mainstream ideological restrictions.  This is quite common among imperialist Dems, and, since he is politically relatively honest, offers a target tosee what could change his opionions.
*****************************************

Yeah, the religious fanatics say the same thing:  I’m limited by my refusal to believe in invisible friends and my refusal to believe that the rational world around me really is irrational and at the whim of a capricious deity.

“since he is politically relatively honest, offers a target tosee what could change his opionions.”

What the hell does that mean? It’s not even English, just a bunch of words thrown together.


*****************************************
As opposed, for example, to Cyrena, who is completely cynical and will spew poison intermixed with her dishonest gibberish. Inherit may not be as intelligent as Cyrnea, but at least he is realitively honest.  Just politially naive
*****************************************
Hey, Girl! Somebody’s actually comparing us!  I’ve had TONS of criticisms of you, Cyrena.  But none of them fit this character’s!

Oh, you’ll be pleased to know that The Authority has spoken: I’m not as smart as you (aw….SHUCKS!). I’d wonder what Volk’s unit of measure is—if I actually had a shred of respect for him or those chunks of regurgitated dogma and tin-foil clap-trap he spews confusing them for ideas, facts and original thought.

Hey, Volks: Here’s a tip, genius: Don’t take a yardstick to bed to measure how long you sleep.  I tell you this out of pure compassion since I don’t think you’re bright enough to figure it you for yourself, and I wouldn’t want you to hurt yourself getting splinters up your wazoo.

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, November 8, 2008 at 9:45 pm Link to this comment

By Folktruther, November 8 at 6:21 pm #

As opposed, for example, to Cyrena, who is completely cynical and will spew poison intermixed with her dishonest gibberish. Inherit may not be as intelligent as Cyrnea, but at least he is realitively honest.  Just politially naive.
———————————————————————
Folktruther

I would just like to say that I think ITW and cyrena are both deep wells of political insignt compared with your superficial, stereoptypical, twisted left-wing ideology.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 8, 2008 at 9:29 pm Link to this comment

KDelphi, November 8 at 12:14 pm #

ITW—Your posts are becoming increasingly histrionic. They used to make some good sense.

Of course people spy, crosspost, etc. There is really no way to stop it when it first happens. (What, you think she/he is “making it up”?). The person posted as a non-registerd commentator. But, the alternative is blunt censorhsip, something the intenet in increasingly moving towards.(I was online about 10 yrs ago—I dropped it when my pc got too old. It was more open then)

It will start with porn (hard to excuse SOME of it,but that is the idea) MySpace, YouTube, proceed to political speeech, etc.(It already has, on many sites. Searches are less open with google and yahoo being the only real choices).

If you have mainstream opinions , you may not notice it.Or care. But, first they came for…well, you know.

“Tunneling in” or using anonymouse is an option—but only if you feel you can fight the attornies representing the censors.Mostly, its just not worth it. But, that dosent make it right.Technically, the website “owns” the posts, and some can make all comments disappear into (??).I suppose it is their right (particuarly if you break the agreement posted), but some have no post of this.

You can “open other accounts” etc. But why shoudl you have to, unless you break an agreement?

I have had happen to me what happened to “Outraged”. It is unsettling , at first.

I just do not get the “act like our names” stuff.I guess, I should act like an “ancient greek dolphin” and folktruther shoudl tell folktales. And you should talk about the Kansas case alot. People pick names from a limited selection—many are already taken.If someone wanted to use “real outraged” or whatever it was, to post opinions, it might be confusing, but ok. They used it to post very strange opinions and Outraged was concerned it would be attributed to her/him.

ok?
***************************************

Ok. 

Now if you’ll just tell me what this stream - of - consciousness drivel is supposed to mean…because I haven’t got a clue!

Report this

By cyrena, November 8, 2008 at 7:28 pm Link to this comment

By Outraged, November 7 at 4:25 pm #
Gee…“unregistered Outraged” why don’t you repost this as a “registered Outraged” if you are legit.

~~~

Outraged, I’m just now seeing this posted by the imposter. I didn’t repost all of it since it’s now accusing me of whatever. My first reply to the imposter was a week or so ago..maybe 10 days. It was the first time I’d seen the name posting as unregistered, and so I did wonder about it. The comments were stupid, and I remember commenting on that as well, to the effect of, “This seems really over the top, even for you.” So even then, it didn’t ‘sound’ like you, despite the fact that I rarely agree with your ideology these days, or maybe I’m just sitting in a different spot in the bleachers, and see a different view.

Regardless, I think I mentioned here earlier, (and there’s no way to prove it, or at least I don’t care enough to prove it) that this is that jerk who was posting under Rus7355. He insisted for months (when he was posting under that handle) that you and I were the same person. It annoyed me then, because I couldn’t figure out why he was so insistent about it, long after most of us had pointed out the obvious. You were the only one who did NOT make it a point to deny it or otherwise respond to such accusations, so maybe in his very troubled mind, that confirms it. I don’t know. I do know that there are lots of crackpots that come and go from these sites.

At any rate, I read the post from you asserting that this unregistered individual using your handle was NOT you, and I made the ‘connection’ right away to my own skepticism when I read that first post that just didn’t ‘sound’ like you. So KDelphi has a point that most folks can figure it out, just based on the disclaimer/notice that you posted yourself, and logged in. I’ve had that happen with me a couple of times, but I mentioned it, and it was addressed fairly soon. Hopefully that will do it, just because I agree that it’s annoying as hell. But it’s also the cost of a supposedly neutral WWW. And actually, Truthdig is NOT known for *frequent* censoring. Every time they’ve done it in the past, it’s pissed a lot of people off, including me. Then again, they’ve also censored a few who I damn sure am glad are gone, even though I suspect they eventually surface again under other handles, and from different IP addresses.

So, it’s two sides of the same coin.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 8, 2008 at 7:21 pm Link to this comment

The basic problem KDelphi, is that Inherit has never been in a left organization so he just doesn’t understand the problems or worldviews.  He has never encountered certain aspects of political thought so he thinks it all nonsense.  Like the Bushites being complicit in the 9/11-antrax homicides. 

He is quite sincere in his beliefs, just limited by mainstream ideological restrictions.  This is quite common among imperialist Dems, and,  since he is politically relatively honest, offers a target to see what could change his opionions.

As opposed, for example, to Cyrena, who is completely cynical and will spew poison intermixed with her dishonest gibberish. Inherit may not be as intelligent as Cyrnea, but at least he is realitively honest.  Just politially naive.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 8, 2008 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment

Hey Nannie! Thanks….

Another is distantocean.com

I wonder if they think that this is building them support…hmmm..

Report this

By Nannie, November 8, 2008 at 4:00 pm Link to this comment

KD ...

http://www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com

Report this

By Nannie, November 8, 2008 at 3:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

KD:

http://www.samsonsworld.blogspot.com

Report this

By KDelphi, November 8, 2008 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment

ITW—Your posts are becoming increasingly histrionic. They used to make some good sense.

Of course people spy, crosspost, etc. There is really no way to stop it when it first happens. (What, you think she/he is “making it up”?). The person posted as a non-registerd commentator. But, the alternative is blunt censorhsip, something the intenet in increasingly moving towards.(I was online about 10 yrs ago—I dropped it when my pc got too old. It was more open then)

It will start with porn (hard to excuse SOME of it,but that is the idea) MySpace, YouTube, proceed to political speeech, etc.(It already has, on many sites. Searches are less open with google and yahoo being the only real choices).

If you have mainstream opinions , you may not notice it.Or care. But, first they came for…well, you know.

“Tunneling in” or using anonymouse is an option—but only if you feel you can fight the attornies representing the censors.Mostly, its just not worth it. But, that dosent make it right.Technically, the website “owns” the posts, and some can make all comments disappear into (??).I suppose it is their right (particuarly if you break the agreement posted), but some have no post of this.

You can “open other accounts” etc. But why shoudl you have to, unless you break an agreement?

I have had happen to me what happened to “Outraged”. It is unsettling , at first.

I just do not get the “act like our names” stuff.I guess, I should act like an “ancient greek dolphin” and folktruther shoudl tell folktales. And you should talk about the Kansas case alot. People pick names from a limited selection—many are already taken.If someone wanted to use “real outraged” or whatever it was, to post opinions, it might be confusing, but ok. They used it to post very strange opinions and Outraged was concerned it would be attributed to her/him.

ok?

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 8, 2008 at 12:46 pm Link to this comment

Folktruther, November 8 at 10:37 am #

Outranaged, Ihherit, there is really no way to stop these false masquerades except by heightening the awareness of truthers and activists.  The police and intelligence agencies routinely send in informers and provocateurs into progressive organizations.  Usually they are so obvious they can be easily recognized or suspected, but sometimes not.

This has been a standard ploy in ostensibly Democratic US, where Freedom of Expression is largely a bad joke. That is why the American population is so deluded and intimidated.
*******************************************

You’re losing your grip on reality. Or you are on really, really good pain meds.

Let’s suppose TD is being monitored…why post? Any good hacker can get “under the hood” and figure out where the poster is located.

Why pretend to be “Outraged”?  And then post stupid stuff, that’s obviously not “Outraged”?  It makes no sense. If you’re GOING to pretend to be “Outraged” then you’ll either have to sound like him/her, or be the bait to draw someone else out you suspect as subversive (with its ever-expanding definition under Bush).

No, a better tactic would be to REGISTER (then nobody can use your handle) from an anonymous untraceable web address and post from THAT with the intent to incite responses. Of course, that borders on entrapment—but only if a poster here says something to indicate they are doing something illegal or possibly illegal.

Crackpot conspiracy theories founder on the rocks of reality.  Most likely it’s just a cowardly @$$#0le looking to make Outraged look bad.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 8, 2008 at 11:37 am Link to this comment

Outranaged, Ihherit, there is really no way to stop these false masquerades except by heightening the awareness of truthers and activists.  The police and intelligence agencies routinely send in informers and provocateurs into progressive organizations.  Usually they are so obvious they can be easily recognized or suspected, but sometimes not.

This has been a standard ploy in ostensibly Democratic US, where Freedom of Expression is largely a bad joke. That is why the American population is so deluded and intimidated.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 8, 2008 at 9:22 am Link to this comment

IRW, Outraged, cann4ing-

I thinkt they were using “the other outraged”—I read a little and just let it go. I wouldnt worry about it. TD usually catches it , from what I know. It has happend to me more than once. You just point it out to them—they wil take them off.

But, it is disturbing—-and catches one off guard. You look—there appaears to be your “user”—but you didnt post it. So you go on—theres another. What?? At first you think—oh no!—but, then people start responding—they know how you usually “speak”.

One did it to me, by “cross—posting”—that is even wierder. They take a post you posted about an entire other topic and take t out of context Ou see it, you think, “Wel, I agreewith that—but why the hell woud I say it—here?”“?

It is childish and cowardly. People wil see it for what it is.

Report this

By Inherit The Wind, November 8, 2008 at 9:07 am Link to this comment

Outraged:
Has somebody been stealing your handle and posting crap pretending to be you?  That really stinks and I hope TruthDig catches and bans the sucker!

When MSN had an open forum about 5 years ago, people would do that—and others would SHRED them.

I may rip everything you say apart.  I may be willing to get down and dirty in the discussion. I may be willing to go bare-knuckle in the argument.  I may even detest you (or not).

But I HATE handle-stealers with an almost irrational passion. NOTHING anybody says no matter HOW obnoxious and offensive is as much of a sin to me as handle-stealing. It is the ultimate mark of cowardice and fascism.  And I will stand with ANY valid poster here against them!  Handle-stealing is just plain WRONG and never justified. NEVER!!!!

Report this

By cann4ing, November 8, 2008 at 8:59 am Link to this comment

outraged—Thanks for the heads up.  Maybe we need some truth in labeling rules at TD.

Report this

By MAR, November 7, 2008 at 7:28 pm Link to this comment

KDelphi. Don’t be pessimistic, there will be a brighter day! Certainly the challenges he has to face are awesome. If those who voted for him keep the faith and the energy displayed in the election then he is halfway there.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 7, 2008 at 6:18 pm Link to this comment

MAR—You are not wrong—it was very touching. Honestly.

But, considering the state of the country (and world ) ecnonomies, we have to be vigilent here that we do not end up with a bunch of neo-anything retreads.

I might be expecting to much. But, if I am, I dont think that it is entirely my own fault—the media (as well as the Obama campaign) have rather set it up that way. Although specifics are hard to come by.

The speech today was rather non-plus…he didnt promise a bunch of stuff-but, he never really has. People just think that he has.The press asked some pretty tough questions, which is fine—I wish they had done taht with Bush!

We shall have to see.If we can ever get the damn neo-cons to stop sending out Trojans and damn neo-liberals to stop banning people LOL!

Report this

By MAR, November 7, 2008 at 5:56 pm Link to this comment

KDelphi, folktruther et al
I have been out of touch with the internet but watched election night. I was truly moved by the sea-change in American politics and without being syrupy, the devil Bush and his evil mates will be pushed aside and replaced by Obama and his crew. I congratulate those Americans who came out and voted, and it was clearly a demonstration that another revolution is not needed because you have one in principal on its way. I do hope I am right as up here we were as interested as you, as was all the world who thought the US was going down the tubes. Fascism is hopefully pushed back. I also watched the 106 year old lady and that was truly moving. As one of the talking heads said, you have demonstrated that the nation, its constitution and its people are still intact.  He got it right!

But I fear the bad neocons will just retreat momentarily into their cave. Be ready when the tongues of fire and billows of smoke are again abroad.

Or is it ignorance, and blind stupididty?

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, November 7, 2008 at 5:54 pm Link to this comment

Re: By cann4ing, November 7 at 12:50 pm #

Was this directed at “Outraged (the real one)”  the “Unregistered commenter”.....?

“By Outraged (the real one), November 7 at 11:16 am #
(Unregistered commenter)”

“Folktruther, outraged, it is obvious that neither of you followed the link I provided.  You ought to see the full context of what Kuttner had to say in order to appreciate where he is coming from.  His analysis includes how events, and his base, forced FDR to move further to the left than he had initially intended and he provides a similar analysis.

You two are way to pessimistic.  Try a little positive thinking, it might brighten your outlook and provide you with a better foundation for constructive engagement.”

cann4ing, I always log in, so that isn’t me, although it certainly makes you wonder about “someone’s” mental state, does it not.  Also, I don’t have the time right now to check out your link but I will, thanks.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, November 7, 2008 at 5:25 pm Link to this comment

Gee…“unregistered Outraged”  why don’t you repost this as a “registered Outraged” if you are legit…?

By The Real Outraged, November 7 at 7:55 am #
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena, I just saw that post from “the other Outraged” I don’t know who it is, but what he said was uncalled for. Whoever it is they are obviously overcompensating for lack of intellect or reason. Judging by what that person wrote I suspect they just don’t like Obama based entirely on his ethnic background. (I have to hear that everyday at work and it makes me sick, the things that are said. I certainly don’t like Obama, but I base it all on his policies and betrayal because that is fair). Yes, I am harsh and I have good reason. However, unless prevoked I will not “personally attack” a person just because they disagree with me. Just like I don’t personally attack Obama, I attack his policies and actions. (I look at it this way: How do I know he was not a great guy before politics)?
As I said, what “the fake Outraged” posted was not fair and uncalled for.
To the person posing as “Outraged” I find you somewhat beneath contempt. Your personal attacks will not win you any arguments or credit. In your case how does anyone know your not just a racist or something? I don’t agree with Cyrena (not to mention a few others), but that does not call for a personal attack. I strongly suggest that you cease and dissist using my ID and launching personal attacks immeadately!

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, November 7, 2008 at 4:55 pm Link to this comment

I see “unregistered Outraged” is back.  This time claiming to be the real one.  Cute.

Report this

By cann4ing, November 7, 2008 at 1:50 pm Link to this comment

Folktruther, outraged, it is obvious that neither of you followed the link I provided.  You ought to see the full context of what Kuttner had to say in order to appreciate where he is coming from.  His analysis includes how events, and his base, forced FDR to move further to the left than he had initially intended and he provides a similar analysis.

You two are way to pessimistic.  Try a little positive thinking, it might brighten your outlook and provide you with a better foundation for constructive engagement.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 7, 2008 at 1:05 pm Link to this comment

HR 676. HR 676. HR 676. HR 676.

People much more experienced than Obama support it.

PDA supports it.

Frank—I said that my OPINION was that I am not certain that the constitution gives people the right to own weapons. (I am not a constitutional scholar, but I know the FISA Amendments are wrong!)It could be wishful thinking o my part, I suppose..

Times have changed. I dont think that Jefferson thought that JOe the Plumber or the Crips should all own AK-47s.

You know, muzzle loaders and all? How can they possibly be comparable? We were discussing a DC weapons ban , which involved automatics. Where does the constitution say everyone shoudl be able to own automatics? Maybe you do not think that they should.Anyone who thinks that we can defend ourselves against intl terrorist organizations like Blackwater with “weapons” is just not being relistic. Shoot Blackwater. Get your house bombed.

Guns are for killing. I think people like to evade that with talk of “freedom” and “right to bear arms”-your freedom ends where my face begins”. What if I seem threatening to you?

To continue to be the “world supplier of arms and death” is shameful. But dont worry—it is not going to change—the NRA will see to that.

Maybe, just to be perfectly “safe”, we should all own our own atomic weapons.

Report this

By Outraged (the real one), November 7, 2008 at 12:16 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I think it’s nothing more than a “cult of personality”. I can’t disagree with Mr. Kuttner’s foundation of “time will tell”, but I believe we have four more years of Bush or more generally, Facism.
I will concede that Mr. Obama is in fact smarter than the last emperors the US has had. I mean at least the guy can complete a sentence and enunciate. I also will concede credit to the fact that Mr. Obama is not a boozer such as Bush STILL IS! (Yes, Bush is till on the sauce! I’ve caught him twice this year in speeches or whatever slurring his words and struggling to stand up. I wish I had noted the date and time, but I was in shock thinking “this guy has his finger on the button”!).
That said though, Mr Obama is weak and he is a Facist otherwise he would not be in office.
Unfortunately, he has already stated and demonstrated that he doesn’t care about the people. Starting with his vote for the Patriot Act and all the way through today with whom he is picking for his administration. (He is even keeping or bringing back some Bush people)!
He also stated it in his “victory” speech if you were paying attention. (Listen to the part about “sacrifice” ,he is not talking about “good sacrifice” folks! He is talking about yet another four years of the Bush regime that he himself is backing)!
On top of all that he is about to appoint another drunk named Lawrence Summers to the treasury!
Obama does not have the strength to go against the party. (There is no Dem or Rep, only the Facist party). He will be steered by the staff.
So in my view he has already failed.
Sadly, the majority of people (99%) in the US are not smart enough or savvy enough to form a strong lasting grassroots movement that will make Obama listen.

By cann4ing, November 7 at 10:16 am #


ROBERT KUTTNER: ...call me crazy, call me an optimist, we have reality on our side. Events are going to drive this, and he’s [Obama’s] either going to rise to the occasion or he’s going to fail. And I think he’s a very smart, very decent guy who doesn’t want to fail. And unlike certain recent presidents, he’s also very intelligent. And I don’t think this is going to be a man who’s going to be steered by his staff. At all the key meetings, the meetings were run by Obama himself. And it’s going to be—I don’t think the die is yet cast. I think this is still a very fluid moment. I’m unnerved by the people he’s appointing. There are deep structural forces that we’ve talked about that put so much power in the hands of Wall Street, that push him in that direction. But this is one of those moments when things could change, if we get counterweights on the part of organizing at the grassroots.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 7, 2008 at 12:14 pm Link to this comment

Cann4ing-I do call Kuttner crazy, an optimist, and in addition a political ding-a-ling.  I beleive him when he says he is unerved by Obama’s appointments because he does not want to believe in Obama’s role in the US power system.

Obama’s function is to consolidate the Bushite political counterrevolution of the last eight years.  That means more war, more impoverishment, more violence and coercion to keep the American people in line.  The American bourgeois Democracy is dead, cann4ing, dead, like Kuttner’s brain cells.

To change course, Obama would have to restrict globalization, which is destroying American jobs and income.  But he is a strong believer in Free Enterprise and there are current hints he is going to appoint a neolib as Treasurer.  More job loss, more lower incomes.  And more guns and clubs to keep the people from protesting them.

And he is stuck with military defeats, which he must defer until he is elected again.  As the Economist has stated editorially, there will be no change in US foreign policy.  It will simply be less successful as the US loses world power.

the election was a massive defeat for the American people.  A conservative Obiden was running against a cancer-ridden, unstable fighter pilot who chose a pretty moose hunting airhead to succeed him.  A lose-lose situation.  Well, amid the senseless jubilation and celebration, we lost.  People again identifying with their own oppression.

Report this

By cyrena, November 7, 2008 at 12:04 pm Link to this comment

Lordy, lordy, lordy… cyrena’s over fourty.

Outraged…

You got this part right, even if you don’t know how to spell forty. (I knew what you meant).

I’m DEFINITELY over 40. But then, you knew that already, and not because of anything having to do with YOUR ‘lord’. Your lord is definitely not MY lord. (you should have already known that as well..I mean REALLY. YOU know how dangerous your evangelicalism is to society-at-large, even if you can’t spell.) So, I’ll cut you some slack on that one. You’re probably over FORTY as well.


The rest is gibberish. Please tell me you haven’t taken up linguistics. (ya gotta learn to spell first…it’s just one of those things with certain disciplines.)

Report this

By cann4ing, November 7, 2008 at 11:16 am Link to this comment

ROBERT KUTTNER: ...call me crazy, call me an optimist, we have reality on our side. Events are going to drive this, and he’s [Obama’s] either going to rise to the occasion or he’s going to fail. And I think he’s a very smart, very decent guy who doesn’t want to fail. And unlike certain recent presidents, he’s also very intelligent. And I don’t think this is going to be a man who’s going to be steered by his staff. At all the key meetings, the meetings were run by Obama himself. And it’s going to be—I don’t think the die is yet cast. I think this is still a very fluid moment. I’m unnerved by the people he’s appointing. There are deep structural forces that we’ve talked about that put so much power in the hands of Wall Street, that push him in that direction. But this is one of those moments when things could change, if we get counterweights on the part of organizing at the grassroots.

http://www.democracynow.org/2008/11/7/can_grassroots_movement_that_propelled_obama

Report this

By The Real Outraged, November 7, 2008 at 8:55 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena, I just saw that post from “the other Outraged” I don’t know who it is, but what he said was uncalled for. Whoever it is they are obviously overcompensating for lack of intellect or reason. Judging by what that person wrote I suspect they just don’t like Obama based entirely on his ethnic background. (I have to hear that everyday at work and it makes me sick, the things that are said. I certainly don’t like Obama, but I base it all on his policies and betrayal because that is fair). Yes, I am harsh and I have good reason. However, unless prevoked I will not “personally attack” a person just because they disagree with me. Just like I don’t personally attack Obama, I attack his policies and actions. (I look at it this way: How do I know he was not a great guy before politics)?
As I said, what “the fake Outraged” posted was not fair and uncalled for.
To the person posing as “Outraged” I find you somewhat beneath contempt. Your personal attacks will not win you any arguments or credit. In your case how does anyone know your not just a racist or something? I don’t agree with Cyrena (not to mention a few others), but that does not call for a personal attack. I strongly suggest that you cease and dissist using my ID and launching personal attacks immeadately!

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, November 7, 2008 at 8:41 am Link to this comment

God, guns and guts have proved quite effective in modern Iraq and Afghanistan (and other places) to force invaders to retreat or at least make deals with the local tribespeople.  That is because the people involved are at least locally united due to inevitable trooping primate psychology: an invading troop must be resisted and, if possible, expelled.

In the case of the Angry White Man (a staple of discourse only a decade or two ago, so it’s odd that Obama was faulted for bringing him up again), the problem is not that God, guns and guts aren’t effective but that Mr. A.W.M. is too divided within to use them.  What he would like most is to return to the old liberal arrangement where the sovereign caste consisted of the White, English-speaking males of property—the topless pyramid under the eye of God depicted on the dollar bill; in other words, people mostly like him.  But in a modern, industrialized, cyberneticized society, the fact that a person is White, or male, or of a certain ethnicity or religion, doesn’t matter very much.  The female, the pigmented, the foreign can do just as well as he in the factory, the office, or even the battlefield.  And they are satisfied with getting by; he still wants (is still acculturated by his society to want) to win.  He cannot revolt against winning and winners because he wants to be one of them.  It is another case of “We have met the enemy, and they are us.”  Clinging to his guns and gods, then, his only hope is to vote for the poetry of war and empire.  And now that is failing, too.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 7, 2008 at 8:37 am Link to this comment

A few things:  Cuomo has a vested interest in the entrenched media getting its way; one of his sons plays Mickey-the-Dunce on ABC’s Good Morning America.
He’s a personal friend of Antonin Scalia - calls him “Nino” - whose father started the American Fascist Party in NYC in 1934.  From a taped telephone conversation back in the Presidential Primary campaign of 1992, Bill Clinton said that Cuomo has ties to the Mafia.

I might be wrong about the “Fairness Doctrine”, but I was going on the assumption that would be replaced with a new “Fairness Doctrine” that may be much worse. I did include something about the internet. Does Truthdig.com need a fairness doctrine? Thank you for the Cuomo quote.

Report this

By Expat, November 7, 2008 at 7:45 am Link to this comment

TAO Walker, November 7 at 6:23 am;

Your comment was so direct, to the point, and complete; no further comment from me is required other than thank you.  Touche!

Report this

By TAO Walker, November 7, 2008 at 7:23 am Link to this comment

Barack Obama’s celebrated remark about “bitter” people who “cling” to their “guns” and “religion” raises, perhaps inadvertantly, the question of whether the tormentors knowingly induce such bitterness, and those particular reactions, because they are confident neither firearms nor creeds will ever be effective in attempts to dislodge them from their “ruling” positions.  It seems only wise to suspect such a possibility, given the well-known tendency among domesticated peoples to hold even tighter to things somebody is “threatening” to take away….even proven-deadly “nicotine delivery systems,” for cryin’ out-loud.

This old Indian has wondered for quite awhile, though, how guns can serve to get people out of an oppressive confinement the fetters of which exist entirely in the minds of the oppressed and exploited.  Alright, blowing-out one’s own brains will do the trick, sort of, as will doing the same favor for someone else….for someone else.  Bullets can’t touch the apparatus of oppression and exploitation, though, and its owner/operators are extremely careful never to be identifiable targets even, nevermind getting caught dead in the crosshairs.

So what’re the chances “the powers” that wannabe keep their subject/citizens “clinging” to guns because they at least know full-well guns are no real threat whatsoever to themselves or their vested interests.  Try shooting-down a “corporate entity,” or defending your homes and loved ones from the ceaseless assaults waged on our Living Arrangement by any of the damned things.

As for religion, people kept convinced real respite from oppression and exploitation can come only in “the afterlife,” as a “reward” for pleasing some other kind of disembodied entity, will put-up with a lot more shit from their here/now abusers than they otherwise might if they knew there is no Life but Life Herownself, and She never holds-back for some empty promise of “pie in the sky when you die.”  Even the Bovine inmates of feedlots know better than that, so how come the self-proclaimed “brains” among the Children of our Mother Earth still ain’t figured it out?

Maybe once upon a time, when the weapons available to would-be tyrants were essentially the same as those their intended subjects might get ‘hold-of, firearms might’ve served to deter outright frontal-assaults on people’s personal liberties and “property.”  While ordinary americans were arming their selves against that, however, their ambitious “betters” were perfecting methods of control of a much more subtle and sophisticated kind….seen in-part today in the proliferation of surveillance techniques and ‘security” check-points.

So what’s a modern-day “Minuteman” to do?

HokaHey!

Report this

By Frank, November 7, 2008 at 4:59 am Link to this comment

KDelphi, perhaps this will help to remove some of your dubiousness on the intent of the Founders with respect to the Second Amendment:

“I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia’s Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”
Richard Henry Lee
writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.

“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full posession of them.”
Zachariah Johnson
Elliot’s Debates, vol. 3 “The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution.”

“… the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms”
Philadelphia Federal Gazette
June 18, 1789, Pg. 2, Col. 2
Article on the Bill of Rights

“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …”
Samuel Adams
quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, “Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State”


“Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
George Washington
First President of the United States

“The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.”
Thomas Paine

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them.”
Richard Henry Lee
American Statesman, 1788

“The great object is that every man be armed.” and “Everyone who is able may have a gun.”
Patrick Henry
American Patriot

“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”
Patrick Henry


“Those who hammer their guns into plowshares will plow for those who do not.”
Thomas Jefferson
Third President of the United States

“The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … “
Thomas Jefferson
letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.

“The best we can help for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
Alexander Hamilton
The Federalist Papers at 184-8

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, November 7, 2008 at 3:32 am Link to this comment

Re: cyrena

Your comment: “We can either talk about what actually *IS* possible in terms of providing the most health care to the most people all of the time, (and I’m honestly not sure that you’re up for that, or that I am either)or we can keep jabbering about stuff that you don’t really have anything more than old criticisms for. I’m not interested in hearing about what’s wrong with the system NOW, because I damn sure know that, and I suspect that most readers here do.

I would be interested if you had something better to offer,

There is something better.  This would be HR.676 as KDelphi has suggested and Kucinich has introduced.  From the Nader/Gonzales site:

Studies show that savings from a single-payer system would be more than enough to provide universal coverage for the same amount that we are now paying.

Typical government estimates put the figure for billing fraud and abuse at 10 percent of annual spending, amounting to over $150 billion annually. PNHP(Physicians for National Healthcare Program) urges the banning of investor-ownership health care sellers in order to dramatically reduce fraudulent billing. Single-payer will reduce fraud because all of the medical information will be in one system

Providing universal health care can only be accomplished through a single-payer system: no country ever achieved universal coverage with private health insurance. President Harry Truman proposed universal health care in 1948 but was rebuffed by Congress. The time to act is yesterday. Let us end our disastrous descent into the corporatization of medicine and its callous consequences.


http://www.votenader.org/issues/social/healthcare/

In addition, check out this link from “Project Censored”.

http://s31076.gridserver.com/assets-managed/pdf/Health.pdf

Report this

By cyrena, November 7, 2008 at 3:07 am Link to this comment

PS KDelphi..

I’ve never intended to suggest that you were an Obama hater. There are several on this board, (most have been consistent over time – about 2 years) and there are others who just pretty much hate everything and everybody. But, I wasn’t including you.

I partially agree about this though…

•  “If Obamas’ supporters continue to resist any reasonable criticism, he wil not get much support.”

The ‘Obama supporters’ description is a little tired – no…it’s REAL tired. This isn’t a homecoming game, or a Kentucky Derby, and we’re not LA Laker’s fans, or T-Ball parents either. This whole idea of ‘reasonable criticism’ of a US President actually MEANING anything is quite new to this latest generation of voters, and a whole bunch of old ones as well.

So, while it sounds very ‘intellectual salon-like’ to suggest that “If Obama’s supporters continue to –resist-? reasonable criticism, he will not get much support’ (at least to some people) it’s really just a blasé’ and meaningless piece of rhetoric. I’m sure you’ll agree after you read it over. The reality is that US citizens, (not ‘supporters’) most certainly CAN, (for the first time in maybe 40 years or so) actually put the criticism out there, and expect a response. I don’t know what the response will be, but that’s a whole hell of a lot more than what we’ve been seeing for the past decade or better. It’s been 8 long years of getting the perpetual finger from Dick Bush.

So, I don’t think this resistance to reasonable criticism is on the side of ‘we the people’. I’ve got plenty of questions/criticisms for some of the things Obama has said/done. But, my criticisms, (which I find reasonable enough) aren’t the same as the criticisms of others.

You mention that your point of disagreement is that you don’t think that health care should be a profit maker. Why in the world do you think that would put you in DISagreement with most of us? How odd. Even the health care providers that I know, don’t think there should be a profit involved. That is unless you call them being able to earn a living a profit. Admittedly, most health care professionals do like to get paid, but I know a few who provide free services like as missionaries or something. Physicians Without Boarders does some of that, but come on, the doc at the clinic generally deserves to have the occasional meal and maybe a roof over his/her head as well.

And yes, I do believe that health care should be a human right. Most folks that I know think that as well. Why do you seem to think that you’re alone in that? You aren’t, and that isn’t really the argument. The question isn’t whether or not people deserve to have health care, but how to make sure that everyone gets it.

I don’t think anyone is going to sue you over the comments you attributed to Obama on the SC ruling of the DC gun ban. I was only questioning what you thought his ‘opinion’ was, and trying to explain it in the proper context. Yeah, I would expect a president or presidential candidate to have something to say about it, IF they had any legal background at all. But, the president is one branch, and the court is still another. That was my only point. In the basic structure, a neither a president or a candidate for the office has any power over the USSC. Sorry. Should I put a complaint about that in the suggestion box? I could add it to the youngster’s complaint about the age requirement to be president. The kid says he doesn’t think he should have to wait until he’s 35 years old to run for President. He wants that changed to age 20. I disagree. wink

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, November 7, 2008 at 3:00 am Link to this comment

Anyone need a laugh?  Let me dissect.

Cyrena’s comment: “I don’t think Obama “AGREED” with this ruling, and if memory serves me, he didn’t say a whole lot about it. He is an attorney and Legal/Constitutional scholar, but *not* a Supreme Court Justice. So, while I would have expected him to possibly weigh-in on that decision, (as he has with others) the system isn’t set up for presidential candidates to influence SUPREME COURT RULINGS!!! Anyone who thinks that is apparently still under the influence of the dictatorship and the corrupted portion of the Supreme Court who put the thugs in control 8 years ago. Apparently ya’ll have adapted to the authoritarian rule of government.”

Hmmm….cyrena doesn’t “THINK” (although we could probably give her that one) Obama, according to cyrena, “AGREED” (in quotes her choice not mine..LOL) of course “if memory serves” cyrena “RIGHT”(comical word choice) “he didn’t say a whole lot about it” (Ahem…you betcha…hey, we agree)

Although cyrena does acknowledge that Obama is “an attorney and Legal/Constitutional scholar” which actually lends MORE credence to that bad, bad, bad unconstitutional vote concerning FISA.

And then there was this hogwash.  And I quote (with emphasis) “So, while I would have expected him to possibly weigh-in on that decision,

What was that? “while” she “would have” “expected” “possibly”...  This was supposedly an explanation of a DECISION…..LOL

Lordy, lordy, lordy… cyrena’s over fourty.

BTW, for good measure. She said, “Anyone who thinks that is apparently”...  So my question is: Does this mean “Anyone who thinks” is in direct opposition to cyrena who claimed “she doesn’t think?”  The record needs to be set straight…...

Report this

By cyrena, November 7, 2008 at 2:23 am Link to this comment

KDelphi, you suggest this:

•  “...I think that, what we essentially disagree on , is political…”

Well, ah..that’s one way to look at it. I’d pretty much decided a long time ago that it’s probably more than ‘political’ though. But then, I’m a realist. I know that there’s an apparatus to ANYTHING..it’s how the wheel does what it does. That’s pure logistics, and logistical, pragmatic nuts and bolts stuff doesn’t have a political flavor.

We can either talk about what actually *IS* possible in terms of providing the most health care to the most people all of the time, (and I’m honestly not sure that you’re up for that, or that I am either)or we can keep jabbering about stuff that you don’t really have anything more than old criticisms for. I’m not interested in hearing about what’s wrong with the system NOW, because I damn sure know that, and I suspect that most readers here do.

I would be interested if you had something better to offer, like exactly how Obama should do this to provide what you demand in terms of this universal health care. Thing is, you NEVER DO. Maybe because you wouldn’t really know how to set the thing up yourself. That would be understandable. It’s sort of ‘more than a notion’ to run anything like that.

So, it’s understandable if you wouldn’t know all of the ins and outs of setting up such a system. But, unless you can, it’s all just a bunch of the same ol’ same ol’ bitching and complaining, before he’s even clocked in.

Anyway, the logistics aren’t political KDelphi, and that’s what I’m talking about. I’m talking about the bureaucracy. I’m talking about the reality of designing any universal system that will adequately serve the health needs of over 300 million Americans.

If you’ve got some ideas, please share them. Otherwise, I’ll just wait ‘til the rubber meets the road. I don’t know enough about all of the intricacies of the system to be able to say that it will work, just like you don’t know enough to say that it won’t. I’ve already seen multiple improvements to the system on a local level, here in my own community, because we haven’t been able to dicker around watching people die because of a cynical and corrupt administration that has been allowed to do just about anything they want. They could allow an entire city to drown and do nothing, so those people had to help themselves. We didn’t know Obama was going to be President until a short while ago, so we haven’t been sitting on our asses waiting for what may or may not happen in terms of health care. So on my end, there have actually been some improvements to access and at extremely low rates that people with no coverage or limited coverage can afford. Based on that, I already know what CAN work, and it’s just a matter of waiting to see that it will work for the overwhelming majority, and not just scattered pockets of the population.

Not political…logistical.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 6, 2008 at 9:02 pm Link to this comment

OK, cyrena—lets talk again when “everybody who needs health care in the uS gets it”.

Or maybe when we “get out of Iraq”.

Here is what Physician’s for a Natl Health Plan think:
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2008/september/an_interview_with_pn.php


I guess Democrats know better.


This is what they suggest. There is also HR 676. I guess since evryone wants to believe Obama’s plan wil cover everyone, it is pointless.This “he would have” done is tiresome. We have gone around and aroung about it, and I dont want to anymore. I see it in plain print.I think that, what we essentially disagree on , is political.

http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what_is_single_payer.php

Why “increase Medicaid and SCHIP funding it ‘everyone is to be covered’”? To pretend that everyone who wants the level of care the Senate has in a profit based system is just silly. As long as we have market based—not everyoen who needs it will be covered. Every country that has experience with it says so—except the Torries who just want to cut taxes. The insurance companies have to make a profit—that is where I disagree. Profit has no place in life/death. It is no better than war contracting.

I think we just disagre as to whether it is as human right.Most politicians in this country see it as—hell I dont know! I do not know how anyone can se it as not a right! The uN does.I could list all the organizations.

Here is a couple on the DC gun ban.I saw the c-span coverage. GOP were saying Obama said it was constitutioanl. But of course they woudl. So, technically, legally I guess one coudl say , that, on that day , he took no position. I was not speaking LEGALLY. Obama is very hard to pin down. What’s more, I was answering someone who seemed concerned. I would outlaw guns—but I dont criticize anyone for not doing that. The NRA just has Congress by teh balls. I am not at al sure that the Constituon grants anyone that right. Most would disagree.

The statement which Burton describes as an inaccurate representation of the senator’s views was made to the Chicago Tribune on Nov. 20, 2007.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/06/obama-camp-disa.html

I guess that the comment on teh gun policy was my opinion of the several comments he has made. If someon is going to sue me, I cannot prove it so I retract it. Wait a minute—sue me?? LOLOL


If Obamas’ supporters continue to resist any reasonable criticism, he wil not get much support. I have NOT been an “Obama hater”-in fact it is ironic to me that , on the same day, I got the Obama Trojan (some right wing group sent it out) AND banned again—from Common Dreams! I cant f*cking win!

Report this

By cyrena, November 6, 2008 at 8:08 pm Link to this comment

KDelphi…

•  “…and Obamas’ agreement with the Supreme Court in overturning The DC City Commisions attempt to ban guns in teh US capital…”

Are you sure about this? I don’t think Obama “AGREED” with this ruling, and if memory serves me, he didn’t say a whole lot about it. He is an attorney and Legal/Constitutional scholar, but *not* a Supreme Court Justice. So, while I would have expected him to possibly weigh-in on that decision, (as he has with others) the system isn’t set up for presidential candidates to influence SUPREME COURT RULINGS!!! Anyone who thinks that is apparently still under the influence of the dictatorship and the corrupted portion of the Supreme Court who put the thugs in control 8 years ago. Apparently ya’ll have adapted to the authoritarian rule of government.

If I get a moment, I’ll re-check for Obama’s ‘reaction’ to the USSC ruling that you’re talking about, but I think it’s a very huge leap, (and not a successful one) to claim that he ‘agreed’ with it.

LSL…people like YOU *MAKE* it ‘easy’ to dismiss you as the hatemongers that you are. Odd that you would use race hate as an example, since I didn’t. But, if that’s what your bias and hate is based on, so be it. You would know that better than I. (in so far as what motivates your hate, I only perceive that you have it).

So, you’re also indulging in the same leaps when you say that Obama “doesn’t support” single payer health care coverage. This isn’t a new topic, so we already know, (as we have for nearly 2 years now) how ALL of these people have intended to go about health care coverage. For starters, ANYTHING will be better than what we DON’T HAVE now, and have NOT HAD for at least 2 decades..or longer. We have NEVER had a single payer health care system, unless you’re considering the Medicare system that was hatched as part of the New Deal. The ONLY candidate that spoke on that, (though I don’t know exactly how he was planning to make it work) was Dennis Kucinich.

Obama has said that if he was setting this up from scratch, he would set it up as a single payer system. He didn’t. So, he’ll offer a government insurance coverage program to anybody who wants or needs it, and without all of the selective shit that the private insurance profit mongers have put us through. ANYBODY can be covered, and at affordable rates. I expect that to eventually eliminate the private insurers, or force them to compete with the government. And, that’s pretty much what most practical/pragmatic people expect to happen as well.

Report this

By troublesum, November 6, 2008 at 6:57 pm Link to this comment

I don’t like the new first family’s choice of a pet.  So much for change.  Both Bush and Clinton used a dog for a prop in their photo ops.  They ought to choose something different like an iguana, a macaw, a python, or a gazelle, or better yet all four.  This administration is supposed to be about change.

Report this

By Ron Ranft, November 6, 2008 at 5:53 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

jackpine talks of high expectations and implies that it is perfectly alright not to have them met. Or is it that We the People are demanding too much when We ask that our rights be upheld? Remember, Obama voted for the new FISA law and that clearly violates the Constitution. He promised to filibuster until the Telecom Immunity section was removed and then he didn’t. But it does not stop there.

Ralph Nader said something early on in the race that every one jumped on crying racism and that was that Obama was a white man in a blackman’s body. The statement could have been stated as Obama being a sheep in wolves clothing. One only need to look at who Obama surrounded himself with during his run to the Presidency. They are members of Clinton’s administration. One only has to give Clinton’s foriegn poicy a cursory look to see how Obama’s is going to go. Eveything points to more of the Bush years and Emmanuel, being far to the right in the Demowon’t Party will put Isreal first. He has mentioned several time the need to “do” something about Iran before it harms Israel. Then there are the two appointments to the Treasurey. One of them was censored for stating that women had no ability to understand science and advocated shipping our toxic wastes to third world countries, especially Africa, since they were so “underpolluted.” When we talk of vetting Palin we have to ask, did Obama vette this misogynitistic moron? If he did and he knows what this dofus advocates then does he agree with him or just think that it doesn’t matter?

Any inclination I had to vote for Obama withered when he refused to meet with the Iraqi War Veterans at the Convention to take their petition for better treatment. As a Viet Nam Vet he dishonored me and every veteran who fought this country’s imperialistic wars before we knew better. American Freedom and Rights are not the reason we have fought a single war since WWII.It would have raised the esteem he has falsely accrued during his campaign immeasurably had he taken 5 minutes to meet with them. But he had more important things to do. The same kind of important things Bush has had to keep him from meeting with all the families whose son’, daughter’s, husband’s, wive’s, uncle’s and aunts he has sent to be slaughtered. Is it our high expectations to expect that Obama will bring all our troops home in the coming months? Is it high expectations to expect that he will realize that to trade the quagmire in Iraq for the quagmire that is Afghanistan will not help in the GOWT or with our economy? Is it a high expectation that he will learn what the British and the Russians learned and out forefathers cautioned future Presidents about, getting involved in foriegn intaglements? Are our expectations too high to expect that he will hold accountable the criminals who lied to us and started this war? Is it too much to expect that he will quit rewarding the criminals that drove our economy in the ground? Are we expecting too much that he appoint people to his administration of honor, integrity, with a sense that they are there to do the People’s, not the Corporatocracy’s business. I don’t think so.

Robert Scheer may wax estatic over Obama’s election but I see someone too much like Bush and Mccain. Obama is a product of the same corrupted system that has produced the last 40 years. The youth of this country are too young to know what this country has experienced since Nixon, or Bush Senior and they should revel in the moment for they will soon learn the bitter feel of betrayal.

I am glad that this country made a person of color President. I am disappointed that he will more than likely be no different than any of the corrupt white men who have held the office for so long. I hoped that I was wrong for the sake of the country, but so far it looks like business as usual.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 6, 2008 at 4:24 pm Link to this comment

Well, I can see that not much has changed since was hacked and had to unhack.
Frank and jack—Is the phrase, “Obama has been studying Reagan for years” supposed to alarm us? Because it should.The only reference we have to Obama’s policy on guns, is, statements from Webb, Biden etc. (alot of hunting in Delaware???) and Obamas’ agreement with the Supreme Court in overturning The DC City Commisions attempt to ban guns in teh US capital. Holmes seemed pretty angry—we shall see. The type of guns they were talking about not hunting rifles (again—alot of hunting in DC??—or, who do you want to kill?)
I find the entire idea that the 2nd Amend somehow guarantees everyone’s rght to own any weapon they want very dubious. I bought a gun once—-had someone teach me how to shoot it. When the person I bought the gun to protect myself form broke into my house, I couldnt use it and he walked up and took it awwy form me. Glad he didnt use it on me. I wish you the same luck. Cause you know more people kill family members with gun than “criminals”.

I tire quickly of the “Democracy is messy” stuff—It becomes an excuse to mess up.it sounds like Rummy talking about Baghdad. WHY is it alwasy “messy”? Why cant the wil of the people just be protected? If people keep up teh “messy democracy” and gun rhetoric, I am afraid i wil have to conclude that Obama’s supporters were just as conservative as I had feared. Blue Dogs—


Why do we have to constsntsly “roll up our sleeves”? Because teh govt has thoroughly convinced teh populace that “freedom is not free” (I thought they said it was a “god given ” right)whatever the hell that means.Alot of people worked harder on this campaign than anything in their lives. Why should their choices be ignored? Why shoudl we have to put a lesser evil choice in every four years and then strive to convince them to do the right thiing? Why can we just elect someone who agrees with our values? .

I hate to say this-but I think it is a point that needs to be made. Correct me if you like. Alot of progressivse cut enormous slack to Af Ams. who are “born again” christians. I have done it myself. If a black friend brings up “christianity” I tend to think, ?“well the church for them is more than a church”—but al the signs of another “born again” was there. People make the mistake of thinking that Af Ams MUST be progressive, when in fact , as far as some things go (like homosexuality , see Prop 8) they are just as conservative as white, or any other race, christians. Hell, Biden made it abundantly clear in teh debates.

It remains to be seen if this wil hit Obama’s desk—but, if it does, I predict another homage to “state’s rights”—another Reganism.

Report this

By Leisure Suit Larry, November 6, 2008 at 3:59 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena says:

But consider these sources though (it’s the same few haters all the time.) Anybody who suggests that he may be short on delivering change is BLIND or hopelessly/hatefully biased against the guy.

It is easy to dismiss anyone who disagrees with the Obama crowd as “haters” who are blind bias, or ignorant.

It is sort of like saying “if you are against him it must be his race, it couldn’t be his policy oratory, or his prejudice against folks who choose to live outside the city limits.

I happen to like Obama (the man) he has a nice family, he is civil, and he talks a good game. As others have pointed out, he sure looks just like the stream of politicians who have led us to where we are.

If you think that is a good place, great.. I love an optimist, however If you believe (as I do) that NAFTA, CAFTA, outsourcing, the global economy, and WTO have gotten us to a less fine place, then Obama won’t change a thing. He’s a free trader and a corporate approved lacky.

Am I happy that the country proved it could elect a black president?  Sure… do I wish it was a person with bigger kenolies?  Sure.

I want single payer health care

Obama doesn’t

I don’t want to bail out Wall Street"s investors. They never offered to bail us out.

I don’t want a war in Pakistan fought in my name. ditto Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Afganistan.

I want the freedom to sue my phone company if they or their masters listen in on my conversations.

I don’t want my driver’s license to be an “identifier” I just wish to go about my business undisturbed by my increasingly invasive government

Obama has either stated (through his votes) positions opposite to mine, or he has failed to address the matter entirely.

Black White or green has nothing to do with it. Obama is not going to give me the “Change” I believe in… The Democratic party as a whole is no better than the Republican party, and after the party is over we will all be back here complaining about Barak’s latest anti-constitutional foible.

Report this

By Outraged, November 6, 2008 at 3:42 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I’m narrowing it down to this:
Concerning Obiden’s policy on Afghanistan (a place I am rather familar with).
Making deals with the Taliban or the druglords and criminals in the parlament including Karzi is not the answer! Of course I know how important it is to the US to have the drug trade and the slaves (innocent Afghanis) to help keep it going. It’s so sick!!
At the same level the US bombing and shooting what is left of the innocent people of Afghanistan is NOT the answer!
Here’s what it boils down to for me: I have a dear friend who is extremely important to Afghanistan and the world and well known! I will not give her name due to extreme risk to her safety. (I’ve known her for about 2 years now. We met in person, I won’t say where and have corresponded since). However, if Obiden/Obama get their way and do the very things I mentioned, if so much as one tiny hair on my friend’s head or her family and friends is so much as touched. I will run to Afghanistan and fight against the US and Taliban and endouver to wipe them all out single-handedly!! Whether I live or die is not the point. I abhore war and guns and all that military stuff and killing, but piss me off enough and I will take up arms against those who wronged me or those I love!!!! So Obama/Biden you better leave my friend alone!!!!!

Report this

By jackpine savage, November 6, 2008 at 3:26 pm Link to this comment

I’m not particularly happy with the Emanual pick either, but it is not a direct policy position. One of Clinton’s mistakes was to not have a whip-cracking CoS from the start. It really doesn’t matter how good the captain is if the ship has no rudder.

Brzezinski is a crazy old Polack, but he’s smart…maybe too smart. And that name always gets brought up, without adding that Obama’s campaign foreign policy team totalled 200 people.

We aren’t just going to stop making war, for God’s sake, people, this is America. We haven’t gone more than 2 years of our entire history without being in a war somewhere. The best we can hope for is to at least move towards smarter wars (or prosecuting the wars we make with more intelligence). We’ll stop making war (maybe) when we no longer have the ability to project our power…that time is coming but it isn’t here yet.

From everything i’ve been able to read on Obama’s 2nd Amendment stance, it doesn’t sound that scary (and that amendment is important to me). He has said that he’d like to find a way to keep the 2nd and a way to keep the worst firearms out of the hands of gangs in the city. (I’d like to see him get the CIA to stop importing and distributing them, but i won’t hold my breath.) There isn’t going to be an easy/good answer to that, and i don’t think that it will be a front and center issue.

The issues will be economic stabilization (hopefully someone can convince the Congress critters to put money into infrastructure projects rather than just cut checks for people to shop with) and health care. At least that’s what my source says, and my source is on a first name basis with the likes of the President-elect and the WHCoS.

Report this

By Ronmamita, November 6, 2008 at 3:17 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

STOP IT!!!!
Now is the time to get progressives and change into key government positions. The corporate lobbyists are imposing their will and offering their delegates for cabinet and beurocratic positions. We need new and non-establishment professionals. Corporate finance has controlled government far too long and if you waste time celebrating while they finalize their government we will continue to see more of the same policies.
I’m sad to say it, but the election was not the most difficult part. The difficult part is ahead; HOW to change government policies and spending?
Remember the promises: bring the troops home; create jobs; help families from housing foreclosures; Provide health care & clean, renewable energy. All these policies will be attacked and resisted.
So turn off your corporate news and get to work. Call & Email government officials to keep their promises and suggest new personnel that are qualified to fill posts in the Obama Administration.

Report this

By troublesum, November 6, 2008 at 3:05 pm Link to this comment

“Fat cats are out.”  Obama got six figure contributions from wall street firms.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 6, 2008 at 3:02 pm Link to this comment

@ Folktruther

Paracelus—You think Gops and right wing Dems would stop fascism?  By filibustering?

I think that major parts of Obama’s program will be unpopular will paleo conservatives. My main aim is to preserve constitutional government. If that means using some conservatives to provide gridlock, then so be it. I would rather that government had closed session on Sept. 10th, 2001 and had gone on vacation for the last 7 years given the laws that have been passed. The problem has been that whenever one party or the other has been given total sway over Congress, the laws passed have been very oppressive. Divided government gives us some protection from the lunatic elites. “Democratic” government is very messy and slow. The agenda needs a party in power with a big mandate to pass large sections of tyrannical law. I am as fearful of the Democrats with a mandate as I am of the Republicans. The agenda hates “democracy” precisely because it is messy and slow. That is why the elites try to recruit from both parties for its think tanks at the CFR and the Trilateral Commission. Remember that bi-partisan is another word for rape.

Report this

By Spiritgirl, November 6, 2008 at 3:02 pm Link to this comment

You’re right, right now we can all take a pause and breath for a few minutes.  You’re also right that Reagan brought forth an intolerance for workers and their rights, he also brought an abdication of government toward 90% of it’s citizens, looking at them as serfs!  An Obama Presidency is not the end, it is the beginning of we the people ensuring that our government starts to pay attention to our needs.

If we must roll up our collective sleeves and knock on doors, right letters, call Congress, and vote them out when they are siding with the public interest!  That he has chosen Rahm Emmanuel as Chief of Staff may not make us all happy, but unlike W. and his handlers Rove and Chaney, I think President Obama has a bit more on the ball than W. 

While I will keep my silence for now, make no mistake after 25+ years of incompetent, deregulatory, corrupt, inept, greedy, hostile to working people, contemptuous bas——, that have been in office ruining this nation - I think I can give him till his first national speech, before I start my writing campaign!

Report this

By troublesum, November 6, 2008 at 3:01 pm Link to this comment

Axelrod and Ploof said recently, “There won’t be any Clinton retreds in the administration.”  So who is the first appointment?

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 6, 2008 at 2:46 pm Link to this comment

@ FENWICK

Even liberal New York Governor Mario Cuomo has argued that, “Precisely because radio and TV have become our principal sources of news and information, we should accord broadcasters the utmost freedom in order to insure a truly free press.” (Mario Cuomo, “The Unfairness Doctrine,” The New York Times, September 20, 1993, p. A19.)

Report this

By kath cantarella, November 6, 2008 at 2:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I have to say I’m not liking O’s choice of staff so far. Seems like more of the same.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 6, 2008 at 1:44 pm Link to this comment

Brezezinski, Obiden’s foreign policy advisor, initiated the Afghan war under Carter.  In his book THE GRAND CHESSBOARD he outlined for the Dems the same strategy that PNAX outlined for the Gops.  He was in favor of invading Afghanistan for geo-stragetic reasons, to dominate the ‘Stans’ and their oil and gas.

The Afghan war is lost, like the Iraq war.  But the US has led Nato countries into a morasss and would lose power by being defeated.  There is now nothing to win.  So the most likely scenario is the most brutal one, just to keep fighting there to avoid losing and saddling Obiden with the defeat. 

Since Wicher is a militarist, this is fine with him while making rosy scenarios of what won’t happen.  Obiden will continue Bushite imperialist policies which are supported by the imperialist Dems. This will drain much of the money that could be used for the American population, the rest being given to the bankers and corporations. If the American popultion acts up, there is always the military and police.

Report this

By Frank, November 6, 2008 at 1:42 pm Link to this comment

Paracelus, I am not aware of any gun control schemes that Obama has planned for his Presidency, though I am well aware of his anti-gun votes in the past as a legislator. Jim Webb, lifelong NRA member and Obama supporter, ran radio ads in Virginia recently stressing his belief that Obama had no desire to take away anyones guns or restrict their second amendment rights. If Webb is correct, it means Obama’s position has either evolved or he has simply decided to govern as a more centrist candidate on gun control at the Presidential level, in order to more easily promote his other social agendas.  I think Obama is well aware of the clout the NRA has with both Republican and Democrats in congress, and is not looking to pick any major fights there that would cause him problems on other issues.  I guess we’ll have to wait and see, though.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 6, 2008 at 1:30 pm Link to this comment

Paracelus—You think Gops and right wing Dems would stop fascism?  By filibustering?

I looked at Laird’s article.  I don’t have the competence to judge his predictions. 

However his analysis of China’s economy is inaccurate according to Ted Fishman’s book CHINA,INC.  China has capital controls and is less affected by world econimic developments.  And as the ECONOMIST stated, China is less dependant on exports than is commonly assumed in the West.  And their economic growth the past thrree decades is near 10% than 8%.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 6, 2008 at 12:58 pm Link to this comment

@ Frank

I think Obama is going to have a hard time getting his CO2 tax scheme going. I don’t think his gun control schemes are going to be easy to ram through Congress. I don’t see another CAFTA ratification as easy. I don’t see illegal alien amnesty as being an easy sell. And I don’t see a hate speech code being implemented. I hope the administration will be stalled on any further union of Canada, USA, and Mexico.

Report this

By Frank, November 6, 2008 at 12:06 pm Link to this comment

Paracelsus, you are correct. The ‘blue dog’ democrats will be Emanuel’s problem   to deal with as WH Chief of Staff. It will be him on the phone and in their face to remind them of their responsibilities to the party who financed their last elections, which he was central in as Democractic Congressional Campaign Committee chair.

I think we will come to find Obama very good at building coalitions with Republicans, especially since he will likely end up with one or two Republicans in his cabinet.  Reagan was the last President who truly excelled at this, and Obama has been studying Reagan for years.  He will only need to bring on a couple of republicans for any bill to break a filibuster.  There will be hurdles, but I do not anticipate gridlock, especially given the clear mandate that voters gave him with both his electoral count and popular vote.

Report this

By Frank, November 6, 2008 at 12:05 pm Link to this comment

Paracelsus, you are correct. The ‘blue dog’ democrats will be Emanuel’s problem   to deal with as with as WH Chief of Staff. It will be him on the phone and in their face to remind them of their responsibilities to the party who financed their last elections, which he was central in as Democractic Congressional Campaign Committee chair.

I think we will come to find Obama very good at building coalitions with Republicans, especially since he will likely end up with one or two Republicans in his cabinet.  Reagan was the last President who truly excelled at this, and Obama has been studying Reagan for years.  He will only need to bring on a couple of republicans for any bill to break a filibuster.  There will be hurdles, but I do not anticipate gridlock, especially given the clear mandate that voters gave him with both his electoral count and popular vote.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 6, 2008 at 10:25 am Link to this comment

@ Folktruther

The Senate is not filibuster proof. There are enough Republicans and blue dog Democrats to frustrate any attempts at setting a fascist government. Please read Chris Laird’s article.

“None of us in the US has ever dealt with the twin threats coming our way in the next few years. The first is a real economic depression. The second will be the demise of the US dollar, or at the very least, its severe devaluation like 70% or more (at first).”

http://www.kitco.com/ind/Laird/nov062008.html

Report this
Tony Wicher's avatar

By Tony Wicher, November 6, 2008 at 10:04 am Link to this comment

“I predict that Obama will have all combat troops out of Iraq within a year. He also will not be sending a lot of troops to Afghanistan. In fact, his policy will be to talk to the Taliban. See Zbiegiew Brzezinski’s statement of Oct. 16: We cannot try to create a modern, centralized, democratic state in Afghanistan from the top down using essentially foreign troops to impose such a solution. This collides with the sense of ethnic identity and religious sensitivity in a country that is very resistant to foreign intrusions. We need an altogether different approach. Some additional troops in the short run may be necessary, but the main emphasis has to be on decentralized political accommodation with the different elements which are collectively described as the Taliban but in fact representing a much more diversified group.”
http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3715692,00.html

Obama and Brzezinski both know damn well as we all do that the United States can no longer afford to be an imperialist power. We need those 10 billion dollars a month for domestic purposes, for health care and energy independence. The empire is falling, and Obama’s job is to negotiate a soft landing instead of a disasterous crash.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 6, 2008 at 7:38 am Link to this comment

The problem is, Paracelus, is that I don’t see HOW your list can be resisted.  The population is complietely atomized and and intimidated.  The progressive activists have been defeated and Obama has WON by isolating leftists. 

And whatever he does will be spun as progressivism by fake leftists like Cyrema who lacks all intellecutal integrity.  Fake leftists simply suck up to power and mislead the population.  And the new young entrants are still politically raw.  The tendency is to go where the power is.

Having opted for a war cabinet, and apartheid Zionism, his next step is to appoint a neoliberal as treasurer, and continue the bailout swindle.  Who is going to oppose it in the Dem-Gop bloc.

The Dems reps claim now that they are going to end the war, increase jobs, cure the sick and raise the dead by governing from the Center.  What they mean is the center of the Elite consensus, not the center of the population consensus.  And there is noone in power to oppose them.

Report this

By cyrena, November 6, 2008 at 4:02 am Link to this comment

Brusays:

•  “…To anyone who believes that Obama delivers a nice speech but may be short on delivering “change” I say, “bullshit.” The ability to light a fire under the electorate is our chief executive’s primary role. Any one - legislature included - who would sell Obama short on that role is going to be in for a surprise. Watch out for this guy, Obama. He takes this job very seriously and understands this essential role like no one I’ve seen…”

VERY WELL SAID, if I may say so.

It IS bullshit. But consider these sources though (it’s the same few haters all the time.) Anybody who suggests that he may be short on delivering change is BLIND or hopelessly/hatefully biased against the guy. Any LOGICAL person could see the CHANGE that has already happened because of Barack Obama, and the movement he’s created and sustained.

So, these fringe crackpot hatefuls aren’t going to be ‘surprised’, because they already KNOW how gifted the man is, and that’s what they hate, only slightly less than they hate themselves.

The results of this election make it exceptionally obvious that an overwhelming majority of American voters know that he takes this job very seriously, and understands the essential role of the President of the United States. And you’re right…a really, really, long time since we had one like that.

The likes of Folktruther, Paracelsus, and the others that would completely wither away without something to consistently ‘hate on’ are a waste of time and energy.

Then again, they provide something to be grateful for. If I had to live such a miserable existence I’d probably shoot myself. Seems like such obnoxiously negative people would get on their own selves nerves. Guess not.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 6, 2008 at 12:37 am Link to this comment

@ Folktruther

We have to resist the following disasters:

1. False flag ops under Obiden.

2. Fairness doctrine for radio and the internet.

3. Harsh austerity measures like Cap and Trade.

4. More free trade treaties.

5. Fascist federal voluntary citizen (spying) corps and militias.

6. Confrontations with China, Russia, Pakistan, and Sudan.

If we can hang on for the first 100 days of Obama, and if we can expose the potential false flag operations in the second 100 days we might be able to sink the fascist agenda of Obama-Biden. (Understand that the diabolic Bush agenda is exhausted, so we have changed to a fresh Judas goat in Obama.)

We are going to be heavily taxed by the new regime to pay off the odious debt contracted in previous years. Obama has promised that there will be much suffering from the austerity program he has in mind.

Report this

By nestoffour, November 6, 2008 at 12:14 am Link to this comment

from obama’s speech last night:
“To those — to those who would tear the world down: We will defeat you. To those who seek peace and security: We support you.”
and we know all those brown people in the ME want to tear our world down, while israel has always been the one for peace and security, right?

Report this

By nestoffour, November 5, 2008 at 11:57 pm Link to this comment

rahm emanuel as chief of staff???  do people realize the enormity of this decision?  how about john kerry, who has profited millions through war investments?  he is pro-blackwater, for crissakes!!

Report this

By Folktruther, November 5, 2008 at 11:42 pm Link to this comment

Great research on Emmanuel, Paracelus.  And as chief of staff he will help pick the remainder of Obiden’s cabinet and advisers.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 5, 2008 at 10:46 pm Link to this comment

I may be accused of pissing on the celebration fire, but it isn’t much of a fire anyway. It’s more like an ash heap of dying embers.

Rahm Emmanuel is emblematic of the disobedience of government to its masters, the people. By large numbers the American people in 2006 had enough of the wars of the Orient. By Rahm’s interventions he had circumvented the will of the public. He had made known his flagrant contempt and disdain for the American people. He used the coffers of Democratic Party to make water flow up hill. This was obvious and flaunted arrogance and disrespect. Obama by hiring this creature has thrown his lot in with elites who are determined to be a law unto themselves. Obama may as well have given the middle finger to the American people by hiring this malefactor and perverter of the elective process. Obama is telling the Democratic doves to go get stuffed. His disrespect is blatant and infuriating.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 5, 2008 at 10:30 pm Link to this comment

http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10142006.html

Rahm Emanuel’s Stable.

To win the House, the Dems must win 15 seats from the Republicans. Here are the 22 candidates hand picked by Emanuel to run in open districts or districts with Republican incumbents, according to The Hill (4/27/06): Darcy Burner (WA), Phyllis Busansky (FL), Francine Busby (CA), Joe Courtney (CT), John Cranley (OH), Jill Derby (NV), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Diane Farrell (CT), Steve Filson (CA) ­ defeated in primary by Jerry McNirney (see above), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Tessa Hafen (NV), Baron Hill (IN), Mary Jo Kilroy (OH), Ron Klein (FL), Ken Lucas (KY), Patsy Madrid (NM), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Chris Murphy (CT), Lois Murphy (PA), Heath Shuler (NC), Peter Welch (VT).

If we group these 22 candidates by their positions, it is much worse than one might have imagined. Here it is:

U.S, must “win” in Iraq (9): John Cranely(OH); Jill Derby (NV); Tammy Duckworth (IL); Brad Ellsworth (IN): Teresa Hafen (NV); Baron Hill (IN);Ken Lucas (KY); Lois Murphy (PA); Heath Schuler (NC).

More troops should be deployed in Iraq. (1): Diane Farrell (CT);

Bush (or Congress or Bush and Congress or someone other than the candidate) must develop a plan or timetable for exit. This means that the candidate does not offer a timetable or other withdrawal plan and amounts only to a partisan criticism of Bush without a plan offered by the candidate. (6): Francine Busby (CA); Joe Courtney (CT); Kirsten Gillibrand (NY); Mary Jo Kilroy (OH); Patricia Madrid (NM); Harry Mitchell (AZ).

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 5, 2008 at 10:27 pm Link to this comment

Case #2, Rahm Appears as the Angel of War

http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10142006.html

But in one case, and sadly in only one of the 22 districts, which Emanuel selected for intervention, he did not prevail; but that is also instructive. The second case study is CA’s 11th CD Dem primary where Emanuel poured in money, much of it apparently coming from his own district in Illinois, to bankroll Steve Filson, essentially a political unknown, who opposed immediate withdrawal from Iraq. But in this primary battle the grass roots prevailed and the strongly antiwar candidate, Jerry McNemey, who supports the Murtha bill for immediate withdrawal, defeated Emanuel’s minion, Filson. It is noteworthy that McNemey, strongly antiwar, won, whereas Cegelis, weakly antiwar, lost. Now in the general election McNemey is pulling ahead of his pro-war Republican opponent by 48 to 46% in the most recent poll even though his opponent has outspent him by $1.6 million to $303,000! McNemey has raised a total of only $452,000 to his opponent’s $2.5 million. Some cash from Rahm would ensure McNemey’s victory it would appear, but it is not forthcoming. It seems that Rahm Emanuel is stanching the influx of money in this very competitive race.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 5, 2008 at 10:25 pm Link to this comment

Case 1, Rahm Backs the Spearchucker

http://www.counterpunch.org/walsh10142006.html

The first case is the Democratic primary race between Christine Cegelis and Tammy Duckworth in Illinois’s 6th CD, a Republican District, which has elected the disgusting Henry Hyde from time immemorial. Then in 2004 Christine Cegelis, who is only mildly antiwar (1), ran as the Democrat with a grass roots campaign and polled a remarkable 44% against the hideous Hyde in her first run. It was not too long before Hyde decided to retire, and the field seemed to be open for Cegelis in 2006.

Enter Rahm Emanuel, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who dug up a pro-war candidate, Tammy Duckworth. Although she had both her legs blown off in Iraq, she has remained committed to “staying the course” in Iraq (2). Duckworth had no political experience and did not live in the 6th District, but Rahm Emanuel raised a million dollars for her and brought in Dem heavyweights Joe Lieberman, Barak Obama, John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton to support her. Despite all this help and with the Cegelis campaign virtually penniless, Duckworth barely managed to eke out a victory by a measly four percentage points. According to a recent Cook Report, Duckworth is not the smashing success that Rahm Emanuel had dreamed of; she remains tied at 41% of the vote with her rookie Republican Rival, Peter Roskam, the same percentage that Cegelis had against the entrenched Hyde in 2004! Recently (9/30), Duckworth was pushed onto the national scene to help her campaign, providing the “rebuttal” to Bush’s weekly Saturday radio address. AP, in its story on the exchange where Duckworth was supposed to differ with W on Iraq, concluded thus: “She offered no proposal for an immediate withdrawal or a timetable for withdrawal.”

Report this

By KDelphi, November 5, 2008 at 10:13 pm Link to this comment

Big B—I tend to agree. Bush is gone, but he wil not be “gone”—Obama has already gone along with too much of teh neo-cons policies—even if he doesnt dirctly endorse them, his refusing to confront them will be almost as harmful.

I do not see why poeple do not understand , why, when we lock up millions of kids for stealing and pot, that they see the hypocrisy of letting W and Fools get away with straight out murder. That is what it is. And most in DC are complicit.

I just saw a video of a young black man (about 13?) in class, talking about Obama win—he says, , “If Barack Obama can be president (then he starts crying) I can do….”. Then he bursts into tears. This is a very remarkable scene. But if Obama wants to respect the pain of so many poor youth, perhaps , especially ones of color-he owes it to them to show them what you CANT do—like kill people,.

This is just a personal thought, Rogelio, I understand how the elections were stolen. Right in front of me here in 2004, But, for me, the cynic (lol) , It made me all the less trusting of both parties. I thought, “Well, Kerry doesnt really give a f*ck. Why should I? They never really chang anything anyway”.

We are all disenfranchised when we only have two corporate candiates, year after year.Some of the really awful stuff being said about Obama (like that he is not a citizen)—or the more virulant fake porn snuff pics, just point to how sick teh “American dream”—which is just MONEY and violence—has made us all.

The “Anmerican dream” is built on blood, and , electing a person of color wont change that. It is unsustaianable, ugly , and , as we are beginning to see, only makes a very few people really happy.

This “cabinet” he is assembling—didnt he already tell progressive to f-off enough? Doesnt he know any progessives at all?Post-partisan politics—that just means they wil work together for their own benefit , but, now they will be more blatent about it.

Now, the neo-liberal media can pat themselves on the back about not being racist—but you would think that that was Obama’s “only characteristic”

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 5, 2008 at 10:12 pm Link to this comment

Contempt for the American People


Emanuel’s War Plan for Democrats
The Book of Rahm

By JOHN WALSH

Last week in CounterPunch (1), I wrote that the chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC), Congressman Rahm Emanuel, had worked hard to guarantee that Democratic candidates in key toss-up House races were pro-war. In this he was largely successful, because of the money he commands and the celebrity politicians who reliably respond to his call, ensuring that 20 of the 22 Democratic candidates in these districts are pro-war. So the fix is in for the coming elections.

In 2006, no matter which party controls the House, a majority will be committed to pursuing the war on Iraq—despite the fact that the Democratic rank and file and the general voting public oppose the war by large margins. (I hasten to add that this state of affairs can be reversed even after the sham election between the two War Parties.)

What are Emanuel’s views on war and peace? Emanuel has just supplied the answer in the form of a scrawny book co-authored with Bruce Reed, modestly entitled: The Plan: Big Ideas for America. The authors obligingly boil each of the eight parts of “The Plan” down to a single paragraph. The section which embraces all of foreign policy is entitled “A New Strategy to End the War on Terror,” a heading revealing in itself since “war on terror” is the way the neocons and the Israeli Lobby currently like to frame the discussion of foreign policy. Here is the book’s summary paragraph with my comments in parentheses:

...

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/11/obama-offers-ra.html

Obama Offers Rahm Emanuel Job of White House Chief of Staff

November 05, 2008 8:30 AM

ABC News has learned that President-elect Obama has offered the White House chief of staff job to Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill.

Emanuel, a knowledgeable source tells ABC News, has not yet given his answer. The sharp-tongued, sharp-elbowed, keenly intelligent veteran of the Clinton White House is said to have ambitions to some day be Speaker of the House. But he also has a keen sense of “duty.”

Today on “Good Morning America” ABC’s George Stephanopoulos reported Obama likes the fact that Emanuel “knows policy, knows politics, knows Capitol Hill” and has told associates that Emanuel would “have his back.”

There is a tentative plan to announce Obama’s chief of staff this week.

- jpt

...

I remember Rahm Emmanuel very well. I remember how he cut off funding for Democratic peace candidates who had won their primaries. I remember how Rahm would rather see a Democrat lose to a war hawk Republican than have a Democrat would stand up against the war lobby win a seat in Congress. I remember well screaming curse words at Rahms’ office aids on the other end of the phone line. I had never known such violent anger against a politician before Rahm Emmanuel. I never had such anger that could put me in danger of arrest until Rahm Emmanuel. To this day I have restrain my tongue whenever Emmanuel crosses my mind. I see that his possible appointment as Whitehouse chief of staff seriously disparages any optimistic thought of my mind that Obama will be a friend to the American people. I will look up the peace candidates that Rahm had buried in 2006.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 5, 2008 at 7:59 pm Link to this comment

You are absolutely, Big B, we can’t move forward until we address the transgressions of the past.  this is not a matter of vengence but of justice; of clearing the air of past crimes to rid them from our sanitized school book history so we can confront them and look forward.  Just as the Germans confronted the crimes of the Nazis.

And this will not be done under Obama.  He is going to bring us together to implicitly justify these crimes.  So we can connit new ones.  And he makes no bones about it.  Already he has called McCaio ‘self-sacrificing’ after one of the dirtiest campaigns in history and appointing a pretty moose hunter as VP as a campaign aid, nevermind about her suitability as a leader.

The Bushites were complicit in the 9/11-anthrax homicide and converup, but you can bet your booties that Obama will not delve into it because he is going to serve Bush’s third term.  So it won’t be done on his watch. He has wars to fight and inequality to increase.

Who controls the present controls the past; who controls the past controls the future.  The past must be confronted to oveturn the Bushite counterrevolution and it won’t be.  It can’t be if the Bushite policies are continued.

Mourning in America.

Report this

By Paracelsus, November 5, 2008 at 7:24 pm Link to this comment

Obama is perfectly extortion friendly. He still has not produced documents to prove that he is a natural born citizen. The judges have so far dismissed the cases. So the system is protecting him. As soon as he strays off the reservation, he will be exposed as an interloper. He is the perfect puppet.

Report this

By Big B, November 5, 2008 at 7:21 pm Link to this comment

“and miles to go before we sleep.”

I’ve never been one to seek revenge. But in the case of the US vs. W, I am willing to make an exception. Our entire future as a nation will be compromised if we the people do not pursue the idea of trying, convicting, and imprisoning all the men whose filthy fingers have been found to be involved in the torture of men, the murder of men, and the slaughter of innocence that has put this country on the road to moral and financial ruin.

If these monsters are not shown that we the people know what they did, and will now excecute our constitutional duty(yes, duty) to punish them for crimes against the state, then we the people have lost the nation. It won’t matter a damn that Obama won if his first action isn’t to crush the attempted insurrection of the bushies. They have taken the bill of rights and whiped their asses with it. If they are not made to pay, others will try in the future. You can count on it.

The scourge of the neocons is not yet over. These traitors need removed from our midst, lest they develope a taste in the future to try the overthrow of our nation again.
Here’s an idea, straight from the paraphrased lips of one of their own, Jessie Helms. We need to take all the people who still think that W will be “vindicated” in the future, and give them a chance to establish their dream nation in say, Nebraska, Kansas, and Oklahoma, where they can drill for oil, pray in school, oppress their women, and plot world domination until their little hearts(if they have them) are content.

We cannot move forward as a nation until we address the transgressions of our past. If we don’t, the american experiment is doomed. We need to stop looking for foreign enemies, and concentrate on the domestic ones. As Kruschev told us, they could kill us from within.

Report this

By BruSays, November 5, 2008 at 6:59 pm Link to this comment

KDelphi,

Agreed. And when we’re all done holding hands and singing “Kumbaya” and feeling warm and fuzzy about how wonderful we were to elect this potentially great leader, it’s time to finally, finally atone for sitting on our asses these past 8 years. 

It’s time to push Obama to carefully set in motion those actions that will lead us to hold Bush, Cheney, and Rove accountable for the deaths and distruction they’ve brought this nation.

Now’s the time, Obama. We can do this.

Report this

By BruSays, November 5, 2008 at 6:50 pm Link to this comment

I congratulate Obama for delivering an eloquent, articulate and moving acceptance speech. Anyone who wasn’t moved by his words is a hopeless, fringe-lurking, irrelevant cynic.

To anyone who believes that Obama delivers a nice speech but may be short on delivering “change” I say, “bullshit.” The ability to light a fire under the electorate is our chief executive’s primary role. Any one - legislature included - who would sell Obama short on that role is going to be in for a surprise. Watch out for this guy, Obama. He takes this job very seriously and understands this essential role like no one I’ve seen.

Report this

By KDelphi, November 5, 2008 at 6:14 pm Link to this comment

All the people assembling in front of the White House to cheer Bush leaving are cowards in the extreme.

I wish to F**K they had had the guts to do it when we invaded Iraq, cut social budgets,even for the Bailout (I know that there was some there—not near as many as to stop war)

Maybe if so many had done more than “make nice”—we wouldnt be where we are. Jesus H Christ would have hell digging us out.

BYW—I cannot log into PDA—I havent tried since Denver—but i’ll bet it is more censorship. These people sure knwo how to shoot themselves in the foot.

Report this

By alterid, November 5, 2008 at 5:54 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

And so, it begins:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081105/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan

Report this

By Rogelio, November 5, 2008 at 5:21 pm Link to this comment

I am as excited as everyone else with our choice winning. Yes, Obama’s ethnicity is important and may explain a lot of the euphoria, but there is more to the picture.

I, along with many Democrats have felt disenfranshised over the past eight years. The election of 2000 was stolen from us (Florida). Amazingly, ‘w’ and all of his corrupt, lying, decietful…cronies somehow manage to win the election of 2004.

We have been waiting 8 long years to have something to celebrate. Surely, our nation has reached a monumental step in history. However, we should not forget the past 8 years that these Right-Wing Conservative Republican Wacos have dominated our nation and shoved their ignorant ideology down our throat. Even though the early polls suggested that Obama was ahead, I think many of us feared a repeat of 2000 and 2004. Where was Karl Rove when the Repbulicans neeeded him.

Well…‘w’ now it is over. I hope that you are ashamed of what you have done to this once great and powerful nation. Shame on you!

Report this

By Outraged, November 5, 2008 at 5:17 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“Try to be kind to each other. Do not radiate triumphalism or disparagement or distaste. Do not gloat. Help your neighbor quietly, and speak encouragingly of all efforts to make things better.  Take your lead from Obama and be respectful, gracious, understanding, and aware that at this time both joy are resentment are hateful to many. Do not presume. Celebrate quietly for what has been gained.  Mourn quietly for what has been lost and what may yet be lost.  Nothing is guaranteed or certain. 

Try to be the people we would want our conquerers to be.”

I must take the opposite direction to your ideas. I find it’s better to live on your feet than to die on your knees.
You couldn’t pay me to take my lead from Obama! Just look at what he has done and is already doing! Voted for wars, voted for domestic spying, voted in favor of Bush and his pals stealing YOUR money as well as everyone else’s and now he is appointing no less than war-mongering zionist “republican” facist pigs to his administration!! This is change how? This is different than Bush/Cheney or McKKKcain/Palin how?
Obama had his chance and he has taken the hope of some of the people in the US and the people abroad and has thrown it down the toilet and pulled the chain! He has blown it!!!! Face it, Obama is owned by corporations, Israel and is a facist or else he would not have been selected by the electorial college.

If you want to continue to live under occupation, that’s your thing, don’t ask the rest of us and certainly not the palastinians, Iraqis and Afghanis to do the same!!!

Report this

By alterid, November 5, 2008 at 4:58 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/472.html

remember there is text beneath the vid

Report this

By =Eric, November 5, 2008 at 4:12 pm Link to this comment

I’ve recently been finding, from both right and left, altogether too many references to Guy Fawkes Day: “remember, remember, the fifth of November, . . .” about tyranny and bloody revolution, the Gunpowder Plot, the movie “V” etc.  All of which suggests that no matter who won or by how much, on the next day almost half of the United States was going to feel angry and resentful.

Well, today is the Fifth of November and all is quiet here, so far. Even Ann Coulter sounded restrained this morning. I still expect the Bushies to incite the military into further attacks on Syria and Pakistan, and try to start something in Iran. (The Obsession DVD was the largest propaganda effort ever done to start a war.)  I still expect more Bush appointees to burrow their way, like trichinosis, into permanent positions in the government.  I still expect disasterous de- and re-regulation in the EPA, Food and Drug, Homeland Security, and all other protective and guardian agencies that have been amBushed in the last eight years.  I expect the stalwarts of the Project for a New American Century (of which McCain and Cheney were leaders) to mine and boobytrap anything in government and the economy that they can’t outright destroy in the next two months.

Had McCain won as resoundingly as Obama did, I would probably be contemplating my own plot, though without gunpowder.

This election shows, much more than who won or lost, that we are still a deeply divided nation.  This election proves that, once again, we are not the people we think we are. 

Try to be kind to each other. Do not radiate triumphalism or disparagement or distaste. Do not gloat. Help your neighbor quietly, and speak encouragingly of all efforts to make things better.  Take your lead from Obama and be respectful, gracious, understanding, and aware that at this time both joy are resentment are hateful to many. Do not presume. Celebrate quietly for what has been gained.  Mourn quietly for what has been lost and what may yet be lost.  Nothing is guaranteed or certain. 

Try to be the people we would want our conquerers to be.

Report this

By Folktruther, November 5, 2008 at 3:57 pm Link to this comment

And now, Rahm Emmanual, the Zionist warmonger and money raiser as Obama’s FIRST appointment.  Just shows you what an honest man Obama is, he stays bought.  You don’t raise $150 milliion a month without selling your soul.

  But as the lady said who was at Grant Park listening to their leader, young and old, black and white, male and female, straight and gay, all celebrating.  And all being sold out by Obiden.

next, a neoliberal for treasurer.

Report this

By leilah, November 5, 2008 at 3:48 pm Link to this comment

Yeah, sort of like the Jew on the side of the road to the Crucifixion singing, “I love a parade!

Report this

By GrammaConcept, November 5, 2008 at 2:27 pm Link to this comment

As they say in the old country:
“We’ll see…”

The Future Is Always A Mystery…

May each of us carefully cultivate receptivity
so that we may, indeed, see
more clearly what is our
unique part to play in this great Mystery ....

Addiction to negativity is actually the greatest danger..
Conscious upbuilding is the healing cure..
As we think, so we become..

If any of us is to be of any use whatsoever in these or, in any, times,
we must understand deeply that despair is no option,
and that The Golden Rule is, really, the only option..
All paths have a version of it..


Here is a Prayer I wrote long years ago for now and for always…:

May we All soon know more
of our One Common Source
so that no more
will we be blind…..
May our angles of vision become
as varied and clear as the crystals
which grow in the caves…...
Lovingly… Firmly… Eternally…..
confronting the darkness…..

I am a 63 year-old great-gramma who has been a quadriplegic
for over 30 years, and these words are part of my offering toward
these times and toward all people, and,
I absolutely do believe that Mr. Obama still has much of his soul intact..
Perhaps we can help him..

I appreciate the existence of TruthDig…

Strive on, friends…..Please.

Report this

By kirkdrysdale, November 5, 2008 at 1:46 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I feel hope for my country today for the first time in a long, long time!

My husband and I were there in Grant Park last night—we’ll never forget it. Black, white, asian, hispanic; young, old, and in-between; gay, straight; city-dweller, suburbanite; rich, poor; college-educated and not—we were all there together. Strangers laughing and talking, and ultimately cheering (and yes, lots of crying, I admit it), all together. This is what Obama can do: bring people of such disparate backgrounds together to find a common purpose, and do we ever need THAT as a nation right now!

(By the by: the police presence was obvious and they kept things moving smoothly; it was a very well-behaved group of 100,000 or so people inside the gates, with another few hundred thousand outside.)

Once we arrived at Congress Parkway, we began the trek into the park (3 checkpoints) just as Pennsylvania was called for Obama.  Ohio was called as we reached the final checkpoint.  Once inside the park, it was almost overwhelming to see how many people were already there.  Jockeying in and among the crowd to find a good position was tricky: once an area was filled, the police moved barriers behind that portion of the crowd and started a new section.  Very well done, as it kept the crowd from pushing toward the stage and crushing people up ahead.

Although we found a vantage point on a slight rise so we could see the stage, it turns out we couldn’t see the podium area as it jutted out farther into the crowd ahead, and there were people standing on the steps in the section ahead of us, blocking that part of the view.  Frankly, what you might have seen on TV was as good (if not better) than we could see in person.  However disappointing it was to not actually SEE Obama at the podium (we did see him walk out onto the stage), the Jumbotron screens they had positioned in the park were brilliant, so we didn’t miss anything.  But it sure was electrifying to be in that crowd!  And knowing we were so close to Obama (as close to the new President as we were ever likely to be), well, that was pretty cool.

What was so interesting was how excited and yet how reserved the crowd—us included—was for most of the evening.  And by reserved, I mean, even when we all, in our small groups of instant comrades, tallied the math after Pennsylvania and Ohio were called for Obama, we couldn’t quite invest ourselves 100% in believing he would be the President-Elect.  It was as if we didn’t want to get caught celebrating only to have the rug pulled out from under us.  Don’t get me wrong, people were joyous in talking about “how the math couldn’t go wrong” and how exciting it was to be there ... but until 10:00 CT came, and he clinched California and the headline popped up on the CNN Jumbotron that Obama had indeed been elected, the crowd was reserved.  (Now, ‘reserved’ is a relative term:  keep in mind there were over 100,000 supporters just within the gates, all hyped up on adrenaline and hope ...)  When he went over the 270 mark, that park went absolutely, wildly, unabashedly bonkers.  And there are no adjectives to describe how we all felt and acted when Barack, Michelle and their girls walked out onto that stage ....

What was perhaps even more awesome (in the true sense of the word), was after the rally, all those thousands of jubilant people poured out of Grant Park into Michigan Avenue! Thousands and thousands and thousands of us walking down one of the US’s most busy, bustling streets, devoid of cars for the evening…and the singing, dancing, cheering, laughing crowds celebrating together. Differences cast aside for the time being, and instead: everyone being in the moment.

I have to say, it was one of the most uplifting experiences of my life.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, November 5, 2008 at 1:45 pm Link to this comment

Folktruther:
‘Anarcissie!  You put your pessimism, cynicism and paranoia away for another day?  For God’s sake, man, buck up!  I never though you would wallow in this kind of sloppy sentimentality.  What’s the matter, are you sick? ....’

I’m fine.  I’m sure my pessimism, cynicism and paranoia will soon be required.  However, I was impressed, not by Obama winning—that, I had expected—but by the public currents that it stirred.  At the moment, many of the people are far ahead of their supposed leaders.  Many pieces of the social order are banging in the wind.  The capitalist financial system and its Empire are acknowledged to be a shambles.  People have asked for change; well, this is what change looks like.  Could be for the worse.  We’ll find out.

Report this

By Rayven, November 5, 2008 at 1:43 pm Link to this comment

This unprecedented, “page turn in history,and a vote for a brighter future election is without a doubt a long time over due.

Yes We Can….! We did this, each of you who voted for “President Elect” Obama made this possible…..you should congratulate yourselves as well!! Lots of work to do…....It is an exciting time, a time to be focused on all Americans working together; setting a course for better days to come…!!!

Report this

By Serginho, November 5, 2008 at 1:13 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

...none pleases me more than knowing that “Joe the Fraud”‘s 15 minutes of fame are expired.

Report this

Page 3 of 4 pages  <  1 2 3 4 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook