will Obama be a good President?

[ksinger]

Date: 9/6/2008 2:15:24 PM
Author: IndyGirl22
Anyone know much about tax policy? I would like comments on this article, as I am not a economist. I was interested in reading it because it used a different approach to evaluating Obama''s tax plans...I''m not trying to bash his policies, so please no defensive replies.

Advice you would do well to take yourself from time to time.

Yes, I am chasing you to this thread. I thought long and hard about replying to you the first time in the Palin thread, and I realize the danger of some sort of s***storm if I do it here. I don''t get into all that much in these threads, strong opinions aside. I don''t feel the need to take people to task about their tone, or sticking on topic or things like that. I don''t come to people''s defense in online pissing matches: I try not to fan the flames of those. I don''t generally offend easily, and try to NOT post when I''m wound up about something. Silence is usually the best reply. But your reply to me in that one really pissed me off for some reason. It''s unusual for me to get annoyed to the point of taking it further. All I''m going to say is this, I was not trashing Palin in the post that got your dander up, nor do I have some nefarious agreement with Moon to annoy you. I''ve read plenty in that thread that I''ve disagreed with or found the tone of personally objectionable in one way or another, and yet I have about 18 posts in the Palin thread compared to your well over 100. You may assume I decided not to say anything to the vast majority of the ones I didn''t like. To assume I''m up to no good there is just unfair. Before assuming that I''m gigging you for a stating a "personal opinion", you might want to take a breath and think about it and see if there is another way to read it - or even ASK me if I''m trying to poke you - next time before you reply thus. I''ve read too much into others'' posts enough times in the past to know how easy it is to do, and the fool I feel when I reply assuming more than was stated.

Sorry to the rest of you for the jack, but I had to get that off my chest.

 

[Anna0499]

Wow...I don't think I'm the one that needs a chill pill...anyway...like I said in the other thread, MOVING ON...any opinions anyone?

I know Obama's plan is supposed to (by most accounts) put more money our pockets, but what about the deficit? Will McCain or Obama's plans do anything to reduce it? It is moving at a scary pace right now.

 

[Linda W]

Yes, I think he will make a wonderful President.



Linda

 

[goobear78]

Ditto that. I think Obama will be an amazing President.

 

[miraclesrule]

I think he would. He has an uncanny knack of gaining support from both sides without inflaming the other. That has been his forte and the skill that has resulted in his unlikely rise to the level he has.

Utimately it doesn''t matter about the Presidency. It''s the people in Congress that have the most power and that is where the active citizenry and grassroots will make a difference.

 

[ladypirate]

Date: 9/6/2008 10:22:57 PM
Author: Linda W
Yes, I think he will make a wonderful President.




Linda

I agree, Linda. I think he will.

 

[Linda W]

Thank you LP

 

[swimmer]

I agree, I can not wait to have a President that we can be proud of. An intelligent, articulate individual who wants to deal with the environment, deficit, international affairs, and crumbling infrastructure and not just stick his head in the sand like our current administration. I am so proud of our country for having a national discussion about race and Obama's plan to have discussions with leaders around the world about how our futures will be shaped gives me hope.

Why must we get bogged down in colloquialisms about pigs? A waste of everyone's time.

 

[stone_seeker]

Date: 9/11/2008 6:51:59 AM
Author: swimmer
I agree, I can not wait to have a President that we can be proud of. An intelligent, articulate individual who wants to deal with the environment, deficit, international affairs, and crumbling infrastructure and not just stick his head in the sand like our current administration. I am so proud of our country for having a national discussion about race and Obama''s plan to have discussions with leaders around the world about how our futures will be shaped gives me hope.

Why must we get bogged down in colloquialisms about pigs? A waste of everyone''s time.

I agree. The lipstick/pig thing is annoying. I dont think Barack would be a bad president but that could change if he truly wants to push his socialist agenda. I have a suspicion if he''s elected he will move more to the center - or at least I hope. I just think he lacks the experience to execute on his plan and the Democratic party knows they can use him to pass some really far left policies. Even yesterday, in his outrage speech - he was reading off a cue card. He''s a great talker but there are a lot of people controlling the strings. Just like Hillary and Bill who said he was unqualified for 12 months and then at the convention said he was ready. Just like that - must have been magic! Just seems too phony.

With McCain, i have this feeling he really wants to shake things up and while he''s doing what he can to get elected, once in office he''ll be the maverick he''s been waiting 30 years to become. He knows how to win battles should we need to and I beleive him when he says he will put country before party.

 

[AGBF]

Date: 9/10/2008 1:29:08 AM
Author: miraclesrule

Utimately it doesn't matter about the Presidency. It's the people in Congress that have the most power and that is where the active citizenry and grassroots will make a difference.

miraclesrule, I disagree with these statements. Had the balance of powers remained as even as they were in earlier centuries, perhaps this might have been so. I agree with those who think that that the executive branch has grown greatly in power, however. I think that we do, now, have an Imperial Presidency. We have had recent presidents go to war without asking Congress to declare war, whereas FDR asked Congress for a formal declaration of war even after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor in 1941.

We have seen that once Congress approved an invasion (of Iraq) that the president was able to continue the war against the will of Congress because the only power that Congress had was the power of the purse and that they did not wasnt to cut funds for the troops irresponsibly in the middle of a war.

We have seen that the president took it upon himself to wiretap and to set up secret prisons where he held people without rights, people whom he-without consulting Congress-deemed to be neither prisoners of war nor criminals with rights under the US justice system.

In other words, being president has allowed might to make right. The president has, indeed, had power. Power has not resided in the Congress.

In addition, it takes 2/3 of Congress to override a presidential veto. The president, again, has a lot of power over legislation.


And let us not forget the Supreme Court. The president appoints the nominees for justices, who then hold positions for life.


I am sure that I have forgotten many things that I will kick myself for forgetting once this is posted!


Deborah

 

[MoonWater]

Should Obama start playing dirty?

http://www.theroot.com/id/48035

 

[Anna0499]

I think he already has & I think he should continue to do so (and not followed by a I-didn''t-mean-it-like-that explanation) if he wants to win.

 

[ladypirate]

Date: 9/11/2008 9:38:46 AM
Author: MoonWater
Should Obama start playing dirty?


http://www.theroot.com/id/48035

Great article, Moon! It gets so frustrating to watch this happening to the democrats over and over again...I hope Obama is able to break through the slander this election.

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 9/11/2008 6:24:12 PM
Author: ladypirate

Date: 9/11/2008 9:38:46 AM

Author: MoonWater

Should Obama start playing dirty?



http://www.theroot.com/id/48035

Great article, Moon! It gets so frustrating to watch this happening to the democrats over and over again...I hope Obama is able to break through the slander this election.

I hope so too.

In other news, Gordon Brown endorses Obama: http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2008/09/brown-backs-oba.html

 

[miraclesrule]

You''re right AGBF, we used to have more power in the past than we do now. I guess I am in denial. I just don''t want to admit that we have eroded the power of the people and Congress and given the Presidency such unchecked power that the position now enjoys.

Although I still hold out hope that if the people choose to exercise their power and unified to a very, very large degree, that it could change.

 

[MoonWater]

I must not be watching enough tv because I haven''t seen any of these ads...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH0xzsogzAk

 

[MoonWater]

Two short but cute/funny clips:

Michelle on Ellen 1

Michelle on Ellen 2

 

[beebrisk]

I think Obama would be a terrible president. In fact, I cannot believe that he is even in the running.
Obama is a far-left Democrat who embraces socialist ideals and hides behind his newly invented ''centrist'' veneer.

Besides all that, I do not understand how this country has rallied behind a man who belonged to a racist and anti-semitic church for over 20 years. If any Republican had been a member of a church as divisive as this and a church where the pastor railed on about "G-dD-mn America" they''d be forced right out of Washington. If a Republican belonged to a church where the pastor has put forth the idea that the US government created the AIDS crisis to weed out the African American community, they''d be laughed out of Washington. (It''s true..he did say it). Louis Farrakhan, a renowned racist, who has never made any secret of his dislike for Jews and white people received an award from Trinity Church last year for "being a man who epitomized greatness". Barack Obama was a member of the church when that award was handed out. Look it up...It''s all true. Unfortunately, the press has mostly remained silent about all of this. After all, the mainstream media is, to a great degree, responsible for Obama''s meteoric rise as a real political contender.


The argument that he "doesn''t necessarily go along with all the pastor''s view" doesn''t hold much water for me. After all, he has often called Rev. Wright his "spiritual mentor", he prayed with him before making the decision to run for president and most tellingly, he has made Wright the godfather to his children. Clearly there is a deep bond between the two men. No one spends 20 years in a church listening to such rhetoric and embracing it''s leader if there isn''t a true commitment to the ideas set forth at the pulpit.


It''s offensive to me and shameful that many in our country have chosen to ignore what Barack is really about. Instead they have chosen only to see the young, good-looking, "rock star" candidate who sparkles in front of the camera with his charm and comely manner. It saddens me that so many don''t actually *want* to see it, either.

This is the double standard to end all double standards. It''s hypocrisy at it most virulent.

 

[E B]

Date: 9/12/2008 10:00:46 PM
Author: MoonWater
I must not be watching enough tv because I haven''t seen any of these ads...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IH0xzsogzAk

Wow, Moon. I saw (and was angered by) the first one, but haven''t seen the others.

Despicable.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 9/1/2008 8:19:40 AM
Author: stone_seeker
I am not voting for Obama simply because he belonged to various anti-semitic institutions (Rev Wright ties to Louis Farakhan among others). He speaks countless times about judgment on various issues, but only gained judgment to leave a church that denounced the existence of entire races only when it helped his candidacy for President.

If Obama wasnt running for office, would he still be a member of this church? I think we can all say the answer to that is YES. And that, folks, speaks volumes when it comes to judgment. He deftly evaded the issue by giving a speech on racism and how his race was the reason he belonged to this church. Sadly, millions of Americans bought it.

Thank you Stone Seeker.

A man''s church affiliation speaks to the very core of who he is.

 

[diamondfan]

Bee, I agree with you. But I got flamed when I mentioned this IN MARCH. And Farrakan? And Ayers? And Jackson, ALL known anti semites, spreading hate and intolerance? How ANY church could honor someone as low as Farrakan is unreal to me. What type of church would think HIS message is anything other than a disgusting and disgraceful bunch of garbage? Obama was all too happy to dump the man who got him into that church, the man who married him, the man who is godfather to his girls, the man whom he called his spiritual adviser...when that man started to let his 15 minutes get out of control. Suddenly, he was a liability and Obama had to answer for the fact that though he said he did not agree with what was said (it was like that crazy uncle at Thanksgiving or whatever) he felt it okay to sit there week after week for TWO DECADES. I could not, under any circumstances, sit in my temple if my Rabbi spoke like that even once, let alone for all those years. Now he gets dumped, because he is an embarrassment. If that is not playing it like any other politico would, what is?

 

[iluvcarats]

Date: 9/14/2008 11:55:43 PM
Author: diamondfan
Bee, I agree with you. But I got flamed when I mentioned this IN MARCH. And Farrakan? And Ayers? And Jackson, ALL known anti semites, spreading hate and intolerance? How ANY church could honor someone as low as Farrakan is unreal to me. What type of church would think HIS message is anything other than a disgusting and disgraceful bunch of garbage? Obama was all too happy to dump the man who got him into that church, the man who married him, the man who is godfather to his girls, the man whom he called his spiritual adviser...when that man started to let his 15 minutes get out of control. Suddenly, he was a liability and Obama had to answer for the fact that though he said he did not agree with what was said (it was like that crazy uncle at Thanksgiving or whatever) he felt it okay to sit there week after week for TWO DECADES. I could not, under any circumstances, sit in my temple if my Rabbi spoke like that even once, let alone for all those years. Now he gets dumped, because he is an embarrassment. If that is not playing it like any other politico would, what is?

They are both hanging out with undesirables, if you ask me.
6 in one;half dozen in the other. (well, maybe Farrakan tips the scales to 7 / 5) But Buchanan?
sarah palin and the jewish vote

 

[diamondfan]

Buchanan is not a winner to me either. Can''t these people pick better company to keep?

 

[iluvcarats]

one can only hope....

 

[diamondfan]

They should. Have to say Farrakan is the worst of them all. He is vile. He does not like mixed races either, which is really gross to me. He can decide someone is unworthy simply because their parents are of two different ethnicities? Please, really? This is what he espouses?

 

[iluvcarats]

Ditto. I''m right there with you - same book, same page.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 9/15/2008 12:10:35 AM
Author: iluvcarats

Date: 9/14/2008 11:55:43 PM

Author: diamondfan

Bee, I agree with you. But I got flamed when I mentioned this IN MARCH. And Farrakan? And Ayers? And Jackson, ALL known anti semites, spreading hate and intolerance? How ANY church could honor someone as low as Farrakan is unreal to me. What type of church would think HIS message is anything other than a disgusting and disgraceful bunch of garbage? Obama was all too happy to dump the man who got him into that church, the man who married him, the man who is godfather to his girls, the man whom he called his spiritual adviser...when that man started to let his 15 minutes get out of control. Suddenly, he was a liability and Obama had to answer for the fact that though he said he did not agree with what was said (it was like that crazy uncle at Thanksgiving or whatever) he felt it okay to sit there week after week for TWO DECADES. I could not, under any circumstances, sit in my temple if my Rabbi spoke like that even once, let alone for all those years. Now he gets dumped, because he is an embarrassment. If that is not playing it like any other politico would, what is?

They are both hanging out with undesirables, if you ask me.

6 in one;half dozen in the other. (well, maybe Farrakan tips the scales to 7 / 5) But Buchanan?

sarah palin and the jewish vote

I find no moral equivalency between Sarah Palin and Barack Obama, Louis Farakahn or Pat Buchannan.

Sarah Palin did not belong to a church that applauded and rewarded (!) a man who has called Jews "bloodsuckers". Barack Obama did.
Sarah Palin did not belong to a church that implied 9/11 was a well-deserved attack on "G-dda-m America". Barack Obama did.

Pat Buchanan may have his issues with the Jews and with Israel, but at least he is HONEST about it.

Obama squirreled himself out of that church only when it became a liability and then tried to minimize the obviously intense, spiritual bond he had with Reverend Wright. For crying out loud, he chose that man to be the Godfather to his children! THIS is who he admires? This is who he looked up to for spiritual guidance for TWENTY years??? Shame on Barack Obama. Shame.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 9/15/2008 12:21:00 AM
Author: diamondfan
They should. Have to say Farrakan is the worst of them all. He is vile. He does not like mixed races either, which is really gross to me. He can decide someone is unworthy simply because their parents are of two different ethnicities? Please, really? This is what he espouses?

I suspect long before Obama became this country''s media-appointed ''saviour'', Louis Farakhan wouldn''t have had too many kind words for Obama''s white mother, either.
Ironic, ain''t it?

 

[iluvcarats]

I don''t think we have to pick and choose here. Shame on them all.

 

[beebrisk]

Date: 9/15/2008 12:47:01 AM
Author: iluvcarats
I don''t think we have to pick and choose here. Shame on them all.

While I understand you might have disagreements with McCain, I''m not sure why exactly he should feel ''shame''.

He has spent his entire career serving the country after nearly dying for it.

McCain has not (as far as I know) associated with known racists and anti-Semites, nor has he spent 20 years listening to (and obviously relating to) the vitriol spewed by his pastor.

I do not understand how anyone can draw a moral equivalence between these two men. There''s no comparison. None.