Obama Presidency Watch/post election & first 100 days

Semper, I'm not going to play your silly game.

Originally posted by semperfortis
Obama is a politician and showed his true colors when he stabbed his friend and mentor, Alice Palmer, in the back politically and basically ruined her career.

Actually Obama challenged her petition signatures and over half of them were invalid. Challenging someone who cheated isn't what I'd call "stabbing her in the back", but to each his own.

Alice Palmer

After her defeat, Palmer broke her promise to Obama not to run for re-election to her State Senate seat and filed nominating petitions with 1,580 signatures on December 18, 1995—the last day to file nominating petitions. Obama challenged Palmer's hastily gathered nominating petitions and those of the three other prospective candidates. Nearly two-thirds of the signatures on Palmer's nominating petitions were found to be invalid, leaving her almost 200 signatures short of the required 757 signatures of registered voters residing in the Senate district

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I was not aware it was a game?

"That was Chicago politics," said John Kass, a veteran Chicago Tribune columnist. "Knock out your opposition, challenge their petitions, destroy your enemy, right?" Kass said. "It is how Barack Obama destroyed his enemies back in 1996 that conflicts with his message today. He may have gotten his start registering thousands of voters. But in that first race he made sure voters had just one choice."

"He came from Chicago politics," Stewart said. "Politics ain't beanbag as they say in Chicago. You play with your elbows up and you're pretty tough and ruthless when you have to be. Sen. Obama felt that's what was necessary at the time, that's what he did. Does it fit in with the rhetoric now? Perhaps not."

The Real Obama

But more than that, Obama brings with him the baggage of Chicago's political culture - the roughest in the US. The small-scale bribes that older Chicagoans remember from visits to City Hall are a thing of the past but the sharp suits, naked ambition and political trading are much the same. So too is the large-scale corruption that has seen 50 elected officials from Illinois jailed over the past 30 years.

Guardian.UK

Semper

reply to post by semperfortis


All that drama and those emotionally loaded phrases don't change the simple non-biased FACTS of the matter. He challenged her petition and her signatures were not valid. Her run would have been illegal.

I don't know about anyone else, but if I found that my opponent had cheated before a race, I wouldn't ignore it. It's not a fair race.

And this is COMPLETELY off topic of "Obama Presidency Watch/post election & first 100 days"

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

Originally posted by semperfortis
The one sure thing that we have learned we can count on, is that politicians lie, cheat and steal. Obama is a politician...

So, politicians lie, cheat and steal.
Obama is a politician.
Therefore Obama lies, cheats and steals.

That sounds like a fallacy to me.

There are some professions that tend to have more corrupt members than others. It's true. Politicians, police and priests come to mind. But we'd be mistaken if we judged all of any group by the actions of some. I prefer to judge a person on their individual accomplishments and results than the character of others in their peer group.

Back to topic.

This article is an in-depth look at what environmental activists, scientists and other "thinkers" would advise Obama to prioritize, as regards environmental issues and energy initiatives, during his first 100 days. I hope someone on his team reads it!

A Green Agenda for Obama's First 100 Days

Although the respondents -- including entrepreneur Paul Hawken, Rajendra Pachauri of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, activist Van Jones, and green investing leader Mindy Lubber -- represent a broad range of interests, they were largely in agreement on how best to solve the current economic and environmental challenges. Basically, they agree that weaning the country off fossil fuels and onto renewable sources of energy is the single best way to rebuild the U.S. economy; that Obama must use all the tools at his disposal -- from invoking the Clean Air Act for regulating greenhouse gas emissions to persuading the new Congress to put a price on carbon -- to tackle climate change and spur the move to alternative energy; that under an Obama administration the United States must lead in forging a new global climate change treaty; and that, given the rapidity of global warming, Obama must be made fully aware of the “scary” scientific facts -- as environmentalist Bill McKibben puts it -- and move with a sense of urgency.

Secondly, I thought it was very telling that the top question on Change.gov is asking about Prosecuting George W Bush for Torture.

[T]he number one submission on the popular "Open for Questions" portion of the site might seem more than a little impolitic to [President Bush]: "Will you appoint a Special Prosecutor -- ideally Patrick Fitzgerald -- to independently investigate the gravest crimes of the Bush Administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping," wrote Bob Fertik of New York, who runs the Web site, Democrats.com.

Though the Obama team has promised to answer some of the top questions as early as this week, they have not said whether they will respond to Mr. Fertik's, which has received more than 22,000 votes since the second round of the question-and-answer feature began on Dec. 30. The site logged more than 1.5 million votes for 20,000-plus questions... The second highest-ranked submission, which is about oversight of the nation's banking industry, is several thousand of votes behind the query about a special prosecutor. Mr. Fertik's question has been pushed to the top, in part, by a coalition of liberal bloggers...

reply to post by semperfortis


Well if you want to play games and show a temper tantrum that is very unbefitting of you.

So be my guess and do as you wish but for what I can see none of your post are about anything but complaining what others have to say.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I have been pondering what to say in response without coping a warn for displaying for displaying my anger towards the Global Warming Hoax . Any Carbon Emission scheme is economical unsound , will only serve to penalize people rather then reward them for good environmental practices and further drive up the cost of living . Eventually the Global Warming Warming fraud will bottom itself out but one thing that wont go away is all the associated taxes . The awful truth is that a viable alternative to Oil isnt going to be developed. What can be done and will happen is that technology will be developed that allows Oil to be drilled in areas where it is currently uneconomical to do so .

A smart energy policy for the US or any country for that matter would be to encourage investment in the technology mentioned , build Oil refines , Nuclear Power plants and make use of Solar and Wind power where feasible . Any investments in infrastructure including what is mentioned above needs to be done on as per needed basis . This prevents projects from becoming an economic flop later on . It may not be a bad idea to hold off on the construction of Oil refines until out put increases in the future . In terms of planning future electricity generation the best thing to do would be to take projected demand and double it .

There is no way that either Obama or the democrat controlled Congress will prosecuted Bush . The vote that authorized the invasion of Iraq didn't come solely from Republicans and the Dems would bound to be found to have been complicit in any wrong doings . The only way Bush and co could be prosecuted without the prosecution implicating themselves would be to reenact(SP?) laws in the style of the war crimes trials of sixty ago . The Criminal proceedings would be akin to the War Crimes trials in the far east which were the most legally dubious of all the post war War Crime Trials .

There are other factors as well which fall beyond the scope of this topic . Although I do not foresee it happening in his first one hundred days the most likely out come is that Obama pardons Bush and Cheney for any crimes they may have committed . All things considered including the need for the US and the rest of the world to move on from Bush incompetence a pardon would be the best outcome .

reply to post by xpert11

I have been pondering what to say in response without coping a warn for displaying my anger towards the Global Warming Hoax. Any Carbon Emission scheme is economical unsound, will only serve to penalize people rather then reward them for good environmental practices and further drive up the cost of living.

We will all know at the same time whether any effort to limit or even reverse carbon emissions is genuine or is just made for show by this test: There are approximately 2,000 SOURCES for carbons around the planet. Each coal mine, each oil field and each natural gas field is a source. There may be other sources I’m unaware of. I’m thinking “fossil” fuels here as opposed to burning down the Amazon rain forest.

Depending on how far down the chain of emitters you want to go there are at least 2,000,000 end users such as factories and electric plants, or 2,000,000,000 if you want to nail every last consumer. Now which group would be EASY to monitor and regulate or which group would be a bureaucratic nightmare and thereby allowing of endless hanky-pank? IE, do as they do now, SELF-REGULATE and report.

Eventually the Global Warming fraud will bottom itself out but one thing that won’t go away is all the associated taxes. The awful truth is that a viable alternative to Oil isn’t going to be developed. What can be done and will happen is that technology will be developed that allows Oil to be drilled in areas where it is currently uneconomical to do so.

That genre of thinking is like the man from La Mancha. See Note 1. Tilting at windmills. Which is to say, ignoring the real but faithfully attempting the impossible. Other than the most doctrinaire of scientists agree we - the planet Earth - are in a warming period unlike any we have ever been in since the end of the last Ice Age about 12-15,000 years ago, the exact time depending on what criteria you employ to define END.

Scientists point to the earlier hole in the ozone layer as evidence that human activity can have drastic (even fatal) consequences. By altering the chemical formula for air conditioner fluids, CFCs, we have “restored” the ozone layer. A naysayer could assert the whole ozone phenomenon was natural and that the human component was not real but only coincidental. See Note. 3.

The only arguable point of disagreement is whether the human contribution to the acknowledged atmospheric increase in CO2 is large enough to make a difference in the rise in global temperatures we are measuring every day. For my example, assume nature puts up 70% of the measurable CO2 in the atmosphere. Human activity puts up the other 30%. By invoking the most draconian of rules, humans could reduce their share to 15%.

Q. Would that reduction in total CO2 (15%) make a measurable difference in the rate of warming or the amount of warming we are now experiencing?

If the answer is NO, then we go on as we are and let the devil take the hindmost. If the answer is YES then we need to stop talking and start working on some serious measures before it is PAST THE TIPPING POINT.

Aside: Completely unrelated to all of this, it may actually be we are entering into another MASS EXTINCTION time as well. Who knows what triggers those events or whether we are already too far into one to be able to alter it even if we could agree we ought to. The PT (200 mya) and the KT (65 mya) events. Million years ago. See Note 2. Information gleaned from those far earlier major M/E events is useful to us today only in the broadest sense.

A smart energy policy for the US or any country for that matter would be to encourage investment in the technology mentioned, build oil refineries, nuclear power plants and make use of solar and wind power where feasible. Any investments in infrastructure including what is mentioned above needs to be done on as per needed basis.

On wind. Unless we install the windmills in W-DC, the steady flow of wind is unpredictable elsewhere. On solar power, I regret to inform you that it takes more electricity to make a solar cell than the cell will produce in its lifetime. But still, I'd vote YES on wind, but NO on solar cells. Like ethanol, solar is a net energy loser. Aside: All the rage over making “bio-fuels” from used cooking oil is over. Cooking oil amounts to less than 1/2% of the oil used in the US, so even if we got 100% recycle, it is not worth the ink it takes to ballyhoo it.

Water. Both the processing of solar cells and irrigation for growing ethanol fuel source plants consume TOO much water. We are shooting ourselves in the foot for perceived gains in both fields. It is more important to our long-term survival as a species that we quickly address the issue of WATER. We COULD live without oil but we cannot live without water.

There is no way that either Obama or the Democrat controlled Congress will prosecute Bush. The vote that authorized the invasion of Iraq didn't come solely from Republicans and the Dems would bound to be found to have been complicit in any wrong doings. The only way Bush and co could be prosecuted without the prosecution implicating themselves would be to reenact laws in the style of the war crimes trials of sixty ago.

The ICJ at The Hague is already up and running. International Court of Justice. The US will not sign on to the treaty for obvious reasons. Obama is on a 1960s style LOVE IN. He has no intention of giving the Republican stalwarts a good reason to oppose him at every move. That is the CHANGE he promised. No retribution. No pay-back. Recall the old political maxim, “Never forget your friends. Never forget your enemies.” Barack wants to move past that. Suck it in and move on! There's work to do.

Although I do not foresee it happening in his first one hundred days the most likely out come is that Obama pardons Bush and Cheney for any crimes they may have committed. All things considered including the need for the US and the rest of the world to move on from Bush incompetence a pardon would be the best outcome.

For sure NO pardons will be forthcoming from Obama. Fortunately for Bush43, Cheney and a myriad of other complicit malefactors during the past 8 years of Republican mal-administration - like Herr Oberfuhrer Rumsfeld - there is too much REAL work for Obama to do than to waste time and energy chasing down all the Halliburton types and that band of thieves. Besides, in anticipation of just such a high level witch-hunt, Halliburton has already moved its GHQ from Houston to that Buck Rogers city, Dubia in the UAE. Home free! Let the House and Senate try to subpoena documents from Dubai!


Note 1.
The original Man of La Mancha stage play is adapted from Wasserman's non-musical 1959 teleplay “I, Don Quixote” which was in turn inspired by Cervantes's 17th century masterpiece Don Quixote. That in turn tells the story of the "mad" knight, Don Quixote. A play within a play, performed by Cervantes and his fellow prisoners as he awaits a hearing with the Spanish Inquisition. The 1965 Broadway production of the Man of La Mancha ran for 2,328 performances. The song, "The Impossible Dream" became a standard and the musical is a popular choice for community theater companies.

Note 2.
PT. Permian Triassic. KT. Cretaceous Tertiary. In both cases it is claimed 90%+ of all living species plant and animal, died off. Of course our evidence is very sparse. The odds of any individual life-form being preserved as a fossil is very low. Say 1 in 10,000. The chance of any fossil being found by us is likewise very low. Say 1 in 10,000. That translates to us having only 1 ten-billionth part of the life forms living THEN available to study NOW.

Even though we have about 1 million animal and 5 million plant forms documented today, we are finding new species of plants and animals every year. People who make those documentaries say we have explored less of the ocean floor than we have of the Moon. Hmm? (Where to you go to get those numbers anyway?)

Note 3.
Chlorofluorocarbons - CFC's (CFC), (freon) any of several organic compounds composed of carbon, fluorine, chlorine, and hydrogen. These hydrocarbons have been used extensively as aerosol-spray propellants, refrigerants, solvents, and foam-blowing agents. They are well-suited for these and other applications because they are nontoxic and nonflammable.

Because of a growing concern over stratospheric ozone depletion and its attendant dangers, a ban was imposed on the use of CFCs in aerosol-spray dispensers in the late 1970s by the United States, Canada, and the Scandinavian countries. In 1990, 93 nations agreed to end production of ozone-depleting chemicals by the end of the century, and in 1992 most of those same countries agreed to end their production of CFCs by 1996. www.c-f-c.com...

[edit on 1/11/2009 by donwhite]

Originally posted by xpert11
I have been pondering what to say in response without coping a warn for displaying for displaying my anger towards the Global Warming Hoax .

I think you're well-spoken enough to display your anger at a concept without getting a warning.

I am personally too uneducated on the concept of Global Warming to have formed an opinion on whether or not it's a HOAX. I do, however, believe we are using nonrenewable resources at a rate faster than we can afford to. I think it's important to look into other options, including local oil.

Solar works very well in the Southwest and wind would work in certain places. Where I am, we could live off the wind all Spring. Where wind is a seasonal thing (Santa Anas) we should capitalize on it. I'm not proposing "a windmill in every yard and a solar panel on every roof", but I do think these renewable resources should be used wherever possible.

reply to post by donwhite


There validly of Global Warming is discussed here in a thread started by Don . I will still address the politics of the massive fraud as the topic requires .

Regulate and or tax what ?
I don't know anyone who just drives around in there car in order to pump out Co2 . Adding to the cost of petrol at the Pump in the US and else where in the world isnt going to make more environmentally friendly alternatives to Oil just magically appear . More then anything it strikes me an assault on people freedom of movement .
Even if the US joined the ICJ all the events of the Bush admin will have taken place before US become a member anyway .

Obama could use a friendly prosecutor to go after members of the Bush admin when he needs to distract public attention away from what ever scandal has erupted . IMO a pardon would display a sign of good character from Obama and a change away from the partisanship that Obama has promised . Let Bush return to Texas in peace and attempted to revise history when he writes his memoires .

Other wise I'm not seeing any signs of the much vaunted change . Obama has or will more or less come around to the Bush admin policy on Iraq . I predict that the delays involved with closing Guantánamo Bay will sensible become permanent.



[edit on 12-1-2009 by xpert11]

Originally posted by xpert11
Adding to the cost of petrol at the Pump in the US and else where in the world isnt going to make more environmentally friendly alternatives to Oil just magically appear .

Just this morning, I heard a high-lever Chrysler Exec. talking about this. He said that when gasoline is $6-$9 a gallon, as it is in some European countries, people are MUCH more willing to spend the extra $5K to $7K to buy a hybrid (not that I think hybrids are the answer, but they're a step in the right direction). There are far fewer SUVs being driven in European countries. We're getting gas for under $2 a gallon and so people break out their Hummers again. I'd love to see a huge tax on gasoline.

And no one said alternatives will just magically appear. That's part of what this stimulus package is for.

Let Bush return to Texas in peace and attempted to revise history when he writes his memoires .

And let the child molesters and armed robbers go too. What the heck?

Other wise I'm not seeing any signs of the much vaunted change .

Yeah, what's he waiting for?

[edit on 12-1-2009 by Benevolent Heretic]

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic...when gasoline is $6-$9 a gallon, as it is in some European countries, people are MUCH more willing to spend the extra $5K to $7K to buy a hybrid (not that I think hybrids are the answer, but they're a step in the right direction). There are far fewer SUVs being driven in European countries...I'd love to see a huge tax on gasoline.

I don't agree that the European model applies to North America. My wife was commuting 90 km each way to work, and driving a small Blazer 4by so as not to get blown off the highway by the semis...especially in the winter. That's not a gas-guzzling obscenity, that's a fact of life.

Europe? You drive for an hour, you're in a different country. In town, the roads won't fit our larger vehicles...but things there are smaller and closer so the auto needs follow. Here, I see a SmartCar on the highway, and I laugh cuz' you wouldn't catch me in it.

Gasoline taxes are a fair user-pay method, but they shouldn't be a revenue grab. We are a mobile society and that is determined by the greater scale of our communities. If Obama wants to adapt a European model, then he has to bring back rail, mass transit, and urban intensification. That ain't likely to happen in this term.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

I don't agree that the European model applies to North America. Europe? You drive for an hour, you're in a different country. In town, the roads won't fit our larger vehicles . . Here, I see a SmartCar on the highway and I laugh cuz' you wouldn't catch me in it.

Gasoline taxes are a fair user-pay method, but they shouldn't be a revenue grab [as in Europe]. We are a mobile society and that is determined by the greater scale of our communities. If Obama wants to adapt a European model, then he has to bring back rail, mass transit, and urban intensification. That ain't likely to happen in this term.

America lost the option to concentrate residential growth in 1945 which is when most people date the rise of if not the invention of the SUBURBS. Levitt town on Long Island was the first. It symbolized the American dream to own a house on a small lot in the suburbs and to DRIVE to and from work and to do the family's business. Quickly followed shopping malls and satellite office parks, and you have a new way of living, all reached in less than a half century and totally without planning or forethought. Developers ruled. Planners were slandered as “socialists” which still a naughty word in America. [Recall how a desperate John McCain tried to attach that label on Obama in the last days of the recent election campaign?]

There is not enough money in the world to BUILD not to speak of operating a rail system that could serve even 50% of Americans. “ . . bring back rail, mass transit, and urban intensification” as you so aptly put it Mr J/C. Outside of NYC I am unaware of any large American city that could justify the cost to install a system that would attract people OUT of their cars.

Reflection: I grew up in Louisville KY, in the ‘30s and ‘40s. Louisville’s population actually peaked in the 1960 census at 369,000. Louisville was (unintentionally) laid out like the letter T. The bar running generally parallel with the Ohio River, it’s northern boundary. About 10 miles from E to W. The post was narrow, about 3-4 miles wide and ran south from the Ohio River about 7 miles ending at the 700 acre (280 hectares) publicly owned Iroquois Park. Total area about 45 sq. miles.

Most of the city’s streets ran N-S or E-W. There was a street railway system located every 6-7 blocks in both the E-W direction in the bar and the N-S direction in the post. Running often and reliably, riders using the allowed double transfer, could begin a trip almost anywhere in the city and arrive at his destination again, almost anywhere in the city and walking not more than 3 or 4 blocks at either the start of finish of the trip. All for a single fare.

The county outside Louisville - about 300 square miles - had a population in the 1950 census of 45,000. In 2000, the city had about 260,000 people and the county outside the city, about 400,000 people. Any rail system serving the whole population would need 25 to 30 lines arranged like spokes of a wheel, all converging on the downtown center of the city as in a large roundhouse.

If each line was 15 miles long, and cost $5 m. per mile, then you would need $1,875,000,000.00 to construct and perhaps $500,000,000.00 to equip. About $2.4 billion. About $3,500 per person. Operating costs including electric power would probably equal a half million dollars a day.

The construction part is soluble. The insoluble part is how to get half or more of the people who commute every day - 300,000 - out of their cars and into the trains. One draconian way would be to require every resident in the county to buy a pre-paid plastic card for use on the trains, for say, $1,500.00. Deduct $2 for each usage thereby “forcing” the car owners to RIDE THE TRAIN OR FEEL THE PAIN. Can you imagine anyone winning an election on this platform promise? End.

So what’s our future look like? In a few words, very bad. I bought the History Channel’s dvd CRUDE and it is making the rounds of my friends. While it is not a “peak oil” proponent, it does worse! It shows how 95% of what we make, use or eat is bound up tightly with crude oil. Dividing 300 million people into 22 million barrels per day of crude gives us THREE gallons of oil used every day by every American! Man, woman and child. Three gallons.

One goes for transport, one for food and one for all other plastic products made from crude oil. We are worse than addicted. We have built our civilization on crude oil. A finite commodity which we do not have control over. And which will surely be priced like diamonds long before this century ends.

[edit on 1/12/2009 by donwhite]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

I heard a high-level Chrysler Exec. talking about this. He said that when gasoline is $6-$9 a gallon, as it is in some European countries, people are MUCH more willing to spend the extra $5K to $7K to buy a hybrid (not that I think hybrids are the answer, but they're a step in the right direction).

Instead of making the better mousetrap, Daimler-Benz bought Chrysler about 10-12 years ago. It looked to them to be the cheapest and quickest way to get into the mass produced part of the American car market, the world’s largest. It may have looked smart to a foreigner but anyone in America could have told them Chrysler was a loser.

Chrysler began its slide down from a solid 20% of the market - equal to Ford - in 1949. It’s first post-war models were so far off the mark they became a popular joke on tv shows. In a desperate attempt to recoup, Chrysler jumped ahead in 1957 style wise, but fell sharply in quality of product.

Although sloppy assembly and loose fit was always blamed on the UAW worker, it turned out that the American worker was equal to any Japanese or German worker. Proof? Honda in Maryville. Toyota in Georgetown. Nissan in Smyrna. Mazda in Flat Rock. Subaru in Lafayette. All American workers and all of world class construction. It turns out it was DESIGN and ENGINEERING that was short changing the buying public. And that was all white collar and not blue collar workers at fault. The top brass, IMO.

Now Mercedes has abandoned its effort to get into the US market. Daimler paid the new owners of Chrysler $7 billion to take over the pension obligations owed to the retired Chrysler workers. Apparently that money was “spent” by the new owners? Or stashed In Swiss bank accounts. And now, those same owners are into the taxpayer’s pocket for another $9 billion. And I thought it was DUMB to “buy” Chrysler! Those guys make cars only incidentally. Preston Tucker reincarnated.

I started this post to point out that ironically, the current generation of Chrysler products was designed by Daimler-Benz to be as good as any car. Anyone wanting a Mercedes on the cheap should look seriously into buying a 2008-2009 Chrysler product. I’m not sure if that D-B re-engineering extends to the Jeep line. It might.

Post Script. A few years ago, Ford was flush with money. Ford bought Jaguar and Aston-Martin of England. VW bought Rolls Royce name and BMW bought the rest of the company. BMW also bought Land Rover. After a complete redesign, Ford bought Land Rover from BMW.

So you have a British icon, designed by Germans, made by Canadians and sold in America by Ford. (Ford has since sold all the old English marques). Globalization anyone?

[edit on 1/12/2009 by donwhite]

My opinion about global warming? well I believe it to be "in part" a hoax for the profiteers of anything to make another buck.

That said, Global warming, the next ice age or vice-versa will hit us and is nothing we would be able to do about, perhaps dig a hole in the ground and go into the underground until is over if the human race is allow to stay in this earth as a dominant species by mother nature.

Anyway the only way is not more alternative fuel and other methods to stay away from oil is because is not profitable enough "yet" for the profiteers to do anything about it.

I don't compare US gas prices with many European nations because we are an oil producing country so I don't see why we can not be enjoying the same low cost of gas as many citizens from oil producing countries are.

Anyway that is my take on the issue.

[edit on 12-1-2009 by marg6043]

[edit on 12-1-2009 by marg6043]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I have no problem with those who have a legitimate need for a 4WD . I do take issue with those who drives such vehicles because they are a status symbol and then complain about fuel costs . Yes there are those who are stupid enough to buy " gas guzzles " in times when fuel prices are lower but the last thing I want to do is to pay for there stupidity. Besides what I pay in ACC levies already go towards in part for paying for others stupidity. It looks like that we are just going to have to agree to disagree on the issue of the petrol Tax .

There is no way that unlike most other accused there is no way that Bush would ever get a fair trial . As what as been observed since the Clinton era the political climate is by far more partisan then that of what existed during Watergate and its after mouth . If a jury was made up of Republicans then Bush would be found innocent and if the jury was made up of democrats he would be found guilty of anything the prosecute came up with . Besides during the Nixon era the Supreme Court ruled that the president is not above the law . So since the dems didn't use this prescient(SP?) to put a stop to some of the Bush admin activities there hardly going to go after him now .

reply to post by donwhite


I am a keen supporter of Public Transport , light rail particular . In fact the light rail network in my old town of Perth has a very good reputation . There are two truths about Public Transport that apply locally and overseas . The first is that issues that fall outside of this topic have prevented the implementation of Public Transport and will continue to do so . The second truth ties in with the first via the fact Public Transport is like Nuclear Power in the fact that it is a viable and proven idea that wont be implemented .

Say I'm wrong and a viable alternative to Oil emerges what is the use in swapping one dependency for another ?
That means you would need at least three profitable viable alternatives to Oil in the market place at one time . Although it would still be a hard sell a better idea would be to increase the capacity of the US and non traditional Oil producing nations to drill and refine Oil . This would allow for supply to keep the price of Oil at a reasonable level . In fact if I had my why I would flood the market with Oil until it became worthless and barrels of it were being dumped into the sea .

[edit on 12-1-2009 by xpert11]

reply to post by semperfortis


All politics is hardball no matter the players or the party... look at the smear the bush team surrogates lathered on McCain in South Carolina in 2000... sending out mailings suggesting that his adopted Bangeledshi daughter was actually the product of a tryst with a black prostitute... now that is foul... and you take Obama to task for challenging signatures on a petition?

Come on now semper.... lets can the attacks and discuss the issues... policies and proposals... alright?

Global warming is indeed real but to claim that it is entirely caused by man is disingenuous but to say that we have no hand in it is equally false. Our actions have added to it just as surely as our actions could ameliorate it and to make every attempt to do so is not just prudent but in our own economic best interests as well... and would remain so even if it were proven that global warming was entirely a fantasy.

On to other subjects such as taxes as in tax increases vs tax cuts.

I am no big fan of taxes... I really don't think anyone actually is... but I am not blinded by the rhetoric that all taxes are bad either or that the best way to raise revenue is to cut taxes... that is a blatant falsehood.

When you look at the issues facing America over basically the remaining duration of my life ( I am 53 now) this depression looms far larger and potentially more dangerous than it should...

The simple facts are this... my generation is just beginning to retire... the drains on social security and medicare/medicaid are just beginning... eventually sometime in the 20's or 30's the expenditures to cover them will start overwhelming our resources... they need to be fixed day before yesterday at the latest and still nothing is being done... this recess/depression needs to be reigned in as quickly as possible and the deficits need to be reduced as soon afterward as possible as well if we are to have any hope of avoiding a national bankruptcy as the social security and medicare/medicaid entitlements begin to blossom.

In short the government revenues needed to face these challenges is breathtaking and to think that we can cut taxes and so generate enough revenue from assumed expanding growth as a result is... well foolish at best. Especially when you consider that Wall Street and the corporations have already sold us out and limited our options by outsourcing and shipping jobs overseas.

Consider California... its current financial mess, which has been building for years is directly connected to the 1978 proposition 13 which limited the amount property taxes the state and localities could charge homeowners therefore limiting the amount of revenue that could be raised... it also required a two-thirds majority in both legislative houses for future increases in all state tax rates... consequently the state has been in financial gridlock for decades now until this current impasse which could effectively shutdown the government of the 8th largest economy in the world.

Do we really want to go down that path?

Obama is going to have to raise taxes at some point and it is probably going to have to be a significant increase but due to political considerations he will probably wait until his second term to do it.

Originally posted by grover
Obama is going to have to raise taxes at some point and it is probably going to have to be a significant increase but due to political considerations he will probably wait until his second term to do it.

Just curious, but what if he cancels those tax cut that Bush awarded the rich? That is certainly a place to start...

I don't see where taxing obscene inheritances is going to harm the national economic recovery, either.

How about simply bringing the troops home and letting the peacekeepers set up...stopping the aggression and supporting the peace processes, instead? Naw...that's far too much of a stretch...

Bottom line is that there are better choices than adding to the lower and middle class tax burdens.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

Just curious, but what if he cancels those tax cut that Bush awarded the rich? That is certainly a place to start . . I don't see where taxing obscene inheritances is going to harm the national economic recovery, either.

Millionaire labor exploiter and Speaker Nancy Pelosi has already said as much about those taxes. It would require a POSITIVE act of Congress to AVOID the lapse of the Bush43 cuts for the R&Fs. Rich and Famous. She has said that will not happen!

I’m acting on memory now, but it is my TRUE belief that the first $1.5 million of every net estate is exempted from taxation. I think there is a special exception providing that persons living on working farms are exempted $3 million on the net. Look it up? Lazy? I have been told my birthing took 2 hours, so I guess you could say I was born lazy?

How about simply . . stopping the aggression and supporting the peace processes, instead? Naw . . that's far too much of a stretch . . . Bottom line is that there are better choices than adding to the lower and middle class tax burdens.

Agreed!

Follows a letter reprinted here with permission.

John
I have a gloomy feeling. It originates with the bail out plans put forth to date. There is NO sacrifice called for. It seems to be offered to us as PAINLESS.

Nobody can really comprehend what a trillion dollars are or is. Borrowing from our future. But who even thinks about that? Obama is offering to FIX the economy which is essential to everything, and still he talks about reforming health care, raising our investment in education, infrastructure overhauls and then, in the typical Republican mode, he speaks of TAX CUTS. As I just said, a PAINLESS solution to our mighty problems. Roosevelt raised taxes every year after 1933, as you can see if you will refer to that table I sent to you 6-8 weeks ago.

I made this same complaint following the Nine Eleven Event. I called for a 75 cents a gallon gasoline tax "for the duration." I envisaged a bumper sticker size placard to be affixed to every gas pump in the country. It would proudly announce the 75 cents tax went to help pay for the cost of the War on Terror. It would be applied for the duration of the WoT.

We first went afoul of involving the public in the Vietnam War. We had made great sacrifices on the home front in WW2. We had some price controls and maybe rationing in the Korean War. I do recall that some cars had painted bumpers in their 1951 models. Chrome was in short supply I suppose.

But since then, we have been on an economic JOY ride. I doubt many American can even spell S A C R I F I C E. And those who can think it was something the Romans did before a crucial battle.

I'm worried.

Don

[edit on 1/13/2009 by donwhite]