Tonight is the republican debate between the seven announced Presidential candidates for the nomination.
They are a sad bunch. No ideas and a non-stop bashing of Obama.
And people wonder how Obama will be re-elected. They are making it easy for him.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 13, 2011, 03:11:09 PM
Tonight is the republican debate between the seven announced Presidential candidates for the nomination.
They are a sad bunch. No ideas and a non-stop bashing of Obama.
And people wonder how Obama will be re-elected. They are making it easy for him.
My how quickly you forget. No different than the Dimocrat candidates in 2004 and 2008.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 13, 2011, 03:11:09 PM
No ideas and a non-stop bashing of Obama.
And people wonder how Obama will be re-elected. They are making it easy for him.
You're right! We should explore this further. . .
On each of their websites they have a link that says "Issues." Under this link it breaks down their various strategies on more detailed categories. Heck, even Michelle Bachman, who hasn't even announced her candidacy has a well developed list of positions on issues.
Looking at their various Facebook pages, they all seem to be engaged in discussion on the primary issues such as the economy, jobs, energy independence, and healthcare. They all also have strategies on addressing Medicare and the growing financial burdens we face.
I don't agree with all of them, but I definitely have the ability to read, judge, and in many cases respond to their stance on issues in
detail.
Now, as I mention in a previous thread, if we direct our browsers to the http://www.barackobama.com site, we have an excellent mechanism for obtaining minions, but absolutely
no presentation of of any stance on any issue at all! It is the campaign of a rock-star.
If I were undecided and tempted to make a comparison between any of these candidates and our current president, I could not.
If I were simply to apply previous experience with president Obama, I would have to conclude that he has little interest in the important issues unless they involve increased spending, taxation, and government growth.
So, unless it is opposite day, and I did not receive the memo, I don't get the "No ideas" reference above. It seems that everyone BUT president Obama is presenting ideas.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 13, 2011, 03:35:25 PM
My how quickly you forget. No different than the Dimocrat candidates in 2004 and 2008.
Well, there might be a smidge more Jesus and a lot more conservative catch phrases.
I went ahead and called my senators and rep to have them cancel the 2012 election because of RM's opinion of the current republican field sixteen months before it takes place. And quit your damned whining about how poor wittle Obama is getting picked on.
RM's youtube (an oldie but a goodie):
Here's a thought, try sticking to what you do best. Your early defense of Weiner which also blew up in your face.
I think that with any candidate there should be a mechanism for comparison. It is unfair to the voter to carry on a campaign with without solidifying your position on at least a few of the important topics.
We elect a representative leader based on the ideas they present. incumbent have an advantage because they can be judged by past performance and new ideas. If they have spectacular performance (Reagan's second term election) than all they need to do is present a short list on the existing issues. If they have less than stellar performance, they are expected to present a more comprehensive plan.
President Obama has offered us the ability to judge his performance only. So that is what we have.
I don't want the election to be canceled. I want the republicans to fight it out till the convention then waste millions of dollars promoting another losing candidate.
Please convince me that one of these seven candidates can beat Obama.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 13, 2011, 05:08:34 PM
I don't want the election to be canceled. I want the republicans to fight it out till the convention then waste millions of dollars promoting another losing candidate.
Please convince me that one of these seven candidates can beat Obama.
I am not even convinced this is the entire field yet. But given the title of this thread, I don't think anyone can convince you of anything when it comes to Republicans. So why bother.
Quote from: guido911 on June 13, 2011, 05:10:47 PM
I am not even convinced this is the entire field yet.
You better hope so.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 13, 2011, 05:08:34 PM
I don't want the election to be canceled. I want the republicans to fight it out till the convention then waste millions of dollars promoting another losing candidate.
Please convince me that one of these seven candidates can beat Obama.
It's his race to lose. If gas is $4.00+ a gallon, unemployment is still in the 8 to 10% range, foreclosures are still up, etc. by Nov. 2012, he's toast.
Those are the things that matter to the average voter. Things like national debt and deficit aren't near as important to the biggest sea of voters rather than whether or not they have meaningful employment and how well they can support their family.
I believe people will start to recognize the stark contrast in President Obama's lavish lifestyle and their own and wonder where that promise of hope and change went for them.
Quote from: guido911 on June 13, 2011, 05:10:47 PM
I am not even convinced this is the entire field yet. But given the title of this thread, I don't think anyone can convince you of anything when it comes to Republicans. So why bother.
Texas governor Rick Perry is being coy about running. He has the usual big negatives - from my point of view - since he's tight with the wingnut/tea biscuits on the right. But if the news is credible, he's also delivered jobs in Texas, and that could gain him some traction on the national stage.
But I really don't want another Texas governor promoted to the White House. The last one was quite enough.
Issues and positions... Wow!
Palin and Bachmann have shown us their position is being profoundly stupid. Can't even bother to read and understand the document they tout so often. Or have even just a smidgeon of knowledge of history.
Newt? Yeah, well, everyone knows about Newt and his contract on America. Not to mention the heinous hypocrisy in the way he conducted himself through the nineties with the whore he married! Yeah, he's the golden boy...
Santorum? Well, Google it. It is self-explanatory what HIS position is. Mentally AND physically!
The rest of them at least have some semblance of a moral compass and at least a modicum of intellect. At least, from what has been shown so far. We will just have to wait and see, won't we?
And Mitt actually comes off as a reasonable guy, sometimes, when he is not contradicting himself too badly. Like with mandatory public health. Or writing emphatically against the GM bailout, and now claiming it was his idea. I can live with both those, since they are so comparatively innocuous.
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on June 13, 2011, 09:11:52 PM
Issues and positions... Wow!
Palin and Bachmann have shown us their position is being profoundly stupid. Can't even bother to read and understand the document they tout so often. Or have even just a smidgeon of knowledge of history.
Newt? Yeah, well, everyone knows about Newt and his contract on America. Not to mention the heinous hypocrisy in the way he conducted himself through the nineties with the whore he married! Yeah, he's the golden boy...
Santorum? Well, Google it. It is self-explanatory what HIS position is. Mentally AND physically!
The rest of them at least have some semblance of a moral compass and at least a modicum of intellect. At least, from what has been shown so far. We will just have to wait and see, won't we?
And Mitt actually comes off as a reasonable guy, sometimes, when he is not contradicting himself too badly. Like with mandatory public health. Or writing emphatically against the GM bailout, and now claiming it was his idea. I can live with both those, since they are so comparatively innocuous.
What do you think about Cain?
Quote from: Gaspar on June 14, 2011, 06:17:57 AM
What do you think about Cain?
QuoteHerman Cain promised not to appoint any Muslims who want to kill Americans to his cabinet
So there's that.
http://tinyurl.com/3as8co9
(http://tinyurl.com/3as8co9)
QuoteNEW YORK – Romney said he'd blow up the world economy over the debt ceiling. Bachmann doesn't believe in evolution or global warming. And those were the debate's stars. Michelle Goldberg on the lunacy of the Republican field.Plus: More Daily Beast contributors on the GOP debate
Here are things that Republicans suggested eliminating or privatizing in last night's debate: FEMA, NASA, the EPA, the Federal Labor Relations Board, Medicaid and food stamps. Herman Cain promised not to appoint any Muslims who want to kill Americans to his cabinet. Michele Bachmann supports states rights on gay marriage, but also supports a constitutional amendment outlawing it. Newt Gingrich faults big government for the lamentable absence of manned stations on the moon. Rick Santorum wants to "a system of discipline" to "punish" gay soldiers, which suggests that his problem with pornographic Google results is not likely to abate. Tim Pawlenty views Iraq as "one of the shiniest examples of success in the Middle East."
In this crowd, Mitt Romney seemed almost statesmanlike, even though he says he's willing to blow up the world economy by refusing to raise the debt ceiling. At least he admitted that Sharia law will not soon be coming to America, about as brave a concession to reality as we're likely to see from this field.
At least Romney admitted that Sharia law will not soon be coming to America, about as brave a concession to reality as we're likely to see from this field.
He and Bachmann were the winners last night. Romney came off as relatively serious and reasonable, and benefited from the fact that Tim Pawlenty wimped out when invited to take on his health care record. Bachmann, who announced her candidacy during the debate, probably gained more from the proceedings than anyone. She was charming, charismatic and far better spoken than Sarah Palin, to whom she's often compared, has ever been. Of course, she doesn't believe in evolution or global warming, thinks homosexuality can be cured and warns of a plot to merge the United States with Canada and Mexico, but in today's Republican Party, none of that is particularly controversial. It's going to be a long seventeen months.
Quote from: Townsend on June 14, 2011, 08:58:50 AM
So there's that.
http://tinyurl.com/3as8co9
(http://tinyurl.com/3as8co9)
Let the bat-smile crazy express begin!
Quote from: Hoss on June 14, 2011, 09:01:44 AM
Let the bat-smile crazy express begin!
Chugga chugga chugga chugga...Wooo woooooooooo
The problem with this year's GOP field is the same as it's been since 2010: no matter how personally moderate any of these folks are, they still have to pander to their base, which is batshit crazy and demands things -- like not raising the debt ceiling -- which will actively destroy our economy.
After that, the GOPers will have to somehow pivot and become palatable to the moderate middle.
The problem is, the GOP base now has no overlap whatsoever with the moderate middle. Building a coalition of those two things is still going to be nearly impossible. Relying on mass dissatisfaction with Obama isn't going to be enough (check O's personal approval ratings; they have consistently defied the right-track wrong track numbers, the economy numbers, etc. People may not like the job O's done, but they might very well be willing to give him another 4 years to see his projects through).
Quote from: we vs us on June 14, 2011, 10:17:10 AM
The problem with this year's GOP field is the same as it's been since 2010: no matter how personally moderate any of these folks are, they still have to pander to their base, which is batshit crazy and demands things -- like not raising the debt ceiling -- which will actively destroy our economy.
After that, the GOPers will have to somehow pivot and become palatable to the moderate middle.
The problem is, the GOP base now has no overlap whatsoever with the moderate middle. Building a coalition of those two things is still going to be nearly impossible. Relying on mass dissatisfaction with Obama isn't going to be enough (check O's personal approval ratings; they have consistently defied the right-track wrong track numbers, the economy numbers, etc. People may not like the job O's done, but they might very well be willing to give him another 4 years to see his projects through).
Still not sure what you are trying to say with your second paragraph. Your English degree is getting in the way of my comprehension. ;)
Continuing to borrow will actively destroy our economy just as adeptly as saying: "No more".
Quote from: Conan71 on June 14, 2011, 10:21:08 AM
Still not sure what you are trying to say with your second paragraph. Your English degree is getting in the way of my comprehension. ;)
Continuing to borrow will actively destroy our economy just as adeptly as saying: "No more".
C'mon Conan.. You know what he was saying. Basically they have to pander to the fringe even if they are moderate (Romney)
Quote from: CharlieSheen on June 14, 2011, 10:25:38 AM
C'mon Conan.. You know what he was saying. Basically they have to pander to the fringe even if they are moderate (Romney)
Good hair that Romney fellow. He'll go far this go-round. (unless they pull out the closet skeletons early)
Bachmann will destroy any sense in the early parts of the run. The 700 Club will love love love her though.
When Michelle Bachman's comments get scrutiny, she is through. Her lies on talk shows will come back to haunt her.
And she doesn't believe in evolution. That should play well with independents.
Quote from: CharlieSheen on June 14, 2011, 10:25:38 AM
C'mon Conan.. You know what he was saying. Basically they have to pander to the fringe even if they are moderate (Romney)
Yup. That's the crux. And it will hurt them in the general election.
My second point is that many GOPers think that, because the economy is in the crapper, Obama will lose a second term. That's always possible, but unlike other past presidents, he gets high personal marks even when people think the country is on the wrong track ("wrong-track, right-track" is a typical poll question that gets a lot of credence: "is the country on the right track or the wrong track?"). IMO that means people will still re-elect him, if only because they believe his work isn't finished.
This isn't a foregone conclusion, obviously, but I currently don't see the trend of the last year or so reversing yet.
Quote from: we vs us on June 14, 2011, 10:52:58 AM
Yup. That's the crux. And it will hurt them in the general election.
My second point is that many GOPers think that, because the economy is in the crapper, Obama will lose a second term. That's always possible, but unlike other past presidents, he gets high personal marks even when people think the country is on the wrong track ("wrong-track, right-track" is a typical poll question that gets a lot of credence: "is the country on the right track or the wrong track?"). IMO that means people will still re-elect him, if only because they believe his work isn't finished.
This isn't a foregone conclusion, obviously, but I currently don't see the trend of the last year or so reversing yet.
People holding unemployment checks who are tired of $4.00 gas will decide the next election
Quote from: Conan71 on June 14, 2011, 11:09:01 AM
People holding unemployment checks who are tired of $4.00 gas will decide the next election
You're right, but it's not clear at all whether that will help the GOP.
Quote from: we vs us on June 14, 2011, 11:17:39 AM
You're right, but it's not clear at all whether that will help the GOP.
Depends on how good a job the Obama campaign can do in
bulshitting convincing those people it's still
Bush's Republican's peak oil's sun spot's global warming's er Bush's fault after all these years.
Gaspar,
Haven't heard enough about Cain. I don't hold out much hope for him or the other side, though. The guy I still like has an Mc in front of it (McCain), in spite of his failure choosing Palin. But he will never get another shot. I like Joe Lieberman, too. And I like Fred Thompson. And Dan Boren.
An hoping Brad Carson runs for district 2 again to replace Boren. He was a good guy before and still is. Sad that he didn't win against Inhofe, but I guess the institutional ignorance in this state is still too deeply entrenched to solve that particular problem.
Used to like Coburn, but he and his buddy Ensign have put me off somewhat. (In general, if Weiner has done something worthy of resignation due to indignation, then Ensign and Coburn have raised the bar to criminal activity. That is what I am having trouble with regarding Tom now.)
These 7 are the dummies put up as targets to expend "ammunition" against before the true annointed ones are selected and debuted. It will happen with the Dummycrats as well as the Republicontins.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 14, 2011, 11:25:19 AM
Depends on how good a job the Obama campaign can do in bulshitting convincing those people it's still Bush's Republican's peak oil's sun spot's global warming's er Bush's fault after all these years.
The other side of the aisle isn't exactly running towards the tape with their arms lifted in victory either.
It's all a commercial for fast food.
First person; "who are you voting for?"
Second person; "It depends on who can sell me their burger."
Fast food politics. Feel free to use that.
These are not the perfect candidates. Each has various flaws and blunders. None of these people may actually be THE candidate.
. . .But all of these people would be vastly better than President Obama!
They come to the table with ideas focused on the economy and private sector growth, not a social agenda at the expense of the economy.
I was critical of the "Anyone but Bush" campaign, because it produced president Obama. I am now convinced that almost anyone willing to work with the private sector and reduce the size of government is a necessary choice for president.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 15, 2011, 06:29:51 AM
These are not the perfect candidates. Each has various flaws and blunders. None of these people may actually be THE candidate.
. . .But all of these people would be vastly better than President Obama!
They come to the table with ideas focused on the economy and private sector growth, not a social agenda at the expense of the economy.
I was critical of the "Anyone but Bush" campaign, because it produced president Obama. I am now convinced that almost anyone willing to work with the private sector and reduce the size of government is a necessary choice for president.
Cool. So it's President Bachmann, then?
PS. I think Huntsman is going to be a stronger contender than anyone expects at this point.
Quote from: we vs us on June 15, 2011, 07:08:32 AM
Cool. So it's President Bachmann, then?
Man,
libs people with at least average intellect and understanding would react worse than all the birthers/racists/social conservatives/religious nuts combined on that one.
Had to include everyone, not just the libs on that one.
Quote from: we vs us on June 15, 2011, 07:08:32 AM
Cool. So it's President Bachmann, then?
PS. I think Huntsman is going to be a stronger contender than anyone expects at this point.
You may be right. The candidate/incumbent that will win this election will have the following as part of their position statement, and will have to have some track record of achievement:
1. Private sector job growth.
2. Reduce government spending.
3. An end to now 4 and soon to be 5 wars that are expenditures we do not need.
4. Healthcare reform that represents a reduction in government healthcare spending and lower healthcare costs.
5. Energy independence that focuses on developing existing resources and exploring new technologies.
6. Immigration reform that respects those who want to come here, and rewards legal immigration with an expedited path to citizenship.
There are a thousand other issues, but these are the balls in play for the majority of voters.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 15, 2011, 06:29:51 AM
These are not the perfect candidates. Each has various flaws and blunders. None of these people may actually be THE candidate.
. . .But all of these people would be vastly better than President Obama!
They come to the table with ideas focused on the economy and private sector growth, not a social agenda at the expense of the economy.
I was critical of the "Anyone but Bush" campaign, because it produced president Obama. I am now convinced that almost anyone willing to work with the private sector and reduce the size of government is a necessary choice for president.
Gaspar, you can't be critical of the " Anyone but Bush " campaign and then yourself say " Anyone of these right leaning people would be better than Obama". You then make yourself no better than the uneducated that voted for Obama because of a slogan.
I am curious as to whether President Obama will be able to hold on to much of his voting base.
While the overall unemployment rate has risen by 1.5% since Obama took office, the rate of unemployment for African-Americans is 3.6% higher. Seen another way, the gap between the African-American unemployment rate versus that of the entire population has widened from 5.0% when Obama took office to 7.1% as of May 2011.
African-Americans were a very passionate sector of his 2008 support base, voting 96% for the candidate, but it seems they were forced to bear the brunt of his change.
. . .and today, according to CNBC The housing crisis that began in 2006 and has recently entered a double dip is now worse than the Great Depression. I can't find numbers on this but I would assume it has probably had a profound effect on his base as well.
It seems that President Obama came out of the gate like a thoroughbred pushing his social agenda and stimulus policies but then took a two year vacation. Except for the occasional military authorization phoned in from the back nine, or the beach, he gave up on the economy.
Now the very people who supported him suffer the most. Will they double down?
Quote from: TulsaMoon on June 15, 2011, 10:12:58 AM
Gaspar, you can't be critical of the " Anyone but Bush " campaign and then yourself say " Anyone of these right leaning people would be better than Obama". You then make yourself no better than the uneducated that voted for Obama because of a slogan.
That's my point. That's what I was saying. . . The "Anyone but Bush" folks had little care for issues or experience, they literally wanted "Anyone but Bush." We have that now, and the issues still remain.
Now we have a stable of candidates all with stated platforms on issues, and most with significant political and business experience. It's the diabolical opposite of the coin, and YES based on that it can be established that any of these people would represent a far more competent opportunity for this country.
You don't know anything about these people who support Obama. Why do you constantly post what they are thinking or doing?
It is a little disturbing that you are always talking about what others think. You seem to constantly want to convince them to agree with you.
When unemployment rates go up, African American unemployment goes up at a higher rate. It doesn't matter that the President is black, white, or brown.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 15, 2011, 10:36:59 AM
You don't know anything about these people who support Obama. Why do you constantly post what they are thinking or doing?
It is a little disturbing that you are always talking about what others think. You seem to constantly want to convince them to agree with you.
When unemployment rates go up, African American unemployment goes up at a higher rate. It doesn't matter that the President is black, white, or brown.
It won't matter RM. Every post he makes other than smoker/grilling is so messed up.
He responds to anyone pointing out his foibles or asinine assumptions with "EXACTLY" and then babbles something incoherently.
Just ignore him and hopefully everyone else will as well.
good idea
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 15, 2011, 10:36:59 AM
You don't know anything about these people who support Obama. Why do you constantly post what they are thinking or doing?
It is a little disturbing that you are always talking about what others think. You seem to constantly want to convince them to agree with you.
When unemployment rates go up, African American unemployment goes up at a higher rate. It doesn't matter that the President is black, white, or brown.
You pretend to know what conservatives think so why can't we engage in some pretend as well? ;)
You miss his point. He's simply pointing out that the base which resoundingly supported his candidacy seems to be hardest hit by his policies or lack thereof. It's not a racial issue, he's simply pointing out that was as significant portion of his base and wondering how they will vote.
No he is not. He is trying to do all he can to attack Obama and now he wants to put words in other people's mouths to do his bidding.
President Obama has done many fine things for his "base". If gaspar and you really think that the majority of black Americans are going to vote for Michelle Bachman or Mitt Romney over Barack Obama, you have lost it as well.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 15, 2011, 11:59:07 AM
No he is not. He is trying to do all he can to attack Obama and now he wants to put words in other people's mouths to do his bidding.
President Obama has done many fine things for his "base". If gaspar and you really think that the majority of black Americans are going to vote for Michelle Bachman or Mitt Romney over Barack Obama, you have lost it as well.
RM, I'm not and I don't.
The post was poised as a question, nothing more. You seem to be increasingly disturbed by my posts, and I am sorry for that.
I was hoping to get opinions and analytic discussion on this point. I invite criticism, and I appreciate when you supply it. As for Mr. Townsend, please mitigate the need for personal attack. The idea is to debate the issue, or point of view, not attack the poster on a personal level. I'm not against the occasional comic jibe, but you seem to be continuously personal with your vitriol.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 15, 2011, 11:59:07 AM
No he is not. He is trying to do all he can to attack Obama and now he wants to put words in other people's mouths to do his bidding.
President Obama has done many fine things for his "base". If gaspar and you really think that the majority of black Americans are going to vote for Michelle Bachman or Mitt Romney over Barack Obama, you have lost it as well.
Why is that? Are you saying they have a racial bias?
Honestly, all one has to do is look at Detroit to see how little the Obama administration has done to advance black America since he came into power. More unemployment benefits, more food stamps, more welfare, more Medicaid. Another generation of slaves to the ruling class of America. President Obama has no more idea what the average unemployed black family is going through than I have an idea of what the men's locker room looks like at Pebble Beach. What's become of programs which were supposed to help give minorities better access to capital? Do you see a clutch of new minority-owned businesses springing up all over as a result of this? We have a new national museum dedicated to them opening and more monuments and parks, but how's that translating to bettering the day-to-day life of average black Americans?
It seems to be that the groups that supported President Obama in general are the ones to suffer the most from his policies or lack thereof.
President Obama received 66% of 18-29 year-old demographic vote, and the unemployment rate for those young people is a little above18%.
70% of voters who earned less than $15,000 per year punched their card for President Obama, and as Ben Bernanke said they have been hit the hardest by continuing unemployment.
So, race aside, it seems that nearly all of the groups that threw their support behind the candidate of Hope & Change seem to be the most damaged.
I wonder if this will make much of a difference in how they vote this time around?
The stagnation of this recession presents many of the same challenges that President Carter faced in his re-election bid in 1980. The steps necessary to end the recession are painfully obvious to most, yet to take those steps would require admission of failure and opposition of the administration's established philosophical stance. I may be wrong, but I doubt this president would ever admit a misstep.
There's nowhere else for African Americans to go for political representation. Just as there's nowhere else for environmentalists to go. Just as there's nowhere for unions to go. If you think the Republican party is somehow offering a competitive vision of the future for these groups I've got a bridge to sell you. There's no way that the GOP will steal these people away, no matter how "freedom-oriented" their agenda may be.
You actually make a good point, Gaspar, about how poorly the Hope-n-Change constituency has fared. While no one's primarying Obama, there's a lot of talk on the left about how responsive -- or not -- the Dem leadership has been, and overall there is a level of dissatisfaction with Obama. The Hope-n-Change group voted him in in part because he was supposed to be a better communicator and seemed to promise that he would be able to articulate what 21st century American liberalism is. IMO he was hired to be an idea man as much as a policy wonk. Also IMO, he hasn't lived up to that billing. He has NOT articulated that vision thing, and even though he makes stupendous speeches, they aren't connected together into a cohesive whole. If he could do just that, he would be able to marshall a lot more support than he has.
But again, there's nowhere to go for the Hope-n-Changers. The GOP is nearly feral at this point, and is gleefully cutting funds to every little string of the social net it can, while championing the superrich top 1%. They have this interesting election message which they somehow think will be compelling: times are tough and you deserve all you're getting and more. Even a lukewarm message from Dems would be preferable.
Excerpt from an interview with Matt Lauer a few weeks into his presidency. The clock is ticking. He saw the writing on the wall from the start. And then there was the promise to his liberal base on closing Gitmo. Reality gets in the way of campaign promises sometimes. Now all that remains to be seen is how genuinely pissed off the people are who voted for him.
"MATT LAUER: At some point will you say, "Wait a minute, we've spent this amount of money. We're not seeing the results. We've got to change course dramatically?"
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Look, I'm at the start of my administration. One nice thing about — the situation I find myself in is that I will be held accountable. You know, I've got four years. And —
MATT LAUER: You're gonna know quickly how people feel —
PRESIDENT OBAMA: — and — and —
MATT LAUER: — about what —
PRESIDENT OBAMA: that's exactly right. And — and, you know, a year from now I think people — are gonna see that — we're starting to make some progress. But there's still gonna be some pain out there. If I don't have this done in three years, then there's gonna be a one-term proposition."
MATT LAUER: Let me go on quickly, if I can, to some other subjects. You signed an executive order in your first week that says you'll close the military detention --
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Right.
MATT LAUER: — center at Guantanamo within a year. So the clock is ticking. And already you've heard the criticism that you don't know what you're gonna do with the 245 prisoners being held there.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: It's the right thing to do. It ultimately will make us safer. You've already seen in the reaction around the world — a different sense of America by us taking this action.
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/28975726/ns/today-today_people/t/obama-were-suffering-massive-hangover/
Quote from: we vs us on June 15, 2011, 01:13:41 PM
There's nowhere else for African Americans to go for political representation. Just as there's nowhere else for environmentalists to go.
This is 21st century America. This isn't the 1950's old south.
It takes a lot of hubris to believe that. What favors have the Democrat party done for them? They keep them on social programs because they only represent a vote to them. If they truly cared about the human condition of African Americans, there would be more job opportunities and skills programs, not handouts and incentives to have more children out of wedlock. Dependence on the government is why so many blacks have little hope of rising into the middle class.
As far as unions, how many jobs have they helped create versus the jobs which go to Mexico or overseas to avoid the high price of union labor?
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 01:25:30 PM
This is 21st century America. This isn't the 1950's old south.
It takes a lot of hubris to believe that. What favors have the Democrat party done for them? They keep them on social programs because they only represent a vote to them. If they truly cared about the human condition of African Americans, there would be more job opportunities and skills programs, not handouts and incentives to have more children out of wedlock. Dependence on the government is why so many blacks have little hope of rising into the middle class.
As far as unions, how many jobs have they helped create versus the jobs which go to Mexico or overseas to avoid the high price of union labor?
It's not hubris, it's realpolitik. They have nowhere to go because there are only two other options: 1) the GOP or 2) no representation at all. Staying in the Dem caucus allows them a seat at the table. Going to the GOP just won't happen.
And that's because the catchall argument amongst the right is government dependence. I know it's all the rage here, but in major cities across the country, it ain't that way. In actual black communities, the problems are the same as they've ever been: guns, violence, drugs, lack of services, lack of opportunity, completely destroyed families. The GOP doesn't have any answers for that aside from tax cuts and more money going to the rich and prayer.
Quote from: we vs us on June 15, 2011, 01:33:59 PM
It's not hubris, it's realpolitik. They have nowhere to go because there are only two other options: 1) the GOP or 2) no representation at all. Staying in the Dem caucus allows them a seat at the table. Going to the GOP just won't happen.
And that's because the catchall argument amongst the right is government dependence. I know it's all the rage here, but in major cities across the country, it ain't that way. In actual black communities, the problems are the same as they've ever been: guns, violence, drugs, lack of services, lack of opportunity, completely destroyed families. The GOP doesn't have any answers for that aside from tax cuts and more money going to the rich and prayer.
Personal accountability and not depending on the same system which has fomented crime and hopelessness doesn't seem to be a popular concept in the ghetto, eh? At some point the black community is going to wake up and realize government has never been the solution for their problems other than locking up their sons and daughters, mothers, & fathers to get drug dealers, murderers, and thieves off their streets and that raises even more problems.
Perhaps Herman Cain could be the sort of leader they could identify with and look up to. He's absolutely no more an elitist than President Obama and actually knows how to create jobs.
Quote from: we vs us on June 15, 2011, 01:13:41 PM
There's nowhere else for African Americans to go for political representation.
I don't vote for people because of the color of their skin. Many, if not most of the people I vote for have no racial similarity to myself.
Why would you imply that political representation needs to be racially based?
Shame on anyone who casts a ballot based on skin color alone.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 15, 2011, 12:22:20 PM
As for Mr. Townsend, please mitigate the need for personal attack. The idea is to debate the issue, or point of view, not attack the poster on a personal level. I'm not against the occasional comic jibe, but you seem to be continuously personal with your vitriol.
Shoot, if you consider a factual post a personal attack then no wonder you state and then reverse course so much.
You make attacks on a politician and then pretend to be delighted when your argument is blown to smithereens. Then you wait for another thread and start all over.
Quote from: Townsend on June 15, 2011, 02:02:13 PM
Shoot, if you consider a factual post a personal attack then no wonder you state and then reverse course so much.
You make attacks on a politician and then pretend to be delighted when your argument is blown to smithereens. Then you wait for another thread and start all over.
I will have to go back and read my posts. Perhaps we are interpreting events differently. Thank you for the insight.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 15, 2011, 02:08:08 PM
I will have to go back and read my posts. Perhaps we are interpreting events differently. Thank you for the insight.
I've asked you to do that before. (deleting old posts doesn't count)
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 12:39:46 PM
President Obama has no more idea what the average unemployed black family is going through than I have an idea of what the men's locker room looks like at Pebble Beach.
Did you think that any President before him did? I would suspect that he probably has a better idea than any other President before him.
Do you see a clutch of new minority-owned businesses springing up all over as a result of this?
Is that what you expect from him? If so, you might be happy with this Commerce Department press release...
http://www.commerce.gov/blog/2011/02/08/black-owned-businesses-outpace-growth-non-minority-owned-businesses
We have a new national museum dedicated to them opening and more monuments and parks, but how's that translating to bettering the day-to-day life of average black Americans?
I don't speak for others on their day to day lives. Talk to gaspar.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 01:42:54 PM
Personal accountability and not depending on the same system which has fomented crime and hopelessness doesn't seem to be a popular concept in the ghetto, eh? At some point the black community is going to wake up and realize government has never been the solution for their problems other than locking up their sons and daughters, mothers, & fathers to get drug dealers, murderers, and thieves off their streets and that raises even more problems.
Perhaps Herman Cain could be the sort of leader they could identify with and look up to. He's absolutely no more an elitist than President Obama and actually knows how to create jobs.
You can keep flogging the personal responsibility agenda, but I guarantee you that that's just not the way it's viewed, either on the West Side of Chicago or North Tulsa or 8 Mile Road in Detroit or wherever. You only see dependence, but for a lot of these folks, the fed government is the only thing keeping them off from living on the streets. Private enterprise and investment have long since vanished from a lot of these places, and the gov is the only thing left. So while you see this as a precarious soul-killing relationship, I guarantee you that there's no other help or support around.
I'm obviously not saying this is the end all be all of the African American voting bloc, but those are seminal experiences and very strongly shape how that constituency votes.
And seriously Gaspar? People vote -- left and right -- based on all sorts of group criteria. Skin color is one among many. And pretending it's only a skin color issue is disingenuous. It's a socio-cultural issue that happens to use skin color as a broad identifier. Though these days, it ain't skin color so much as heritage.
Quote from: RecycleMichael on June 15, 2011, 02:16:39 PM
Is that what you expect from him? If so, you might be happy with this Commerce Department press release...
http://www.commerce.gov/blog/2011/02/08/black-owned-businesses-outpace-growth-non-minority-owned-businesses
That's awesome, Michael! That was during the Bush Administration, though. I thought he hated blacks?
"Today the Commerce Department's Minority Business Development Agency (MBDA) and U.S. Census Bureau released new data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2007 Survey of Business Owners showing that the number of African American-owned firms in the United States increased by 60.5 percent between 2002 and 2007 to 1.9 million firms. African American-owned businesses also drove job creation over the five-year period, with employment growing 22 percent, exceeding that of non-minority-owned businesses."
Damn, what's that? A President Bush success story? I didn't think there was such a thing...
"
Quote from: we vs us on June 15, 2011, 02:42:01 PM
And seriously Gaspar? People vote -- left and right -- based on all sorts of group criteria. Skin color is one among many. And pretending it's only a skin color issue is disingenuous. It's a socio-cultural issue that happens to use skin color as a broad identifier. Though these days, it ain't skin color so much as heritage.
Reminds me of "It's not hubris, it's realpolitik."
You really are adept at parsing aren't you? ;)
Some keepers on this thread!
The West Side of Chicago or North Tulsa or 8 Mile Road in Detroit are not just places, they are groups of people who band together and call themselves a neighborhood, community, and family. Government has no more ability to free them from poverty as the tooth fairy. All the State can provide are the chains of dependency. It is up to the individual, or the community to escape.
Elections pose important choices for them. Vote for the person who promises you the most bread, or vote for the person who promises the most opportunity. If they choose to gorge themselves on government they will surely starve.
As the state grows, one's sense of self-ownership is destroyed, liberty is traded for "security," the human spirit diminishes, and the citizenry increasingly thinks and behaves like dependent children. – Eric Englund
Quote from: Gaspar on June 15, 2011, 03:46:09 PM
Some keepers on this thread!
The West Side of Chicago or North Tulsa or 8 Mile Road in Detroit are not just places, they are groups of people who band together and call themselves a neighborhood, community, and family. Government has no more ability to free them from poverty as the tooth fairy. All the State can provide are the chains of dependency. It is up to the individual, or the community to escape.
Elections pose important choices for them. Vote for the person who promises you the most bread, or vote for the person who promises the most opportunity. If they choose to gorge themselves on government they will surely starve.
As the state grows, one's sense of self-ownership is destroyed, liberty is traded for "security," the human spirit diminishes, and the citizenry increasingly thinks and behaves like dependent children. – Eric Englund
Aaaaaaand we're back to ideology.
I can see you're having a hard time imagining that people might have a different relationship with government than the one you have, or believe you have.
It's a biiiiig country, brother.
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 03:28:44 PM
Reminds me of "It's not hubris, it's realpolitik."
You really are adept at parsing aren't you? ;)
Well, hell, I'm in sales, aren't I?
Unless you're being sarcastic, in which case :P.
Quote from: Gaspar on June 15, 2011, 03:46:09 PM
Some keepers on this thread!
The West Side of Chicago or North Tulsa or 8 Mile Road in Detroit are not just places, they are groups of people who band together and call themselves a neighborhood, community, and family. Government has no more ability to free them from poverty as the tooth fairy. All the State can provide are the chains of dependency. It is up to the individual, or the community to escape.
Elections pose important choices for them. Vote for the person who promises you the most bread, or vote for the person who promises the most opportunity. If they choose to gorge themselves on government they will surely starve.
As the state grows, one's sense of self-ownership is destroyed, liberty is traded for "security," the human spirit diminishes, and the citizenry increasingly thinks and behaves like dependent children. – Eric Englund
While there are some people picking yourself up by the bootstraps (or whatever you want to call it) will work for. I don't know that Detroit is in a position (with a 25% population decrease the last 10 years) to have neighborhoods rise up and start businesses there is nobody to go to.
Quote from: we vs us on June 15, 2011, 02:42:01 PM
You can keep flogging the personal responsibility agenda, but I guarantee you that that's just not the way it's viewed, either on the West Side of Chicago or North Tulsa or 8 Mile Road in Detroit or wherever. You only see dependence, but for a lot of these folks, the fed government is the only thing keeping them off from living on the streets. So while you see this as a precarious soul-killing relationship, I guarantee you that there's no other help or support around.
I'm obviously not saying this is the end all be all of the African American voting bloc, but those are seminal experiences and very strongly shape how that constituency votes.
And seriously Gaspar? People vote -- left and right -- based on all sorts of group criteria. Skin color is one among many. And pretending it's only a skin color issue is disingenuous. It's a socio-cultural issue that happens to use skin color as a broad identifier. Though these days, it ain't skin color so much as heritage.
"Private enterprise and investment have long since vanished from a lot of these places, and the gov is the only thing left."
You know, I am curious as to why there were, and are still, so many Mexicans working in Tulsa building new homes and businesses, landscaping, mowing yards, cleaning houses, etc. while also creating new businesses in other parts of Tulsa,,, when presumably it would be easier for say a black who speaks the language to do so. Many of the Mexicans I work with all the time barely speak the language, if at all, and managed to get to South Tulsa all the way from southern Mexico, yet there are so many other people that can't get to south Tulsa from north Tulsa?
I have watched new Mexican immigrants pool their resources to buy an old beat up truck (and go to a small mexican owned repair shop when needed, thus supporting and creating yet another job), they all pile in it and get to work. They often camp out in cramped quarters, make lunches at work, (also supporting tiny, entrepreneurial, local businesses like food wagons or small grocery stores and restaurants, in their neighborhoods to purchase food stuffs ((while many in north Tulsa complain of a food desert in their neighborhood? isnt that opportunity knocking? )) )etc.
Having painted for 20+ years, I have seen many a guy who started small then worked his way up to owning painting companies, restaurants, getting a nicer house and vehicle, etc. I get an occasional reminder when I see a few of them very attentively watching me work to see if they can do what I do, and asking questions. I know what they are doing, if they can figure out how to do it and make money at it, they are going to do it. Fortunately, much of what I do requires more than something you can learn or "technique" or I would be out of a job lol. Plus, yes, I have the advantage of being a white guy that can speak the language. I could go on, but there were apparently job opportunities in Tulsa, interestingly, it wasn't the natives that were stepping up to take them, or make them. And many times I overhear what they are making to; lay tile, bricks and stone, paint, faux walls and cabinets, etc. with some of those jobs they can often make more than me.
Quote from: TheArtist on June 15, 2011, 04:09:50 PM
"Private enterprise and investment have long since vanished from a lot of these places, and the gov is the only thing left."
You know, I am curious as to why there were, and are still, so many Mexicans working in Tulsa building new homes and businesses, landscaping, mowing yards, cleaning houses, etc. while also creating new businesses in other parts of Tulsa,,, when presumably it would be easier for say a black who speaks the language to do so. Many of the Mexicans I work with all the time barely speak the language, if at all, and managed to get to South Tulsa all the way from southern Mexico, yet there are so many other people that can't get to south Tulsa to north Tulsa?
I have watched new Mexican immigrants pool their resources to buy an old beat up truck (and go to a small mexican owned repair shop when needed, thus supporting and creating yet another job), they all pile in it and get to work. They often camp out in cramped quarters, make lunches at work, (also supporting tiny, entrepreneurial, local businesses like food wagons or small grocery stores and restaurants, in their neighborhoods to purchase food stuffs ((while many in north Tulsa complain of a food desert in their neighborhood? isnt that opportunity knocking? )) )etc.
Having painted for 20+ yeats, I have seen many a guy who started small then worked his way up to owning painting companies, restaurants, getting a nicer house and vehicle, etc. I get an occasional reminder when I see a few of them very attentively watching me work to see if they can do what I do, and asking questions. I know what they are doing, if they can figure out how to do it and make money at it, they are going to do it. Fortunately, much of what I do requires more than something you can learn or "technique" or I would be out of a job lol. Plus, yes, I have the advantage of being a white guy that can speak the language. I could go on, but there were apparently job opportunities in Tulsa, interestingly, it wasn't the natives that were stepping up to take them, or make them. And many times I overhear what they are making to; lay tile, bricks and stone, paint, faux walls and cabinets, etc. with some of those jobs they can often make more than me.
Back away from the gold paint, Artist. You are just making waaaay too much sense! ;)
Quote from: Conan71 on June 15, 2011, 01:25:30 PM
It takes a lot of hubris to believe that. What favors have the Democrat party done for them? They keep them on social programs because they only represent a vote to them. If they truly cared about the human condition of African Americans, there would be more job opportunities and skills programs, not handouts and incentives to have more children out of wedlock. Dependence on the government is why so many blacks have little hope of rising into the middle class.
I so wish that were so, Conan. If it were, the solution would be simple.
Not that there aren't problems with the way welfare benefits are distributed. Dollar for dollar reductions in benefits for earnings are pretty dumb, for example. Setting it up so earning an extra dollar only loses you fifty cents of benefits would eliminate any possible disincentive to work.
Sadly, though, things like the significantly higher incarceration rate for blacks and the lack of resources put into their neighborhoods by government (relative to their richer neighbors) and their, as a class of people, still finding themselves disadvantaged relative to the rest of us economically because of their history of slavery followed by extreme marginalization. (compounding, ever heard of it?)
There is a structural disadvantage we refuse to acknowledge. Our functionally (although not intentionally) racist justice system is a big part of this.