Forum Post: Re-elect Obama
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 16, 2011, 12:15 a.m. EST by malikov
(443)
from Pasadena, CA
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Still safer to have a Democrat in the Office.
Obama is a clown and has shamefully broken basically every promise he made. You will never see an improvement until a 3rd party at least threatens the Democrats, and it's preferable that the whole dirty Democratic machine goes down.
http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
Might as well take a look
This is a more accurate version:
http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
Nice.
Your fun website starts with the closing of Guantanamo Bay, yet the facility appears to be open. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp
Facts hurt the brains of bin Laden fans. They call constitutionalists racist but think it is perfectly fine to look past the fact that they voted for bin Laden because they were too caught up on his dark skin to figure out what he did with his life.
"voted for bin Laden"?
Obama is Osama. Third generation CIA operative active in the Af-Pak theater in the 80s. Coincidences are not accidents. Wake up.
And Cain is the guy who killed Abel. I see.
Your sarcasm bites, but it's ok. You have a lot of cognitive dissonance. You also have a lot of love and potential. The latter will win out and you'll see.
Check this site too:
http://whatinthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/
You guys are just haters!!
a bunch of little things that will chipped away at and changed in no time. I'll tell you one WTF he did that can't be changed very easily. He made a bad deal with the bank in 2009, deal in which he lost, we lost and here we are now. So, get ready for Perri cause he's coming...
Hear, hear! Obama is a lying uncompassionate heartless drone killer!
No! President observing, thinking, tough decision!
" the whole dirty Democratic machine"
I think Democracy is much better than tyranny.
Democracy is tyranny of the masses. Please learn the difference between Democratic and democratic. They have two very different meanings; as do republican and Republican. That said, I would take a republican form of government over a tyrannical democracy any day.
"tyranny of the masses", that's what the 1% demonizes and is scared shitless of. Yeah, as soon as we have tyranny of the masses we'll turn into the animals that we are, the ruthless greedy lot. Yeah, we need their superior rule, or we'll go chop each other up in the mindless rage that is the workers' natural state.
As always, it's a projection of their mentality onto others.
"tyrannical democracy" is an oxymoron.
Too much participation from the people can only have a bad outcome. As James Madison put it in the Federalist Paper No. 10, "[Democracies] have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."
Furthermore, Edmund Burke in Reflections on the Revolution in France, said that, "The tyranny of a multitude is a multiplied tyranny." In OWS's foolish efforts, they are actually inadvertently working to bring in a far worse society than we currently have. I just pray that you fools do not usher in the second coming of Robespierre. Unchecked, a majority could destroy its opposition and, in the process, destroy democracy as well.
They (Hamilton/Madison) were also against the party system and banks, if I remember correctly. Regarding the Democracy, they just named some practical difficulties in proper implementation, rooted in "popular rage" - the human factor. It's hard to argue with that point.
But there's a way to overcome it by education (which should be free both monetarily and free of those neoliberal attempts to robotically quantify everything) and cultivating the general culture (sorry for the tautology) of making collective decisions. We just need to start somewhere, and we live 200 years after those events, in the age of global knowledge, global transportation, global communication. Representational democracy will eventually become direct democracy. The question is when. Meaning while we are alive, or after we die and won't see it.
Actually, Alexander Hamilton created the banking system, and James Madison was for it. The Federalist Party was created by Alexander Hamilton and was dominant to 1800. The rival Republican Party (Democratic-Republican Party) was created by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, and was dominant after 1800. Madison worked diligently to form party lines inside the Congress and build coalitions with sympathetic political factions in each state. It is interesting that in your supposed age of global knowledge that you are so lacking of it.
If the age of global knowledge, transportation, and communication does indeed usher forth direct democracy, the we will all share in global poverty. Collective decision-making will be our undoing.
Ok, it were Jefferson/Madison, sorry. Jefferson was against banks, not Hamilton. I guess I should have checked my memory. But guess what, in Federalist 10 Madison goes on and on about how bad political factions are. If he had to form a party it was only to counter-balance the other guys.
But tell me, doesn't the Congress make decisions collectively? Or do they merge into one being, some giant jelly-dude, to make a decision?
protip: when "Democratic" or "Democrat" is capitalized, it refers to the Democratic party - that's called a "proper noun," and proper nouns are capitalized. When "democratic" or "democrat" is not capitalized, it refers to the concept of democracy. This is not rocket science.
I can capitalize whatever word I choose, to emphasize its role in the sentence or to show distinction. No, this is not rocket science. This is free, living, language.
haha - you capitalize random words to show "distinction"? This is called "arbitrary usage" and it destroys language, which requires TWO people, namely yourself and your listener, to understand basic rules and definitions - for example, my post OBVIOUSLY referred to the Democratic party, which you would have known if you knew the rules for capitalization. But since you don't know those rules, you derailed the conversation by making a non-sequitur comment about "democracy" (a smear, actually) rather than speaking about the Democrats.
Your proposal for a "free, living language" literally destroys meanings that have already been decided upon. You are making the language poorer.
Dude, you don't own the language. I can do with the language whatever I want as a native speaker, even use misleading terms, such as "Democratic machine", with as much or as little regard to the listener as I feel like.
I derailed conversation, destroyed meaning, and made language poorer by saying you speak nonsense? Well, if you say so. But I believe it is your right to speak nonsense any time, so, please, do.
as;odigjtwpoiehgh poihwepioghawerg poihawgpoihwerg That's me "doing whatever I want as a native speaker," you functional retard. Oh, and also a salary-slave media-duped troll. I hope your children die bleeding on the sidewalk while the surgeon treats a fat banker for the heart disease he got from eating too much caviar.
The only reason Democracy might not work out is people like you.
I think he was talking about the democratic party
He was talking nonsense.
I have a question? What is democracy in the USA? Two parties (Democrats and Republicans)? You can chose between 2 candidates on presidential elections, and both of them are just figures in the hands of bigger players. Where is a possibility to chose some third, fourth or some independent candidate? I'm always hearing that USA has the biggest level of democracy. Can anyone explain me this nonsense?
Republicans lined up 9 candidates for 2012, democrats - 2. Each candidate is being invested in by big business to pay for promotion. Americans are pretty evenly divided into two parties, that cover up real issues with rhetoric specific to that party, because the business believes that real issues are too dangerous for an average mind to deal with. Whoever has the best logo - wins.
Is it democracy (the government of people)? No it isn't, and in the same time USA wants to bring democracy to the other parts of the world. That's the capitalism dictatorship and should be referenced like that in every oppositional movement.
Americans revolt until they hit a fence that says "private property". That stops the revolt. Or alternatively, to stop a revolt one can say "it's socialism", or "it's communism" - they'll beat you up, turn around, and go home.
Of course it's capitalist dictatorship, but that's what we want to preserve. Just stretch the leash a bit.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: One of the main pillars of Conservative propaganda is that both parties are the same. Nothing they say is further from the truth. It is an insidious lie intended to demoralize progressives, and discourage them from voting. Do not fall for this canard, because if both parties are the same, there is no hope for change, and therefore no reason to vote. The truth is that there is a difference between the parties. A stark difference! One party works for the rich, the other party works for all Americans. One party takes money from the needy to feed the greedy, and the other party takes money from the greedy to feed the needy. One party has plans and policies to create jobs, and the other party has a long list of lame excuses for not doing anything. Liberals want to change things. Conservatives want things to stay the same. There is a difference. One party wants to tax the rich, and the other party wants to tax the poor. One party wants to destroy Unions, and the other party wants to support them. One party supports the Occupation of Wall Street, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to rebuild America, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to provide health care for all, and the other party doesn’t. One party wants to regulate Wall Street, and the other party doesn’t. One Party wants to end the wars; the other party wants them to go on forever. There is a difference. One party is Myopic, and the other party is Far Sighted. One party wants to help the Middle Class, and the other party is at war with the Middle Class. One party wants to fire Teachers, and the other party wants to hire them. One party wants to create more jobs in America, and the other party wants to create more jobs in Asia. There is a difference. One party wants to protect pensions, and the other party wants to loot them. One party has a heart, and the other party has Ann Coulter. One party protects the right bear Arms, and the other party protects the right of freedom of assembly. One party believes that the only role for the Government is to provide for the common defense, and the other party believes that the Government should also promote the general Welfare. There is a difference, and anybody that tells you there is no difference between the parties is simply not conversant with reality. In addition, anyone that blames the Democrats for the current state of affairs has no understanding of who controls the Government. One Party has the Presidency, and the other party has the Majority in the House, controls the Senate, has a majority on the Supreme Court, and is responsible for current economic policy. So, if you’re angry, and you want to start a real fight, I submit that we should start a real fight with the Conservatives! America has a Two Party System. One party is clearly on your side, the other party thinks you’re and Anti-American mob. At some point in time you’re going to have to pick one. Choose wisely, your future is at stake
It is the country's problems！
[Removed]
Stop disrespecting the president like that!! Who would you vote for, Cain, Perry, Bachman, etc...
[Removed]
I gather that you do not realize that the President cannot keep a promise with a congress that does nothing and has a sole mission to bring him down. Consider the alternative. If you want him to keep his promise, get the voice out to take back the congress from the Tea Rats.
I believe as commander in chief, the President has full(100%) control over the Executive branch. Did they stop teaching that? Stopping the wars could happen tomorrow, if he wanted it. Stopping enforcement of bad laws at the federal level(such as medical marijuana raids by the feds) could happen tomorrow, if he wanted it.
Remember that Nader very possibly caused Dubya to become president. Theory vs. reality.
Yea that is the strategy. Undermine the machine. That is our actual freedom, not the formal freedom offered by the machine. But that strategy is long run and a tactic is to re-elect him because at least he is the whore with a golden heart. We will likely remain for at least a year under the machine - but the Republican machine will be a lot more violent towards dissent don't you think.
Are you serious? He has been bought by the same 1% that own everything. He is no better than bush. Just this week he went along with the Iran / Mexican drug cartel false flag and sent troops to africa.
Any president will be better than Bush!!
He talks better than Bush, and looks better. That's to formally oppose your thesis. In my experience, the guy who is not bought by the 1% is the guy who is going to sell to 1%. Say, mayor of Toronto (Canada) was praised by the public that he didn't take his Councillor expense account. Now Toronto is up for sale, as my friends tell me. Public services go out, private buyers get in.
[Removed]
Hahaha.... Im sold but can he at least use lube this next term because I am sore from constantly getting screwed.
[Removed]
Your replies to our little clashes on this forum are never to the essence of the question, but your own monologues on the keywords you pick up from a quick scan of a post. That doesn't demonstrate any respect, that a polite person should show.
You can only serve 2 terms as president. Bush can't run because he already served 2 terms. It never ceases to amaze me how stupid some people are. Bush vetoed more bills then any other president. He tried to keep congress in check, but there is only so much he could do. He tried to reform social security, but congress wouldn't allow it. Obama is a puppet, look up the speech when his tele prompter went out, he can't come up with a logical sentence. He makes speeches sounds good, but he can't make a decision. He wants to please everyone, and as president that is not possible.
Herman Cain for president 2012. Herman Cain is running for president. He’s not a career politician (in fact he has never held political office). He’s known as a pizza guy, but there’s a lot more to him. He’s also a computer guy, a banker guy, and a rocket scientist guy. Here’s his bio: Bachelor’s degree in Mathematics. Master’s degree in Computer Science. Mathematician for the Navy, where he worked on missile ballistics (making him a rocket scientist). Computer systems analyst for Coca-Cola. VP of Corporate Data Systems and Services for Pillsbury (this is the top of the ladder in the computer world, being in charge of information systems for a major corporation). All achieved before reaching the age of 35. Since he reached the top of the information systems world, he changed careers! Business Manager. Took charge of Pillsbury’s 400 Burger King restaurants in the Philadelphia area, which were the company’s poorest performers in the country. Spent the first nine months learning the business from the ground up, cooking hamburger and yes, cleaning toilets. After three years he had turned them into the company’s best performers. Godfather’s Pizza CEO. Was asked by Pillsbury to take charge of their Godfather’s Pizza chain (which was on the verge of bankruptcy). He made it profitable in 14 months. In 1988 he led a buyout of the Godfather’s Pizza chain from Pillsbury. He was now the owner of a restaurant chain. Again he reached the top of the ladder of another industry. He was also chairman of the National Restaurant Association during this time. This is a group that interacts with government on behalf of the restaurant industry, and it gave him political experience from the non-politician side. Having reached the top of a second industry, he changed careers again! Adviser to the Federal Reserve System. Herman Cain went to work for the Federal Reserve Banking System advising them on how monetary policy changes would affect American businesses. Chairman of the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank. He worked his way up to the chairmanship of a regional Federal Reserve bank. This is only one step below the chairmanship of the entire Federal Reserve System (the top banking position in the country). This position allowed him to see how monetary policy is made from the inside, and understand the political forces that impact the monetary system. After reaching the top of the banking industry, he changed careers for a fourth time! Writer and public speaker. He then started to write and speak on leadership. His books include Speak as a Leader, CEO of Self, Leadership is Common Sense, and They Think You’re Stupid. Radio Host. Around 2007—after a remarkable 40 year career—he started hosting a radio show on WSB in Atlanta (the largest talk radio station in the country). He did all this starting from rock bottom (his father was a chauffeur and his mother was a maid). When you add up his accomplishments in his life—including reaching the top of three unrelated industries: information systems, business management, and banking—Herman Cain may have the most impressive resume of anyone that has run for the presidency in the last half century.
Now who would you rather have as your president? Obama who has never held a real job in his life? Or Cain who has been to the top of 4 industries?
Neither Herman Cain use to be head of the Kansas city Federal reserve. He knows plenty about creating low end minimum wage jobs and cutting the quality of the product he serves to fatten the masses to turn a profit. He was also opposed to auditing the Fed. They already run our currency lets hand our country over to them too. Who know by the end of his second therm that New World Order the WTO has always dreamed of will be upon us.
I'm starting to believe in Cain. At least he has some ideas that are making some sense regarding the economy. I've been confused about what's going on in the Democrat party. Not saying I'm sold, but at least I'm seeing something potentially better than what we have now.
I agree, we need more nuts in leadership. Go Cain! That's how you set up the stage for someone normal in the future. And the nuts will create an environment like 2009 that a normal leader can take advantage of.
[Removed]
Just because someone is a bad president doesnt mean he shouldnt be a president. 2012 and 2013.
[Removed]
Both failure and success should be equally rewarded. Everyone must be rich.
[Removed]
Well there you go. Utopia for all!
hahahahahhhhahahahahahha
They both kind of look like monkeys.
Seriously lets not be blind Obama is in bed with wall street just look at his cabinet.Lawrence Summers, director of the National Economic Council and Obama’s top economic adviser who has recieve millions from top hedge fund has been paid by J.P Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and Chase upwards of 100k each to deliver speeches for them. Michael Froman, deputy national security adviser for international economic affairs, worked for Citigroup and received more than $7.4 million from the bank from January of 2008 until he entered the Obama administration. David Axelrod, the Obama campaign’s top strategist and now senior adviser to the president was paid upwards of three million dollars combined by two Wall Street consulting firms he owns. Thomas E. Donilon Obama’s deputy national security adviser was paid $3.9 million by a Washington law firm whose major clients include Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and the private equity firm Apollo Management. Louis Caldera, director of the White House Military Office, made $227,155 in 08, from a California bank that promoted sub prime mortgages. David Stevens, who has been chosen by Obama to head the Federal Housing Administration was a former top executive of Freddy Mac. Neal Wolin, Obama’s choice for deputy counsel to the president for economic policy, is a top executive at the insurance giant Hartford Financial Services, where his salary was $4.5 million. I can go on and on the fact that OWS supporters would support someone who is so inextricably codependent with wall street and the financial sector is madness. Obama is contrary to everything that we are fighting for.
that and the majority of his cabinet during the first two years where tax cheats
Well, you know, there are those politicians who are in bed with Wall Street, and those who try to get in bed with Wall Street. Government should manage large public projects and be responsible to citizens for every dollar. That's not happening. But someone lined up 9 candidates for me to satisfy my any wish: what president I like: thin, fat, black, white, a woman, young, old - they have all sizes and colors. That worries me, who is making the sale?
If this was going on six years ago everyone would be blaming Bush. Why is Obama off the hook? This man is immune to criticism because as soon as anyone criticizes him they are called racist.
like
One man can not be responsible for the well-being of 350,000,000 people (unless he presses the wrong button in that nuclear suitcase). One man can only do so much. Maybe we are not supportive enough. Obama seems to me to be a good man. That's why he compromises. And when you compromise too much you won't have much done. If we were more united behind his back, this would give him strength to go against the pier of bankers. I think out of all presidents I remember he is the most vulnerable to domestic critique.
No one was more united behind a President than we were in 2008. We owned both houses and the WH, but yet the things campaigned on didn't happen like we were told. Now, IMO, he's just using this movement. He's just raking it in from the corporations. He could decide to turn around and give it to the movement if he wants real support.
I wish he did, but as far as I know OWS is trying not to get into electoral politics. This thread is my own initiative, and only represents my interest in the question. Obama did lots of good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Domestic_policy
His voters expected too much from him. Now they are disappointed.
"YES HE CAN" when that one man is elected on the platform of change and fails to deliver"Yes he can"..... When that man sells us lies wrapped it eloquent speeches "Yes he can" When he smiles to our face supporting our protests but stabs us in the back by helping sell us out the the very people we are trying to fight against. "Yes he can" When he promises to bring our troops home only to further commit more troops with a failed surge.... Can one man be held responsible "Yeas He Can"...
OWS should have happened just when he got elected. We could have been living in a different world now.
It happened because so many of us believed Obama could change things but when he turned out to be just like all the rest it made us mad. The government we elect and give power to is using that power for their own gains at the cost of the American people. To them it may be a game but this is our lives. They feed us puppets as candidates that look presidential and deliver great speeches. Do you know how many writes Obama has for his speeches. They give them public speaking classes tell them how to control facial expressions and gestures all so they will appeal to a broader range of voters. These aren't presidents these are ,in fact, political actors who serve at the pleasure, not of the American people as is their sworn oath, but to the pleasure of the Federal reserve and Wall Street(the highest bidder). There is only one candidate who has the integrity to turn things around but he is being marginalized by the corporate media just like our movement.
And that candidate has no speechwriters or public speaking experience?
No we can find out by looking at his track record Obama, Bush Romney, Perry, Clinton, or whom ever every single candidate for president in the last 40yrs has flip flopped constantly you can find them saying one thing and years later saying another it is a political game their goal is to convince weak minded SHEEP to jump on the band wagon so they will defend him to the bitter end even when he has FAILED the American people. The candidate I would choose has integrity you cannot find him flip flopping or changing message for the 30 yrs hes been in politics. His supporters aren't brain washed by eloquent speeches they are awakened by education and facts and are trying to get the rest of you to wake up and educate yourselves as well..... You have offered no valid reason why we should keep your beloved Obama in the white house. All you can do is make excuses why he has failed. Not one of his promises has been lived up to and Im not sure how you found your way into the OWS movement. Close minded supporters of clear political puppetry is how we got into these dire straights and open minded free thinkers that swim against the current is how we'll get out of it. As the saying goes fool me once shame on you , fool me twice shame on me. I mistakenly voted for him once and will not be fooled again I have a belly full of bullshit and refuse to swallow any more of Obama's federal reserve consulting Wall street lead puppeteer-ed lies again.
I don't think there can be that brilliantly logical pure sure reason in this matter just because people are not robots and one can never guarantee what another person will do. It's always a bet. Even in physics no result of an experiment guarantees that the next experiment will demonstrate same result.
But for me it's not 100% about Obama as much as not voting for Republicans. That said, if he promised something and didn't deliver, but didn't promise and delivered something else - that's not that bad. With one signature he gave 4,000,000 children a health insurance, which previous Republican president personally vetoed twice. Obama may not be perfect, but no one is perfect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Domestic_policy
Of course they all do but that candidate doesn't pander lies to gain votes that candidate is honest in the face of criticism and possesses a rare commodity these days INTEGRITY!!!
"that candidate doesn't pander lies to gain votes"
Too bad we can only find it out after we sign up.
Excellent point, Mr Obama is just one person and the machine hes ttying to drive is broken
Obama to! America needs you! The world needs you! ---- Change! Change! Wall Street to change it! !
OBAMA IS WALL STREET!!! Please educate yourself it is sounding like you have heard one too many speeches and are taking the far too literally
No! President observing, thinking, tough decision!
Observing his Wall Street friends rip us off and looking the other way, Thinking about how much his cut is going to be, and making tough decisions like what string of bullshit lies will they swallow this year. You know nothing about him or the others you just like the sound of his speeches. Hitler too had great speeches( Disclaimer: In no way am I some nut job trying to make any comparisons between a brutal Fascist murdering dictator like Hitler and a financial sector prostitute like Obama) but you shouldn't believe in what your fed stay objective and educate your self....Question everything.
No! Believe the United States, I believe the President. We will be good!
You are uneducated in the corrupt inner workings of the current administration. I do believe in the US and the US is about changing things when they are hurting you. Obama may give good speeches but very few in this country see him as the hero you do. He is not. He is just as corrupt as the last president and we are sick of our government who we elect to serve us use and betray us. We are not a commodity to be sold or some expendable number on a piece of paper for the name of profit we are sick of our food supply being used as a chemistry experiment. We are sick of the people in the financial sector whos sole purpose is to make money off of our labor screw us and force a continuously lower standard of living on us. We are being hoodwinked, hog washed, and run a muck. We are being sold out, strung out, and lied to. We are not slaves, we are not collateral damage, we are not pawns on your chess board or chips on a roulette table. We are Americans and we will not stand for this it is the birthright that was bestowed to us by our forefathers. We will take our country back. Then we will be good.
good！！！We are Americans and we will not stand for this it is the birthright that was bestowed to us by our forefathers. We will take our country back
Yes Ron Paul 2012 defender of the constitution.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka1ym7S3F3w
Let me get this straight. You're unhappy with the current situation, yet you want to keep the current leader. Go figure.
The current situation roots in times decades ago and ideas that are dimensions apart.
Wow, so just because he's a Democrat mean's you'll elect him? It doesn't even matter that most Democrats have disowned him out of common sense and that he's basically been one big disappointment for everyone who foolishly put their trust in him in the first place? Wow.
I can say I'm not voting Republican, that's for sure.
If you vote for the Democrats no matter their policies, what incentive do they have to take your views into consideration?
Good point. Yet another flaw of Representation.
To me it seems like a flaw in voting Democrat.
I misinterpreted your remark as, basically, if you elect someone for the second term, what incentive does he have to do his best?
Answering the your real concept I'd say everyone can say anything (Hitler said he was a socialist, Christian right say Jesus was pro-profit), including that they will take your views into consideration. No one is really expected to follow through. But at least Democrats have a tradition of being a bit left of Republicans.
If you really can't find any desirable candidate, you can reserve your right to abstain from voting for anyone. Four more years of Obama will dig us into an even deeper hole than the first four years have done already.
I think you might be overestimating the role of a president. A president is not a Roman emperor.
A president is considered the leader of the free world for a reason. It's not a ceremonial position.
No, not ceremonial. Probably, a captain of a sail boat is a good image. Yes, he can order to go left (and right, too), but only if there's proper wind, if the sailors are good, if the wheel-guy obeys, if there's no storm, etc.
"leader of the free world", hey? That's funny.
Vote libertarian. Choosing someone who has screwed us is insain. Why are you in this movement when Obama gave money too and protected the very people we are trying to send a message to?
We give money to these people every day ourselves, don't we. That "take my money from Citibank" was good. That's what we gotta do. The same day Citipresident wanted to talk.
I don't think OWS has a position on Obama. But personally I think we should support him and give him strength. We are the people. The government is supposed to do what we ask it to do. So instead of changing managers all the time, like those corporations do when they don't meet their short-term profit expectations, we should take our current managers by the checkbook, and demand that they do their jobs and carry out our will.
Ok well sticking with the captain until he sinks the ship is not my idea of progress However I do see you point about changing managers all the time. As a business owner if I had a manager who walked into a tough situation and tried his best and things didnt pan out right away I might give him another shot. However If he was deliberately lying and stealing he would be gone no questions asked. This is not a matter of Obama doing his best and not succeeding. He flat out lied to us none of his campaign promises were fulfilled he send more troops to war instead of bringing them home. He sold us out to the industrial military complex, he sold us out to big business, and he sold us out to wall Street. He has done nothing in the best interest of the American people I hate liars as acquaintances and refuse to have a thieving LIAR as a president. Just to throw away your vote on Obama because you are either foolishly intractable or too lazy to educate yourself on the other possibilities out there is ridiculously unpatriotic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Domestic_policy
CHIP (twice vetoed by Bush) alone is tremendous.
what does that have to do with Obama Increasing the bail out and refusing to prosecute wall street executives that criminally got us in this mess. No one is disputing that Bush was a shitty president and a lot of people had your same give him another chance mentality which is why he got re elected and Ill be damned if we do that again four years is a lot of time if you cant make measured gains in that allotment of time then you are not the man for the job who is?????.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka1ym7S3F3w
The SEC under Obama is trying to find another way to prosecute the banksters, as current laws are very limiting, according to the WSJ. These things, unfortunately, tend to be a very long, show process.
dont be stupid we have to work in the walls we r in. vote for no one we will be the subject to the tea party for 8 more yrs. the guys not jesus, he said it be long and hard. he can get no one confirmed. u know what that means its like running a micky d reasterant with 2 people. u know how many filabusters he had to over come. wake up!!!! the a reason he turn coat, the people turn coat on him, the media his party
You wake up bush had the dems controlling the house fighting against him and he still pushed through all their BS so the republicans are fighting Obama this is to be expected. Did they make him lie to us? Did they make him choose a heavily vested Wall Street/ Financial sector cabinet. Did they make him choose to nit prosecute the architect of this financial crisis we're in open your eyes you are being screwed He is the same as Bush only more well spoken with a liberal flare so the hippies can have their turn and say that their in control now. Dem or Rep they are all working for the same bosses and no its not us.
Yep, it's like some first test of a new type of boat - it may work the same as the conventional type, but everyone will flee at the slightest sign of trouble.
What a joke, worst president since Jimmy Carter
Obviously, you drank way too much Koolaid.
Obama received more money from Wall Street interests than other politician in U.S. history. His Chief-of-Staff, Bill Daly, is his gatekeeper in the White House, whose sole role is to keep Wall Street happy. Obama appointed Wall Street flunkies, Bernanke and Geithner, to run the U.S. economy and they duly ran it into the ground. Frankly, that's all you need to know about Obama. Don't let Obama swing the watch in front the nose of OWS and co-opt the movement. Ditto all other politicians. You might as well go home if you succumb to their overtures. They are part of the problem.
Of course they are part of the problem. Who isn't?
Surely by now it is obvious that Obama is simply a slicker version of Bush. Almost every Bush administration position that outraged liberals as been accepted by Obama, and he's gone even further in some respects.
Continuing to accept the lesser evil argument for supporting increasingly bad people is a really bad idea. Now is the time to put our energy into building a powerful party to promote the interests of the 99%. The Green Party, which is already organized in many states, and which ran a top notch candidate for governor of NY (Howie Hawkins) in the last election, might be used as a starting point.
For more detailed arguments about the need for a third party, see "Wake Up America! 2012 is Coming!" at http://www1.cs.columbia.edu/~unger/articles/wakeUp.html
Obama has actually been far worse than Bush in many respects: on the environment (he's expanded offshore drilling); nuclear weapons (expanded once-retired programs); he's escalated wars and started new ones, appointed a deficit commission to gut Social Security and Medicare; bailed out the banks while letting ordinary people suffer economically; made permanent a regime of torture and created the precedent for the US to assassinate American citizens with no due process--the list goes on.
What's more, as a Democratic politician, all of these heinous policies have now been normalized, whereas under a Republican president, at least some partial formal opposition from the Democrats could have been counted on. The insidious ideological effect of having Obama as the agent of these retrograde policies should not be discounted. There is now total confusion on the left as to what to oppose, with some even coming out in favor of policies they forcefully rejected under Bush. That is the legacy of Obama.
Seems you forgot who was in contoll for 8 years before B rock inherited this mess.
Everything I mentioned was done on Obama's watch. You can't criticize Bush and then give Obama a pass for accelerating and expanding on Bush's policies--and innovating new ones that are just as, oftentimes more, regressive.
Dont think he should get a pass, but remember who sent our brothers and sisters to Iraq and Afgahnistan, and who gave corporate taxes a rest. That is the problem, there isnt one entity at fault, its the whole system, unless you change it all the bad will spoil the good, what do you think gets more press, the peaceful side or the arrests and pepper spray?
I basically agree with your last point. Democrats and Republicans use each other essentially as decoys to pander to their respective constituencies, but their policies are nearly indistinguishable. For the left, and for Occupy Wall Street, it is the Democrats who are closest in proximity, and who are positioned to deflate the momentum that is building. We should recognize how retrograde the Democratic Party is. Turning OWS into a get out the vote mechanism for the Democrats would be a true disappointment. I think outreach to labor, organizing for a major escalation such as a general strike, is the best route forward.
A general strike would be a very effective tactic. Hit them where it counts...the pocketbook.
Read this article on the prospects of a general strike. I do think there are risks involved, but I am partial to it as a tactic.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/10/2011107135115719238.html
Thanks. Very interesting, indeed. I never really thought about the NY "go-it-alone" mindset. Do you feel an urgency to step-up the approach before winter, as stated in article?
I agree, its all quite complicated, personalities, opinions, ideology,
The Democrats are not the left. They are just a bit left of Republicans.
The current political process in the U.S. is a waste of time. Suggest not wasting your time with it if you are interested in real change. We need to start figuring out how to overturn the system instead.
I've put together a few general features of a free society that we should try to achieve. Please, have a look: http://superunion.org/m/articles/view/One-Direction
Great ideas. Now, how are you going to make that happen?
These ideas must become common knowledge. Everybody should learn these ideas and understand them. And then we'll be able to just make them happen, one by one.
I sincerely hope for a viable third choice. Without this, I'll vote for Obama.
that would be nice.
O(b/s)ama is third generation CIA agent. Put him in jail for war crimes.
Check out Pastor Manning's interview of Wayne Madsen on youtube.
I guess you won't find it here: http://occupywallst.org/forum/experimental-elections/
[Removed]
That would require common sense which most of these people are obviously lacking.
If I believed that Ron Paul would end the FED I would vote for him. What holds me back is the concern that he wouldn't end the FED but instead privatize social security or medicare.
[Removed]
The US must repeal the Federal Reserve act of 1913. Obama sure won't do it, neither will any Republican. Yes, Ron Paul has talked about it, along with abolishing social security, medicare, etc. I am somewhat doubtful he would be able to follow through on ending the Fed. But am very afraid he might have success with the others.
I am a liberal. I believe progressive taxation, social safety nets, worker protections, and industrial regulation are the only reasons there is a middle class in the US. As well, I believe with all my heart that the middle class is the most important sector of the economy. That is why I would go with Obama over Paul.
As long as we have the Federal Reserve we will all be victimized. Rich. And. Poor. Once it is gone we can decide on liberal or conservative policy. Until it is gone, I'm not going to sell out the middle class.
[Removed]
If any Republican candidate believed in progressive taxation they would be proposing tax increases on the affluent with a corresponding equal value decrease on less affluent. I understand their reluctance to take more of the money from the economy to service the interest on the governments loans. They have taken the Norquist pledge after all. But, they could keep an even level but shift the responsibility. You hear about Job Creators but what about Demand Creators. Isn't that income level important to the economy as well?
When you hear about Austerity, know that it is the compromising of Social Safety Nets. Programs like Social Security, etc. All Republican candidates have proposals for so called reform. Some would privatize it. Why would we want that in the hands of private banks?
Unions are the only entity that has as its entire charter to protect workers. They provide legal support and pressure government to enact laws. Every Republican has nothing good to say about Unions. You really buy it that Unions are out to screw their members?
[Removed]
Then you'd be voting for a president thaw proven over and over he wants a restricted controlled economy that produces no new jobs.' we'd already be climbing out of this recession if Obama didnt implement new entitlements corporations have to pay and regulations that sap profits.
[Removed]
Out of 2 piles of dog crap...one of them will taste better than the other...but....they will both taste like crap.
I wouldn't really use such a comparison, but I, basically, am making the same point. So I choose based on some general party tendencies and prefer anything to Republicans.
I was just being a little colorful. My wife says I was being an asshole.
[Removed]
Change?.......my underwear, seriously aside from Bush he's the main reason why I feel voting is shit & will never do it again...simple
You gotta vote. Or make a revolution. But do something or change will never happen. Just don't vote Republican.
Kudos..It's why were all here,fed up of all the false promises. A pacifier just to complete under the table schemes.
LA Times article on Obama and Civil Liberties
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/29/opinion/la-oe-turley-civil-liberties-20110929
Aljazeera article "Symptoms of the Bush-Obama presidency"
Where Obama got his money http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638
FUCK NO!!!!!!! fuck liberals. Get someone in office who actually has an idea on what to do
Like healthcare only for those who can pay?
Yes! No one gets anything free! Like free education/healthcare/food/everything else for illegals!
Nothing is free, but if someone doesn't have to pay for a service it doesn't make anyone poorer.
Besides, not to insult you or anything, but your position is fascist.
I guess I should preface my comment by stating that I volunteered for the Obama camp in florida, and took thirty middle school students to witness his inauguration. That aside, if this movement decides to put its weight behind Obama it is a complete farce and totally misguided. Read the article in the LA times which states that Obama is worse than Bush on civil liberties and a recent article in Al Jazera titled the Bush-Obama presidency. Most importantly, look at who funded his campaign the most in 2008---WALL STREET---
I guess I should preface my comment by stating that I volunteered for the Obama camp in florida, and took thirty middle school students to witness his inauguration. That aside, if this movement decides to put its weight behind Obama it is a complete farce and totally misguided. Read the article in the LA times which states that Obama is worse than Bush on civil liberties and a recent article in Al Jazera titled the Bush-Obama presidency. Most importantly, look at who funded his campaign the most in 2008---WALL STREET---see subsequent post for the gory details
Where Obama's cash flow came from in 2008
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638
agree, he seem somewhat shady, but I think he fells whats the point of being president without a second term?
Aljazeera article previously mentioned--Symptoms of the Bush-Obama presidency
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/201182185829490112.html
LA times article perviously mentioned http://articles.latimes.com/2011/sep/29/opinion/la-oe-turley-civil-liberties-20110929
Thanks user briceryant for providing empirical evidence reinforcing my original thesis that it is safer to have a Democrat in the office.
Yes, it is much safer.
Comment (briceryant): "as;odigjtwpoiehgh poihwepioghawerg poihawgpoihwerg That's me "doing whatever I want as a native speaker," you functional retard. Oh, and also a salary-slave media-duped troll. I hope your children die bleeding on the sidewalk while the surgeon treats a fat banker for the heart disease he got from eating too much caviar."
Ref: http://occupywallst.org/forum/re-elect-obama/#comment-126910
It doesn't matter who the president is. They are all sell-outs. And besides, the President is probably the smallest pawn of all.
They seem to be a giant puppet now. The power of the president is gone.
Until the system is fixed, it won't matter who you have in the Oval Office.
He's a puppet and needs to be challenged in the upcoming Democratic primaries. Former Labor Secretary Robert Reich would be a good choice in my view. If no challenger emerges, then I believe people should just not vote in the upcoming primary to send a big message that his re-election will not be a shoe in.
"Expand the Earned Income Tax Credit — a wage supplement for lower-income people, and finance it with a higher marginal income tax on the top five percent. For the longer term, invest in education for lower income communities, starting with early-childhood education and extending all the way up to better access to post-secondary education." sounds ok.
Let's re-elect Obama and let him add even more bankers to his staff of advisors!
I do not support Obama anymore. He has become the very thing he campaigned against. He now takes more money form wall street then anyone and by a large margin. I took his promise to bring our troops home from Iraq to the bank and lost. I now support Ron Paul because he stands by what he says. However I do respect your opinion as we are all apart of this.
Cheers.
R u out of you fucking mind, he is not supportive of the movement, he has done NOTHING to help the people and wants more and more debt that we the people will have to pay back. Think about things before you blurt out bull shit. We need a new form of goverment that protects our our people and not enslaves them with hevy tax burdens that we are all forced to pay back. Oh one more thing you must of forgot, his wife is in the 1% of americans hes just one more of the rich geting richer.
R u out of you fucking mind, he is not supportive of the movement, he has done NOTHING to help the people and wants more and more debt that we the people will have to pay back. Think about things before you blurt out bull shit. We need a new form of goverment that protects our our people and not enslaves them with hevy tax burdens that we are all forced to pay back. Oh one more thing you must of forgot, his wife is in the 1% of americans hes just one more of the rich geting richer.
I personally believe the whole system needs to go. I believe that we cannot sustain ourselves as a planet within the current monetary system which in itself is perpetuating corruption. However, while we are within the constraints of it I would rather have someone like Ron Paul who is all about diminishing government rather then empowering it. Someone who is not in bed with the elites that we protest about. If we do nothing and vote for no one, someone will get into office and most likely it will be the one that will make it all the more difficult for us to have the freedom to change it or remove it. Common sense. Step by step plan.
http://superunion.org/m/articles/view/One-Direction
Join me.
R u out of you fucking mind, he is not supportive of the movement, he has done NOTHING to help the people and wants more and more debt that we the people will have to pay back. Think about things before you blurt out bull shit. We need a new form of goverment that protects our our people and not enslaves them with hevy tax burdens that we are all forced to pay back. Oh one more thing you must of forgot, his wife is in the 1% of americans hes just one more of the rich geting richer.
R u out of you fucking mind, he is not supportive of the movement, he has done NOTHING to help the people and wants more and more debt that we the people will have to pay back. Think about things before you blurt out bull shit. We need a new form of goverment that protects our our people and not enslaves them with hevy tax burdens that we are all forced to pay back. Oh one more thing you must of forgot, his wife is in the 1% of americans hes just one more of the rich geting richer.
He gets $400k/year, you can say he is one of 1% as well.
I am all for new form of government, namely Direct Democracy. But that's too radical even for most people on this forum.
Here's where I stand: http://superunion.org
That said, I don't see any alternative to Obama in the coming election.
An Open Letter to Occupy Wall Street Protesters
Congratulations! You are successfully focusing public attention on the root cause of our political ills. Moreover, you are doing so with dignity and grace -- qualities which will not only influence more people, but make it far harder for the Establishment and their political agents to employ their normal repressive methods. You occupy the moral high ground; do not give it up no matter the provocation.
But, as surely you must know, this act is only the first in a long drama. The system you protest is robust and designed to withstand challenge. The banks and corporations from whom you wish to wrest power are well organized and have, over many long years, fully institutionalized their political and social controls. Our adversaries have waged class war for well over a century, have much invested, and everything to lose -- a long and difficult struggle lies ahead.
With this in mind, now is the time to consider and shape a second act, even as the first continues to unfold. To be successful, this act must not only engender widespread protest but also dramatically enumerate that discontent. Or else, as is happening already, your efforts will simply be dismissed as theatric, but essentially meaningless, commentary by an insignificant fringe of malcontents.
And therein lies the essential contradiction -- the only undeniable measure of and outlet for public discontent is the ballot box. Yet elite control of both political parties makes this a futile exercise. Past well-organized and powerful protest movements were defused and broken by an electoral process dominated by party candidates. Third parties have, historically, been marginalized and had little practical effect. Moreover, time is short -- the next election is barely a year away.
But what might happen if you inject some unpredictability into this well ordered system? If you explicitly reject both party's candidates? What will their media report on election night if millions of us join your protest by writing in "None of the Above" on our ballots?
What might happen indeed...
Yes! – he is our only choice. We Must Have Pres Obama in the White House to Appoint New Supreme Court Justices
Yes! – he is our only choice. We Must Have Pres Obama in the White House to Appoint New Supreme Court Justices...
Yes! – He is our only choice. We Must Have Pres Obama in the White House to Appoint New Supreme Court Justices
Yes! – He is our only choice. We Must Have Pres Obama in the White House to Appoint New Supreme Court Justices
We can't go there!
http://occupywallst.org/forum/we-cannot-become-the-lefts-version-of-the-tea-part/
This is my personal opinion only. I don't speak for anyone else here.
Agreed.
I voted for his hope and change and got 65K tuition bill for my troubles. We have got to run our own person in 2012. Ron Paul, has some great ideas or bring back Ralph Nader.
I agree, Ron Paul has some sense too. He seems to be no nonsense and seems to get it.
I voted for his hope and change and got 65K tuition bill for my troubles. We have got to run our own person in 2012. Ron Paul, has some great ideas or bring back Ralph Nader.
Education must be free. Along with free healthcare (and other things) it's the foundation of true freedom and equal opportunity. http://superunion.org/m/articles/view/One-Direction
Obama 2012... I mean, duh.
There was a great conversation on Charlie Rose this past Wednesday:
http://www.charlierose.com/view/interview/11938
A part of the conversation was dominated by the notion that politicians won't get out on march if nobody is behind them. It's up to the people, to take back the government and make it work for them at the local, state and federal level. We can't wait for a plan, we need to present a plan.
I think Obama is way more likely to get in front of this march then most of the Republican hopefuls, a few have already condemned this movement.
Let's talk about throwing Tea Part/Christian Right Neo-Cons and their backward 19th century principals out of office all across the country. Take back both houses and for once we can have a true progressive majority in this country to match this growing progressive movement.
Absolutely!
"politicians won't get out on march if nobody is behind them" - exactly my point. If we openly and strongly stand behind Obama he will not have to compromise.
OWS is not a pro-Obama movement. We are a pro-change movement that is non-partisan. We don't care what party you're affiliated with or what ideology you subscribe to; if you recognize the real problems we're facing today and you promote real solutions to them, then we will support you.
That said, as we judge Obama on his performance as President over the last 2.5 years, it's a good idea to keep in mind the substantial change that he has brought to America that gives me some hope for the future:
1) He passed healthcare reform
2) He signed the New START treaty on nuclear disarmament and got it ratified
3) He had Osama bin Laden found and killed
4) He issued an executive order ending torture and rendition
5) He repealed DADT
6) He passed the Matthew Shepard Act
7) He signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act
8) He regulated the financial sector
9) He passed the stimulus bill
10) He saved the auto industry
11) He raised fuel efficiency standards drastically
12) He appointed Sotomayor and Kagan to the Supreme Court
It is also important to recognize his substantial failures:
(a) He has not closed Guantanamo
(b) He has not allowed the Bush Tax Cuts on the rich to expire as scheduled.
(c) He has not protected enough homeowners from foreclosure
(d) He has not passed Cap & Trade
(e) He has made no progress towards peace between Israel and Palestine
(f) We are still at war
(g) Washington remains as polarized, corrupt, and incompetent as ever.
While we should recognize Obama's significant successes, we should continue to push for these important issues where he has failed. Individuals should make up their own minds about whom to vote for in 2012. But OWS as a movement should recognize that Obama has brought some substantial change to America that we support, even as we demand that much more be done as we seek to hold Wall Street accountable.
Great list. I'm copying for reference.
Thanks. For a more detailed grading of Obama's presidency (based on promises kept or broken), check out:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/
The "perfect as the enemy of the good" issues tend to hold us from getting anywhere, and I think Obama is an example.
Fantastic SisterRay, I agree with you and support your opinion (also thanks for this excellent list). I personally believe he has been constrained by the system far more than he expected before entering the role of President. I am sure he has had a hell of a time staying positive and powerful through the muck has has tried to battle through. If anything, we should call out to inspire him to action through our voices and actions.
I opened this thread to represent my personal private opinion and not OWS at al.
Though I am surprised at the level of negativity this raised, because it seems that my Google works differently than others': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Domestic_policy
The 1% has won the war of words on this issue, I'm afraid, which helps keep the power structure in place.
They always do, don't they?
Get money out of politics!!
However, he is still owned by the corporations and is conducting war on an unprecedented scale. Even more so than Bush.
This isn't about electing anyone! It's about change. We don't support candidates or corporations.
A disclaimer for some essos:
This is my personal opinion, that has nothing to do with the OWS movement.
Malikov
Just what I thought - this 'movement' was hatched by Dems - it's very suspicious that protesters aren't criticizing Obama - now I know why. I believe they genuinely feel betrayed by him and it's a hard pill to swallow that he betrayed you ... even after you voted for him - he hoodwinked you. But come next November you will all sheepishly vote for him again ...
http://occupywallst.org/forum/re-elect-obama/#comment-126126
YES WE DIDN'T! 2012 campaign slogan!
Just not the white house office, maybe the unemployment office.
Plainly - no it is not.
He has betrayed the peace movement, the global justice movement and the environmental movement. Time to forget about this guy.
Yes for 3rd Party people party
I've seen that elsewhere, maybe a strong third party candidate is a possibility, but who to push into the spotlight?
Than in this case need to change the system,will doit like the Greek did it long time ago
that's not even relevant this year
President of the Wake up! ! Your citizens cry！！
there might not be an election if the protest keeps this momentum folks
there might not be an election if the protest keeps this momentum folks
That would be truly an achievement.
It is starting to seem like the entire objective of the OWS movement is the reelection of Obama.
Obama has endorsed the movement. He is even now using the same language of the movement, using the term "99%" on Sunday.
He uses it as political posturing Obama hasnt deliverd on anything he has promised he is a puppet just like the rest and the fact that there are OWS people trying to back him is ridiculous. He didnt have to offer more money to his pals in wall street. He could have chose to prosecute those responsible but he didnt and he never will. I cant believe I was dumb enough to think that just because he gave great speeches at a time when America needed hope that he would do anything different. The GOP is no better all the corporate media feeding us their next crop of puppets. Only one of them has any integrity and only one who has a chance of doing the right thing. But that one would require people to deprogram themselves and educate their minds. Forget how presidential they're suppose to look or how well their speeches go. We'd have to quit treating political parties like any of them give a shit about us dem rep its all the same. But most swallow the garbage the media feeds them with little to no education. We need a revolution of ideas not this close minded whining that has been going on and great ideas require action.
I would bet a lot of money you would still vote for Obama in 2012.
Not many people in this movement seem to be willing to vote for anyone not Democrat or not on the left.
I'm not following him again. He's too corporate, but I don't know who else to vote for. But, I'll be sitting at home if he's it. Screw me once...
You would be wrong... I choose honesty and logic I am not a sheep and do not fallow the objectives of any movement, I may agree with some of them, but it is on my own accord. On the contrary I feel that if anyone in this movement votes for Obama they are a hypocrite and go against the real change we're trying to achieve
Yeah, I wish he hadn't endorsed us. He's trying to use the movement to his benefit. Maybe if he gave us the corporate money that he's received to campaign on and make his reelection truly about grass roots, that would be the thing. Yeah, give us the money to help fund the signs, shelter, etc.
Support him now. Push him, bully him, do whatever, but support him. Make him stand for us.
Why, it's not like you'll get anything out of it? Once he's back in, then he's not even up for reelection and who knows where he'll turn.
With nation-wide support he may be able to change things. Everyone is a dark horse, so to speak. I am a Christian, and Republican ideals fused with "Christian" Right cause severe nausea to me.
No it is not, EVERYONE in office now, no matter the party, HAS to go.
Obama is giving our tax money to the rich too!!!
http://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/2011/10/14/hey-protesters-what-about-solyndra/
Our tax dollars are going to the rich. Read this article
How about the office itself? I mean "to go"?
Oh, yes, lets have more wars (oh, wait, we do - in Libya and Yemen), and keep re-uping the PATRIOT Act, and keep assassinating American citizens, and keep sending more cannon fodder (soldiers) to die in Afghanistan and to kill more innocent people. Yeah, that sounds like a great idea!
As if Obama started any of that.
Uh, he indeed did. The war on Libya started in February. Obama ordered bombings in Yemen. Obama voted to renew the PATRIOT Act. He ordered the assassination of an American citizen, overseas. He's ramped up the war in Afghanistan and taken into Pakistan. He's just another New World Order tool like Bush.
Oh, and he voted for the bailout.
What war on Libya? The one that's been planned since the seventies when Gaddafi cut off Occidental Petroleum, through bombing in 1986, and that finally resulted in a NATO backed revolution against a billionaire dictator?
I don't know much about Yemen.
Re-new act that was before Obama.
Assassinations (as if it matters here or abroad) happen in politics and business. That's bad, but blaming Obama for this stuff is ridiculous.
Moore's "Capitalism" clearly shows how the bailout was orchestrated.
My point is that it all wasn't invented by Obama.
So tell us about some of the things he did. Repealing DADT was one good thing.
No amount of money can get you a better Google: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Domestic_policy
SO can you call for a special election?
Any constitutional schoolars out there?
How about Ralph Nator / Warren Buffet / A Chomsky Appointee / Chris Hedges..........
I would never want Buffet. Haven't you seen that his accountants have reserved $1.05 Billion on their books for tax money they've been fighting off for 10 years. So, if they reserved for it, they think it's something they owe. I wouldn't trust him at all. In the end, he's about greed as well.
Who do you suggest?More importantly can this actually be done, I mean the next election is only 13 months away.
There is the problem of constructing a "Party" and getting the a canidate. That is allot of organizing in a very, very short time.
I have no answer for who, but not what we have. I just don't like Buffet because he's not what he appears IMO.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/experimental-elections/
If we are going to elect someone that has zero qualifications, is completely incompetent, void of accomplishment, and perpetually campaigning then I say we vote in Megan Fox. At least we would have something to look at when we are fed bullshit
GOP already lined up 9 candidates of all kinds. Next step is a show called "American President", or "The Real Big Brother".
eehh, the Obama campaign gets credit for turning the presidential election into American Idol
And sorry, but Hermain Canes rack just isnt as nice as Megans. She still gets my vote. (Like your "The Real Big Brother" dig, gunna have to use that one lol)
Yeah, I'll take Megan any day. Sharp and hot as it gets.
;-)
I want a third party
I could imagine it now. Restore the Constitution. Paul/Ventura 2012. An eagle soaring out of the net held by an elephant and a donkey.
Join me: http://superunion.org
Re elect? Why? You like the economy, unemployment, unprotected borders and his failed policies?
The economy has suffered more from Wall Street than from Obama's office. I don't care in the slightest about unprotected borders through which workers come to Arizona to pick tomatoes (where farmers now doubt they will be in business next year without those workers). And blaming one person for failed policies (a very vague term) which are supposed to be regulated and enforced by 300 million people - ridiculous.
Not "safer". Obama is just as tied to financial intrests as Republicans. He will never act against their intrests. He speaks platitutudes to make weak minded followers "feel" like he "cares". He only "cares" about being in power.
Every politician I've ever seen on TV and in person, dead or alive, only cares about being in power. Those who don't care about that don't stay in the office long enough to do anything.
OWS as a group is non-partisan, but you are entitled to your partisan political viewpoint.
obama got a lot of corporate donations from banks.... that's surprisng to me.
Corporate donations run elections in this country - that's not really surprising.
But, it also implies that they owe them something. Same with union money. I'd rather see donations limited to individuals and ruling that no corporation or organization can donate as it could cloud the way they make decisions.
Absolutely.
http://www.usdayofrage.org/
Can any one tell me why we are always given two crappy choices by the mainstream media and it doesn't matter Democrat or Republican, we continue with the same crappy foreign policy, financial policy, trade and tax laws and the criminals at the top are never punished. As they continue to tear apart the constitution piece by piece.
What ever happened to Obama's support of bringing our troops home , stop fed raids of state legalized substances, reducing the budget or any other campaign promise he gave. His cabinet is made up of the same bankers and crooks that were robbing us and taking our rights away under Bush.
That's the curse of our political system - we can't change the whole apparatus every four years. And the people (until now) were more than apathetic. At least people realize it's two (or one) choices, not eleven.
I personally believe we should start working towards Direct Democracy, where the executive branch manages things we hire them to manage.
Here's an experiment: one person since morning - http://occupywallst.org/forum/experimental-elections/
"One can only hope that the Occupy Movement is armed with the knowledge of the Democratic Party’s record of cooptation and betrayal of radical movements; and will therefore chart a political movement of the working people and other grassroots independent of both parties of big business."
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/10/14/an-insidious-threat-to-the-occupy-movement/
Try not to look too kooky. They are watching.
We have to pressure Obama. According to a new book he likes to make friends. He has trouble with confrontation. He is middle of the road. Like Roosevelt, we need to pressure him all the time.
He's using us and if we're going to get broad support, we cannot lean to one side, we must stay neutral.
Yea, we must remain neutral. But, if a Republican becomes President we are screwed. I would expect marshall law.
I'd say. He does make a distinct impression of a good person, but it's Wild West in politics where good people don't last. I agree with you, but I'd change the modality a little. Instead of bullying him, we should make it clear to him what we want, and assure of our support if he actually goes and does what we want. This gives good people the strength. This will make him bold and firm. If it's not too late.
Most posters seem on track: you might hate bush but Obama worse, no end to war, no real hc reform, more drilling, nobody in jail for securities fraud
Look up those fascist videos on YouTube by John Birch Society, criticizing the hc reform.
I don't hate any person. But power comes from the people, and we just lay it on this guy or that guy. There's only so much ONE can do. Let's make a list of those we believe should go to jail, and demand it. That'll give him power to do that.
No way. He is a huge cause of all of this and takes more money for campaigning then every other candidate running. Compare Obama and Romney to Ron Paul.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance#canda=ron-paul&candb=mitt-romney
Compare them party to party.
None of these stats ever show those contributions no one knows about. But it's naive to think there are none like that.
The more these stats show up, the more I think: "That's a nice strategy. Give him a million (which I make every minute) and the media will have him for lunch, cause he will disclose it."
Looking to form working cells or joining them. Check me out http://www.google.com/search?q=Facebook+Stephen+David+Mauldin I have been saying that its a good tactic to re-elect Obama even though our strategies for the longer run may not be what he is best for. He was of course compromised to get where he got in the existing system. Still, he is the whore with the golden heart.
One of the best commentaries I've read here.
My (hopefully one day self-sustaining) organization: http://superunion.org
I really need more people.
Ron Paul or Buddy Roemer do not appear to be bought by the 1%. I guess thats why most people havent heard of them.
So true, when Paul wins a straw poll the news states "Cain had a strong showing", "Romney leads over Perry", they pretend he doesn't exist, until he loses a poll, then it's big news. The question is how do we get people to wake up from the mainstream media brainwashing, so we can choose a president who isn't on the payroll of Bankers/WallSt/BigOil.
a candidate who isn't on the payroll of Bankers/WallSt/BigOil will never get to the FEC office. Or will be shot the next day.
If foreign leaders decide to nationalize oil - oil fights back with tanks and airplanes. (And it must please them enormously to spend public money to protect their private interests.)
They will behave same anywhere, cause it's not a national issue for them. They are truly International.
What I read on this forum is nothing but different opinions on various subjects that have nothing to do with your intent. Will you change the world? Believe me, nobody can. All you can reach instability and economic damage. There is no plan that everyone can support, there is nothing but criticism you give. The USA is not better than the rest of the world. So come with a plan that makes the world better and start with yourself. You bring chaos, no improvement.
I propose to cultivate courtesy towards each other, to respect each others only and depleting life-time. Instead of crying like children "I want all my pie" we should all realize that relatively soon we shall all die, and try to help each other enjoy this brief moments of consciousness.
Someone's gotta promote these ideas (not to be destroyed by greed), so I take on the task: http://superunion.org
Honestly there is only one person running this time around that has proven himself not to be a puppet. He has done this by never voting to raise taxes, he voted against the wars, He doesn't participate in the congressional pension plan because he feels it's not right for congress to have such a privileged program and the people don't. He wants to get rid of the federal income tax because he is correct in saying it is not a legal action by the Federal Government and he wants to get rid of or drastically curtail the cause of the financial inequality the Federal Reserve. Please look past the fact he is running as a republican. He is doing that because he wants to be a part of the debates. He is apart from his party on many issues and he is the only person running we can call Doctor. He understands whats is wrong with the medicare system because he had to work with it and with out it in his career as a doctor. He is a veteran and a flight surgeon and has broad base support from our military service people but not from the military industrial complex which is behind the phony wars we are involved in now. He wants to stop the war on drugs because it's a waste of money and time and produces no results. He has maintained unchanged positions on the issues for 30 years and this shows a steadfast belief in what he holds dear, The Constitution of the United States His name is you guessed it
DR. RON PAUL
Please take a serious look at this man I think you will be impressed as I am!
Take a serious look at Ron Paul? Absolutely. Though him being a Republican (and no tax increase?) severely damages his image in my eyes.
Defeat Obama ! Let a conservative president come and cause more destruction and pain. No pain no gain !
If by conservative you mean Romney/Perry/Cain/Bush/McCain or any of the other Republicans that have sold out to the establishment and get media attention then I agree. But, there is a new brand of conservative. One that believes in smaller government, lower taxes, end the fed(inflation is a hidden tax on us), personal liberty, freedom of choice(for everything that doesn't harm others), the constitution and the end of war. I almost wish he would tell the "so called" Republican party where to shove it, and run as Independent. And yes, I'm talking about Ron Paul! Let the rEVOLution begin!
Let's all go demonstrate on Washington at the White House! After all, they enabled Wall Street greed by deregulation, tax breaks for the wealthy and bailouts. Why isn't anyone criticizing the politicians! I notice people don't criticize Obama and I note that Obama is not criticizing the movement. I believe he's biding his time to see if people in the movement will figure out that 's he's to blame through deregulation, tax breaks for wealthy and bailouts. He's waiting to see which way the wind blows. By the way, you had Ralph Nader years ago - I wish he would run now but I'm afraid the Dems would assassinate him.
Let's all go demonstrate on Washington at the White House! After all, they enabled Wall Street greed by deregulation, tax breaks for the wealthy and bailouts. Why isn't anyone criticizing the politicians! I notice people don't criticize Obama and I note that Obama is not criticizing the movement. I believe he's biding his time to see if people in the movement will figure out that 's he's to blame through deregulation, tax breaks for wealthy and bailouts. He's waiting to see which way the wind blows. By the way, you had Ralph Nader years ago - I wish he would run now but I'm afraid the Dems would assassinate him.
people voted to end the wars and for healthcare
Then you lack an open mind and prove that this is, in fact, democrats (OWS) against everyone else.
Obama controls this movement! He owns it!
No one owns me.
No. Obama is just as bad as the republicans.
So, you gonna vote for the Green Party?
I'm putting all of my energy into something that will actually make a difference: OWS. Voting does nothing, because our representatives don't represent us.
Yep. As my father-in-law puts it: "We are overgoverned and under-represented."
Though this thing is not doing so well: http://occupywallst.org/forum/experimental-elections/
And this: http://superunion.org
Better still to have a congress that agrees with your goals. We need to elect a new congress, put up our own candidates, not reelect some hack that has jumped on the current unrest, like Obama. He's gone to the financial well of Wall Street too many times to honestly make a change. Forget the president, a congress of reformers can make a difference, a president is just another corrupt politician.
How about we give it a test run, conduct a small experiment? http://occupywallst.org/forum/experimental-elections/
Agree with Steve. Give me a viable choice and I will take it. The GOP have nothing.
To the life wasting losers of "Occupy Wall Street" When you finally come down from your last hit of "insert whatever crap drug your loser bud just passed you" Read about what it means to be a hero. http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/10/sunday-reflection-protestors-should-try-occupying-reality-real-change
Why all the anger? Do you not believe in free speech?
that right-wing page with a Ronald Reagan ad says it's not found.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7886780711843120756#
I used to think so too. What would be wrong with Romney, for example? After all, BO got more money from wall street than any republican. Do you think a republican will be worse? The stupid religious part is what keeps me away from them though.
That's not necessarily true about the contributions. Someone already showed me that graph. On the same page same money were re-distributed by party - 48% Republicans, 45% Democrats. Though, I would stand behind any candidate who would advocate true Christian virtues. Not those Christian Right twisted lies.
It is hard to separate them. The only reason they "stand" for any vlaues is to get votes from the group that likes those values.
True. It's a failure of Representation, in my mind. We had a good ride, but we might start drifting towards more direct control over legislation and execution.
What do you think about the latest fed crackdown on marijuana dispensaries in states where it is legal? Why have state law if the fed can override it? I agree it is still safer to have a democrat in the office but not him. Hes extremely intrusive and has gotten the most money from wall street.
I have this half-thought out idea that the power should start at the community level. For example, if in a community they decide that weed is legal - it is legal there. Then the next level of government deals with inter-community issues (municipal), than county, state, fed. The fed should ensure base human (constitutional) freedoms, and manage large projects, say, national communication systems. The fed should work under constant down-to-dollar responsibility to the people, but not interfere with smaller jurisdictions.
About Obama's contributors - if you look a little closer you'll see that's not true on party level. And if not Obama, who then? Not that pro-life guy.
Agree. What if the ran someone else from the party?
Not this pro-life guy! But in the perfect sense it doesn't matter who, like cleaners - it doesn't matter if it's Manuel or Eduardo cleaning the office, as long as he doesn't steal and cleans well.
Related link: http://occupywallst.org/forum/experimental-elections/
Because you fail to understand that marijuana possession and distribution is not state issue it is a federal issue. The supremacy clause states that federal laws trumps state laws and guess what there's a federal law that's why you get federal prison time if you get caught with marijuana at the border. The "state" laws like prop 19 in california just stated that state law enforcement wouldn't arrest you if you had less than a certain amount.
Why have a state law if it can be over ridden by the feds inside the state? It makes no sense. Because of the state law, people set up dispensaries. Now they are being targetted. Isnt the state then responsible fo misleading them? Or the state law means nothing. It was a waste of time.
exactly the state had no right to do it. The feds were lenient with dispensaries until it was noticed these dispensaries were not distributing marijuana to those with doctor notes but pretty much to anyone that had anything that looked authoritative.
Then this whole nonsense of state v fed laws should be done away with. One law so people know what the law is. I agree state laws have issues. For example gay marriage. A couple that is married in one state is suddenly not married when they move to another state. Stupid, if you ask me.
Actually that isn't true marriage is just like driver licenses: if you have it in one state you have it in another. It's in the constitution that the states should obey each others "laws" i'm not sure what the wording exactly was.
Marriage has federal implications. Can a person apply for immigration for a spouse based on marriage? Also, until federal taxes are abolished, can the marriage be used to differentiate marital status? It only works when marital status has no relevance at the fed level. Until then it has to be a federal issue.
You do know Obama are taking bribes from wall street also? His hole financial department is made of former CEO from the big banks.
Obama is as corrupt as the republicans
Please, read other posts in this thread. Half of them are saying the same thing. But yes, brides and stuff, same as everyone. There is no other choice.
I would love to see Ron Paul and Dennis kucinich run together
Hey I said the same thing in another thread here. Kucinich is the only guy who pointed out that healthcare should not be a for profit industry.
what incentive would there be for creating new drugs, medical devices, etc.? How would that work?
Drugs can still be sold just like any other commodity. We dont need to pay the insurance company in the middle. In most third world countries you could go to a doctor and get treated. You buy drugs from a pharmacy. There is no middleman. Drugs are much cheaper. The rest of the world does it. In case of people that cant afford, there could be a public option. It then ties to everyone having to pay a healthcare tax. Just like we pay for other services like fire, cops and the army.
Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul would be the best. Kucinich was attacked by the media for sticking up for the working class American and stating the truth about the other democratic candidates in 08 and now Ron Paul is getting attacked for a similar situation. People got to wake up and watch the real news not no Fox news BS or CNN
Even with the money bias out of the equation, the government is compromise-driven. Obama knows that. He also knows that you need to get things done, and adjust as needed. The (R)s sabotaged him with a scorched earth attitude. He is a good president. I am voting for him again.
Doesn't the fact that he is in bed with GE bug you? (just 1 thing among many) I am trying to understand what he has done to make you like him so much? Why are you willing to give him a pass? Why is he a "good" president? He had two years with both the house and the senate, so how could the (R) have sabotaged him? I am pretty sure that they clarified that their number one priority for getting him out of office has to do with the 4 trillion he has spent in 3 years, with no signs of letting up. But then it looks like your willing to put that little money bias off to the side too.(if that was what you are referring to, or maybe it was Solyndra, or the failed stimulus) I have never understood why he gets such a pass? Please explain why you are so taken in by him? How about the issues addressed here: http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/11-reasons-why-occupy-wall-street-protesters-are-hypocrites-if-they-do-not-call-for-barack-obama-to-resign. Please reply, who knows maybe you will convince me
I think he is a good man, and he is honestly doing his best. His faults come from that - he knows he can make mistakes and takes responsibility personally. I can imagine him not sleeping at night worrying about people.
He takes responsibility personally? what do you mean by that? He blames everyone and everything else for all his mistakes and he's the smallest, most thin skinned President I have ever heard. He's vindictive and unpresidential in his attacks against the GOP, or anyone else who doesn't agree with him. He can't even hold a press conference without it being totally controlled and in the rare chance that someone in the press does challenge him, he gets pissed off real fast, because he's not used to it- because like you the press has hasn't held him accountable, instead they have cheered him on, which is not their job. He is the most incompetent leader we have ever had in my life time. You are right about one thing, he is doing his best.
Answering your direct question "He takes responsibility personally? what do you mean by that?"
It seems to me he actually doesn't sleep nights worrying about things, driving Michelle crazy, trying to find some answers. Just like everyone of us. And unlike someone who has everything under control, cause he has all his PR ready, cause he has an agenda, and the public has no clue.
He's gonna get us in another one, and this won't be just some little thing.
Corporate-Fascists Clamor for Iran War
http://www.infowars.com/corporate-fascists-clamor-for-iran-war/
Wel, Iran is no little cripple. I really don't think the West is ready for that kind of war.
You Obama bashers make me sick - waawaawaa - he came into the worst mess in history, didn't instantly fix it pronto and you cry babies drop him like a bad habit. Grow up - he had about 3 months of a 60 Dem majority - the T-Baggers started screaming - the GOP only say NO - you babies stayed home crying in 2010 and the repukes killed us - thanks to you. He's done a hell of alot more than you realize and he's the best we got so grow a pair, shut up and use your fucking heads.
It's change WE can believe in not HE can believe in. HELP HIM !!!
Obama extended the patriot act, enlarged the wars and even started a new war in Libya. He is pro torture and just assassinated an American citizen with a drone in another country and then wouldnt even give us one shred of evidence as to the guys guilt. I don't know about you but the press whacking people without even present evidence of his case scares the shit out of me.
I agree the movement needs to target the repeal of the Patriot Act as a high priority. And we need to do the reverse of it in terms of strong protections on privacy. At the same time, leave in place every tool law enforcement needs to do its work -- as long as it doesn't infringe on any American civil liberties. I want protection from terrorism AND protection of civil rights. The gov't is going to have to figure out how to accomplish that.
Regarding the killing of the American citizen al-Awlaki, there was evidence he was involved in terror operations. But, in my mind, renouncing his American citizenship was inherent in his advocacy of mass killing of innocent Americans as part of a holy war. It isn't like sedition, it is declaring war. After 911, and with unaccounted for plutonium floating around, it is just a reality that we deal with our terrorist enemies like combat enemies (disarm, turn yourself in, or be killed).
Unless you are a terrorist I wouldn't worry about it.
You idiot - our dear American citizen al-Awlaki, PREACHED killing Americans and the best way to do it. He said we were devils, the enemy. When a psycho says this he's treasonous - the penalty for treason is death. Stop crying over this POS and start helping your fellow Americans - grow a pair baby.
Assassinated for preaching? What crime did he commit? Even if he was conspiring against the govt that does not warrant assassination. We have to defend those that we don't agree with if we don't want the assassinations to be turned on us, there are people who say that we are terrorists, wouldn't you want a trial? Aside from that, the war on terror is a big lie, 911 was an inside job, we invade countries to exploit their resources and to prop up the military industrial complex. Iraq wasn't a threat to us, neither was Afghanistan. The Taliban and al quaeda got CIA weapons and training during the cold war. Our government creates enemies then creates false flag attacks to get the public behind wars for profit and control. Thisnhas been going on since ww1.
I agree, there is all these posts complaining about Obama "KILLING AMERICAN CITIZENS" and they are talking about two treasonous terrorists who would blow you up and cut off your head for your beliefs and our freedoms. This generation has lost any sense of self-preservation and common sense, which is surprising since there is such a sense of entitlement. If they want to get all incensed, why don't they complain about Obama and Holder's refusal to prosecute the Black Panthers for voter intimidation. They are upset that Obama is not prosecuting the CIA guys in the Bush administration who ordered water boarding (of terrorists), but killing al-Awlaki is not o.k.
Look, Obama is a piece of shit just like bush. We are so far down the rabbit hole at this point it going to take a lot more learning on the part of the people if we want to change anything. There is a govt within a govt in this country the politicians we see are only actors. I don't trust anything they say. What stopsnthem from declaring anyone a terrorist and detain or torture/kill them without presenting any evidence? Even after ww2 we hunted down nazi war criminals and gave them a trial. We are a nation of laws and supposed justice. What justice is there in killing someone without ever charging them with a crime? If you did this you would go to prison. Lastly no Muslims "hate us for our freedoms" that is total propaganda, anyone in the middle east that hates us it is because of hundreds of years of colonialism. Let me tell you, and I know from personal experience, that Iraq is a fucking free for all. There is no " democracy" being installed. It's a big orgy of international contractors and mafia types stealing our money, oppressing the native people, and smuggling massive amounts of weapons and drugs. This has been going on for centuries, remember your history.
Wow... I thought I'd never agree with anyone called "aynrand", but I agree with this.
86 ayn rand - I hate her - thanks
oh... I wasn't familiar with this meme. Yeah, 86 ayn rand!
86
Note- although there are several theories as to the origin of this term, one common misconception has been debunked. The idea that it came from Chumley's, the speakeasy at 86 Bedford St. in Greenwich Village, NYC. Stanley Chumley opened this restaurant in 1928, and many people refer to it's prohibition-era activities as the origin for the term 86 (there are several variations on this). However, there are several records of the term being used in the late 10's and early 20's, 5-10 years before Chumley's was opened and before prohibition began. Likewise, the "old west" theory of 86 proof alcohol being served to a drunk instead of 100 proof is unlikely, as the term first gained popularity along the east coast, primarily in NYC. The most likely theory is the reference to the east line trolley in Manhattan that ran from 12th Street to 86th Street, where the announcement was made, "86th Street, end of the line, all out!" A less lively option is the use of rhyming slang in the early 20th century (trouble and strife=wife, etc.) and 86 was used for another slang term, nix. The 8' x 6' grave size theory also seems quite plausible.
You're cute - my grandpa told me "86ed" was when a guy was let out of the army - like it was 'form 86' or something. I worked at a bar and we would 86 the drunks.
:-) I'm a linguist by education - this is music to my ears. Or honey to my brain, or smth.
Completely agree.
What I like best is that Obama is willing to compromise. That's important for a Pres. You can work with him, differences can be overcome. I think that, even though he is a Democrat, he's the guy we need right now. The fact that he didn't get all of his agenda items through actually seems like a good thing to me. We definitely do not need some uncompromising extremist from either side as President right now.
Totally incorrect. The narrative of Obama as weak president "willing to compromise" needs to be dispelled. Obama has actively led the charge against the working class and poor, with his handpicked deficit commission that is charged with destroying Social Security and Medicare; with his escalation of wars, which are fought by the poor and working class; with his extension of the Bush tax cuts; with his investment bank-led economic team. This is not "compromise." This is a government by and for the investment banks and rich, with deadly consequences for the poor and working class, of this country and around the globe.
I disagree with most of what you have said but I would fight for your right to say it. Obama pulled the troops out of Iraq, and Libya is just air support, hardly risking any lives there, much less the lives of the "poor and middle class", unless you think the poor and middle class are likely to become fighter pilots (yeah right). Social Security and Medicare are just as intact today as they were pre-Obama. The Bush tax cut extension was in-line with his promises not to raise taxes on anyone earning under $250K, and a compromise not to raise taxes on those earning more. You are correct that he has not done enough to correct the systemic flaws and injustices of the investment banks and the foreclosure crisis. Nobody's perfect. Hopefully if OWS is strong enough and can create enough political pressure it will get him off his butt and working on that, but I think that would be far more likely to be successful with Obama in the White House than most anyone else.
"hardly risking any lives there". What about the libyans?! do non American lives not count? How would you feel if your family was killed by a Chinese drone attack on our soil? Unbelievable.
I was responding to a comment about poor and middle class American lives being risked in Libya. You are taking what I said out of context.
I love how everyone now uses the example of chia invading us as an analogy of the us invading every other country. If we didn't have nukes they could. But it would be just as pointless for them. They are easily winning the economic and pr war. Instead of bombing the shit out of people they build them bridges
Please do more research about your fearless leader.
"Obama pulled the troops out of Iraq" What about the ones he added to Afghanistan?
Ugh I've had this conversation too many times to keep doing it. Dems vs Repubs keep us divided from real issues. The ones you said Obama has not done enough about. That's all the proof you need, he had a full democratic congress for two years to pass whatever he wanted yet he didn't take advantage of it. "Nobody's perfect" is not a valid argument against his inaction.
I can't reply to you directly which is a time saver because you're a POS troll. - I imagine you have some sort of life? Go forth and live it.
And you still ignore what I said about the person you support... yet I'm the troll?
Here it is for a third time: Obama knew the bill wouldn't pass and some Dems even voted against it. The jobs bill is campaign material so when it doesn't pass he can blame congress and look like a hero. He's a puppet like the rest of our leaders tugging at our citizens heartstrings with names like Jobs Bill. Again the repub vs dem fight is bullshit. Both parties had people in power for decades that passed legislation to bring us to this point today. It's not the repubs, it's not the dems, its both. Neither is better in my mind they are both failures.
Ok numbskull - I give, - no... Obama thought it would pass as did many DEM's did because they just couldn't see the repukes shooting themselves in the head - but hey, whadoyano, they did. ( I on the other hand, knowing it takes 60 votes knew no repukes would dare to vote yes because the T-Bags might actually T-Bag them ) Two blue dog pukes voted against it - Nelson & Tester because they are CS and live in bright red states. Combined they have a population of under 3M. Yeah, just crawling with millionaires - California with a population of 37M votes for the jobs bill with bucu mil & billionaires. Geez Einstein, do you see a pattern?
I'm not saying the dems are darlings, I'm saying the dems don't boo gay soldiers, don't applaud deaths from lack of health insurance and don't cream their pants at executions. There is a difference.
I agree with your stance that repubs are useless, but again, I support the idea the dems are just as responsible, they just use different issues to push legislation down the throats of the American citizens.
My insurance premium went up 50% 2011 vs 2010, can't wait to see how much higher they go as we creep towards 2014 when the law goes live. If my premiums went up this much I would hope they could insure 50% more people, but I doubt this will happen since those who don't have it now won't be able to afford it in the future without a gov handout.
If you could figure out that no repubs would vote for it I assume Obama and the dems knew that as well, if they didn't know this then are incompetent.
They knew exactly what they were doing and I stand by my claim that this is a symbolic act to paint repubs as anti-American during Obama's reelection campaign.
Dems and repubs is a false battle, they both got us here.
Also considering the jobs bill is mostly packed with money for unions and construction it's no surprise Cali endorses it, they will get a far greater benefit from its passing than a state like Montana or Nebraska.
There has not been a Democratic Triumvirate of Congress the Senate and the White House the way there has been a Republican Triumvirate through portions of this mess. The entire time that Obama has been in power the Senate has been Republican.
Are you fucking kidding me? I can't even be civil with blatant misinformation like this. The senate has been democratic the entire time he has been in office, the house became republican dominated during the last elections.
Dumbass motherfucker you are what is wrong with America, get the fuck out of my face and learn to google.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/112th_United_States_Congress
86 ayn rand - 86 big mouth
What? Are you implying you are using 86 as a slang reference to get rid of something? There is more than one way to interpret those numbers before your name.
And you ignored the content of my response that is further down, choosing to post this instead?
Here it is again then: Obama knew the bill wouldn't pass and some Dems even voted against it. The jobs bill is campaign material so when it doesn't pass he can blame congress and look like a hero. He's a puppet like the rest of our leaders tugging at our citizens heartstrings with names like Jobs Bill. Again the repub vs dem fight is bullshit. Both parties had people in power for decades that passed legislation to bring us to this point today. It's not the repubs, it's not the dems, its both. Neither is better in my mind they are both failures.
No dumbass you listen - this isn't your mama's senate. You can't get anything done without a 60 majority - not 51 - 60. The repukes filibuster if the wind is blowing a certain way or if they didn't get lucky last night - anything to make "Obama a one term president" - the easy, even for you, difference between the parties is the jobs bill smart guy - not ONE repuke voted to help Americans - not one. Not hard to figure out the best of the two - change your fuck'n user name Sammy, you're a disgrace.
Woo lets argue supermajority vs majority and ignore real issues, granted I did this as well in my comments towards the other poster, my mistake.
Obama knew the bill wouldn't pass and some Dems even voted against it. The jobs bill is campaign material so when it doesn't pass he can blame congress and look like a hero. He's a puppet like the rest of our leaders tugging at our citizens heartstrings with names like Jobs Bill. Again the repub vs dem fight is bullshit. Both parties had people in power for decades that passed legislation to bring us to this point today. It's not the repubs, it's not the dems, its both. Neither is better in my mind they are both failures.
You could change your name too, Obama wants to pay for the jobs bill by taxing the rich, "paying their fair share" is being tossed around a lot these days. She was against taxes all together.
Alright so I got the House and the Senate mixed up. I actually pay attention and am going from memory on this, I don't just use Google. I am still right that there has not been a Democrat triumvirate while Obama has been in power, so you still have no point.
UNFORTUNATELY THIS BOARD WILL NOT LET YOU REPLY AFTER SO MANY RESPONSES PEOPLE RESEARCH THIS YOURSELVES HE'S WRONG!!!
Are you fucking stupid or a troll? Did you even read the links? Do your own research I am correct, you are not. Stop with your misinformation campaign you fucking piece of shit.
No you are still wrong, the first two years he was in power the dems had both house and senate.
I went from memory too but I used google to find the proof to put it up for you to read... but apparently you would rather just go off your shitty memory than double check the facts. FUCK OFF YOU DUMBSHIT MOTHERFUCKER.
Pulled the troops out of Iraq? Factually incorrect. There are still 40,000 troops there, and an embassy the size of Vatican City. Obama escalated the war in Afghanistan. Began drone bombing campaigns in Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia. When I said poor and working class, I meant the poor and working class of all nations. They die when Obama bombs the countries in which they live.
On Libya: you support that war? This should do more to discredit your other arguments than anything I can say.
Obama appointed a deficit commission in 2009. It was made up of politicians who are known to be hostile to Social Security and Medicare. This summer, Obama spent the entire "debt ceiling debate" begging Republicans to get on board with his plan to slash Social Security and Medicare. It's true, they wanted more cuts. But Obama and the Republicans are in agreement on the basic hostility to these programs. Let's not even start on Obama's betrayal of unions, with his scuttling of the Employee Free Choice Act in 2009.
You admit that Obama made the Bush tax cuts permanent, so I cannot argue with you there--let's let readers of this board judge for themselves what it says about your politics and Obama's.
On the environment: Obama has accelerated offshore drilling. Expanded nuclear energy. Sabotaged the regulation of ozone emissions; is on the cusp of signing off on the Keystone XL pipeline deal.
On civil liberties: he has solidified the Bush regime of indefinite detention, government secrecy and torture. He has added to that the Executive's prerogative to assassinate American citizens without due process.
But you don't suggest a Republican, do you?
Or maybe one of us? http://occupywallst.org/forum/experimental-elections/
I don't think OWS should concentrate on electoral politics. There are huge institutional barriers to a third party victory, and campaigns are a drag on energy with very little to be won in return.
I tend to agree with that.
John Birch Society is against "Obamacare", which is a strong indication of "Obamacare"'s good nature.
Obama's healthcare plan is a disaster. It does nothing to lower costs and forces everyone to buy a terrible, overpriced product from the powerful and corrupt private insurance companies.
What's more, the perception that Obama's healthcare plan is a "victory" has essentially silenced further discussion of the issue, weakening the hand of people who advocate the cheapest, healthiest and most ethical solution: medicare for all, a single-payer plan.
Healthcare free for all is one of the foundations of real individual freedom, in my book.
Obama's plan seems to be a compromise that has good and bad sides. All these compromises... But what can one do if the nation is divided? Those Republican states running scare campaigns against "Socialized Medicine".
I'd rather he was tougher. Still, the best choice. Or the only choice.
Some reading on the topic:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/10/07/obama%E2%80%99s-new-populist-fakery/
http://www.newleftreview.org/?view=2821
http://www.salon.com/2011/10/11/can_ows_be_turned_into_a_democratic_party_movement/singleton/
But that's all windbagging.
This is your very own style of argument I see.
The first two links are to some site I've never heard of (but look suspicious). The Salon quotes Bloomberg, which quotes Obama saying that if Baseball players can get millions, why not the CEOs. Windbagging.
You continue to innovate in your own style of argumentation. A unique style.
Can you deal with it?
Here's an interesting link: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread691734/pg1
Both parties lead us down the same road, just different spin.
This film, made 2 years ago, exposes there is no difference between the parties.
http://occupywallst.org/forum/deception/
Spin, hey? I was just thinking the influence of the parties is similar to the weak force. Particle physics in politics :-)
Start small and build - even in politics.
Obama wants a more progressive income tax; his opponent (whoever he'll be) has already pledged to protect the 1%, and never ever increase taxes on those "job creators".
By sitting it out, or voting for someone who cannot win, we help the 1% keep their power.
The stronger the "progressive income" tax - the stronger the Democracy.
No, by supporting either of the two mainstream media choices we help the 1% keep their power. Government produces nothing and is a burden on all. Creation of jobs must come from industry and commerce. Face it, if America doesn't produce goods then we are broke, and we can't count on the government to bail us out. There is only one man that I know of that has been honest, ethical and consistent in politics. Ron Paul, which is why the media pretends he doesn't exist.
lol
WE should find out a spiritual leader with extremely high wisdom
NOT a pure politician anymore....We cannot trust any politician any longer. THEY have PLAYED enough....
BUT, who can be the right spiritual leader, and can leader us to real equality, unity, and freedom??? WHO???????...............................
I will.
Seriously? Girlfriend, you 2 types of stupid.
Yes because that hope and change he offered up has helped spurn job creation and not stifled it right?
Obama is worse than Jimmy Carter and Carter was horrible and it his mismanagement of the economy that let to the rise of Regan.
As far as I understand, Obama successfully crush-landed America, after Bush broke the controls.
And the engines were dying, btw, due to outsourcing and foreign investment and mad derivatives.
The outsourcing happened because the our labor laws drove up the costs of doing business so we're not competitive in the world market. You can blame public unions and some private unions for that,'and the politicians they bought and paid for.
Outsourcing happened because corporations, instead of taking care of the people of the country, take care of their short-term profits. Blame the unions that people get $10/hour instead of $10/month.
Why is this "business" cares more about a handful of investors than thousands of workers and their families? How do you justify that?
Costs of doing business, hey? The profit margins of 100% or 10000% - that's the cost of doing business. Pure distilled quintessential G R E E D.
Doesn't change the fact that building something inthe US costs more.' they can't compete against another country selling similar items. How do you stay in business.
Sorry to say most companies in the US only turn about an 8% profit on average. Nothing crazy outlandish.
Corporations take all the risks financially,' why shouldn't they reap the rewards?
You mean they pay 8% dividends - that's a different story. Their margins are thousands of percents (though depends on the industry.)
Corporations are nothing without workers. If free people join in a free enterprise they have to share the loot. Workers must be partners in a corporation. That's the only decent form of incorporation.
Yeah we should elect obama, though this time george soros should be vice president.