Obama Nation or Abomination ?

[tbrown 26]

With only 241 Constitutional days left to the Bush presidency (and provided Dick Cheney doesn't invoke some emergency powers as President of the Senate), it seems likely that Barack Obama will be next President of the United States.

Unless she has Obama assasinated, as she has lately been hinting at, we can count Heil Hillary out of the running. She and Bubba will both be sent packing back to New York, where their subsequent divorce will provide tabloid fodder at supermarket checkout counters for the next year or two. I do not believe McCain will prevail over Obama either. Nothing against McCain, he's a good & honorable man, but I think that he and the entire Republican species are about to be swept away. Though both McCain and Heil Hillary will have their Senate seats waiting for them to return.

So, for the sake of argument, this thread will ASSUME that Obama has won the election and been sworn in as our 44th President. What's your take on America in the next four years under an Obama presidency ? There's plenty to think about with the economy & mortgage crisis, the price of oil, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the rising fortunes of China and Russia, a strong Euro against a weakening dollar, and Iran hell bent at lobbing a nuke at Israel.

So how do YOU see a President Obama (better start practicing how to say that, it might take some work) facing these challenges ? How would an Obama presidency affect YOUR life ?

Me personally, though I am an Obama supporter, I'm hoping he won't turn out to be another Jimmy Carter. And since I work for a company that makes jet and rocket engine parts, I'm concerned that the Dems will always cut defense spending, leaving me out of a job - again. But I can't vote based on my fears and I'm not willing to give John McCain another five years to "fight on to victory" in Iraq. So I'll take my chances on the man from Illinois and hope for the best.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[Royd 0]

He'll bowl a 38!

[billvon 3,116]

> He'll bowl a 38!

I have confidence he will break 40 once he has access to the presidential bowling alley.

[TankBuster 0]

We take one more huge step closer to becoming the United Socialist States Republic. Half the country is in love with that idea. The rest of us are stockpiling food and ammunition.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

The rest of us are stockpiling food and ammunition.

I figured that is what the right wing militias would be doing.

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

I figured that is what the right wing militias would be doing.

Rather than make a post which is totally devoid of intellect or wit, why don't you answer the question of the thread?

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[kallend 2,148]

Quote

Quote

I figured that is what the right wing militias would be doing.

Rather than make a post which is totally devoid of intellect or wit, why don't you answer the question of the thread?

Seemed like a perfectly reasonable response to your post.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[TankBuster 0]

Reasonable. But so obvious and devoid of wit! C'mon - you Obamanites can do better.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[Amazon 7]

Sorry but I dont think the sad sad people who go join right wing militias are deserving of wit.. and since most of them are on the low side of the intelligence mean I think it would be a total waste on them anyway.

But I guess they will be ready for the race war they are so afraid of( Actually I think they will be the ones to start it if there is indeed going to be one

[TankBuster 0]

Weak.

To answer your PA's, I'm not in a right wing militia. If being a gun owner and a conservative implies that to you, ok, but I think it is an unreasonable and inflamatory assumption. But you know that. The "stockpiling food and ammunition" comment was half humor.

My level of intelligence fluctuates and is highly suspect most of the time. You hit that one on the head, but for the wrong reason. Not in a right wing militia.

Why do you reference a race war? This ain't about race, sweetie. It's about a congress with a socialist agenda unchecked by a socialist president. I can list several people much more qualified to be president than any of the three running. Herman Cain, Condoleeza Rice, Gen Colin Powell. All black.

So, you guys know why I dislike the idea of the Obama presidency. Back to Tbrown's question. What do you think?

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[SpeedRacer 1]

what specific policy does Obama have that makes him more socialist than other candidates?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

So how do YOU see a President Obama (better start practicing how to say that, it might take some work) facing these challenges ? How would an Obama presidency affect YOUR life ?

In the notional scenario posed, how an Obama presidency would face those challenges and how it would affect my life would first be dependent on who he selects for appointee positions. He's got some fantastic folks (imo) on his advisory team, e.g., former SecNav Richard Danzig (defense); Joe Cirincione & Susan Rice (foreign policy); Austan Goolsbee & Jeffrey Liebman (both staunch centrists who prefer empiricism to ideology in political economics); Christina and David Romer (macroeconomics); & Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar (immigration, also has expertise in homeland security aspects of immigration policy).

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

We take one more huge step closer to becoming the United Socialist States Republic.

Quote

It's about a congress with a socialist agenda unchecked by a socialist president.

You must be familiar with Sen Obama’s positions, history, and record to make such authoritative assertions; what specifically in your primary research have you found that would indicate such?

For example, what do you see in Sen Obama’s positions, history, and record that indicates a move toward elimination of all private property?
And, what do you see in Sen Obama’s positions, history, and record that indicates a move to state-based collectives?
And, while I do strongly support increase in defense budget neither the Heritage Foundation nor I have advocated for an increase to >40% of GDP going to the services' budgets, which is a subset of the overall defense budget? By what indication and mechanism in Sen Obama’s positions, history, and record do you see that being accomplished?
What do you see in Sen Obama’s positions, history, and record that indicates a state-control and ownership of all media?

Quote

The rest of us are stockpiling food and ammunition.

Are you asserting that it is the cause of the rise in food commodity prices?
Would it not be more effective in the long run to turn to raising your own crops?


Or were you being hyperbolic?
It’s rarely clear on the internet.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[TankBuster 0]

Quote

Or were you being hyperbolic?
It’s rarely clear on the internet.

Yes, I was, but I do forsee a possibility where we create such a large, inefficient federal government that taxes and restricts our economy to the point that it totally collapses. I don't believe that would be the fault of just one of the parties. The Republicans squandered their political capital and haven't reduced the size of the beast at all. Thanks for your question. I appreciate your approach to debate. I'm going to try and answer it soon. For now I must get back to tending the bar-b-q. Enjoy your Memorial Day!

On THAT topic, here's a salute to my old college friend, Capt Steve Phillis. Shot down and killed over Kuwait on 15 February, 1991, in an A-10, while flying cover for his downed wingman. Blue skies Syph, we miss ya.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[Skyrad 0]

Who'd have thought that there would be regime change in the USA and the new Presidents name was Hussien! oh the irony.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Yes, I was, but I do forsee a possibility where we create such a large, inefficient federal government that taxes and restricts our economy to the point that it totally collapses.

We're close...time to pull the hogs back from the trough.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,116]

>Yes, I was, but I do forsee a possibility where we create such a large,
>inefficient federal government that taxes and restricts our economy to
>the point that it totally collapses.

I agree, and would add that the growth in the debt over the past decade has put a massive strain on the economy.

>The Republicans squandered their political capital and haven't reduced the
>size of the beast at all.

?? Not reduced it? The past 7 years has seen the largest growth in Federal spending in the past three decades.

So while I agree with your premise, I would much rather have a smart man in the White House who can see the risk posed by our debt than have a man whose primary plan seems to be "do basically the same thing." We can't afford another two terms of 20% growth a term.

[pirana 0]

Quote

We take one more huge step closer to becoming the United Socialist States Republic. Half the country is in love with that idea. The rest of us are stockpiling food and ammunition.

Such a step doesn't represent anything more than the next incremental movement; much less a dramatic movement in the direction we have been heading since the 30's. Mr Obama is part of the trend, not one of it's causes.

I used to think only some disaster of Biblical proportions might stop it; but they only seem to feed the trend since every problem just presents more people who need to and/or want to be nannied.

The classical liberal ideal of individuality (with it's associated freedoms) is no longer of paramount importance to anything near a majority. Being protected from every bad thing that could possible happen is now what the flock wants more than anything else. The joke is on them because no government can meet such a guarantee; but they will sap the huddled masses of every possible resource in their attempts to do so.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[TankBuster 0]

Well said, a very concise way to put it. That's the most accurate post I've seen on SC. In these critical times, though, if the dems can push through their entire agenda unchecked, we may be in for more than just an incremental movement.

The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer.

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

The classical liberal ideal of individuality (with it's associated freedoms) is no longer of paramount importance to anything near a majority. Being protected from every bad thing that could possible happen is now what the flock wants more than anything else. The joke is on them because no government can meet such a guarantee; but they will sap the huddled masses of every possible resource in their attempts to do so.

True. Consider how much money has been wasted on the war on terror, despite the fact that the probability of any of us being harmed from terrorism is near zero, compared to much more likely scenarios such as unexpected unemployment, the need for catastrophic medical care, or an impending need to ensure our kids can get enough education to prepare them for a profitable existence in the labor market.

The GWOT certainly has contributed to the draining of our national resources.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

The GWOT certainly has contributed to the draining of our national resources.

Welfare is still the largest outlay in the budget.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[DrewEckhardt 0]

Quote

Quote

The GWOT certainly has contributed to the draining of our national resources.

Welfare is still the largest outlay in the budget.

How do you figure that? In 2007 our budget included $294B spent on welfare and unemployment.

The Defense budget appears bigger at 481B even before you mix in > $100B in supplemental spending for the war on terror.

On paper we spend more on Social security, but that's just giving people back their forced savings with minimal interest thrown in for low wage earners (the rest of us get a negative rate of return).

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The GWOT certainly has contributed to the draining of our national resources.

Welfare is still the largest outlay in the budget.

How do you figure that? In 2007 our budget included $294B spent on welfare and unemployment.

The Defense budget appears bigger at 481B even before you mix in > $100B in supplemental spending for the war on terror.

On paper we spend more on Social security, but that's just giving people back their forced savings with minimal interest thrown in for low wage earners (the rest of us get a negative rate of return).

$294B - Welfare / unemployment
$394B - Medicare
$276B - Medicaid
_______
$964B - all welfare related payments

$548B - Defense
______
$416B - disparity between welfare related payments and defense

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,116]

>$964B - all welfare related payments

>$548B - Defense

$548B - Defense

Add in supplementals, Department of Energy defense-related payments, DHS defense-related payments, Department of the Treasury's Military Retirement Fund, The Department of Veterans Affairs, The Department of State defense-related expenditures, NASA's defense related expenses etc:

$1028 billion - all defense related payments.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1941

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>$964B - all welfare related payments

>$548B - Defense

$548B - Defense

Add in supplementals, Department of Energy defense-related payments, DHS defense-related payments, Department of the Treasury's Military Retirement Fund, The Department of Veterans Affairs, The Department of State defense-related expenditures, NASA's defense related expenses etc:

$1028 billion - all defense related payments.

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1941

I'd like to see the same sort of analysis done for welfare-related payments - I'd bet it's still larger once you include all the subsidies and whatnot.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706