U.S.A Elect Obama

Full Lotus said:
Now where's JPsych :Grin:
Click to expand...
What the hell does what I think have any bearing on it? For what it's worth I totally agree with Martin :

martin_e said:
It's a good thing. I think the excess of hopefulness at the moment will be tempered as reality bites. But it's still a powerful move away from what they've had before.
Click to expand...
Sums it up as well as I could, if not better.

whitedog said:
Great, so now America can get ready for martial law, as Obama makes good on his promise to "put more boots on the ground" both at home, with his "Ameri-Corps" of youngsters doing national service at home, a paramilitary “civilian national security force” made up of American youth “just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded” as the US military , and abroad. Remember, he said: “We need more troops in Afghanistan to finish the fight against the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11.” , “Our military needs more men and women to reduce the strain on our active force. I will add 65,000 soldiers to the Army and 27,000 Marines.”, and, unbelievably: “China’s military capabilities require preparedness on our part. We must guarantee that China’s rise is peaceful. This requires that the US maintains a military that is second to none and that we retain our forward deployment in the Asia-Pacific area.”
Oh yes, don't forget he has also talked about bombing Pakistan, in order to stamp outAl-Quaeda.
Click to expand...
OK, where do I start here? I believe that what he was talking about was a redeployment of the National Guard from Iraq back home, which was the point of the National Guard in the first place - i.e to have a disciplined workforce at home, able to respond to state and national emergencies.

His "Ameri-Corps" idea sounds more like a modern version of JFK's Peace Corps rather than the Hitler Jugend.

And as for the rest - of course he's not going to unilaterally remove US troop presence from Afghanistan and the Asia-Pacific area, because to do so would not only incur the wrath of the US military at a time when he needs them on-side as well as feeding the myth that Democratic administrations are anti-military, but also because, especially in the case of Afghanistan, they still have work to do there. The key question is whether an Obama administration would use the military in a more intelligent way, in concert with diplomacy. As long as this happens, it is a good thing.

Faction said:
he can only temporarily mask the rot at the core.
Click to expand...
But that's the nature of politics Colin - incremental change. There hasn't been a violent revolution in the West for over a century, and democracy, whether it be representative or parliamentary is a big reason for that.

Had McCain won, the resulting civil war might well have cleared the decks for a change at the heart of the US Government.
Click to expand...
I think the fact that McCain is expected to garner 173 Electoral College votes precludes any chance that there would have been a civil war were he elected. While there is a deep division between the solidly progressive and conservative elements in the US, the fact is that the divisions are not easily drawn, and the conservative elements of the press would have convinced those who do not fall into either camp that the election result was legitimate.

sqoo said:
California voted to outlaw same sex marriages last night
Click to expand...
That was a rigged issue from the get-go, largely financed by the Mormon Church in Utah. I really hope they can repeal it.

grokit23 said:
Politically, probably David Cameron. :ilol:
Click to expand...
You *know* that's horseshit, Ali - funny though! I'd say he was closer to David Owen (of "the "fucking Social Democrats" - Alan Bennett). :Smile3:


As Martin said, I don't think that Obama's election will cause a complete sea-change in the US, and with the US economy struggling I don't think that there's enough funds to enact everything that the progressives demand, which *will* cause some disillusionment, and he needs to be honest with the people of the US about what he can realistically achieve.

I remain cautiously optimistic however, because the fact is that all being well, come January the President of the United States will no longer be an emotionally stunted, incurious man with serious unresolved Daddy issues being manipulated by holdovers from the Nixon Administration who believe that the world can be threatened into submission.

Also, because Lemmy seems happy with this (0:46), and what's good for Lemmy is good for me. :Smile3:

Motorhead - It's Obama!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAAI5Vonw7s

J.
 
Lemmy - so awesome he can redeem even a boring politics thread!
 
Verb said:
IMO you could say that about any American president of recent times.
Click to expand...

Of course. In fact, you could say that about any democratic election anywhere ever to some degree. I would say however that this is a particularly striking example.

Every four years the American public goes to the polls and thinks it is choosing the lesser of two evils, but the orders still come from the same place (corporations/big business), no matter who is elected.

And who gives a fig about policies? Like they ever keep their word once they are elected anyways...

I think Colin is right in the sense that we need a 'clear the decks' kind of scenario before we are gonna make any real progress with this. Otherwise it's just gonna be the same shit, different color (pun intended).
Click to expand...

What I don't get about this argument is how you think that 'clearing the decks' is going to make any difference. There is no intrinsic problem with the models of democracy/communism/capitalism/etc , the problem seems to be that people in general are greedy and stupid. 'Clear the decks' and you still have a load of greedy, stupid people. Much better to try and work on the greed and stupidity itself I reckon; and this 'overcoming of the mental barrier' in relation to Obama's election that I was talking about represents a small decrease in stupidity imo.
 
JPsychodelicacy said:
You *know* that's horseshit, Ali - funny though! I'd say he was closer to David Owen (of "the "fucking Social Democrats" - Alan Bennett). :Smile3:
Click to expand...

True, it wasn't meant as a serious comment. It was meant more as an illustration of how the Democrats are closer to our right wing parties than any party over here with any inkling towards, that nasty word which seemingly sets anybody in US politics completely on edge, socialism.

You knew that though, I'm sure, in much the same way that you knew the only vaguely serious comment I've made in this thread, until now, was my very first.


On that note, when the hell are we getting a unified, cross-party policy on biscuits sorted?

Top one for the Motorhead - Obama ting btw. :Grin:
 
Biscuits for ALL! *

3006661792_33c7f4e48c.jpg


*some exceptions to this policy will be made after my position as world dictator is assured!
 
i think obama being voted in is important in an iconic way rather than a major political change. it will make a difference. i agree with whitedog, when people talk about him being black there is still a race issue, but there is a race issue that is rife, not only in the US but in the UK too.

even if his policies are only marginally better than whats gone before, the legacy of having someone non-caucasian in the whitehouse is important.
 
there is a race issue that is rife, not only in the US but in the UK too
Click to expand...

The race issue is global. In one of Obama's acceptance speeches he spoke of reaching out to people in the forgotten countries of the world. He was blatantly talking about africa. That's what people like Paxman and the civil rights activist he was interviewing today were getting excited about, that the cultural shift his appointment could represent in the US could not only inspire a similar thing here, but it could also step up to the international level.
 
yeh they are worldwide, and hopefully the fact that obama has been elected will make impact even if his policy isnt great.
 
floatyhippyflower said:
Sorry. I'm a biscuitist. I don't do jammy dodgers at all.
Click to expand...

Bigot :iwink:

sqoo said:
California voted to outlaw same sex marriages last night
Click to expand...

Indeed, which to be honest has made the election result kind of bitter sweet for me, on the one hand america is currently a country that is now screaming to the rooftops about how proud they are to have moved on from discrimination and prejudice, having elected a president of colour, brilliant!

But at the same time one of the biggest states which has one of the largest gay populations has managed to vote yes on an amendment that will ban gay marriage and effectively will not allow gay couple to have the same rights as hetrosexual couples.

I think my american mate scott summed it up quite well when he said:
Though I feel confident that somewhere, somehow, this will be overturned. but it does goes to show, that for all that America is saying right now, it does feel that no matter on your ethnic orgin or religion, everyone stil hates the gays.

I feel proud the men and women of the country I was born in have managed to make a big jump, however, so many more steps need to be taken in a country that believes under their flag that there should "be liberty and justice for all".
Click to expand...
 
http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200811050054DOWJONESDJONLINE000043_FORTUNE5.htm

President-elect Barack Obama may pursue legislation early next year to speed a transition to an economy fueled by renewable energy sources and delay a fight on climate change until the economy improves.

With unemployment at a five-year high, an early effort to create jobs by encouraging electricity production from solar and wind will get top priority, energy lobbyists and analysts said. A more far-reaching effort on a climate-change bill may be delayed until late next year or 2010.
Click to expand...

Smart move. :iyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top