Obama's Looking Glass

[politicalfootballfan]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

----nm----

[marvenger]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

If you're interested in the zeitgeist movement watch the movie, its pretty long and pretty radical, but I like it. http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...05277695921912

also thezeitgeistmovement.com, its got some written info and some interviews.

Basically they believe there is enough technology now for a resource economy to develop where science, IT and knowledge of available earth resources are used to create an automated system of production to provide a high sustainable living standard for everyone without money and liberating people to follow their own interests; and because there is no scarcity, social problems will be greatly reduced. Also should highlight that they emphasise that monetary system actualy encourages inefficiency and scarcity through money=debt, profit motive and enginered obsolescence.

[whatnow]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

Why the use of the word "sacrifice"? Are the gods displeased? Next thing you know we'll find out the sacrifice is for the greater good.

Anyone that hopes for change will certainly be sucked into sacrificing someone elses good fortune for their own benefit.

[c1ue]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

Why do you think the "corruption in this nation is mostly for the h*** of it?" Do you dismiss motive, or at least the exercise of attempting to decipher motive?

Football,

I say the corruption is for the h*** of it, because Senators and most Congress-critters are all well into the financial strata which can afford tickets to baseball games and what not.

Stealing an entire national oil industry - that's life altering.

Taking bribes 10x your monthly salary to overlook a speeding ticket, that's survival.

Accepting 1 - $400 ticket to a baseball game, what exactly changed?

Of course the other possibility is sheer hubris: I work so hard for my constituents/country/family that it is only right that I receive this small gift.

Either way, just lame and pathetic.

[GRG55]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

...Unlike the Bush administration which has done everything it can to raise the dead, Obama is starting down his own path. I'll feel a lot more confident when I hear President Obama give a speech to the nation, within a couple weeks of taking office, explaining the mess we are in, and calling for sacrifice from everyone.

Toast: As I recall you are well versed in the ways of US politics. Didn't Jimmy Carter try something similar on July 15, 1979? Didn't go over too well with the analysts, media pundits, or the voters as I recall. Would be interested in your take as to why this is a good idea for Obama, under current circumstances. Doesn't it risk going against the audacity of hope strategy?

[Forrest]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

Toast: As I recall you are well versed in the ways of US politics. Didn't Jimmy Carter try something similar on July 15, 1979? Didn't go over too well with the analysts, media pundits, or the voters as I recall. Would be interested in your take as to why this is a good idea for Obama, under current circumstances. Doesn't it risk going against the audacity of hope strategy?

Not to mention that Obama's majority voters are expecting him to pay their bills, not ask for 'sacrifice'. And Obama, if I recall, wants get more into Afganistan...which reminds me of Kennedy and Vietnam, for some strange reason....and then there's Obama's civil service draft, to add to the WPA flavor of everything. Weird.

[we_are_toast]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

Toast: As I recall you are well versed in the ways of US politics. Didn't Jimmy Carter try something similar on July 15, 1979? Didn't go over too well with the analysts, media pundits, or the voters as I recall. Would be interested in your take as to why this is a good idea for Obama, under current circumstances. Doesn't it risk going against the audacity of hope strategy?

Jimmy Carter was right when he warned of Americas energy problems, as we all know now. The voters were more concerned with hostages in Iran, climbing interest rates, oil shortages, and the propaganda from a presidential candidate that deregulation was the answer to everything, than with a president who was straight with them.

From a political and ethical point of view, Obama MUST tell the American people that the previous administration has left the greatest economic mess ever left to a new president. Politically, it would temporarily inoculate him from blame for the mess and it would demonstrate the continuous lies from the previous administration have come to an end. Ethically, there simply is no reason to hide the truth from the public and they deserve to know it.

A comparison with FDR would be more appropriate. Instead of asking them to go shopping, I believe Americans are ready to hear a leader ask for sacrifice in a time of great danger for our country. Getting through the troubled times ahead will need a lot more than secret plans of Fed chairmen and Sec. of Treasuries, it will be much easier with the support of the entire country.

I will be very disappointed if I do not here this speech shortly after the inauguration. But then I'm getting very accustomed to disappointment lately.

[GRG55]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

Jimmy Carter was right when he warned of Americas energy problems, as we all know now. The voters were more concerned with hostages in Iran, climbing interest rates, oil shortages, and the propaganda from a presidential candidate that deregulation was the answer to everything, than with a president who was straight with them.

From a political and ethical point of view, Obama MUST tell the American people that the previous administration has left the greatest economic mess ever left to a new president. Politically, it would temporarily inoculate him from blame for the mess and it would demonstrate the continuous lies from the previous administration have come to an end. Ethically, there simply is no reason to hide the truth from the public and they deserve to know it.

A comparison with FDR would be more appropriate. Instead of asking them to go shopping, I believe Americans are ready to hear a leader ask for sacrifice in a time of great danger for our country. Getting through the troubled times ahead will need a lot more than secret plans of Fed chairmen and Sec. of Treasuries, it will be much easier with the support of the entire country.

I will be very disappointed if I do not here this speech shortly after the inauguration. But then I'm getting very accustomed to disappointment lately.

Thanks for your perspective. It's much appreciated!

I cannot disagree with any of your observations. But would just add that to exercise power, one must first attain the position and, second, one must retain the position. I suppose we will see soon enough if the gap between what the American people need to hear, and what they want to hear, has narrowed enough to allow the new President the luxury of telling it like it is.

[Scot]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

Well, we've tried dumb and dumber for the last 8 years and we've seen how that worked out.

President Elect Obama's Saturday address gave me a small feeling of hope. His proposal for infrastructure reconstruction without an overwhelming emphases on NEW highway construction is a good sign.

Oh really? Tell, me: how is new infrastructure going to translate, as a tool, in the near term, into greater, more efficient production? How, in the near term, will it help create a surplus of production? How, in the near term, can this new infrastructure be expected to really help produce anything at all?

It won't because that's not what it's meant to do. It isn't meant to increase productive capacity or efficiency. It's meant to placate those in the construction industry. It's a jobs program.

Sure, some of these projects may provide benefits to later generations in the same way Hoover Dam did. But such projects are mistake right now because they will siphon desperately needed capital away from other areas.

What's needed now is enthusiasm among investors and capital to direct their dollars into those enterprises that organize and employ people in the production of goods and services.

How can Obama accomplish that? I don't think he has the will or the desire. If anything, like most on the extreme left end of the political spectrum, he's shown a certain antagonism toward those on the other side of the class divide. And the coming changes to the rules that govern the relationships between capital and labor are not going to cause capital to rush into labor intensive industries. Instead we'll see more fear. And capital will stay away.

I'll feel a lot more confident when I hear President Obama give a speech to the nation, within a couple weeks of taking office, explaining the mess we are in, and calling for sacrifice from everyone.

I'm sure by everyone he'll mean the rich. And, because he doesn't get the difference between wealth and income, it will be well-paid professionals that get to do the most sacrificing.

[Scot]

Re: Obama's Looking Glass

The voters were more concerned with hostages in Iran, climbing interest rates, oil shortages, and the propaganda from a presidential candidate that deregulation was the answer to everything, than with a president who was straight with them.

Uhg. Propaganda, huh?

Most voters didn't even know what 'deregulation' meant. For propaganda to work, it has to use simple slogans -- like "hope" and "change". "Deregulation" just doesn't stir the bowels in the same way.

But if you really want undue all that nasty deregulation, first sell your FedEx stock, since we'll be bringing back all those restrictions on cargo aircraft size. Government knows best, after all, and if FedEx is ruined, oh well.

But maybe that's an unfair example, since that example of deregulation was performed under the Carter administration and he's a-o-k great leader of The People.

And maybe deregulation of the 2.4Ghz band was okay, too, since much of that happened under Clinton. Still, there just seems something wrong with not requiring users of the spectrum to recite their call sign before each packet. Maybe they should call out their IP address, instead. But wait. That won't work -- what about the use of NAT at access points? We wouldn't have unique addresses.

Ah, there's a solution! More regulation! We'll just have to make NAT illegal. And we can do that It won't be an approved device on "The Peoples" well-regulated network.

And maybe letting an unregulated public onto a national network was a mistake. Let's give it back to the DoD. Opening up a military project to the unfettered market has been such a disaster.

I think I'm convinced!