West Coast Connection Forum
Lifestyle => Train of Thought => Topic started by: jeromechickenbone on January 24, 2009, 08:47:34 AM
-
This sums up everything I've been saying since day 1. Obama = Bush.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=216538&title=changefest-09-obamas-inaugural
-
Not an Obama groupie by any means, but could care less what Jon Stewart got to say, least funny "comedian" ever.. ?
-
stewart & colbert = 4tw
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
-
Not an Obama groupie by any means, but could care less what Jon Stewart got to say, least funny "comedian" ever.. ?
I wasn't posting this as a props to his humor, I posted it for the near identical sound bites between Bush and Obama. I've been trying to illustrate that they are both controlled by the same corporate lobbyists, they are both deeply entrenched in the establishment. Anyone that thinks Obama is going to change anything is caught up in the hype.
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
-
i like stewart, but i think he fell off, hasnt been as funny for a while
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
For what it's worth. I've felt the exact same way for a while now. The only real difference I think we are going to see in the next 4 years is that while Bush was bombing places and spending too much tax money he was being blamed for bombing places. Obama will be bombing places and spending too much tax dollars but we'll be blamed for spending. Notice how most of the things he ran on weren't even mentioned in his speech. Did he once say we're gonna bring them home from Iraq while he was jabbering about "our enemies"?
The US could invade Iran next week and no one is going to doubt him.
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
SEE ABOVE...
-
ITS TIME FOR A CHANGE 8)
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
SEE ABOVE...
That's the fucking point. HE BRINGS NO CHANGE. Don't believe the hype. Dude is brown and is good at giving speeches. Those are the only differences between him and Bush.
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
For what it's worth. I've felt the exact same way for a while now. The only real difference I think we are going to see in the next 4 years is that while Bush was bombing places and spending too much tax money he was being blamed for bombing places. Obama will be bombing places and spending too much tax dollars but we'll be blamed for spending. Notice how most of the things he ran on weren't even mentioned in his speech. Did he once say we're gonna bring them home from Iraq while he was jabbering about "our enemies"?
The US could invade Iran next week and no one is going to doubt him.
Exactly. Obama will absolutely be the same war monger, he's a puppet.
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
For what it's worth. I've felt the exact same way for a while now. The only real difference I think we are going to see in the next 4 years is that while Bush was bombing places and spending too much tax money he was being blamed for bombing places. Obama will be bombing places and spending too much tax dollars but we'll be blamed for spending. Notice how most of the things he ran on weren't even mentioned in his speech. Did he once say we're gonna bring them home from Iraq while he was jabbering about "our enemies"?
The US could invade Iran next week and no one is going to doubt him.
Exactly. Obama will absolutely be the same war monger, he's a puppet.
Actually, Obama very well might be a puppet, but you're miss judging the scope of puppetry we're dealing with here....
It's not cookie-cutter fellas... Obama can do his presidency completely different from Bush, doesn't mean he's not still being controlled... ya dig???
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
For what it's worth. I've felt the exact same way for a while now. The only real difference I think we are going to see in the next 4 years is that while Bush was bombing places and spending too much tax money he was being blamed for bombing places. Obama will be bombing places and spending too much tax dollars but we'll be blamed for spending. Notice how most of the things he ran on weren't even mentioned in his speech. Did he once say we're gonna bring them home from Iraq while he was jabbering about "our enemies"?
The US could invade Iran next week and no one is going to doubt him.
Exactly. Obama will absolutely be the same war monger, he's a puppet.
Actually, Obama very well might be a puppet, but you're miss judging the scope of puppetry we're dealing with here....
It's not cookie-cutter fellas... Obama can do his presidency completely different from Bush, doesn't mean he's not still being controlled... ya dig???
The US Empire needs certain things to happen to maintain itself, so it can never be too different from Bush's regime. It just has to look that way. Carefully study the policies Clinton's 8 years with Bush's 8 years and you'll notice how similar both presidents were, despite the media talking like it was night and day.
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
For what it's worth. I've felt the exact same way for a while now. The only real difference I think we are going to see in the next 4 years is that while Bush was bombing places and spending too much tax money he was being blamed for bombing places. Obama will be bombing places and spending too much tax dollars but we'll be blamed for spending. Notice how most of the things he ran on weren't even mentioned in his speech. Did he once say we're gonna bring them home from Iraq while he was jabbering about "our enemies"?
The US could invade Iran next week and no one is going to doubt him.
Exactly. Obama will absolutely be the same war monger, he's a puppet.
Actually, Obama very well might be a puppet, but you're miss judging the scope of puppetry we're dealing with here....
It's not cookie-cutter fellas... Obama can do his presidency completely different from Bush, doesn't mean he's not still being controlled... ya dig???
The US Empire needs certain things to happen to maintain itself, so it can never be too different from Bush's regime. It just has to look that way. Carefully study the policies Clinton's 8 years with Bush's 8 years and you'll notice how similar both presidents were, despite the media talking like it was night and day.
The problem with this argument is that the country is saying we want to follow a different way of maintaining. Obama might not even realize that his supporters are ready to hold him accountable. Obama promised changed, and if he doesn't not deliver, people like me will hold his feet to the fire. Almost every friend I have that worked for his campaign all say the say thing, that they all are going to hold his feet to the fire.
-
lol @ people thinking obama is a miracle cure
-
Obama and jay z=overrated
-
Not an Obama groupie by any means, but could care less what Jon Stewart got to say, least funny "comedian" ever.. ?
Finally, somebody that recognizes the real.
and....
LMAO @ anyone who think Obama got elected because he's black (possibly the funniest thing I've ever heard)
LMAO @ anyone who think Obama is gonna fix everything (name one president that has been able to accomplish everything he said he would do)
and finally
LMAO @ anyone who wants Obama to fail (Your ass is on the line too retards)
-
^ thats alot of laughing
-
Not an Obama groupie by any means, but could care less what Jon Stewart got to say, least funny "comedian" ever.. ?
Finally, somebody that recognizes the real.
and....
LMAO @ anyone who think Obama got elected because he's black (possibly the funniest thing I've ever heard)
LMAO @ anyone who think Obama is gonna fix everything (name one president that has been able to accomplish everything he said he would do)
and finally
LMAO @ anyone who wants Obama to fail (Your ass is on the line too retards)
He got elected because the corporations that run America saw a man who was intelligent and charming but also who would represent a perceived change to disillusioned americans because he is black and therefore black people in particular think he shares their pain and understands their struggles and so will be the saviour. Therefore they pushed him as one of the top tier candidates and shunned other very capable candidates because their vision of America was very different to their own.
I don't think me, jrome or anyone else here actually wants him to fail to live up to all of the wonderful things his supporters are hoping for. Merely that that the status quo will not change for the better and it's apparent from the appointments of so many corporate and globalist cronies that the road being headed down is exactly the same one. The major difference between him and his predecessor is he is smarter than Bush and so is more capable of selling the message.
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
For what it's worth. I've felt the exact same way for a while now. The only real difference I think we are going to see in the next 4 years is that while Bush was bombing places and spending too much tax money he was being blamed for bombing places. Obama will be bombing places and spending too much tax dollars but we'll be blamed for spending. Notice how most of the things he ran on weren't even mentioned in his speech. Did he once say we're gonna bring them home from Iraq while he was jabbering about "our enemies"?
The US could invade Iran next week and no one is going to doubt him.
Exactly. Obama will absolutely be the same war monger, he's a puppet.
What the fuck are you talking about? As that wise person right below you said, he may be a puppet, but not all puppets are designed to be evil. And who's controlling Obama anyways? The Lobbyists? Which Lobbyists? Who exactly is controlling everything Obama says and does? He's a cooperate whore to who? The environment movement? The same people who controlled Bush, aren't controlling Obama. You think Obama will what? Invade more countries like Bush did. I'll guarantee you anything their won't be another major war. Some people are so fucked in the head.
He probably won't improve the world as much as people think, but after Bush, it's hard to imagine him doing any more harm.
-
Not an Obama groupie by any means, but could care less what Jon Stewart got to say, least funny "comedian" ever.. ?
Finally, somebody that recognizes the real.
and....
LMAO @ anyone who think Obama got elected because he's black (possibly the funniest thing I've ever heard)
LMAO @ anyone who think Obama is gonna fix everything (name one president that has been able to accomplish everything he said he would do)
and finally
LMAO @ anyone who wants Obama to fail (Your ass is on the line too retards)
He got elected because the corporations that run America saw a man who was intelligent and charming but also who would represent a perceived change to disillusioned americans because he is black and therefore black people in particular think he shares their pain and understands their struggles and so will be the saviour. Therefore they pushed him as one of the top tier candidates and shunned other very capable candidates because their vision of America was very different to their own.
I don't think me, jrome or anyone else here actually wants him to fail to live up to all of the wonderful things his supporters are hoping for. Merely that that the status quo will not change for the better and it's apparent from the appointments of so many corporate and globalist cronies that the road being headed down is exactly the same one. The major difference between him and his predecessor is he is smarter than Bush and so is more capable of selling the message.
I definitely agree with you on the whole "savior of the black community" thing. I have a feeling a lot of his black supporters will turn on him once they realize that he isn't gonna go down into the hood and rescue them. They'll eventually realize he is just more fo the same.
But everyone that wants to force the fact that he is more of the same need to chill with that shit too. Anyone with half a brain already knows this, so some of you are just preaching to the choir.
-
LOL dude,
they were being funny man, in actuality Jon Stewart is an Obama supporter.....
and as for what they said in the video.... well, Obama got elected NOT because Black, but because he knows how to play the game.... ALL PRESIDENTS SPOUT THAT RHETORIC.... Get over it dude, have a V8 instead...
And, you clearly missed the point as well. It doesn't matter if it was McCain or Obama or Bush, they are purely figureheads. The only candidates that would have actually changed anything would have been Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich, or Ralph Nader.
When did I say he only got elected because he was black? I'm not upset because a black democrat is in the white house, i'm upset because so many idiots running around thinking that Obama is fundamentally different than 95% of the rest of Congress.
For what it's worth. I've felt the exact same way for a while now. The only real difference I think we are going to see in the next 4 years is that while Bush was bombing places and spending too much tax money he was being blamed for bombing places. Obama will be bombing places and spending too much tax dollars but we'll be blamed for spending. Notice how most of the things he ran on weren't even mentioned in his speech. Did he once say we're gonna bring them home from Iraq while he was jabbering about "our enemies"?
The US could invade Iran next week and no one is going to doubt him.
Exactly. Obama will absolutely be the same war monger, he's a puppet.
Actually, Obama very well might be a puppet, but you're miss judging the scope of puppetry we're dealing with here....
It's not cookie-cutter fellas... Obama can do his presidency completely different from Bush, doesn't mean he's not still being controlled... ya dig???
The US Empire needs certain things to happen to maintain itself, so it can never be too different from Bush's regime. It just has to look that way. Carefully study the policies Clinton's 8 years with Bush's 8 years and you'll notice how similar both presidents were, despite the media talking like it was night and day.
The problem with this argument is that the country is saying we want to follow a different way of maintaining. Obama might not even realize that his supporters are ready to hold him accountable. Obama promised changed, and if he doesn't not deliver, people like me will hold his feet to the fire. Almost every friend I have that worked for his campaign all say the say thing, that they all are going to hold his feet to the fire.
Me too, I worked on his campaign......
first time ever I got involved with politics.... I kinda liked it though.....
Hey, if the world doesn't end on Dec 21 2012, I'm gunna run for president some day....
-
...
....................................░▒▓▓▓▒░......................................................
..........................░▒▒▓▓▓▓█████▓▓▓▒▒▒▒░..................................
..........▒▓▓▓▓▓███▓▓▓▓▓█████████████▓▒..............................
.......▒▓▓▓▓▓█████████████▓▓▓▓▓██████▓▓░........................
.....▓██▓██████████▓▓▓▒░..░░░▒▒▓▓███▓▓█▓▒......................
.....██▓███▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒░░░▒▒▒▒▒░░▒▒▓██▓▓██▓......................
.....████▓▒▒▒▒░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓█████▒......................
.....███▒░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓███████▓░...............
..▒██▓▓░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓███████▓................
...▒██▓▒░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▓▓▓███████▒...............
......▒█▓▒▒▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▓█▓▓▒▒▒░▓▓▓██████▒................
........░█▓▓▓▓▓██▓▓▒▒▓▓███▓▓▒▓▓▓▒░▒▓▓▓▓█▓██▒................
..........▒▓▓▓▓██▓▓▓▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓█▓▓▒▒▒░▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▓▓▒.................
............▓▒▒▒▒▒░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░▒▒░░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▓▒░...............
............░▒░░░░░▒▓▒▒▒▒▒░░░▒░░▒▒▒▒▒░▒▒▒▓▓░.▓▒................
..............▓▒▒▒░▒▓▒░░░▒▓▓▓▒░▒▒▓▓▒░░▒▒▒▒▒▓▒▓▒.................
.............▒▓▒░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▓▓▓▓▒▒▓▓▓▓▒....▓█▒................
..............▒▓▓▒▓▓▒░▒▓▒░....░▓▓▓▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▓█▓....................
...............▒▓▓▓▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓██▓.......................
.................▓▓▒▓▓████████▓▒▒▓▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░...*****' THING
.................▓▓▒▓▓███▓▓█▓▓█▓▒▓░▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░.........SUCKS!.......
.................▒▓▒▓▒▒▓▒...▒░..▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░.../.......................
...................▓▒░▒▒▒.░▒░░▒▓▓▒▒▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒...........................
..................▒▓░░▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒░.░▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▓░.▓▓.........................
.....▒▓▓█████▓░▒▓▓▒▒▒▒░░░░▒▓▓▓▓▓▓▒.....▒▓██▓░.................
███████████▒▒▓▒▒▒▒▒░▒▒▓▓█▓▓▒▒...........▒███████▓▒░....
███████████▓..░▓█████▓██▓▒░.................▒█████████████
███████████▓░.......▒▓▓▓▓██▒....................░█████████████
████████████▒..............▒████▓░................▒▓████████████
████████████▒............░████▒.▓▒.............░.░████████████
███████████▓░...........░▓▓▓█▓░.░░.................████████████
-
Let's not forget that a lot of these "groupies" are starting to be more politically active in their community. Say what you want about where were these people before Obama, but the case remains that these types of people are here because of Obama winning.
-
Let's not forget that a lot of these "groupies" are starting to be more politically active in their community. Say what you want about where were these people before Obama, but the case remains that these types of people are here because of Obama winning.
word,thats one undeniable positive thing to come out of this election,regardless the outcome. not only the youthful movement but the resurgence as a whole of the voting process. we owe alot of it to Obama and W for being a colossal fuck-up.
-
Let's not forget that a lot of these "groupies" are starting to be more politically active in their community. Say what you want about where were these people before Obama, but the case remains that these types of people are here because of Obama winning.
word,thats one undeniable positive thing to come out of this election,regardless the outcome. not only the youthful movement but the resurgence as a whole of the voting process. we owe alot of it to Obama and W for being a colossal fuck-up.
Put another way, how do you think this current surge of grass roots enthusiasm will feel if they feel that Obama is not a change for the better, demoralised maybe?
-
Let's not forget that a lot of these "groupies" are starting to be more politically active in their community. Say what you want about where were these people before Obama, but the case remains that these types of people are here because of Obama winning.
word,thats one undeniable positive thing to come out of this election,regardless the outcome. not only the youthful movement but the resurgence as a whole of the voting process. we owe alot of it to Obama and W for being a colossal fuck-up.
Put another way, how do you think this current surge of grass roots enthusiasm will feel if they feel that Obama is not a change for the better, demoralised maybe?
If people are helping out the community already, they're not going to stop doing what they are doing because of what Obama has done. I'm not talking about the people that went to vote for the first time, I'm talking about that actually showed a deeper interest in stuff like medical care, students, senior citizens, and others.
-
Let's not forget that a lot of these "groupies" are starting to be more politically active in their community. Say what you want about where were these people before Obama, but the case remains that these types of people are here because of Obama winning.
word,thats one undeniable positive thing to come out of this election,regardless the outcome. not only the youthful movement but the resurgence as a whole of the voting process. we owe alot of it to Obama and W for being a colossal fuck-up.
Put another way, how do you think this current surge of grass roots enthusiasm will feel if they feel that Obama is not a change for the better, demoralised maybe?
If people are helping out the community already, they're not going to stop doing what they are doing because of what Obama has done. I'm not talking about the people that went to vote for the first time, I'm talking about that actually showed a deeper interest in stuff like medical care, students, senior citizens, and others.
Point well taken my friend, but many people became interested in doing something about "medical care, students, senior citizens, and others" only because of Obama, and that is something that sets him apart from all other presidents (besides the fact that he has the biggest dick and his wife has the biggest ass :o) indeed, he did bring "Change" but only as an inspiration....
See, a lot of folks just don't get it.... Obama is like those crappy Diet pills you buy at Wal-Mart.... They don't do shit... but when you take them, YOU do more work, so YOU get the results that YOU wanted, even though the pills didn't do shit for you.... they are just a catalyst.... that's what Obama is, a catalyst...
-
Let's not forget that a lot of these "groupies" are starting to be more politically active in their community. Say what you want about where were these people before Obama, but the case remains that these types of people are here because of Obama winning.
word,thats one undeniable positive thing to come out of this election,regardless the outcome. not only the youthful movement but the resurgence as a whole of the voting process. we owe alot of it to Obama and W for being a colossal fuck-up.
Put another way, how do you think this current surge of grass roots enthusiasm will feel if they feel that Obama is not a change for the better, demoralised maybe?
If people are helping out the community already, they're not going to stop doing what they are doing because of what Obama has done. I'm not talking about the people that went to vote for the first time, I'm talking about that actually showed a deeper interest in stuff like medical care, students, senior citizens, and others.
Point well taken my friend, but many people became interested in doing something about "medical care, students, senior citizens, and others" only because of Obama, and that is something that sets him apart from all other presidents (besides the fact that he has the biggest dick and his wife has the biggest ass :o) indeed, he did bring "Change" but only as an inspiration....
See, a lot of folks just don't get it.... Obama is like those crappy Diet pills you buy at Wal-Mart.... They don't do shit... but when you take them, YOU do more work, so YOU get the results that YOU wanted, even though the pills didn't do shit for you.... they are just a catalyst.... that's what Obama is, a catalyst...
The biggest thing I got from seeing Obama in person speak was this point, that we as people in the community need to go out and make change ourselves. And this is way more powerful than anything I've seen out of the Ron Paul camp... ;)
-
Let's not forget that a lot of these "groupies" are starting to be more politically active in their community. Say what you want about where were these people before Obama, but the case remains that these types of people are here because of Obama winning.
word,thats one undeniable positive thing to come out of this election,regardless the outcome. not only the youthful movement but the resurgence as a whole of the voting process. we owe alot of it to Obama and W for being a colossal fuck-up.
Put another way, how do you think this current surge of grass roots enthusiasm will feel if they feel that Obama is not a change for the better, demoralised maybe?
If people are helping out the community already, they're not going to stop doing what they are doing because of what Obama has done. I'm not talking about the people that went to vote for the first time, I'm talking about that actually showed a deeper interest in stuff like medical care, students, senior citizens, and others.
Point well taken my friend, but many people became interested in doing something about "medical care, students, senior citizens, and others" only because of Obama, and that is something that sets him apart from all other presidents (besides the fact that he has the biggest dick and his wife has the biggest ass :o) indeed, he did bring "Change" but only as an inspiration....
See, a lot of folks just don't get it.... Obama is like those crappy Diet pills you buy at Wal-Mart.... They don't do shit... but when you take them, YOU do more work, so YOU get the results that YOU wanted, even though the pills didn't do shit for you.... they are just a catalyst.... that's what Obama is, a catalyst...
The biggest thing I got from seeing Obama in person speak was this point, that we as people in the community need to go out and make change ourselves. And this is way more powerful than anything I've seen out of the Ron Paul camp... ;)
Bingo Bango.....
-
Read this and get back to me.
http://www.bignews.biz/?id=788260&pg=3&keys=financial-Rothschilds-Goldman-presidency
-
Interesting,
but most people greatly over estimate the power and the influence of families like the Rothchilds, Rockafellars, or "Goldman Sachs" which is a new one to me.....
One good turn deserves another, right?
http://www.theinfovault.net/vault/spirituality/theinsider.html
-
Interesting,
but most people greatly over estimate the power and the influence of families like the Rothchilds, Rockafellars, or "Goldman Sachs" which is a new one to me.....
One good turn deserves another, right?
http://www.theinfovault.net/vault/spirituality/theinsider.html
Clearly your statement is inaccurate, here is an excerpt I just took from the israeli times....
Mayer Amschel Rothschild (February 23, 1744 - September 19, 1812) was the founder of the Rothschild family banking empire that would become one of the most successful business families in history. In 2005, he was ranked 7th on the Forbes magazine list of the The Twenty Most Influential Businessmen Of All Time. The business magazine referred to him as a “founding father of international finance.”
He was born Mayer Amschel Bauer on February 23, 1744 in Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany to Moses Amschel Bauer. He changed his name to Rothschild (Red Shield in English) from Bauer, the previous family name, in reference to the red shield that was the official house sign and thus logotype of the family business, a bank founded by his father Moses.
Much of the early Rothschild fortune and rise to prominence was built on business dealings with Wilhelm IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel. William had inherited what was purported to be among the largest fortunes in Europe and eventually came to depend substantially on Mayer for managing this fortune, particularly during and after the invasion and conquest of the area by Napoleon.
In fact, it was Nathon Rothschild who Within 11 years he had gained such a position of power in the City of London he was able to supply enough coin to the crown to stop a "market liquidity crisis", not dissimilar to the current credit crunch. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2008/10/23/rothschild-dynasty-a-true-tale-of-rags-to-riches-115875-20830890/
Just on a general note to, how can anyone underestimate the power of the banking families? who finances the wars? who finances the think tanks? I have noticed a pattern, if you read the mainstream media they positively reveal in the power and influence of the banking families and their fortunes, until that is, people turn round and start viewing this in disgust and then of course you are a conspiracy theorist, you hate jews blah blah blah.
-
Interesting,
but most people greatly over estimate the power and the influence of families like the Rothchilds, Rockafellars, or "Goldman Sachs" which is a new one to me.....
One good turn deserves another, right?
http://www.theinfovault.net/vault/spirituality/theinsider.html
Clearly your statement is inaccurate, here is an excerpt I just took from the israeli times....
Mayer Amschel Rothschild (February 23, 1744 - September 19, 1812) was the founder of the Rothschild family banking empire that would become one of the most successful business families in history. In 2005, he was ranked 7th on the Forbes magazine list of the The Twenty Most Influential Businessmen Of All Time. The business magazine referred to him as a “founding father of international finance.”
He was born Mayer Amschel Bauer on February 23, 1744 in Frankfurt-am-Main, Germany to Moses Amschel Bauer. He changed his name to Rothschild (Red Shield in English) from Bauer, the previous family name, in reference to the red shield that was the official house sign and thus logotype of the family business, a bank founded by his father Moses.
Much of the early Rothschild fortune and rise to prominence was built on business dealings with Wilhelm IX, Landgrave of Hesse-Cassel. William had inherited what was purported to be among the largest fortunes in Europe and eventually came to depend substantially on Mayer for managing this fortune, particularly during and after the invasion and conquest of the area by Napoleon.
In fact, it was Nathon Rothschild who Within 11 years he had gained such a position of power in the City of London he was able to supply enough coin to the crown to stop a "market liquidity crisis", not dissimilar to the current credit crunch. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2008/10/23/rothschild-dynasty-a-true-tale-of-rags-to-riches-115875-20830890/
Just on a general note to, how can anyone underestimate the power of the banking families? who finances the wars? who finances the think tanks? I have noticed a pattern, if you read the mainstream media they positively reveal in the power and influence of the banking families and their fortunes, until that is, people turn round and start viewing this in disgust and then of course you are a conspiracy theorist, you hate jews blah blah blah.
1) I said over estimate, not under estimate....
2) did you even follow the link and read the article before you responded to this????
3), if you answered no to the question, then go read the link, and then get back to me....
-
Admittedly my friend i have not read that link as of yet but when i saw you say that there is an over estimating of their influence, i thought you were implying that financially and geo politically, that they are not one of the biggest players there is but I shall read that link you gave.
-
I love the title "changefest"...and some people are just not able to handle satire. stewart's point was to show how similar presidential rhethorics are when they come from different people with approaches that are actually different. this wasn't about showing obama is similar to bush, which, frankly and no matter how much you like obama or not, is a rather dumb thing to say
-
I love the title "changefest"...and some people are just not able to handle satire. stewart's point was to show how similar presidential rhethorics are when they come from different people with approaches that are actually different. this wasn't about showing obama is similar to bush, which, frankly and no matter how much you like obama or not, is a rather dumb thing to say
How is it dumb? and again there is this refusal to see a distinction it's not about liking or disliking an individual it's about what they stand for. Me and others have pointed out hundreds of times why nothing is changing, at least not changing for the better anyway but here is a quick run down.
The military is staying put in Iraq, there are some 30 permanent bases in Iraq need I remind you
The troops are being withdrawn from Iraq but in turn are being used to bolster the troop numbers in Afghanistan
Supposing guantanamo bay is closed, Obama has just ordered the continuation of CIA extroadinary renditions aka the kidnapping of civilians who are to be placed in "secret prisons" aka other torture centres.
He has called for a internal corp just as strong just as powerful as the military
The Federal Reserve is still there and even if it loses some of it's power, it's already been discussed in Davos that a new world central bank needs to be created, further centralising power.
He has continued to pledge future tax payers money towards more bail outs.
He is fully supportive of carbon tax, which gives them the opportunity to basically tax every facet of your life, more taxes, going into a depression hmmm
He supports a flatulence tax on cattle, which maybe some people find funny, it sounds crazy doesn't it? but i wonder if the indpendent farmers will be laughing.
He supported the bank cash give aways in fact he even appeared before congress to give an impassioned speech urging the bail out bill to be passed.
He said he would not support the Fisa bill which gave the president the authority to allow for warrantless wiretapping and also retroactively safeguarded the telecoms giants and yet he turns full circle and supported it. To put this into context even the staunchest of democrats Olbermann talked about it.
10% of his staff are members of the american arm of the trilateral commission, a giant globalist body whose interests have nothing to do with wanting to help any nation. In fact his cabinet consists of a whose who scumbags lineup all criminals in their own right
Brzienski is his military advisor, read the grand chessboard.
He voted in favour of the patriot act, the act that has been decried by so many, in fact it is so draconian and so far reaching in it's definitions that thousands of non terror related cases have been tried under the patriot act.
He said he would overturn the military commissions act but since he has already re-approved the kidnapping and torture of civilians i wouldn't hold my breath in him repealing this either.
I don't even need to summarise what all this means, it's self explanatory and of course the media is playing the complaint lap dog talking about "oh he is so diferent from Bush, instead of decades in Afghanistan he is talking about several years there". Several years lol that is semantics and indeed a measured slow troop withdrawal was also promised by Bush. He is following the same agenda, the difference is that in Obama the agenda is further down the line. I guess if you put bullshit on the menu enough times people will order it.
-
Bush or any Repbulican would never want a Federal program to weatherize your home. That's in the works with Obama as President, something that Bush-led Congress would never approve of. And there's plenty of little important things like that shows the difference between the two. Now this whole fantasy you guys have about eliminating the Federal Reserve, etc....it's just not going to happen anytime soon. The fact is that Obama didn't campaign on getting rid of it or anything like it.
-
Bush or any Repbulican would never want a Federal program to weatherize your home. That's in the works with Obama as President, something that Bush-led Congress would never approve of. And there's plenty of little important things like that shows the difference between the two. Now this whole fantasy you guys have about eliminating the Federal Reserve, etc....it's just not going to happen anytime soon. The fact is that Obama didn't campaign on getting rid of it or anything like it.
You mean to control the temperature in your home? and if so, you call that a good thing, a government having the power to decide your thermostat. Also the Federal Reserve was only one element, if that was all, well it could be grudgingly accepted but it sure isn't, that's only the tip of the iceberg.
-
Bush or any Repbulican would never want a Federal program to weatherize your home. That's in the works with Obama as President, something that Bush-led Congress would never approve of. And there's plenty of little important things like that shows the difference between the two. Now this whole fantasy you guys have about eliminating the Federal Reserve, etc....it's just not going to happen anytime soon. The fact is that Obama didn't campaign on getting rid of it or anything like it.
You mean to control the temperature in your home? and if so, you call that a good thing, a government having the power to decide your thermostat. Also the Federal Reserve was only one element, if that was all, well it could be grudgingly accepted but it sure isn't, that's only the tip of the iceberg.
You must not live in cold weather. I digress, I think we learned months ago you and I will never be on the same page on topics like these.
-
Bush or any Repbulican would never want a Federal program to weatherize your home. That's in the works with Obama as President, something that Bush-led Congress would never approve of. And there's plenty of little important things like that shows the difference between the two. Now this whole fantasy you guys have about eliminating the Federal Reserve, etc....it's just not going to happen anytime soon. The fact is that Obama didn't campaign on getting rid of it or anything like it.
You mean to control the temperature in your home? and if so, you call that a good thing, a government having the power to decide your thermostat. Also the Federal Reserve was only one element, if that was all, well it could be grudgingly accepted but it sure isn't, that's only the tip of the iceberg.
You must not live in cold weather. I digress, I think we learned months ago you and I will never be on the same page on topics like these.
You don't understand, captain planet and his team of simians are going to decide for you, that's the issue here. In the "interests of saving the earth", captain planet must be prudent, you have to balance your needs with conserving energy.
-
Bush or any Repbulican would never want a Federal program to weatherize your home. That's in the works with Obama as President, something that Bush-led Congress would never approve of. And there's plenty of little important things like that shows the difference between the two. Now this whole fantasy you guys have about eliminating the Federal Reserve, etc....it's just not going to happen anytime soon. The fact is that Obama didn't campaign on getting rid of it or anything like it.
You mean to control the temperature in your home? and if so, you call that a good thing, a government having the power to decide your thermostat. Also the Federal Reserve was only one element, if that was all, well it could be grudgingly accepted but it sure isn't, that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Home Weatherization isn't just controlling the temperature in your home. The government deciding the power of your thermostat? Are you kidding me?! You're overreacting, all we're talking about is a way of saving energy. Something that should have been done a long ass time ago. Why should we use energy excessively when there are ways we can reduce it, to help each and every one of us.
-
Bush or any Repbulican would never want a Federal program to weatherize your home. That's in the works with Obama as President, something that Bush-led Congress would never approve of. And there's plenty of little important things like that shows the difference between the two. Now this whole fantasy you guys have about eliminating the Federal Reserve, etc....it's just not going to happen anytime soon. The fact is that Obama didn't campaign on getting rid of it or anything like it.
You mean to control the temperature in your home? and if so, you call that a good thing, a government having the power to decide your thermostat. Also the Federal Reserve was only one element, if that was all, well it could be grudgingly accepted but it sure isn't, that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Home Weatherization isn't just controlling the temperature in your home. The government deciding the power of your thermostat? Are you kidding me?! You're overreacting, all we're talking about is a way of saving energy. Something that should have been done a long ass time ago. Why should we use energy excessively when there are ways we can reduce it, to help each and every one of us.
You are talking to someone who voted for Ron Paul, who wasn't even on the ballot... you are talking to someone with a real grip of reality.
-
well virtuoso, i will not lie about the fact that some of the stuff mentioned by you is unknown to me (flatulence tax and whatnot) and don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that obama's every single word deserves lavish praise. nevertheless, you said some things that i can't quite agree with
I love the title "changefest"...and some people are just not able to handle satire. stewart's point was to show how similar presidential rhethorics are when they come from different people with approaches that are actually different. this wasn't about showing obama is similar to bush, which, frankly and no matter how much you like obama or not, is a rather dumb thing to say
How is it dumb? and again there is this refusal to see a distinction it's not about liking or disliking an individual it's about what they stand for. Me and others have pointed out hundreds of times why nothing is changing, at least not changing for the better anyway but here is a quick run down.
this is slightly contradictive. it could change for the worse and ruin the world and still the point would be that it changed :)
The military is staying put in Iraq, there are some 30 permanent bases in Iraq need I remind you
The troops are being withdrawn from Iraq but in turn are being used to bolster the troop numbers in Afghanistan
how is that not change? iraq is a country still pretty much lying in shambles but its government was no terrorist threat to begin with. obama opposed the war from the start and so on a hypothetical level it is improbable that a obama/biden administration would have set this thing off. now he's taking over from a monumentally idiotic president who fucked up good in the middle east and he has to be pragmatic. a complete withdrawal of all troops would be irresponsible at this point. and gradually shifting the focus to the real hotspot is not such a dumb idea.
Supposing guantanamo bay is closed, Obama has just ordered the continuation of CIA extroadinary renditions aka the kidnapping of civilians who are to be placed in "secret prisons" aka other torture centres.
i read he didn't. either my source was spreading bs or yours. still, the guantanamo shutdown is progress. the equation is not change + no change = no change. it might be change + no change = too little change, yes.
The Federal Reserve is still there and even if it loses some of it's power, it's already been discussed in Davos that a new world central bank needs to be created, further centralising power.
so you expected dude to step up and eliminate the federal reserve system first thing after taking office? c'mon....and what's "it's already been discussed in Davos" has to do with a president who's kept US presidence in that very place at the lowest level possible?
He is fully supportive of carbon tax, which gives them the opportunity to basically tax every facet of your life, more taxes, going into a depression hmmm
you might not like that and i agree it could be abused but the main aim of carbon tax is to protect the environment. environmental protection wasn't exactly high on bush's agenda, and that's who we're comparing obama to right now. and elevated taxes don't automatically create a depression, although there's definitely a very difficult correlation there.
He supported the bank cash give aways in fact he even appeared before congress to give an impassioned speech urging the bail out bill to be passed.
and why didn't the bail-out make it through congress the 1st time? mostly because of conservative republicans (like bush). the reason that bush supported it was that he's been part of a gigantic failure and knew he needed to compensate. the reason it was opposed by people on the left was populism ("don't bail out the billionnaires"), the reason that the right opposed it was to take a step away from bush's policies and, erm, populism ("don't take people's taxes and make big government out of them").
the fact is that, sadly, the bail-out was needed to prevent the economy from going into an unprecedented freefalling spiral. obama is supportive of imposing regulations on banks that have received tax money, he has harshly critisized high wages and he wants to facilitate things for labor unions. that is very unlike bush dude.
..............................i'd get into some more statements you made, but i have a bus to catch right now, so i'll leave you with this for the moment
-
well virtuoso, i will not lie about the fact that some of the stuff mentioned by you is unknown to me (flatulence tax and whatnot) and don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that obama's every single word deserves lavish praise. nevertheless, you said some things that i can't quite agree with
I love the title "changefest"...and some people are just not able to handle satire. stewart's point was to show how similar presidential rhethorics are when they come from different people with approaches that are actually different. this wasn't about showing obama is similar to bush, which, frankly and no matter how much you like obama or not, is a rather dumb thing to say
How is it dumb? and again there is this refusal to see a distinction it's not about liking or disliking an individual it's about what they stand for. Me and others have pointed out hundreds of times why nothing is changing, at least not changing for the better anyway but here is a quick run down.
this is slightly contradictive. it could change for the worse and ruin the world and still the point would be that it changed :)
but why would we want bad change? i mean of course obama supporters didnt vote for him for that. its not like he can use that as an excuse "welll this r worse off than before, o well i kept my promise and brought change though"
-
My point was that "change" creates a perception of something different, something better, whereas this, if you can call it change is just a change of direction away from where the roots of where america was prided as being a free country. There is absolutely no need to be in Afghanistan or Iraq, if you thought the Taliban were a piece of shit, well, the Northern Alliance are arguably worse, you only need look at the raping and murderous rampages across Kabul. Again to point out that the hawks of Obamas administration are now just echoing the line of the Bush administration when it comes to Iraq also, a slow withdrawal but it will never be a total withdrawal because the think tank Project For The New American Century have already stated their goals. to stay in Iraq and use it as a staging post for further wars. So since you brought up contradictive statements or ideas, there is not a cat in hells chance that Obama is anti war because the think tanks produce the policies. The media are just playing the game, they know that most people will not dare question Obama right now and so they happily fall into the role of the cheer leader.
I really have no idea what source indicated to you that Obama had not renewed extraordinary rendition orders, but here it is http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,7548176,full.story he gives a flying fuck for human rights. You also mention the bank bail outs, the reason why the bail outs were even on the agenda was essentially because banks have been creating 50 times the money they actually hold in capital out of thin air via derivatives. This has led to a situation in which the banks have created a situation in which derivative contracts are almost ten times greater than the total world economy. So sure they were running out of money, but a) it was a criminal ponzi scheme anyway and secondly, it was obvious what would happen when the bank bail outs were approved, the same people engaging in colossal criminality were not going to stop. It was not hard to predict what was going to happen either, despite all of this future tax payers money being handed to them to once again reignite the debt based economy they have instead been using it to lavish their top people with bonuses, to use it in bank acquisitions and furthermore to create new financial bubbles. So the people have been paying almost 8 trillion to the bankers as a means of getting the credit flowing again and yet only a fraction of that is being used for that purpose, man this is looting on a scale which makes my head spin.
By the way, you are seeing carbon tax through tinted glasses, it's been designed to be abused, it's been designed to tax every facet of your life and thus create a giant bureaucracy to dwarf what is currently there. What are they doing in rwandan seas? dumping toxic chemicals into the sea, how many hundreds of thousands of tonnes of depleted uranium have been used against Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia? I shudder to think and I know the media likes to downplay this to such an extent that it appears the notion of "conspiracy theorists" but in fact when you research it, the devastation of depleted uranium is accepted that is to say beyond the general public denial line. In fact politicians in the English parliament (back benchers) want answers, but they never get them. This is seen as being one of the taboo subjects, if they gave a shit about the environment this would cease, but of course it doesn't. There is no interest in stopping it, because it's battering ram of epic proportions when it comes to being a deadly weapon.
The honey bees are dying out, gm crops are spreading like wildfire. diseases are rocketing through the roof, there is a correlation here. Do you see them panicking about the honey bees? mentioned a few times in passing, any suggestion that the gm crops are wiping out the honey is dismissed, but of course it would be, Monsanto is reaching the point where they have an almost total monopoly on the food supply. The best thing people can do is start growing their own food, and stick their fingers up to these politicians who comprise largely of self serving greedy bastards, or sadistic megalomaniacs. You can not and do get in a position of power without the approval of the major players who control this world, economically and so they control the geopolitical landscape with it.
-
Bush or any Repbulican would never want a Federal program to weatherize your home. That's in the works with Obama as President, something that Bush-led Congress would never approve of. And there's plenty of little important things like that shows the difference between the two. Now this whole fantasy you guys have about eliminating the Federal Reserve, etc....it's just not going to happen anytime soon. The fact is that Obama didn't campaign on getting rid of it or anything like it.
You mean to control the temperature in your home? and if so, you call that a good thing, a government having the power to decide your thermostat. Also the Federal Reserve was only one element, if that was all, well it could be grudgingly accepted but it sure isn't, that's only the tip of the iceberg.
Home Weatherization isn't just controlling the temperature in your home. The government deciding the power of your thermostat? Are you kidding me?! You're overreacting, all we're talking about is a way of saving energy. Something that should have been done a long ass time ago. Why should we use energy excessively when there are ways we can reduce it, to help each and every one of us.
You are talking to someone who voted for Ron Paul, who wasn't even on the ballot... you are talking to someone with a real grip of reality.
-
well virtuoso, i will not lie about the fact that some of the stuff mentioned by you is unknown to me (flatulence tax and whatnot) and don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that obama's every single word deserves lavish praise. nevertheless, you said some things that i can't quite agree with
I love the title "changefest"...and some people are just not able to handle satire. stewart's point was to show how similar presidential rhethorics are when they come from different people with approaches that are actually different. this wasn't about showing obama is similar to bush, which, frankly and no matter how much you like obama or not, is a rather dumb thing to say
How is it dumb? and again there is this refusal to see a distinction it's not about liking or disliking an individual it's about what they stand for. Me and others have pointed out hundreds of times why nothing is changing, at least not changing for the better anyway but here is a quick run down.
this is slightly contradictive. it could change for the worse and ruin the world and still the point would be that it changed :)
but why would we want bad change? i mean of course obama supporters didnt vote for him for that. its not like he can use that as an excuse "welll this r worse off than before, o well i kept my promise and brought change though"
obviously. if obama actually manages to run US government into the ground even more than bush did, he's a complete failure. i was merely drawing that logical conclusion cause what we're doing in this country is comparing obama to bush. and if you say they're akin to each other in political terms, then their policies have to be similar. in other words, bad change is still change, but of course that wouldn't defend obama at all.
Now virtuoso, you do your research and you seem to do it well, yet the conclusions you draw seem a bit rash to me at points, or the information you extract seems to be slightly selective in my opinion. don't get me wrong, i'm not trying to say you don't have a point. but look...
My point was that "change" creates a perception of something different, something better, whereas this, if you can call it change is just a change of direction away from where the roots of where america was prided as being a free country. There is absolutely no need to be in Afghanistan or Iraq, if you thought the Taliban were a piece of shit, well, the Northern Alliance are arguably worse, you only need look at the raping and murderous rampages across Kabul. Again to point out that the hawks of Obamas administration are now just echoing the line of the Bush administration when it comes to Iraq also, a slow withdrawal but it will never be a total withdrawal because the think tank Project For The New American Century have already stated their goals. to stay in Iraq and use it as a staging post for further wars. So since you brought up contradictive statements or ideas, there is not a cat in hells chance that Obama is anti war because the think tanks produce the policies. The media are just playing the game, they know that most people will not dare question Obama right now and so they happily fall into the role of the cheer leader.
You might not be completely off, but you're not being fair. first off, the PNAC doesn't even exist anymore and the goals stated by their megalomaniac neocon asses did affect the Bush administration policies, but I'm wondering why obama should be so keen on sucking up to them. of course these guys keep operating, but that organization is not a good example.
anyways, my general problem with your statements is that you seem to leave out one thing: obama is one man who's been given the world's most powerful single job, but not any more than that. you keep emphasizing yourself that lobbyists and think tanks wield great power, so what on earth do you expect from a new administration? obama has to initiate a slow process of fundamental restructuring and i don't think you're naive enough to believe that this can be done by popping up in the oval office and saying "hey guys, let's do a 180 on everything bush did". this is what i mean by saying you're not being fair. there's a huge mess to clean up and obama doesn't have a magic wand to do it with. he needs to start at the very point the bush administration got america to and that is a point so low that he can't possibly begin with something purely exciting.
and where i think you're wrong is your conclusion that this means that he's "echoing" bush. bush originally wanted to do a quick invasion, install a puppet government à la Pahlavi and, in Reagan's words, pave the country, put parking stripes on it and be home for christmas. with obama in office, this wouldn't have happened and obama is intelligent enough to know he can't just run now. he knows he needs to look what the best option under these circumstances is. as for afghanistan, the northern alliance (well, what is left of it) is a bunch of criminals, yes, and that is actually a good reason for a troop surge: the us started this thing and now it would be irresponsible to leave the country to a bunch of pillaging rogues. of course this is not the only reason why obama would want to stay in there, but the fact that this country can't handle its own business and is still in the aftermath of a us invasion is not insignificant.
I really have no idea what source indicated to you that Obama had not renewed extraordinary rendition orders, but here it is http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-rendition1-2009feb01,0,7548176,full.story
swiss newspaper, usually a reliable one though. but i think they just said he's not planning to renew at a certain point.
he gives a flying fuck for human rights. You also mention the bank bail outs, the reason why the bail outs were even on the agenda was essentially because banks have been creating 50 times the money they actually hold in capital out of thin air via derivatives. This has led to a situation in which the banks have created a situation in which derivative contracts are almost ten times greater than the total world economy. So sure they were running out of money, but a) it was a criminal ponzi scheme anyway and secondly, it was obvious what would happen when the bank bail outs were approved, the same people engaging in colossal criminality were not going to stop. It was not hard to predict what was going to happen either, despite all of this future tax payers money being handed to them to once again reignite the debt based economy they have instead been using it to lavish their top people with bonuses, to use it in bank acquisitions and furthermore to create new financial bubbles. So the people have been paying almost 8 trillion to the bankers as a means of getting the credit flowing again and yet only a fraction of that is being used for that purpose, man this is looting on a scale which makes my head spin.
there might have been mistakes in terms of regulations imposed by the bail-outs, yes. it's obvious what the reaganite idea of a free economy ended up being, i fully agree with you on that. mind you, this thing was still passed under the bush administration and in the background there were a lot of things going on that neither you nor i can quite see through. but as you might have noticed, obama has critisized this whole bonus lunacy in a way that bush would never have and there is legislation being worked on to further regulate and restrict these cynical spending frenzies. again, obama has a lot of resistance coming from the conservative department and he needs to find a way to get things done. man, he's been president for two weeks now, so you'll have to wait and see how this unfolds.
By the way, you are seeing carbon tax through tinted glasses, it's been designed to be abused, it's been designed to tax every facet of your life and thus create a giant bureaucracy to dwarf what is currently there. What are they doing in rwandan seas? dumping toxic chemicals into the sea, how many hundreds of thousands of tonnes of depleted uranium have been used against Iraq, Afghanistan and Yugoslavia? I shudder to think and I know the media likes to downplay this to such an extent that it appears the notion of "conspiracy theorists" but in fact when you research it, the devastation of depleted uranium is accepted that is to say beyond the general public denial line. In fact politicians in the English parliament (back benchers) want answers, but they never get them. This is seen as being one of the taboo subjects, if they gave a shit about the environment this would cease, but of course it doesn't. There is no interest in stopping it, because it's battering ram of epic proportions when it comes to being a deadly weapon.
i'm not seeing it through tinted glasses, i did say it could be abused, but it is also my belief that, if rightly done, it could be a good first step towards doing what has been long overdue. environmental protection has ceased to be a matter of political attitude, it's a mere matter of sanity and rational thinking at the point we have now reached. i don't mean to be preaching, but something has to be done. the other facts you're mentioning are sad truths, but not directly related to carbon tax. what is directly related to it is where that money goes.
The honey bees are dying out, gm crops are spreading like wildfire. diseases are rocketing through the roof, there is a correlation here. Do you see them panicking about the honey bees? mentioned a few times in passing, any suggestion that the gm crops are wiping out the honey is dismissed, but of course it would be, Monsanto is reaching the point where they have an almost total monopoly on the food supply. The best thing people can do is start growing their own food, and stick their fingers up to these politicians who comprise largely of self serving greedy bastards, or sadistic megalomaniacs. You can not and do get in a position of power without the approval of the major players who control this world, economically and so they control the geopolitical landscape with it.
i'll answer this by raising the simple question i've been wanting to ask you with regards to most of what you said. what would you want obama to do?
-
http://www.dubcnn.com/connect/index.php?topic=208249.0 (http://www.dubcnn.com/connect/index.php?topic=208249.0)
:)
-
I love how everyone here thinks they know what Obama is going to do. There is simply no way to know and there is no use debating what he will do. What should be debated is what should be done.
I also love how some people think that there are masterminds behind an enormous plot who decide what happens in the world. There is no table that these masterminds sit at and plan world domination and power. That shit is just comic book thinking. It is the combined motives of hundreds of business and social interests.
-
"Having said that, if we capture a high-value prisoner, I believe we have the right to hold that individual temporarily, to debrief that individual and to make sure that individual is properly incarcerated so we can maintain control over that individual," he said.
You are looking into a headline, i just used that above to illustrate the doublespeak.
No it's not comic book thinking, that statement is based from a misunderstanding and a naivety and and an ignorance just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean you should dismiss it because it is outside of your current paradigm of thought. David rothkopf brags about how 10,000 elite individuals control the world and indeed it is they who should control the world. Global bodies have ceded so much power from the sovereign states and furthermore unashamedly do it. Look at the power of the european union, look at the trilateral commission, look at the rockefeller foundation, but you see these are just names to you.
However I do agree with you on something, if Obama does try acting too much like a president instead of a stooge, he will be popped, that is why no one should ever trust anyone in power. This is the problem, a long time ago, many americans switched off and started trusting government and that has been exploited. That is not an attack on americans, if anything the english, the europeans have been too blindly seduced but americans have been in previous eras more vigilant.