Barack Obama and the illusion of change

[MontyCircus]

Originally Posted by Weasel Soup

So the only current option for change of any amount is Obama. And frankly with the current administration change is needed.

And marketing wise, for the rest of the world, I think it would do the U.S. a lot of good. All of that ill-will and pessimism would turn into...at the very least...intense curiosity.

[Weasel Soup]

Well atm it looks like McCain v Obama is likely. My home state just had their primary and turnout was huge, and frankly Ms. Clinton got beat decisively. The interesting aspect was that Clinton's losing votes would have crushed McCain.

But national polls show McCain beating Hillary and Obama beating McCain.

But then again, it is only February and November is a long way away.

As a "man on the street" (barkeep in real life) I hear alot of conversations, and there is a remarkable interest in the current election, like nothing I have heard in my adult life (36). This should be an interesting year.

[Connavar]

Clinton has lost to Obama when McCain is starting to attack Obama even before its certain he has won.


I must say its exciting to watch the race this time. Cause of Obama or Clinton being president means a change in the type of person who lives in the white house. If one of them wins the white house doesnt belong to only old white men in their 60-70 anymore.

[Bel_Azad]

Well I am speaking as a Londoner here - but I have been following the news in the US about the election.

I firmly believe that people who want to become president - are not really the right people to hold that office - that includes politicians in the UK

The idea that certain people have the urge to serve their country and hold office - for the benefit of others - just has not been proved to me - I dont even know if that type of person ever existed.

Most of the people that serve their country with honour - are in the army/ navy etc Soldiers tat put their lives on the line.

10 years ago the UK was promised a lot of change and we got some - then lots of lies and deceit - the arbitar of change (T Blair) tried to figure out ways to bypass any changes he introduced.

I really hope Obama can change that country - the bits that need changing - a lot of things are great about the USA -

But I fear all the people will be fooled again - but at least it shows that hope cant be lost despite what our elected leaders do -

Now what is that quote?

Fool me once shame on you.
Fool me twice - er ..

[Drachir]

It is beginning to appear that Barack Obama has the Democratic nomination. As an untested politican it is difficult to forecast how well he will do if he becomes president, but he could hardly do worse than the incompetent George W. Bush or the do-nothing Bill Clinton.

There is a much to be said in favour of an Obama presidency. First, he doesn't have the same ties to the corrupt American system that Hillary Clinton or John McCain have. Second, as a member of a racial minority he will finally break the last vestiges of the colour barrier that once dominated American society. Third, he has refused to accept donations from major corpoartions, freeing himself from any obligations to the corporate establishment.

It is worth noting that John F. Kennedy was a relative unknown before he ran for president. While the Kennedy presidency was short-lived it did have some notable achievements. Let's hope that if Obama becomes president he has the courage to introduce real change in the United States. It is long past due.

[Wiglaf]

Originally Posted by Drachir

It is worth noting that John F. Kennedy was a relative unknown before he ran for president. While the Kennedy presidency was short-lived it did have some notable achievements.

Was that the Bay of Pigs or active troop involvement in Vietnam?
The only area he showed any worth was in direct confrontation with the soviets when acted more like a Republican along the lines of Reagan.
He was not a Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, or Reagan. Unfortunately neither were the last three Presidents nor is the next President likely to become one.

Can any one tell me any positive change Obama is likely to cause?

[Parson]

If Obama is elected, and even his nomination is NOT sure yet! The most likely scenario is that he will be just like JFK, all style and little substance. The best thing he will have going for him is that the press will love his looks, wife, and family --- Just like JFK. The social programs JFK is famous for were actually implemented by LBJ. And for a strict Constitutionist and financial conservative like myself (outside of the civil rights act) the rest were just ways to spend money the US doesn't actually, mostly on people who need to go to work.

[Newton's Cat]

Few people are familiar with the writings of Hitler. When I read Barack's stuff it comes across to me as Mein Kampf minus the nasty bits. However - I do hold out hope that he will have a genius for implementing altruistic projects. He will be opposed - probably to the extent that only a small percentage of his ideas will be successfully applied, but, at the very least, I think he will be "good for America's soul". The similarity between Barack's thinking and Hitler's thinking is, too me, rather striking - but I doubt if he, after giving a particularly rousing speech depicting himself as a "benevolent leader", is the kind of person who would turn to his close associates and say:

"I suppose the fools will believe that!"

It would really be too much if Barack does have a "dark side".

[Delvo]

The change they're usually talking about, and the change that most of the American populace would immediately think of and be most interested in, is more specific than you might think: the undoing of several of Bush's specific actions:
1. Extraction from Iraq
2. Cancellation of the tax cuts
3. Reversal of multiple Executive Orders by the signing of new Executive Orders
4. Going around to various other countries' governments where Bush is believed to have damaged the USA's reputation, to try to fix that by showing how abnormal Bush's kind of attitude and behavior is

[Wiglaf]

Originally Posted by Delvo

The change they're usually talking about, and the change that most of the American populace would immediately think of and be most interested in, is more specific than you might think: the undoing of several of Bush's specific actions:
1. Extraction from Iraq
2. Cancellation of the tax cuts
3. Reversal of multiple Executive Orders by the signing of new Executive Orders
4. Going around to various other countries' governments where Bush is believed to have damaged the USA's reputation, to try to fix that by showing how abnormal Bush's kind of attitude and behavior is

Yet Obama promises to do little of that. In fact, in reference to #2, he proposes a $1000 tax cut to "working families." All this while apparently having never come accross a socialist program he does not support. In my opinion this is flirting with danger when an abundance of debt is held by less than friendly nations, eg. China, and a weak dollar is threatening to spark trade disputes.
Two of the most notable costs of healthcare are the shortage of healthcare professionals relative to demand and malpractice. The former he ignores. The later he simplistically offers to command the cost to go down. The military has free healthcare with low malpractice costs; it is illegal to sue a military doctor for malpractice no matter how gross the negligence.
As for education, a refund may sound nice but, at a California State University, tuition is free and registration fees are $1500/sem($3000/yr)not including parking, housing, student health fees, books, etc. The problem is less cost than overcrowding. Community Colleges cost $20/unit; a full 30units(10 classes) a year would cost $600 plus $1000 - 1500 for books plus under $50 in fees. ROP(Regional Occupational Program) classes are free. All these prices are without financial aid. What we need to increase the percentage of American workers with necessary training is more capacity and accessability. His change does not mention construction, teaching staff increases, or expansion of night, weekend, or internet classes.
Obama is merely treating adult Americans as pets by dangling a doggie biscuit in front of them and saying, "Be good little doggies and Uncle Barack will give you a bone."

Why do foreigners, seemingly Canadiens in particular but not exclusively, seem to be so enamoured of him?

[Drachir]

Originally Posted by Wiglaf

Was that the Bay of Pigs or active troop involvement in Vietnam?
The only area he showed any worth was in direct confrontation with the soviets when acted more like a Republican along the lines of Reagan.
He was not a Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, or Reagan. Unfortunately neither were the last three Presidents nor is the next President likely to become one.

Can any one tell me any positive change Obama is likely to cause?

It is hard to say what Kennedy might have achieved, however, if you want one or two brief examples there is the avoidance of nuclear war with the Soviet Union through his handling of the Cuban Missile Crisis, his furthering of the Peace Corps, and his unleashing of Bobby Kennedy on certain aspects of corporate America. Also, blaming Kennedy for situations that he inherited such as the Bay of Pigs and Vietnam may be a bit unfair. However the topic is Obama not Kennedy. The US system of government is in dire need of reform. It seems unlikely that Clinton or McCain who are very closely tied to the present system will institute any meanigful reform, and indeed Obama might not either. However, it is more likely that Obama might begin the long process of bringing the American government into the 21st century and freeing it from its present bondage to corporate America and its undemocratic and corrupt structure.

[Drachir]

Why do foreigners, seemingly Canadiens in particular but not exclusively, seem to be so enamoured of him? Quote for Wiglaf

Why do Canadians like Obama? Simple, it is because Canada has a Bush-loving, religious fundamentalist, conservative for Prime Minister. Obama is a fresh face in American politics and his views mirror the views of many Canadians who by American standards are quite liberal. Even the Prime Minister I just slammed would be considered on the political left left if he was an American politician. Obama represents a refreshing change in US politics especially when compared to first the inept do-nothing Bill Clinton and then the embarrassingly incompetent George W. Bush, a leader who is regarded by most Canadians as a buffoon at best. Sadly, the most powerful nation on earth has been very poorly served by its last two presidents.

[Delvo]

Originally Posted by Wiglaf

Yet Obama promises to do little of that.

Actually, he has said he'd do each of them. The meme that he has no specific plans is quite dishonest. Yes, his speeches contain flowery and empty-sounding sentences, but in the OTHER sentences, he gives actual policy statements. The media just don't pay any attention to THOSE sentences because they're trying to help Hillary.

Originally Posted by Wiglaf

In fact, in reference to #2, he proposes a $1000 tax cut to "working families."

...which would still be a reversal of the Bush tax cuts, which Democrats describe as having gone to "the rich".

[Parson]

Originally Posted by Delvo

The change they're usually talking about, and the change that most of the American populace would immediately think of and be most interested in, is more specific than you might think: the undoing of several of Bush's specific actions:
1. Extraction from Iraq
2. Cancellation of the tax cuts
3. Reversal of multiple Executive Orders by the signing of new Executive Orders
4. Going around to various other countries' governments where Bush is believed to have damaged the USA's reputation, to try to fix that by showing how abnormal Bush's kind of attitude and behavior is

I think the jury is out on whether a majority of Americans would agree that 2 and 4 of this list needs to be done, and it would be close on 1 if the extraction were a simple let's bring them home as fast as possible without a thought about what's going to happen next. 3 to me is vague. Are you talking about the Patriot Acts? They are much more popular with the masses than most people are led to believe.

A word to the wise never listen to the press to find out what Americans really think.

[Wiglaf]

Originally Posted by Delvo

Actually, he has said he'd do each of them. The meme that he has no specific plans is quite dishonest. Yes, his speeches contain flowery and empty-sounding sentences, but in the OTHER sentences, he gives actual policy statements. The media just don't pay any attention to THOSE sentences because they're trying to help Hillary.

...which would still be a reversal of the Bush tax cuts, which Democrats describe as having gone to "the rich".

His own web site is against him? That is where I got the info.
Besides, businesses hire people and pay them money. Also like most Americans, my savings and retirement consists of investments in these corporations; their falling profits has cost me hundreds of dollars. I am not a rich American either; three years ago I became apprenticed as an electrician(not part of the pocket picking IBEW) after working my way up in the food service industry. Offering to reduce payroll costs for employee health benefits with a program paid for by payroll taxes is does not reduce the payment only the name written on the check.
Having defeated Marxism, Americans are not eager to now imbrace it. The change we want is to end corruption, usurping of the Constitution, and a lack of consideration for America's interests in foreign policy in favor of avenging family members. Many have no desire to throw out the baby with the bathwater and institute socialist government. We merely want abuses ended and to be delivered what is promised.