Obama: The New George Bush

[lord_casek]

haha Casek you are joking aren't you?

 

Who cares if we go to the moon, there is nothing there, been there done that sort of situation, I don't know of any younger generations that are impressed by that whatsoever, then the rest of people don't believe it even happened in the first place. NASA is a good place to pull unnessecary funding for projects that frankly don't go anywhere.

 

Who cares if China or India go there, you already have.

 

 

It's very important. The moon is our jumping point to Mars and going to Mars is

very important for a ton of reasons.

 

The space race is still on whether or not you know or care about it.

[Decyferon]

Then more research needs to be put into actually being able to man a ship to Mars not just to get back to the moon, I understand space travel is very important, but at this current moment in time and finiancial situation I can certainly see why it is put on a backburner.

 

I know the space race is still on, I just think it is pointless focusing on going to the moon when we wouldn't be able to go to Mars anyway.

[angelofdeath]

Yea I am all for pulling all kinds of funding from Israel, I don't think that country needs or deserves any of the funding or military support that the US gives it, it just continues Israel's war crimes against the palastinians.

 

i might be wrong, but last i heard the palestinians get more funding than does israel. im just pointing out the conflicts of interest

 

Yea New Orleans was not handled well by the BUSH administration, I don't see how bringing that up has anything to do with Obama and what he has to do, he has to follow through on the promises that the US have agreed to.

 

you cant blame the blunders of FEMA solely on bush. sure he was president, but this is the nature of all federal programs and bureaucracy. it wasnt bush, it was the federal governments response to fema.

 

if you keep telling yourself that 'all we need are the right people in charge' of an inefficient thing you will die after a long life of sore disappointment.

 

i brought this up to show that the US government cant even handle disaster relief within her borders how can it handle disaster relief in foreign countries.

as i always like to say but it continually falls on deaf ears...

when the government can fix all the problems they claim they can, say in a small area like washington dc... when they can eliminate poverty, illiteracy, and make this small area a utopia like they claim they can, then we can start talking about moving onto other parts of the country.

 

Obviously you don't think that government will do anything well, I have never heard you mention anything positive about government unless it comes in the same sentance as the revolution.

 

i think the government should solely exist to protect rights. thats it.

i congratulate law enforcement when they catch a murderer. etc.

 

He should be taxing companies that are polluting the environment through the nose, oil companies should be getting taxed more, and tax breaks given to green initiatives. He should be giving funding to redevelop poorer areas and turn them around from the slums you have within your own country, encouraging social development projects and aiding the people that need it.

 

i want to make my position on energy clear before you misinterpret anything.

i do not favor any sort of particular energy. i am not for or against wind, solar, nuclear or coal fired energy. i am against the government with its 'experts' pushing an agenda on the entire US. i am for letting '1000 flowers bloom' so to speak and seeing what people buy. i am against the US government distorting the market place of energy. look at the ethanol disaster. ethanol was the future when gas prices spiked during hurricane katrina. now its considered by everyone but a few hold outs to be stupid. look at the tax payer money wasted on this debacle.

 

i am against government protection of business, which is the side you always forget about. i am for property rights. so take nuclear energy for instance. the government decided a long time ago that nuclear energy was good. they also passed a price anderson act that basically limited the liability of these companies. nuclear waste in your backyard? tough shit. they arent liable. the same line of logic you use to justify the things you like the government supporting is the same line of logic used to eliminate the property rights of americans by limiting the liability of various big businesses. during the industrial revolution for instance they thought it was a good idea to limit the liability of pollution producing companies in the form that property owners cannot have recourse through the law to sue these companies for damage to their property... and they still agree that certain amounts of pollution because of the benefit to all out way silly things like property rights.

 

in a free market, nuclear energy might not be as 'cheap' because if nuclear companies were liable 100% for their actions like pollution or damage to property for instance they could easily be sued. could you imagine if nuclear waste showed up in in a county and you had an entire county suing a nuke company for property damage? how long do you think it would take them to clean up their act?

but government actually protects the companies from this.

 

im not for or against wind or solar energy, although as a consumer i believe that solar energy, if i could afford to invest in the equipment to do so is a great energy source. i personally want to be as independent of the 'grid' as possible. but some people dont. some people like grid power. why not just allow freedom of entry and see what people buy? the market always allocates resources the best. supply and demand. high bid wins. economics 101. governments, by taxation, regulations, subsidies, monopoly protections, corporate welfare, etc, all distort the true market. as mises pointed out every intervention leads to distortions and unintended consequences that cause other problems. which then call for more interventions to fix the new problems and so it goes on forever.

 

if solar and wind are true alternatives, the government should remove all barriers to entry, stop protecting other companies through monopoly privilege, subsidies, etc, allow a level playing field to develop and let these companies compete! i have no doubt in my mind that if wind and solar is the wave of the future, they will kick the pants off of other energy forms if a free market place was allowed.

 

as for rebuilding the inner cities... this has been tried on so many levels since the war on poverty began which by the way is the exact time that the decrease in poverty that was happening through out the 20th century, STOPPED. as soon as you subsidize something, you get more of it. this is the unintended consequence of the war on poverty. when they declared war on drugs, we got more drugs. when they subsidize unemployment through unemployment insurance you get more of it. when you subsidize sickness through universal healthcare you get more sickness. you start getting people going to the doctor for a hang nail as opposed to in a free market and they had to pay for it, they might not go. simple and basic economics.

 

the problem with 'rebuilding' poor areas is that section 8 public housing is not privately owned for example. if you do not own your house and it was given to you, what incentive do you have to maintain it and keep it nice? absolutely none. in fact if you destroy it, no worries because they will just bulldoze this project down in 10 years and build another nice new one for you. its the same thing with bums. if you gave the average bum panhandling in the bar districts of inner cities, $5000, would he start his life again? no. he would have that money blown on drugs, hookers and booze in 1 week and be back to square one holding up the sign. throwing money at the problem solves nothing. which is why private shelters are better for instance. they usually have some sort of requirement before they hand things out for example. i know some wont give food if you are drunk. this is an incentive to get off the bottle. it is essentially the person being in a hole and the private system gives you 'freedom rungs' on the ladder to gradually pull yourself out.

give a man a fish and he'll eat it then he'll be starving again. teach a man to fish and he'll be good to go.

 

if HUD was scrapped a building boom in cheap private apartments would take place.

 

and if the department of commerce was abolished big business would have to makes it own way in the world. no more handouts, subsidies, monopoly privileges, and liability protection at the expense of consumers and competitors.

 

 

Giving aid to the Mujahadeen in the 80s is not the same as giving aid to 3rd world countrie that need it, your country was paranoid about the Russians and decided to arm and train these people who were fighting against the Russians, you reaped what you sow, they used that training against you, blame the Republican party and Reegan who were in power for making those awful decisions.

 

true that.

i dont need to solely place blame on reagan and the republicans when the entire principle of foreign aid leads to this. anyone can point to bad foreign aid and intervention engaged in by both sides, parties and numerous presidents. this is merely a consequence of intervention. the principle of intervention in general, not just a bad decision. the vietnam war was a consequence of democrat (kennedy and johnson) intervention.

 

our rulers are not angels nor is anyone else on this earth.

[angelofdeath]

i actually agree with decy on something...

NASA is one of the last things to be concerned about in my view.

which brings to mind this quote from a plan to 'fix america'

 

" NASA is blasted. Private businesses and scientific organizations now launch satellites at their own expense. If Star Trek fans want space exploration, they are free to pay for it."

[lord_casek]

Then more research needs to be put into actually being able to man a ship to Mars not just to get back to the moon, I understand space travel is very important, but at this current moment in time and finiancial situation I can certainly see why it is put on a backburner.

 

I know the space race is still on, I just think it is pointless focusing on going to the moon when we wouldn't be able to go to Mars anyway.

 

You don't get it, the moon is our jumping point to Mars. We have to get back to the moon

to set up a base so that whatever type of craft that will travel to Mars doesn't have to deal with Earth gravity (taxes the fuck out of fuel when we lift off from Earth),

 

At the current time Decyferon, our blackbudgets need to be cut. Fuck those alphabet agencies and fuck the nameless "organizations". They make plenty off of cocaine and arms sales, anyhow. Let's strip their budget. It's the biggest in the country.

[lord_casek]

i actually agree with decy on something...

NASA is one of the last things to be concerned about in my view.

which brings to mind this quote from a plan to 'fix america'

 

" NASA is blasted. Private businesses and scientific organizations now launch satellites at their own expense. If Star Trek fans want space exploration, they are free to pay for it."

 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for privately funded space programs. I think it's neater than sliced bread. I still think the nation needs to keep our eyes on the prize (manned deep space exploration).

[lord_casek]

Obama Making Plans to Use Executive Power

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/13/us/politics/13obama.html?ref=us

 

Article I, Section 1 of the Constitution states: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Article II, Section 3 states that the president may call Congress into emergency session during a national crisis.

[Decyferon]

You don't get it, the moon is our jumping point to Mars. We have to get back to the moon

to set up a base so that whatever type of craft that will travel to Mars doesn't have to deal with Earth gravity (taxes the fuck out of fuel when we lift off from Earth),

 

At the current time Decyferon, our blackbudgets need to be cut. Fuck those alphabet agencies and fuck the nameless "organizations". They make plenty off of cocaine and arms sales, anyhow. Let's strip their budget. It's the biggest in the country.

 

Oh I couldn''t agree more there are plenty of shady agencies that need to have their funding cut. I don't see why funding should be cut to projects aimed at improving the life of the American public in general but people like the CIA/NSA those sort of agencies don't need to be swallowing up billions of dollars because they have proven to be pretty shit at the job they do.

[shai]

At the rate this planet is getting trashed, we had better figure out some kind of fallback position whether it's via NASA or private industry.

[angelofdeath]

Oh I couldn''t agree more there are plenty of shady agencies that need to have their funding cut. I don't see why funding should be cut to projects aimed at improving the life of the American public in general but people like the CIA/NSA those sort of agencies don't need to be swallowing up billions of dollars because they have proven to be pretty shit at the job they do.

 

i covered this in my last post at the bottom of the last page.

 

this is the way government works. the more they screw up the more money they get in their budgets. it is like this on all levels. if a private company screws up, they LOSE money, therefore having an incentive not to screw up.

governments have failed in curing poverty, education, defense, and just about everything else. yet they still have their budgets increased every year. consider the department of agriculture. the department is now something like 20 times bigger than it was in 1900, when everyone was a farmer. now the percentage of farmers is a fraction of what it was then, yet the department is so much bigger.

 

no use in complaining about the CIA's budget being to big while you want your welfare budget bigger. once you acknowledge that the rule of law can be broken and money can be allocated against the constitution, you have to deal with this sort of thing.

 

wishing for a government that can only do warm cuddly things like help the needy and engage in charity is like wishing for a lion that only purrs and cuddles or a rattle snake that only provides percussive accompaniment to marachi music. you must acknowledge the nature of the state.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic

Pronunciation: \ag-ˈnäs-tik, əg-\

Function: noun

Etymology: Greek agnōstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnōstos known, from gignōskein to know — more at know

Date: 1869

 

1 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

2 : a person unwilling to commit to an opinion about something <political agnostics>

 

— ag·nos·ti·cism \-tə-ˌsi-zəm\ noun

 

Basically it means he is undecided on the matter.

 

I don;t think you are wasting your time Soup. I just wanted to say that there are some people that's opinions will never be changed, which is fine. I was just glad to see someone else commenting from a more common point of view to myself.

 

Saying things like this makes it seem like people who hold your position are right, and the rest of us are just in the way.

 

I'm sure I could say the same things directed towards many other people on this board.

 

However, this is meant as a discussion. We aren't here trying to persuade anyone to anything. We are just discussing our own viewpoints on separate issue's.

 

I don't expect anyone to all of a sudden go, "I GOT IT!" after reading one of my posts. Although if it does get someone thinking from a abnormal perspective from the usual. That's more than enough for me.

 

At least that is how I look at it at this point.

 

I especially appreciate people who's viewpoint I don't belong with, explaining why or why they don't think a certain way, helps me gain other perspective's on an issue.

 

It's just when the whole, your a fucking moron, and this and the next thing get involved, my maturity goes flying out the window, right quick.

[Decyferon]

I didn't mean it as a disrespectful comment to anyone, I certainly conceed points in a discussion, but I just meant it that some people in a discussion are unwaivering. I meant it as that some people will not view it from a different viewpoint than their own no matter what. I tend to get very involved in discussion to try and understand the other person's point of view, I sometimes feel others don't.

 

I am certainly not 'right' about anything it is always just my opinion, and I apologise to you if that is the way that comment came across because it certainly wasn't intended that way. I certainly don't ever intend to go down the your a fucking moron route, apart from when I got into it with Soaker and he started being abusive toward me.

 

Also, I do like to take the opposing side in a discussion just to get a discussion flowing and different viewpoint and ideas knocking around, like playing devils advocate, it would be really boring if we all agreed on everything.

[Decyferon]

i covered this in my last post at the bottom of the last page.

 

this is the way government works. the more they screw up the more money they get in their budgets. it is like this on all levels. if a private company screws up, they LOSE money, therefore having an incentive not to screw up.

governments have failed in curing poverty, education, defense, and just about everything else. yet they still have their budgets increased every year. consider the department of agriculture. the department is now something like 20 times bigger than it was in 1900, when everyone was a farmer. now the percentage of farmers is a fraction of what it was then, yet the department is so much bigger.

 

no use in complaining about the CIA's budget being to big while you want your welfare budget bigger. once you acknowledge that the rule of law can be broken and money can be allocated against the constitution, you have to deal with this sort of thing.

 

wishing for a government that can only do warm cuddly things like help the needy and engage in charity is like wishing for a lion that only purrs and cuddles or a rattle snake that only provides percussive accompaniment to marachi music. you must acknowledge the nature of the state.

 

I don't expect governments to just do nice things, I am fully understanding of the world we live in and how the governments operate, it just seems that you have so many agencies within the US government whose work seems along the same lines that it is like they are doing the same job.

 

All I meant is funding shouldn't be cut to the schemes aimed at improving life for the people and that the funding to the more shady aspects do get cut.

 

I'm the first to admit that you all are more knowledgable on American government than I am, I am not American and I have to try and catch up and read what I can just to comment, so sometimes I miss the issue, but I enjoy the discussions.

[lord_casek]

I didn't mean it as a disrespectful comment to anyone, I certainly conceed points in a discussion, but I just meant it that some people in a discussion are unwaivering. I meant it as that some people will not view it from a different viewpoint than their own no matter what. I tend to get very involved in discussion to try and understand the other person's point of view, I sometimes feel others don't.

 

I am certainly not 'right' about anything it is always just my opinion, and I apologise to you if that is the way that comment came across because it certainly wasn't intended that way. I certainly don't ever intend to go down the your a fucking moron route, apart from when I got into it with Soaker and he started being abusive toward me.

 

Also, I do like to take the opposing side in a discussion just to get a discussion flowing and different viewpoint and ideas knocking around, like playing devils advocate, it would be really boring if we all agreed on everything.

 

Yep. I like it when it gets just heated enough. Not size 7 red font heated, but when the discussion gets intense.

 

Look at it this way, this is the only part of the forum that has such heated discussion and is still able to self moderate (somewhat). I think we're doing pretty well.

[Decyferon]

This is the one part of the forum that kinda restores my faith in humanity that there are people that at least care enough to talk about this sort of thing.

 

My wife thinks I'm mental getting into discussions about American politics when I live in the UK, I just can't help it though it is damn interesting!!

[angelofdeath]

All I meant is funding shouldn't be cut to the schemes aimed at improving life for the people and that the funding to the more shady aspects do get cut.

 

the only problem with this is that 1. it doesnt recognize the true nature of government and it is an impossibility. 2. you have all these different factions seeking to control the central state that in effect controls all aspects of peoples lives. and you can see why they do it. it is big. it is powerful. this group wants this, this group wants that, the other group wants what they want, etc. because of this conflictive nature, the only solution is to limit the state and its influence as much as possible. if you dont, then you will have continual conflict and continual fighting over which group gets what spoils. the very same argument used to justify 'schemes aimed at improving life' are the same arguments used by others that increase the CIA budget, etc. because in their view this is 'improving peoples lives.'

 

it is considered blasphemy by the establishment repubs and dems to ask them why we now have a dept of homeland security. ron paul was laughed at when he makes this point....pointing out 'dont we already have a dept of DEFENSE?' the military industrial complex is a very influential creature as is the pharmaceutical industrial complex/medical industrial complex, the welfare lobby, etc. all these different groups log roll to get what they want. one group will put up with totalitarian police state depts on america's shores in exchange for some handouts. another group will spend domestically whatever they have to to shut up the welfarists while they conduct a foreign war. then you have the sensible centrists like bush, obama, hilary, mccain, etc. that will simply support ALL of this stuff no matter what.

[lord_casek]

This is the one part of the forum that kinda restores my faith in humanity that there are people that at least care enough to talk about this sort of thing.

 

My wife thinks I'm mental getting into discussions about American politics when I live in the UK, I just can't help it though it is damn interesting!!

 

Yep. I've been called "nuts" for getting into intense discussions on a forum. All good, though. I live in Tennessee. There is a strong lack of intelligent people around me.

Have to turn somewhere.

[Decyferon]

the only problem with this is that 1. it doesnt recognize the true nature of government and it is an impossibility. 2. you have all these different factions seeking to control the central state that in effect controls all aspects of peoples lives. and you can see why they do it. it is big. it is powerful. this group wants this, this group wants that, the other group wants what they want, etc. because of this conflictive nature, the only solution is to limit the state and its influence as much as possible. if you dont, then you will have continual conflict and continual fighting over which group gets what spoils. the very same argument used to justify 'schemes aimed at improving life' are the same arguments used by others that increase the CIA budget, etc. because in their view this is 'improving peoples lives.'

 

it is considered blasphemy by the establishment repubs and dems to ask them why we now have a dept of homeland security. ron paul was laughed at when he makes this point....pointing out 'dont we already have a dept of DEFENSE?' the military industrial complex is a very influential creature as is the pharmaceutical industrial complex/medical industrial complex, the welfare lobby, etc. all these different groups log roll to get what they want. one group will put up with totalitarian police state depts on america's shores in exchange for some handouts. another group will spend domestically whatever they have to to shut up the welfarists while they conduct a foreign war. then you have the sensible centrists like bush, obama, hilary, mccain, etc. that will simply support ALL of this stuff no matter what.

 

I do see what you mean, this is when it comes down to having a strong leader who is prepared to stand up and say no to these departments, the whole homeland security thing to me is laughable, like you say you already have a department for defense.

 

It is like when they set up all this focus groups and parlimentary commisons to investigate things, to me all of that is a waste of money. In the UK we currently have a scandal with MPs expenses, the parlimentary commission that investigated the expenses row actually cost more than the amount of expenses claimed by MPs, to me that is bureaucracy out of control. Simply these MPs should have been made to pay the expenses back and if their expenses were deemed out of what they could claim for then they should have lost their positions.

[angelofdeath]

I do see what you mean, this is when it comes down to having a strong leader who is prepared to stand up and say no to these departments, the whole homeland security thing to me is laughable, like you say you already have a department for defense.

 

It is like when they set up all this focus groups and parlimentary commisons to investigate things, to me all of that is a waste of money. In the UK we currently have a scandal with MPs expenses, the parlimentary commission that investigated the expenses row actually cost more than the amount of expenses claimed by MPs, to me that is bureaucracy out of control. Simply these MPs should have been made to pay the expenses back and if their expenses were deemed out of what they could claim for then they should have lost their positions.

 

'internal' investigations are probably the most laughable things that governments or government agencies do. conflict of interest much? hahaha

[Decyferon]

maybe they should set up a publically funded department solely for investigating these matters hahahaah (I kid)

 

would be funny if it wasn't something they would actually consider doing.

[lord_casek]

Cheney Admits to War Crimes, Media Yawns, Obama Turns the Other Cheek

 

http://www.truthout.org/cheney-admits-war-crimes-media-yawns-obama-turns-other-cheek56924

 

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=9818034

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/margolis/margolis180.html

 

Don't blame Iran.

 

Wasn't sure where else to post this.

[ILOTSMYBRAIN]

http://www.independent.org/pdf/policy_reports/2010-02-10-fda.pdf

 

An interesting read entitled, Medical Disasters and the Growth of the FDA.

 

I guess I could start another thread but due to Obama's unrelenting pursuit of a socialized medical system in the U.S. this fit's here as well.

[Zig]

this term; "The New George Bush", is a term I can't really fully comprehend. If we are calling Obama, George Bush 2, then we have to go back and take a look at what George Bush represents to us.

 

To me, George Bush represents:

- Police State

- Executive Decision

- War Crimes

- Contempt for the Constitution

- Contempt for Civil Liberties

 

I was young when 9/11 occurred, probably around 16 years old... so I wasn't paying much attention to the world around me at that time. I remember the Clinton years somewhat, but I wasn't politically aware, so Bush for me was someone that through his administrations actions which I so profoundly disagreed with, and was disgusted by, really enlightened me to something I may have already been becoming aware of growing up with the kind of parents I have. That government was not working in the best interests of the people, and rather had different agendas being manipulated by different kinds of forces, whether it be money, corporations, or people of power and influence.

 

George Bush himself, to me however, didn't seem capable enough to be personally pursuing a lot of the actions his administration took and to me it didn't seem like he was making a lot of these decisions alone. So, in my view George Bush is only the most extreme manifestation of the corruption of our political system, rather than someone who is an evil conspiratorial person knowingly making deals behind closed doors to purposely sabotage America.

 

Now, we have Rolling Stone magazine and many other publications, as well as the people themselves referring to Barack Obama who campaigned as being the ANTI-Bush, comparing him to being just like George Bush and continuing Bush policies. The reason is because, when you take the personalities out of it, and it has nothing to do with George Bush or Barack Obama as individuals, we can see that our system of government is and has been for decades now on a long steady road towards a more closed society that is regulated, policed, centralized, and becoming a Tyranny more and more. It is the natural progression of every nation, you can research this throughout history. George Washington and our founding fathers KNEW this to be the case and WARNED us about it through their writings. I honestly don't hate these figures who find themselves at the top of this system, I have no personal strife with them and in a way I pity them because just like you and I they are trapped in a corrupted system that continues to grow and gain power over freedom and independence. That is the nature of power, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. This is common sense.

[boratderkaghad]

wow zig your the first youngster on here with some sound words and its easier to call him bush 2 cuz you cant call him a nigger on air cuz thats just how whites think why cuz im white as well not mixed or jewish or any of that and i live in the city not the burbs just a realist that's all

[Michael Jackson.]

obama bin laden

[Spitfire15]

wow zig your the first youngster on here with some sound words and its easier to call him bush 2 cuz you cant call him a nigger on air cuz thats just how whites think why cuz im white as well not mixed or jewish or any of that and i live in the city not the burbs just a realist that's all

 

[she's crafty]

 

 

:lol: :lol: :lol: obama the clown !!!

[she's crafty]

The new george bush???? yea, pretty much !!!

 

2 quick examples that stick out like a sore thumb

 

1} escalating the war in iraq? no, escalating it in afganistan...

 

2} slow responce in the gulf for hurricane katrina disaster? no, slow responce in the gulf to the worlds worst oil disaster.

[fastZeetec302]

^ and when all thats going on. dude goes on the view. fucking embarrassing.