Democratic Presidential Primaries 2008

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by lchoy

I don't remember learning this in university, but is the Canadian system for electing party leaders this complicated?

No. It's getting more democratic but mostly it's only the real party faithful who bother to get involved. It seems each party has their own system and the public just gets presented with the party leader. I vote in almost every election but have only voted for a party leader once and I had to pay for a party membership.

[Vulcan]

I wouldn't count Hillary
out yet. All I heard on CNN this morning was about the American economy going into the sewer. People will remember the good times when Bill was in power. As he said "It's the economy stupid" may be ready for another go round.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

What exactly did Hillary Clinton do while HER HUSBAND was in the White House? What did she do that would have provided stimulus to the economy? What would she do to stimulate the economy right now?

The best way to stimulate this economy is to bring new products and technologies to the world market. If the United States can restart its manufacturing and export engine it will once again become the dominant economy in the world. Until that happens, it will continue to be the world's greatest consumer and continue to spiral into the crapper. The only way this dramatic change takes place is through someone with vision, that can inspire, and has the fortitude to stand up to the lobbiests and think tanks. Clinton is not that person. She is a status quo candidate.

Seriously, I fear for America. The average Joe on the street doesn't have a clue at what is going on. They think everything is just fine. They don't understand the precarious position this country is in. I got into it with one of my co-workers, who is an MBA, and tried to make him see the horrid position the country is in, and how the dollar is on the edge of oblivion. I predicted almost a year ago that the American buck could find itself in serious trouble as other countries move away from the dollar and onto the Euro or other currencies as a trade standard. This would decrease the value of the dollar and increase the value of the debt that America carries. This would push America to the brink of bankruptcy. Of course my MBA compatriot defended the American way of life and stated that it would be impossible for nations to get off the dollar standard and that America would always have the number one economy, because its the way the system was designed. A year later and we're starting to see other countries move off the dollar and adopt other currencies for trade. America is on the edge of an economic disaster. The industrial heart of the nation is about to go into cardiac arrest, and not a damn thing is being done about it. The Bush Administration's response is spend, spend, spend, and encourage Americans to do the same. Max out them credit cards, the President demands. More debt is exactly what this country needs! Clinton's plan would be the exact same as Bush's and lead America further into the abyss.

I think the only hope this country has is to think way outside the box and think about being a leader again. America needs another Jack Kennedy, who will challenge America to do the impossible, and from those results, lead the world. Obama is the closest thing to Jack Kennedy that has come along since his untimely death. He provides vision. He provides hope. I hope America realizes Obama is what the nation needs.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

I think the only hope this country has is to think way outside the box and think about being a leader again. America needs another Jack Kennedy, who will challenge America to do the impossible, and from those results, lead the world. Obama is the closest thing to Jack Kennedy that has come along since his untimely death. He provides vision. He provides hope. I hope America realizes Obama is what the nation needs.

I am Barak Obama and I approve of this message!

(Paid for and brought to you by the Barak Obama for President of the United States campaign)

On a more serious note I agree with the debt issue you bring up, I agree with promoting a strong greenback, and I also agree that Hillary Clinton is not the person to do just that. What America needs is a timely, acceptable conclusion to the conflicts abroad that drain the country of money, a clawback of domestic spending, and to resist the urges to create new entitlement programs. Over time as debt is paid back to an acceptable level (25% of annual GDP), people and businesses will be able to perform at a high level and the fruits of their labor will go towards rewarding themselves as opposed to paying back creditors.

My questions surrounding Obama is whether or not he can resist the urges to spend on new social programs domestically. The problem with electing a Democrat in office is that they always come with the usual left-wing economic baggage, not because they themselves espouse to those leanings but rather good factions of their supporters do. Same can be said for electing a Republican president when it comes to religious baggage.

[HotHotHeat]

Lanny just hit a home run. Wow, great post.

It's true, a large majority of Americans just dont comprehend the magnitude of the problem. They see Bush come on TV yesterday and say everything is alright, and then magically everything is alright. Amazing how that actually works.

The American economy is in such distress, it's flat out scary to think about what's going to happen in the next 5-6 months. Especially with the idiot running the FED and an incompetent President with the economics understanding of a 12 year old.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Barack Obama just made a speech for generations to appreciate. There are watershed moments in history, and this speech will be one of them. It takes the major problem facing America and applies some humanity to it. Win or lose, this speech will resonate for ever and be acknowledged as one of the best rebutals to an election issue in the past 40 years.

Here is the full text of that speech. Mods, there is no copyright on this content as it was a fully released transcript by the individual, for public consumption. Also, at a time when "politics" is all about making statements based on sound bites, this will place everything in complete context and not allow for the twisting or misinterpretation of the man's words.

"We the people, in order to form a more perfect union."

Two hundred and twenty one years ago, in a hall that still stands across the street, a group of men gathered and, with these simple words, launched America's improbable experiment in democracy. Farmers and scholars; statesmen and patriots who had traveled across an ocean to escape tyranny and persecution finally made real their declaration of independence at a Philadelphia convention that lasted through the spring of 1787.

The document they produced was eventually signed but ultimately unfinished. It was stained by this nation's original sin of slavery, a question that divided the colonies and brought the convention to a stalemate until the founders chose to allow the slave trade to continue for at least twenty more years, and to leave any final resolution to future generations.

Of course, the answer to the slavery question was already embedded within our Constitution – a Constitution that had at is very core the ideal of equal citizenship under the law; a Constitution that promised its people liberty, and justice, and a union that could be and should be perfected over time.

And yet words on a parchment would not be enough to deliver slaves from bondage, or provide men and women of every color and creed their full rights and obligations as citizens of the United States. What would be needed were Americans in successive generations who were willing to do their part – through protests and struggle, on the streets and in the courts, through a civil war and civil disobedience and always at great risk - to narrow that gap between the promise of our ideals and the reality of their time.

This was one of the tasks we set forth at the beginning of this campaign – to continue the long march of those who came before us, a march for a more just, more equal, more free, more caring and more prosperous America. I chose to run for the presidency at this moment in history because I believe deeply that we cannot solve the challenges of our time unless we solve them together – unless we perfect our union by understanding that we may have different stories, but we hold common hopes; that we may not look the same and we may not have come from the same place, but we all want to move in the same direction – towards a better future for of children and our grandchildren.

This belief comes from my unyielding faith in the decency and generosity of the American people. But it also comes from my own American story.
I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton's Army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I've gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world's poorest nations. I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters. I have brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, uncles and cousins, of every race and every hue, scattered across three continents, and for as long as I live, I will never forget that in no other country on Earth is my story even possible.
It's a story that hasn't made me the most conventional candidate. But it is a story that has seared into my genetic makeup the idea that this nation is more than the sum of its parts – that out of many, we are truly one.

Throughout the first year of this campaign, against all predictions to the contrary, we saw how hungry the American people were for this message of unity. Despite the temptation to view my candidacy through a purely racial lens, we won commanding victories in states with some of the whitest populations in the country. In South Carolina, where the Confederate Flag still flies, we built a powerful coalition of African Americans and white Americans.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either "too black" or "not black enough." We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.
And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.

On one end of the spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike. I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed. But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems – two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.

Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way.

But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God's work here on Earth – by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.

In my first book, Dreams From My Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity:

"People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend's voice up into the rafters....And in that single note – hope! – I heard something else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion's den, Ezekiel's field of dry bones. Those stories – of survival, and freedom, and hope – became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into future generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories that we didn't need to feel shame about...memories that all people might study and cherish – and with which we could start to rebuild."

That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety – the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions – the good and the bad – of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.

Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through – a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point. As William Faulkner once wrote, "The past isn't dead and buried. In fact, it isn't even past." We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow.

Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven't fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today's black and white students.
Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments – meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today's urban and rural communities.

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families – a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods – parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement – all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.

This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What's remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn't make it – those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations – those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings.

And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright's sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.

In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience – as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze – a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns – this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.

This is where we are right now. It's a racial stalemate we've been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy – particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.

But I have asserted a firm conviction – a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people – that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.
For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances – for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives – by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.

Ironically, this quintessentially American – and yes, conservative – notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright's sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country – a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen – is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope – the audacity to hope – for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds – by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world's great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother's keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister's keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.
For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle – as we did in the OJ trial – or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.

We can do that.

But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we'll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change.

That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, "Not this time." This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can't learn; that those kids who don't look like us are somebody else's problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time.
This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don't have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.

This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn't look like you might take your job; it's that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.

This time we want to talk about the men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. We want to talk about how to bring them home from a war that never should've been authorized and never should've been waged, and we want to talk about how we'll show our patriotism by caring for them, and their families, and giving them the benefits they have earned.

I would not be running for President if I didn't believe with all my heart that this is what the vast majority of Americans want for this country. This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected. And today, whenever I find myself feeling doubtful or cynical about this possibility, what gives me the most hope is the next generation – the young people whose attitudes and beliefs and openness to change have already made history in this election.
There is one story in particularly that I'd like to leave you with today – a story I told when I had the great honor of speaking on Dr. King's birthday at his home church, Ebenezer Baptist, in Atlanta.

There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organized for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She had been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and one day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.

And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that's when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.

She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.

She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.

Now Ashley might have made a different choice. Perhaps somebody told her along the way that the source of her mother's problems were blacks who were on welfare and too lazy to work, or Hispanics who were coming into the country illegally. But she didn't. She sought out allies in her fight against injustice.

Anyway, Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they're supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who's been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he's there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, "I am here because of Ashley."

"I'm here because of Ashley." By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.

But it is where we start. It is where our union grows stronger. And as so many generations have come to realize over the course of the two-hundred and twenty one years since a band of patriots signed that document in Philadelphia, that is where the perfection begins.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

My questions surrounding Obama is whether or not he can resist the urges to spend on new social programs domestically. The problem with electing a Democrat in office is that they always come with the usual left-wing economic baggage, not because they themselves espouse to those leanings but rather good factions of their supporters do. Same can be said for electing a Republican president when it comes to religious baggage.

Come on, that is just more Republican garbage dreamed up and positioned by some think tank, and then repeated through the echo chamber of the mass media too lazy to fact check the position. How have Democrats been responsible for the state of the economy? The Republicans certainly are good at spinning a yarn. Sadly, people continue to swallow it and repeat it.

This stuff of Democrats being "free spending" and "big government" is just GARBAGE. Yeah, with the New Deal, came about from a Democrat, and created a bureaucracy that did not exist prior to that, but that was back in the 1930's for crying out loud. Since then, it has been the Republicans that have been big spenders, makers of new and wonderous governmental agencies (that do nothing and make government less efficient), and generally run the country into the ground. The numbers don't lie. Since WWII, the Republicans have managed to build up government and spend the country into oblivion. Eisenhower started the cold war and the arms race, and the incredibly expensive missle defense programs. He was the one who spend billions on the interstate system (props for investing in infrastructure). Eisenhower learned from his mistakes and warned us of what he kick started and how the military industrial complex could lead to the ruination of the country. Nixon continued to pour money into this black hole. Reagan kicked it into an even higher gear and left the nation with a deficit and debit it is still trying to get out of. The first Bush added to that, and his mentally challenged son has spent money in a way that would make Reagan blush. In between all of those were Truman, Kennedy, Carter and Clinton. Of those, Kennedy was the only one to increase government and spending substantially. Kennedy did so to push the nation and ended up creating massive industrial growth because of the technologies developed while trying to get a man on the moon. The Democrats have been fiscally responsible and any programs they have created have been for the common good. The Republicans continue to spend, spend, spend, and only to the benefit of those in the military industrial complex. This is the problem. I do not see how Obama and his position plays into the continuance of this issue.

[llama64]

I wonder... if someone were to tally up the total economic expenditures of the past few Democratic and Republican presidents, how would they stack up?

Without doing any research, I'd guess that the Republicans have spent far more money on wars then the Democrats ever spent on social programs. Perhaps I'm a typical leftist moron, but spending money on helping people sounds more appealing then spending public funds to destroy other people halfway across the world.

Barack remains the best choice in the entire race. Though, I'd be happy to have any of the remaining candidates (Obama, Clinton, McCain) take it. Any choice is a better choice then the mess of an administration leaving office this fall.

The funny part is that Canada still has the potential to complete a full political cycle in the time it took to run the 2008 Presidential race. America is a deeply flawed political nightmare.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Come on, that is just more Republican garbage dreamed up and positioned by some think tank, and then repeated through the echo chamber of the mass media too lazy to fact check the position. How have Democrats been responsible for the state of the economy? The Republicans certainly are good at spinning a yarn. Sadly, people continue to swallow it and repeat it.

This stuff of Democrats being "free spending" and "big government" is just GARBAGE. Yeah, with the New Deal, came about from a Democrat, and created a bureaucracy that did not exist prior to that, but that was back in the 1930's for crying out loud. Since then, it has been the Republicans that have been big spenders, makers of new and wonderous governmental agencies (that do nothing and make government less efficient), and generally run the country into the ground. The numbers don't lie. Since WWII, the Republicans have managed to build up government and spend the country into oblivion. Eisenhower started the cold war and the arms race, and the incredibly expensive missle defense programs. He was the one who spend billions on the interstate system (props for investing in infrastructure). Eisenhower learned from his mistakes and warned us of what he kick started and how the military industrial complex could lead to the ruination of the country. Nixon continued to pour money into this black hole. Reagan kicked it into an even higher gear and left the nation with a deficit and debit it is still trying to get out of. The first Bush added to that, and his mentally challenged son has spent money in a way that would make Reagan blush. In between all of those were Truman, Kennedy, Carter and Clinton. Of those, Kennedy was the only one to increase government and spending substantially. Kennedy did so to push the nation and ended up creating massive industrial growth because of the technologies developed while trying to get a man on the moon. The Democrats have been fiscally responsible and any programs they have created have been for the common good. The Republicans continue to spend, spend, spend, and only to the benefit of those in the military industrial complex. This is the problem. I do not see how Obama and his position plays into the continuance of this issue.

I'm proposing to cut out money spent on the war effort, AND cutting back on regular domestic program spending WITHOUT adding new programs. I understand the Republicans are not likely to do very well on my first point and I understand that Democrats aren't likely to do very well on the last point. Both are or will be very expensive endevours especially as America's largest demographic enters retirement. In fact domestic social spending will grow in proportion to everything else anyway without any new programs announced just from demographic shifts. The ugly debt monster needs to be battled on two fronts and Obama's not likely to claw back on current domestic spending or withhold from creating new initiatives, just as McCain, Hillary (or any other of the other prior nominees minus Ron Paul) isn't likely to slash military spending to the levels needed, or cut domestic spending.

I'm not defending the Republicans at the expense of the Democrats, but rather take issue to the Obama glorifying going on here that isn't deserved. Sure at times he looks good compared to other candidates, but he's hardly worthy of using the phrase "Watershed moment" to describe any of his speeches. He's a politician, just like the rest of them. Right now his stench isn't as bad as others but don't try to convince me it smells like roses.

[North East Goon]

Anyone else here willing to admit that they backed Bush in both of the last 2 elections? I did , and cant believe how stupid I was to believe in this guy. I just really didnt like the campaigns that Kerry and Gore put up against him.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

Anyone else here willing to admit that they backed Bush in both of the last 2 elections? I did , and cant believe how stupid I was to believe in this guy. I just really didnt like the campaigns that Kerry and Gore put up against him.

I never liked Gore... I think he is an arrogant, slimy, manipulative opportunist. His fake pensive poses and faux sympathy in what I saw of "An Inconvenient Truth" was enough to totally affirm that long-held belief.

I did initially back Kerry because Bush was/is an incompetent. However, it quickly became a battle to see who was the bigger idiot, and in the end, it seemed that Bush was the slightly better choice.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I am Barak Obama and I approve of this message!

(Paid for and brought to you by the Barak Obama for President of the United States campaign)

On a more serious note I agree with the debt issue you bring up, I agree with promoting a strong greenback, and I also agree that Hillary Clinton is not the person to do just that. What America needs is a timely, acceptable conclusion to the conflicts abroad that drain the country of money, a clawback of domestic spending, and to resist the urges to create new entitlement programs. Over time as debt is paid back to an acceptable level (25% of annual GDP), people and businesses will be able to perform at a high level and the fruits of their labor will go towards rewarding themselves as opposed to paying back creditors.

My questions surrounding Obama is whether or not he can resist the urges to spend on new social programs domestically. The problem with electing a Democrat in office is that they always come with the usual left-wing economic baggage, not because they themselves espouse to those leanings but rather good factions of their supporters do. Same can be said for electing a Republican president when it comes to religious baggage.

According to what Obama has said, actually according to what all 3 candidates have said....Obama, compared to the others will be spending more than everyone else.

Which isn't a problem in itself....the problem is spending it on stuff that isn't needed.

That means pissing off certain politicians and refusing to allow a budget bill to go through unless its balanced.

I doubt it will happen though.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

Anyone else here willing to admit that they backed Bush in both of the last 2 elections? I did , and cant believe how stupid I was to believe in this guy. I just really didnt like the campaigns that Kerry and Gore put up against him.

Yes. That was unbelievably stupid.

But mad props to you for admitting your mistake. That takes some serious character, particularly given all the "I-told-you-so" us anti-Bues have been storing up for 8 years now, waiting to be unleashed upon you.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

Anyone else here willing to admit that they backed Bush in both of the last 2 elections? I did , and cant believe how stupid I was to believe in this guy. I just really didnt like the campaigns that Kerry and Gore put up against him.

Just like a lot of others.

And some liked Bush.

Apparently some of those idiots(according to certain people around here) who supported Bush(not you)....are now supporting Obama.

Funny how the stupidity of the American people is judged by who they vote for. They were stupid when they voted for Bush....not so much when they vote for Obama.

[Azure]

And I love it how the Democrats are set on a pedestal despite controlling Congress, having a worse approval rating than the President, and just passing a budget that isn't exactly helping things either.

Hilarious.

[Gozer]

Lanny, that speech by Barack still amounts to a hill of beans when it comes to implementation. All this talk of unity is reminiscent of the great fascists of history.

America needs a Ron Paul. They need to realize that they aren't the be-all and end-all of the world. They are no longer the most powerful entity in the universe. Get your ego in check, stop devaluing the dollar to prop up an economy, and cut back on military spending.

Really, the problem with America is that it has shared too much and cannot sustain it's relative strength as other countries learn from them.

[HotHotHeat]

Originally Posted by Azure

Just like a lot of others.

And some liked Bush.

Apparently some of those idiots(according to certain people around here) who supported Bush(not you)....are now supporting Obama.

Funny how the stupidity of the American people is judged by who they vote for. They were stupid when they voted for Bush....not so much when they vote for Obama.

Azure, wtf are you even talking about? Bush supporters are now Obama supporters?

They weren't stupid for voting for Bush. Bush pushed his agenda in a historically convincing way. It was complete BS propaganda, but it did it's job.

Drawing comparisons between Bush supporters and Obama supporters is pure garbage. The US is in a much different state than either of the past two elections. Different priorities, different circumstances. Unbelievable.