Looking back, was Obama exactly what America needed?
I haven't posted here in a while, but I've been thinking about this for some time now and would like to get ya'lls take on things. As we all know, American politics are screwed up, and as those who pay attention to history know, that has been happening over the past 100 years or so. The reason it has gotten so bad is because the dismantling of the constitution has happened so gradually for so long, so few noticed it, and even of those who did it didn't seem so pressing that they put a huge effort forward to fix it.
My point being, Obama came in screaming that he was going to change things and did, quickly. He pushed through HUGE spending bills that rocked American's to their core and brought many out of the mentality of party politics. Republican and Democrat are no longer the only two options, and people are motivated to hit the reset button on American politics (how much of a reset we can get this late in the game is debatable)
I think that if McCain was put in office things would have just continued as usual without anyone realizing it.
Any thoughts?
__________________
† Christ † Krew † #22
'We need to stop worrying about putting Christ back in Christmas and start putting Christ back in Christianity'
'Christians are people who don't lay down the law, but lift up the love'
-Leonard Sweet
You know, I never really thought about it that way. Maybe Obama's legacy is to wake up the American people to how things have been going in Washington and really "change" things.
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Just in case you're looking for specific things to clarify:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
The reason it has gotten so bad is because the dismantling of the constitution has happened so gradually for so long, so few noticed it, and even of those who did it didn't seem so pressing that they put a huge effort forward to fix it.
How so?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
He pushed through HUGE spending bills that rocked American's to their core and brought many out of the mentality of party politics.
Whut
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
Republican and Democrat are no longer the only two options, and people are motivated to hit the reset button on American politics
Whut
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
I think that if McCain was put in office things would have just continued as usual without anyone realizing it.
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Looking back, was any President, or Politician for that matter exactly what America needs? No. As for Obama, he turned millions of people into prophets, as Politicians usually do, and is doing exactly the same things many predicted, and said he would do. Politicians are politicians, Democrat, Republican, left, center, right--they're Politicians.
Here's a great article from Doug French about politicians, and why they're almost always the way they are.
Just in case you're looking for specific things to clarify:
How so?
Study a little about American Progressivism. Marx actually predicted capitalism would fail. If you look at our semi-recent history you'll understand why he said that.
Whut
What do you mean? You are unaware of the spending bills pushed through by this administration? Hate to be the bearer of bad new to that rock you've been hiding under, but there was over a trillion dollars added to our deficit this year
Whut
Why not ask an intelligent question. Many people are dissociating themselves with party politics. Do I need to use smaller words?
hahahahah W-HAT
?
.
furious george - did you actually read the OP or did you just read the title of the thread?
apunk - Good call on the movie lol....looks like you just sparked a monty python night for me
__________________
† Christ † Krew † #22
'We need to stop worrying about putting Christ back in Christmas and start putting Christ back in Christianity'
'Christians are people who don't lay down the law, but lift up the love'
-Leonard Sweet
thats a good way to think of it actually. Only problem with it is that it seems like America loves its extremes, so chances are people who won't vote fo Obama again, would vote for the Republicans and we'd have the same mess again, just with different names and different goals. And then after we all pissed and moaned about the republicans, we go back to the dems.
Sounds stupid, but that's the most likely scenario. The last time the 3rd party was actually a contention was the Bull Moose Party with Teddy Roosevelt.
__________________
"Originally posted by §Galactus§if i had a horse, i would put armor on it. and i would wear armor, and ride around collecting taxes and tributes from the serfs."
"Originally posted by §Galactus§You should sig me again. That way, when everyone looks at your signature, they would be like "Holy **** that dude is so awesome he got sigged twice" It would be espically awesome if you sigged this post. So that people who read your sig will be confused as well as amazed
Study a little about American Progressivism. Marx actually predicted capitalism would fail. If you look at our semi-recent history you'll understand why he said that.
What do Marx or Progressivism have to do with the "bad state of affairs due to the dismantling of the constitution?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
What do you mean? You are unaware of the spending bills pushed through by this administration? Hate to be the bearer of bad new to that rock you've been hiding under, but there was over a trillion dollars added to our deficit this year
So we go through 8 years of a presidency that nearly triples the national debt, and now you're *****ing about added deficit? (Most of which are a product of the inherited recession and hidden un-budgeted costs of the previous presidents abuse of discretionary spending.) Who's really been hiding under a rock? This is the first time that the war budget has actually been enumerated in the annual federal budget. Have you already forgotten the multiple "emergency funding" bills?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
Why not ask an intelligent question. Many people are dissociating themselves with party politics. Do I need to use smaller words?
"Many" meaning people jumping ship from the GOP for "independent." Right? I don't see the same evacuation being reported about the Democratic Party.
And yeah, nice hyperbolic speculative thread starter with no references.
Quote:
Originally Posted by apunkjunkie
Whenever I think of Obama, I think of this video clip:
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Last edited by CrazyLittle : 09-16-2009 at 08:38 PM.
thats a good way to think of it actually. Only problem with it is that it seems like America loves its extremes, so chances are people who won't vote fo Obama again, would vote for the Republicans and we'd have the same mess again, just with different names and different goals. And then after we all pissed and moaned about the republicans, we go back to the dems.
Sounds stupid, but that's the most likely scenario. The last time the 3rd party was actually a contention was the Bull Moose Party with Teddy Roosevelt.
That has been the process we have seen in our system of party politics. What I am saying is that I am hopeful that this may be enough to break us out of that rut. You could very well be right, but I think if this doesn't do it, nothing will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrazyLittle
What do Marx or Progressivism have to do with the "bad state of affairs due to the dismantling of the constitution?"
....Because both of those are in direct opposition to the constitution of the United States...We have been moving closer to socialistic principals over the past century and that's why we're in the mess we're in now. Want me to make you a picture book?
So we go through 8 years of a presidency that nearly triples the national debt, and now you're *****ing about added deficit? (Most of which are a product of the inherited recession and hidden un-budgeted costs of the previous presidents abuse of discretionary spending.) Who's really been hiding under a rock? This is the first time that the war budget has actually been enumerated in the annual federal budget. Have you already forgotten the multiple "emergency funding" bills?
I was appauled by Bush's economic policy as much as anyone, but when that is double and tripled so is my disdain for it. BTW, I'm not even talking about the budget, that is a small part of this. I know you will try to defend keysian economics with memorized rhetoric and google searches, but it doesn't work efficiently and is completely against the American spirit as defined by all of our founding documents.
"Many" meaning people jumping ship from the GOP for "independent." Right? I don't see the same evacuation being reported about the Democratic Party.
Then you need to open your eyes....
And yeah, nice hyperbolic speculative thread starter with no references.
If he were the messiah, that would be a clear violation of the establishment clause
.
__________________
† Christ † Krew † #22
'We need to stop worrying about putting Christ back in Christmas and start putting Christ back in Christianity'
'Christians are people who don't lay down the law, but lift up the love'
-Leonard Sweet
That has been the process we have seen in our system of party politics. What I am saying is that I am hopeful that this may be enough to break us out of that rut. You could very well be right, but I think if this doesn't do it, nothing will.
.
you know, it would be nice. But until we get a great 3rd party candidate, I just don't see it happening. And we have no good options right now.
I'm sure someone will say Ron Paul, but he's literally a nobody on the national stage outside of people who talk about politics and want to sound different.
__________________
"Originally posted by §Galactus§if i had a horse, i would put armor on it. and i would wear armor, and ride around collecting taxes and tributes from the serfs."
"Originally posted by §Galactus§You should sig me again. That way, when everyone looks at your signature, they would be like "Holy **** that dude is so awesome he got sigged twice" It would be espically awesome if you sigged this post. So that people who read your sig will be confused as well as amazed
....Because both of those are in direct opposition to the constitution of the United States...We have been moving closer to socialistic principals over the past century and that's why we're in the mess we're in now. Want me to make you a picture book?
Wait wait wait, so you demonstrate that you have little to no understanding of what socialism really is, and then you claim to be an expert enough on constitutional law to make that value judgment. Is this a joke or am I really supposed to take your replies seriously?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
I was appauled by Bush's economic policy as much as anyone, but when that is double and tripled so is my disdain for it. BTW, I'm not even talking about the budget, that is a small part of this. I know you will try to defend keysian economics with memorized rhetoric and google searches, but it doesn't work efficiently and is completely against the American spirit as defined by all of our founding documents.
No, as I'm not an economist so I'm not going to build an argument based on Keynes. If Frank feels like doing that, he's more than welcome to do so. To call Frank's position on economics "rhetoric" is an ad hom at best, and ignorant at worst. (Since of course that would be your next step... see I can foretell the future too!)
Would you rather the banking system implode and just put everyone out on the streets as loans are revoked en masse?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mtcfla2
Then you need to open your eyes....
No, you need to show me the proof of your claims. My eyes are open. You're seeing illusions.
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
you know, it would be nice. But until we get a great 3rd party candidate, I just don't see it happening. And we have no good options right now.
I'm sure someone will say Ron Paul, but he's literally a nobody on the national stage outside of people who talk about politics and want to sound different.
The other option, and one I hope would come, is that someone from either the Dem or Rep side of the aisle would wake up to the founding principals of this country and run with that platform (and actually follow through). I really do think there are good people in congress, we just have to find them.
__________________
† Christ † Krew † #22
'We need to stop worrying about putting Christ back in Christmas and start putting Christ back in Christianity'
'Christians are people who don't lay down the law, but lift up the love'
-Leonard Sweet
The other option, and one I hope would come, is that someone from either the Dem or Rep side of the aisle would wake up to the founding principals of this country and run with that platform (and actually follow through). I really do think there are good people in congress, we just have to find them.
The trifecta is complete. Please, tell us, oh wise prophet. What are the "founding principles" and how would they be different from today? If the Constitution were supposed to be immutible, why was it designed with the built-in power to amend it? Where does the Bill of Rights fit in to the "founding principles" or perhaps the 14th Amendment? 18th Amendment? 21st Amendment? How does the founding principle of the 3/5ths compromise fit into OUR AMERICA.... huh?
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Last edited by CrazyLittle : 09-16-2009 at 08:59 PM.
The trifecta is complete. Please, tell us, oh wise prophet. What are the "founding principles" and how would they be different from today? If the Constitution were supposed to be immutible, why was it designed with the built-in power to amend it? Where does the Bill of Rights fit in to the "founding principles" or perhaps the 14th Amendment? 18th Amendment? 21st Amendment? How does the founding principle of the 3/5ths compromise fit into OUR AMERICA.... huh?
the founding fathers attempted to create a limited government with the primary purpose of protecting individual rights and individual freedom. why are you so dense?
also, the 3/5ths compromise was wrong, but it has to be understood in the context of the 18th century, not today.
the founding fathers attempted to create a limited government with the primary purpose of protecting individual rights and individual freedom. why are you so dense?
also, the 3/5ths compromise was wrong, but it has to be understood in the context of the 18th century, not today.
you're skipping the question: If the Constitution was designed to be immutible, thus "small government forever", then why were we given the power to amend it? If the constitution is not supposed to be amended, how do you justify the following in today's society?
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Wait wait wait, so you demonstrate that you have little to no understanding of what socialism really is, and then you claim to be an expert enough on constitutional law to make that value judgment. Is this a joke or am I really supposed to take your replies seriously?
Then maybe you can educate me. Or, maybe you're one of those who agrees with the statement 'to each according to their need, from each according to their ability' but don't agree with socialism because the word is icky
No, as I'm not an economist so I'm not going to build an argument based on Keynes. If Frank feels like doing that, he's more than welcome to do so. To call Frank's position on economics "rhetoric" is an ad hom at best, and ignorant at worst. (Since of course that would be your next step... see I can foretell the future too!)
I have had long discussions with him concerning that topic and have put in a lot of time studying and understanding the theories presented by Keynes. Yes, I do believe his position on economics is memorized rhetoric taught by professors of economics who feel all of humanity can be controlled through government control of a nation's money flow. I think he is well educated in the subject, but misguided as far as the effectiveness of the theories he is taught. For every economist that he agrees with there is one that has a differing opinion on that matter. I have a lot of respect for the time he spends in study and enjoy discussing that type stuff with him, even though we don't always agree.
Would you rather the banking system implode and just put everyone out on the streets as loans are revoked en masse?
The banking system would not 'implode'. You believe everything you hear on TV don't you. I bet you believed that 'unemployment will go over 8% if we don't spend 700 billion dollars NOW!' too didn't you. The government had a hand in banking by backing sub-prime mortgages to people who couldn't afford them and pushing the banking industry hard with unfair regulations, that is why we're in the trouble we're in now. Bush actually brought that to light 8 years ago and revisited it with higher urgency in '03 only to be reamed by Barney Frank and the other idiots in congress who can't see past their own noses. That being said, I don't really want to turn this in to a thread on economics, which you obviously don't understand
No, you need to show me the proof of your claims. My eyes are open. You're seeing illusions.
What claims? I was making general statements based on my own observations. You really sound like you're some high school kid without any real understanding of the world. How old are you?
.
__________________
† Christ † Krew † #22
'We need to stop worrying about putting Christ back in Christmas and start putting Christ back in Christianity'
'Christians are people who don't lay down the law, but lift up the love'
-Leonard Sweet
you're skipping the question: If the Constitution was designed to be immutible, thus "small government forever", then why were we given the power to amend it? If the constitution is not supposed to be amended, how do you justify the following in today's society?
3/5ths compromise
Bill of Rights
14th Amendment
18th Amendment
21st Amendment
Please, if you're so smart, explain that paradox.
if you're so smart, stop asking really stupid questions, OK? I didn't say the Constitution is not meant to ever be amended. quit creating straw men, mkay?
if you're so smart, stop asking really stupid questions, OK? I didn't say the Constitution is not meant to ever be amended. quit creating straw men, mkay?
Actually it was...that's why we have amendments......
Is this a joke or am I really supposed to take your replies seriously?
