The Obama Administration / State of the Union Address

ibis wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Nothing is simply with you boys over there ever is it ? This Rahm Emanuel - he's working for the Jews now but his father was a Palestinian Arabic Freedom Fighter?

The Irgun were a Zionist group - their aim was to drive both the British and the Arabs out of Palestine. The similarities with our own various organisations is obvious.

I was going to observe that if you wanted to spout the usual brit propoganda you should at least put it into context, but that's not how propoganda works does it? The only verifiable "cleansing" that took place during the 6 county war occurred at the very beginning and was carried out by the supposed legitimate state against its own citizens. Remember the refugee camps along the borders? On the another note, we still want the brit army out of our country. That hasn't changed, nor will it. If you're so enamoured with the mother fuckers, invite them into your neighborhood. We'd be glad to be rid of them.

As for the Obama and his administration, I'm not in the least surprised he's invited Goldmans Sachs frat boys to take up leading financial positions. If you want to catch a thief, you ideally want a thief to do the job. They have insider's knowledge of operations. Which leads me onto the most fundamental aspect I can detect about Obama, his methods and how we can expect things to pan out over the next four years. Obama is not an insider. In fact, his rise to power has relied on some slick advertising and an almost religious adherence to sticking with those who are insiders and picking the correct (ie winning) side despite the impact of given policies. US politics, as far as I can see, isn't predicated upon ideologies or even a set of coherent policies - bar some vague notions about undefined free trade on the rgiht wing. Obama will, imo, then select a group of insiders to tackle very specific agendas that will utlimately be moderate in tone and probably ineffective in the long term.

The closest parallel to this era and administration will obviously be the depression era and F Roosevelt. While the magnitude of the problems are similar, the context and the players are vastly different. F Roosevelt was the utlimate insider. He came from a partician like dynasty and enjoyed the wealth and priviledge that was attached. He had access to existing power structures from an early age and used these connections to his advantage. There was one obvious difference he understood despite his class position. He understood if you impoverished the vast majority of your citizenry, the rich and tiny minority wouldn't be able to sell their goods and services to the poor majority as they wouldn't be able to afford the goods and services. It seems our modern days politicians can't understand this wee equation.

Anyhow, Roosevelt, the somewhat class traitor, stands in stark contrast the new ultimate political outsider that is Obama. Can Obama use this to his advantage? I'm not so sure given how US politics works.

Also I'd like to quickly point out some obvious macro details that are different at this time. The US is energy dependent. The US debt levels, including contingent liabilities like social security, are monsterously out of proportion to any previous measure of wealth creation. The level of international competition in regards to trade is vastly different given the rise of the BRIC nations and the re-emergence of Europe. Most of all, there hasn't been the emergence of a new a new industry or alteration of existing industries to drive new growth and spread excess wealth down to the wage earner. The Americans, along with many other nations, have been searching for over 25 years with out much success. But, I suppose, these "new" industries pop up when you least expect them to.

Art-T mentioned that Billy Clinton did a good job. I'd pretty much agree with his/her assessment. However, Billy boy was only playing for time. While he tried to get the US's finances in order, with some success, he realised that real and verifiable productive wealth creation was on the wane in the US. He relied on and encouraged the pvt citizen to take on more debt in oder to drive consumer lead growth. And, lest we forget he was the one who finanally drove the nail into verifiable statistical issuance by the US govt when they began the bastardisation of inflation figures. Billy did alright, and would have been a damn site better than the Bush blood suckers, but that's all water under the bridge at this point.

Given the the increased intensification of the struggle for the world's resources, Obama and the US's options are limited. Their financial positions also curtails thier room for manouvre. They need some big ideas and some big plans for new wealth creation. I don't see where these are coming from. At best the US will stagnate for years and come to rest at an equilibrium on par with Europe if they're lucky. Meanwhile, I just don't see how the greenback can survive in its present state.

Auditor #9 wrote:

youngdan wrote:

What are they saying about Obama doing something that Lincoln did - bringing opposites together to stir up some creativity ? Do you know the phrase exactly .. ?

I am not sure of a phrase but maybe it's about The Team of Rivals: the Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, by Doris Kearns Goodman? Obama refers to it frequently and has spoken with the author. It seems Lincoln built his cabinet using enemies as well as friends, keeping them inside the tent....

I'll read the full post later, it looks very interesting, but for the record the quote at the top is not by me.

This is what I said

cactus flower wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

Quote :

Yes, it's Change, as The One chooses his one, Congressman Rahm Emanuel (D-IL), to be his H.R. Haldeman. Emanuel is known for being smart and intense, mailing dead fish to people he hates, and freaking out at subordinates. Loving revenge, never forgiving a slight, and brooking no dissent, he's famous as an enforcer. Such figures are valued in the state (and the Mafia), if not in private society. Emanuel, with Pelosi's blessing, famously blocked antiwar Democrats from running for the House in 2006 (he controlled the money for new candidates). Emanuel is an advocate of endless war in the Middle East. No chickenhawk, during the Gulf War, he volunteered as a civilian worker for the Israeli army. His father Benjamin, a physician, was a guerilla fighter for the Irgun against the British occupation of Palestine. The Irgun, a secret insurgent group, is described by unfriendlies as a terrorist organization for such acts as bombing the King David Hotel and ethnically cleansing with extreme prejudice Arab villages. Rahm's mother, Martha, was a civil-rights activist and rock 'n roll nightclub owner in Chicago.

Nothing is simply with you boys over there ever is it ? This Rahm Emanuel - he's working for the Jews now but his father was a Palestinian Arabic Freedom Fighter?

What does Rahm Emanuel's job entail anyhow - I can't remember who was Chief of Staff in the Bush gang.

www.counterpunch.org/brenner1223.html+Irgun+and+nazis&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=ie" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:i_GmCp-YlREJ:www.counterpunch.org/brenner1223.html+Irgun+and+nazis&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=ie

The Irgun was a Zionist armed group that was described as terrorist. Separatist, right wing and anti-Arab.

n an interview with Ma'ariv, Emanuel's father, Dr. Benjamin Emanuel, said he was convinced that his son's appointment would be good for Israel. "Obviously he will influence the president to be pro-Israel," he was quoted as saying. "Why wouldn't he be? What is he, an Arab? He's not going to clean the floors of the White House."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1225910047157&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Does this bring closer to, or further away from, a strike against Iran?

Back later

candide wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

youngdan wrote:

What are they saying about Obama doing something that Lincoln did - bringing opposites together to stir up some creativity ? Do you know the phrase exactly .. ?

I am not sure of a phrase but maybe it's about The Team of Rivals: the Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln, by Doris Kearns Goodman? Obama refers to it frequently and has spoken with the author. It seems Lincoln built his cabinet using enemies as well as friends, keeping them inside the tent....

That sounds exactly it - "Team of Rivals". Thanks!

rockyracoon wrote:

ibis wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Nothing is simply with you boys over there ever is it ? This Rahm Emanuel - he's working for the Jews now but his father was a Palestinian Arabic Freedom Fighter?

The Irgun were a Zionist group - their aim was to drive both the British and the Arabs out of Palestine. The similarities with our own various organisations is obvious.

I was going to observe that if you wanted to spout the usual brit propoganda you should at least put it into context, but that's not how propoganda works does it? The only verifiable "cleansing" that took place during the 6 county war occurred at the very beginning and was carried out by the supposed legitimate state against its own citizens. Remember the refugee camps along the borders? On the another note, we still want the brit army out of our country. That hasn't changed, nor will it. If you're so enamoured with the mother fuckers, invite them into your neighborhood. We'd be glad to be rid of them.

As for the Obama and his administration, I'm not in the least surprised he's invited Goldmans Sachs frat boys to take up leading financial positions. If you want to catch a thief, you ideally want a thief to do the job. They have insider's knowledge of operations. Which leads me onto the most fundamental aspect I can detect about Obama, his methods and how we can expect things to pan out over the next four years. Obama is not an insider. In fact, his rise to power has relied on some slick advertising and an almost religious adherence to sticking with those who are insiders and picking the correct (ie winning) side despite the impact of given policies. US politics, as far as I can see, isn't predicated upon ideologies or even a set of coherent policies - bar some vague notions about undefined free trade on the rgiht wing. Obama will, imo, then select a group of insiders to tackle very specific agendas that will utlimately be moderate in tone and probably ineffective in the long term.

The closest parallel to this era and administration will obviously be the depression era and F Roosevelt. While the magnitude of the problems are similar, the context and the players are vastly different. F Roosevelt was the utlimate insider. He came from a partician like dynasty and enjoyed the wealth and priviledge that was attached. He had access to existing power structures from an early age and used these connections to his advantage. There was one obvious difference he understood despite his class position. He understood if you impoverished the vast majority of your citizenry, the rich and tiny minority wouldn't be able to sell their goods and services to the poor majority as they wouldn't be able to afford the goods and services. It seems our modern days politicians can't understand this wee equation.

Anyhow, Roosevelt, the somewhat class traitor, stands in stark contrast the new ultimate political outsider that is Obama. Can Obama use this to his advantage? I'm not so sure given how US politics works.

Also I'd like to quickly point out some obvious macro details that are different at this time. The US is energy dependent. The US debt levels, including contingent liabilities like social security, are monsterously out of proportion to any previous measure of wealth creation. The level of international competition in regards to trade is vastly different given the rise of the BRIC nations and the re-emergence of Europe. Most of all, there hasn't been the emergence of a new a new industry or alteration of existing industries to drive new growth and spread excess wealth down to the wage earner. The Americans, along with many other nations, have been searching for over 25 years with out much success. But, I suppose, these "new" industries pop up when you least expect them to.

Art-T mentioned that Billy Clinton did a good job. I'd pretty much agree with his/her assessment. However, Billy boy was only playing for time. While he tried to get the US's finances in order, with some success, he realised that real and verifiable productive wealth creation was on the wane in the US. He relied on and encouraged the pvt citizen to take on more debt in oder to drive consumer lead growth. And, lest we forget he was the one who finanally drove the nail into verifiable statistical issuance by the US govt when they began the bastardisation of inflation figures. Billy did alright, and would have been a damn site better than the Bush blood suckers, but that's all water under the bridge at this point.

Given the the increased intensification of the struggle for the world's resources, Obama and the US's options are limited. Their financial positions also curtails thier room for manouvre. They need some big ideas and some big plans for new wealth creation. I don't see where these are coming from. At best the US will stagnate for years and come to rest at an equilibrium on par with Europe if they're lucky. Meanwhile, I just don't see how the greenback can survive in its present state.

I'd pretty much agree with all of this. The US was a rising power in Roosevelt's day and is a declining one now. If we can get through the next few years without a major war and collapse in food supplies, imo we will have done very well. It seems to be a time to come up with some new solutions, or else to get very, very lucky.

What a crock. He is surrounded by thieves and Emmanuel could be indicted any minute. The money men run him and he does what he is told.

Yesterday another oiece fell together. The man that could have been president got a job. Vilsack of Iowa ran but decided to drop out in Feb 07 because he had no money. Believe that and you will believe anything. He was owed and yesterday he was paid.

Entire programme dedicated to Obama's foreign policy on BBC's The World Tonight, this evening.

Click on the link to listen:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/aod/news.shtml?radio4/worldtonight

Obama does not have a foreign policy. He will do as he is told. So don't hold your breath on an Iraqi withdrawal of a withdrawal of 180000 Blackwater either. There will be a push in Afghanistan and to break up Pakistan.

All the front men are getting a job except for Edwards of course.

These people were pushed forward to compete for the democrat nomination. Hillary, Barack, Biden, Richardson, Edwards. Vilsack ran but was told to get out as he being the governor of Iowa was going to win. Kuicinich and an old man of 76 were let into the debates but the old man started making sense so he was quickly tossed him.

Lets see who ended up in cabinet positions.

Hillary, Barack,Biden,Richardson and Vilsack. Edwards screwed up.

Not to worry everyone in Ireland are optimistic for change.They think Obama is boss.

Predicting the future is as easy as apple pie. Obama has been put in there to be the target of rage. From day one he will stutter and stammer and be the fool. Regardless the Obamabots will follow like sheep as they will say that he was sabeutaged by a vast right wing conspiracy.

We have only 4 weeks to wait to see this begin

Gotta say that I'm not hopeful that Obama will be any good.

Pakistan is looking pretty screwed, what with unmanned drones firing missiles into villages and India talking war.

Iran is still in the firing line too.

The Siege of Gaza...

Next year is going to be an interesting one.

Hermes wrote:

Gotta say that I'm not hopeful that Obama will be any good.

Pakistan is looking pretty screwed, what with unmanned drones firing missiles into villages and India talking war.

Iran is still in the firing line too.

The Siege of Gaza...

Next year is going to be an interesting one.

Doubling the US troops going into Afghanistan.

I am despondent that you are not hopefull Hermes. Why were not half the fools here crying on election night with the dawning of a new age. My old buddy who loved elephant whole was openly blubbering that tears were rolling down his face as the Sun was breaking on his Dun Laoire apartment.

Mayde is thinks Gates will change from Jan. 19 to Jan 21. He is a bit loopy so he would believe anything.

In the meantime this poster needs some spiritual guidance so he can watch my Pastor's sermon from a few days ago

http://www.atlah.org/broadcast/ndnr12-19-08.html

cactus flower wrote:

Hermes wrote:

Gotta say that I'm not hopeful that Obama will be any good.

Pakistan is looking pretty screwed, what with unmanned drones firing missiles into villages and India talking war.

Iran is still in the firing line too.

The Siege of Gaza...

Next year is going to be an interesting one.

Doubling the US troops going into Afghanistan.

Aye, not to mention the more than 6,000 still held at Bagram Air Base, many of them women and children. The US are balking about handing over custody of these prisoners to the authorities in Afghanistan, as they say that they are concerned that the prisoners may not receive humane treatment...

EDIT: had 20,000 for the figure of prisoners held at Bagram. It's about 650 and they are in a worse position than anyone in Guantanamo - what little has been achieved, by way of rights, does not benefit those held without charge or trial at Bagram. My apologies, the gremlins have gotten to me today.

Rocky wrote:

You have to love the irony. [/font][/color]

Not irony. No, it simply illustrates that he was elected on a pack of lies.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1102951/Shhhh-As-world-waits-Obama-voice-opinion-Gaza-Americas-President-waiting-hits-golf-course.html

This is
who the donkeys elected. How will the fools spin this. The likes o papal knight will keep the twaddle going I am sure. It was all Bush's fault

youngdan wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1102951/Shhhh-As-world-waits-Obama-voice-opinion-Gaza-Americas-President-waiting-hits-golf-course.html

This is
who the donkeys elected. How will the fools spin this. The likes o papal knight will keep the twaddle going I am sure. It was all Bush's fault

We should start a blog, Youngdan. We could call it "Flopwatch" and document the Failure of Hope at the hands of Obama.

When he was elected, it was held as something fantastic. America has "changed". I said it then that I hope it works out for them, because as a nation they've been given such a kicking in the last few years and the disappointment on Obama's failure to deliever "hope" and "change" will be all the more crushing. But I think it's inevitabally going to happen. In order to get elected he over promised and how he will under deliver and so so drastically.

What has been dissappointing so far is the fact that the spinners can only think up the excuse that he is not president yet. That is lame from this great leader. He can drop the fake MLK accent now as I don't remember him playing golf before he took the bullet.

We are getting a president dumber than Bush and all he needs is a stupid dog under his arm getting off airplanes.

Arabs voted for Huessein left right and center

You cannot say he's dumber than Bush. The man can put more than two words together in a funny grammatical construct some of us call "a sentence" and still sound credible. Sorry, no. Does not compute. Non es possible

"No Comment" in relation to Gaza is not a comment.

It is funny to look at peope who supported the no-hoper Bush in some way thinking that Obama being a no-hoper is cause for comfort.

As they say in France, Blanc bonnet/bonnet blanc

He is dumber than Bush. Bush has degrees from Yale and Harvard and he is not even black. Obama records are sealed. Take away his telepromter and he is a fool. Nobody told him what to say on Gaza so he has no comment. Imagine Enda Kenny having won a GE but before taking power saying no comment on an important event.

It is so lame that were it Sarah Palin or McCain there would be uproar.

With Obama the light is on but there is nobody home

All US administrations are hogtied when it comes to the Middle East... the pro Israeli/Jewish lobby has real power, and there is the moral issue that no-one in the West took care of the WWII Jewish refugees; many ended up in a refugee camp in Cyprus for years because no-one agreed to take them. Conversely, they need to keep some sort of lid on the Middle East as they need the oil. "no comment" is at least honest; because no US administration actually seems able to do much about it. He also cannot be seen to be interfering as he ain't Prez yet.

Having said that, if he comes out with a no comment like that after 21 Jan 09, I will be more convinced of your argument. But it won't happen. Clinton is the incoming Sec of State, and whether she has the right comment or not, she always has a comment....the leader is often a figurehead. Obama has at least had the wit to surround himself with intelligent people; as a scientist, I was PARTICULARLY impressed with his choices of Nobel prize winners and energy specialists on the science admin side of things. Makes a change from oil industry types, anyway

Obama got inaugurated today to a crowd of over two million people on a sunny winters day in Washington DC. He pledged the Greening of America would restore or start to restore a butchered economy and culture.

Aw gowan Auditor #9. You know you want to put the ISEQ up there too...

I was surprised a bit at that Dow fall overall - you'd imagine there'd be a bit of a surge of pride at history being made there today and all - the introduction of the first Black American President and at the same time the back of the worst American President ...

Maybe they're being cautious ...