a refreshing look at Obama

[Ben]

So because some doctors bought into Nazi ideology ALL doctors are corrupt. This is an insane view of the world.

Yep! All doctors -- ha ha!
No. The point is: given the right conditions anyone of us can either be a monster or a saint.
We all have the same genes. So, anyone of us, under the right circumstances can be either exceedingly good or monstrously bad. As happened in NAZI Germany.
And, too, AMORAL attributes occur in a corporate setting. One has to put the corporate shareholders above all else. So, if need be: set up sweatshops in Cambodia, let global warming occur etc., etc.
Anyone seen this film about Obama or is eager to see it?

[Ben]

Obama's Excuse for War Crimes Creates Moral Decay:

The problem is power. And concentrated power. Which conservatives are against. Traditional conservatives are against the concentration of power.
So, people in positions of power, and this is the crux of the problem, come to believe in the justness and merit of their elevated status [and this makes no difference whether it's Obama or Bush or Clinton or Carter or Reagan] and with that comes the belief that they're ABOVE THE LAW.
So, this applies to, again, Obama and Bush and Cheney. They believe in the importance and rightness of their high status and thus are above the law. Hence: the invasion of Iraq, hence Obama's drone strikes and indefinite detention...

[Ben]

Drone warfare's deadly civilian toll: a very personal view

From The Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-civilian-toll

[pantybulge69]

keep an eye on state of ohio. of all the supposely key swing states, as far back as 1960 whomever wins ohio ....wins the presidential elections.

the latest leading polls in key swing state are just a sign of things to come.

[Ben]

Hold on! Did Madonna just say that Obama is "fighting for gay rights." Well, that simply isn't true. He is "fighting" for votes. Obama, unlike Madonna, is somewhat socially conservative. I understand why she'd rather Obama than Romney.
No mention of Jill Stein??????? The nominee for President under the Green Party banner. Madonna, like most, is simply serving her parochial interests.
Madonna, firmly ensconced in the top 1 percent, is, again, serving her own rational interests.
I mean, a "Green" President could tax the shit out of her -- ha ha ha! Well, Stein may put in place policies that says: the planet has value, too. We can't continue to trash the planet.
So people like Madonna who maximize personal gain so as to maximize personal consumption may pay a high price under a Stein presidency....
Anyway, Madonna certainly is committed to gay rights. She is certainly socially liberal.
And the idea of a Romney presidency and the religious right having influence over him makes her, well, uneasy, to say the least. As it does me.
I mean, right-leaning Christians make me cringe. With their dogged intolerant belief systems. Not, say, moderate Christians, tolerant Christians. And I fear Romney will bring them back into the political fold, as it were.

[robertlouis]

Hold on! Did Madonna just say that Obama is "fighting for gay rights." Well, that simply isn't true. He is "fighting" for votes. Obama, unlike Madonna, is somewhat socially conservative. I understand why she'd rather Obama than Romney.

Ben, if this was anyone other than you, I'd think you were being wilfully disingenuous. You know as well as I do that the issue of gay rights and rights for the lgbt lobby in general are a very difficult topic to deal with at a practical political level. There's a huge difference between marching in the streets and making coherent, effective and workable policy.

I shake my head almost every time you appear to equate Obama with Romney. You're a great guy and I enjoy your posts, but surely you can see that a Romney - indeed these days ANY Republican presidency - would be socially regressive and would certainly attempt to reclaim hard-won minority rights at every level, even to the point of active persecution. What you'd get from the Democrats would be slow and cautious, but at least you know it would be moving in the right direction.

[trish]

[Ben]

Ben, if this was anyone other than you, I'd think you were being wilfully disingenuous. You know as well as I do that the issue of gay rights and rights for the lgbt lobby in general are a very difficult topic to deal with at a practical political level. There's a huge difference between marching in the streets and making coherent, effective and workable policy.

I shake my head almost every time you appear to equate Obama with Romney. You're a great guy and I enjoy your posts, but surely you can see that a Romney - indeed these days ANY Republican presidency - would be socially regressive and would certainly attempt to reclaim hard-won minority rights at every level, even to the point of active persecution. What you'd get from the Democrats would be slow and cautious, but at least you know it would be moving in the right direction.

Depends Robert, I guess, on which Dems we're talking about. Yeah, I think someone like Dennis Kucinich is very good. Russ Feingold, too. Not sure if he'll jump back into politics.
But I don't see Obama being a champion for gay rights or so-called progressive causes.
The author Paul Street, who is a democratic socialist, in his book The Empire's New Clothes, points out -- and this is from, again, a very left perspective -- that Obama is deeply conservative.
Anyway, Obama is there to manage the system, as it were. Not change it. The whole Hope and Change campaign was brilliant marketing.
President Obama indeed did make a good step by affirming his support of same-sex marriage. Now Romney (and, well, I've no idea where he truly stands on issues surrounding LGBT rights) will move to the right with respect to social issues. Because, in part, to satisfy the Republican Party and the overall base.
But, again, I disagree with Madonna that Obama is fighting for gay rights. That's like saying he's fighting for union rights or fighting to stem global warming or fighting for middle and working class Americans. And, too, Obama didn't even fight for the public option. Obama is against public health care. But he could've fought for the public option. But didn't.
So, it's simply not true. That isn't Obama. And that's fine. (Naomi Klein said that Obama is a centrist. And that's fine, she said. We just need to push him to the left, Klein said.
But politicians do respond to public movements, as it were. FDR did. Nixon did. Politicians do. That's the hope -- )
I think the author Paul Street is correct: Obama is conservative, deeply conservative.
I mean, Obama is, in the words of Paul Krugman, a Republican from circa 1992....

[Ben]

Bill Maher: Democrats Are the New Republicans:

[Prospero]

Loudon Wainwright's update of an old song....