Obama is smooth...

[Ben]

On this, well, he was smooth -- :)

President Obama Gets North Korea to Stop Nuclear Weapons Program - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWifGN8NZ88&list=UUvixJtaXuNdMPUGdOPcY8Ag&index=4&feature=plcp)

[fred41]

On this, well, he was smooth -- :)



I don't really understand David Pakman's claim...what is his relevant point?

Is he perturbed that the President isn't getting enough kudos for this from the media or that he isn't getting kudos from the "conservative" media?

[sp fan]

smooth? more like slick snake oil salesman

[Ben]

smooth? more like slick snake oil salesman

He is a salesman. And also a brand.

Obama Wins! ... Ad Age's Marketer of the Year

At ANA Gathering, Marketing Pros and Agency Bigs Tap Barack Over Apple, Zappos

By: Matthew Creamer (http://adage.com/author/matthew-creamer/515) Published: October 17, 2008 (http://adage.com/results?endeca=1&return=endeca&search_offset=0&search_order_by=score&search_phrase=10/17/2008)

ORLANDO, Fla. (AdAge.com) -- Just weeks before he demonstrates whether his campaign's blend of grass-roots appeal and big media-budget know-how has converted the American electorate, Sen. Barack Obama has shown he's already won over the nation's brand builders. He's been named Advertising Age's marketer of the year for 2008.


http://gaia.adage.com/images/bin/image/photo/3-ObamaProgress-022508.jpg?1203720350
Mr. Obama won the vote of hundreds of marketers, agency heads and marketing-services vendors gathered here at the Association of National Advertisers' annual conference.


Mr. Obama won the vote of hundreds of marketers, agency heads and marketing-services vendors gathered here at the Association of National Advertisers' annual conference. He edged out runners-up Apple and Zappos.com. The rest of the shortlist, selected by Ad Age's editorial staff, was rounded out by megabrand Nike, turnaround story Coors and Mr. Obama's rival, Sen. John McCain.

From unknown to presidential nominee
"I think he did a great job of going from a relative unknown to a household name to being a candidate for president," said Linda Clarizio, president of AOL's Platform A, the sponsor of the opening-night dinner attended by 750 where the votes were cast.

"I honestly look at [Obama's] campaign and I look at it as something that we can all learn from as marketers," said Angus Macaulay, VP-Rodale marketing solutions "To see what he's done, to be able to create a social network and do it in a way where it's created the tools to let people get engaged very easily. It's very easy for people to participate."

Jon Fine, marketing and media columnist for BusinessWeek, pointed to Mr. Obama's facility with engaging voters in social-media channels. "It's the fuckin' Web 2.0 thing," he said.

In introducing the winner to the crowd, Ad Age Editor Jonah Bloom joked, "I'm surprised. I thought you [all] made more than $250,000."

While Mr. Obama may have won the most votes, he didn't get them from several of the bigger marketers in the room, many of whom supported Apple, Coors and Nike instead. Procter & Gamble Co. had a split ticket. Outgoing Global Marketing Officer Jim Stengel, currently on special assignment as he prepares to leave the company at the end of the month, voted for Apple.

Linda Clarizio, president of AOL's Platform A, said of Barack Obama, 'I think he did a great job of going from a relative unknown to a household name to being a candidate for president.'


Apple's 'amazing consistency'
"Year in and year out, Apple delivers great innovation, customer service and user experience," Mr. Stengel said. "It has amazing consistency." His successor, Marc Pritchard, was a Nike supporter because of its development of a global community of users. "I think [the concept] is going to be huge," he said.

Brian Perkins, corporate VP-corporate affairs of Johnson & Johnson, also backed Apple, though Nike was a close second for him. "I admire all of the work they do, the clarity and consistency of their message, their design and everything they do," he said of Apple. Nike likewise consistently builds its brand across everything it does, Mr. Perkins added, noting that "they don't do a lot of TV. In fact, I don't remember when was the last time I saw a Nike ad on TV."

Mark Kaline, recently appointed global media director of Kimberly-Clark Corp., voted for Coors "because they showed business results," he said. "Quite frankly, because political advertising kind of goes against a lot of what ANA stands for, I don't think it belongs in the voting. ... A lot of political advertising is false and misleading, and marketers at this conference don't expect to see that kind of stuff."

Coors' 'new approaches'
Nancy Abraham, assistant VP-integrated marketing communications for Allstate Insurance Co., likewise backed Coors. "They've done an excellent job taking some new approaches in a market that hasn't seen a lot of growth over the years."

How they voted
Marketer % of votes Obama 36.1% Apple 27.3% Zappos 14.1% Nike 9.4% Coors 8.7% McCain 4.5% Source: Meridia ARS

While Apple's strong second-place showing in the voting surprised no one, lesser-known Zappos' third-place finish probably caught a few off guard. But the online shoe seller is a sexy story because of its practice of pumping the budget it would spend on advertising into its customer service, leading to strong retention.

"Zappos has great customer service, a great business model and it's smart to use the internet as a platform," said Maria Luisa Francoli, CEO of Havas' media agency MPG (http://adage.com/directory/mpg/143). "And I love the name."

[Ben]

The woman behind Obama. Penny Pritzker. Billionaire. But remember: we live a meaningful democracy -- ha ha!

Penny Pritzker - Chicago Public Education Fund #2 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RazGItKq5is)

And we should note. The billionaires behind Romney:

JOHN PAULSON - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP8ZRC37WJQ)

Romney Koch Brothers Connections - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ik5rv59bjE)

But all this is irrelevant because America is a profound and meaningful and functioning democratic society where money has no influence in our politics. It's no joke; it's true -- ha ha ha!

[Dick Tate]

Obama smooth? He's Steve Urkle all grown up!

[buttslinger]

Maybe Obama can get a job as color commentator on MSNBC after Newt is in the White House.

[Merkurie]

I did not know Newt was married to The Joker.

[buttslinger]

CALLING ALL REPUBLICANS!!!!!

Bet your House on Romney! Do it NOW before the odds flip. Better return than GOLD! Double your portfolio and pay ZERO taxes when Mitt gets in the White House. YOU CANNOT LOSE!!! Get your bet down before gas hits $10 a gallon. I have it on good authority that Rush and Sean have over 100 MILLION on Romney's nose. Mortgage your house now before word gets out on this sure thing! Show the GOP you care. Be there! SUCKAHS!!

http://www.politicalbettingodds.com/2012-us-presidential-election-odds.html

[Ben]

Eliot Spitzer says President Barack Obama was on Wall Street's side from Day One:

Eliot Spitzer says President Barack Obama was on Wall Street's side from Day One - Fast Forward - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp7rnWqS258)

[mathematics1900]

What exactly are you people complaining about? You are sheep that are being ran by the government, sorry, that is what happens when smart and intelligent people get into power and accumulate all the wealth in the nation. You are never going to remove them from office, you are never going to stop the rich, and you people are sniveling over party politics? Lol, wake up already!

[runningdownthatdream]

I did not know Newt was married to The Joker.

Well done Sir!

[buttslinger]

eliot spitzer says president barack obama was on wall street's side from day one:

米特·罗姆尼的家庭照片
罗姆尼将在今年总统大选中对决奥巴马几成定局。本图集回顾了他从襁褓婴孩到在高中与后来的妻子牵手，再到成 为五个男孩的父亲的历程。
朝鲜失败的火箭发射

[Ben]

What exactly are you people complaining about? You are sheep that are being ran by the government, sorry, that is what happens when smart and intelligent people get into power and accumulate all the wealth in the nation. You are never going to remove them from office, you are never going to stop the rich, and you people are sniveling over party politics? Lol, wake up already!

It's more a system, a structure, of concentrated power. And concentrated power is exceedingly dangerous -- and is gonna serve its own interests regardless of the grievous impact on others.
That includes oil companies, mining companies, big banks, and other structures of concentrated power. Including government. Which most of the time serves institutions of concentrated wealth. (Obama isn't in office to serve the interests of the small business owner or the small farmer or, say, the carpenter. That isn't his role.
And anyone with any understanding of power and institutional structures understands this.)

[mathematics1900]

It's more a system, a structure, of concentrated power. And concentrated power is exceedingly dangerous -- and is gonna serve its own interests regardless of the grievous impact on others.
That includes oil companies, mining companies, big banks, and other structures of concentrated power. Including government. Which most of the time serves institutions of concentrated wealth. (Obama isn't in office to serve the interests of the small business owner or the small farmer or, say, the carpenter. That isn't his role.
And anyone with any understanding of power and institutional structures understands this.)

No one is disagreeing with your assessment of the consequences of when power becomes concentrated into a small group, AKA the 1%. However the problem is when there are countless candidates who are for small business, who aren't in the pockets of lobbyists, who do have the interest of the people at heart, but guess what? Nobody votes for them, nobody cares about self-interest, the only thing people care about are the hot topic issues, gay marriage, religion, immigration. America is it's own worst enemy, and nothing with change because America is getting stupider, lazier, and more uneducated. I just can't wait for everyone 40+ to die.

[buttslinger]

I am confident in Obama's conscience and abilities. Probably after they told him about Area 51 they told him the Republicans were only lying 51% of the time, and that America's greatest generation has come and gone. I suspect the reason he hasn't gone after the robber barons on Wall st is tied up with China and India somehow, but they don't tell me nothin.

[mathematics1900]

and that America's greatest generation has come and gone.

Laughable.

[buttslinger]

Laughable.

Austin or Dallas?

[mathematics1900]

Austin or Dallas?

You must be from Texas, your name makes sense now.

[buttslinger]

You must be from Texas, your name makes sense now.

HAW HAW HAWAW Where you from, boy?

[mathematics1900]

HAW HAW HAWAW Where you from, boy?

I am from a place where a mind like yours can never reach, or comprehend. So stick to what you're good at...pecans.

[buttslinger]

I am from a place where a mind like yours can never reach, or comprehend. So stick to what you're good at...pecans.

Boy, I think you're from Texas and ashamed to admit it. A shit talkin shit kicker.

[buttslinger]

Lol, you see me saying yall?

You hang with OMK?

[GrimFusion]

I am from a place where a mind like yours can never reach, or comprehend. So stick to what you're good at...pecans.

Why do you have to be such a dick?
You're not that smart, and flaunting any intelligence you may have is just going to get you laughed at.

[catherinefan]

The worst president was George Bush..you know the guy that we had for 8 years? That couldn't speak correctly or read? Took us into a fake war?
ETC ETC ETC

Perhaps not the worst president ever but certainly the worst I have known. But with more than a million innocent civilians killed, you can hardly speak of a fake war. The arguments used for the invasion were fake and I guess that's what you meant.
George Bush by the way didn't just start one but two wars, thereby dragging quite a few other countries into the conflict. Because after all, "If you're not for us, you're against us".
Worst part of all is that (just like the Vietnam war) both wars will go into history as not having achieved anything at all. Isn't politics a wonderful thing?

Sorry about the late response, Kelly. Just couldn't resist.

[NYCTSluv]

105. Saved Wall Street

Not sure. That place is still a mess and all those crooks at the big firms who caused all the crap, walked free. Big boys still getting big golden umbrellas and still practicing shady buisness.

[robertlouis]

Why do you have to be such a dick?
You're not that smart, and flaunting any intelligence you may have is just going to get you laughed at.

You're pretty sharp, and succinct with it GF. :Bowdown:

[onmyknees]

I am confident in Obama's conscience and abilities. Probably after they told him about Area 51 they told him the Republicans were only lying 51% of the time, and that America's greatest generation has come and gone. I suspect the reason he hasn't gone after the robber barons on Wall st is tied up with China and India somehow, but they don't tell me nothin.


Yea...somethin' like that............or this

[Ben]

The always insightful Noam Chomsky on why Obama is worse than Bush with respect to the Middle East. (And, too, one should take note that income inequality is worse under Obama than Bush.
Well, his policies, like the previous policies of Bush and Clinton, favor the super-rich. Meaning: the 0.01 percent of the population.
And they're deliberately designed to do that.)

Obama is worse than George Bush and Tony Blair says Noam Chomsky - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mA4HYTO790)

Economist Josh Bivens talks about wealth inequality.

Josh Bivens on Failure by Design - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqZ_KJulxUM)

[onmyknees]

Well for consistencies sake Ben, I find Chomsky tedious and hopelessly tied to some fantasy called the UN....but I did enjoy the incredulity of the BBC dude when Chomsky stated Obama was worse ! Thanks for that.

[zulusierra]

The differences netween Obama and Bush are trivial at best. Dumb and Dumber...
http://i585.photobucket.com/albums/ss300/zulusierra/1307236457361.jpg

http://i585.photobucket.com/albums/ss300/zulusierra/lulz/bo-1.jpg

http://i585.photobucket.com/albums/ss300/zulusierra/1319337150594.jpg

[Ben]

Cheney: Obama An 'Unmitigated Disaster' - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH6FmoMZpcc&feature=context&context=C4ba3442VDvjVQa1PpcFPa90Qx73V4N4zweK-HMnYkN7dZJGEiIms=)

[Ben]

The differences netween Obama and Bush are trivial at best. Dumb and Dumber...

The differences, true, between Obama and Bush are slight.

[buttslinger]

Being President isn't like bowling, you'll never get a 300 score. If you don't know what Obama is doing, then you don't need to know. Obama is looking 5 years down the road. If it can be done, Obama is doing it. The differences between Bush and Obama are black and white!!!

[catherinefan]

The differences, true, between Obama and Bush are slight.


One of these guys loved war.........the other does not.

I would not call that a slight difference!

[zulusierra]

One of these guys loved war.........the other does not.

I would not call that a slight difference!

Is that why more people have been killed in A-stan in Tweedledumbs 1 term than in Tweedledee's 2?

Just because they rename the deployed units or use contractors doesn't mean we're not killing more ppl more efficiently that ever b4.

Is that why we have troops on the ground in more countries than EVER before?

Is that why we have performed more Predator drone strikes...

Is that why we are assasinating foreign leader and American citizens?

Obama is owned by the same banks and corporations as Bush was. Republicn/Democrat is two sides of the same coin. If voting made a difference it would be illegal.

[catherinefan]

Is that why more people have been killed in A-stan in Tweedledumbs 1 term than in Tweedledee's 2?

Just because they rename the deployed units or use contractors doesn't mean we're not killing more ppl more efficiently that ever b4.

Is that why we have troops on the ground in more countries than EVER before?

Is that why we have performed more Predator drone strikes...

Is that why we are assasinating foreign leader and American citizens?

Obama is owned by the same banks and corporations as Bush was. Republicn/Democrat is two sides of the same coin. If voting made a difference it would be illegal.


Just in case you have forgotten......the war in Afghanistan was also strarted by George Bush!

[buttslinger]

Obama is owned by the same banks and corporations as Bush was. Republican/Democrat is two sides of the same coin.

You HAVE to know that Bush put us in those wars and Obama is taking us out. Everybody knows that. Obama would have gone into Pakistan to Kill Osama Bin Laden in 2002. Bush didn't.

The banks own EVERYBODY. Obama can't wave a magic wand and cure poverty. Or take us out of a World Recession.

Bush was not a president that used to be a businessman, he was a businessman who just happened to be president. Obama's roots couldn't be more different. His Agenda couldn't be more different than Bush. Is he going to change your life? What would you like him to do? He got me a new Honda!!!

[zulusierra]

You HAVE to know that Bush put us in those wars and Obama is taking us out. Everybody knows that. Obama would have gone into Pakistan to Kill Osama Bin Laden in 2002. Bush didn't.

The banks own EVERYBODY. Obama can't wave a magic wand and cure poverty. Or take us out of a World Recession.

Bush was not a president that used to be a businessman, he was a businessman who just happened to be president. Obama's roots couldn't be more different. His Agenda couldn't be more different than Bush. Is he going to change your life? What would you like him to do? He got me a new Honda!!!

When we are actually out of the wars I will believe it. If OBL was actually killed, it was murder. The "official" reports state that he was unarmed and not fighting. It is against both the Hague and Geneva conventions to kill an unarmed person trying to surrender. Period. Don't believe everthing you see on Fox News and CNN.

Bush sucked. So does Obama. The only difference is which part of the constitution they want to wipe their ass with first.

I don't want him to do anything to/for/about me and my loved ones besides stay out of my business. I am an adult and do not need the government to tell me who I can fuck/marry, what I can smoke/ingest, what I can say/do as long as I'm not restricting anyone else's civil rights.

Btw, if "he" actually got you a new honda, you need to thank the taxpayers. That's who foots the bills.:)

[buttslinger]

you need to thank the taxpayers. That's who foots the bills.:)

Welcome to the 21st century.
OK, I'll bite. Who should "our leader" be?

[zulusierra]

Welcome to the 21st century.
OK, I'll bite. Who should "our leader" be?

I don't know. I do know that in a nation with 313,370,000 people we can do better than the clowns (on both sides of the aisle) that are currently running things.

Actually, I don't feel that elections (being glorified popularity contests) are necessarily the best way to have a "representative" government. I think voting does have it's place in certain applications though (like ballot initiatives, local issues, ect...).

[buttslinger]

we can do better than the clowns (on both sides of the aisle) that are currently running things.


You would think so.....

[Ben]

I don't know. I do know that in a nation with 313,370,000 people we can do better than the clowns (on both sides of the aisle) that are currently running things.

Actually, I don't feel that elections (being glorified popularity contests) are necessarily the best way to have a "representative" government. I think voting does have it's place in certain applications though (like ballot initiatives, local issues, ect...).

Maybe the best leader is no leader. Alan Moore explicates. By anarchy he means libertarianism. (Alan Moore wrote V for Vendetta.)
So, what would a libertarian society look like? Well, your guess is as good as mine. But there are different factions, as it were.
There is right leaning libertarianism associated with the likes of Ludwig Von Mises, Murray Rothbard and Ron Paul. And left-leaning libertarianism associated with the likes of Murray Bookchin, Rudolf Rocker and Noam Chomsky. So, pick your political poison -- ha ha! :))

Alan Moore on Anarchism - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKfF-nxjDi0)

Noam Chomsky on Libertarian Socialism - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0xEivNvs-sg)

[Ben]

One of these guys loved war.........the other does not.

I would not call that a slight difference!

Obama isn't a dove. Never has been. Look I, myself, am not a pacifist. It isn't realistic. Or sensible. (And, too, to suggest that Obama wants peace, well, everyone wants peace. Even Bush wanted peace. He asked Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq in '03 so we could have peace.)
I mean, Obama could've -- and still can -- simply pulled out of Afghanistan if he detested war. (We eventually pulled out of Vietnam. So, when do we leave?) I mean, what's the endgame? Why are American troops still in Afghanistan?
I agree with Ron Paul on this issue. He's right.

This War Is Illegal! Ron Paul Afghanistan War Debate - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyiOGVLfy7w)

[Ben]

Bush -- wanting peace:

Archive: George Bush threatens Iraq 03-17-03 pt 1 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS5AYQX1m6c)

And Obama:

Barack Obama on Afghanistan - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cyrxgWfINS8)

[buttslinger]

You guys don't seem to remember this whole thing is a crapshoot anyway. Some Dream Jefferson had that men could live in a country without a King. If Bush had pursued Bin Laden and killed him in 2002, the war would have been over then and there. Cheney would be President now. The Bush years were a complete and total disaster.

[robertlouis]

Obama isn't a dove. Never has been. Look I, myself, am not a pacifist. It isn't realistic. Or sensible. (And, too, to suggest that Obama wants peace, well, everyone wants peace. Even Bush wanted peace. He asked Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq in '03 so we could have peace.)
I mean, Obama could've -- and still can -- simply pulled out of Afghanistan if he detested war. (We eventually pulled out of Vietnam. So, when do we leave?) I mean, what's the endgame? Why are American troops still in Afghanistan?
I agree with Ron Paul on this issue. He's right.



We (the US, the UK and the rest of the allies) invaded Afghanistan in 2001 when all the intell pointed to Bin Laden being in Pakistan. Wonder what happened there....?

There's also a good case for saying that the CIA essentially armed and made the Taliban into a credible fighting force in the first place on the basis that anyone fighting the Russians during the cold war was our friend, proving that it's possible to be both doctrinaire and hopelessly naive at the same time.

Bush and Blair got us into the fuckup that was Iraq by lying and into Afghanistan by a knowingly wilful misinterpretation of intelligence. As with most politicians, they have left the stage, amassed their fortunes and left their successors to clear up the mess.

Afghanistan is both intractable and probably insoluble as a military conundrum. But the mess that we are in is very largely of our own making. If we walk away too soon - and we will - the Afghan people will be left to carry the can, the Taliban will take over, and the country will tumble back into the dark ages of theocratic tyranny.

I don't see a solution, but at the same time the thought of the west abandoning the Afghans to their grisly fate sticks in my craw. There's a moral responsibility here. The question is how many of our soldiers' lives have to be lost before the calls for withdrawal become overwhelming.

I don't envy the politicians in their options, but I do believe that Obama and to a certain extent Cameron, are acting as sincerely and honestly as the dreadful circumstances allow.

[catherinefan]

Obama isn't a dove. Never has been. Look I, myself, am not a pacifist. It isn't realistic. Or sensible. (And, too, to suggest that Obama wants peace, well, everyone wants peace. Even Bush wanted peace. He asked Hussein and his sons to leave Iraq in '03 so we could have peace.)
I mean, Obama could've -- and still can -- simply pulled out of Afghanistan if he detested war. (We eventually pulled out of Vietnam. So, when do we leave?) I mean, what's the endgame? Why are American troops still in Afghanistan?
I agree with Ron Paul on this issue. He's right.

This War Is Illegal! Ron Paul Afghanistan War Debate - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vyiOGVLfy7w)


I'm sure Obama isn't a dove but to suggest that Bush actually wanted peace......... Why then would he have started that war with Irak on totally false grounds, thereby forcing other countries to support his crooked plan? More than a million innocent civilians died in this totally unnecessary war. People that did have nothing at all to do with 9/11.

And unlike the victims of 9/11.......no-one remembers them.

[mildcigar_2001]

#ObamaDogRecipes (https://twitter.com/search/%23ObamaDogRecipes) Michael Vick's Ol' Fashioned Backyard Jambalaya

[loveboof]

We (the US, the UK and the rest of the allies) invaded Afghanistan in 2001 when all the intell pointed to Bin Laden being in Pakistan. Wonder what happened there....?

There's also a good case for saying that the CIA essentially armed and made the Taliban into a credible fighting force in the first place on the basis that anyone fighting the Russians during the cold war was our friend, proving that it's possible to be both doctrinaire and hopelessly naive at the same time.

Bush and Blair got us into the fuckup that was Iraq by lying and into Afghanistan by a knowingly wilful misinterpretation of intelligence. As with most politicians, they have left the stage, amassed their fortunes and left their successors to clear up the mess.

Afghanistan is both intractable and probably insoluble as a military conundrum. But the mess that we are in is very largely of our own making. If we walk away too soon - and we will - the Afghan people will be left to carry the can, the Taliban will take over, and the country will tumble back into the dark ages of theocratic tyranny.

I don't see a solution, but at the same time the thought of the west abandoning the Afghans to their grisly fate sticks in my craw. There's a moral responsibility here. The question is how many of our soldiers' lives have to be lost before the calls for withdrawal become overwhelming.

I don't envy the politicians in their options, but I do believe that Obama and to a certain extent Cameron, are acting as sincerely and honestly as the dreadful circumstances allow.
Agreed. Well said...

[mildcigar_2001]

We have sunk low as a country to have a dog eater as President.

Perhaps thats one of the reasons we have a rule against foreigners in becoming President?



Obama: “I can’t believe Romney strapped his dog to the roof of his car. That ruins the flavor.”

Obama isn’t anti-woman; when he said “bitch,” he was referring to his meal.

When Obama was looking for a dog he wasn’t allergic to, I thought it was the dander he was worried about.

Obama: “I promise you: If you like your dog, you can keep him. Though I may ask you to share some with me.”

Cesar Milan (the Dog Whisperer): “Remember, it’s exercise, discipline, then affection.”
Obama: “Yeah, but what temperature do I set the oven?”

[trish]

So are you casting aspersions on the entire population of Indonesia, or just your president?

[mildcigar_2001]

I'm casting aspersions on a good portion of the population of Indonesia and my President. I'm trying not to be too jingoistic, but I don't think the country is well served by someone who didn't grow up here.

The Obama cure for a hangover – hair of the dog.

Bo doesn’t let Obama give him a bath anymore because the last time, the water was way, way too hot and there were carrots and celery floating around in it.

[trish]

I'm casting aspersions on a good portion of the population of Indonesia ...Because they eat dog???

[robertlouis]

We have sunk low as a country to have a dog eater as President.

Perhaps thats one of the reasons we have a rule against foreigners in becoming President?



Obama: “I can’t believe Romney strapped his dog to the roof of his car. That ruins the flavor.”

Obama isn’t anti-woman; when he said “bitch,” he was referring to his meal.

When Obama was looking for a dog he wasn’t allergic to, I thought it was the dander he was worried about.

Obama: “I promise you: If you like your dog, you can keep him. Though I may ask you to share some with me.”

Cesar Milan (the Dog Whisperer): “Remember, it’s exercise, discipline, then affection.”
Obama: “Yeah, but what temperature do I set the oven?”

You're a racist cunt, and unfunny with it.

[mildcigar_2001]

You're a racist cunt, and unfunny with it.


I don't believe I mentioned anything about Obama's race. I'd be just as disgusted if a white boy was a dog eater.

It is very telling that I'm called a racist when I dare to challenge the cult of personality of our dear leader (someone should alert the Secret Service that I'm making fun of him. Perhaps they will take time out from their whore-mongering to investigate me)

Q: Why did Obama take Bo for a walk?
A: Because he likes eating free range dog.


Q: When do the dog days of summer start at the Obama house?
A: When Barack Obama sets up the Weber grill.


Just to prove I'm not racist, I'll throw in a free Joe Biden joke:

The White House may have to lay off all nonessential workers if the government shuts down. You know: interns, pages, Biden...

At least for all of his plagairizing, dimwitted faults, Joe Biden doesn't go around eating dogs.

[mildcigar_2001]

Because they eat dog???


Exactly, I don't believe in cultural relativism.

To quote Conan O'Brien:

"Indonesia
This year marks the fiftieth anniversary of your first democratic election, in which apparently, everyone voted to never have another democratic election. "

Not all countries are created equal. A big part of that inequality is the nation's culture. I believe that there are certain actions that are beyond the pale and the eating of dogs is one of them.

[Ben]

How Obama Became a Civil Libertarian's Nightmare

Obama has expanded and fortified many of the Bush administration's worst policies.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/155045/how_obama_became_a_civil_libertarian%27s_nightmare/

[trish]

Exactly... I believe that there are certain actions that are beyond the pale and the eating of dogs is one of them.So is there a reason behind your belief... reason so persuasive, clear and concise that it allows one to write off a whole population as morally deficient on the basis of their culinary choices?

[robertlouis]

Exactly, I don't believe in cultural relativism.

To quote Conan O'Brien:

"Indonesia
This year marks the fiftieth anniversary of your first democratic election, in which apparently, everyone voted to never have another democratic election. "

Not all countries are created equal. A big part of that inequality is the nation's culture. I believe that there are certain actions that are beyond the pale and the eating of dogs is one of them.

So what? I've tried dog and deep-fried silkworms in Korea, snake and shark's fin soup in China, kangaroo in Australia and horse in Belgium, oh, and Hershey Bars in the US. Hershey is the only substance on the planet that actually tastes like vomit.

Wouldn't go out of my way to try them again, except maybe the horse.

And if Conan O'Brien is your cultural arbiter, well....

[zulusierra]

So what? I've tried dog and deep-fried silkworms in Korea...

Dogs and silkworms are not the same. Dog's are man's best friend. You don't eat your friends.

I'm not saying the dog you ate was beaten before it was slaughtered, but I"ve seen documentaries showing how they beat them in order to release adrenaline and other stress hormones which supposedly makes the flavor better. The conditions before death are pretty grim as well.

I would not eat a dog, chimp, dolphin, whale, or any other highly evolved, intelligent, social animal unless I absolutely had to. I did eat a whole bunch of weird stuff the year I lived in Japan, tho...:party:

[mildcigar_2001]

So is there a reason behind your belief... reason so persuasive, clear and concise that it allows one to write off a whole population as morally deficient on the basis of their culinary choices?


It is a question of morals. If you don't know why eating a dog is wrong, I can't explain it to you.

[robertlouis]

Dogs and silkworms are not the same. Dog's are man's best friend. You don't eat your friends.

I'm not saying the dog you ate was beaten before it was slaughtered, but I"ve seen documentaries showing how they beat them in order to release adrenaline and other stress hormones which supposedly makes the flavor better. The conditions before death are pretty grim as well.

I would not eat a dog, chimp, dolphin, whale, or any other highly evolved, intelligent, social animal unless I absolutely had to. I did eat a whole bunch of weird stuff the year I lived in Japan, tho...:party:

Do you eat pork? Pigs are also highly evolved social animals with acute intelligence not much below that of dogs.

And if you do eat meat are you concerned about the insanitary and factory conditions in which food animals are kept? Do you only eat free range eggs and chickens? Most US beef is pumped full of artificial hormones? Veal? Foie Gras? There are simply too many ways in which we in the west are too ready to condemn others' food practices without considering the horrors and scandals that underlie our own food industries.

The only people who can have an entirely clear conscience in this debate are vegetarians and vegans. Spurious relativism doesn't cut it.

[buttslinger]

It is a question of morals. If you don't know why eating a dog is wrong, I can't explain it to you.

What about abortion, cigar...is that cool with you?

[mildcigar_2001]

What about abortion, cigar...is that cool with you?


Nope.

The practice of abortion is dark stain on this country. As morally repugnant as the practice of slavery was in the 19th Century.

[robertlouis]

Nope.

The practice of abortion is dark stain on this country. As morally repugnant as the practice of slavery was in the 19th Century.

Would you go as far as Santorum and insist on rape victims carrying to term?

[trish]

It is a question of morals. If you don't know why...., I can't explain it to you.If you can't explain it, then you don't know why.

[robertlouis]

If you can't explain it, then you don't know why.


Correct, Trish. It's a question of moral relativism, more like. What gives mildcigar or anyone else the right to assume that his morals are somehow inherently superior to those of another culture?

[zulusierra]

Do you eat pork? Pigs are also highly evolved social animals with acute intelligence not much below that of dogs.

And if you do eat meat are you concerned about the insanitary and factory conditions in which food animals are kept? Do you only eat free range eggs and chickens? Most US beef is pumped full of artificial hormones? Veal? Foie Gras? There are simply too many ways in which we in the west are too ready to condemn others' food practices without considering the horrors and scandals that underlie our own food industries.

The only people who can have an entirely clear conscience in this debate are vegetarians and vegans. Spurious relativism doesn't cut it.


Maybe you've never been blessed to experience the loyalty and affection of a good dog. If not, you are missing out on one of natures finest gifts. A pig won't defend my wife and child to the death, comfort a sick child in a hospital, or be a blind persons eyes.

You are correct about the horrible state of western food production.
Yes, I have been to abattoirs to get bovine eyes for research purposes. I think everyone should see where their food comes from at least once in their lives. It is nasty. It is inhumane. The conditions that the illegal immigrants are forced to work (actually they are treated like slaves) in are appalling and dangerous. I have no problem with eating meat or slaughtering animals, it is the inhumane conditions I have a problem with. There are ways to make it more ethical but that will not happen in my country.

One does not have to eschew meat to have a clear conscience. If you ethically hunt (in my area deer and pig and turkey to name a few) and fish you get the best of all worlds. The animal lives its life naturally, is hormone free and lean, and as long as the hunter does his part is dead before it realizes anything happened. Also, with a minimum amount of land, chicken, bees, and goats become viable options to raise yourself. I am not where I can subsist like this right now but am working on it.

[mildcigar_2001]

Correct, Trish. It's a question of moral relativism, more like. What gives mildcigar or anyone else the right to assume that his morals are somehow inherently superior to those of another culture?


That is idiotic. Of course some cultures are superior to other cultures. If you don't believe me, follow the below link to see what some of our muslim brothers have been up to recently:

http://www.care2.com/causes/150-afghan-girls-poisoned-for-attending-school.html


We should Christianize and civilize most of the muslim world.

[robertlouis]

Maybe you've never been blessed to experience the loyalty and affection of a good dog. If not, you are missing out on one of natures finest gifts. A pig won't defend my wife and child to the death, comfort a sick child in a hospital, or be a blind persons eyes.

You are correct about the horrible state of western food production.
Yes, I have been to abattoirs to get bovine eyes for research purposes. I think everyone should see where their food comes from at least once in their lives. It is nasty. It is inhumane. The conditions that the illegal immigrants are forced to work (actually they are treated like slaves) in are appalling and dangerous. I have no problem with eating meat or slaughtering animals, it is the inhumane conditions I have a problem with. There are ways to make it more ethical but that will not happen in my country.

One does not have to eschew meat to have a clear conscience. If you ethically hunt (in my area deer and pig and turkey to name a few) and fish you get the best of all worlds. The animal lives its life naturally, is hormone free and lean, and as long as the hunter does his part is dead before it realizes anything happened. Also, with a minimum amount of land, chicken, bees, and goats become viable options to raise yourself. I am not where I can subsist like this right now but am working on it.

:iagree: I agree with everything you say in this post and sincerely wish you luck in achieving your goals.

As it happens, I grew up with a succession of German shepherds whose love and devotion was intensely moving and who remain a blessed memory. These days I have cats, but that is a lifestyle choice - dogs and the life of a touring musician just don't mix.

When I have eaten what we would regard in the west as somehow beyond the pale it was on the basis of curiosity and experiment, usually one bite was enough! I guess what I was getting at was the arrant hypocrisy of most westerners for criticising the food choices of other cultures - our regimes for raising food animals are largely tucked away, in the less developed world they tend to be more open and are therefore seen as cruel, whereas what could be more cruel than the methods used in battery farming of poultry?

Add in the fact that the western insistence on a high meat diet contributes both to food poverty elsewhere and damages the planet, and it becomes very easy to destroy any notion of moral superiority.

[buttslinger]

We should Christianize and civilize most of the muslim world.

Before or after we bomb them? ha
Muslims are MUCH more religious than we are.
Dogs were wolves til we domesticated them.
Obama hasn't had a dog in years, except maybe at Ben's Chili Bowl.
What about sucking SHEMALE cock, cigar, what's your position on that???

[robertlouis]

That is idiotic. Of course some cultures are superior to other cultures. If you don't believe me, follow the below link to see what some of our muslim brothers have been up to recently:

http://www.care2.com/causes/150-afghan-girls-poisoned-for-attending-school.html


We should Christianize and civilize most of the muslim world.

First of all, I condemn these actions just as much as you do, although you should also take into account that they are those of a minute fraction of muslims who generally go about their daily lives peaceably and constructively. I dare say you'll be just as offended when I say that the scandal of kiddyfucking and abuse by "Christian" priests horrifies me, but when you come back with the argument that they are a small, if privileged and powerful, minority, I'll accept it. Or are all muslims somehow inherently evil?

You don't seem to understand the difference between "superior" and "different". I suppose "Christianising and Civilising" would take place at the point of a gun after bombing them to shit in that good ol' boy way.

You're a racist, pure and simple. And as you've had the benefit of a good education that makes you all the worse - you can't hide behind the excuse of ignorance.

[trish]

It is a question of morals. If you don't know why...., I can't explain it to you.Come on mildcigar, I'm waiting. Why does eating dog make one morally inferior? If you can't explain it, then you don't know it.

[Prospero]

Much of what we consider "western civilisation" comes from the Islamic world. Through the long centuries of barbarism in early medieval Europe the great centres of learning were in the Arab world - particularly in Cairo and Baghdad - and it was Arab scholars who helped preserve the works of philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato until Europe sorted itself out after the collapse of the Roman Empire. As for more civilised? That is such a relativistic concept. The long centuries of Christians bringing "civilisation" to the 'coloured peoples" of the world should be remembered with untold thousand being butchered for refusing the message of Christ - and the rule of European colonisers. How civilised was the slave trade? History and cultural and civilisational issues are complex. Nearly everybody condemns the actions of what are a tiny minority of Muslim terrorists. But remember that the worst massacre in Europe since Srebrenica (an act of violence against unarmed Muslim civilians) was the massacre in Norway. That was a white supremacist killing white people - young Norwegians.

[GroobySteven]

It is a question of morals. If you don't know why eating a dog is wrong, I can't explain it to you.

Try. I've ate dog, it was over-rated but I've no issue with people who do. Some people say a horse is their best friend, I've ate horse and if I could get it I'd buy horse meat and cook it in the UK.
I certainly have much higher morals then your racist arse.

[catherinefan]

That is idiotic. Of course some cultures are superior to other cultures.


Incredible.....and yet you claim not to be a racist! Bet that's another one you "can't explain".

By the way, what should happen to those other cultures? Gas chambers perhaps?

[loveboof]

We should Christianize and civilize most of the muslim world.

That's hilarious and terrifying at the same time...

[mildcigar_2001]

Try. I've ate dog, it was over-rated but I've no issue with people who do. Some people say a horse is their best friend, I've ate horse and if I could get it I'd buy horse meat and cook it in the UK.
I certainly have much higher morals then your racist arse.


I am truly puzzled that the term racist is being applied to me and/or my posts. I believe that in the United States one may criticize the President regardless of whether or not he is black. I think I am a fair man and try to treat people on the content of their character rather than their skin color. I attibute Obama's poor performance as President to his lack of having any executive experience prior to becoming President. If you were really a good manager, would you pick Joe Biden as your second in command???

Obama might have my support if he had done something other than explode the national debt by almost 50% in a little over 3 years. In my view Obama's skin color is the least of his problems. It is interesting that those crying racism at any critic of the President are bigots for thinking that the man can't defend his own record.

As for the Muslims, I will agree that a majority are not terrorists, but I hear very little from "moderate Muslims" when one of their brothers blows up a trainful of woman and children. As for the Catholics and the molestation scandals half the Bishops probably should be drawn and quartered for covering it up for so many years. There are plenty of F'd up people who call themselves Christians, but on the whole they are a lot more peacable than the Muslims.

[buttslinger]

I am truly puzzled that the term racist is being applied to me and/or my posts.

Backpeddle!!
I think I'll vote for Romney. I feel sorry for him.

[mildcigar_2001]

President Obama: "Dog Eater," the Music Video

President Obama: "Dog Eater," the Music Video - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE3cpsdMg3Q)


I bet David Axelrod wishes he had never started this.

[catherinefan]

I am truly puzzled that the term racist is being applied to me and/or my posts.

You're puzzled??? You openly state that some cultures are superior to others and you're surprised to hear that you're a racist? I find that very hard to believe.

[mildcigar_2001]

You're puzzled??? You openly state that some cultures are superior to others and you're surprised to hear that you're a racist? I find that very hard to believe.


I hate to belabor the obvious but there is large difference between culture and race. If I were making points stating that one race is better than another then I could be labeled a racist.

I guess it is currently politically incorrect to point out that some cultures are better than others. A case in point are the nations of Haiti and the Dominican Republic. These two countries basicly split the isle of Hispanola between each other. Haiti, due mostly to a dysfuctional culture is one of the most God awful spots in the entire world. The Dominican Republic while it has its problems is generally trending in the right direction. Being that these two countries share the same island it stands to reason that they each have about the same amounts of natural resources, so it is easy to see that the main determinent of prosperity or lack thereof is the culture of each nation.

You will notice that I did not mention race once in my comparison of cultures. Raise someone of Haitian descent in America and they will prosper, and raise that same person in Haiti and they will be worshipping chicken bones and not prospering.

[Ben]

President Obama: "Dog Eater," the Music Video

President Obama: "Dog Eater," the Music Video - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jE3cpsdMg3Q)


I bet David Axelrod wishes he had never started this.

I'm vegetarian now. But I've eaten cow, lamb, chicken, pig.... I mean, we all have. Plus the term meat is a euphemism. It's really a killed animal that we're eating. And, too, is it moral? I'm not laying siege to anyone, as it were. I'm simply saying is it moral to eat meat, or dead animal? And, too, the industrial food system and how we or they (companies) treat animals turned me right off.
Where was Obama when he gorged on dog meat?

[buttslinger]

I hate to belabor the obvious but there is large difference between culture and race. If I were making points stating that one race is better than another then I could be labeled a racist

White man speak with forked tongue.

[Willie Escalade]

All I can say is...if you don't like e way a country is doing something, stay out of that country!

[robertlouis]

All I can say is...if you don't like e way a country is doing something, stay out of that country!

You mean like Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Vietnam? A good idea in retrospect lol.

Joking btw - I know what you meant, Willie.

[trish]

I hate to belabor the point, mildcigar, but you said said Indonesians were morally inferior because they ate dog. But you failed to explain why eating dog makes one morally inferior (to one say who eats pork, or beef or pink slime). When asked, you exclaimed, "If you don't know, I can't explain it." If you can't explain, then you don't know why. So you believe in the inferiority of a whole population without any real explicable reason; i.e. on a trumped up pseudo-reason. What did the six year old Obama have in common with his Indonesian neighbors that you find appallingly offensive? You would have us believe their common trespass was the eating of dog meat. That's your cover; Obama and all of Indonesia are your moral inferiors because Indonesians eat dog meat and six year old Obama sampled it. Yeah. Right. Like we're supposed to believe you're that stupid. I'm afraid your racist fears shine through your frayed attempts to cover them up.

[robertlouis]

I hate to belabor the obvious but there is large difference between culture and race. If I were making points stating that one race is better than another then I could be labeled a racist.

I guess it is currently politically incorrect to point out that some cultures are better than others. A case in point are the nations of Haiti and the Dominican Republic. These two countries basicly split the isle of Hispanola between each other. Haiti, due mostly to a dysfuctional culture is one of the most God awful spots in the entire world. The Dominican Republic while it has its problems is generally trending in the right direction. Being that these two countries share the same island it stands to reason that they each have about the same amounts of natural resources, so it is easy to see that the main determinent of prosperity or lack thereof is the culture of each nation.

You will notice that I did not mention race once in my comparison of cultures. Raise someone of Haitian descent in America and they will prosper, and raise that same person in Haiti and they will be worshipping chicken bones and not prospering.

You are ignoring the burdens and legacies of history.

Both halves of the island suffered under colonial masters and were buffeted by the ripples of European wars. Dominica, as was, had the usual small island history where it suffered US-bolstered dictatorship for most of the 20th century, but has now emerged with a defensible and established democracy as well as a thriving tourist industry.

Haiti, on the other hand, was a military playground for the various strands of French revolutionary politics and wars from the 1790s to the 1830s, when the French government, to their everlasting shame, imposed huge reparations on the infant republic for the loss of slaves and the industry that they supported. The scandal is that this debt remains to the present day, accumulating crippling levels of interest, and has therefore crippled Haiti economically ever since. The relative degradation and under-development of Haiti can largely be attributed to enforced poverty imposed by the former colonial masters. It's also worth noting that Haiti is the only French-speaking territory in the region that has never been offered inclusion into metropolitan France. The poor bastards never really had a chance.

[Prospero]

Dog eating = a lack of civilisation? Try telling that to the Chinese whose great civilisation pre-dates our by millennia. Oh and they eat bugs and other uncivilised stuff too. And this from the land of the big Mac!

[mildcigar_2001]

You are ignoring the burdens and legacies of history.

The poor bastards never really had a chance.


I think your arguments buttress my main point that culture does make a difference. Even as screwed up as the Spanish colonies were, the French were worse. I lived in Puerto Rico for a few years, and was able to travel around the Caribbean a fair bit and I noticed a big difference in the islands based on who their former colonial masters were. As a general rule, you were a lot better off if the Union Jack had been flying over your island. Culture matters.

Not that anyone would want to go to the trouble, but Haiti would be far better off if is became some country's colony. As Haiti sits now it is hell on earth for the most part. The recent earthquake of a couple of years ago is a good example of the poor organization of the people/government. There were thousands of people just sitting in temporary camps waiting for someone from the UN to fix their country. If there were any sort of proper leadership, those thousands would have been actively engaged in clearing the rubble and rebuilding. As it is most are sitting on their collective asses.

[Prospero]

I think mildcigar you are describing differences in attitude and colonial behaviour. I don't think that - by and large - Spain France and the UK would be considered different civilisations. And cultural differences there certainly are - but I don't think you can privilege one over the other. Muslim culture, Hindu culture. Christian culture. All different but with vast areas of common ground too. None better or worse. just different.

[runningdownthatdream]

I think your arguments buttress my main point that culture does make a difference. Even as screwed up as the Spanish colonies were, the French were worse. I lived in Puerto Rico for a few years, and was able to travel around the Caribbean a fair bit and I noticed a big difference in the islands based on who their former colonial masters were. As a general rule, you were a lot better off if the Union Jack had been flying over your island. Culture matters.

Not that anyone would want to go to the trouble, but Haiti would be far better off if is became some country's colony. As Haiti sits now it is hell on earth for the most part. The recent earthquake of a couple of years ago is a good example of the poor organization of the people/government. There were thousands of people just sitting in temporary camps waiting for someone from the UN to fix their country. If there were any sort of proper leadership, those thousands would have been actively engaged in clearing the rubble and rebuilding. As it is most are sitting on their collective asses.

Black people had independent thought and action wrenched from them through fear in the New World. They're sitting on their collective ass because that's what the Europeans taught them to do - follow orders. Hence if no-one is giving orders they don't know what to do. Slavery will do that. It dehumanizes, destroys instincts, and enforces submission through violence and the threat of violence. It also disrupted the family structure for generations - look at the mess black people are in wherever they were enslaved - and 'emancipating' slaves doesn't automatically bring back all those traditions nor the attendant instincts. The legacy of the colonizers and slavers is this. Most people from former colonies are too busy thinking about how to eat and where to live to think about WHY they are in the situation they are in.

You are a fool. I'm sure that in the typical way of a fool you will continue to present the garbage you're presenting in this thread under the guise of reason. Like the other jackass you don't want to look at the past to understand the present and you seem to think social ills just sprang from race and/or culture. In your inept way you have partly got it right - culture is to blame. But ask yourself this fool: WHO created the culture?

[buttslinger]

The Democrats here tried to send a strong message to "poor people" about their party but it flopped. It seems that poor people don't think of themselves as poor, they think of themselves as "working people"
The USA don't have no slaves. We have a lower class stuck on an economic treadmill where everything WE give them, WE take back, one way or another.

[mildcigar_2001]

Black people had independent thought and action wrenched from them through fear in the New World. They're sitting on their collective ass because that's what the Europeans taught them to do - follow orders. Hence if no-one is giving orders they don't know what to do. Slavery will do that. It dehumanizes, destroys instincts, and enforces submission through violence and the threat of violence. It also disrupted the family structure for generations - look at the mess black people are in wherever they were enslaved - and 'emancipating' slaves doesn't automatically bring back all those traditions nor the attendant instincts. The legacy of the colonizers and slavers is this. Most people from former colonies are too busy thinking about how to eat and where to live to think about WHY they are in the situation they are in.

You are a fool. I'm sure that in the typical way of a fool you will continue to present the garbage you're presenting in this thread under the guise of reason. Like the other jackass you don't want to look at the past to understand the present and you seem to think social ills just sprang from race and/or culture. In your inept way you have partly got it right - culture is to blame. But ask yourself this fool: WHO created the culture?


It is somewhat difficult to debate someone who doesn't understand even simple terms such as culture. For humans culture is almost all consuming.

A basic definition:

Culture consists of the beliefs, behaviors, objects, and other characteristics common to the members of a particular group or society. Through culture, people and groups define themselves, conform to society's shared values, and contribute to society. Thus, culture includes many societal aspects: language, customs, values, norms, mores, rules, tools, technologies, products, organizations, and institutions. This latter term institution refers to clusters of rules and cultural meanings associated with specific social activities. Common institutions are the family, education, religion, work, and health care.

It is obvious the the term culture would include the history that produced that culture.

It is a politically incorrect fact but a large number of countries that were former colonies were a lot better off with the colonial masters back in charge. A case in point is Rhodesia which once was the breadbasket of Africa can not even feed itself.

A love people who continue to whine and cry about slavery even after almost 150 years in the U.S. and almost 200 years in Haiti. It is an unhappy legacy but we need to move beyond it. My own ancestors were little more than serfs in europe when they immigrated in the 19th century, and I don't feel the need to blame the remote past for my current economic circumstances. The desendants of slaves need to man up and put their big boy pants on, and quit making excuses for themselves. Slavery flourished for several millienum throughout most of the world, most of the world has been able to move beyond its legacy, so too should the blacks.

[tiramisu]

No comment

[buttslinger]

[QUOTE=mildcigar_2001;1129292]My own ancestors were little more than serfs in europe when they immigrated in the 19th century,

I thought you said 1636.

It is an unhappy legacy but we need to move beyond it.

That's what we're trying to tell you.

[mildcigar_2001]

A little something to wash down the dog.

Malt liquor reviews:

http://www.joegrossberg.com/archives/000163.html

[trish]

Still no explanation from the racist why eating dog makes one morally inferior. I see you know how to avoid a question, but you certainly don't know how to answer one.

[buttslinger]

"And it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-black sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations," Obama said.

[zulusierra]

Still no explanation from the racist why eating dog makes one morally inferior. I see you know how to avoid a question, but you certainly don't know how to answer one.


Not taking a side either way but I'd like to join the discussion. :2cent

If I've learned a few basic lessons in earning my degree in biology and philosophy it's that without an objective, external right/wrong/morality (whether God, the "uncaused cause", or whatever other explanation one could come up with) morality is a very tricky, evanescent concept that very quickly breaks down even before symbolic logic is applied.

Stated simply, without an external source of rules, it's not an easy task to explain that such a thing a right/wrong exists at all. Without a concept such as God (and I'm not proselytizing any particular faith or spiritual tradition) it seems to break down to pleasure/pain/tradition, and utilitarian considerations.

[trish]

One can of course have pragmatist, utilitarian etc. foundations for morality. But I would claim that given a foundation of his choice, mildcigar commits what logicians call a category mistake. He asserts quite explicitly a few pages back in this that both Obama and a large number of individual Indonesians are morally inferior for eating dog. For Indonesians dog is an occasional source of protein. For Obama, he was a six year visitor sampling the cuisine. So the inferiority stems not from their motivations but from the consumption itself. When asked to explain how it can be the eating dog makes one morally inferior midlcigar is at a loss. So he changes the discussion to one of culture, claiming one culture can be inferior to another. Cultures and individuals are distinct categories. Even if (and that's a big "if") one culture could be inferior to another, it doesn't follow an individual from the lesser culture is morally inferior to an individual of the the greater culture. Even if (another big "if") the culture of Indonesia were inferior to the culture of redneck Alabama, it doesn't follow that rednecks are morally superior to Indonesian medical doctors. Moreover, none of this talk about morally comparative cultures has anything to do with Obama who was raised with Western values, largely in the U.S. and who epitomizes western values. He's obviously in no way Indonesian. Of course to mildcigar and other conservative, Obama is The Other, and it is in their interests to paint him as The Other at every opportunity.

Next question, does driving long distances on a family vacation with the family dog strapped to the roof, sick and vomiting, make you a) morally inferior; b) an unfeeling idiot or c) out of touch with dogs?

[Stavros]

This whole debate about eating dog is just another excuse for an attack on President Obama to suggest he is 'not one of us', an 'other' as Trish has said before. If anything, it suggests to me your Commander-in-Chef has more bottle than most Americans.

Starving people have eaten rats, grass, the bark of trees.

I once knew an Italian who was amazed I had never eaten horsemeat or donkey meat, and as amazed that I should be disgusted by it.

Anyway there are dogs and dogs, and isn't it the case that puppies are the tastiest when roasted? Just thought I would throw that in on a Sunday lunchtime...

[onmyknees]

One can of course have pragmatist, utilitarian etc. foundations for morality. But I would claim that given a foundation of his choice, mildcigar commits what logicians call a category mistake. He asserts quite explicitly a few pages back in this that both Obama and a large number of individual Indonesians are morally inferior for eating dog. For Indonesians dog is an occasional source of protein. For Obama, he was a six year visitor sampling the cuisine. So the inferiority stems not from their motivations but from the consumption itself. When asked to explain how it can be the eating dog makes one morally inferior midlcigar is at a loss. So he changes the discussion to one of culture, claiming one culture can be inferior to another. Cultures and individuals are distinct categories. Even if (and that's a big "if") one culture could be inferior to another, it doesn't follow an individual from the lesser culture is morally inferior to an individual of the the greater culture. Even if (another big "if") the culture of Indonesia were inferior to the culture of redneck Alabama, it doesn't follow that rednecks are morally superior to Indonesian medical doctors. Moreover, none of this talk about morally comparative cultures has anything to do with Obama who was raised with Western values, largely in the U.S. and who epitomizes western values. He's obviously in no way Indonesian. Of course to mildcigar and other conservative, Obama is The Other, and it is in their interests to paint him as The Other at every opportunity.

Next question, does driving long distances on a family vacation with the family dog strapped to the roof, sick and vomiting, make you a) morally inferior; b) an unfeeling idiot or c) out of touch with dogs?




I don't know Trish.....why don't we ask the dogs ? One made it after a bout with car sickness, and one met with an untimely demise. LMAO

Look...the entire conversation is a diversion, and a new way for the sycophants in here to be even more creative in defense of their dear leader...I don't care if he ate raw kangaroo while camping in the outback with uncle Oyango and his aunt Zeituni , but it's worthy of some comedic attention. Do you think if the instances were reversed it wouldn't be fodder for Stewart, Letterman, Rock and Maher? My goodness....imagine the press releases from PETA had it been someone other than Obama. Betty White might never recover !!!!!!! Most Americans will find the practice a bit odd.....and it will rekindle that quieted flame of racism in all of us....right? There...I've explained it away. See how easy it was? This blue print can be used for just about any disagreement one might have with Obama,...even for those who set aside their chronic racism and voted for him in '08. I personally find Colombian hookers, and lavish Vegas parties much more "juicy" but that's just me. So until the next scandal, or misuse of taxpayer money by this administration breaks, mind if we have a little fun with the whole doggie thing.....or is humor only funny when it's aimed at folks you despise and coming from folks you agree with ?
OK...so in conclusion....... we know he can snap out an Al Green tune, dine with the locals on exotic cuisine, play some golf and enjoys vacationing with his 1% friends, and those things seem to endear him to most of you..........the question is....in addition to all those weighty attributes, is ...............can and will he govern?

I think now would be the time to insert some cartoon humor about the entire episode, but it seems suddenly everyone's sensibilities seem to be so razor thin, I wouldn't want to offend anyone with some canine humor....so this will do for now...but stay tuned !

[trish]

The instances already go both ways. Gail Collins makes fun of Romney's Dog-On-The-Roof incident in every column. But she never drew mildcigar's conclusion that Romney was morally inferior. The liberal line has been that Romney is simply not very connected, not very sympathetic and rather self-contained.

Obama eats dog and what conclusions does the right draw? He morally inferior. He is prone to the anti-colonialist attitudes that are rampant in Kanya. Proves he wasn't born in America. In a whisper: he's BLACK.

The difference is that progressives aren't afraid of racial, cultural or religious differences. In comparison you guys are simpering cowards.

Speaking of religious differences, it's Sunday morning and you're a good Christian posting his hatred again in a porn forum. Doesn't that strike you as .... sinful???

[buttslinger]

Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter both had rabidly conservative fathers who were Judges......think about it.

Cigar doesn't care if the American Indians we slaughtered ate dog. He just wants to be on the winning end of the joke, for a change.

I thought Stavros was from London.

It doesn't matter if zulusierra understands better than anyone the motives and behavior of everyone in the USA. That still leaves 300 million who don't.

The same hard times that made people eat dog made people own slaves.

Buddha actually finished reading the book of life 2500 years ago, all the way through to the end. But we're all blind men looking at the elephant from different angles.

Obama was sent down from Heaven to save the WORLD.word to your mother.

[Stavros]

I thought Stavros was from London.


? Don't see the relevance of this comment. I wasn't born in London and haven't lived there for 25 years. And I have not eaten dogs, puppies, donkeys, horses, or insects. I have tried soya milk, which is disgusting. I like all kinds of food, but I am not particularly courageous with stuff I don't know about.

Which, as I suggested before, makes your Commander-in-Chef a more adventurous and gung-go eater than most Americans who come to Europe and think the food in France is crap, and end up in McDonalds more often than the local brasserie.

All you need now is a President who likes...mushrooms...

[Ben]

I didn't know the full story. Obama was 6 or 7. Possibly 9. The so-called controversy is kinda silly. I mean, I ate rabbit when I was a kid. I regret it now.
Obama revealed it 8 years ago. In his book Dreams from my Father. Why is it surfacing now? Does it have anything to do with how Mitt mistreated his dog? And this is a counterattack? It's petty politics. And TAKES AWAY from real issues.

'Obama Ate Dog' Attacks - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MwJkCmbdOU)

[onmyknees]

[QUOTE=Stavros;1129496]This whole debate about eating dog is just another excuse for an attack on President Obama to suggest he is 'not one of us', an 'other' as Trish has said before. If anything, it suggests to me your Commander-in-Chef has more bottle than most Americans.

QUOTE]


Hey wait...there's only space for one smartest man in the room title, and it's not you.....

That's a nice fantasy you've laid on us, but it has more to do with conjecture and your own biases and ignorance, than anything factual or evidentiary. The gullible in here will gladly lap up your racism charges, but that's fairly obvious.... it's what they revel in...So let me enlighten the so called enlightened....

The story of Obama eating canine has been around for quite some time. In fact he narrated it from his own book a decade ago, and one would think if there was a political opportunity to be had, those racist right wingers would have used it by now...it's widely known. The fact of the matter is, the Romeny story was kept alive by Obama campaign chairman, David Axle douche. He began tweeting it as far back as January of this year after a picture of Barry and Bo in the limo surfaced saying that's how dog lovers treat thier dogs. I urge you to google it and get informed. Of course it was picked up by late night comics, MSNBC, and they went off and running with it. Not a problem....all's fair in love and politics. But in attempt to keep the Romney story alive and continue to paint his as a cold hearted inhumane animal hater, Axle douche kept on Tweeting. It was picked up by other liberal politicians who I named in another post, and just last week Axlerod referred to it again. It was then that the Romney campaign and other right wing bloggers pointed out the reality in a humorous way....that is Romney may have put the dog on top of the family car, but Obama dined on it. They certainly weren't responding with anything untrue, and if it was fair and fun for the Obama campaign to continue to talk about the Romney incident, why would it be the same for the Obama episode? I'm sure you guys thought the jokes about the dog on the family car were hilarious, but you've suddenly lost your sense of humor. You all tend to do that...along with your objectivity when the subject is Obama. I'd say this blew up in Axle douche's face, but when you're attempting to deflect voters attention with doggie stories, you run that risk. So now you know the rest of the story, but once again....you're entitled to your opinion no matter how uninformed.

[zulusierra]

Next question, does driving long distances on a family vacation with the family dog strapped to the roof, sick and vomiting, make you a) morally inferior; b) an unfeeling idiot or c) out of touch with dogs?


Most definitely "b" and "c", not sure I'd go quite as far as "a" (not for that reason alone, but he may have other traits that make "a" a correct answer as well).

[buttslinger]

Just thought I would throw that in on a Sunday lunchtime...


OOPS Stavros, misread your timestamp, thought you were a Yank. I had lunch at Pizza Hut in London, same as here, but to get to the bathroom you had to go down three flights and 5 centuries.
Castle-brick-concrete.

[BluegrassCat]

I'm sure you guys thought the jokes about the dog on the family car were hilarious, but you've suddenly lost your sense of humor.

It's very telling that OMK thinks the Seamus story is a "joke" that liberals tell each other and crack up about. I guess I don't get how doing that to a dog is funny.

[Stavros]

[QUOTE=Stavros;1129496]This whole debate about eating dog is just another excuse for an attack on President Obama to suggest he is 'not one of us', an 'other' as Trish has said before. If anything, it suggests to me your Commander-in-Chef has more bottle than most Americans.

QUOTE]
Hey wait...there's only space for one smartest man in the room title, and it's not you.....

That's a nice fantasy you've laid on us, but it has more to do with conjecture and your own biases and ignorance, than anything factual or evidentiary. The gullible in here will gladly lap up your racism charges, but that's fairly obvious.... it's what they revel in...So let me enlighten the so called enlightened....

The story of Obama eating canine has been around for quite some time. In fact he narrated it from his own book a decade ago, and one would think if there was a political opportunity to be had, those racist right wingers would have used it by now...it's widely known. The fact of the matter is, the Romeny story was kept alive by Obama campaign chairman, David Axle douche. He began tweeting it as far back as January of this year after a picture of Barry and Bo in the limo surfaced saying that's how dog lovers treat thier dogs. I urge you to google it and get informed. Of course it was picked up by late night comics, MSNBC, and they went off and running with it. Not a problem....all's fair in love and politics. But in attempt to keep the Romney story alive and continue to paint his as a cold hearted inhumane animal hater, Axle douche kept on Tweeting. It was picked up by other liberal politicians who I named in another post, and just last week Axlerod referred to it again. It was then that the Romney campaign and other right wing bloggers pointed out the reality in a humorous way....that is Romney may have put the dog on top of the family car, but Obama dined on it. They certainly weren't responding with anything untrue, and if it was fair and fun for the Obama campaign to continue to talk about the Romney incident, why would it be the same for the Obama episode? I'm sure you guys thought the jokes about the dog on the family car were hilarious, but you've suddenly lost your sense of humor. You all tend to do that...along with your objectivity when the subject is Obama. I'd say this blew up in Axle douche's face, but when you're attempting to deflect voters attention with doggie stories, you run that risk. So now you know the rest of the story, but once again....you're entitled to your opinion no matter how uninformed.

Thank you so much for that informative response. But its chiming midnight and my broom is waiting...woof woof!

[Stavros]

Just thought I would throw that in on a Sunday lunchtime...


OOPS Stavros, misread your timestamp, thought you were a Yank. I had lunch at Pizza Hut in London, same as here, but to get to the bathroom you had to go down three flights and 5 centuries.
Castle-brick-concrete.

Pizza Hut? You really have slipped even further in my estimation. Now Obama's culinary experimentation really does mark him out as a leader. Bow, wow.

[mildcigar_2001]

Still no explanation from the racist why eating dog makes one morally inferior. I see you know how to avoid a question, but you certainly don't know how to answer one.


As I stated earlier, if you don't know why eating dog is wrong, I can't explain it to you. It is like if you don't know why murder or abortion are wrong I can't (or won't take the time) to explain it to you in the middle of a T-girl porn forum.

But to cheer you up. Below is a picture from the Obama family Library.
It's caption reads: "Wait a minute. This is a cookbook!"

[stimpy17]

Hmm, he never did say if it tastes like chicken.

[trish]

If you can't explain why, you don't know why? If you won't take the time, then why do you keep posting?

[buttslinger]

Hmm, he never did say if it tastes like chicken.

Dog tastes like beef, stringy gamey.
Humans taste like pork.
Cats taste like turkey.
I would say Dinosaurs tasted like fowl, based on recent findings, but that's just a guess.

[mildcigar_2001]

If you can't explain why, you don't know why? If you won't take the time, then why do you keep posting?


Just trying to shead a little light on the activities of our president (God help us, an admitted dog eater).

It is a close call but I don't know which I'd be more uncomfortable with:

A. Leaving my daughter alone with Bill Clinton, or

B. Leaving my dog alone with Obama.

At least Bill Clinton had the good grace to lie about his unwholesome appetites.

[robertlouis]

Umm. Koreans eat dog. I've been there and I've tasted to too. Are you going to throw out your Samsung or LG phone, TV, dvd player, all sorts of other electronics etc and all those Hyundai and Kia cars as well because they come from "an inferior culture"?

Oh, and by the way, when Obama did eat dog he was less than ten years old. When you were a kid did your parents tell you to eat what you were offered as a matter of politeness? And at that age how informed are your choices anyway? If your point is based on the fact that a child took a mouthful of cooked dog, then, you're a racist.

[Ben]

English authoress Jemima Khan, daughter of billionaire financier James Goldsmith, talks about how Obama has doubled the number of drone attacks on Pakistan, compared to Bush.

Jemima Khan asks, what's more dangerous, terrorism or counter-terrorism? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbP4efWCfmw)

Jemima Khan on America's illegal 'risk free' drone warfare - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_QFhK-Vz9s)

[trish]

Once again, cigar, you avoid the question by attempting to change the subject; but you have yet to address the charge of category error and to directly explain how you can charge whole populations of individuals with moral inferiority based simply on what they eat. You really are a little shit eating racist aren't you?

[Ben]

Jemima Khan Afghanistan and the War on Terror 10 Years On 11 06 11 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgxP0Zdz--Q)

[robertlouis]

Once again, cigar, you avoid the question by attempting to change the subject; but you have yet to address the charge of category error and to directly explain how you can charge whole populations of individuals with moral inferiority based simply on what they eat. You really are a little shit eating racist aren't you?

Now now Trish. Eating dog is one thing, but accusing a fine upstanding citizen of eating shit? Come now ma-am, that's unworthy of you. :wink:

[nonnonnon]

I almost slipped in all this mud you're throwing

[GrimFusion]

Just trying to shead a little light on the activities of our president (God help us, an admitted dog eater).

It is a close call but I don't know which I'd be more uncomfortable with:

A. Leaving my daughter alone with Bill Clinton, or

B. Leaving my dog alone with Obama.

At least Bill Clinton had the good grace to lie about his unwholesome appetites.

You and people like you are the reason why I don't trust the majority of Americans to vote responsibly any longer. Neither Obama's experience with dog-cuisine or Clinton's fellatio escapades have anything to do with their policies or intentions. It's fine to dislike them because of their personal digressions, but dismissing them as worthy politicians is sad. Retarded-sad.

[trish]

Now now Trish. Eating dog is one thing, but accusing a fine upstanding citizen of eating shit? Come now ma-am, that's unworthy of you. :wink:

Please be clear, I'm not saying mild cigar is morally inferior; a lot of fine breeds eat shit.

[robertlouis]

Please be clear, I'm not saying mild cigar is morally inferior; a lot of fine breeds eat shit.

And don't ever forget the premise of Soylent Green lol.

[buttslinger]

Neither Obama's experience with dog-cuisine or Clinton's fellatio escapades have anything to do with their policies or intentions.

Thank you for reminding me why I have absolutely no problem shitting on a shiteating Republican any chance I get. Fuckin Ken Starr. God I hated that prick.

[runningdownthatdream]

It is somewhat difficult to debate someone who doesn't understand even simple terms such as culture. For humans culture is almost all consuming.

A basic definition:

Culture consists of the beliefs, behaviors, objects, and other characteristics common to the members of a particular group or society. Through culture, people and groups define themselves, conform to society's shared values, and contribute to society. Thus, culture includes many societal aspects: language, customs, values, norms, mores, rules, tools, technologies, products, organizations, and institutions. This latter term institution refers to clusters of rules and cultural meanings associated with specific social activities. Common institutions are the family, education, religion, work, and health care.

It is obvious the the term culture would include the history that produced that culture.

It is a politically incorrect fact but a large number of countries that were former colonies were a lot better off with the colonial masters back in charge. A case in point is Rhodesia which once was the breadbasket of Africa can not even feed itself.

A love people who continue to whine and cry about slavery even after almost 150 years in the U.S. and almost 200 years in Haiti. It is an unhappy legacy but we need to move beyond it. My own ancestors were little more than serfs in europe when they immigrated in the 19th century, and I don't feel the need to blame the remote past for my current economic circumstances. The desendants of slaves need to man up and put their big boy pants on, and quit making excuses for themselves. Slavery flourished for several millienum throughout most of the world, most of the world has been able to move beyond its legacy, so too should the blacks.

Rhodesia as an example for the superiority of the colonizers? Put their 'big boy pants on'? Slavery 'flourished'? You seem to have missed a good chunk of learning on your way to making these pronouncements but whatever......keep on doing what you do and all the best with everything. I won't have a discussion with a fool.

..................oh and when you meet Ayn Rand ask her how it feels being dead and irrelevant................

[robertlouis]

I suspect that mildcigar knows exactly what he's doing. He's a racist commentator with a veneer of learning which he's happy to twist to suit his prejudices, and he's therefore doubtless enjoying a mild cigar, a bourbon or two and a throaty chuckle while he messes with our pointy little liberal heads.

How close am I?

[runningdownthatdream]

I suspect that mildcigar knows exactly what he's doing. He's a racist commentator with a veneer of learning which he's happy to twist to suit his prejudices, and he's therefore doubtless enjoying a mild cigar, a bourbon or two and a throaty chuckle while he messes with our pointy little liberal heads.

How close am I?

You're likely right on.......his views seem awfully (and I mean that literally) familiar. Probably a glass of Wild Turkey and a good slave-made Dominican seegar dressed in cricket whites while admiring the fine young men (hence the throaty chuckle) prancing about his little house in suburbia..........but maybe I'm just oversimplifying.

[GrimFusion]

Slavery is a little hard to put on the back burner when black people get daily reminders that they're somehow inferior. You can't say "put on your big- boy-pants" when some of your neighbors are likely the ones yelling racist obscenity. So long as racism is still an issue, our nation's history with slavery will still remain one.

[buttslinger]

At the end of the day, Obama is in the White House. And unlike Romney, he doesn't need some Advisor to tell him to wear blue jeans. Obama destroyed Trump in ten minutes, and he'll take down Mitt, in 6 months. It's a lock.

[mildcigar_2001]

At the end of the day, Obama is in the White House. And unlike Romney, he doesn't need some Advisor to tell him to wear blue jeans. Obama destroyed Trump in ten minutes, and he'll take down Mitt, in 6 months. It's a lock.


Yep with $4-5/gallon gasoline it must be a lock. With an additional 5 TRILLION added to the national debt it must be a lock. With the Occupy Wall Street protesters rioting in the streets this upcoming May it must be a lock.

[Willie Escalade]

Geez...I thought the thread was about his singing...

[strokeitnow]

Kelly,

You could not be more un-informed about what the Republicans stand for. Is it wrong to get ahead through hard work and dedication? The democratic choice would be to sit at home do nothing and wait government subsidy programs to pay your way. Who do you think pays the taxes that support those programs? That is right the Republicans. Wealth is not given it is earned. Those who don't want to work for it don't get it, those who do prefer not to give handouts to lazy people. Democrats want to retain power through the process of buying votes with Government subsidy programs. The thought process is to simple manipulate the masses with money. Stealing from the rich and giving to the poor did not work for Robin Hood nor will it work for the Democrats, people are much smarter than Obama and his corrupt cronies think. They are sitting in the White House as we speak laughing their asses off about how they have hood winked the majority of Americans into believing their bull shit. He professes hope and change, yet practices hate and divisiveness. Claims to have saved General Motors when all he did what prop up his corrupt union bosses for a few extra years with Government bail out bucks. Where do you think that money came from? General Motors still has not paid back it's bill to Americans let alone pay a single dollar in taxes. Go ahead and vote for Obama again,if he wins you will get what you deserve. A country in total financial collapse under the weight to excessive Government spending. A country divided by all the hate talk about haves and have nots. A country where freedom means you get to do what you like as long as the Government approves of it. A country that does note even remotely resemble what our founding fathers framed in our Constitution. Good for you but I say no thank you. Most bad Government is born out of too much Government .

[trish]

Is it wrong to get ahead through hard work and dedication?No, of course not. Is it wrong to help people who labor and persist with loyalty and dedication but who don't get ahead? Is it wrong to have a reasonable minimal wage and guard against the exploitation of workers by corporations that profit by their labor? The current GOP seems to think so.


The democratic choice would be to sit at home do nothing and wait government subsidy programs to pay your way...Democrats want to retain power through the process of buying votes with Government subsidy programs.So now who is uninformed? Agriculture, Banking, Oil, Gas, Logging...you can't name a major industry that is not subsidized by the tax payer. Many of the Americans you call lazy hold down two to three jobs all paying less than minimum wage and raise families at the same time. Is the GOP shoo-in presidential candidate worried about the poor. He says not. He say there's a safety net. Yes, there's a safety net: installed by the democrats, maintained for decades with bi-partisan support until recently...the current core of the republican party is philosophically opposed to safety nets, and hand-outs of any kind that aren't going into corporate coffers. Republicans want to stay in power by letting corporations write legislation (via ALEC) and by creating artificial obstacles to block students and poor citizens from voting.


Stealing from the rich and giving to the poor did not work for Robin HoodActually it did. Haven't you seen any of the movies :) Stealing from the middle class is giving it to the wealthy works too. That's what happening now, aided by the GOP. The middle class is shrinking as the gap between 0.1% and the 99.9% is growing. What we're facing is a de facto oligarchy of a few wealthy men and corporations who dictate legislation to conservative state legislators who are influenced by their superpac contributors.


..yet practices hate and divisiveness.Utter bullshit here.


Claims to have saved General Motors when all he did what prop up his corrupt union bosses for a few extra years... General Motors is thriving, doing better than ever with new models and creating jobs.


vote for Obama againYes, please do.


if he wins you will get what you deserve.Indeed, continued recovery, healthcare, pay equity, reasoned and pragmatic executive decisions. Unfortunately if you don't also vote to shift the power in the house we will also have more obstructionism. There used to be such a thing as a loyal opposition. No longer. Using Ann Coulter's word, the opposition has resorted to the treachery of "treason."


Most bad Government is born out of...
Most bad government is born out of an inability to conceive of compromise.

[Prospero]

Phew - I'm mightily impressed that you burrowed into that diatribe and posted some corrective remarks Trish. It seemed to me to be a hopeless case (I suspect it is). But engagement is better than simply flipping past it and sighing - which is my response now to some of these people. They really do not understand how they are being manipulated to argue and vote against their own interests. It's a clever trick the GOP hae managed - funded by the likes of the Koch brothers and with a growing chorus of media cheerleaders such as Fox and many of Murdoch's newsppers. Black is white. Peace is war. etc etc. The real newspeak at work.
Elsewhere I'm told to keep my nose out of US politics. Why I wonder? it has an impact on us all. The legacy of the insane Bush years is still being felt all over the world.

[runningdownthatdream]

Phew - I'm mightily impressed that you burrowed into that diatribe and posted some corrective remarks Trish. It seemed to me to be a hopeless case (I suspect it is). But engagement is better than simply flipping past it and sighing - which is my response now to some of these people. They really do not understand how they are being manipulated to argue and vote against their own interests. It's a clever trick the GOP hae managed - funded by the likes of the Koch brothers and with a growing chorus of media cheerleaders such as Fox and many of Murdoch's newsppers. Black is white. Peace is war. etc etc. The real newspeak at work.
Elsewhere I'm told to keep my nose out of US politics. Why I wonder? it has an impact on us all. The legacy of the insane Bush years is still being felt all over the world.

....we should all be blessed with the patience and knowledge possessed by Trish.

I think though, Prospero, that it's too simplistic to pass off ignorance or lack of breadth of knowledge to a manipulative upper class. It is incumbent on each of us to question the lives we lead and the experiences to which we are exposed. When we don't do that and look at things from the ridiculous perspective of politics or simply focus on the acquisition of material goods (for example) we break the natural structure of life itself.

We are all guilty of being partisan (whether it be in politics or social issues or whatever turns each of us on) and that to me isn't the real problem. Rather, I see the problem as people who refuse to open their minds to possibilities, people who are dogmatic, people who don't want to look at root cause before attempting to solve problems, people who want or like to take the safe way out of bad situations by penalizing others (these traits fit people of all political persuasions although Conservatives, Republicans, and Fascists seem to hold them dearer than others). Being Liberal (i.e.: having an open mind to change and adaptation) is now considered to be something inhuman when in fact it is because of liberal thinking and liberal attitudes that we have advanced as far as we have within a relatively short period.

I found this fascinating and I hope others do too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mqT82oGeax0#!

[tommy001]

when i saw the post "Obama is smooth" and me not being from the USA i thought he was into shaving and waxing!

[runningdownthatdream]

when i saw the post "Obama is smooth" and me not being from the USA i thought he was into shaving and waxing!

......................and perhaps wearing a wig and a dress? What colour lipstick would you like on him - I hear he's taking requests.

[strokeitnow]

I must have touched a nerve with my earlier comments. We will always agree to disagree I have no problem with the other opinions expressed in the thread. Let's all agree to express on our opinions at the polls on election day and let the people decide what is best for our country. Peace for all.

[GrimFusion]

I like turdles!http://i.imgur.com/HtTeB.jpg

[Prospero]

....we should all be blessed with the patience and knowledge possessed by Trish.

I think though, Prospero, that it's too simplistic to pass off ignorance or lack of breadth of knowledge to a manipulative upper class. It is incumbent on each of us to question the lives we lead and the experiences to which we are exposed. When we don't do that and look at things from the ridiculous perspective of politics or simply focus on the acquisition of material goods (for example) we break the natural structure of life itself.

We are all guilty of being partisan (whether it be in politics or social issues or whatever turns each of us on) and that to me isn't the real problem. Rather, I see the problem as people who refuse to open their minds to possibilities, people who are dogmatic, people who don't want to look at root cause before attempting to solve problems, people who want or like to take the safe way out of bad situations by penalizing others (these traits fit people of all political persuasions although Conservatives, Republicans, and Fascists seem to hold them dearer than others). Being Liberal (i.e.: having an open mind to change and adaptation) is now considered to be something inhuman when in fact it is because of liberal thinking and liberal attitudes that we have advanced as far as we have within a relatively short period.

I found this fascinating and I hope others do too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mqT82oGeax0#!


Thanks Running. I agree with you 100 percent. I was not in any way trying to suggest that it is all down to a small coterie of evil minded manipulators. Rather that these sort of people - through history - have been able to manipulate the masses precisely because of the lack of open mindedness among so many people - the failure to look more deeply at the world and to accept the obvious and readymade.
"The unexamined life is not worth living" Socrates

[buttslinger]

Smooth........



Slow Jam The News with Barack Obama: Late Night with Jimmy Fallon - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFQIciWsF4)

[catherinefan]

No, of course not. Is it wrong to help people who labor and persist with loyalty and dedication but who don't get ahead? Is it wrong to have a reasonable minimal wage and guard against the exploitation of workers by corporations that profit by their labor? The current GOP seems to think so.

So now who is uninformed? Agriculture, Banking, Oil, Gas, Logging...you can't name a major industry that is not subsidized by the tax payer. Many of the Americans you call lazy hold down two to three jobs all paying less than minimum wage and raise families at the same time. Is the GOP shoo-in presidential candidate worried about the poor. He says not. He say there's a safety net. Yes, there's a safety net: installed by the democrats, maintained for decades with bi-partisan support until recently...the current core of the republican party is philosophically opposed to safety nets, and hand-outs of any kind that aren't going into corporate coffers. Republicans want to stay in power by letting corporations write legislation (via ALEC) and by creating artificial obstacles to block students and poor citizens from voting.

Actually it did. Haven't you seen any of the movies :) Stealing from the middle class is giving it to the wealthy works too. That's what happening now, aided by the GOP. The middle class is shrinking as the gap between 0.1% and the 99.9% is growing. What we're facing is a de facto oligarchy of a few wealthy men and corporations who dictate legislation to conservative state legislators who are influenced by their superpac contributors.

Utter bullshit here.

General Motors is thriving, doing better than ever with new models and creating jobs.

Yes, please do.

Indeed, continued recovery, healthcare, pay equity, reasoned and pragmatic executive decisions. Unfortunately if you don't also vote to shift the power in the house we will also have more obstructionism. There used to be such a thing as a loyal opposition. No longer. Using Ann Coulter's word, the opposition has resorted to the treachery of "treason."


Most bad government is born out of an inability to conceive of compromise.



Terrific reply, Trish! :Bowdown:

[stimpy17]

....smooth...LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[tommy001]

......................and perhaps wearing a wig and a dress? What colour lipstick would you like on him - I hear he's taking requests.

Maybe a nice pair of high heels as well, i wouldn't worry too much about the lipstick colour too much. Be smooth and wax and shave is the main thing!

[zulusierra]

General Motors is thriving, doing better than ever with new models and creating jobs.


Unfortunately, besides some Cadillacs and the Corvette (the high-dollar models), GM vehicles are shitboxes and not competitive with other makes in their respective classes according to the more independent reviewers such as Consumer Reports.

It's unfortunate, cuz GM used to make world-class products.:angry

Just test drive a GM back to back with a Toyota or Honda and the difference in quality is undeniable from the feel of the controls to the quality of fabric and plastic.

[trish]

Smooth........



Slow Jam The News with Barack Obama: Late Night with Jimmy Fallon - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFQIciWsF4)
Great slow jam.

Rush Limbaugh recently complained that college students want their contaception for free and now they want their education for free. Applying for a loan is not asking for free money. Loans are repaid and usually with interest...unless you’re a commerical bank. Commercial banks are still being lent money with zero interest rates. The GOP can’t see their way clear to make student loans available at a reasonable rate of interest, at a time when we need educated personnel and yet they can easily see their way clear to giving tax breaks to Bill Gates, the Koch Brothers, George Soros, and other assorted billionaires. The Koch brothers aren’t creating new jobs, and they wouldn’t need the extra money even if they were. The cost of an education now competes with the cost of a small house. If two students who meet in college get married, the union is already saddled with the debt of two small houses. I thought the GOP was the party of family values!

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/25/opinion/subsidize-students-not-tax-cuts.html

[kensterling]

Obama seized the student loan program when he took office. You should talk to him about interest rates, GOP has nothing to do with it. BTW, why are univerisities so expensive anyway? They should have a limit on how much they can raise their tuition, like they do with homeowners tax.
Just a couple thoughts.

[mildcigar_2001]

If two students who meet in college get married, the union is already saddled with the debt of two small houses. I thought the GOP was the party of family values!



The federal government student loan program is one of the major factors in driving up college education costs.

I've been back to college several times since my initial bachelors degrees (this is over the last 20 years or so). The "game" as the colleges and federal government play it is to raise the tuition prices and then raise the borrowing amounts that are allowed each semester for student loans, and then raise the tuition. This seems to go on in an endless cycle. The colleges raise their fees in order to “capture” more of the available revenue. At the same time less and less money (percentage wise) goes towards actual education (faculty) and more and more money goes towards administrative expenses.

The amounts available to borrow each semester should be cut (the maximum amount should be the cost of going to a state college). We should not be supporting Ivy League colleges (especially since most have multi-billion dollar endowments). There are plenty of spurious areas that can be cut out of college budgets and almost everyone knows it but it is too politically incorrect to mention cuts to Woman’s studies, Gay studies departments. The amount of administrators should be reduced. Focus on the sciences and traditional liberal arts. We do no one any favors allowing them to go thousands into debt and end up in a more or less useless degree in social work or woman’s studies. If you can’t afford the Ivy League go to state college.

Quit encouraging dependency on the government.

[trish]

That's just stupid. Education is always the first thing state governments cut money is tight. Higher Ed is always the first sacrifice. Over the last thirty years state universities and colleges have met funding cuts with tuition hikes. That is the primary factor in the current high cost of educated at state sponsored schools. Private universities and colleges have always had individually negotiated tuitions; it's an old practice that cannot be blamed on the existence of federal student loans.

Btw, Obama was pretty damn smooth slow jamming' the news.

[mildcigar_2001]

That's just stupid. Education is always the first thing state governments cut money is tight. Higher Ed is always the first sacrifice. Over the last thirty years state universities and colleges have met funding cuts with tuition hikes. That is the primary factor in the current high cost of educated at state sponsored schools. Private universities and colleges have always had individually negotiated tuitions; it's an old practice that cannot be blamed on the existence of federal student loans.

Btw, Obama was pretty damn smooth slow jamming' the news.


Below is a list of Departments from UCLA:
Curricula and Courses by Department

African Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-54.htm#369439960_pgfId-998845)

International Development Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-440.htm#449444400_pgfId-1006630)
Afro-American Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-60.htm#369466520_pgfId-998917)

Islamic Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-445.htm#449452896_pgfId-1006708)
American Indian Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-66.htm#369556056_pgfId-999172)

Italian (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-450.htm#448898480_pgfId-1006748)
Anesthesiology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-72.htm#369161144_pgfId-999324)

Labor and Workplace Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-456.htm#448978912_pgfId-1007076)
Anthropology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-75.htm#369166456_pgfId-999345)

Latin American Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-461.htm#448988368_pgfId-1007170)
Applied Linguistics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-81.htm#369177016_pgfId-1000019)

Law (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-467.htm#445824064_pgfId-1007343)
Archaeology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-88.htm#369819488_pgfId-1000462)

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-471.htm#445831288_pgfId-1007514)
Architecture and Urban Design (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-93.htm#369827936_pgfId-1000546)

Life Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-476.htm#445840120_pgfId-1007604)
Art (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-99.htm#369988040_pgfId-1000749)

Linguistics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-480.htm#445847608_pgfId-1009110)
Art History (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-105.htm#369999048_pgfId-1001943)

Management (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-487.htm#450951776_pgfId-1009557)
Arts and Architecture (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-111.htm#370009800_pgfId-1002452)

Materials Science and Engineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-493.htm#446560792_pgfId-1010322)
Asian American Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-114.htm#440143968_pgfId-1002479)

Mathematics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-499.htm#446571952_pgfId-1010550)
Asian Languages and Cultures (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-120.htm#440153888_pgfId-1002792)

Mathematics/Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-506.htm#446584912_pgfId-1011985)
Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-136.htm#440713680_pgfId-1003831)

Mathematics/Economics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-510.htm#451826640_pgfId-1012020)
Bioengineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-142.htm#440723920_pgfId-1004126)

Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-514.htm#451833648_pgfId-1012065)
Bioinformatics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-147.htm#440732432_pgfId-1004225)

Medicine (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-520.htm#451844952_pgfId-1012492)
Biological Chemistry (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-152.htm#440740432_pgfId-1004275)

Microbiology, Immunology, and Molecular Genetics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-524.htm#451852152_pgfId-1012546)
Biomathematics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-157.htm#440749072_pgfId-1005732)

Middle Eastern and North African Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-530.htm#452900080_pgfId-1012760)
Biomedical Engineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-162.htm#440757200_pgfId-1005886)

Molecular and Medical Pharmacology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-535.htm#452908744_pgfId-1012809)
Biomedical Physics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-167.htm#440766224_pgfId-1006100)

Molecular Biology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-540.htm#452918248_pgfId-1012985)
Biomedical Research (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-172.htm#441092312_pgfId-1006215)

Molecular, Cell, and Developmental Biology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-545.htm#452926768_pgfId-1013018)
Biostatistics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-177.htm#441101080_pgfId-1006266)

Molecular, Cellular, and Integrative Physiology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-551.htm#450373424_pgfId-1013278)
Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-182.htm#441108760_pgfId-1006460)

Molecular Toxicology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-556.htm#450382184_pgfId-1013339)
Chemistry and Biochemistry (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-188.htm#440368584_pgfId-1006725)

Moving Image Archive Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-561.htm#450391976_pgfId-1013403)
Chemistry/Materials Science (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-194.htm#440379080_pgfId-1007309)

Music (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-566.htm#451453208_pgfId-1013453)
Chicana and Chicano Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-198.htm#440386248_pgfId-1007356)

Musicology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-572.htm#451465016_pgfId-1014898)
Civic Engagement (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-204.htm#440397000_pgfId-1007652)

Near Eastern Languages and Cultures (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-579.htm#451478456_pgfId-1015123)
Civil and Environmental Engineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-209.htm#441716864_pgfId-1008716)

Neurobiology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-595.htm#451735456_pgfId-1015981)
Classics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-215.htm#441726720_pgfId-1009051)

Neurology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-601.htm#452282168_pgfId-1016130)
Communication Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-223.htm#441740672_pgfId-1009649)

Neuroscience (Undergraduate) (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-605.htm#452288768_pgfId-1016158)
Community Health Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-228.htm#442526472_pgfId-1009914)

Neuroscience (Graduate) (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-610.htm#452297288_pgfId-1016268)
Comparative Literature (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-233.htm#442534792_pgfId-1010275)

Neurosurgery (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-615.htm#452305904_pgfId-1016366)
Computational and Systems Biology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-239.htm#442544712_pgfId-1010556)

Nursing (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-619.htm#452313728_pgfId-1016386)
Computer Science (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-244.htm#442251416_pgfId-1011527)

Obstetrics and Gynecology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-625.htm#452348632_pgfId-1016842)
Conservation of Archaeological and Ethnographic Materials (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-250.htm#442261336_pgfId-1011953)

Ophthalmology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-629.htm#452593192_pgfId-1016868)
Dentistry (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-255.htm#442270104_pgfId-1012031)

Oral Biology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-633.htm#452600104_pgfId-1016892)
Design | Media Arts (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-258.htm#442275032_pgfId-1012053)

Orthopaedic Surgery (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-638.htm#452608744_pgfId-1017010)
Digital Humanities (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-264.htm#442285016_pgfId-1012259)

Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-642.htm#452615656_pgfId-999330)
Disability Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-268.htm#442291864_pgfId-1012303)

Pediatrics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-647.htm#452624296_pgfId-999506)
Earth and Space Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-272.htm#442298648_pgfId-1012362)

Philosophy (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-651.htm#453148504_pgfId-999541)
East Asian Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-278.htm#442308824_pgfId-1012861)

Physics and Astronomy (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-657.htm#453158776_pgfId-999921)
Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-284.htm#443754184_pgfId-1012931)

Physiology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-664.htm#453170560_pgfId-1000470)
Economics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-290.htm#443764936_pgfId-1017874)

Political Science (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-668.htm#451485208_pgfId-1000517)
Education (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-296.htm#443775048_pgfId-1014962)

Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-674.htm#451495456_pgfId-1001129)
Electrical Engineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-302.htm#443785800_pgfId-1015769)

Psychology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-678.htm#451502824_pgfId-1005191)
Engineering Schoolwide Programs (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-308.htm#443796680_pgfId-1016232)

Public Affairs (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-684.htm#451514296_pgfId-1006027)
English (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-312.htm#443803208_pgfId-1016317)

Public Health (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-688.htm#453395560_pgfId-1006057)
Environmental Health Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-318.htm#443813320_pgfId-999310)

Public Health Schoolwide Programs (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-692.htm#453403672_pgfId-1006086)
Environmental Science and Engineering (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-323.htm#444358600_pgfId-999523)

Public Policy (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-696.htm#453410560_pgfId-1006131)
Epidemiology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-328.htm#446700840_pgfId-999590)

Radiation Oncology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-701.htm#453419200_pgfId-1006411)
Ethnomusicology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-333.htm#446709720_pgfId-999834)

Radiological Sciences (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-704.htm#454683440_pgfId-1006432)
European Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-339.htm#446720256_pgfId-1000226)

Religion, Study of (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-707.htm#454688624_pgfId-1006447)
Family Medicine (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-344.htm#446730120_pgfId-1000292)

ROTC Program
Aerospace Studies
(http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-712.htm#454804208_pgfId-1006513)Military Science (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-717.htm#454813232_pgfId-1006563)
(http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-717.htm#454813232_pgfId-1006563)Naval Science (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-722.htm#454823288_pgfId-1006654)
Film, Television, and Digital Media (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-347.htm#445872416_pgfId-1000322)

Scandinavian Section (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-727.htm#454832888_pgfId-1006725)
Foreign Literature in Translation (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-353.htm#445882784_pgfId-1000961)

Slavic Languages and Literatures (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-733.htm#454352056_pgfId-1006981)
French and Francophone Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-356.htm#445884344_pgfId-1001151)

Social Thought (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-749.htm#454049784_pgfId-1009009)
Freshman General Education Clusters (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-362.htm#445898528_pgfId-1019200)

Social Welfare (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-754.htm#454058952_pgfId-1009048)
Geography (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-365.htm#446960128_pgfId-1002473)

Society and Genetics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-759.htm#454572664_pgfId-1009327)
Germanic Languages (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-371.htm#446970856_pgfId-1002904)

Sociology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-764.htm#454581976_pgfId-1009485)
Gerontology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-380.htm#447880904_pgfId-1003290)

South Asian Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-770.htm#454592440_pgfId-1009998)
Global Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-384.htm#447887816_pgfId-1003333)

Southeast Asian Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-774.htm#454596256_pgfId-1010037)
Health Services (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-390.htm#445399376_pgfId-1003409)

Spanish and Portuguese (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-779.htm#456229224_pgfId-1010127)
History (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-395.htm#445408016_pgfId-1003671)

Statistics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-786.htm#370795624_pgfId-1010634)
History/Art History (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-401.htm#445418264_pgfId-1005307)

Surgery (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-792.htm#370630280_pgfId-1010939)
Honors Collegium (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-405.htm#445424936_pgfId-1005349)

Theater (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-796.htm#370637144_pgfId-1011853)
Human Complex Systems (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-410.htm#448021680_pgfId-1005651)

Urban Planning (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-802.htm#370648184_pgfId-1012546)
Human Genetics (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-415.htm#448030176_pgfId-1005706)

Urology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-808.htm#440421016_pgfId-1012866)
Indo-European Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-420.htm#448039440_pgfId-1005816)

Visual and Performing Arts Education (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-812.htm#440427856_pgfId-1012886)
Information Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-425.htm#448047960_pgfId-1005885)

Women’s Studies (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-815.htm#440433520_pgfId-1012915)
Institute of the Environment and Sustainability (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-430.htm#444952176_pgfId-1006154)

World Arts and Cultures/Dance (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-821.htm#440443912_pgfId-1013241)
Integrative Biology and Physiology (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-434.htm#444959064_pgfId-1006352)

Writing Programs (http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/catalog/catalog11-12-828.htm#440885632_pgfId-1013696)

I think I could easily cut at least 25% of the Departments (begining with African Studies and ending with World Arts and Cultures/Dance) and there would be greatly reduced cost to the university and there would be more actual education going on. Do we really need "Asian American Studies" let alone gay studies? These BS departments are one of the reasons the cost of college in skyrocketing and real learning is diminishing. Focus on the traditional liberal arts and sciences. Anyone who is stupid enough to borrow money for a degree in dance deserves their poverty.

[buttslinger]

My niece went to the Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology in Fairfax Co. Thomas Jefferson, which serves as Northern Virginia’s selective magnet school, is known for its scholastic excellence. It has been named the nation’s best public high school by U.S. News & World Report during all five years the magazine has published its ranking.
Of those students receiving acceptance to the school for 2016, 64.2 percent (308 students) are Asian, 26.3 percent (126) are white, 2.7 percent (13) are Hispanic, and 1.5 percent (seven) are black.
Wake up, Cigar. Education is our Economic Future.

[trish]

Nonsense again. It is not the variety of products offered that increases their price, but the demand for the product. Education has always been expensive; you just didn't because state and federal governments subsidized most of your education. Today student are paying for more of it themselves. Students are not even asking for the subsidy rate you got when you were a student; they are simply asking the GOP to refrain from doubling the interest rates of student loans.

Universities have always been and will likely continue to be the primary innovators in science, technology and arts ranging over biological, engineering, computing, agricultural, medical, genetic and energy related applications. The payoff in expertise and directly applicable knowledge made available through universities to corporations of every ilk is of incalculable value. Cut universities and you slice off a chunk of your future ...in the name of ideology and very short run savings.

[trish]

You forget too, mildcigar, that departments depend upon one another financially. Though physicists, chemists and mathematicians are urgently needed, students of these disciplines are few and far between. They are educated by departments that make their bread and butter teaching theater students, musicians and others elementary science and mathematics. Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics departments in most universities are known as service departments because the greater portion of the students they education do not major in those subjects. Cut all theater programs and you may well diminish the number of chemical engineers available to industry at large, that or make educating a chemical engineer a much more expensive endeavor.

[mildcigar_2001]

Nonsense again. It is not the variety of products offered that increases their price, but the demand for the product. Education has always been expensive; you just didn't because state and federal governments subsidized most of your education. Today student are paying for more of it themselves. Students are not even asking for the subsidy rate you got when you were a student; they are simply asking the GOP to refrain from doubling the interest rates of student loans.

Universities have always been and will likely continue to be the primary innovators in science, technology and arts ranging over biological, engineering, computing, agricultural, medical, genetic and energy related applications. The payoff in expertise and directly applicable knowledge made available through universities to corporations of every ilk is of incalculable value. Cut universities and you slice off a chunk of your future ...in the name of ideology and very short run savings.

Universities are similar to most governments in being inherently wasteful. The recent GSA scandal reinforces this point in spades. The GSA is supposed to be the government’s watchdog agency and yet no one it seems is keeping an eye on the watchdog.

You didn’t respond to my main point that there is plenty on “educational fat” to be cut. Of what economic value are gay studies, or African studies or Dance departments?
None.

Save the money on the spurious programs and concentrate on teaching the basics of math, science, history. As I said I got my first college degree about 20 years ago, and I was shocked looking at the UCLA catalog how many frivolous departments there now are. The universities need to make some hard choices and eliminate some programs, eliminate administrative staff and thereby lower costs. Good God what is someone going to do with a bachelor’s degree in gay and lesbian studies? Believe me I made a similar mistake myself in originally getting a Sociology degree (the only thing it was good for was to get into graduate school).

[trish]

Universities are similar to most governments in being inherently wasteful. The recent GSA scandal reinforces this point in spades.No, it doesn't. You haven't been to any academic conferences sponsored by state institutions if you think they are anything at all like the GSA affair. LOL You're all conjecture and opinion with nothing to back it up.


You didn’t respond to my main point that there is plenty on “educational fat” to be cut. Yes I did. Read again. Go back and take a reading comprehension course. Pay twice the current interest rates.


Good God what is someone going to do with a bachelor’s degree in gay and lesbian studies? Believe me I made a similar mistake myself in originally getting a Sociology degree Don't blame your own poor decisions on the availability of low interest student loans. You got a subsidized liberal arts education and now you want to deny others the opportunity you wasted.

[Stavros]

Universities are similar to most governments in being inherently wasteful. The recent GSA scandal reinforces this point in spades. The GSA is supposed to be the government’s watchdog agency and yet no one it seems is keeping an eye on the watchdog.

You didn’t respond to my main point that there is plenty on “educational fat” to be cut. Of what economic value are gay studies, or African studies or Dance departments?
None.

Save the money on the spurious programs and concentrate on teaching the basics of math, science, history. As I said I got my first college degree about 20 years ago, and I was shocked looking at the UCLA catalog how many frivolous departments there now are. The universities need to make some hard choices and eliminate some programs, eliminate administrative staff and thereby lower costs. Good God what is someone going to do with a bachelor’s degree in gay and lesbian studies? Believe me I made a similar mistake myself in originally getting a Sociology degree (the only thing it was good for was to get into graduate school).

I am surprised at the one-dimensional view you have of university education -some people do a degree in law or medicine because they want to practice it, but I used to work with someone who studied law and went into business; an undergraduate colleague of mine was destined to be a real estate agent because his dad owned the firm, he was doing a degree in Politics because he was a disciple of Margaret Thatcher and wanted to be a Conservative MP (he hasn't made it so far). In another department in another university I discovered in the 1990s that graduates in Geography were being recruited by financial services; as for Media studies, dance etc-these all have practical applications from being able to use to a camer in a TV studio to teaching dance in schools or ballet class. If universities did not have enough students enrolling for Medieval Embroidery the course would cease to exist: the growth of micro-history has, in its own way, written the history of those gay men and women, those Black American railroad workers, those women who kept the USA working in the darkest days of the 1940s, who would otherwise have been forgotten.

Perhaps most of of all, a university education is designed to give a student analytical skills, writing skills, and through a range of subjects, a broad intellect and an appreciation of issues that would otherwise be obscure. Finally, as a UK citizen, I did not pay a penny for my education; I received a grant from my local council and in the Summer and Christmas vacations I had my rent paid and welfare so I could spend those free times reading. I had already paid in taxes the cost of my education, and have since paid twice more, or more, in taxes -and it was my taxes that paid for the education of the man who, as my doctor prescribes the medicine I need, the dentist who fixed my teeth, and so on.

Education is a right, not a privilege.

[mildcigar_2001]

No, it doesn't. You haven't been to any academic conferences sponsored by state institutions if you think they are anything at all like the GSA affair. LOL You're all conjecture and opinion with nothing to back it up.

Yes I did. Read again. Go back and take a reading comprehension course. Pay twice the current interest rates.

Don't blame your own poor decisions on the availability of low interest student loans. You got a subsidized liberal arts education and now you want to deny others the opportunity you wasted.

I've worked directly for the military, a state government, and as a contract employee for the Vet. Admin., and a California county. Believe me there is plenty of waste to be cut. The government just has very little incentive to cut costs.

The last place I worked (as a contract employee) was for a public hospital in Los Angeles County, and it was almost impossible for the managers to manage anything. There was really no way to either reward good employees or to punish lazy employees (the place was unionized, think of a hospital that run like the Post Office).

I will not belabor the point further, but please relook at the least of UCLA departments and honestly tell me that a good number can't be done away with. I guess you think I'm joking, but we are doing kids no favors by letting them major in Chicano Studies. Perhaps we need to invest more in trade schools. I don't know the exact answer, but I'm pretty sure the answer is not more Woman's Studies type departments.

[trish]

we are doing kids no favors by letting them major in Chicano Studies.1) What happened to freedom, liberty and individual choice? You really don't want to LET them major Chicano Studies?? 2) You don't have to major in Chicano Studies, but I would claim a liberal arts student can benefit from taking a course Chicano Studies. 3) If your goal was to use college as vocational prep, if it was your mind-set to use college as a springboard to a job, then it was pretty stupid of you major in sociology and not simultaneously prepare yourself in a related field where jobs are more plentiful and appealing to your personal palate. It was your inefficiency, your waste, not the university's or the government that aids it. Speaking of efficiency, what is it universities are inefficient doing? Are they inefficient at finding new relationships between projective geometries and quantum field theory? Are they inefficient at discovering genealogical connections between modern and ancient languages? Are they inefficient at training the best hard working minds and guiding them to the forefront of modern frontiers? Schools have a multitude of goals. Each student has their own goals. Some students apply themselves. Some get distracted. Sometimes the fit is good. In your case it evidently wasn't. So you want to double the interest rates on all student loans. Grow up and face your own failures and stop blaming them on others.

[trish]

Jimmy Fallon - Slow Jam The News with Barack Obama: Late Night with Jimmy Fallon - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAFQIciWsF4)


The Barackness Monster is smooth.

[mildcigar_2001]

The Barackness Monster is smooth.


Can you say unpresidential?

American Crossroads: "Cool" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhXGkeMdOJs)



If you are elected President you should uphold the digninty of the office. He certainly has not grown with the office. It is no wonder Bo looks nervous around him.

Here is how a President should act:

John F Kennedy 'Ask not' - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLdA1ikkoEc)

It is interesting that he is not pushing handouts as being a solution to all our problems. I'm sure he must have been a racist if he was not offering everyone in the country an EBT card.

[mildcigar_2001]

1) What happened to freedom, liberty and individual choice? You really don't want to LET them major Chicano Studies?? 2) You don't have to major in Chicano Studies, but I would claim a liberal arts student can benefit from taking a course Chicano Studies. 3) If your goal was to use college as vocational prep, if it was your mind-set to use college as a springboard to a job, then it was pretty stupid of you major in sociology and not simultaneously prepare yourself in a related field where jobs are more plentiful and appealing to your personal palate. It was your inefficiency, your waste, not the university's or the government that aids it. Speaking of efficiency, what is it universities are inefficient doing? Are they inefficient at finding new relationships between projective geometries and quantum field theory? Are they inefficient at discovering genealogical connections between modern and ancient languages? Are they inefficient at training the best hard working minds and guiding them to the forefront of modern frontiers? Schools have a multitude of goals. Each student has their own goals. Some students apply themselves. Some get distracted. Sometimes the fit is good. In your case it evidently wasn't. So you want to double the interest rates on all student loans. Grow up and face your own failures and stop blaming them on others.

The Sociology degree more or less did its job of getting me into law school, but other than that almost totally worthless. As far as Chicano Studies goes who in the world is going to hire you with a bachelors degree in that field. Not to pick on Chicano Studies there are plenty of college degrees that you can't do anything with unless you go on to graduate school. Unless one is independently wealthy one of the main points of going to college is to get a good job. My bet is that with a degree in Sociology, Women's Studies, etc. you can get the same job at Denny's both before and after graduation. Don't have people go deep in debt for degrees that have no practical use. P.S. Thankfully I was able to get the Sociology degree without debt, however the same thing can't be said of law school.

[mildcigar_2001]

An example of a talk show appearance that doesn't make one gag:

JFK on Jack Paar show, 1960 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIkZK-Z21Pw)

[trish]

The Sociology degree more or less did its job of getting me into law school, but other than that almost totally worthless. As far as Chicano Studies goes who in the world is going to hire you with a bachelors degree in that field. Not to pick on Chicano Studies there are plenty of college degrees that you can't do anything with unless you go on to graduate school. So if you're job oriented don't go for a degree in those disciplines. Simple right? You don't have to double the interest on student loans to do that. Sheesh! Just how stupid are you? Or should I ask, how racist?

[trish]

If you are elected President you should uphold the digninty of the office.This from the people who seriously considered Herman Cain. LOL Nixon, Reagan and W all appeared on comedy shows. Not only that, they humiliated themselves. Obama was smooth as ice.

[onmyknees]

Sheesh! Just how stupid are you? Or should I ask, how racist?


There is is...we have a winner !!!! ding ding ding...Come on down !!! I knew if I stuck with this thread long enough, one of you all would invoke the obligatory "racist" label. I had you as odds on favorite, but there were others close in the competition. It did take longer than I thought, but it was ultimately inevitable, as it always is. Job well done.

[Dino Velvet]

Slow Jam(2008 Edition)...

Sing for Change Obama - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TW9b0xr06qA)

[mildcigar_2001]

So if you're job oriented don't go for a degree in those disciplines. Simple right? You don't have to double the interest on student loans to do that. Sheesh! Just how stupid are you? Or should I ask, how racist?


I'm really curious how this argument is once again turning on my "racism." It seems to me that charges of racism are now a "go to" category if a colored person is losing an argument. If you argue against Obamacare then you are a racist. If you want people to show ID to vote then you are racist. If you want people not to go thousands into debt for worthless college degress then that is racist.

I just love people who are unable to argue on the facts, and then resort to name calling, i.e. you are stupid or a racist. It is a shame you can't argue the facts without becoming childish.

Another example of a dignified President:

Reagan at Brandenburg Gate - "tear down this wall" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtYdjbpBk6A)


If Obama wants to be Al Green thats fine, but don't subject the rest of the country to that.

[Dino Velvet]

Not too smooth but it was a jam...

Shame on You, Barack Obama - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_X-RoRghAY)

[trish]

There is is...we have a winner !!!! ding ding ding...Come on down !!! I knew if I stuck with this thread long enough, one of you all would invoke the obligatory "racist" label. I had you as odds on favorite, but there were others close in the competition. It did take longer than I thought, but it was ultimately inevitable, as it always is. Job well done.
Invoked nothing asshole, just asked a question. Why are you so sensitive?

[zulusierra]

..you know he still gets Michelle in doggy and slaps her ass and says take it bitch lol

After reading parts of his autobiographies and observing him on various media I get the feeling he's more into snorting a couple lines and frotting with his "mom jeans" around his ankles...:shrug

[mildcigar_2001]

Invoked nothing asshole, just asked a question. Why are you so sensitive?


Why are you so insecure that you call everyone a racist? Just because you disagree with a black person does not make you a racist. However calling everyone who disagrees with your point of view does make you a racist. Perhaps you need to go to racial sensitivity training. This is afterall a multicultural society. Or perhaps you need to change your screen name to "Trish X" to show that the Man is oppressing you. I'm sorry that life gave you a raw deal, but you need to grow up and treat others with respect even if they don't conform to your world view.

[zulusierra]

=Stavros;1131795
Education is a right, not a privilege.

Is it actually a right in the UK, or are you saying it should be?

Being an Americunt, I'm not familiar with your constitution.

[buttslinger]

I'll say it! cigar and kness are lying rascists. he he he. I don't care if you deny it a thousand times. You can't bullshit a bullshitter. You guys should have wasted your money on some racist-homophobe classes at USC. Why are you guys wasting your time on a site that is so obviously made for non-Republicans? Don't you know your redneck buddies would blast you if they knew you were here? Livin' a lie, fellas???

[zulusierra]

That feel when I graduate Saturday with a Bachelors in Biology(major)/Philosophy(minor) paid for by to the American taxpayer via the G.I. Bill and V.A. Vocational Rehab for serving 4 years in the Marines...

http://i.imgur.com/qZ0OH.gif

People should have to do a period of some sort of public service for educational assistance funded by taxpayers.

There are myriad ways the country could use young people willing to sacrifice a couple years to earn an education (not just military).

[mildcigar_2001]

That feel when I graduate Saturday with a Bachelors in Biology(major)/Philosophy(minor) paid for by to the American taxpayer via the G.I. Bill and V.A. Vocational Rehab for serving 4 years in the Marines...

http://i.imgur.com/qZ0OH.gif

People should have to do a period of some sort of public service for educational assistance funded by taxpayers.

There are myriad ways the country could use young people willing to sacrifice a couple years to earn an education (not just military).

Under Obama it is now ask what your country can do for you, not what you can do for your country. Under Obama they are asking for a handout not a hand.

Real Time with Bill Maher March 16 2012 - Alexandra Pelosi Interviews Welfare Recipients in NYC - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2kGPdxkofo)

[trish]

Why are you so insecure that you call everyone a racist?Wrong again, I only asked if you were being racist. Again, why so sensitive? Do you get accused of that a lot? I know it tough. Used to be a badge of honor. Now you have deny it in public and then in private roll around in it. Have a nice doggy evening.

[trish]

Taking out a loan and paying it back with interest is not public assistance. But if you're suggesting one could perhaps forgo the loan entirely and "pay" for one's education by a few years of public assistance, it sounds like a workable idea. I'm sure there are some though who would call it socialist.

[zulusierra]

Taking out a loan and paying it back with interest is not public assistance. But if you're suggesting one could perhaps forgo the loan entirely and "pay" for one's education by a few years of public assistance, it sounds like a workable idea. I'm sure there are some though who would call it socialist.


I don't know enough about the way student loan rules are structured to have an informed opinion that issue.

As for the part in red, that's exactly what I'm suggesting. A sense of ownership in ones country. A feeling of "I helped build that road". Being part of a team providing a valuable service for my fellow citizens.

I don't see anything wrong with that. The taxpayers get a service up-front, and receive more tax revenue and societal participation over time from the better educated citizen with "skin in the game" so to speak.

I am totally against compulsory service in any form (military draft, Americorps, etc...) however.

[BluegrassCat]

Under Obama it is now ask what your country can do for you, not what you can do for your country. Under Obama they are asking for a handout not a hand.


Simply ridiculous assertion based on nothing.

Obama saying you can get college in exchange for service:

"Scholarships to every young person in America who wants to go to college in exchange for community service"
http://www.hark.com/clips/xnsqdkljlp-scholarships-for-service

[runningdownthatdream]

Why are you so insecure that you call everyone a racist? Just because you disagree with a black person does not make you a racist. However calling everyone who disagrees with your point of view does make you a racist. Perhaps you need to go to racial sensitivity training. This is afterall a multicultural society. Or perhaps you need to change your screen name to "Trish X" to show that the Man is oppressing you. I'm sorry that life gave you a raw deal, but you need to grow up and treat others with respect even if they don't conform to your world view.

Asking to treat others with respect when you post the rubbish you have posted in this thread masquerading as jokes? You must be that jackass OMK's twin - are you on your knees too?

[Stavros]

Another example of a dignified President:

Reagan at Brandenburg Gate - "tear down this wall" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtYdjbpBk6A)



This is the same man who used narco-terrorists to undermine a democratically elected government in Nicaragua, and who never once had the 'dignity' to go to Saudi Arabia and condemn the autocratic rule of one family and make a plea for democracy and freedom there. The same man who lacked dignity or indeed the responsibility of his office when he refused to stand up for American citizens murdered in El Salvador. The same man who bankrupted the USA in his reckless need to enrich the rich through insane tax cuts, and out-spend the USSR on arms; the same 'dignified' man who bankrolled the 'Islamic' Military dictator Zia of Pakistan and through its collusion with Saudi Arabia paved the way for the growth of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. And wasn't it this man's wife whose faux pas at a Chicago fund-raiser led her to remark on how good it was to look out on an audience and see "all these beautiful white faces"?

Student loans are a curse, on both sides of the Atlantic.

[robertlouis]

This is the same man who used narco-terrorists to undermine a democratically elected government in Nicaragua, and who never once had the 'dignity' to go to Saudi Arabia and condemn the autocratic rule of one family and make a plea for democracy and freedom there. The same man who lacked dignity or indeed the responsibility of his office when he refused to stand up for American citizens murdered in El Salvador. The same man who bankrupted the USA in his reckless need to enrich the rich through insane tax cuts, and out-spend the USSR on arms; the same 'dignified' man who bankrolled the 'Islamic' Military dictator Zia of Pakistan and through its collusion with Saudi Arabia paved the way for the growth of al-Qaeda in Afghanistan. And wasn't it this man's wife whose faux pas at a Chicago fund-raiser led her to remark on how good it was to look out on an audience and see "all these beautiful white faces"?

Student loans are a curse, on both sides of the Atlantic.

:iagree::iagree::iagree: Perfectly put, Stavros. The reverence in which Americans hold Reagan is simply baffling when so many scandals and horrors happened on his watch. Politically, he represents the ultimate triumph of show over substance, and we've been dealing with that legacy on both sides of the Atlantic ever since.

[TheGeneral]

No one talks about how poverty grew at an alarming rate under Reagan. Folks want to pretend he was Jesus. He was in a ton of scandals and raised taxes. Go Figure. Jesus wouldn't raise taxes, lol

[mildcigar_2001]

:iagree::iagree::iagree: Perfectly put, Stavros. The reverence in which Americans hold Reagan is simply baffling when so many scandals and horrors happened on his watch. Politically, he represents the ultimate triumph of show over substance, and we've been dealing with that legacy on both sides of the Atlantic ever since.


Yes it is very baffling to leftists that we hold a President in esteem, who stood up to the Soviet Union (the evil empire, the Soviets even put the Nazis to shame in killing their own population). Leftists are always very happy when a weak sister like Carter or Obama is in office actively harming the country's interests.

Normandy Speech: Ceremony Commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the Normandy Invasion, D-Day 6/6/84 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEIqdcHbc8I)

[Merkurie]

Remind me what Ronald Reagan did during the War?

That's right he played the role of an officer in the movies.

[mildcigar_2001]

Obama is so smooth, he even helps with the dishes.

Evidentially these are being sold in the UK (for some reason).

[buttslinger]

Reagan was a Union Buster. At the end of his term he had Alzheimers and no-one noticed. Company Man. Nancy was a bitch.

[mildcigar_2001]

Reagan was a Union Buster.

Dude, this is a positive trait. As you may remember he fired the illegally striking air traffic controllers. This in turn helped convince the Russians that he had some spine. I’m all for the right to unionize within the private sector (and they are free to strike), but if you work for the government that is a different matter.

Remarks and Q & A with reporters on the Air Traffic Controllers (PATCO) strike - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3ZTCPJ39LA)

[Stavros]

Yes it is very baffling to leftists that we hold a President in esteem, who stood up to the Soviet Union (the evil empire, the Soviets even put the Nazis to shame in killing their own population). Leftists are always very happy when a weak sister like Carter or Obama is in office actively harming the country's interests.

Normandy Speech: Ceremony Commemorating the 40th Anniversary of the Normandy Invasion, D-Day 6/6/84 - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEIqdcHbc8I)

The point is that there are ways of assessing a Presidency, and yours is more biased than most, so I consider my own response was a balancing act: I know quite well how popular Reagan was, it is not in doubt, his election results proved it. There is also the compelling argument that in his second term he was more willing to do deals with the USSR than his advisers, and that it was this transformation of Reagan into a 'weak sister' that created the Neo-Cons: Kristol, Richard Pearle and the other founders of the Project for a New American Century to ensure that the next Republican President would not become a 'weak sister' but walk tall and carry a big stick.

Yes, Reagan got historic arms reduction agreements from Gorbachev, but by that time the USSR was in its death-throes anyway. Your 'weak sister' was 'standing up' to a failed state, it failed in Afghanistan, it failed in Poland, it failed in its own back yard. When I was active on the left in the UK, nobody I knew had any illusions about the USSR and it was an open secret that the Communist Party of Great Britain was financially corrupt even if the full details did not emerge until after 1989. There was a Trotskyist called Hillel Ticktin who used to write articles [mostly in a journal called Critique] on what a dump the USSR was and why it didn't work and was destined to collapse -nobody took any notice, but it was just one among many examples of a 'Leftist' who had no starry eyed romantic ideas about the USSR, whereas you seem to have such a glorious vision of Ronald Reagan -whose faults, in my opinion, outstripped whatever positives he had. You are still living with his legacy; just as we are living with the legacy of Margaret Thatcher in the UK.

Looked at in the context of their times, Carter was a better President than Reagan, in fact one of the finest Presidents of the 20th century, and certainly one of the most decent and honourable.

[buttslinger]

Hoover
Eisenhower
Nixon, Agnew
Ford
Reagan
Bush, Quayle
Bush, Cheney
Williard Mitt Etch-a-Sketch Romney(loser with money)

[stimpy17]

Reagan was a Union Buster. At the end of his term he had Alzheimers and no-one noticed. Company Man. Nancy was a bitch.

Wow BS your smooth too!!!!!!!

[yodajazz]

Reagan's greatest legacy was his ratcheting up of the "War on Drugs". There is no proof other than testimony, that the CIA, imported cocaine to fund the illegal war on democratic Nicaraugua. However many people believe this to be true, as the spread of the crack epidemic coincided with the war. What is easily documentable, is the amount of new laws, introduced, such as the expansion of minimum sentencing requirements for drug offences. The harsher sentencing for crack vs powder cocaine directly targeted the Black community. So the suburban user of powder, would have to 100 times the amount of the urban 'rock' form, to have the same prison sentence. Reagan's crack down was intrumental in making the US the world largest prison population. It is true, the following presidents continued those policies. But given Reagan's public stance on drugs, it is ironic that the CIA continued to support Manual Noriega, the Panama dictator, who was finally arreasted for major drug dealing the year after Reagan left office (1989), and sentenced to 45 years. Reagan's administration used Noriega as a go between in support of its war against the Nicarauguan goverment. So harsher punishments effecting the Black community, while protecing others from punishment. Was Reagan's achievment, that still has great repercussions today.

Here is a reference article to my facts.
War on Drugs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_on_Drugs)

[buttslinger]

Cool-Not Cool

[mildcigar_2001]

You are right, Obama is so suave.

[talldudeil]

He has a sexy voice..Michelle must love it..you know he still gets Michelle in doggy and slaps her ass and says take it bitch lol


I bet she is a bitch who would take the beating and then go get him a beer after.

[fred41]

I bet she is a bitch who would take the beating and then go get him a beer after.

lol...they're marriage is heading for the 20 year mark...if you believe any of that, you've never been married.

[Ben]

The problem with the so-called left. When Bush carried out drone strikes they denounced him. When Obama does it, well, they're silent....
If it was wrong under Bush it should be wrong under Obama....

Jeff Morley and Thom Hartmann discuss "the drone surge" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzWtBQBF-Uc&feature=relmfu)

[Ben]

Former CIA Director Against Drone Strikes - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URl61u2D-kA)

[buttslinger]

My guess is that Obama is transitioning from our stategy of driving around in circles getting hit by IEDs to putting a big intelligence umbrella over the whole region. And that will be the US position for .....forever. Hopefully.
Ben: What would you do if you were Obama?

[catherinefan]

My guess is that Obama is transitioning from our stategy of driving around in circles getting hit by IEDs to putting a big intelligence umbrella over the whole region. And that will be the US position for .....forever. Hopefully.

Sure, that way terrorism will also stay with us........forever. A balanced policy would do much more to create peace. But it's unlikely that the US will ever adopt one. Too much lobbying going on all the time.

[buttslinger]

No COUNTRY will ever declare war on the United States.
It is the Human Rights Advocate's job to make people aware of crimes against Humanity going on in the World. It is the Republican's job to criticize the President no matter what he does. It is Obama's job to actually be responsible for everything that goes on in the Middle East.
As Official Advisor to the President, I would advise him to build a couple AFB CITIES in Afghanistan and Iraq, that have tentacles that reach out from Pakistan to Palestine. Drones, CIA, spies, sattelites, DEA, Hillary, and a place to train troops in real situations, test new military equipment, and REMIND any serious terrorist groups that we LIKE chasing their ass. If you build a million dollar Mansion, you need to figure in the price of a big fence, and keep it maintained. Before 9-11 the US policy was to basically hope none of that hell would find it's way over here. That policy is over. What would you have Obama do? Ignore them?

[catherinefan]

No COUNTRY will ever declare war on the United States.
It is the Human Rights Advocate's job to make people aware of crimes against Humanity going on in the World. It is the Republican's job to criticize the President no matter what he does. It is Obama's job to actually be responsible for everything that goes on in the Middle East.
As Official Advisor to the President, I would advise him to build a couple AFB CITIES in Afghanistan and Iraq, that have tentacles that reach out from Pakistan to Palestine. Drones, CIA, spies, sattelites, DEA, Hillary, and a place to train troops in real situations, test new military equipment, and REMIND any serious terrorist groups that we LIKE chasing their ass. If you build a million dollar Mansion, you need to figure in the price of a big fence, and keep it maintained. Before 9-11 the US policy was to basically hope none of that hell would find it's way over here. That policy is over. What would you have Obama do? Ignore them?

No country will ever declare war on the United States? But isn't declaring war on other nations not just a US hobby?

As for what I would have Obama do? I would love to see the US get out of our back yard. Agression has never solved anything.

[Ben]

Will Prez Obama support Gay Marriage before or after Nov election? - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss7VlQcFP50&list=UUY8x1K2FMBw-jm-WCPbcHEg&index=2&feature=plcp)

[loveboof]

No COUNTRY will ever declare war on the United States.

That seems fairly short-sighted. It's happened before, it can happen again.

[buttslinger]

Once again, our Commander-in-Chief has laid his balls on the table. In support those who dare fall in love. Romney, meanwhile, is on the phone asking what this means.

On my knees, yes, I'll mar:fuckin:ry you.......

[onmyknees]

Once again, our Commander-in-Chief has laid his balls on the table. In support those who dare fall in love. Romney, meanwhile, is on the phone asking what this means.

On my knees, yes, I'll mar:fuckin:ry you.......


LMFAO....you call that set up interview laying his balls on the table????? John Stewert isn't even buying that one. Man...you really are a sycophant , aren't you? Here's the reality ....his position was "evolving" for 3 1/2 years until he was forced out of the closet by Joe Biden. Note the political timing Einstein between the Biden revelation, and Barry's set up interview..... Joe Biden may be the dumbest guy on the planet, but he's the one who laid his balls on the table...not Barry. If you think Obama wanted this coming out party with 7 key swing states voting against gay marriage, you're incredibly naive...with all due respect.

And the problem with guys like you is not your position on gay marriage.....I think most can respect that even though they don't agree....but guys like you are never willing to extend that same respect to those with opposing views. Rather than try to convince them, you'd rather bash them over the head with pejoratives, which is probably a large reason why 41 States have laws defining marriage between a man and a woman, and 30 States have voted that way on referendum. It's hard to bring someone around to your opinion while you're disparaging and disrespecting them. Witness West Virginia.


And here's an my take on the whole Osama thing....In the ad that Slick Willie made in an attempt to use the killing of Bin Laden for political gain ( which is fine by me, btw) Clinton says "suppose the Navy Seals had been captured or killed...the downside would have been horrible for HIM" (meaning Obama) ....Interesting take on the political risks, but what about the killed or captured Seals? Think it might have just been a little horrible for them too? It's always about Obama.

[Ben]

A big day for civil rights (http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/a_big_day_for_civil_rights/singleton/)

President Obama's gay marriage support carries political risk, but he had no moral choice

By Joan Walsh (http://www.salon.com/writer/joan_walsh/)

http://media.salon.com/2012/05/obama_joan-460x307.jpg

Make no mistake: President Obama’s decision to publicly endorse gay marriage carries serious political risk, though also moral reward. Every state gay-marriage ban referendum has passed, except one in Arizona that was rewritten and adopted on a second try. And in swing states, from North Carolina (which just banned both marriage and civil unions Tuesday) to Nevada to Virginia, the president’s stance could cost him votes.
The latest Gallup poll shows that public opinion has gotten a little cooler toward gay marriage in just the last year, though most Americans support it. The sad truth is, most Americans may back it, but those who oppose it have been far more motivated to cast votes based on their animus, so far anyway.
That said, it was the right and necessary thing for the president to do. Future generations will look back and wonder what took him so long. The president believes in the saying attributed Martin Luther King Jr., that “the arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” Despite his too-slow “evolution” on gay marriage, Obama knows the arc bends faster when we pull on it, and today he gave it a good tug.
Like Vice President Joe Biden (http://www.salon.com/2012/05/06/let_biden_be_biden/), who clearly deserves credit for accelerating this public “evolution,” Obama cast his decision in personal terms, telling ABC’s Robin Roberts:
I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.
Cynics are already saying that Obama’s decision is pegged to big fundraisers in Hollywood and New York over the next few days. I honestly think the risk is higher than the reward, and the president made a personal decision. “I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married” isn’t the most stirring call to justice, but it sounds honest to me.
I remember thinking Mayor Gavin Newsom was doing a politically dangerous thing when he began marrying couples at San Francisco City Hall in 2003. Then I went and watched the weddings – and I was converted to the notion that there can be no compromise on marriage rights. Fellow Democrats blamed Newsom for costing John Kerry the election the next November, and no one can say for certain that he didn’t. Karl Rove surely used gay marriage as a wedge issue in 2004, pushing ballot initiatives in swing states to beef up the GOP’s Christian right turnout. And yet once I saw real individuals joyous at their weddings – and later crushed when the wedding spree was ended by the courts – it became impossible for me to suggest they have to wait because the country isn’t ready to give them equal rights. After he signed the Civil Rights Act, Lyndon Johnson famously told Bill Moyers “we just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come.”
But no person of conscience would today suggest Johnson did the wrong thing. “I had assumed that civil unions might have been enough,” Obama told Roberts. He did not say how long ago he realized he was wrong; it’s enough that he realized it today.
By all accounts Joe Biden did bend the arc of justice a little, with what are being called spontaneous and unplanned remarks on “Meet the Press” Sunday supporting gay marriage. The Catholic Biden, like Obama, put his evolution in very personal terms. “The good news is that as more and more Americans come to understand what this is all about is a simple proposition. Who do you love?” he told David Gregory. “Who do you love and will you be loyal to the person you love? And that’s what people are finding out what all marriages at their root are about.”
Whether they are marriages of lesbians or gay men or heterosexuals. Jay Carney faced 50 gay-marriage questions in Monday’s briefing, after Secretary of Education Arne Duncan joined Biden in supporting gay marriage on “Morning Joe.” The White House’s brief effort to deny the importance of Biden’s statement was futile and they wisely dropped it. Then they did more than that – they endorsed it.
Obama’s move may be less risky than it feels right now: Public Policy Polling has found that folks who oppose gay marriage already think the president supports it, anyway. African-Americans are less likely to support gay marriage than other groups, yet it’s hard to imagine Obama’s stance depressing black support for him given everything else that’s at stake in 2012.
I also want to say a word on behalf of the advocacy community that pushed the president to take this step – even as fervent Obama supporters insisted they were dooming the president’s reelection bid with their demands. Activists and agitators make history. Leaders rarely move to claim risky but necessary territory on their own. Congratulations to all the voices who made this happen – and to the president, who must be relieved to be able to say publicly what we’ve known he’s believed privately for a long time.

[buttslinger]

guys like you are never willing to extend that same respect to those with opposing views


51% of Americans should not quote morals to 49% of Americans.
It's not ALL about Obama. I don't want a Goddam Etch-a-Sketch liar repeating the Bush years. Tell me one difference between Romney and Bush.

[loveboof]

Tell me one difference between Romney and Bush.

Romney is a mormon.

(hmm, did I put too many M's in there... ?)

[Ben]

Romney is a mormon.

(hmm, did I put too many M's in there... ?)

I think if Romney were, say, running as an Independent, as it were, he could be fairly moderate. He is NOT a social conservative. But he has to appeal to the Republican base.
So, the problem is he has to appeal to a lot of religious crazies in the Republican Party. He has to placate them. Ya know, those who believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible, those who are steadfastly opposed to gay marriage and abortion etc. etc. etc.
And he can't control them....
Obama and Romney have a lot of similitudes. Where do they part ways? Your guess is as good as mine.
I mean, on a simplistic level: every president has to appease international money markets.
There's what's called a virtual senate. Whereby investors and lenders take a moment by moment referendum on government policy. And if they view government policy as irrational -- meaning: caring about the people -- they simply attack the currency by capital flight... :) :) :)

[Ben]

guys like you are never willing to extend that same respect to those with opposing views


51% of Americans should not quote morals to 49% of Americans.
It's not ALL about Obama. I don't want a Goddam Etch-a-Sketch liar repeating the Bush years.

Tell me one difference between Romney and Bush.

Quoting, at fair length, from the American journalist Chris Floyd: "Both parties support empire, militarism, corporatism, exceptionalism, oligarchy, executive tyranny, torture and the shielding of torturers, indefinite detention, extrajudicial killing, regime change (covert, overt, by proxy), special ops, black ops, rendition, the drug war (http://harpers.org/archive/2012/05/hbc-90008595), the terror war, undeclared war, war crimes, the relentless expansion of the "National Security" apparatus, the militarization of police powers, slashing the social safety net, serving the needs of Wall Street and the One Percent, and so on and on and on."

http://www.chris-floyd.com/

[robertlouis]

And the problem with guys like you is not your position on gay marriage.....I think most can respect that even though they don't agree....but guys like you are never willing to extend that same respect to those with opposing views. Rather than try to convince them, you'd rather bash them over the head with pejoratives, which is probably a large reason why 41 States have laws defining marriage between a man and a woman, and 30 States have voted that way on referendum. It's hard to bring someone around to your opinion while you're disparaging and disrespecting them. Witness West Virginia.




Hell, omk, stop being reasonable and sane, it's really doing my head in lol.

And I agree with you on Obama's position, damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. On the other hand, during the Civil War, it was political and military calculation rather than moral principle which finally stirred Lincoln into making the emancipation proclamation, and while that was couched deliberately in ways to ensure that it's primary impact would fall on areas controlled by the south, in the end the results were profound and and immensely effective.

Maybe a pragmatic response to finding himself forced into a corner might have the same effect for Obama. Let's wait and see.

It's the middle of the night here, but let's hold further comment until we see what Fox and the main spokesmen of the GOP have to say on the subject before passing premature judgement - something all of us here are just too damn good at. :wiggle:

[buttslinger]

so on and on and on.

While to most people, the difference between Obama and Romney is like the difference between Country and Rock, behind the scenes there are plenty of differences. Like the difference between Ginsberg and Scalia, National Healthcare, War, Hurricanes, Brownies, Oil companies, the Future of all mankind. Have you forgotten Dick Cheney?

[robertlouis]

Have you forgotten Dick Cheney?


Mephistopheles himself.

[BluegrassCat]

And the problem with guys like you is not your position on gay marriage.....I think most can respect that even though they don't agree....but guys like you are never willing to extend that same respect to those with opposing views. Rather than try to convince them, you'd rather bash them over the head with pejoratives, which is probably a large reason why 41 States have laws defining marriage between a man and a woman, and 30 States have voted that way on referendum. It's hard to bring someone around to your opinion while you're disparaging and disrespecting them. Witness West Virginia.


LMFAO! Everyone knew knees would have to find a way to attack the president on this but he chose a pretty hilariously stupid way.

Right, the reason so many states have passed marriage amendments is not because they want to deny civil rights to a minority of Americans that do icky things in the bedroom, no, no, not that, it's because us libruls didn't say please. GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK! In fact, in the 60's white Southerners actually would have been happy to extend civil rights to blacks, they totally wanted to, but those damn civil rights activists were just so damn pushy and kept insisting they were right that the Southerners had to literally let the dogs out (Mitt knows what I'm saying, woof woof!) and let the firehoses out and the billy clubs.

Yup, the problem is not intolerance, it's the uppity fags who demand their rights before we're comfortable. What about my feelings? I mean, it's your life but if it grosses me out to imagine you fucking, shouldn't I able to vote to take away your rights?

[Prospero]

Pure homophobia is why those states voted against gay partnerships. And I'm afraid there are many religious bigots who promote this hatred of gays for their "unnatural" practices etc. After all its in the book. It takes a long time for people to overcome inbred and religiously fostered prejudices. Devout Muslems and Christians share this hatred of gay and transgendered people.

I do actually agree with OMK re the president on this. It was Joe Biden who had the guts to go public and this put the president in a position where he'd no choice but to say publicly what he may have privately felt for a long time. It may cause him some political damage. But equally some equivocating Middle ground voters may swing behind him on the issue.

The notion that the liberals should have been more polite to southern bigots is just ludicrous.

And re Hilary and the killing of Bin Laden. Well she was responding to a question about the political impact on the President - not the impact on the lives of the Seals and their families. So it is dishonest to use this to hammer Obama.

[Nicole Dupre]

LMFAO! Everyone knew knees would have to find a way to attack the president on this but he chose a pretty hilariously stupid way.

Right, the reason so many states have passed marriage amendments is not because they want to deny civil rights to a minority of Americans that do icky things in the bedroom, no, no, not that, it's because us libruls didn't say please. GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK! In fact, in the 60's white Southerners actually would have been happy to extend civil rights to blacks, they totally wanted to, but those damn civil rights activists were just so damn pushy and kept insisting they were right that the Southerners had to literally let the dogs out (Mitt knows what I'm saying, woof woof!) and let the firehoses out and the billy clubs.

Yup, the problem is not intolerance, it's the uppity fags who demand their rights before we're comfortable. What about my feelings? I mean, it's your life but if it grosses me out to imagine you fucking, shouldn't I able to vote to take away your rights?
This.^

Fuck this "extending respect" bullshit. What kind of ass-kissy nonsense is that? It's no one's business, it never was, and it never will be. Christianity is a glorified cult with no basis in reality anyway. Waiting for these simpletons to become "comfortable" with something is a waste of precious time. And Obama can "evolve" all he likes. But it's none of his business either. If you're against gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. It's pretty simple. No one tells these rednecks and hillbillies that they can't marry their underage cousins. So let them learn to mind their own business.

[buttslinger]

As the first black president, Obama has to be right on everything. Not now. 50 years from now. He's sowing seeds. For National Healthcare, he has taken the first step. For LGTB rights, he has taken the first step. Fifty years from now he will be looked back at as a visionary, because all the kids are cool with homos and healthcare is going to become more and more a cost issue, and we can't afford free service to every family that shows up with a sick kid to the hospital with no insurance. You can't have half the country with no credit.
You could not have found a better first black president than Barrack H Obama. Not even casting "24" .....He has to pull it off. He needs perfect perspective on everything, simply because he is the first black president.
You cannot get so far ahead of the parade that you can't hear the music. It's important that the Democrats can point to the Republicans as the BAD guys. No matter what party you're in, We, the people need to point the finger at someone, to shift any wrongdoing off ourselves.

[txjr3]

:fu:
As the first black president, Obama has to be right on everything. Not now. 50 years from now. He's sowing seeds. For National Healthcare, he has taken the first step. For LGTB rights, he has taken the first step. Fifty years from now he will be looked back at as a visionary, because all the kids are cool with homos and healthcare is going to become more and more a cost issue, and we can't afford free service to every family that shows up with a sick kid to the hospital with no insurance. You can't have half the country with no credit.
You could not have found a better first black president than Barrack H Obama. Not even casting "24" .....He has to pull it off. He needs perfect perspective on everything, simply because he is the first black president.
You cannot get so far ahead of the parade that you can't hear the music. It's important that the Democrats can point to the Republicans as the BAD guys. No matter what party you're in, We, the people need to point the finger at someone, to shift any wrongdoing off ourselves.

:fu: I'm pointing this finger at Nth Carolina!

[Ben]

Romney: Gay couples should have right to adopt...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/romney-gay-couples-should-have-right-to-adopt/2012/05/10/gIQArjAVGU_blog.html

Obama “evolves” on marriage (http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/e_3/singleton/):

http://www.salon.com/2012/05/09/e_3/singleton/

[Ben]

This.^

Fuck this "extending respect" bullshit. What kind of ass-kissy nonsense is that? It's no one's business, it never was, and it never will be. Christianity is a glorified cult with no basis in reality anyway. Waiting for these simpletons to become "comfortable" with something is a waste of precious time. And Obama can "evolve" all he likes. But it's none of his business either. If you're against gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. It's pretty simple. No one tells these rednecks and hillbillies that they can't marry their underage cousins. So let them learn to mind their own business.

I agree: "... don't marry a gay person." :)
But it's important, I think, that the President of the United States comes out in favor of gay marriage.
It's a very big and positive step.
And, too, Romney has taken a stand:
Mitt Romney opposes same-sex marriage‎ (May 9, 2012) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUaJgf_D31I)

[Ben]

Obama, as a tactician, wants to appeal to libertarians with respect to gay marriage. (Albeit libertarians want government out of marriage.)

Libertarian David Boaz on Gay Marriage - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXrUdgTMG4E)

[Nicole Dupre]

I agree: "... don't marry a gay person." :)
But it's important, I think, that the President of the United States comes out in favor of gay marriage.
It's a very big and positive step.

It's very important and long overdue. And ultimately it will be helpful for transsexuals as well.

[Ben]

It's very important and long overdue. And ultimately it will be helpful for transsexuals as well.

It's good for transsexuals. It's good for the country. It's historic.

[Ben]

White House Nixes Executive Order Prohibiting LGBT Discrimination By Federal Contractors: (http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/04/12/white-house-nixes-executive-order-prohibiting-lgbt-discrimination-by-federal-contractors/)

http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/04/12/white-house-nixes-executive-order-prohibiting-lgbt-discrimination-by-federal-contractors/

[robertlouis]

Obama, as a tactician, wants to appeal to libertarians with respect to gay marriage. (Albeit libertarians want government out of marriage.)

Libertarian David Boaz on Gay Marriage - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aXrUdgTMG4E)

Just how big is the libertarian constituency, Ben? Big enough to make a difference, or is it just to fill a small gap in the big tent?

I doubt if it impinged that much on Obama's thinking.

[Ben]

Quoting blogger Glenn Greenwald on President Obama: "He engineered the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. His Justice Department is refusing to defend the constitutionality of DOMA in court, a very unusual step. He has ushered in a series of important federal spousal benefits for gay employees of the federal government. And now, for the first time, the office of the American President is officially supporting a policy that a mere decade ago was deemed truly radical: same-sex marriage. Those are real achievements."

http://www.salon.com/writer/glenn_greenwald/

[Ben]

Just how big is the libertarian constituency, Ben? Big enough to make a difference, or is it just to fill a small gap in the big tent?

I doubt if it impinged that much on Obama's thinking.

How big?????? Hard to say. But the established libertarian movement over here leans to the right. Not the left.
One should note that there's a distinction between left-leaning libertarians like Noam Chomsky and right-leaning libertarians like Ron Paul.
But left-leaning libertarians don't get any, say, widespread press.... I mean, one would conclude that libertarians lean exclusively to the right.
This isn't true.
Here we go. Ol' wikipedia -- :)

Left-libertarianism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism

[Ben]

Obama Endorses Marriage Equality…But Not for All:

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/05/obama-endorses-marriage-equality-federalism

[robertlouis]

I agree: "... don't marry a gay person." :)
But it's important, I think, that the President of the United States comes out in favor of gay marriage.
It's a very big and positive step.
And, too, Romney has taken a stand:
Mitt Romney opposes same-sex marriage‎ (May 9, 2012) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUaJgf_D31I)

Interesting, although it came across as more a quick reaction than a constructed policy statement.

But with Romney and his record, is his response:

a) personal belief

b) political calculation for his core constituency

c) another flip-flop.

Only he knows.

[robertlouis]

How big?????? Hard to say. But the established libertarian movement over here leans to the right. Not the left.
One should note that there's a distinction between left-leaning libertarians like Noam Chomsky and right-leaning libertarians like Ron Paul.
But left-leaning libertarians don't get any, say, widespread press.... I mean, one would conclude that libertarians lean exclusively to the right.
This isn't true.
Here we go. Ol' wikipedia -- :)

Left-libertarianism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-libertarianism

Thanks Ben. Interesting. But I'd reckon that the differences of opinion, if not of principle, between libertarians of left and right, are so enormous that giving them the same title is wildly misleading

[robertlouis]

Sums it up pretty well. It will change. Some people will always oppose it, but it will change in time.

And this is a historic moment to remember.

[Ben]

Thanks Ben. Interesting. But I'd reckon that the differences of opinion, if not of principle, between libertarians of left and right, are so enormous that giving them the same title is wildly misleading

Yeah. And left-libertarianism thinks that people should control their own labor. Ya know, the people who work in the mills should own the mills. Noam Chomsky has also talked about nature having rights. (I mean, this is why the corporate press doesn't give them much, if any, attention. Because, in part, left-leaning libertarianism is to the left of so-called progressives and social democrats.) I mean, why should nature have rights, eh? ha ha ha!
So, the natural world should have rights and animals should have rights and the animals in forests should have the right to live in those forests. (Actually, to underscore a crucial point: we often talk about how Native Indians/Americans were here first. Actually, that isn't entirely true. Bears, wolves, salmon, frogs etc., etc., etc., etc. were here first. And shouldn't they have rights? What about an actual forest? I mean, these are questions that never arise?
And that, too, extends to future generations. When we swat a mosquito that's a value judgement. We're saying the mosquito has no value. So, we, collectively, are saying future generations have no value because of what we're doing with respect to global warming.)
So, left-leaning libertarianism isn't exclusively business-based. They pose a lot more fundamental questions.
Questions seemingly ignored by most people and, of course, the mainstream/corporate press. Which is understandable. Because it isn't in their interests to talk about the rights of nature....

[robertlouis]

Yeah. And left-libertarianism thinks that people should control their own labor. Ya know, the people who work in the mills should own the mills. Noam Chomsky has also talked about nature having rights. (I mean, this is why the corporate press doesn't give them much, if any, attention. Because, in part, left-leaning libertarianism is to the left of so-called progressives and social democrats.) I mean, why should nature have rights, eh? ha ha ha!
So, the natural world should have rights and animals should have rights and the animals in forests should have the right to live in those forests. (Actually, to underscore a crucial point: we often talk about how Native Indians/Americans were here first. Actually, that isn't entirely true. Bears, wolves, salmon, frogs etc., etc., etc., etc. were here first. And shouldn't they have rights? What about an actual forest? I mean, these are questions that never arise?
And that, too, extends to future generations. When we swat a mosquito that's a value judgement. We're saying the mosquito has no value. So, we, collectively, are saying future generations have no value because of what we're doing with respect to global warming.)
So, left-leaning libertarianism isn't exclusively business-based. They pose a lot more fundamental questions.
Questions seemingly ignored by most people and, of course, the mainstream/corporate press. Which is understandable. Because it isn't in their interests to talk about the rights of nature....

So the Libertarians have their roots in the Diggers of 17th century England. Winstanley lives on!

As a trivial aside, Ben, you know my views on the attractions or otherwise of Derrick Barry, but I must say that your current avatar is the first pic I've seen where I've actually thought, "I very well might, you know....." lol.

[Ben]

Former VP Dick Cheney on gay marriage:

Dick Cheney on Same-Sex Marriage - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5jefmsqBG8)

[Ben]

Author and blogger Glenn Greenwald puts it perfectly: "The President is not Our Father; he’s a politician who, like all people wielding political power, is in great need of constant critical scrutiny and adversarial checks — from all citizens, but especially media figures. Relating to him as some kind of guiding paternalistic authority is, I’m sorry to say, really quite warped. But it’s far from uncommon, and that explains a lot."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTQawLBC59g&feature=player_embedded#!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xdf4uYnMmkg&feature=player_embedded#!

[Ben]

Ashton Kutcher's Creepy Pledge - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTQawLBC59g)

Pledging to be a Servant - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xdf4uYnMmkg)

[Ben]

Author and blogger Glenn Greenwald puts it perfectly: "The President is not Our Father; he’s a politician who, like all people wielding political power, is in great need of constant critical scrutiny and adversarial checks — from all citizens, but especially media figures. Relating to him as some kind of guiding paternalistic authority is, I’m sorry to say, really quite warped. But it’s far from uncommon, and that explains a lot."

Another interesting quote from economist Paul Krugman: "... by the way, the idea of Obama as somebody who governs from the left.... I mean, Obama’s positions are those of a moderate Republican circa 1992. He’s not a leftist. What’s happening now is you have a radical-right Republic Party."

[Ben]

Colin Powell Rejects Hannity's Claims; Favors Gay Marriage - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TE9lZ4REo0c&feature=plcp)

[Ben]

Judge Napolitano on Obama's Secret "Kill List" - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lmk5S6YFTLg&feature=related)

President Obama's Kill List - Alyona Minkovski - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdaIpyIX0tY&feature=plcp)

[Ben]

Interesting article from 2008: "Wall Street puts its money behind Obama."
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2008/06/05/analysis-shares-obama-idUKNOA53525520080605

I consider myself of the so-called left. And we must understand that both parties are subservient to Wall Street and Big Business.
The Dems do not, contrary to leftist belief, serve the interests of ordinary Americans: small business owners, carpenters, electricians, teachers.... I mean, it's time to wake up and smell the cappuccino -- ha, ha! :)

And:
White House visitor logs provide window into lobbying industry:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/white-house-visitor-logs-show-lobbying-going-strong/2012/05/20/gIQA2ok4dU_story.html

[yourdaddy]

You children got hood-winked by the liberal press failing to properly vett the least prepared and least qualified candidate in modern times.

The business of America is business. No one close to "his narcissist" has ever been exposed to making a living except through big government.

The unions will go down this week in Wisconsin and again in November.

[buttslinger]

You children got hood-winked by the liberal press failing to properly vett the least prepared and least qualified candidate in modern times.The unions will go down this week in Wisconsin and again in November.

Cape Fear Laughing - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rm81LSKJC2k)

[trish]

Which party vetted Sarah Palin??

[Ben]

Love Obama? This Will Piss You Off (But You Need To Hear It):

Love Obama? This Will Piss You Off (But You Need To Hear It) - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toEjMwMdVd4&feature=plcp)

McCain condemns Citizens United; predicts foreign money in American elections - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2V7sKYorUO8)