-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Prospero
So because some doctors bought into Nazi ideology ALL doctors are corrupt. This is an insane view of the world.
Yep! All doctors -- ha ha!
No. The point is: given the right conditions anyone of us can either be a monster or a saint.
We all have the same genes. So, anyone of us, under the right circumstances can be either exceedingly good or monstrously bad. As happened in NAZI Germany.
And, too, AMORAL attributes occur in a corporate setting. One has to put the corporate shareholders above all else. So, if need be: set up sweatshops in Cambodia, let global warming occur etc., etc.
Anyone seen this film about Obama or is eager to see it?
2016 Obama's America: Trailer 3 - YouTube
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Obama's Excuse for War Crimes Creates Moral Decay:
The problem is power. And concentrated power. Which conservatives are against. Traditional conservatives are against the concentration of power.
So, people in positions of power, and this is the crux of the problem, come to believe in the justness and merit of their elevated status [and this makes no difference whether it's Obama or Bush or Clinton or Carter or Reagan] and with that comes the belief that they're ABOVE THE LAW.
So, this applies to, again, Obama and Bush and Cheney. They believe in the importance and rightness of their high status and thus are above the law. Hence: the invasion of Iraq, hence Obama's drone strikes and indefinite detention...
Obama's Excuse for War Crimes Creates Moral Decay | Brainwash Update - YouTube
Ron Paul Says Indefinite Detention "Un-American" - YouTube
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Drone warfare's deadly civilian toll: a very personal view
From The Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-civilian-toll
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
keep an eye on state of ohio. of all the supposely key swing states, as far back as 1960 whomever wins ohio ....wins the presidential elections.
the latest leading polls in key swing state are just a sign of things to come.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Hold on! Did Madonna just say that Obama is "fighting for gay rights." Well, that simply isn't true. He is "fighting" for votes. Obama, unlike Madonna, is somewhat socially conservative. I understand why she'd rather Obama than Romney.
No mention of Jill Stein??????? The nominee for President under the Green Party banner. Madonna, like most, is simply serving her parochial interests.
Madonna, firmly ensconced in the top 1 percent, is, again, serving her own rational interests.
I mean, a "Green" President could tax the shit out of her -- ha ha ha! Well, Stein may put in place policies that says: the planet has value, too. We can't continue to trash the planet.
So people like Madonna who maximize personal gain so as to maximize personal consumption may pay a high price under a Stein presidency....
Anyway, Madonna certainly is committed to gay rights. She is certainly socially liberal.
And the idea of a Romney presidency and the religious right having influence over him makes her, well, uneasy, to say the least. As it does me.
I mean, right-leaning Christians make me cringe. With their dogged intolerant belief systems. Not, say, moderate Christians, tolerant Christians. And I fear Romney will bring them back into the political fold, as it were.
Madonna Concert: Obama is a Black Muslim...What? - YouTube
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ben
Hold on! Did Madonna just say that Obama is "fighting for gay rights." Well, that simply isn't true. He is "fighting" for votes. Obama, unlike Madonna, is somewhat socially conservative. I understand why she'd rather Obama than Romney.
Ben, if this was anyone other than you, I'd think you were being wilfully disingenuous. You know as well as I do that the issue of gay rights and rights for the lgbt lobby in general are a very difficult topic to deal with at a practical political level. There's a huge difference between marching in the streets and making coherent, effective and workable policy.
I shake my head almost every time you appear to equate Obama with Romney. You're a great guy and I enjoy your posts, but surely you can see that a Romney - indeed these days ANY Republican presidency - would be socially regressive and would certainly attempt to reclaim hard-won minority rights at every level, even to the point of active persecution. What you'd get from the Democrats would be slow and cautious, but at least you know it would be moving in the right direction.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
1 Attachment(s)
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
robertlouis
Ben, if this was anyone other than you, I'd think you were being wilfully disingenuous. You know as well as I do that the issue of gay rights and rights for the lgbt lobby in general are a very difficult topic to deal with at a practical political level. There's a huge difference between marching in the streets and making coherent, effective and workable policy.
I shake my head almost every time you appear to equate Obama with Romney. You're a great guy and I enjoy your posts, but surely you can see that a Romney - indeed these days ANY Republican presidency - would be socially regressive and would certainly attempt to reclaim hard-won minority rights at every level, even to the point of active persecution. What you'd get from the Democrats would be slow and cautious, but at least you know it would be moving in the right direction.
Depends Robert, I guess, on which Dems we're talking about. Yeah, I think someone like Dennis Kucinich is very good. Russ Feingold, too. Not sure if he'll jump back into politics.
But I don't see Obama being a champion for gay rights or so-called progressive causes.
The author Paul Street, who is a democratic socialist, in his book The Empire's New Clothes, points out -- and this is from, again, a very left perspective -- that Obama is deeply conservative.
Anyway, Obama is there to manage the system, as it were. Not change it. The whole Hope and Change campaign was brilliant marketing.
President Obama indeed did make a good step by affirming his support of same-sex marriage. Now Romney (and, well, I've no idea where he truly stands on issues surrounding LGBT rights) will move to the right with respect to social issues. Because, in part, to satisfy the Republican Party and the overall base.
But, again, I disagree with Madonna that Obama is fighting for gay rights. That's like saying he's fighting for union rights or fighting to stem global warming or fighting for middle and working class Americans. And, too, Obama didn't even fight for the public option. Obama is against public health care. But he could've fought for the public option. But didn't.
So, it's simply not true. That isn't Obama. And that's fine. (Naomi Klein said that Obama is a centrist. And that's fine, she said. We just need to push him to the left, Klein said.
But politicians do respond to public movements, as it were. FDR did. Nixon did. Politicians do. That's the hope -- )
I think the author Paul Street is correct: Obama is conservative, deeply conservative.
I mean, Obama is, in the words of Paul Krugman, a Republican from circa 1992....
Wall Street does better under Democrats, says Paul Krugman -- Freeland File - YouTube
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee Debbie Wasserman Schultz is clueless or pretending to be clueless about Obama's kill list.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFh0nIYNAyY
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Conor Friedersdorf, a staff writer at The Atlantic, makes an interesting case as to why he will not vote for Obama:
Why I Refuse to Vote for Barack Obama...
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...-obama/262861/
And Glenn Greenwald:
Who is the worst civil liberties president in US history? Where do the abuses of the last decade from Bush and Obama rank when compared to prior assaults in the name of war?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...erties-history
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz snort...
Oh, more closet commies whining because President Obama hasn't lived up to their expectations for things they wish he would have promised in 2008?
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Odd that so-called conservative Andrew Sullivan would be defending/supporting Obama. But then again Sullivan has called Obama a moderate Republican. Is Obama merely a moderate Republican??? (And we must remember that about 42 percent of Americans didn't vote. Now why didn't they vote? Well, they've been extensively studied and it turns out that the vast majority of them are social democratic. So, well, who are they going to vote for? Because the Dems are NOT a social democratic party.
So, it's understandable why a fairly substantial number of Americans didn't vote.... I mean, really you've got one party: the business party. And two wings of that party. Even Ron Paul agrees with that.... Even though Paul doesn't support social democratic policies -- ha ha!)
Watch S.E. Cupp Reduce Bill Maher’s Panel to Obscenities Over Obama’s Foreign Policy:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/watc...oreign-policy/
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Obama's kill list policy compels US support for Israeli attacks on Gaza
The US was once part of the international consensus against extra-judicial assassinations. Now it is a leader in that tactic.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...assassinations
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
President Jimmy Carter on US Violating Human Rights & Israel, Palestine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=H2IQiYI1Emw
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
greyman
Carlin is brilliant. Especially this bit about how the planet is fine. There's nothing wrong w/ the planet. The planet will be here for another 5 billion years. We won't. So, as Carlin says, pack your shit -- ha ha!
Save the planet -- ha ha ha!
Carlin: "Environmentalists don't give a shit about the planet."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScDfYzMEEw
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Why Paul Krugman should be President Obama's pick for US treasury secretary:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...sury-secretary
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Obama hasn't had it easy. Peak oil for crude was in 2005~ and the net energy is avalanching downwards. The US is using 5 million barrels less every day than a few years back. It's impossible to have economic growth, more jobs and prosperity in such a situation, alas.
Reagan and Bush Senior had it easy with Alaskan oil and North Sea oil coming online. :)
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kire89
Obama hasn't had it easy. Peak oil for crude was in 2005~ and the net energy is avalanching downwards. The US is using 5 million barrels less every day than a few years back. It's impossible to have economic growth, more jobs and prosperity in such a situation, alas.
Reagan and Bush Senior had it easy with Alaskan oil and North Sea oil coming online. :)
Kire you must be aware in Norway that the attempt to spread hydraulic fracturing across the US has alrready reduced US imports of crude and gas, that potentially it could make the US self-sufficient in hydrocarbons, and that some estimates of the Arctic Region's reserves are somewhere around 25-30 billion bbls. With new reserves being discovered in other parts of the world, albeit at a smaller level than in the golden age of the 20th century, the concept of 'peak oil' is still contested. Ironically as I am sure you know, Hubbert applied it to US supplies which he said would peak in the 1960s -he was wrong about that, and I don't know if 'Peak Oil' is a valid concept globally as you would need to compute a range of indicators on production, consumption and predictions of reserves yet found, and so on.
That doesn't mean we are all safe, that hydrocarbons are here for our lifetimes, but the profile isn't so clear either and the development of technological and storage capacity in renewables is crucial for the fuel-mix of the future.
Small point -I think Alaskan and North Sea hydrocarbons came onstream in the 1970s, not online!
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
You know fracked oil and gas wells have a lifespan of something like 5 years before they hardly produce BTUs enough to heat a kettle of tea? Conversely, a conventional gas well in Russia might produce high-quality stuff for 30 years. Fracking is a net energy mess and has been known for half a century. It can't beat the conventional stuff of the past.
The Arctic might hold a cubic mile of oil (30 billion barrels~), but that just adds another year of consumption to the reserve base. Not exactly something to write home about.
Hubbert correctly assessed the US peak to be in 1970-71. You were the Saudi Arabia of oil for a very long time. Cumulatively you might produce more than Saudia Arabia ever will, but your conventional reserves are down to ~20GB.
To me peak oil isn't so much an issue (ie. the total liquid volume) as the total net energy that's available from day to day. That's what's killing America's and Western Europe's wealth. 5 million barrels less a day means less oil to refine into the $3-4/gal gas you're so fond of, fewer flyer miles, less domestic industry, less consumption und su weiter.
Anyway, I feel for Obama, the energy situation is grim for the US and the world at large.
As for the North Sea, it took quite a while for production to ramp up. And we sold most of it at $10-20 a barrel. What utter waste. :)
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kire89
You know fracked oil and gas wells have a lifespan of something like 5 years before they hardly produce BTUs enough to heat a kettle of tea? Conversely, a conventional gas well in Russia might produce high-quality stuff for 30 years. Fracking is a net energy mess and has been known for half a century. It can't beat the conventional stuff of the past.
The Arctic might hold a cubic mile of oil (30 billion barrels~), but that just adds another year of consumption to the reserve base. Not exactly something to write home about.
Hubbert correctly assessed the US peak to be in 1970-71. You were the Saudi Arabia of oil for a very long time. Cumulatively you might produce more than Saudia Arabia ever will, but your conventional reserves are down to ~20GB.
To me peak oil isn't so much an issue (ie. the total liquid volume) as the total net energy that's available from day to day. That's what's killing America's and Western Europe's wealth. 5 million barrels less a day means less oil to refine into the $3-4/gal gas you're so fond of, fewer flyer miles, less domestic industry, less consumption und su weiter.
Anyway, I feel for Obama, the energy situation is grim for the US and the world at large.
As for the North Sea, it took quite a while for production to ramp up. And we sold most of it at $10-20 a barrel. What utter waste. :)
Good post, Kire. And I couldn't agree more with your final point. By allowing free market capitalism to dictate the finances of North Sea oil and gas, rather than treating it as a strategic resource, we have knowingly blown a golden opportunity to rebalance the UK's long-term energy approach and potentially society as a whole. Like you, I'm rather eager to see what will follow in capitalism's sorry and discredited wake.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kire89
You know fracked oil and gas wells have a lifespan of something like 5 years before they hardly produce BTUs enough to heat a kettle of tea? Conversely, a conventional gas well in Russia might produce high-quality stuff for 30 years. Fracking is a net energy mess and has been known for half a century. It can't beat the conventional stuff of the past.
The Arctic might hold a cubic mile of oil (30 billion barrels~), but that just adds another year of consumption to the reserve base. Not exactly something to write home about.
Hubbert correctly assessed the US peak to be in 1970-71. You were the Saudi Arabia of oil for a very long time. Cumulatively you might produce more than Saudia Arabia ever will, but your conventional reserves are down to ~20GB.
To me peak oil isn't so much an issue (ie. the total liquid volume) as the total net energy that's available from day to day. That's what's killing America's and Western Europe's wealth. 5 million barrels less a day means less oil to refine into the $3-4/gal gas you're so fond of, fewer flyer miles, less domestic industry, less consumption und su weiter.
Anyway, I feel for Obama, the energy situation is grim for the US and the world at large.
As for the North Sea, it took quite a while for production to ramp up. And we sold most of it at $10-20 a barrel. What utter waste. :)
Small point -I am in the UK. I dont disagree with much of what you say, and I am not sure at what pace the development of the Arctic will proceed, probaby slower than currently assumed -more and more developments of a declining resource is, however, the way the industry is going, as it is still profitable to do so; fracking appears profitable right now, that seems to be what is driving a lot of it in the US. Human ingenuity will have to come up with some solutions in the next 25 years, and usually does at the level of technology, so soner rather than later we may be using completely different forms of fuel for domestic, industrial and military uses from the fuels we know of today.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Kire89
You know fracked oil and gas wells have a lifespan of something like 5 years before they hardly produce BTUs enough to heat a kettle of tea?
Kire, I'm really interested in this comment that you made. Do you know of a couple of sources for this? I hadn't heard about the short lifespans of fracked wells, but I have read that there are many, many frackable (is that word?) reserves dotted all around the world. Based on what I've read their cumulative volume is huge.
BTW, coming at this from another direction, peak oil can also be thought of as a useless concept because if we burn even half of our remaining reserves, the carbon released will have disastrous consequences on our climate.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Odelay if I might interject, having an interest in this subject, I have linked some scholarly articles that might help you, although the precise data on the life-span of the average well seems to be obscure. From the first source on the list it would seem that five years is a good lifetime for a large reservoir, suggesting that in smaller ones two years might be the maximum life of production, although complicating factors could shorten the life of any conventional/unconventional reservoir.
1. Hydraulic Fracturing and Shale Gas Production: Technology, Impacts, and Policy
http://www.gliccc.org/wp-content/upl...s_Polic....pdf
-from the Department of Energy (US) clearly written, well-illustrated introduction.
2. HYDRAULIC FRACTURING AND SHALE GAS EXTRACTION
http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace/bitst...pdf?sequence=5
-master's thesis which is also well-written if a bit superficial
3 Life cycle analysis of water use and intensity of oil and gas recovery in Wattenberg field, Colo
http://cewc.colostate.edu/wp-content...-of-Water-.pdf
-although a technical paper it offers documented use of the huge volumes of water that are used in fracking, which in turn raises questions in rural areas about the priorities that water use demand -food production or gas?
4.Untested Waters: The Rise of Hydraulic Fracturing in Oil and Gas Production and the Need to Revisit Regulation
http://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/theste...20Fracking.pdf
-Hannah Wiseman's paper is from 2009 but ranges across some controversial topics and is worth reading if you are into the details of policy making in science.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
It'll be even more frightening when someone further to the right than Obama becomes President.
But, at present, most Americans, sadly, support the Drone program... because they see it as better than sending in soldiers...
DOJ Memo Justifies Drone Strikes and Targeted Killings of Americans:
DOJ Memo Justifies Drone Strikes and Targeted Killings of Americans - YouTube
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
I must admit that I see drones as what Cheney talked about right after 9/11 which was the "dar side". I had no idea that Cheney meant two conventional wars, indefinite detention, the Patriot Act and torture.
All that shit is pretty hard to put back in bottle. The US is still in the process of leaving Afganistan and no President once granted the extraordinary powers given Bush 43 after 9/11 will give them back. Candidates will denounce how they are used but incumbents will keep them, believe "they" would never abuse them.
Now right or wrong, drones are an approach to combat with terrorists that is proportional versus conventional warfare. It is unappealing and in the hands of the wrong person it could create even greater harm but by its very nature easier to roll back than an invasion by 160,000 ground troops or carpet bombing to create "shock and awe". And for better or worse more likely to get the bad guys.
It is horrid that any of this exists but for all the outrage about drones, look at all the crap the Obama administration took and is taking over the embassy attack in Libya. The public expects the President to be excessively diligent in the defense of the nation and in the case of Obama I do not think anyone can say he has not. He has not however been provocative and fallen into the neo-con trap of pre-emptive action against Iran. But make no mistake the GOP found itself in the 2012 in the unusual position of not being able to attack the Dems as weak on defense.
There is no winning in killing and that is as it should be. Obama has sadly learned that closing Gitmo was no easy matter which is as sad as is the liberal use of drones. Genie left the bottle on 9/11 and as long as their are terrorists that render conventional defense meaningless, new and unfortunate means of dealing with it will sought out.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Barack Obama is pushing gun control at home, but he's a killer abroad
President Obama's appeals to respect human life in the US are at odds with his backing for drone strikes in foreign parts
Gary Yonge The Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisf...-drones-killer
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
An Interview with Marjorie Cohn about Targeted Killings:
http://www.zcommunications.org/an-in...-marjorie-cohn
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Gary Younge's premise seems to rely on the assumption that if the President had advance knowledge that a domestic shooter was going to plan an assault on 20-30 American's on US soil that the President would not use drones to eliminate shooter prior to the execution of his plan.
Obama's opponents on the left and many others worry that just opposite could be true.
Drones are a nasty topic as is all forms of killing. Even more nasty perhaps than how the drones are used today is how they could be used in the hands of others with executive power.
The drones are scary and the moral questions are obvious. But let's assume for a minute that the Bush Administration had drilled down on the warnings they got of impending attack better, that they were lucky enough to get more data and imaginative enough to realize that terrorists were going to hijack airliners and use them as suicide bombs on sites with high concentrations of innocent people.
Should the Bush people have ordered drone attacks targeting the key players in the plot r should they have waited until 3,000 plus had died and then attempted to capture, jail and put on trial the principle plotters since those that actual attacked the buildings died in doing so?
Indeed it is a dark question, it is what I thought Cheney meant went he said the dark side versus large conventional warfare combined with torture of detainees.
It is a leap of faith to give our elected officials the right to use drones and that is a slippery slope but I do believe when small groups of people render a nation's conventional defensive deterrents as irrelevant that the options all become unsavory.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Ben
Their premise is a great example of triangulating.
-
Re: a refreshing look at Obama
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fivekatz
Their premise is a great example of triangulating.
Yep! It is....
