political views

Tbh I don't think there is a greater good in this one. What's your opinion on this Bomb?

You are correct in your assumption that the telecomm CEO's have been granted ex post facto amnesty via retroactive immunity. Notwithstanding their role in wiretapping, there are several other pursuable, yet unrelated crimes that said companies have participated in. I understand your convictions to bring them to justice, but neither our government, nor our laws are perfect. Sometimes, people do get away with highway robbery (see: the wall street financial bailout).

But, on the lighter side of the issue, the bill did not grant immunity to those within our government who instigated the application of these illicit actions. (This was one of Obama's reasons for agreeing to the compromise.) It is these people who should be pursued and held accountable. The corruption starts from the top down, and should be addressed in that order.

If it's because he would have given ammunition to the GOP for being weak on terror...well he talks about being against the war from the beginning and that doesn't make him weak, I thought it was admirable.

Admirable or not, if you've been paying attention to this election, you know that anything can and will be used by the GOP to discredit Obama's character; from trivial flag lapel pins to guilt by association -- such as with reformed domestic terrorist William Ayers (as L-Meister so tastefully pointed out). His vote on FISA represents a quintessential part of Obama's defensive strategy to overcome the Republican smear machine. If he intends to win this election, he must remain bipartisan and avoid any situation that could paint him as a far left progressive. Unlike the divisional Rovian tactics that have been applied in the past two elections, he is attempting to unite both sides of this country.

This is no easy task, and it will sometimes end with results I may disagree with. Yet, a single issue such as FISA will not deter my confidence that he is our country's single best chance at curbing the cataclysmal polices this administration has enabled. They have weakened nealy every aspect of our country's stature, and have shaken the moral foundations from upon which it was built.

This is what must be done in order to culminate my notion of the greater good; he must win. I have learned that not every issue I disagree with will be attended to in the manner I prefer, nor will every injustice I protest be brought to light. Nevertheless, by usurping power away from those who've allowed these malefactors to run rampant, we can begin to cleanse our government of the agencies that have been politicized for the purpose of suppressing impartial equality and fairness. This puts a great deal of faith into a politician I hardly know, however, that is what this election is all about: hope.

Sometimes, people do get away with highway robbery (see: the wall street financial bailout).

Well I'm glad you brought this up. The FISA Bill got me listening because of the flip-flop. The Bailout got me to start researching. There are many faults, but the massive size alone -almost the financial equivalent of the entire Iraq War- got my attention.

In my opinion the Bailout signifies a simple fact in America. We are a plutocracy, a government ruled by the wealthy, the richest 1%. If there was ever a question about this, I read in the news the other day, Goldman Sachs, is going to receive funds from the Paulson Bailout. At first this sounds fine, until you realize that Henry Paulson was a Chairman for Goldman Sachs before he became the Secretary of Treasury….In other words they are going to rob the public and give it to each other right in front of our faces. Warren Buffet was so confident he even invests $5bln into a company that supposedly needs rescuing.

I make the argument that it wasn’t unexpected because the entire country watched the beginning of the housing crash, and several stations reported about it swallowing up Wall Street later on. Now our potential presidents had a number of ways they could have reacted. And keep in mind even President Bush (who had been denying a crisis for months) urged Congress to pass this bill. Now by the time it got to the Senate (Second Edition) there was a state of panic all over the media. And this happened when the vote came back to the House.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnbNm6hoBXc&eurl=http://www.prisonplanet.com/democratic-congressman-representatives-were-threatened-with-martial-law-in-america-over-bailout-bi

So here's what I was wondering. What was Obama doing in midst of all of this financial chaos?...Supporting it of course…

Direct Quote –
"I understand completely why people would be skeptical when President Bush called for a blank check to solve this problem," he said.
"There will be time to punish those who set this fire, but now is not the time to argue about how it got set or did the neighbor...leave the stove on," Obama said. "Right now we want to put out that fire...
"..."This will not solve all our problems," he said. "It is a necessary but not sufficient step."

And it’s interesting he mentions punishing those responsible, because the bill doesn’t allow for judicial oversight of who Paulson lends to. And if it were so necessary for Congress to pass this bill to “save our economy”, why hasn’t the result been much better.

In my opinion it’s because it was never designed to save anything. It was a manipulated vertical integration of banks in this country. The rich just got richer. Meanwhile, the inflation-adjusted income of wage-earners has declined for three decades making daily life more and more expensive. If the FISA Bill wasn’t a good enough opportunity for Obama to make a difference, the Paulson Bill was. He’s failed twice on critical legislation in this campaign alone.

Also below is the official roll call for the Senate’s vote of the Paulson Bill.

Akaka - Aye
Alexander - Aye
Allard - No
Barasso - No
Baucus - Aye
Bayh - Aye
Bennett - Aye
Biden - Aye
Bingaman - Aye
Bond - Aye
Boxer - Aye
Brown - Aye
Brownback - No
Bunning - No
Burr - Aye
Byrd - Aye
Cantwell - No
Cardin - Aye
Carper -
Casey - Aye
Chambliss - Aye
Clinton - Aye
Coburn - Aye
Cochran - No
Coleman - Aye
Collins - Aye
Conrad - Aye
Corker - Aye
Cornyn - Aye
Craig - Aye
Crapo - No
DeMint - No
Dodd - Aye
Dole - No
Domenici - Aye
Dorgan - No
Durbin - Aye
Ensign - Aye
Enzi - No
Feingold - No
Feinstein - Aye
Graham - Aye
Grassley - Aye
Gregg - Aye
Hagel - Aye
Harkin - Aye
Hatch - Aye
Hutchison - Aye
Inhofe - No
Inoye - Aye
Isakson - Aye
Johnson - No
Kennedy - n/v
Kerry - Aye
Klobuchar - Aye
Kohl - Aye
Kyl - Aye
Landrieu - No
Lautenberg - Aye
Leahy - Aye
Levin - Aye
Lieberman - Aye
Lincoln - Aye
Lugar - Aye
Martinez - Aye
McCain - Aye
McCaskill - Aye
McConnell - Aye
Menendez - Aye
Mikulski - Aye
Murkowski - Aye
Murray - Aye
Nelson, FL - No
Nelson, NE - Aye
Obama - Aye
Pryor - Aye
Reed - Aye
Reid - Aye
Roberts - No
Rockefeller - Aye
Salazar - Aye
Sanders - No
Schumer - Aye
Sessions - No
Shelby - No
Smith - Aye
Snowe - Aye
Specter - Aye
Stabenow - No
Stevens - Aye
Sununu - Aye
Tester - No
Thune - Aye
Vitter - No
Voinovich - Aye
Warner - Aye
Webb - Aye
Whitehouse - Aye
Wicker - No
Wyden – No

Obama votes Aye. I was wondering what your opinion is on this TBomb?

* sigh *

I'll get back to you on this.. Enough politics for one week.

Must say it is very difficult to me jump in the conversation, due to my lack of vocabulary in english and knowledge on your dayly political issues. Nevertheless i must recognize i share some concepts with you guys (i wont quote properly, it already takes me a long time to write in english with proper words, so i apollogize once again): i.e. i like when you put your thought in order and call all what happened in Irak a "military invasion" which would be, if not the proper concept -as far as citizens were killed, and some pics travled around the globe even though we all knew what was all about- at least the nearest to the precise one, and not "military intervention", which wouldve brought my speculative anger on upon you (lol). So, in the end, im saying im glad to see the conceptual ground were we all move is a common one.
I must desagree about how the economics breaks with real politics discussions, although it is an inevitable side to consider and although i have to recognize the tendency of making a conversation a speculative one doesnt rly influences no one, but i dont have to be aware of the dayly debate to know that what rly matters in politics as we know them (which isnt real politics in my humble opinion) are the cross discurses, which, adding slightly differences, are pretty much the same on each side (conservative, republican, and so on, for you North Americans). If you realize...there are no real breaks on each side of the discurses. I bring this cause Tbomb said he doesnt want to bring anger to politics discussion, casue it ends up with losing friends and so, well, i completly disagree with it, the very ground of politics (and not the one created by the parlamentarian-representative parties) is a struggle, it should make you break with some bounds youve created with some ppl, but it truly makes you create new ones. Just my thought about two points i consider important, i excuse myself for not elaborate more, and maybe cause i wont be an active presence in this debate, but i wanted you to know, as i said to Munch, i follow very closely what you write, so keep it up...it is thought food for Hoffs brains ;)

it is thought food for Hoffs brains ;)

haha i love it. And I hope it doesn't sound like I'm bringing anger into it Bomb. I was just trying to explain why I think this man is the same as others who have touted "change." A few actions different here and there but overall, what swings to the left always swings back to the right.

That's where my argument for a third party comes into play. Quick way of reaching the end of my argument haha :D

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/03/081103fa_fact_bruck?printable=true

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Q9NSVUu8nk

Touch screen vote switching in action.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Q9NSVUu8nk

Touch screen vote switching in action.

Here are 9 links also dealing with the problems of electronic voting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iVlZTWH7u8w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4KIkOzw4XM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D346bkr15VU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z74jIT9pJ7s&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DFb8pjuEuk&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZPmckj3Oi8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYkck4JNNMg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeXtPNP2a-s&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIAzCM3OYYc&feature=related

And a side note, because of this film and testimony from Bev Harris, the lady from Cleveland who says "Our random is our random, correct?" got sent to prison for 3 years.

“It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.” - Joseph Stalin

View Full Version: political views