Why vote Obama?

Phil Rader AIA

We all know he's for "change" (it's all we'll have left in our pockets after paying for his new social entitlement programs)
We all know he's for "hope" (we hope we can live on the "change" left in our pockets)
We all know he's for raising the taxes on the rich.
We all know he's for meeting with leaders of rogue states without precondition.
We all know he thinks he's campaigning against George W Bush.

So, aside from a decent-looking younger guy who can give a great delivery of a canned speech that says practically nothing (almost hypnotic, isn't he?) and an older running-mate who thinks President Roosevelt addressed the nation on TV during the stock market crash of 1929, what do we get? Does anyone have substantive answers? I'll not be argumentative - but I will be analytical

one answer:

Our government is 10 Trillion dollars in debt. And some say that's just the Debt that's obvious the real number is likely to be 70 TRILLION

the first social entitlement program he should tackle is our societies DEBT so let's see who can he get the money from...oh yes the citizens ALL of them rich poor, white black, male female, Young old...we are all on this sinking ship together and we had all better pick a hole to plug.
See answer number 1
See answer number 1
Misleading he has said he would meet with after the appropriate lower level diplomatic arrangements have been met. But even if that is not true do you believe we can solve world problems with our enemies with Bombs alone. What we tend to forget is that these "ENEMIES" are just like us a society of people and unles you intend to eradicate every single Iranian living on this planet than it seems to me that we should find a way to have open and honest dialog with them so that we can get on with the business of allowing people of any and all ethnic backgrounds to develop and prosper as peace loving people. I don't pretend to understand the motives of the Iranians but I do firmly believe that violence and war will only lead to more violence and war. it's a simple law of physics action and reaction. Until someone is truly brave enough to step aside and let an aggressor fall on his face the shoving match will continue. War and war mongering are not the answer and never have been.
See answer number 1

Anyway as to your response on "substantive" answers specific to Obama well when you are lost and you get to a fork in the road and one sign says stay on the same path you have been on for the last eight years or take this path which may lead to a happier place...I'll take may or might, or possibly. or slim chance in hell, or only a glimmer of hope...over certain continued suffering any day.

I don't claim to know what Obama's plans for our countries future are anymore than you can claim to know what McCain has planned for our future.

Let's just boil it down to candidate x and candidate y. Candidate x represents a continuation in whole or part of the policies of the past eight years and candidate y represents a "potential" change in the policies of the last eight years...Again I vote for the "potential" change.

So for me it's really less about the specifics of Obama's promised policies because we all know how much a politicians promise is worth, and more about that glimmer of hope that "change" may happen.

PKast

It's all a matter of idealogy. What do you want, what do you believe in?

Do you believe that money should trickle down, or do you believe it should trickle up. Both sides will re-distribute wealth, one to the wealthiest and corporations, the other to the lowest income, working, and middle class. Do you believe healthcare for everyone is a privilege or do you believe it is a right. Do you believe we should be stewards of the environment, or do you believe industry and timber should regulate the environment. Do you believe in the "yoyo" principle for American society (you're on your own) or do you think we should take care of the least amongst us. Do you believe banks should regulate themselves, or do you believe that government should regulate them. Do you believe we should invest in a superior education for everyone, or do you believe that the best education belongs to those who can afford it. Do you believe that we should use diplomacy with foreign countries, or do you believe that we should talk loudly and "carry a big stick". Do you think we should all shoulder the burden of paying taxes for national defense, roads, bridges, public education, or do you believe we should all get a tax break. Do you believe workers should have the right to have unions, or do you believe the benevolent factory owner will take care of his employees.

Over the past eight years we have overdosed on the "yin" side of this idealogy, it is time to let the "yang" side balance things out.

Best,

sepo

Seems like major vin for Obama.... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27265369/

Phil Rader AIA

WOW Juan

Those are some very deep thoughts. Although my little brain can't really comprehend the full extent of the implications. I do believe that there are forces at work that are of a higher nature than people can plainly see.

Thanks for giving me a peep hole to have a glimpse into the a possible higher meaning for the outcome of our choices.

JuanV.Soler

thank you Phil,
I am glad you liked it

bellwells

Here is the of essence Obama's tax plan:

"From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need."

solo

I dunno but I prefer that to "Drill baby drill"

JuanV.Soler

I have to quote again that jewish bohemian,

@unknownuser said:

Cabala and Barack Obama
The intricate system of the Cabala uncovering ethereal connections resulting in sudden, obscure illumination is limitless in its scope since creation is constant and without end, but certain happenings are clearly embedded in the fiber of life for all to see—like Barack Obama. After enduring Bush and Dick for eight years we are now blessed with the expectation of Barack Obama.

It is through the name that the soul is conveyed into the body; throughout numerous incarnations the soul remains the same, but the body changes therefore requiring another name—same soul different body. The determination combining body and soul is hidden within the bosom of the Creator, but some names hint to the purpose of the person.

Barack in Hebrew means: to draw down; the entomology of the word Barack is in the word Braikim/Knees because it is the bending of the knees which draws the head down to the earth; and how water runs downhill, another use for the word Barack. The attributions of the name Barack are one of humility and subservience; Obama, on the other hand, is a high place where the leader stands to address the people.

Who is Barack Obama? He is the person, as indicated through his name, properly fit to represent our country in our true color-diversity. The strength of America is not in her numbers or her wealth, but in her ability to accommodate all strains of human beings living together beneath the one roof of the United States.

http://www.jewishbohemian.com/essaypages/obama.htm

and :

@unknownuser said:

Barack Obama and 2012
The next four years in the presidency of America will have a direct effect on the year 2012; America is compose of peoples from around the globe and though settled by white Christians, America has emerged as an entity inclusive of the human race in her entirety. The next president will preside over 2012.

There has always been a religious aspect to the presidency—all, but JFK were Protestant. Religion has come to play a large part in American politics and to have a president without strong religious ties could help facilitate change. But, it must not be forgotten that religion also has an agenda that coincides with a timetable, like the Mayan calendar ending on 2012.

Also, the ancient Hebrew calendar which still has a couple of hundred years left before it ends, conjuncts at 2012 with the historic integer, 5772 regarded as a significant number with cabalistic ramification pertaining to the conclusion of a cycle in which Rome plays a major part. According to the Jewish mystics Rome was to have 2000 years of ruler ship over the earth—Rome’s time has expired; the state-church government having reached that juncture, conquering the world going undefeated just as prophesized. Included in these prophesies is the notification that the last king of Rome will be known by the Irom/Naked because of embarrassment. Bush in Hebrew means embarrassment.

Rome was fathered by Esau, twin brother of Yaakov father of the Jewish People. Esau had established 12 tribes which ultimately became the force which took land from the ancient Etruscans and built Rome; Yaakov established the 12 tribes of Yisroel on the promised a land; Ishmael uncle to the two twins also fathered 12 tribes which became the Arab People populating the Middle East. These three forces are about to collide into what is hoped by the Evangelical Christians as Armageddon—the destruction of the Jewish People and the subsequent subjugation of the world by the cross.

The Mayan calendar foresaw a galactic cycle that for the purposes of the earth ends in 2012—the last year of the next president’s term. In these coming years for the safety of the earth the human being must learn to look beyond politics; the world has been led to the edge of the cliff, but we can change direction for the safety of the world.

For two hundred years America has been led by an errant vision full of death and destruction; presently young people have been herded into a mercenary military to fight wars which never needed to be fought. America has become rich and arrogant through these excesses. The next president will stop the war, isolating Israel among angry neighbors as the prophets said: in that day the nations of the world will surround Israel like 70 wolves. That day is very close to 2012.

There is a cataclysmic force coming to the earth that will bring about world peace, the number 5772 provides a huge window for this event, but the enemy is not finished fighting they still plan to stage their own event—Armegedon. It will be good to have a president who can see the difference between truth and dogma.

http://www.jewishbohemian.com/essaypages/obama2012.htm

from Dovid Krafchow

it is all poetry
it is all good
it is all hope

what else ?

bellwells

Pete, do you know who said this?

solo

Why vote for someone that says this:

[flash=425,355:29try428]http://www.youtube.com/v/igAmVs0cvY8[/flash:29try428]

Clueless!!

Who said that? It was McCains choice of VP or president if indeed he does not make the next four years, in essence he said it as he runs his campaign.

bellwells

No, no!! Do you know who said "From those according to their ability; to those, according to their need"?

solo

Karl Marx

You are still living in the days of 'Red scare", you need a McCarthy not a McCain my friend.

solo

How things backfire, first the Neocons use the word 'Liberal' to scare the masses, then everyone is a 'terrorist' now it's 'socialist' what's next 'racist' or 'communist'?

repeating a name over and over actually desensitizes it and the people are bored with all this right wing name calling, It won't stick.

McCain also signed onto the bailout .... is he too a socialist now?

watkins

Dear Ron,

Are you endorsing that statement, or posting it as a warning?

If by 'need' is meant a living wage and equal opportunities with access to good health care, then it sounds about right to me.

I have noted a number of postings railing about paying taxes. Generally, and in almost any country you can name, the rich pay a lower percentage of their gross income than the average wage earner. Just think of all those tax lawyers helping the rich figure out new and novel ways to ease their tax burden.

As John Dunn once famously wrote 'No man is an island', and the prosperity of our communities 'as a whole' add to our own prosperity by way of better job opportunities, lower crime rates etc. How taxes are used is more a political issue and so remains, to a small degree, the choice of the electorate. I tend to favour the Swedish model of taxation and care in the community over the American model of 'winner takes all', which is sadly epitomised by the remuneration of Leyman Brothers'Chief Executive Richard S. Fuld Jr over the past seven years (somewhere in the region of 480 million USD).

Kind regards,
Bob

solo

If McCain pushes this 'socialist' rhetoric too hard he may just end up being the Sheriff of Nottingham and Obama end up looking like Robin Hood.

bellwells

Bob, as I said in an earlier post, the quote from Karl Marx defines Obama's tax plan. Nearly half of the 95% Obama says will benefit from his tax plan don't even pay taxes! This is socialism and I oppose it vehemently.

Pete, I said before how disappointed I am that McCain voted for the bailout. And, yes, his vote does display a socialistic tendency and this why I will not vote for him. After all my huffing and puffing against Obama, I do have significant issues with McCain. However, my general political leanings are more aligned with McCain than Obama.

sepo

Well if the state end up owning some banks than Bush will be first socialist president US had... To be honest there is nothing wrong with state helping unfortunate ones....Scandinavians made descent model out of it. Healthcare for everyone even when not run prefectly (like our NHS in UK) is more desirable than none...In UK on both side of the house (or rather 3 sides) they all agree that strong NHS is something which all of us want here. Also I believe that top guys should pay more. Some of them pay less taxes than me and that is not right when they make like millions. Selfishness is not way forward for the humankind.

Stinkie

@sepo said:

Selfishness is not way forward for the humankind.

I agree wholeheartedly with El Sid. (Yeah ... dumbest pun ever.)

watkins

Dear Ron,

Socialism doesn't have to follow an extreme model, such as post-war Chinese communism. The concepts of socialism are no different from the precepts of most religions, and specifically Christianity, so why does the word socialism raise your hackles? For example: 'Do as you would be done by', is a good socialist concept. To my mind, and relating to employment, it means paying a man/woman a decent hourly rate for their labour. This is evidently not the case for many developed countries as those on the lower rungs of society's prosperity ladder will testify.

I think we need to agree to disagree.

Kind regards,
Bob

solo

OBAMA HOOD