US Election. - Page 10

Micky: “That said, the Republicans have NEVER, EVER in modern history held a "bomb-proof" majority in the Senate.  If the Democrats get a 60 vote majority, as could happen, we would truly be looking at a totalitarian situation.”

Didn’t think you’d want to scare the folks this late or suddenly split hairs galore, Micky! 
Given the bleak economy, my last post insinuated that a Democrat dual-House majority might not be such a bad thing – apparently I’m not alone. Historically, as you’d know, investors inevitably prefer the Republicans. Yet latest dedicated poll shows them not only equally divided (despite Obama tax mention), but relatively blase on the prospect of the Democrats controlling both houses. First time ever, as far as I can recall. Their fear of continued Republican shenanigans appear to outweigh all other considerations; they want change and good action.

KTF: “It is morally indefensible for a nation such as the US not to have some sort of safety net that ensures that ALL of its citizens receive at least some level of healthcare if they are uninsured.”

Totally agree – fundamental, more so for world’s richest nation. I missed your previous remarks and apologise for any misinterpretation. Closing tax loopholes isn’t quite as easy as it might at first appear though; a veritable army of clever tax experts thrive on constantly inventing new twists and turns, whereas Courts favor the law’s letter over its spirit.

Other than as a revenue-raising measure and particularly where dealing with major riches, estate tax is in fact partially aimed at safeguarding a nation’s future wealth by way of impeding perpetual accumulation in the hands of the few (even now, the top 1% own one-third the wealth). Concentrated wealth equals economic and political power, corrupts the democratic process, undermines free market competition, and promotes public discontent and destructive inequality, if not pervasive sense of political impotence. Only a shame that the multi-national isn’t subject to more effective checks - in my opinion their unbridled growth/powers pose a far greater threat to the future public good. The Carnegies of this world in fact drove most of the modern corporation’s facilitating legal framework.

This thread is fast becoming academic but what the heck. To you estate duty smacks of ‘socialism’, but as for loaded labels like ‘capitalism’ isn’t this mere semantics? By definition all government motion (by the people, for the people?) – taxes, services, law enforcement and Courts, highways, endless regulations etc, etc – all have a communal or social intent. To me on the other hand, using taxpayer funds to buy stakes in private enterprise financial institutions reminds unduly of communism (and how is it to be eventually unraveled?); much ado over Obama’s ‘spread the wealth’, yet here nary a dissenting voice!

KTF: “They deserve to be held accountable and the way that is done in a democracy is to replace the party in power. I would feel the same way if it were the Democrats who made a mess of things.”

You caught it in one! Thought Obamacon article pretty pertinent. Goes to show that governments tend not so much to win government as lose it, although where Obama is concerned, credit where credit is due, whereas McCain’s rhetoric throughout may only be described as ‘content free’.

Bye, bye, Blitzen? I too think Obama will breeze in - electoral votes his bar the formalities.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 "To me on the other hand, using taxpayer funds to buy stakes in private enterprise financial institutions reminds unduly of communism (and how is it to be eventually unraveled?);"

Amen!  This bailout is a real Trojan Horse, Chisum.  We've sat by and allowed government takeover of our banking system, while we tut-tut over Chavez' oil companies' nationalization.  We've failed our descendants, sadly.  Too bad we've got a bunch of spineless wimps in office, with the exception of a few courageous Blue Dog democrats and non-RINO republicans.

For the record, we did post about it on this forum, when it happened.  You're late to the party.  BabyEagle4U tirelessly posted the contact information for members of Congress and the Senate.  A lot of us called our reps, more than a few times.

Now we have the January 2008 video of Obama, safely in San Francisco, explaining how, under his new regulations, anyone so foolhardy as to build a new coal-fired power plant will be bankrupted.  I don't know about California, but with an agenda like that, Mr Obama is going to preside over a lot of chilly Americans.  But, that's ok, he's gonna bring HOPE and CHANGE.

Can we go back and nominate a centrist Democrat like Senator Clinton, and/or a business-minded Republican, like Governor  Romney?

In the FWIW, category, I have friends and acquaintances both in the US and overseas who have been following the US election closely - but are not political junkies like I tend to be. I sent an email to these individuals this morning after I received several emails asking for my opinion on the likely outcome of the election. Here is an excerpt from that email for anyone who is interested (with minor modifications):

 

"As most of you know, the popular vote is not the determinant for who wins the presidential election - it is determined by the electoral college which consists of delegates won on a state by state basis. For those not familiar with the intricacies of the electoral college process in the US which determines who wins the presidency here are the key elements to watch:

Polls close in Indiana first at 6 pm Eastern time. This is a consistently Republican state but is closely contested this election according to the polls. If Indiana is called for Obama in the first hour after the polls close, the belief is that Obama will win big.

If Pennsylvania OR Ohio goes to Obama, he will almost certainly win the presidency. If both these states are won by McCain, then we are probably in for a long wait to know who wins the presidency because we will have to wait for the outcome of all the other states. Pennsylvania voted for Kerry and Gore in the last two elections but it is considered vulnerable this time because of the demographics. It is an unusual state which was once described as being "Philadelphia in the east, Pittsburgh in the West and Alabama in the middle".  Apparently, in Western Pennsylvania there are people who still fly the Confederate flag - and an African-American for president does not sit well with many people there.

The KTF family, including sibling's family will deliver nine votes for Obama in Virginia . These votes for Obama in Virginia make a difference because it is a state that has never voted Democrat since 1964 and is currently trending towards Obama. If Virginia goes for Obama, even if he loses Pennsylvania AND Ohio, the odds favor a victory by Obama."

I wish many good lucks with your votes.  It makes not a good time for vote.  We must return to Europe Thursday and had a good time at the National event and make many friends to vote.  I try to shake the hand of Mrs Palin when she come to our friends buts the police moved us, shame.

Gert

Ron Paul interview regarding Berg vs.Obama 10:00PM Eastern Tonight.
 
http://www.lanlamphere.com/public/2008/11/03/ron-paul-appearing-on-overnight-am-with-lan-lamphere-tonight/
 
He will also be on American Morning 11 04 08  
 
:o)~
 
 
 
 

Well summed, KTF. What, us political junkies! The disinterested only deserve what they get, as realized by mass of newly–invigorated early voters.  Love or loath him, Obama re-awakened constituents, injected fresh hope and dynamism. If he loses, disappointment and despondency all round, and not only within the US.

Sorry Micky, wasn’t aware corporate bailout issue ran hot previous. Sets a hell of a precedent though, rewarding failure and encouraging future repeat, if not in part aimed at maintaining Party electability. Then Bush calls international summit and, for benefit of proles back home no doubt, rants about the joys of unfettered capitalism … And suddenly so eager to share self-inflicted woes with ‘tired, old Europe’!

Chilly Americans? Don’t know the full Obama tale but pretty absurd to talk of bankrupt coal-fired power plants without viable alternatives. Domestically, given the political will, spurring alternative energies by hitting power plants with steep carbon levies is easy enough, as for concurrently applying proceeds toward alleviating consumer pains etc, but as for ‘clean coal’ it leaves the crucial question of international competitiveness. The whole issue demands effective global accord and now rather than tomorrow, and what chance of that!

Romney’s got the brain and economic expertise McCain lacks (I’d even overlook the Mormon thing!) but plenty of baggage too – media would probably have had a field day with him too. Still, how many Presidents pursued policies in complete opposition to pre-election rhetoric? In fact, in lieu of a mostly chronically parochial and inadequate education system and widespread ‘non enlightenment’ (with some sort of nationalistic hubris ruling the roost?), the less specifics the better. I bet Obama wishes he’d hadn’t misread public psyche by proffering in good faith ‘spread the wealth’ reply.

Almost anywhere else and but for culture-derived prevailing sense of misplaced priorities, often bordering on the surreal (witness luxurious obsession over guns and range of other irrelevancies – soon, many will be lucky if they can even afford a gun a gun!), or were election held six months hence (consumer confidence at record lows, October manufacturing down to 25-year low, Ford worst October sales since WW2, anything up 200 000 additional jobs lost and with a further two million set to lose their homes), Obama would probably romp in. Is Obama’s ‘they cling to their guns and religion’ really so far off the mark? How many can even begin to relate to his ‘citizen of the world’ notions, or patently rational, evidence-based mindset?
 

 [(witness luxurious obsession over guns and range of other irrelevancies – soon, many will be lucky if they can even afford a gun a gun!),  Is Obama’s ‘they cling to their guns and religion’ really so far off the mark?]

 Where I live, a gun might just make the difference whether you eat meat, or whether you subsist on beans and rice, hardly a luxury.  I know many, many people in my area that supplement their diet with venison and other game, and that's when the economy is considered good.  Now, more people will look to the woods for nutritious food.  In addition, Hunters for the Hungry feeds the homeless in my area. Those whitetails don't march to the butcher by themselves, you know.

We can't have these poor dullards clinging to religion, now, can we?  I'm sure C.S Lewis, John Milton, and St Thomas Aquinas would agree most heartily with Mr Obama.  He's so much more intelligent than they were.  But wait, does Mr Obama not profess to be a Christian?  I'm so confused.

Come on, Micky, I doubt Obama was referring to hunting rifles or thinking that people should starve before being allowed to hunt. Most of the educated and thinking people I know who live here in PA agreed 100% with his statement. The truth is that parts of this state value guns over all else and  use their professed love of god and religion to their own advantage. I have had  many neighbors and co-workers over the years who openly expressed their hatred and disdain for anyone who isn't a white protestant while in the next breath touting how much they love god.  How is that possible?

Certainly not a bright statement for Obama to have made, but about as spot on as one could possibly be when it comes to the mentality in some areas of this state where there are more hate groups than any other state in the union.   Within 200 miles of my house there are about 10 organized hate groups  including the KKK, the Council of Conservative Citizens, the Keystone Skinheads, the National Socialist Movement AKA America's Nazi party, The American Thule Society, the Aryan Nation,  and the White Power Liberaton Front.  

It's not about something as innocuous as hunting at all; it goes far deeper than that. It's about justifying the narrow world of hate in which somelive and thrive in here in PA. The good news for Obama is that the majority of those who were offended by his statement have never voted in their lives and are not even registered; they don't want to put themselves into a system that might force them into abiding by the law and registering their arsenals of weapons.  

I live in Northern Virginia but in an area that is not densely populated. I arrived at the voting site at 6 am when the polls opened and there were about 300 people in line. Just to keep things in context, in prior elections, when I have arrived at the poll booth there have been about a dozen people ahead of me. It took me about 40 minutes to vote.

I would like to share an email I received from England this morning that expresses eloquently the sentiments of many around the world about our election. I have made a couple of minor edits to maintain the anonymity of the sender since I am posting it without his express consent:

"And so the day has come at last.  To paraphrase the immortal words of another world leader, while America votes, the world awaits! 

In all my years of political consciousness, going back to the days of Suez and Hungary in 1956, I have never experienced the kind of excitement and suspended animation that surrounds this election, of a US President.  The nearest that I remember was that of JFK in 1960, and the live debates between him and Nixon.  This is decidedly different.  I had a glimpse of what the Americans themselves were going through in June when we were in the States. 

But from the wider global perspective, there can be no doubt that most of us feel that right now America stands at a cross-roads.  And it is no exaggeration to say that the world at large wants Obama to win, because only he has the charisma, the intellect, the moral fibre, the vision, the imagination and the understanding to regain America`s image and status as the most powerful nation on earth, as the leader of democracies - and because he can be trusted to exercise that power wisely.  If McCain should get in, then it will be more of the same, which is not saying much.  Obama on the other hand is uniquely placed to restore America`s greatness and credibility in the eyes of the world.  He comes across as a person who has empathy with humanity as a whole.  

From an American perspective, an Obama win will seal for once and all the claim and the implicit promise of the founding fathers of the nation as reiterated by Martin Luther King in his `I have a dream` speech in 1963, to create a society in which people are judged by the content of their character rather than by the colour of their skin.  That day has come.  We can only hope for the best.
 
The world is watching!"

"Come on, Micky, I doubt Obama was referring to hunting rifles or thinking that people should starve before being allowed to hunt."

Please understand, that part of my post was personally to Chisum, about his "luxurious obsession over guns" statement.  I did NOT refer to Mr Obama making such a claim.  Please do not put words in my mouth.