|
|
|
MarneGator
|
I am totally satisfied that the campaigning is over. Of course, the 2012 campaign will begin soon enough!
I'm normally quite the pessimist (especially in the realm of national governance) but I'm actually cautiously optimistic on this one. Are there doubts remaining about the new President-elect? Sure, but no more than any other politician.
I have some genuine faith in a President Obama administration but I'll refrain from proper judgement until after January 20th.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
-Veritas-
|
|
|
scalliano
Elite
Posts: 1095
Yup, that's me
|
With reservations, I'd say that I am pleased with the result. I strongly doubt that the fear machine will suddenly grind to a halt after the 20th January, but to those who voted for McCain I'd just like to reassure you: Barack Obama is no socialist.Ultimately, all that the McCain/Palin ticket had was rhetoric. Now while I have strong reservations that Obama will deliver half of the change that he's promising, I think that the Republican party as a whole could never win the election given the current state of play and the fact that their efforts had been sorely crippled by a current president who couldn't find his ass with an atlas. Granted, this is a milestone in American history. I'm sure that we all saw the footage of Jessie Jackson crying his eyes out (ironic, since he was caught on microphone saying he'd like to cut Obama's nuts off  ), but I can't help but feel that Obama will end up toeing the line like everyone else. I'm optimistic, but cautious. I tip my hat to McCain, though. He accepted defeat in a gracious and dignified manner, which is more than could be said for his audience ... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
PSN ID: scalliano
The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
|
|
|
|
Kajet
|
It's pretty sad when THE ENTIRE WORLD is scared by a single countries electoral candidate.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fourier
|
It's pretty sad when THE ENTIRE WORLD is scared by a single countries electoral candidate.
It seems scary that THE ENTIRE WORLD is scared by a single country's electoral candidate if there is a rational reason for it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
What I find scary is how willing so many are to embrace someone they know almost nothing about, not just in the United States, but the world over. "Obama mania" struck me as a hair short of idolatry, if not outright idolatry. He's promised change. So? That's like promising the sun will rise tomorrow, things are always changing. Does anyone know what he's going to actually do? I see this election as a victory for a cult of personality that did an excellent job of not telling anyone anything specific, and a lot of willful ignorance. How many people voted for this man because he's "Not Bush"? If some people voted for him because he is supposedly African-American, that's wrong for several reasons. First, voting for someone based on racial terms is racist, even if the person is an ethnic minority. Second, Obama is of mixed descent, which means (surprise) he's an American. Just because his skin is dark doesn't make him "black" any more than the fact that his skin not being very dark makes him "white". From Dr. Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" speech:
I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal." I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood. I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice. I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. (emphasis mine)
So anyone who voted for Obama because they want "the first black president", shame on you. Race isn't supposed to matter, isn't that what Dr. King said? I'm hoping that race was not a strong motivation for people voting for or against him, though I know human nature and I know there are people on both sides that either wanted a black president or were appalled at the idea. Leaving that behind, what then what is known about Obama's character? I know that he has had strong associations with very radical and dangerous people. Reverand Wright comes to mind, along with Ayers, and his connections with ACORN. There's a lot of things on his record that bear looking into. For those who are pleased with his election to office, I make a request of you. Research this man's history. Learn who he has been prior to this election. Scalliano, you say he is not a socialist. He has said that, and I quote, "It's good when you spread the wealth around". That is, by definition, a socialist statement. I say this not to begin an argument, but just to bring forth a fact in order to ask you - can you be certain he is not?
I realize many are tired of George W. Bush. I have found his presidency to be a disappointment as well, though probably not for the same reasons as many who dislike him. I don't want to dash anyone's hopes here, I just urge caution in accepting change for change's sake. Personally I hope everything I think about this man is wrong and that he turns out to be an excellent president and a strong leader that does not flush the US Constitution down the toilet. McCain, to me, was a disappointing choice to contrast with Obama, as I don't think his record shows that he's anything beyond a weak moderate. I would have preferred a hard-right conservative to have run against him. At least there would be a stronger contrast.
I am not going to get my hopes up over any of this, nor am I going to view this as the end of America as many on the right are now expecting. I remember how so many thought that Bush being re-elected would "doom us all", that some contrived emergency would result in martial law, National Guard troops throwing people into cattle cars and carting them away to concentration camps, and Dick Cheney's "shadow government" would take over the country, etc. History has proven otherwise, has it not? Fearmongering is of little use to me, and I have seen absurd paranoia on both the left and the right over the years. I will observe, as I always do, though my opinion regarding Obama is that he's a left-wing liberal with little experience, a tremendously huge ego, possibly a vicious vengeful streak, and I do not see any reason to trust him to be anything other than yet another career politician. I am fairly conservative in my views and extremely distrustful of politicians. I know what power does to people, what it can do. I refuse to see Obama as anything other than "just another man in a suit" with all the flaws of human character that come with that. For those who think the world is going to suddenly get brighter because of a single political election, to quote a very wise individual, you may find in the end that having is not nearly as fulfilling a thing as wanting.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
  I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
Tabun
Pixel Procrastinator
Team Member
Elite (3k+)
  
Posts: 3330
|
I would just like to make a small note from the sidelines, namely that I chose "yes" as the answer to the question "do you like the results of the election". If there would have been additional options, such as "yes, it's fantastic!" or "yes, finally! the world is saved!" or "yes, I'm orgasmic about it!", et cetera, I would still have chosen a modest and simple "yes".
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
| Tabun |
?Morituri Nolumus Mori? |
| |
|
|
|
scalliano
Elite
Posts: 1095
Yup, that's me
|
While spreading the wealth is very much a socialist mantra, in Obama's case I doubt it will amount to much. I'm aware of his past, however, the endorsement of a multi-billion-dollar financial bailout of the big banks speaks volumes. As I said, I have my doubts. He may be involved with ACORN, but true left-wing politics won't get him very far in the White House. The US definition of "left-wing" apparently seems to be "not quite as far right as the Republicans". There still seems to be that "damn ruskies" mentality when it comes to political ideology. Besides, the last few months of bakruptcies, repossessions and redundancies have demonstrated that capitalism is as open to corruption as socialism, fascism or communism. It has merely had a better reputation until now. Case in point: in the UK, the Labour party used to be the main socialist party, while the Conservatives, well you get the point. Fact is, since Tony Blair took over the Labour party in 1994, they've both been as right-wing as each other. Both favour privatisation, both support the war in Iraq and both think that everything can be solved by throwing taxpayers' money at it (Northern Rock, anyone?). Not much of a choice, is it? And, of course, now we have our own dim-witted slack-jawed twat in charge. Is liberalism really such a dirty word? Liberalism put an end to slavery. It gave women the vote. It gave rights to homosexuals and ethnic minorities. Without it, America would be no better than China, whereas now it is still slightly better Is the world going to change overnight? Not bloody likely, but we've seen eight years of fearmongering and shit excuses for passing bills that negate some of the most basic human and constitutional rights, not all of which are entirely the work of Bush. Not to mention TWO (count 'em) failing military conflicts (one of which was based entirely on bullshit, but that's another thread). Bush has publicly said that he doesn't give a shit about Bin Laden, yet the entire objective of the War on Terror was to find those who masterminded the WTC attacks. It is definately time for a rethink. I'd like to look upon the result of this election as the general public saying that they've had enough. Now, it could be argued that in that case they could have voted for a third party, but who the hell is gonna do that? |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: 2008-11-08, 04:50 by scalliano »
|
Logged
|
PSN ID: scalliano
The Arena knows no gender, colour or creed, only skill.
|
|
|
|
Thomas Mink
|
I'm quite happy with Obama winning the presidency, being the liberal leftist that I am. Sure, I have my differences on some subjects.. but he clearly had more in common with my views than McCain did. In the end though, I'll just assume I'll be disappointed with his run as president. I've been for the last 7 years, so it's probably just implanted in my brain.. since I really never paid much attention to politics until maybe 8 years ago during my senior year in high school.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
ReBoOt
Mean ol Swede
Team Member
Elite
Posts: 1294
|
Well while im not that interested in the election of an US president, I do however feel Obama was the right choice.
Thought as Pho said i really hope that ppls didnt just vote for him cuz his black, it shouldnt matter if a man/woman is pink/green/red/black/white and so on, as long as him/she is the right man/woman for the job.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Phoenix
|
Scal, I'm no fan of capitalism or socialism. I think both systems, since they are monetary systems, can lead to misery and poverty. Socialism rewards nobody, while capitalism helps nobody. The conditions people lived in under Communism were appalling. I cannot see how socialism works any better than capitalism, only that it creates a different set of problems.
The problem with the housing markets that led to the current financial collapse wasn't strictly a capitalist problem either. It runs a lot deeper than that. Race politics and some very crooked lending practices ended up in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - which were government run entities, by the way, not private sector - assuming bundled mortgage sales of what were going to be failing debts. When I first saw sub-prime mortgages being sold I knew right then and there that the housing market was going to drop like a brick once the loans went past the initial "teaser" rates and the payment on the mortgage would basically double. People would default and abandon their houses and just live somewhere else, and that's exactly what happened. The system was set up to fail with one bad piece of legislation and one clever lending tactic that was brought into play. Forcing banks to lend to people who could not repay them could only result in defaults on loans, but when the bill was passed and for a few years more minorities were "owning their own homes" it made a LOT of politicians look good and feel warm and fuzzy so they could pat themselves on the back, and of course get re-elected for their next term. In the end, the minorities got screwed, the taxpayers got screwed, and the bank investers got screwed. Nobody won except the politicians, and it cost everyone else very greatly. Then along comes the government - which created the problem in the first place - to the rescue by throwing money at the problem, which will result in higher taxes or a larger federal deficit. That's like trusting the same idiot who broke your car to come along and fix it. The biggest failure in this isn't capitalism or socialism, it's the US Congress's ability to do anything other than muck everything up.
As for definitions, I think perhaps a semantics difference is at work here. In the political debate of liberal vs conservative I could write paragraph after paragraph expanding on the differences between the two as far as defined in the United States, but it would be easier to just point you toward Sir Google. Google Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan for a good start. I also would not say liberalism freed slaves or gave anyone the right to vote. Liberalism as defined in the US actually began with President Wilson. Liberalism as a political ideology should not be confused with liberty, which the conservatives and libertarians in the US value very greatly. Abraham Lincoln was not politically liberal by today's standards.
What I dislike about American politics and politics in general is that people often do not state their ideologies when running for office. They run as what they think people want, then execute their own plans when in power. If you believe raising taxes, banning firearms, and allowing gay marriage is good for the country, then say so. If you think cutting taxes, concealed carry, and defining marriage as only between one human male and one human female is good, then say so. That way people know where you stand and can choose accordingly. That's how it's supposed to work, is it not? Personally I think the level of dishonesty and also dishonesty by the press has reached a point where nobody has a flocking clue about anything, least of all those going in to vote. That's what concerns me most is ignorance and deception, and how much of a role those have played into this election and every other election. I'm looking down the road at how this may act on a global scale with even more charismatic people saying things that people want to hear.
I'm aware that Bin Laden is still out there, and I'm aware that the wars were handled badly. My opinion regarding war is this. You do not go to war unless necessary, but once engaged, you annihilate the enemy until there's no enemy left, or until they surrender unconditionally. This whole idea of "proportional response" is a load of crap. Prolonging a conflict costs more in civilian lives than an all-out blitzkrieg. World War II was fought with much more primitive weapons, and the US was in the war for only a few years, and it was a major war fought by the US on two fronts. Iraq should have been done and over with in less than a year, with the borders secured completely, the country run with an iron fist while rebuilding, and the reconstruction done in less than 5 years. But... everyone's afraid of looking bad in front of a camera. The military's job is to kill people and blow things up. If you're going to accept anything less than total and complete victory then there's no point in going. So I agree with you that Iraq has been handled badly. As for whether it was a mistake to start that war in the first place, well, I would say Saddam fooled everyone a little too well, but I'll let history judge that. There's more conflicts looming on the horizon and I think even after Iraq is rebuilt that region is going to remain problematic regardless of what anyone wants.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
I fly into the night, on wings of fire burning bright...
|
|
|
|
McDeth
|
One thing we have to realize about this election is that we had a distinct contrast between new and old. It is important to note we have a generation of politically over saturated high school students and college students who have spent Bush's second term watching their parent's sweat a storm over bills or wondering where money for tuition was going to come from. It is very easy to make the mistake that the president holds the majority of the blame for issues that occur in our economy, but it is congress that holds the purse strings.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that this country, namely the young, were not necessarily voting for Obama, but they were voting against a system that they felt had failed them and those that are close to them.
I suppose that every generation needs their Jimmy Carter, but will see what happens.
As for the country going bankrupt, I think we are coming to a point in our history where there is consensus on how our economy should be run and I believe that the majority is finally realizing the necessity for fiscal responsibility. Even though it's difficult, I have a more positive outlook in this country's future. For the first time in our history, we have now a generation of moderately, to highly intelligent politically conscious young people who have voted in a bigger mass then they ever have. Their interest will not stop at simply voting, but they will demand a more active voice in how their elected officials operate. This may very well backfire on the left who promoted this to begin with especially when they find that leftist economics have no chance in Hell of working.
I probably should mention that the purist conservative model of an unregulated market is just as bad too so that I don't get trolled.
At any rate I wanted to counter act some of the negative outlooks I've read in this thread so far with some of my more positive theories.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Beer? I'm down.
|
|
|
|
