Congrats to Obama (OT)

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

The ironic thing is, that while Congress, as a whole, has low approval ratings, almost every single Representative and Senator has good to excellent ratings from his own district or state.

That's because, as a whole, we realize Congress really sucks sticking all this crappy pork onto every miniscule worthwhile Bill, but no one complains when some grant is awarded to measure the viscosity of ketchup that creates 10 jobs in Pocatello, Idaho...............

[Archive]

Posted By: Ryan Christoff

What this country really needs is more pompous rhetoric from the fascist uber-right for the benefit of the uninformed. Too bad there's no one on this board that could fill such a void.

-Ryan

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

Ted- well I guess that makes me one of the usual suspects.

But I do agree his rhetoric alone will not save the country. He has to produce. But you know what, we are so much better off with Obama in charge than we were the last eight years that I will guarantee an improvement. We just ended one of the darkest eras in our country's history.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tom Boblitt

of the Uberleftists either.................

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

As usual the rightists on the board will skewer figures to advance their hard line ideological right wing agenda.
The view that the New Deal accomplished little, that only WWII ended the Depression, is very widely held. But it is not correct. It is based on a mis-reading of reconstructed unemployment statistics from that time, which treat the workers actually employed by the New Deal as though they were unemployed. Which they were not.
So it is fundamentally incorrect to argue that FDR's New Deal did nothing and that only the Second World War actually got the American economy out of the Great Depression. Such historical revisionism has been made popular during the past 25 years by a cadre of ideologically motivated economists and historians.
These two paragraphs are taken from a lengthy essay at:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/21/unemployment_statistics_of_the_new_deal_era/

==

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Unknown author
--
We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.
No retreat baby, no surrender.
The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Joe Jones

I tend to vote for who I think is the best person for the job.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

These Unemployment figures I posted are out of the World Almanac (80 million copies sold).

1930....25.5%
1935....20.3%
1936....16.9%
1937....14.3%
1938....19.1%
1939....17.2%
1940....14.8%
1945.....1.9%

So people....I ask you, is the World almanac "ideological motivated" ? ?

Richard....you and your rhetoric are the ones that are ideological motivated.....get real ! !

And, quit your super leftist-propaganda bull-crap on this forum.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

Ted - as long as right wing idealogues post her, I think I have just as much right as you do to post. How dare you tell me to quit posting,,, or is that just George Bush and your favorite of all, Tricky Dick, rubbing off on you.

==

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

Unknown author

--

We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.

No retreat baby, no surrender.

The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Will

I don't think it would be difficult at all to cause at least, let's see ... one, two, three, hell, four people on this board to expire today by way of coronary if we so decided. But, too much work today though it might be fun to try.



One good way to summarize presidential politics and influence is to look at the differnces between Clinton and Bush and then try to figure where Obama fits in. Following is my PSA political scale:



On a scale of 1-10, 1 being Communist left and 10 being Nazi Fascist right, Bill Clinton was about a 5.5. Bush was about an 8.5/9. This democracy appears to work better when you have someone in the middle at the controls who's willing to do some compromising. Clinton did and the US had unprecendeted wealth and world influence. Bush did not and, well, look around.



Obama is likely a little left of Clinton but, face it, politics at that level are completely controlled by major corporations and the collosal budget of the military. They'd never allow a president to shift much farther left (on my scale) then to, say, a 4 so we're likely to do a lot better with Obama then we did with Bush (despite that being a pathetically low bar).

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

Funny stuff Will, but if kidney cancer didn't kill me, then I don't think this board will do it either.
And I like your analysis of Obama-Bush-Clinton.
==

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Unknown author
--
We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.
No retreat baby, no surrender.
The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Will

Don't worry, Richard, you're not on the list of likely candidates.

[Archive]

Posted By: gotwins

Ted, I'm with Richard on this one. Before you call bullcrap, you should look in the mirror.

First, the unemployment numbers you use start in 1930--why? FDR did not take office until 1933. All you show with your first, largest number is just how bad it was under Hoover.

Second, the unemployment rate FDR inherited in 1933 was just about 25%. Even using your figures, he made a significant drop to 20% in two years. Another significant drop to under 17% occurred the next year. On what basis do you believe the rates should have dropped more dramatically and/or would have if your glorious Republican ideology were followed? None.

In fact, it is widely held among economists that the unemployment spike in 1938 is in large part due to FDR's decision to act more conservatively in his policies, as he focused on balancing the budget. Included in the fold of economists who believe this conservative approach was untimely is Paul Krugman, you know, the guy who just won the Nobel Prize in economics.

Finally, FDR brought us much overdue regulation in areas that brought about and/or worsened the economic collapse-- banking and Wall Street. Sound familiar? The FDIC and SEC were both created under Roosevelt in response to the abuses in stocks and banking practices. A true man of action took action, rather than simply chant the "we don't need no regulation" "let the market dictate everything" "government is nothing but intermeddling" claptrap I keep hearing from the self-righteous right.

Give the new guy a chance, rather than taking early aim at policies which may very well work and which are needed and which cannot possibly worse than those left by the biggest pinhead to ever sit in the Oval Office.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

I will repeat the question....

" So people....and Richard....I ask you, is the World almanac "ideological motivated" ? "


And Richard, as usual you have the facts confused......you said about me....

"your favorite of all, Tricky Dick, rubbing off on you."


During my lifetime, one of my favorite Presidents is John F. Kennedy....the very 1st President I voted for in 1960.

And, another one of my favorite Presidents is Ronald Reagan, who I voted for twice.

Both these Presidents supported a strong Military; and.....CUT TAXES !

Kennedy in today's environment would be considered a CONSERVATIVE ! !


Can you "dig" that Richard ?


Or, is this beyond your ability to comprehend this fact ? ?

[Archive]

Posted By: JohnG

ShoelessJJ said in reference to Obama(I paraphrased)

" His record speaks for itself in the accomplishment category."




Are you serious?

Could you or anyone post a list of his "Accomplishments"? I'd sure like to see such a list.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

"is the World almanac "ideological(ly) motivated" ?"
To answer this question,,,the World Almanac is of course not ideologically motivated, but regarding the figures they used, did those figures include the workers that were working on New Deal projects. The numbers would change greatly then.
And I am sure JFK today would have been an advocate of gay rights, woman's choice rights, against the Iraq war, and many other liberal positions.
And regarding the tax cuts,,, Bush was the only president in history to cut taxes during wartime, (2 wars not just 1),,, how well has that worked out?
Was it ok for me to answer you Ted, or do I have to ask your permission to speak out again?
And I got the info on you and Tricky Dick from a prior post of yours, in another thread, in which you (I think I remember this correctly) defended him,, (boy talk about minority positions) and attacked Woodward and Bernstein.
=

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Unknown author
--
We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.
No retreat baby, no surrender.
The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

Hey guy......go back and re-read what I posted

Why did I start with 1930....wasn't the Depression at the end of 1929 ?

I don't understand where you are coming from with that question ?

The year 1929 culminated the "Roaring Twenties", a period of high living. Very similar to our recent scenario,
where the Housing Market was "booming" and the Stock Market's DOW climbed to 14,000.

The Roaring 20's and Hoover are directly responsible for the Depression which caused 25% Unemployment
by 1930.

When FDR took over in 1933, his solutions to try and restore our economy were "Big Government" type remedies.

It is well documented that FDR's policies (which were very similar to what our politicians are doing now) only
exacerbated this country's economic woes. And, dragged out our depressed economy for another 8 years.

But, if you are comfortable with all these multi-Billion (or Trillion) dollar bailouts, then I cannot convince you
of anything....and, I will not waste my time trying to.

It's your children and my grandchildren that will be burdened with inevitable future HIGH TAXES to pay for these
policies.

I would rather that the 100 Million middle-class working people be given $10.000 TAX rebates (that's a Trillion),
then give these $$$$$$ to the culprits and institions that created this economic mess.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

"I would rather that the 100 Million middle-class working people be given $10.000 TAX rebates (that's a Trillion),
then give these $$$$$$ to the culprits and institions that created this economic mess." - Ted Z
Well at least we can agree on something Ted, though I must say I think that deregulation caused these problemss and that has gone on with greatly increased velocity in the past eight years. In addition to deregulation I guess you have to toss in greed also.
==




I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Unknown author
--
We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.
No retreat baby, no surrender.
The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: JimCrandell

Whew--thanks for joining in Ted--at last someone with some sense. I never thought the left wing coalition of labor unions, minorities, college profs and the mainstream media could include sports card collectors but I guess it could be wrong.

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I agree- these bailouts are horrendous, nobody knows where the money is going, there seems to be no accountability, and it already seems clear that they are not working.

Bailing out banks, instead of people, is the wrong way to go. Help out the middle class by giving them a huge tax rebate. If one fails, good riddance. There are other banks.

[Archive]

Posted By: LetsGoBucs

First, I also want to wish the new president well. I hope that in four years he wins a massive landslide re-election, because that would mean we've made great strides in the USA.

Second, I'm a "right-wing conservative". I'm also an American and proud of it. For those that want to bash Bush for everything wrong in the country, I'd say blame him for foreign policy (which he is responsible for), blame him for the handling of the war (he is commander in chief), but lets make sure we lay plenty of blame at the doorstep of individuals and Congress for overspending. For regulations passed under Clinton that Congress refused to reconsider and regulators that were a joke. Lets also acknowledge that there hasn't been another terrorist attack in the USA. That doesn't make the war on terror policy correct, but it is a fact (even if you say it was luck). But overall I think everyone can agree that in the past four years especially the country has not made great strides.

Third, I think Obama will be somewhat like Clinton. I think he's pragmatic. I think he's chosen people from a range of philosophies to surround himself with and will listen to. His biggest challenge will be that really for the first time he is running the show. And yes he ran a very effective campaign, but this is just a little bit bigger

The one thing that I really believe pulls this country apart was mentioned earlier. How can half of the people not pay taxes? My father was far from wealthy, far from middle-class, and in a good year was "lower-middle-class". He paid taxes, he never complained about it, he never felt someone else should pay his taxes for him. Our current situation leaves half the people believing things can be "free" and the other half believing they are being robbed. I personally believe in a progressive tax system. I believe those that benefit the most from our freedoms should contribute more to maintaining them. I am willing to pay more taxes as I realize that we have to balance the budget (then I want my taxes reduced). I also believe that everyone has a responsibility to contribute.

I truly hope Obama meant what he said about responsibility. I hope he follows through and that we don't see "bailout" of homeowners that bought an extra 200 or 300K of house that they couldn't afford. That we don't see any more bank bailouts with executives earning millions per year. That he doesn't give California and other fiscally irresponsible states billions to continue spending money on programs that in essence just exist to get people re-elected. We as a country have a lot of cleaning up to do and we do need to pick ourselves up, brush ourselves off, and suck it up and work hard to get back to even. And no better way to convey that message than through actions that force individuals to take responsibility, states to take responsibility, Congress to take responsibility (ok they are idiots but I hope he can use the bully pulpit to force them to at least not do any more damage), etc, etc, etc.

Good Luck Mr President

[Archive]

Posted By: sagard

Bottom line is that if Bush (and republicans) would have been a conservative the republicans would have never lost power.

The far left and the far right are both up in arms with Obama, so he must be off to a good start.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

JohnG wrote: "Are you serious?

Could you or anyone post a list of his "Accomplishments"? I'd sure like to see such a list."

-Columbia graduate
-Harvard Law graduate
-Head of the Harvard Review
-Illinois State Senator
-United States Senator
-President of the United States

Your turn to list your accomplishments JohnG

[Archive]

Posted By: J Levine

How is this for the most disgusting thing on TV last night...local news ran a story on one of Arnold's proposed taxes...In California, the state tax on a bottle of wine is 4 cents. Arnold wants to up that to something like 30 cents. This is not 30 cents on the dollar but 30 cents on the bottle of wine regardless of cost. They interviewed several people including a multi-millionaire who was upset that the wine tastings he routinely has at his house is going to cost him an extra $1000-$1500 a year. He makes nearly 8 million dollars a year and he is worried about $1000!!! It makes me sick...I pay $1000 a year for classroom supplies that used to be given free. And this multimillionaire is worried about his damn parties...it makes me sick. BTW, the wine tax would net the state a substantial amount of money but nowhere near what we need.

Joshua

[Archive]

Posted By: Patrick McHugh

George W Bush was the best president we have ever had. The economic problem was brought on by the every one must own a house democrats. Although most of you do not see it now Bushes unwavering policy of this country will never be attaced again as long as i am in charge proved true. There are so many people-terrorists in this world just waiting to bring down america i hope the Obama team is ready. I for one am thankful for Mr. Bush and his tough on terrorist policys which have enabaled me to live with freedom and dignity the last 7 years. Just keep downing Bush and keep beliving that your rights and freedom were not protected by him. Wake up! Do you not remember 9/11? I guess if you have not served you do not understand.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd Schultz

"It is well documented that FDR's policies (which were very similar to what our politicians are doing now) only exacerbated this country's economic woes. And, dragged out our depressed economy for another 8 years."

Maybe on Planet Ted, where apparently FOX news is the only source of information.

Again, many/ most economists and the world's current Nobel prize holder in economics state otherwise.

"In a November 10, 2008, New York Times column, Krugman wrote that Roosevelt's policies included "long-run achievements" that "remain the bedrock of our nation's economic stability" and that Roosevelt's short-term successes were constrained because "his economic policies were too cautious."

Krugman further wrote:

Now, there's a whole intellectual industry, mainly operating out of right-wing think tanks, devoted to propagating the idea that F.D.R. actually made the Depression worse. So it's important to know that most of what you hear along those lines is based on deliberate misrepresentation of the facts. The New Deal brought real relief to most Americans."

"Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, wrote: "In reality, any careful reading showed that the New Deal policies substantially ameliorated the effects of the Great Depression for tens of millions of people. The major economic failing of the New Deal was that President Roosevelt was not prepared to push the policies as far as necessary to fully lift the economy out of the Great Depression." Baker continued:

Roosevelt was too worried about the whining of the anti-stimulus crowd that he confronted. He remained concerned about balancing the budget when the proper goal of fiscal policy should have been large deficits to stimulate the economy. Roosevelt's policies substantially reduced the unemployment rate from the 25 percent peak when he first took office, but they did not get the unemployment rate back into single digits."

"Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke -- appointed by President George W. Bush -- wrote in his Essays on the Great Depression, "Only with the New Deal's rehabilitation of the financial system in 1933-35 did the economy begin its slow emergence from the Great Depression."

So learn to listen to someone other than Bret Hume and you may take a more "fair and balanced" understanding of what occurred with the New Deal.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Good for Ahnold...now they should legalize marijuana and prostitution - both of which will exist no matter what penalties exist on the law books. Tax them and see what kind of revenue comes in from that. Removes the criminal element, brings in money for the state, reduces the tax burden, and the jails won't be so overcrowded.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

Me......

" I would rather that the 100 Million middle-class working people be given $10,000 TAX rebates (that's a Trillion),
then give these $$$$$$ to the culprits and institutions that created this economic mess. - Ted Z "

Richard......

"Well at least we can agree on something Ted, though I must say I think that deregulation caused these problems
and that has gone on with greatly increased velocity in the past eight years. In addition to deregulation I guess
you have to toss in greed also."


Deregulation in the Housing and Stock Markets goes back further than the past 8 years. It goes back to 1979 when
Carter initiated the Community Reinvestment Act. And, was exploited to a higher level during the Clinton years.

Furthermore, the practice of Mortgage Co's "flipping off" their primary mortgages to speculators during the 1990's
thru to the present exacerbated this economic demise.

I don't know what to make of your above "agreement" with me....but, I think you can agree with my description of
the causal effects of our current economic situation.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

If you are quoting Krugman, then I will not argue with you. This guy is a full-bred Socialist.

I recommend the book that Stephen Mitchell mentioned in an earlier post on this thread......it focuses on
the years before, during, and after the Great Depression...."The Forgotten Man", by author Amity Schlaes.

Then you can decide for yourself what is real.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

I think you make good points. Victimless crimes shouldn't make for overcrowding in jails. We should reserve that room for the bank executives, auto executives and mortgage executives that are getting golden parachutes when they should be getting pin striped jump suits.

LetsGoBucks- You are my hero. A perfectly stated post that I agee with 1 million percent....

The main problems with America- Greed and the lack of individual repsonsibility.....EVREYONE should pay taxes...the more you make the more you pay. If you make 10k per year...your tax can be one dime...but damn it...you are paying as there is no free ride....Ok....now I will get off of my soap box....carry on.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

Ted - If you will notice, I stated deregulation went on with an increased velocity in the last 8 years. I did not state that deregulation started in the last 8 years. I was well aware that deregulation went back 30 years.

=



I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.

Unknown author

--

We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.

No retreat baby, no surrender.

The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Dave Hornish

Why all the debate? It's a known fact the White House has been leaning left for the last 60 years:

"White House leans again to the left(ies)
By Diane Mapes

With the inauguration of President Barack Obama, the left has taken over the White House yet again just as it did with Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush.

Confused? Dont be. Were talking hands, not political ideology.

Im a lefty. Get used to it, Obama said as he signed his first official documents on Tuesday, making him the sixth southpaw-in-chief weve seen since the end of World War II

Interestingly, his opponent, John McCain, is also left-handed, as were former presidents Harry Truman and Bill Clinton, former vice presidents Nelson Rockefeller and Henry Wallace and 1992 presidential candidate Ross Perot."

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Heh. That's funny Dave...and something I didn't know.

I wonder if Reagan had to learn to throw right handed or if he was ambidextrous.

[Archive]

Posted By: Steven Finley

For those that think the Obama administration is going to collapse with the rest of the country why don't you go ahead and sell me all your cardboard for 20% of the going rate. If you're right, you really should invest in Gold and not cards. I'm generous how about 25%. Like your beloved Bill O'Reilly says it, "You can't take it with you!"


P.S. Price adjusted to 22.67%.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

Dave

Your story left out Clinton who is Left-handed.

Also, that reporter has her story wrong on Reagan....he was Right-handed.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Patrick said: "George W Bush was the best president we have ever had. "


Perhaps in some bizzaro-like, parallel universe, but not on the planet earth. He was an intellectually disinterested man who allowed those surrounding him to run things. He will go down in history as one of, if not the, worst President in the history of the USA.


For the record, I am a life long Republican who has voted for Democrats exactly three times in my life, and two of those were purely anti-Bush votes. My vote for Obama was a protest to the GOP for what we have become.

The last eight years have divided our country more deeply than at any time since the Civil War. For the GOP to become successful again, the key is to heal that divide, not widen it. Both sides have their extremists. Always have. Always will. But roughly 80% of our country is centrist in their thinking. To allow a party to be led by the 10% on their fringe is suicidal.

[Archive]

Posted By: Glenn

The same goes for a baseball card forum, methinks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Simon

Kudos to JimVB for a very well written and thought provoking post.
=

I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Unknown author
--
We made a promise. We swore we'd always remember.
No retreat baby, no surrender.
The Boss

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Ted,

Reagan wrote with his right hand, but often told people that he was left-handed in everything else he did. Writing right-handed was forced upon Reagan by strict school teachers when he was young.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Reagan and I have something in common here. My Kindergarten teacher turned me into a righty and that was only 36 years ago. I still do many things left handed...including the computer mouse.

[Archive]

Posted By: Doug

I'm waiting to get my "Do you smell what Barack is cookin'?" T-shirt! Seriously, he has a mess to deal with and I hope he can do something to improve it.

[Archive]

Posted By: dan mckee

Agreed Jim with the entire statement starting this thread. I personally think he will do a spectacular job which is what will be needed to dig us out of this mess. He won my vote. Dan.

[Archive]

Posted By: Jim VB

Dan,

I went to Catholic schools for 13 years (K-12). In the 1960's and early 1970's. We had nuns. Creating a few new righties was far down their list of "accomplishments."

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

I went to public schools and I'm sure in 1972 they were no longer thinking lefties were EEEEVIL. My mother says I showed no preference when I entered school...I would write/color/eat with whatever hand suited me at the moment so they chose right for me. I'm pretty sure they were wrong though with my tendency to still do many things left handed.

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

Just came back and noticed 90+ posts on this thread I started.

I would like to personally thank everybody who kept political agendas out of it.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

DITTO to......
" Reagan and I have something in common here. My Kindergarten teacher turned me into a righty and that was only 36
years ago. I still do many things left handed...including the computer mouse.

My left hand and my left foot are large than my right. I should have been a natural left hander. I too, do the mouse as
a lefty....I bat better as a lefty....I occasionally play tennis as a lefty.

My backhand is better than my forehand. This, and batting lefty, are better simply because of the "leading eye" factor.
The vision in my right eye is better than my left eye.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

"Hey guy......go back and re-read what I posted Why did I start with 1930....wasn't the Depression at the end of 1929 ? I don't understand where you are coming from with that question?"

Perhaps you should re-read, Ted. You were trying to make the point that FDR's policies did not bring down unemployment. It makes no sense, then to begin with 1930. You should have begun with the unemployment rate in 1933, the year FDR, took office.

And, as was pointed out by gotwins, the numbers you posted show that FDR's policies worked, and worked well.

"It is well documented that FDR's policies (which were very similar to what our politicians are doing now) only exacerbated this country's economic woes. And, dragged out our depressed economy for another 8 years."

Care to back this absurd statement up with facts and/or numbers? Get busy with that World Almanac.

"It's your children and my grandchildren that will be burdened with inevitable future HIGH TAXES to pay for these policies. "

Yeah. The two trillion for the worse-than useless Iraq war won't be any problem at all, though.

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

"Reagan wrote with his right hand, but often told people that he was left-handed in everything else he did. Writing right-handed was forced upon Reagan by strict school teachers when he was young."


As it was forced upon almost all lefties, including Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig (and my father.)

[Archive]

Posted By: David Atkatz

"George W Bush was the best president we have ever had."

Bwa ha ha ha ha... (Excuse me; I couldn't help myself.)

Abraham Lincoln, wherever he is these days, must be extremely surprised.

"Wake up! Do you not remember 9/11? I guess if you have not served you do not understand."

Served? You mean like how Bush and Cheney served?

[Archive]

Posted By: Anonymous

I have laid off of this hanging curveball of a thread awhile but I just can't help myself any longer. First let me say, I am mostly apolitical and a moderate. I always vote my conscience and my pocketbook. I am neither red nor blue although I err to the conservative and those of you who have fifteen-year-old daughters understand. I love my family, I love my country. I have served my country honorably in action and am proud of who I am and who we are. I am not sure who said it but I am an advocate of the phrase Love your country unconditionally. Love your government because they deserve it.

I wish the current administration well no, it's more than that. I want them to be successful because we need more than change. We need action. This stewardship must be successful. We have been weathering a virulent storm on so many fronts for so long - and there are still dark clouds on the the horizon. There is a lot of work to be done.

History does not begin with this president. The oceans will not stop rising, the planet will not begin healing itself, and I will not get that pony I have been wishing for since my 9th birthday just because Mr. Obama has ascended. We need results not just effort.

Now then ,I feel compelled to say, I am not warmed by Mr. Obamas first bold course of action of signing an order to shutter Guantanamo prison within a year saying it violates domestic and international detainee rights as well as providing for the prompt and appropriate disposition of the individuals currently detained to further the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States and the interests of justice.

Well gosh, we shouldn't violate anyones rights just because their sole purpose in life is to kill us all and destroy our country by whatever means available to them! And what exactly does disposition mean anyway? I think it means these folks are going back to where they came from on their Mr. Obama Get Out Of Jail Free Card. You think they will just go away? I think not. Do I have a solution or an alternative? No. But I do know you cannot negotiate with terrorists and anarchists. It is one hundred percent counter to their agenda. We will see them again in one form or another and it will not be good.

My one political post for the year. It is not about an agenda, espousing hate, promoting torture, fermenting xenophobia, polarization or baiting anyone. It is about keeping our country a safe, secure place for us and ours.


hanks.

[Archive]

Posted By: Dan Bretta

Torture doesn't work. Ask John McCain who named the offensive line of the Green Bay Packers while being tortured to give up names.

And Gitmo has become a symbol around the world of injustice. I'm pretty sure none of the prisoners will just be released without a trial...they'll probably be relocated to federal prisons while that process takes place. The United States should never hold people indefinitely without giving them a day in court and that should hold for non-citizens too.