IT'S THE FINAL COUNTDOWN! (a/k/a Here Comes The Barackalypse!)

Awww.... I miss arrested development. Gob's shows were the best.

Mildly optimistic. He says good things, but the proof is in the pudding.
 
Barackalypse? Nice, I like it.

I've been curious about this too. It's interesting to see how people's opinions are so all over the map, and I've been entertained at taking America's "litmus test" on the matter the past few days.

Two opposite examples I came across yesterday:

I was skimming over critics reviews on RT about Gran Torino, and came across this negative one:
A terribly dated mix of 8-Mile, The Karate Kid and Death Wish. The desperate last gasp of pre-Obama Era intolerance.
Click to expand...
I had to reread it a few times as my mouth gaped open. What in the world is this guy getting at? Amusing for sure.

Then I flipped over to Sean Hannity while running errands (unfortunately the only talk radio my car will pick up anymore :roll:) and he was rambling on about how no matter what Obama does, he vows to never vilify, besmirch, and degrade him as much as the media felt it was ok to vilify, besmirtch, and degrade Bush.

Me personally - the only thoughts I've had so far is that I'm slightly surprised that so many of what I would consider "neo-cons" are in certain cabinet positions; which means I would not expect a much different foreign policy agenda in the Obama presidency. Sure, it will have totally new spin, but ultimately it will be par for the course.

I also have read about Obama's intention to close Gtmo his first day/week in office. I may be incredibly obtuse, but i fail to see the sound logic behind such an action, other than pandering. Sure, I understand that lots of people are upset with the slow wheels of Habeus Corpus, and two or three water dunkings a few years ago, but I don't quite understand why the entire base needs to be shut down, instead of just overhauled, by Obama. That's a big facility that has cost a lot of money, and those Prisoners are going to have to go somewhere else, likely more expensive. If this is the first sign of Barak's fiscal priorities, we are in trouble. Symbolism over substance, at higher $, is not really what I'm looking forward to.

Speaking of fiscal priority, is anyone else slightly offended by the huge ass multi-million dollar extravaganza planned for his inauguration? Right in the middle of the worst financial crisis of our lifetimes? I don't know that tax-payers are paying for it, but it matters little if they are. It's a little troubling to celebrate in such an expensive manner, a president, that we are hoping can get us out of this mess.
 
gob.gif

l_b10cefdec59dfd0aa51322ba757caeeb.gif


oh, also, anxious.
 
I think the stimulus plans for the new administration are doomed to failure unless we repeal the Reagan tax cuts and go back to a 71% top tax rate, once you hit 3.2 million a year.

Those monies spent for the stimulus do not have as significant of an effect if they come about by by deficit spending.

Tax and spend, not borrow and spend. Johnson lowered the top tax rate from 91% to 71% while funding the Great Society (and the Vietnam War) on credit. Disaster. Though technically, they closed enough loop holes that it may have actually been an effective tax INCREASE.
 
Mildly optimistic. I think he can do great things for the country, but he has a ton of obstacles to overcome with the economy, 2 wars, poor image of US among many allies and more resentment among hostile states than we had 8 years ago etc. etc. etc.

As for the inauguration. Not much they can do. It's evolved into an event, and this one will be costly because of the millions of people flocking to DC for it. I live in the DC area and could walk 3 blocks and take the metro downtown, but I don't plan on going anywhere near that place. It's going to be a mad house down their, and costly with all the security requirements etc.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Then I flipped over to Sean Hannity while running errands (unfortunately the only talk radio my car will pick up anymore :roll:) and he was rambling on about how no matter what Obama does, he vows to never vilify, besmirch, and degrade him as much as the media felt it was ok to vilify, besmirtch, and degrade Bush.[/quote]
Hannity better not start pretending to be civil. I'll stop listening.

I also have read about Obama's intention to close Gtmo his first day/week in office. I may be incredibly obtuse, but i fail to see the sound logic behind such an action, other than pandering. Sure, I understand that lots of people are upset with the slow wheels of Habeus Corpus
Click to expand...
How nonchalantly you dismiss the machinations of government creep on an issue like Habeus! Aren't you the one always braying about how the government can't be trusted ever or something like that?
and two or three water dunkings a few years ago
Click to expand...
A torture joke. I get it.

but I don't quite understand why the entire base needs to be shut down, instead of just overhauled, by Obama. That's a big facility that has cost a lot of money, and those Prisoners are going to have to go somewhere else, likely more expensive. If this is the first sign of Barak's fiscal priorities, we are in trouble. Symbolism over substance, at higher $, is not really what I'm looking forward to.
Click to expand...
Wait a minute. You're telling me you plan on gauging Obama's fiscal policy by whether or not he closes Guantanamo?

Are you drunk or something?

Speaking of fiscal priority, is anyone else slightly offended by the huge ass multi-million dollar extravaganza planned for his inauguration? Right in the middle of the worst financial crisis of our lifetimes? I don't know that tax-payers are paying for it, but it matters little if they are. It's a little troubling to celebrate in such an expensive manner, a president, that we are hoping can get us out of this mess.
Click to expand...
lolwut

Here's hoping Obama is awesome. Hell, here's hoping the Republicans are good opposition leaders. I'm rooting for everyone at this point.
 
im highly skeptical. id love to see him make big changes, but until they happen i wont hold my breath. that being said i am more than happy to see bush on his way out.
 
Even though Barak's name is similar to mine, I think we're unfortunately in for the same ol' shit.

As long as the country is controlled by the Republicans and Democrats, anyway.

(No. I'm not a Libertarian.)
 
Cautiously optimistic. Obama has inspired a lot of people, and a lot of people working together for a good cause can go a long way. I read in the paper one lady was taking her children to the inauguration and telling them, look, Obama doesn't wear his pants down at his knees. Amen.

Obama's staff and Cabinet picks are a mixed bag so far, but of course it depends more on what he allows them or directs them to do than what they do on their own (while that is important too). But I'm also cautiously optimistic about that.

Basically, I think the best thing Obama brings is to make other people optimistic about the future. America is an incredible place and can become a heck of a lot more incredible, even, if we the people decide to take a stronger interest. I'm one who believes Phil Gramm was right last year when he called us a nation of whiners, and I'm hopeful that a change in power can have a positive effect on the overall attitude of the country toward all sorts of things.

I'm an American and I hope our next president will succeed brilliantly. Good luck, Barack.
 
I am interested to see what transpires in the next four years. I have my doubts, though, as there is a lot for Obama to clean up from the last eight years. I hope cleaning up Bush's mess doesn't hurt Obama's presidency, but that's too much to ask for.
 
After watching his first few post-election press conferences, I like him. I'm even more optimistic. He still talks about governing from the center, he gets opinions from the right, he treats everyone with respect, and he's avoided being disingenuous.

The Daily Show did a good comparison of press conference styles.

We'll see, but only six more days.
 
[quote name='speedracer']
How nonchalantly you dismiss the machinations of government creep on an issue like Habeus! Aren't you the one always braying about how the government can't be trusted ever or something like that?[/quote]
Gtmo isn't the problem though, it's just a symptom. Gtmo's existance alone doesn't cause those naughty things to happen that everyone is against. That's my point. There are many CIA holding prisons around the world, most of which are secret. Gtmo is a large facility that can be useful once the "cancer" is rooted out of the system at it's core.

Gtmo has just become a symbol for the "tyranny" of Bush in the world (read: Europe) and Obama is closing it to signal big change to the world (read: Europe). If you disagree, please explain why Gtmo's physical existence alone is the problem, and how closing a facility and relocating prisoners to more expensive facilities fixes the problem versus simple policy and/or HR change.

A torture joke. I get it.
Click to expand...
Every prison has some hicups. Every prison has some bad decisions that happened a couple times by a couple people. Rarely is it reason to blame the location and close it.

Wait a minute. You're telling me you plan on gauging Obama's fiscal policy by whether or not he closes Guantanamo?
Click to expand...
No. But as per above, it's symbolism over substance and on the surface looks like it will cost the tax payers more to close Gtmo. Gtmo is cheaper to run than a prison on US soil precisely because it isn't on US soil.

Unless you truly believe all the Prisoners are going to be sent home with "sorry" gift bags from Obama, then those prisoners are almost certainly going to be moved to regular prisons on US soil and cost more to do pretty much exactly what they were doing at Gtmo - sitting on their asses on tax payer dime waiting for trials/hearings.

So Obama's very first act is going to do something that will cost tax payers more money. Which isn't exactly an impressive first foot forward.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[quote name='thrustbucket']Gtmo isn't the problem though, it's just a symptom. Gtmo's existance alone doesn't cause those naughty things to happen that everyone is against. That's my point.[/quote]
Let's look at this objectively. I don't want to have to take anything for granted here. What we have in Guantanamo is a prison colony on an island outside of American "control", run by the American military that refuses virtually all forms of oversight and legislative attempts that don't originate from an executive branch that now runs the government with an iron fist.

That's a helluva symptom.

There are many CIA holding prisons around the world, most of which are secret. Gtmo is a large facility that can be useful once the "cancer" is rooted out of the system at it's core.
Click to expand...
Either way, I'd prefer it not exist. Hey, one less hopefully.. right?

Gtmo has just become a symbol for the "tyranny" of Bush in the world (read: Europe) and Obama is closing it to signal big change to the world (read: Europe). If you disagree, please explain why Gtmo's physical existence alone is the problem, and how closing a facility and relocating prisoners to more expensive facilities fixes the problem versus simple policy and/or HR change.
Click to expand...
Since I answered the whole physical existence part, I would say that:

1. Europe can piss off (No offense to Europeans, seriously you guys are great).
2. Do you really believe it is America's best interests to continue to use Guantanamo?

I cannot see how someone wanting to support the totality of American interests would find that Guantanamo is a net gain to the United States... for economic reasons.

Every prison has some hicups. Every prison has some bad decisions that happened a couple times by a couple people. Rarely is it reason to blame the location and close it.
Click to expand...
Please dude. The federal prison at Guantanamo (and others) is not just a failure of the bad apple. This is a systemic, endemic problem from the top down. The whole damn government is in this bad a shape right now.

No. But as per above, it's symbolism over substance and on the surface looks like it will cost the tax payers more to close Gtmo. Gtmo is cheaper to run than a prison on US soil precisely because it isn't on US soil.
Click to expand...
The entire concept of proportionality and competing interests is lost on you.

Unless you truly believe all the Prisoners are going to be sent home with "sorry" gift bags from Obama, then those prisoners are almost certainly going to be moved to regular prisons on US soil and cost more to do pretty much exactly what they were doing at Gtmo - sitting on their asses on tax payer dime waiting for trials/hearings.

So Obama's very first act is going to do something that will cost tax payers more money. Which isn't exactly an impressive first foot forward.
Click to expand...
You're a kvetcher. That's your problem. Straight up.

Besides, if you really want to get past the bullshit, ask yourself this: Is there a program that Obama can alter that didn't cost a bazillion dollars already? What hasn't Bush shoveled your money at trying to buy his way out of (you know, except for job creation)? It that a reasonable litmus test?

Of course not.
 
There IS such a thing as enemy combatants. We can't arrest every person in every war we decide not to kill, ship them back here, put them in the US penal system, and give them due process. It isn't going to happen.

Now I admit Guantamano needs to be overhauled to be more "legal" under the Geneva conventions and not operate in such a grey area, but it's existence is not completely outside of the realm of usefulness in civilized society.

It can be a place of use and purpose other than a museum, but I'm half expecting the entire complex to be given to Raul in a giant gift wrapping as some type of International gesture of peace and good will under this administration.

And yes, when it comes to everything that's been in the American political scene and everything on it's horizon, I am a kvetcher.
 
Honestly, that underscores why there needs to be some worthwhile international organization for these type of things.

The UN is useless, but there needs to be some kind of global organization tha has responsble for holding and trying "enemy combatants" and what not. Nations have no authority to hold and try foreign combatants (they're not a part of that nations social contract).

Something like that is a long time from being feasible. But in an increasingly global society, it will eventually be a necessity to have internatonal law and an organization to hold and try enemy combatants and others that violate international law.

Until then, it will continue to be a human rights mess.
 
I still can't believe Obama chose that dumb motherfucker Arny Duncan to come along to Washington. That guy makes Bush look like Einstein on steroids. Good God. The last place they should have brought someone from is the Chicago Public School system. Why on Earth he would do that is beyond me. Arny Duncan is a complete retard. Oh well.
 
[quote name='Blackout']I still can't believe Obama chose that dumb motherfucker Arny Duncan to come along to Washington. That guy makes Bush look like Einstein on steroids. Good God. The last place they should have brought someone from is the Chicago Public School system. Why on Earth he would do that is beyond me. Arny Duncan is a complete retard. Oh well.[/QUOTE]

The federal Department of Education is a joke anyway. It should be shut down immediately. All it does is tell states and localities what to do and spend money better used by those levels of government.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top