We officially have a new Prez

[Bittersteel]

[quote name='Malatesta' post='1660559' date='Jan 23 2009, 23.49']No those criteria make perfect sense.

If you are going to claim that Obama is a new phase of American politics and can lead the world and right the world's problems - start with the ones you created. The list was composed of some of the most rudimentary problems you cause that I could think of off the head.



Well polls don't lie and I sourced them about 4 years ago. The overwhelming majority of the population have supported over the years in some form or another something in line with universal health care ideals. You clearly don't understand American politics because in spite of that it didn't even get talked about until about two years ago.

It isn't just health care either - there are a range of issues where the American public are well
to the left of state policy.



The only one with a lack of understanding of American politics seems to be you. In 1912 US marines put down a rebellion of sugar workers in Cuba. I can start before 1912 or I can point out other things that happened later on.

The US is a business run society - that is just a historical truism - and if you like we can go beyond Cuba... you know... Panama... United Fruit Co... and so on.



The democratic and republican parties are corporate based institutions. The US is the only industrialised country that doesn't have a labour party as one of the two major players.



US labor was smashed at the end of the 19th century and has NEVER been allowed to recover - this is basic US working class history 101. The US has virtually the worst labour protection laws in the Western Hemisphere - again another thing that has a source if I went to the filing cabinet, which I'm not going to do.

In the technical literature the US is referred to as a polyarchy. It isn't a false accusation it is a pretty well accepted understanding of how the US political system works. I suggest you do some reading rather than lecture me because its clear you have delusions about a grand republic.[/quote]

Sweet, dude.

1) Polls are worthless barometers of public opinion - any American political observer knows this. It all depends on phrasing and word choice, and any political group worth its salt in the US has a communications apparatus capable of winning the spin wars and reaching the public (and putting polls into the field to back up their position.) Thus, it often boils down to a battle over definitions. Marc Ambinder has a great bit in his blog today about the fight over "card check" - how, essentially, a slight tweak in the question can produce a 50 point swing in either direction. Universal health care has always been an issue in which 80+% of the population supports the idea of it, but a large majority oppose massive government intervention or single payer (Social Security is another example, but one that bedevils the right; most want it fixed, but broaching privatization is political suicide.)

2) Somehow, I don't feel that a 1912 sugar rebellion or the UFC are relevant to today's politics. Big Business is a staunch supporter of normalizing relations (not for the right reasons, I'm sure) and the fact that you don't understand the situation on the ground is telling. The major obstacle is, and has been, the Cuban-American community in Florida. It's wealthy, large and situated in a pivotal "swing state." Fortunately, second and third generation Cuban-Americans are significantly more liberal than their forebears and less likely to nurse grudges against Castro.

3) The Democratic Party receives much of its organizational muscle from labor groups (I would say most, but the Obama campaign changed that.) Unions spend millions every year putting boots on the ground, putting ads on the air and helping the party win elections. For someone who fancies himself a scholar of American politics, this is yet another glaring oversight. Card check, which will pass Congress soon, is going to be an opportunity for AFL-CIO and Change to Win to regain much of their workplace muscle. That's why they've poured nearly limitless resources into the fight and matched the Chamber of Commerce dollar for dollar on the air.

Dismissing the DP and RP as corporate institutions, meanwhile, is really too gross of an oversimplification to comment on. Silly, really.

4) The US is a big country. Labor is non-existent in the South and strong in the Midwest and Rust Belt. Workplace protections and wage guarantees are solid in the Northeast and weak in the Southwest. Much of this is managed at the state level and that's something I'm not sure you fully understand.

But in terms of the federal level, state political considerations are still important. So if Republican Senators Arlen Specter (Pennsylvania) and George Voinovich (Ohio) vote against the labor-friendly EFCA this year, they're likely to be ousted in 2010. But if Kay Bailey Hutchinson (Texas) or Johnny Isakson (Georgia) do, they'll just be voting their constituencies. If you get a chance, and you're not too busy doing drugs or rifling through this filing cabinet of yours, you really should read up on voting blocs and political demography in the US. It's quite fascinating.

[Kelli Fury]

[quote name='Malatesta' post='1660585' date='Jan 23 2009, 23.24']Coffee, pain killers, etc.



I would suspect the unions endorsed him because he was the better choice of the two. That doesn't say anything to the power or standing of US labour unions - which is virtually none - nor does it say anything about the democratic party which is not a labour based party.[/quote]
Oh, so you're one of those. Okay, carry on.

[Ser King]

Obama,

Bush,

I don't see the difference (I'm not talking physically hear).

[The White Wolf]

[quote name='Ser Wolf King' post='1660603' date='Jan 23 2009, 23.51']Obama,

Bush,

I don't see the difference (I'm not talking physically hear).[/quote]

One defended torture of detainees, one has moved to shut down where it happened.

One went to war on cherry picked intelligence over the objections of most of the rest of the world, one has promised to make diplomacy a larger part of his foreign policy.

One advised Americans to go shopping in a time of crisis, one has called for sacrifice and an assumption of duties.

One argued that secrecy was necessary in governing, one has already signed ordered increasing transparency.

One chose a CEO of one of the top 5 worst polluters for his secretary of energy, one has chosen a Nobel winning physicist and director of one of the top alternative energy research groups in the world.

I could go on, but I hope this clarifies some of the differences.

[Galactus]

[quote]We are ready for this. Our president confirmed this in a telephone conversation with Barack Obama straight after he was elected. I think there will be additional telephone - and not only telephone - contacts between our leaders.[/quote]

... Maybe my mind is just dirty, but is Medvedev hitting on Obama?*

[quote]I don't know what Mal is talking about with having no Labor party. Sure, we don't have one named that (well, in Minnesota the Democratic party is Democratic-Farm-Labor party or DFL) but if you pay any attention to the Democratic primaries and caucuses- the labor unions have huge pull in choosing the Democratic candidate. Obama owes a lot of his early primary success from union endorsements.[/quote]

The US has a unionization rate of around 20%, IIRC.

Sweden has between 70% and 80%.

And this ironically despite the fact that swedish unions probably offer less benefits than US ones.

* My mother thinks Obama is hot. Make of that what you will.

[Annelise]

[quote name='Bruce Galactus' post='1660807' date='Jan 24 2009, 09.51']... Maybe my mind is just dirty, but is Medvedev hitting on Obama?*[/quote]

Did you see German Chancellor Merkel's statement, where she referred to him as coloured? 'Lil lost in translation moment there, we started laughing; you know, in that context it carries a connotation for Americans that I'm sure was unintentional on her part.

[quote]If you ask me, Putin is upset because Obama looks better shirtless than he does.[/quote]

Uh oh. I wonder if tiger wrestling will be a prerequisite of future "not only telephone" contacts between them.

[Bellis]

[quote name='Bruce Galactus' post='1660807' date='Jan 24 2009, 09.51']... Maybe my mind is just dirty, but is Medvedev hitting on Obama?*[/quote]

Well... Silvio seems to know something we don't...

[url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/06/italy-barackobama"]http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/0...aly-barackobama[/url]

[quote]When asked by a reporter about the future prospect of US-Russian relations, Berlusconi referred to the youth of both leaders - Medvedev, 43, and Obama, 47 - which he said should make it easier for Moscow and Washington to work together.

He then continued: "I told the president that [Obama] has everything needed in order to reach a deal with him: he's young, handsome and tanned."[/quote]

[quote]* My mother thinks Obama is hot. Make of that what you will.[/quote]

I wouldn't turn down a date with him, but that's more for his dorky charm. I don't find him "hot" myself.

[Annelise]

[quote]He then continued: "I told the president that [Obama] has everything needed in order to reach a deal with him: he's young, handsome and tanned."[/quote]

:rofl: wth? Er, I mean--great!

Makes ya rethink our Cold War leadership--oh, the missed opportunities..

[alguien]

[quote name='Malatesta' post='1660559' date='Jan 24 2009, 00.49']No those criteria make perfect sense.

If you are going to claim that Obama is a new phase of American politics and can lead the world and right the world's problems - start with the ones you created. The list was composed of some of the most rudimentary problems you cause that I could think of off the head.[/quote]

Yeah, I get that you believe these are problems we created (and I didn't have to even use my coffee drug--whatever the hell that means). My response, and the point you seem to be consistently missing, is that your "eloquent" list is completely unrealistic and grossly oversimplified, which demonstrates a failure to grasp world politics in an effective level. A bias brought about, I suspect, by a severe case of US-hatred.

[IheartTesla]

[url="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/education/23gap.html?_r=3&ref=us"]Obama improves test scores of AA students[/url]. Our President has already began working for us. Enjoy:

[quote]In the study made public on Thursday, Dr. Friedman and his colleagues compiled a brief test, drawing 20 questions from the verbal sections of the Graduate Record Exam, and administering it four times to about 120 white and black test-takers during last year’s presidential campaign.

In total, 472 Americans — 84 blacks and 388 whites — took the exam. Both white and black test-takers ranged in age from 18 to 63, and their educational attainment ranged from high school dropout to Ph.D.

On the initial test last summer, whites on average correctly answered about 12 of 20 questions, compared with about 8.5 correct answers for blacks, Dr. Friedman said. But on the tests administered immediately after Mr. Obama’s nomination acceptance speech, and just after his election victory, black performance improved, rendering the white-black gap “statistically nonsignificant,” he said.[/quote]

This study aint peer reviewed yet, and I dont know what the predictive power of SAT tests are (i.e, how correlated they are with intelligence etc. like the claims for IQ tests). But still, it made me chuckle.

[Tempra]

[quote name='cyrano' post='1661223' date='Jan 24 2009, 18.42'][url="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/23/education/23gap.html?_r=3&ref=us"]Obama improves test scores of AA students[/url]. Our President has already began working for us. Enjoy:



This study aint peer reviewed yet, and I dont know what the predictive power of SAT tests are (i.e, how correlated they are with intelligence etc. like the claims for IQ tests). But still, it made me chuckle.[/quote]


Perhaps everyone was drunk and scored 0?

[Kat]

Now that I'm back in the city (temporarily), I have time to respond.

At the crack of dawn on Tuesday morning, I asked the two other people I was camped with where they wanted to try to watch the Inauguration. Our options were a town of 100 people about 30 miles away, that had a TV in a bar that the owner had told me was hooked up to the karaoke system and she didn't know how to switch it to broadcast, or whether it could even receive a signal, or the golf resort village in the middle of the national park, which had a bar with 3 TVs where the bartender had told me a week earlier that they would "probably" be showing the Inauguration. Naturally, both the bartender and I forgot that noon EST is 9am PST, and the bar would not be open at that time. Anyway, we chose the latter, and while driving there (about an hour drive from our campsite) I listened to what AM radio I could pick up as they talked about the events to come, politician-watched, etc. When we arrived, I went to the bar, discovered it was closed (because middle-aged golfers in RVs do not drink at 8:30am??) although the door was open and the TV was on. The waitress at the adjoining cafe was extremely snappy to me and told us all to get out of the doorway, and had no suggestions for what we could do despite my heartbreaking tale of having driven an hour to get to possibly the only public TV in an 80-mile radius, and promises to buy lots of food and leave great tips if she let us sit within view of the TV. A bunch of dull-eyed tourists, disturbed from their omelettes, stared at us. Finally the other waiter took pity on us and told us that they had a TV at the 19th Hole snack bar by the golf course. As the ceremony was about to begin, we ran over, and luckily, the waiter had been correct and they were indeed showing it. We joined the other three people in the open-air snack bar, ordered some crappy microwave breakfast sandwiches, and began watching the inauguration. The other folks were not particularly liberal, but at least they were interested and respectful. My friends and I, all liberals to the bone, immediately became teary-eyed and watched in rapt attention, high-fiving each other as we listened to encouraging promises to fund science research. It was a little hard to hear in there, especially since we were next to the golf cart parking area and people kept backing them up, which makes a loud beeping noise. Then, some loud, obnoxious guys came in, announced that they needed some coffee before their game, and looked at the TV. "That's not football!" one of them said, and they all guffawed. "I guess today is some sort of speech," another one laughed. And the third guy just stared at the rest of us and then laughed too, saying, "Have any shots been fired yet?" This caused all three to laugh uproariously before just sitting down and having a conversation at the bar. :rolleyes: (Say what you want about liberals, but I had enough manners not to joke about assassination on 2 Bush inaugurations...or at all. He may have been a shitty president, but no one deserves to be shot. The alternative was even worse, as well.)

We left after the poem because we needed to work, and didn't know how long things would be lasting. Luckily my father recorded several hours of CNN for me which I look forward to watching. But, I've concluded that Furnace Creek is chock-full of badly-dressed golfer yahoos, and its visitors are even worse than typical national park tourists, and its only pro as a 'town' is that they sell block ice. Two thumbs down. At least they had a TV, at all, however.

[TerraPrime]

[quote name='Kat' post='1661362' date='Jan 24 2009, 20.58']Then, some loud, obnoxious guys came in, announced that they needed some coffee before their game, and looked at the TV. "That's not football!" one of them said, and they all guffawed. "I guess today is some sort of speech," another one laughed. And the third guy just stared at the rest of us and then laughed too, saying, "Have any shots been fired yet?" This caused all three to laugh uproariously before just sitting down and having a conversation at the bar. :rolleyes: (Say what you want about liberals, but I had enough manners not to joke about assassination on 2 Bush inaugurations...or at all. He may have been a shitty president, but no one deserves to be shot. The alternative was even worse, as well.)[/quote]

Oh, the wit. The humor. How could you have sustained such brilliant bon mots without dying of laughing fits, Kat? :P


PS Hope the field trip is going well!

[cosnik]

[quote name='Ser Wolf King' post='1660603' date='Jan 23 2009, 21.51']Obama,

Bush,

I don't see the difference (I'm not talking physically hear).[/quote]
glad someone else is paying attention

all right america fuck yeah!
we bombed a village in pakistan yeahhhhh!
fuck those civilians, there was [i]probably[/i] al queda there