Democrats & Liberals Archives

What a Future!

What a day it has been today! What a future it will be tomorrow!

Our new president, Barack Obama, inspires us to rise to the challenges facing us, not by toiling separately for selfish ends but by working together with other citizens for the common good of our country. By being ONE, we lift the well-being of 300 million.

President Barack Obama - it sounds good, doesn't it? - laid out the daunting challenges facing us at home and abroad: recession, war, terrorism, global warming. Instead of caving into fear, he told us we can beat these problems and return our country to greatness - if only we modify our actions:

On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.

Isn't it amazing that Obama, who belongs to a race that has been brutalized in slavery and treated as non-human, would be the one to make such a statement? Not only does he celebrate that blacks are part of the American mainstream, he places each and every one of us, regardless of our faith or lack of faith, in the mainstream:

We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus - and non-believers.

Barack Obama is acting in the spirit of Martin Luther King. Martin Luther King asked us to live according to our principles as written in the Constitution. It took us a long time to do it. But today we do it with a bang. A black is "free at last," to become a complete citizen, to enjoy the bounties of this nation, to become president of the United States!

Yes, indeed. We now have a black president, who like Martin Luther King, is showing us how we may call on our American principles and our character to solve our problems. Never mind fear; let's get to work:

Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.

How shall we remake it? Let's take care of the little guy:

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.

What is good for America is good for the world. What the world needs is to get together to work for the common good of the world. The problems that confront America are the same problems that confront the world: recession, war, terrorism, global warming. We can't solve them by ourselves. We must cooperate with other nations to improve the world. Even those nations that seem to be against us:

To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.

Obama offered an olive branch to Muslim nations:

To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.

One big way our country has been on the wrong track is to believe that in order to be safe from terrorists we must sacrifice some of our ideals. President Obama says "NO":

... we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.

What a day of inspiration! What a future we can expect! But, Obama says over and over that it depends on each of us and how much we want to contribute to the remaking of America:

For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies.

In these tough times President Obama, not only shows us the way out, but how to again make America the giant pillar of the world.

Posted by Paul Siegel at January 20, 2009 10:36 PM
Comments
Comment #273976

Paul, Your use of the Obama line-

The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works - whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified.
-is apt. I will be pleased to hold the man to this challenge. Government is far and away the least efficient component of our economy. To the extent it does not work it actively stands in the way of all his other goals. A decent wage is impossible if the jobs required to pay the wages don’t produce goods to buy.

Very soon, as early as 2016, Social Security taxes will not be enough to pay Social Security’s obligations, which means those “decent” wages will be even further eroded by tax increases paid not just by the rich (out of whose ‘plenty’ our productive jobs are created) but by the Middle Class.

We will be squeezed between employers with less to spend on innovation, investment, and new employment, and a government determined to pile us high with the financial burden of one untrimable ‘solution’ after another.

Yes, Paul, happy days are here again.

Posted by: Lee Jamison at January 21, 2009 9:32 AM
Comment #273978

Lee Jamison,

I didn’t take, at all, from Obama’s speech that “happy days are here again.” It seemed to me that Obama’s address was designed to prepare the nation for some very difficult choices that have been avoided in the past by both parties. It was a speech about perseverance in the face of adversity. Trusting our basic values and avoiding expediency. It was about survival.

Posted by: Rich at January 21, 2009 10:40 AM
Comment #273982

I am not inspired nor do I feel any sense of unity. We are not one.

In fact, Obama is going to tear this country apart. More accurately his followers will.

Republican wins: we are divided. Democrat wins we are united and the country is new. Not inspiring. It’s tiring.

Posted by: Eric Simonson at January 21, 2009 12:58 PM
Comment #273983

Eric,

You are right…it IS tiring…Republicans DO divide, and Democrats DO include…live with it, it’s the nature of the beast. The carping about it is what’s tiring. Yours COULD be the party of inclusion…ya’ll opt not to be. You can’t blame Democrats for that.

Posted by: Marysdude at January 21, 2009 1:25 PM
Comment #273988


The Democrats have claimed a big tent for many years but, is that true? For the past four decades, the Democrats have supported virtually everything the Republicans wanted economically. As a result, the middle class and the poor working class have, for the most part, been left behind while the good times rolled.

The question is, how will the Democrats respond to the desires of those in the big tent that have been neglected for decades while still catering to the investment class and the corporations?

Example: How many jobs will be created by corporate owned solar and wind farms vs. home based and community based solar and wind power?

Posted by: jlw at January 21, 2009 2:11 PM
Comment #273989

Paul writes; “Instead of caving into fear, he told us we can beat these problems and return our country to greatness - if only we modify our actions:”

“On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.”

I am waiting for the end of petty grievances and recriminations on these blogs as well as an end of the worn out dogma that we can spend our way out of our financial crisis. I also look forward to the end of the false promise of reducing wasteful spending with real cuts.

Any honest person will acknowledge that we have had enormous government spending in the past 20 or 30 years, not only by the Feds, but state governments as well. If huge spending plans were good for our economy why has it not succeeded yet with the trillions of debt we have piled up?

Liberals say big government spending and heavy regulation of our lives is the answer. Conservatives say individual freedom and hard work by those same individuals is the answer.

I don’t know what Republicans say any more.

Posted by: Jim M at January 21, 2009 2:15 PM
Comment #273995

To those posting from the opposing point of view my comments are: blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Posted by: Carolina at January 21, 2009 2:59 PM
Comment #273996

>I don’t know what Republicans say any more.
Posted by: Jim M at January 21, 2009 02:15 PM

Jim M,

You do know what Republicans say…you just don’t want to talk about it. You don’t have to, all you really need to do is become a good one and influence others to do the same. Get rid of the social conservatives and the fiscal conservatives will come back. Fiscal conservatives used to be the backbone of your party. Your party was hi-jacked. That was your loss, but it can be corrected, you just have to work hard toward that end.

Posted by: Marysdude at January 21, 2009 3:00 PM
Comment #274000

Marysdude writes; “Get rid of the social conservatives and the fiscal conservatives will come back.”

Huh…from where did you get this brilliant observation? That many republicans will vote for this God-awful democrat constructed bail-out (vote pandering) proposal now floating around is certainly true, but I find no connection between RINO’s likely voting for this bill and social conservatism. Please explain your theory or tell me I misunderstand your meaning?

A few blogs ago I asked liberals if there was any concern over the amount of CO2 that would be needlessly released for the coronation extravaganza. Since I am not, and have never been, a proponent of MMGW it caused me no concern. However, I know from reading these blogs that for many of you releasing CO2 into the atmosphere is a mortal sin regardless of the necessity. Following is an estimate from one source.

The Institute for Liberty (IFL) has taken data from federal agencies, environmentalist organizations and news agencies to extrapolate the estimated environmental impact for the 2009 Inauguration. It concludes that the 600 private jets expected to fly visitors to and from the capital city will produce 25,320,000 pounds of CO2, with personal vehicles accounting for 262,483,200 pounds of the odorless gas.

Indeed, during the Inaugural Parade, horses alone will produce more than 400 pounds of carbon dioxide, with the total carbon footprint for the day likely exceeding 575 million pounds of CO2.

If my arithmetic is correct, that’s 28.75 pounds for each of the 2 million attendees. Is this something you should celebrate?

In comparison, it would take the average U.S. household 57,598 years to produce a carbon footprint equal to that of the new President’s housewarming party.

I have space remaining on my 11 acres to plant a few more trees for those of you who wish to offset the horrendous consequences of January 20th and am even willing to offer a reduction in my prices to show that I really care about your heartache.

Posted by: Jim M at January 21, 2009 4:05 PM
Comment #274003

Jim,

If that’s the best you’ve got I hope you’re planning on keeping your day job.

Posted by: Rocky Marks at January 21, 2009 4:22 PM
Comment #274004

How quick the republicans have forgot all the years we have been called unamerican aganst the troops commies and so forth so enjoy your time in the minority. It will take generations to come back just as it did after Nixon. But if you ask me drop the social agenda and maybe just maybe people might come back alittle sooner.

Posted by: Jeff at January 21, 2009 4:38 PM
Comment #274005


Considering the fact that neither social conservatives nor fiscal conservatives got virtually much of anything from the Republican Party over the last eight years, one has to ask, who are these people who hi-jacked the Republican Party?

Is it possible that they are the same people who hi-jacked the Democratic Party?

Both political parties have worked together to produce policies that large majorities of the people disagree with. This has put the voters in a Catch 22 position. No matter which party they vote for, the policies that they disagree with are continued. This unconstitutional and undemocratic situation has been exasperated by the ability of the two parties and the corporate media to ignore, be dismissive of or quackify third parties or independent alternatives.

Posted by: jlw at January 21, 2009 4:43 PM
Comment #274014

jlw,

Did we advance in embryonic stem cell research? Did we appoint a couple of pro-choice justices to the Supreme Court (one the Chief Justice)? Why should I have to list what should be plain to you?

I can imagine past Republicans believing in Science, and believing in individual rights, and perhaps appointing judges who might be business friendly…??? How much do you need reminders for?

The present day Republican party is in what I call a Falwell Loop. When things go wrong, they blame it on Lesbians, and call up God’s wrath.

Do you think maybe Cornyn was actually concerned about Hillary’s appointment to S of S? Hardly, he’s still steaming about Bill’s semen.

Posted by: Marysdude at January 21, 2009 7:26 PM
Comment #274022


Marysdude, you forgot to mention that the social/religious right got, what I consider unconstitutional federal monies for faith based initiatives. They have been assured by Obama that this will be continued.

Embrionic stem cell research has continued in this country as well as others despite the restrictions by the Bush Administration. The two justices were chosen more for their pro corporation records than their pro life views. Rowe is still the law of the land.

The social conservatives got no help in the areas of school prayer, or religious icons on public property. They certainly wanted but did not get a Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage.

What they got most was a lot of retoric from Republican politicians which is exactly what progressives get from the Democrats.

I don’t think any of them care who is S of S as long as he/she is a member of the insider scam club that has sucked every dollar possible out of this economy and has Obama saying that trillion dollar deficits might be the norm for a decade or more.

I was one who joined with liberals to condemn Bush for doubling the national debt and that it seemed as if the Republicans were determined to bankrupt the country to end entitlements. Now it looks as if the liberals are poised to break all the Republican records. I know, I know, nothing is to much when it comes to salvaging this mass consumption economy.

Posted by: jlw at January 21, 2009 11:04 PM
Comment #274029

jlw,

You’re pretty good at whining…give us an escape, tell us what steps to take to recover from this mess without spending money (thus creating an America so weak, it fails). I’ve heard about enough of the wailing and gnashing-of-teeth from those on the right about Obama’s big spending agenda, now you join them from the middle.

You folks put on your hair shirts as soon as it was obvious Obama was going to win the election…when do you think those shirts will be taken off and tossed into the dirty laundry?

I’m assuming ya’ll have a plan? The plan is more workable than anything on the table now? If you do, don’t waste our time with it, get to Obama…he has stated that he has no ‘pride of authorship’, anyone with a better plan will be heeded…go for it. If you can’t put a plan together by yourself, ask Lee and Jim M to join in. Between the three of you, it should be a piece of cake. Ooops! Marie already baked that cake…

Posted by: Marysdude at January 22, 2009 6:20 AM
Comment #274033

Lee
At about 2016 SS will start having to cash out the bonds they(we) have been selling to the government for years. SS itself should be solvent till 2043 at which point many of us boomers will no longer be collecting because we will be dead.Whether or not that means tax increases or not depends on the will of congress at that point. Spending less on a bloated military is one option and may be appropriate at the time. Who knows? But the bonds do not mature all at once and there are plenty of ways to pay for their redemption. Tariffing imported oil? Selling Alaska back to the Russians? What I do know is that default will not be tolerated. The US has never defaulted on its bonds before and is not likely to start.
It should be quite evident by now that the rich are not the only ones to create or sustain jobs. It is the average consumer and the amalgamated capital(pension funds etc.) of average working people can and does capitalize industry just as effectively as the owning class and probably more sustainably. The economic failure today was certainly not caused by rich people not having enough money. Quite the opposite,they had too big a share. For capitalism to go forward ways must be allowed for the people that keep the economy moving to get a larger share.”Supply side economics ” is now only the realm of cranks,charletans, and Republicans at this point. (paraphrase Krugman)

Posted by: bills at January 22, 2009 8:45 AM
Comment #274034

John McCain has been included by the new President quite nicely I think we can all agree. Now, who wants to wager how long it will be untill Johnny Mac tells us all how to get Bin Laden. He definitely had the answer how to a few months back.

Posted by: ray at January 22, 2009 8:53 AM
Comment #274037

Jim M
So you assume that horses only crap during parades?Typical right wing logic.” It must be true because I have only seen them crap at parades.” Same for corporate jets and cars I imagine.
Ya all have trashed the country for eight years. Thats over. We had a party!Now its time to fix the mess.

Posted by: bills at January 22, 2009 9:41 AM
Comment #274051

Jim M. said “I am waiting for the end of petty grievances and recriminations on these blogs as well as an end of the worn out dogma that we can spend our way out of our financial crisis”

Jim M. I would suggest that you must then not air your petty grievances and recriminations. It is a 2 way street. Obama has said that he is willing to listen to other points of view, such as tax cut our way out of any crisis, however if the ideas you are expounding don’t warrant implementation then ….

Posted by: j2t2 at January 22, 2009 11:56 AM
Comment #274058

bills asks of me; “So you assume that horses only crap during parades?” A non response to the question asked is not surprising. The MMGW crowd doesn’t really give a “shit” about this psuedo-science, only the political advantage it may give them.

In addition to the horses crapping, there are all the political donkeys doing the same thing.

Posted by: Jim M at January 22, 2009 12:42 PM
Comment #274060

Jim M. there are a lot of obvious questions that need to be answered regarding your claim of 575 million lbs. of additional carbon generated due to the inauguration. I would ask you to explain why you think this study is accurate when it seems like such a strawman to me. All these people would still be on the planet driving the same vehicles. The horses would still exist. The airplanes may or may not be flying elesewhere that particular day, so why would one be naive enough to think that an additional 575 million lbs. of CO2 would be emitted? If the point was that it was not an additional 575 million lbs. added but merely totaled up for the event then what is the point? Seems to me more hot air was emitted by the IFL conducting the study than was emitted Tuesday. Perhaps the reason this wasn’t discussed before was that it wasn’t worthy of discussion. AM I missing something here?

Posted by: j2t2 at January 22, 2009 12:59 PM
Comment #274113


Marysdude, you are every bit as good at sucking up as I am at whinning. Since you think that anyone who disagrees with yours or Obama’s opinions is on the right I am informing you that assumption is not true.

I used to be a highly partisan Democrat but, that was before I watched the Democrats sell the working class out to Republican philosophy. For many workers the pain and suffering began long before this economic downturn.

I am not an economist and I don’t have the answers But, common sense tells me that when you have corporations to big to fail, our government and we are going to be subserviant to them or, they might fail.

Posted by: jlw at January 23, 2009 2:24 AM
Comment #274120

jlw,

Yep…that is likely to happen…Republicans left in charge, it will happen…Obama may be our only hope at this point, hence, my plea that if you have good ideas on how to make things better, go to the one person-in-high-office who might listen and even act on it. The man has acted as if he cares, and has presented his case before America…let’s encourage him to succeed. What have we got to lose by giving him a helping hand?

Posted by: Marysdude at January 23, 2009 4:17 AM
Comment #274139

j2t2 writes; “I would ask you to explain why you think this study is accurate when it seems like such a strawman to me. All these people would still be on the planet driving the same vehicles.”

Please consider that I quoted IFL as the source for the information and nowhere did I indicate my agreement or disagreement.

Your response exposes how some folks loose all perspective and logic when their political brain takes all the blood supply away from their rational brain. To say, “All these people would still be on the planet driving the same vehicles.” is true, and do you actually believe they would have driven these vehicles the same number of miles staying home and going to their jobs as they did in getting to the coronation?

Horse farts and crap don’t bother me at all while the flatulence coming for the political class in D.C. continues unabated.

Posted by: Jim M at January 23, 2009 12:01 PM
Comment #274160

Jim M,

If you use a reference, it normally means you agree with all or part of it. If you agree only in part, it clarifys if you mention the parts you don’t agree with. But to use one and then say you just supplied it but don’t necessarily agree with it, mostly means you have little respect for those who will read it, as they read it because of you and the respect they hold for your opinions and views.

The opposing view was valid…was that why you made so light of your own offering?

Posted by: Marysdude at January 23, 2009 2:51 PM
Comment #274168

nomas,

Why in the world would they need rifles, if they are going to chop off heads? When was the last time you tried to chop a head off using a rifle? How can you be taken seriously, when you take yourself so lightly?

Posted by: Marysdude at January 23, 2009 3:35 PM
Comment #274182

nomas

Get real man. Obama is not going to bend over for the terrorists.
Its only his third day on the job and other than some feel-good PR talk and feel-good PR orders, he hasn’t done anything.
Let alone anything that warrants such a statement as yours.

Posted by: kctim at January 23, 2009 5:44 PM
Comment #274186

marysdude, could you please rephrase comment #274160? I would like to respond but I don’t understand the question. Thanks

Posted by: Jim M at January 23, 2009 5:55 PM
Comment #274227

>marysdude, could you please rephrase comment #274160? I would like to respond but I don’t understand the question. Thanks
Posted by: Jim M at January 23, 2009 05:55 PM

Jim M,

Nope…

Posted by: Marysdude at January 24, 2009 5:19 AM
Post a comment