Obama?

[SCUMGOD13]

So... Are we still YES WE CANING this yr. I don't see a lot of other choice besides the Obvious RON PAUL but that's not going to happen. In four yrs. if we're still having elections or at least going through the motions maybe Rand Paul.
I really am Curious though, where is everyone at now? I voted Obama last time and I'm not voting Mitt Romney, so I will throw away my Vote just to support Ron Paul.

[Scott]

I'm voting Obama,

[F-Stop]

so I will throw away my Vote just to support Ron Paul.

Bill Hicks once said, "I have a feeling that whoever gets to be President, after the election, they take 'em in a little room and show an angle of the Kennedy Assassination that no one has ever seen before, then ask, "Any questions?"

I'm not entirely convinced that it happens that way, but I'm not entirely convinced that it doesn't, either. My point is, I believed in Obama before the election (his honesty, that he wants to make most Americans lives better). I also tend to believe that Ron Paul is at least honest. I disagree with some of his views, again, that's ok. But he's one guy. One guy throwing pebbles at the Corporate Superstructure is still just one guy. Even if he's President of the United States. (Hope and change Ron Paul-style doesn't look a whole lot different than Hope and Change from President Obama, really).

[Cracko]

One guy throwing pebbles at the Corporate Superstructure is still just one guy. Even if he's President of the United States. (Hope and change Ron Paul-style doesn't look a whole lot different than Hope and Change from President Obama, really).

After numerous hours watching C-SPAN and the Tennessee Channel 203 (starring the TN legislature) I can report that the Corporate Superstructure is for real and alive and well. I truly feel that the will of the American People has lost out to the almighty dollar, which ain't so mighty any more. Which says even more about our loss or power.

OTOH, I once heard a statement that continually rings truer each day: We get the government we deserve.

[James]

I voted for Obama.
I believed him. He was so genunine and his whole message was about change. I was ecstatic because my pet issue (the food system) was finally going to be addressed. Obama announced to Iowa farmers no less that GMOs would be labeled if he was elected. We thought finally, the insane corruption of the FDA and USDA would be addressed. After all what is more important than food?

NO! not only did Obama lie about that, the first thing he does is put the most corrupt people in the chemical/drug industry (which is the industry in charge of the food system in the USA) in charge of the FDA and and industrial meat gods in charge of the USDA. This, while his own wife plants an organic garden in the yard.

The audacity of bullshit.

[CubeDoctor]

James.....Obama is a man of change. He changed his position on almost everything he promised before he was elected.

Our food system is slowly wrecking our health.

[Cracko]

Meanwhile:

China buys oil rights in America, China buys acreage in America to build its own cities for the Chinese under their own laws, China gets their flag flown above The American Flag right on Constitution Avenue of all places, the Empire State Building lights red to honor the Communist anniversary, Red Dawn II gets delayed over and over and has the bad guy switched to the N. Koreans (like they could ever attack mainland America), China gets approval to purchase American banks, on and on and on. See a pattern here? And to think at one time America looked down on Communism? And McCarthy, Robert Welch, Ezra Benson Taft and others, all warned us years ago of creeping Communism within our government and people shrugged it off as impossible? It’s here…just go to Wal-Mart and look around.

[jeffx]

if anything, obama has proved that without real campaign finance reform, all we'll ever get are slight variations on the same corporate/military industrial complex. i still prefer the obama variation to the other options offered, but my expectation level is certainly a lot lower.

[James]

Meanwhile:

China buys oil rights in America, China buys acreage in America to build its own cities for the Chinese under their own laws, China gets their flag flown above The American Flag right on Constitution Avenue of all places, the Empire State Building lights red to honor the Communist anniversary, Red Dawn II gets delayed over and over and has the bad guy switched to the N. Koreans (like they could ever attack mainland America), China gets approval to purchase American banks, on and on and on. See a pattern here? And to think at one time America looked down on Communism? And McCarthy, Robert Welch, Ezra Benson Taft and others, all warned us years ago of creeping Communism within our government and people shrugged it off as impossible? It's here;just go to Wal-Mart and look around. There is so much truth here; so much truth.

[Johnny Ringo]

Meanwhile:

China buys oil rights in America, China buys acreage in America to build its own cities for the Chinese under their own laws, China gets their flag flown above The American Flag right on Constitution Avenue of all places, the Empire State Building lights red to honor the Communist anniversary, Red Dawn II gets delayed over and over and has the bad guy switched to the N. Koreans (like they could ever attack mainland America), China gets approval to purchase American banks, on and on and on. See a pattern here? And to think at one time America looked down on Communism? And McCarthy, Robert Welch, Ezra Benson Taft and others, all warned us years ago of creeping Communism within our government and people shrugged it off as impossible? It’s here…just go to Wal-Mart and look around.

Other than it being a brutal repressive dictatorship, is there anything about China that's even remotely "communist" any more?

North Korea is probably the last country on earth that can arguable be called communist, and it is a pretty good representation of where that philosophy leads outside of thought experiments and academic treatises.

[Scott Barker]

Other than it being a brutal repressive dictatorship, is there anything about China that's even remotely "communist" any more?

North Korea is probably the last country on earth that can arguable be called communist, and it is a pretty good representation of where that philosophy leads outside of thought experiments and academic treatises.

On the flip side, there aren't many purely capitalist countries either. Most countries have varying degrees of government regulation of markets. The true story of economics over the past 200 years or so isn't the struggle between free markets and state control, but in finding the sweet spot where the right amount of regulation allows markets to create the maximum amount of wealth with the minimum amount of moral depravity.

[Cracko]

On the flip side, there aren't many purely capitalist countries either. Most countries have varying degrees of government regulation of markets. The true story of economics over the past 200 years or so isn't the struggle between free markets and state control, but in finding the sweet spot where the right amount of regulation allows markets to create the maximum amount of wealth with the minimum amount of moral depravity.

Yep, that is a good point. And though from the perspective I expressed it seems like China is affecting us there can be no doubt that we are affecting them in ways that are readily apparent. I would say that at this point, China has come miles more towards being westernized than the Occidental world has gone towards being "easternized".

[toby]

North Korea is probably the last country on earth that can arguable be called communist, and it is a pretty good representation of where that philosophy leads outside of thought experiments and academic treatises.

And then there was Karl Schmitt, nicht wahr?

[Johnny Ringo]

On the flip side, there aren't many purely capitalist countries either. Most countries have varying degrees of government regulation of markets. The true story of economics over the past 200 years or so isn't the struggle between free markets and state control, but in finding the sweet spot where the right amount of regulation allows markets to create the maximum amount of wealth with the minimum amount of moral depravity.

Not the point. Cracko was making a point about "creeping communism.". I'm just suggesting that it's anachonistic to describe China as communist any more. It is a bureaucratic one-party dictatorship, but it's probably fairer to describe China as mercantilist these days.

[Johnny Ringo]

And then there was Karl Schmitt, nicht wahr?

The opera singer? I'll admit you've lost me there.

[Scott Barker]

Not the point. Cracko was making a point about "creeping communism.". I'm just suggesting that it's anachonistic to describe China as communist any more. It is a bureaucratic one-party dictatorship, but it's probably fairer to describe China as mercantilist these days.

I agree. My point was that describing any country as communist or capitalist is anachronistic (if ever those terms truly applied to countries in the real world). Actually, the proper term probably is simplistic. Labels are handy, but they do not reflect the manifold permutations of reality.

[toby]

I'll admit you've lost me there.

I know.

[toby]

I agree. My point was that describing any country as communist or capitalist is anachronistic (if ever those terms truly applied to countries in the real world). Actually, the proper term probably is simplistic. Labels are handy, but they do not reflect the manifold permutations of reality.

http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/schumpeter-joseph-2.jpg

[JMG]

Is that Bat Boy?

[James]

You know what I think? I think that China will foot the bill for our crumbling infrastructure the way they are footing the bill for constructing the infrastructure in developing countries. Basically buying the rights to ownership of the entire system. While fed and state governments waste money on "security", insurance and interest payments, the society will need what China will be offering. Only thing is, the Chinese have capitalism down to an art form, since they practically invented it two thousand years ago.

But even if they did all that, what then? The system is still unsustainable.

The only thing I see is that a very big change is on the way that has nothing to do with either the US or China's political position in the world. Individual people have to wake up.

[Johnny Ringo]

I know.

I would never challenge your mastery of the obscure.

[The Pullet Surprise]

James.....Obama is a man of change. He changed his position on almost everything he promised before he was elected.


Yeah, and you really know what position you're getting when you ask Mitt Romney to take a stance.

[James]

Yeah, and you really know what position you're getting when you ask Mitt Romney to take a stance.The dems and the gops are the same nowadays. Both driving this train to the cliff.

[toby]

I would never challenge your mastery of the obscure.

Nothing obscure about the Nazi theorist lovingly quoted by your man Alberto Gonzales in his brief defending US detention and torture policies.

[Johnny Ringo]

Nothing obscure about the Nazi theorist lovingly quoted by your man Alberto Gonzales in his brief defending US detention and torture policies.

Right, because really, who HASN'T read that?

[toby]

Right, because really, who HASN'T read that?

Yeah, you know, it's wrong to read things and stuff. Just go along with it all. It will be ok. It's just a shower.

[spinetingler]

Other than it being a brutal repressive dictatorship, is there anything about China that's even remotely "communist" any more?

beat me to it.

[edens]

You know what I think? I think that China...

...is even more fucked than we are.

[Hank IV]

On the flip side, there aren't many purely capitalist countries either. Most countries have varying degrees of government regulation of markets. The true story of economics over the past 200 years or so isn't the struggle between free markets and state control, but in finding the sweet spot where the right amount of regulation allows markets to create the maximum amount of wealth with the minimum amount of moral depravity.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QDv4sYwjO0

[James]

Now it turns out not only was Stuxnet (code-named Olympic Games) created by the US under Obama direction, after it got out and spread all around the world, he doubled down on the concept of creating cyber weapons (viruses). (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/world/middleeast/obama-ordered-wave-of-cyberattacks-against-iran.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1)

[Johnny Ringo]

Now it turns out not only was Stuxnet (code-named Olympic Games) created by the US under Obama direction, after it got out and spread all around the world, he doubled down on the concept of creating cyber weapons (viruses). (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/world/middleeast/obama-ordered-wave-of-cyberattacks-against-iran.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1)

I'm totally ok with this. Only the insane or terminally naive could think that Iran with a nuclear weapon would be an acceptable outcome. Cyber attacks that undermine their program without killing anyone would seem the be the most humane way to achieve a goal that is clearly in the strategic interest of the US. I just hope they are working as hard on cyber defense, because this will get turned on us eventually if it hasn't been already.

[Michael]

Now it turns out not only was Stuxnet (code-named Olympic Games) created by the US under Obama direction...
That's not the way I read that:

"Mr. Obama decided to accelerate the attacks — begun in the Bush administration and code-named Olympic Games..."
and
"'Should we shut this thing down?' Mr. Obama asked, according to members of the president’s national security team who were in the room. Told it was unclear how much the Iranians knew about the code, and offered evidence that it was still causing havoc, Mr. Obama decided that the cyberattacks should proceed."

Not saying he didn't accelerate the attacks, but it doesn't seem to indicate that they were "created by the US under Obama direction."
~m.

[James]

I'm totally ok with this. Only the insane or terminally naive could think that Iran with a nuclear weapon would be an acceptable outcome. Cyber attacks that undermine their program without killing anyone would seem the be the most humane way to achieve a goal that is clearly in the strategic interest of the US. I just hope they are working as hard on cyber defense, because this will get turned on us eventually if it hasn't been already.Why is it unacceptable for Iran but not unacceptable for North Korea? Also, this things spread and can't be contained forever.

[Johnny Ringo]

Why is it unacceptable for Iran but not unacceptable for North Korea? Also, this things spread and can't be contained forever.

It is unacceptable for north Korea as well, but years of dithering and fruitless negotiations allowed them to get the bomb. The fact that we've had one unacceptable outCome doesn't mean we have to accept them all. I'm quite happy President Obama has pursued this course, and hopefully President Romney won't let up.

[James]

Now it turns out not only was Stuxnet (code-named Olympic Games) created by the US and continued under Obama direction, after it got out and spread all around the world, he doubled down on the concept of creating cyber weapons (viruses). (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/01/world/middleeast/obama-ordered-wave-of-cyberattacks-against-iran.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1)fixed.


American cyberattacks are not limited to Iran, but the focus of attention, as one administration official put it, “has been overwhelmingly on one country.” There is no reason to believe that will remain the case for long. Some officials question why the same techniques have not been used more aggressively against North Korea. Others see chances to disrupt Chinese military plans, forces in Syria on the way to suppress the uprising there, and Qaeda operations around the world. “We’ve considered a lot more attacks than we have gone ahead with,” one former intelligence official said.

Mr. Obama has repeatedly told his aides that there are risks to using — and particularly to overusing — the weapon. In fact, no country’s infrastructure is more dependent on computer systems, and thus more vulnerable to attack, than that of the United States. It is only a matter of time, most experts believe, before it becomes the target of the same kind of weapon that the Americans have used, secretly, against Iran.

[Rocky Hillian]

Stuxnet is actually a very interesting piece of coding. It was designed to attack a very specific routine on one manufacturer's one type of control apparatus. Look at Ars Technica's reporting on it. (http://arstechnica.com/search/?query=stuxnet)

The US is extremely vulnerable to similar types of attacks. Luckily the only entities with the resources to do it are either allies (Israel), only look to steal money (Russian organized crime) or simply look to glean information (China.) The cyber defense industry has little doubt that if, or when, China decides to remove US power, both figuratively and literally (electric grid) all it will have to do is throw a switch. But a decimated US is not in China's interest.

[crooked-finger]

Watching the power of language is a hobby. Interesting how easy it is to just redefine the word "militant" (http://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/singleton/) and voila, no problems.

By the way, it really is just a past time. I am this close(finger held about an inch from my thumb) from not giving a rat's ass.

[James]

It is unacceptable for north Korea as well, but years of dithering and fruitless negotiations allowed them to get the bomb. The fact that we've had one unacceptable outCome doesn't mean we have to accept them all. I'm quite happy President Obama has pursued this course, and hopefully President Romney won't let up.

Of course "President" Romney will do the same thing, they're both controlled by the same Military/industrial complex.

I say let them join the damn Nuke club.

[James]

Watching the power of language is a hobby. Interesting how easy it is to just redefine the word "militant" (http://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/singleton/) and voila, no problems.

Yup.


For the moment, leave the ethical issues to the side that arise from viewing “all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants”; that’s nothing less than sociopathic, a term I use advisedly, but I discuss that in the separate, longer piece I’ve written. For now, consider what this means for American media outlets. Any of them which use the term “militants” to describe those killed by U.S. strikes are knowingly disseminating a false and misleading term of propaganda. By “militant,” the Obama administration literally means nothing more than: any military-age male whom we kill, even when we know nothing else about them. They have no idea whether the person killed is really a militant: if they’re male and of a certain age they just call them one in order to whitewash their behavior and propagandize the citizenry (unless conclusive evidence somehow later emerges proving their innocence).

[SnM]

House GOP releases documents on health care deals (http://news.yahoo.com/house-gop-releases-documents-health-care-deals-165702383--finance.html)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House played political hardball with drug industry honchos to get a 2009 deal that helped keep health care overhaul legislation from bogging down in Congress, according to internal emails released Thursday by House Republicans.

Obtained from the industry by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, the emails and documents shed light on the saga of President Barack Obama's health care overhaul as its fortunes shifted back and forth in Congress...

[spinetingler]

President Romney

A little early to predict what his grand kids will grow up to do.