Barack Obama Victory Speech in South Carolina

[iranissick]

KAZ alotta people criticize obama bcuz they say he has no clear agenda and he is simply fluff talk...
if u research or if u watch the debates, he outlines very specific policies... other candidates don't do so more than he does. i think this is a point of criticism for Obama becuase people who want to criticize him can't find anything else to criticize him on

 

[westwienmaskulin]

Hahahaha...uh...? Oh I get it, they sound the same...:--confuse

Funny one there, we got a comic genius in the house.

comic genius? whatever..

eitherway, I'm sure pulling out of WTO, Nafta, UN and everything else will solve the world's and the US problems..not to mention getting rid of automatic citizenship and other great libertarian ideas of his..

 

[Khorus]

John F Kennedy's daughter has endorsed Barack Obama.

The title of her column is..."A president like my father".

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/opinion/27kennedy.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

That is not much of an endorsement, JFK was not that good a president!

 

[Kaz]

comic genius? whatever..

eitherway, I'm sure pulling out of WTO, Nafta, UN and everything else will solve the world's and the US problems..not to mention getting rid of automatic citizenship and other great libertarian ideas of his..

See another joke, you're on a roll...talking as if you know what Ron Paul is actually about.

http://citizen.typepad.com/eyesontrade/2007/07/ron-paul-for-fr.html

Actually, Paul's position, unlike that of more opportunistic libertarians, is to oppose WTO and NAFTA precisely because they are not about so-called "free trade... in practice." As Paul said on the floor during the CAFTA debate:

If we were interested in free trade, as the pretense is, you could initiate free trade in one small paragraph. This bill is over 1,000 pages, and it is merely a pretext for free trade. At the same time we talk about free trade, we badger China, and that is not free trade. I believe in free trade, but this is not free trade. This is regulated, managed trade for the benefit of special interests. That is why I oppose it.

And, in case you weren't sure, Paul is the only GOP candidate (and only one of two in the entire two-party field) to have an 100% fair trade voting record.

And the citizenship deal...you know why he is against that...or were you making another joke? He's against giving citizenship to people who immigrate illegally, get easy citizenship then drain the free services afforded to them without having inputting anything into the system. If you cared about decreasing illegal citizenship, you would support this. WHY? Because as Ron Paul says, you take away the incentive for these people to get in.

But yeah man, if you were just joking and all, I apologise for the lecture.

 

[Khorus]

yes true that, but the fact that he talks about his quest to change USA's corporate health care system, poor education, and big corps outsourcing, shows he really understands the problems ordinary Americans face and is strong enough to change that.
Other candidates(Repub and Democ) just wanna continue or maybe moderate current govt's mandates, thats all.

Nilu jaan, everybody makes the same promises every election. You have to gauge the person for his ability to work within the system and his/her character. It is very difficult to judge a candidates ability from their speeches. Also, just so you know, every legitimate candidate is talking about change, becuase this election is about change. People are tired of 8 years of the same crap, so change is in order. Not one of the candidate can even remotely hint at leaving things status quo and expect to get elected. All being said, I think Hillary is the best man for the job right now.

 

[Kaz]

KAZ alotta people criticize obama bcuz they say he has no clear agenda and he is simply fluff talk...
if u research or if u watch the debates, he outlines very specific policies... other candidates don't do so more than he does. i think this is a point of criticism for Obama becuase people who want to criticize him can't find anything else to criticize him on

To an extent I agree with you. With regards to the economy and even the war, he hasn't been as forthcoming as some other candidates. Especially, in this case, Ron Paul - who has pretty much laid it out on the table.

America is headed into a shit-hole and fast. The only candidate that seems to have the brains and the guts to make the huge changes necessary, to me, is Paul. Everyone else is twiddling their thumbs.

 

[Fole_Penalt]

To an extent I agree with you. With regards to the economy and even the war, he hasn't been as forthcoming as some other candidates. Especially, in this case, Ron Paul - who has pretty much laid it out on the table.

America is headed into a shit-hole and fast. The only candidate that seems to have the brains and the guts to make the huge changes necessary, to me, is Paul. Everyone else is twiddling their thumbs.

Things are not as bad as you think. The reason is not because the US is following the right policies, more or less what Ron Paul states, but because generally others are even further away from those policies than the US. With all its problems the US continues to have one of the freest economies in the world. The number of countries that come even close are numbered. And this is why it continues to be as powerful as it is in total disbelief of everyone around the world.

What is unfortunate is that this gap, used to be a chasm, but now, many countries have adopted some or most of the free economy policies and a few have surpassed the US in economic freedom, while the US itself has regressed. And the results show.

 

[Kaz]

Nilu jaan, everybody makes the same promises every election. You have to gauge the person for his ability to work within the system and his/her character. It is very difficult to judge a candidates ability from their speeches. Also, just so you know, every legitimate candidate is talking about change, becuase this election is about change. People are tired of 8 years of the same crap, so change is in order. Not one of the candidate can even remotely hint at leaving things status quo and expect to get elected. All being said, I think Hillary is the best man for the job right now.

LOL.

Problem is 'change' is now a buzzword. Most the policies being brought up seem to be 'the same shit but different smell'. Mr. "I will stay in Iraq for 100 years" McCain seems like he is actually going to challenge when everyone intially thought he was going to be weak.

In the latest (I think) Republican candidates debate all the candidates bar Ron Paul said the War was a good idea and they'd stay as long as needed. These guys are idiots. They know a hefty majority of the American people are against the War but they still tout it. If any of these idiots get the nomination then they will lose to any of the Democratic alternatives.

 

[Kaz]

Things are not as bad as you think. The reason is not because the US is following the right policies, more or less what Ron Paul states, but because generally others are even further away from those policies than the US. With all its problems the US continues to have one of the freest economies in the world. The number of countries that come even close are numbered. And this is why it continues to be as powerful as it is in total disbelief of everyone around the world.

What is unfortunate is that this gap, used to be a chasm, but now, many countries have adopted some or most of the free economy policies and a few have surpassed the US in economic freedom, while the US itself has regressed. And the results show.

Wrong. Totally wrong. Ron Paul is the biggest detractor of what is going on right now. Where did you read he agrees with it? He is the most reformist of the lot.

What is going on is that everyone, including foreign investors, have realised the American currency isn't worth shit anymore and the market will fail. The debt coupled with the inflation is eating you up. You need a government to spend less, borrow less and stop printing money to pay off more debts.

 

[Fole_Penalt]

Wrong. Totally wrong. Ron Paul is the biggest detractor of what is going on right now. Where did you read he agrees with it? He is the most reformist of the lot.

What is going on is that everyone, including foreign investors, have realised the American currency isn't worth shit anymore and the market will fail. The debt coupled with the inflation is eating you up. You need a government to spend less, borrow less and stop printing money to pay off more debts.

Kaz, you are typing too fast. You did not follow my post. I support Ron Paul, and the policies he stands for, and have stated it on this site, in fact before you did. The point was not about Ron Paul.

The point is that as far as US is from what is right, freedom, what more or less Ron Paul stands for, it is better off than almost everyone in the world. For example, you are concerned about the government debt? Go ahead look at the statistics of other developed countries and you will see that the ratio of government debt to GDP is far worst in Japan and Germany for example, the two next largest economies. In other words it is not all gloom and doom.

And secondly, yes, the US used to have a far greater lead over the world in terms of freedom. And unfortunately the US has regressed and some places in the world have advanced.

 

[Kaz]

Kaz, you are typing too fast. You did not follow my post. I support Ron Paul, and the policies he stands for, and have stated it on this site, in fact before you did. The point was not about Ron Paul.

The point is that as far as US is from what is right, freedom, what more or less Ron Paul stands for, it is better off than almost everyone in the world. For example, you are concerned about the government debt? Go ahead look at the statistics of other developed countries and you will see that the ratio of government debt to GDP is far worst in Japan and Germany for example, the two next largest economies. In other words it is not all gloom and doom.

And secondly, yes, the US used to have a far greater lead over the world in terms of freedom. And unfortunately the US has regressed and some places in the world have advanced.

Sorry Fole_Penalt jan, I actually read all your post, I must have just misread it.

With regards to the statistics, I was talking to an american friend the other day who is an economist and he was talking about how the govt. has been hiding how badly they've been doing by removing some things from the indexes. I can't recall exactly what it is (something to do with inflation/CPI), just wondering if that resonates with anyone?

 

[Niloufar]

Nilu jaan, everybody makes the same promises every election. You have to gauge the person for his ability to work within the system and his/her character. It is very difficult to judge a candidates ability from their speeches. Also, just so you know, every legitimate candidate is talking about change, becuase this election is about change. People are tired of 8 years of the same crap, so change is in order. Not one of the candidate can even remotely hint at leaving things status quo and expect to get elected. All being said, I think Hillary is the best man for the job right now.

Shahriar jan,
In comparison, I havent heard Clinton or McCain seeking big changes in social-eco demographic of USA as Obama does.
The same Hillary Clinton who bashes current administrator, was one of the senate voters supporting Iraq war. U cant claim your opposition with current govt, when u actually stand by the current govt's biggest mistake that cost American citizens big $$$.

The whole private health care system in USA, who costs millions of $ from citizens' pocket, has not only prevented very ill but poor ppl from going to doctor, but also has caused huge gap bn rich and poor for having the basic health care access. No where else in the world, such system is operated like that.

Im sure any half brainer candidate, if elected, will stop Bush's war on terror campaigns due to recession, but is that all Americans want? not really. Seems like they've realized their problems lies beyond terrorism, but internal issues instead..
and among all candidates, only Obama has realized that it seems!!

 

[Faran]

Fole jan the fact is that when you are talking about the U.S. economy both internally and in terms of its place in the World, some things need to be realized that can't exactly be spelled out in an economics text book:

1) The government needs to be of some considerable size for the corporations to be able to use it as a vehicle. The problem of economic globalism is not just economic freedom but the fact that powerful governments enforce the authority of corporations around the world to act as they please. This is bad for the environment and for peace. It doesn't much matter how wealthy a corporation is if the police in developing countries are going to tell them to get out of their cities and rain forests. As to whether or not those governments can be bought, the history of countries like Panama and our own Iran show that this is made more possible when the United States government is acting as a vehicle for the will of corporations, and not the people. It is easy to state that governments can be bought but historically, nations are attracted towards autonomy.

2) On the subject of Ron Paul: There are immense bureaucracies in the United States that represent frightening wastes of money. With the exception of taxation services like the IRS, they don't generate any revenue. The income tax itself represents about half of the United States government's income, but so many expenses can be cut that within a short period of time you could abolish the IRS and also make the country more economically successful than ever. And believe me, if Ron Paul is going to abolish the IRS, most Americans wouldn't care if he wanted to personally shoot them and then deny them health care.

3) It doesn't matter how big Japan's debt is, the US President should not needlessly incur debts. It isn't just a matter of staying a nose ahead of others. Furthermore, the US's production capabilities are dwindling rapidly. Now all of that aside, the economic problems we are most worried about in the United States are those of the people, not the government. Everybody knows the US government is strong and smart, they aren't exactly the ones we are worried about. People want their kids to have health care, not their country to have maximum empire-forging capabilities.

 

[Faran]

The problem with saying Barack realized anything is that we know he has a lot of money and we know it doesn't come from you and me.

The guy can talk, sure, though the mainstream candidates have the best speech writers, the most confidence, and the most airtime and thus leisure to speak, but at the present time it is more important for Keith Olbermann to be a gifted orator than the next President. The reason I say that is that there are simply so many actions which will speak louder than words which need to be taken.

Barack's words about changing Washington are nothing new. All these politicians claim they are fed up with Washington and intend to go there to change it. Actually, they are already there, and the mainstream politicians are the ones who are most comfortable there.

Maybe Barack really is the new one, the one who wants to be a parasite to the current policy, but the fact is that everyone before him claimed the same merit and it came to nought. Barack's record in Washington is not as impressive as his rhetoric, and while I prefer him to any other mainstream candidate, despite my disdain for democrats, it's important to realize that as a mainstream politician he can't be the good news he claims to be. It's just not in his hands. He might be good hearted, but with politicians you have to realize that the more powerful they seem the less powerful they actually are because that's somebody else's power showing through them.

Just wondering, how many people here are going to be able to vote in this election? I am, I'm wondering how many are US citizens because we have some people from abroad who are rightfully interested.

 

[Faran]

lol,think about it this way: There wont be any Osama when GW.Bush leaves office!
Osama became Osama thanx to Bush, and his power will be taken away when his buddy leaves the White house!

Not really Nilou jan, the guy was a pretty big deal when Clinton was President Has Obama said he wants to take Americans out of the region entirely? Out of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc? No, so how can you say Osama Bin Laden will calm down if Barack is elected??

 

[Faran]

What is his policy toward Iran?

you wouldn't like it, it's comparatively peaceful.

 

[Fole_Penalt]

Sorry Fole_Penalt jan, I actually read all your post, I must have just misread it.

With regards to the statistics, I was talking to an american friend the other day who is an economist and he was talking about how the govt. has been hiding how badly they've been doing by removing some things from the indexes. I can't recall exactly what it is (something to do with inflation/CPI), just wondering if that resonates with anyone?

No worries Kaz jaan. In fact as I was replying to you I was imagining Ron Paul himself. The guy gets bombarded by character assassinations, untrue characterizations, and ridiculed from all sides, while he is by far and away the most earnest candidate. Its hard to figure out which attack to respond to.

What I am suggesting is not to loose the big picture. There is much to be improved upon, but all you need to do is take a trip outside of US to practically anywhere and stay and work there for a year or so and then you will see just how much better the US is, still with all its problems.

For example, on US's current account deficit and the Federal reserve printing money to finance it. It is bad but it is not as bad as it is for other countries. The problem is not the US but China and Japan for example. They are the ones that peg their currencies or constantly intervene to undermine their own currencies by buying dollars. If they wish to get paper for goods they sell to the US, let them. Enjoy the paper. Sure this situation is worst than if there were true free trade, but it is better than US stopping free trade. The point I am trying to make is that while one should not loose track of the fundamentals, maximum freedom, one should also keep things in perspective by comparing to other real world examples, in this case other countries.

 

[Khorus]

Shahriar jan,
In comparison, I havent heard Clinton or McCain seeking big changes in social-eco demographic of USA as Obama does.
The same Hillary Clinton who bashes current administrator, was one of the senate voters supporting Iraq war. U cant claim your opposition with current govt, when u actually stand by the current govt's biggest mistake that cost American citizens big $$$.

The whole private health care system in USA, who costs millions of $ from citizens' pocket, has not only prevented very ill but poor ppl from going to doctor, but also has caused huge gap bn rich and poor for having the basic health care access. No where else in the world, such system is operated like that.

Im sure any half brainer candidate, if elected, will stop Bush's war on terror campaigns due to recession, but is that all Americans want? not really. Seems like they've realized their problems lies beyond terrorism, but internal issues instead..
and among all candidates, only Obama has realized that it seems!!

Maybe I need to listen more and read more, but it seems everybody is yelling change. Whether or not any of them including Obama can make change happen is another matter completely. I for one, don't think that the best speaker is necessarily the best candidate. I believe that all candidates realize that the economy has it's short term problems, that the war in Iraq is a problem, that the education system needs help, and that the health care system needs some serious changes, every single one of them. What they want to do about them is what this election is about. Again, it is tough to choose a candidate because as you know, very often the words spoken during the campaign have very little to do with what actually takes place after the election is over. I seem to agree more with Hillary on the issues that are the most important to me than any of the other cadidates from either party, so that is why I think she is the best candidate. Now she could have some really messed up ideas that I agree with, so in that context, she may be a poor choice, but that is why we vote now, isn't it!

 

[Niloufar]

Not really Nilou jan, the guy was a pretty big deal when Clinton was President Has Obama said he wants to take Americans out of the region entirely? Out of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc? No, so how can you say Osama Bin Laden will calm down if Barack is elected??

yes I know Osama was powerful before, but G.Bush(the father)'s support of Saudi govt and businesses at his reign, and then G.W.Bush's support of Osama, as a rich investor,through Halliburton co., all lead to expansion of Taliban and Al Qaeda in ME region. dont support them or let them invest in U.S, and Osama's group will be weakened to operate.

and yes, Obama was against the war on Iraq as a senator and in his campaign, he promises to pull out of Iraq and any other potential war.

Maybe I need to listen more and read more, but it seems everybody is yelling change. Whether or not any of them including Obama can make change happen is another matter completely. I for one, don't think that the best speaker is necessarily the best candidate. I believe that all candidates realize that the economy has it's short term problems, that the war in Iraq is a problem, that the education system needs help, and that the health care system needs some serious changes, every single one of them. What they want to do about them is what this election is about. Again, it is tough to choose a candidate because as you know, very often the words spoken during the campaign have very little to do with what actually takes place after the election is over. I seem to agree more with Hillary on the issues that are the most important to me than any of the other cadidates from either party, so that is why I think she is the best candidate. Now she could have some really messed up ideas that I agree with, so in that context, she may be a poor choice, but that is why we vote now, isn't it!

Yes ofcourse, its completely a personal opinion as to whom to trust more among candidates. Your expectations of a presidential candidate may be very diff than that of mine and thats very natural and respectable.

However what bothers me about Hillary, is that unlike her husband, she actually has very conservative and traditional views and mandates as a Democrat candidate. and
like always she tries to keep all ppl around her happy,which usually big insurance companies and alikes have more influence than ordinary ppl, hence nothing much changes in current politics of U.S . so if one wants to rely on improved economy for big corps in order to create jobs for ppl, then Hillary may be a better choice there!

 

[Messi]

you wouldn't like it, it's comparatively peaceful.

LOOOL
Nice 1