Remember were you were

[HNT5]

Remember where you were 20 Jan 2009. You witnessed history unfold; you lived during a historical moment, never to be repeated again. Just as those of you who watched as the first human set foot on the moon (I was just a wee one and don’t remember) or other historical events both good and bad. Regardless of your personal or political feelings about President Obama, whether or not you voted for him, believe him and/or his party or not. It really was a historical day.

Regards
Nathan

[TCups]

Why?

Read Juan Williams editorial in the WSJ today before you answer.

B. Hussein Obama was the recipient of the benefits of all who came before him that made his Presidency possible.  Perhaps it is those who struggled, and yes, gave their lives to secure Obama's freedoms and civil rights who would be more appropriately celebrated and remembered for the day.  In that regard, this wasn't anything Obama accomplished himself, per se, any more than any other candidate who has ever before run for and been elected President.  Do you remember where you were when Clarence Thomas became the first Supreme Court Justice?  Condy Rice the first black female Secretary of State?  Do you know who the first black astronaut was?  Or first four-star general?  Do you remember where you were when MLK was assassinated?

Please give me and America and even President Obama a break here.  He is a successful politician, no more, no less.  To judge his Presidency any other way demeans him and the Office of the Presidency.  Juan Williams has it exactly right.

[JWC]

It would be nice to reach the day (and the mind-set) where a black man can achieve something and not have his skin color pointed out, for any reason, because it's simply irrelevant.  We're obviously not there.

[dave2288]

on the day he was sworn in, there were times where he was being related to mlk...well, i don't think mlk wanted the black man to finally get ahead...way to set sociecty back.  idiot me thought unity and equality were what we were supposed to want.

[miked6762]

I've seen staying out of the political forum- at least since it was moved from the backroom; but I have to agree that it was a very important day, not only for the black community-but for all of us. Wasn't it only about 40 years ago that the south ended segregation?  I watched the inauguration and was very moved. I'm more proud to be American now than I have been for 8 years.
 Try to remember; Obama didn't place us in the position that we are in. 8 years of greed fueled policies and backroom dealings put us where we are. The Bush family and their business partners have become even more wealthy, primarily due to defense and oil contracts. The American people have been deceived. False patriotism is everywhere. Patriotism is not love of one's government. It is the love of one's country and it's people-your neighbors.
At some point, Wall street bought our government (maybe the Reagan years?-probably much earlier). It's obvious now, isn't it? I mean, Have you been bailed out? Neither have I. Can you declare bankruptcy, and still be rich? Neither can I.
Like some others here; I have served in our military-and I have worked in our healthcare system.  It's too bad that the latter isn't as efficient as the former. For those of you that didn't know, I worked in a trauma center/ER for years before I became disabled. I dealt with the uninsured masses-I know how people suffer when they have no other access to health care.  Health insurance? -a concept of some very wealthy men. Make them pay when they're well, and make them pay more when they're not.
 If we don't take care of each other, who will?
 I agree that the government should fear the people-not the other way around.
Like everyone else here, I love my guns-and I plan on keeping them.
I have hope for the future. My hope is that the old divide and conquer strategy, and the rule by fear mentality that has worked so well to keep us in line will begin to fail as Americans come together.

Michael

[JWC]

miked6762 - 1/25/2009  1:14 PM

...I have to agree that it was a very important day, not only for the black community-but for all of us. Wasn't it only about 40 years ago that the south ended segregation?

I think it's good that it's possible for a black man to be elected to the highest office in the land.  However, I stand by my previous statement, in that I think it would be even better if it were simply not an issue, and not a big deal.  I find myself unable to applaud over the election of President Obama simply because of his skin color, when I think his political beliefs and the policies that he will pursue are not in the best interest of the citizens and our nation.

I tend to share the opinions that Anne Wortham stated in her essay, "No He Can't," which I quote, below:

Fellow Americans,

Please know: I am black; I grew up in the segregated South. I did not vote for Barack Obama; I wrote in Ron Paul’s name as my choice for president. Most importantly, I am not race conscious. I do not require a black president to know that I am a person of worth, and that life is worth living. I do not require a black president to love the ideal of America.

I cannot join you in your celebration. I feel no elation. There is no smile on my face. I am not jumping with joy. There are no tears of triumph in my eyes. For such emotions and behavior to come from me, I would have to deny all that I know about the requirements of human flourishing and survival – all that I know about the history of the United States of America, all that I know about American race relations, and all that I know about Barack Obama as a politician. I would have to deny the nature of the "change" that Obama asserts has come to America. Most importantly, I would have to abnegate my certain understanding that you have chosen to sprint down the road to serfdom that we have been on for over a century. I would have to pretend that individual liberty has no value for the success of a human life. I would have to evade your rejection of the slender reed of capitalism on which your success and mine depend. I would have to think it somehow rational that 94 percent of the 12 million blacks in this country voted for a man because he looks like them (that blacks are permitted to play the race card), and that they were joined by self-declared "progressive" whites who voted for him because he doesn’t look like them. I would have to be wipe my mind clean of all that I know about the kind of people who have advised and taught Barack Obama and will fill posts in his administration – political intellectuals like my former colleagues at the Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

I would have to believe that "fairness" is equivalent of justice. I would have to believe that man who asks me to "go forward in a new spirit of service, in a new service of sacrifice" is speaking in my interest. I would have to accept the premise of a man that economic prosperity comes from the "bottom up," and who arrogantly believes that he can will it into existence by the use of government force. I would have to admire a man who thinks the standard of living of the masses can be improved by destroying the most productive and the generators of wealth.

Finally, Americans, I would have to erase from my consciousness the scene of 125,000 screaming, crying, cheering people in Grant Park, Chicago irrationally chanting "Yes We Can!" Finally, I would have to wipe all memory of all the times I have heard politicians, pundits, journalists, editorialists, bloggers and intellectuals declare that capitalism is dead – and no one, including especially Alan Greenspan, objected to their assumption that the particular version of the anti-capitalistic mentality that they want to replace with their own version of anti-capitalism is anything remotely equivalent to capitalism.

So you have made history, Americans. You and your children have elected a black man to the office of the president of the United States, the wounded giant of the world. The battle between John Wayne and Jane Fonda is over – and that Fonda won. Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern must be very happy men. Jimmie Carter, too. And the Kennedys have at last gotten their Kennedy look-a-like. The self-righteous welfare statists in the suburbs can feel warm moments of satisfaction for having elected a black person. So, toast yourselves: 60s countercultural radicals, 80s yuppies and 90s bourgeois bohemians. Toast yourselves, Black America. Shout your glee Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Duke, Stanford, and Berkeley. You have elected not an individual who is qualified to be president, but a black man who, like the pragmatist Franklin Roosevelt, promises to – Do Something! You now have someone who has picked up the baton of Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society. But you have also foolishly traded your freedom and mine – what little there is left – for the chance to feel good. There is nothing in me that can share your happy obliviousness.

November 6, 2008

Anne Wortham is an individualist liberal who happens to be black and American.

miked6762 said:

Try to remember; Obama didn't place us in the position that we are in. 8 years of greed fueled policies and backroom dealings put us where we are.

It was far more than 8 years of Bush that put us where we are at, now.  It is multiple decades of big spending, big government policies.  It doesn't matter whether it's tax and spend, or expand credit/inflate the dollar and spend.  Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Bush apologist at all.  However, I think the the policies of the Democrats are just as culpable.  Obama represents a continuation and even acceleration of the same old stuff.  More government.  More socialist and nationalist policies.  More Keynesian monetary policy with ever-expanding credit, debt, and inflation.  Less freedom.  

Sorry if I sound cynical, but I call them like I see them.

[TCups]

Michael:

I repeat, Juan Williams, writing in the WSJ, has it exactly right.  Very insightful commentary written, by the way, by another (African-) American.

See:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123249791178500439.html

And by the way, it always irritates me to hear the inference that racism and segregation was strictly a phenomenon of the "south" or a morale defect of "southerners" living in the USA, sir.  You might also want to read some of another fine (black) author, Thomas Sowell --  

"Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality" and "The Economics and Politics of Race".  

Or not.  Perhaps it is just more comfortable to feel good about your politically correct self (after all, you voted for Obama, right?) and point the ugly finger of racism at us good ol' boys down hyere in da South.  Have a nice day, sir.

PS:  I love your oxymoronic commentary, in your first two sentences where you speak of the "Black Community" as a separate entity from "all of us" and then decry "Segregation"!  How intellectually nimble of you.  I am impressed.

[Gene_SC]

At this point it does not matter whether the so called elected President is black, white, yellow or green. He was placed in office by the corporations of the world. It is the agenda that we should be discussing and not the color. After all our presidents are merely puppets and controlled by big money.

[miked6762]

TCUPS-
 Man, try to relax. You act as if I wrote something specifically designed to rile you up-when it was nothing of the sort. It was a great day for the black community. I don't know about where you live, but where I live there is a separation. It's unfortunate, but true. I've lived in the south for most of my life. I may never leave.  My father was a bigot/racist, and thankfully my early recognition of that fact helped me choose a different path. You are right. Racism is everywhere, but we're known for it. Didn't the south vote predominately democratic up until the early civil rights movement?
I didn't get to vote for the candidate of my choosing. I got to vote against a candidate of my choosing. -just like every other election in which I've voted. I'm used to it.
As usual, you  write like a very intelligent, literate, and well informed person. Unfortunately, this time you were also insulting. If I didn't know better; I'd swear you were a lawyer. It's too bad that one cannot express a positive view of an event without coming under attack.
Lesson learned.
Thanks.

[JWC]

miked6762 - 1/27/2009  3:20 PM

I didn't get to vote for the candidate of my choosing. I got to vote against a candidate of my choosing. -just like every other election in which I've voted. I'm used to it.

This sentiment is one reason why nothing ever really changes.  We're presented with a "false choice" between status-quo candidates that represent superficial differences, at best, and most people pick one of them.

If all of us would vote based on the candidate that we really feel is the best choice, rather than voting "against" a possible winner we can't stand, or holding our noses and pulling the lever for a "lesser evil" candidate, perhaps we'd have a chance, and our political landscape would undergo some *real* change (instead of moving an inch on a mile scale and calling it change).  It's too bad "none of the above" isn't ever on the ballet, too -- if it were, we might see something meaningful.

If I vote, I want my vote to do two things.  First, I want it to decide the winner.  That's obvious.  Second, I want it to represent my beliefs and my positions, to the highest degree possible.  The effect of my vote in deciding the winner needs no detailed evaluation or explanation: it either decides the winner or it does not; if it does not, then it failed in that respect.  In contrast, the effects of my vote as a representation of my beliefs do not depend on the winner or loser of the election.  The fact that my vote counted in the totals of a particular candidate adds weight to that candidate's political positions in the overall scheme of things, and helps influence the political climate.  It can even influence the political actions of the winners, by pulling them in one direction or another.  Lastly, it can influence future votes and voters; as a third party gains enough support, it makes voting for that party more viable in the eyes of voters.  Thus, the "representation of my beliefs" aspect of voting is much like an investment, where you hope for a future return.  It does not depend on the winner or loser.

In the last election, I didn't vote for either major party candidate.  I do not think my vote was wasted.  Here's why:

Take a situation where there's a Democrat, "Demagogue D," and a Republican, "Reprobate R," and a host of third-party (including independent) candidates.  Can a third party candidate win, given the realities of our political climate?  In theory, yes, there's some astronomical possibility that a third party candidate can win and my vote can help; realistically, this won't happen, and my vote won't matter in deciding the winner.  Practically speaking, the chances of a third party candidate winning are essentially zero.  So, practically speaking, if I despise Reprobate R more than I despise Demagogue D, shouldn't I vote for Demagogue D?  I don't see that, either.  In theory, yes, there's some astronomical possibility that my vote would be THE vote that propels Demagogue D to victory; realistically, this won't happen, and my vote won't matter in deciding the winner.  Indeed, a recent Fox news article cited a study which gave the odds as 60 million to 1, and notes that you're more likely to be struck *twice* by lightning.  And that's for a *national* average.  Depending on the state you live in, the chances might be even less favorable.  Realistically and practically, the odds of my vote deciding the election one way or another are "essentially zero."

Given that, what does it say about wasting my vote?  Here are the realistic and practical scenarios (i.e. the only likely ones):  

Scenario 1:  I vote for Demagogue D as a vote against Reprobate R, even though I think there are candidates that better represent me.  Demagogue D loses.  My vote didn't decide the winner.  My vote doesn't accurately represent my beliefs or stand as an investment in the future.  I lose on all fronts, and my vote is truly wasted.

Scenario 2:  I vote for Demagogue D as a vote against Reprobate R, even though I think there are candidates that represent me better.  Demagogue D wins.  My vote didn't decide the winner.  My vote doesn't accurately represent my beliefs or stand as an investment in the future (indeed, it contributes to a "false mandate" that says I approve of Demagogue D's positions).  I lose on all fronts, and my vote is truly wasted.

Scenario 3:  I vote for the candidate that best-represents my beliefs.  That candidate loses.  My vote didn't decide the winner.  However, my vote *DOES* represent my beliefs and stand as an investment in the future.  My vote is not wasted.

In other words, if I vote for a candidate that doesn't best represent my beliefs (a "lesser evil" vote for "practical" reasons), the only time that vote *isn't* wasted is if my vote is THE vote that decides the winner.  In all other scenarios, that vote is wasted, even if that "lesser evil" candidate wins.  In fact, *especially* if that candidates wins, because now my vote for him is contributing to a "false mandate" that says I approve of his positions.  So which scenario is likely to be the biggest waste?

Think about the inauguration.  If you removed your vote from the mix, does the outcome change?  That is, did your vote matter in deciding the winner?  Next, ask yourself if your vote truly represented the candidate and policies you believe would be best, regardless of the actual winner of the election.   If you can honestly answer "yes" to one of those questions, then your vote was well-spent.

I think this is view something that we've lost, caught up in the dog-and-pony show of the status quo.  On this, I stand with John Quincy Adams, who said "Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."  Voting for principle is the practical thing to do.

[airgun/cuz]

JANUARY 20, 2009 is old news!!!!!   So is Election Day!!!   FEBRUARY 1, 2009 is the future & another historic event which has just as much media attention as any elected puppet,,,errr,, president had,,,black,white,purple,green & white dotted!!!!!!

WHO'S GONNA WIN THE SUPER BOWL!!!!!!!!!


" STEELERS   or   CARDINALS ''


WHERE YA GONNA BE!!!!!!!    LOL!!!!

[3n00n]

It'll be justgreat to remember all this greatness!

`

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z5z9lD4C2Io&feature=iv&annotation_id=event_652267

`

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MouUJNG8f2k

`

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e-KJCMWcoms

[Gene_SC]

Mike I think you have over reacted to Tommy's post back. Tommy is a good person and very intelligent and sometimes I have a hard time following him and his views but Tommy does not come off as being insulting but merely putting his point of view across like me and many other's.

I admit that sometimes my skin gets a bit bruised from someone with different views or opinions but remember this is a forum and we all have the right to express our thoughts on subjects the way we see them. So do not take offense until someone out right abuses you. The rules are clearly written in the GTA Office Section and when they are broken then we take that seriously.

And as a foot note...:) I truly believe that we vote for the candidates that the Big Corps put on the Ballot. We get to vote on them and many people in the United States do not realize what is even going on...:) IMO, on this years election the Corps found that it was time to place a Black American in office. It was an easy shoe in as far as I am concerned. And the next nominated candidate for presidencymight very well be a Yellow American. Just my two cents.

[miked6762]

"Perhaps it is just more comfortable to feel good about your politically correct self (after all, you voted for Obama, right?) and point the ugly finger of racism at us good ol' boys down hyere in da South. Have a nice day, sir.

PS: I love your oxymoronic commentary, in your first two sentences where you speak of the "Black Community" as a separate entity from "all of us" and then decry "Segregation"! How intellectually nimble of you. I am impressed."

Gene,
I respect everyone's right to voice their own opinions. I even agree with some of yours, for the most part. I do find the comments above insulting, even if it is presented as sarcasm. I don't really feel all that bruised about it-I was just pointing out that I knew an insult when I saw one. I know you gotta have thick skin when you hang around back here- so no worries.
Michael

[TCups]

Just sat down and wrote a long and thoughtful response, but you know what?  After thinking about it some more -- to hell with it.  I reason that any response I make, and in fact, most of the content of this particular forum are after all, just a boondoggle.  I have no animosity or anger toward any member who posts here regardless of your race, creed religion or political beliefs.  And nothing that can be posted here will ever change mine.  So, th' the uh, th' the uh, th' the uh, th' -- That's all, folks!

Congratulations Mr. President!