The day that changed America (and probably the world too)

[tech_support]

Obama.

Your thoughts?

[tfit]

It's a beginning, but who is on his bus? (jim collins - good to great)

[ddadmin]

I think he'll do a great job, but ultimately the effectiveness of a US president is based on the people around him that make up his government. Who he picks is going to be just as important in taking up those important posts.

I think Obama will be scrutinized by the American public and media more than any other US president in history when he becomes president. It's a lot of pressure.

[TheJoshMan]

The odds are certainly stacked against the man, that's for sure.

I wasn't too pleased with either primary choice for president. I was actually about an inch away from voting for Nater... LOL

[Twey]

'cause nobody saw that one coming three months in advance.

[james438]

I'm more of a wait and see kinda guy myself. I don't think he is the devil or the savior like many people seem to think. I belive that actions speak louder than words, so I'll wait and see what changes he brings about before making any judgement. I know he was elected based on a platform, but that does not mean that he will follow through or will be able to.

I have to agree with Nyne Lyves comment.

[magicyte]

I wasn't too pleased with either primary choice for president.

Hey- Amen. I am INDEED an independant.

I was drawn in to Obama with his unseen propaganda that wasn't really true, after I thought about it.

I only liked McCain because he was older and because he wouldn't have much power considering there are more democrats in Congress than republicans (which doesn't really mean he has LESS power). This is also why I didn't want Obama to be president. He might have too much power. He has more democrats in Congress and yet gets to appoint the next 3 people in the Supreme Court. I don't know how check 'n' balances 'll work now.

I think that Obama will do okay, but I can't tell the future...

-magicyte

[djr33]

Well, just about anything will be an improvement, and we can hope for a lot more than that.

[tfit]

I just heard something striking: Obama will face the same resistance as the open source community; you have to work harder to prove you're right.

Btw, never trust a politician.

[eightiesbaby80]

Obama.

Your thoughts?

I'm definatley excited at all the possibilities, however I'm a little scared becasue it closely resembles the kennedy election, and look what happened to him =(

[TheJoshMan]

Well, just about anything will be an improvement, and we can hope for a lot more than that.

I absolutely agree about that! This country is so far in the $h1t hole right now, there's nowhere to go but UP!

I do have one thing about Obama that doesn't please me. The fact that he favors legalization for illegal aliens who are currently employed in the US. How much audacity does it take to openly admit that you want to make illegal aliens legal since they work here? That's just asking for MORE illegal aliens to hop the border and find a job with a fake ID. With the economy the way it is now, LEGAL citizens need jobs and can't find them due to the overwhelming numbers of illegal aliens willing to work for peanuts.

I'm also not very fond of the idea of full birth abortions, but I guess if a woman wants to kill her baby that should be her decision. That's a very heated topic though. I completely understand about things like rape, incest, or if the mother is going to DIE by giving birth or carrying the baby full term... I just don't know if killing a baby after it leaves the womb should be called abortion... I mean, why not just call it "legalized murder"?

Just my two cents anyhoo.

[djr33]

I'm fully in favor of allowing abortion as a legal option and decision by the mother, but the point at which the baby can survive on its own marks something different than abortion, and anyone responsible should figure out what she's going to do before that point.

As for going up, yeah. Mccain would have been an improvement.

As for the immigrants, it's a more complex issue than that-- if you're willing to work for less than minimum wage in terrible conditions, then go join the illegal aliens once they're legalized, and you'll have a job. They're not really taking the jobs that people want, though I can see overlap once they're legalized, perhaps.

[magicyte]

I'm fully in favor of allowing abortion as a legal option and decision by the mother

I respectfully disagree. I know America is a free place and all, but it just isn't right to have an abortion. You are destroying a child's life, for better or for worse, and that is not right.


As for going up, yeah. Mccain would have been an improvement.

I respectfully agree, even though I am an Independant.

-magicyte

[molendijk]

I do have one thing about Obama that doesn't please me. The fact that he favors legalization for illegal aliens who are currently employed in the US. How much audacity does it take to openly admit that you want to make illegal aliens legal since they work here?
Aliens? Are you talking about Martians, or about people who are willing to WORK in order to have an honest daily meal?

With the economy the way it is now, LEGAL citizens need jobs and can't find them due to the overwhelming numbers of illegal aliens willing to work for peanuts.
What's wrong with people (not aliens!) willing to work for peanuts? I would say they show more perseverance than people who only want to work for big money. Your 'legal' citizen is nothing more or less than someone who had the luck to be born on side side of the border instead of on the other side. (There's nothing 'legal' or 'illegal' about where you were born). I get the smell of 'my own people first' here. It reminds me of something of the past, sorry). By the way, I hope you realize why the economy went the way it is now: certain people wanted to make big money by doing obscure things that have nothing to do with honest work.


I completely understand about things like rape, incest, or if the mother is going to DIE by giving birth or carrying the baby full term... I just don't know if killing a baby after it leaves the womb should be called abortion... I mean, why not just call it "legalized murder"?
If you understand about things like rape etc., then don't call it murder. That's verbal demagogism. Abortion is just about the things you say to 'completely understand' yourself. And what do you mean by 'I just don't know if killing a baby after it leaves the womb should be called abortion'. As far as I know, nobody ever would allow that to happen.
Arie.

[james438]

You should keep up with the abortion issue some more molendijk ;)

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/015/404kfgky.asp
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1207159750412&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYRpIf2F9NA

Many democrats (and especially Obama) are pushing for after birth abortions. Every time after birth abortion has come up Obama has voted for it. I hear about it on the news all the time. I was shocked when I first heard about after birth abortions. I believe it was called "wrongful birth" or something like that the first time it was introduced in congress. Just do a simple search for it on google and you'll find out more about it.

Personally I am against abortion in all cases unless the life of the mother and the child are at stake and there is zero chance that the baby will be born alive. If all of those conditions are met then I am for abortion.

The term for abortion after birth is more commonly known as infanticide. I call it murder. It is not verbal demagogism on my part when I use the word murder. I use that term to mean the unlawful killing of another person. People have tried to find new ways to excuse murder that they give it new names like abortion or RU486 (are you for 86? ("the combatant has been 86'd sir")). Murder is still murder. I use the term unlawful here to mean that which directly violates God's word (the Bible). Yes, I know hardly anybody these days really is Christian, but so what?

In fact in my experience most people who claim to be Christian are not. Almost always Christians will get really angry (livid) at the notion that there is a God and especially that there is only one way to salvation and that is through repentance and acceptance of Jesus as lord and savior. Christians hate that. Non Christians seem fine with that however. Kinda odd really.

No matter. Obama will soon be president and life goes on. Part of being a Christian means abiding with the current government, to pray for our leaders and to pay taxes even if those taxes go towards abortions. Unless the current government leadership demands that I directly disobey God's word I will honor and respect the leadership as he was appointed by the people and ultimately by God Himself even if that appointed person is evil. Obama could have been worse after all. Actually, I am not so sure that McCain would have been all that much better than Obama. Being an inept president is ok with me. Being solidly reformed and Christian is what I look for in a leader. The rest is secondary.

I try not to let this get to me, but it really does bother me. It bothers me that so very many evangelical Christians voted for Obama and it bothers me that so many people know so little about the issues.

The funny thing is that many people voted for him simply because they like one tiny issue or another and could care less about illegal aliens or abortion or socialized medicine, but like him because he is black. That actually doesn't bother me. The fact that he is black is actually a good thing, but it doesn't outweigh his position on the other issues as being so very wrong (sinful or evil). What bothers me is that Christians voted for him in such numbers and I can't imagine why. I'm sad about that. It bothers me. I am not angry. I don't really know what this feeling is exactly. disappointment? frustration? confusion? None of these feelings are towards Obama. Well, maybe a little. Much of this feeling, I suspect, is directed towards Christians who voted for him.

[tfit]

I am pro freedom.
I never understood why some people want to tell other people how to live their life. If you're against abortion than don't, what gives you the right to tell others what they should do. Also the questions if some parents are able to provide a good life for the child remains unanswered.
As vegetarian i wonder if these pro-life people are as passionate about pro life of animals!?

[james438]

If you're against abortion than don't, what gives you the right to tell others what they should do.

all laws are nothing more than legislating morality. Beyond that I have said all I care to say on the question/statement first posed in this thread in my previous post. Other than that my heart is not into debate.

[molendijk]

You should keep up with the abortion issue some more molendijk ;) ... Many democrats (and especially Obama) are pushing for after birth abortions.
James438, I didn't follow the discussion about 'after birth abortion' (I'm not an American), but I cannot imagine that people who voted for it did it out of immorality. I think their line of reasoning would be: 'if a baby survives abortion, then, if it can only survive in miserable circonstances (being dependent of a machine, suffering unbearable pain all the time), then, given the fact that it cannot tell whether of not it wants to live that miserable life, let's leave things 'as they are', and 'let nature decide'.
In this regard, notice that keeping human beings alive with the help of machinery that your God didn't have in mind when he told you to respect life, can be as immoral as finishing the life of a suffering person who didn't ask you to finish his or her life. Medical progress (being able to keep someone alive in more and more artificial situations) should always be in line with ethics.


Personally I am against abortion in all cases unless the life of the mother and the child are at stake and there is zero chance that the baby will be born alive. If all of those conditions are met then I am for abortion.
I almost agree with you, but see above.


The term for abortion after birth is more commonly known as infanticide.That is verbal demagogism, see above.

I use the term unlawful here to mean that which directly violates God's word (the Bible).
Talking about God and killing babies / children: you certainly know that God ordered Abraham to kill his own son.


In fact in my experience most people who claim to be Christian are not. That has nothing to do with the issue. Religion and morality are separate things.


Part of being a Christian means abiding with the current government, to pray for our leaders and to pay taxes even if those taxes go towards abortions.And to obey the leader even if he's some sort of a Hitler?
===
Arie.

[TheJoshMan]

@molendijk? You don't even live in America yet you are partaking (and getting quite adamant) in a heated debate about our president. lol

I am only to assume that you are simply being a smart @$$ about "what is an alien" and so forth. It is quite sad actually, that you would attempt to shoot holes in an American's point of view when you are not even an American yourself.

Granted, the illegal immigrants aren't doing the most "pleasant" of jobs. However, do you really think that many of us "middle class" people will have "nice" jobs in the near future? At the rate that the economy is falling, it won't be long before people like us... Computer nerds who frequent these forums, are going to be wishing we could work in a damn chicken plant like Tyson. JUST so that we can have a job AT ALL. (purely speculation of course)

[molendijk]

@molendijk? You don't even live in America yet you are partaking (and getting quite adamant) in a heated debate about our president. lol
Now, that's nice! Why shouldn't I talk about America when, at the same time, America talks about (the destiny of) the rest of the world (and tries to control whole parts of the rest of the world!). I don't say they don't sometimes have reasons to do so. I'm just saying that I have the right to talk about what happens in your country, because your country often tries to control what happens in my country, directly or indirectly. What happens in America affects my country as well. So I feel free to talk about what's going on in your part of the world.

I am only to assume that you are simply being a smart @$$ about "what is an alien" and so forth.
I'm not a native speaker of English, so I may have misunderstood what you mean by 'alien'. Given certain connotations attached to that word, I thought that, by using it, you asserted something unfriendly about certain non-Americans.

It is quite sad actually, that you would attempt to shoot holes in an American's point of view when you are not even an American yourself.
It is quite sad actually, that certain American leaders would attempt to shoot holes in the points of view of people living in other parts of the world when those (American) leaders are not even Russians, Chinese, Dutch, Germans etc. themselves.

Granted, the illegal immigrants aren't doing the most "pleasant" of jobs. However, do you really think that many of us "middle class" people will have "nice" jobs in the near future? At the rate that the economy is falling, it won't be long before people like us... Computer nerds who frequent these forums, are going to be wishing we could work in a damn chicken plant like Tyson. JUST so that we can have a job AT ALL. (purely speculation of course)
Yes, that would be a pity. But that's not the Mexican's (etc.) fault. Why do you think the whole economy thing started in the first place? Not the fault of the 'aliens'. I think that Dmitry Medvedev was partly right when he said that US selfishness should be blamed for it (I myself would rather say: 'Western selfishness'; see this link (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2095070/Russian-president-Dmitry-Medvedev-blames-%27US-selfishness%27-for-global-financial-crisis.html)).
---
As for me being adamant (I had to look up the word in the dictionary), I think that part of what you feel about my words and phrases has to do with the fact that I'm not a native speaker of English, so a certain subtleness is not in my vocabulary. Anyhow, the fact that we can communicate has to do with the willingness of many non-Americans to learn English.
===
Arie:) (You can get a free course of Dutch, if you like, so that you can shoot holes in my point of view. In Dutch, of course. But leave the dykes intact: no holes there!)

[TheJoshMan]

Now, that's nice! Why shouldn't I talk about America when, at the same time, America talks about (the destiny of) the rest of the world (and tries to control whole parts of the rest of the world!). I don't say they don't sometimes have reasons to do so. I'm just saying that I have the right to talk about what happens in your country, because your country often tries to control what happens in my country, directly or indirectly. What happens in America affects my country as well. So I feel free to talk about what's going on in your part of the world.

No disagreement with you there, you are absolutely right. America (as a whole, not as individual Americans) seems to think that it is (and must be) the "World's Police", and therefor sticks IT's nose in many places it does not belong and is NOT wanted. So I fully agree that what happens in America will more than likely indirectly (if not DIRECTLY) affect you as well.


I'm not a native speaker of English, so I may have misunderstood what you mean by 'alien'. Given certain connotations attached to that word, I thought that, by using it, you asserted something unfriendly about certain non-Americans.

No, I was simply using the term "alien" as a way to describe anyone living in the country illegally. It is fast becoming an issue which will soon make the native residents of the US the "minority". I suppose I could have used the term "immigrant" or "non-citizen", but in my part of the country "alien" is the politically correct way to say it.


It is quite sad actually, that certain American leaders would attempt to shoot holes in the points of view of people living in other parts of the world when those (American) leaders are not even Russians, Chinese, Dutch, Germans etc. themselves.

No disagreement with you there either. As I mentioned above, I fully agree that America (as a government) attempts to force it's beliefs/opinions on countries that want no part of it. I think that our (America's) biggest downfall is that we (America) do not really uphold the "separation of church and state". What a politician/military leader believes (in my opinion) should have nothing to do with how they run the country. It is not possible to run a country from a truly "Christian" viewpoint, not without breaking countless "rules" set forth by the bible. If the country is run by "Christian" views/opinions, then there is no real room for tolerance of other beliefs. Which in turn causes the global distress we can see today when America tries to tell another country what to believe.


Yes, that would be a pity. But that's not the Mexican's (etc.) fault. Why do you think the whole economy thing started in the first place? Not the fault of the 'aliens'.

I agree whole-heartedly that it is not the Mexicans' (or others) fault. I do however, believe that a country will never be able to flourish and truly prosper if it is being overrun with countless thousands of people who do not wish to be a "contributing" part of society. These illegal residents (not all, but the vast majority) do not wish to contribute anything to making this country any better. They are here for one purpose and one purpose only: To make a decent wage, on which they can bring more of their family and friends to a place which is "better" than the one from which they came. I do not think there is anything wrong with that, if done correctly. There are LEGAL ways to become a US citizen. It is not that expensive (in the long run), and does not take a "genius" to achieve.

All they have to do is put in an application (just as I myself would have to apply for citizenship in ANY other country). They would be required to learn the bare minimum basics about US History and our government. They would also be required to pass an "English" exam (which I agree with 100%). Granted, the process may take a while... However, they would never have to worry about INS. They would never have to worry about stuffing their family in the gas tanks of cars to get across the border. They could simply walk right through, no questions asked. This is not too much to ask, is it?

[molendijk]

I was simply using the term "alien" as a way to describe anyone living in the country illegally. ... I suppose I could have used the term "immigrant" or "non-citizen", but in my part of the country "alien" is the politically correct way to say it.
I see. Sorry for the misunderstanding. My fault.

There are LEGAL ways to become a US citizen. It is not that expensive (in the long run), and does not take a "genius" to achieve. All they have to do is put in an application (just as I myself would have to apply for citizenship in ANY other country). They would be required to learn the bare minimum basics about US History and our government. They would also be required to pass an "English" exam (which I agree with 100%). Granted, the process may take a while... However, they would never have to worry about INS. They would never have to worry about stuffing their family in the gas tanks of cars to get across the border. They could simply walk right through, no questions asked. This is not too much to ask, is it?
I see. I didn't know that. (But I maintain what I said in my previous post about world-economy).
===
Arie.

[tfit]

Short update about stormy weather for him to face:
http://files.libertyfund.org/econtalk/y2008/Klingswaps.mp3

[tfit]

Rauchway on the Great Depresson and the New Deal

http://files.libertyfund.org/econtalk/y2008/Rauchwaygreatdepression.mp3

[Twey]

There are LEGAL ways to become a US citizen. It is not that expensive (in the long run), and does not take a "genius" to achieve. All they have to do is put in an application (just as I myself would have to apply for citizenship in ANY other country). They would be required to learn the bare minimum basics about US History and our government. They would also be required to pass an "English" exam (which I agree with 100%). Granted, the process may take a while...That's not actually true. The US accepts only a certain number of immigrants per year, and it's a very low number compared to the number of people attempting to enter it. There's a lot of luck involved, and they tend to try to pick the ones who have something to offer the country — which most people from countries in a poor enough state to make attempting to illegally enter the US worthwhile don't, since they lack both education and money.
It is fast becoming an issue which will soon make the native residents of the US the "minority".The native residents of the US are already a minority. They mostly live on reservations, at the mercy of the invaders. :)