Obama Will Win!

[Nimue1995 1]

This is the transcript of an interview with Bill Moyer with an author that considers himself a conservative. Maybe all you so-called conservatives might want to read the interview and maybe even the book. This is a guy who makes sense. Although we as a nation will never do what's necessary to preserve the future of our kids and grandkids.http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/transcript1.html

[copernicus 0]

This is the transcript of an interview with Bill Moyer with an author that considers himself a conservative. Maybe all you so-called conservatives might want to read the interview and maybe even the book. This is a guy who makes sense. Although we as a nation will never do what's necessary to preserve the future of our kids and grandkids.http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/08152008/transcript1.html

He may describe himself as a "conservative", and he may be in many ways. However he has long taken the Chomsky line that the US is an imperial nation when all evidence is to the contrary. In every single military conquest we've been involved in off our shores there has been no attempt to acquire land or other assets. The recogniton that the best response to threats against our beliefs and way of life is to spread freedom and democracy. That is the opposite of imperialism.The interview is also very telling wrt to his agenda:ANDREW BACEVICH: Absolutely. And I think - I don't want to talk about my son here. BILL MOYERS: Your son? ANDREW BACEVICH: Yeah. BILL MOYERS: You dedicate the book to your son. ANDREW BACEVICH: Yeah. Well, my son was killed in Iraq. And I don't want to talk about that, because it's very personal. But it has long stuck in my craw, this posturing of supporting the troops. I don't want to insult people. His son was never raised until he comes up with "I dont want to talk about my son here", and the proceeds to spend the majority of the rest of the interview talking about his son. While he may be more thoughtful and far more intelligent, he relegates himself to Cindy Sheehan territory with such an obvious ploy.And can Moyers get beyond "Right" for insightful analysis?

[Nimue1995 1]

He may describe himself as a "conservative", and he may be in many ways. However he has long taken the Chomsky line that the US is an imperial nation when all evidence is to the contrary. In every single military conquest we've been involved in off our shores there has been no attempt to acquire land or other assets. The recogniton that the best response to threats against our beliefs and way of life is to spread freedom and democracy. That is the opposite of imperialism.

But can you accept that giving the people of a country their freedom means just that. That we don't have the right or obligation to impose our form of government on people that don't want that? If the people of Iraq were to vote to break up into 3 countries or vote to have a king instead of having a democratic form of government could the United States give them that freedom? Somehow I doubt it. I am sickened that the United States is in such a weakened position at this time when Russia has decided to flex it's muscles. When Sadaam invaded Kuwait, we didn't have any wars going on and there was no hesitancy from George Bush Sr to bring together a coalition to drive him back into his own country. Now Russia is doing the same thing in Georgia and all we can do is sit on the sidelines and wring our hands. That's what fighting 2 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is doing to the military of the United States. At this point, I don't know that we'd be able to do anything if Russia decided to invade Europe and establish the old USSR + some. And don't kid yourself that Putin doesn't know it.

[copernicus 0]

But can you accept that giving the people of a country their freedom means just that. That we don't have the right or obligation to impose our form of government on people that don't want that? If the people of Iraq were to vote to break up into 3 countries or vote to have a king instead of having a democratic form of government could the United States give them that freedom? Somehow I doubt it. I am sickened that the United States is in such a weakened position at this time when Russia has decided to flex it's muscles. When Sadaam invaded Kuwait, we didn't have any wars going on and there was no hesitancy from George Bush Sr to bring together a coalition to drive him back into his own country. Now Russia is doing the same thing in Georgia and all we can do is sit on the sidelines and wring our hands. That's what fighting 2 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is doing to the military of the United States. At this point, I don't know that we'd be able to do anything if Russia decided to invade Europe and establish the old USSR + some. And don't kid yourself that Putin doesn't know it.

WRT to the first paragraph, yes, if that were the result of a free election and not imposed by Iran or Syria, absolutely.WRT to the second paragrph, I think you underestimate our military capabilities. In the face of all out aggression from Russia, without having to dance around "world opinion" and 7 years of UN resolutions, we would make short work of turning them back and without seriously diverting our attention from Iraq. Bacevich obviously disagrees, and if it were on a very large scale it would obviously take the kind of commitment and mobilization ala FDR that he seems to think was missing from Iraq (even though it was totally unnecessary). Somehow I think he would find a reason to object to that as well.

[Nimue1995 1]

WRT to the first paragraph, yes, if that were the result of a free election and not imposed by Iran or Syria, absolutely.WRT to the second paragrph, I think you underestimate our military capabilities. In the face of all out aggression from Russia, without having to dance around "world opinion" and 7 years of UN resolutions, we would make short work of turning them back and without seriously diverting our attention from Iraq. Bacevich obviously disagrees, and if it were on a very large scale it would obviously take the kind of commitment and mobilization ala FDR that he seems to think was missing from Iraq (even though it was totally unnecessary). Somehow I think he would find a reason to object to that as well.

I have a son in the Navy and a son-in-law in the Army and believe me, without a draft, there's no way that the United States could be prepared to turn back Russia at this time.

[copernicus 0]

I have a son in the Navy and a son-in-law in the Army and believe me, without a draft, there's no way that the United States could be prepared to turn back Russia at this time.

I didnt preclude a draft in my comment, though I disagree that one would be needed. This is primairly a European problem, and Europe would mobilize and provide the ground troops necessary, while we provide the technological/weapons support.

[Nimue1995 1]

I didnt preclude a draft in my comment, though I disagree that one would be needed. This is primairly a European problem, and Europe would mobilize and provide the ground troops necessary, while we provide the technological/weapons support.

Not to upset any Europeans on this board but I think you give their governments way too much credit. It's my opinion that like Hitler, it would take major Russian offensives into several European countries and not just those that were under the previous Soviet Union's umbrella for Europe to take any action. Happened before with Hitler and it's my opinion that if anything Europe has become less energized to take on that kind of threat then they were at that time. Sadly I see Georgia as this generation's Ethiopia. And we'll react with about the same alacrity that we did 60 some years ago.

[gradin123 0]

I don't know that we'd be able to do anything if Russia decided to invade Europe and establish the old USSR + some. And don't kid yourself that Putin doesn't know it.

Nukes. That is the only direct military option either the US or Russia have against each other.It's the great equalizer. Russia doesn't want to conquer europe. Yes they probably would like to reclaim some of the soviet union but they'll pick their spots. What Russia and Putin really want is the respect and fear of the world again and they are well on their way to achieving that.

[Nimue1995 1]

Nukes. That is the only direct military option either the US or Russia have against each other.It's the great equalizer. Russia doesn't want to conquer europe. Yes they probably would like to reclaim some of the soviet union but they'll pick their spots. What Russia and Putin really want is the respect and fear of the world again and they are well on their way to achieving that.

Lol I have to figure by that comment that you don't consider Poland or any of the other former Soviet Union nations to be part of Europe. I have a feeling that the reunited Germany would have a different view.

[gradin123 0]

Lol I have to figure by that comment that you don't consider Poland or any of the other former Soviet Union nations to be part of Europe. I have a feeling that the reunited Germany would have a different view.

The Soviet Union is dead. But Russia still will try and peddle its influence in many of its former territories. Some like Belarus may happily side with Russia. Russia isn't going to invade Germany anytime soon or even Poland for that matter. Putin wants Russia to regain its former cold war influence level but he is a smart man and realist. He knows it won't happen overnight and right now Russia is just trying to send the message to the world, We are back! Don't dismiss us anymore.

[hblask 1]

he is a smart man and realist. He knows it won't happen overnight and right now Russia is just trying to send the message to the world, We are back! Don't dismiss us anymore.

If he were a smart man he would know that the old techniques of central planning combined with intimidation of citizens won't work this time, either. I don't think he's smart, he's just another power-hungry dictator who doesn't realize his own limitations.

[LongLiveYorke 38]

If he were a smart man he would know that the old techniques of central planning combined with intimidation of citizens won't work this time, either. I don't think he's smart, he's just another power-hungry dictator who doesn't realize his own limitations.

Don't confuse his being wrong with his not being smart. Clearly his brain is extremely gifted at certain tasks, such as gaining power and abusing it.

[Balloon guy 158]

Don't confuse his being wrong with his not being smart. Clearly his brain is extremely gifted at certain tasks, such as gaining power and abusing it.

Wait, are we still talking about Obama here? or did we change over to Clinton?

[Nimue1995 1]

Wait, are we still talking about Obama here? or did we change over to Clinton?

BG you just gotta keep up here. Obviously they were talking about you.

[gradin123 0]

Because the big money and media is behind him. McCain's policies are too similiar to Bush's, Hillary in the long run will prove to have been the bigger obstacle.I would bet any money that Obama will beat McCain. Hillary simply can't beat him now. The unpledged superdelegates will by majority back Obama and that is all he needs.The media and big money was behind the Iraq war. It happened.The media was split over Bush vs Gore and Bush vs Kerry. Big money was behind Bush both times.

The wall Street big players are behind Obama. Notice how Obama didn't stand up to the Wall Street lobbyists on the bailout issue.I am somewhat convinced now that the timing of the huge fall in the stock market is being somewhat orchestrated in order to get Obama elected.

[jmkiser 0]

The wall Street big players are behind Obama. Notice how Obama didn't stand up to the Wall Street lobbyists on the bailout issue.I am somewhat convinced now that the timing of the huge fall in the stock market is being somewhat orchestrated in order to get Obama elected.

:D :icon_clap: :icon_clap:

[gradin123 0]

:D :icon_clap: :icon_clap:

Well ask yourself this.Who benefits from this wall street mess and stock market crash? And why is it falling so hard right now?It is fact that Wall Street employees are supporting Obama over McCain.Sometimes you have to ask yourself. Who is leading the lemmings?

[jmkiser 0]

Well ask yourself?Who benefits from it? And why is falling so hard right now?It is fact that Wall Street employees are supporting Obama over McCain.Sometimes you have to ask yourself. Who is leading the lemmings?

If you can find out a shred of evidence or even at the least the names of the people who are responsible, I'll listen. Until then, you can make conspiracy theories about anything.

[Nimue1995 1]

Good grief, I'd thought I'd heard all the conspiracy theories out there. But of course new ones are invented every day I guess. It's all a huge plot to get Obama elected. Next you'll be telling me that people are selling their votes- oops wait a minute, I think LMD & H have put theirs up for sale.

[gradin123 0]

If you can find out a shred of evidence or even at the least the names of the people who are responsible, I'll listen. Until then, you can make conspiracy theories about anything.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26760673/Three executives from Goldman Sachs Group Inc. have raised at least half a million dollars for Obama. That firm is Obama's top source of campaign money overall; its employees have contributed more than $690,000 to his campaign, according to the center.Btw, Goldman Sachs ex-employees are the big players in this bailout package. No surprise Obama supported itLehman Brothers contributionsTop ten members of Congress: campaign contributions from Lehman Brothers employees, 1989-2008Member Contribution receivedSen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. $409,980Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. $395,574Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. $181,450Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. $165,800Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. $165,450Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. $151,664Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. $145,100Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y. $38,650Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del. $38,500Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind. $37,250

[gradin123 0]

Good grief, I'd thought I'd heard all the conspiracy theories out there. But of course new ones are invented every day I guess. It's all a huge plot to get Obama elected. Next you'll be telling me that people are selling their votes- oops wait a minute, I think LMD & H have put theirs up for sale.

The polls were getting real close.Then this whole crisis came to a head. I'm not saying the financial woes are not real. I'm saying they are coming to a head now for a REASON!

[jmkiser 0]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26760673/Three executives from Goldman Sachs Group Inc. have raised at least half a million dollars for Obama. That firm is Obama's top source of campaign money overall; its employees have contributed more than $690,000 to his campaign, according to the center.Btw, Goldman Sachs ex-employees are the big players in this bailout package. No surprise Obama supported itLehman Brothers contributionsTop ten members of Congress: campaign contributions from Lehman Brothers employees, 1989-2008Member Contribution receivedSen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. $409,980Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill. $395,574Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. $181,450Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn. $165,800Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn. $165,450Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. $151,664Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz. $145,100Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y. $38,650Rep. Mike Castle, R-Del. $38,500Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind. $37,250

But that says absolutely nothing about a conspiracy to tank Wall Street to make Obama look good. And it gives absolutely no names on who would do such a thing. People contribute to campaigns all the time. I could give you names of people who contribute hundreds of thousands of dollars to McCain's campaign and say that they're suspicious, too, but it doesn't make my claim credible.

[jmkiser 0]

The polls were getting real close.Then this whole crisis came to a head. I'm not saying the financial woes are not real. I'm saying they are coming to a head now for a REASON!

The financial woes are coming around because of bad financial policies and our country's economic status. Not because of a conspiracy to get Obama elected.

[gradin123 0]

But that says absolutely nothing about a conspiracy to tank Wall Street to make Obama look good. And it gives absolutely no names on who would do such a thing. People contribute to campaigns all the time. I could give you names of people who contribute hundreds of thousands of dollars to McCain's campaign and say that they're suspicious, too, but it doesn't make my claim credible.

Do you think they would advertise it? Did you see the soft ball questions the head of Lehman brothers got today?Goldman Sachs employees aren't minor contributors to Obama. They are his top contributor overall!Henry Paulson - US Treasury Secretary - Former CEO and CharimanUS Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has tapped a former Goldman Sachs executive, Neel Kashkari, to head the government's new $US700 billion ($913 billion) financial bail-out program.

[gradin123 0]

The financial woes are coming around because of bad financial policies and our country's economic status. Not because of a conspiracy to get Obama elected.

Repeat!I'm not saying the financial woes are not real. I'm saying they are coming to a head now for a REASON!