[MonteQuest]

GOP agenda will increase the deficit.

Dem agenda would have also increased the deficit. Don't you get it, they are both the same?

GOP agenda will increase the deficit far higher than it currently is.

[IM_Rich]

Dominic Lawson: Democrat fingerprints are all over the financial crisis
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/co ... 49653.html

How the Democrats Created the Financial Crisis: Kevin Hassett
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... KSoiNbnQY0

[IM_Rich]

Let me rephrase: Are you suggesting that the system would not have collapsed in 2008, if there hadn't been a bailout? You'd be hard pressed to try and defend that.

I think we would have had a deep recession. Some banks would have failed and been bought by banks that didn't.

But that's exactly what did happen. Banks failed and we entered a deep recession.

Without the bailouts, financial institution failures and frozen credit markets would have crippled the system.

Hey look you are fine with being the mark in a hustle and I'm ok with that, but once you realize that you've been hustled you don't keep giving excuses for the con man. The truth is that someone you trusted in the Bush administration made you believe the end of the world was coming unless they acted in a certain way and you believed it. I didn't believe it. That's it.

Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.
Poison gas and biological weapons were found in Iraq. Sadam used poison gas on the Kurds and against Iran."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002



"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

[wildbourgman]

IM-Rich, what's your point with the quote from this discussion that you posted and the quotes about weapons of mass destruction? The same weapons which seem to have actually been found to some extent according to some recent news. What's your connection ?

On another topic it looks like the Keystone pipeline will get a vote during the lame duck session of congress. Wow what a turn of events, I'm sure it's not political. I'm thinking a vote out of left field could actually pass this sucker.

[IM_Rich]

The Democrats did it, not Bush.

[wildbourgman]

The Democrats did it, not Bush.

The quote you posted from this thread was discussing the bailouts and your quotes that show that the democrats did it and not Bush were concerning the war in Iraq. I don't understand the connection.

Were you confused about the discussion?

I'm all for blaming democrats for everything bad, but your going to have to connect the dots for me.

[dolanbaker]

Looks like the US has concluded that the days of Americans being able to "influence" the political orientations of Latin American governments are over.

Another sign that the US global empire is waning.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-32261550
US President Barack Obama has told Latin American leaders that the days when his country could freely interfere in regional affairs are past.

He was speaking just before the seventh Summit of the Americas in Panama City.

Mr Obama and Cuban leader Raul Castro shook hands as the opening ceremony began, their first encounter since a December detente.

But their historic formal talks due on Saturday could be overshadowed by tensions between Venezuela and the US.

Mr Obama told a forum of civil society leaders in Panama City that "the days in which our agenda in this hemisphere presumed that the United States could meddle with impunity, those days are past".

[ROCKMAN]

"President Barack Obama has told Latin American leaders that the days when his country could freely interfere in regional affairs are past." So true: look how little interference in the regional affairs of the Middle East the US as created in the last 20 years. No need to worry: we're the US govt and we're just ?here to help Latin America. LOL.

[Plantagenet]

Mr Obama told a forum of civil society leaders in Panama City that "the days in which ... the United States could meddle with impunity, those days are past".

Mr. Obama seems to have forgotten that he himself is meddling in Venezuela. Obama instituted sanctions against the current regime in Venezuela just a few weeks ago.


Anti-Obama demonstration in Venezuela

[Cid_Yama]

Bad photo shop. Clearly not what was actually on the sign.

[dolanbaker]

Bad photo shop. Clearly not what was actually on the sign.

Yep! you can see the join.

[ROCKMAN]

Odd that anyone would try to create any hype while the net is flooded with stories. Such from Aljazeera USA:

"Washington’s antipathy toward Venezuela is not new. Since Venezuela’s election of leftist leader Hugo Chávez in 1998, the U.S. government has routinely sought to undermine Venezuela’s democratically elected government. Washington supported a failed coup attempt in 2002 against Chávez. But U.S. efforts to discredit the Venezuelan government did not end there. Washington continues to spend millions to support the opposition in Venezuela and undermine the government through NGOs such as the National Endowment for Democracy.

The sanctions bill affirms that the U.S. seeks “a mutually beneficial relationship with Venezuela based on respect for human rights and the rule of law and a functional and productive relationship on issues of public security.” It appears, however, to be premised more on Washington’s resentment of the leftward shift of some Latin American countries and growing regional cooperation and independence than on concern for the rights of protesters. Latin America is increasingly moving out of the sphere of U.S. influence, rejecting its economic and political dictates."

[onlooker]

What effects on energy extraction and climate policy will we see as a result of US Republicans gaining control of both houses of Congress and gains in State Governorships/legislatures? Have Americans thumbed their noses at any chance of dealing with our climate and energy predicaments? Is this confirmation of what many of us have already determined; that we'll keep burning stuff and dumping our waste steams into our environment,, until we can't? Does short-term gain trump long-term sapience every time?

I think the modern history shows conclusively that we are stubbornly wedded to the meme of economic growth at any price. I say this because since the 60's we have had Cassandras warning us of this mad dash for growth. Limits to growth, the book a Silent Spring , academia etc. even the President Jimmy Carter are some sources that stand out. Did the industrial countries heed any of this NO. In the relative more present times, climate conferences have come and gone and so very little progress is being made. China has adopted some of the US worst economic practices such as widespread car use. As for answering directly your question. In my mind the answer is a resounding NO. Both Democrats and Republicans have come and gone and none truly embarking on a new course. Business as Usual is the overwhelming modus operandi. Greed as a byproduct of the economic edifice we created seems to be so ubiquitous and potent in all areas of society that it seems to thwart change at every juncture. So not until events and conditions force change will we see change.

[wildbourgman]

The political class has so many dependents whether it's ultra rich oligarchs, multinational corporations, middle class government workers and/or contractors, big agribusiness, average farmers, wall street, or the millions of government assisted poor folks, that there are not enough people left over to tear down the protected political class structure.

Who would tear down a house of horrors when they are also seek shelter in that same house?

[ennui2]

There is no upswell of greenies wanting to tear down the protected political class structure in a way that would really blunt the impact of limits-to-growth.

There's a lot of discontent with the status quo but it has very little to do with energy/environmental policy. It's mostly the poor not liking the rich getting richer and the poor poorer while foolishly thinking the answer is more deregulation and trickle-down economics (because that's what Fox News wants them to believe). But they don't want to cancel the cult of growth and institute some permaculture utopia. Not by a longshot.

[Plantagenet]

Mr. Obama seems to have forgotten that he himself is meddling in Venezuela. Obama instituted sanctions against the current regime in Venezuela just a few weeks ago.


Anti-Obama demonstration in Venezuela

Now the Venezuelans are trying to get 10 million signatures on an anti-obama petition to protest the sanctions Obama imposed on Venezuela.

venezuela-maduro seeks 10 million signatures to oppose obama's sanctions

[Pops]

Most Republicans Say They Back Climate Action, Poll Finds

An overwhelming majority of the American public, including half of Republicans, support government action to curb global warming, according to a poll conducted by The New York Times, Stanford University and the nonpartisan environmental research group Resources for the Future.

In a finding that could have implications for the 2016 presidential campaign, the poll also found that two-thirds of Americans said they were more likely to vote for political candidates who campaign on fighting climate change. They were less likely to vote for candidates who questioned or denied the science that determined that humans caused global warming.

Among Republicans, 48 percent say they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports fighting climate change, a result that Jon A. Krosnick, a professor of political science at Stanford University and an author of the survey, called “the most powerful finding” in the poll. Many Republican candidates question the science of climate change or do not publicly address the issue.

..

The poll found that 83 percent of Americans, including 61 percent of Republicans and 86 percent of independents, say that if nothing is done to reduce emissions, global warming will be a very or somewhat serious problem in the future.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/31/us/po ... finds.html

Those are pretty stark numbers. But here is the situation in the US:
It is fashionable to say regulation is bad and hampers the rich from getting richer creating jobs
It is also fashionable to say government is bad/wasteful/crooked and has no ... well, has no job at all and we'd be better off more like Somalia except with a military 10 time the rest of the world put together
And the old standby; there is no practical difference in who is elected


The people who vote most regularly are old, white and "better off", recent converts to the Republican party after civil rights drove them out of the D party. They also are the folks most likely to pooh pooh GW so of course they are the core constituency for the anti-GW party. I don't see any change there for another 10 or 20 years until most of my generation is kaput.

[onlooker]

There is no upswell of greenies wanting to tear down the protected political class structure in a way that would really blunt the impact of limits-to-growth.

There's a lot of discontent with the status quo but it has very little to do with energy/environmental policy. It's mostly the poor not liking the rich getting richer and the poor poorer while foolishly thinking the answer is more deregulation and trickle-down economics (because that's what Fox News wants them to believe). But they don't want to cancel the cult of growth and institute some permaculture utopia. Not by a longshot.

So absolutely true ! The state of mind of most in US is about finding some distraction and enjoyment in anything on TV, Internet or Radio. Television especially distracting people with mindless programs that seem to me have no redeeming value. Zombies, Kardashians you get the drift. So your average Joe has is beer , is Sunday football, he is happy as can be. I too see no sign of a revolution not even close.