Obama Socialist Party member 1996?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by madanthonywayne, Oct 9, 2008.

  1. joepistole Deacon Blues Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,910
    You know I have it on good authority, Obama is a Venusian.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Is there no end to the desperate insanity on the right? Is there no limit to the depts they will stoop to deceive the American voter?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. spidergoat Liddle' Dick Tater Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    53,966
    And the one area of government the Cons don't want to cut is the biggest socialist institution on the planet, the US military.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Cavalier Knight of the Opinion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    157
    I'm surprised this story didn't hold up (as Fox News will hammer something like this unless it is dead beyond all doubt), but the bigger question I have is what information this kind of information really gives us. Knowing a party affiliation, especially from a whoile ago, is really "proxy evidence" for how a politician will act. It is, in other words, reasonable to surmise that, on average, you can expect a Republican to back laws that are conservative.

    That kind of proxy information is not as useful as direct evidence of a politicians's actual actions in office though. Some Democrats supported for welfare reform, for example, even though one might not have guessed that Bill Clinton would do that back when he was still the Democratic nominee.

    We have plenty of evidence on what Obama really believes right now and how he would govern if re-elected. There is less need to rely on proxy evidence for that.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. John T. Galt marxism is legalized hatred!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    617
    Actually secession is far more Amereican than anything associated with Socialism.

    If you actually understood American history, you would understand that.
     
  8. John T. Galt marxism is legalized hatred!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    617
    Enlighten us, what was Iran-Contra about?
     
  9. John T. Galt marxism is legalized hatred!! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    617
    Neither are compatible or good.
     
  10. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    Not entirely true. A president Obama who will never again have to face the voters may be much different from a president Obama trying to get re-elected. As Obama told Medvedev:

    President Obama: On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved but it’s important for him to give me space.
    President Medvedev: Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you…
    President Obama: This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.
    President Medvedev: I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir.

     
  11. Cavalier Knight of the Opinion Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    157
    Hence I said "less need" not "no need", but still I do not believe that Obama has been behaving in a particular way in the State legislature, then Senate and thru his his first term, only as part of a plan to unleash the true Obama in second term. I also don't really see why people found the quote to Medvedev so menacing...ALL presidents do he same thing. I have no doubt that Obama will run as more of a centrist than he actually is (or was in his first term). I have no doubt that Mitt will, as President, not be the man he claims to be now. Once elected both would have more flexibility to be themselves again, and to do what they think is right, as opposed to what they think is popular, or would play well in the press.
     
  12. madanthonywayne Morning in America Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,461
    I think it was especially troubling because he was speaking to a foreign dignitary on a matter of US national defense.
     
  13. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Obama was a member of the Democratic Party, then and now.

    The "New Party" was not a political Party, but was instead a faction of the Democratic Party, similar to the "Tea Party" now (a faction of the the Republican Party).

    Obama has never been a member of the Socialist Party. Essentially none of his policies or actions in any of his elected offices have been Socialist (a matter of some disappointment in lefty circles).

    There is no point in pretending this thread has anything to do with any reality concerning Obama. Madanthony's thread title is dishonest. Most of his thread titles are dishonest, and he knows it - look at the Fox technique of framing an accusation as a question, so when the facts come out the questioner can deny their motives and agenda.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2012
  14. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,966
    Are you really that paranoid?

    When you post party-line hot air like that, people really do wonder.

    As Steve Benen noted in March:

    The revelations aren't exactly shocking here. Obama, in Seoul for a nuclear security summit, told the Russian leader, "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved, but it's important for him to give me space." In this context, "him" appears to refer to Vladimir Putin. When Medvedev noted that he appreciates the larger context, Obama added, "This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility."

    Medvedev responded, "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."

    Mitt Romney is feigning outrage, and Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who's often confused about U.S. policy in Russia but likes to pretend otherwise, is looking for the fainting couch, but Obama's comments aren't exactly scandalous.

    The president believes the election season restricts his foreign policy options? Well, sure, but that isn't exactly breaking news. The administration, if given a second term, plans to have additional talks with Russia on missile defense, and would like Russia to be patient until after the election? Yep, we knew that, too.

    Ultimately, Obama didn't say anything we didn't already know, or echo remarks he's already made publicly. He was a little more candid in his delivery with Medvedev in Seoul, but it's not unusual for U.S. presidents to seek some election-season "space" from negotiating partners, especially when it's an election year in both countries.

    And then a few days later:

    I still don't see what all the fuss is about. Obama, in Seoul for a nuclear security summit, told Russian President Dmitri Medvedev he's willing to work on missile defense, but the U.S. will need "space" and "flexibility" outside of an election season. Obama was quietly confirming what we already knew -- political environments sometimes restrict foreign policy talks.

    So what is it, exactly, Republicans are worked up about? The gist of the argument seems to be that Obama will effectively scuttle Western missile-defense policy once freed from re-election concerns.

    And then again, shortly after that:

    Mitt Romney and his campaign team seemed to be having such a good time with President Obama's hot-mic comments to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev. It apparently didn't occur to them that they could take this a little too far.

    Late Friday, Romney spokesperson Andrea Saul, responding to calls for the former governor's still-hidden tax returns, pushed her luck in a written statement:

    "Obama should release the notes and transcripts of all his meetings with world leaders so the American people can be satisfied that he's not promising to sell out the country's interests after the election is over."​

    This really wasn't a smart thing to say.

    To the other, I do recognize this is an issue on which you've been a leading voice for disclosure. When Dick Cheney tried to reserve his energy policy notes, you loudly demanded he disclose them. When George Bush was alleged to say he invaded Iraq on God's orders, you loudly demanded the administration release notes and transcripts. So, yes, you are consistent in advocating your belief that executive negotiations should be carried out in full public view, and I can respect this consistency even if I disagree with the policy.

    The problem with conducting international negotiations, and especially military-strategic discussions, in public is reflected in the infamous Stalin quote about "no man, no problem". We cannot presume that the millions of people we call "Americans", or the millions we might call "Russians", will simply fall in line and let the executives work out the issues.

    But it's good to know that Mitt Romney and his supporters will work to attempt this experiment should the former Massachusetts governor win the White House. It will be interesting to see how it all works out.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Benen, Steve. "When presidents meet a 'hot mic'". The Maddow Blog. March 26, 2012. MaddowBlog.MSNBC.MSN.com. June 9, 2012. http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/26/10871996-when-presidents-meet-a-hot-mic

    —————. "Conservatives still hot over hot-mic story". The Maddow Blog. March 30, 2012. MaddowBlog.MSNBC.MSN.com. June 9, 2012. http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/30/10940658-conservatives-still-hot-over-hot-mic-story

    —————. "Team Romney pushes its luck with hot-mic story". The Maddow Blog. April 2, 2012. MaddowBlog.MSNBC.MSN.com. June 9, 2012. http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...eam-romney-pushes-its-luck-with-hot-mic-story
     
  15. Chipz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    838
    How can you cite Maddow? She is admittedly not a news program. How does it feel being brainwashed?
     
  16. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    Please.

    Half the original colonies were socialist (The "Commonwealth of Massachusetts", the "Commonwealth of Virginia", some of these things were practically communes) - especially the "religious freedom" ones. Their attitude toward private corporations - the attitude of most of the Founders, the people who wrote the Constitution etc - varied from careful limitation and watchfulness to open hostility.

    The original rebellion, the Revolution, was a revolt against the powers, tax breaks, and various privileges given to private corporations in the colonies.

    The only secession we've had from socialism was an attempt to preserve slavery as a capitalist institution - and you'd think those people would have learned from that experience, instead of reviving the that ugly old monster.

    Maddow gets her facts straight. That makes her a worthy source - if facts are your thing.
     
  17. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,966
    On the most definitive argument ever written

    I cited Benen when he was at Washington Monthly, too.

    And? I've cited Bill Maher before, too.

    Such admirable rhetorical prowess about your considerations of the issues Benen raised and points he expressed leaves me unable to formulate a sufficiently intelligent and sophisticated response that would appropriately honor your intellectual primacy.
     
  18. Chipz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    838
    If you're having these kind of issues Tiassa, perhaps you should purchase some castor oil. Truth is; I dislike all pundits, reporters, and editorialists. They are not worthy of citation because by definition they must cite another. If for some reason you trust the most popular left-leaning political commentator in America today to be unbiased, then something must be wrong with you.
     
  19. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,966
    Stricken with awe

    I can only admire the intricacy with which you dismiss the argument without even considering it. Such a powerful intellect leaves us all stricken with awe.
     
  20. Chipz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    838
    Which dismissal is most impressive? My dismissal of your sour wit? Or my dismissal of American politics as a whole?
     
  21. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    30,994
    She gets her facts straight. That makes her a better source than an unbiased person who doesn't.

    What's not to trust?
     
  22. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    36,966
    Such astounding insight

    The dismissal of Steve Benen's consideration of the issue because you are under some delusion that he is "the most popular left-leaning political commentator in America today".
     
  23. Chipz Banned Banned

    Messages:
    838
    Oh okay. I am glad you're most impressed with the latter.
     

Share This Page