What actions would you like to see Obama take in the next 100 days?
I'd like to see him focus on getting the economy up and running by enforcing strict guidelines for those companies who benefitted from government "bail-outs".
By making sure his stimulus money is distributed and used correctly for the good of the country as a whole and not special interest groups. Thus far only 6% of that money has been distributed.
I'd like to see a detailed tax plan that pays for his recent spending plan which amounted to $11,000+ for every American citizen.
I'd like to see a detailed plan for the end of the war including committments from our allies to help reshape the Middle East into a place that enforces civil rights for All it's citizens.
I'd like to see a POLICY put into place to create new forms of energy that will sustain us into the future.
That seems like a good 100 days worth of work....if half of that gets accomplished he'll be the greatest president of my lifetime.
You may have different priorities and that's great too.....any/all accomplishments will help move us forward and I'm all for that.
That sounds good. I was thinking along the line of civil rights and gay marriage.
"Civil Rights don't mean much if you don't have a civilization to enjoy them in"
What actions would you like to see Obama take in the next 100 days?
I'd like to see him focus on getting the economy up and running by enforcing strict guidelines for those companies who benefitted from government "bail-outs".
By making sure his stimulus money is distributed and used correctly for the good of the country as a whole and not special interest groups. Thus far only 6% of that money has been distributed.
I'd like to see a detailed tax plan that pays for his recent spending plan which amounted to $11,000+ for every American citizen.
I'd like to see a detailed plan for the end of the war including committments from our allies to help reshape the Middle East into a place that enforces civil rights for All it's citizens.
I'd like to see a POLICY put into place to create new forms of energy that will sustain us into the future.
That seems like a good 100 days worth of work....if half of that gets accomplished he'll be the greatest president of my lifetime.
You may have different priorities and that's great too.....any/all accomplishments will help move us forward and I'm all for that.
Rock you must be in 7th heaven given that Obama is working on all of these fronts in some form or other. As far as paying for spending, you would be shocked at how few people are actually looking at what it would take to balance the budget. That's why both sides rely so heavily on economic growth to minimize deficits. I had to laugh about item #1 because there was laughbably little propsed in the way of guidelines. Haven't you been appalled to see the government begging these guys to start lending the money they were handed? What kind of fucked up world are we living in when the broke set the terms of their bailout?
I am curious why you are concerned about middle eastern countries' civil rights policies. Do you think that we are in a position to dictate how they act toward their citizens?
Who are the non-special interest groups who should be receiving stimulus money?
I am curious why you are concerned about middle eastern countries' civil rights policies. Do you think that we are in a position to dictate how they act toward their citizens?
I don't think "we're" in a position to dictate anything...that's why I specifically said " including committments from our allies.
Who are the non-special interest groups who should be receiving stimulus money?
I am curious why you are concerned about middle eastern countries' civil rights policies. Do you think that we are in a position to dictate how they act toward their citizens?
Who are the non-special interest groups who should be receiving stimulus money?
I'll back Rock on one.
We may not be in a position to dictate, but we have a moral obligation to work with out allies to promote civil rights in the Middle East, and the rest of the world.
Why Rock thinks we should do that in the Middle East, and not at home, I'm not sure.
I am curious why you are concerned about middle eastern countries' civil rights policies. Do you think that we are in a position to dictate how they act toward their citizens?
I don't think "we're" in a position to dictate anything...that's why I specifically said " including committments from our allies.
Who are the non-special interest groups who should be receiving stimulus money?
Americans
Americans? That's a little general don't you think. Could you be more specific as to who is especially deserving of the stimulus funding? American cake makers? Where should this money be directed? To whom? For what end? I am curious how you would do it, if at all.
Our allies have many different agendas in the middle east, little of which has to do with civil rights. Herding cats would be easier.
I am curious why you are concerned about middle eastern countries' civil rights policies. Do you think that we are in a position to dictate how they act toward their citizens?
I don't think "we're" in a position to dictate anything...that's why I specifically said " including committments from our allies.
Who are the non-special interest groups who should be receiving stimulus money?
Americans
Americans? That's a little general don't you think. Could you be more specific as to who is especially deserving of the stimulus funding? American cake makers? Where should this money be directed? To whom? For what end? I am curious how you would do it, if at all.
Our allies have many different agendas in the middle east, little of which has to do with civil rights. Herding cats would be easier.
By "allies" I did mean our historical allies but I'd let the U.N. dictate too....as long as we don't single handedly try to enforce this change moving forward. All I would expect is basic human rights along the lines of no genocide and/or barbaric behavior towards law abiding citizens regardless of their faith, skin color, sex, etc......whatever current model that everyone agrees is currently working best would be worth pursuing as a role model.
On the Stimulus distribution I just have some fairly loose guidelines I'd like to see followed.....the money should be considered nothing other than an investment in the future of the American taxpayer......this would include education, alternative energies, housing, anything that creates fair paying jobs possibly including marijuana legalization/growth/cultivation.
The money should be distributed on a case by case basis with the ROI being considered as whether it is worth investing in....this includes non-commodities like education and some level of health care.
This money should be distributed based on the merits of the investment without ever taking into consideration race, creed, religion or sexual preference. If it's gonna have a good ROI let's do it, if not you're SOL.
The further you drill down the more details you can get but basically this is an investment in our future and investments that don't yield returns are foolish.
I am curious why you are concerned about middle eastern countries' civil rights policies. Do you think that we are in a position to dictate how they act toward their citizens?
I don't think "we're" in a position to dictate anything...that's why I specifically said " including committments from our allies.
Who are the non-special interest groups who should be receiving stimulus money?
Americans
Americans? That's a little general don't you think. Could you be more specific as to who is especially deserving of the stimulus funding? American cake makers? Where should this money be directed? To whom? For what end? I am curious how you would do it, if at all.
Our allies have many different agendas in the middle east, little of which has to do with civil rights. Herding cats would be easier.
By "allies" I did mean our historical allies but I'd let the U.N. dictate too....as long as we don't single handedly try to enforce this change moving forward. All I would expect is basic human rights along the lines of no genocide and/or barbaric behavior towards law abiding citizens regardless of their faith, skin color, sex, etc......whatever current model that everyone agrees is currently working best would be worth pursuing as a role model.
On the Stimulus distribution I just have some fairly loose guidelines I'd like to see followed.....the money should be considered nothing other than an investment in the future of the American taxpayer......this would include education, alternative energies, housing, anything that creates fair paying jobs possibly including marijuana legalization/growth/cultivation.
The money should be distributed on a case by case basis with the ROI being considered as whether it is worth investing in....this includes non-commodities like education and some level of health care.
This money should be distributed based on the merits of the investment without ever taking into consideration race, creed, religion or sexual preference. If it's gonna have a good ROI let's do it, if not you're SOL.
The further you drill down the more details you can get but basically this is an investment in our future and investments that don't yield returns are foolish.
It's interesting that you would fund education. One of the big disappointments from the stimulus package was the large reductions (from Obama's initial proposal) in school construction funding that moderates insisted on in order to get their vote. I can't think of better place to spend money. We need a billion to fix our 90 year old schools here in my town. I wouldn't complain if we spent the money on educational assistants to help bring down teacher to student ratios either.
All in all I think that you would approve what is being funded. Health care was not in the stimulus that I know of.
ROI is a very subjective term too. I think that Obama's plan reflects his notion that infrastructure is important to a burgeoning economy and that gov't should lead not wait for bidness to invest in the future.
Rock started the thread by saying that Obama and Ms Cali have the same stance on gay marriage.
Then Rock came back and said that Obama's and Bush's stance were the same.
When it was pointed out how wrong he was he took major offense at my use of the word policy.
He is still lecturing me on the difference between policy and stance.
I asked him what he would like to see Obama do. See I thought we were talking about gay marriage, and I thought, he objected to Obama's position on gay marriage since in his mind it was the same as Ms Cali and Bush.
Turns out he doesn't want Obama to do any thing about gay marriage or even civil rights.
No wait. I take that back. He wants Obama to get the Middle Eastern countries to increase civil rights.
Here is what a conversation between the US and a Middle Eastern country might sound like.
You can't torture people, unless they are really bad or you do it in nice ways like we do.
You can't behead gay people, but you don't really have to give them any rights either.
In fact you can't behead anyone, that is mean torture.
If you want to kill someone, do what we do in Texas, electric chair and lethal injection.
Trials, should always be fair and open, unless the person being tried is really bad, then you can use military tribunals that are neither fair or open.
There should be no warrantless search and seizures, unless you trying to stop drunk drivers or other bad people, then all bets are off.
Of course Rock aint that dumb. He would have our allies do the talking, they still have some moral credibility.
Rock started the thread by saying that Obama and Ms Cali have the same stance on gay marriage.
Then Rock came back and said that Obama's and Bush's stance were the same.
When it was pointed out how wrong he was he took major offense at my use of the word policy.
He is still lecturing me on the difference between policy and stance.
I asked him what he would like to see Obama do. See I thought we were talking about gay marriage, and I thought, he objected to Obama's position on gay marriage since in his mind it was the same as Ms Cali and Bush.
Turns out he doesn't want Obama to do any thing about gay marriage or even civil rights.
No wait. I take that back. He wants Obama to get the Middle Eastern countries to increase civil rights.
Here is what a conversation between the US and a Middle Eastern country might sound like.
You can't torture people, unless they are really bad or you do it in nice ways like we do.
You can't behead gay people, but you don't really have to give them any rights either.
In fact you can't behead anyone, that is mean torture.
If you want to kill someone, do what we do in Texas, electric chair and lethal injection.
Trials, should always be fair and open, unless the person being tried is really bad, then you can use military tribunals that are neither fair or open.
There should be no warrantless search and seizures, unless you trying to stop drunk drivers or other bad people, then all bets are off.
Of course Rock aint that dumb. He would have our allies do the talking, they still have some moral credibility.
Rock started the thread by saying that Obama and Ms Cali have the same stance on gay marriage.
Then Rock came back and said that Obama's and Bush's stance were the same.
When it was pointed out how wrong he was he took major offense at my use of the word policy.
He is still lecturing me on the difference between policy and stance.
I asked him what he would like to see Obama do. See I thought we were talking about gay marriage, and I thought, he objected to Obama's position on gay marriage since in his mind it was the same as Ms Cali and Bush.
Turns out he doesn't want Obama to do any thing about gay marriage or even civil rights.
No wait. I take that back. He wants Obama to get the Middle Eastern countries to increase civil rights.
Here is what a conversation between the US and a Middle Eastern country might sound like.
You can't torture people, unless they are really bad or you do it in nice ways like we do.
You can't behead gay people, but you don't really have to give them any rights either.
In fact you can't behead anyone, that is mean torture.
If you want to kill someone, do what we do in Texas, electric chair and lethal injection.
Trials, should always be fair and open, unless the person being tried is really bad, then you can use military tribunals that are neither fair or open.
There should be no warrantless search and seizures, unless you trying to stop drunk drivers or other bad people, then all bets are off.
Of course Rock aint that dumb. He would have our allies do the talking, they still have some moral credibility.
You seem delusional and/or living in your own secret mindgarden.
Sometimes it's entertaining.....sometimes it's just sad.
Comments
"Civil Rights don't mean much if you don't have a civilization to enjoy them in"
Rock-A-Logic 2009
Rock you must be in 7th heaven given that Obama is working on all of these fronts in some form or other. As far as paying for spending, you would be shocked at how few people are actually looking at what it would take to balance the budget. That's why both sides rely so heavily on economic growth to minimize deficits. I had to laugh about item #1 because there was laughbably little propsed in the way of guidelines. Haven't you been appalled to see the government begging these guys to start lending the money they were handed? What kind of fucked up world are we living in when the broke set the terms of their bailout?
I am curious why you are concerned about middle eastern countries' civil rights policies. Do you think that we are in a position to dictate how they act toward their citizens?
Who are the non-special interest groups who should be receiving stimulus money?
I don't think "we're" in a position to dictate anything...that's why I specifically said " including committments from our allies.
Americans
I'll back Rock on one.
We may not be in a position to dictate, but we have a moral obligation to work with out allies to promote civil rights in the Middle East, and the rest of the world.
Why Rock thinks we should do that in the Middle East, and not at home, I'm not sure.
If every person on earth had the civil rights and freedoms that you do in America the world would be a much better place.
Americans? That's a little general don't you think. Could you be more specific as to who is especially deserving of the stimulus funding? American cake makers? Where should this money be directed? To whom? For what end? I am curious how you would do it, if at all.
Our allies have many different agendas in the middle east, little of which has to do with civil rights. Herding cats would be easier.
By "allies" I did mean our historical allies but I'd let the U.N. dictate too....as long as we don't single handedly try to enforce this change moving forward. All I would expect is basic human rights along the lines of no genocide and/or barbaric behavior towards law abiding citizens regardless of their faith, skin color, sex, etc......whatever current model that everyone agrees is currently working best would be worth pursuing as a role model.
On the Stimulus distribution I just have some fairly loose guidelines I'd like to see followed.....the money should be considered nothing other than an investment in the future of the American taxpayer......this would include education, alternative energies, housing, anything that creates fair paying jobs possibly including marijuana legalization/growth/cultivation.
The money should be distributed on a case by case basis with the ROI being considered as whether it is worth investing in....this includes non-commodities like education and some level of health care.
This money should be distributed based on the merits of the investment without ever taking into consideration race, creed, religion or sexual preference. If it's gonna have a good ROI let's do it, if not you're SOL.
The further you drill down the more details you can get but basically this is an investment in our future and investments that don't yield returns are foolish.
It's interesting that you would fund education. One of the big disappointments from the stimulus package was the large reductions (from Obama's initial proposal) in school construction funding that moderates insisted on in order to get their vote. I can't think of better place to spend money. We need a billion to fix our 90 year old schools here in my town. I wouldn't complain if we spent the money on educational assistants to help bring down teacher to student ratios either.
All in all I think that you would approve what is being funded. Health care was not in the stimulus that I know of.
ROI is a very subjective term too. I think that Obama's plan reflects his notion that infrastructure is important to a burgeoning economy and that gov't should lead not wait for bidness to invest in the future.
If every AMERICAN had the civil rights and freedoms that you do the world would be a much better place.
Rock started the thread by saying that Obama and Ms Cali have the same stance on gay marriage.
Then Rock came back and said that Obama's and Bush's stance were the same.
When it was pointed out how wrong he was he took major offense at my use of the word policy.
He is still lecturing me on the difference between policy and stance.
I asked him what he would like to see Obama do.
See I thought we were talking about gay marriage, and I thought, he objected to Obama's position on gay marriage since in his mind it was the same as Ms Cali and Bush.
Turns out he doesn't want Obama to do any thing about gay marriage or even civil rights.
No wait. I take that back. He wants Obama to get the Middle Eastern countries to increase civil rights.
Here is what a conversation between the US and a Middle Eastern country might sound like.
You can't torture people, unless they are really bad or you do it in nice ways like we do.
You can't behead gay people, but you don't really have to give them any rights either.
In fact you can't behead anyone, that is mean torture.
If you want to kill someone, do what we do in Texas, electric chair and lethal injection.
Trials, should always be fair and open, unless the person being tried is really bad, then you can use military tribunals that are neither fair or open.
There should be no warrantless search and seizures, unless you trying to stop drunk drivers or other bad people, then all bets are off.
Of course Rock aint that dumb. He would have our allies do the talking, they still have some moral credibility.
god, what a waste of time writing all that shit.
You seem delusional and/or living in your own secret mindgarden.
Sometimes it's entertaining.....sometimes it's just sad.