How bad is Obama? Does anyone support him?

[Dean]

OK, I know its the gorilla in the room. We are almost all leftists, and as such there has been a time for nearly all of us when we supported democrats. And many of us are still sympathizers. I have friends who like Obama, but I am tired of the same old rhetoric. The onyl thing that is promising to me is that he USED TO talk about Palestinian freedom, and has a slightly better concept of healthcare than Hillary. But even the healthcare plan wont work in the U.S., and his "used to" activism is nothing to write home about.

So, does anyone here support him? If so, why? And please, none of the tired old rhetoric about how they are "all the same." Of course, you know I agree that the differences are miniscule and superficial in most cases, but in case Obama does get elected, I want to know what to expect.

[freakazoid]

Heck no, strongly oppose both of them. They are both strongly against firearm ownership, especially Hillary. Another really bad thing about Hillary is that she is wanting to get rid of the ESRB and replace it with a government controlled one, yeah that is going to turn out real well.

[raspute]

Hell of a speaker. Had me convinced for a while that he wouldn't be so bad until I realized that he appeals purely to emotions and only talks about how bad things are, not how he'd change it. And I believe he voted for the continuation of the Patriot act.

I was (and really still am) a full-on Ron Paul "revolutionary", until I realized that he had zero chance of winning from the start, with the control out media has over the American people.

[RHIZOMES]

Obama is a fluff candidate who is full of rhetoric and no action. The US ruling class realized how angry the Americans were getting with their politicians, so they pulled out of their ass a charismatic black man so the American masses can actually think they are making a difference when they vote. Despite his populist message, he, like every other bourgeoisie politician, is in the pockets of big business. His leading economic advisors include Austan Goolsbee, a University of Chicago professor who advocates free-market policies. BusinessWeek also noted Obama's exchange of emails with Robert Wolf, CEO of UBS America who has donated millions in donations to his campaign. According to estimates made by the Center of Responsive Politics, 80% of the money raised for his campaign last year came from donors affiliated with business.

I quite like the headline for the RCPUSA's Revolution newspaper on the elections, it summed it up perfectly: "Deciding the best face for American imperialism".


I was (and really still am) a full-on Ron Paul "revolutionary", until I realized that he had zero chance of winning from the start, with the control out media has over the American people.

...Uhh... :confused:

[R_P_A_S]

i simply don't support ANYONE in the U.S. elections because...

if there was a working class movement anywhere in the U.S. and in the world, he would simply SQUASH IT. he would mobilized his military to suppress it. SIMPLE AS THAT.

fuck his politics whatever else they might be.

[Lead Headache]

Obama is like Kerry. Empty words and unexplained promises.

[RNK]

I'll expect that "unconscious" racists will use his Presidency to say "look, how can you say there's any racism or oppression of minorities in the US! We've got a black President! lol you're so dumb, racism doesnt exist".

It will also either depress a lot of more radically left people who will find absolutely shit-all has changed, or it will cement the idea in some people's minds that bourgeois democracy is wonderful, because, look, a black President! We're saved!

And like every President we'll see a gradual decline in his support; if he's lucky, he'll get re-elected with a much smaller majority, and in 8 years, people will yet again take to the campaign offices and party delegations in their millions, chanting for "change".

[Joby]

HELL YA!!!!

I voted for him yesterday....and though we lost the Primary vote, we still won the caucus.

Denver, here we Come!

And I can't stand the "There's no difference" BS.

Yes, they do look similiar if you're way out there compared to most people here.

But let's just ask: Were you paying $3 a gallon under Clinton? Was the cost of college setting records? Was the economy falling to shit? Was the US invading nations against the will of the world? Were Israel and Palestine this close to all-out confrontation, when under Clinton it was thisclose to all-out peace?

If we elect Obama, America will be considered a good country again in much of the world.

[Dean]

HELL YA!!!!

I voted for him yesterday....and though we lost the Primary vote, we still won the caucus.

Denver, here we Come!

And I can't stand the "There's no difference" BS.

Yes, they do look similiar if you're way out there compared to most people here.

But let's just ask: Were you paying $3 a gallon under Clinton? Was the cost of college setting records? Was the economy falling to shit? Was the US invading nations against the will of the world? Were Israel and Palestine this close to all-out confrontation, when under Clinton it was thisclose to all-out peace?

If we elect Obama, America will be considered a good country again in much of the world.

I'm not sure its a bad thing that gas is expensive.

[Green Dragon]

[
quote=RNK;1090858]I'll expect that "unconscious" racists will use his Presidency to say "look, how can you say there's any racism or oppression of minorities in the US! We've got a black President! lol you're so dumb, racism doesnt exist".

Would a sign of an "unconscious" racism be using the term "gorilla" in reference to the Obama candidacy?

[Coffee Mug]

Obama is an unusual politician; he gives speeches and inspires the way that JFK and MLK jr. had. Barack Obama has been able to tap into our previously apathetic youth to actually be interested and involved in politics.
He is the most liberal candidate running for office.

Shouldn't we support the most liberal, inspirational, and perhaps revolutionary candidate with a great chance to become the President of the United States of America?

[jake williams]

I was (and really still am) a full-on Ron Paul "revolutionary", until I realized that he had zero chance of winning from the start, with the control out media has over the American people.
Restrict this Ron Paul fuck. These kiddies who've never so much as glanced at the "Issues" section of his website (CLICK HERE (http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues)) need to get the fuck off my internet.

About Obama - he's clean and articulate! And friendly and youthful and all that. And totally honestly, I have every sympathy for his black supporters, even though I do disagree vehemently with their choice. But while he might've done some neat stuff in Chicago awhile ago, to put it lightly I'm not at all a fan. I've explained why elsewhere, or at least started to. He's hopeless.

[Joby]

Obama is an unusual politician; he gives speeches and inspires the way that JFK and MLK jr. had. Barack Obama has been able to tap into our previously apathetic youth to actually be interested and involved in politics.
He is the most liberal candidate running for office.

Shouldn't we support the most liberal, inspirational, and perhaps revolutionary candidate with a great chance to become the President of the United States of America?

That's a huge reason why I support him.

I'm hoping he makes the 30 and unders as politically active as the 65 and over's.....Like the last period of even moderate social upheaval here in the US....

[Bud Struggle]

That's a huge reason why I support him.

I'm hoping he makes the 30 and unders as politically active as the 65 and over's.....Like the last period of even moderate social upheaval here in the US....

I support him. Nothing's going to change and yet American leadership is going to be oh so Black, and and so handsome, and oh so articulate.

American capitalism took a hit with George Bush. We're going to hit back with Barak Obama. Capitalism is all about SALES. And American Capitalism never had a better salesman than Barak Obama.

OBAMA IS THE MAN!!!! (Literally and figuratively.:D)

[Dros]

No. Obama's popularity is fundementally vacuous. He talks about the need to unify the country in the way Reagen did. But what is the material basis for national unity in a country like the US? The Reagen example is pertinent: Obama is an imperialist who supports U.S. imperialist interests abroad and continued exploitation at home. He is akin to the black mayers who served long terms in Chicago and other major cities while systematically exploiting thousands of black workers even more vigorously. That is what this unity is: the basis for the U.S. to be the boot crushing the face of the vast majority of humanity.

[Dejavu]

I don't support Osama, Hanoy Mccain, or Billary.
Same deal , different packages.

[Dean]

[

Would a sign of an "unconscious" racism be using the term "gorilla" in reference to the Obama candidacy?

I hadn't noticed that, but I don't think it implies that I am a racist. For starters, to make any good assertion on someone's unconscious thoughts, you would have to have a lot of evidence, for one, and in 90% of cases know the person outside of an internet forum. You are aware of what a "gorilla in the room" is, correct?

Though I don't think I should have to defend myself, it's ironic that I saw this post directly after I posted a story in the new "reactionary chatter" thread about how pissed I was at someone being racist on the jobsite.

[freakazoid]

Restrict this Ron Paul fuck. These kiddies who've never so much as glanced at the "Issues" section of his website (CLICK HERE (http://www.anonym.to/?http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues)) need to get the fuck off my internet.

Yeah, long live big government and the nanny state. :rolleyes:

[Ultra-Violence]

HELL YA!!!!

I voted for him yesterday....and though we lost the Primary vote, we still won the caucus.

Denver, here we Come!

And I can't stand the "There's no difference" BS.

Yes, they do look similiar if you're way out there compared to most people here.

But let's just ask: Were you paying $3 a gallon under Clinton? Was the cost of college setting records? Was the economy falling to shit? Was the US invading nations against the will of the world? Were Israel and Palestine this close to all-out confrontation, when under Clinton it was thisclose to all-out peace?

If we elect Obama, America will be considered a good country again in much of the world.

have you even researched any one of the canidates Obama is getting his money from big corparation! HELLO RED FLAG RIGHT THIER! What so differenr about obama and hillary's "policy's" thier almost the same shit seruiosly stop watching so much dang television. Obama sole purpose as i have stated in other post is to DEMOBILIZE PEOPLE AND TO KEEP THEM FROM GETTING ACTIVE IN THE STRUGGLE! I mean just look people are voting in record number the youth is some what starting to wake up and Obama is like a Political fireman sent to but out the emebers before they burn down the ruling classes house down!:mad:

[RHIZOMES]

Yeah, long live big government and the nanny state. :rolleyes:

Yeah nothing better than cutting welfare, privatizing health care even MORE and ending the department of education! That'll sure help the working class!

I hate these survivalist far-right "libertarian" retards (Like Ron Paul, for example) that seem to think any sort of government program is gonna lead to a Orwellian police state.

Also is anyone else slightly put-off by the fact the fucking fascists (http://www.***************) seem be Ron Paul's biggest supporters?

[Green Dragon]

I hadn't noticed that, but I don't think it implies that I am a racist. For starters, to make any good assertion on someone's unconscious thoughts, you would have to have a lot of evidence, for one, and in 90% of cases know the person outside of an internet forum. You are aware of what a "gorilla in the room" is, correct?

Though I don't think I should have to defend myself, it's ironic that I saw this post directly after I posted a story in the new "reactionary chatter" thread about how pissed I was at someone being racist on the jobsite.


This site, being of an international flavor, its probably innapropriate to bring up American domestic political issues. Who in London really cares about the latest delegate count betwen Obama and Clinton and the impending shitstorm the Democratic Party is facing?

I found the phrase "gorilla in the room" amusing when the "gorilla" in question was Barack Obama. I wrote it off as written by some European who knows what the phrase means, but does not quite understand or is not quite aware of the subtleties in American English of the word "gorilla."

then to my stunned disbelief, the writer was from the heart of the confederacy! Who is basically a proud revlefter in the doghouse for one transgression or the other. ! I didn't know whethet to laugh or what.

I have no reason to believe you are a racist, "unconscious" or otherwise. And I did not respond.

But when the post from the other American surfaced, it annoyed me. The note basically said an election of an African-American to president would be irrelevent in terms of America being a racist community. The issue is one of "unconscious racism." Of course, the initial note in this thread tied Obama to being the "gorilla." It was completely ignored by that writer. My question was never responded to, most likely because that writer does not think you are a racist either.

Which would suggest the term "unconscious racism" is one of these terms which rabble-rousers and mischief makers like to throw out to cause trouble. It has no substance behind it. Its a vessel filled on a case by case basis.
That was my question (and objection).

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

No. Obama's popularity is fundementally vacuous. He talks about the need to unify the country in the way Reagen did. But what is the material basis for national unity in a country like the US? The Reagen example is pertinent: Obama is an imperialist who supports U.S. imperialist interests abroad and continued exploitation at home.

Proof of this? And just because he talks of "unifying the country" doesn't mean he's a clone of Reagan with darker skin. "unification" is quite a broad concept.

Obama may not be a leftist revolutionary, but he's better than the alternatives. It's such a pity that it doesn't really mattter because by the time he's likely to be US president, the US economy is going to be in the shitter and the GOP will be going "See?! See?! We told you that this would happen if you voted Democrat!", thus garaunteeing that the Republicans will win the next election by a landslide, and thus continuing the cycle.

Such is the nature of bourgeouis politics, and hence why reformism is unworkable.


He is akin to the black mayers who served long terms in Chicago and other major cities while systematically exploiting thousands of black workers even more vigorously. That is what this unity is: the basis for the U.S. to be the boot crushing the face of the vast majority of humanity.

Not really. Things have gotten to a point where most people are sick of the GOP, so the system rebalances itself by providing a candidate who will curb the worst excesses of the previous administration, but in a time of country-wide economic downturn which will ensure that Republicans get voted in again later.

[bootleg42]

I was (and really still am) a full-on Ron Paul "revolutionary", until I realized that he had zero chance of winning from the start, with the control out media has over the American people.

Paul is a hardcore far right-winger and none of us leftists here would ever support him.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/ron-paul-t70687/index.html

That thread talks about him and I made a few good points about him and his beliefs and why we would never, in our right minds, supports him.

After getting to know his DOMESTIC policies and the reasoning of his "anti-war" stance, you'll see how much of a nut he is and always will be.

[Dros]

Proof of this? And just because he talks of "unifying the country" doesn't mean he's a clone of Reagan with darker skin. "unification" is quite a broad concept.

Yeah. Except he drew that comparison, not me. Pretty suggestive...


Obama may not be a leftist revolutionary, but he's better than the alternatives.

I dunno. I kinda think REVOLUTION is a pretty attempting solution.


It's such a pity that it doesn't really mattter because by the time he's likely to be US president, the US economy is going to be in the shitter and the GOP will be going "See?! See?! We told you that this would happen if you voted Democrat!", thus garaunteeing that the Republicans will win the next election by a landslide, and thus continuing the cycle.

He's not going to be president. But the economy is turning South...

[QUOTE]Not really. Things have gotten to a point where most people are sick of the GOP, so the system rebalances itself by providing a candidate who will curb the worst excesses of the previous administration, but in a time of country-wide economic downturn which will ensure that Republicans get voted in again later.[/QUOTE

And this has what to do with the argument that Obama will be a token used to prop up the fantasy that racims doesn't exist while systematically smashing the proletariat and the oppressed nations of the U.S.?

I also think that people will vote Republican. I think McCaine is going to win this election. People are going to vote for Hillary in the coming months. Obama won't win the nomination. And then Clinton will get shat on in the general election.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Yeah. Except he drew that comparison, not me. Pretty suggestive...

He compared himself to Reagan? What comparison are you talking about?


I dunno. I kinda think REVOLUTION is a pretty attempting solution.
Revolution isn't happening any time soon. In the meantime, the sensible option is to pick between the lesser of two evils. This doesn't rule out revolution in the future.

In other words, don't fuck yourself over in the short to medium term in the pursuit of uncertain long term goals.


He's not going to be president. But the economy is turning South...Can I use your crystal ball? What makes you so sure he won't win?


And this has what to do with the argument that Obama will be a token used to prop up the fantasy that racims doesn't exist while systematically smashing the proletariat and the oppressed nations of the U.S.?I don't believe that anyone saying that racism doesn't exist in the US. 50 years ago, it would have been unthinkable that a black man could potentially become President of the United States. Racism is still an issue, but nowhere near the issue it was before. how can you argue with that?

As for the proletariat being screwed, that cannot be denied. But Obama or whoever else gets the presidency won't need to do much - the economic situation is going to fuck plenty of workers over.

Oppressed nations? You aren't one of those racist idiots who thinks nation is decided by race, are you?


I also think that people will vote Republican. I think McCaine is going to win this election. People are going to vote for Hillary in the coming months. Obama won't win the nomination. And then Clinton will get shat on in the general election.And you are basing this on what, exactly?

[Dimentio]

Obama is quite scary, since he is evoking an almost religious zeal. He might seem weak and uninspired, but as fast as a charismatic character is calling for unity, expect repression to tighten.

Inexperienced politician toying with experienced ones (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8hNaCnOdcw)

[Kwisatz Haderach]

Shouldn't we support the most liberal, inspirational, and perhaps revolutionary candidate with a great chance to become the President of the United States of America?
Look, there is nothing remotely revolutionary about Obama. He may seem progressive by the standards of mainstream American politics, but (1) he is all talk and no substance, he can inspire people but cannot come up with decent policies, and (2) he's a liberal. He's not even a social democrat. He's a liberal. Any candidate advocating Obama's views in Europe would be running for some type of reactionary party and would come under intense attack from left-of-centre reformists.

The only good thing to be said about Obama is that him winning the presidency would probably cause a few stormfronters' heads to spontaneously explode.

[RHIZOMES]

The only good thing to be said about Obama is that him winning the presidency would probably cause a few stormfronters' heads to spontaneously explode.

I saw a thread on Stormfront that said they'd be moving back to Europe if Obama won.

European Antifa should be ready!

[Unicorn]

McInsane might be a good choice. McCain's and Obama's stated policies are essentially identical but McCain spent six years in captivity in Vietnam. It is possible that McCain was "turned" in Vietnam and he is secretly a Communist.

McCain's GOP opponents circulated evidence of this . See for example:
http://www.usvetdsp.com/manchuan.htm

I estimate that there is a 5% chance that McCain is a Communist and 0% chance that Obama actually holds ANY socialist positions. Even McCain's stated positions are only slightly worse than Obama's. So why not vote for McCain?

[Dean]

McInsane might be a good choice. McCain's and Obama's stated policies are essentially identical but McCain spent six years in captivity in Vietnam. It is possible that McCain was "turned" in Vietnam and he is secretly a Communist.

McCain's GOP opponents circulated evidence of this . See for example:
http://www.usvetdsp.com/manchuan.htm

I estimate that there is a 5% chance that McCain is a Communist and 0% chance that Obama actually holds ANY socialist positions. Even McCain's stated positions are only slightly worse than Obama's. So why not vote for McCain?

I'm not suggesting voting for Obama, but it is clear that if McCain was elected, he would simply perpetuate and build upon the Neocon style imperialism in the middle east & south / central america in particular, whereas Obama, while having similarly bland rhetoric, has exemplified / promoted a much more progressive and less destructive foriegn policy. His statements and historical fight for Palestinian rights, though changed due to his presidential bid, are enough to make me prefer him among the current mainstream candidates.

[Robespierres Neck]

Obama over Hillary and (definitely) McCain.

[Unicorn]

I like this Obama poster.
http://bp3.blogger.com/_hr8iaA4NHXQ/R7lGI4d14BI/AAAAAAAAAXs/7HaJtlLrSAY/s1600-h/obama+poster.jpg

[graffic]

He's the best of a sour bunch, I would put money on Hilary winning the elections in the autumn though

[Dejavu]

Well. Again its a choice for the least evil. It against my nature to vote for any bigger govt type so I'm gonna refrain from voting for any of them.

However, out of the three I deem Hillary the least dangerous. People ask why? Well, Hillary is a lying slvtty cvnt ( I can say that right?) and that just might be her saving grace against an idealist like Obama.

I consider Obama considerably more dangerous than Hillary and its not because I think Obama is really a bad guy. I'd say as a person, Obama has both Mccain and Hillary beat on moral and ethical grounds and he tends to be more honest than the two ( naturally due to lack of political experience.)

However, in my estimation, I think general lack of political experience in Washington automatically makes you a better candidate but not in the case of Barack Obama.

Here is what scares me about Obama. Obama has the grandiose plans to increase the power of the central state by coming up with all these half-baked doomed-to-fail government programs that would resemble in many ways the 'New Deal,' ' Great Society,' and other state engineered disasters. Strangely, but maybe not that strange, that most textbooks tend to celebrate the absolute worst presidents in U.S. history such as FDR, Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, ( JFK I'll cut a little slack to) and tend to ignore largely some of our best presidents; Martin Van Buren, Grover Cleveland, Harding, Coolidge,etc. The stark difference between these two groups is that the former was statist and 'carved out' their legacies at the expense of the American people due to their miserable policies. The latter group tended to follow more of the Constitutional restraints of the Executive and stayed out of our lives for the most part, interestingly, we see the greatest economic real growth under the latter bunch. What do you expect? Most of the education in this country is run by the state. :glare: Oh and a little did you know fact : Dubya's foreign policy is not all that different than the first group's , that being imperialist. Dubya is simply carrying on the tradition but gets most of the flak because he's not exactly 'New Left' material like the formers but in reality much of the neo-conservative core ideology , especially about foreign policy, comes from the so-called 'progressives' of yesterday. Rarely will you hear a Neocon talking smack about TR , Wilson, and FDR.

Anyway back to the point. Let me give you an example why Obama scares me more than Hillary and then wrap it up why Mccain is the worst of the three. Much of what Obama and Hillary say are the same thing. Both of their platforms are virtually 90% identical and IMO economically unsound and have the potential to yield the most sickening results we have yet to see in this country's history. Now heres where Obama and Hillary are different. Its likely that Hillary wont do most of the stuff she says. He's a habitual liar and makes promises just for consolidation of power. Furthermore, Hillary is tied tightly with corrupt corporations wedded to the state and will see to serving them before enacting her perpetual nightmares like Hillary health care. Obama has similar ties to corrupt business but not as strong as Hillary. Barack is more idealist and naive as well and I fear he will actually go through with what he says i.e. both will probably enact a tax increase, but Hillary is unlikely to strengthen Unions which will destroy more jobs since a lot of the Unions are in Obama's camp but its likely Barack will increase Union influence along with tax hikes creating more unemployment thanunder a Hillary regime.

Mccain trumps them both in being the absolute worst choice of the three. Mccain may promote Bush's 'tax cuts' but in reality will increase spending above and beyond even both Hillary or Obama putting this country in even more debt while debasing our currency at the same time. I think Mccain made it clear he was a committed warmonger and imperialist and predicts a strengthened war economy will take us out of this grotesque recession were heading into at the speed of a freight train and will think , much like FDR did, that war will pull us out of an eventual depression by 'creating wealth.' Anybody that thinks war creates prosperity please PM me so I can slap you. :D

So there you have it , three bad choices. Way to go America!