Comments for Re(e)d This Blog

Comment on Obama is not FDR. Obviously. by Richard Holloway

Richard Holloway — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 13:45:59 +0000

i share your concern reed, we are seeing the deck of cards being shuffled

Comment on Obama’s First Economic Decision; The Tax on Oil Profiteers by Reed

Reed — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 17:48:13 +0000

as a brief add-on, 2008 marked yet another world-record breaking profit year for ExxonMobile.

Comment on Barack Obama; the Sound and the Fury. by WordSmith

WordSmith — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 20:03:50 +0000

Huh…I had seen much different figures on MSNBC in terms of the tax cuts in the package. But your info seems to match the other info I can find, so…good. I’m glad tax cuts are not as big a part of the package as I thought and that most of it is going toward infrastructure.

Comment on Barack Obama; the Sound and the Fury. by Reed

Reed — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:07:09 +0000

i found the full text the three presidential orders regarding gitmo, torture, black sites, and extraordinary rendition–
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090122/ap_on_go_pr_wh/suspected_terrorists_glance
it does immediately end our use of CIA detention facilities … leaving only the Navy floating jails as official US extralegal prisons. It does call for a review of our rendition policy, and will hopefully be followed up with additional orders removing our powers of rendition and requiring we operate within the bounds of the law in the sovereign state in which we act.

i do recognize that the steps being taken are positive, and are fairly sweeping, but i still contend that if the door to extralegal rendition, interogation etc. is left open a crack, then the previous measures come to naught— acting within the bounds of international law is a black and white issue, you’re either in observance, or you’re not.

if we decide that our current rendition policy is fine, then instead of keeping the illegal prisoners in our cia sites, or gitmo, we’ll just send them to Egypt or Somalia to be tortured by CIA trained operatives [like Chile in the 70s and 80s] … and these signed orders will have meant little.

as for the fuel efficiency element- while allowing the states to increase the pace of the change is a good thought, it doesn’t take a firm stand on the need for stricter control nationwide– moreover, wouldn’t one hope that Obama would work fast to enact stricter standards than Bush was pushing for?

i feel like the huge number of crises looming before us give him a mandate to act radically and quickly– FDR 100 days style— and i want to see him go to the mat for these kinds of issues, changing them and this irrevocably in the process.

Comment on Barack Obama; the Sound and the Fury. by Griffin

Griffin — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 03:57:59 +0000

Actually, Obama ordered the close of all CIA detention centers period, and created a special task force to investigate the previous practice of extraordinary rendition. We’re still breaking a bunch of the Geneva conventions, particularly relating to the use of certain weapons, but it’s a start.

Also, I’m not sure where you guys are getting your information about the stimulus from, but if you read the actual document, you will see that about 1/3 (275 Billion) of the proposed package will be spent on tax cuts. Most of it (550 Billion) will be spent on public programs, R&D and infrastructure a basic breakdown looks like this:

54 Billion: invested in clean energy technology and infrastructure

16 Billion: 10Bn for scientific research and 6 for the expansion of broadband access

90 Billion invested in bridges, highways, etc. 10Bn of that in public transportation (clearly not enough, but a start)

142 Billion in education

24 Billion investment into our healthcare infrastructure
102 Billion to expand unemployment, food stamps and to help workers keep health insurance

91 billion to state governments to prevent government job cuts in vital areas like fire departments and public safety

I’m not saying it’s perfect, but it’s not quite as bleak as you are making it out to be.

Comment on The privatization of public works; Obama’s 2009 “American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan” by WordSmith

WordSmith — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 02:23:14 +0000

They’ve cut all that infrastructure stuff to like less than a fifth of the stimulus plan at this point anyway, in favor of fucking tax-cuts. As I posted in the other thread:

“And we haven’t even gone into the ridiculous tax cut-centric stimulus package. Larry fucking Summers and his dislike of infrastructure…there is a disconnect between Obama and his economic team right now that really needs to be explored and fixed. There is this fear of the idea of infrastructure spending, almost as if the idea of “spending” just means giving out money and getting nothing. Ridiculous. The republican fondness for tax cuts as a means of stimulating the economy does not have to be indulged at this point, there is nothing to support its merits. There is no reason to try to appease them to this extent…but Summers and his people essentially agree with the republicans on how to boost the economy, so Obama is being advised that way. You were definitely right about the economic team, or about some of them at least.”

But yes, I also agree that privatizing those public works is a mistake…although replacing them with tax-cuts is just ridiculous to me.

Comment on Wait, the other $350b is available… with no additional rules? by WordSmith

WordSmith — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 02:19:40 +0000

Oh you posted about that in the other post…I’ll repost part of this there.

Comment on Wait, the other $350b is available… with no additional rules? by WordSmith

WordSmith — Mon, 26 Jan 2009 02:19:11 +0000

So wack. So incredibly wack and just unbelievably stupid. I agree with everything you’ve said here.

And we haven’t even gone into the ridiculous tax cut-centric stimulus package. Larry fucking Summers and his dislike of infrastructure…there is a disconnect between Obama and his economic team right now that really needs to be explored and fixed. There is this fear of the idea of infrastructure spending, almost as if the idea of “spending” just means giving out money and getting nothing. Ridiculous. The republican fondness for tax cuts as a means of stimulating the economy does not have to be indulged at this point, there is nothing to support its merits. There is no reason to try to appease them to this extent…but Summers and his people essentially agree with the republicans on how to boost the economy, so Obama is being advised that way. You were definitely right about the economic team, or about some of them at least.

Comment on The privatization of public works; Obama’s 2009 “American Recovery and Reinvestment Plan” by Bobby

Bobby — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 17:36:53 +0000

You should check out this NYT Op-Ed:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/04/opinion/04lewiseinhorn.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=opinion

Comment on government assistance as class warfare by DixieFlatline

DixieFlatline — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 20:18:05 +0000

Rule of law that is imposed, as you said you have no say in the creation of laws which regulate you.

The issue is, we pass of our own sovereignty to the state, and thus it should come as no surprise that we’re no longer in charge of our own fate.

I think it was Barry Goldwater who said, (paraphrased) that “a government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take it all away”.

So I guess we agree.