You are right. McCain actually had more support here than in the U.S. But I see that the Cuban embargo has not worked for so many decades, it has been detrimental to both Cuba & the U.S. That is why I believe it a good idea that Obama gets to speak to Castro and Chávez. Diplomacy in my opinion should be restored.
Perhaps he can learn a few tricks. Am I right?
I am very well aware of that. I hope not and you can be sure I will act locally as much as I can to warn everyone of this real & scary possibility. I urge you as an opponent of Obama to make sure by all the means you can that does not happen. I actually hope Chávez gets forced to moderate his anti-yankee discourse.
Consider how many republicans still support Bush. They don’t just support him, they really believe in him like he can do no wrong (e.g. those who still insist Saddam had WMDs). What makes you think it will be any different with Obama, who seems to represent the democrat ideal even better than Bush does the republican one?
Methinks you have far too much hope in the American people. You may see them suddenly reaching mass enlightenment (from the efforts of the Paulians), but I think we’re first much more likely to see mile-long lines from state medical clinics of people with cholera and influenza and leprosy saying in a zombie voice “Obama will make it betttteeerrrrrrrr…”
Case in point: think about everything that FDR did and how it’s perceived today. Does anyone aside from libertarians and some conservatives consider him anything but the great president who saved the economy from the Great Depression? Obama will probably contribute to a new great depression, expand government more, start some new wars and will be remembered 60 years from now as a great president, too.
Natalie and Solomon,
Good points.
I wonder how all this hope for ‘change’ will be remembered in four years. I will certainly be reminding some soon-to-be-disappointed friends that only a few years before they had been expecting utopia. But, as you suggest, Bush will probably become the new Hoover to Obama’s FDR.
But, I still cling to my own hopes for change.
You have to be change. You have to do it. No one is going to do it for you, and the statists are constantly working to shore up their regimes and ideas. They may stumble, but they have the resources and control to recover.
We have to be the ones to get things done, whether it is resistance, innovation or education.
Ha, you almost sounded like Obama there. [:)] Very inspirational.
The only viable option for me is to educate the small number of people I interact with (calling them looters and thieves doesn’t seem to work - who knew?), even if that consists of merely pointing them to this website. I can’t afford resistance - too costly to those who depend on me - and I’m not smart or creative enough to innovate.
Every movement, particularly ones like the liberty movement, which is driven by individuals and individualists, needs foot soldiers.
There is nothing wrong with taking care of the the grunt work and soldiering on. I’ve got grandiose ideas but only time to nickel and dime the statists right now.
LOL this is so funny I’m not even going to comment
I don’t know, despite my vast differences with Ruben, I thought the observation was more or less valid. I would modify it to "doesn’t really have any left-wing parties in power ", however.
The Democrats are left wing. They are totally for social and economic justice (sic) through redistribution. That is a left agenda. That is a so-called progressive agenda.
The right are a lot of nasty things, but they are not redistributionist bleeding hearts.
I suppose it depends on the definition, but I’ll wager that in any European Dems would call themselves Social Democrats because their policies are pretty much the same.
I think Rueben’s point is that compared to the left wings of other countries (like Venezuela), our left wing isn’t too far left. Yet. I would add that i think this is only because they haven’t been in power. Once they’re sworn in, we’ll see some real left wing action in America.
Well, I think the left has been repudiated many times in America. Even in Canada, our farthest right party is really just center right has been our trend (barring the Chretien regime) over the last 30 years.
People like right rhetoric. I’m starting to reconsider that Obama winning is the end of the soul of liberty. There is a strong case, made again this morning on CNN by Ron Paul, that this election was more about rejecting Bush and neoconservatism, than it was about the youth turning out en masse for Obama.
Yes, that’s what Obama followers believe in, but can he deliver? Can he repeal the Patriot’s Act? He voted for it, didn’t he? Did he promise to stop US aggressive involvement overseas? No, he didn’t. If he’s so anti Bush, why did he support the bailout? I’m starting to think that he’s going to be as bad (possibly, worse) than Bush but he will get away with it.
I think that Obama’s messianic followers will give him a mandate. That will make him dangerous, which is why we need to erode the myth of Obama relentlessly. We need his approval ratings by the end of year 2 to be less than 40%, which if the economy keeps going the way it is, shouldn’t be too hard.
I don’t know if you realize it, but the system is fixed. Only power wins. It doesn’t matter who the President really is. Nothing about the empire really, meaningfully changes. Obama would have never got to this point, if he was any threat to established orders.
Exactly.
He’ll just blame the previous administration for his troubles. Also, things were pretty bad under Roosevelt but he was reelected a few times. The average American listens to the media and the media loves Obama. He just can’t go wrong no matter what he does.
Of course, but he’s more dangerous than many others because of the personality cult. I’m afraid that even a new great depression wouldn’t hurt him 
I agree. But I think it’s entirely valid to say that even the “left wing” has been shifted to the right noticeably (to the point where left has been re-defined in proportion to neoconservatvism); I know many leftists and/or progressives who disagree with Obama almost entirely, & who were advocating Kucinich.
Someone like Kucinich represents the left in the "left-wing " far more than any other candidate, aside from Mike Gravel (who was last seen lost in woods & tossing stones into lakes).
Neither flavors of Statism are correct (a given considering this forum), but both flavors have noticeably become more nationalistic (& in time, more fascist, I suspect), despite their differences (Obama being for social & economic justice via redistribution). I mean look at the possible succession here: Obama 2008, Obama or Palin 2012, ??? 2016, ??? 2020.
Those question marks give me shivers with the first two entries in that possible sucession.