[sdnativeson]

“The most fanatical Republican elements are like gung-ho crusaders. They only understand force and they despise reason. To beat them, it has to be an eye for an eye. They need to be beaten into submission.”

Only Republicans? You sound like the fanatic. This is what
you bring to the table? You are not open, You have no interest in dialogue, you espouse what has been the liberals (failing) mantra for too long; Do as I say, not as I do.

You remind me of the peace protestors with their violent demonstrations, those who preach love, but scream down and even physically attack those who have differing values and opinions. Yet in their minds they are open-minded, intellectual and progressive.

[sdnativeson]

I kind of thought some of the wedge political issues were the SSI/Medicare/immigration/security issues. I really don’t believe Obama will be much different than any other politician who is affilated with either party, if he was they wouldn’t be backing him, it isn’t in their best interest and that is how both function. Obamas voting record is partisan, look it up, he might espouse this we are all americans, we are in this together but as his voting record would indicate, I am a democrat and I toe the party line.

I guess one could argue that the Republicans have acted in an obstructionist way – in the manner that they persued their own agenda, but the logic is invalid. I have seen failures on both sides of the aisle but overall, I have seen the Democratic party bring the government to a near standstill with their filibusters and other stalling tactics. So, the question is can he put aside his liberal leanings? I doubt it. So, his agenda is questionable, as is every politicians.

Both parties have failed their country.

From my own observations he is not ready at this time. I see little in his actions and persona that show me true leadership characteristics at this stage of his career.

Again, I hold to my opinion, I see very little that supports many of the statements/opinions bandied about on these off topic threads.

[sdnativeson]

I respect the opinion you stated in your last paragraph zk,
I just don’t agree with it. Still, I can’t find any particular time where he “has reached across the isle” gave way much less compromised as politics is “the art of compromise” (correct me if I’m wrong) then he isn’t practicing that particularly well as I can tell.

I also disagree with you if you’re saying Karl Rove started this “bash the other” side mentality. It was practiced way before he came along. I can’t help but think about the way Dan Quayle was attacked off the top of my head. Both sides are guilty.

[sdnativeson]

noone; or, an abundance or profusion of something desirable, which can be construed as, well whatever you want, right? Your point though, is accurate.
Of course, your children, wife, roof over your heads, clothes on your backs and food in your stomach are all tangible items are they not?

[sdnativeson]

Obviously I gave the impression that I am or may be buddhist – which I am not, I am a practicing Catholic. I believe that to grow in my chosen faith I need to know more not just about it, but other faiths as well. I can say that for the most part, I have found “gold” in most all (MKP speak).
I concur, Western civilization has fallen away from Christianity (IMHO to it’s detriment). Still, religous or faith affiliation of any nature(sadly, as we all know) doesn’t necessarily mean there is any deep-rooted desire to better oneself and/or those around them. However, That does not invalidate the acheivements, beliefs, values, morals of those who do.

[sdnativeson]

WOW. I cannot believe some of the things I have read here.
I didn’t see the Bush interview and I haven’t read the transcript yet so I won’t speak to that.

What I can, and will, speak to is the rhetoric that so many espouse with little, if any, validation. More so, I see a disconcerting rise in the level of civility. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I would hope however, that before they voice it they do some “homework” as to the validity of their argument. That would mean getting outside your comfort zone, finding and reading materials that may be contrary to the mind set you (and those who influence you)have. I really don’t see that very often here.

What I have observed and experienced, is those who spit out the most vitriol are quick to ask for “proof” or “data” from those with a contrary opinion, upon being provided with it they often disappear.

[sdnativeson]

LOL, cnn isn’t IMO a bastion of unbiased reporting (meaning wayyyy to the left)… and I don’t find Fox exactly fair and balanced either… but that is my observation.

Defending oneself and those who share some of the same common values against those who seek to subjugate or destroy you isn’t a definition of war-mongering.

[sdnativeson]

You might know little about Buddhism, but it sounds like you know about life sdrealtor. I added that for all the other posters, maybe it will give them pause.
Thank you for sharing about your brother.

[sdnativeson]

I agree with sdrealtor. He has the proper perspective. I find that his perspective/belief being so easily dismissed fascinating, and more than a little sad.
Some might find this interesting;

http://www.care2.com/channels/solutions/home/1214

[sdnativeson]

certainly are a lot of people here with a lot of style…
too bad it comes at the cost of a lack of class.

[sdnativeson]

don’t want to interupt the lovefest between you and PC but zk where do you get your data? Obama has an extremely partisan voting record and hasn’t embraced the “both sides of the isle” approach. He has an almost perfect 100% partisan (liberal partisan!) voting record. What you’re really saying is you want a liberal democrat for president, and I am guessing you choose him as Hillary is just too scary, Kerry is to transparent (outwardly showing what every liberal believes), Edwards is just plain vapid and (in the off chance that he runs again) Sharpton is a bigot.

[sdnativeson]

I agree the Republicans have, at least most of them deviated from the party’s original principles toward government.

One could easily take the Republican out of that statement and replace Democrat and IMHO it would be even more accurate.

I think both parties need a lesson.

I see Pelosi and Co. already reneging on their campaign promises for their first 100 hours. (LOL 2.5 weeks…) Big surprise, but I would be dishonest to say that it’s strictly a democratic trait.

Still, the Democrats give me a much bigger “charge” than the Republicans. They outright don’t practice what they preach, for my primary example they hamstrung the senate on numerous issues for the last three years through partisan tactics. They campaigned on ending the partisan politics but they’ve reneged on that already. Why not? They were the obstructionists in the first place.

I look at the Democrats behaviour and I see their leaderships primary interest is gaining control of the government, even if they have to cripple the country to do so which they effectively did. They wasted years creating stalemates because the agenda being passed wasn’t theirs.

I don’t see humility or cooperation being exercised by Pelosi or Reid but I never expected to, and Teddy Kennedy?
don’t even get me started there.

If you’re for small government and not blinded by hubris and truly would work with anyone whose goal is to strengthen America and enhance the quality of life for it’s citizens then run for office. You got my vote.

[sdnativeson]

As I am posting this in a forum with lots of members far more learned and sophisticated in the financial world than myself, I want to say I am not attempting to pass myself off as any sort of expert or authority on the issue. I read a lot (maybe too much) and like everyone else, I have a vested interest in trying to get a grasp as to the direction of the economy and what variables I should focus on, pay attention to and those that aren’t so critical.

Anyway, the article, the first one I read, was in the WSJ, then more in businessweek the atimes and more. The estimated bad debt loaned internally is/was approximately 991 Billion US. Just because they have lots of cash due to massive foreign investment and trade surpluses doesn’t mean their unperforming loans aren’t cause for concern. The companies set up to start handling this debt are government owned and are being criticized for shuffling the debt from entity to entity. As the government controls the banks and the markets it isn’t readily transparent but eventually these loans if not settled in some way can cause a domestic bank crisis. Similar to the S&L crisis here.

O_M you mentioned the article in the Economist..when I read your paraphrasing I couldn’t help but think of Japan buying Real Estate like crazy here in the 80’s, I believe that was mostly disastrous for them in the long run.

So, I can see where they might/will buy Euros but they will stll keep a healthy chunk of it in US dollars.

I’ve babbled enough for now..back to work.

[sdnativeson]

PC, I thought you were more libertarian than Democrat.. yet your posts sound like a real live partisan Dem suffering from BDS.. also, “I’m not rooting for failure. But” “but” is a qualifier, so the “I’m not rooting for failure” is a meaningless statement, oh hell, I’ll just say it, it’s a either a lie or just not thought out well.

You ARE rooting for failure so Bush and the Republicans you dislike so much can go down in history as corrupt, stupid, warmongering, imperialistic, whatever adjectives you choose.

But then, you are going to vote for Hillary. Indulge me, what are the values she holds that inspire you to vote for her? Tough question to answer as it depends on the day of the week and to whom she is lying, I mean speaking to at the moment.

[sdnativeson]

PC, I thought you were more libertarian than Democrat.. yet your posts sound like a real live partisan Dem suffering from BDS.. also, “I’m not rooting for failure. But” “but” is a qualifier, so the “I’m not rooting for failure” is a meaningless statement, oh hell, I’ll just say it, it’s a either a lie or just not thought out well.

You ARE rooting for failure so Bush and the Republicans you dislike so much can go down in history as corrupt, stupid, warmongering, imperialistic, whatever adjectives you choose.

But then, you are going to vote for Hillary. Indulge me, what are the values she holds that inspire you to vote for her? Tough question to answer as it depends on the day of the week and to whom she is lying, I mean speaking to at the moment.

[Author]

Posts