Disqus - Latest Comments for thefed

Re: It's Election Day! - 3 Key Primary Races To Watch

thefed — Tue, 18 May 2010 17:03:20 -0000

It will be interesting...

Unless you are a political junky (or live in the area) the primaries have been relatively under the radar...it will be interesting on the influence the respective "power brokers" have on the outcome. There is A LOT of time between now and the general election. We should see plenty of fireworks as they start attacking across the aisle.

Re: Elena Kagan Is Obama's Choice For Supreme Court

thefed — Tue, 11 May 2010 17:59:37 -0000

EXACTLY!!!

What I do find fascinating is this little dance that the right likes to play.

They don't like the government..um..governing! They call that "Socialism." They want the free market to be free. But then, they don't want those in the free market to do what they do either.

Well, what is it you want?

I also find it interesting that we want the top people in their fields to lead us, but are offended that these top people work for the top firms in the private industry. Do we really think they are just sitting there reading books waiting for a government official to pick them up? No, if you look at the history for most people, in ANY administration, you will see that they worked for a large firm in their respective fields. Most people doing the most bitching JUST heard about Goldman Sachs.

Go down the list of most any cabinet member in any administration, then bitch about every single one of them.

Re: Elena Kagan Is Obama's Choice For Supreme Court

thefed — Tue, 11 May 2010 17:26:25 -0000

I don't know why you keep saying what any of us have or haven't done as you know NONE of us personally...

With that being said, we have done our home work which does involve reading, but more than just Ann Coulter's latest rant...I also know enough to not stop at the first page, but to dig a little deeper.

Technically, yes, she did work - but I worked for Burger King at one point so I guess TECHNICALLY, I worked for Goldman Sachs, since it is part owner of Burger King. What you FAILED to mention is that during her "time" on the "advisory board" (NOT actually with Goldman Sachs) she worked A GRAND TOTAL OF 3 DAYS. One day a year, she would get together with other members.

Are you going to tell me that working ONE day a year for a company means she is a corrupt corporate insider?

Halliburton? Really? So...Just so we are clear...in your brain...
Someone who goes DIRECTLY from being the CEO/Chairman of a company to being the Vice President of the US is equal to someone who worked a total of three days for a company and is being promoted within her field? Is that your logic?

Re: Elena Kagan Is Obama's Choice For Supreme Court

thefed — Tue, 11 May 2010 09:22:52 -0000

Do you even know her connection with Goldman Sachs, or are you just repeating what you heard?

Re: Elena Kagan Is Obama's Choice For Supreme Court

thefed — Mon, 10 May 2010 13:18:06 -0000

I agree with you...

Just Googled Kagan + Miers and got back 1,850,000 hits...

It has begun already. They attacked Kagan for her association with one of the most respected Justices, and compared Sotomayor to Miers...you really think this is past them?

Is that air you’re breathing now?

Re: Elena Kagan Is Obama's Choice For Supreme Court

thefed — Mon, 10 May 2010 12:57:24 -0000

Because we all know it will come up, lets get ahead of the conversation...

So why Kagan, but not Harriet Miers?

First:
Both are female, attorneys and never served as a judge...

-Kagan has argued before the Supreme Court ... Miers had not
-Kagan is highly regarded as a great legal mind, as illustrated by her rise to the Dean of the leading law school in the country...Miers was known more as being a manager and less as a litigator but was the first female president of the Texas Bar Association. But in the area of Constitutional law, Miers pales in comparison to Kagan.
-Kagan has actually held positions in the federal government
-For Miers...you just had to take Bush's word for it. Kagan can stand on her own reputation in the legal community, not to mention others in the government (Kagan worked for both Bill Clinton and Joe Biden).

Lastly...conservatives spent their "Mier likeness currency" on Sotomayor...are they just going to scream "Mier" anytime someone without the "required" male parts, is nominated?

Re: Black Republicans Part 3 of 3: The Black President

thefed — Mon, 10 May 2010 10:40:06 -0000

Are they excellent observations? Do we ignore the cities such as Miami or maybe Charlotte, NC, both have or had recently, Republican leaderships in the cities. Both some of the most violent places in America.

Or maybe even some of the best places to live like Austin, or Houston, TX. Maybe Minneapolis or Milwaukee, Portland or Boston...All under Democratic leadership...

Or do we just not count those. See, people like Killswitch want to throw up HALF the story and use it as fact across the board. When the truth is, there are plenty of violent and poor cities ran by Republicans, and PLENTY of safe, wealthy cities ran by Democrats.

Which leads anyone who cares to look, that politics plays very little in the economic and social state of MANY of the cities he mentioned. But that is only for those that care to look.

Re: Black Republicans Part 3 of 3: The Black President

thefed — Mon, 10 May 2010 09:30:10 -0000

I have a question...

Can we separate race and ethnicity from politics? Should we? Can't we?

A while back, a few of us had a conversation about the first "Black President." What if he was a republican? What if it was someone like...I don't know...Alan Keys?

Personally, I can't stand for many of the things Alan Keys represents, but does that mean I shouldn't celebrate his accomplishments as a black man? Does that mean I shouldn't celebrate if he had become the first black president?

When do we separate race and politics? Clearly there are advantageous and disadvantageous to both.

I understand that there are points in time when one trumps the other, but does that mean at there is a point when it is NEVER okay to celebrate on over the other?

For example, I can say that I may have honestly supported Colin Powell if he ran as a republican (besides the fact that I think he is very level headed and moderate) where as I wouldn't have supported Keys (even if he ran as a Democrat)... But I would have celebrated the accomplishments of both, as black men.

Just some random thoughts...

Re: Black Republicans Part 3 of 3: The Black President

thefed — Fri, 07 May 2010 16:00:52 -0000

Well...

Aside from your points being 1) Of point, as Reid emphatically apologized PUBLICLY for his use of the language. Not to mention, if you KNOW the definition of racism, his comments didn't not contain the required inferior/superior meaning necessary to be considered racism. Which doesn't excuse his comments, but, for someone who is asking to spread the love, need to find something equivalent; and 2.) something that was said in 1984....Great examples.

Now, coming back to reality...

Are you REALLY comparing examples from MULTIPLE groups to the example from ONE group, and calling them equal? That's kinda stretching a little isn't. Not to mention that the sponsors of ANY left movement does not void or invalidate what is said about the Tea Party movement.

Look, I understand playing the contrarian role, really I do. (just ask the others...LOL) but every once in a while, I have to be honest with myself. If your best examples are made up things from many different groups, taken over many different decades (I'm still laughing at the 1984 "Hymietown" reference), and compare them to what is happening in ONE group within a year’s period of time, I GOTTA believe that even you would say...OK...maybe there is something to this...

Like Common said, it doesn't take all day to recognize Sunshine.

Re: Black Republicans Part 3 of 3: The Black President

thefed — Fri, 07 May 2010 14:22:32 -0000

I think if we are honest with ourselves we can come to one of two conclusions...

1.) While the Tea Party movement may not be a "bunch of racists" there is something about them that attracts those that do harbor racist points of view.

I don't think MOST rational people would call EVERY member a racist.

2.) Their silence can be just as loud...

During the Tea Party's first national conference, their OPENING SPEAKER (Tom Tancredo) said they should reinstate literacy tests before allowing people to vote. In South Carolina, he said Obama should "Go back to Kenya." If this was some random person in the crowd...okay, maybe...but this was the OPENING SPEAKER of the first national conference.

At the VERY least, they should have come out STRONG (not some BS response on the last page of their web page) but it was said by a prominent national figure, it should be rejected on the same level. Instead...NOTHING.

What are we to take away from the silence except that this type of rhetoric is okay. Are we really that wacko for thinking this is racist rhetoric?

While we can all agree that ANY movement, of ANY issue is BOUND to have its share of "loons," we can also agree that there appears to be a little extra involved with this movement. A survey (for whatever their worth) done by the University of Washington showed nearly 60% of Tea Party supporters feel that Blacks and Latinos are simply "lazy." Many rallies have been sponsored by the Council of Conservative Citizens, a known "hate group."

At some point, you would have to say that, if nothing else, there was something that needs to be addressed correct?

(I won't even get into them protesting Obama for doing the same thing that Bush did, yet nothing was said when Bush did it...)

Re: Confederate Patriotism or American Patriotism - Pick One Already!

thefed — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 14:26:48 -0000

Actually No (on the history lesson point)...I don't think you are wrong.

I think you are BOTH correct. (You both left out something...recruitment tool for tourism to VA).

My point is, while advocating for education and tourism, he is also honoring Confederacy. Anytime you dedicate the Month to a certain cause or issue, it is ALWAYS out of honor and/or acknowledgement.

I just STRONGLY fill this is an issue that should NOT be honored in any way.

Education (on the Confederacy) is good...(side personal note: In lite of recent political violence/turmoil...knowing history to avoid it is ALWAYS a good thing)
Promoting tourism is ALWAYS good...
Doing it in a manner that honors or appreciates the efforts of those involved, and treating it like it was a positive thing for individuals and/or our nation (In MY opinion) is the WRONG.

Re: Confederate Patriotism or American Patriotism - Pick One Already!

thefed — Fri, 09 Apr 2010 11:31:08 -0000

@ Killswitch...
I know it is your "job" to be the contrarian and just disagree for the sport of it (regardless of the issue).

But talk about COMPLETELY missing the point! (Not to mention predictable) WOW!

We won't even get into your assumption that no one on here read the proclamation. Not only is it incorrect...

As odd as it sounds...I understand your point on the face, but I think that point misses the larger picture. This is classic "can't see the forest for the trees."

It appears you are trying to separate highlighting VA's ROLE in the Confederacy vs highlighting the Confederacy itself.

You can't separate the two. You can't recognize Virginias' role in the Confederacy WITHOUT recognizing the Confederacy itself. The soldiers, the Capital of the Confederate States, even the creation of West Virginia. It was ALL part of Confederacy. Even if we were to study Virginia's role in the Confederacy, you are still studying the Confederacy.

You can study Virginia separately
You can study the Confederacy separately
But you CAN'T study Virginia’s role in the Confederacy separately....that is impossible.

But to the larger point, Confederate IS a "bad word." As much as Al-Qaeda, Taliban, or any other buzzword we want to throw out there.

I understand that we live in a country where ANYTHING that is done by an American State is ALWAYS seen as a positive no matter what it is, but let's be honest...
I appreciate that they were fellow Americans (AFTER President Johnsons pardon and reinstatement by President Ford). I appreciate the fact that they have many relatives still living and are citizens...great. That still doesn't take away from the issue.

The Confederate States of America succeeded from the United States, claimed control of US land, declared WAR on the United States taking the lives of over 600,000 citizens, all for the purpose of OWNING human beings as property. As such, it SHOULDN'T be celebrated, it SHOULDN'T be highlighted, and it SHOULDN'T be honored.

Let’s not pretend that the Governor isn’t trying to paint the confederate leaders and soldiers in a positive light, and asking us (I live in VA) to understand their sacrifices… WHAT? Should I also understand the sacrifice of Jeffery Dalmer, he actually killed less people.

Re: Get Off My TeeVee: RNC Chairman Michael Steele Edition

thefed — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 09:52:05 -0000

I've made this point before (at least tried)...
No matter WHAT HE THINKS of himself, others will see him as a black man. Period! He can fool, delude, trick himself all he wants. At the end of the day, they see him as a black man! I agree with him. Wait until you hear THEIR response! They are going to show him how black THEY think he really is. Sit back and watch it unfold!

Re: April Book of the Month - Republicans and the Black Vote

thefed — Thu, 01 Apr 2010 14:38:47 -0000

Good read...

I have always found it interesting that Black Republicans always say "What have the Democrats done..."

I don't mind the question at face value...but I shake my head in confusion as if the Republicans have taken up the fight, and I was the only one that hadn't noticed.

Re: Top 5 Reasons Why Health Care Reform Will Likely Be Upheld By The SCOTUS

thefed — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 15:55:25 -0000

OF COURSE...The other side of this pillow is that the "new" SCOTUS is very unpredictable...

Precedence...Legal Opinion...what have you...appear to not mean a damn thing to them.

Re: The Urban Beat - January 25, 2010

thefed — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:27:56 -0000

I wouldn't say that Obama's Policy towards GITMO is the same as Bush's. Bush just made a decision without regard towards anything else. Obama had a expert panel make certain decision on the issues. They are trying some, releasing some, and the others have been seen as too dangerous to release...

This is uncommon, read up on Noriega (the REAL Noriega - NOT the rapper). He was scheduled for release in 2007, but they didn't let him go and are holding him for France to try for crimes. He was to dangerous to just "let go."

As far as Geithner goes, I agree, he should GO!!!

Re: May The Best Candidate (That Money Can Buy) Win!

thefed — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 17:58:21 -0000

Which is EXACTLY what I would expect him to say...

My response to that would be that we have established that when it comes to entities, you can't separate the person from the entity.

In one breath he is saying that the people ARE the government...in the other, he is saying that the corporations IS a person. To me, those are contradictory statements in that one the people are defined by the government, and the other, the corporations are defined by the person. That is cake and eating it too...

Re: May The Best Candidate (That Money Can Buy) Win!

thefed — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:29:52 -0000

No...but in a twist of irony...those same janitors and secretaries MAY have a say from the Union perspective...

Which then gets into a form of coercion...(In my opinion)...what happens when companies can't match the money of the corporation...does the corporation squash the unions voice?

Re: May The Best Candidate (That Money Can Buy) Win!

thefed — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:17:10 -0000

I say that is BS!!

There are plenty of entities out there that are made up of PEOPLE, but aren't extended full constitutional rights...

I am a Fed...as such, I am limited in my activities due to the Hatch Act. Isn't the Federal Government made up of "PEOPLE?" How is it any different? Are corporate "people" different than federal "people?" That seems like a pretty obtuse statement...bottom line is if he wants to take the position that the constitution protects entities that are made up of "people" (which is EVERY institution) then based on that sole definition, we need to extend the constitution to EVERY institution...including churches, schools (students), work place, etc.. All of which have been limited in the constitutional rights simply BECAUSE they weren't individuals BUT entities...Try bringing a gun to work...can't...no 2nd amendment here...

Re: May The Best Candidate (That Money Can Buy) Win!

thefed — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:10:01 -0000

I'm so pissed with this decision, I can't see straight!!!

Doesn't the essence of past decisions mean ANYTHING to this court! There appears to be a blind belief that corporations aren't corrupt and won't act inappropriately. History has shown us otherwise.

Plus, should we ALL not feel offended that corporations have more rights in this arena than individuals? As an individual, you are limited to $2400 per federal election (among other limitations), but a company can do whatever it wants? REALLY????? Where are my 1st amendment rights here? Why can't I donate more than $2400 (not that I would - but you understand my point).

Re: How To Lose A Guy in 10 Days

thefed — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:50:31 -0000

So if Obama does the splits at the SOTU address, then I'm done!!! I can't take NO MO'!!!

Re: How To Lose A Guy in 10 Days

thefed — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 16:47:14 -0000

Exactly!

@ Lady Z:
I'm trying to be as optimistic as you...But let's not kid ourselves...Like Janitor said, Obama is showing a pretty good track record of being Mr. Nice Guy.

It's one thing to continue the fight, it's a WHOLE 'nother thing, to wait for a guy that has said he will be against it NO MATTER WHAT (...no "let me think about it...no, inside information, no staff going over the details, etc...JUST 'NO') to get in office and start the fight over with reduced forces...

I'm not saying break the rules like Bush, but I am saying stop conceding to the side that DOSEN'T LIKE YOU. And whose SOLE focus is NOT governing, or making American lives better, but to simply BRING YOU DOWN!

That is ALL they are focused on right now. They reason they don't have a Health Care bill...because they are busy tearing you down...the reason they don't have an energy bill...because they are busy tearing you down...the reason they don't have a jobs bill.......you see where I am going. They are SOOOOO busy talking shit to Obama, that they aren't even doing what they were put in office to do. And yet you want to play nice???

Okay...have a nice one term Mr. President.

Re: How To Lose A Guy in 10 Days

thefed — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:02:29 -0000

There goes Obama being nice again!!! Do you think Bush would've waited?

Re: Get Off My TeeVee II: Michael Eric Dyson Edition

thefed — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 15:23:19 -0000

Stephen Lendman I see!!! So these aren’t YOUR views/ideas/ or thoughts! GOT IT!

So let’s look at each one of Stephen’s ideas one by one shall we?

-- reinvented a "Cold War" with Russia;

-- is encircling it and China with military bases, and proceeding with provocative plans to install interceptor missiles in Poland (for offense, not defense) and advanced tracking radar in the Czech Republic;

Georgia attack, and Missile Shield…All under Bush.
But, I’ll humor you…more correctly, Obama abandon the missile shield (which Russia liked). Obama and Medvedev (the Russain President) met in December to discuss a Nuclear Arms treaty. Oh…and Medvedev has gone on record as saying that Obama is his new “comrade.”

They have actually come closer on the position on Iran

-- escalated war in Afghanistan;

Yeeeeeeah…

With respect to the drone issue…this is a continuation of a Bush policy.

However, there are legitimate issues here. This is actually ONE of the few things where Obama has bi-lateral support. It does kill top terrorist officials, but it has been known to kill civilians…on one hand it keeps us safe, on the other, it pisses off the opposition and fuels their reasoning for U.S hatred!

As far as Columbia and the Netherlands…we should 1.) Probably believe our president over Chavez when he says that they aren’t trying to pick a war with Venezuela. And 2.) understand that our agreement with Colombia is on going, and this again, is just a continuation of past relationships. Obama can’t just come in and say screw everyone we worked with!!! Also, we have ramped up operations in both Mexico AND Colombia in response to the drug related violence that came to a crescendo towards the end of 2009.

-- failed to subvert Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's reelection; continues destabilization tactics for regime change; and may, preemptively without cause, attack Iran's nuclear facilities;

Again, REALLY??? Complain about our international role, THEN say we should have usurped a sovereign Country’s election process…Okay…

Most of this (as with this entire piece) is speculation. It is pretty dangerous (in my opinion) to develop political positions based off of speculation. Things that may or may not exist! and may, preemptively without cause, attack Iran’s nuclear facilities.” Completely made up!!!

-- ousted the democratically elected Honduran president, installing a fascist regime to replace him;"

What in the WORLD are you talking about??? President Zelaya with the help of Chavez, tried to rewrite the constitution and abolish term limits to maintain power…HIS OWN GOVERNMENT (Military, Congress, and Supreme Court) said what he was doing was unconstitutional and kicked him out!!!!

Obama, along with the UN, EU, OAS all condemned the removal and called it a coup.

I believe your source has the facts backwards on this one. You can actually say that the Honduran government worked buy not letting the President obtain ultimate power. It followed it’s own constitution and removed their president from power. You could also argue that Obama’s (and others) support is in the wrong place by NOT recognizing Honduras’ governmental decisions.

Sooo…I’ll let you all decide…I’m done.

Re: Get Off My TeeVee II: Michael Eric Dyson Edition

thefed — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 16:41:50 -0000

You and I couldn't agree more!

I appreciate MANY of the things Dyson says...especially as it relates to Hip-Hop.

But I also understand that he has an agenda...

I also agree that there is a place and a role for him and those like him. I OFTEN (maybe TOOOO often) get into debates with friends about the Sharpton's and Jackson's of the world. And for better or worse, I believe that they have value, and serve a role. Not that I would following them off a bridge, but they do put light on many issue that would go without...

People ARE needed!