In his latest column Thomas Sowell writes: Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s.
Protecting criminals, attacking business, increasing government spending, promoting a sense of envy and grievance, raising taxes on people who are productive and subsidizing those who are not -- all this is a re-run of the 1960s.
Internationally, the approach that Senator Obama proposes -- including the media magic of meetings between heads of state -- was tried during the 1930s. That approach, in the name of peace, is what led to the most catastrophic war in human history.
In the dangerous times we live in, I don't think we can afford the kind of "change" Obama wants and has yet to fully define.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell042908.php3
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterSo you think FDR caused WWII?
In his latest column Thomas Sowell writes: Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s ...[text shortened]... a wants and has yet to fully define.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell042908.php3
Well, that's just wrong. The causes of WWII were many, including the rise of fascism, a growing Japanese empire, European bitterness over Versailles, the worldwide Depression (which FDR actually helped solve), and the ineptitude of the League of Nations.
Obama doesn't "protect criminals." He hates Palestine more than McCain.
And I don't think you should talk about him ruining the economy, because that happened under Bush. Bush ruined the economy, taxed the lower classes heavily, and acted like he cared. But he had the power to protect the residents of New Orleans from Katrina. Did he? Is he just inept, or was that part of a plan to destroy the lower classes?
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI'll pick one of your points and let others tackle the rest. "Productive" seems to all-encompassing a word to describe Obama's plan. Yes he wants to raise taxes, on the wealthiest Americans. The "productive" middle class needn't worry. The plan is good. I won't vote for him, and he hasn't a chance in the world of winning, but that's one policy I'm all for.
In his latest column Thomas Sowell writes: Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s a wants and has yet to fully define.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell042908.php3
Originally posted by PinkFloyd...he hasn't a chance in the world of winning...
I'll pick one of your points and let others tackle the rest. "Productive" seems to all-encompassing a word to describe Obama's plan. Yes he wants to raise taxes, on the wealthiest Americans. The "productive" middle class needn't worry. The plan is good. I won't vote for him, and he hasn't a chance in the world of winning, but that's one policy I'm all for.
Riiiiiiight. Keep telling yourself that, PF. 😀
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterThat's nothing...Dubya Shrub has reversed the country's poor back 53 years!
In his latest column Thomas Sowell writes: Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s ...[text shortened]... a wants and has yet to fully define.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell042908.php3
"After adjusting for inflation, the value of the minimum wage is at its lowest level since 1955."
http://www.cbpp.org/6-20-06mw.htm
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterTypical right wing propaganda ignoring that the Republicans have wrecked our economy and are promising more of the same. Isn't Dallas the national home of right wing radicals going back over 50 years?
[b]In his latest column Thomas Sowell writes: Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s.
Why aren't you fighting in Iraq ? It is a right wing cause after all.
Lots of talk, but no true belief in your supposed cause.
Originally posted by howardgeeHmm, the minimum wage law was established in 1964?
That's nothing...Dubya Shrub has reversed the country's poor back 53 years!
"After adjusting for inflation, the value of the minimum wage is at its lowest level since 1955."
http://www.cbpp.org/6-20-06mw.htm
Originally posted by epiphinehasEpi, I am so sure that I would bet my entire Pink Floyd collection, which is pretty much my entire "estate" 🙂 , that come November, the only "change we can believe in" America will be ready for is an old war vet with a maverick streak. 😀
[b]...he hasn't a chance in the world of winning...
Riiiiiiight. Keep telling yourself that, PF. 😀[/b]
Originally posted by howardgeeYet again, the resident dumbest republican bigot on this site, fails to respond to a post giving the facts against his original post.
That's nothing...Dubya Shrub has reversed the country's poor back 53 years!
"After adjusting for inflation, the value of the minimum wage is at its lowest level since 1955."
http://www.cbpp.org/6-20-06mw.htm
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterOthers have already covered most of these points but I can think of another -- it's patently false to say that Obama wants to increase govt spending. On the contrary, he wants to end the Iraq war as soon as feasibly possible, which will save the country FAR more money than he plans to spend on domestic infrastructure. You gotta look at the national debt because paying for military expenses on credit card is no better than paying for them immediately with taxes.
In his latest column Thomas Sowell writes: Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s ...[text shortened]... a wants and has yet to fully define.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell042908.php3
Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter"Change" does not necessarily mean "new things". It could also mean "change which old things we're using".
In his latest column Thomas Sowell writes: Although Senator Obama has presented himself as the candidate of new things -- using the mantra of 'change' endlessly -- the cold fact is that virtually everything he says about domestic policy is straight out of the 1960s and virtually everything he says about foreign policy is straight out of the 1930s ...[text shortened]... a wants and has yet to fully define.
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell042908.php3