Don't click or your IP will be banned


Hittin' The Web with the Allman Brothers Band Forum
You are not logged in

< Last Thread   Next Thread ><<  1    2    3  >>Ascending sortDescending sorting  
Author: Subject: Its not taking this administration long, is it?...

Ultimate Peach





Posts: 3057
(3097 all sites)
Registered: 10/3/2003
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 03:17 AM
If this has already been posted here, I apologize.

We could be in big big trouble.

You know what to do...

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=263543


"D"

 

____________________
In my 38th year following the Allman Brothers. Things that "rock"....The Allman Brothers Band, Jam bands, Bluegrass music and Steamboats

 
Replies:

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8375
(8376 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 04:27 AM
Did you really expect anything different? Especially in Congress...

I'll bet you were also pleased to lectured by Dr. Joseph Lowery as he singled out white people and remind us we still need to "embrace what is right" in his benediction. Never mind that all should heed that advice.

I think the pattern is starting to become clear. Soaring, inclusive, centrist rhetoric (almost center-right) from BO. But his minions will speak in far different terms, which will only be decried by the Great One when public reaction turns too negative.

The important thing will be to watch the actions, compare them to the words, and judge how well the two align. This stimulus package will be a big test. If we listen to his words, BO should veto what looks to be the all-time champion porkfest by the time it hits his desk.

Didn't he say he's against wasteful spending?

Wanna bet on that?

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16489
(16489 all sites)
Registered: 6/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 07:19 AM
You know the old saying...You get what you pay for.

 

____________________


R.I.P. Hugh Duty


 

Extreme Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3576
(1891 all sites)
Registered: 1/22/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 07:23 AM
Yeah man, white people are so discriminated against...

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 10:18 AM
Sounds a lot like set-asides to me...How's this change? As far as infrastructure repair, I think we should try to get the most bang for the buck. That would be to hire the most experienced and qualified workers available, regardless of color or sex.

Of course, it will turn out being more of a social engineering project, when civil engineering is what's called for. Not that I'm surprised. That's one of the reasons I'm not a Democrat...They're too hung up on race all the time.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 24908
(24938 all sites)
Registered: 1/5/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 10:20 AM
the video seems to be tampered with

 

____________________

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8375
(8376 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 11:01 AM
quote:
the video seems to be tampered with

Here it is on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opxuUj6vFa4

You gotta love Reich's honesty. It lays bare so much of liberal thinking. It's more important that they have the "right people" build the roads and bridges than qualified people. If that doesn't sum up big gov't, what does?

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15832
(15866 all sites)
Registered: 8/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 11:29 AM
You could change the title of this thread to "Let's Bash The Liberals," or maybe, "Stereotype Here."

 

____________________


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 18593
(18594 all sites)
Registered: 11/20/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 11:43 AM
quote:
You could change the title of this thread to "Let's Bash The Liberals," or maybe, "Stereotype Here."
Where is that RBK when we need him???

 

____________________
"Come on down to the Mermaid Cafe and I will buy you a bottle of wine, and we'll laugh and toast to nothing and smash our empty glasses down..."

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8944
(24893 all sites)
Registered: 10/30/2010
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 11:50 AM
quote:
quote:
You could change the title of this thread to "Let's Bash The Liberals," or maybe, "Stereotype Here."
Where is that RBK when we need him???


Hush now.

 

____________________



 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8643
(8641 all sites)
Registered: 12/14/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 11:58 AM
quote:
You could change the title of this thread to "Let's Bash The Liberals," or maybe, "Stereotype Here."


I don't quite understand your comments...did these people not say these things?

Where is the bashing / sterotyping you speak of?

What I heard that they actually said was they wanted to give the jobs to everyone BUT qualified white males...

That sounds real productive in the healing process for our nation.

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15832
(15866 all sites)
Registered: 8/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 12:02 PM
I didn't watch the video...I'm just commenting on statements such as

"I think the pattern is starting to become clear. Soaring, inclusive, centrist rhetoric (almost center-right) from BO. But his minions will speak in far different terms, which will only be decried by the Great One when public reaction turns too negative,"

and " That's one of the reasons I'm not a Democrat...They're too hung up on race all the time,"

and maybe "It lays bare so much of liberal thinking. It's more important that they have the "right people" build the roads and bridges than qualified people. "

 

____________________


 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8375
(8376 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 12:39 PM
I've read plenty of direct comments from you SCB about failures in conservative philosophy or your opinion of conservative leaders. I find these kinds of statements as wrong-headed as you do about conservative principles.

As for our new President, I find his rhetoric diametrically opposed to the actions and path he's setting this administration on. If you only read the words of his inaugural and didn't know who said them, you'd think he was a Regan conservative. His agenda however appears to be as far removed from that as possible.

If you're gonna be a liberal leader, at least have the stones to say so in front of the country. Instead of hiding behind lofty bs about responsibility, tell the nation your agenda is about diminishing individual responsibility and giving over the power and thought to elected leaders, who will lead the sheep because they are so much wiser.

In regards to the content of the video, please tell me you don't align with these social engineering morons who would rather run up future debts to create their vision of social justice than ensure the money gets spent in ways that guarantee the best outcome. Or simplier: do you want to be driving on bridges built by people barely know what they are doing, but have government's preferred ethnicity?

I thought we were getting past the ethnic divisions. I thought that was a theme of this election and this new administration. Seems like the liberals are the ones ensuring that card keeps geting played over and over. Shouldn't ability be the principle measurement of qualification?

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8643
(8641 all sites)
Registered: 12/14/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 02:11 PM
quote:
I didn't watch the video...I'm just commenting on statements such as

"I think the pattern is starting to become clear. Soaring, inclusive, centrist rhetoric (almost center-right) from BO. But his minions will speak in far different terms, which will only be decried by the Great One when public reaction turns too negative,"

and " That's one of the reasons I'm not a Democrat...They're too hung up on race all the time,"

and maybe "It lays bare so much of liberal thinking. It's more important that they have the "right people" build the roads and bridges than qualified people. "


So did you have a comment on the video where Robert Reich, economic advisor to Obama says while in front of congress, "I am concerned that these jobs not go to high skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers...." and "criteria can be set so that the money does go to others" ?

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15998
(15990 all sites)
Registered: 10/13/2007
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 02:45 PM
quote:
quote:
I didn't watch the video...I'm just commenting on statements such as

"I think the pattern is starting to become clear. Soaring, inclusive, centrist rhetoric (almost center-right) from BO. But his minions will speak in far different terms, which will only be decried by the Great One when public reaction turns too negative,"

and " That's one of the reasons I'm not a Democrat...They're too hung up on race all the time,"

and maybe "It lays bare so much of liberal thinking. It's more important that they have the "right people" build the roads and bridges than qualified people. "


So did you have a comment on the video where Robert Reich, economic advisor to Obama says while in front of congress, "I am concerned that these jobs not go to high skilled people who are already professionals or to white male construction workers...." and "criteria can be set so that the money does go to others" ?



Abhorrent.....Now change one key word and assume a Republican said it. "I am concerned that these jobs not go to high skilled people who are already professionals or to BLACK male construction workers." Can you imagine the 24/7 media firestorm over that one? Plus, whoever said it would have probably been forced to resign already. The double-standard and hypocrisy on full display is staggering. (sickening?)

For Obama not to contest the statements Reich made yet tells me that he must be in agreement with it. I am deeply suspicious of the whole "stimulus" in the first place, and on many levels. I think it's a code word for "the government using this opportunity to absorb/ tamper with as much of the private sector as possible." It's not about stimulating the economy... It's about control.

 

____________________

 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 27533
(27822 all sites)
Registered: 2/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 03:07 PM
Until Obama actually implements a policy to that effect, I'm not going to pay attention to what everyone else is saying around him. As for putting the unemployed to work....the ones who are on,say, welfare, I'm all for it. It takes them off the public assistance and saves money while creating a tax base. As for hiring unskilled labor....there will always have to be qualified people to head up the projects.

 

____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 16489
(16489 all sites)
Registered: 6/4/2004
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 04:15 PM
quote:
The guy is oin office less than a week and the people who had nothing negative to say about the previous 8 years are all over the new administration. Keep reaching.


Free speech John and a certain amount of being stuck inside in the winter boredom.

 

____________________


R.I.P. Hugh Duty


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 27533
(27822 all sites)
Registered: 2/18/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 04:34 PM
For Obama not to contest the statements Reich made yet tells me that he must be in agreement with it.

I've discovered lately that people you think are in the know about what's going on are often busy doing other things and don't find out until later. Do we know if Obama has heard the statement? Dont you think he'll answer when asked about it? I'm still willing to give him some time. There are a lot of knots to untangle from the last eight years.....can't all be done in less than a week.

 

____________________
Sometimes we can't choose the music life gives us - but we damn sure can choose how we dance!


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 04:40 PM
quote:
Until Obama actually implements a policy to that effect, I'm not going to pay attention to what everyone else is saying around him. As for putting the unemployed to work....the ones who are on,say, welfare, I'm all for it. It takes them off the public assistance and saves money while creating a tax base. As for hiring unskilled labor....there will always have to be qualified people to head up the projects.


I agree with this. I think racial set asides in 2009 are a big mistake but Reich has always had this unreconstructed philosophy. There is a reason he does not have a cabinet position. Let's see what Obama actually does. His mandate is to get the country moving again and implement necessary structural reforms so that some of the bad things do not happen again. I will wait to see what happens before criticizing at all. What Reich said is nothing new. And the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, which did just happen to be opposed by the left wing of the Democratic party, was built on the philosophy that people should work if they receive benefits and this is the best way to get them off. This, btw, is a neo-conservative idea. Workfare has been a great success and it should be increased, even if the projects are makeshift. No one should ever be on the idol dole, it destroys morale.

 

____________________

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3911
(3918 all sites)
Registered: 11/19/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 08:10 PM
quote:
quote:
Until Obama actually implements a policy to that effect, I'm not going to pay attention to what everyone else is saying around him. As for putting the unemployed to work....the ones who are on,say, welfare, I'm all for it. It takes them off the public assistance and saves money while creating a tax base. As for hiring unskilled labor....there will always have to be qualified people to head up the projects.


I agree with this. I think racial set asides in 2009 are a big mistake but Reich has always had this unreconstructed philosophy. There is a reason he does not have a cabinet position. Let's see what Obama actually does. His mandate is to get the country moving again and implement necessary structural reforms so that some of the bad things do not happen again. I will wait to see what happens before criticizing at all. What Reich said is nothing new. And the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, which did just happen to be opposed by the left wing of the Democratic party, was built on the philosophy that people should work if they receive benefits and this is the best way to get them off. This, btw, is a neo-conservative idea. Workfare has been a great success and it should be increased, even if the projects are makeshift. No one should ever be on the idol dole, it destroys morale.



One thing the 1996 "Welfare Reform Act" didn't address was the far bigger problem of CORPORATE WELFARE.
As Ralph Nader put it:
"Corporate Welfare---the enormous and myriad subsidies, bailouts, giveaways, tax loopholes, debt revocations,
loan guarantees, discounted insurance and other benefits conferred by government on business---is a function of political corruption. Corporate Welfare programs siphon funds from appropriate public investments,
subsidize companies ripping minerals off federal lands, enable pharmecutical companies to gouge
consumers, perpetuate anti-competitive oligopolistic markets, injure our national security, and
weaken our democracy.
During the time the 1996 Welfare Reform Act passed, one would've expected that a public effort to
curtail welfare would focus on big handouts for large corporations, not small supports for
poor individuals. But somehow the invocations of the need for stand-on-your-own-two-feet
responsibility do not apply to large corporations.
When the '96 Welfare Reform Act gutted the welfare system for poor people--fulfilling a pledge to
"end welfare as we know it", no such top-down agenda had emerged for coroporate welfare
recipients. The savage demogoguery against imaginary "welfare queens" has never been matched
with parallel denunciations of gluttonous corporate welfare kings---The DuPonts & Britol-Myers-
Squibbs that embellish their palaces with riches taken from the public purse."

[Edited on 1/26/2009 by woodsdweller]

 

____________________


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 15832
(15866 all sites)
Registered: 8/9/2002
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 09:13 PM
Fuji, I fully expect most people to disagree with my views. I know I'm not exactly "mainstream."

And I haven't had a chance to watch the video, but I disagree with hiring people based on anything but their ability to do the job.

 

____________________


 

Zen Peach



Karma:
Posts: 20943
(20942 all sites)
Registered: 6/15/2005
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 09:44 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
Until Obama actually implements a policy to that effect, I'm not going to pay attention to what everyone else is saying around him. As for putting the unemployed to work....the ones who are on,say, welfare, I'm all for it. It takes them off the public assistance and saves money while creating a tax base. As for hiring unskilled labor....there will always have to be qualified people to head up the projects.


I agree with this. I think racial set asides in 2009 are a big mistake but Reich has always had this unreconstructed philosophy. There is a reason he does not have a cabinet position. Let's see what Obama actually does. His mandate is to get the country moving again and implement necessary structural reforms so that some of the bad things do not happen again. I will wait to see what happens before criticizing at all. What Reich said is nothing new. And the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, which did just happen to be opposed by the left wing of the Democratic party, was built on the philosophy that people should work if they receive benefits and this is the best way to get them off. This, btw, is a neo-conservative idea. Workfare has been a great success and it should be increased, even if the projects are makeshift. No one should ever be on the idol dole, it destroys morale.



One thing the 1996 "Welfare Reform Act" didn't address was the far bigger problem of CORPORATE WELFARE.
As Ralph Nader put it:
"Corporate Welfare---the enormous and myriad subsidies, bailouts, giveaways, tax loopholes, debt revocations,
loan guarantees, discounted insurance and other benefits conferred by government on business---is a function of political corruption. Corporate Welfare programs siphon funds from appropriate public investments,
subsidize companies ripping minerals off federal lands, enable pharmecutical companies to gouge
consumers, perpetuate anti-competitive oligopolistic markets, injure our national security, and
weaken our democracy.
During the time the 1996 Welfare Reform Act passed, one would've expected that a public effort to
curtail welfare would focus on big handouts for large corporations, not small supports for
poor individuals. But somehow the invocations of the need for stand-on-your-own-two-feet
responsibility do not apply to large corporations.
When the '96 Welfare Reform Act gutted the welfare system for poor people--fulfilling a pledge to
"end welfare as we know it", no such top-down agenda had emerged for coroporate welfare
recipients. The savage demogoguery against imaginary "welfare queens" has never been matched
with parallel denunciations of gluttonous corporate welfare kings---The DuPonts & Britol-Myers-
Squibbs that embellish their palaces with riches taken from the public purse."

[Edited on 1/26/2009 by woodsdweller]


Completely irrelevant to the topic here.

 

____________________

 

Ultimate Peach



Karma:
Posts: 3911
(3918 all sites)
Registered: 11/19/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 09:53 PM
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Until Obama actually implements a policy to that effect, I'm not going to pay attention to what everyone else is saying around him. As for putting the unemployed to work....the ones who are on,say, welfare, I'm all for it. It takes them off the public assistance and saves money while creating a tax base. As for hiring unskilled labor....there will always have to be qualified people to head up the projects.


I agree with this. I think racial set asides in 2009 are a big mistake but Reich has always had this unreconstructed philosophy. There is a reason he does not have a cabinet position. Let's see what Obama actually does. His mandate is to get the country moving again and implement necessary structural reforms so that some of the bad things do not happen again. I will wait to see what happens before criticizing at all. What Reich said is nothing new. And the 1996 Welfare Reform Act, which did just happen to be opposed by the left wing of the Democratic party, was built on the philosophy that people should work if they receive benefits and this is the best way to get them off. This, btw, is a neo-conservative idea. Workfare has been a great success and it should be increased, even if the projects are makeshift. No one should ever be on the idol dole, it destroys morale.



One thing the 1996 "Welfare Reform Act" didn't address was the far bigger problem of CORPORATE WELFARE.
As Ralph Nader put it:
"Corporate Welfare---the enormous and myriad subsidies, bailouts, giveaways, tax loopholes, debt revocations,
loan guarantees, discounted insurance and other benefits conferred by government on business---is a function of political corruption. Corporate Welfare programs siphon funds from appropriate public investments,
subsidize companies ripping minerals off federal lands, enable pharmecutical companies to gouge
consumers, perpetuate anti-competitive oligopolistic markets, injure our national security, and
weaken our democracy.
During the time the 1996 Welfare Reform Act passed, one would've expected that a public effort to
curtail welfare would focus on big handouts for large corporations, not small supports for
poor individuals. But somehow the invocations of the need for stand-on-your-own-two-feet
responsibility do not apply to large corporations.
When the '96 Welfare Reform Act gutted the welfare system for poor people--fulfilling a pledge to
"end welfare as we know it", no such top-down agenda had emerged for coroporate welfare
recipients. The savage demogoguery against imaginary "welfare queens" has never been matched
with parallel denunciations of gluttonous corporate welfare kings---The DuPonts & Britol-Myers-
Squibbs that embellish their palaces with riches taken from the public purse."

[Edited on 1/26/2009 by woodsdweller]


Completely irrelevant to the topic here.



Really? Sounds to me like you were mentioning how the Welfare Reform Act was successful and it was a neo-conservative idea. Interesting how the neo-conservatives have no problem with getting the poor off welfare, but not the rich.

 

____________________


 

Peach Extraordinaire



Karma:
Posts: 4924
(4923 all sites)
Registered: 3/28/2008
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/25/2009 at 09:53 PM
Watching the vid, it seemed like the video and audio weren't synched properly. after a search on CNN, I got a link to Reich's blog, and this is what he says. You may not agree with it, but the tone and tenor are much different than the vid on youtube, which imo selectively left out some of the verbage.

"But if there aren’t enough skilled professionals to do the jobs involving new technologies, the stimulus will just increase the wages of the professionals who already have the right skills rather than generate many new jobs in these fields. And if construction jobs go mainly to white males who already dominate the construction trades, many people who need jobs the most — women, minorities, and the poor and long-term unemployed — will be shut out.

What to do? There’s no easy solution to either dilemma…

People can be trained relatively quickly for these sorts of jobs, as well as many infrastructure j0bs generated by the stimulus — installing new pipes for water and sewage systems, repairing and upgrading equipment, basic construction — but contractors have to be nudged both to provide the training and to do the hiring

I’d suggest that all contracts entered into with stimulus funds require contractors to provide at least 20 percent of jobs to the long-term unemployed and to people with incomes at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level. And at least 2 percent of project funds should be allocated to such training. In addition, advantage should be taken of buildings trades apprenticeships — wich must be fully available to women and minorities.."

 

Maximum Peach



Karma:
Posts: 8375
(8376 all sites)
Registered: 3/22/2006
Status: Offline

  posted on 1/26/2009 at 01:14 AM
quote:
Watching the vid, it seemed like the video and audio weren't synched properly. after a search on CNN, I got a link to Reich's blog, and this is what he says. You may not agree with it, but the tone and tenor are much different than the vid on youtube, which imo selectively left out some of the verbage.

"But if there aren’t enough skilled professionals to do the jobs involving new technologies, the stimulus will just increase the wages of the professionals who already have the right skills rather than generate many new jobs in these fields. And if construction jobs go mainly to white males who already dominate the construction trades, many people who need jobs the most — women, minorities, and the poor and long-term unemployed — will be shut out.

What to do? There’s no easy solution to either dilemma…

People can be trained relatively quickly for these sorts of jobs, as well as many infrastructure j0bs generated by the stimulus — installing new pipes for water and sewage systems, repairing and upgrading equipment, basic construction — but contractors have to be nudged both to provide the training and to do the hiring

I’d suggest that all contracts entered into with stimulus funds require contractors to provide at least 20 percent of jobs to the long-term unemployed and to people with incomes at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level. And at least 2 percent of project funds should be allocated to such training. In addition, advantage should be taken of buildings trades apprenticeships — wich must be fully available to women and minorities.."
This certainly sounds more reasonable, but you never know how it plays out till it's enacted.

Which brings up the bigger question: if infrastructure spending is fraught with many questions about who's getting the benefit or how fast it gets into the economy, then why do it?

The fastest possible way to put money into the economy in an equitable fashion is just to send out checks. That's proven not to be a very good solution because its too short term.

The next best solution is lowering the cost of business and business investment via tax cuts. Real cuts in rates - not this tax credit junk they want to dress up as a cut. Those are just another means of granting political favors. Why is this not on the agenda?

Easy answer - because it takes away power from the politicians.

To quote BO's new Chief of Staff - Rahm Emanuel - "never let a crisis go to waste". The only solutions we're likely to see are those whose strings are tied directly back to political control in Washington.

 

____________________
Obamacare: To insure the uninsured, we first make the insured
uninsured and then make them pay more to be insured again,
so the original uninsured can be insured for free.

 
<<  1    2    3  >>  


Powered by XForum 1.81.1 by Trollix Software


Privacy | Terms of Service
The ALLMAN BROTHERS BAND name, The ALLMAN BROTHERS name, likenesses, logos, mushroom design and peach truck are all registered trademarks of THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. whose rights are specifically reserved. Any artwork, visual, or audio representations used on this web site CONTAINING ANY REGISTERED TRADEMARKS are under license from The ABB MERCHANDISING CO., INC. A REVOCABLE, GRATIS LICENSE IS GRANTED TO ALL REGISTERED PEACH CORP MEMBERS FOR The DOWNLOADING OF ONE COPY FOR PERSONAL USE ONLY. ANY DISTRIBUTION OR REPRODUCTION OF THE TRADEMARKS CONTAINED HEREIN ARE PROHIBITED AND ARE SPECIFICALLY RESERVED BY THE ABB MERCHANDISING CO.,INC.
site by Hittin' the Web Group with www.experiencewasabi3d.com