Obama's CabinetFollow

Direct to DvD?

On a serious note, I really cannot wait to see what his team achieves be that a silent revolution or otherwise

Smash, it's a novel about logic. I'm weak, and I have two weeks off coming up.

And I'm weak.

Well, you are a Logic Analyst, so I guess it's ok.

I am? I thought that was you?

Now I have to read it to find out. Off to the book store!

He didn't try to dismantle all banks, he basically took money from the central bank and redistributed it to state banks.



Or maybe I can understand this simple equation...

money != credit

That is the fundamental flaw behind the modern money mechanics credit based economy, where credit (which they falsely believe is the equivalent of money) is created by banks through loans.

This ridiculous process is explained in a pamphlet released by the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago: http://landru.i-link-2.net/monques/mmm2.html

The constitution provides Congress with the authority to coin our own money supply, why should we go into eternal debt by borrowing money from a private corporation and then attempting to pay the corporation back (federal income taxes) with the money we borrowed from them. It is a perpetual debt cycle where the banks with the most money win.

My money is on JP Morgan...

Smash, I assume you are being sarcastic about my posts on the economy but I'm not clear. Do you support a credit based economy? If so, do you support the creation of currency by private corporations and not the government?

A credit based economy is a clever way of selling people into slavery without them realizing it because they think they are getting ahead of other people by collecting more federal reserve notes.

The fact is we have the technology, resources, and capability to produce a society without slave-labor for perceived debts and without vicious competition for resources that leave many people starving to death, where everyone can have an ecologically friendly home, enough food and clean water to survive, and leisure time.

This will never happen in a credit based economy where the bankers can pull the wool over everyone's eyes with fuzzy math and logic and confuse the issue, where people are too ignorant or careless to figure out what money actually is or how it is created (and who controls it), and where the flock of sheep manages itself by ostracizing anyone with a differing opinion.



I should not be so quick to judge Emanuel before he has done anything, but here is his history.

His father and uncle were self-proclaimed militant Zionists. His first name comes from Rahamim, a combatant of the armed underground Zionist group Lehi. He is a proponent of economic liberalization, or bending over to let the corporations **** us in the bumhole and steal our future.

Based on this I am assuming:
1. He is an ardent supporter of Israel, which I despise.
2. He is an ardent supporter of corporatocracy, which I despise.



Daschle is a good choice except that now he might not be able to do it because of his coziness with pharmaceutical corporations in the last few years since he lost his Senate seat. I'm not interested in healthcare unless its proactive in preventing poor choices regarding health and disease, not retroactively masking the problems of bad decisions by society (smoking, eating terrible foods, exposing oneself to chemicals and radiation, etc...) So yeah I'm for Dean, but Daschle is fine with me too.



I suppose that I am really more concerned with Bill, but both of them are millionaire insiders who have shady pasts, who have been proven to make poor decisions to benefit themselves and not the community, who have absolutely no shame or guilt in blatantly lying to the public, and who are more interested in their egos, their legend, and their money than serving any sort of common good.



I will accept your self-proclaimed expertise on him as I really have no idea (although I suspect none of us do), all i know is that he was appointed by Bush which makes me immediately suspicious. Anyway it's said he will only be temporary, possibly to be replaced by Richard Danzig? Don't really have an opinion about him either, although his first official capacity in the Dept. of Defense was under Richard Nixon.



I would much prefer Nunn over Jones, but both are military insiders who have been in positions of power for many years. Although Nunn's main focus has been nuclear disarmament, he still has had a chance to become cozy with Chevron, Coca-Cola, and GE in his time in office. He is still part of the good 'ol boy network.

I think Susan Rice, who has focused on ending international poverty as her life's work, would be a much better choice than either of these two.



I'm not under some delusion that Obama is going to single-handedly change our society, although that is a nice straw man argument for you all to build up and knock down, I simply think he could be making much better choices with his cabinet selections and his stance on the bailouts (and on Israel, although he has always been clear about his position regarding Israel.)



I think this is a good point, but right now Obama has the voice of the American people. The time to play rhetorical, political games is over. No one in Congress or government would be able to stand up against this man at this moment in time. He has the whole nation rallied up with him, and most will blindly follow where he leads us. It is time for him to start picking people for positions of power who will not submit to the status quo, entrenched wealth and special interests, and the dehumanization of our society that has been rapidly accelerating over the last 30 years.

Not passing the bailouts will force businesses to be responsible in the future.

The same Democrats that f*cked up Sallie and Freddie are going to be the ones to fix this mess? You must be joking.

I have an idea. Why not take all that bailout money and create the nationalized healthcare systems Democras frequent cry about.

I probably should have been more clear, I am not opposed to the idea of credit in general. I am opposed to the creation of currency by private banks as a result of debt, or loans. This is the basis of modern money mechanics and what I mean by the term credit-based economy.

http://www.truthsetsusfree.com/ModernMoneyMechanics.pdf

Not sure exactly what you mean by private property. I may be in agreement with you here, but thats an entirely different topic.



I care. Its an issue of fairness, seperation of church and state, and human rights. Do we only care about human rights when a tangible resource we could be utilizing is at risk (oil in Iraq?)

You are correct that Emanuel won't officially be making policy, so my point is somewhat moot, but it makes me nervous about Obama's religious bias and judgments. Obviously anyone would be better than "team End Times" regarding Israel.



I'm not opposed to Daschle but I read some rumors that he would have to exclude himself from consideration because of his vested interests. Healthcare is just not my issue, but Daschle would be fine with me.

The insiders give us little tidbits like civil rights once a decade to distract us from the fact that we are all under the influence of a sadistic and twisted society governed by a very few rich elite. The fact that civil rights bills weren't passed until the 60's is pathetic and shameful, and it wasn't solely because of LBJ (and more Congressmen than just he deserves credit for walking it through Congress), it was because people started marching in the streets and boycotting businesses. At that point the status quo had no choice but to accept change.

I do find value in your point, change cannot happen without insiders, but it also will not happen unless people from the outside push the insiders to make change. They are more interested in preserving the status quo than making any real change.



While not passing the bailouts is a terrible thing in itself, passing them would be even worse.

It will lead to the destruction of a specific and particular amount of labor, it will not crash the whole economy.

It seems like this is a perfect time to enact major fiscal policy change as well, as the current system has proven to be a fraudulent sham and a monolithic burden on the US citizen.

And when was the last time an incumbent president failed to earn his party's nomination?

I question what would make you delude yourself into thinking that would happen here?

You know what this Hilary nomination might be? A spin off of the Janet Reno dance party.

Are you an Obamacrat now then?

http://www.slate.com/id/2205323/

Interesting take on the Hellbeast nomination.

Totem

Just to be clear, this is from the same guy with whom you were all excited when he compared Obama to Dukakis before the election and claimed that Obama's campaign was in, gosh!, turmoil.I honestly have no problems with her personally as Sec of State. Even back during the primaries I admitted that she was a smart, issues-oriented policy wonk who probably delights in reading boring *** policy shit that'd drive me to either sleep or tears by page 2. Hell, I'm not even all that worried about Mr. Clinton.

More than anything, I'm just bored to death with idiots going "OMG Clinton Conspiracy!!" and predicting doom. Apparently, since they were shown to be ignorant retards when their predictions of a giant convention war didn't pan out, this is a chance for them to double-down on their efforts.