[Vision2020] Candidate issues - Foreign Policy
No Weatherman
no.weatherman at gmail.com
Mon Oct 13 03:51:48 PDT 2008
Just when I thought we had the fixin's for an interesting subject to
discuss, Iran had to go and set two preconditions before they'd meet
with the US:
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/terry-trippany/2008/10/13/iran-refuses-meet-us-without-preconditions
IOW, the president of a terrorist state has higher standards for
negotiation than Barack Obama.
On 10/12/08, Art Deco <deco at moscow.com> wrote:
>
>
> Paul writes:
>
> "I'm happy that Obama has some experience with Islam and Muslims." In
> addition, he argues that open discussion without conditions among those that
> disagree is generally desirable.
>
> I can't agree strongly enough with the second sentiment. While discussion
> may not always lead to conflict resolution, having no discussion never does.
>
>
> With regard to his first point:
>
> I think it a very big mistake to think there is heterogeneity within the
> so-called Islamic community and within the so-called Christian Community.
>
> There are two major Islamic sects between which there is very little
> harmony, theological or otherwise. In fact, active news readers will know
> that the division between the two sects is so great that it frequently
> provokes murderous acts and other atrocities.
>
> According to The Encyclopedia of American Religion there are at least 280
> identifiable Christian sects of some noteworthy size in the US each with
> significant but differing sub-sects. In addition, pick a major ethical
> issue -- abortion, death penalty, gay marriage, gun control, environmental
> stewardship, etc -- and it is easy to find major Christian sects on the
> opposite sides of the issue.
>
> Nobody speaks for either the so-called Islamic community or so-called
> Christian community, and in reality rather than artificial semantic
> classification, there are no such communities. Things are far more complex
> ,and to some extent, much more fluid than that.
>
> Discussion is very important. But it is important to know with whom you are
> having a discussion, who they may or may not represent, and what power or
> influence they may yield over those they may claim to represent. This is
> especially true on the national and international level.
>
>
> W.
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Rumelhart
> To: No Weatherman
> Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
> Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2008 4:03 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Candidate issues — Foreign Policy
>
> I was planning on starting other issues threads, anyway. I guess I'd
> like to start with the implication that simply sitting down to talk with
> someone without preconditions is somehow the wrong thing to do. If we
> don't start a dialogue, how are we supposed to get anywhere?
>
> Diplomacy used to be this country's strong suit, before our current
> President trashed out international reputation. Sit down, discuss, look
> for points of potential compromise, stand firm on issues we have no room
> for compromise on. It's an art that our country seems to have lost. We
> have a lot more weapons in our arsenal than tanks and automatic rifles,
> if we'd just use them.
>
> Also, sitting down and discussing issues with bad people, even
> terrorists, does not transfer those ideas automatically like some kind
> of virus. Besides, today's terrorist is yesterday's CIA trainee. It's
> a crazy world we live in, and uncompromising positions based on fear
> doesn't serve us too well in it.
>
> I'm happy that Obama has some experience with Islam and Muslims. He
> might be able to get past this country's prejudices and find a solution
> to Iraq that is workable for everyone. That is, if he doesn't get shot
> because some idiot thinks he's an "Ayrab".
>
> Paul
>
> No Weatherman wrote:
> > Paul:
> >
> > Don't be offended but I'd rather not participate in the economic part
> > of the conversation because I don't believe any candidate can "fix"
> > the economy and in the end both men offer loser plans.
> >
> > When you're ready, I'd like to address foreign policy and Barack
> > Obama's willingness to sit down with rogue world leaders, without
> > precoditions, like Iran's president who believes Israel should be
> > "wiped off the map."
> >
> > The irony with this position is that while some of Obama's LOUD and
> > dishonest supporters in this forum refuse to engage me at all, their
> > homeboy Barack Obama wants to sit down with leaders of
> > terrorist-sponsoring countries without any preconditions that would
> > hold those countries responsible.
> >
> > I don't know the reason for Obama's naive approach to foreign policy
> > but the best explanation for this policy is that Obama has spent a the
> > vast majority of his adult life palling around with terrorists, both
> > international and domestic, and so his foreign policy would be no
> > different.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Right now, because the money has to come from somewhere and I'd rather it
> >> not be on the backs of the middle class, I'd say I'm for shifting some of
> >> the tax burden to the corporations instead. I wouldn't call it
> "penalizing"
> >> them, but the money has to come from somewhere.
> >>
> >> Getting out of Iraq would also help the economy.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> No Weatherman wrote:
> >>
> >>> Apologies. My bad.
> >>>
> >>> So where are you on the issue?
> >>>
> >>> Penalize corporations or relieve their burden?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 10:34 AM, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> I'm sorry, but the hell they do. I'm not saying that no corporations
> >>>> should
> >>>> make a profit. That would be silly. I'm saying that no _specific_
> >>>> corporation has a right to a profit. They only have a right to be able
> >>>> to
> >>>> compete on a level playing field.
> >>>> If Corporation X goes broke because Uncle Sam raised their taxes, then
> >>>> Corporation Y (who has found a way to work a little leaner) will step
> in
> >>>> and
> >>>> take over their customers. Likewise, if Corporation X pulls up it's
> >>>> stakes
> >>>> in the US and moves it's headquarters to China, then Corporation Y
> might
> >>>> just step up to the plate with a "made in America" ad campaign. It's
> not
> >>>> like we're going to run every corporation into the ground because we're
> >>>> raising taxes on them. Like you said, they'll just pass it on to the
> >>>> customer anyway. But now said customer has a choice - should they
> spend
> >>>> their extra paycheck money on shoes for the kids, or on a widget from
> >>>> Company X?
> >>>>
> >>>> Paul
> >>>>
> >>>> No Weatherman wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>> Comrade Paul:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Corporations absolutely have a right to make a profit and it's
> >>>>> possible to tax them right out of existence or out of the country.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And if they go broke or abandon the US, how where will the government
> >>>>> get its tax revenues?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why don't we worry about where people are going to find their next
> meal
> >>>>> before we worry about how corporations are supposed to make their
> >>>>> profits?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Paul Rumelhart
> <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> If you raise the gas prices, the transportation costs are sent on to
> >>>>>> the
> >>>>>> consumer. If you raise the price of some component they need, the
> >>>>>> costs
> >>>>>> are
> >>>>>> sent on to the consumer. If you raise the minimum wage, the costs
> are
> >>>>>> sent
> >>>>>> on to the consumer. What Obama wants to do is relieve some of the
> >>>>>> burden
> >>>>>> on
> >>>>>> the "consumer", by lowering their personal tax burden. With all
> these
> >>>>>> costs
> >>>>>> being passed on to them, lowering their tax burden might actually
> >>>>>> convince
> >>>>>> them that they can still buy their product.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Corporations don't have a right to make a profit. If economic times
> >>>>>> are
> >>>>>> tough, we should be focusing on the individual, not on how well
> Company
> >>>>>> X
> >>>>>> can sell widgets to people that probably don't even need them.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If you have a bunch of yahoos making more money than they know what
> to
> >>>>>> do
> >>>>>> with, why overly tax the person that's living on ramen noodles and
> >>>>>> Koolaid?Why don't we worry about where people are going to find their
> >>>>>> next meal
> >>>>>> before we worry about how corporations are supposed to make their
> >>>>>> profits?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Just my two cents.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Paul
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> No Weatherman wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Paul:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If you raise taxes on corporations so that you can lower taxes for
> one
> >>>>>>> sector of the population, how do you think those corporations will
> >>>>>>> recover the money they lost by the tax increase?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> THEY WILL RAISE PRICES ON THEIR PRODUCT TO RECOUP THEIR LOSSES.
> >>>>>>> THEREFORE, ANY MONEY GAINED BY TAX RELIEF WILL BE LOST AT THE
> CHECKOUT
> >>>>>>> STAND.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Punitive tax hikes on corporations do not take place in a black hole
> >>>>>>> and neither does redistribution of wealth. These companies are in
> >>>>>>> business to make money, not pay taxes, and they will make their
> >>>>>>> profit, taxes or not.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 9:00 AM, Paul Rumelhart
> <godshatter at yahoo.com>
> >>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> This is an attempt to get a discussion started on the issues
> instead
> >>>>>>>> of
> >>>>>>>> all the threads on who associates with who and who is encouraging
> the
> >>>>>>>> most emotional responses.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Here are links to the sections on the economy from the Democratic
> and
> >>>>>>>> Republican candidates for office:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> John McCain:
> http://www.johnmccain.com/Issues/jobsforamerica/
> >>>>>>>> Barack Obama:
> http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The biggest difference between the two, in my opinion, from my
> >>>>>>>> reading
> >>>>>>>> is that John McCain is focusing on helping corporations through tax
> >>>>>>>> breaks to help the economy whereas Barack Obama is focusing on tax
> >>>>>>>> breaks for the middle class instead. Both plans have a lot of
> >>>>>>>> provisions I like - both are looking at different ways that the
> >>>>>>>> work/family balance can be strengthened, for example.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There's a lot of information there to go through. Please let us
> know
> >>>>>>>> your thoughts, so we can all become more educated on the candidates
> >>>>>>>> positions. Also, if others want to tackle third-party positions on
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> topics, please do. I'm not educated enough about them this time
> >>>>>>>> around
> >>>>>>>> to even know who they all are.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Paul
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> =======================================================
> >>>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> >>>>>>>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>>>>>>> http://www.fsr.net
> >>>>>>>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>>>>>>>
> =======================================================
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> =======================================================
> >>>>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
> >>>>>>> communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>>>>>> http://www.fsr.net
> >>>>>>>
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>>>>>>
> =======================================================
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> =======================================================
> >>>>> List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
> >>>>> communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> >>>>> http://www.fsr.net
> >>>>>
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>>>>
> =======================================================
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>> =======================================================
> >>> List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
> >>> communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> >>>
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >>> =======================================================
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > =======================================================
> > List services made available by First Step Internet,
> > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> > http://www.fsr.net
> > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> > =======================================================
> >
> >
>
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
> =======================================================
> List services made available by First Step Internet,
> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
> http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list