He can talk the talk...

[Guest woxof]

A good portion of both races in the US are calling him black (African American). The only one who really does not acknowledge or talk about it is Obama himself. I suspect it is because he rises above it and sees himself as a President and American - not black or white.

Hmmm....Looks like Obama and I think alike. So far he seems to be doing well overall. Should Canada really be trying to work closer with him though including his vision of the world?

[J.O.]

Obama and his team have certainly learned how to reach out to the younger "wired" generation. I suspect it had a great deal to do with his election success.

How Obama will use web technology:

Editor's Note: The following guest post was written by Kevin Merritt, the CEO and founder of Blist, a Web-based list manager and spreadsheet that was used on Change.gov, the Obama Administration's transition Website.

---------------

President Barack Obama was sworn into office this week as our nation’s 44th president.  Despite running into a few technical challenges in the first few days at the White House, the Obama Administration will embrace technology in unprecedented ways. Led by forward thinking, web savvy technologists, President Obama’s new media team looks poised and ready to fulfill President Obama’s vision of open-source democracy.

Coincident with Mr. Obama being sworn in, the Obama Administration’s new media team assumed control of WhiteHouse.gov at 12:01 PM EST on Tuesday.  This is the official website of the sitting administration. The new media team has identified three top priorities of the new administration – communication, transparency and participation. Let’s examine how the new administration has been leveraging web technologies to meet these priorities.

Communication. This administration’s use of Google’s YouTube during both the campaign and after winning the election leverages Internet video to reach a generation of Americans and global citizens who no longer tune in to AM radio on a regular basis. President Obama has vowed to continue video recording his fireside chats and publishing them via YouTube and other video sites. With the transition of WhiteHouse.gov to the new administration, for the first time ever an official White House blog came online. You can sign up for email updates from the president. Through the blog, Mr. Obama is the first U.S. president to have an RSS feed!

During the campaign President Obama relied heavily on Facebook, Myspace and Twitter to build support, communicate with constituents and develop a core audience. By far, Mr. Obama has more followers on Twitter than anyone else (168,000). His fan page on Facebook has more than 4 million fans.

Transparency. Mr. Obama promises to run the most open, honest and transparent administration to date. Through the Your Seat at The Table section on the CHANGE.GOV transition site, the Obama transition team posted the minutes of hundreds of private meetings with then President-Elect Obama.

Even all of the content on the CHANGE.GOV site, unless otherwise noted, is licensed to the public at large via a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

The Obama-Biden Transition Team used my company, Blist, to disclose the names of all donors to the transition project. Two key points of note are that the disclosure was entirely voluntary and the tool they chose to use made the data itself much more consumable by the mainstream public. Compared to a plain HTML table, which is bulky, cumbersome and hard to work with, by publishing the data via a Blist widget the data can easily be sorted, searched, filtered, downloaded, printed, emailed and even republished – all capabilities not previously enjoyed by most consumers of public data sets.

Participation. The Obama Administration has been conducting bold experiments in interactive government. The Citizen’s Briefing Book, powered by Salesforce.com, has allowed citizens to suggest topics Mr. Obama should consider upon taking office. Once a topic was submitted, other visitors to the Citizen’s Briefing Book could vote the topic up or down and comment on it. Voting, ranking and commenting are hallmark features of web-based, social media applications.

The new Administration has brought forth a new era of honest, open, participatory and transparent government by creatively employing web-based software from innovative companies like Google, Facebook, Salesforce.com and Blist. We’re eager to see the use of these technologies extended to WhiteHouse.gov initially and from there we’d love to see more government agencies quickly embrace web technologies to promote communication, transparency and participation.

Crunch Network: CrunchBase the free database of technology companies, people, and investors

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/Techcrunch/~3/xsjjd8YHz4A/

[Guest rattler]

Interesting commentary on Obama.

I think this "change" only underscores that he is a very smart individual and is prepared to use any advantage he has in his talks with foreign governments.

Partial quote, the rest can be viewed at:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...slim-roots.aspx

Steven Edwards: Suddenly Obama has Muslim roots

Posted: January 28, 2009, 10:45 AM by Kelly McParland

Full Comment, U.S. Politics, Steven Edwards

During the U.S presidential campaign, Barack Obama’s handlers vigourously pointed out his Christian faith whenever the misconception arose he may be Muslim (even though the politically correct response should have been his religion doesn’t matter).

The handlers also roundly denounced any conservative commentator who might mention (mischievously, admittedly) his Arabic middle name, Hussein.

They charged that such usage was "fear mongering."

Once elected, however, he personally insisted on his middle name being spoken at his swearing-in ceremony.

And now – in a gesture to the Muslim world – he has not only granted the first sit-down interview of his presidency to a pan-Arab television network, but uses the occasion to gush about his Muslim ties.

"I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries," Obama tells Hisham Melhem, the Washington bureau chief of Saudi-owned Al Arabiya, which is based in Dubai.

[Kip Powick]

I dunno..... Didn't you like Jack's outrage at Iggy going forward........a much more entertaining piece of #$@@$%

With all the snow that has been falling here all day, I found Jack's speech more depressing, yet hilarious, than the weather.

[Guest rattler]

I dunno..... Didn't you like Jack's outrage at Iggy going forward........a much more entertaining piece of #$@@$%

With all the snow that has been falling here all day, I found Jack's speech more depressing, yet hilarious, than the weather.

Followed very closely by Danny Boy.

[Guest rattler]

Seems that Obama is prepared to listen.

US Senate eases 'trade war' bill 

"Buy American" was meant to ensure only US goods are used in public works

The US Senate has voted to soften a controversial "Buy American" clause in an economic recovery package, after warnings it might spark a "trade war".

The clause had sought to ensure only US iron, steel and manufactured goods were used in projects funded by the bill.

But senators approved an amendment requiring that provisions in the bill comply with international trade agreements with Canada and the EU.

Earlier President Barack Obama said the US should avoid seeming protectionist.

The BBC's Jonathan Beale in Washington says the climb-down by the US Senate follows warnings from the EU and Canada that the stimulus bill could spark a trade war.

[zipped]

Shouldn't B.O. lead by example.

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/CEOProfiles...=6806414&page=1

[Kip Powick]

I agree...a bicycle and an RJ200 ,or even a B737-100, should be adequate, after all he is only the most powerful person in the world so just his presence and name should be adequate to strike fear in the hearts of those who would contemplate evil toward mankind............. between 0800 and 1700 on weekdays

[Canus Chinookus]

The CEO's at the competing companies aren't trying to kill these CEO's... Although that doesn't sound like a bad idea! CEO DEATHMATCH!

[DEFCON]

"CEO DEATHMATCH"

Now there's a "stimulus plan"!

[chockalicious]

"CEO DEATHMATCH"

Now there's a "stimulus plan"!

Put it on Pay Per View and have the proceeds go to layed off workers.

[Canus Chinookus]

I'd pay $50 dollars to see that!

[mrlupin]

tonight's speech

http://www.cbc.ca/video/popup.html?http://...o-special-f.asx

What a change from the Bush years...

[Guest rattler]

And he continues to follow through but note the number of troops left in Iraq after 2010 and their role.

Obama reveals US troop pullout plan 

Obama said ultimately Iraq's future was in the

hands of the Iraqis themselves [Al Jazeera]

Barack Obama, the US president, has announced that US combat forces will leave Iraq by August 2010.

The plan would pull combat troops out of Iraq 19 months after Obama took office in January this year, slightly longer than the 16 months he promised while on the campaign trail in 2008.

"Let me say this as plainly as I can: By August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end," Obama said on Friday in a speech at Camp Lejeune, a Marine Corps base in North Carolina on Friday.

Obama said that a transitional force of between 35,000 to 50,000 US troops would remain in the country after this deadline to help the "transition to full Iraqi responsibility".

The transitional force would train Iraqi security forces, conduct targeted "anti-terror" missions and protect civilian efforts and leave at the end of 2011 as mandated in a previous Iraq-US agreement known as the Status of Forces Agreement (Sofa) forged by George Bush, Obama's predecesor, he said.

"I intend to remove all US troops from Iraq by the end of 2011. We will complete this transition to Iraqi responsibility, and we will bring our troops home with the honour that they have earned," he said.

Obama also assured Iraqis that the US "pursues no claim" on the country's territory or resources, responding to Iraqi fears about continuing US troop presence in the nation.

"We respect your sovereignty and the tremendous sacrifices you have made for your country [and] we seek a full transition to Iraqi responsibility for the security of your country," he said.

The US president also said that while Iraq's neighbours had not always aided the nation's security the US was willing to pursue "principled and sustained engagement" with all nations in the region including Iran and Syria.

However Obama said that the future of the country was ultimately in the hands of the Iraqis themselves.

"The most important decisions that have to be made about Iraq's future must now be made by Iraqis," he said.

Marwan Bishara, Al Jazeera's senior analyst, says that Iraq remains a fragile country with there is a power struggle below the surface and it remains to be seen how the US will deal with Iran and other regional players.

Senior Obama administration officials also told AP on Friday that, of the roughly 100,000 US combat troops to be pulled out of Iraq over the next 18 months, most will remain in the war zone until least the end of this year to ensure national elections due to be held provisionally in December this year go smoothly.

Republican criticism

The maintenance of a residual force for a period of time in the country does not come as a surprise, but some in Obama's own party had questioned the size of it.

"When they talk about 50,000, that's a little higher number than I had anticipated," Harry Reid, the senate majority leader, said.

Some Republicans criticised the announcement, with John Boehner, the House Republican leader, saying that while such proposals may have sounded good during the election campaign "I do think it's important we listen to those commanders and our diplomats who are there to understand how fragile the situation is".

There are currently about 142,000 US troops stationed in Iraq.

More than 4,250 US military members have died since the war began in March 2003, though US military deaths plunged by two-thirds in 2008 from the previous year.

Some analysts have attributed the fall in casualties to improving security after a troop build-up, or so-called surge, in 2007.

[Guest woxof]

but some in Obama's own party had questioned the size of it.

"When they talk about 50,000, that's a little higher number than I had anticipated," Harry Reid, the senate majority leader, said.

And guess what. The 2 brigades coming home in 2009 were already planned to before he became president. So it is not until 2010 that his act of drawing down troops begin.

Obama is not stupid. He knows troops are still needed there for stability. Fortunately he is ignoring the naive far left types with only an agenda without tought of consequences. Even Mccain agrees with him fulfilling the much talked about bipartisanship.

[Don Hudson]

woxof and others;

Other than for rhetorical effect, why the focus on the naive far left? They're a fringe group with little opportunity to put their thoughts into action.

I would be focussed on the corporate socialism that is now well underway and which states loud and clear that when capitalism doesn't work there is social welfare for the rich.

What is happening is the rescue of a system proven to be unsustainable. Reagan fired all Air Traffic Controllers wholesale, as a signal that labour itself was going to be busted. Why not "fire" all the CEOs and other partners in the present crisis or at least jail them, because we know damn well labour's fingerprints are not on this disaster - government and business did this.

What can now be said for neoliberalism?

Now that "suggestion" itself is hyperbole obviously, but the point itself is serious. We should not be breathing life into an economic system that has proven itself incapable of sustaining an economy in which everyone "prospers" and not just the narrow class of the fabulously wealthy right at the top.

[Guest woxof]

Back to Iraq....Obama does not want to be known as the president who blew it in Iraq. The surge has worked for various reasons. I think there are some on the far left of the Democratic party that are similar to many of the neo-cons in that all that matters is their ideology without consideration for realpolitik. Both are dangerous.

But Obama knows better I think. It pleases me that he is willing to piss off some in his own party in order to do what is common sense. That is...leave Iraq in an orderly fashion and be willing to change the withdrawel schedule if necessary.

As for the naive far left.....thay are like the foolish far right. That is....representing very few yet very vocal. And as they say...the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Firing the controllers was absolutely necessary and we have already looked into the politicians(attempting to buy votes) forcing companies to loan money to people to buy houses that should never have had money loaned to them. As if it makes sense that everyone should own their own home. A massive subsidy that would appear to defy common sense leading to the real estate crisis. But I suppose we could start by putting Bill Clinton in jail as he was the pres involved when all this started and on the top 25 list posted for people involved in the whole debacle.

[chockalicious]

Woxof

The post you made is indicative of why a few on here have disengaged in discussion with you. The Iraq war was being debated and you throw in some words about Clinton that had nothing to do with anything.

The CRA - community re-investent act that Clinton signed in to law did not force banks to lend to unqualified buyers . I have posted it on here before the fact that unqualified buyers did not cause the housing crisis, the packaging of these mortgages as security and being resold did. Here is a counter to what you heard on the radio:

Federal housing data reveal that the charges aren't true, and that the private sector, not the government or government-backed companies, was behind the soaring subprime lending at the core of the crisis.

Now Clinton did sign the bill that removed oversight on the banks and should share blame for that.

As far as Iraq goes I would still like someone to define what victory is. The reason the surge appears to be working is due to the awakening and the ethnic cleansing that has happened rather than the increased troops.

The naive left is also not as dangerous as the far right. I don't recall wars being started because of wingnuts on the left.

[Guest woxof]

Woxof

The post  you made is indicative of why a few on here have disengaged in discussion with you.  The Iraq war was being debated and you throw in some words about Clinton that had nothing to do with anything.

Now Clinton did sign the bill that removed oversight on the banks and should share blame for that.

The reason the surge appears to be working is due to the awakening and the ethnic cleansing that has happened rather than the increased troops.

The naive left is also not as dangerous as the far right.  I don't recall wars being started because of wingnuts on the left.

All in response to subjects brought up in previous post. As usual, you are the only one with difficulties(or whatever it is this time).

Concerning your comments about Iraq.....as I said in my last post...."The surge has worked for various reasons."

Wingnuts on the left never caused a war? Have you ever heard of communism?

Woxof...once again, covering all the bases.

[chockalicious]

The discussion was about voices on the left and right within the democracy in the US. Nobody on the far left has started a war unlike Cheney, Rumsfeld et al.

Of course making a point within the context of the discussion can sometimes be difficult.

[Guest woxof]

The wingnuts on the left and the right exist all around the world even if you don´t want to consider them(due to it proving you wrong).

The wing nuts on the right and the left have caused plenty of wars around the world.

Perhaps the Democratic party was not on the left side of politics back in the day of James Polk(Mexican War, Manifest Destiny, 54-40 or fight)

While I dont consider JFK and Johnson as wingnuts, they sure did get the U.S. involved in Vietnam didn´t they. Ooops...forgot about that one didn´t you(Were you not protesting at the Chicago convention in 1968?).

Next time.

[chockalicious]

your understanding of things unrelated to aviation are about an inch deep without the ability to grasp concepts that are not black and white

[Guest woxof]

A review of the latter part of this relatively long 7 page thread is interesting. On the second last page which just ended with last night´s posts, you can see that there are various topics discussed such as Canadian politics, CEO´s, and even Chockolicious made a comment about laid off workers. This was followed by two posts including one by myself on Iraq.

Then Don Hudson made a post that had nothing to do with Iraq but several subjects directed specifically at myself. My reply started with "Back to Iraq...." which was most of the response but I gave a response to all subjects in Don´s post and mentioned this " As for the naive far left.....thay are like the foolish far right."

Then Chockoliscious roars on here with quotes like...

The post you made is indicative of why a few on here have disengaged in discussion with you. The Iraq war was being debated and you throw in some words about Clinton that had nothing to do with anything.

and

I don't recall wars being started because of wingnuts on the left.

Of course I said how obviously wrong he was with the example of all the wars started by the communists.

Knowing that he was obviously proven wrong(in my opinion) Chock said

The discussion was about voices on the left and right within the democracy in the US.  Nobody on the far left has started a war unlike Cheney, Rumsfeld et al.

So I pointed out the obvious that it was to the left administrations(in fact not even a far left government) in the U.S. that got them deeply into Vietnam. You will notice that the only response he can muster is another personal insult.

This has been the result of most if not all of my so-called debates with him. A review of them will show similar results including on this very thread where he made a false quote attributed to myself(later deleted but discussed by Kip and myself at the top of page 4).

While I am not surprised by this outcome, the shallowness of his arguments ending in another insult is disappointing but typical of those without thoughtful response.

However, being always open to constructive criticism, I welcome any specific examples proving this last quote directed at myself......

your understanding of things unrelated to aviation are about an inch deep without the ability to grasp concepts that are not black and white.

[Mitch Cronin]

Woxof.... .... an observation... if I may...

As you may know, it is often difficult to read the whole nature of any given bit of text... Without facial expressions, body language, intonation, and other dynamics of a face to face conversation, unless a writer is very good, it can be really difficult to fully understand the intent of what's read....

Likewise, it can be equally difficult for some to see how their own writing is being read.

What I'm trying to say, as politely as I can... is that I think you may not be seeing how you come across sometimes....

...hope you don't misinterpret this...

Cheers,

Mitch

[chockalicious]

Woxof

Against my bettyer judgement I will respond.

My comment to you is because of your habit of posting a bunch of information that is a lot of times irrelelevent to the conversation. When these irrelevencies are pointed out you post more and then sit back and claim to have won an arguement when others are just tired of trying to prove something to a wall...the affirmative action thread was an example of this.

In this thread you throw in a comment about Clinton to bolster an arguement that nobody is really talking about.

As far as the Vietnam argurement. I said that the loony left does not start wars where the loony right does - Iraq and Cheney/Rumsfeld were my example (all within the context of the conversation - American politics).

You then bring up wars started by communists and vietnam. There is lots of blame to go around for Vietnam but the fact is that US involvement started with the 50000 troops sent by Eisenhower. I would also not call Kennedy part of the loony left.

My comment about you seeing things an inch deep was because of your propensity to see the surface of one issue and then try and fit facts to see your point of view. As I have said before, there is nuance and shades of grey in a lot of issues and not everything falls into a silo of left/right.