Better Get to Sweepin': Obama's Challenges in his First 100 Days

I have noticed a huge disconnect between countless Americans and members of the government when it comes to the issues plaguing Operation: Iraqi Freedom. Some might even argue that the blame for many of the challenges the Iraq situation now poses is a direct result of the actions of the Bush administration over the last eight years.

The Bush administration has also carried out the largest transfer of wealth in American history, but this wealth has not been transfered from the rich to the poor, but rather from the future to the present. This type of transfer of wealth will have devastating consequences for generations to come. Future generations will have no choice but to continue to pay for the monstrous financial burden we see today. Like us, they too will be responsible for paying for the government bailout plans, countless bank bailouts, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the general budget deficit as well, not to mention the cost of rebuilding Iraq and whatever lies ahead after troop withdrawal, if that ever even happens.

President elect Obama has a huge job ahead of him. He faces more challenges than most of the Presidents of the 20th century. The actions that President Bush has taken in the past eight years reminds me of the middle of the 19th century, where presidents such as James Buchanan continued to ignore countless problems, like slavery and expansion that were plaguing the nation, before it was too late and Civil War broke out. It eventually took an intelligent, humanitarian leader, Lincoln, to restore the nation, but even he could not fix what countless Presidents had broken by himself. It took decades, and more than a generation of transformation and restoration to recover from the Civil War. President elect Obama has no choice but to act, because the world cannot wait. We cannot continue on the paths of "cowboy economics," where wealthy America waits to see how bad things will get for themselves before they lift a finger. Obama will need to act quickly, making progress in issues of energy, war, education, economics, and human rights. The American people, and the world at large, will have to exhibit patience in the next few years, as Obama will not be able to quickly fix what the Bush administration has so quickly destroyed. As long as we are patient and as long as Obama delivers a good amount of progress, with direct communication to the American people and the world, we will find ourselves on the other side of this mess.

Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright appeared on Larry King Live the week before the election and stated that she hopes the President elect will close Guantanamo Bay within his first 100 days in office. She believes it will show the world that a new, more approachable and dependable leader is in charge, who is committed to global peace. America is ready for this kind of an act. The country who reelected George W. Bush in 2004 just saw its first African American president elected by the largest margin of popular vote since the 1968 reelection of Lyndon B. Johnson. The American people are ready for change, and Obama has promised to deliver. The millions of supporters who donated five, ten, or fifty dollars to Obama's campaign will be the same people who keep him in check, and who will remind him of his given promises if needed. Obama will be our leader for the next four years, but the power is truly in the hands of the people, as it always has been, only this time, America has found its voice again.

Sarah Palin is For a Federal Ban on Gay Marriage

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado (CNN) — Add one more policy item to the list of things John McCain and Sarah Palin disagree on. Palin told CBN’s David Brody over the weekend that she supports a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, a proposal John McCain voted against in 2004. McCain believes the matter should be left to the states.

Brody asked Palin if she supports “something like” an amendment banning gay marriage. “I am,” Palin said. “In my own, state, I have voted along with the vast majority of Alaskans who had the opportunity to vote to amend our Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. I wish on a federal level that that's where we would go because I don't support gay marriage.

“I'm not going to be out there judging individuals, sitting in a seat of judgment telling what they can and can't do, should and should not do,” she said. “But I certainly can express my own opinion here and take actions that I believe would be best for traditional marriage and that's casting my votes and speaking up for traditional marriage that, that instrument that it's the foundation of our society is that strong family and that's based on that traditional definition of marriage, so I do support that.”

McCain and Palin disagree on a number of issues, including stem cell research, whether or not global warming is man-made, and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Reserve. In the past, McCain has joked away any policy differences between the two running mates. “By the way, you may figure out from time to time, Sarah and I don’t agree on every issue,” McCain said at a joint town hall last month in Michigan. “What do you expect of two mavericks, to agree on everything? Eh?”

Source:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/20/palin-and-mccain-disagree-on-federal-gay-marriage-ban/#comments



Here are some of my favorite comments that were posted by readers on the Political Ticker:


October 20th, 2008 9:51 am ET
We are fighting two wars. There is a radical branch of Islam that is planning more attacks on us. Our economy is in the tank. So what does Sarah want you to worry about - the gay couple down the street with the terrific house and nice garden out back - THEY are the serious threat to our country. THIS WOMAN IS NUTS!

October 20th, 2008 9:49 am ET
Strange that Sarah supports unrestricted denial of abortion, not even for rape or incest, and then opposes the one group that has an unblemished record of never having had an abortion!

October 20th, 2008 9:49 am ET
So making your Pregnat daughter get married because she is underage and pregnat is what you call protecting marriage?? REALLY???

October 20th, 2008 9:47 am ET
She is for everyone who is NOT different from her.

A Brief History of 1920's America

I just finished my latest mini-documentary on 1920's America and would appreciate any feedback. :-)

www.youtube.com/flipflopjulie

A beautiful, important video

Please take a moment to watch this video. Ellen Degeneres addressed the murder of Lawrence King, an eighth grader from California, who was murdered on February 12 because he was gay.

A few days before his murder, Larry asked his would-be killer to be his valentine. Ellen says, "When the message out there is so horrible that to be gay, you can get killed for it, we need to change the message. Larry is not a second class citizen. I am not a second class citizen. It is okay if you're gay."

Ellen also notes that many groups of people are discriminated against daily and none of this behavior is acceptable. She asks us viewer to pay close attention to how often being gay is a punchline of a monologue, or how often gay jokes are in movies or on television. She states that abuse starts with laughing, and can then escalate to verbal and physical abuse.

Please watch this beautiful video. It's not often that Ellen gets emotional on her talkshow, but she is never afraid to talk about sensitive issues, educate her audience, or advocate for a murdered teen.

The Landmine-Sniffing Rats of Mozambique

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1811203,00.html

Pentagon: New Troop Deployments

For those who haven't heard, yesterday the Pentagon announced that more than 42,000 troops will be deployed overseas by years end. That statistic alone brings little cause for alarm, but the fact that 25,000 of 42,000 troops deployed will be placed on active duty in Iraq is great cause for concern. But the Pentagon does not want you to worry, and they justify this move by stating that the Army soldiers to be sent to Iraq will only be replacing the 20,000 "surge troops" previously schedules to come home by the end of 2008.

So we the people are supposed to believe that these new troops are being sent to war to give the surge troops some much needed rest and relaxation. Give the math one more look, and it doesn't take long to find a surplus of 5,000 troops. That's right, replacing the surge troops will actually INCREASE the amount of soldiers fighting in Iraq.

So what can we do about it? My guess is that most Americans will accept the "troop replacement" for just that, and won't question the Pentagon whatsoever. To the rest of us who disagree with this move, I encourage us all to write letters to our Senators asking why a surplus of 5,000 troops were sent to Iraq, and what the Pentagon's plans for them are. Let us not accept half-hearted answers for after all, it is an election year, and our Senators work for the people of this nation.

An increase of 5,000 troops sent to Iraq under the guise of replacing the surge troops is morally wrong, and the Pentagon should offer each American an apology for thinking that we aren't intelligent enough to notice, let alone question, this TROOP INCREASE.