I have a question for Obama supporters.

[mmonk]

Obama votes against CAFTA but talks about globalization being inevitable as if it were a naturally occuring event not being forced violently on third world nations. This can be a little confusing. My question is, is he from the Freidman school of economics or Keynes?

[sandnsea]

1. I think he's writing his own school

I don't think he cares what you call it, I think he knows what changes need to be made and will be focused on that.

"You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil, through an energy policy that doesn’t simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.

Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair."


http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama's_Iraq_Speech

[mmonk]

3. Do you think he will reign in some of our clandestine operations

and economic hitmen and allow nations to choose to run their own economies without threat of overthrow?

[sandnsea]

4. I really don't know

I do know not very many politicians had the guts to make that kind of speech in 2004 and that he was right on the money. I know he has talked about the refugees in Iraq when nobody else did, and keeps Darfur in the conversation. I wish somebody would talk about all the underhanded dealings we get involved in, that's for sure.

[MH1]

6. I trust Obama to do that about as much as I trust any of the Dems

I don't trust republicans to do it at all.

I believe the goal you pose in that question is more difficult than it may appear to us on the outside, but that someone like a John Kerry would make a real effort to do it. Unfortunately none of the candidates has convinced me that they are anywhere near "someone like a John Kerry", so I have to make the best of the actual choices.

I think one or two of the Dem candidates would not make a real effort at all, but I won't stir the pot by giving the names. Obama I am unsure of on this point, but I think he is at least as likely as any of the others to make improvements in that area. (I guess to be fair, Kucinich probably would have the goal, but my main problem with Kucinich is that I think he would be dangerously ineffective in most areas, and ineffective at least on this issue as well.)

If I sound lukewarm about Obama on this, just rest assured I don't feel any better about the others in the field - but any of them would be better than Republicans, who will actively work to increase American hegemonic influence by exploiting other nations, imo.

[PATRICK]

14. The Good Globalization

and other benign uses of free trade are something Bill Clinton tried to do by doing first the possible of giving the GOP what it wanted- then having no one around to regulate the bad effects or install the good ones. God help me, under another website I posted that theory before Clinton used the same words. Yet that is motivating vision of a lot of Dem leaders, to take back and restore the system in its just intentions and reign in the horses of capitalism without shooting them.

The immense sufferings and the rampant, horrifyingly exposed consequences of accommodating the forces of current globalization seem about as real to some of these candidates as the traditional values and wisdom of core democratic bases, of history. Utopia being just around the corner is Hoover, not FDR. It makes one wince to hear what seems reasonable but is, in effect, a blinded compromise with disaster. Dictators harbor and offer hope. There are always things more important than ever allowing it to be actually realized. Power and money and their primacy. What reasonable men offered years ago in trying to make things work with pirates and oppressors given license is no longer the same. The dogs have turned upon us
and become the masters, and the nominal political leaders know it not- or too well.

What he is saying is wisely good in intention, but we are actually standing on the road to hell. Why can't our "leaders" see that for all their grand vision? The past indeed has to be dead in its lessons to sustain such illusory mildness and the debt swollen future misty beyond realization.

[Nick_Irving]

10. Obama Funds War

This video demonstrates how Obama Funds and Supports War.

Obama fans need to see it a learn a thing or 2.

"Attention Democrat Voters: Who's Progressive?"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_WBT35CKBs

[MH1]

11. Kucinich wants my nephew to die. No thanks. nt

[sandnsea]

12. Oh god leave me alone n/t

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

18. How is that relevant to his economic views?

You keep spamming that link in every thread on Obama, regardless of whether it's relevant.

[DemReadingDU]

13. Wikisource does not have a text with this exact name

edit to add this link...
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama%27s_Iraq_Speech

Delivered on 26 October 2002 at an anti-war rally in Chicago by Barack Obama, Illinois Senator.

[MH1]

2. "Globalization" and "rapacious trade" are not synonymous.

Globalization is like gravity - you can't stop it - unless of course you want to close borders, turn off the internets, and generally stop the flow of information and people. Then be prepared for even more wars, as influencers in various governments no longer have economic interdependencies with influencers in other nations, and people can't get information about what's going on outside their borders.

Recognition of the reality I just described as very little to do with what rules are set on trade - whether the rules allow big countries to exploit little countries or whether those rules are more fair.

[mmonk]

7. Alot of it is forced servitude with loans, the IMF,

selling off national assets, privatization, and default loans covered by the US directly to corporations while the offending country is forced through austerity programs requiring corporate control. Many times, this is kept in force through threat of violence and a hardline dictatorship.

[MH1]

9. True now, but mere "globalization" does not require that it be that way. nt

[TomClash]

5. If you look at his advisers, neo-Keynes nt

[mmonk]

8. Thanks.

Link?

[TomClash]

15. This story is a start

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/02/business/02leonhardt.html

[MH1]

23. Thanks, that's a helpful article

This is a good sign:

Senator Obama’s ideas, on the other hand, draw heavily on behavioral economics, a left-leaning academic movement that has challenged traditional neoclassical economics over the last few decades. Behavioral economists consider an abiding faith in rationality to be wishful thinking. To Mr. Obama, a simpler program — one less likely to confuse people — is often a smarter program.

:applause:

[frazzled]

16. A question for Edwards supporters

And I didn't ask it, the NYT editorial page asked it yesterday:

We're still waiting for Mr. Edwards to explain how he, or any politician, can turn back the tide of economics and globalization. We'd prefer if he explained how to make it work for all Americans.

This was in the context of Mr. Edwards's final ad, which featured an out-of-work Maytag guy saying Edwards promised his 7-year-old son to "keep fighting for your daddy's job." Exactly how would he do that (now that the job is gone), concretely--not just in words and promises. What has he done in the past to have stemmed the loss of a job or the tide of globalization? I seriously want to know.

[mmonk]

24. My post is not an attack. I want to know.

I get different currents running through his book, The Audacity of Hope.

[frazzled]

26. Thanks ... I guess I can confirm

that there is no answer to my question, since neither you nor any Edwards supporter could provide one. So he has done nothing to fight globalization.

Now, I'd say your question was an attack in the way push polls are an attack.

[2008hope]

17. I love the way Obama speaks

I also have a question along those lines. Is it true that Obama is a member of the group they talk about in the second half of Aaron Russo's film seen here: http://TheHolyGrail.biz ??

[maddezmom]

19. can't get the youtube to work this morning, what group are you talking about?

[MH1]

21. Bwahaha...check out the wikipedia page for the film

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_fascism

[salin]

20. could you please

describe the group to which you are referring if you don't recall its name? I don't have the time to watch half the movie. Thanks.

BTW, welcome to DU!

[2008hope]

28. yes

They are called the Council on Foreign Relations.
I wasn't as interested in the IRS segments of the film as much as the quotes from the bankers, although the piece about Joe Louis was very sad.

[MH1]

22. Heh...Ron Paul supporter?

Welcome to DU, enjoy your stay. :hi:

[2008hope]

27. He's very gracious tonight

The Republicans were like a grouchy pack of sled dogs

[panzerfaust]

25. He is to the left of Hillary

but not of any other demo-candidate