Not Barack Hussein Obama

What if his name had been, say, William Johnson, instead of Barack Hussein Obama? I wonder by what margin might he have been elected in 2008?

34 responses to “Not Barack Hussein Obama

  1. What if his name had been Jacob Schwartz…

    Like

  2. Wouldn’t have mattered as long as his father was WHO HE was…..

    Like

    • I seriously doubt that most voters were aware of his parentage – that was kind of a politicla junkie/media thing. But the name shared with Saddam, now that’s another story. I’m sure many people could not vote for him for that reason alone.

      Like

      • What difference does it make? There’s an entire group of people that voted for him because he’s black.
        Sigh … it’s his destructive policies Moe, not his name or is skin color.

        Like

        • Thought I replied here yesterday Steve but it’s not here. I think I said that while somethig like 98% of black voters probably voted for Obama, blacks are only about 12% of the population and likely voters probably a much smaller percentage. And in any case, his policies – and we will characterize them differently – weren’t in play during the election.

          Like

  3. Let’s see, Egypt is holding more than 10 Americans hostage yet Obama wants to give “Arab Springs” nations, including Egypt 800 million tax payer dollars. The Muslim Brotherhood is laughing all the way to the bank. Hmmm, I see several more millions of tax payer dollars to rebuild mosques …
    and the “rich need to pay their fair share” …
    Maybe after we get our money from Solyndra, etc. That’s the thing that gets me the most. Those in the government throw our money away by the billions, yet want more to waste and you guys actually fall for the “tax the rich” line; like making the “rich” pay more is going to do anything for you? Typical liberal thinking … bring others down for self elevation.

    Like

    • You know Steve, I’m not rich and I’ll make an assumption that neither are you (apologies if I’m wrong). Most importantly, we’re not likely to get rich either. When you defend them, you defend an abstraction. I don’t resent the rich, but I don’t feel a great need to protect them at all costs from the tax rates (on income only) they paid up to the year 2002 either, when Bush astonishigly cut taxes as we were already in one war and headed to another, an unprecedented action in US history. Plus, they don’t seem to have been doing well with that ‘job creation’ thing, a frequent argument for protecting their tax rates.

      Solyndra? The gov’t gave them $500 million in loan guarantees. Half a billion dollars. Last week the gov’t committed another $8.3 BILLION in loan guarantees to Vogtle, a private ocmpany that is about to build (a good thing I think) the first new nuclear plant in 30 years – in Georgia. That’s sixteenth of what we issued to Solyndra. These guarantees are investments – they don’t all work out, but neither does it all work out when private equity companies do it. The idea of course is that the ones that DO work out produce real jobs and product and contribute to the GDP, so on balance, investment is a good thing even as we win some and lose some.

      As for the Vogtle deal, it’s the same as Solyndra: “Under the program, the government would assume a company’s debt if it were to default on a project.”

      I think the Obama admin overall is doing a very good job dealing with our economic woes.

      Like

      • Moe, Bush was/is an ass. A globalist walking in the same steps as his dad. I find it difficult to believe anyone would think for a second that I could or would ever defend anything G.W. Bush did. Bush was/is as much as a traitor as Obama and his corrupted administration.
        Okay, he’s doing a great job:

        http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/painful-cost-obama_629745.html

        No Moe, I’m not rich, but I’m sick of the class warfare and the waste of those in our government, and yet we don’t hold them accountable for the wasted tax money … yet we jump at the chance to give them more … if it comes from rich folks. Makes no sense.

        Like

        • Steve, I’m with you on the waste in government, but it pales in comparison to what we legally spend in response to the special interests who support the re-elections of incumbent congresscritters and senators – of BOTH parties. I don’t think it’s so much a matter of how much they spend, as what we GET for it. That would be the measure in the private sector. No business would tolerate its employees buying stuff that isn’t needed or spending way more than it’s worth. I’m sure you’re familiar with the business practice of pursuig ‘best practices’. Our legislators (not so much the wider government areas) are the ones who violate this rule over and over again.

          “Class warfare” is just a phrase grabbed by the Republicans and not at all applicable to the idea of restoring the tax rate for the rich. It’s not warfare – the argument about how much the rich should pay has been around from the first days of the income tax. And before probably. Hell, it goes all the way back to the earliest days of the English Parliament. So it’s eternal, the issue will never go away. It’s only a matter of what’s the day’s prevvailing theory. And that changes from generation to generation – up and down, up and down. It also is affected by the financial health of the country. And when the country has needed it, the rich have always bneen asked to pay more. As they are now.

          Steve, I’m gonna get you to love Obama before you have to hold your nose and vote for Romney!

          Like

  4. I think you’re somewhat misinformend about the “class warfare” phrase. Regardless of how the term came about it is the continued wedge people like Obama will drive into society to get regular folks to view “rich” or successful people as greedy. It is designed for that specifically. People like Obama who don’t produce anything use that against the more successful folks who produce everything. In general, successful people are the ones who invent stuff, create jobs, produce goods and services. I’ve never had a job where I didn’t work for someone that was somewhat more successful than I. Let’s also not forget about the nearly 50% of all U.S. residents who pay zero income tax. You should know by now that Obama was serious when he said he’s going to redistribute America’s wealth; and that means to other nations.
    The Republicans won’t win the election Moe. Even if they did, Ron Paul is probably the only one I’d actually vote for; maybe Santorum.
    I think Obama will probably be the last president the United States has. Who knows?

    Like

    • [You should know by now that Obama was serious when he said he’s going to redistribute America’s wealth; and that means to other nations.]

      I thought he was redistributing to the 99%?

      Last president? Dear elvis – pretty apocalyptic of you. The end of the country has been being predicted by certain groups ever all of my life. It doesn’t happen. We bumble along and toss the ball back and forth.

      And nothing changes. THAT is the problem, not Obama. He’s pretty much same old/same old.

      Like

      • To the 99%!? Oh, now I see where the support and aid to Islamic nations and the minimum global tax is going.
        Even if it were going to the 99% what right does Obama or anyone have to take something from some people and give it to others? Hmmm, I must be old fashioned but I was taught that was stealing.
        I thought the “last president” thing would get your attention. Regardless the so called “apocalypse” could become a reality sooner than anyone thinks.

        Like

        • what right does Obama or anyone have to take something from some people and give it to others?

          I believe the Dark Ages have just the solution for you, its called Feudalism and from what you’ve been saying, you are a strong advocate for such a system.

          Hmmm, I must be old fashioned but I was taught that was stealing.

          Oh I agree completely! Those who do not pay their fair share of taxes for all the benefits a stable society provides society should be called out, the OWS is the first step in encouraging the progressive and fair taxation of all people in society.

          Like

          • You really should extent your naps; say to 24 hours a day? Well, 23 you’ll probably need to have some one feed you.
            I’m a strong advocate in supporting the feeble minded and I’m doing my best for you. Take good care and get plenty of rest.

            Like

          • I’m a strong advocate in supporting the feeble minded and I’m doing my best for you.

            Hard to win an argument with insults, but given the calibre of what I’ve seen from you, your ‘commentary’ is hardly surprising.

            Like

  5. Pingback: February 18, 2012 … Rants By Steve « Cry and Howl

  6. Ms. Holland ,

    ” “Class warfare” is just a phrase grabbed by the Republicans and not at all applicable to the idea of restoring the tax rate for the rich ”

    You have defended the OWS crowd. They are Obama’s people, right ? They have called for property redistribution, by the government through confiscatory taxes, Uh that is class warfare .

    By income, I am in the 99%. Obama, and the OWS crowd do not speak for me.

    One last thing. There is a world of difference between a nuclear power plant and solar power. Nuclear has a good prospect of returning a profit, with out government money . If your green lawyers did not bury every nuclear project in lawsuits, they would not need government welfare. If the government made the regulatory process more streamlined the nuclear industry would not need government welfare . Nuclear does not need a global warming mandate to be viable.

    Solar Power is the opposite . Those solar monstrosities in the California deserts need a renewable energy state mandate to be viable. They do not need relief from environmental lawsuits or government regulations, they just need government relief.

    That is a the difference between Vogtle and a Solyndra, and it matters .

    Like

    • You have defended the OWS crowd. They are Obama’s people, right ? They have called for property redistribution, by the government through confiscatory taxes, Uh that is class warfare .

      Class warfare is what is being perpetrated on the American People by the monied elite as they continue to a set up a oligarchy in America for the rich and by the rich, To suggest class warfare is some sort a feature of just one class is just silly.

      If the government made the regulatory process more streamlined the nuclear industry would not need government welfare .

      Just like in Japan?

      No, Mr.Scott, it is regulations and rules set by governments that keep the people and the land safe. Streamlining is just another word for deregulation and the looting and plundering that it entails.

      By income, I am in the 99%. Obama, and the OWS crowd do not speak for me.

      Speaking of false consciousness, it would seem that you have a fair case of that going. I doubt that OWS is attempting to speak specifically for you, but rather to issue of income inequality in the US, which currently is the greatest threat to continued American prosperity and stability.

      Like

    • [Those solar monstrosities in the California deserts need a renewable energy state mandate to be viable. They do not need relief from environmental lawsuits or government regulations, they just need government relief. ]

      Which is why China is investing vast State sums into developing solar into a viable ocmmercial product. And they will reap the reward and earn the profits. That could be us, but it won’t be. Thinking like yours Alan assures that China grabs this new industry.

      Nuclear? Nobody in gov’t stopped any company from building a nuclear plant over the last 30 years (none built). The private market just chose not to do it because they didn’t think it would be profitable enough if htey had to adhere to all those damn safety regulations, the really stiff ones that are essential if one wants to build nuclear.

      Like

      • Which is why China is investing vast State sums into developing solar into a viable ocmmercial product. And they will reap the reward and earn the profits. That could be us, but it won’t be.

        It is hard to see that state sponsored investment can sometimes be a good thing. In the United States and to a lesser extent Canada the dogmatic free market fundamentalist view is becoming the norm. Unfortunately the above view does not coincide with reality all the time and people become blinded to the good that state intervention can do in a nation. The free market is not the solution to every problem, just like state intervention is not always the solution. But turning away just because an idea isn’t vetted by private capital is short sighted, short term thinking (that the free-market excels at).

        Like

        • What gets ignored in this argument Arb, is the astonishing history of the feds investing in the basic research for new products and industries and then turning that intellectual property over to the private sector to create product, jobs and profits. Our past is full of stuff like this. And it works. And it’s good for everyone. But I guess that ‘good for everyone’ thing has (oddly in this ‘Chriistian’ nation) become a BAD thing.

          Like

          • I know Moe, mention the fact that the government is the nexus for technological development and research and the free-marketeers collapse into a apoplectic fit.

            I must admit the private sector has done a great PR hatchet job on all things that actually benefit the public good.

            Like

          • But why would they do that when it’s clearly been in their interest to let gov do the heavy lifting so they can then make the money?

            Like

  7. Ms. Holland,

    I know we had these discussions before. I seem to remember you playing the China card before. If two billion Chinese jump off of a building, will you jump off of a building ?

    China has to keep it’s population working. It’s the only way to keep the peons from overthrowing their one party masters . If the economy tanks over there they can’t blame Bush . 3 years of >8% unemployment and their heads would be on pikes. Solar is a great way to keep a lot of folks working . It doesn’t have to make a profit or make sense. Especially when you can steal American technology and use American government incentives to support your wind and solar industries .

    China is rich enough to play this stupid game, the US is not. Caleefornia sure as hell is not. I really want to see these monstrosities in 10 years . I predict a landscape of worthless junk when the sunshine state can no longer afford to throw good money after bad to subsidize it . Hopefully President Romney will not be tempted save them .

    Arbourist,

    I do love your consistency. You never waiver in your anti capitalist theme . Our difference is that you fear ” monied elite “, while I fear the government elite .

    Somehow I believe the situation at the Vogtle nuclear plant is slightly different from Japan . It’s probably just me. I am trying to figure how a Tsunami could hit a plant 65 miles from the Atlantic Ocean . I suppose it could travel up the Savannah river.

    Like

    • Somehow I believe the situation at the Vogtle nuclear plant is slightly different from Japan .

      The point Mr.Scott, was that more stringent regulations could have prevented or at least mitigated the catastrophe that happened in Japan. The back up diesel generators were below sea level at the plant in Japan, perhaps more stringent regulations (less streamlining) could have changed the outcome.
      Regulations that protect people the and the environment are not a bad thing Mr.Scott.

      Like

  8. I have to correct a mistake. Florida not California is the sunshine state . I meant Golden State.

    Like

  9. The Arbourist,

    ” Regulations that protect people the and the environment are not a bad thing Mr.Scott. ”

    I agree.
    You are right about the diesel generators in Japan’s nuclear plants . That was the Achilles heal . It is not any great technical challenge to fix . Secure back up power systems are used in communications and data systems that cannot afford to go down .

    Like

  10. “I think the Obama admin overall is doing a very good job dealing with our economic woes.”
    I wish I could agree with you Moe. I don’t really need the following to dispute that but for your benefit:

    http://www.blacklistednews.com/18_Statistics_That_Prove_That_The_Economy_Has_Not_Improved_Since_Barack_Obama_Became_President/18034/0/0/0/Y/M.html?CFID=22049280&CFTOKEN=d6e353822c93651-2A17EC3A-9992-373F-B55E6C18AFB56003&jsessionid=84306c2d3893b9bd54b41b55737d5425b352

    Like

    • I used the phrase ‘dealing with’ Steve. Fixing it is not yet in the cards – things like oil prices etc (as cited in your link) are entirely out of the hands of the US. We have zero control over that. And yes, it could get worse. Oil and Europe could pull us down again. For four years, it’s been about keeping our heads above water so we don’t slide from the great recession into a real depression (although many say we are there).

      The economic crisic is world wide remember. We aren’t god although we like to think we are.

      Private sector employment has been going up for 21 straight months. It’s gov’y employment which is negating those gains – local, state and fed layoffs are pulling down revenues everywhere. IT’s a terrible game of dominos..

      Like

  11. Ms. Holland ,

    ” Nuclear? Nobody in gov’t stopped any company from building a nuclear plant over the last 30 years (none built). ”

    Unbelievable!

    ” The private market just chose not to do it because they didn’t think it would be profitable enough if htey had to adhere to all those damn safety regulations, the really stiff ones that are essential if one wants to build nuclear. ”

    Maybe you can splain something to a poor dum Conservative. First I do not believe you when you say government or rather the Eco-Marxists in the US government do not actively block nuclear power. But that aside, tell me why if it so , so , so difficult for America to build nuclear plants and build them so they run safely, why is it possible for France ? Are we so much stupider than the French that we can’t figure it out ? I really have to make a note to stop bashing the French . They are geniuses. No one else in the universe seem to know how to get the permits and financing .

    Like

    • Getting permits and financing nuclear plants while still adhering to safety statutes did happen in France as you note. It happened because it was government owned. And enormously successful. As you note.

      The French nation develped their nuclear industry beginning in the 1950’s and partially privatized it in 2004. “it (EDF) is now a limited-liability corporation under private law (société anonyme), after its status was changed by statute. The French government partially floated shares of the company on the Paris Stock Exchange in November 2005,[8] although it retained almost 85% ownership as of the end of 2008.[9]” The company iis very profitable.

      American energy companies want bigger profits which they dont get if they meet all the regs. So they just don’t do it. Not the gov’t’s fault unless you think we shoild blame the gov’t for insisting on all that safety stuff.

      Since the tsunami, Japan has decided to try to close its nuclear plants by the way.

      Like

  12. I see it totally different . It has nothing at all to do with public verses private or bigger profits. It has to do with the French deciding to go ahead. In your left wing sites I’ve noticed the French being bashed because the Germans have decided to close their nukes after the Tsunami.

    France knew that with it’s limited fossil fuels it had to go nuclear . They have stayed the course . I expect the French to continue to prosper as they sell electricity to the dummkopfs in Germany , I knew there was a reason I took 3 years of high school French and not German .

    Japan is in the situation the US was in after three mile Island . Emotion will triumph over intellect . How much you wanna bet that most of the lost nuke power capacity will be replaced by oil and gas and not Green ?

    Like

    • [It has to do with the French deciding to go ahead.] And who would ‘the French’ be in your scenario? Of course it has to do with private/public.
      The French gov’t created a private/public partnership – the kind of thing we did for generations till the 1980’s. And that today are viewed as Kenyan commie Muslim atheist terrorism.

      Maybe someday we’ll regain our sanity.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s