I do admit that reality has a liberal bias! :-) And, the majority of people in the US, when questioned and not just polled by sound bites and propaganda, agree with the majority of the list.
I see him as ignoring the will of the people. Yes, he may be wishing to protect the wishes of the minority and this does have its place. Unfortunately, it isn’t the minority who voted for him. On Nov 17, 12:31 pm, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > <<Perhaps I haven’t listed those here before? >> > > I also don't think that failing to adopt the entire left agenda means > that things won't change. If he is to accomplish anything, he needs > to focus on small list of goals. If he came into office with the > goals you listed, he would get nothing done and would confirm all the > greatest fears of the conservatives. And the centrists. > > I hope he has the strength to resist the extremists in his party. > > On Nov 17, 1:41 pm, ornamentalmind <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > “Pretty vague news report to base conclusions on. How about a little > > optimism?” – Taylor > > > Oh, I don’t base my concern on this one 18 minute interview alone. (I > > assume you watched/listened to the entire section rather than the > > short part they had typed up.) > > > I have based this view on his own positions. > > > Perhaps I haven’t listed those here before? > > He is not interested in a single payer national health insurance plan. > > He is not interested in addressing the wasteful military budget. > > He not only has been personally involved with nuclear power, but > > supports it along with that oxymoron ‘clean coal’. > > He is not interested in cracking down on corporate crime nor corporate > > welfare. > > He wishes to maintain and protect the ‘two party system’. > > He does not wish to adopt a carbon pollution tax. > > He does not wish to reverse the US policy in the Middle East. > > He will not consider impeachment nor prosecution of Bush/Cheney. > > He is not interested in repealing the Taft-Hartley anti-union law. > > He is not interested in adopting a Wall Street securities speculation > > tax. > > He has not signed on to put an end to ballot access obstructionism. > > He is not interested in putting an end to corporate personhood. > > He is not interested in debating how to defend, restore and strengthen > > the Civil Justice System. > > He is not interested in adopting the National Initiative. > > He has changed his view from getting out of Iraq to something quite > > different. As I understand it, he supports keeping the US presence > > there along with what will be the largest US ‘consulate’ on the > > planet. > > > I’m sure there is more, but this list will support my conclusion as > > well as why I don’t base my projection about what the future will hold > > upon being a pollyana, oozing optimism. Rather than a naïve faith in > > the future, I base the probability upon the past, and current > > realities. > > > On Nov 17, 10:42 am, Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > <<I fear that many people's hope was rather misplaced. >> > > > > Pretty vague news report to base conclusions on. How about a little > > > optimism?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
