Do you have any problem with Zbigniew Brzezinski endorsing him and becoming one of the formulators of his foreign policy and the effects that would have on U.S.-World relations should he ever become president?
Obama supporters
- Thread starter ColdBlooded
- Start date
Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzezinski (Polish: Zbigniew Kazimierz Brzeziński ['zbigɲev bʐɛ'ʑiɲski]) : (born March 28, 1928, Warsaw, Poland) is a Polish-American political scientist, geostrategist, and statesman who served as United States National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter from 1977 to 1981. Known for his hawkish foreign policy at a time when the Democratic Party was increasingly dovish, he is a foreign policy realist and considered by some to be the Democrats' response to Republican realist Henry Kissinger.[1]
That's super fantastic! but at least he's black, right?
I should have made this a poll to see if people even know who Zbigniew Brzezinski is first.
There is always the other side of the coin with Madeline Albright and Richard Holbrooke.
I'd need a poll for that one too.
Shame that people get fooled so easy. I mean it is pretty well expected that Clinton is going to be like the previous Clinton. But this whole Obama is about change shit when his advisors are all made up of old guard too is just silly.
WOW he's Black! Damn she's a woman! Oh wait, the same people who run these two are the ones that got us into the problems we have today, DOH!
Silly Americans - Elections are for monkeys.
There is always the other side of the coin with Madeline Albright and Richard Holbrooke.
I'd need a poll for that one too.
Shame that people get fooled so easy. I mean it is pretty well expected that Clinton is going to be like the previous Clinton. But this whole Obama is about change shit when his advisors are all made up of old guard too is just silly.
WOW he's Black! Damn she's a woman! Oh wait, the same people who run these two are the ones that got us into the problems we have today, DOH!
Silly Americans - Elections are for monkeys.
I already said.. that Obama has ties to the CFR..
the CFR's mission to to unite.. ALL countries.. into one super state.. and have a fascist one world government.
That is why they wrote the documents for the North American Union.
Now Zbigniew Brzezinski and Kissinger = New World Order.. scum.
End of Line... all those who folllow Obama.. are voting in...
New Wordl Order Tyranny...
Like I said.. love him or hate him.. Ron Paul.. is the only one who is not for world goverment... He's all about freedom.. and Liberty.
If people are dumb enough to vote for a new world order.. puppet..
then they deserve to be slaves...
I'll leave this country.. before.. it turns into.. Nazi Germany though...
the people who stay can have fun..
thanks.
the CFR's mission to to unite.. ALL countries.. into one super state.. and have a fascist one world government.
That is why they wrote the documents for the North American Union.
Now Zbigniew Brzezinski and Kissinger = New World Order.. scum.
End of Line... all those who folllow Obama.. are voting in...
New Wordl Order Tyranny...
Like I said.. love him or hate him.. Ron Paul.. is the only one who is not for world goverment... He's all about freedom.. and Liberty.
If people are dumb enough to vote for a new world order.. puppet..
then they deserve to be slaves...
I'll leave this country.. before.. it turns into.. Nazi Germany though...
the people who stay can have fun..
thanks.
Short, but good article:
The Obama Mirage — Behind the Rhetoric of Hope and Change
It seems on the cusp of being real. For the first time in the U.S., an African American has a serious chance of being the next occupant of the White House.
The centerpiece of Barack Obama’s campaign has been the claim that he is the candidate of “hope” and “change” as opposed to the establishment figure Clinton. He has crowned himself the king of post-racial and post-partisan politics. With the assistance of the corporate media, he has captured the imagination and hope of millions of voters, particularly new layers of politicized young people.
A Corporate Candidate
The truth behind the Obama phenomenon, however, is much less attractive than the image. If you look at his concrete policies, voting record, and source of campaign funds, Obama is a trusted servant of the big business elite. He represents the U.S. ruling class’s desperate attempt to put a new face on its domestic and global domination.
Obama’s list of top campaign contributors reads like a Wall Street Who’s Who list, with Goldman Sachs at the top. How does he claim to not be taking money from lobbyists and PACs and still raise over $100 million? The answer is the magic of bundling – elite individuals with a lot of influence get many senior and junior level executives to donate the maximum amounts. As of October 29, Obama had received 46% of his campaign money from mega-rich donors who had given $2,300 or more (OpenSecrets.org).
It’s very convenient for “antiwar” Obama that he wasn’t in the Senate to vote for the Iraq War resolution in 2002. Based on a tepid speech he made in 2003, in which he attacked the Iraq War as the “wrong war at the wrong time,” Obama claims he has opposed the war from the start.
His record in the Senate should speak much louder. He has consistently voted to approve hundreds of billions of dollars to continue funding the war and refuses to commit to pulling all the troops out by the end of his first term, in 2013! Further, Obama supports a troop increase in Afghanistan and is fully committed to the “War on Terrorism.” Obama supports an expansion of the military by 92,000 troops and increasing the bloated Pentagon budget.
Obama’s claim to be the candidate of universal healthcare is no better. His plan, like Clinton’s and Edwards’, is only a reorganization of the current private for-profit healthcare system. This is less a guarantee for universal healthcare and more a huge scam to line the pockets of the healthcare industry by forcing working people to buy insurance from them. As long as private profit isn’t taken out of all aspects of healthcare through a single-payer system, talk of affordable and universal healthcare is no more than a mirage.
Post-Racial Politics?
Mr. Obama’s success as a mainstream candidate reflects his unspoken promise not to have a “race agenda.” Instead, he makes patently false statements about how “Blacks have already come ‘90% of the way to equality,’ inferring that his election would provide the final ten percent.” (Glen Ford, blackagendareport.com) In reality, people of color face huge inequities that belie Obama’s anesthetized proposition of a post-racial paradigm.
2005 Census data shows the median income for black households was $30,939, compared to $50,622 for white households (Washington Post, 11/14/06). Although only about 12% of the U.S. population, blacks comprise 900,000 of the nation’s 2.2 million prison population (The Sentencing Project, July 2007). Equally grotesque structural racism can be found in the criminal neglect of infrastructure, education, and housing in the black community.
Nevertheless, Obama’s rhetoric about change doesn't come out of thin air. Most Americans want to ditch the extreme right-wing, militaristic presidency of George W. Bush - along with his Democratic Party accomplices. Millions of working-class people and youth are frustrated by falling incomes, lack of healthcare, and the unending military occupation of Iraq. Obama’s campaign strategists have skillfully tapped into this very real sentiment for change.
Workers, young people, and people of color should reject Obama and the Democratic Party. We have no need for a party of big business that pretends to fight for regular people. We don’t need any corporate politicians whose purpose is to confuse and derail our path to independent politics. What we need are principled, independent, antiwar and pro-worker candidates to challenge the two parties of big business at all levels of office.
source
The Obama Mirage — Behind the Rhetoric of Hope and Change
It seems on the cusp of being real. For the first time in the U.S., an African American has a serious chance of being the next occupant of the White House.
The centerpiece of Barack Obama’s campaign has been the claim that he is the candidate of “hope” and “change” as opposed to the establishment figure Clinton. He has crowned himself the king of post-racial and post-partisan politics. With the assistance of the corporate media, he has captured the imagination and hope of millions of voters, particularly new layers of politicized young people.
A Corporate Candidate
The truth behind the Obama phenomenon, however, is much less attractive than the image. If you look at his concrete policies, voting record, and source of campaign funds, Obama is a trusted servant of the big business elite. He represents the U.S. ruling class’s desperate attempt to put a new face on its domestic and global domination.
Obama’s list of top campaign contributors reads like a Wall Street Who’s Who list, with Goldman Sachs at the top. How does he claim to not be taking money from lobbyists and PACs and still raise over $100 million? The answer is the magic of bundling – elite individuals with a lot of influence get many senior and junior level executives to donate the maximum amounts. As of October 29, Obama had received 46% of his campaign money from mega-rich donors who had given $2,300 or more (OpenSecrets.org).
It’s very convenient for “antiwar” Obama that he wasn’t in the Senate to vote for the Iraq War resolution in 2002. Based on a tepid speech he made in 2003, in which he attacked the Iraq War as the “wrong war at the wrong time,” Obama claims he has opposed the war from the start.
His record in the Senate should speak much louder. He has consistently voted to approve hundreds of billions of dollars to continue funding the war and refuses to commit to pulling all the troops out by the end of his first term, in 2013! Further, Obama supports a troop increase in Afghanistan and is fully committed to the “War on Terrorism.” Obama supports an expansion of the military by 92,000 troops and increasing the bloated Pentagon budget.
Obama’s claim to be the candidate of universal healthcare is no better. His plan, like Clinton’s and Edwards’, is only a reorganization of the current private for-profit healthcare system. This is less a guarantee for universal healthcare and more a huge scam to line the pockets of the healthcare industry by forcing working people to buy insurance from them. As long as private profit isn’t taken out of all aspects of healthcare through a single-payer system, talk of affordable and universal healthcare is no more than a mirage.
Post-Racial Politics?
Mr. Obama’s success as a mainstream candidate reflects his unspoken promise not to have a “race agenda.” Instead, he makes patently false statements about how “Blacks have already come ‘90% of the way to equality,’ inferring that his election would provide the final ten percent.” (Glen Ford, blackagendareport.com) In reality, people of color face huge inequities that belie Obama’s anesthetized proposition of a post-racial paradigm.
2005 Census data shows the median income for black households was $30,939, compared to $50,622 for white households (Washington Post, 11/14/06). Although only about 12% of the U.S. population, blacks comprise 900,000 of the nation’s 2.2 million prison population (The Sentencing Project, July 2007). Equally grotesque structural racism can be found in the criminal neglect of infrastructure, education, and housing in the black community.
Nevertheless, Obama’s rhetoric about change doesn't come out of thin air. Most Americans want to ditch the extreme right-wing, militaristic presidency of George W. Bush - along with his Democratic Party accomplices. Millions of working-class people and youth are frustrated by falling incomes, lack of healthcare, and the unending military occupation of Iraq. Obama’s campaign strategists have skillfully tapped into this very real sentiment for change.
Workers, young people, and people of color should reject Obama and the Democratic Party. We have no need for a party of big business that pretends to fight for regular people. We don’t need any corporate politicians whose purpose is to confuse and derail our path to independent politics. What we need are principled, independent, antiwar and pro-worker candidates to challenge the two parties of big business at all levels of office.
source
