Taking up the Gauntlet-A Challenge for all of Triskelos

Let me begin by saying that I think Kade has made an admirable challenge. It made me think about the way in which discussion is undertaken in Triskelos. Sometimes it is, and sometimes it is not. That is a problem. How do we fix it? I think Kade has the right idea. If you want to know what someone thinks then call them out. Throw down the gaunlet, and see if that person will pick it up. I don't propose that every artictle or comment be a challenge, or that we even do this perpetually at Triskelos. I just think it would be a good way to spark diccussion.

POINT OF CLARITY
When I said that Obama has proven himself, I meant specifically that he has proven to have an in depth knowledge of the issues facing our nation and he has proposed detailed solutions for these issues. As for Obamamessiah, I am not a true follower or even a proselyte. For me, he was the next best thing (that is far as I can take this comment without breaking the stipulation of making a McCain/Palin comparison). I was a hardcore Hillary supporter, and I find Obama’s proposals quite similar to her own. While, I find his lack of experience a political liability, he has still satisfied my doubt by providing detailed plans time and time again that are consistent with my own politics, and in doing so revealed a thorough knowledge of the issues at hand. If you want to argue that a Junior Senator is ill-equipped to be president, then I might agree to that as a generality. However, I think that with the exception of Sen. Clinton, no other candidate has proven to be as well-versed in or as forthcoming about offering solutions for problems as Obama. In short, I rationalize my support for a Junior Senator, because he has proven to be a far more seasoned politician than his resume suggests. With that said…

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED

You asked for the following:

OBAMA NEVER WRITTEN A BILL

Maybe he wasn’t the primary author, but here is a link to a lengthy list of bills that Obama has sponsored since being a US Senator:

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

Conisder this:

Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 570 bills in the 109th and 110th Congress.Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 15 bills that have become LAW since he joined the Senate in 2005.Senator Obama has also introduced amendments to 50 bills, of which 16 were adopted by the Senate.

http://lestyoubejudged.wordpress.com/2008/09/13/is-barack-obama-qualified/

Does all of this count for nothing in a presidential campaign? It would be hard to argue that it doesn’t.

MOST OF HIS CAREER CAMPAIGNING FOR PRESIDENT

I assume you raise this issue to make the point that he has spent more time campaigning than working as though his campaigning has hindered his accomplishments. In actuality this is not true, because Obama served two terms as a state legislator before moving to the national level. As for wanting the title and not the responsibility, I am not sure that anyone could know that. For someone who doesn’t want the responsibility, Obama has put in a lot of work at mastering the issues, and communicating the direction in which he would attack them. Do you guys honestly believe that a having a silver tongue alone allowed Obama to make it this far?

Here is something that Obama has done at the state level that is of immense importance:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/12/obama.death.penalty.ap/
http://www.icadp.org/page236.html

And again with health care:

http://mediamatters.org/items/200712170003

On the national stage he has made efforts to reform the way lobbyists influence Washington. Let me rephrase that, he has made an effort to prevent lobbyists from corrupting our congressmen/women:

http://feingold.senate.gov/~feingold/releases/07/01/20070108.html


MEMOIRS RATHER THAN BILLS

It is apparent that Obama has worked on plenty of legislation. Whether we want to argue about who was the primary author or not is irrelevant. This is a clever way of repeating the same thing you said earlier. As a matter of fact all of these are the same:

1) Obama hasn’t written bills
2) Obama writes memoirs not bills
3) Obama has spent most of his career running for president.

Why don’t you cut the crap, and just say, “he doesn’t have a lot of experience, and I don’t think he hasn’t accomplished a whole lot.”

Personally, I like it when politicians write memoirs, because it gives voters a more in depth look at who that person is. I don’t think Obama’s writing career has caused him to neglect his constituents (as your comment would imply) neither has his running for president. As a matter of fact, his constituent’s seem to approve as well as many other Americans.

CAN HE DO MORE THAN SPEAK

Is it really how he says things that get people fired up? Partially, he is a great speaker, but I think it is also the substance that has caught the ears of voters. I might as well elaborate on this a bit further, which is what I will do below discussing issues that I believe are important to most Americans. While Obama is not as experienced as McCain in terms of sitting in the Senate, I feel Obama’s understanding of what America needs and his proposal for accomplishing it outweighs the fact that his U.S. Senate career has been short. While I may not convince the conservative membership of Triskelos that Obama’s knowledge should be as important to them as it is for me, I don’t have to. I am thoroughly enjoying Obama’s lead in the polls, which will probably receive a slight bump for Obama after the most recent debate. There are many Americans who see Obama’s potential to be a great American president, and that will be the difference in this election. I savor the notion that conservatives who can’t stand him are gritting their teeth as they read this. I think Obama will win the election, and time will determine if he is qualified (as with any president before or after him). Even still, I like to be thorough. I offered a view of qualification based on knowledge and quality proposals (or substance if you prefer) so I guess I better address them:

NATIONAL SECURITY AND FOREIGN POLICY

I will very briefly go through nation by nation.

Iraq:
Pull the troops out gradually, bur definitely pull them out.

Iran:
Let Iran know that the US considers nuclear proliferation a direct threat to national security., and also that threatening Israel will not be tolerated.

Pakistan:
Give them the opportunity to cooperate in the search for Osama Bin Laden within Pakistani borders, and emphasize that killing OBL and destroying Al Qaeda are at the top of our priority lists.

Afghanistan:
Redirect resources form Iraq. Increase the troop presence to root out Al Qaeda cells.

Israel:
Protect our ally. Assure Israelis that a threat to Israel is not going to be tolerated by the US.

Russia:
Obama understands that the old Soviet bloc needs financial assistance. Just like after WWII, if assistance comes from Russia then Russia will absorb that state, but if the US provides assistance then we can prevent a reformation of the USSR.

China:
It is simple, stop borrowing their money.

Let’s not forget that Obama will have the advice and ear of foreign relations adept, Joe Biden. Both men understand that our future is tied to our relationship to the rest of the world in every way imaginable, and it is about time that we have a leader that accepts this.

ECONOMY, ENERGY, AND HEALTH CARE

As for taxes, it is a republican myth that Obama wants to raise taxes for all Americans. He is only wanting to raise them for the wealthiest of Americans. I hardly see how that applies to most of us with maybe a couple of exceptions. Actually, most us will receive a tax break or will see no change at all in terms of income tax. He wants to tax rich people and use that to make it possible for uninsured Americans to receive health care and not go into debt because of it. In doing so he will allow Americans to maintain their current insurance if they so choose, and only mandate health insurance for children. What about any of this is bad? Obama forsees the dangers of deregulating the health care industry, and the flight of health care professionals to states with the most business tax credits. His intention is to streamline health care by going paperless across the industry. Obama recognizes health care as a right for individuals, and seeks to give coverage to individuals with pre-existing conditions. Again, I emphasize that his health care plan will be financed by taxing individuals and businesses which make more than $250K, and he is helping small businesses provide coverage by offering a 50% tax credit on costs. Obama seeks attack both energy and the economy simultaneously by creating jobs within the industry and investing $15B per year over ten years to get away form foreign energy dependence. Obama is looking to the future in terms of economics. He understands that a certain amount regulation must be implemented to protect our country from having to bailout large institutions. The bottom line is that he knows there is more to the economy than basic free market principles. I think it says something that financial guru, Warren Buffett is backing Obama.

JUDGMENT
I think judgment is an admirable quality in a presidential candidate. Below I have some examples of issues in which Obama claims to have had the correct judgment:

1) Iraq- This speaks for itself.

2) Deregulation-

An article quote:
Long before the Wall Street banks imploded in a wave of subprime mortgage defaults and home foreclosures, congressional lawmakers had called upon Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke to swiftly rein in predatory lenders whose unorthodox practices in the subprime industry threatened to derail the global economy.
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama was one of those lawmakers. In a March 22, 2007 letter, Obama urged Paulson and Bernanke to convene a “a homeownership preservation summit with leading mortgage lenders, investors, loan servicing organizations, consumer advocates, federal regulators and housing-related agencies to assess options for private sector responses” to the wave of foreclosures.
http://www.pubrecord.org/nationworld/348-in-march-2007-obama-called-on-paulson-bernanke-to-address-economic-crisis.html

3) On 04/21/08 an Obama press release warned against Putin’s aggression toward Georgia.

4) Subprime lending-Here is a link to the views of Obama’s economic advisor, which were in turn the advice that shaped his own view. May be Obama warning us was really Obama relaying the message of his top economic guru, but I think that it is common for leaders of all types to rely on the advice of their experts:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/business/29scene.html?_r=3&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/10/obamas_curious_economic_advise.html

I am sure this section will come under fire most by conservative commentors, which is why I put it here in the first place. If this is something that you disagree with then challenge it.

DOES HISTORY HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY ABOUT EXPEREINCE?

Other than the fact that conservatives label Obama as a socialist, I think their major issue with him is experience, as demonstrated by Kade’s arguments. The question is, to what extent does that matter? I have tried to make an argument that it does to an extent, but that extent doesn’t include Obama. If we only look at one variable, and create the hypothetical, cetaris paribus- all things being equal but experience, then an argument could be made. Even though I have been asked to defend Obama in a vacuum, that is just not the way it is. There is nothing less absolute and more relative than politics. However, I digress, that is not the point of this response. I think we have have a couple of American history buffs here. I am going to give a link to a chart that graphs how history has portayed a presidents administration versus the amount of experience prior to taking office. Granted, on a few presidents this is debatable, but I think we can agree on where most fall:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Images/Scatterplot-rank-vs-experience-labeled.jpg

Americans have realized that a little more gray hair doesn’t equate to knowledge or even wisdom. As for the argument of not knowing anything about him, then maybe you should spend more time watching the news, because no one has been more scrutinized in this election. He has pushed beyond generalities to show that his plans have substance ( I mean substance as in the way Aiden defined it, as a clear plan.). He knows how he will lead on every major issue, and I believe he has communicated that clearly and satisfactorily to enough Americans to take the White House.

TO KADE

Kade, if I have redirected questions in a way so as to side step any issues that are important to you then bring it up. Or better stated, I challenge you to challenge me. We can dissect them one at a time. We can start with dissecting my answer to your challenge. Unlike some, I am not all that concerned with being blasted by fellow contributors. If you think that that the Democratic ticket needs more criticism then post an article. If you are concerned about getting blasted then fire back. If you know what you believe and have a foundation for it then it shouldn’t matter what anyone writes in response to your views. As for sounding like Obama, I think I can formulate my own thoughts without his help. My thought processes or ideals haven’t changed much since we have been blogging together. I do admit that I feel compelled to push hard on politics and this election exacerbates this tendency. You use the rhetoric of someone who is fed up, and it sounds like with me. Here is a suggestion, don’t blame me for your or anyone else’s unwillingness to contribute. Speak your mind. I don’t have any reservations about “blasting” the comments of fellow contributors, and I as far as I am concerned I shouldn’t. The comments here are not meant to be personal. My comments are directed at ideas not at individuals. If contributors are insecure about putting their own perspective on the table then that is their own problem. If you are unwilling to let your ideas be challenged then you are missing the point of Triskelos altogether. That said, I have a challenge of my own:

1) Create a new article post, lay out your political views on all issues (the major ones in this campaign), and why they are what they are.
2) Compare your beliefs to McCain or Palin’s
3) Tie in how your candidate can bring about what you think is the best possible future for America. I understand best is a relative term. I am looking for the best available.
4) You can even mention Obama and Biden if you wish
5) Lastly, I won’t blast you, better yet, I won’t comment at all.

FOR THOSE OFFENDED BY MY COMMENTS (MEANING NOT JUST KADE)

I will put his the simplest way I know how. Quit bitching and put your self out there, and say something. I don’t care what it is as long it has a foundation, but say something. Are you scared of getting your feelings hurt, or looking stupid? I have news for you; no one is keeping score here so you might as well engage in an opportunity to sharpen your own perspective, or if you don’t have an opinion to develop an opinion. Or you could sit in front of your keyboard frustrated, perpetually disagreeing with me but not engaging in a discussion. Personally, I would prefer to see someone stand up and voice their opinion even if it is in opposition to my own. I can respect that, but I don’t want to hear people complaining because of how harshly their comments are scrutinized. What do you want, a moderator, censorship, to put aggressive debaters in timeout? We could just have a boring discussion where we oppose each other, and just agree to disagree without fleshing out any issues. If that is what you guys want then just say it.

Actually, Aiden, let’s make it the next poll. It will give our members a chance to anonymously vote, and to allow any readers to chime in.

Here is the question:

Do want to see the aggressive rhetoric used in Triskelos discussion to be toned down?

Yes, I personally do not feel that the blog should be used as a forum for debate anyway.
Yes, I think it defeats the purpose of friends coming together to have an intelligent discussion.
No, healthy debate is good, and the discussion is not always uncivil.
No, the more aggressive the better. Let’s get to the heart of these issues.