Hi Pic,

Thanks for your response, as I stated in my first post, it was written with respect and thus not an attack. As we both know this is unnecessary in Agoracom. I just temporarily had flashbacks to Talkin' John Birch Paranoid Blues (Bob Dylan) and had to ask why! American politics are certainly colorful, but I would argue there is a serious issue with the difference between foreign policy power and domestic. Most US presidents who wish to make a serious impact would be best to work on foreign affairs as they have nearly unlimited powers (OK the congress theoretically has to sanction any war, but as with the Gulf of Tonkin Act this can be done retroactively to avoid a constitutional showdown.) The real problems emerge when there is domestic work to be done.

Look back and think about it. Any president who focused heavily on domestic policy made little or no inroads, unless driven by fears propagated by foreign policy concerns (wiretapping, Patriot Act, homeland security). Even Bush who looked like he could do anything he wanted to do in foreign politics (badly) had no real sway in domestic policies. I think this is a fundamental achilles heal to the US and it is something that needs to be rectified. How similar is the infrastructure in terms of domestic policy today to that of 60 years ago? Very similar. The only major changes (as rightfully pointed out yesterday by another board member) were in changes to assist the rich to get richer through false economics and manipulation (gold standard... ach who needs it eh?). The loosening of regulations, the unleashing of the 'magic of the market' is a real disaster. The fundamental flaw according to Greenspan was to underestimate the greed of the banks and other financial institutions even when it is against their own long term interests! Really... underestimating the greed of banks. Funny that.

Anyhow, when it comes to real hard core domestic issues that require urgent attention (health care, welfare state, social security) the US presidents avoid the issues or tackle them to their eventual detriment (even if they have a super majority in the Senate). Why, because the congress is a joke. There are two parties who are comprised on individuals in constant 'election mode'. Build bridges & hospitals with your name on it, get military contracts, help the local bank, secure a monetary nod from the Hedge Fund millions... but god forbid you do something you actually believe it! Why do most of them vote on way or the other... what do they get for their state or region by voting one way or the other. A system of bribes and positions taken to represent business interests. The problem is how do you fix a totally broken system of government when it takes that same government to vote for the changes? "Change we can believe it" is simply not really possible, except for the mentality of the leader. Obama, in my opinion is honestly trying to make changes for the better and bravely stepping into areas of US politics that only the bravest would dare. Will it be his undoing? It was for Clinton. If you see a sudden shift in Obama to looking towards focusing on international issues, you can bet your bottom dollar that's it for the remainder of his 8 years regarding domestic policies. He'll have learned that changing the infrastructure in the US is a minefield of mud slinging, finger pointing and 'death panels' (that made me laugh my ass off, especially having lived in some of the best medical systems on the planet... Canada, the UK, Australia and now Switzerland).

I do hope we can all sit down with a massive share price to celebrate, and at that meeting see a major reformation in US policies for those who have the least, not the most. Better justice system, better health care, better social policy and greater understanding and respect between the people there. Isn't is strange that on forums like these, people of divergent opinions can come and discuss things without the circus like chaos of a town hall meeting? Respect.