8 Responses to “NorthEscambia.com Will Have Barack Obama Inauguration Coverage And Photos From Washington, D.C.”

1. Darryl Hall on January 22nd, 2009 9:57 am

   LOL; Ron just loves a good debate, and knows what I think of Bush and his cronies. And he knows I think they trashed the Constitution. As for Obama’s birth, he was born in this country to an American. Granted it was the woman, and there is a notion that is as old as civilization here that his mother doesn’t count. We’re only products of our fathers, and the ties to our mothers are not important, which is wrong. Why do some try so hard to discredit his citizenship, his birth to an American, with a birth certificate in Hawaii?

   I don’t think Democrats as a whole have all the answers, nor do all Republicans, and I think the economic mess is a shared mess, both of government and of private enterprise in the financial businesses, but my issues with Bush revolve around the manipulation of raw intelligence, the pre-determination of some of his administration to go into Iraq, the use of torture, sometimes as a means of revenge. Torture is unreliable for information and its use is against treaties we signed, thus against the Constitution, and it is just immoral. Are we no better than those that oppose us?

   Hope everyone is staying warm, although I understand Oak Grove and Walnut Hill already have warmed up, so send it up here: I’m freezing.

2. Redhead on January 20th, 2009 10:16 pm

   Hey Ron and Darryl ya’ll boys give each other a call on the phone so you can chat all you want to there. I have hope backed by faith which means it is not false hope. Hope without the faith isn’t worth anything. What a historic day we have witnessed. I tried to turn off the coverage today but kept coming back to it. I just had to see more. I found it incredibly moving and poignant to each American. President Obama was elected to help us get out this mess we got ourselves into with Dubya. Thank goodness he’s back in Texas and they can have him. lol

3. Ron on January 20th, 2009 2:45 pm

   Can’t we agree on a few things?

   Can we agree that Barack Obama is indeed our new President, and GWB is simply a past-President. My team lost this round, your team won.

   So:
   Can’t we agree that there was no conspiracy between the courts and the Republican National Committee?

   Can’t we agree that Bush and the RNC did not undermine the rights and institutions required for free elections?

   Can’t we finally agree that such narratives about Bush-Cheney-RNC-SCOTUS political machinations, dirty tricks, and conspiracies to steal elections, are merely paranoid fantasies?

   Can’t we agree that George and Dick didn’t know all along where Osama Bin Laden was?

   Can’t we agree that there was no October surprise?

   Can’t we agree that the Bush Administration has NOT subverted the Constitution or imposed totalitarianism on America?

   Can’t we agree that Congress voted on the war, and some of the loudest voices for authorization are now members of this new administration?

   Can’t we agree that the election tells us America’s attitudes toward race have changed?

   Can’t we agree that Americans are not as bigoted as race baiters say we are, and apparantly still want us to be?

   Can’t we agree we just narrowly dodged a bullet on illegal voter registration and voting fraud?

   Can’t we agree we should solve these problems such as associated with ACORN and similar organizations, before a scandal tangles up a future election?

   Can’t we agree that the Constitution and the electoral process are NOT fundamentally flawed and do NOT require revision, other than through the established 2/3’s Amendment process?

   My hopes and prayers are for the divine guidance of this new administration.
   He needs it, and We the People absolutely require it.
   God bless America.

4. Darryl Hall on January 20th, 2009 11:46 am

   Ron, I know you consider Democrats some sort of humanist evil and only Republicans are good, but the facts don’t support that. Look at Bush: to say no terrorist attacks happened on his watch is to forget the worst attack on Amerian soil by terrorist: 9-11. Clinton did expand anti-terrorist funding, did try to get Bin Liden, missing once and waited too long on a second opportunity. What about Bush’s first 8 months: he tried to cut anti-terrorist funding 23%, he refused to support the FBI’s request for more anti-terrorist agents, and his administration pushed aside the CIA director ignoring serious warnings from them and the out-going Clinton Administration. After 9-11, when we went in to Afghanistan, and had bin Laden trapped in one region, what did he authorize? Not one US soldier to go in. Instead he sent in Afghan warlords, and relied on Pakinstan to block his escape route. We see how that turned out. Then they lied, manipulated raw intelligence data, and pushed the country for an invasion of Iraq, who did not have anything to do with 9-11. A country that Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfwitz, and other administration officials had tried to get Clinton to attack after being upset with Bush Sr. for not going into Bagdad. Then they did the most incompetent job of planning on the intial invasion, and not once did W consult the one person who came throught the CIA, who had first hand knowledge of the region and of Iraq; his father. Was this arrogance or just stupidity? Probably both. An unjustified war that had nothing to do with terrorism (does now) that will probably cost us directly and indirectly between 2 and 3 trillion dollars. And Bush supporters say it is all the Democrats fault?

5. APPREHENSIVE on January 18th, 2009 5:19 pm

   Well stated, Mr. Wilson. One of President Bush’s last comments to the nation was to caution against complacency towards terrorism. I, too, “hope” this advice did not fall upon deaf ears. Also, there was a great truth in your remarks about the strength and validity of our constitution. We all should, indeed, be praying for our country–”hope” will not be enough.

6. Ron Wilson on January 17th, 2009 3:43 pm

   In October 2000, during the election cycle, after eight years of the Clinton
   administration, a strengthening al Qaeda attacked the U.S.S. Cole. No such
   thing happened in 2008. Al Qaeda today seems in retreat. But most voters didn’t
   let being safe at home, any more than winning a war abroad, determine their
   vote.

   Americas’ tendency to take hard-fought national security successes for granted,
   (once, of course, they are won), seems to be the key to how Democrats win Presidential elections.

   Dwight Eisenhower pursued a cautious yet effective foreign policy.
   Voters, however seem to have been unimpressed by the peace and stability of 1960 and chose John Kennedy. Partly as a result of Kennedy’s initial weakness, the Berlin Wall went up, and the Cuban Missile Crisis followed.

   Then, due to Lyndon Johnson’s need to appear strong, we escalated in Vietnam.

   The voters elected Richard Nixon to extricate us from the quagmire in Vietnam,
   which he did, and Gerald Ford attempted to prevent the Democratic Congress from walking away from our responsibilities.

   Voters decided, however, to give the presidency back to the party of JFK and
   LBJ, and we got the Iranian revolution and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan,
   along (in case anyone has forgotten) with double digit interest and inflation
   rates, from the clueless Jimmy Carter.

   So again a disheartened and downtrodden America wisened-up and elected Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and stunningly, we won the Cold War (virtually without having fired a shot), and Bush determinedly drove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait.

   So, again in 1992 the voters were able to take peace for granted and to focus on
   domestic policy. “It’s the economy, stupid” was a stupid but successful slogan
   just as its equivalents had been in 1976 and 1960, and we ended up with the
   completely corrupt and morally bankrupt administration of Bubba Clinton!

   I am fearful that we have now made the same error in selecting Barack Obama. I
   “Hope” that I’m proved wrong. I am somewhat encouraged that President-elect
   Obama seems (at times) to understand that it’s a dangerous world, that he’ll be
   tested, and that weakness is provocative and dangerous.

   The much-derided Bush administration got 911, Katrina, the war in Iraq, and the
   results of the Democrats failed policies from the Community Reinvestment Act and the real estate bubble started by the failed Fannie/Freddy. He did however succeed in preventing a second terrorist attack in the United States over the last seven years. But this fact, like Iraq, barely came up in the presidential campaign.

   John McCain advocated the surge publicly and made the case for it privately. The
   Republicans staked everything on success in Iraq. They defended it passionately and kept enough public support for the surge so the Democratic party’s repeated efforts to abort it failed.

   The surge worked better than even its strongest proponents expected. The strategic and moral calamity of an American withdrawal in defeat, from the front in the war against terroristic jihadist Islamic fascism, was averted.

   Because of a few heroic principaled Conservative Republicans, and our brave unparalleled miltary, the United States is on the verge of snatching victory from the jaws of defeat that Harry Reid & Nancy Pelosi, et al so desperately seemed to be attempting. Meanwhile, John McCain said repeatedly that he’d rather lose an election than lose a war. We ended up winning a war, and he ended up losing the election.

   So, as a result of the remarkable progress in Iraq over the past two years, Iraq
   faded as an issue in the presidential race. And with it, the critical question
   of who should be commander in chief also receded.

   And, President Obama (who was all for unilateral capitulation and withdrawal),
   will now be able to draw down in an orderly manner.

   The Republican Party lost the White House primarily because a complicit Main
   Stream Media convinced a majority of the populace that President Bush had acted incompetantly, and McCain being from the same party as Bush found himself “guilty by association”.

   So it seems that in politics such as life, no good deed goes unpunished.

   So, now it’s our turn to “Hope” that President Obama’s policies and decisions
   will strengthen the nation.

   We must simply “Hope” that our country and the cause of freedom in the world
   will emerge from the next four years stronger than they are today.

   And, I guess we are just supposed to completely disregard the Constitutional
   eligibility test. If the plain language of the Constitution is no longer to be
   taken seriously by our nation’s controlling legal authorities, we have now
   become an outlaw nation, no longer under the rule of law but under the rule of
   men.

   And, with that being the case, if history is any indication, we probably ought
   to do more than “Hope”, I’d say we had better pray!

7. century girl on January 17th, 2009 7:22 am

   Regardless of who anyone may have supported in the past, it is time to move forward and support “Our” President. Yes, “our” president! We must, as a nation, become a Born again American. Unity in our country will begin the healing process.

8. Darryl Hall on January 16th, 2009 9:42 am

   I know a lot of people back down there are against Obama (he’s a Democrat, or he’s too liberal, he’s black or one of the silly false rumors of his religion or culture) but after Bush’s complete lack of Constitutional integrity (use of torture, violation of foreign treaties and Constitutional laws and principals, manipulation of raw intelligence data to push for invasion of Iraq when they were not a terrorist threat, etc. etc. etc.) the country simply had enough. Anyone who thinks Bush is strong on security need to read about how, in the first 8 months in office, tried to cut anti-terrorist funding 23% (after Clinton raised it for 3 years running), refused FBI request for more funding for more agents for anti-terror work, ignored the CIA’s head man on al Qaeda, and didn’t do any serious work on al Qaeda until after 9-11. Then there were their attempts to reduce soldier pay increases, tried to cut combat pay bonuses, wasted years not properly funding personale and vehicle armor programs while our soldiers where being killed and maimed. The administration’s complete lack of preparation for a war they were gunning for since Clinton’s administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfwitz and others in the administration were part of a group who wrote Clinton demanding he attack Iraq and that we should fight a two front war to show the world are capabilities) is criminal. I suggest anyone interested on this last point to watch “No End in Sight” out on DVD. It interviews people who were part of the Bush Administration’s people in Iraq trying to get it under control.

   So an African-American getting elected President is a big thing, for under normal circumstances it probably wouldn’t have happened for decades more, but Bush and his administration’s foul behavior just fueled the fire for a big change.