 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular Views on Obama
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: CarolC Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:03 PM Labels are a distraction. They only serve to promote the idea of politics and government as a team sport. It's time to dispense with the labels and deal with the issues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Azizi Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:03 PM Another Clinton surrogate has maligned Senator Barack Obama. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/bet-chief-raps-obama-in-sc/ BET Founder Slams Obama in South Carolina By Katharine Q. Seelye ; January 13, 2008 Here's an excerpt of that article: "COLUMBIA, S.C. — Robert L. Johnson, the founder of Black Entertainment Television, who is campaigning today in South Carolina with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, just made a suggestion that raised the specter of Barack Obama's past drug use. He also compared Mr. Obama to Sidney Poitier, the black actor, in "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner." At a rally here for Mrs. Clinton at Columbia College, Mr. Johnson was defending recent comments that Mrs. Clinton made regarding Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. She did not mean to take any credit away from him, Mr. Johnson said, when she said that it took President Johnson to sign the civil rights legislation he fought for. Dr. King had led a "moral crusade," Mr. Johnson said, but such crusades have to be "written into law." "That is the way the legislative process works in this nation and that takes political leadership," he said. "That's all Hillary was saying." He then added: "And to me, as an African-American, I am frankly insulted that the Obama campaign would imply that we are so stupid that we would think Hillary and Bill Clinton, who have been deeply and emotionally involved in black issues since Barack Obama was doing something in the neighborhood – and I won't say what he was doing, but he said it in the book – when they have been involved." Moments later, he added: "That kind of campaign behavior does not resonate with me, for a guy who says, 'I want to be a reasonable, likable, Sidney Poitier 'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner.' And I'm thinking, I'm thinking to myself, this ain't a movie, Sidney. This is real life." ... Update: 5 p.m. Mr. Johnson just released this statement, through the Clinton campaign: "My comments today were referring to Barack Obama's time spent as a community organizer, and nothing else. Any other suggestion is simply irresponsible and incorrect. "When Hillary Clinton was in her twenties she worked to provide protections for abused and battered children and helped ensure that children with disabilities could attend public school. That results oriented leadership — even as a young person — is the reason I am supporting Hillary Clinton." " -snip- Judging from the numerous comments posted by readers of this article, lots of people are beyond angry with Hillary Clinton. She is losing a large number of African Americans votes as well as votes from non-African Americans because of the not at all subtle race baiting tactics used by her campaign. If Hillary Clinton had known what a low opinion most African Americans have regarding Bob Johnson and BET {Black Entertainment Television}, she may not have never asked him to help her back pedal her now infamous MLK/LBJ comments. Here's two examples of those comments criticizing Bob Johnson and the Clinton campaign: "I find Mr. Johnson's comments demeaning and insulting. His barely veiled allusion that Senator Obama was doing something inappropriate (ie drug dealing), rather than the community organizing which Senator Obama did in fact engage in, is the same filthy tactic that has already been used by the Clinton campaign in NH with Mr. Shaheen's comments. Is the Clinton campaign going to "distance itself" from these comments as well? As an African American woman, what really enfuriates me is that this is an African American man denigrating another African American man. Simply disgusting!" — Posted by Teach53 ** "The founder of the disgrace to Black culture that is BET needs to shut up and fix his channel. He holds no weight. Is this the best that HRC could get? Shame. And what does Barack's drug use years ago have anything to do with the nonsense that is coming out of the HRC camp?? What about his "kind of campaign behavior" Wow, his stupidity runs deep. I think he just made things worse…after all, Clyburn came to his own conclusions without the help of the Obama campaign. Is he stupid? I love how Hillary is singlehandedly dividing the Democratic party (read: the outrage in NH), the Black community, Unions…I mean, the woman is on a roll…Keep doing that you're doing. We'll all be thrown back into the 1990's in no time. " — Posted by Uzoma -snip- Here's an explanation of Uzoma's reference to "Clyborn": Clyburn keeps heat on Clintons by Mike Dorning "In case the presidential candidates didn't get the message from comments published in the New York Times yesterday, Rep. Jim Clyburn, the most powerful African-American in the congressional leadership, issued a written statement underscoring his unhappiness over recent comments from Sen. Hillary Clinton and President Bill Clinton that appeared to dismiss, respectively, the importance of Martin Luther King Jr.'s contributions to the passage of civil rights legislation and Sen. Barack Obama's candidacy. Clyburn is a powerful political figure in South Carolina and especially among African-Americans, who make up about half of the electorate in the Democratic primary there"... http://weblogs.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/blog/2008/01/clyburn.html |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:07 PM You are absolutely right, B-Mick... This is the Dems election to loose and what I am seein', especially out of the Clinton camp, is an amazing ability to use subtle racial remarks that can get one heck of a lotta black voters, in particular, to sit this one out... Next thing ya' know the Clintons will have cleared out enough of the front lines that usually stand up and say "Hey, that is outta bounds" so that the Repubs will be askin' Obama if he ever solf drugs to school kids... Makes this ol' hillbilly sick... I have no problems with any camp except the Clinton camp which, IMO, could teach Karl Rove a few new tricks... Well, I don't see Hillary *weepin' her way to the White House*... But I do see her damaging Obama's chances... The Clintons need to do some serious rethinkin' here... They are the ones who have played the race card... I don't give a flyin' frig if the old guard civil rights folks think that Bill Clinton was the first black president... If that's what they think, fine... Keep it to yourselves... He ain't black... Hey, ain't no bad folks here... Just folks who need to rethink the game... The amin thing is to stop the insanity... If one looks at the Repub hopefulls its like looking into a looney ward at some state mental hospital... Yeah, lets at least keep our ranks tight... That's why I proposed a deal with CarolC... Lets just get the Repubs (including the Clinton Repub-lites) outta the White House, catch our collective breath and go on from there... Sorry if I consider the Clintons as Repubs but they are... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: mg Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:07 PM watch the sneaky two not really say stuff but omit stuff..I thought it was a bit cagey of Bill to refer to Obama and then the boys and girls..meaning other candidates..he did not put him in with the "boys" but watch for little blank spaces for the agile mind to insert its own stuff...there will be nothing to deny, nothing to fire out of control subordinates that you just can not seem to restrain ..for...watch and weep for America. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Azizi Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:12 PM In case folks here are unfamiliar with BET and why so many African Americans are down on that television station and its founder/former owner, here's two more comments from that New York Times blog: "One only needs to turn on BET to see how it promotes all the horrible stereotypes of young black men as being stupid misogynist drug-using gangsters. Frankly, I wouldn't take the endorsement of a guy who spreads these stereotypes seriously. James Clyburn serves as a positive example to the black community, and he independently criticized Mrs. Clinton for her comments." — Posted by Nicholas Finch ** "Robert Johnson has got a lot of nerve! Has anyone looked at BET recently? Johnson has gotten rich on the degradation of his own community. I suggest Johnson take a look in the mirror when he makes insinuations about insulting the intelligence of the black community. And by the way, Hilary and Bill may have been emotionally involved in "issues" concerning the black community, but last time I checked they did little but pay lip service to and play the saxophone. And by the way, as an African American I have NEVER considered Bill Clinton to be the first black president. That day will come when Barak Obama is sworn in!" — Posted by Ashamed of BET |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:13 PM Exactly, mg... The Clintons are up to no good here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:20 PM Hmmm. Mick, I think the way your primary system is set up (as a "winner takes all" free-for-all like the game "Risk", held prior to your national elections) almost guarantees this kind of divisive and very destructive infighting in both parties, Democratic and Republican, but, yes, the Democrats seem to suffer more on account of it, perhaps because they (some of them) are more idealistic and less pragmatic in a sense. You need to have a different system...one where your parties select their leader LONG before the next election, not just before it. And they should not do it by fighting public battles for the popular vote. They should do it through an internal party process that works to select the most effective leader overall...and it should be a relatively short process (a few weeks of discussion INSIDE the party caucuses, followed by a convention, period...NO primaries.) In Canada, and in most parliamentary democracies, that is exactly how it is done, and it results in far fewer dirty tricks, far fewer lies and innuendos, far less misleading propaganda to manipulate the public vote, far less damage to the party. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Azizi Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:21 PM Here's two more comments from that New York Times blog: "The assertion that it took President Johnson's legislative leadership to pass the Civil Rights Act is another example of top down historical analysis that devalues the impact and political agency of grass roots movements. Without the pressure exerted by student, community, labor and church activist, which ultimately exposed the hypocrisy inherent in American society, President Johnson would have moved with "all deliberate speed" to sign the Civil Rights Act. Hillary Clinton's contention that her experience and connections will allow her to deliver on her promises is exactly the type of arrogant political leadership that the electorate must reject." — Posted by JNB ** "Unfortunately, the Clintons' despicable Dick-Morris-triangulation strategy to inject race into the campaign and then frame and blame Obama for the very act they themselves have done is being executed today as I anticipated it would last night ("Bill Clinton Tries to Tamp Down 'Fairy Tale' Remark" Comment #236). The only surprise is that the comments of her surrogates are are no longer subtle "dog whistle" undertones but open and blantantly vile bile that all but the most obtuse Clinton supporters intentionally adopting their "see no evil, hear no evil" poses must acknowledge. They're bringing it from both directions: one anonymous surrogate ridiculing Obama's white supporters by implying that Obama's "hip black[ness]" is his only noteworthy attribute that would attract those wannabe hipsters, while trotting out their African American toady Bob Johnson, to compare Obama to Sidney Poitier, who's often unfairly criticized as a "sanitized" black person whose acceptable to white people (i.e., "not black enough") and also refer to "Guess Who's Coming To Dinner" to associate Obama with the "taboo" and taint of miscegenation in case there's anyone left who doesn't know that Obama's mother was white and his father was black. All the while, Hillary claims that race and gender shouldn't be misused in this way in the campaign. Yesterday I was heartbroken by the tactics of the Clintons, for whom I had so much admiration and a deep reservoir of good will. Today, they have gone too far to ever assuage my feelings or, more importantly, have my vote, as beguiling as Bill Clinton is and no matter how much I'd like to reminisce about the good times we had back in the '90s. I can no longer bear to see them every day on the national and world stage. I'm a lifelong Democrat but if Hillary Clinton becomes the party's nominee, for the first time, a viable third-party candidate (Bloomberg? Gore? even - gasp - McCain under the right circumstances, Iraq policy and the Supreme Court be darned) would get my vote." — Posted by Richard O. http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/bet-chief-raps-obama-in-sc/ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:29 PM Mind you, our parliamentary prime ministers also have a good deal LESS power than your president does. It's a different approach to governing. They cannot veto legislation, they can only act as party leader in parliament to influence by persuasion the rest of their party members and other seated members regarding proposed legislation, and their influence, needless to say, is usually considerable in that case...but once parliament ratifies a new piece of legislation, it's law. The prime minister cannot then veto it. Your presidents have considerably too much power, in my opinion. Your executive office needs to be tamed. Under G.W. Bush it's been right out of control, and your Congress has been rendered into a shadow of what it should be. A government such as Mr Bush's would have been voted out in Canada sometime well prior to 2004, probably prior to 2003. The Iraq War would never have been allowed to happen at all, because there was no legal or rational basis for waging it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:39 PM Exactly, Mizi-A... This ias the kinda stuff the Clintons don't mind one bit usin'... It is racism-lite... The message is that black folk is fine for suggestin' ideas but ain't up to the task of being "president" and implimentin' those ideas... What does this make Dr. King??? Chopped liver??? Bull... He had a better handle on what was going down in the 60's than any white leader... Okay, Bobby Kennedy was catchin' up but still not there when he was on his way to the Dem nomination... As a white person, I resent the implication that Bill Clinton was the first black president... I resent that a former civil rights leader would imply that Bill Clinton slept with more balck women than Barak Obama... Bill Clinton ain't black... Period... Get over it, Clintonites... Yeah, the Clintons need to rethink their campaign... If they wanta have hillary cry at the drop of a hat that's fine... Here's a box of Kleenix... But please spare US the race thing... Lotta of US are beyond yer juviline race stuff, thank you... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 13 Jan 08 - 08:43 PM A government such as Mr Bush's would have been voted out in Canada sometime well prior to 2004, probably prior to 2003. The Iraq War would never have been allowed to happen at all, because there was no legal or rational basis for waging it. Well, our system here is not that different from yours in some of those ways, Little Hawk, and it didn't work out that way. No legal or rational for the war didn't stop our MPs believing what they were told (or making out that they believed it), and lining up to vote for the war. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Richard Bridge Date: 13 Jan 08 - 09:09 PM It is possible that I am under-sensetised to race issues, but there seems to me to be a possible aura of sanctimoniousness about the cries of "racist language". There is a debate on, and language is needed to enable issues to be addressed. The debate is stultified if every word has to be examined in microscopic detail to see whether it is politically correct. Can it really be that the words complained of are an appeal to racial prejudice? It is a very long way from Enoch Powell's "Rivers of Blood" speech. Or is it more likely that the complainants are manufacturing an accusation? Indeed, since as I see it Obama has gone out of his way not to be a "black candidate" are the accusers as much mavericks from his campaign as most of the accused may be from the Clinton campaign? Surely it is more relevant to examine and compare the detailed policies of the candidates. I have been working on this, but have run out of time until next weekend, but I feel I am close to a comparison on health care: - HEALTH INSURANCE: Clinton: Use existing insurance system in for-profit medicine. Fix holes in Medicaid and SCHIP. New Federal provision like FEHBP for all. Expanded Medicare scheme. Insurers must cover – but set own premium. Tax credits to assist affordability (net tax cuts). No mention of assistance for non-taxpayers. Tax breaks for employers with good plans. Apparently no cover for those who "choose" not to insure. Obama: Existing insurance system, expand Medicaid and SCHIP. New Federal provision like FEHBP for all. Insurers must cover. Premiums must be fair and NOT health-dependent. Federal subsidy for affordability, apparently not tax-based. Employers without health scheme taxed to support subsidy cost. Healthy living and quality of care proposals. Right to import safe prescription medicines. Conclusion: Hardly anything in it, Obama by a whisker |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Jan 08 - 09:24 PM Richard - It always seemed to me like the "race" thing was hugely overdone in American politics, but that has a lot to do with people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, who have made a living out of turning everything into a racial issue. And everytime they do, the media gives them the attention they need to capitalize on it. In this current skirmish, it isn't clear who benefits by bringing up the racial issue. If Hillary thinks the New Hampshire win had something to do with racial preferences, she might think it is to her advantage. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: mg Date: 13 Jan 08 - 10:42 PM it sounds like they are playing with Hispanic heads as well..the Clinton campaign..chips and avacados..reminding them that Hispanics might be uncomfortable with Obama etc. etc. I could not understand the first time I saw Bill Clinton how anyone would ever vote for him and the more I saw her same same. If you want J. Edgar back ....if you want more dirty tricks than anyone ever...I am sure she has some good plans..and would work very hard...but heaven help the person who crosses her. And what do they have in secret files on some of their supporters and endorsers one may ask???? Is it all true, totally voluntary and above=board? And tie in that nasty comment by Andy Young about women who have been involved with both Obama and Clinton..and a nasty comment by Al Sharpton about Obama's racial heritage...mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 13 Jan 08 - 11:00 PM McGrath...yeah, it was astounding that Tony Blair was able to strongarm his party and his government into going into that war...clearly going against the wishes of a great majority of his own population...just an incredible hijacking of a government. To the credit of his party, there were many in it who vigorously opposed what he was doing. As far as I'm concerned he utterly betrayed his party and his nation. It seems that no matter who you vote for in the UK, you get a government that serves the same grand imperial plan...in concert with the USA. Your parties have been bought and hijacked. Canadians in general did not support that war either, and our government stayed out of it. It's clear to me that Tony Blair and George Bush had decided long in advance of the Iraq War exactly what they were going to do...and they were serving their own secret agenda for the war, regardless of what the British people thought about it. Their agenda had nothing to do with Iraqi WMDs or Iraq's ability to threaten anyone. Iraq had no real ability to threaten other nations after the Gulf War in '91. They were after other things, things they never spoke of or would admit to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 13 Jan 08 - 11:27 PM "...and a nasty comment by Al Sharpton about Obama's racial heritage..." I didn't know Sharpton had commented on Obama's heritage. What did he say? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 14 Jan 08 - 11:33 AM MG has brought up an important point about Hillary in saying "Heaven help anyone who crosses her..." Given the "tool box" of executive powers that Cheney has carved out for Bush a Hillary with all that power could be very dangerous, especially when one thinks that Bill will be playin' with the tools behind the scenes... Hmmmmmmmmmmm??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 14 Jan 08 - 11:56 AM Obama Endorsed By Two More 'Red State' Senators AP | January 13, 2008 12:59 PM Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has won the endorsement of two fellow Democratic senators from the heartland _ Ben Nelson, a popular moderate in largely Republican Nebraska and Claire McCaskill from Missouri, historically a bellwether in presidential contests. Nelson said Saturday he believes Obama has ability to bridge the partisan divide and to carry Democratic candidates across the country to victory in 2008. Nelson, pledging his support for his Illinois colleague, said Obama has "the greatest potential to ending the bitterness and poisonous atmosphere in Washington." McCaskill plans to announce her support for the Illinois senator Sunday, according to an Obama aide and a McCaskill staffer who spoke Saturday on condition of anonymity so as not to upstage the announcement. Her endorsement is expected to be a major boost for Obama in Missouri, one of nearly two dozen states holding primaries or caucuses on Feb. 5, and could help Obama woo female voters in his race against New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, his chief rival for the Democratic nomination. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: mg Date: 14 Jan 08 - 02:03 PM http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erica-jong/whos-tired-of-pink_b_81087.html Here is something nasty beyond belief..definitely sexist..racist against "pink" men... I know that there are lots of really bad men out there..but I just don't seem to meet any of them...mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 14 Jan 08 - 02:10 PM "Crucial votes in Iowa and New Hampshire aren't the only places the presidential race is seeing a shake-up. Columbus-based market research firm Opinion Consultants released the results of its latest Central Ohio CEO/Leaders Poll, which showed a change in candidate support from April. Nearly half of surveyed Republicans would vote for Sen. John McCain in a primary while Sen. Barack Obama came in a commanding first place on the Democratic side with 58 percent support. A similar poll conducted in April 2007 found that nearly half of all respondents supported none of the top three contenders on their party ticket. The poll was conducted between Jan. 2 and Jan. 11, during the first two presidential contests, and included more than 200 area respondents. Obama and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee garnered the most support at the Iowa caucuses Jan. 3, while Sen. Hillary Clinton and Sen. John McCain won the New Hampshire primary Jan. 8. McCain, with 48 percent support in the local poll, edged out former New York mayor and early Republican frontrunner Rudy Giuliani, who garnered 28 percent support, while former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney pulled in third place with 15 percent. Mimicking the surprising results of the Jan. 3 Iowa caucus, Sen. John Edwards came in a distant second on the Democratic side with 17 percent support, while Clinton pulled a third-place finish with 14 percent. " |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Wolfgang Date: 14 Jan 08 - 04:09 PM LH, I do not read any toxic beliefs into your post. I merely (merrily?) smiled about the surface form of your post which invited deliberate misreadings. Read your post again: (1) It comes immediately after the post by CarolC decrying "racism". In that context your To call someone a "racist", of course, is also a very handy way of destroying his reputation could be read easily with a different angle than the one I knew you did intend. (2) All you post is about labels: communist, fellow traveler, Muslim, anti-Semite, racist, socialist, in that order. This too invites another reading than the one you did intend. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 14 Jan 08 - 04:33 PM Okay, Wolfgang. ;-) Yes, one has to be very careful how one says anything in order not to be misunderstood. Imagine what it must be like when running for high office! Rather like walking through a minefield on wobbly stilts, I would think. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: CarolC Date: 14 Jan 08 - 07:30 PM Wolfgang has confirmed my suspicions, LH. While he only named you in his little snipe, he actually was aiming to hit both of us with it. That seems to be a little hobby of his. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 14 Jan 08 - 09:02 PM "RENO, Nev. Ð As he campaigned in northern Nevada on Monday, Senator Barack Obama said he was concerned that a heated discussion of racial issues in the presidential campaign could divide the Democratic Party. ÒI donÕt want the campaign at this stage to degenerate into so much tit-for-tat, back-and-forth, that we lose sight of why all of us are doing this,Ó Mr. Obama told reporters at a news conference here. ÒWeÕve got too much at stake at this time in our history to be engaging in this kind of silliness. I expect that other campaigns feel the same way.Ó Mr. Obama was seeking to be seen as taking the high road in the ongoing feud between his campaign and that of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. First, he conducted three back-to-back interviews with the major television networks here. Then, he hastily called a news conference at the Reno Events Center. After speaking to hundreds of Nevada voters at a rally here, Mr. Obama urged Democratic voters not to become embroiled in racially-charged or motivated discussions. ÒIf I hear my own supporters engaging in talk that I think is ungenerous or misleading or in some way is unfair, I will speak out forcefully against it,Ó he said. ÒI hope the other campaigns take the same approach.Ó On a day that initially was devoted to speaking about the economy, he held a nine-minute news conference. Before taking questions, Mr. Obama mentioned his rivals by name and praised them. ÒI think that I may disagree with Senator Clinton or Senator Edwards on how to get there, but we share the same goals. WeÕre all Democrats,Ó Mr. Obama said. ÒWe all believe in civil rights. We all believe in equal rights. We all believe that regardless of race or gender that people should have equal opportunities.Ó He continued, saying: ÒThey are good people, they are patriots. They are running because they think that they can move this country to a better place.Ó..." You'da thunk he was being coached by Big Mick... A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 14 Jan 08 - 09:14 PM Well, Amos, in a way, this is good for not only the dems but for Obama... Let's get this outta the way now... I mean, you know that the Repubs would love nothin' more than to "Willie Horton" Obama late into the campaign like they did Dukacas... Problem is that for the Repubs is that Hillary is taking care of that little situation right here and now and Obam just rises above it and it's not lost on the population how his "grace" and his "non-confrontaion" are just what people are looking for... Hillary and Bill, in their attacks, have made Obama a better candidate and also shown the Repuns that there isn't any weakness there and that if they think they can "Willie Horton" Obama that ... ... that dog won't hunt... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: mg Date: 14 Jan 08 - 10:11 PM I don't see the democratic race as men vs. women, race vs. race. I see it as good (hopefully) vs. evil..and I think there is deep evil that awaits us. I have never felt this way about any other political person or duo but I really think it is so. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 15 Jan 08 - 01:14 AM If you ask me, John-all-war-all-the-time-McCain is evil. And now he's got Joe Lieberman campaigning for him, who is more evil than he is. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 15 Jan 08 - 08:59 AM Yeah, Rigs, these are two sides of the Axis of Evil with Cheney's position up for grabs... Now if McCain get the nomination and brings Giuliani in as his VP then the Axix will be complete... But I think that McCain might even select his bud, Joe "Warmonger" Lieberman and in case there would still be an opening for someone new... Or old... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 15 Jan 08 - 10:41 AM Oddly enough, I like McCain personally -- I admire his steady-on attitude and his spunk. But I think he is immersed by experience and training in a miltarist's view of the world; and it woudl be a mistake to elevate such a viewpoint tot he Presidency, IMHO. I am still very much in favor of Barack Obama; I notice, however, that the media is shunning him to some degree, tending to dance to the tune of the Hillary Waltz. We have a lot to see in the coming weeks before February. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 15 Jan 08 - 10:58 AM "By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen Washington Post Staff Writers Monday, January 14, 2008; Page A01 The first contests of the 2008 presidential campaign have led to a dramatic shake-up in public opinion nationally, with Sen. John McCain now leading the Republican field and Sen. Barack Obama all but erasing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's once-overwhelming advantage among Democrats, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll. ..." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 15 Jan 08 - 11:20 AM Presidential hopeful Barack Obama has won the endorsement of two fellow Democratic senators from the heartland _ Ben Nelson, a popular moderate in largely Republican Nebraska and Claire McCaskill from Missouri, historically a bellwether in presidential contests. Nelson said Saturday he believes Obama has ability to bridge the partisan divide and to carry Democratic candidates across the country to victory in 2008. Nelson, pledging his support for his Illinois colleague, said Obama has "the greatest potential to ending the bitterness and poisonous atmosphere in Washington." McCaskill plans to announce her support for the Illinois senator Sunday, according to an Obama aide and a McCaskill staffer who spoke Saturday on condition of anonymity so as not to upstage the announcement. Her endorsement is expected to be a major boost for Obama in Missouri, one of nearly two dozen states holding primaries or caucuses on Feb. 5, and could help Obama woo female voters in his race against New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, his chief rival for the Democratic nomination. ... (Huffington Post) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 16 Jan 08 - 10:36 AM Abortion I explained my belief that few women made the decision to terminate a pregnancy casually; that any pregnant woman felt the full force of the moral issues involved and wrestled with her conscience when making that decision; that I feared a ban on abortion would force women to seek unsafe abortions, as they had once done in this country. (context) Climate change The issue of climate change is one that we ignore at our own peril. There may still be disputes about exactly how much we're contributing to the warming of the earth's atmosphere and how much is naturally occurring, but what we can be scientifically certain of is that our continued use of fossil fuels is pushing us to a point of no return. And unless we free ourselves from a dependence on these fossil fuels and chart a new course on energy in this country, we are condemning future generations to global catastrophe. (context) Education Today we are failing too many of our children. We're sending them out into a 21st century economy by sending them through the doors of 20th century schools...This is unacceptable. If we truly believe in our public schools, then we have a moral responsibility to do better - to break the either-or mentality around the debate over education that asks us to choose between more money or more reform, and embrace a both-and mentality. Because we know that good schools will require both the structural reform and the resources necessary to prepare our kids for the future. (context) Energy This is our chance to step up and serve. For decades, we have heard President after President call for energy independence in this country, but for decades, we have fallen short. Well it's time to call on ourselves. We shouldn't wait for the next time gas hits $3 a gallon - and we shouldn't accept any more headlines that talk about a dying auto industry or a terrorist plot to use oil as a weapon against America. We should act - and we should act now. Now is the time for serious leadership to get us started down the path of energy independence. Now is the time for this call to arms. (context) Gun control If you want to go hunt, go hunt. Nobody is trying to take your shotgun or rifle away. But when you've got the gun lobbying saying that we can't use ballistics to trace back where guns came from ... then it is time for us to stand up to the gun lobby and say enough. It is time for a change in Washington...I believe that the majority of NRA members would not object to doing a background check from a bullet that has been used to kill a child. (context) Health care Every American has the right to affordable health care. I believe that the millions of Americans who can't take their children to a doctor when they get sick have that right...We now face an opportunity - and an obligation - to turn the page on the failed politics of yesterday's health care debates. It's time to bring together businesses, the medical community, and members of both parties around a comprehensive solution to this crisis, and it's time to let the drug and insurance industries know that while they'll get a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair. (context) War on terror It is time to turn the page. When I am president, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world's most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland...There must be no safe-haven for terrorists who threaten America. We cannot fail to act because action is hard. (context) Immigration It behooves us to remember that not every single immigrant who came into the United States through Ellis Island had proper documentation. Not every one of our grandparents or great-grandparents would have necessarily qualified for legal immigration. But they came here in search of a dream, in search of hope. Americans understand that, and they are willing to give an opportunity to those who are already here, as long as we get serious about making sure that our borders actually mean something.Today's immigrants seek to follow in the same tradition of immigration that has built this country. We do ourselves and them a disservice if we do not recognize the contributions of these individuals. And we fail to protect our Nation if we do not regain control over our immigration system immediately. (context) Iraq I strongly opposed this war before it began, though many disagreed with me at that time. Today, as Americans grow increasingly impatient with our presence in Iraq, voices I respect are calling for a rapid withdrawal of our troops, regardless of events on the ground. But I believe that, having waged a war that has unleashed daily carnage and uncertainty in Iraq, we have to manage our exit in a responsible way - with the hope of leaving a stable foundation for the future, but at the very least taking care not to plunge the country into an even deeper and, perhaps, irreparable crisis. I say this not only because we owe it to the Iraqi people, but because the Administration's actions in Iraq have created a self-fulfilling prophecy - a volatile hotbed of terrorism. (context) Gay marriage Well, it is my strong belief that the government has to treat all citizens equally. I come from that, in part, out of personal experience. When you're a black guy named Barack Obama, you know what it's like to be on the outside. And so my concern is continually to make sure that the rights that are conferred by the state are equal for all people...That's why I am a strong supporter not of a weak version of civil unions, but of a strong version, in which the rights that are conferred at the federal level to persons who are part of a same sex union are compatible. (context) Reform When I am president, I will make it absolutely clear that working in an Obama administration is not about serving your former employer, your future employer or your bank account -- it's about serving your country, and that's what comes first. A lot of people have told me this is pretty tough, but I refuse to accept the Washington logic that you cannot find thousands of talented, patriotic Americans willing to devote a few years to their country without the promise of a lucrative lobbying job when they're done. I know we can find them...A lot of people have told me this is pretty tough, but I refuse to accept the Washington logic. (context) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: CarolC Date: 16 Jan 08 - 11:31 AM getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan Hmmm... against the war in Iraq (even though he voted to fund it) but for war in Pakistan... Did you catch that, Bobert? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 16 Jan 08 - 11:50 AM Carol: Snipping that statement from its proper context is inaccurate. Pakistan is a dubious ally at best, and Obama is much too smart to puruse a war where one is not advisable. The question would be, where the Al Qeda strongholds and support channels really are; I don't know the answer, though. Do you? But in any case I believe you could rely on Obama to avoid like plague any war which could be resolved through diplomatic or economic means. Don't misapply what he is saying here. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Jan 08 - 12:16 PM "where the Al Qeda strongholds and support channels really are; I don't know the answer, though. Do you?" Ummm....in Washington D.C.? My point being, without the last 50 years of outrageous American interference in the lives of people in the Middle East, without the provocations, coups, betrayals, and wars perpetrated by the USA upon Muslim populations in the Middle East, without the CIA's messing around and gathering together in the 80's the most extreme Muslim fanatics they could find and funding and arming them to kill Russians in Afghanistan... ...there would be no Al Queda. There would be no reason for any Al Queda. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 16 Jan 08 - 12:27 PM LH - Your comments sound like they came straight out of the Ron Paul playbook. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Jan 08 - 12:35 PM Yes, we appear to agree on that, don't we? And so would many others outside the USA. Ron Paul seems to be able to think outside the American "box", which is pretty amazing for a USA politician. There are people all over the world to whom his reasoning doesn't sound extraordinary at all, but it sounds extraordinary within the bubble of the usual American political dialogue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 16 Jan 08 - 12:50 PM Yes, well, you'll get a lot of agreement there! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: CarolC Date: 16 Jan 08 - 01:31 PM Amos, an acquaintance of mine who is Pakistani told me that the reason extremist groups like Al Qaeda a able to operate with some degree of impunity in Pakistan is because it helps Musharraf solidify his hold on power for them to do that, and for this reason, he assists them in doing what they are doing. He said that the reason Musharraf is able to do that is because he and the Pakistani army (the generals) are being propped up by the US and other Western goverments. My acquaintance said that Musharraf punishes the moderate, pro-Western people in Pakistan, because they are pushing for democracy, and Musharraf can't allow democracy to happen there or he will lose his hold on power. My acquaintance said that if the West would stop propping up the army, and Musharraf, the people of Pakistan would take care of the extremists. If Obama wasn't a tool of empire, he would know these things, and his rhetoric would reflect this. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 08 - 01:46 PM Tell ya' what, CarolC... If any candidate takes Ron Paul's position on Iraq, Afganistan and Pakistan they can 100% guarentee they will not only not be nominated, will not be elected but also will never be in any position to do anything about these various wars and shady deals... You gotta start somewhere... I'm glad that Paul and Dennis are getting at least some air time... They are the kinds of polical martyrs that are needed... Barry Goldwater singlehandedly launched the conservative movement but he had to take the fall to do it... I'm not sure I want to sacrifice '08 to a John "Warmonger" McCain just so I can sit back and think how righteous I was in making my stand... Do I know for sure that Obama will make the changes nessessary to bring a foriegn policy paradyme switch but, at the very least, he is somewhat electable and we know exactly what we will get with McCain... More of the same... Call it pragmatism, if you like, but this time around I'm not willing to take win the moral battle and loose everything else... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: CarolC Date: 16 Jan 08 - 02:00 PM I don't know why you've invoked Ron Paul's name in response to my post, Bobert. I endorse Kucinich's positions on this subject. The reason people like Kucinich and Paul, who are the only candidates not bought and paid for by the corporatocracy, can't get elected, is because of the vast number of people like you who say, "I can't vote for him because he can't get elected". It doesn't matter how eloquent and "above it all" Obama is. He represents the corporatocracy. If we want to free ourselves from corporatocracy rule, we have to take back our votes and only give them to the candidates who will work for us and not the corporatocracy. If we keep electing the representatives of the corporatocracy, we will never have a democracy, and we will never be free of being ruled by the corporatocracy. And considering the corporatocracy's long-term goals (endless war), we really can't afford to waste our votes on anyone who works for these people. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: artbrooks Date: 16 Jan 08 - 03:44 PM Amos, are those statements from Sen. Obama or are they your own? Sometimes an attribution is helpful. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 16 Jan 08 - 03:45 PM Sorry -- they are Obama's, not mine. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Azizi Date: 16 Jan 08 - 08:18 PM This posting is self-explanatory: ** Open Letter to the Jewish Community: Obama E-Mail Rumor January 15, 2008 An Open Letter to the Jewish Community: As leaders of the Jewish community, none of whose organizations will endorse or oppose any candidate for President, we feel compelled to speak out against certain rhetoric and tactics in the current campaign that we find particularly abhorrent. Of particular concern, over the past several weeks, many in our community have received hateful emails that use falsehood and innuendo to mischaracterize Senator Barack Obama's religious beliefs and who he is as a person. These tactics attempt to drive a wedge between our community and a presidential candidate based on despicable and false attacks and innuendo based on religion. We reject these efforts to manipulate members of our community into supporting or opposing candidates. Attempts of this sort to mislead and inflame voters should not be part of our political discourse and should be rebuffed by all who believe in our democracy. Jewish voters, like all voters, should support whichever candidate they believe would make the best president. We urge everyone to make that decision based on the factual records of these candidates, and nothing less. Sincerely, William Daroff, Vice President, United Jewish Communities Nathan J. Diament, Director, Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America Abraham Foxman, National Director, Anti-Defamation League Richard S. Gordon, President, American Jewish Congress David Harris, Executive Director, American Jewish Committee Rabbi Marvin Hier, Dean, Simon Wiesenthal Center Rabbi David Saperstein, Director, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism Phyllis Snyder, President, National Council of Jewish Women Hadar Susskind, Washington Director, Jewish Council for Public Affairs 2008 Anti-Defamation League http://www.adl.org/internet/Letter_obama.asp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 08 - 08:36 PM Okay, CarolC, make that Dennis's stand on Iraq??? Ain't gonna get no one to the White House except McCain... (Sheet fire, Bobertz... Ain't been that long since you were saying "Green at all costs"...) That was before Bush and Iraq and McCain... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,dianavan Date: 16 Jan 08 - 08:44 PM "The question would be, where the Al Qeda strongholds and support channels really are; I don't know the answer, though. Do you?" - Amos We have known since before the Iraq invasion, that Al Qaeda strongholds are in NW Pakistan along the border with Afghanistan. We also know that the U.S. supports the military dictatorship of Musharef and Musharef supports the tribal warlords in that region. This has to change. This area of the world is very unstable and they have nuclear weapons. We should also closely examine our relationship with Saudi Arabia who is another repressive regime that is not to be trusted. In fact, isn't that where the most of the terrorists originated? We should also question why Sudan harbours terrorists and wonder at the number of training camps elsewhere in the world. Better yet, lets look at why they are so angry with the U.S. corporatocracy. Probably for the same reasons we are angry with corporate America, only more so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 16 Jan 08 - 08:53 PM Yer right, D... We really need to re-examine our entire foriegn policy, top to bottom... It ain't workin' on any level... Right now ain't the time to be sqabbling over "human rights"... Wish it were... IT's about stabilization of the region and then go after "human rights"... I hate to say that but Bush has screwed it up so bad that this is our, and the world's, reality... If I had to put a number on the years that Bush has set "human rights" back it would be somewhere between 20 and 40 years... Nice going, George... You don't have to worry about leabing a legacy... You have sho nuff left one... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: CarolC Date: 16 Jan 08 - 09:36 PM You can't stabilize the region until you stop violating the human rights of the people in the region. The region is unstable because the people there are really, really sick and tired of having their human rights stepped on. If any candidate takes Dennis Kucinich's position on Iraq, Afganistan and Pakistan they can 100% guarentee they will not only not be nominated, will not be elected but also will never be in any position to do anything about these various wars and shady deals... You sure as hell won't get anything except wars and shady deals if you elect someone who is openly promoting and supporting the wars and has a track record of enabling the shady deals. If everyone who thought like you voted for Kucinich, he would be president. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Richard Bridge Date: 17 Jan 08 - 03:00 AM Those summaries of the Obama viewpoint increase my concern that there is sufficient lack of precision in what he is saying that almost anything (well, maybe not as to abortion where he is fairly specific) could lie within the area of the promised "change". "Change" may be all very well, but yuo need to know exactly what change is proposed before you can support it or otherwise. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Mrrzy Date: 17 Jan 08 - 12:12 PM One interesting thing is that he grew up atheist - wonder when THAT will come up in the smear campaigns? |
