 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular Views on Obama
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Stringsinger Date: 10 May 07 - 03:31 PM Obama, Clinton and Edwards have stated that "Iran is not off the table". Code word for possible invasion. As aggravating as Gravel appeared to be, I think he told the truth. Not sure that on policy regarding "national security" (a buzzword for police states and invading foreign countries) makes Obama, Clinton and possibly Edwards much different from the GOP position. None of them are talking about reducing nukes. Kucinich makes the most sense to me. Frank Hamilton |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 10 May 07 - 05:04 PM Frank, Tell me how to make Kucinich more competitive. I feel the same way you do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 10 May 07 - 05:52 PM Make him Obama's VP? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 10 May 07 - 06:03 PM Obama would have to get the nomination first, and I'm having a hard time seeing that happen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 10 May 07 - 06:47 PM US DJ criticised over Obama song (BBC News) Limbaugh has referred to Barack Obama as "Halfrican American" US talk show host Rush Limbaugh has come under fire for airing a racially charged song about the Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Limbaugh has been playing a song called Barack the Magic Negro, to the tune of Puff the Magic Dragon. The right-wing talk show host defended himself by saying he is an entertainer and the song is a parody. Mr Obama, who hopes to become the first black American president, has played down the row. Rush Limbaugh, whose radio show is one of the most popular in the US, justified running the song by saying that an article by a black commentator in the liberal Los Angeles Times was the first to link the term "magic negro" to Mr Obama. Limbaugh said liberals upset about the term should be aware that "magic negro" is a historical cultural term, a reference to benevolent African-Americans portrayed in old films. 'Inflaming audience' The song, he said, was intended to make fun of the problems Mr Obama's candidacy poses to "race-obsessed Democrats", as well as questions from media pundits as to whether Mr Obama was "black enough". Mr Obama said he had not heard the song but that he did not take himself so seriously as to be offended by every comment made about him. His campaign team described the song as dumb. Karl Frisch, a spokesman for Media Matters, a US monitoring group, said the song was consistent with previous comments by Limbaugh, such as referring to Mr Obama as "Halfrican American". Mr Frisch accused Limbaugh of inflaming his audience. The song was first aired in March and there has been a lot of internet traffic associated with it. The CBS News website has temporarily blocked all readers' comments on its stories about Mr Obama. Mike Sims, the director of the website, said CBS could not collectively delete the derogatory remarks because of their "volume and persistence". Mr Obama was last week given secret service protection after threats appeared on white supremacist websites. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 10 May 07 - 06:53 PM And, of course, Don Imus is off the air for making comments that were not intended to harm anyone, though I'll admit they were insulting, while we have this kind of insanity being broadcast unchecked. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Dickey Date: 10 May 07 - 11:26 PM "In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed," Obama told a crowd of 500 in Richmond on Tuesday. The actual number of deaths was 12. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 11 May 07 - 12:11 AM Dickey: Why did you leave out his later statement correcting and apologizing for the misstatement? Trying to slant things? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Peace Date: 11 May 07 - 12:14 AM Dickey slant things? Nooooooooooooooooooooo . . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 11 May 07 - 12:23 AM That's the trouble with being a politician. Every single word that comes out of your mouth can come back to haunt you. Has anyone among us never once made an error when they were talking about something? Besides me and Dickey and Chongo, I mean..... (grin) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Dickey Date: 11 May 07 - 12:19 PM Apollogies are only accepted from democrats and left wingers: Howard Dean: "You think the Republican National Committee could get this many people of color in a single room? " Dean asked to laughter. "Only if they had the hotel staff in here." PASS Trent Lott: "When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over the years, either" Forced to resign. Klansman Byrd: "There are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time." PASS John Kerry: "You know, education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don't, you get stuck in Iraq." PASS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 11 May 07 - 01:28 PM "Why did you leave out his later statement correcting and apologizing for the misstatement? Trying to slant things?" Amos, Are YOU sure you want us to apply the same standards you are putting on him to be applied to you and YOUR posts? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 11 May 07 - 02:37 PM What's wrong with Dean said there? Well I suppose it might offend some Republicans, but I can't see how anyone could see it as in any way racist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 11 May 07 - 03:12 PM Aww...horsefeathers. You are all guilty of what you accuse others of. Just admit it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Dickey Date: 11 May 07 - 11:16 PM The other side of the story is too much for Amos to deal with so he tries to dogpile it. I don't see any original thinking by Amos. He just echos whatever negative crap he can dig up and adds some spin of his own. Play it safe Amos, follow the crowd. When things go wrong just call someone a liar to throw the attention on them while you wiggle off of the hook. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 12 May 07 - 12:43 AM Dickey: I notice you did not answer my question in your haste to throw slurs. Obama made a perfectly clear apology and explanation for his error. As a responsible person who misspoke would do. I just wondered why you left that out. I fail to understand why this question means I am accusing you of lying, which I did not. What is it you think I am wiggling off of, exactly? Do you have any specifics for your peculiar accusation? A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 12 May 07 - 06:27 AM Dickey: You really do need to do a bit of research before regurgitating your chosen drivel: When was Byrd's quote from? When was Lott's quote from? I know--do you? The answers make a big difference. Kerry's quote was from a joke he botched--by leaving out one word. Not that we'd ever want to imply that you are an amazingly credulous right wing fool. As Cheney might say, I'm not here to state that. Have you ever figured out what a non-denial denial is? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 15 May 07 - 03:03 PM Obama will vote for the Feingold amendment: "Tomorrow, I expect cloture votes on two other proposals. One is the Reid-Feingold plan, which would begin a withdrawal of troops in 120 days and end all combat operations on April 1. The other is Senator Levin's proposal, which would create standards and benchmarks for additional funding." "I will support both, not because I believe either is the best answer, but because I want to send a strong statement to the Iraqi government, the President and my Republican colleagues that it's long past time to change course." "Meanwhile, I'll continue to press for my own plan, and work to find the 16 votes in the Senate to pass it with a veto-proof majority and bring our troops home quickly, safely and responsibly." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Wolfgang Date: 20 Jul 07 - 05:03 AM Obama unplugged (in DER SPIEGEL) (Note: the magazine is left of the middle, but this particular journalist is right of the middle, especially when it comes to discussing economy) The senator from Illinois does not live up to the myth his campaigners are trying to create. Wolfgang |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST, Ebbie Date: 20 Jul 07 - 05:24 PM Wow. He learned all about Obama in one speech. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Teribus Date: 21 Jul 07 - 07:20 AM Thanks for the link Wolfgang, I particularly liked this observation: "Comparing Apples and Oranges And Obama does exactly what populists like to do most: He compares apples and oranges. A kids project in Harlem that he would like to see extended across America costs $46 million a year -- the kind of money that is spent in just one morning in the Iraq war, he says. Let's invest this money better, he calls out to the audience. The applause speaks for the effectiveness of these kinds of comparisons. But it also speaks against the candidate. Buying toys instead of weapons is the surest way for America to lose its status as a superpower. The conflict with an aggressive Islam could not be won in this way. Naturally Obama knows this -- that's why in an article for Foreign Affairs he writes that in his opinion the US military urgently needs to be "revitalized." That means more money, more soldiers and more ground forces -- he suggests an increase of around 100,000 men and women. "A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace," he writes." As I stated on another thread, the crop of U.S. Politicians around at the moment could not lead a well trained dog on a leash. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jul 07 - 04:32 PM Obama says Clinton has foreign policy like Bush's By Steve Holland Reuters Thursday, July 26, 2007; 12:26 PM WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama accused Hillary Clinton on Thursday of backing a foreign policy toward hostile nations no different than U.S. President George W. Bush's in an escalation of their war of words this week. Obama, an Illinois senator, fired back at New York Sen. Clinton for calling him "irresponsible and naive" for saying during a CNN/YouTube debate on Monday that he would be willing to meet without preconditions the leaders of Iran, Syria, North Korea, Cuba and Venezuela during his first year in office. The dust-up between the two top contenders in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination in the November 2008 election has been the most dramatic spat thus far in the campaign. Clinton has tried to portray herself as the most experienced option among Democrats, far more prepared to be commander-in-chief than Obama, who has been in the U.S. Senate less than three years compared to her eight years as first lady to President Bill Clinton and senator since 2001. Clinton took a more cautious approach to a debate question about meeting troublesome world leaders, arguing the president should only meet with such leaders after lower-level diplomatic spadework is completed. Obama, in a conference call with reporters, said that is Bush's position as well. "The Bush administration's policy is to say that we will not talk to these countries unless they meet various preconditions. That's their explicit policy," Obama said. At the same time, Obama seemed to walk back a little bit from his debate position, saying diplomatic preparation would be necessary before presidential meetings. "Nobody expects that you would suddenly just sit down with them for coffee without having done the appropriate groundwork. But the question was, would you meet them without preconditions, and part of the Bush doctrine has been to say no," he said. "You'll have to ask Senator Clinton what differentiates her position from theirs," Obama added. (From WAPO) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 05 Aug 07 - 01:57 AM Analysis: Obama Talks Tough on Terror By NEDRA PICKLER The Associated Press Wednesday, August 1, 2007; 11:29 PM WASHINGTON -- Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama warned Pakistan Wednesday that he would use military force if necessary to root out terrorists, the second time in two weeks that he's staked out a dramatically different road for U.S. foreign policy. The Illinois senator's tough talk against Pakistan comes after he pledged to meet with leaders of rogue nations who have been rebuffed by President Bush. Democratic presidential hopeful, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., speaks during a town hall meeting, Monday, July 30, 2007, at Roosevelt Middle School in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall) (Charlie Neibergall - AP) Maria Ramirez officiates as Marcia and Elvis Jimenez are married in the courthouse. (Carol Guzy - The Washington Post) SEE FULL COLLECTION Feedback In Today's A Section • House Passes Bill to Support Renewable Energy • Inspections Note Significant Flaws, But Officials Call Area Bridges Safe • The Rise Of Jeri Thompson • Tougher Stance on Pakistan Took Months • No Money Down Disappearing as Mortgage Option » More in Today's Print Edition Save & Share Article What's This? Digg del.icio.us Yahoo! And while Bush has embraced Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf as a valued ally in the war on terror, Obama said he would take a harder line. He said Musharraf must do more to shut down terrorist operations along the Afghan border or risk a U.S. military attack against the foreign fighters and the loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military aid. "Let me make this clear," Obama said. "There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will." Obama's stance against Pakistan comes after last week's dispute with top rival Hillary Rodham Clinton in which the New York senator accused him of being "irresponsible and naive" for saying he would meet with heads of states such as Cuba, North Korea, Syria and Iran without conditions. This new policy is designed to show that Obama would be a tough commander in chief when times demand it, even though he opposed the Iraq war and wants to open a dialogue with foreign foes. Obama's foreign policy ideas all have one thing in common _ they stake ground on the flip side of current U.S. policy when many voters are dissatisfied with the country's direction in the world. The first-term Illinois senator is determined to show he can give diplomacy a fresh start. "It's time to turn the page," Obama said four times in a 45-minute speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. The speech was written by Ben Rhodes, a longtime aide to Center president, Sept. 11 Commission Vice Chairman and former Indiana Rep. Lee Hamilton. While he is rejecting Bush's approach, Obama is also trying to lump Clinton in with the administration. His speech also criticized Congress' approval of the Iraq war resolution four times. "With that vote, Congress became co-author of a catastrophic war," Obama said. In 2002, Clinton vote for the resolution authorizing Bush to topple Saddam Hussein's regime. Thousands of Taliban fighters are based in Pakistan's vast and jagged mountains, where they can pass into Afghanistan, train for suicide operations and find refuge from local tribesmen. Intelligence experts warn that al-Qaida could be rebuilding to mount another attack on the United States. ... (WAPO) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,mg Date: 05 Aug 07 - 01:01 PM Again I will say he is the best seeming domestic candidate to come down the pike in a long time. He is exactly what America needs, especially the young men of America need something in the way of a role model, but someone who can talk sternly to them when needed. But why oh why is he talking about invading one of our allies? There are things best left unsaid or said behind closed doors or whatever....Drop Iraq, invade Pakistan....I can not grasp the logic, even it is were just to get votes, which I don't think it was...mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Teribus Date: 05 Aug 07 - 02:48 PM Obama's little outburst regarding his intentions toward Pakistan, will almost guarantee the stopping of any on the ground intelligence coming out of Pakistan. Hillary is perfectly correct when she states that he is incredibly naive when it comes to foreign policy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,mg Date: 05 Aug 07 - 04:21 PM Surely he knows about saving face etc....their's...when they have done a lot to rout out terrorists there..probably others in the same area supporting them...but surely this is so the opposite of diplomacy, statesmanship etc...I am always thinking well, someone must know more about it than me, and perhaps he does, but I can not understand going after our few allies. Allies good, enemies bad...hard to tell difference sometimes but try. If he was just trying to look tough, how about speaking harshly to Bin Laden or insurgents etc. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: katlaughing Date: 05 Aug 07 - 07:22 PM I was really excited about his candidacy until I heard his remark about invading Pakistan. It left me cold and uninterested in him. The will of the people is to get out of Iraq, which means ultimately out of WAR, so why did he have to almost promise another one? I am not interested in ANY candidate who talks war, period. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Donuel Date: 06 Aug 07 - 09:45 AM The new characterization of Obama by the ruling class now calls him Jane Fonda and Dr. Strangelove in the same breath regarding seperate answers Barak gave concerning the use of American nuclear weapons. Add these to the long list of defamatory propoganda phrases aimed at Barak Obama in the 'Obama's goose is cooked' thread. In the last election, the black Congressman Ford was defeated by a commercial that implied he consorted with white women (at a Playboy Magazine party in which Bill OReilly was also in attendence). Eventually an ad will infer that the safety of white women in America will be threatened if Obama is given any exedutive powers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,mg Date: 06 Aug 07 - 06:05 PM Legitimate concerns about national security, which I have, are way different than defamatory propaganda. Like I said, I wished I had more confidence in him to lead us through possible attacks on the USA, and I don't. I do wish there was only this country to worry about, and then I would wholeheartedly support him, as I think he has an extreme lot to offer. Maybe if he had General Powell advising him, maybe some other solutions..I don't know...but I was stunned when I heard that Pakistan remark. I would like to see him president but I can't reconcile it with that comment..which is not only ignorant, as far as I can tell, but inflammatory and self-destructive and dangerous for the country. Maybe someone can help him but he might have totally self-destructed with that..hopefully there is a role that he can fill...president if he can persuade us he is not a loose cannon..but maybe secretary of education or health and welfare or something. Vice President, when he should have been president..but not to Hillary, God forbid she gets the nomination, which she probably will at this point. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: robomatic Date: 07 Aug 07 - 03:55 PM There are way worse politicos out there already in office and contending for office, than Obama could ever be. I don't think his comments on Pakistan constitute his policy, I think he's trying to position himself outside of his own party as having certain hawk-like components. Hillary's riposte was alert on her part but not impossible to foresee on his part. He's thinking beyond the nomination. Mitt Romney's comments were cute but no death blow. I like the way Obama presents himself. He has a sense of humor. What he does not have is experience in power. I would prefer there was more of a history there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,mg Date: 07 Aug 07 - 11:46 PM If you want to show that you have hawk-like components to your personality, will stand tough etc...there are enemy terrorist groups etc. you can speak harshly about..not your allies who are fighting the terrorists alongside you and providing you with logistical bases, intelligence etc....granted the terrorists are intermingled with host country, but nevertheless....you can say we will assist the Pakistani government in routing out our mutual destructive enemy etc...It is sort of like when Ford didn't seem to realize Poland was a communist-controlled country. mg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: robomatic Date: 08 Aug 07 - 02:36 AM mg you're sort of helping me with my point. When Pres. Ford made that statement about Poland he was clearly suffering a mid-debate brain fart, for which he paid heavily. I don't think for a moment given time and consideration he would have said what he said. It's a genuine case of mis-speak. Obama is trying to make some political hay and establish himself as a would-be 'player'. He is betting that his gains will exceed his losses, politically. As for our 'ally' Pakistan, in a part of the world where the US is trying to establish democracy, it is a military controlled state which has enabled the greatest dissemination of nuclear weapons technology in two generations...it has made a peace treaty with Al Qaeda. Afghanistan does not look upon Pakistan with great affection as a sanctuary for elements of the Taliban. And the present US government had no qualms about calling up the leader of Pakistan and out-and-out threatening him and his country to secure his cooperation. So, while I have reservations about Obama as stated above, his little aside about Pakistan should not be blown out of proportion, although I'm sure it will be, like Howard Dean's little war whoop. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 07 Sep 07 - 11:06 AM On August 21, 2007, democrat and U.S. presidential candidate, Barack Obama called for an end to the inhumane economic sanctions that were imposed by the Bush administration in 2004 and 2006, which mercilessly divide Cuban families (1). The draconian measures, designed to strangle the islands economy and ultimately bring down the Cuban government, limit visits to the island by Cubans living in the U.S. to 14 days every three years. Cubans wishing to travel to Cuba must obtain State Department authorization and must intend to visit a direct relative. As defined by Bush, this includes grandparents, parents, siblings, children or a spouse. Therefore a U.S. citizen of Cuban origin does not have the right to visit cousins, uncles, aunts, nieces or nephews who have remained in Cuba (2). Obama also denounced the restrictions on remittances that Cuban-Americans can send to their families (maximum $100/mo). "This is both a humanitarian and a strategic issue. That decision […has] had a profoundly negative impact on the welfare of the Cuban people," he declared. As president, "I will grant Cuban-Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send remittances to the island," he promised (3). The Illinois senator also stated his willingness to begin bilateral talks with the government in Havana. "To normalize relations and ease the embargo that has governed relations between our countries for the last five decades." Obama is the first presidential candidate to suggest the possibility of lifting the economic blockade against Cuba. This is an extremely positive development even though the distinct stench of colonialism that emanated from his some of his words illustrating his intention to impose conditions on a sovereign nation was lamentable (4). Felipe Pérez Roque, Cuba's minister of foreign affairs, welcomed Obama's initiative, "These declarations express the opinion of the U.S. majority." The minister denounced the barbaric and anachronistic cruelty of the Bush administration toward Cuba (5) and pointed out that the restrictive measures violate the constitutional rights of U.S. citizens to free movement (6). Conversely, democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, eyeing campaign contributions from the extreme rightwing heirs of the Fulgencio Batista regime, called Obama's rational point of view "irresponsible and frankly naive" (7). She called for continuing the economic sanctions, remaining faithful to her husband legacy. Bill Clinton signed the senseless, retroactive and extraterritorial Helms-Burton law of 1996 in hopes of delivering the coup de grâce to the Cuban Revolution. "She supports the embargo and our current policy toward Cuba," stated her spokesman, Mo Elleithee (8). The vast majority of the general public in the U.S. as well as the Cuban-American community strongly support lifting the economic sanctions that seriously suppresses the standard of living on the island. The blockade imposed on Cuba since 1960 demonstrates Washington's inability to recognize the independence of the Caribbean nation. Not to mention that it has been totally ineffective. The government of Fidel Castro has proposed dialogue based on mutual respect several times to the White House. But so far, the northern neighbor has not come to terms with and still refuses to acknowledge Cuba's liberation from U.S. tutelage in 1959. Jen Psaki, spokeswoman for Barack Obama, summed it up this way: "Ultimately, this election is a choice between staying with the failed policies of the past […] or turning the page and taking a new approach to global diplomacy." It is yet to be seen whether reason and common sense will prevail and the cruel and unjust punishment exacted on the Cuban people will disappear forever. From this site. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 27 Nov 07 - 02:13 PM "...In an interview with the Hollywood Reporter, Winfrey said she will not use her "platform" on Obama's behalf -- meaning her show and her eponymous magazine -- but instead will speak for him with her "personal voice." Why? "Because I felt it was the right thing to do. And you know, I weighed that: What is the cost to me for doing it? Am I going to lose viewers? I made the decision that I have the right to do it as an American citizen. . . . I know him well enough to believe in his moral authority. And that is the number one reason why I am supporting him." Timing is everything, in entertainment as well as politics. Winfrey's upcoming campaign appearances with Obama will come less than a month before the nominating caucuses in Iowa, where a recent Post-ABC News poll showed Obama with a slim lead. Winfrey's support might not make any difference. But if I were running for president, I'd rather have her with me than against me. Asked by the Hollywood Reporter whether she had any doubts -- not specifically about politics but about herself, about life, about anything -- Winfrey gave this answer: "No, I don't have any doubts. I really don't. Because I live in a very spiritual space -- not a religious space, but I live in a spiritual space where I understand the connection that we all have with each other. It's not just rhetoric for me. I really do understand the common denominator in the human experience." If anyone else were to say such a thing, it would sound like nothing but a bunch of New Age newspeak. When Oprah Winfrey says it, you can't escape the nagging feeling that she knows something the rest of us don't. " (From a Washington Post column). A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 04 Dec 07 - 12:57 PM Obama hopes for sane solutions Globe Columnist / December 4, 2007 BARACK OBAMA talked softly that he would beat off the big stick the Republicans are sure to wield on immigration. "Yes we have to have comprehensive immigration reform, we have to be serious about border security, we have to crack down on employers who are taking advantage of illegal immigrants, and we have to have a pathway to citizenship for the 12 million who are here," the Illinois senator told the Globe's editorial board yesterday in its series of endorsement interviews before the New Hampshire primary. "But the politics of immigration I don't think will change until American workers feel as if somebody is listening to them, looking out for them, fighting for them and their economic concerns . . . If people see that we're taking those steps, then it puts them in a more generous mood when it comes to immigrants." To borrow from the title of one of Obama's books, he has the audacity to hope for sanity if he becomes the Democratic nominee for president. A month ago, front-runner Hillary Clinton came under fire from Obama and the rest of her rivals as well as from conservative talk shows for appearing to vacillate in a debate on a proposal in her New York state to give driver's licenses to undocumented immigrants. She went from saying the now-dumped proposal by Governor Eliot Spitzer "makes a lot of sense" to saying "Do I think this is the best thing for any governor to do? No." Obama was one of the candidates who immediately challenged Clinton's position. "I was confused on Senator Clinton's answer," Obama said. "I can't tell whether she was for it or against it. And I do think that is important. One of the things that we have to do in this country is to be honest about the challenges we face. Immigration is a difficult issue. But part of leadership is not just looking backwards and seeing what's popular." ... Rest of article can be found here (Boston Globe). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 08 Dec 07 - 06:19 PM CNN Washington Bureau DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN) -- Saying she felt compelled to support "the man I believe has a new vision for America," Oprah Winfrey spoke passionately about Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama at a rally in Iowa Saturday. "These are dangerous times, you can feel it. We need a leader who shows us how to hope again in America as a force for peace," Winfrey told the enthusiastic crowd. "I believe Barack Obama will bring statesmanship to the White House," she said. "He's a man who knows who we are and knows who we can be." Winfrey said she has voted for as many Republicans as she has Democrats over the years, so her endorsement wasn't about partisanship. "This is very, very personal. I'm here because of my personal conviction about Barack Obama and what I know he can do for America," she said to applause. Obama thanked Winfrey for drawing a big crowd and coming out to the event. "There are some people here who are here to see Oprah. I'm sort of a by-product of that and I appreciate that, but what I know is that for her to take the risk of stepping out of her comfort zone is extraordinary," the senator from Illinois said. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 08 Dec 07 - 07:04 PM You've got to wonder who would go to see Oprah. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 08 Dec 07 - 08:30 PM Well, fact is, she is loyally followed and trusted by a large following. For better or for worse. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST,Ron Davies Date: 09 Dec 07 - 07:57 AM Problem is: Hillary does not seem to learned an important lesson from Lincoln: "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all the time...." Maybe she doesn't think she should pay attention to any Republican--which Lincoln of course was. But she's trying desperately to be all things to all people--hence her pathetic floundering on the immigration issue, and the issue of attacking Iraq, and the issue of attacking Iran, and........ Obama can--and does--take stands. And as far as Oprah--she deserves a lot of credit---she's a self-made woman, who among other things, is standing up for vital issues--like the important nature of reading--hence her book club. Even if you may not agree that all her book selections are the best literature, just the idea of encouraging people who watch her show to read is wonderfully laudable. Admittedly she doesn't show the encylopedic knowledge of luminaries such as St. Thomas (Tancredo)--who does?--and therefore may not be acceptable to Rig. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 09 Dec 07 - 08:00 AM Have to agree with you on this one, Ron. I may not like what his stands are, but at least with Obama I know what he stands for, and have some idea of what his future actions might be. And he does seem to be running on something other than "I am not Bush": That alone could get him a lot of votes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 09 Dec 07 - 08:03 AM And on the driver's license question, Hillary demonstrated that St. Thomas Tancredo was indeed the Republican to whom she should be talking. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 09 Dec 07 - 08:22 AM Absolutely, Rig. Hillary should say forthrightly that she agrees with St. Thomas on the immigration issue. That should settle her hash nicely--and she knows it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 09 Dec 07 - 08:31 AM The real problem is, she, as well as all the other serious candidates have to deal with the problem of getting the nomination without saying something that would seal their defeat in the general election. Obama plays nicely to the home town crowd, but how would he do in the general election. Practical Democrats should probaly oughta be thinkin' about that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 09 Dec 07 - 09:03 AM Obama is more moderate than you think, Rig. But still willing to take a stand. And somebody who can break with the 60's (and 90's) legacy weighing Hillary down. It's time for a change. And Hillary is not change. She already has an "enemies list". And, as I've said before, I'm a Republican--though not one who ever supported our Chickenhawk-in-Chief. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ron Davies Date: 09 Dec 07 - 09:37 AM From what I read, the problem Obama has--tactically--in Iowa, is that many of his supporters are quite young voters. And the Iowa caucus will take place over the Christmas break-- when the vast majority of college students will not be in Iowa. They therefore will not be able to vote there--if that were possible--and will not even be able to help ferry voters to the polls or do other work for Obama. Whereas Hillary's strongest supporters are appear to be older women--who will be there--and tend to vote in large numbers. However, if Hillary does not win in Iowa by a large margin, Edwards and Obama can team up afterwards--and stop her. The visceral anti-Hillary sentiment in the country is huge. Not so high for Edwards and Obama. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 09 Dec 07 - 10:51 AM Balancing his odds and his virtues, and the fact that really only Hillary is in the other pan, I would urge myself (and others) to vote for him. Unless something dramatic changes the picture between now and then, I think he will be a national asset of significance, rather than a national catastrophe (Bush) or a figure-head for more of the same (Hillary). A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Riginslinger Date: 09 Dec 07 - 11:07 AM Ron - I think the college age vote not being there is what is working for Gomer Pyle in Iowa on the Republican side as well. One problem the Democrats have with Obama, however, is in the South. Most of the black voters there are registered Democrat, so he can expect to do very well in the primary. But in the general election he'd really have trouble. And I wouldn't be surprised if white Democrats will back away from him even more than white Republicans will. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Dec 07 - 06:58 PM Could be. Someone would need to be a pretty deep-dyed racist to vote against Obama because of his skin colour, but I'm sure there are plenty like that. But I'd also imagine there'd also be quite a lot of people who mightn't be totally sold on him, who might be swayed to vote for him in a general election, as a way of asserting that the USA isn't any longer a racist country. (And the same could apply to Clinton, for analogous reasons, if she turns out to be the Democratic candidate.) Opinion polls are pretty suspect things, but this round-up of them seems to indicate that either Obama or Clinton would stand a pretty good chance of beating the likely opponents, and there's not a lot between them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 09 Dec 07 - 06:59 PM This round up of polls - I forgot the link. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 09 Dec 07 - 07:01 PM Go Dennis!!! 100... B~ |
