BS: Popular Views on Obama

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 04 Jun 08 - 02:02 PM

Well, he comes off as an arrogant twerp to me, but we'll see what happens.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 04 Jun 08 - 02:06 PM

Well, Rig, sometimes you do also.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 04 Jun 08 - 08:06 PM

WASHINGTON (AP) Ñ While much of the political world waits for Hillary Rodham Clinton to concede defeat, most superdelegates are done waiting.
The avalanche of endorsements, expected so many times throughout the campaign, has finally materialized.
Barack Obama added 51 superdelegates Tuesday, the final day of a marathon battle for the Democratic presidential nomination. He picked up 21 more Wednesday, including numerous members of Congress who said it was time to unite the party for the general election.
Clinton had a net loss of nine superdelegates over the two days.
Obama has 2,175 delegates Ñ 57 more than needed to win the nomination at the party's national convention this summer. Clinton has 1,923.5, according to The Associated Press count.
"The most important thing our party could get out of this primary was an open and transparent process that reflected the will of the Democratic voters," Rep. Mike Doyle of Pennsylvania said in a statement. "I think the Democratic Party has accomplished this, and it's clear to me that Barack Obama has won this nomination fair and square."
Sen. Herb Kohl of Wisconsin said the party was "fortunate to have two exceptional candidates who were willing to put themselves forward and work tirelessly these many months, and for that they have our gratitude."
But, he added, "Now that Senator Obama has won the nomination, we can unite behind his historic candidacy."

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 04 Jun 08 - 09:06 PM

All the United States was his stage yesterday as Barack Obama re-scripted 200 years of history by adopting the mantle of the first African American to win the presidential nomination of a major political party, an achievement that elicited wonder and admiration from cafes in Texas to the White House in Washington.

Even as Mr Obama turned his attention to healing deep rifts in his party, President George Bush Ð through a spokesperson, rather than a telephone call Ð congratulated the 46-year-old Illinois senator, saying he had come "a long way in becoming his party's nominee. And his historic achievement reflects the fact that our country has come a long way, too."

There were even warmer sentiments from Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State. "The United States of America is an extraordinary country. It is a country that has overcome many, many, now years, decades, actually a couple of centuries of trying to make good on its principles. And I think what we are seeing is an extraordinary expression of the fact that 'We the people' is beginning to mean all of us," she said....WaPo

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ron Davies
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 07:14 AM

It should be painfully obvious to any thinking person what McCain's stances are on the Iraq war, on the Supreme Court, and on the separation of church and state.

Anybody who wants to bring the combat troops home from Iraq, who wants to protect Roe v Wade, or is interested in trying to stop the erosion of church/state relations needs to start supporting Obama.

Anybody who doesn't and believes in any of the above causes can be perfectly described as at best willfully ignorant, and at worst possibly racist and/or a hypocrite.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 07:22 AM

"...he comes off as an arrogant twerp to me"

Uppity, you might say?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 08:02 AM

You might!

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 10:19 AM

Wall Street puts its money behind Obama
Thu Jun 5, 2008 10:50am BST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Wall Street is putting its money behind Democrat Barack Obama for president, despite worries that his administration would raise taxes and take a tougher line on trade and regulation.

The signs Wall Street reads point to Democrats prevailing in the November presidential and general election as voters punish the incumbent Republican Party for a flagging economy and lengthy Iraq war.

And the fact that Obama began raking in a bigger share of the cash as his campaign picked up steam suggests that investors simply want to back the eventual winner.

Illinois Sen. Obama, who captured the Democratic presidential nomination on Tuesday after a lengthy primary battle against New York Sen. Hillary Clinton, has received $7.9 million (4.1 million pounds) n contributions from the securities and investment industries, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

His opponent, Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, banked a little under $4.2 million, putting him behind fellow Republicans Rudolph Giuliani and Mitt Romney, who have long since dropped out of the race.

Overall, Democrats garnered 57 percent of the contributions from the securities and investment industry. If that trend continued through November, it would mark the first time since 1994 that they have drawn more Wall Street cash than Republicans in a presidential election year, according to the data complied by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 10:41 AM

Yes, it's a real problem for McCain. He could probably raise that much money and more from the right-wing-religious-wakkos, but he'd have to stoop to their level to do it.

                     While Obama has already stooped to the level of the Democratic Elites, so he can take advantage of that revenue source.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 11:16 AM

Rig:

What do you mean by "democrat elites"? Obviously something other than the words imply.

I would think being a Democrat Elite would be a pretty good category of existence, if I were looking for one to slip into.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 12:12 PM

You're right, Amos, I'm going to have to find a more descriptive term. Blind-Babbling-Buffoons, maybe.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 12:17 PM

It's not too late to switch your vote to the American Primate Party, Riginslinger. "Put a REAL chimp in the White House this time!"

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 02:47 PM

STep carefully, lest you step in the very cowshit you are trying to throw with your heated generalizations of badness unhampered by any specifics at all.

Very poor form, Rig.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 04:32 PM

Maybe, but these people are hard to define. They think they are helping, but they're actually making things worse, and they get mad if one tries to point that out.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 04:50 PM

Which people, in particular, are you thinking about here, Rig? And what actions which have done as you describe? Who and what?



A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 07:05 PM

I guess it would be those self appointed "intelectuals" in the Deomocratic Party. Not the teamsters, long shoremen, waitresses, or steel workers. But the people who hear Obama and think they are hearing great speechifying, where the rest of us only hear self rightous pontificating.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 07:53 PM

If it's someone you already like and trust, it sounds great. If it's someone you already are opposed to and distrust, it sounds like "self righteous pontificating".

The ear hears what the mind and heart have already decided to hear, and that is true of virtually all people. They are not nearly as impartial and objective as they imagine themselves to be.

For instance, my Mother (who is absolutely obsessed with politics and follows it daily on TV like Sherlock Holmes cracking a case) HATES Hillary Clinton with a vitriolic hatred. I'm sure she would be delighted to see her dead. Accordingly, EVERYTHING Hillary says sounds very bad to my Mother, but she LOVES everything Obama says. If fate (which works in mysterious ways) had arranged to have her loving Hillary and hating Obama instead, I can assure you she'd be interpreting their respective speeches in the diametrically opposite fashion...and Obama would be able to do or say nothing that she approved of.

I like Obama way better than Hillary. However...I thought Hillary gave a superb speech on Tuesday night and I remarked on that to my Mother. She had nothing but scorn for Hillary's speech. I reminded her that I too, much prefer Obama to Hillary, but that I simply thought that Hillary had given an unusually good speech on Tuesday night (despite conceding nothing). She finally, grudgingly admitted that Hillary's speech had been, for a political speech, a pretty good one.

You see, her utter loathing of Hillary Clinton simply does not allow her mind to hear anything good coming out of Hillary Clinton's mouth. It would get in the way of her enjoyment of her loathing for Hillary Clinton.

That's what the more rabit political people on this forum are like. They don't want anything to interfere with their emotional biases.

I think you have a problem like that where Obama is concerned, Rig, although I'm not suggesting you loathe him. I'm just suggesting that you're already against him as the Democratic candidate, therefore your mind can't help but make everything he says sound bad in some way...like "self righteous pontificating"...whereas if Hillary had said it instead, and in just the same way, you would put a much more positive interpretation on it.

That's how people's minds tend to work. The emotional underlay of their likes and dislikes shapes their interpretation of what they hear, and in a profound way.

But they do not question their reactions in that sense. To them it is reality, and they don't question it.

Someone who becomes aware of this dynamic working in himself is well on the way to taking note of that great saying, "the unexamined life is not worth living", and acting upon it and questioning his own biases now and then...engaging in self-examination. And there, I submit, lies one possible path to wisdom.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 10:02 PM

Well, LH, I don't find anything you say in your post above to disagree with. When this whole thing started out, I wasn't nearly at opposed to Obama as I find myself now.
                      There were some things that happened. I think it started with Wisconsin, where Obama outspent Hillary 5:1. A few days later we discovered that Hillary's campaign was broke and she had to loan money to keep the candidacy alive.
                      I think that's when it became more apparent to me how important the MoveOn.org people were. They were simply herding the American people towards the person that they picked out to serve as president for the American public.
                      The other thing were the caucuses. When I looked into how they worked, I could see that there were a whole lot of people who were excluded. They weren't overtly excluded; they were excluded because they didn't have the disposable time to participate. Of course, if it was a life and death thing for them, they could have probably worked something out, but most people don't feel that way about voting.
                        Then too, I don't know how many times I heard gaggles of pundits making the announcement, "Obama got more delegates out of Idaho than Hillary got out of Texas and Ohio." I would submit, there is something patently wrong with that.
                        The thing about the caucuses in places like Idaho and Wyoming is, there are hardly any Democrats there. The ones who are there are probably people like school teachers, librarians, postal workers, and etc. I'm sure you'll agree, there aren't a lot of long shoremen in Wyoming.
                      By the time things got to West Virginia and Kentucky, the working class folks had figured out that they'd really been had. I think that's why those folks voted the way they did, and racism had very little to do with it. An old retired coal miner suffering from "black lung" can certainly see multitudes of problems related to a bunch of school teachers in Idaho delivering more delegates to a candidate then the combined states of Ohio and Texas.
                      And then, backtracking a little bit, in the deep south states, the black vote went to Obama by more than 90% in some cases. That, to me, is the most stark example of racism I've ever seen in my life--though I suppose you could call it sexism.
                      At the end of the day, I don't see myself really disliking Obama, I just don't think he should be in the postition in which he finds himself. I don't think he's qualified to serve in the office of president, and I'll be damned if I'll support him.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Jun 08 - 10:32 PM

Hmmm. Interesting viewpoint, Riginslinger. I understand what you're getting at. Now, I'm a person who is naturally attracted to the intellectual types like Obama, and I am not so much in a natural sympathy with working class psychology in America, because it's too conservative for my taste. I'm in tune with the kind of people you describe as most probably forming the caucuses in Idaho. ;-)   However, I realize that any candidate needs to court the American working class successfully in order to win an election!

Your point about the Black population voting so solidly for Obama is definitely a cogent one...because it's a way out-of-balance situation which is the end result of a long historical process where Blacks have been enslaved, marginalized, felt discriminated against and disadvantaged...so they vote for Obama because he's Black (not only because of that, but it is a huge factor). That's simply not a sensible reason (in itself) to vote for someone.

If 90% of all the women in the USA voted for Hillary because she's a female...that would be a comparable situation gone way out of balance. It would not make any sense.

You said, "the black vote went to Obama by more than 90% in some cases. That, to me, is the most stark example of racism I've ever seen in my life"

Well, yeah! But you can't call it that in the media, because Blacks are seen as the injured party in American history. So it's not considered politically correct at this time to say that gross ethnocentric race-based prejudice is "racism" when Blacks do it. Or when Native Americans do it. Or when Jews do it. Why? Because they are all seen as historical victims.

That's an unfair situation to all the other people, such as the White majority in North America. The moral deck has been stacked so that they must carry a measure of implied guilt which certain other groups (the "victims") are spared. It's a guilt trip. So if it makes working class Whites nervous when Black Americans vote so obviously as a bloc on the basis of race...and there is then a backlash against it on the part of the working classs Whites, I can understand why.

But I don't think that's Obama's fault. I think it's a fatal and terrible flaw in the thinking of an entire society, and Obama just happens to be struggling in the grip of it like a man wading through chest-deep mud. He didn't ask for that, but it was inevitable that he would get it.

It must be quite discouraging for him, I would think. I would certainly be discouraged if I had to deal with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 12:15 AM

People will vote for the candidate in whom they seem themselves best reflected.

The question is not why a large per centage of black voters did so, but why the vast majority of educated white ones did.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:26 AM

I think a large number of a certain type of white voters cast their lot with Obama because they either wanted to prove to themselves and to others that they were not racist. There were still others that didn't want to be percieved as racist, and some because they really felt like they were racist and found themselves seeking some kind of therapy to get over it.

                   And then, of course, there were certainly a substantial number who were never racist, didn't consider it an issue at all, and simply thought Obama was the best candidate.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 08:31 AM

Then too, Little Hawk is probably right, Obama himself is more of a victim in all of this than an instigator.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:20 AM

A good point, RIg.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 01:40 PM

And from the Westest of West Coast columnists, this gem from Mark Morford of SFGate.com. I hope Mister Morford doesn't get shot by the reactionary Lizard Corps International for writign this kind of thought. It's pretty dangerous stuff...

Is Obama an enlightened being?

Spiritual wise ones say: This sure ain't no ordinary politician. You buying it?

By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist

Friday, June 6, 2008



"I find I'm having this discussion, this weird little debate, more and more, with colleagues, with readers, with liberals and moderates and miserable, deeply depressed Republicans and spiritually amped persons of all shapes and stripes and I'm having it in particular with those who seem confused, angry, unsure, thoroughly nonplussed, as they all ask me the same thing: What the hell's the big deal about Obama?


I, of course, have an answer. Sort of.


Warning: If you are a rigid pragmatist/literalist, itchingly evangelical, a scowler, a doubter, a burned-out former '60s radical with no hope left, or are otherwise unable or unwilling to parse alternative New Age speak, click away right now, because you ain't gonna like this one little bit.


Ready? It goes likes this:


Barack Obama isn't really one of us. Not in the normal way, anyway.


This is what I find myself offering up more and more in response to the whiners and the frowners and to those with broken or sadly dysfunctional karmic antennae - or no antennae at all - to all those who just don't understand and maybe even actively recoil against all this chatter about Obama's aura and feel and MLK/JFK-like vibe.


To them I say, all right, you want to know what it is? The appeal, the pull, the ethereal and magical thing that seems to enthrall millions of people from all over the world, that keeps opening up and firing into new channels of the culture normally completely unaffected by politics?


No, it's not merely his youthful vigor, or handsomeness, or even inspiring rhetoric. It is not fresh ideas or cool charisma or the fact that a black president will be historic and revolutionary in about a thousand different ways. It is something more. Even Bill Clinton, with all his effortless, winking charm, didn't have what Obama has, which is a sort of powerful luminosity, a unique high-vibration integrity.


Dismiss it all you like, but I've heard from far too many enormously smart, wise, spiritually attuned people who've been intuitively blown away by Obama's presence - not speeches, not policies, but sheer presence - to say it's just a clever marketing ploy, a slick gambit carefully orchestrated by hotshot campaign organizers who, once Obama gets into office, will suddenly turn from perky optimists to vile soul-sucking lobbyist whores, with Obama as their suddenly evil, cackling overlord.


Here's where it gets gooey. Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.


The unusual thing is, true Lightworkers almost never appear on such a brutal, spiritually demeaning stage as national politics. This is why Obama is so rare. And this why he is so often compared to Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., to those leaders in our culture whose stirring vibrations still resonate throughout our short history.


Are you rolling your eyes and scoffing? Fine by me. But you gotta wonder, why has, say, the JFK legacy lasted so long, is so vital to our national identity? Yes, the assassination canonized his legend. The Kennedy family is our version of royalty. But there's something more. Those attuned to energies beyond the literal meanings of things, these people say JFK wasn't assassinated for any typical reason you can name. It's because he was just this kind of high-vibration being, a peacemaker, at odds with the war machine, the CIA, the dark side. And it killed him.


Now, Obama. The next step. Another try. And perhaps, as Bush laid waste to the land and embarrassed the country and pummeled our national spirit into disenchanted pulp and yet ironically, in so doing has helped set the stage for an even larger and more fascinating evolutionary burp, we are finally truly ready for another Lightworker to step up.


Let me be completely clear: I'm not arguing some sort of utopian revolution, a big global group hug with Obama as some sort of happy hippie camp counselor. I'm not saying the man's going to swoop in like a superhero messiah and stop all wars and make the flowers grow and birds sing and solve world hunger and bring puppies to schoolchildren.


Please. I'm also certainly not saying he's perfect, that his presidency will be free of compromise, or slimy insiders, or great heaps of politics-as-usual. While Obama's certainly an entire universe away from George W. Bush in terms of quality, integrity, intelligence and overall inspirational energy, well, so is your dog. Hell, it isn't hard to stand far above and beyond the worst president in American history.


But there simply is no denying that extra kick. As one reader put it to me, in a way, it's not even about Obama, per se. There's a vast amount of positive energy swirling about that's been held back by the armies of BushCo darkness, and this energy has now found a conduit, a lightning rod, is now effortlessly self-organizing around Obama's candidacy. People and emotions and ideas of high and positive vibration are automatically draw to him. It's exactly like how Bush was a magnet for the low vibrational energies of fear and war and oppression and aggression, but, you know, completely reversed. And different. And far, far better.


Don't buy any of it? Think that's all a bunch of tofu-sucking New Agey bulls-- and Obama is really a dangerously elitist political salesman whose inexperience will lead us further into darkness because, when you're talking national politics, nothing, really, ever changes? I understand. I get it. I often believe it myself.


Not this time. "

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 01:55 PM

Yeah, that's exactly what I think about it...that Obama has become the victim of a general social dysfunction.

Obama grew up in a bi-racial family. That gives him a totally different slant on it than most people have. He does not cleave to either one side or the other of the great mental divide. He finds it natural to walk both sides simultaneously.

I know a family like that. They are a White couple from Montreal who had no children, and they adopted two Black children (at a very young age) and have brought them up without raising any issues about "race". Those two are in their teens now. Being around them I noticed the ease with which they relate to being who they are....not Black, not White, but just people among other people. What a gift! Now, this is what will happen eventually in a society where intermarriage between races eliminates the feeling of "us and them" that presently exists and divides people.

When you have "us and them", you have fear.

Obama grew up without feeling that he was one or the other. He was both.

But when he tries to bring that unified consciousness to a society where most people still think in terms of Black/White division...he runs right into a brick wall...and the media exacerbates the problem! You had the ludicrous situation where some Blacks didn't think he was "Black enough" (He doesn't talk in exaggerated ghetto patois!)...while all the Whites referred to him simply as "a Black man", although he is half White!!!!!

How stupid can it get? He is neither a Black man nor a White man, he's a man. Period. A man.

Get flippin' OVER the race thing, America!!!! Grow up.

If Obama gets elected, he will not be the first Black man to get elected president. He will be the first man elected president who was mature enough to realize that it doesn't matter what racial heritage a man came from who gets elected president.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:32 PM

Amos 1:40- interesting take on it. I just wish the world weren't so dangerous for 'Lightworkers'.


Here are disjointed snippets from the Muckety.com site that Stilly River Sage linked to. Not totally admiring, it nevertheless reveals a man, a mensch.

   "By then, Obama had mastered the skill of mixing an idealist's message with a politician's tactical approach to alliances.

" There are some people who say he's not strong enough on this or that, that he's wishy-washy, that he's trying to have it both ways," Mikva, a former state legislator, congressman, judge and counsel to President Bill Clinton, told the New York Times. "But he's not looking for how to exclude the people who don't agree with him. He's looking for ways to make the tent as large as possible."

"After his stint as a community organizer, followed by law school, Obama returned to Chicago in 1992. It is testament to his idealism that he delayed going to work for a law firm to direct a voter registration campaign targeting low-income blacks. Illinois Project Vote, as it was called, registered more than 100,000 new voters for the 1992 presidential election, boosting both Bill Clinton's tallies in Illinois, as well as Moseley Braun's campaign to become the first black woman elected to the U.S. Senate.

"Some of those he enlisted in the vote effort would become long-term allies, among them John R. Schmidt, a former chief of staff to Daley and associate attorney general, and John W. Rogers Jr., a young black money manager and college friend of his brother-in-law's.
"He really did it, and he let other people take all the credit," Schmidt told the Washington Post. "The people standing up at the press conferences were Jesse Jackson and Bobby Rush and I don't know who else. Barack was off to the side, and only the people who were close to it knew he had done all the work."

   "For six of the seven years Obama spent in Springfield, the Republicans controlled the General Assembly, and like other Democrats, Obama had only limited success in passing legislation, among other items, a rare ethics law in a state known for government corruption.

"But when the Democrats achieved a sweep in 2002, and (Emil) Jones became majority leader, he anointed Obama as the go-to guy on virtually every high-profile piece of legislation – a record that set him up for his run for U.S Senate.

   "In October, 2002, Saltzman was organizing an antiwar rally and asked Obama if he would speak. About to announce his bid for the U.S Senate, Obama did not say yes right away. Ultimately, he appeared, giving what was arguably the most important speech of his political career up until that time.

   "Saying he was not opposed to all wars, only "dumb wars," Obama warned that a U.S. occupation of Iraq would be of "undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences." (Emphasis mine. Eb)

   "The speech, which would prove prescient, would help define him not just for the U.S. Senate race, but later in the crowded field of contenders for the Democratic nomination for president."

Good Reading (Thanks, Stilly)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ron Davies
Date: 06 Jun 08 - 10:43 PM

So, the CEO of Smears R US says "I'll be damned if I'll support him"

Fine.

Then let's not hear anything more from him about how important it is to stop the encroachment of religion on public life. If anybody thinks McCain will be more effective in fighting the erosion of the church/state division, I have several bridges to sell.

And let's not hear anything more about how said CEO is against the war in Iraq. No question who thinks "victory" is just about within our grasp--by 2013--unless of course it's not. It's not Obama who has said this.

And who has said he will start bringing combat troops home--and dedicating our energies to the real fight in Afghanistan. That's not McCain.

Any more moaning from said CEO about how terrible it is that religion is threatening the US secular state, or allegation that he is against the war in Iraq will be filed under Hypocrisy, Blatant.

Since there's only one way to keep McCain from taking over--and, amazingly enough, it's not quite enough to bellyache about the above issues on Mudcat--without supporting Obama. He's the only game in town.   Hillary is not an option.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 Jun 08 - 09:10 AM

Ron, the following is a "smear," do what you can with it:


             John McCain is an Episcopalian, he offers a much better chance of offering continued separation of church and state than somebody who has engaged in a VooDoo-quasi-Christain type of "mind control" for the the last 20 years.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Jun 08 - 11:22 AM

Rig, read up. McCain is an Episcopalian who attends a Baptist church. You think Baptists are for the separation of church and state?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Blind DRunk in Blind River
Date: 07 Jun 08 - 11:27 AM

My uncle Elmer was a flippin' Epistopedalian Seventh Day Adventurist or some flippin' thing like that, but he could not flippin' even control his OWN mind, never mind them other minds of people around him!

He useta quote the Bible a lot, eh? One time he qwoted to me from it after I had got in trouble with the police and he said, "The only road for a sinner is the road that leads straight to the fiery lake of eternal torment!" and he shook his flippin' finger in my face.

I know he was lyin' becoz I have been down every flippin' road around here in Don's pickup and there ain't no such lake to be found, eh? If it was there I woulda found it by now.

I figger such a lake could be handy becoz, like, if you went fishin' there you cuold pull out a fish and it would already be cooked!

That would be pretty cool, eh? I would buy up such a lake and charge people to fish there and get flippin' RICH!

But there ain't no such lake coz my uncle was nuts.

- Shane

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ron Davies
Date: 07 Jun 08 - 11:43 AM

I don't care what McCain calls himself. Anybody who complains about 20 years of mind control-- or whatever the absurd formulation was-- should take a bit of time to actually read what McCain himself has said as to the importance of religion in public life. And how McCain and Obama have voted on issues bearing on this topic. And the views of their respective supporters on the topic.

Not that smear artists are expected to actually do any research--or any thinking. Smears R Us would have to shut down.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 07 Jun 08 - 01:34 PM

"But there ain't no such lake coz my uncle was nuts."


                        Frankly, I think everybody who goes to church is nuts, but Obama is just a little more nuts than most.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 10:42 AM

Short CBC Obama Bio.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 11:10 AM

Rig:

I challenge you to offer anything -- anything at all-- to substantiate the slur you last posted. I seriously want to know what--if anything--lies behind our careless defamation of character.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 12:01 PM

The French love the guy for a number of reasons.

An interesting essay on international dynamics.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 12:38 PM

Barack Obama appears to be a pragmatic idealist. As opposed to George W. Bush who is neither a pragmatist nor an idealist, an opinion I came to in watching Dubya flail about, spasmodically and almost at random.

An idealist who studies how to make things work- what a concept.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 01:58 PM

"I challenge you to offer anything -- anything at all-- to substantiate the slur you last posted."


                        I was trying to get a substantial reaction out of Ron Davies, but it doesn't seem to have worked.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 02:03 PM

He's gone to a bluegrass festival or something like that, Rig. You'll have to wait until he returns, sunburned and tired but nonetheless exhilarated, and ready to engage in further verbal jousting here.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 08 Jun 08 - 06:52 PM

Rig:

You haven't answered the question. Did you notice that? You twisted out of it, instead.

Deflection is not necessary; have the courage of your viewpoint and answer up fairly as it actually seems to you.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 10:05 AM

I thought I explained what I was trying to do, or are we talking about something farther up in the thread?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 12:42 PM

Grumbling Clinton supporters make Democrats nervous

Story Highlights
Sen. John McCain's campaign reaches out to Sen. Hillary Clinton's supporters

Some Clinton voters say they'll pick McCain over Sen. Barack Obama

Clinton backers express support for McCain on her Web site

Obama advisers say they think Democrats will unite around senator from Illinois

By Rebecca Sinderbrand
CNN
   
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- While Sen. Hillary Clinton was endorsing Sen. Barack Obama, some of those weighing in on her campaign Web site were less willing to concede.

As Clinton wrapped up her remarks Saturday in Washington with a plea for supporters to work "as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me," many were posting messages saying they would never vote for the presumptive Democratic nominee. A few even called on her backers to visit Sen. John McCain's campaign Web site.

"I love her and will vote for her in 2012, but it's McCain all the way now," wrote one within moments of the former first lady's address.

Whether that sort of statement signals a defection to the presumptive Republican nominee, a voter less likely to make it to the polls on Election Day or just a bit of low-grade, post-primary grumbling -- it's the sort of sentiment that makes for a nagging, low-grade anxiety among nervous Democrats and brings a gleam to the eye of McCain.

As Democratic leaders met last month and decided to seat Florida and Michigan at half strength at the convention, angry Clinton supporters who had backed her plea for the seating of full delegations from both states began to chant, "Let's go, McCain!"

And as Clinton's presidential bid wound down, some of her loudest supporters began insisting they would consider voting for McCain if she were not the Democratic nominee. Watch Clinton call on voters to support Obama »

A newly released CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll found that if Obama does not select Clinton as his running mate, 22 percent of her supporters would stay home this fall -- and another 17 percent would vote for McCain.

"That's just one estimate of the 'Clinton factor,' and it may not be an accurate predictor since it piles several hypotheticals on top of each other and asks people to guess their state of mind five months from now," said Keating Holland, CNN's polling director.

"Nonetheless, it does indicate that unmotivated Clinton supporters may be a bigger risk to Obama than defections from the Clinton camp to McCain."

The numbers haven't gone unnoticed at McCain campaign headquarters in Arlington, Virginia. In the days since Obama effectively claimed the Democratic nomination, the senator from Arizona's campaign has aggressively reached out to Clinton supporters -- women and blue-collar voters who were the strongest supporters of her presidential bid.

A few hours after her speech -- which was free of attacks on Obama's fall opponent -- McCain aide Michael Goldfarb wrote on the campaign's official blog that "there is a genuine affection for her here at McCain HQ. During her speech there was no small amount of pleading with the TV: 'Don't do it, you can still win!' "

"Sen. Clinton has really grown on us over here in Crystal City over the past few months," wrote Goldfarb, calling her an "impressive candidate" who "inspired a generation of women" but "fell victim to a vast left-wing conspiracy that resented her generally centrist foreign policy views."

And one of the first posts on the newly launched blog was a video of Abba's "Take a Chance on Me" under the headline, "Take a Chance on McCain." Wrote Goldfarb: "Attention disaffected Hillary supporters, John McCain is a huge Abba fan. Seriously.''

McCain's maverick reputation has always translated into significant support from independent voters, but the diminished appeal of the GOP brand this year may translate into a weaker showing. Despite emotions still raw from the bruising Democratic primary, an appeal to Clinton voters could be a tough sell for the Republican.

But McCain and his campaign have made bold moves in recent weeks to distance the senator from President Bush and the Republican Party, and redirect the focus to his independent image -- essential in his effort to reach disaffected Clinton voters.

McCain adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin blasted the president's handling of the economy, and campaign manager Rick Davis said the battered image of the national Republican Party made for an uphill climb for its presidential nominee.

McCain aides see an opportunity in Obama's struggle to connect with white working-class voters.

The campaign has assembled focus groups in Democratic areas where Obama struggled this spring to gauge McCain's potential appeal among, and best approach to, this demographic -- particularly those most angered by Clinton's loss. A campaign tour directed at these voters also is being planned.

The day after Obama claimed the nomination, McCain said, "There's a lot of Sen. Clinton supporters who would support me because of their belief that Sen. Obama does not have the experience or the knowledge or the judgment to address this nation's national security challenges."

McCain was more effusive in his praise of Clinton at a Louisiana campaign event Wednesday as her campaign revealed she would be ending her run in a matter of days. "As the father of three daughters, I owe her a debt for inspiring millions of women to believe there is no opportunity in this great country beyond their reach. I am proud to call her my friend," he said.

Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut -- who has taken on increasingly high profile campaign roles on McCain's behalf -- announced Thursday that he was heading a new grass-roots organization, Citizens for McCain, with a direct appeal to Clinton's disappointed supporters.

In a message sent to the Arizonan's supporters after news broke that Clinton was suspending her run, the Democrat-turned-independent highlighted McCain's "very good working relationship with Sen. Clinton."

"The phones at the campaign headquarters have been ringing with disaffected Democrats calling to say they believe Sen. McCain has the experience, judgment, and bipartisanship necessary to lead our country in these difficult times," Lieberman wrote. "Many of these supporters are former supporters of Sen. Clinton."

He called on supporters to "reach out to Americans who are not currently involved in the campaign. Will you help us by recruiting your friends, family, and co-workers who may not consider themselves members of the Republican Party and ask them to join the Citizens for McCain organization?"

But can McCain really win over these loyal Democrats? History isn't on his side.

In the modern era, the pledge of mass defections by disappointed primary voters isn't rare -- but it rarely has a major influence on election results. The number of voters who identify with a given party may shift dramatically over time -- but among that self-selected group, loyalty tends to be remarkably high, with greater than nine in 10 usually supporting their party's presidential nominee, according to exit polling over the past few presidential cycles.

In 2004, despite similar anger from supporters of unsuccessful presidential candidate Howard Dean, 8 percent of Democrats supported Bush over Sen. John Kerry.

And on most major issues, McCain's positions are completely at odds with those of the Democratic working class and women voters he's hoping to reach: in favor of the Iraq war and Bush's tax cuts, against abortion rights and health care policies favored by many Democrats.

Obama advisers say they think the passion of the primary season will soon fade, and the party will unite around the senator from Illinois. But they've moved quickly to cement party unity: Last week, a thank you message -- and a plea for visitors to "show your support" for Clinton -- appeared on Obama's Web site.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 01:40 PM

So? Doesn't that sort of thing always happen in a race where various contenders for one party's ticket are forced to quit? Some of their supporters have got so emotionally involved and hostile over the issue that they will vote for the other party just to get even or because they've built up such a head of steam over how much they hate the guy who knocked off their favorite candidate, etc.

The same thing would happen if Hillary had won and Obama had lost. Some of Obama's people would vote Republican or not vote at all rather than vote for Hillary. Hell, the same thing happens in Canada with our parties too.

So what??? That's life.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 01:47 PM

Or to put it another way...that is not news. ;-) It's just some writer called Rebecca Sinderbrand trying to generate more useless election controversy in the media. Then too...maybe some of the Republican Party strategists slipped her some money to write that article for them. (grin)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 01:48 PM

Or maybe the Democrats slipped here the money, to try to get those voters back...


Just trying to provide a "popular view" here...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 02:54 PM

Anything's possible... ;-) (specially when it comes to those two corrupt parties and their backers)

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 03:29 PM

THis is the kind of divisive press-coverage that, at best, acts to assert a prophecy that becomes self-fulfilling.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: beardedbruce
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 03:31 PM

Sort of like the NYT anti-Bush articles.... that ignored any positive acts by the Bush administrations since they did not fit the image the NYT (and Amos) wanted to present...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 03:37 PM

I don't think that is quite fair, Bruce. SOmewhere int he Popular Views thread I actually posted one or two articles that praised Bush for things he was right about. But I think you will agree that the impact of his overall Administration -- Wolfowitz, Rove, CHeney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, and the rest -- has been highly divisive in its own right. It was not necessary to create controversies out of thin air.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 03:44 PM

There's been much written and You-Tubed about supporters of Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton who are having trouble making the switch to presumptive nominee Barack Obama -- and say they may never. Or may never unless he puts Clinton on the ticket with him as vice president.

Are women a big problem for Obama? Maybe not. At least one poll shows rapid recent movement to Obama overall among Democrats, including women.

Pollster Scott Rasmussen says that as of today, based on 3,000 automated telephone surveys over the past three nights, Obama gets support from 52% of the women in his national tracking poll compared with 40% for presumptive Republican nominee John McCain. He says that's better than Democrat John Kerry did with women against President Bush in 2004.

Scott attributes Obama's performance to unification within the Democratic Party over the past few days. "Before last Tuesday, Obama routinely earned around 70% of vote from Democrats," he tells us in an e-mail. "He's up to 81% today. Clearly the party has been coming together."...

USAT

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 09 Jun 08 - 03:47 PM

I just read something comparing him to a lightworker..also to Pope John II and Princess Diana...I can see it more than the MLK/JFK analogies...mg