 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Popular Views on Obama
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 21 Jun 08 - 09:18 AM Just because they are liberal does not mean they are stupid.... It just might be they want the best person for the job. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 21 Jun 08 - 09:28 AM ...lol, bb... BTW, did ya' go back and read the Obama/slam that you apparently missed??? I'd sho nuff hate for you to miss yet another opportunity to slam Obama... Might cost you some sleep... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 21 Jun 08 - 10:18 AM Unlike Amos, I see no need to post every criticism of someone I do not support ( several times) If the point has been made in one article, that should be enough. You seem willing to attack anyone who says something you don't agree with- ever think about reading them and seeing where your candidate needs to change to appeal to a broad enough group to win? I will be waiting to see if you are going to evaluate the ones that slam McCain... Since you have been known to claim that sources are only true when they agree with you, and then regardless of the truth of what they say. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: dick greenhaus Date: 21 Jun 08 - 12:14 PM BB- Aside from McCain's fervent dedication to pursue the Iraqui war, which you seem to approve of, just what does he stand for that you think is worthwhile? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 21 Jun 08 - 12:20 PM Guilty as charged, sir; it is the sorry legacy of my chromosomes and my early larnin' among the HUmanoids and I have never overcome the weakness. I am a subjective beast, and nothing more. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 21 Jun 08 - 12:29 PM Ummmmmm, maybe I missed something here, bb, but exactly where did I attack you??? Me thinks that you may be a tad on the hypersensituve side... (Is that an attack??? Hmmmmmmm??? Well, maybe it is??? But if it is it certainly doesn't on ther surface look like an attack...) B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 22 Jun 08 - 02:15 AM WASHINGTON (AFP) Ñ Democratic White House hopeful Barack Obama has surged to a 15-point lead over Republican John McCain in the latest Newsweek poll out Friday, by far the biggest margin of any recent survey. The magazine's poll gave Obama 51 percent to 36 percent for McCain among registered voters nationwide -- three times the margin of four to five points that other polls this week have given the Illinois senator. Obama is enjoying a post-primary bounce after seeing off the dogged challenge of his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton earlier this month, and supporters of the former first lady are flocking to his side, Newsweek said. "The latest numbers on voter dissatisfaction suggest that Obama may enjoy more than one bounce. The new poll finds that only 14 percent of Americans say they are satisfied with the direction of the country," it reported. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: DannyC Date: 24 Jun 08 - 11:43 AM No Slogans here |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 24 Jun 08 - 11:01 PM Dany: What a hoot!! I was about to post the same link with the comment that you can learn a lot about a politician by what he says to his own staff people. This one is a winner. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 24 Jun 08 - 11:23 PM The LA Times: "...(O)n Tuesday, a guest column appeared in Newsweek disputing what has been taken as a given in the campaign: McCain's experience advantage. It argues, provocatively, that the eight years Obama served in the Illinois state legislature before winning a U.S. Senate seat in 2004 might trump McCain's 22 years as a senator from Arizona. The case is made by Alan Ehrenhalt, executive editor of Governing magazine, which trains its eyes on state and local government (and, not surprisingly, has a rather small and specialized circulation). Ehrenhalt concedes that, at first blush, state legislative experience would strike most Americans as a "kind of irrelevant" preparation for the presidency. But he then writes that "looking back on quite a few years covering Congress, and an almost equal number of years following legislatures, I'm drawn to some slightly curmudgeonly comments about what it is that U.S. senators do, and what it is that state legislators do." Observations that follow include: "Twenty-first century U.S. senators are, virtually by the nature of the job, gadflies. They flit from one issue to another, generally developing little expertise on any of them; devote a large portion of their day to press conferences and other publicity opportunities; follow a daily schedule printed on a 3x5 card that a member of their staff has prepared; depend even more heavily on staff for detailed and time-consuming legislative negotiation that they are too busy to attend..." "By contrast, what do state legislators do? ... At their best, they keep all the state's significant issues in mind; it is possible to do that in a state legislature in a way that is not possible in Washington. During the years that Obama served in Springfield, 1997-2005, he was forced to wrestle with the minutiae of healthcare policy, utility deregulation, transportation funding, school aid, and a host of other issues that are vitally important to America's coming years, but that U.S. senators are usually able to dispose of with a quick once-over. State legislators have to do this largely on their own, without ubiquitous staff guidance, because staffing is not lavish even in the more professional state capitols." "...For a smart, curious and hard-working young legislator -- for a Barack Obama in the Illinois Senate -- can we be so sure that the skill set picked up over eight years in a state Capitol is inferior as presidential preparation to two decades in the pompous, cordoned-off environment of the U.S. Senate? I seriously doubt it." So there. We seriously doubt the Obama campaign is going to roll out ads anytime soon that tout Obama's time in Springfield quite like Ehrenhalt does. But his column makes for an intriguing read, nonetheless. -- Don Frederick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 24 Jun 08 - 11:48 PM "WASHINGTON (AP) -- Sen. Barack Obama on Sunday said as president he would strengthen government oversight of energy traders he blames in large part for the skyrocketing price of oil. The Democratic candidate's campaign singled out the so-called "Enron loophole" for allowing speculators to run up the cost of fuel by operating outside federal regulation. Oil closed near $135 a barrel on Friday - almost double the price a year ago. "My plan fully closes the Enron loophole and restores commonsense regulation as part of my broader plan to ease the burden for struggling families today while investing in a better future," Obama said in a campaign statement. Obama's campaign blamed the loophole on former Sen. Phil Gramm, a Texas Republican who serves as Republican candidate Sen. John McCain's co-chairman and economic adviser. The Obama campaign accused Gramm of inserting a provision into a bill in late 2000 "at the behest of Enron lobbyists" that exempted some energy traders from government oversight. Houston-based Enron collapsed in scandal in 2001 when it was discovered the company had vastly overstated its income...."CNN |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: DannyC Date: 25 Jun 08 - 12:52 AM Yeah Amos, While he did go thru a couple of standard stump vignettes, most of the video exhibits a side of him that we won't get to see as the general election nears. I guess the whole thing becomes a media matchup now. I'll tell you, I really miss working the canvass routes and the calling lists. I got footsore and the staff took pity on me - actually gave me my own logon to do my calling from home.... like I was one of those old Eugene McCarthy Era luddites that I would see hanging around the gathering places. ;-) But what I miss most is the kids, and their zeal and their quiet confidence. The atmosphere inside the campaign is the most race-neutral environment that I have ever experienced. The beauty of their purity and their work has brought me to quiet but insistent tears on several occasions. Working for the campaign has caused me to recall all sorts of nooks and crannies in my life where I witnessed barbaric racism - mostly Philadelphia Street stuff in my youth - along with a good deal of memories from my own community organizing activities in 1970s SW Baltimore. Perhaps my involvement with the Obama movement will give me a chance to put the racial incidents (they have been many - they have sometimes been bloody) into context - to make some use of them - maybe engage in part of the cleansing dialogue that Barack - in his soaring response to the Rev Wright blowup - has called for us to undertake as a nation. The single political occurance that comes most frequently to my mind is the Julian Bond/Lester Maddox standoff regarding the seating of the Georgia delegation in the mid '60s. Though I was very young at the time, in my mind's eye I can still see their faces on TV and the shots of the convention floor - the offered compromise - and then Maddox leading his group off the floor. Thus Nixon's 'Southern Strategy' was begotten. The implicit racism in Nixon's clever opportunism is readily apparant. It has sustained his party for the better part of 40 years... ...but now, my friend Amos, my comrade volunteer, the chickens might indeed, at long and dear last, be coming home to roost. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:01 AM Danny, Thank you, sir, for your work. It is our one best shot, and we should give it everything we can. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 09:30 AM Maureen Dowd kicks Karl Rove right in the nuts for dissing Barack (on top of a whole big pile of earlier offenses against humanity). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 11:17 AM The Los Angeles Times -- Twelve-point lead for Obama: "Buoyed by enthusiasm among Democrats and public concern over the economy, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has taken a sizable lead over Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., at the opening of the general election campaign for president, a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll has found. In a two-man race between the major-party candidates, registered voters chose Obama over McCain by 49% to 37% in the national poll, conducted Thursday through Monday." The survey of 1,115 registered voters has a margin of error on each result of +/- 3 percentage points. • Rocky Mountain News -- Nader says Obama tries to "talk white:" "Independent presidential candidate Ralph Nader accused Sen. Barack Obama, the presumed Democratic Party nominee, of downplaying poverty issues, trying to 'talk white' and appealing to 'white guilt' during his run for the White House. Nader, a thorn in the Democratic Party's side since the 2000 presidential election, has taken various shots at Obama in recent days while ramping up his latest independent run for president. ... The Obama campaign had only a brief response, calling the remarks disappointing." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:08 PM Obama - The Postmodern Coup: Making of a Manchurian Candidate Barack Obama is a deeply troubled personality, the megalomaniac front man for a postmodern coup by the intelligence agencies, using fake polls, mobs of swarming adolescents, super-rich contributors, and orchestrated media hysteria to short-circuit normal politics and seize power. Obama comes from the orbit of the Ford Foundation, and has never won public office in a contested election. His guru and controller is Zbigniew Brzezinski, the deranged revanchist and Russia-hater who dominated the catastrophic Carter presidency 30 years ago. All indications are that Brzezinski recruited Obama at Columbia University a quarter century ago. Trilateral Commission co-founder Brzezinski wants a global showdown with Russia and China far more dangerous for the United States than the Bush-Cheney Iraq adventure. Obama's economics are pure Skull & Bones/Chicago school austerity and sacrifice for American working families, all designed to bail out the bankrupt Wall Street elitist financiers who own Obama. Obama's lemming legions and Kool-Aid cult candidacy hearken back to Italy in 1919-1922, and raise the question of postmodern fascism in the United States today. Obama is a recipe for a world tragedy. No American voter can afford to ignore the lessons contained in this book. About the Author Webster Griffin Tarpley (Massachusetts 1946) is an intelligence expert and historian who has been studying and exposing covert operations for over thirty years. He is the author of George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography (1992) and 9/11 Synthetic Terror (2005). He has appeared on C-SPAN, CNN, Fox News, and many more. http://www.amazon.com/Obama-Postmodern-Making-Manchurian-Candidate/dp/0930852885/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1214413510&sr=1- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:12 PM Wow--what a crock of crap, Guest Unknown. I suspect this man is a raving asshole. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:17 PM Hmm. Well, there's an interesting alternative viewpoint. Only time will tell if there's anything to it. I'll say this. I can hardly believe that the corrupt oligarchy which runs the Democratic and Republican parties would dream of letting anyone but a hand-picked servant of their world-dominating fascist policies get to the Oval Office. And if so, and if he gets elected, then Obama is their man. If he's not their man, he's in very great danger. Anyway, time will tell. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: DannyC Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:27 PM "the catastrophic Carter presidency"? I remember Carter establishing the Dept. of Energy. I remember Carter's emphasis on the need to find renewable (and cleaner) energy resources. Carter was labelled a 'doomsayer' for talking about energy resource limits. We were told that it was 'Morning in America'. (It was, in fact, closer 4:30 in th afternoon.) I remember very clearly that on the day after the 1980 election - the very first working day for the new President-elect, Ronald Reagan lunched with the CEO of Texaco. The fix was in... "catastrophic presidency" indeed!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:30 PM Yeah, I don't get that bit either. Seems to me that Carter was the unfortunate recipient of something he was not in any way to blame for (the Iran Hostage crisis)...and that destroyed his presidency. It would have destroyed just about anyone's presidency. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: DannyC Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:32 PM Jimmy Carter delivered this televised speech on April 18, 1977. Tonight I want to have an unpleasant talk with you about a problem unprecedented in our history. With the exception of preventing war, this is the greatest challenge our country will face during our lifetimes. The energy crisis has not yet overwhelmed us, but it will if we do not act quickly. It is a problem we will not solve in the next few years, and it is likely to get progressively worse through the rest of this century. We must not be selfish or timid if we hope to have a decent world for our children and grandchildren. We simply must balance our demand for energy with our rapidly shrinking resources. By acting now, we can control our future instead of letting the future control us. Two days from now, I will present my energy proposals to the Congress. Its members will be my partners and they have already given me a great deal of valuable advice. Many of these proposals will be unpopular. Some will cause you to put up with inconveniences and to make sacrifices. The most important thing about these proposals is that the alternative may be a national catastrophe. Further delay can affect our strength and our power as a nation. Our decision about energy will test the character of the American people and the ability of the President and the Congress to govern. This difficult effort will be the "moral equivalent of war" -- except that we will be uniting our efforts to build and not destroy. I know that some of you may doubt that we face real energy shortages. The 1973 gasoline lines are gone, and our homes are warm again. But our energy problem is worse tonight than it was in 1973 or a few weeks ago in the dead of winter. It is worse because more waste has occurred, and more time has passed by without our planning for the future. And it will get worse every day until we act. The oil and natural gas we rely on for 75 percent of our energy are running out. In spite of increased effort, domestic production has been dropping steadily at about six percent a year. Imports have doubled in the last five years. Our nation's independence of economic and political action is becoming increasingly constrained. Unless profound changes are made to lower oil consumption, we now believe that early in the 1980s the world will be demanding more oil that it can produce. The world now uses about 60 million barrels of oil a day and demand increases each year about 5 percent. This means that just to stay even we need the production of a new Texas every year, an Alaskan North Slope every nine months, or a new Saudi Arabia every three years. Obviously, this cannot continue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: GUEST Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:34 PM Surprised I haven't been locked out. This fascist forum normally does that after one post. Anyway, Obama has never been elected in a fair election. State Senator in Illinois--his opponent was forced off the ballot by TriLateral Commission lawyers at the last minute. US Senate Democratic primary and General election--both his opponents were destroyed by FBI files. Sex stuff. So, Obama has obscure origins and powerful lawyers backing him. His past has never been fully investigated. He hasn't been vetted, and he's going to lose on account of it. A nasty piece of work, supported by bigger money than the Bushes ever tapped into. The Dems made a mistake by not pushing for Hitlary. Now we'll have a president who spent SEVEN YEARS IN THE HANDS OF SOVIET MIND MANIPULATORS. Geez. Why are you Dems so easily led? Brezinski's goal, by the way, is to pit the US against Russia/China. He's written it all up in his books. Now he has his stooge ready to rubberstamp all of it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:42 PM So you think Obama's unvetted past will sink his election chances? Interesting. I wonder if you're right? I really don't think that either the Democrats or the Republicans are a pleasant prospect to contemplate...but the way the media works in the USA there is simply no one else who's going to get elected. The sheep will eat what the media feeds them on a daily basis...because they are mostly not even aware that there IS anything else to eat. The most powerful thing in society is the flow of information. That determines what most people think about everything, and it determines who they will vote for. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:46 PM A question: Are the ideas of "Soviet mind manipulators" really any worse for the world than the ideas motivating those presently governing in America? ;-) Just wondering what you think about that. Seems like 6 of one and half a dozen of the other to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 01:47 PM June 25 (Bloomberg) -- Democrat Barack Obama has opened a 15-point lead in the presidential race, and most of the political trends -- voter enthusiasm, views of President George W. Bush, the Republicans, the economy and the direction of the country -- point to even greater trouble for rival John McCain. Illinois Senator Obama, winning support from once skeptical women and Democrats, beats McCain 48 percent to 33 percent in a four-way race, a Bloomberg/Los Angeles Times poll shows. Independent candidates Bob Barr and Ralph Nader get 7 percent combined, with the remainder undecided. Obama's margin and most of the poll's findings in other areas give the Democrats a commanding advantage more than four months before the November election, says Susan Pinkus, the Los Angeles Times polling director. ``The Obama voters are much more energized and motivated to come out to vote than the McCain voters; McCain is still struggling to win over some of his core groups,'' she says. ``The good news for Obama is also that he seems to be doing better on the issue that is uppermost in voters' minds, and that is the economy.'' Two-Way Race The poll shows that the third-party candidacies of Barr and Nader, who political experts say likely will be on the ballot in most states, are hurting Arizona Senator McCain slightly more than Obama. In a two-way race, Obama's lead over the presumptive Republican nominee narrows to 12 points. (Bloomberg) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Def Shepard Date: 25 Jun 08 - 03:11 PM Once more the credibility of posts is compromised by hiding behind the name GUEST...and don't you JUST love conspiracy theories? The very stuff of some politics :-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jun 08 - 03:12 PM Washington Post The Wrong Way to Kick An Oil Habit By Michael Gerson Wednesday, June 25, 2008; Page A13 High oil prices, like a walk under the summer moon, can drive normally rational people to do foolish things they later regret. For Barack Obama, it is a fling with a windfall profits tax on American oil companies -- one of the most thoroughly discredited economic policies of the past few decades. A 2006 Congressional Research Service report found that Jimmy Carter's version of the tax generated less than one-fourth of expected government revenue while depressing domestic oil output between 1.2 percent and 8 percent and increasing dependence on imported oil between 3 percent and 13 percent. It is typical of a tired economic liberalism to look at the global energy crisis and see American companies as the problem -- even if punishing them leads to greater dependence on foreign oil. But it is also naive to believe this dependence will be addressed by the normal working of energy markets. Those markets are producing what one economist calls the "greatest wealth transfer the world has ever known." In a single year, the revenue of oil- and natural gas-producing Persian Gulf states have nearly doubled -- giving nations in the region hundreds of billions of surplus dollars to play with. Recent Saudi promises to increase oil production may help ease prices. It is also the profitable accommodation of an addiction. How much money are we talking about? Because the Gulf monarchies are extravagantly secretive, the estimates vary. The Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency declares official reserves exceeding $300 billion, but the real number is probably much larger. And this does not include the wealth of individual royals. Brad Setser, my colleague at the Council on Foreign Relations, estimates that Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds have perhaps $1.5 trillion set aside for a rainy day. And what do these countries do with this money? Mainly they buy bonds through Swiss and English financial intermediaries. But they are also trying to defuse world outrage at this massive wealth transfer through some high-profile charity work. Saudi Arabia recently pledged $500 million for the World Food Program. Late last year, members of the Arab League promised about $700 million to the cash-starved Palestinian Authority. In both cases, there is less to this generosity than meets the eye. Oil-producing countries in the Middle East are large importers of food and declining producers (as water in the desert becomes too valuable for use on grain). So Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and others have begun using petrodollars to buy and rent farmland in other countries -- nations such as Egypt, Pakistan, Cambodia and the Philippines -- to ensure their own "food security." This may eventually lead to political instability in food-producing countries, as citizens ask: "Why are we sending staples to the Saudis while we have our own food shortages and inflation?" And by abandoning their production and locking up arable land in other countries for their own use, oil producers will only make global food markets tighter, accelerating the rise in food costs. On help for the Palestinians, the pledges of Arab countries have always come easier than actual donations. As of May, many Arab League members had yet to honor their promises to Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas. The Saudis have performed better than most. But their $170 million-a-year commitment needs to be put in perspective. London's Sunday Times reported that the late Saudi King Fahd, in preparation for a 2002 summer vacation, spent about $200 million to renovate his Mar Mar Palace in Marbella, Spain -- a mansion built as a replica of the White House. And by far the most consistent form of Saudi "generosity" since the 1970s has been the promotion of Wahhabism -- a minority form of Islam that tends toward extremism and anti-Semitism -- through the global distribution of madrassas, mosques and missionaries. According to one knowledgeable estimate, this effort has cost at least $75 billion. It should not surprise us that oil producers pursue their interests, excesses and ideologies with our money. But the massive transfer of wealth to some of the world's least responsible nations should disturb us. And confronting this problem -- with rapid increases in auto fuel efficiency and the urgent encouragement of alternatives to oil -- will involve a cost and commitment more general and more serious than a misguided windfall profits tax. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 25 Jun 08 - 03:17 PM Washington Post Patriot Games By Ruth Marcus Wednesday, June 25, 2008; Page A13 When in the course of political events it becomes advantageous for a presidential candidate to dissolve a campaign promise, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that the candidate at least refrain from wrapping himself in the Declaration of Independence. Not Barack Obama. Click on Obama's campaign Web site and you'll find a virtual parchment scroll, complete with running tally of how many "citizens have declared their independence from a broken system by supporting the first presidential campaign truly funded by the people." Written as " the PEOPLE," in that familiar, evocative style -- and with a July 4 deadline for signing up. So Obama isn't just junking his campaign pledge to participate in the public financing system if his opponent agreed to do the same. He isn't just becoming the first presidential candidate since Watergate to run a campaign fueled entirely by private money. No, he deserves praise for this selfless -- scratch that, patriotic-- move. "Our opponents are dedicated to manipulating this broken system to raise as much money as possible -- and they've proven they are very good at it," Obama's site declares. No mention that Obama's been pretty good at it himself, raising $295 million to John McCain's $122 million. "To compete" -- as if he wouldn't be competitive otherwise -- "Barack has decided to keep putting his faith in ordinary people like you giving only what you can afford." Ordinary people, that is, if your definition of ordinary people includes bundlers who can collect six- and even seven-figure sums for your campaign. Because even as he was rhapsodizing in public about "the grass-roots values that have already changed our politics and brought us this far," Obama was privately cozying up to Hillary Clinton's major fundraisers. Earlier this month, he dispatched his campaign manager, David Plouffe, to woo Clinton bundlers in Washington and New York. This week, Clinton will introduce Obama to nearly 200 of her major bundlers, including some who have raised $1 million or more, in a meeting at the Mayflower Hotel. "This group could represent 50 million, if not 100 million, bucks," said one top Clinton strategist. Their money is central to Obama's bet that he will do better raising money on his own than taking the $84 million in public financing for the general election. The Obama campaign is aiming to bring in another $300 million for the candidate -- $200 million of that from smaller donations, $100 million from the big players -- plus $150 million for the Democratic Party, much of which would also come in big contributions. Donors can give $2,300 each to Obama's primary and general election campaigns. So can their spouses. Each can also give $28,500 to the party. So you and your spouse are welcome to write a check totaling $66,200. So much for the campaign truly funded by "ordinary people." The Obama campaign likes to point out that 93 percent of its 3 million contributions have been $200 or less; nearly half have been $25 or less. Those numbers are impressive, and they reflect a healthier mix of small donors than the McCain and Clinton campaigns. But they are also misleading. One-third of Obama's cash has come in the form of contributions of $1,000 or more. Even in the age of the Internet, those don't tend to arrive courtesy of the Check Fairy. Bundlers help. I don't take issue with Obama's decision to opt entirely out of the public financing system. That was bound to happen eventually. Obama is smart to exploit his fundraising advantage over McCain. The political price of his about-face will be negligible. Likewise, I don't begrudge Obama his bundlers -- or Clinton's bundlers, for that matter. What's galling is Obama's effort to portray himself through this entire episode as somehow different from, and purer than, the ordinary politician. Different might have been coupling the announcement with a self-imposed limit on the size of donations. Different might have been -- it could still be -- taking the big checks but acknowledging that, since bundlers will be bringing in even bigger hauls, disclosure should be adjusted accordingly, to reveal not only who raised $200,000 but also who brought in $500,000, who $1 million. Obama's not the first politician to break a promise. He may be the first to do so in the guise of John Hancock, exuberantly signing the Declaration. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 03:53 PM Hey, DS, almost every official theory out there is a conspiracy theory. ;-) Example 1: The US government theorizes that a shadowy group called Al Queda somehow planned and executed the 911 attacks all by themselves, using 19 Muslim operatives including some grossly incompetent pilots who couldn't fly a Piper Cub properly, let alone a 747. GREAT conspiracy theory! LOL! Example 2: The US government theorizes that Iran is trying to secretly build nuclear bombs and blow up Israel with them. Another popular conspiracy theory. Strangely enough, those sponsoring the above conspiracy theories attack most opposing viewpoints by calling them "conspiracy theories". I find that quite ironic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Ebbie Date: 25 Jun 08 - 06:24 PM Hmmmm. The substance of opinion if not the style of a beloved female Guest doth ring a bell. If it walks like a duck...? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 06:41 PM I knew he was my kinda of guy: "The Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama showcased his diverse musical taste, ranging from Bob Dylan to Jay-Z and Bruce Springsteen, after revealing the playlist on his iPod. In an interview with Rolling Stone magazine, to be published this Friday, the Illinois senator said he had "pretty eclectic tastes". The list of bands reads like the acts at a summer music festival, with the Rolling Stones, Sheryl Crow and Ludacris all in the mix. Obama said that, growing up, he listened to Elton John and Earth, Wind & Fire but that Stevie Wonder was his ultimate musical hero during the 70s. The Stones' track Gimme Shelter topped his favourite songs from the band. His selection also contained 30 songs from Dylan. "One of my favourites [for] the political season is [Dylan's] Maggie's Farm. It speaks to me as I listen to some of the political rhetoric." In the song, Dylan sings about trying to be himself, "but everybody wants you to be just like them". The jazz legends Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Charlie Parker were also included in the compilation."... (Guardian) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 25 Jun 08 - 06:47 PM Yeah, Eb, but much more entertaining this time around as the commie-connection is one of the various Swiftbaot ideas that is very much on the McCain 527 table... I personally like that one... You know, callin' yer opponent a "commie"... Deja vu, Joe McCarthy 'n all that... I love it... They have bettter ones than that will be launched over the coming months but "Commie Obama" ain't a bad opening move... Wait until they say that Obama is part of al-Qeada... Oh, that one is gonna be real fun... Swiftboaters, start your engines!!! Word on the street is that Obama has some 527ers that are gonna cut loose on McCain as womanizing cheater who has over 50 lobbiest as his advisors... No, wait a minute... That stuff is all old news... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 06:52 PM I believe the comment about Soviet mind control was in reference to McCain's lengthy imprisonment in the Vietnam conflict, not to Barack Obama. Obama was characterized in that post as a front man for corporate fascists, not communists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 08:22 PM These guys chap my ass, but what pains me worse is the thought of the dozens of briquet-brained ne'er-do-well meatballs who will allow such things to seep into their festering swamp-minds and multiply like vicious viruses. What bothers me is that people like that still pose as human. It is a great disservice to the species, IMHO. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 08:33 PM Does the "H" stand for "honest" or "humble"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 25 Jun 08 - 08:33 PM Not to fret, Amos... Most of these folks don't vote... They just complain and complain and complain... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 25 Jun 08 - 08:38 PM Well, I would vote in your elections if I could...but I'm not an American citizen. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 25 Jun 08 - 11:53 PM Dem governors unite behind Obama"On Thursday, the nationÕs Democratic governors will gather in Chicago, united in one common goal: to bring real change and a new direction to our nationÕs capital. For more than a year, weÕve engaged in an energetic primary and a robust debate, involving some of the most talented candidates who have ever endeavored to lead our nation. Many of us picked sides, we fought hard, and the rhetoric was passionate and tough. Yet, from the start of the campaign, we agreed on a key point: that when it was over, we would join together again under the leadership of our nominee. Today, in Chicago, we will come together to show the strongest support for Barack Obama as the next president of the United States. The stakes in this election are enormously high and, as governors, we know all too well how urgently change is needed in this country Ñ the kind of change Barack Obama will bring. Governors deal in real time with the real lives of our constituents. Rising gas prices, rising mortgage foreclosures, rising unemployment, rising health insurance costs, education, security Ñ these are the close-to-home issues confronting working people. And while thereÕs a lot of talk about them in Washington, thereÕs been very little action. With a former governor currently occupying the Oval Office, the past eight years should have been a success story of federal-state relations. Instead, the Bush administration has conducted an unprecedented assault on effective governance by ignoring statesÕ rights, cramming down unfunded mandates and dangerously expanding the reach of the federal government. Sadly, we find examples of this everywhere. In the case of childrenÕs health insurance, this administration vetoed a bipartisan effort to extend the program to cover more uninsured children. Further, with no input from states, the Bush administration Ñ supported by John McCain Ñ unilaterally and stealthily changed federal rules to cost-shift to state taxpayers $50 billion in Medicaid services over the next five years, robbing teaching hospitals of critical funding and cutting health services provided at schools, including services for special needs students. Those costs donÕt just vanish; they must be absorbed by each and every state. Governors hold great pride in their stateÕs National Guard Ñ we are commanders in chief of Guard troops who are now deployed worldwide. Yet, when our troops return home, their equipment stays behind. Last year, the National Guard Bureau reported that the GuardÕs equipment budget is almost $38 billion underfunded. States absorb much of that loss. Our constituents struggle to buy groceries and gasoline because of a recession brought on, at least in part, by the subprime mortgage industry that Washington allowed to run unregulated and ignored. Enough. Our nation cannot withstand a repeat of the past eight years. The change Barack Obama talks about starts in Washington, D.C., but it will have tremendous impact in every state in the union. Change means restoring sense to our foreign policy. It means taking bold steps to ease our dependence on foreign oil and shift toward renewable energy sources. And it means jump-starting this economy to help our families thrive again. ..." By GOV. JANET NAPOLITANO & GOV. MARTIN O'MALLEY | 6/19/08 7:43 AM EST |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 10:53 AM CNN (Jack Cafferty): "Barack Obama is widening his lead over John McCain in early polling. A new Los Angeles Times-Bloomberg poll shows Obama topping McCain by 12 points – 49% to 37% – in a two-man race. If you include third-party candidates Ralph Nader and Bob Barr, Obama leads McCain by 15 points. A recent Newsweek poll also shows Obama up by 15. CNN's poll of polls reflects this growing gap as well, with Obama now leading McCain by 8 points – 48% to 40%. That's double the 4-point lead Obama held in this average of polls less than two weeks ago. Obama's lead may be due in part to his positions on domestic issues, with many voters saying he'd do a better job than McCain handling healthcare, taxes and the economy, the nation's number one issue. McCain once said he's not an expert on the economy. He continues to insist that the fundamentals of the economy are very strong." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: beardedbruce Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:26 AM Washington Post The Obamacons Who Worry McCain By Robert D. Novak Thursday, June 26, 2008; Page A19 What is an "Obamacon?" The phrase surfaced in January to describe British conservatives entranced by Barack Obama. On March 13 the American Spectator broadened the term to cover all "conservative supporters" of the Democratic presidential candidate. Their ranks, though growing, feature few famous people. But looming on the horizon are two big potential Obamacons: Colin Powell and Chuck Hagel. Neither Powell, first-term secretary of state for George W. Bush, nor Hagel, retiring after two terms as a U.S. senator from Nebraska, has endorsed Obama. Hagel probably never will. Powell probably will enter Obama's camp at a time of his own choosing. The best bet is that neither of the two, both of whom supported President Bush in 2000 and 2004, will back John McCain in 2008. Powell, Hagel and lesser-known Obamacons harbor no animosity toward McCain. Nor do they show much affection for the rigidly liberal Obama. The Obamacon syndrome is based on hostility to Bush and his administration and on revulsion over today's Republican Party. The danger for McCain is that desire for a therapeutic electoral bloodbath could get out of control. That danger was highlighted in a June New Republic article on "The rise of the Obamacons" by supply-side economist Bruce Bartlett, who was a middle-level official in the Reagan and George H.W. Bush administrations. He expressed "disgust with a Republican Party that still does not see how badly George W. Bush has misgoverned this country" -- echoing his scathing 2006 book, "Impostor: How George W. Bush Bankrupted America and Betrayed the Reagan Legacy." While Bartlett says "I'm not ready to join the other side," his anti-Bush furor characterizes the Obamacons. The prototypal Obamacon may be Larry Hunter, recognized inside the Beltway as an ardent supply-sider. When it became known recently that Hunter supports Obama, fellow conservatives were stunned. Hunter was fired as U.S. Chamber of Commerce chief economist in 1993 when he would not swallow Clinton administration policy, and he later joined Jack Kemp at Empower America (ghostwriting Kemp's column). Explaining his support for the uncompromisingly liberal Obama, Hunter blogged on June 6: "The Republican Party is a dead rotting carcass with a few decrepit old leaders stumbling around like zombies in a horror version of 'Weekend With Bernie,' handcuffed to a corpse." While he never would use such language, Colin Powell is said by friends to share Hunter's analysis of the GOP. His tenuous 13-year relationship with the Republican Party, following his retirement from the Army, has ended. The national security adviser for Ronald Reagan left the present administration bitter about being ushered out of the State Department a year earlier than he wanted. As an African American, friends say, Powell is sensitive to racial attacks on Obama and especially on Obama's wife, Michelle. While McCain strategists shrug off defections from Bruce Bartlett and Larry Hunter, they wince in anticipating headlines generated by Powell's expected endorsement of Obama. While Powell may not be a legitimate Obamacon because he never was much of a conservative, that cannot be said for his close Senate friend Hagel. He has built a solidly conservative record as a senator, but mutual friends see no difference between him and the general on Iraq, Dick Cheney, Don Rumsfeld, George W. Bush and the Republican Party. In a speech today at the Brookings Institution, Hagel is expected to urge Obama and McCain to reach out to each other. At the least, Hagel is not ready to strap on armor for his longtime political ally and office neighbor, John McCain. Reports listing additional Obamacons do not add up to tides of conservative Republicans leaving their party. Former Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker is a Democrat who entered government in the Kennedy administration. Conservative commentator Armstrong Williams (an African American) leads me to believe that he has no intention of endorsing Obama. Conservative author Richard J. Whalen is for Obama because he sees a dead Republican Party, but he also was for John Kerry in 2004. Nevertheless, Obamacons -- little and big -- are reason for concern by McCain. They also should cause soul-searching at the Bush White House about who made the Republican Party so difficult a place for Republicans to stay. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:40 AM McCain is a good man, but he has more important concerns than the Obamacons; as the figure-head-elect of the Republican Party he has a personal responsibility which, I think, he may not feel up to--to generate some fresh air in a fetid charnel house. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:47 AM "he (McCain) has a personal responsibility which, I think, he may not feel up to--to generate some fresh air in a fetid charnel house." Yes. ;-) But...you could say the same of Obama in regards to the Democratic Party. Both of those parties can be described as a fetid charnel house, IMHO. (The "H" stands for "happy"...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 11:52 AM There's a world of difference in the current phases of the two entities, LH. Obama is successfully revitalizing the Dems, while McCain is not having any reinvigorating imapct I can see on the sorry Republicans who still have the Bush albatross rotting around thier necks. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Little Hawk Date: 26 Jun 08 - 05:54 PM Yes, that may be so. I regard McCain as just more of Bush. Matter of fact, I think he might be even worse than Bush in office, given the chance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Bobert Date: 26 Jun 08 - 06:14 PM Interesting op-ed that bb posted... I read it during my lunch break today... I usually don't get too far into Novak's op-eds but I read the entire thing... I've wondered if Colin Powell would endorse Obama and have also thought that Powell would be an excellent choice in a s econd shot at Secretary of State but with a "new" mission... He allready knows alot of the players so I think he would be great... Hagel??? I don't know??? There's definately a role for him in an Obama administration but I confess to not knowing enough about him, other than he is a Repub who opposes the Iraq War, to know where he would fit but he and Obama are tight so, who knows??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 06:56 PM Howard Dean writes: As of this month, the Democratic National Committee no longer accepts = donations from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs. We're joining the campaign of our presumptive nominee, Barack Obama, in = setting a new standard for a people-powered politics. Unlike John McCain and the Republican National Committee, we will not = allow Washington lobbyists or PACs to control our campaigns, manipulate = our candidates, or drown out the views of the American people. But we face a crucial financial reporting deadline on Monday night, which = will be the first test of the financial consequences of this decision. Please make a donation of $25 now to show that our party is at its best = when it's powered by ordinary people giving whatever they can afford: https://donate.barackobama.com/DNCdeadline Your support of our 50-state strategy has helped create the opportunity = for Barack Obama to run a true 50-state campaign -- but we need your help. We have our work cut out for us. John McCain and the Republican National Committee had a three-month head = start on the general election, and they raised nearly $45 million last = month alone. Over the past three years, we've worked tirelessly to build our party from = the ground up in all 50 states. Now, for the first time in a generation, a presidential campaign is = putting staff in all 50 states so Democrats across the country can compete = in races up and down the ballot. And that campaign, and the national party supporting it, are refusing = contributions from Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs. We'll need unprecedented resources to build our operation in every state = -- and we'll need them at the same time we're cutting ourselves off from a = major fundraising source campaigns usually rely on. This is a damned historical miracle--a whole party turning its back on special interests. It may not be snow-driven purity but in the world of American politics, it is worthy of plaudits. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 08:24 PM Days after revealing the "eclectic" contents of his iPod, Barack Obama was feted at a music award ceremony where Sean 'P Diddy' Combs led a rallying cry of "Obama or Die". Support for the Democratic presidential nominee was a recurring refrain at the Black Entertainment Television awards in Los Angeles. "If we all register and vote, we will have the first black president in the history of America," rapper Combs told the crowd, before chanting "Obama or Die", a twist on his non-party, get-out-the-youth-vote slogan from the 2004 election, "Vote or Die". Accepting her best female R&B artist award, Alicia Keys, echoed Combs, telling the audience it was time black people removed the word "can't" from their vocabulary. Article continues advertisement "Together we can do anything," she said, before referencing the Illinois senator's "Yes We Can" motto with a shout of "Obama y'all!" Other stars present wore clothes emblazoned with Mr Obama's name. While the presidential nominee did not attend the ceremony, he was close by at a lavish fundraiser where Hollywood stars paid up to $14,000 each to show their support. The night, attended by the likes of Samuel L Jackson, John Malkovich, Don Cheadle, Heidi Klum and Cindy Crawford as well as an array of directors, producers and studio executives, was seen as a demonstration of Hollywood unity in the wake of the divisive nomination race. Many former Hillary Clinton backers were among the 900 attendees, who were entertained by British singer Seal performing Sam Cooke's A Change is Gonna Come. Mr Obama is the cover star of the new issue of Rolling Stone magazine and in an interview reveals his musical hero to be Stevie Wonder. Discussing his iPod playlist, he says he had "pretty eclectic tastes" ranging from Bob Dylan, Sheryl Crow and Jay-Z to Miles Davis and Yo-Yo Ma. He also dispenses some carefully considered views on rap, saying while he is concerned by the materialism and misogyny of some the lyrics, he believes "the genius of the art form has shifted the culture and helped to desegregate music". The senator already has a strong following among younger voters, but the BET "shout-outs" were seen as evidence of a further coup - the support of figures at the cutting edge of contemporary youth culture. "Barack Obama is not only the first black presidential candidate destined to earn a party nomination, but he's also the first truly cool candidate of the new millennium," writes Ann Powers in the Los Angeles Times. ... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 08:33 PM With just a few days left before June ends, there's a clear frontrunner for the month's least surprising political development -- the endorsement Barack Obama received today from the AFL-CIO. The massive conglomeration of 56 national and international unions -- comprising about 10.5 million workers -- steered clear of making a pick during the primary season because there was no consensus choice among the group's various affiliates. Many of the unions backed Obama, many supported Hillary Clinton and (while he was in the race) some were for John Edwards. Once Obama emerged triumphant, though, it was a foregone conclusion the federation would get in his corner. And it's the clout the group's increasingly sophisticated political operation will add to his side that makes the endorsement, though predictable, noteworthy. The days are long gone when union members voted in virtual lockstep with their leaders. But over recent campaign cycles, the federation has gotten better and better at marshaling its manpower and money to aid its favored candidates. Its get-out-the-vote efforts, for instance, played an important role in fueling the strong Democratic showing in the 2006 midterm elections. ... (LATimes) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 08:36 PM WASHINGTON (AP) Ñ Hillary Rodham Clinton lauded Barack Obama for "his grit and his grace" as she resumed public and private campaigning Thursday to support the candidate who dashed her hopes of winning the Democratic presidential nomination. The New York senator spoke to two trade groups before an evening meeting to introduce Obama to her most loyal fundraisers, while behind the scenes the two sides are working out details over the extent of her involvement with Obama's campaign going forward. "I am asking you to do everything you can to help elect Barack Obama," Clinton told the American Nurses Association, a 2.9-million member group that backed her candidacy. "I have debated him in more debates than I can remember and I have seen his passion and his determination and his grit and his grace. In his own life he has lived the American dream." Clinton and Obama plan to appear together for the first time since the end of the primary on Friday in symbolic Unity, N.H. Ñ where each got 107 votes in the state's January primary. Clinton won New Hampshire in an upset that set the stage for their long campaign, and it is now a critical battleground for the general election. Obama told reporters Wednesday that he thinks she'll be extraordinarily effective in speaking for his candidacy and he'd like to have her campaigning for him as much as she can. "I think we can send Senator Clinton anywhere and she'll be effective," Obama said. But the extent of her travel for Obama is not clear. Obama campaign manager David Plouffe said Wednesday that they have not scheduled any events after New Hampshire. "We don't have any specific knowledge of her schedule past Friday," Plouffe said. Three Clinton confidants Ñ Cheryl Mills, Minyon Moore and Robert Barnett Ñ are in talks with Obama's campaign to work out details of her future involvement, including travel, her role at the national convention and resolution of her more than $20 million debt. Part of their argument is that Clinton can spend more time helping Obama if she isn't working to pay off her debts. Some Clinton supporters, including some of those attending Thursday's fundraiser meeting, remain frustrated that Obama is not doing more to help with her debt while they are raising even more money for him. In response, the Illinois senator has asked five of his top donors to coordinate an effort to do so. "As those of you who were on the call yesterday heard, Barack has asked each of us to collect five or six checks to help Senator Clinton repay the people who provided goods and services to her campaign," finance chair Penny Pritzker said Wednesday in an e-mail to Obama's national finance committee. "He made this request in the spirit of party unity. Senator Clinton has promised to do everything she can to help us beat John McCain." "We recognize that this has been a long and, at times, hotly contested campaign," the e-mail said, with a "Clinton for President Debt Retirement" donor form attached. "But in the same way Senator Clinton has asked her supporters to move beyond the primary campaign, Barack has asked us to help in this effort to defray her debt. As he said on the call, `We are all in this together.'" Clinton's debt includes $12 million of her own money. She has said she is not asking for help to pay back that portion. Obama told reporters Wednesday he wouldn't send an e-mail asking his small-dollar donors to donate to Clinton because "their budgets are tighter" and they probably couldn't make much of a dent. Clinton told the National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials Thursday that every issue the group is fighting for is at risk in the campaign between Obama and Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain "We have to be determined to chart a new course and we cannot do that without electing Senator Obama our president," she said. "So that is what I'm going to be working for, that is what I'm going to be fighting for." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama From: Amos Date: 26 Jun 08 - 09:34 PM Let's put some brains back into the White House--elect Barack Obama. 2 2 0 0A |
