BS: Popular Views on Obama

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 02:01 PM

No, Rinslinger. It means that Woody Allen will soon be revealed as the father of Brittney Spears next love child.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 02:15 PM

I thought he would never come clean!! Does Mia know???


"Weeks in the making" is the time it took to confirm he would do it, and then decide when he would do it, is all. No big mystery there.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 02:19 PM

Mia and Woody aren't talking. If they were, though, I think this latest revelation would put the final nail in the coffin. ;-)

I am most pleased that John Kerry has endorsed Obama.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 02:33 PM

In other words "he took an awfully long time making his mind up about it." Not quote as whole-hearted and enthusiastic as might have been hoped for.


I'm reminded of the union leader who was taken ill and had to go in hospital. In due course he received a get well card from his committee - with a note saying this had been put to the vote and passed by five votes to four with two abstentions.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 02:36 PM

Sounds like the card Bill Shatner got from the rest of the Star Trek cast when he was down with the flu....

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Azizi
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 04:14 PM

Here's an interesting dailykos diary about Senator Kerry's endorsement of Senator Obama:

Back from the Obama/Kerry Event
by segseg
Thu Jan 10, 2008 at 11:35:48 AM PST
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/10/14154/6472/806/434472

Excerpt:

"Sen. Kerry gave one of the best introductory speeches I have seen. Full of passion, simple yet inspiring language, true conviction for the host he was to introduce. Simultaneously folk around us asked "where was this guy four years ago." Kerry laid out why the naysayers were wrong. How Jefferson was in his twenties when he wrote the Declaration of Independence and how MLK was a mere 34 years old when he marched on Washington.

He conceded that youth inspires and the old politicians must make way for young new exciting passion and ideas. He knew Obama would end the swiftboaters and change tone which he tried to do four years ago.

(Then like Kerry, he went on a bit to long, but what are you going to do.)

Obama then spoke. I had seen most of the speech he gave before on TV, but live, the guy is a leader and a rock star....

I now believe hope alone can breed new ideas and ultimately success. I will not let my ex-favorite politician Bill Clinton to tell me to stop believing in Fairy tales. As the Senator put it, that is what the dream of a country from Sea to shining sea was to many: a fairy tale. But thousands upon thousands went west anyway. Putting a man on the moon: a fairy tale, but Kennedy inspired hope to go and we did.

The Hope to change and make things better–that is what is missing from our country. Bitter over 9-11 we have digressed into grumpy finger pointing doom and gloomers. It must change and change now. Obama can, we can.,,

Hoping the fairy tale of a greater America comes true".....

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 04:58 PM

Kerry's Endorsement is worth listening to.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 05:09 PM

Excellent. Kerry sounds genuinely inspired this time.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 05:37 PM

Well, geeze.... Yeah, I guess this is good but not all that good... I'd rather see Bill Richardson, who I think is about to bow out, endorse Obama...

But we'll take what we can...

BTW, I was at a smallish luncheon (maybe 70 people) today with Mark Warner in Luray... The invite only crown was made up of both Repubs and Dems and really not too sure how I got an invite...

Mark made his way around the room and spoke with everyone personally... I had made this nice badeg that read "Obama/Warner '08" and had it pinned to the inside of my sports coat and when Mark came over to my table I whispered in his ear that I had something for him to see and showed him the button... I know he liked it and he whispered back that he was shocked at the N.H. primary...

I don't take that as an endorsement but it was obvious he was delighted to see his name on the button with Obama's...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 07:01 PM

I notice Richardson left the field without endorsing anyone, so I suppose he is holding it in reserve for a shot at Veep. Not a bad tactic.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Azizi
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 07:36 PM

Ned Lamont, who rose to national prominence after defeating Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary in the 2006 Connecticut race for the US Senate just endorsed Senator Barack Obama.

See this excerpt from Lamont's website:

"It's Time To Change The Game

When I decided to run for Senate, I did so because I deeply believed that the citizens of Connecticut were yearning to see fundamental changes in our politics – changes that would make government work for them again.

Today, with our Presidential primary in Connecticut less than a month away, I am announcing my support of Barack Obama for President because I am convinced that his forward-looking, progressive vision provides the best chance to enact meaningful reforms in the way Washington works."...

http://www.nedlamont.org/

**

Btw, Senator Lieberman {of the Independent party or whatever party he belongs to} went on to win that campaign in Connecticut. Lieberman recently endorsed Republican Senator John McCain for US President.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Azizi
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 07:43 PM

I meant to mention that Ned Lamont was initially for Senator Dodd who is no longer running for the Democratic nomination for President of the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 08:20 PM

Well, one thing that I have noticed on another thread is that some folks are beginning to let media-speak set into their opinions of the various candidates... And the media-speak on Obama is that he hasn't done any thing and isn't saying anything...

This is a terrible injustice but is more a sad commentary on just how unjournalistic our media has become...

I used an example in the other thread of the work that Obama did in the Illinois state house in bringing about video-taping of interogations and confession of suspected criminals...

Where was the political payoff??? Where ere the lobbiests with big checks... No where...

This was a "heart" issue and speaks volumes about the man becasue he not only got the legislation thru but he also had bipartisan support in doing so... No easy feat with the right wing law 'n order folks fighting him...

This showed courage... He had nothing to gain politically but everyone gained from his work in making for a more just system where confessions could no longer come from intense beatings...

Will we hear about things like this on the campaign trail??? Probably not... Campaigns are in the details of policies... That is unfortunate because if they were I believe that Obama would look even better...

B~

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

The media are closely tied to various special interest groups...namely those with the most money. Accordingly, the media cannot be trusted.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Bobert
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 08:54 PM

That should have read, "Campaigns aren't"...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Stringsinger
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 09:06 PM

OK, I have to reverse myself on Kucinich. I found out that he would run with Ron Paul as a VP and I find this intolerable. Paul is an avowed racist, and had views that run counter
to everything I believe in. DK has just effectively lost his bid for the presidential race by suggesting Paul as a running mate. What must he be thinking to run with Paul who supports David Dukes and is unseemly critical of African-Americans. Wow, was I mislead.

Back to Obama or should I say O-prah-bama (hope he doesn't run against Chuckobee).
His manner is much like a preacher with the "Yes I Can" mantra. He seems likeable and appears to be sincere but I don't find much substance under his stump rhetoric. I know that he has paid a few dues (yes, real experience Hillary) in Chicago politics but he seems unclear as to how he would 1. Bring the troops home from Iraq, 2. Implement health care so that it is out of the hands of the crooked insurance companies, 3. Restore   unionism (although he has received support from the SEIU), 4. Do something about restoring habeas corpus and abolishing the Patriot Act, 5. Get rid of NAFTA and get out of the WTO, 6. Stop the wiretapping and restore FISA, 7. Do something about the dysfunctional voting machines (go back to paper ballots counted at the precinct level), 8. Be serious about eliminating 527's and do campaign finance reform, 9. Outlaw the Telecommunications Act and give the media back to the people, 10. AND take Iran off the table.

Then I could consider his nomination as being viable.

Frank Hamilton

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 09:15 PM

Did Kucinich say he would run with Ron Paul? Boy, talk about the odd couple...

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 09:57 PM

Having just seen an interview on CNN that happened tonight with Ron Paul around this very issue of him supposedly being a "racist"...some really vicious smears that are clearly being spread noisily by some unknown fuckers who've been quietly hired by some other Republican Party candidate(s), Frank Hamilton, I think you are 100% mistaken about that, and you better check your facts and check 'em twice.

He spoke at great length about the injustice of how black people are being unfairly treated in the criminal justice system, and various other related matters.

You're chewing on a large red herring of the type that is released in all elections these days to ruin someone's candidacy. Just another "Swift Boat Veterans For Truth" effort is what I think it is. Dirty politics.

And you are spreading their message for them. That's your mistake, but not theirs.

I saw the interview. I heard the full explanation. This is not a new story, it's ancient, and it was discredited a long time ago. Ron Paul did not write any of the articles you are referring to, and he was not aware of them or in sympathy with them when they were written. If someone who happens to like and support Ron Paul also writes an article that has racist views IN it, that is not Ron Paul's fault...nor does it have anything to do with an evaluation of Ron Paul or his stand on issues.

This was a long time ago, this issue you have happened upon, and it's just a red herring being dragged around by some disinformation spreaders who are out to knock Ron Paul out of the Republican lineup, because his views on American foreign policy are embarassing the hell out of his party which cannot bear to hear the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Azizi
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 10:35 PM

Is Ron Paul a racist?

Yes.

Here's an example of his racist writing:

"LOS ANGELES RACIAL TERRORISM

Taken from the Ron Paul Political Report, 1120 NASA Blvd., Suite 104, Houston, TX 77058 Aug 4 1993, 12:15 am

The Los Angeles and related riots mark a new era in American cultural, political, and economic life. We now know that we are under assault from thugs and revolutionaries who hate Euro-American civilization and everything it stands for: private property, material success for those who earn it, and Christian morality...

Indeed, it is shocking to consider the uniformity of opinion among
blacks in this country. Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5% of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty, and the end of welfare and affirmative action. I know many who fall into this group personally and they deserve credit--not as representatives of a racial group, but as decent people. They are, however, outnumbered. Of black males in Washington, D.C, between the ages of 18 and 35, 42% are charged with a crime or are serving a sentence, reports the National Center on Institutions and Alternatives. The Center also reports that 70% of all black men in Washington are arrested before
they reach the age of 35, and 85% are arrested at some point in their lives. Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the "criminal justice system," I think we can safely assume that 95% of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal.

If similar in-depth studies were conducted in other major cities, who
doubts that similar results would be produced? We are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, but it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings, and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers."

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.african.american/msg/c8668bd3662b0fa5

Also, there's these comments found on http://thecrossedpond.com/?p=574 :

In one issue of the Ron Paul Survival Report, which he had published since 1985,published since 1985, he called former U.S. representative Barbara Jordan a "fraud" and a "half-educated victimologist." In another issue, he cited reports that 85 percent of all black men in Washington, D.C., are arrested at some point: "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the 'criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal." And under the headline "Terrorist Update," he wrote: "If you have ever been robbed by a black teenaged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be."

In spite of calls from Gary Bledsoe, the president of the Texas State Conference of the NAACP, and other civil rights leaders for an apology for such obvious racial typecasting, Paul stood his ground. He said only that his remarks about Barbara Jordan related to her stands on affirmative action and that his written comments about blacks were in the context of "current events and statistical reports of the time." He denied any racist intent....

What made the statements in the publication even more puzzling was that, in four terms as a U. S. congressman and one presidential race, Paul had never uttered anything remotely like this.
When I ask him why, he pauses for a moment, then says, "I could never say this in the campaign, but those words weren't really written by me. It wasn't my language at all. Other people help me with my newsletter as I travel around. I think the one on Barbara Jordan was the saddest thing, because Barbara and I served together and actually she was a delightful lady." Paul says that item ended up there because "we wanted to do something on affirmative action, and it ended up in the newsletter and became personalized. I never personalize anything."

His reasons for keeping this a secret are harder to understand: "They were never my words, but I had some moral responsibility for them . . . I actually really wanted to try to explain that it doesn't come from me directly, but they campaign aides said that's too confusing. 'It appeared in your letter and your name was on that letter and therefore you have to live with it.'" It is a measure of his stubbornness, determination, and ultimately his contrarian nature that, until this surprising volte-face in our interview, he had never shared this secret. It seems, in retrospect, that it would have been far, far easier to have told the truth at the time."

-snip-

Sorry, but I'm not buying Paul's excuses for those words.

If it walks like a duck & quacks like a duck, it is a duck.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 10 Jan 08 - 11:22 PM

Not quite as bad as Robert Byrd, I suppose, but still pretty damaging.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 11:43 AM

Reposted from the Kucinich thread...

The word I got from the Kucinich campaign at the national level (and I am in the Kucinich campaign myself - on the state level) is that, and I quote: "There will not be a Kucinich / Ron Paul ticket".

Frank, could you please post this to wherever you posted that stuff?


Ron Paul doesn't believe in the separation of church and state. Kucinich does. Ron Paul believes that the Christian churches should "eclipse the government in importance".

Kucinich and Paul have totally opposite plans for health care. Kucinich believes everyone should have it, and that profit motive should not be a part of the health care equation. Ron Paul believes that the market should determine who can have it and who can't.

Obama, by the way, believes that everyone should be required to have it, whether they can afford it or not. He has no plans to remove the extra costs that result from the profit motive of the insurance companies - in fact, his plan actually subsidizes the insurance industry. With Obama's plan, everyone will still have to pay premiums, deductibles, and co-pays to the insurance companies, and the insurance companies will still make their profits by denying care. Michael Moore endorses Kucinich's health care plan. He does not endorse Obama's health care plan.

With Kucinich's plan, the profit motive and all of its associated costs (advertising, lobbying, dividends to stock holders, etc.) will be eliminated, and we will receive a higher standard of care for less money overall.

Obama says he is against the Iraq war, but he has voted to fund it. Kucinich has voted consistantly to not fund it.

Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich are good friends, and they share some of their beliefs about foreign policy, but their domestic agendas and some of their foreign policy ideas are completely incompatible.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 11:46 AM

Somebody writes stuff that he doesn't agree with, that is very damaging to him, puts him in the frame for writing it - and he feels a duty to cover for that person. Doesn't make much sense really.

Accepting responsibility for something done in your name doesn't mean going along with it, or making out rhat you did it yourself - it means recognising you have a personal responsibility to try to undo any harm and insult caused to other people.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 11:52 AM

BTW, using the 'racist' charge against Ron Paul to try to diminish his voter base won't work. There's too much plausible deniability, and most of his supporters appear to be White. The only way to effectively undermine his support is to show people in what way it's in their own best interest to not support him. I know this, because I've been doing it out on the street, and I've found it to be very effective.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 12:01 PM

I've seen Ron Paul speak about it. My impression is that 1. He didn't write that stuff...and 2. He is not a racist.

Furthermore, let me say this:

If every one of us here had someone able to search through every word we have ever said or written in our lives....then searched through it all diligently and separated out a few choice bits of prose carefully...

We could ALL be depicted by someone in the media as racists.

And that includes the Black people and the Hispanics and the Whites and the people of North American Indian blood among us. Every single one of us.

I guarantee it.

You just have to pick the right moment. Everyone has said something at some point in their lives that someone else could later use to depict them a racist, and if they are a writer or a public figure it may well be on record somewhere.

If you were getting highly paid under the table to hunt up some stuff with which to tar some politician as a racist....and you had the resources of a well-staffed office to do it....you'd find it.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 12:19 PM

LH - Yes, I know I've said things that people have taken completely differently than I meant them. Then when I go back and look at what I've said or written, I can understand completely why they took it the way they did, even though I didn't mean it that way.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 12:22 PM

For instance, the Toronto police force has gotten in trouble on occasion for merely saying that an inordinate amount of crime is presently being committed (per capita) by young Black men in Toronto.....and that is the TRUTH!!! And there are a large number of social/financial and cultural reasons for why that is presently the case....and they have nothing to do with Black people being intrinisically better or worse than anyone else!

But the Toronto police spokesman have still been called "racist" for daring to openly say that a large proportion of violent crimes are being committed by young Black men! Even though it's literally true.

So is it "racist" to tell a literal truth? Well, it all gets pretty damned politically motivated in about half a second, doesn't it? The chip you are carrying on your own shoulder will determine exactly how you react to any given truth when it is stated. Do you react in a completely defensive manner, based on your own self-conscious identity as a member of a racial or cultural "group"? Or do you deal with a truth dispassionately and objectively, simply AS what it is...a fact.

Can you step outside the mental box of your own race, religion, nationality, and culture and just act as a completely objective and unprejudiced "human being" instead? Can you stop BEING consciously "White" or "Black" or "Christian" or "Muslim" or "atheist" for one minute and just be human???? Can you do that for 5 minutes? For a whole day?

Very few people seem to be much good at doing that, I've noticed. They fall back on their group identity in the blink of an eye, the moment they're under stress. This means, ultimately, that they don't think objectively so much as they merely react to any outer stimulus which awakens the memory of their past emotional pain.

As such, they are not really free beings. And they probably ARE racist in some measure, although they'd never admit it to themselves or anyone else either. It becomes the unspeakable...that which must be denied at all cost.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 05:44 PM

Here's what Mister O. says for himself:

"This is a defining moment in our history.

Our nation is at war. Our planet is in peril. The dream that so many generations have fought for feels as if it's slowly slipping away.


We've seen the cost of Washington's inaction and indifference.

The time has come for a President who'll be honest about the choices and the challenges we face; who'll listen to you and learn from you even when we disagree; who won't just tell you what you want to hear, but what you need to know.


I'll be a President who finally makes health care affordable and available to every single American the same way I expanded health care in Illinois,by bringing Democrats and Republicans together to get the job done.

I'll be a President who ends the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and puts a middle-class tax cut into the pockets of the working Americans who deserve it.

I'll be a President who harnesses the ingenuity of farmers and scientists; citizens and entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil once and for all.Ê


And when I am President, we will end this war in Iraq and bring our troops home. We will finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. We will care for our veterans. And we will restore our moral standing in the world."


These are policies and goals, not project orders, but they ring true and they certainly point in the right direction. Let's put him in and let him roll on them.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 05:53 PM

nterestingly enough, whoever gets elected President will have a good deal of power to effect change--largely thanks to the work that the Shrub did in marginalizing the Congress.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 06:11 PM

Hmmm. I wonder how he envisions "finishing the job" against Al Queda in Afghanistan? I've read my history books, and this is what I know about Afghanistan...the fighting there (other than that between the local warlords) ends when the foreign occupying forces leave.

However, I guess he's saying what he figures he has to say, as an American politician.

I like most of what he has to say very much. It's not perfect, but it is positive and it's well said.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 06:12 PM

Hey,

All you beautiful intelligent inspired Americans!

I read her and there how we may or may not see Obama win and he may still lose but the battle is not lost etc ...

The point as I see it is that This battle has gone further than any previous battle of it's kind.

He friging won Iowa - forget about whether history will or won't be made, it has been made - and more importantly it is still being made.

The boundaried are being pushed further every day that Obama is still in the hunt.

You are all part of it right now and you should be proud of yourselves.

Talk about cutting edge!

And what about "liberal europe" criticizing "reactionary America" -

PAH!

I stick to what I say about the Myth of reactionary America.

I think most Americans are more mature than that. My experience supports that view.

Enough with all stereotyping.

I read a thread like this and I feel like I'm about to burst as I sense in everyone a deep sense of "wow are we really breaking into a new era"

You are redefining America right now - you are all afraid of being disappointed - but you all want the best and you know that that is what he represents. Keep going.

the very idea -- "yes we can" -- it's eating away at the walls - erosion takes a long time, but then suddenly you're there.

I hope this doesn't appear sentimental or superficial, but then I think I'd be underestimating you if I carried on in that vein so I'll just move on - you're the ones making the change so I reckon you know better tha me that something unfathomably significant is happening.

Tally ho chaps.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 06:41 PM

Yeah, it's certainly good to see, isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Azizi
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 06:48 PM

Little Hawk,

I stand by my comments of 10 Jan 08 - 10:35 PM.

The everybody does it/everybody is a racist sometime or another stance doesn't excuse racist words and racist actions.

How will we ever get beyond racism if we continue to excuse it?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 06:56 PM

No one excuses it Azizi. It is, along with anti-semitism and sexism and the "n" word, among the greatest and most pervasive taboos of our age. To call someone a "racist" or an "anti-semite" at the present time has the sort of fatal power of accusation/condemnation that calling someone a "witch" once had in Salem.

Now who wrote the articles in those old Ron Paul newsletters? If it wasn't Ron Paul, and if he had no knowledge of those articles at the time, how does that make him a racist?

Guilt by association?

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 07:06 PM

I wonder what Ron Paul would say if he were confronted with all of those things now.

                The other thing is, when something like this comes to light in the middle of a political campaign, it really deserves a good looking over.

                Remember that rumor about John McCain having a black child out of wedlock, planted by George Bush and totally untrue in South Carolina, in 2000.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 07:14 PM

WHAT??????????????? Oh, for heaven's sake. I never heard about that one before, Rinslinger. It's downright amazing the stuff that these political disinformationists come up with. And think how well they are paid for it!

It's the "National Enquirer" approach to public affairs, and people go for it, because nothing spreads faster than malicious gossip.

I've seen Ron Paul's reaction to it on CNN, and I was well impressed with what he said in response to it. I know one thing for sure, the rest of the Republican Party would absolutely looooove it if people forgot all about Ron Paul's platform on Iraq and foreign affairs and the Constitution, and instead obsessed from now on about whether he's a racist or not.

That would be most convenient from their point of view, and that's why it's happening. The people who sprang this story did not do it in order to help end racism in America. If racism ever ended, they'd be deprived of one of the key guns in their arsenal.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 07:24 PM

Yes, I agree with everything you say above.

       But the deal with McCain was this, as I understand it:
Cindy McCain was in India, and there was a little girl, an infant, who needed an operation. The only way Mrs. McCain could get the child out of the country and back to the states for the operation fast enough was to adopt her. So she did; the operation was a success and the girl is alive and well today.

       Karl Rove took that, and twisted it into a story about John McCain having had a black child out of wedlock, and the child now lived in the McCain's home.

       The press found a child of color in the McCain's home and ran with the Rove story.

         I think all of this has been pretty well documented. It makes one wonder about any kind of dirt coming up during a political campaign.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 07:54 PM

People who do what Karl Rove did should be thrown in prison for a minimum of 25 years in my opinion. That might go a long way toward cleaning up American election campaigns.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: mg
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 08:01 PM

I believe she was from Bangladesh.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 08:18 PM

Why 25 years, LH???... Why not just give them probation and 100,000 days of community service???

Might of fact, throw in another 100K for Rove, Bush, Cheney, Rumsy, Wolfsie, Pearle and a couple hundred for Powell for gettin' sucked into Bush's "horror show"...

As for Obama???

Hey, folks will be shootin' at him 'cause "why"??? Because he's the front runner... He is the one who has captured America's spirit... Who wlse are they gonna use up their dry powder on??? JOhn McCain??? He has "zero" chance of becoming the next president... That zero with a capital "Z"... He doesn't offer US anything more than a complete rerun of George Bush???

Yeah, I hope the Repubs nominate McCain... Really, no bull like when the Repubs say stupid stuff like "We hope they nominate Obama"... Thay don't mean it... I very much mean it.... MCcain??? He will keep our kids dieing in Iraq going into the next century... Bring the sumabich on...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Riginslinger
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 09:54 PM

Well, I'm certainly not blowing my horn for McCain, but it was a pretty rotten thing Karl Rove did to him in South Carolina. And I agree with LH; he should have been prosecuted for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ron Davies
Date: 11 Jan 08 - 11:51 PM

Don't underestimate McCain. He's an authentic American hero. If, God forbid, Hillary is the nominee, he can bring up the festering sore of Vietnam without even trying--just by his own history. With Hillary trying to deal with both the 60's and the 90's--each with huge numbers of people still bitter--what do you think the Swift Boating was about?--the Democrats will have big problems--again.

But it will all likely hinge on Iraq--as I predicted over year ago. There is now a serious movement to replace Maliki. If that happens, the US public will give up on Iraq--there'll be no chance of "national reconciliation"--and all the Republicans, especially McCain, will be sunk. But it's not clear if that will happen.

The other possibility is a recession. That almost always results in throwing out the president's party.

Obviously a recession is nothing anybody would wish for.





Back to Obama:

Sometimes it seems that Azizi, Peace, Amos, Bobert, mg, a -very-- few others, and I are the only ones who are not dyed-in-the-wool cynics. Ironic--I used to think of myself as a classic hard-bitten cynic. But compared to quite a few Mudcatters, I'm Roy Rogers--Happy Trails and all.

But actually, I think it's just attitude--we are willing to believe that the US, led by Obama, can improve. While many Mudcatters seem to feel the case is hopeless. Our attitude (hope and belief) is more typical of younger folks--we're not teenagers, right?--but just to feel that hope makes you feel younger, and more positive about life in general--rather than picking sourly at any good news in search of flaws, as is the wont of many here.

I've somehow fallen into the role of optimist. Not type-casting, I assure you. As an enthusiastic amateur historian, I know how hopes can be dashed. Some here seem to endorse Paul Verlaine's prescription: "Prends l'eloquence et tords-lui son cou"--"Take eloquence and wring its neck".

But I also know that perhaps the greatest power of the presidency is the power to persuade--(see Neustadt) It's been so at least since TR's "bully pulpit". And what better goal can there be but the end of bitter partisanship so we can actually get the US moving in the right direction? Obviously the power to persuade can be used for good (Obama's goal) or ill--Bush's manipulation of the US public to earn himself a place in Hell next to the Austrian corporal.

After Bush's abuse of the presidency and his betrayed promise--"uniter not a divider"--it's such an incredible relief to have somebody come on the scene who wants to use the position for good--and is truly more than willing to have a "big tent"--turning his back on the narrow adversarial culture which has ruled for so long.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 12:05 AM

I'm voting for (and campaigning for) the candidate who's positions and proposals most closely fit my own ideas about what's good for this country. Many (most) people I talk to about this say that they also feel that my candidate's positions and proposals most closely fit theirs, but they can't vote for him because they think he can't win. So who's really the cynic and who's the idealist?

Some of the people in this thread seem to be implying that if I don't vote for the Black candidate, it's because I'm a racist. If Kucinich was Black, I would vote for him. If Obama had Kucinich's positions and proposals, I would vote for him. Anything else would be cynical on my part.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Ron Davies
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 12:06 AM

The cynics are the ones who assume Obama is just a smooth talker. If the shoe fits....

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 12:11 AM

Like Carol, I like Kucinich's policies best of all, but like you, Ron, I am quite enthusiastic about Obama, and for the same reasons you have stated. I hope that Obama is elected (he has a very good chance of it), and I hope in that case that some of the good ideas Kucinich has brought to the election have a useful effect on future policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Amos
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 12:13 AM

As far as I am concerned he stands head and shoulders above any of the "possible" candidates, a category I do not place Dennis in in my mind. If I did I would be torn, but would go for Dennis.

But it takes votes to do what needs to be donbe; Dennis won't be in the election. Obama most likely will.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: CarolC
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 12:15 AM

Smoother talker or not, I don't agree with what he says. I'm voting for the candidate who's positions and proposals I most agree with. The cynics are the ones who are voting for someone they don't necessarily agree with just because they don't think the one they agree with can get elected. That makes me the idealist.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Little Hawk
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 12:54 AM

Yes, indeed it does.

If I was in the USA and could vote in a primary, I'd vote for Kucinich. If it ended up with Obama running for President after all the primaries were done, then I'd vote for Obama.

It's different in Canada, because you don't vote directly for the chief executive himself here, you vote for your local party representative instead, and the party that wins the most ridings across the nation forms the next government in office, and their party leader becomes the new chief executive...with less overall power than an American president. He cannot veto legislation. He leads his party in our version of "Congress"...our parliament. The other parties form the Official Opposition in Parliament.

I frankly think it's a better system than the American one, although I like the bicameral legislature (House and Senate) that the USA has...an excellent idea that helps balance regional power against "rep by pop". We could use that in Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Azizi
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 01:07 AM

See this excerpt from http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2008/01/6838_clinton_faces_t.html


Clinton Faces Trouble in South Carolina for MLK Remarks

"Before the New Hampshire primary, Hillary Clinton went on Fox News and responded to Barack Obama's frequent invocations of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "Dr. King's dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964," she said. "It took a president to get it done."

The message was clear: knowing how to work the levers of power is more valuable in getting stuff done than even the mightiest of speeches.

But slighting Dr. King is probably not the best way to make any political point. Maybe the biggest ramification is this: South Carolina Representative James Clyburn, the highest-ranking African-American in Congress and a veteran of the civil rights movement, appears poised to abandon the neutrality he has maintained throughout the presidential race and endorse Barack Obama.

"We have to be very, very careful about how we speak about that era in American politics," Clyburn told the New York Times. "It is one thing to run a campaign and be respectful of everyone's motives and actions, and it is something else to denigrate those. That bothered me a great deal."

Clyburn is a heavyweight in South Carolina politics, and his endorsement could help solidify Obama's support amongst the black community there. The black vote in South Carolina, as we've discussed, is not solidly in anyone's camp at the moment, and if Obama can add that voting block to others that are on his side, he will have a very solid chance at the nomination. After all, if he could win Iowa and be competitive in New Hampshire, two states that are heavily white, imagine what he can do in places that are more diverse..."

-snip-

Here's two comments that bloggers made regarding the above article:

For him to go after Obama, using a 'fairy tale,' calling him as he did last week, it's an insult. And I will tell you, as an African-American, I find his tone and his words to be very depressing," Donna Brazile, a longtime Clinton ally who is neutral in this race, said on CNN earlier this week.

Asked in an e-mail from Politico about the situation Friday, she responded by sending over links to five cases in which the Clintons and their surrogates talked about Obama, along with a question:
"Is Clinton using a race-baiting strategy against Obama?"
-Posted by: Buddy on 01/11/08 at 5:41 PM

**

I supported Bill Clinton as a politician from outside Washington who was different in 1992 and 1996.

But I am personally and professionally offended by his tone in stating "…this whole thing is a fairytale." There is no doubt in my mind what Bill referring to!

I don't care how much Hillary may have worked for civil rights (after supporting Barry Goldwater), it will never match what Barack Obama has done and support he has gained by running for President.

I am in no way playing a so called "race card". The good people of New Hampshire, where 0.7% of the population is African-American, supported Barack Obama with over 104,000 votes!

I was born a colored child, who became a Negro in elementary school, transitioned to Black in the late sixties and then to African-American. At no point in that time, except when outside the borders of the USA, was I ever referred to as "just" a plain old patriotic American.

But with Barack I will be an American -- no color descriptor required!

Go Barack Obama '08

I once was lost but now am found, Was blind, but now I see!
-Bob , Florida - RFO on 01/11/08 at 6:58 PM Respond

-snip-

I stand with an increasing number of African Americans and non-African Americans who believe that the Clintons and their campaign spokespeople are using racial code words in their descriptions of Barack Obama, and are thus exploiting racism for their own personal gain {to try to win the Democratic nomination.

Whether the Clintons are racist or not, their and their surrogates intentional use of racism so that the Clintons may return to the White House is despicable.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: Peace
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 01:18 AM

Clinton would be just more of the SSDD. Another money-machine gofer.

Subject: RE: BS: Popular Views on Obama
From: mg
Date: 12 Jan 08 - 01:23 AM

Of course they are using code words. Anything those two do is thought out. if someone else used certain words or phrases ...Romney, etc...I would say it was a slip of the tongue, perhaps a Freudian slip..but I doubt it would be intentional.

If I was Barack I would say..OK..I am quite willing to be the second black president..we have had the first one and it's now no big deal so get over it.

And I am totally for him domestically.(great concerns internationally) ...I think we absolutely need him..most especially the youngsters...and he needs to inspire them, and he needs to go after some of their behaviors like Mrs. O. did with the Mean Girls. mg