Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Thursday, August 07, 2008
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Commissioner Joe sends us an article from Times Online!!
He ventured forth to bring light to the world
By Gerard Baker: July 25th 2008
The anointed one's pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a miracle in action - and a blessing to all his faithful followers
And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.
The Child was blessed in looks and intellect. Scion of a simple family, offspring of a miraculous union, grandson of a typical white person and an African peasant. And yea, as he grew, the Child walked in the path of righteousness, with only the occasional detour into the odd weed and a little blow.
When he was twelve years old, they found him in the temple in the City of Chicago, arguing the finer points of community organisation with the Prophet Jeremiah and the Elders. And the Elders were astonished at what they heard and said among themselves: “Verily, who is this Child that he opens our hearts and minds to the audacity of hope?”
In the great Battles of Caucus and Primary he smote the conniving Hillary, wife of the deposed King Bill the Priapic and their barbarian hordes of Working Class Whites.
And so it was, in the fullness of time, before the harvest month of the appointed year, the Child ventured forth - for the first time - to bring the light unto all the world.
He travelled fleet of foot and light of camel, with a small retinue that consisted only of his loyal disciples from the tribe of the Media. He ventured first to the land of the Hindu Kush, where the
Taleban had harboured the viper of al-Qaeda in their bosom, raining terror on all the world.
And the Child spake and the tribes of Nato immediately loosed the Caveats that had previously bound them. And in the great battle that ensued the forces of the light were triumphant. For as long as the Child stood with his arms raised aloft, the enemy suffered great blows and the threat of terror was no more.
From there he went forth to Mesopotamia where he was received by the great ruler al-Maliki, and al-Maliki spake unto him and blessed his Sixteen Month Troop Withdrawal Plan even as the imperial warrior Petraeus tried to destroy it.
And lo, in Mesopotamia, a miracle occurred. Even though the Great Surge of Armour that the evil Bush had ordered had been a terrible mistake, a waste of vital military resources and doomed to end in disaster, the Child's very presence suddenly brought forth a great victory for the forces of the light.
And the Persians, who saw all this and were greatly fearful, longed to speak with the Child and saw that the Child was the bringer of peace. At the mention of his name they quickly laid aside their intrigues and beat their uranium swords into civil nuclear energy ploughshares.
From there the Child went up to the city of Jerusalem, and entered through the gate seated on an ass. The crowds of network anchors who had followed him from afar cheered “Hosanna” and waved great palm fronds and strewed them at his feet.
In Jerusalem and in surrounding Palestine, the Child spake to the Hebrews and the Arabs, as the Scripture had foretold. And in an instant, the lion lay down with the lamb, and the Israelites and Ishmaelites ended their long enmity and lived for ever after in peace.
As word spread throughout the land about the Child's wondrous works, peoples from all over flocked to hear him; Hittites and Abbasids; Obamacons and McCainiacs; Cameroonians and Blairites.
And they told of strange and wondrous things that greeted the news of the Child's journey. Around the world, global temperatures began to decline, and the ocean levels fell and the great warming was over.
The Great Prophet Algore of Nobel and Oscar, who many had believed was the anointed one, smiled and told his followers that the Child was the one generations had been waiting for.
And there were other wonderful signs. In the city of the Street at the Wall, spreads on interbank interest rates dropped like manna from Heaven and rates on credit default swaps fell to the ground as dead birds from the almond tree, and the people who had lived in foreclosure were able to borrow again.
Black gold gushed from the ground at prices well below $140 per barrel. In hospitals across the land the sick were cured even though they were uninsured. And all because the Child had pronounced it.
And this is the testimony of one who speaks the truth and bears witness to the truth so that you might believe. And he knows it is the truth for he saw it all on CNN and the BBC and in the pages of The New York Times.
Then the Child ventured forth from Israel and Palestine and stepped onto the shores of the Old Continent. In the land of Queen Angela of Merkel, vast multitudes gathered to hear his voice, and he preached to them at length.
But when he had finished speaking his disciples told him the crowd was hungry, for they had had nothing to eat all the hours they had waited for him.
And so the Child told his disciples to fetch some food but all they had was five loaves and a couple of frankfurters. So he took the bread and the frankfurters and blessed them and told his disciples to feed the multitudes. And when all had eaten their fill, the scraps filled twelve baskets.
Thence he travelled west to Mount Sarkozy. Even the beauteous Princess Carla of the tribe of the Bruni was struck by awe and she was great in love with the Child, but he was tempted not.
On the Seventh Day he walked across the Channel of the Angles to the ancient land of the hooligans. There he was welcomed with open arms by the once great prophet Blair and his successor, Gordon the Leper, and his successor, David the Golden One.
And suddenly, with the men appeared the archangel Gabriel and the whole host of the heavenly choir, ranks of cherubim and seraphim, all praising God and singing: “Yes, We Can.”
By Gerard Baker: July 25th 2008
The anointed one's pilgrimage to the Holy Land is a miracle in action - and a blessing to all his faithful followers
And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness.
The Child was blessed in looks and intellect. Scion of a simple family, offspring of a miraculous union, grandson of a typical white person and an African peasant. And yea, as he grew, the Child walked in the path of righteousness, with only the occasional detour into the odd weed and a little blow.
When he was twelve years old, they found him in the temple in the City of Chicago, arguing the finer points of community organisation with the Prophet Jeremiah and the Elders. And the Elders were astonished at what they heard and said among themselves: “Verily, who is this Child that he opens our hearts and minds to the audacity of hope?”
In the great Battles of Caucus and Primary he smote the conniving Hillary, wife of the deposed King Bill the Priapic and their barbarian hordes of Working Class Whites.
And so it was, in the fullness of time, before the harvest month of the appointed year, the Child ventured forth - for the first time - to bring the light unto all the world.
He travelled fleet of foot and light of camel, with a small retinue that consisted only of his loyal disciples from the tribe of the Media. He ventured first to the land of the Hindu Kush, where the
Taleban had harboured the viper of al-Qaeda in their bosom, raining terror on all the world.
And the Child spake and the tribes of Nato immediately loosed the Caveats that had previously bound them. And in the great battle that ensued the forces of the light were triumphant. For as long as the Child stood with his arms raised aloft, the enemy suffered great blows and the threat of terror was no more.
From there he went forth to Mesopotamia where he was received by the great ruler al-Maliki, and al-Maliki spake unto him and blessed his Sixteen Month Troop Withdrawal Plan even as the imperial warrior Petraeus tried to destroy it.
And lo, in Mesopotamia, a miracle occurred. Even though the Great Surge of Armour that the evil Bush had ordered had been a terrible mistake, a waste of vital military resources and doomed to end in disaster, the Child's very presence suddenly brought forth a great victory for the forces of the light.
And the Persians, who saw all this and were greatly fearful, longed to speak with the Child and saw that the Child was the bringer of peace. At the mention of his name they quickly laid aside their intrigues and beat their uranium swords into civil nuclear energy ploughshares.
From there the Child went up to the city of Jerusalem, and entered through the gate seated on an ass. The crowds of network anchors who had followed him from afar cheered “Hosanna” and waved great palm fronds and strewed them at his feet.
In Jerusalem and in surrounding Palestine, the Child spake to the Hebrews and the Arabs, as the Scripture had foretold. And in an instant, the lion lay down with the lamb, and the Israelites and Ishmaelites ended their long enmity and lived for ever after in peace.
As word spread throughout the land about the Child's wondrous works, peoples from all over flocked to hear him; Hittites and Abbasids; Obamacons and McCainiacs; Cameroonians and Blairites.
And they told of strange and wondrous things that greeted the news of the Child's journey. Around the world, global temperatures began to decline, and the ocean levels fell and the great warming was over.
The Great Prophet Algore of Nobel and Oscar, who many had believed was the anointed one, smiled and told his followers that the Child was the one generations had been waiting for.
And there were other wonderful signs. In the city of the Street at the Wall, spreads on interbank interest rates dropped like manna from Heaven and rates on credit default swaps fell to the ground as dead birds from the almond tree, and the people who had lived in foreclosure were able to borrow again.
Black gold gushed from the ground at prices well below $140 per barrel. In hospitals across the land the sick were cured even though they were uninsured. And all because the Child had pronounced it.
And this is the testimony of one who speaks the truth and bears witness to the truth so that you might believe. And he knows it is the truth for he saw it all on CNN and the BBC and in the pages of The New York Times.
Then the Child ventured forth from Israel and Palestine and stepped onto the shores of the Old Continent. In the land of Queen Angela of Merkel, vast multitudes gathered to hear his voice, and he preached to them at length.
But when he had finished speaking his disciples told him the crowd was hungry, for they had had nothing to eat all the hours they had waited for him.
And so the Child told his disciples to fetch some food but all they had was five loaves and a couple of frankfurters. So he took the bread and the frankfurters and blessed them and told his disciples to feed the multitudes. And when all had eaten their fill, the scraps filled twelve baskets.
Thence he travelled west to Mount Sarkozy. Even the beauteous Princess Carla of the tribe of the Bruni was struck by awe and she was great in love with the Child, but he was tempted not.
On the Seventh Day he walked across the Channel of the Angles to the ancient land of the hooligans. There he was welcomed with open arms by the once great prophet Blair and his successor, Gordon the Leper, and his successor, David the Golden One.
And suddenly, with the men appeared the archangel Gabriel and the whole host of the heavenly choir, ranks of cherubim and seraphim, all praising God and singing: “Yes, We Can.”
Thursday, July 24, 2008
The headline today if it was President Obama!!
Thursday July 24, 10:37 am ET By Martin Crutsinger, AP Economics Writer
Just thought I would write the flip side of this AP Article.
Inventories at all time highs and prices down 2.6 percent equal a great time for families and first time home buyers!!
(APe) Washington -- The news for buyers keeps getting better with prices declining yet again in June. The National Association of Realtors reported sales dropped by 2.6%. To a seasonally adjusted rate of 4.86 million units. The median price of a home is at $215,100.
The consensus among economists is that now is the time to purchase a home because it is a buyers market. The governments action in ending the credit crisis by saving Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae means buyers can purchase their home with confidence.
Interest rates remain at all time lows increasing purchasing power of individuals unlike any other time in the past two decades. These facts combined our economy remaining at full employment and oil prices coming down substantially means a bright future ahead for the American Economy.....................
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
On the lighter side (not really)..... Obama's policy in Iraq
The First Lady and I were watching the news last night regarding Obama's trip overseas. She pointed out she would be furious if a Republican candidate went over during a war and appeared to negotiate with a foreign government and apparently disregarded the role of our current Commander in Chief.
Then on a recent post reporters apparently had to remind an Obama advisor he was not the Commander in Chief, but the election is still coming up in November.
I thought Obama's trip to Iraq crossed the line. If you want to go on a fact finding mission that is fine. However, do not insert yourself into the Presidents position during critical negotiations.
This cartoon is a good illustration of what Mr. Obama would have visited this weekend had we followed his great judgement.
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Monday, June 09, 2008
Painfully Inadequate: Election 2008
By Thomas Sowell
Now that the two parties have finally selected their presidential candidates, it is time for a sober — if not grim — assessment of where we are.
Not since 1972 have we been presented with two such painfully inadequate candidates. When Election Day came that year, I could not bring myself to vote for either George McGovern or Richard Nixon. I stayed home.
This year, none of us has that luxury. While all sorts of gushing is going on in the media, and posturing is going on in politics, the biggest national sponsor of terrorism in the world — Iran — is moving step by step toward building a nuclear bomb.
The point when they get that bomb will be the point of no return. Iran’s nuclear bomb will be the terrorists’ nuclear bomb — and they can make 9/11 look like child’s play.
All the options that are on the table right now will be swept off the table forever. Our choices will be to give in to whatever the terrorists demand — however outrageous those demands might be — or to risk seeing American cities start disappearing in radioactive mushroom clouds.
All the things we are preoccupied with today, from the price of gasoline to health care to global warming, will suddenly no longer matter.
Just as the Nazis did not find it enough to simply kill people in their concentration camps, but had to humiliate and dehumanize them first, so we can expect terrorists with nuclear weapons to both humiliate us and force us to humiliate ourselves, before they finally start killing us.
They have already telegraphed their punches with their sadistic beheadings of innocent civilians, and with the popularity of videotapes of those beheadings in the Middle East.
They have already telegraphed their intention to dictate to us with such things as Osama bin Laden’s threats to target those places in America that did not vote the way he prescribed in the 2004 elections. He could not back up those threats then but he may be able to in a very few years.
The terrorists have given us as clear a picture of what they are all about as Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did during the 1930s — and our “leaders” and intelligentsia have ignored the warning signs as resolutely as the “leaders” and intelligentsia of the 1930s downplayed the dangers of Hitler.
We are much like people drifting down the Niagara River, oblivious to the waterfalls up ahead. Once we go over those falls, we cannot come back up again.
What does this have to do with today’s presidential candidates? It has everything to do with them.
One of these candidates will determine what we are going to do to stop Iran from going nuclear— or whether we are going to do anything other than talk, as Western leaders talked in the 1930s.
There is one big difference between now and the 1930s. Although the West’s lack of military preparedness and its political irresolution led to three solid years of devastating losses to Nazi Germany and imperial Japan, nevertheless when all the West’s industrial and military forces were finally mobilized, the democracies were able to turn the tide and win decisively.
But you cannot lose a nuclear war for three years and then come back. You cannot even sustain the will to resist for three years when you are first broken down morally by threats and then devastated by nuclear bombs.
Our one window of opportunity to prevent this will occur within the term of whoever becomes president of the United States next January.
At a time like this, we do not have the luxury of waiting for our ideal candidate or of indulging our emotions by voting for some third party candidate to show our displeasure — at the cost of putting someone in the White House who is not up to the job.
Senator John McCain has been criticized in this column many times. But, when all is said and done, Senator McCain has not spent decades aiding and abetting people who hate America.
On the contrary, he has paid a huge price for resisting our enemies, even when they held him prisoner and tortured him. The choice between him and Barack Obama should be a no-brainer.
Now that the two parties have finally selected their presidential candidates, it is time for a sober — if not grim — assessment of where we are.
Not since 1972 have we been presented with two such painfully inadequate candidates. When Election Day came that year, I could not bring myself to vote for either George McGovern or Richard Nixon. I stayed home.
This year, none of us has that luxury. While all sorts of gushing is going on in the media, and posturing is going on in politics, the biggest national sponsor of terrorism in the world — Iran — is moving step by step toward building a nuclear bomb.
The point when they get that bomb will be the point of no return. Iran’s nuclear bomb will be the terrorists’ nuclear bomb — and they can make 9/11 look like child’s play.
All the options that are on the table right now will be swept off the table forever. Our choices will be to give in to whatever the terrorists demand — however outrageous those demands might be — or to risk seeing American cities start disappearing in radioactive mushroom clouds.
All the things we are preoccupied with today, from the price of gasoline to health care to global warming, will suddenly no longer matter.
Just as the Nazis did not find it enough to simply kill people in their concentration camps, but had to humiliate and dehumanize them first, so we can expect terrorists with nuclear weapons to both humiliate us and force us to humiliate ourselves, before they finally start killing us.
They have already telegraphed their punches with their sadistic beheadings of innocent civilians, and with the popularity of videotapes of those beheadings in the Middle East.
They have already telegraphed their intention to dictate to us with such things as Osama bin Laden’s threats to target those places in America that did not vote the way he prescribed in the 2004 elections. He could not back up those threats then but he may be able to in a very few years.
The terrorists have given us as clear a picture of what they are all about as Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did during the 1930s — and our “leaders” and intelligentsia have ignored the warning signs as resolutely as the “leaders” and intelligentsia of the 1930s downplayed the dangers of Hitler.
We are much like people drifting down the Niagara River, oblivious to the waterfalls up ahead. Once we go over those falls, we cannot come back up again.
What does this have to do with today’s presidential candidates? It has everything to do with them.
One of these candidates will determine what we are going to do to stop Iran from going nuclear— or whether we are going to do anything other than talk, as Western leaders talked in the 1930s.
There is one big difference between now and the 1930s. Although the West’s lack of military preparedness and its political irresolution led to three solid years of devastating losses to Nazi Germany and imperial Japan, nevertheless when all the West’s industrial and military forces were finally mobilized, the democracies were able to turn the tide and win decisively.
But you cannot lose a nuclear war for three years and then come back. You cannot even sustain the will to resist for three years when you are first broken down morally by threats and then devastated by nuclear bombs.
Our one window of opportunity to prevent this will occur within the term of whoever becomes president of the United States next January.
At a time like this, we do not have the luxury of waiting for our ideal candidate or of indulging our emotions by voting for some third party candidate to show our displeasure — at the cost of putting someone in the White House who is not up to the job.
Senator John McCain has been criticized in this column many times. But, when all is said and done, Senator McCain has not spent decades aiding and abetting people who hate America.
On the contrary, he has paid a huge price for resisting our enemies, even when they held him prisoner and tortured him. The choice between him and Barack Obama should be a no-brainer.
Friday, June 06, 2008
Obama kicks off campaign for 2nd term as President!!
The inevitability of any candidate should be a major concern for any campaign, especially, the Presidency of the United States. This is the 2nd time in a few weeks I have heard Obama talk about his eight years as President. It tends to rub voters the wrong way when you start claiming to read their minds.
He should not be taking McCain so lightly in my opinion. The electoral map is wide open in many states a "traditional" Republican would have no shot at. The northeastern states and even the "left" coast are fair game for McCain right now, and this is not the same as organizing caucus voters in small states. He still has the Clinton's to deal with too!!
Play of the Day: Obama pitches Olympic bid
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 1 minute ago
CHICAGO - Barack Obama says if Chicago is chosen to host the 2016 Olympics, he's hoping there will be a hometown president to kick off the games.
"In 2016, I'll be wrapping up my second term as president," Obama said. "So I can't think of a better way than to be marching into Washington Park ... as president of the United States and announcing to the world, 'Let the games begin!'"
The Illinois senator, spending a weekend at home after clinching the Democratic presidential nomination, made a surprise appearance at a downtown rally Friday to promote the city's bid. He drew loud cheers from the crowd and gawkers pressed up to windows from the high rise office buildings surrounding the rally.
Obama joked that his home is only a couple blocks from Washington Park, the proposed site of the games, so he's thinking about how much he could get for renting it out. He's hoping to be living in the White House any way.
Chicago is competing to host the games along with Tokyo; Madrid, Spain; and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Obama was joined at the rally by other elected officials and dignitaries from the city and athletes including track and field gold medalist Jackie Joyner-Kersee.
"It is a great time to be in Chicago," Obama said. "White Sox are winning. Cubs are winning. And Chicago's going to win the 2016 Olympics and Paralympics. And your senator, he's winning, too."
He should not be taking McCain so lightly in my opinion. The electoral map is wide open in many states a "traditional" Republican would have no shot at. The northeastern states and even the "left" coast are fair game for McCain right now, and this is not the same as organizing caucus voters in small states. He still has the Clinton's to deal with too!!
Play of the Day: Obama pitches Olympic bid
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer
2 hours, 1 minute ago
CHICAGO - Barack Obama says if Chicago is chosen to host the 2016 Olympics, he's hoping there will be a hometown president to kick off the games.
"In 2016, I'll be wrapping up my second term as president," Obama said. "So I can't think of a better way than to be marching into Washington Park ... as president of the United States and announcing to the world, 'Let the games begin!'"
The Illinois senator, spending a weekend at home after clinching the Democratic presidential nomination, made a surprise appearance at a downtown rally Friday to promote the city's bid. He drew loud cheers from the crowd and gawkers pressed up to windows from the high rise office buildings surrounding the rally.
Obama joked that his home is only a couple blocks from Washington Park, the proposed site of the games, so he's thinking about how much he could get for renting it out. He's hoping to be living in the White House any way.
Chicago is competing to host the games along with Tokyo; Madrid, Spain; and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Obama was joined at the rally by other elected officials and dignitaries from the city and athletes including track and field gold medalist Jackie Joyner-Kersee.
"It is a great time to be in Chicago," Obama said. "White Sox are winning. Cubs are winning. And Chicago's going to win the 2016 Olympics and Paralympics. And your senator, he's winning, too."
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
A WSJ Editorial
The Obama We Don't Know
June 4, 2008; Page A20
With Barack Obama clinching the Democratic Party nomination, it is worth noting what an extraordinary moment this is. Democrats are nominating a freshman Senator barely three years out of the Illinois legislature whom most of America still hardly knows. The polls say he is the odds-on favorite to become our next President.
Think about this in historical context. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were relatively unknown, but both had at least been prominent Governors. John Kerry, Walter Mondale, Al Gore and even George McGovern were all long-time Washington figures. Republican nominees tend to be even more familiar, for better or worse. In Mr. Obama, Democrats are taking a leap of faith that is daring even by their risky standards.
No doubt this is part of his enormous appeal. Amid public anger over politics as usual, the Illinois Senator is unhaunted by Beltway experience. His personal story – of mixed race, and up from nowhere through Harvard – resonates in an America where the two most popular cultural icons are Tiger Woods and Oprah. His political gifts are formidable, especially his ability to connect with audiences from the platform.
Above all, Mr. Obama has fashioned a message that fits the political moment and the public's desire for "change." At his best, he offers Americans tired of war and political rancor the promise of fresh national unity and purpose. Young people in particular are taken by it. But more than a few Republicans are also drawn to this "postpartisan" vision.
Mr. Obama has also shown great skill in running his campaign. No one – including us – gave him much chance of defeating the Clinton machine. No doubt he benefited from the desire of even many Democrats to impeach the polarizing Clinton era. But he also beat Hillary and Bill at their own game. He raised more money, and he outworked them in the small-state caucuses that provided him with his narrow delegate margin. Even now, he is far better organized in swing states than is John McCain's campaign. All of this speaks well of his preparation for November, and perhaps for his potential to govern.
Yet govern how and to what end? This is the Obama Americans don't know. For all of his inspiring rhetoric about bipartisanship, his voting record is among the most partisan in the Senate. His policy agenda is conventionally liberal across the board – more so than Hillary Clinton's, and more so than that of any Democratic nominee since 1968.
We can't find a single issue on which Mr. Obama has broken with his party's left-wing interest groups. Early on he gave a bow to merit pay for teachers, but that quickly sank beneath the waves of new money he wants to spend on the same broken public schools. He takes the Teamsters line against free trade, to the point of unilaterally rewriting Nafta. He wants to raise taxes even above the levels of the Clinton era, including a huge increase in the payroll tax. Perhaps now Mr. Obama will tack to the center, but somehow he will have to explain why the "change" he's proposing isn't merely more of the same, circa 1965.
There is also the matter of judgment, and the roots of his political character. We were among those inclined at first to downplay his association with the Trinity United Church. But Mr. Obama's handling of the episode has raised doubts about his candor and convictions. He has by stages moved from denying that his 20-year attendance was an issue at all; to denying he'd heard Rev. Jeremiah Wright's incendiary remarks; to criticizing certain of those remarks while praising Rev. Wright himself; to repudiating the words and the reverend; and finally this weekend to leaving the church.
Most disingenuously, he said on Saturday that the entire issue caught him by surprise. Yet he was aware enough of the political risk that he kept Rev. Wright off the stage during his announcement speech more than a year ago.
A 2004 Chicago Sun-Times interview with Mr. Obama mentioned three men as his religious guides. One was Rev. Wright. Another was Father Michael Pfleger, the Louis Farrakhan ally whose recent remarks caused Mr. Obama to resign from Trinity, but for whose Chicago church Mr. Obama channeled at least $225,000 in grants as a state senator. Until recently, the priest was connected to the campaign, which flew him to Iowa to host an interfaith forum. Father Pfleger's testimony for the candidate has since been scrubbed from Mr. Obama's campaign Web site. A third mentor was Illinois state Senator James Meeks, another Chicago pastor who has generated controversy for mixing pulpit and politics.
The point is not that Mr. Obama now shares the radical views of these men. The concern is that by the Senator's own admission they have been major moral influences, and their views are starkly at odds with the candidate's vision as a transracial peacemaker. Their patronage was also useful as Mr. Obama was making his way in Chicago politics. But only now, in the glare of a national campaign, is he distancing himself from them. The question is what in fact Mr. Obama does believe.
The young Senator has been a supernova exploding into our politics, more phenomenon than conventional candidate. His achievement in winning the Democratic nomination has been impressive. Now comes a harder audience. The presidency has to be earned, and Americans have a right to know much more about the gifted man who is the least tested and experienced major party nominee in modern times.
June 4, 2008; Page A20
With Barack Obama clinching the Democratic Party nomination, it is worth noting what an extraordinary moment this is. Democrats are nominating a freshman Senator barely three years out of the Illinois legislature whom most of America still hardly knows. The polls say he is the odds-on favorite to become our next President.
Think about this in historical context. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton were relatively unknown, but both had at least been prominent Governors. John Kerry, Walter Mondale, Al Gore and even George McGovern were all long-time Washington figures. Republican nominees tend to be even more familiar, for better or worse. In Mr. Obama, Democrats are taking a leap of faith that is daring even by their risky standards.
No doubt this is part of his enormous appeal. Amid public anger over politics as usual, the Illinois Senator is unhaunted by Beltway experience. His personal story – of mixed race, and up from nowhere through Harvard – resonates in an America where the two most popular cultural icons are Tiger Woods and Oprah. His political gifts are formidable, especially his ability to connect with audiences from the platform.
Above all, Mr. Obama has fashioned a message that fits the political moment and the public's desire for "change." At his best, he offers Americans tired of war and political rancor the promise of fresh national unity and purpose. Young people in particular are taken by it. But more than a few Republicans are also drawn to this "postpartisan" vision.
Mr. Obama has also shown great skill in running his campaign. No one – including us – gave him much chance of defeating the Clinton machine. No doubt he benefited from the desire of even many Democrats to impeach the polarizing Clinton era. But he also beat Hillary and Bill at their own game. He raised more money, and he outworked them in the small-state caucuses that provided him with his narrow delegate margin. Even now, he is far better organized in swing states than is John McCain's campaign. All of this speaks well of his preparation for November, and perhaps for his potential to govern.
Yet govern how and to what end? This is the Obama Americans don't know. For all of his inspiring rhetoric about bipartisanship, his voting record is among the most partisan in the Senate. His policy agenda is conventionally liberal across the board – more so than Hillary Clinton's, and more so than that of any Democratic nominee since 1968.
We can't find a single issue on which Mr. Obama has broken with his party's left-wing interest groups. Early on he gave a bow to merit pay for teachers, but that quickly sank beneath the waves of new money he wants to spend on the same broken public schools. He takes the Teamsters line against free trade, to the point of unilaterally rewriting Nafta. He wants to raise taxes even above the levels of the Clinton era, including a huge increase in the payroll tax. Perhaps now Mr. Obama will tack to the center, but somehow he will have to explain why the "change" he's proposing isn't merely more of the same, circa 1965.
There is also the matter of judgment, and the roots of his political character. We were among those inclined at first to downplay his association with the Trinity United Church. But Mr. Obama's handling of the episode has raised doubts about his candor and convictions. He has by stages moved from denying that his 20-year attendance was an issue at all; to denying he'd heard Rev. Jeremiah Wright's incendiary remarks; to criticizing certain of those remarks while praising Rev. Wright himself; to repudiating the words and the reverend; and finally this weekend to leaving the church.
Most disingenuously, he said on Saturday that the entire issue caught him by surprise. Yet he was aware enough of the political risk that he kept Rev. Wright off the stage during his announcement speech more than a year ago.
A 2004 Chicago Sun-Times interview with Mr. Obama mentioned three men as his religious guides. One was Rev. Wright. Another was Father Michael Pfleger, the Louis Farrakhan ally whose recent remarks caused Mr. Obama to resign from Trinity, but for whose Chicago church Mr. Obama channeled at least $225,000 in grants as a state senator. Until recently, the priest was connected to the campaign, which flew him to Iowa to host an interfaith forum. Father Pfleger's testimony for the candidate has since been scrubbed from Mr. Obama's campaign Web site. A third mentor was Illinois state Senator James Meeks, another Chicago pastor who has generated controversy for mixing pulpit and politics.
The point is not that Mr. Obama now shares the radical views of these men. The concern is that by the Senator's own admission they have been major moral influences, and their views are starkly at odds with the candidate's vision as a transracial peacemaker. Their patronage was also useful as Mr. Obama was making his way in Chicago politics. But only now, in the glare of a national campaign, is he distancing himself from them. The question is what in fact Mr. Obama does believe.
The young Senator has been a supernova exploding into our politics, more phenomenon than conventional candidate. His achievement in winning the Democratic nomination has been impressive. Now comes a harder audience. The presidency has to be earned, and Americans have a right to know much more about the gifted man who is the least tested and experienced major party nominee in modern times.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Breaking News: Obama visits 58 States in the Union!!
Dan over in the accounting wing of the America's Small City Mayor Government Centers forwards a great clip showing Obama has been in 58 states not counting Alaska & Hawaii.
I wonder if Obama can name all of them and their capitals since he wants to be the Education President?
Source: Radioactive Liberty
I wonder if Obama can name all of them and their capitals since he wants to be the Education President?
Source: Radioactive Liberty
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Monday, April 28, 2008
Clinton highlights Obama's objection to gas tax holiday
GRAHAM, N.C. (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized Barack Obama on Monday for opposing proposals to suspend federal gas taxes this summer, a plan she and Republican John McCain have endorsed. Obama didn't take the bait. He ignored Clinton and focused on McCain.
"My opponent, Senator Obama, opposes giving consumers a break from the gas tax," Clinton said at a firehouse. "I understand the American people need some relief," she added, implying that Obama doesn't get it.
Obama has said motorists would not benefit significantly from suspending the gas tax.
"This is his solution to the problems of the energy crisis and your gas bills," Obama told several thousand at a noisy rally in Wilmington. "Keep in mind that the federal gas tax is about 5 percent of your gas bill. If it lasts for three months, you're going to save about $25 or $30, or a half a tank of gas."
The idea to suspend the 18.4 cent federal gas tax and 24.4 cent diesel tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day was first proposed by McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, as a way to lessen the pain at the pump for consumers this summer.
Clinton said she would make up the lost revenue by imposing a "windfall profits tax" on oil companies.
"If we suspended it and made up the lost revenues, that's the best of both worlds," she said.
Clinton also picked up a prized endorsement. North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley was expected to announce his support for the former first lady on Tuesday, people close to the governor and Clinton told The Associated Press. They spoke on condition of anonymity because a formal announcement was pending. Easley is one of the superdelegates who are likely to choose the party's presidential nominee.
Both Democrats canvassed the state Monday, pushing supporters to go to the polls early here and in Indiana before both states hold primaries on May 6. Obama is favored in North Carolina while the two are competing closely in Indiana.
"That's his big solution," Obama said of McCain. "He had the gall yesterday to tell me that because I don't agree with his plan, I must not be sympathetic to poor people. This is at the same time as he is proposing hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for corporate interests, for the wealthiest Americans."
McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds noted Obama's support for suspending gas taxes when he served in the Illinois Senate.
"Senator Obama's arguments against John McCain's gas tax holiday are complete fiction," Bounds said.
Leading in convention delegates and popular votes, Obama sought to avoid the daily back and forth with Clinton. Before leaving Wilmington, he was asked about his longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who said Monday that criticism of some of his fiery sermons is an attack on the black church. Wright's third public appearance in four days kept alive a story that continues to dog Obama's campaign.
Obama said the voters he talks to don't ask him about Wright. "It's not what I hear. What I'm hearing is concern about gas prices. People are concerned about their jobs being shipped overseas," he said.
At the rally, Obama said McCain's approach to the issue of high gas prices was typical of how Washington works.
"There's a problem, everybody's upset about gas prices. Let's find some short-term, quick-fix so we can say we did something, even though we didn't do anything," Obama said. He argued that reducing consumption and increasing the use of alternative fuels represent real long-term solutions to rising gasoline and diesel fuel prices.
Besides urging supporters to vote early, Clinton spent part of the day raising money. She and daughter Chelsea were to appear at a closed-door fundraiser in Greensboro, with two more fundraisers scheduled later in Charlotte.
Obama returned to the gas tax issue during a rally in Wilson, arguing that McCain's proposal is little more than a gimmick.
"Instead of really trying to solve the problem, you use a gimmick," said Obama. "Where has John McCain been for the last 25 years?" Obama was wrapping up his long campaign day with a late-night voter turnout rally in Chapel Hill and was pledging to stick to the high road. "We're going to keep it positive," said Obama.
In Washington, meanwhile, Democratic Party chief Howard Dean said either Clinton or Obama will know when it's time to drop out of the race for the nomination after the primaries end in early June.
Dean, saying he was speaking from experience as a candidate for president in 2000, said he won't have to force anyone out.
"Either of these candidates, if it's time for them to go, they'll know it and they will go," Dean said on "Good Morning America" on ABC. "They don't need any pushing from me. You know when to get in and you know when to get out. That's just part of the deal."
Dean also said superdelegates shouldn't wait until August to decide which candidate to support. Superdelegates are the nearly 800 elected and party officials who attend the convention and can vote for any candidate.
"We really can't have a divided convention. If we do, it's going to be very hard to heal the party afterwards," Dean said. "So we'll know who the nominee is and that'll give us an extra 2 1/2 months to get our party together, heal the wounds of having a very closely divided race and take on Senator McCain."
Asked about Dean's comments, Clinton said the extended nomination fight has been good for the party because voters are registering as Democrats in large numbers.
"So we're going to go through these next contests, we're going to see where we end up and we'll take stock of where we are after they finish," Clinton said. She said the disputes over the Florida and Michigan primaries also must be resolved.
Mike Glover reported from Wilmington, N.C.
"My opponent, Senator Obama, opposes giving consumers a break from the gas tax," Clinton said at a firehouse. "I understand the American people need some relief," she added, implying that Obama doesn't get it.
Obama has said motorists would not benefit significantly from suspending the gas tax.
"This is his solution to the problems of the energy crisis and your gas bills," Obama told several thousand at a noisy rally in Wilmington. "Keep in mind that the federal gas tax is about 5 percent of your gas bill. If it lasts for three months, you're going to save about $25 or $30, or a half a tank of gas."
The idea to suspend the 18.4 cent federal gas tax and 24.4 cent diesel tax from Memorial Day to Labor Day was first proposed by McCain, the likely Republican presidential nominee, as a way to lessen the pain at the pump for consumers this summer.
Clinton said she would make up the lost revenue by imposing a "windfall profits tax" on oil companies.
"If we suspended it and made up the lost revenues, that's the best of both worlds," she said.
Clinton also picked up a prized endorsement. North Carolina Gov. Mike Easley was expected to announce his support for the former first lady on Tuesday, people close to the governor and Clinton told The Associated Press. They spoke on condition of anonymity because a formal announcement was pending. Easley is one of the superdelegates who are likely to choose the party's presidential nominee.
Both Democrats canvassed the state Monday, pushing supporters to go to the polls early here and in Indiana before both states hold primaries on May 6. Obama is favored in North Carolina while the two are competing closely in Indiana.
"That's his big solution," Obama said of McCain. "He had the gall yesterday to tell me that because I don't agree with his plan, I must not be sympathetic to poor people. This is at the same time as he is proposing hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for corporate interests, for the wealthiest Americans."
McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds noted Obama's support for suspending gas taxes when he served in the Illinois Senate.
"Senator Obama's arguments against John McCain's gas tax holiday are complete fiction," Bounds said.
Leading in convention delegates and popular votes, Obama sought to avoid the daily back and forth with Clinton. Before leaving Wilmington, he was asked about his longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who said Monday that criticism of some of his fiery sermons is an attack on the black church. Wright's third public appearance in four days kept alive a story that continues to dog Obama's campaign.
Obama said the voters he talks to don't ask him about Wright. "It's not what I hear. What I'm hearing is concern about gas prices. People are concerned about their jobs being shipped overseas," he said.
At the rally, Obama said McCain's approach to the issue of high gas prices was typical of how Washington works.
"There's a problem, everybody's upset about gas prices. Let's find some short-term, quick-fix so we can say we did something, even though we didn't do anything," Obama said. He argued that reducing consumption and increasing the use of alternative fuels represent real long-term solutions to rising gasoline and diesel fuel prices.
Besides urging supporters to vote early, Clinton spent part of the day raising money. She and daughter Chelsea were to appear at a closed-door fundraiser in Greensboro, with two more fundraisers scheduled later in Charlotte.
Obama returned to the gas tax issue during a rally in Wilson, arguing that McCain's proposal is little more than a gimmick.
"Instead of really trying to solve the problem, you use a gimmick," said Obama. "Where has John McCain been for the last 25 years?" Obama was wrapping up his long campaign day with a late-night voter turnout rally in Chapel Hill and was pledging to stick to the high road. "We're going to keep it positive," said Obama.
In Washington, meanwhile, Democratic Party chief Howard Dean said either Clinton or Obama will know when it's time to drop out of the race for the nomination after the primaries end in early June.
Dean, saying he was speaking from experience as a candidate for president in 2000, said he won't have to force anyone out.
"Either of these candidates, if it's time for them to go, they'll know it and they will go," Dean said on "Good Morning America" on ABC. "They don't need any pushing from me. You know when to get in and you know when to get out. That's just part of the deal."
Dean also said superdelegates shouldn't wait until August to decide which candidate to support. Superdelegates are the nearly 800 elected and party officials who attend the convention and can vote for any candidate.
"We really can't have a divided convention. If we do, it's going to be very hard to heal the party afterwards," Dean said. "So we'll know who the nominee is and that'll give us an extra 2 1/2 months to get our party together, heal the wounds of having a very closely divided race and take on Senator McCain."
Asked about Dean's comments, Clinton said the extended nomination fight has been good for the party because voters are registering as Democrats in large numbers.
"So we're going to go through these next contests, we're going to see where we end up and we'll take stock of where we are after they finish," Clinton said. She said the disputes over the Florida and Michigan primaries also must be resolved.
Mike Glover reported from Wilmington, N.C.
Obama: Under the bus with Grandma!!
If you follow politics..... the media rounds made by Rev. Wright have been amazing.
Political pundits of every persuasion are astounded by this situation because it is Obama's pastor that is sinking Obama's campaign.
Obama has gone out of his way (endangering his political career) defending his pastor. In return the comments made by Rev. Wright have been very harsh towards Barack Obama. I think this article illustrates that a conversation on race relations is relevant and would have been refreshing in this campaign.
It is also the reason he loses the Catholics, Lutherans, and conservative protestant church attenders in the Midwest and Northeast.
Jeremiah Wright May Have Just Sunk Obama's Campaign
The Obama campaign is off the rails.
NROnline-The entire tone of the race changed the moment we saw the first fiery Wright sermon. The sight of those sermons triggered a question in a lot of voters' minds: How do you get the moderate-sounding, pleasant, agreeable student Barack Obama from an angry, divisive, radical, way-out-of-the-mainstream teacher like Jeremiah Wright? The sermons weren't quite a deal-breaker, but many Obama supporters, leaners, and undecideds were asking... how did Obama choose this man as a mentor? How could he possibly not know that his mentor had these attitudes? And does Obama agree with any of Wright's inflammatory statements?
In response, Obama gave a very eloquent speech about race relations in America. But it never quite answered the question, and in fact tried to blur the distinction between family we are born into and those we choose to turn to for guidance. Hillary jabbed at this in the debate, and Obama never quite had an appropriate response. He even said he disowned Wright, then backtracked and said he disowned his controversial statements.
And since then, it's gotten worse, even with a Bill Moyers interview that wasn't softball so much as it was Nerf Tee-Ball. We've heard Wright compare the Roman Legions who punished Jesus to the U.S. Marines, we've heard him argue that the U.S. and al-Qaeda are doing the same acts under different flags, etc.
Now we hear Wright analyzing the differences between white and black brains (!) and that the criticism of him for his comments was "an attack on the black church." He didn't retract his assertion that the U.S. government created the AIDS virus. He didn't retract his accusation that the United States had committed terrorism. He raved about Louis Farrakhan.
And again, we're left with that question... presuming Obama strongly disagrees with all of Wright's statements in these areas... how did he end up selecting this pastor? This church? (I know we get the story in Obama's autobiography. But did Obama once agree with all of the crazy conspiracy theories? Does he still agree, late at night, when the microphones and television cameras are far away?)
Obama is saying he should be president, instead of two much more experienced rivals, because of his superior judgment. But what kind of judgment is needed to select Wright as a surrogate father figure?
More reaction:
Jake Tapper: "He clearly was not doing Obama any favors, not only by reappearing before a ravenous media thus distracting from Obama's attempt to relate better to white working class voters in Indiana and North Carolina, but by implying Obama's condemnation of some of his sermons was not sincere."
David Brody: "Jeremiah Wright did Barack Obama no favors. Pastor Wright’s appearance at the National Press Club today started out as a great opportunity to explain the importance of the black Church experience. Instead it turned into a circus atmosphere and ensured that the Wright controversy is not going away and has the potential to single-handily take down Obama’s campaign."
Jim Geraghty Reporting
Political pundits of every persuasion are astounded by this situation because it is Obama's pastor that is sinking Obama's campaign.
Obama has gone out of his way (endangering his political career) defending his pastor. In return the comments made by Rev. Wright have been very harsh towards Barack Obama. I think this article illustrates that a conversation on race relations is relevant and would have been refreshing in this campaign.
However, the Obama campaign is wrong by trying to use this strange situation as its platform for that discussion. Voters are smarter than that and turned off by this!!
It is also the reason he loses the Catholics, Lutherans, and conservative protestant church attenders in the Midwest and Northeast.
Jeremiah Wright May Have Just Sunk Obama's Campaign
The Obama campaign is off the rails.
NROnline-The entire tone of the race changed the moment we saw the first fiery Wright sermon. The sight of those sermons triggered a question in a lot of voters' minds: How do you get the moderate-sounding, pleasant, agreeable student Barack Obama from an angry, divisive, radical, way-out-of-the-mainstream teacher like Jeremiah Wright? The sermons weren't quite a deal-breaker, but many Obama supporters, leaners, and undecideds were asking... how did Obama choose this man as a mentor? How could he possibly not know that his mentor had these attitudes? And does Obama agree with any of Wright's inflammatory statements?
In response, Obama gave a very eloquent speech about race relations in America. But it never quite answered the question, and in fact tried to blur the distinction between family we are born into and those we choose to turn to for guidance. Hillary jabbed at this in the debate, and Obama never quite had an appropriate response. He even said he disowned Wright, then backtracked and said he disowned his controversial statements.
And since then, it's gotten worse, even with a Bill Moyers interview that wasn't softball so much as it was Nerf Tee-Ball. We've heard Wright compare the Roman Legions who punished Jesus to the U.S. Marines, we've heard him argue that the U.S. and al-Qaeda are doing the same acts under different flags, etc.
Now we hear Wright analyzing the differences between white and black brains (!) and that the criticism of him for his comments was "an attack on the black church." He didn't retract his assertion that the U.S. government created the AIDS virus. He didn't retract his accusation that the United States had committed terrorism. He raved about Louis Farrakhan.
And again, we're left with that question... presuming Obama strongly disagrees with all of Wright's statements in these areas... how did he end up selecting this pastor? This church? (I know we get the story in Obama's autobiography. But did Obama once agree with all of the crazy conspiracy theories? Does he still agree, late at night, when the microphones and television cameras are far away?)
Obama is saying he should be president, instead of two much more experienced rivals, because of his superior judgment. But what kind of judgment is needed to select Wright as a surrogate father figure?
More reaction:
Jake Tapper: "He clearly was not doing Obama any favors, not only by reappearing before a ravenous media thus distracting from Obama's attempt to relate better to white working class voters in Indiana and North Carolina, but by implying Obama's condemnation of some of his sermons was not sincere."
David Brody: "Jeremiah Wright did Barack Obama no favors. Pastor Wright’s appearance at the National Press Club today started out as a great opportunity to explain the importance of the black Church experience. Instead it turned into a circus atmosphere and ensured that the Wright controversy is not going away and has the potential to single-handily take down Obama’s campaign."
Jim Geraghty Reporting
Saturday, April 26, 2008
Not Everything Is About Race
A wrong and reckless approach.
By Peter Wehner
In his Friday column, E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post writes this:
But the ad in question doesn’t mention race anywhere; rather, it includes a clip of Reverend Wright’s incendiary words. Wright happens to be black — but his race is not the reason he’s in the ad. His words are — and if Wright were white, his words and picture would still be used.
Dionne argues that racism has to be the motivation of the North Carolina Republican party because the ad showed Wright’s comments instead of focusing on Obama’s foreign-policy views. But perhaps the reason for that is that Wright’s words insisting that God “damn America” — which Dionne himself concedes are “offensive” and has elsewhere described as “anti-American,” “lunatic,” “pernicious,” and ones we should “loathe” — are far more troubling to many Americans than Obama’s stand on the U.N. or the E.U.
If the ads are racist, then does Dionne believe asking questions about Wright is racist as well? Are news networks racist for having played the clips in the first place? Are columnists who write on this topic playing on racial fears as well?
It doesn’t help matters, of course, when Senator McCain asserts the ads are “unacceptable” and worth “repudiating.” Senator McCain never explains why, perhaps because the ads merely quote Reverend Wright, whom Obama spent 20 years worshiping under and developed a close personal relationship with. Does McCain believe those who are concerned about Obama’s association with Wright are acting against the spirit of Lincoln, TR, and Ronald Reagan (who himself was falsely accused of racism by liberals countless times)?
These kind of criticisms, un-anchored to any persuasive or substantive argument, are the kind that conservatives find discouraging and disturbing. The senior senator from Arizona could probably find more constructive things to do with his time than to help those on the Left brand conservatives as racists. The deeper damage, of course, will be that when real racism does emerge — and it does exist — the accusations will be largely dismissed.
What Dionne is doing, and what McCain is aiding Dionne in doing, is wrong and reckless. People who are troubled by what the Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr. said — which is just about everyone who heard what Wright said — are not racists, and calling attention to what Wright said is not racism. To pretend that’s the case is an effort at intimidation, and I rather doubt it will work. The Wright issue won’t go away, nor should it.
— Peter Wehner, former deputy assistant to the president, is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
A wrong and reckless approach.
By Peter Wehner
In his Friday column, E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post writes this:
Republicans clearly know that they can find ways to play on racial feeling while fully denying they are doing so. On Wednesday, the North Carolina Republican Party released a television ad showing Obama's former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, giving his now-famous sermon in which he declared, "God damn America." Of course Wright's comments were offensive, but to pretend that the ad does not have racial undertones would be to deny the obvious. After all, why didn't North Carolina Republicans focus instead on attacking Obama's alleged "elitism" or his foreign policy views?
But the ad in question doesn’t mention race anywhere; rather, it includes a clip of Reverend Wright’s incendiary words. Wright happens to be black — but his race is not the reason he’s in the ad. His words are — and if Wright were white, his words and picture would still be used.
Dionne argues that racism has to be the motivation of the North Carolina Republican party because the ad showed Wright’s comments instead of focusing on Obama’s foreign-policy views. But perhaps the reason for that is that Wright’s words insisting that God “damn America” — which Dionne himself concedes are “offensive” and has elsewhere described as “anti-American,” “lunatic,” “pernicious,” and ones we should “loathe” — are far more troubling to many Americans than Obama’s stand on the U.N. or the E.U.
If the ads are racist, then does Dionne believe asking questions about Wright is racist as well? Are news networks racist for having played the clips in the first place? Are columnists who write on this topic playing on racial fears as well?
It doesn’t help matters, of course, when Senator McCain asserts the ads are “unacceptable” and worth “repudiating.” Senator McCain never explains why, perhaps because the ads merely quote Reverend Wright, whom Obama spent 20 years worshiping under and developed a close personal relationship with. Does McCain believe those who are concerned about Obama’s association with Wright are acting against the spirit of Lincoln, TR, and Ronald Reagan (who himself was falsely accused of racism by liberals countless times)?
These kind of criticisms, un-anchored to any persuasive or substantive argument, are the kind that conservatives find discouraging and disturbing. The senior senator from Arizona could probably find more constructive things to do with his time than to help those on the Left brand conservatives as racists. The deeper damage, of course, will be that when real racism does emerge — and it does exist — the accusations will be largely dismissed.
What Dionne is doing, and what McCain is aiding Dionne in doing, is wrong and reckless. People who are troubled by what the Reverend Jeremiah Wright Jr. said — which is just about everyone who heard what Wright said — are not racists, and calling attention to what Wright said is not racism. To pretend that’s the case is an effort at intimidation, and I rather doubt it will work. The Wright issue won’t go away, nor should it.
— Peter Wehner, former deputy assistant to the president, is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.
Friday, April 25, 2008
The Irony of the 2008 Republican/Democrat Primaries
I have been giving much thought to the recent news about John McCain taking the North Carolina Republican Party to task over the ad campaign featuring Rev. Wright.
The aspect I find intriguing revolves around what if the Republican and Democrat primaries were reversed. Without question the Democrats would have their winning nominee Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama as vice-president. We can say this because of the winner take all format Republicans use and Clinton winning the "big" states. The Democrat primaries would have ended weeks ago on a positive note, and in large part positioned it to win in a landslide.
On the other side you would have John McCain locked in a bloody primary battle with Mike Huckabee because of the proportional allocation of delegates. The brash comments leveled at the North Carolina GOP would not be an issue because McCain would have never said them.
John McCain still has a problem if you look at the Pennsylvania results. He only received 72% of the vote with Ron Paul taking 16% and Huckabee taking 12%. The 28% is a significant problem for McCain in any other election, however, it is beginning to look like it might not be in this one if the current pattern holds.
Truth IS Stranger that fiction!!
In an NBC interview aired on Friday, the Arizona senator said he has done all he can to persuade the state party to cancel the television ad that criticizes Obama as "too extreme" because of controversial remarks made by his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
"They're not listening to me because they're out of touch with reality and the Republican Party. We are the party of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan and this kind of campaigning is unacceptable," McCain told NBC's "Today" Show.
"I've done everything that I can to repudiate and to see that this kind of campaigning does not continue," he added.
Asked if the state party's unwillingness to heed his call raised questions about his leadership, McCain replied: "I don't know exactly how to respond to that."
The aspect I find intriguing revolves around what if the Republican and Democrat primaries were reversed. Without question the Democrats would have their winning nominee Hillary Clinton & Barack Obama as vice-president. We can say this because of the winner take all format Republicans use and Clinton winning the "big" states. The Democrat primaries would have ended weeks ago on a positive note, and in large part positioned it to win in a landslide.
On the other side you would have John McCain locked in a bloody primary battle with Mike Huckabee because of the proportional allocation of delegates. The brash comments leveled at the North Carolina GOP would not be an issue because McCain would have never said them.
John McCain still has a problem if you look at the Pennsylvania results. He only received 72% of the vote with Ron Paul taking 16% and Huckabee taking 12%. The 28% is a significant problem for McCain in any other election, however, it is beginning to look like it might not be in this one if the current pattern holds.
Truth IS Stranger that fiction!!
Thursday, April 24, 2008
The longer the race goes the BLUER Obama gets
Why Can't Barack Obama Close the Deal?
Clinton's Blue-Collar Coalition Fuels Critical Wins, Raises General Election Doubts
Clinton's Blue-Collar Coalition Fuels Critical Wins, Raises General Election Doubts
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
A prediction of defeat from a Democrat
Road Map to Defeat
By BOB HERBERT
Published: April 19, 2008
The Democrats are doing everything they can to blow this presidential election. This is a skill that comes naturally to the party. There is no such thing as a can’t-miss year for the Democrats. They are truly gifted at finding ways to lose.
Jimmy Carter managed to win the White House in 1976 by looking pious and riding a wave of anti-Watergate revulsion. After four hapless years, he dutifully handed the keys back to the G.O.P.
Bill Clinton tried hard to lose, with sex scandals and whatnot, during the 1992 campaign. But Ross Perot wouldn’t let him. Mr. Clinton won with a piddling 43 percent of the vote. For eight years, Mr. Clinton tried to throw the presidency away (with sex scandals and whatnot), but he was never able to succeed.
That’s been it for the party for the past 40 years. The Democrats have become so psychologically battered by these many decades in the leadership wilderness that they consider the Clinton years, during which the president was impeached and they lost control of both houses of Congress, to have been a period of triumph.
Now comes 2008, a can’t-lose year if there ever was one. A united Democratic Party should be able to win this election in a walk. The economy is terrible and getting worse. The Republicans are demoralized. John McCain is no J.F.K. And the country wants to elect a Democrat.
So what are the Democrats doing? The Clintons are running around with flamethrowers, gleefully trying to incinerate the prospects of the party’s leading candidate, Barack Obama. As Bill Clinton put it last month: “If a politician doesn’t want to get beat up, he shouldn’t run for office.”
Senator Obama, for his part, seems to have lost sight of the unifying message that proved so compelling early in his campaign and has stumbled into weird cultural predicaments that have caused some people to rethink his candidacy.
While some of those predicaments raise legitimate concerns (his former pastor, his comments in San Francisco) and some do not (stupid questions about wearing a flag pin), he has allowed them to fester unnecessarily. The way for a candidate to eventually change the subject is to offer policy prescriptions so creative and compelling that they generate excitement among the electorate and can’t be ignored by the press.
Voters want more from Senator Obama. He’s given a series of wonderful speeches, but he has to add more meat to those rhetorical bones. He needs to be clear about where he wants to lead this country and how he plans to do it. That’s how a candidate defines himself or herself.
Instead, Mr. Obama is allowing the Clintons and the news media to craft a damaging persona of him as some kind of weak-kneed brother from another planet, out of touch with mainstream America, and perhaps a loser.
Wednesday night’s debate in Philadelphia may have been a sorry exercise in journalism, but even many of Senator Obama’s own supporters were disappointed with his lackluster performance.
The big issues of our time are being left behind as pettiness and mean-spirited partisanship carry the day.
Voters across the country seem disgusted with this state of affairs. George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson of ABC News are being pilloried for the way they conducted Wednesday’s debate. Hillary Clinton’s disapproval ratings have climbed into a zone that makes it legitimate to wonder whether she could defeat Senator McCain. And much of the excitement and enthusiasm surrounding Mr. Obama’s candidacy has cooled.
That raucous laughter you hear in the background is coming from the likes of Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, President Bush and Senator McCain. They can’t believe their good fortune.
The issues still favor the Democrats. More and more Americans are losing their jobs, and many of those still employed are working fewer hours and cashing smaller paychecks. Vacation plans are being curtailed because of declining family income and sky-high gasoline prices. The value of the family home is eroding.
Instead of capitalizing on the political advantages presented by these issues, the Democrats, with their increasingly small-minded approach to this election, are squandering them.
There was always going to be resistance in the U.S. to putting a black person or a woman of any color in the White House. To overcome that built-in resistance, three things are crucially important: new voters have to be brought into the process; the nominee must have an exciting and compelling message; and the party has to be extraordinarily unified behind its standard-bearer.
It’s not too late for the Democrats to pull this off. But there’s already blood on the floor from the nomination fight, and the fight ain’t over. The G.O.P.’s fondest wish is that the Democrats keep doing what they’re doing.
By BOB HERBERT
Published: April 19, 2008
The Democrats are doing everything they can to blow this presidential election. This is a skill that comes naturally to the party. There is no such thing as a can’t-miss year for the Democrats. They are truly gifted at finding ways to lose.
Jimmy Carter managed to win the White House in 1976 by looking pious and riding a wave of anti-Watergate revulsion. After four hapless years, he dutifully handed the keys back to the G.O.P.
Bill Clinton tried hard to lose, with sex scandals and whatnot, during the 1992 campaign. But Ross Perot wouldn’t let him. Mr. Clinton won with a piddling 43 percent of the vote. For eight years, Mr. Clinton tried to throw the presidency away (with sex scandals and whatnot), but he was never able to succeed.
That’s been it for the party for the past 40 years. The Democrats have become so psychologically battered by these many decades in the leadership wilderness that they consider the Clinton years, during which the president was impeached and they lost control of both houses of Congress, to have been a period of triumph.
Now comes 2008, a can’t-lose year if there ever was one. A united Democratic Party should be able to win this election in a walk. The economy is terrible and getting worse. The Republicans are demoralized. John McCain is no J.F.K. And the country wants to elect a Democrat.
So what are the Democrats doing? The Clintons are running around with flamethrowers, gleefully trying to incinerate the prospects of the party’s leading candidate, Barack Obama. As Bill Clinton put it last month: “If a politician doesn’t want to get beat up, he shouldn’t run for office.”
Senator Obama, for his part, seems to have lost sight of the unifying message that proved so compelling early in his campaign and has stumbled into weird cultural predicaments that have caused some people to rethink his candidacy.
While some of those predicaments raise legitimate concerns (his former pastor, his comments in San Francisco) and some do not (stupid questions about wearing a flag pin), he has allowed them to fester unnecessarily. The way for a candidate to eventually change the subject is to offer policy prescriptions so creative and compelling that they generate excitement among the electorate and can’t be ignored by the press.
Voters want more from Senator Obama. He’s given a series of wonderful speeches, but he has to add more meat to those rhetorical bones. He needs to be clear about where he wants to lead this country and how he plans to do it. That’s how a candidate defines himself or herself.
Instead, Mr. Obama is allowing the Clintons and the news media to craft a damaging persona of him as some kind of weak-kneed brother from another planet, out of touch with mainstream America, and perhaps a loser.
Wednesday night’s debate in Philadelphia may have been a sorry exercise in journalism, but even many of Senator Obama’s own supporters were disappointed with his lackluster performance.
The big issues of our time are being left behind as pettiness and mean-spirited partisanship carry the day.
Voters across the country seem disgusted with this state of affairs. George Stephanopoulos and Charles Gibson of ABC News are being pilloried for the way they conducted Wednesday’s debate. Hillary Clinton’s disapproval ratings have climbed into a zone that makes it legitimate to wonder whether she could defeat Senator McCain. And much of the excitement and enthusiasm surrounding Mr. Obama’s candidacy has cooled.
That raucous laughter you hear in the background is coming from the likes of Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, President Bush and Senator McCain. They can’t believe their good fortune.
The issues still favor the Democrats. More and more Americans are losing their jobs, and many of those still employed are working fewer hours and cashing smaller paychecks. Vacation plans are being curtailed because of declining family income and sky-high gasoline prices. The value of the family home is eroding.
Instead of capitalizing on the political advantages presented by these issues, the Democrats, with their increasingly small-minded approach to this election, are squandering them.
There was always going to be resistance in the U.S. to putting a black person or a woman of any color in the White House. To overcome that built-in resistance, three things are crucially important: new voters have to be brought into the process; the nominee must have an exciting and compelling message; and the party has to be extraordinarily unified behind its standard-bearer.
It’s not too late for the Democrats to pull this off. But there’s already blood on the floor from the nomination fight, and the fight ain’t over. The G.O.P.’s fondest wish is that the Democrats keep doing what they’re doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
