Been a bit busy lately, so it’s past time for a new US elections thread. Since Super Tuesday we’ve had an anticipated string of Barack Obama victories from caucuses in Nebraska, Washington and Maine and a primary in Louisiana, along with a narrow win for John McCain in Washington and probably meaningless victories for Mike Huckabee in Kansas and Louisiana. Tomorrow US time we have both parties holding primaries in Virginia, Maryland and the District of Columbia.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
US primaries open thread
Copyright © 2008 Private Media Pty Ltd, Publishers of Crikey.com.au. All Rights Reserved.
Independent news, blogs and commentary on politics, media and business.
Editor: Jonathan Green.
Publishers: Eric Beecher, Diana Gribble.
Level 7, 22 William St, Melbourne, 3000. Ph: 1800 985 502 Fax: (03) 8623 9975
1,263 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 … 26 » Show All
No 849
Mr Bernanke’s snap interest rate cuts will certainly not help either. That will simply fuel more debt.
you entirely missed the point
its not debt they are worrying about but the collapse of the dollar & economic activity…….Greenspan’s legacy
834 KR – [ha! That pretty much sums it up, but you forgot one word: “loathing”
…as in: “ignorant loathing lefties”]
Sorry KR that I appeared to be loath to use loathing.
Now you mention it, I remember the word being used to disparage Obama supporters in that discussion way back somewhere, possibly in early January. You clearly never, never forget.
Diogenes – You were worried that there was no thoracic or cardiology specialist in Darwin for Ramos-Horta, but I presume there were 30 or 40 of them flown in very quickly.
853
jaundiced view
You are forgiven JV, but remember we are all ILL here: ‘Ignorant Loathing Lefties’
But do not speak ill of the ILL. I for one will, as you say, never forget! LOL
well the right are known for their social compassion KR
Diogenes
His life is going to lose all meaning if a fellow Muslim terrorist-supporter with a middle name like Hussein becomes POTUS
What policy or lack there of in Obama makes you believe this way ?
Doctor D at 820, that’s great news about Jose Ramos Horta.
and at 847, father time is catching up with the old patrician, as indeed he does to all of us. Goughie’s never been the same since his “boy” Mark lost the plot at the business end of the 2004 election. I wonder how JRH really feels about how Gough “looked the other way” when Jerry Ford and Henry Kissinger personally green-lighted Suharto to “go for it” and invade Timor L’Este in 1975, and the subsequent systematic slaughter of some 200,000 innocents in the years 75-98.
Guess we’ll have to wait till JRH fully recovers and writes his memoirs.
————————————————————-
With pals like The Imbecile, I reckon McCain will be electorally horse-whipped by Obama in a way that even the dodgies from Diebold couldn’t fix. Providing of course The Kid stays alive. Pity there isn’t a way he could be “immunised” from getting whacked.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/mikeluckovich;_ylt=A0WTUZFkhrVHocEA6RMHcggF
856 Ron-my reference to fellow Muslin terrorist-supporter was completely facetious.
853 jv- I made some inquiries into the surgeon’s involved in Ramos-Horta’s care. While none were specialist cardiac or chest surgeons, several of the local general surgeons are well-trained in chest trauma, especially the professor of surgery, and they were more than able to manage him extremely well.
855
Ron
yeah, we’ve seen some of that lately, haven’t we? From Iron Bar to Horatio Hornet, they’ve pretty much disgraced themselves.
But they do believe in what’s called the ‘trickle down effect’, whereby monstrous benefits accrue to the rich through overly generous tax arrangements, and then, from a great height, they p1ss on the poor, and of course, that’s how you get the trickle down effect.
Simple, really.
Oh dear, am I being too ILL?
For a moment I had the hope that Adam was back to keep all of us wacky tobaccy leftists from having the audacity to assume that Americans would vote for someone who had different skin colour to them.
We miss you Adam wherever you are!
And I stick to my prediction from 4 or 5 threads ago that if Obama didn’t lose Sup Tuesday by more than 100 he would win the nomination. A prediction I would gladly have let everyone forget if it looked like he was losing around now
858
Diogenes
facetious , but its a label the conservatives would like to portray him as but its alittle too rough even in swift boating
Obama is arguing a more balanced approach midddle east approach and presumably you do not agree ?
no you are not ILL.
its why since 1996 we not only have increased non means tested middle class welfare but upper income welfare………….and no money spent on infrastructure
Erytnicam , he’s here under a disguise ‘right’ blog
Ron – I’m still wading through books on the middle east and don’t know enough to have an educated opinion, so I shut up when the Middle East is mentioned.
From my superficial knowledge and from Chalmers Johnson’s tick of approval, I think Obama has the best Middle East approach of the candidates. Billary is too pro-Israel to get anywhere and Macca is barking mad in his foreign policy.
Diogenes , your opinion is well founded from Chalmers Johnson’s tick of approval
and your own observations
Generally Obama is proposing a carrot & stick approach with strong diplomacy & economic threads.
What has not worked for 40 years is either too pro-Israel approach nor the isolation of Iran or Syria , nor the support of the Shah of Iran nor the Iraq war
It has bred dangerous terrorism , potential nuke development in 2 countries and an over reliance on supporting despotic Arab rulers who control oil
Ron @ 862 – [Erytnicam , he’s here under a disguise ‘right’ blog]
I don’t think he is. There’s no-one else with the same declamatory directness that attempts (but fails) to brook no argument.
Diogenes – [I’m still wading through books on the middle east and don’t know enough to have an educated opinion, so I shut up when the Middle East is mentioned.]
Don’t yer worry too much ’bout book lernin. Only the one book yer need to read to know most ev’thing. In the good ol’ USA anyways. Gets ‘em through the days and into the wars. Only problem is ain’t no chapter in the Good Book ’bout gettin’ back on out, when ye cain’t kill all the heathens right off.
interesting development
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/NL14372119.htm
“Some analysts have said the visit would irk Washington, but the White House on Thursday voiced support for the trip, so long as Iran stopped supporting militias in Iraq. Ahmadinejad often speaks out against the U.S. military presence in Iraq”
866 Gusface – Interesting because it’s a bit of a wedge for the US.
A. Looks good that the propped up Iraqi ‘government’ gets legitimacy and recognition of another nation
B. Looks bad because the US wants to demonise Iran but they allow the evil Iran to be received ibn Iraq by the new regime when they have, what, 140,000 troops in occupation?
C. But wait – a Third Way (perhaps suggested by Tony Blair!) Maybe this is a ploy to get out of Iraq if Iran will take some responsibility to assist the new government – Shi-ite to Shi-ite. Which means the US do a deal with Iran and go softer on their nuclear aspirations whle Iran deploys trrops in Iraq under the auspices of the Iraq govt of course. The Shi-ites win. Shame about the other groups.
All conjecture of course but something’s going on with the US allowing this visit to happen.
jaundiced view
option c
perhaps with an eye on the upcoming presidential election bush 2 has finally listened to bush 1
interestingly i heard/read somewhere that gadaffi had played a role (whether directly or as ‘neutral ground’) in negotiations
in terms of geopolitics the superpowers have done a deal methinks
we live in very interesting times
“Former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir dies at 91″
The British should have hung the terrorist 60 years ago.
.
HarryH @ 838
“The American people are largely sick of war,”
Not sure about that. I think it’s more that they are largely sick of loosing wars
The polls inicate a narrowing is on in Texas – a nice steeply rising Obama narrowing. It reminds me of California, which begs the question: how much pre-poll voting is there likely to be in Texas? There is an element of caucusing in some areas, so I’m presuming this at least reduces some of Clinton’s pre-poll advantage.
Newsradio is starting a regular US election program at 12:30 today. Just in case you can’t get enough politics. Here’s where to find Newsradio for those who don’t know.
http://www.abc.net.au/newsradio/listen/
870 Robert B
I wonder if the advantage to Clinton in the pre-polls will disappear now that the tide has well and truly turned for Obama. Clinton was still the favourite for the nomination in the period before California on super Tuesday remember. Now the writing is on the wall.
jv-that’s a good point I hadn’t considered. I’d imagine most pre-polls would favour Obama at the moment and if there were a significant number eg 20%, it would mean Billary has shift the momentum even further to make up for the pre-polls
Diogenes – Did you see the article discussed in the early hours above posted by Gusface (at 866-868) about the Iranian visit to Iraq? What do you reckon are the ulterior motives of the Bush admin in that? For Iran to cover for them in Iraq while the US can plan withdrawal – to help McCain?
Wisconsin is going to be interesting, and as usual, the voters being polled are not very certain just yet:
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey shows Obama with a narrow four-point advantage over Clinton, 47% to 43%. Nearly one-fourth of the voters say there’s a good chance they might change their mind. Five percent (5%) of those who currently support Obama and Clinton say there’s a good chance they could change their mind before voting.
…I’m not quite sure how to interpret that, but it seems to say that 25% of voters who are yet committed, aren’t yet committed! LOL
While only 5% of committed voters are possible waverers.
Ah, psephology, the art of reading entrails!
874
jaundiced view
I don’t think the US is overly pleased with the Shiite junta (replete with death squads, ethnic cleansers, and the usual corruption) that squats in the Green Zone. Especially since the majority of them have deep Iranian connections, and those that don’t, like Muqtada al Sadr, run their own anti-US militia, and snipe at those that do, (literally!).
The close ties with Tehran are not something the US can do anything about, and in some ways they must allow if they ever want to get out in one piece, because Iran can and must play a big role in keeping the fractious Shiites together.
On the other side, the Sunni are sh!tting themselves that if they don’t get armed and organised enough before the US leaves, they are toast, as there will be no stopping the ethnic cleansing in the few remaining Sunni areas of Baghdad and any remaining mixed populations elsewhere.
So the Yanks are between Iraq and hard place, they need the Iranians to support the Shiite government, but the downside is that the Sunni are enraged that the country they fought for a decade in the eighties is now chummy with the government of their county.
Anyone who thinks the ’surge’ has done anything but given the Sunni time to build up their own forces is just living in fantasy land. This ain’t over, not by a very long shot, and the little lull before the storm is not ‘victory’ or ‘mission accomplished’ or any other assinine term some Whitehouse spokesdrone wants to call it.
KR – Agreed- I just suspect the yanks are up to something involving Iran aimed at getting themselves out of the mess, and hang the consequences.
not sure j/v the Iraq & Iran Shiite leaders already had historical close relations when Iraq was under the minority Sunni leadership. Now those same Shiite Iraqi’s are in leadership of Iraq….strenghtening Iran’s position in ME
yet US policy pre invasion was to counter Iran’s THEN influence…suceeded ?
811 Jen, Max 812, jaundiced et al
.
In Adam & co’s absence, you can crow your smug delight at me instead. I’m tough, I can take it (and I have the time on my hands), I’m used to be on the losing side, voting ALP all through the Howard years, even trying hard to find something to motivate my support for Latham (talk about difficult ask! LOL). I even liked Keating, despite thinking he made a really BIG MISTAKE in going for PM. He was a good Treasurer, being PM was just not his forte.
.
but back to the Obama Phenomenon..
.
.. barely 6 weeks into the US election year, and its all over (bar the shouting and fireworks!) According to 15 major national US media networks, dozens of regional ones, 4,213,987 websites, blogs, forums, podcasts, streaming broadcasts, 50 opinion polls (per week), betting markets, Utube…and the list goes on. Including the dozen or so regulars on Pollbludger. Its all over, done and dusted, the bitch is toast, and Obama will take McCain in November, for a New World Order.
.
I hate to be the pessimist, the misery-guts at the party, but its still a loooong way to November guys. Its still a long way, just to the Party Conventions.
.
As for the numbers on the Dems primaries, admittedly they are record turn-outs for the Dems, but still a long, (very long) way below the average voter turn-outs on election day. Even at the highest turnout US elections, around one third of eligible voters do not vote. I guess they belong to the “Can’t be Farq’ed, Prefer to Watch the Game” Party.
.
The low numbers attending Primaries, (especially caucuses) even in record numbers on previous history, aren’t indicative of anything, let alone any sort of measure of electability, or a “mood for (real) change” sweeping the nation.
.
Oz numbers weren’t THAT good either, in the final wash-up. Rudd did not get a landslide. We just like to think so
.
Secondly, Clinton’s support may be trailing Obama’s in the primary tallies to date, but its still nothing to sneeze at or treat with such disdain and contempt, even if he does win. She’s not losing by much, and probably will not lose by so very much (if she does). Thats still a lot of core Democrat Party grass-roots rank-and-file support.
.
pro-Obama sites, TV and radio networks, probably outweigh pro-Clinton by about 10 or even 20 to one. Just my own perception, impression etc – but many aren’t so much about supporting *him* as their preferred candidate, but in attacking *her*. Almost a blood sport, they don’t want their candidate to win as much, as they want her to lose, and lose badly, in a crushing humiliating public defeat for their entertainment.
.
If thats what the vision of “unity”, and “hope” and “change” is all about, then count me out, OK?
.
This grass-roots Party faithful support, even if second-best, (and a very large second-best) is the one group being pissed off the most. Not so much by Obama himself, but by the very vocal rabid frothing-at-the-mouth Clinton-hating crowds following him.
.
This was why the New Mexico primary count had to take so long, so many Independents and out-of-state registrants (ineligible voters trying to vote twice) showed up, it took forever to double-check the eligibility of voter registrations.
.
The majority of Clinton/Edwards etc supporters, who nearly always vote in primaries, are the ground-troops of the Democrat Party. They are the ones who have been volunteering in campaigns since the year dot, doing the hard foot-slog of letterboxing, shopping malls, booths, and are especially critical in swing-states, due to the stupid Electoral College winner-takes-all system. Remember Rudd’s call only days before our election? ” Door-knock until your hands bleed” – and aussies did, in large numbers, coz they were motivated to do so. Again, remember it was not a landslide here. Piss off this large contingent of core sidewalk slogging Democrats, by insulting them, offending them, laughing at them, putting them down as idiots and fools, cheering wildly with popcorn and champers with the “bitch is toast” will not help Obama come November. As one State Dem delegate said ‘If we treat nearly half our people like crap, we’re farqed’. They may still vote mostly for Obama on election day, but if even a small percentage decide to sit it out and watch the ballgame in a swing-state in November, or call into to their local branch when asked to volunteer to leaflet at a shopping mall, they are likely to say ” Not this year, mate. Too busy”.
.
They know their system, they know the DNC rules, and they know that the primaries are meant to be just Party pre-selections, and get *input* from the rank-and-file on campaign strategies in states, and Open ones are supposed to be where the new and curious can find out more info, be encouraged to become registered Party voters/members, not *decide* the freaking nomination. And stick to the calendar, the States are in a particular order for a reason. Super-Tuesday is the big one that truly counts. In Florida for example, the state legislature is Republican dominated and they pushed it through for their own reasons, and I think they swung it so they only lost half their delegates, LOL.
.
And all this supposed groundswell of support for Obama, if only say – 3-5% of these new primary voters, the Indies, crossing-floor soft Repubs, are just early hangers-on and rabid anti-Clintonites, (which is very different to being pro-Obama) once they have completely toasted the bitch, and they are all smug, smirky and satisfied, will they still be around to vote in November?
.
but according to everybody, especially multinational megacorp dominated US media outlets, and all their global offspring, its only 6 weeks in, with nearly 9 months to go to the Big Day, and its all over, done and dusted, the Bitch is Dead (best part of all, huh?) and Obama will lead the world into a new era of truth, justice and the American Way.
.
kr,jv
i agree re the deep doo-doos that is iraq- at present
but certain external forces are probably driving a resolution
China,India,Pakistan,Turkey,Russia, all have strategic,economic
and ethnic/religious interest
China olympics is soon- nothing will be allowed to distract attention from this display of china’s status
India-modernising like nobody’s business also has some critical interests/needs in the region-will brook no attempt to forestall its rush to being number 1
Pakistan-the joker in the pack (but neutered by having no patron)
Turkey-still wants to resolve ww1 borders also increasing islamic extremism
Russia-Vlad justs wants to be left alone as Tsar-the most malleable of the five
(until russia sorts its soul out)
ultimately who this favours will remain to be seen
mccain will lose his “war” card and anyway i think the repubs are sunk ths time
hilary/obama will face a few very hard decisions
Rain @ 879- I reckon the MSM attacks on Clinton are almost all from the conservatives, not from Obama’s people. It’s all because of the excess baggage Clinton brought on the cruise, the weight of which is going to drag her underwater like a stove tied to her ankle.
Is it ’smug, smirky and satisfied’ to be pleased that a candidate with what appears from a distance to be a penchant for real change in US policies is also resonating with the American people? If so, I’m in that club.
Yes, it’s only a relative handful of swinging voters who are making the difference, but that’s always the case – as it is here, as you say.
What I still don’t understand is where your rusted-on Clintonism could possibly come from. As a liberal (?) surely you don’t prefer more of the same old US policies? Don’t you want to see your American friends and relatives with a better health system? And with a new approach to the M East? With less chance of being attacked by terrorists? Tell me how Obama offers less than Clinton in those areas.
Gusface @ 880 – Yes, plenty of pressure no doubt is being applied. If McCain doesn’t win, Obama will be much more open to the other nations’ ideas for a resolution.
Hi Rain -
You seem a tad defensive (the Bitch is Toast). Certainly my personal preference for Obama is not based on hatred for Hillary, but seeing him as representing a new approach to politics which, similarly to Australia, voters appear to be wanting.
You obviously have extensive knowledge of the US system and appear to have a finger on the pulse of the inner goings on of the Dems, but as an outsider with no machiavellian agenda it all seems a little more obvious than uyor picture. People are tired of the current political approaches, and this is beyond party lines.
881 Correction: ‘have a penchant’, not ‘be a penchant’
Memo to ESJ.
I do not like the fact that you are making reference to my appearance, name and so on.
I have never hidden my identity and anyone who wanted to could have checked out my details as a candidate at the last election. Perhaps some did: I have no idea.
You are crossing the line though.
This site is a blog for political discussion and I enjoy being part of it, but we all respect the fact that we are not known to each other personally, although over time many of us have revealed some personal information about ourselves. This has been treated with respect without exception as far as I know, and I ask that you do the same.
Also – I am sure this is of completely no interst to anybody else, so stop it.
Rain ,
Have read your blog & there is much I agree with in it , however as one of the strongest pro Obama blogers some points are worth considering.
Not all pro Obama supporters can be lumped together. I have said that I would vote for Hillary rather than McCain. But I would vote for Obama over Hillary.
The differences between HRC & O are significant
The spread of Nukes means for the ist time in history our whole civilisation could get wiped out. HRC represents basically unchanged US foreign policy..disaster
Obama represents are more ‘even handed’ treatment of ‘enemies’
Secondly, ditto re Climate Change potential world disaster. HDC soft. O is not
Thirdly, on social justice & equity issues HRC & O have similar policys excl healthcare. The system needs dramatic overall & my sense is O an outsider will be less worried about stepping seriuosly on establishment toes in doing so vs HRC who is from within the establishment and so expect O to achieve more
Whilst all Pollies are ‘power driven’, some like Rudd make you believe their beliefs are stronger than their power desires. O gives me that sense. HRC does not.
In fact you staying with Bill & using him magnifies my ‘belief’ concern re HRC
Your views on p…off their own Democrat base are 100% spot on
Rain at 879.
That’s quite an impassioned polemic, some parts of which are well argued and not without merit.
Obama or his team have never said the “bitch is toast”. Enthusiastic and ignorant supporters of Obama may have said so on blog sites but you can’t logically swat BHO or his team for that strawman. Lots of public figures have supporters who they find embarrassing.
Many who feel as I do, don’t like HRC for many reasons but two predominate.
1) Hillary is an unabashed warmonger. She voted for the phoney Iraq ooccupation and invasion and has never publicly rescinded her decision or apologised for it. Hillary Rodham Clinton is therefore part of the problem ie. the systemayic looting and pillaging of the US Federal Reserve for the benefit of the military industrial political complex. Hillary is beltway connected up the wazoo and has been from the first time she chowed down as a resident of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
2) HRC has a grasping born-to-rule persona that many find grating. The fact that she is a woman is irrelevant. It’s a personality not a gender isuue.
Latest indications are that the lady is gonna get her political butt whupped in Texas.
After “The Candidate” is chosen by the Dems, the huge majority will fall in behind no matter who it is, rather than endure the possibity of four more years under another GOPper, especially one like Johnny “Bomb-Bomb” McCain.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/02/15/arg_poll_obama_leads_in_texas.html
P.S. Rain, can you provide a link to where Obama talks or writes about a “New World Order” as you suggested? So far I havn’t detected such fascist tendencies in the junior senator from Illinois.
Some crappy rambling thoughts and streams of consciousness… (no facts, I’m sorry to say)
.
Obama’s Iraq-war record:
It’s great that Obama opposed the war in 2002, but that was a speech made in a state govt, not a resolution, not a real action, just a very stirring speech – and in 2004 he clearly had a very different sentiment. He even took the speech transcript off his website when he started to run for the congress Senate, cos it was “out-dated”.
.
He had a chance to say something about it at the Democrat convention in 2004, but he didn’t. He actually said he doesn’t know which way he would have voted. Mr. Obama said. “What would I have done? I don’t know. What I know is that from my vantage point the case was not made.’ ” (New York Times, 7/26/04)
.
It was Kucinich(sp?) who led the anti-war protesting Democrat faction at the 2004 Democrat Convention. Obama supported Kerry, Edwards etc.
.
And later in 2004, he is quoted directly as having the same position as Bush on the war:Note he says “MY” position:
“On Iraq, on paper, there’s not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago. There’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage.” (Chicago Tribune, 07/27/04)
.
Obama waited a full 18 months, after gaining his Senate seat before even making a speech on Iraq, and ironically,it was one where he opposed a time table for withdrawal:
.
“I’m also acutely aware that a precipitous withdrawal of our troops, driven by Congressional edict rather than the realities on the ground, will not undo the mistakes made by this Administration. It could compound them.” (Obama Speech, 6/21/06)
.
Until Obama began his Presidential campaign, Obama voted for every single war funding bill, even though while running for the Senate in 2004, he said he would not vote for a single one.( what is so “different” or representative of “real change” and “hope” when pollies break campaign promises?)
.
Once he got in the Senate, he voted the exact same way Sen. Clinton (and most other Democrats) did:
.
“In fact, Obama’s Senate voting record on Iraq is nearly identical to Clinton’s. Over the two years Obama has been in the Senate, the only Iraq-related vote on which they differed was the confirmation earlier this year of General George Casey to be Chief of Staff of the Army, which Obama voted for and Clinton voted against.” (ABC News, 5/17/07)
.
yet this difference in one single solitary vote, (and on a minor matter of appointments as well) is the basis of how “different” Obama’s position is.
.
884 Jen
Your rebuke to ESJ was too generous
perhaps as a cultured lady thats your strongest
Most blogers would be very uncomfortable that your space & privacy has been violated & feel as I do embarassed for you ..we do wish you to leave the blog
So perhaps ESJ can rectify by simply giving an ‘apology’
(on a lighter note Jen , ESJ opposes an ‘apology’ to the stolen generation so perhaps you could get lucky)
typo: NOT
-”Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote ‘present’ on a bill that sought to protect the privacy of sex-abuse victims, and the only state senator to not support the bill.” (HB854, Passed 58-0-1, 05/11/99)
-
-”Sen. Obama was the only State Senator to vote ‘present’ on an adoption bill that imposed stricter requirements for parental fitness, and the only State Senator to not support the bill.” (HB1298, Passed 57-0-1, 5/6/1999)
-
-”During Sen. Obama’s 2004 Senate campaign, the Illinois National Organisation of Women (NOW) PAC did not recommend the endorsement of Obama for U.S. Senate because he refused to stand up for a woman’s right to choose and repeatedly voted ‘present’ on important legislation affecting women and children”.
-
Here are several quotes from Barack Obama’s interview with the Reno Gazette-Journal:
.
-”The Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there, over the last 10 to 15 years.”
.
-”I think Ronald Reagan changed the directory of America, in a way that Richard Nixon did not, and in a way Bill Clinton did not.”
.
-”(Reagan) put us on a fundamentally different path, because the country was ready for it.”
.
-”With all the excesses of the 60s and 70s…he (Reagan) tapped into what people were feeling—we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism.”
.
Well..it maybe just personal impressions/beliefs etc – but I remember Reaganomics, and the M.A.D. years under Reagan.
.
But I do get personally puzzled and confused when I read articles like this, which party does Obama belong to again? Can someone remind me? and Bill Clinton similar to Richard Nixon?
.
Thanks Ron.
Rain,
I can’t but help feeling a little suspicious of your ability to fingd all these qutes and yet claim that you are not particularly connected to any campaign!
And while I read your offerings with interest nothing yet has dissuaded me from the view that Obama offers something new to that represented by Hillary. I would expect similar views from them on a range of issues -they are both Democrats after all. However, this election appears to be about more than policy position. Something almost intangible perhaps: a human desire for a cultural change of direction.
Rain , if Obama is the Democrat Nominee would you support himbeing POTUS ?
Yes Rain – Again, why is it that you are doing this? This is just re-hashing trawled junk from the Clinton team, such as the very selective Reagan stuff . Why the full-on support for Clinton? It seems more and more likely you must have a direct connection of some sort. You have been asked that question several times but have not answered it. I am genuinely interested in that answer.
Rain,
I suspect that your attempts to paint Obama in a bad light are having about as much success here as similar attempts in the US.
ie- bugger all.
In fact, they may be backfiring as they appear to be somewhat ridiculous :Obama = Reagan????. Sorry, try again.
Well, Rain? – Stop trawling for more mud on Obama – although it’s not really mud from what I can make of that old stuff so far. More like water – off a duck’s back.
Out yourself and you’ll get more respect. You said something vague earlier about some ‘connections’ to the US, which wasn’t the full story I thought.
Rain , you are a thorn surrounded by roses……but you are still in the garden
whereas the ‘fundamentalists right’ are yesterdays antiques
I regard you as a strong Clinton support. Fine
But those numerous Pbama ‘quotes’ you supplied , can you supply links because Aunty Fay proved yesterday how words can be taken out of context
So many of those quotes are simply out of context, and seem a cut and paste from partisan Hillary fans. There are plenty of those involving Hillary as well, yet I don’t see much merit in posting it. For those who do the research, generally speaking such out of context quotes are rubbish.
McCain voting to extend the ability to torture on the other hand is far more blatant.
Zimmer McSame, oh the speed & the flexibility…
http://www.alternet.org/rights/77178/
Jen, my research skills are not what they used to be but…ESJ, serial shopper will have to do for now…
http://photos1.blogger.com/photoInclude/img/220/955/640/supershopper.jpg
Nice colours.
Chelsea turns up at a superdelegate’s college to have “breakfast” with him. Sadly for Miss Clinton, the 21 year old superdelegate turns out to be openly gay (although somehow he hasn’t told his parents before telling the international media??).
http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_ektid52256.asp
PS I’m not seriously suggesting she is pimping for Billary, I just thought the story provided an interesting insight into what’s happening to the superdelegates.
Pages: « 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 … 26 » Show All