Duke it out here. Those participating in the US election threads are advised that they do so at their own risk.
Reflections on the Miracle of Democracy at Work in the Greatest Nation on Earth
Duke it out here. Those participating in the US election threads are advised that they do so at their own risk.
1,623 Comments
From the previous thread.
2129 Possum Comitatus I understand what you are saying and agree with it. But with the tidal wave coming he doesn’t need to have someone like that, and from the indications I am getting he could get away without Hillary’s support either.
The Insiders is going to the US this week to do a show on the US election.
Well said William
Hey All
I’ve noticed in a couple of places there have been references to Obama receiving a ‘post nomination bump’ in recent pollls putting him ahead nationally.
Can anyone explain to me a) if this is a legitimate phrase – i.e. that its not similar to the ‘circuit breaker’ concept from the 07 Australian election and b) why it occurs?
Cheers
Yohoho
The bounce comes from the polls previously being polluted by a three horse race, now crystalising out in a proper two horse race.
If you go back to polls when Huckabee and Romney were still around, the same thing was happening on the Republican side as well.
Poss 2105 from prev thread
Interesting points.
The thing is there is no “perfect” pick, but it all gets down to who Obama thinks will help best with the balance of getting elected, and then helping him govern.
In the few polls since HRC’s concession, Obama seems to have shored up the elderly white woman vote. They are natural Democrats. Do you consolidate this by selecting Sebelius or risk it by picking Webb?
Webb would be fantastic for going after white appalachian men but these are usually reliable Republican.
It is a game of pros and cons. Sebellius and Webb both have advantages, listed in many places. I would suggest Sebelius has a few fewer disadvantages.
I think they have fairly equal pluses in helping Barry’s election.
But Sibelius helps him much more in Governing. It is often said Webb’s personality is perfectly suited to be a Senator and perfectly unsuited to being a VP.
We will see.
G’day Bludgers,
Not so smart Bomb-Bomb is hamstrung between two demographics he desperately needs in order to be a running child’s chance in a napalm storm of surviving this campaign of fear and loathing; educated women AND fundies.
“Party Chairman Howard Dean has said the party will highlight a perception that McCain has “old-fashioned views.” According to Dean, in DNC focus groups, women in the most conservative group were “shocked that [McCain] believed health insurance shouldn’t cover birth-control pills and they were shocked about his belief in abstinence-only education.”
They key target here is the women who are showing weaker Democratic leanings this year. Party operatives believe that, once they learn that McCain said “Roe v. Wade was not only a bad decision but a flawed decision,” these women will abandon any thought of supporting him.”
http://www.nypost.com/seven/06112008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/zapping_mac_114971.htm
(Thanks for the newly disclaimed thread, BillBo)
The only problem with Sebelius: I doubt Kansas is at all winnable for Obama in November!
The much publisized Hillary backlash thing doesn’t seems to be doing much either
Two new polls:
Obama well ahead of McCain in New York State and Washington State.
Wed June 11:
http://news.yahoo.com/comics/boondocks;_ylt=A0WTUeckjlBIwB8BpxsDwLAF
One would have expected a boost for the Obama campaign following his clinching of the nomination. However, there are some cautionary signs in the latest polls for the Obamatics. Personally, would not be giving too much credit to any polls until after the conventions. However, will conceed that, as always, any trends will be give us all plenty of talking points.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/06/11/wsjnbc_poll_obama_holds_six_point_lead.html
Looks like a smaller meeting type is now the Obama option.
“Obama had planned to campaign Wednesday in Iowa, but flooding there prevented him. His campaign hastily arranged the Chicago event to avoid a day with no public events during a week in which he is criticizing McCain on several economic issues.
Barely two dozen people attended the event, in which Obama talked with three struggling borrowers and a consumer advocate at a small table. The setting was in keeping with his recent emphasis on small, low-key events that contrast sharply with the huge rallies for which is known.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080611/ap_on_el_pr/obama_lending
FINNS & GG
A perspectives to my posts on the Iraq vote, the role of the UN in the corrupted pre invasion Intell & Obama’s “Senate” position was not addressed. Beforehand , the backsdrop is we now know from the Dems Congress controlled Phase (ii) Intell Report that 000’s pages analysis from the CIA , NSA & other US security Agencys suppliedto then Senators was not their assessments at all , & instead the Intell data had been corrupted by Bush/Cheney administration The scale is unprecedented in a democracy .However back in 2002 these 000,’s of pages of Intell & visuals plus classified briefings were supplied as if it was independent Intell to US Senators & it overwhelmingly made an invasion case on National Security grounds. The country assessed being Iraq had previously without provaction invaded Kuwait , had used chemical weapons on its own people Iraq and where in October 2002 UN Inspectors were actualluy in Iraq looking for biological & chemical weapons
The Bush/Cheney corrupted Intell fed into a post 9/11 US siege psche , it fed into the misuse of the respected but conned Colin Powell as the frontman , it fed into Iraq’s previous invasion of Kuwait , it fed into Iraq’s slaughter of its Kurds in the north & its Shia in the South , it fed into the UN Inspectors then being in Iraq actually looking for WMD’s & being obstructedand , it fed into the Senates constitutional role to receive genuine CIA , NSA & other Intell unfalsified. The Dems Senators looked at all of this , made a value judgement & 28 Dems voted yes the invasion case was made, John Edwards thought so. So did Hillary , and so do I having read a lot of data. Now in 2005 , when it became clearer the Intell was a fraud , both Edwards & Hillary publicly recanted their decision & expressed contrition , stances the MSN deliberately thereafter ignored , & worse falsely perpetuated the myth they still supported the invasion criteria & had shoen no regret The corrupt power of the MSN
Now to the UN inspector’s unwitting role in the Bush/cheney Intell falsification Bix the chief UN-MOVIC weapons inspector & Mohamed El Baradei, the IAEA chief inspector for atomic weapons , specifically had cited to the UN in 2002 Reports Iraqi failures to eliminate prohibited chemical and biological arms programs & adamanant the possible existence of chemical and biological arms were a present possible danger Ironically but cruciallys it was Bix & Mohamed El Baradei comments & Reports that unwittingly allowed Bush/Cheney to be able to falsify US intell Reports with some credibility of Iraq’s WMD danger to con the Senators This was then magnified by the Intell being presented to the Senators as the CIA/.NSA ‘s assessments when instead it was actually Bush/Cheney’s
Its no point people saying oh but the ALP opposed the invasion. The ALP , like the UN Council , never had access to the persuasive 000’s of corrupted & classified Intell & briefings the Senators received on which they made their decision This was simply a case of the ALP either through suspicion of the US , factionism or ignorance (of the Intell as it didn’t have that Intell) being proved right with hindsight , over those who had all the 000’s of Intell I mean no one has ever suggested that Sadamm given his use of gas on his own people , his slaughter of the Kurds & Shia’s & his Kuwait invasion would not have wanted WMD’s nor wanted to use them After all that’s why the UN imspectors were in Iraq
The first casuality of war is the truth. Bush/Cheney have unfairly succeeded in dirtying 28 Dems Senators including John Edwards, Kerry & Hillary The MSN “truth” have perpetuated this “truth” & for some their minds are now made up depite the Phase (ii) Intell Report starting to demolish the massive detailed but grossly corrupted Intell supplied to the 28 Dems Senators
An aside , Obama was not then in the Senate. However in October 2002 when he made his ‘Iraq” speech , he had decided to run for the US Senate for 2004 & at that time he appointed David Axelrod as a strategist & announced his candiditure 2 months later.As a new candidate what else was Obama to say & further he had none of the 000’s of false intell info anyway. Suggest instead consider Obama’s 2004 comments , where he did not repeat his 2002 anti invasion comments at all but instead told the Chicago Tribune he “did not know” how he would have voted on the war resolution had he been a Senator at the time. That is NOT his distancing from the Kerry , Hillary & Edward’s vote at all , not at all , otherwise he woud have repeated his 2002 comments Obama’s change simply was he had by then become aware of the 2002 Intell the Senators had received As an aside Obama also says in 2004 , quote “there’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage of the Iraq War” Everyone including Obama was reading or hearing of grosly corrupted Intell Now by 2005 when Edwards & Hillary admitted their mistake vote & their contrition , the Intell authenticity have become suspicious for all Dems
Given Obama’s 2004 comments , his 2008 comments retrospectively quoting his 2002 remarks when a Senate ‘candidate’ is simply clever politics & good on him , but cann’t be seriously used against the 28 Dems vote , given his 2004 comments & that he had in 2002 none of the falsified corrupted Intell the Dems Senators had The Iraq vote instead should be judgd on the ealier info in this post
Finally one of the most strident opponents of “Billary” here , the posts defending Hillary & Edwards & Kerry revealed dispasionate reasoning & frankness lives.To FINNS yes I’ve been naughty , again , with another probably unread long galactic post to convert the Obama’s to the barbarian fairness darkness but the 30 odd Obama’s responses are of such varying quality that sniper fire to barbarians always gets under the ‘rules of engagement’ return snipers fire whilst the silent cn ponder the substance & maybe the 22nd Century lingo
Speaking of small events, I was surprised McCain challenged Obama to a series of small ‘town hall’ debates across the US… I note the Obama campaign has been slow to accept but has not rejected the idea – they must be thinking ‘what the hell is the old fool playing at’? Can McCain trap Obama with folksy down-hominess?? Personally, I don’t think McCain is that deft or Obama that dumb…
Arrggghhh…not the small, cosy town hall type meetings which both Hewson and Latham indulged in?
Both leaders were lauded for ‘getting in touch with real people on the ground’ at the time; the media both acclaimed these meetings as signs of their political genius.
In both cases, the morning after the election commentators were saying what a bad idea these small forum meetings were.
And they are. They don’t reach enough people to change enough votes. They fritter away the candidate’s time and energy, giving them the illusion of doing something when they’re not.
It’s a media dominated world. A TV appearance on the least watched television program in the nation is going to get you more than two dozen viewers.
I guess this is McCain’s pitch to the blue-collar crowd where Obama has been weak – he will try and paint Obama as ‘elite’ as he can – it also nails down quite a bit of Obama’s campaigning time to McCain’s schedule (I think he’s proposed 13-14 town-halls???).
Obama must learn from Kucinich’s election theft impeachment
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
June 11, 2008
“…….. Two of the articles deal with the fact that Bush was never elected, and in fact stole the election of 2004 in Ohio. They should serve as a cautionary notice to the Obama campaign that this year’s election could also be stolen……….
Ironically, though these facts have finally penetrated to a proposed Congressional indictment of the nation’s chief executive, they have yet to be reported in the “mainstream” corporate-owned media.”
Not on the BushCo beholden Fox propaganda channel either.
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2008/3143
Jay Leno, via U.S. News: “You know, I’ll tell you, things are not good. The price of oil doubled in less than a year. Home foreclosures are at a record high. Unemployment is surging. But yesterday . . . we saw a ray of hope. President Bush left the country. So maybe things will get better.”
Maybe McCain wants as little exposure as possible, zoom
Ron,
Nice post and puts the lie to some of the hysterical anti Hillary rhetoric from our friends here at PB. But, I am not expecting any retractions or mea culpas any time soon.
Your research and clear thinking, as always, are a credit to you. It is nice to read something by someone who gathers information before drawing conclusions.
Possum if you’re still about…
Why then, is the conventional wisdom that the bounce will disappear? I noticed the votemaster said something about it being ‘temporary’…
Yo ho ho – conventional wisdom is that the party’s vote is coalesing, so Obama gets some Clinton vote. But the candidate who has just won the nomination (in this case Obama) also hold the news cycle and the excitement, so they are thought to get a point or two from that. But this excitement doesn’t last, and those who switch to a candidate in a moment of such excitement are probably soft support. Some of this support bump may drop away upon greater scrutiny.
This primary has been particularly bruising though, and Obama has plenty of negatives already out there, so it is debatable whether a rerun of these negatives will cause him to dip. People know him pretty well, for a candidate at this stage, and he has been all over the media for months.
I guess it is more a question of whether the bump has come from Democratic partisans (who will remain onboard in a divisive contest) or excited unaligneds (who may drift to McCain if he runs well).
I’m me-tooing Pancho
#14, Ron, there were lines from the song Guantanamo that goes something like this:
“I am a simple man from this land of palm trees
Before dying I want to share these poems of my soul
My verses are light green
But they are also flaming red”
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=X5JLCAIJLJ8
Obama has stated this clearly: “Let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. It was a terrible mistake to fail to act when we had a chance to take out an al-Qaida leadership meeting in 2005. If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”
So as a simple man, what did he mean by “actionable intelligence”? Did Obama say the intelligence should be “TRUTHFUL” “ACCURATE” “HIGH VALUE”? No, he simply said “actionable”. Of course the dogs of war at the DOD and CIA would ensure the intelligence he gets are “actionable”.
So Black Prince might disappoint the World and turn out to be more of a warmonger than the Cowboy Dubya. Sad, but that is a possibility because he will be a hostage to the dogs of War at DOD and CIA. Once a satan, always a great satan.
As you have correctly quoted: “As an aside Obama also says in 2004 , quote “there’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage of the Iraq War”. Yes, we know.
Ta Pancho and Possum.
Appreciate the illuminating. I had trouble with it for the exact reasons you outlined Pancho – its been such a damn long and hyped primary, i couldn’t fathom people not having opinions as yet. I guess we play the waiting game then?
Finns, no US President is going to be some hippy peacenik living in a self-imposed Age of Aquarius.
Finns @ 24 – surely a non-issue (when it comes to the election)… McCain will definitely be viewed as more of hawk than Obama throughout the campaign.
Latest odds have Dems @ $1.45 and Reps @ $2.70 if you’re into a flutter.
Hang on Poss, i thought that is what Obama is selling and the World is buying it in a big dose. You know talking unconditionally to Iran, Syria, N Korea, Cuba, Venezuela etc.
The World is expecting peace, harmony and Kumbaya to be breaking out when Obama is elected. Although, the poor Hamas and Palestinians have just got their dose of reality.
The people of the World are taking him as is, face value. they do not have the luxury of long analytical on the shade and shading of Mr. Obama’s words. Words that are matter or not matter.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/11/opinion/11friedman.html?_r=2&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Sorry about the long absence – been very busy with assignments of late.
A few points I’d like to make…
1. Obama was certainly helped by Clinton’s generous endorsement of him – she outlined, in a clear and convincing fashion, why her voters should go for him as a second choice, which would have helped a LOT of her supporters to put her loss behind them and rally behind Obama.
2. The NY Post article refers to “gale-force” headwinds against Republicans this year. I’d go further – it looks like there could well be a filibuster-proof Democrat majority in each House of Congress, plus a Dem president. In other words, we’d be in territory not visited since (let me check) 1977-79 (the 95th Congress), when the Democrats held over 60% of each House’s seats, and the Presidency.
3. In short, the Republicans are in danger of becoming even more irrelevant than the Liberals are here – at least the Libs can make life difficult for the Government in the Senate.
And what is the world expecting if McCain gets elected Finns?
People may be more amenable to talk with Obama. Also, is it not an ‘only Nixon could go to China’ kind of thing? If Obama is perceived by the rest of the world to be more like them, will they be more amenable to hearing some hard talk?
Wed June 11:
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/jeffdanziger;_ylt=AgfXuXYVRkrx1i8JWWSL0A1X_b4F
Wed June 11:
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/patoliphant;_ylt=AgRFkQ32nWAxyoN5E9b0Ex7d.sgF
Matt, it’s possible those Republicans who can’t stand McCain may very well sit this one out in the belief that 2 years of ‘unfettered left’ will swing the voters back to them by the midterms… Obama and unabridged Democrat power as circuit-breaker for the whole mess the Republicans currently find themsleves in. Don’t know how large a group they’ll be, or if it will actually have much effect on this election…
Here is his David Brooks’ view from his most recent weekly discussion on the Newshour with Jim Lehrer.
DAVID BROOKS:I think the Republicans fully expect — and I know they fully expect Obama to really shoot upwards in the polls, which we’re beginning to see, but shoot up to a significant lead, and then McCain try to close in the last three or four weeks.
But Obama is going to have a big lead within a couple of months because the Democrats will unify.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/jan-june08/brookshields_06-06.html
Betting agencies have Obama a clear favourite
http://www.way2bet.com.au/odds_comparison/16437/16438/28241/USA
#22
“People know him pretty well, for a candidate at this stage, and he has been all over the media for months. ”
Pancho, I would disagree with the first part of that statement. A great many Americans (admittedly, in “the South”) think Barack Obama is a Moslem. They’re not necessarily being nasty; they’re just not politically engaged, and have the wrong impression (helped along by the Republican sleaze machine).
Earlier I suggested that Al Gore might be an interesting if unlikely pick for VP. I just saw that HuffPo is reporting James Carville is suggesting the same thing.
I’d like to retract my suggestion.
37
lol optimist.
Don’t get too close to Carville…you might catch something nasty.
Matthew,
Given the Dems are going to go well in the Senate and HOR, is there any liklihood of people supporting Mccain as a bulwark against “wall to wall” Democrats. I only raise this because I have read a number of recent comments by Hillary supporters (mainly women) still underwhelmed by Obama and that this is how they intend to vote.
The argument being that a strong Democratic Congress is all the protection they need.
HarryH,
good advice.
29 Finns
You’re drawing a pretty long bow there (and Friedman’s ‘evidence’ is entirely anecdotal and not worth a fig). America is on the nose for very good reasons in many parts of the world. If/when Obama becomes POTUS this will certainly improve the way ‘America’ appears internationally, but it will take a long, long time for the nation’s image to recover. Also, I wouldn’t make the bland judgements that you do about ‘the people of the world’. Again, what’s your evidence?
Governors get to decide how votes are counted in “their” States. Here are 83 ECVs the Dems are “severely handicapped” at winning in 2008.
11; MO, Gov Matt Blunt-(R)
11; IN , Gov. Mitch Daniels-(R)
34; TX, Gov. Rick Perry-(R)
27, FL, Gov. Chuckie Crist-(R)
————-
“Obama must learn from Kucinich’s election theft impeachment
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
June 11, 2008
………. Two of the articles deal with the fact that Bush was never elected, and in fact stole the election of 2004 in Ohio(Gov. Bob Taft (R).) They should serve as a cautionary notice to the Obama campaign that this year’s election could also be stolen……….
Ironically, though these facts have finally penetrated to a proposed Congressional indictment of the nation’s chief executive, they have yet to be reported in the “mainstream” corporate-owned media.”
Not on the BushCo beholden Fox propaganda channel either.
http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2008/3143
Jay Leno, via U.S. News: “You know, I’ll tell you, things are not good. The price of oil doubled in less than a year. Home foreclosures are at a record high. Unemployment is surging. But yesterday . . . we saw a ray of hope. President Bush left the country. So maybe things will get better.”
Apres,
I think you’ll find that most of Finns arguments are based on false premises eg: “The World is expecting peace, harmony and Kumbaya to be breaking out when Obama is elected.”
29 Finns
I think you are mostly right. Sadly, Obama has to win the US election not the “Planet Earth” election. The world will still be held hostage by the US one way or another. Hopefully, some of his rhetoric will not be followed by action when POTUS. Funnily enough, GWB professed to be anti-war when he came to power. Things change.
EC,
That’s a regurgitation there. Is that how you feed the young’uns?
GG#39,
I’d say…unlikely.
The US electoral cycle is much more President(or leader)-centred than Australia’s used to be.
Ultimately, McCain was the best of a poor lot of candidates, and it’s going to show.
Matthew,
surely we’ll see the idea of wall-to-wall Dems used as a strategy to get out the vote. Perhaps not now, but in the later stages of the campaign if nothing else sticks – we’ve already seen a tacit acknowledgement that McCain isn’t energising the base in the attempts to smear Obama and whip up fear about him. You disagree?
Matthew Cole @ 46,
Whilst what you say is normally true, it didn’t hold in either 1996 or 2000 (and didn’t really in 1992 or 1988 either). In 1996, after Clinton won a landslide against Dole, the Democrats only picked up a handful of seats in the House (which was always to be expected after the Republican revolution in 1994) and lost 2 seats in the Senate.
In 2000, after an admittedly very close “win” for Bush, the Democrats picked up 4 seats in the Senate (to split it 50/50) and a handful of seats in the House. In 1988 (a Republican landslide), the Democrats gain 1 seat in the Senate and 2 in the House.
The only time in recent memory when there have been definite coattails in both the House and the Senate was in 2004, where the Republicans gained 3 seats in the House and 4 seats in the Senate. However, a lot of those Senate gains were due to long-serving Southern Democratic senators retiring with their open seats being won by Republicans.
29
The Finnigans Says:
The World is expecting peace, harmony and Kumbaya to be breaking out when Obama is elected.
With respect, that is a gross strawman misrepresentation, even allowing for a bit of hyperbole.
New Wisconsin survey. Wisconsin is one of the designated swing states.
http://www.wispolitics.com/index.iml?Article=128513
#44 – [Finns - I think you are mostly right] and
Diogenes, you will be richly rewarded for being so kind to the Amigos.
and Yes, world peace will come.
[Bertrand Delanoë, the mayor of Paris, declared: “His candidacy carries an enormous hope for his country and for peace in the world.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/05/world/05react.html?fta=y&pagewanted=print
SL
this year we have the scenario you described in 2004.
the repugs have more retiring senators and more senate seats up for grabs.
i think it is 25 Repug seats to 12 Dem seats that are up for grabs in the senate this year.
i think it’s safe to say it looks like major losses in the House and Senate for the Repugs plus a loss of the Presidency.
Just Me,
Finns argument holds.
Ron has shown that the mighty Obama is more a dissembler on the Iraq situation than a sage with special insight. Basically, he has used the fact that he was not in the Senate to vote on the Iraq War as evidence that he never supported that war and pilloried his opponents. An uncritical media has let him get away with this nonsense to date. Also, his many supporters have jumped to the conclusion that he is a better anti conflict candidate. Big jump indeed.
The reality is that he is unproven. Given his utterances whenever he ventures in to Foreign Affairs, he is naive and down right dangerous. When the crunch comes, will the US electors go for the experiened pro or the prevaricator.
I suspect that many of the Obama luvvies here at PB will be sorely disappointed should their champion prevail in November.
No wonder poor old Bill went loco during the campaign. Barry is usurping him in more ways than one.
Now all the Hollywood Hotties are lusting after Barry. Bill must finally be feeling his age.
http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=7381F248-3048-5C12-005F78C017A32C17
HarryH @ 52,
Yep, I agree with you there.
The election that this seems to be more closely correlated to is 1980, where the Republicans picked up 12 seats in the Senate to take control of it. Whilst the Democrats aren’t going to pick up 12 seats this year, they are on track for a minimum of 4-5 and have decent shots in another 4 more.
Of course, it also seems unlikely that Obama will win a Reaganesque landslide this year. McCain seems to be a much stronger opponent than Carter (or Mondale, for that matter).
Got to read a New Yorker article last night from a couple of issues ago that analyses how the puff has gone from the Republicans. The proud right-wing tradition of divide and conquer is over (much as it failed in our election, and the US Republican Party is where JWH got it from):
“The Fall of Conservatism
Have the Republicans run out of ideas?”
by George Packer
… The fact that the least conservative, least divisive Republican in the 2008 race is the last one standing—despite being despised by significant voices on the right—shows how little life is left in the movement that Goldwater began, Nixon brought into power, Ronald Reagan gave mass appeal, Newt Gingrich radicalized, Tom DeLay criminalized, and Bush allowed to break into pieces. “The fact that there was no conventional, establishment, old-style conservative candidate was not an accident,” Brooks said. “Mitt Romney pretended to be one for a while, but he wasn’t. Rudy Giuliani sort of pretended, but he wasn’t. McCain is certainly not. It’s not only a lack of political talent—there’s just no driving force, and it will soften up normal Republicans for change.”…
The key terms and triggers used to attack the Democrats by the Right since Nixon aren’t going to work this time. The landscape has changed, but the Repugs don’t realise it yet. Also couldn’t help noticing that most of the right-wing attack flags listed here have been used by the PB “right-wing” to attack Barry and his supporters, time and time again:
… Because we can’t anticipate what ideas and language will dominate the next cycle of American politics, the previous era’s key words—“élite,” “mainstream,” “real,” “values,” “patriotic,” “snob,” “liberal”—seem as potent as ever. Indeed, they have shown up in the current campaign: North Carolina and Mississippi Republicans have produced ads linking local Democrats to Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama’s controversial former pastor. The right-wing group Citizens United has said that it will run ads portraying Obama as yet another “limousine liberal.” But these are the spasms of nerve endings in an organism that’s brain-dead.
Among Republicans, there is no energy, no fresh thinking, no ability to capture the concerns and feelings of millions of people.In the past two months, Democratic targets of polarization attacks have won three special congressional elections, in solidly Republican districts in Illinois, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Political tactics have a way of outliving their ability to respond to the felt needs and aspirations of the electorate. …
The wedge has lost its splintering power! It’s long but a good and relevant article for the battle now beginning:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/05/26/080526fa_fact_packer
GG,
Obama’s words are evidence of the fact that he opposed the war! He spoke in Chicago on October 2002 saying….
“I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income – to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.”
He went on to say…..
know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.
I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.”
That was a week before the resolution authourising the war passed congress.
He is proven …..proven right. His opposition to the war is on record and as much as you would like to Hannitise that fact, it ain’t goin away!
GG
Obama will be better than McCain. It’s really as simple as that.
Will America still be America?…sure it will. But will America be better than it was in 2000-2008…i’d say so.
Ronnie & GG, Its ON.
Bush III Vs Carter II – It makes Clinton II looks better and better each day.
well, everyone is entitled to make mistake.
GG #53,
That is wrong.
As an Illinois State Senator, Obama spoke out long and loud agaisnt the war before it started and in its earliest days.
Agree or disagree with this policy as you please, but its not an invention on Obama’s part to say that he always opposed the Iraq War.
Mathew,
thank you.
Harry #54,
Yeah, well – just remember that Bill Clinton was one of the most photogenic Presidents in recent US history.
And, yeah, it’s showing that he’s 15 years older than Barry…..he’s looked a lot older in various photos during this campaign.
jv
I read that article, and others like it. And it seems to be people from the Conservative camp itself that most realise that it is all over. I have read quite a few introspective articles from staunch Conservatives.
The political and cultural cycle is tilting again.
The self interested are trying valiantly to hold back the tide and only the blind cannot see it coming.
GG #53,
I forgot – PolitiFact article backing me up.
http://politifact.org/truth-o-meter/statements/95/
HarryH,
I agree that the tide has turned, but remain concerned about Republican “tactics” – voter fraud, voter disenfranchisment, Katherine Harrismant, swiftboating and other forms of cheating.
Eternal vigilence is the price of liberty.
Optimist #65
The cycle is eternal, and anyone with a sense of history can predict what will happen….
1. The Democrats will win big, and dominate politics for about 10 years.
2. The Democrats will drift away from their principles, while the Republicans renew theirs.
3. The Republicans will make small gains, like snakes in the long grass, while Democrat after Democrat is embroiled in high-profile scandals.
4. The Republicans will seize marginal control of both Houses, and possibly the Presidency.
5. The Democrats will alienate more of their support base flailing against it.
6. Revert to position #1, but switch Party names.
It happened during the 1920s, it happened during the ’60s, the ’80s, the 90’s and now.
Mathew,
how does the 2000 result fit into the framework you’ve layed out above?
I’m not arguing with you, just curious.
HarryH – Yes, the Repug insiders are peering deeply into the lint. Even Gingrich is predicting disaster for his party.
Optimist @ 65 [Eternal vigilence is the price of liberty.]
Dead right, and who better to keep an eye on the states with Repug Governors than Obama’s Army of internet recruited local volunteers. After the last Florida fiasco and similar cheating in recent elections there will be literally millions of them scrutinising every electoral move, and screaming from the rooftops (ie internet) every time a rort is attempted.
voter fraud and disenfranchisement are real and need to be addressed but they won’t affect the result of this election. They need to be highlighted and kept in check as thoroughly as possible and then addressed i the next 4 years.
As for Republican “tactics”? they work when conditions are optimal and fail when conditions aren’t optimal.
When the population’s mood is susceptible to swiftboating and cheap mud, then it will work.
But the population are mad as hell. And they are mad as hell on substantive issues.
Don’t worry about the Repug smear tactics. They are gonna get swiftboated on the Issues.
For anyone interested in attempts to disenfranchise voters……
http://www.gregpalast.com/
HarryH,
I generally agree and hope you are right. Remember though, we’re not just talking about the Presidential election. There are a number of tight senate races which, if unfairly tipped to Republicans could mean the difference between a significant Democratic majority and an unstoppable one (ie: fillibuster-proof).
M Cole @ 66 – On that timetable, by the end of the next Republican cycle Hillary will be only 82, and will be well set to be Ready On Day One, again, for the Dems.
Optimist @ 67,
2000 would probably fall into Category 4 – Republicans win narrowly across the board.
Of course, 1992 would probably be a mix of Category 1 and 2 – the Democrats won the Presidency by drifting to the right, but the Republicans regrouped and took Congress in 1994.
JV,
I hope you’re right too – I worry that despite the millions of internet eyes watching proceedings that ultimately these matters are for courts to decide – courts that are stacked with Bush appointees and buddies like the loathsome Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Swing Lowe – I see the pattern, I just think it’s a tad oversimplified.
As you correctly stated, Dems won the White House in 92 only to lose congress to Gingrich and co in ‘94 – that hardly constitutes dominating politics for 10 years now does it?
Matthew Cole @ 60 & 64
It’s okk..GG has stated often that he admits to and corrects his mistakes, so i’m sure he’ll get around to Post#53 soon.
HarryH – yeah riiiiggghttt.
You kidder, you.
Optimist #67
I’d be likely to say that the 2000 result was Step 3, in reverse – the Democrats gained in each House, and almost won the Presidency.
HarryH #76,
That may not be fair. I haven’t seen GG around since the initial disagreement – he probably had to go. It happens to everyone…
MC 78
Oh i agree. Nowhere in my post did i suggest GG might be laying a little low until a more opportune time to continue his line of UnBarryness…oh no…never.
I’m sure you’re right. He probably got called away.
30 Mathew Cole That’s interesting coming from a Murdoch paper. It used to be owned by Rev Moon of the Moonies.
50 HarryH At last some polling evidence showing what will happen in the next election. It will be interesting to see what happens on the next votemaster update. (Usually about 9pm.)
http://www.electoral-vote.com
66 Mathew Cole One thing you left out. The Democrats are introduing one vote one value. (That means a persons vote will have more value than cows or desert in some cases). This will heavily favour the Democrats. This will either force the Repugs to change or stay in oblivion.
55 Swing Lowe The evidence I am seeing shows otherwise. Just keep an eye on votemaster over the next month or two. The poll just taken in Wisconsen will make one change. Oregon, Michigan and Maine will change (normally blue states). Maine changed in 2006 despite a very good/moderate candidate.
Reassuring point about Ohio: it now has a Democratic Governor and a Democratic Secretary Of State, they will ensure there’s a free and fair vote this time. In 2004 it was obvious the previous Republican Governor was doing a little underhand electoral fraud for Bush.
Progressive #84,
It is, is it?
How so?
84 Progressive When Ohio changes to one vote one value it will no longer be a swing state as such. Instead of winner take all it will be proportional to the number of votes.
Swing Lowe at 55:
“Of course, it also seems unlikely that Obama will win a Reaganesque landslide this year. McCain seems to be a much stronger opponent than Carter (or Mondale, for that matter).”
This well written article may give you pause for concern, SL.
“The Obama campaign’s voter registration drive could radically alter the electoral map this fall …….these numbers, coupled with Silver’s(538) track record, should strike fear into the McCain camp, whose ground game is already suffering from a resource gap with Democrats and a lack of enthusiasm among the GOP’s evangelical base.”
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/3741/expand_the_vote/
While it is true that Obama offerred the “fluffy” words that underpinned his “principled” opposition to the Iraq conflict, the fact is he wasn’t a member of The Senate at the time of the vote. Therefore, much of the debate revolves around the “If your grandma had a moustache, she’d be your prandpa”.
If some of you took the time to read Ron’s eloquent 14, it is clear that his actual position, should it have come to the crunch was somewhat more ambivalent than his “dyed in the wool” supporters here and elsewhere would have us all believe.
That Obama used this ambivalence through the nomination period to gather support from the young and idealistic internet generation is very clever politics. However, in the heat of the POTUS campaign, real questions can be asked and Obama falling back to the contrived blandness spouted to date will not cut the mustard.
So in the spirit of forgiveness, I await all your apologies for getting this aspect of the campaign so wrong.
Cheers.
GG,
give it a rest will ya – you were wrong – you know it, we all know it.
First you say at # 53
“Basically, he (Obama) has used the fact that he was not in the Senate to vote on the Iraq War as evidence that he never supported that war and pilloried his opponents.”
You have been repeatedly proven wrong on that and you don’t have the courage or integrity to simply admit it.
Instead you shift the goalposts again and claim that whtever he said was irrelavant because he wasn’t a member of the Senate.
Back to school with a slap for you.
Beep, beep, beep, here comes the busman again.
Obama handling of the Johnsongate once again demonstrates of his oiliness. Just as in the Pastorgate case.
First, just deny that he is on the bus,
Second, there he is, he is on the bus. Alright then, he is just a passenger.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/11/obama_defense_of_johnson_raise.html?hpid=topnews
Third, but he was driving. Ok then, he’s just a hitch hiker. We throw him under the bus just as the Pastor, the Church, the Priest, the Grandma and the Grand Uncle.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/12/us/politics/12veep.html?adxnnl=1&ref=politics&adxnnlx=1213262017-cgx7iKne70k0q76KYgZGYA
If I were Michelle, I will make sure that I have his birth certificate safely tucked away, as Michelle slammin’ is a comin’.
Optimist #89,
Not so fast.
It is true that Obama has, at times, expressed support for the Bush Administration’s Iraq policies once on the ground – but not for the decision to go there. (Note the “half-True” ratings on the following statements – it’s complicated. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/284/ http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/378/ )
Still, it is easy to mix the two up.
Also, GG is partially right: literally speaking, Obama’s 2002 opinion is irrelevant to the Iraq War – he didn’t get a say. However, it does provide insight into his mindset.
Optimist,
Thank you for your apology.
You are forgiven.
Still taking your medication? Being so many different people must be a burden around tax time.
Google On!
GG, please be gentle with the second eleven.
gg give it to them good and hard
Matthew,
Thanks for the balanced outlook. I suppose I am yet to be convinced of Obama’s sincerity regarding Iraq. There has already been too much convenient jettisoning of people and personal positions whenever their utility to his chances to win have expired.
Finns #90,
That rather lengthy diatribe goes too far.
As someone who has read MANY PolitiFact judgements (and gotten a sense of how they’re issued), I’m going to award my own to that one (per this schedule: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/about/ ): Barely True.
Your attack distorts critical facts: Obama has not thrown anyone but Rev. Wright “under the bus”, and only did that after Wright gave a particularly odious public statement.
However, it is a matter of concern that Obama did say “We don’t vet the vetters”. Has he never heard this? “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes” (Latin). English translation: “Who shall watch the watchers?”
Mathew,
puh-lease. It is not “literaly” irrelevant – his position as a State Sen. and candidate for the U.S Senate was crystal clear. That was the subject under discussion -precisely that.
If you want to defend the desperately circular logic GG employs, that is your choice.
I am addressing GGs statements here – the fact is that GG stated : “Basically, he (Obama) has used the fact that he was not in the Senate to vote on the Iraq War as evidence that he never supported that war and pilloried his opponents. ”
You yourself agree that that was flat wrong. Rather than admit that, GG consulted the Fox news playbook and tried reframe the issue suggesting that Obama’s stance was irrelevant because (with GG’s breath-taking hypocrisy) he wasn’t a Senator at the time.
I am making a point about the integrity of the specific argument in the context of the posts referred to- it is a matter of logic and language – not a policy issue. If you want to broaden the scope and change the context, feel free.
If you want to “not-so-fast” me, look at precisely what I said and the context in which I said it.
Your post failed to do that.
So yes – SO FAST.
Matthew,
What about Pfleger and the Trinity Church?
GG,
what happened to admitting when you were wrong?
Optimist,
Five GG’s in one post. You must be rattled.
Google over there please.
Optimist,
I admit you were wrong. Satisfied my multi personalitised friend.
Do any of you have your own opinions? Or do you just flutter into a fancy of fine flatulence.
Google is a very large number elsewhere.
GG, the night watchman is available
Optimist #97,
Fair enough. I addressed what you said, not the context in which you said it, and the fact is that GG was shifting the goalposts. However, Obama himself has admitted that he doesn’t know how he would have voted IF he were a Senator, due to his non-access to the classified briefings which were given to the Senate (and, no doubt, higlhy slanted).
GG #98,
How did Obama throw Pfleger under the Bus? Pfleger was never on Obama’s campaign in the first place, and he made incendiary, racially-charged comments. I actually commend Obama for disowning them so quickly. He stated that he was “disappointed in Father Pfleger’s divisive, backward-looking rhetoric”. As far as I’m aware, he wasn’t Obama’s personal spiritual counselor (as Wright was), nor a close supporter of the Obama campaign. There is (as far as I’m aware) simply no evidence that he and Obama had any particular association in the first place.
92 “You are forgiven.”
Good God! Spoken like a true deity.
Matthew,
My personal view is that Pfleger got the “green light” from Team Obama. Timing and content were remarkably convenient. I don’t believe in co incidences.
It also leads in to the question of how a person can sit in a church congregation for twenty years and “allegedly” be shocked by the words of the preachers who practice there. I smell bulldust. This is a judgement issue. To me he is either a liar or a fool (and Obama is no fool).
steve,
Thank you. I always wanted to be Chris Judd.
GG #105,
It is clear that no matter what new information is unearthed, you will continue to believe badly of Senator Obama.
Can we just leave the evaluations at that, and return to discussing the likely outcome of the US election?
This site should come in handy – http://www.electoral-vote.com
Mathew good luck with your noble quest re: Obama, but rest assured it willl be fruitless
Thankyou MC, well said this bitterness is getting very tiresome indeed.
Matthew,
Can assure you and others that the only bitterness I hold, is a stubby of Vic.
This is a feature of this blog. Apparently, if you don’t go with the majority view you are bitter. The fact is that I have alternative views and am not afraid to articulate same. If you can’t deal with it, find another hobby.
I have said before that I was a Hillary supporter. Now that she is out of the big picture (temporarily?) then I am looking at the reamining characters. Obama is young and callow, but apparently charismatic. McCain is old and carries a legacy from Bush through Iraq and the downturn in the economy.
So genuinely, I am open to persuasion. However, the Obama team needs to come up with some real policies not just rely on anti Republican feeling.
As for Votemaster. I am a big fan and tune in daily because he just puts the numbers up as they are and provides uninflated commentary. I have already said today that the current polls will be misleading and that the only interesting aspect is the trend. Will take more closer interest after the Conventions.
Who wants to have a play at “pick the VP’s”? Something to keep things interesting here in quiet times. No wine or any prizes. Just for fun.
A Pollbludger sweepstakes.
JV ,or anyone else , would you be interested in organising like you did the “Hillary Deathwatch” game? Personally i’m hopeless at that kinda thing. Don’t even know how to use the quote feature lol.
Everyone could have a pick for each Party.
I’ll kick it off.
Democrat: Kathleen Sebelius(KS)
Republican: Mark Sanford(SC)
GG @ 110 [So genuinely, I am open to persuasion.]
Hahahahahhahaha …. ha. Ha ha ha ha … Ah…ha ha …hee hee … … … hahahaha…. aaah, hahaha … … … ha … oh, dear … (wipes eyes)
Never laughed so much in all my life.
JV,
DuDah, Not persuaded yet.
Join the lucky losers over with Optimist and his multiple personalities.
Continuing to argue that the nomination should be HRC’s is like arguing for Gore in 2000, Nixon in 1960 or Whitlam in 1975… POINTLESS AND BLIND TO REALITY.
HRC is only relevant in terms of her support base moving to Obama or not in the General – this is no small thing and, unless BO pulls away from McCain comfortably in the rust belt by July, probably crucial enough to necessitate picking HRC for VP.
At least ESJ speaks to this angle from time to time, but when he and the amigos go on about the stolen nomination, etc… well, why don’t we take up bandwidth and talk about how Kennedy gypped Nixon as well??!
Not that I agree it was “stolen” by any means, but its an irrelevant argument now.
I keep looking at those 13 states, see how impt Ohio, PA and Michigan are – and tend to agree with Possum that he has to pick Hilary unless he finds a comfort zone there in his own right before choosing. This is FAR from proven yet!
I’ll go for:
Pawlenty and Warner
BTW I like the cut and thrust and outright bitterness of the US thread. Has anyone been on the Federal thread? It’s a great big lovefest. I can’t tolerate so much niceness and conformity. It makes me feel like retching.
#116 Diog, one hand clappin’ is not NORMAL
Haven’t visited the Federal Thread for months.
Expat Follower,
Wecome to the cauldron. Nice to have a new enthusiatic contributor.
Looking at Votemaster today, the midwest seems to be where the action is regarding this election. There are about 83 Evs on margins of less than 5%. These States will obviously decide the election.
As said earlier, the current numbers have an Obama haze about them and I will be waiting for later numbers before drawing any conclusions.
HarryH,
you really think Sebelius over Webb?
I won’t be surprised if McCain goes for Bobby Jindal or possibly Romney purely for the Michigan factor.
HarryH introduces a new concept of exclusion. “Threadism”.
Pick the VPs:
Democrat – not willing to take a shot yet. My thinking is on Sebelius (Gov-KS), however.
Republican – If McCain knows what he’s doing, Bobby Jindal (Gov-LA).
Mathew,
snap.
Optimist #124,
snap?
I’ve run into this term before.
What does it mean?
Mathew,
we both suggested Bobby Jindal at precisely the same time.
Snap is a kids card game – each kid holds half a deck and places a single card face up onto the pile on the table. When one card of a given suit is followed by a card of the same suit, the first to yell snap and place their hand on the pile wins the round.
Identical suggestions of Jinal at the same exact time – hence snap!
Harry H
I’ll go for Jindal and Sibelius. Without much confidence on either.
Me too on Jindal, I see – he gives McCain youth, which he needs desperately
you can play the VP game too GG. We’re all one big family here.
Just put your VP picks up……and then we’ll throw you back off the bus.
Optimist #124,
Ah. I see.
Also, Hillary remains as definite possibility for the VP slot (as Expat Follower #115 mentions). I’d rather see her as a Senator, though. She could get much more done – she has a legislative temperament and can get a lot through hostile Houses.
I’m hoping that Antonin Scalia has a massive coronary and that Hillary replaces him on the USSC.
I think she’d compromise the change message for Obama.
Optimist @ 126 Re “Snap” –
I thought that was the audible sound from Belinda Neal’s cranium when a bar person forgets to put a little umbrella in her drink.
And that the massive Democratic congressional majority sees a swift confirmation for HRC.
HarryH,
Do the wheels go round and round,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEtuXrV_KnM
Optimist #131:
Huh?
Let’s see: Hillary would get through – she’s a top-flight lawyer, with a lot of legal experience.
She’s uphold Roe V Wade, and probably fall in line behind Obama’s other stuff.
Remember – as far as policies go, there’s not a pin’s worth of difference between them.
Besides, she’d probably decline such a nomination. She wants to have another chance, this time with a functioning campaign staff.
jv,
hheeheehee.
GG
Speaking of wheels on the bus, i could do a Dean Mighell impersonation and call you a skidmark …but that would be uncouth.
Got any VP picks?
Mathew,
Optimist has too much bitterness about Hillary. So do the rest of his personalities.
117 “#116 Diog, one hand clappin’ is not NORMAL”
Finns does this one hand clappin’ include the HRC cheersquad or is their support different to Federal politics in Australia and support for BO?
HarryH,
And I could refer to your premature ejaculations, inaccurate predictions and your improvident gambling.
You have always been the best customer for last nails.
i still think webb the best pick. Former repug, military credentials, endorsed by Reagan in the past. Yes also a first term senator but in the same way as Obama not tainted by Iraq
Was just looking at electoralvote (which is looking very blue ATM, but I agree with GG that we need to wait for the conventions before taking much notice) and saw that the Repugs have NEVER got more than 9% of the vote in DC. Do they euthanise anyone who looks like a Repug there? Is Mugabe the electoral officer there? What gives?
PS Hillary for SCOTUS?? Hahahaha. That second rate mind would get eaten alive on the Supreme Court especially as she hasn’t practiced law for 20 years. Give me a break!
#139, we the 3 Amigos dont clap, we fight, we ride and we love
Finns,
Hussar!
Dio #142,
Please stop trashing Hillary.
Some much worse people have made it into SCOTUS.
Hillary Clinton is actually quite intelligent.
GG, can i do the lovin bit, pleeeease. dont like fighting
143 You mean, ‘all for one’? Since the ‘one for all’ has suspended her campaign? But which one has the allegiance moved to now? Hillary for VP and then confusion if it doesn’t eventuate, perhaps, Finns.
Matt
Hillary is quite intelligent but she is not remotely in the league of a Supreme Court judge either in intellect or in legal expertise. These people are meant to be there for their jurisprudence, not as a sop for political convenience. She is a politician NOT a lawyer, let alone a judge.
And just because worse people have made SCOTUS does not bear any relevance on whether Obama should appoint her. What happened to appointing people based on merit rather than for political expediency? That’s where the US (and Oz) have gone wrong recently by politicising every aspect of our lives. Obama should be above such a tawdry appointment.
Finns,
It sounds like a C&W song to me that hasn’t been written.
#147, So just to save few more of my brain cells, my amigo GG has put it rather well.
#110 [So genuinely, I am open to persuasion. However, the Obama team needs to come up with some real policies not just rely on anti Republican feeling.]
14 Repug congress members refuse to endorse McCain and another dozen not committed
http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/new-gang-of-14-wont-back-mccain-2008-06-11.html
Mathew – Hillary will not, could not, must not be appointed to the Supreme Court. She is not qualified to sit on that Court by any stretch of the imagination – it isn’t the NSW Industrial Commission for christ’s sake. As I’ve said before, there are thousands and thousands of relevantly experienced, intelligent lawyers who are currently judges of inferior courts who also would support Roe vWade, and who would have the right to be apoplectic if a legal flake like Hillary got on that bench. It’s laughable. It would also fatally taint Obama’s term if he did that.
Dio #148,
Errrm, newsflash: Hillary Clinton has a postgrad degree in law, and was a practising lawyer from at least 1974 to 1992.
She helped research impeachment precedents for the House Committee seeking to impeach Nixon in 1974.
In 1974 also, Hillary Clinton became one of two female faculy members in the School of Law in the University of Arkansas.
She was named the first female partner of Rose Law Firm in 1979, and was referred to as a “rainmaker”, or a partner who brought in clients. From 1978 to 1992, Hillary Clinton earned more as a lawyer than Bill did as the Governor of Arkansas.
Clinton’s work was noted for its specialisation in copyright infringement and IP fields, although she also did pro bono work in the field of childrens’ law.
Clinton was also described by multiple sources (none in her campaign) as one of the most important scholar-activists of the 1970s and 80s.
So, I’m afraid that you get a big, fat ZERO on that statement, Dio.
Hillary DOES, in fact, have extenstive legal experience and expertise, as well as a lot of history of understanding the theoretical legal principles behind judgements. She would, in fact, make a more-than-competant SCOTUS judge.
150 Sounds like a very bad case of one hand clapping to me. Where is the fight in that?
#154, i just leave the fightin’ & ridin’ to my amigos Ronnie & GG, i just do the lovin’ bit.
From previous thread…eons ago it seems:
2104
Ferny Grover Says:
June 12th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Cold Duck…..bbbbbbrbrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
That was an awful memory JV. Stop it.
…can I suggest it’s not nearly as bad as the Cold Turkey that Eddy et al will get when all their tiresome huffing and puffing is drowned by Obama’s win in November.
Hi Andrew,
Nice first post.
It is exciting to have you on board. It is lovely to have someone post an opinion backed up by a topical link to a story rather than the usual situation where an opinionated blowhard comes on line and generates nothing but rubbish. And then has the temerity to claim the high ground. Don’t let it happen to you.
My colleague Finns is a great instance of someone who is fearless in his opinions and doesn’t suffer idiots harassing him. You will be wise to heed his example.
153
Mathew Cole
As I reminded everyone yesterday MC, Hillary’s bar exam results:
Failed in D.C
Passed in Arkansas
(I rest my case)
Gruffy and “blowhard” in the same post.
Hand and glove.
JV,
Get over your bitterlessness, call for more VB.
In the spirit of unity , maybe they could get together and promote Hillary Clinton and Harriet Miers to SCOTUS.
SCOTUS is not a crony dumping ground of convenience, as Dio and jv have stated.
There are plenty of political positions for Hillary. Her fans needn’t fret.
KR,
Always something interesting to contribute to the discussion.
155 “i just do the lovin’ bit.”
I thought that was what you were deriding on the Federal Politics thread in 117 when you declared ‘one hand clappin’ is not NORMAL, Finns?
Mathew @ 153 –
A recitation of her CV doesn’t cut the mustard. She has not got the relevant experience for that top job. That Bush appointed right-wing bastards does not change that fact. I have many lawyer friends who have better CV’s than that in law, and they would never in a million years be appointed to our High Court. Hillary hasn’t even practiced for some 16 years. You’re kidding, surely.
steve,
You have the in hand story. You are obviously stretching it out.
Matty
Lets take them one by one.
1. She hasn’t practiced law, except as a defendant in twenty years. She has never been a judge.
2. The “rainmaker” title referred to her ability to get clients in the door of her firms practice due to her contacts. The clients were then advised by a lawyer who actually knew something and she came in and said hello occasionally to keep them sweet.
3. She was SACKED from the Nixon impeachment for unethical conduct. (Why the fcuk you people keep walking into that one defies me)
4. Pro bono work on kids law 30 years ago DOES NOT make you fit for the Supreme Court.
5. Her earnings as a lawyer were due to her connections bringing in clients, not due to her skills
6. I doubt that very much copyright law from 30 years ago is extant.
7. Most SCOTUS appointees have at least 35 years of legal experience. Some of them have even been judges which is a HUGE surprise when you are looking for a judge. Hillary has 18 years in the distant past.
She is a pygmy dinosaur legally.
JV,
You should have supported her for POTUS.
Now she might end up somewhere she can do some real damage.
Careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
Diog, joining Belinda Neal in her anger management course soon?
That’s apart from all the personal issues Hillary has of course, such as a worrying difficulty in distinguishing truth from confabulation. That propensity alone might make her judgement in the evaluation of evidence problematic.
BTW, why is Pru Goward looking like a Japanese Kabuki actress on Jonesy Q&A on ABC1 tonite?
Finns
Nope. Just amused.
BTW Are there any good books on the US’s foreign policy towards China? The wife’s wondering whether to do an essay on it.
GG -[Now she might end up somewhere she can do some real damage.]
That’s right – every time I turn around people are trying to bung her into another bloody job she wouldn’t handle! First POTUS, then Veep and now SCOTUS! Geez. There comes a point where her supporters have to give up surely?
Why can’t she just run off and do some pro bono meals on wheels??
JV,
Is that bitterness I detect?
It must be so terrible when the world refuses to conform to your desired expectations.
I think you and your friends need to embrace your inner Hillary. The world will be a better place.
Diog,
I think she’ll get everything she ever needs from this excellent site:
http://www.jamestown.org/china_brief/
eg:
Foreign Policy
* Hu-Fukuda Summit: The East China Sea Dispute
* Ma’s Inaugural Address as President of Taiwan
* Medvedev’s First Visit to China as Russia’s President
* An Assessment of China’s Deepening Ties to Latin America
* Fukuda-Hu Summitry: Mutual Interests, not Mutual Trust?
* Beijing’s Regional Strategy and China-ASEAN Economic Integration
* Trouble and Strife in the South China Sea Part II: The Philippines and China
* Dubai Inc. in China: A New Vista for Gulf-Asia Relations
* Beijing’s Perspectives: Burma?s Referendum and International Discordances
* Trouble and Strife in the South China Sea: Vietnam and China
* Ma Ying-jeou and the Future of Cross-Strait Relations
* Heixiazi Island to Return to PRC by End of 2008
* The Future of China’s Overseas Peacekeeping Operations
* “Honeymoon” for Sino-Japanese Defense Relations
* Lee Myung-bak and the Future of Sino-South Korean Relations
Military/Security
* International Disaster Relief and Humanitarian Assistance: A Future Role for the PLA?
* Sanya Nuclear Submarine Base Shakes Asian Neighbors
* Instability in Tibet and Its Repercussions for Xinjiang
* Chinese Soliders and Arms Exports Embroiled in Zimbabwe’s Electoral Impasse
* Sino-Russian Strategic Partnership Matures
* Terrorism and the Beijing Olympics: Uyghur Discontent
* China?s Ascendancy to a Space Power
* Time for Conflict Prevention Across the Taiwan Strait
* China’s Military Budget Spurs Debate Over the Taiwan Strait
* PLA Navy Modernization: Preparing for ?Informatized? War at Sea
* The PLA’s Evolving Operational Doctrine: Experiments in Modularity
* China’s Revolution in Military Affairs: Rhetoric Versus Reality
* Taiwan’s Spratly Initiative in the South China Sea
* Soldier Scholars: Military Education as an Instrument of China’s Strategic Power
* China’s Expanding Naval Presence Troubles Neighbors
I also find Asian Times an excellent source: http://www.atimes.com/
Enjoy.
And herein lies the difficulty for the HRC cheersquad. Couldn’t have put it better myself, GG.
GG – [embrace your inner Hillary]
No, just bemusement at the Hillarian antics. I haven’t even seen anywhere that Hillary wants SCOTUS – has she said that?
But- I’m very happy with the way things have turned out actually, now you mention it. I thought Obama was the best candidate from the beginning, and the Dem party has agreed with me, the money was put on him early, and I also picked McCain for the Repug nomination early with good odds.
No, you could safely rule out any bitterness on my part. Mostly euphoria really. Thanks for caring though.
As for ‘embracing your inner Hillary’, the concept is one suggestive of a long fruitless search for anything of substance to get a grip on.
Mathew Cole & Optimist
You both are not only wrong you changed the subject of my #14. My post concerned the Iraq vote I referred to Obama’s October 2002 speech and the fact he had no Intel that the Senators had. I had also said neither ‘oz’ Pollies nor even the UN had all this classified Intell (since found corrupted) but the 28 Dems Senators did. The point being they were the only ones with the info to make a sound judgement. So your posts repeating Obama’s uninformed views or his Illinois comments are irrelevant to the point of my post. My point stands which itself was a minor point in my overall post of the UN Inspectors Reports and the alleged authentic CIA/NSA adverse Iraq assessments etc I listed leading to the 28 Dems Senators making at the time a correct yes invasion vote. Obama’s 2002 comments were ‘uninformed’ & just like the ALP’s uninformed comments happened to later proved right but irrelevant to my post’s point which is why I listed both Obama 2002 & the ALP’s 2002 views.
Neither of you challenged the substance of my post ie. the 28 Dems Senators votes. Further , neither of you challenged or addressed Obama’s 2004 comments where he told the Chicago Tribune he “did not know” how he would have voted on the war resolution had he been a Senator at the time. Nor did yous challenge his other 2004 quote “there’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage of the Iraq War” Again as my post indicated he also by then had read or heard of the 2002 Intell that did support an invasion , his stance had altered , ie demonstrating from his 2004 comments that Obama’s ‘uninformed’ 2002 comments are irrelvant in considering the correct then decision that the 28 Dems made. Instead re-look at the post #14 and look at the ‘informed’ parties including the UN Inspectors & the supposed authenic CIA/NSA assessments etc & consider the point of the post , not a side issue that was uninformed & then irrelevant
steve,
Obama is the Democratic (presumptive) nominee.
I am sitting on the fence re POTUS.
Enough moveonedness for you.
BTW do you have any opinions or are you just another sniper.
JV,
Not by what you write. 172 says you are cross. Hide behind 176 now that you are put under pressure and need to write a reply.
Where do you stand?
Cheers.
171 Diog
If your wife is after more scholarly sources than China Brief (174) she could look for:
The new Asian power dynamic / editor, Maharajakrishna Rasgotra
New Delhi ; Thousand Oaks, Calif. : SAGE ; New Delhi : Observer Research Foundation, 2007
China’s expansion into the western hemisphere : implications for Latin America and the United States / Riordan Roett and Guadalupe Paz, editors
Washington, D.C. : Brookings Institution Press, 2008
A triad of another kind : the United States, China, and Japan / Ming Zhang, Ronald N. Montaperto
New York : St. Martin’s Press, 1999
The United States, China and Southeast Asian security : a changing of the guard? / Wayne Bert, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire ; New York : Palgrave Macmillan, 2003
Historical dictionary of United States-China relations / Robert Sutter
Lanham, Md. : Scarecrow Press, 2006
178 [BTW do you have any opinions or are you just another sniper.]
Just sussing out the lie of the land but all I can say at this stage is that it seems Hillary has run her race and clearly suffered from ‘candidate’s disease’ by spending more in the campaign than she managed to raise which is never a healthy thing.
I would have been quite happy to see her do well but she didn’t and there comes a time when people have to reassess the situation and move on. There is no point in doing as some did in the last Australian Federal election campaign and blindly supporting a cause that has been and gone with ample evidence available from polls and other sources to allow them to come to another conclusion.
GG even if people don’t know who to support this far out from an election I can understand. But to defend someone who has suspended her campaign is bordering on lunacy in my view. It is an irritating handbrake on the US election thread which adds nothing to the debate and just comes across as sour grapes x 3.
Those mentioning Jindal for VP – save your betting money. Not a chance in hell (pun intended): http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/bobby_jindals_dance_with_the_d.php.
Finns and apres
Thanks for that. I’m back in the good books now!!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/going_dutch.html
Excellent article about the course of the presidential campaign
GG
The link Mathew Cole supplied supported my arguments and damaged his !
I’ll quote the reference in full :
“They (Obama’s opponents) argue Obama should answer definitively how he would have voted if were in the Senate at the time of the vote. Obama said in 2004 he can’t answer that question fully because he doesn’t know what intelligence the senators had access to.”
ie. Obama is admitting in 2002 that his 2002 comments were “uninformed’ That was my point. It was also my point re the ALP in ‘oz’. Mathew & optimist shot themselfs in the foot. Only the 28 Dems Senators got all the Intell to make a decision not people outside the Senate
NOTE , the link also does not quote Obama’s other comment
he did not know how he would have voted on the war resolution had he been a Senator at the time. Again emphasising the issue of the 28 Dems. Some posters run to Obama’s defence even when the point of my post #14 had no real relevance to Obama at all , he & the ALP were a side point at best
What bullshit Ron. The millions of people that marched against the war in Australia were not uninformed – the exhibited common sense in not swallowing what was obviously a cooked story. Neither were the tens of millions around the world who marched and spoke out. It was small cliques in the corridors of power getting lost in pathetic dossiers prepared by charismatic hawks who you are claiming are ‘informed’ now.
steve,
Nice contribution and exactly what this site needs on an on going basis.
You make some sensible points but regardless of anything, Hillary’s 18 million votes give her a seat at the table regarding the Democratic campaign. How that manifests itself is up to the participants.
However, not accomodating Hillary and more importantly her voting supporters will cause Obama a lot of grief in the long run.
The people who voted for Hillary will not necessarily vote for Obama.
Pancho
your red herring does not wash. Its bullshit. They were uninformed
Last time you came on here with a bullshit red herring on Obama & Kyoto. That is your debating tactic & it does not wash. Fortunately there is ONE Obama supporter here with intellectual honesty to correctly defend the 28 Dems
Pancho Left,
I think you have pinged old son.
EStJ
Obama +13 in Wisconsin, Democratic identification +12. http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/wi_poll_obama_13.php
Pretty handy numbers at this stage of the game.
Sorry Ronnie – keep fightin if you want, but you’re wrong.
Pancho 182
While young Bobby Jindal may have been occupying his time playing exorcist, my tips for VP, Sibelius(D) and Sanford(R) were off being courted by The Bilderberg Group.
Follow the scent of power.
Pancho,
Love the rhetoric. You sound almost excited.
The truth is that most Australians were and are ambivalent. Harsh, but it is the truth. As they say, there were an awful lot of Austrlians that did not march.
Where’s Doktor Robert? The masses need the vanguard to lead the march.
That’s true GG, and the only figures I can quote off the top of my head are the about 500,000 that walked through Sydney. In a city of about 4 million. Take away the too young and old (and keep in mind that old advertising adage which claims that if you hear from one person, another 6 are on the same track) and these marches were pretty big events. Certainly like nothing else in the past couple of decades. My point is that there were many, many people who had it right from the start. They didn’t need to read (or not read, in Sen. Clinton’s case – that one’s for you Ron
) a 90 page NIE dossier, which itself cautioned against the rush to war. It was enough to see the pro-war agitation in the PNAC-Cheney group to realise that something wasn’t right.
GG
compare my info per the above link vs Panchos
quote “They (Obama’s opponents) argue Obama should answer definitively how he would have voted if were in the Senate at the time of the vote. Obama said in 2004 he can’t answer that question fully because he doesn’t know what intelligence the senators had access to.”
ie. Obama is admitting in 2004 that his 2002 comments were “uninformed’ , that he Obama did not know how he would have voted !!!
But Pancho’s intellectual argument is the marchers the protesters against invasion were smarter than Obama , they knew how they would have voted !!!
He tried this minor point red herring over Kyoto , which is why when I post blogs they are only for people who think objectively. he should have said Obama was wrong on Kyoto and he should agree with Obama own admission in 2004 above , he didnot know how he’d vote as he had no intell, ie so the marchers didn’t either
Pancho,
How many were shopping at the Rocks anyway?
Sydney pop about 5.5 mill.
Not saying it was not a protest ( the TV cameras were there and they never lie), but………..
Mr and Mrs Western Suburbs meant what?
Still wrong Ron. For the third time before I’m off (and you can bleat into nothingness) Obama’s position on the environment is below. Try to think objectively about it, and put the name of Japanese cities out of your head for a moment:
‘Re-Engage with the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change: The UNFCCC process is the main international forum dedicated to addressing the climate problem and an Obama administration will work constructively within it.’
And the overwhelming majority opinion about the rush to war just makes your opinion that the few insider parties gunning for it were the ‘informed’ ones look patently rediculous, given what we now can all see (even our ‘informed’ friends).
FINNS
where is that bus , someone else got run over. My post #196 quotes Obama’s own words and own position vs Pancho’s “uninformed” protesters
the bus has niow run over Obama’s own words & own (truthful & correct admissions) he didn’t have the Intell so he didn’t knwo in 2004 how he would have voted in the 2002 resolution vs Pancho whose in favor of the protesters over Obama’s own opinions
As to Kyoto , Pancho still can not justify Obama ’s refusal to say he supports the ratification of Kyoto. Instead he relys on Obam’s red herring that ‘Obama will work with’ but Obama is saying he does not support ratifying Kyoto. Rudd did pre 2007 election. Red herrings re Iraq vote & Kyoto , then he disappeared
Where’s the bus.
Ron,
The barbarians are not listening!
But, you are the star.
It must be a full moon tonight, the lunatics are out again!
More news that will frustrate the Obama haters:
He has extended his lead over McCain in the latest Rasmussen poll for the state of Iowa:
OBAMA 45
MCCAIN 38
Remember Iowa was won by Bush in 2004!
Progressive,
The Driveby shooter of PB.
Completely misses all targets.
and GG
FINNS needs 2 bus’s . Not only have Obma’s own words & opinion that I quoted in #196 been run over by the Obama supporters bus & are to be dismised in favour of ‘uninformed ‘ protesters , thats the additional bus FINNS needs.
BUT he now needs a 2nd additional bus for my further barbarian logics. IF john Edwards was so negligent in looking at the Intell & voting for the invasion per the Obama suporters here , then Obama supporters here can NOT support him for VP can they ? In fact they cannn’t support him for AG or any cabinet role at all !!
This bus needs to be big because there were 28 of these negligent Dems Senators voting for the invasion resolution ,so ALL of whom must be now disqualified from any Obama cabimet , diplomatic or statutory position in an Obama administration per the Obama supporters logic here
At this rate of bus run overs , Obama is going to have to call on the barbarian
to fill a cabinet role ?
Mr progressive, have you suffered long from premature ejaculation?
Helo Tabitha
I’m the only barbarian on the site , but even the female Obama supporters seem attracted by my barbarian naughtiness & wickedness and want to mother me & educate me. Abit distracting when i’m trying to barbarianly mount defences of Edwards , Hillary , Kerry & the 28 Senators
Ron,
you may have noticed that I haven’t directly responded to you or any of your comments / postings up to now.
I’ll briefly give you an example as to why i havent and as to why i am unlikely to again.
In #177 as you discuss the Democratic senators in 2002/3 who had access to full intelligence briefing, you say….
“The point being they were the only ones with the info to make a sound judgement.”
Just reflect on that statement for a second.
Imagine yourself a Republican pundit being quoted on The Daily Show as the words go through your head, ok.
Given that authorisation for war passed the Congress, your words and apparently your brand of logic insists that the decision to go to war was inherently sound as it was based on the intelligence briefings only congress and the White House had access to.
Also underpinning your statement is the suggestion that intelligence alone dictated the decisions of the congress as oppossed to….ummmm i don’t know maybe huge political pressure in a climate fuelled by the White House.
If you believe that the decision to go to war was sound, fine. I’ll respect that as your opinion and respectfully disagree vehemently. However, the point is, is that most Americans, & the rest of the world would agree now that the original decision to go to war was not sound and futhermore that the intelligence was not sound.
The public debate that took place at the time of the decision included many extremely forceful and expert arguments against the war – these were shouted down by the White House and its surrogates; that is clear.
Their position, most would argue is now vindicated – the war is unquestionably unpopular amongst Americans.
True that Obama has said that he doesnt know how he would have voted, but that does not mean that it is impossible for people to recognize retrospectively that Obama was right on in the position that he took based on what information he had.
Part of the argument in the lead up to the war was railing against precisely what your statement about sound judgement presumes;
that intelligence is all, that the voice of the White House that compiled that intelligence through cherry picking, hyperbole, speculation and outright deception (an example being of the WH knowing the uranium story was garbage but leaving in the SOTU address) is supreme.
As I said, if you still think that going to war was a sound decision, feel free. I am exceedingly proud to say that I never supported the war in Iraq and that none of the arguments even came close to convinving me. What’s more, I knew and belived in the various arguments against the war and i wish I had never had to see them vindicated – Iraq was wrong then and Republican policies on it continue to stink.
As I have posted many many many times here –
Scott Ritter is vindicated.
Optimist,
But which one of you was it?
Google eggs on!
On today’s polling, Obama has to go for Hilary as VP.
On today’s polling, JohnnyMac has to go for a rustbelter as well – preferably one with some economic cred. Romney kinda fits, maybe also Porter… I’ll take a plunge on Romney (hee hee, if McCain picks him after their previous stoushes its even more of a sell-out than Barack picking Hilary!!)
Oh, and inside word is that Bob Barr has shortlisted Monica Lewinsky and Joh Bjelke-Pietersen, whilst Nader is going for Katherine Harris
EF,
Sad news but Johs been dead awhile. Maybe Steve Bracks?
GG – maybe Wilson Tuckey has dual citizenship? (is he still alive, by the way – that’s a name I haven’t thought of for years and years)
How much would Obama have to pay Ron Paul to run?
I have this almost masochistic desire for a Bob Barr – Mike Gravel ticket with 15% support just to see them in the debates!!
EF,
Still an MHR. 68 years stupind. Gets chucked out of Parliament very often. Apparently being belligerent is the new black.
Optimist
#206
You have misunderstood my 2 essential points. but first i’ll deal with your personal opinion of invasion opposition at the time. The fact you personally were right is fine by me & I do not object to you being proved right. You had values and stuck to them
However i’m talking about US Senators and I’ll name one of the 28 John Edwards. Edwards first Senate responsibility is to protect the National Security of the US & its people.
FIRST John Edwards sees the Inspectors adverse comments Bix the chief UN-MOVIC weapons inspector & Mohamed El Baradei, the IAEA chief inspector for atomic weapons , specifically had cited to the UN in 2002 Reports Iraqi failures to eliminate prohibited chemical and biological arms programs & adamanant the possible existence of chemical and biological arms were a present possible danger
SECOND he sees 000’s of pages & visuals (some ordinary some damaging) & assessments allegedly from the CIA & NSA and allegedly unfalsified whose job is to provide National Security info which mounts a strong cae for invasion , if Sadamm won’t comply
THIRD , he understands Bush/Cheney are Republicans and he knows there is opposition from protestors & others about how existent or dangerous Iraq’s WMD’s are. BUT he is sitting on credible Intell (he then thought credible) & that plus the Inspectors reservations lead him inthe security intersts to vote for the resolution (dspite knowing of protestors & others reservations. He acted honestly & on ‘cedible intell and I think his desion was right. so did 27 other Dems
Four , Obama in 2004 , refer my #196 quote , himself ADMITS he did not know in 2004 how he would have voted in 2002 because as Obama himself sdmits he had no Intell in 2002 (if its good enough for Obama to say that Intell is crucial then its good enough for Edwards etc) On this occasion you , the ALP & protestors were right (only because the Intell was forgeed by Bush/cheny , but Edwards job is to sigicantly rely on Intell in Nationa Security issues and so Senators should. Sorrty Pancho , Edwards should not have instead decided on Mrs howard protesting in Bennelong in ‘oz’
and for the record Optimist , I personally at the THAT time also opposed the invasion. I have been proved wrong on the original Intell Edards etc got , but proved right now by the fortune the Intell was falsified
201
Progressive
You can tell when they hate the message, they take inane shots at the messenger! LOL
But, oh, if they get it back…the outrage!
Also optimist
re-reading your post , i notice a further flaw, not in your then own personal opinion , but in your ignoring of Obama’s own truthful admission in 2004 , refer the #196 post. you simply ignored he made the statement ! I’ll repeat it
Obama in 2004 himself ADMITS he did not know in 2004 how he would have voted in 2002 , because as Obama himself admits he had no Intell in 2002 to be able to make a resolution decision !
Obama is saying the Intell is crucial to make a National Security decision , so that blows Panchos argument of believing the protestors because as Obama himself says they had no intell so they couldn’t make a sound decision
So per Obama’s opinoon , we are indeed back to the only oneswho had the National Security orientated Intell . the 28 Dems. Now THEY including Edwards thought it wa credible. If you guys think he made such a negligent decision on the ACTUAL Intell he got which he thought was authentic , then you MUST argue to disqualify Edwards from VP , aG & any cabinet role plus all of the other 27 Dems
You guys are either embarassed Obama used his 2002 comment sin the 2008 Primarys & disengenuously by passed his 2004 comments. Thats just politics , get over it. or yous are so anti Hillary that you’re annoyed Hillary may be & is inniocent a is Edwards of their 2002 vote , or both. Irrespective , your logic re 2002 even using only Obama’s own 2004 words runs you over
You can not argue both viewpoints (despite yout then own personal opinions)
Oh dear, Presidential election minus 21 weeks, that bad William?
EC, thanks for the codgY 4 stroke Victa moment last night, trooly touched; do let us know when the ‘shower’ isron won’t you? I’m currently knocking up a dwalfy in the back shed; potty howler, tabitha squirt & barbarian galactic models are available; but the butterflies want a loading on the latter! Alas the ESJ model has been confiscated…
Good news on the grass but; the neighborhood caucus on length versus noise came in: Cemon Victa 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WBdp_RITz_k
Mowing the lawn or reading Ron?
Progressive, watch out, you may get a ‘Stalk me at your peril’…boogie woogie lol.
FINNS & GG
Before going back to my Charles Dickens , you’ll see reading the posts from mid evening the barbarian has achieved by night end the ultimate irony.
The barbarian by nights end is on Obama’s side & supporting Obama’s comments and the Obama supporters are opposed to Obama’s comments !
And if that was not enough damage , furthermore the Obama supporters have been lead into now disqualifying Edwards and the other 27 Dems from any cabinet role or any position in an Obama administration , seeing Edwards & the other 27 were so negligent in believing the Intell was so damaging & justifiable
And the 3rd irony , unlike these now anti Obama posters & disqualifyers of the 28 from future cabinet roles , is that I opposed the invasion at the time , then when i’ve seen the Inspectors reservations & particularly the Intell Edwards saw I have then support Edwards decision of him being right at that time , and now later I learn the Intell was falsified , so I now later find I was originally right to oppose the invasion in the first place , but still support Edwards then decision and so would appoint him & the other 27 to cabinet roles , so barbarianly the reasoning seems fine & I’m supporting Obama (in 2004) as well. But the others problem is they’re now selectively anti obama comments & the 28 can not be in a future cabinet
Ron at too many places to count:
At least your not at the bottom of the PB heap – without any doubt, GG takes this weeks bottom feeder award.
The sad thing about that is that there is as good a political, analytical brain as any in the country being wasted on an audience of two instead of contributing to the wider PB readership. It runs the risk of being as relevant as ‘Bull butter Boy’ in the last Federal election.
At his best GG is as good a writer, and as sharp as anybody. I have been reading his work for years and for longer than he has been commenting on PB including all he has written this year, seems we all find dry gullies occasionally and GG has found one too.
#184 – ESJ – Your link [Will the Election Be All About Obama?]
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/going_dutch.html
I have already told them, didn’t I? In the last thread:
#623 – The Finnigans Says:
June 5th, 2008 at 7:27 pm – November will be a referendum on Obama on all fronts. The signs are there that Obama has to change positions more often than the Kama Sutra recommended. He has to live up to the expectation of many people. In the end, the US voters might not know him as Arthur or Martha and just stick to the devil that they know.
Obama faces some real obstacles that he has to overcome that none of previous nominees faced:
1. He is black.
2. He is unknown.
3. He has no track records.
4. He comes from left of centre left, in other words, he is liberal or ultra liberal, not a centrist.
5. His closest people, Michelle/Wright/Pfilger, have been perceived as “anti American”.
6. He is perceived as cultural disconnected by the mainstream USA. Exotic is the kind word and Muslim is the harsh word, take your pick.
7. He will not sign Kyoto, despite Pancho’s contortion on Obama’s meaningless pledge.
8. His foundness of kama sutra – The signs are there that Obama has to change positions more often than the Kama Sutra recommended.
If he can overcome all of these and becomes POTUS. He will be then a truly remarkable politician. Have a good day to all.
Friends, scholars and pseph-heads, lend me your minds.
“McGruder, the “Boondocks” creator, says satire appeals to many young people at a time when they’re discovering politics. “That’s your biggest window of opportunity,” says the 34-year-old cartoonist, though “it may not manifest for another 10 to 15 years.”
And once satire takes hold, perhaps its greatest influence is encouraging critical thought. “Good satire goes beyond the specific point it’s trying to make and teaches you how to think critically,” McGruder says. “Even after your favorite cartoonist retires or Colbert wraps it up, you’re not left believing everything they’re telling you.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/11/AR2008061103898.html?nav=rss_politics
Thurs June 12:
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/robertariail;_ylt=AuPBxSHTe3s2lnPgcvo
CjQ3e.sgF
Thurs June 12:
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/tomtoles;_ylt=AlD2miF_FaBclZ1HLRVxQygV2r8F
Re Bludger Veepstakes; Dem (Ted “I’m not a candidte” Strickland), GOPper (Bobby “The Exorcist” Jindal)
Tabitha has resurfaced to join her right wing troll friends LOL
Kirribilli Removals: Abuse is their only weapon, I take it as a compliment!
Progressive @223,
Buy a mirror and take your irony tablet.
For those not wanting to entertain the notion that NC is on the table (ESJ, I’m lookin your way):
“Barack Obama’s promise to make a play for North Carolina — a state that has consistently voted Republican since 1980 — might just have some potential to really pay off, a new poll from Rasmussen suggests.
The numbers: McCain 45%, Obama 43%, within the ±4% margin of error. This is consistent with other recent polls that have shown McCain with only a small lead here.”
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/poll_suggests_obama_is_putting.php
Worth an Intrade punt at roughly 5-1
Pancho: interesting, maybe putting John Edwards on the ticket wouldn’t be a bad idea after all!
McCain is for freedom and love of country
Obama is for tyranny and love of muslims
More words of wisdom from Tabitha LOL
Thats right Progressive, when Tabitha talk – I listen. She just commands that much respect
“so and so suks”-
that’s Irony Grinch?
You lot have completely lost it.
Timbo: Tabitha is the oracle, she knows all, as she proved last November(sniggers to himself).
Electoral-vote.com update:
Michigan moves into the Obama column
He now has a projected 303 electoral college votes, 221 for McCain
Tabitha- who ever you are (I’m going for ESJ) -
keep going sweetie. Every post puts your compatriots further in the basket of irrelevance on this site.
(First and last response to you from me)
Lol Jen, My moneys on ESJ too
Just trawled back -
Three Amigos???
GG -Mo
Finns -Larry
Ron- Curly…
ESJ- Tabitha.
Well you know an election is on the way when Tabitha resurfaces to spread her insightful right-wing messages…
Obama launches website to deal with right wing smears
http://www.fightthesmears.com
Jen , you like so many of your colleagues have contributed zero to PB but thats not surprising seeing most of you come from looney far left
zero Ron? – i reckon sometimes I’m pretty entertaining.
Not quite as amusing as your attempts to explain that Obama’s opposition to the war wasn’t really, and that those that supported it were right even though you admit they were wrong.
That is funny.
I’ve been perusing the US blogs and of course here in Oz. It is amazing to me how much the US election is mimicking the Oz one in terms of blogger opinion and composition.
Like the Howard supporters last year, the McCain (or anti-Obama) supporters are struggling, I mean REALLY struggling, to maintain a coherent argument for why McCain should be elected POTUS. Then, as they back themselves into tight corners and start going round in circles, many end up descending into personal attacks out of frustration, or start spouting ridiculous crap like Tabitha.
Obama supporters on the other hand are FAR more numerous, just as Rudd supporters were last year, and seem to have no problems making a cogent and powerful case for why they think change is required in the US and the world.
The blogging world tends to represent the “thinking” populace, but if this group struggles to give a solid reason for voting for McCain or not voting for Obama, you know that McCain is in trouble, just as Howard was last year.
When I see the likes of GG, ESJ, Finns, Ron, and now our dear friend, Tabitha, twist and weave themselves into all kinds of knots trying to maintain their support of McCain, just as Glen and ESJ did last year with Howard, I know that the extreme right are losing their grip on present-day politics.
I do, however, suspect that a couple of our resident McCain supporters are closet Obama supporters. It’s just that they backed themselves into a corner during the primary season, and can’t bear to show a change of heart now, either due to inner conflict or face-saving. So they’re stuck with McCain. Some of them, like GG, were die hard Rudd supporters last year, and voices against all things neocon, and now they find themselves on the other side barracking for the guy who Howard would most approve of winning. It’s a little sad actually…
Jen , your post again demonstrates why you cann’t contribute. You are unable to understand an argument even on John Edwards , so you resort to a one liner misrepresentation to cover your ignorance of it , as you just did again
I thought it was a pretty good one liner Ron. Just out of interest did you oppose the invasion of Iraq in 2003
Jen , the only diffference between you and Pancho is that you honestly do not understand arguments & resort to ‘barbs’ so contribute nothing to PB , whereas Pancho does unerstand and uses intellectual fraud red herrings or plain bullshit to cover up rather than admit Obama the truth was wrong , as he did on Edwards & as he has previously on Kyoto
Noocat – to be fair to Greeny, I havent seen him (or Finns for that matter) say they back McCain, just that they arent convinced about Obama.
Scepticism is healthy people.
But they sure do know how to rattle cages!
Finns, I don’t agree with this. While Obama’s candidacy forces people to confront racism, the rest of your list of “fronts” are just Republican smears, and already many Americans have shown an ability to see through them.
A majority of Americans already like Obama. This is why he has not suffered in the polls during the “bittergate”, Wright-gate, and other smear attacks. Similar to Rudd last year, they are looking for reasons to LIKE Obama even MORE, not dislike him. Obama will therefore have to do something very freaky in order for him to plummet in their estimation.
I believe this election, perhaps the first for a long time, is about the issues. A lot of Americans are suffering with foreclosures, rising unemployment, an increasing awareness of having a crappy health system, massive amounts of personal and governmental debt, a sense of going in the wrong direction, to name just a few.
Obama has positioned himself very well on these issues AND has a character and oratory style that is attractive to a lot of people.
This coming election is one that McCain and the Republicans are going to have to work VERY hard to win. They not only have to distance themselves from all the problems that have occurred while they have held the White House, they have to provide effective solutions to these problems, somehow reduce Obama’s appeal (a tough job in the current climate), and increase the appeal of an old, sickly-looking McCain.
Possum, you might be right there, but when skepticism begins to look like scraping the bottom of the barrel, I think it’s safe to start reading between the lines.
Anyway, will be interesting to see how it unfolds in the coming months… I met a woman last night (here in Oz) who is so passionate about this election that she has already donated to Obama’s campaign and is flying to the US in November to help out. She thinks the world is at a crucial turning point and feels so deeply about it that she is willing to go to such an expense.
While the cynics will say she is wasting her time and money, she thinks there is something deeply symbolic about this election, and cares too much to stand idly by. There’s some powerful stuff going on this year…
Noocat, I thought you had to be a citizen to make a donation
The face of modern propaganda…..(well, one of the faces).
‘Obama mama’
Fox News in disgrace over racial slur
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/obama-mama/2008/06/13/1213317005990.html
Well, they might be in disgrace with decent human beings, but I am wondering how in disagrace they are with some involved in the Republican attack machine?
It is going to get a lot uglier than this, people.
Regarding states, looking at the betting markets I cannot see North Carolina as a possible pick-up for Obama. However, it is entirely possible that we will see an alteration to the betting markets as news of this poll sinks in. As a caveat to that, there have been some relatively close North Carolina polls in the recent past which have not to my knowledge altered the betting markets in favour of Obama. But they are good numbers for Obama, at any rate.
Looking at other polls, Indiana has corrected, as predicted. No chance for Obama there. He is now ahead in Michigan, although still within margin of error. I want a Virigina poll! Oh, and an Ohio one. Betting markets look good for both Ohio and Michigan. And Obama only needs to win one of those three to win the White House. Still tough, though: the worrying thing is that McCain is still within reach in all three of those key states. He would have to win all three (and not lose North Carolina). But even so, it is not sewn up yet.
Yep Timbo, foreign nationals are not allowed to contribute to campaigns.
Obama is for killing the unborn and weakness
McCain is pro life and strong defence
201 Progressive Its good to see you providing substance on this site. Keep up the good work.
Dinsdale Piranha for nailing heads to the floor.
Ron, I’m just wondering if you’ve had a chance to consider my question, Did you support the invasion of Iraq in 2003?
Bored at work, folks
William..please fix
Timbo
#240
“Just out of interest did you oppose the invasion of Iraq in 2003″
Timbo , I’ll supply a proper answer , then you can personally make your own decison. However here are only 3 Obama blogers here who debate with me sensibly perhaps youll be the 4th The rest are snipers who contribute zero to PB. Perhaps you may not have had the oportunity to read my posts #214 & #218. where I said I did oppose the invasion in 2003. But I did more than just march like some elitists claim they did , a one days contribution. The ALP Party itself was the key to tangible worldwide ‘oz’ opposition, and Kim , nice guy but factionally weak & average ticker. I simply oppose all wars because innocent civilians die and Pollies go home safely at night to their mansions in their own country , as Bush did. But sometimes you have no choice but to go to war , but with Iraq I did not think in 2003 an Iraq invasion or war was justified. In 2008 I think the same.
However subsequent to the 2003 invasion , I was disturbed why John Edwards , Hillary & John Kerry , 28 Dems would vote against my views of them so I checked. thats all. And forget Panchos crappy summary , I researched their detailec Intell etc reasons
I found from the detailed UN Inspectors Reports citing Iraqi failures to eliminate prohibited chemical and biological arms programs but the UN Inspectors couldn’t find them. France Russia & China concurrently int the Security Council would not enforce beefing up the Inspectors authority. Edwards knew this , he also knew there was vast invasion opposition including from respected people , but Edwards knowing he UN Inspectors concerns gets CIA & NSA assessments 000’s and visuals (some ordinary , some worrying) saying the Iraq biological & chemical arms are an immediate threat & the Intell makes a case to stop them by invasion . As a US Senator , Edwards legally & Constitutionally was entitled to believe the assessments 000’s & visuals were legitmate. Further , as a US Senator John Edwards job was protect the National Security of the US & its people so he legitimately voted for the resolution on Inspectectors concerns but crucially on credible (then) CIA & NSA Intell of current bio & chemical dangers
At that time & on that Intell , I think John Edwards made the right decision. My personal opposition did not have the benefit of Edwards Intell info
Obama in 2004 (refer my #196 post) says he Obama could not say how he’d have voted in 2002 because he did not have in 2002 the Senate Intell. So Obama is also saying in 2004 the Intell is crucial to how he would have decided.in 2002 despite his & Edwards anti war beliefs. I agree with Obama , all outsiders including me who opposed the invasion were not “informed’ The fact the opponents of invasion including me were suspicious of Bush has been proved right , but it is only right because we’ve learnt from the subsequent Congress Phase (ii) Report that the CIA & NSA Intell was grossly falsified by Bush/Cheney (which is unprecedented in a democracy).
But just because we now know the Intell was grossly falsified does not make John Edwards decision wrong as at 2002 when he made it , instead Edwards is only wrong now with hindsight knowing now the CIA & NSA Intell was false. Back in 2002 he thought the CIA & NSA Intell was legit and the Intell was certainly persuasive. I’m defending the legitimacy of the 2002 Edwards reolution decision as at 2002 , despite my original misgivings now being proved correct.
What some are asserting is they had similar misgivings to me BUT Edwards should have either listened to outside respected voices or doubted the Intell. That is Intellectually unfair on Edwards , the CIA & NSA Intell was professionally falsified over 0000’s and it was credible. As a US Senator acting on National Security grounds Edwards correctly acted THEN on that Intell. So the 28 Dems are not responsible for the invasion resolution at all , they were professionally conned , the invasion resolution & the war is 100% to be blamed on Bush/Cheney , however I’m in minority here but history may hopefully support me. Timbo , this professional Intell fraud on such a large scale created Edwards as one of the victums , but it is on this massive National security fraud the Impeachment articles have the best chance of success against Bush & the best chance of demonstably & correctly staining his reputation historically
Ron @ 257
I completely agree with your vindication of John Edwards et al.
However, you cannot say that Obama has ever supported the war in Iraq. His admission that he doesn’t know how he would have reacted in circumstances that never arose is testament to his honesty. He is grateful (presumably) that he wasn’t lied to in the blatant way that the 28 senators were. In his case, and that of the countless Australians who “knew” the Bush gang were fraudsters, Ignorance was, and is bliss.
I didn’t know that. Well this woman has some relatives in the US, so maybe she organised it through them??
Jen, what did you do to get WB to name this site after you, the Poll Bludger.
do you do your own research, analysis and conclusion. Or you are simply happy to bludge on other people.
Thurs June 12: Bomb-Bomb ponders the advantages of getting things signing-statemented his way.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/mikeluckovich;_ylt=AvNL3W9BJk6vZFZ5lO53auUV2r8F
Chris: thanks buddy, you’re too kind! If I’m offending the 3 amigos and their alter ego Tabitha, I must be doing something right!
Thurs June 12: Bomb-Bomb demonstrating his firm grasp of economic fundamentals.
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/tonyauth;_ylt=AlkEa39TtztnT8E2HcHlOqEV2r8F
Hmmm, I always thought the issue was the ability of Saddam to utilise his weapons of mass destruction, none of which could reach the US. Now, Korea’s could (or at least they were presumed to able to) but they haven’t been attacked. There was also sufficient noise in regard to questions around the various reports (including the Nigerian uranium story) to actually call into question the veracity of the intel. At that point the question is surely as much a political question as a “national security” on – a Senator is a politician too. Further, the question I would have hoped that both Democrats and Republicans alike would have considered is whether attacking Iraq was the best way of dealing with a medium or long-term threat to the USA. I would argue it is not, and would have actually thought that (given the propensity for Democrats to start wars) the Republicans would have been the ones arguing for a re-armament BUT with a “fortress-USA” mentality.
So, there’s John Edwards, reading intel that has a question mark over it, hearing plenty of other dissident views, and needing to weight up his options. Does he go with his (possibly natural) instinct to intervene where he thinks there is a grave injustice (remember Bill Clinton sending in US troops into Somalia?) occuring – the death of many Iraqi’s under Saddam’s regime? Does he go with the intel he has in front of him, possibly “adulterated” (after all, it the CIA we’re talking about – they’re in the business of obfuscation, as well as many other things)? Does he go with the considerable doubts over the competency of GWB and co to both plan and prosecute a potentially lengthy war? Does he go with the State Dept’s recorded misgivings about invasion as a viable long term strategy? Does he go with populism and many in the US baying for blood?
In the end I wasn’t so surprised that he went the way he did, although disappointed. If Obama had gone that way I wouldn’t have been so surprised either (imagine Fox News take on it “Hussein supports Hussein” etc) – if only to save his own political skin and avoid the kind of vilification poured out on opposition to the original invasion in Australia’s parliament in 1991.
But frankly, if the argument is: Obama’s got himself in a bind by being unsure in 2004 about how he would have voted, compared to now being quite sure, well, he’s entitled to both beliefs. Hindsight, as they say, has 20:20 vision – looking back and saying “how would I have voted” from this far away is actually rather pointless as Obama simply wasn’t in the position to make that judgement, wasn’t exposed to the pressures that Senators were (or presented with the variety of information), and so can’t honestly know what he would have done – so it really is a matter of belief, which may change over time given different information etc.
Wow, thanks, couldn’t agree more Ron, esp your entire first paragraph. It is also true to say as a US Senator with the Security of the Nation as your responsibility, you have to take very seriously what is in front of you in terms of intellegence. It wasn’t just the Dems who were conned, I’m sure there are plenty of moderate Republicans who also feel gyped. However in terms of Obamas 2004 admission, I think he was just being honest, and this admission really is just in step with what you have just told me.
I will admit that it is perhaps fortunate for Obamas 2008 presidential campaign that he was not in the US Senate in 2003, having said this, he should justifiably be proud that he is on record as being against the invasion, his opposition has been vindicated, as has mine, as has yours.
I’d like to think that had I been a US Senator in 2003 (I often pretend – just around the house) I still would have oppossed this war (mainly for the reasons you list in your first paragraph), but in keeping with what you have said and with Obamas 2004 admission, I think its hard to say. I’m more than happy to give him the benefit of the doubt.
21 Weeks to go…
http://www.Intrade.com has Obama with 293 or 306 ECV depending on the last trade in Virginia.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ has Obama on 278 and drifting up.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/ has Obama ahead in states totaling 304 ECV
As the democrat party heals itself and fresh polls wash though I’d expect these indicators to continue to improve for Obama.
In AFL terms, its early in the first quarter, Obama is a few goals up, but lots playing time ahead.
I do admire then energy been shown by bloggers here – but can you sustain it for the next five months?
The WTR I suspect the conservatives will try the Howard narrative and say Obama is untested and would be too risky and that the polls will shift back in the end. This is just a HONEYMOON!!
Not likely I think.
Timbo, I agree with you. As I’ve said before, if Federal Labor here found grounds AT THE TIME to oppose the war, so the US house dems could have.
Andrew, no doubt the Howard narrative will get a run.
I can see how Obama could loose the election in the face of a tight disciplined negative campaign. But I can see many more ways the repubs can loose.
McCain could simply implode.
The debates could be fatal for McCain – as they were for Nixon against Kennedy
The negative campaign could backfire.
Obama could charm another 5% of voters from here win by a huge margin.
Or things say pretty much where they are and Obama scapes home.
Tabitha @ 250: I’m confused. Shouldn’t killing the unborn be viewed as a sign of strength? We have to defend ourselves before they all grow up to be criminals, terrorists, Muslims, or worst of all, Obama-baby-mamas. As Our Don said, The best defence is a sensible attack.
I think thats right WTR, another problem for the GOP is that McCain is nowhere near there talented political operator Nixon was. McCain is just not up to this and I think this will become more and more apparent as the campaign wears on.
Finns/Larry -
you don’t think the prediction of TOAST shows a forensic- like analysis of all psephological and media data available?
and as it happens i was right (and will be again).
Apart from that, yeah, I just have a bit of fun really.
Thurs June 12, SCOTUS and ECs to GWB. FU, and shove your “signing statements”, shove ‘em real good, Georgie boy!
http://news.yahoo.com/edcartoons/bensargent;_ylt=ApV9_f2tTXYsr2K3Xom4VWZN_b4F
“Justice Anthony Kennedy, writing for the court, determined that the prisoners in the U.S.-run (torture) facility (Gitmo) “have the constitutional privilege of habeas corpus. … ”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/06/12/BL2008061202172.html
I reckon there is going to be a 39.74% swing to Liberal in the Robertson by-election later this year.
“Scalia said the nation is ‘at war with radical Islamists’ and that the court’s decision ‘will make the war harder on us. It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed.’”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/06/12/BL2008061202172.html
Sums up in one short para why the Australian judicial system, and system of appointing judges, is so far superior to the US. We don’t have HC Judges who spout inflammatory political rhetoric, we don’t have a HC that predictably splits 4-3 along political lines in all controversial cases (in fact 4-3 decisions on any topic are rare), and we don’t have a farcical appointment system that crushes straightforward, intellectually honest lawyers and promotes political game-players.
Go Aussie go!
Absolutely Simon
HC Judges in Australia are still chosen along political lines,but they tend to take the whole separation of powers thing very seriously, In general I think the westminster system is superior (except for whole Monarch thing). Especially (and suspect everyone on this site is with me here) the selection of the party parlimentary leadership.
“It will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed” Scalia
What an outrageous comment. So giving detainees a right to challenge their detention leads to US deaths??
“‘I think the real story is the shadow that George Bush is casting over this election,’ Mr. Newhouse [says]. What’s hurting Sen. McCain is voters’ sense that ‘he will pattern his policies after George W.’” (WaPo, June 12, Froomkin)
“McCain’s Ties to PNAC*
John McCain’s connection to PNAC can be traced back to before its formation in 1997. In fact, he was president of the New Citizenship Project, founded by Kristol in 1994. This organization was parent to PNAC, and served as its chief fundraising organ……..
McCain also was co-chair (with Sen. Joseph Lieberman) of The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq (CLI). Established by PNAC in late 2002, this committee continued to finance Chalabi’s INC with millions of taxpayer dollars, until shortly after the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003……”
Johnny Bomb-Bomb is keen for “The Horror” to continue because he helped to create it from scratch. And a lot of his “special friends” are making obscene amounts of money from it. Guess that’s why President Ike called the mega-rort, the Military Industrial Complex, and warned Americans about it in his step-down speech in Jan. 1961.
(In an interesting aside, original footage of Ike’s speech was shown in the film “Good Night and Good Luck” [yes, like Keith Olbermann says] but the scene was censored by SBS when it broadcast the black and white masterpiece about a month back. Tres curious, but hardly unexpected because El Rodente’s appointees still occupy positions where political censorship can be applied.)
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080612_john_mccains_chilling_project_for_america/
* PNAC = Project for a New American Century, Warmongers and Warprofiteers-R-Us.
—————–
D’accord, SimonH.
SimonH
275
I am not convinced of superiority of the Australian Judicial system when I remember Sir Garfield Barwick and some of his statements on States Rights and his overtly political role in the Whitlam Dismissal.
Neither am I convinced that the Court doesn’t split on political issues – ie Gaudron & Kirby v the rest in the Yorta Yorta Case.
I also recall there was quite an outcry from the legal profession when John Howard appointed Ian Callinin
Althouh it is true that the appointments to the High Court in Australia do act with a greater degree of independence than their US counterparts, for example Michael McHugh was a Labor appointment who proved one of the Courts conservative members.
#262 – Progressive Says: [If I’m offending the 3 amigos and their alter ego Tabitha,] – i never had SEX with that woman.
A video you’re gonna see more than Wright’s greatest hits here, and of an actual candidate’s own words no less. I’m almost beginning to feel sorry for the hiding that McCain is on already: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/12/21211/8266/934/509602
Finns – ESJ will probably be pleased to hear that.
EC
278
You are spot on about the “special friends” making obscene amounts of money. Naomi Klein has written extensively about how Bremer enacted a radical set of laws in Iraq that were unprecedented in their generosity to multnational corporations.
“There was Order 37, which lowered Iraq’s corporate tax rate from 40% to a flat 15%. Order 39, which allowed foreign companies to own 100% of Iraqi assets. Even better, investors could take 100% of profits they made in Iraq out of the country; they would not be required to reinvest and they ould not be taxed….All that remained of Saddam Hussein’s economic policies was a law restricting trade unions and collective bargaining”
State of play as the right sees it…
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=26960
Pancho, thanks for the link. Good fodder for the Obama camp. For those who are too lazy to watch the link:
“The fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I have been totally in agreement and support of President Bush. So, have we had some disagreements on some issues – particularly domestic issues? Yes, but I will argue my conservative record of voting with anyone’s, and I will also submit that my support for President Bush has been active and very impassioned on issues that are important to the American people. And I am particularly talking about the war on terror, war on Iraq, national security, national defense, support of men and women in the military, fiscal discipline, a number of other issues; I strongly disagree with any assertion that I have been more at odds with the President of the United States than I have been in agreement”
Ron,
Great post again at 257. Nice to see Timbo taking the time to read and understand your invaluable contribution. You’ll win them all over eventually with your well researched views and clear thinking.
Cheers
Thanks Grace, a certain gentleman of letters concurs.
Gore Vidal waxes vitriolic on Kucinich35 and the supine Sep MSM:
“Naturally, I do not want to sound hard, but let me point out that even a banana Republican would be distressed to discover how much of our nation’s treasury has been siphoned off by our vice president in the interest of his Cosa Nostra company, Halliburton, the lawless gang of mercenaries set loose by his administration in the Middle East. “
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080612_taking_back_the_republic/
Com Mistah Tallyman, tally me banana(Republican),
Daylight com, now we vote ‘em all gon.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OeJ8FrTkjM&feature=related
Loved Gore Vidal in “Bob Roberts”,
wonder if Tim Robbins would consider writing a sequel – oh, that’s right, Karl Rove already wrote it and it’s not a comedy.
It is interesting & surprised to see and hear the Dear Leader called President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of Indonesia, in public, 3 times, as “Bapak President” (Father President). Something that Keating was reported to have also done but was denied.
Just wondering also if Pres. Obama would have done the same, especially in the lingo that he can speak plus his fondness for the Indonesian tripe soto soup.
Growler@286-
glad to see you do know the meaning of ‘irony’ after all.
Cheers!
Obama is for fornicating homosexuals
McCain is for patriotic freedom lovers
“Rep. Ron Paul’s presidential campaign, a pugnacious, ideological crusade against big government and interventionist leanings in the Republican party, will officially end Thursday at a rally outside the Texas GOP’s convention, ABC News has learned.
Paul told supporters back in March, in a video posted on his Web site, that he was “winding down” his campaign and planning a new phase to what he and fans call their “revolution.”"
http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=5056019
Gippslander , Stewart J , Timbo ,
#258 , #264 , #265
Just dropped in again & read your posts. Thank you for your replys to my long post. Just a few comments before going off to the footy.
Gippslander & Timbo , appreciate your frankness in clearing the 28 Dems & absolving them for any blame for their Iraq resolution vote. The consequence of your views (like mine) is to leave the vote resolution solely 100% the responsibility of Bush/Cheny , where it belongs , and by extension Bush/Cheney 100% to blame for the war. I just felt the 28 had been unfairly portrayed by the MSN causing some Dems supporters to have doubts on their vote role/responsibility , which therefore diverted where 100% of the anger & the vote resolution blame belonged (and therefore the war) , ie. at Bush/Cheney
Regarding Obama , my wording may have left an impression I thought Obama definitively would have voted for the Resolution. That was not intended. Intellectually & anti war like Edwards he may have for Edwards analytical reasons , OR he may not have depending on his own personal assessments of the CIA & NSA Intell , so I can not honestly say how he would have actually voted and that is his position as well as stated in 2004. My SOLE reason for introducing Obama’s name into my post was to use Obama’s OWN argument (which I agree with) that the then CIA & NSA Intell was crucial to him in the vote resolution decision making , therefore it was likewise crucial to Edwards in the vote resolution decisionmaking , and therefore per Obama’s own criteria anyone who did not have that CIA & NSA Intell like me was not ‘informed’. The point the ‘uninformed’ got it right i thought did not detract fromm Edwards original basis nor Obama support for Intell being a crucial decisionmaker
So nowhere in my post was there an intent to knock Obama , i was agreeing with his 2004 comments criteria As you said Gippslander , ignorance can be a bliss , and a vindication. Both of you have given the 28 Dems a fair go and a derserved zero responsibility for the vote resolution as do I
Stewart J , my only general comment is its easier naturally to be on the outside looking in , than being on the inside and intellctually weighing up a yes or no to invasion especially with your own Country’s best CIA & NSA Intell which you believe is authentic saying there’s a case to invade vs your own anti war beliefs & senior respected outside people also saying to vote no. I happen to believe the 28 Dems chose to vote for their national security responsibilies then (and correctly) , but with great reluctance , and now that the Intell hs been proven false & they’ve also been vilified , they’ll all carry it even heavier in silence. Re your Obama comment , I tried to address your view to the other guys above & thanks for replying
New game for all to join in on…..
People’s thoughts on the signature song to be used at the respective conventions…..
The 1984 Republican selection of Springsteen’s brilliant “Born In The USA” was a classic example of misinterpreting a song and then politicising it in a way the authour never intended…..in that spirit my first nomination is for the Republican convention…..this one needs no re-interpreting – seems to fit the McCain / Bush experience very nicely.
“Political Science”
by Randy Newman…(special thanks to Randy for sparing us and our kangaroos).
“No one likes us
I don’t know why.
We may not be perfect
But heaven knows we try.
But all around even our old friends put us down.
Let’s drop the big one and see what happens.
We give them money
But are they grateful?
No they’re spiteful
And they’re hateful.
They don’t respect us so let’s surprise them;
We’ll drop the big one and pulverize them.
Now Asia’s crowded
And Europe’s too old.
Africa’s far too hot,
And Canada’s too cold.
And South America stole our name.
Let’s drop the big one; there’ll be no one left to blame us.
Bridge:
We’ll save Australia;
Don’t wanna hurt no kangaroo.
We’ll build an all-American amusement park there;
They’ve got surfing, too.
Well, boom goes London,
And boom Paris.
More room for you
And more room for me.
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town.
Oh, how peaceful it’ll be;
We’ll set everybody free;
You’ll have Japanese kimonos, baby,
There’ll be Italian shoes for me.
They all hate us anyhow,
So let’s drop the big one now.
Let’s drop the big one now.”
This selection just pipped McCain’s personal re-writing of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara-Ann” which McCain himself sang as “Bomb, bomb, bomb – bomb,bomb Iran.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I
to listen to Randy Newman….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl5zf8_VmAo
Any other ideas…….
USA is a member of the United Nations. Iraq also. UN membership makes it illegal to make war against other members without sanction of Security Council. Where is the problem with opposing the war apart from political posturing?
William, how about some moderation? Tabitha at 292 has gone beyond the pale even by her/his standards
Finns,
Bapak also translates as a formal version of Mister (the longer version of Pak), so Bapak President is more of a Mr. President than a Father President.
297 Andrew, I don’t think that Tabitha and moderation should ever be used in the same sentence.
Is there too much pressure on girls in Pol-Bizz families to succeed?
Can the Glass Ceiling have hidden flaws?………
Our Neo-Feminist reporter, Kristol Shard, scythes her cutting edge report:
Fri 13 June:
http://news.yahoo.com/comics/mattbors;_ylt=Aios2rLavKrDt8NwkucIannX.sgF
Cheney with another foot in mouth effort.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080613/ap_on_go_pr_wh/cheney_oil_drilling
Fri June 13: Danae for Preident!!
http://news.yahoo.com/comics/nonsequitur;_ylt=ArLKklpJ6PXQuMQ.xCE220BR_b4F
There’s an “s” in there.
In 2008, I’m voting Republican because you get free bananas at polling stations.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU
“William, how about some moderation? Andrew at 297 has gone beyond the pale even by her/his standards”.
I can hear the nasal whining now.
All he ever does is bitch and complain about other posters. Never had an original idea. Is entirely a deviant of some straight laced upbringing and is always seeking to impose his perverted view of the world on the rest of us.
The Blackboard duster monitor who made that a career.
Foreclosures are up 48% in May compared with May last year.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080613/ap_on_bi_ge/foreclosure_rates
Patriotic women support McCain
Alternative losers support Obama
Mmmmmmm
Wonder why GG and Ron often appear at much the same time, with GG saying little and Ron saying a great deal more (though not making much sense). Could it be that they’re tarred, as it were, with the same keystroke? Then there’s GG’s sycophantic attitude to Ron, as in:
As if. Perhaps they’re related? There’s no other explanation for the fulsome flattery.
308 apres I said that the other day when they were both attacking me similtaniously. The both use the same type of language.
Type: They were both.
Andrew,
William did warn that you participate in this thread at your own risk! If you don’t like a poster, ignore them. No point getting all heated up over Tabitha’s rather inane posts.
I apologize once again for the inferiority complex of my parrot
Chris B, they don’t use exactly the same kind of language, but if you’re as practised as I am at analysing language you can see that one is using the other as cover: one (relatively) coherent, the other off the wall; one attacking, the other supporting the attack; one pontificating, the other applauding.
Interesting opinion piece in The Age today, saying that McCain’s campaign is ‘the political equivalent of a Mickey Rooney and Judy Garland movie: every morning a few guys get together and say, “Let’s put on a show!” and that ‘McCain’s state campaign organisations, coalition outreach and get-out-the-vote efforts are weak or non-existent.’ A warning for Bomb-Bomb: ‘Eventually, a presidential campaign needs a national organisation. Eventually, McCain must define McCainism’:
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/from-dead-in-the-water-to-the-oval-office-20080612-2pm4.html
McCain is for workers
Obama is for parasites
307
tabitha Says:
June 13th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Patriotic women support McCain with viagr*
Alternative losers support Obama of their own free will
codger at 316
ROTFLOL
Chin, Catrina…etc…
Been busy doing other things for a while.
Did we ever conclude the discussion about who won the wine, and how us wine donors actually get the bottle to the winner?
Or is Hillary deemed not to have yet conceded?
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/54686
Hey, codge ‘n’ Cat, 5/4 SCOTUS says my kind are all habeus corpused up. Next step, BushCo put up or shut up with prosecutions because it’s high time innocents in Gitmo were set free.
And then they can sue to the shithouse and beyond the parties responsible for incarcerating and torturing them there under an American flag, some for six years.
And didn’t Scalia squeal like a stuck pig? Boy did Colbert have loaded stones to mock the bastard at the D.C. annual press gig in 2006.
It’s a keeper EC; put it straight in the codgY Victa file…under ‘dwalfy’ of course… filing is fun!
The Unravelling…but keep it quiet we wouldn’t want them to know would we?
Scalia Squeeelia! LOL!
HI Dyno-
pretty sure it was me that won the wine (for my toast prediction) -
you can send it to me
C/o Dunk Island
which if I recall was also part of the prize.
Otherwise it may have been Ferny Grover, and we are waiting on directions via email from William.
Kieth Olbermann on John McCain
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/25130683#25130683
The closing line is about as deep a cut as I’ve seen him deliver, ever.
Good video clip Catrina.
Bet the repugs have been madly phoning the Saudi’s too now that the higher oil prices have spiked US inflation up again.
Inflation jump worst for six months.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25138878/
Some bad news concerning someone we have got to know over the last few months. Tim Russert from NBC died earlier today.
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/06/tom_brokaw_announces_the_news.php
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/54780/
“Political language —- is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind.”
George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language”, 1946
Imbecile petulant, mission unaccomplished: can’t fool all of (we) the people, all of the time.
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/54751/
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/54754/
http://www.sacbee.com/babin/image_media/1010202.html
“In yesterday’s landmark Supreme Court decision that President Bush cannot deny prisoners at Guantanamo Bay the right to challenge their detentions in federal court, there’s a key passage about protecting people from despotism.
The passage comes as Justice Anthony M. Kennedy is relating the history and origins of the great writ of habeas corpus. Kennedy quotes from Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist No. 84, which in turn quotes English jurist William Blackstone: “[T]he practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny. The observations of the judicious Blackstone . . . are well worthy of recital: ‘To bereave a man of life. . . or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation; but confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government.’”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2008/06/13/BL2008061301832.html
Better get a lawyer, son.
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/54766/
In disastrous news for KR, the US economy continues to splutter along.
Await with interest his next installment of “How I predicted the next depression”.
http://business.theage.com.au/surprise-rise-in-us-retail-sales-20080613-2psd.html
Very sad news about Tim Russert! I’ve watched a bit of MEET THE PRESS in recent years, I always thought Mr Russert was one of the better U.S political commentators! Thoughts go out to his family!
EC-
great cartoons and great news
Surely now there is a chance of these bastards getting charged and convicted.
McCain must be wishing he’d never heard of GWB. He supported the prick, and deserves to go down with him.
( and , no, not in same the way George Clooney does, whoever said that)
Votemaster has some frofiles for potential female VP candidates for Obama. The most obvious and qualified one is missing though.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/Jun13.html
More evidence of the coming tidal wave from the Votemaster.
NRSC chairman Sen. John Ensign (R-NV) said that he expects to keep his losses in the Senate to eight seats, max. Not exactly optimistic talk. Usually guys charged with winning back control of the Senate say they are going to win half a dozen seats, not lose up to eight. He probably has already conceded Virginia, New Hampshire, Colorado, and New Mexico, and is worried silly about Alaska, Maine, Oregon, and Minnesota. That makes eight. And then there is Roger Wicker’s seat in Mississippi which is not supposed to be competitive but which polls show to be a statistical tie.
http://www.electoral-vote.com
And then there’s this about Colin Powell may vote for Obama.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2008/06/13/powell_may_vote_for_obama.html
On the other hand, Obama is not rushing to unite his party.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=2&docID=news-000002895941
Not convinced? Here’s more evidence. McCain may loose his home state.
http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?docid=news-000002897197
Lets throw in a little bit of corruption as well. The Ghost of Abramoff
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/13/us/politics/13web-hulse.html
Chris B,
You haven’t been paying attention. Many of the Obama supporters here regard Colin Powell as the Darth Vader of the Republican regime. It will be fascinating to watch his reformation into an outstandingly principled person of merit by our anti Iraqi war cabinet here.
Triple pike sumersaults with wedgies.
Now here is the perfect way to unite the Hillary supporters behind Obama.
Just a couple more attacks and watch how the Hillary supporters rally around Obama.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/chi-michelle-obama_thujun12,0,2869097.story
Great comment in the Latino story above.
“a true leader knows that he should reach out to his aggressors camp for unity and integration as a whole. BHO ignoring this means he is using the rule of the pirates “KILL ALL THE PEOPLE OF THE VANQUISHED” This is his brand of unity. If you don’t want to join him you are eliminated. Come to think this is also mob rule, typical during the mobster era in Chicago”.
It just keeps on coming. The Repugs campaign must be run by the Keystone Cops with the Three Stooges as their cheer squad.
And for those who think the election is a cakewalk for Obama.
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/polltracker/2008/06/another-poll-another-close-oba.html
GG
If Colin Powell endorses Obama, I will view it as a pathetic attempt by a crushed lickspittle homunculous to redeem himself by attaching himself to the more decent candidate.
Should be homunculus.
BTW I’m just finishing “Free Ride: John McCain and the Media”. I thought it was time to move on from Hillary. It’s sad really: she provided so much “actionable intelligence”.
Just though of a nice idea – “Hillary / Chelsea ‘16″
Diogenes,
I was thinking of you when I posted about Powell. You’ve always been one of the more balanced contributors on the subject.
Cheers.
Growls at 343: “And for those who think the election is a cakewalk for Obama.”
Growler, when you’re not being such a caution, you really are a creative inspiration! Thank you so much for drawing to Bludgers’ attention the historical significance of the “cakewalk” that Michelle and Barry will perform when they minstrel it on down1600 Penn come January.
http://www.edwardaberlin.com/images/edwardberlin-340-exp-Cakewalk-1904-s.jpg
http://www.basinstreet.com/assets/CakeWalk.jpg
“I had the blues, so bad one time it put my face in a permanent frown
You know I’m feeling so much bteter, I could cakewalk into town
Honey, I woke up this mornin’ feelin’ so good, you know I laid back down again
Throw your big leg over me mama, I might not feel this good again
My baby, my baby, I do love the way she walks
And when my woman gets sleepy, I love the way she baby-talks
My work is getting scarce, oh baby, my work it done got hard,
I spend my whole day stealin’ chickens Honey from the rich folks yard*
I would love to take a picnic in the country and stay all day
I wouldn’t do nothing but while my blues away
I had the blues so bad one time it put my face in a permanent frown
You know I’m feelin’ so much better I could cakewalk into town “
(Taj Mahal a.k.a. Carlton Fredericks)
*That’s right, horse, Barry’s coming, and he will not rest until your chicken coop is free…….. (of chickens).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFg9BsXnXA
—————-
Bonjour et merci, Jen.
EC,
The Collingwood theme song has the immortal words, “Oh, the Premiership’s a cakewalk, for the good old Collingwood”.
Problem is they’ve only one two Premierships in 50 years.
A bit like the Democrats really.
Cheers.
Pity about the clip. Youie chucked a wobbly. Lots of good examples of the cakewalk on YouTube for anyone interested.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cakewalk
(and full kudos once again to Growling Man)
GG
us non Collingwood brethern normally are not so kind giving them 2
GG at 349: “Problem is they’ve only one two Premierships in 50 years.
A bit like the Democrats really.”
Numerically inappropriate example, Horse. There have been at least 5 Dem Presidents elected in that same time period.
However, to win a “flag” a team needs talent as well as the right politics lest it be divided against itself.
Barry is loose, he got da moves, man, but his Team is tighter than Booker T. Washington and the Memphis Group (MGs). Those boys, they sure knew how to Get Down!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHq4laFwAEM
347 GG
I was thinking you were thinking of me when you posted that. I didn’t want to disappoint you!
And McCain isn’t very popular in Arizona. I’d be surprised if he lost though. The press in Arizona HATE him, a feeling that is mutual. They have seen through his maverick straight-talk veneer and realise he is just an angry self-serving oppourtunist (in other words a normal politician). The MSM seems to be slowly realising this. More on this later…
Ron,
Give ‘em nothing, take ‘em nowhere.
BTW, seems you and I are the subjects of literary analysis by the more studious of our antagonists. Perhaps you and I will become the classical literary icons of our age. Who knows, perhaps we’ll be remembered as the Hemingway and Shakespeare of the blogosphere.
I could imagine the children of 300 years hence cursing as they have to study the musings of Ron as part of their VCE. But, like the PBers, it will be character building for them and make them better butterflys.
Cheers.
Diogenes,
Maybe we are channelling the “Bananas in Pjamas”!
Better get a lawyer, son.
http://editorialcartoonists.com/cartoon/display.cfm/54766/
Legacy of an Imbecile: it was them other suckers that got ‘emselves killed and maimed in I-raq, ain’t got no re-grets at all. Besides, all mah buddies done got plenty rich from I-raq.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/opinions/cartoonsandvideos/telnaes/telnaes06132008.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
http://cartoons.nytimages.com/wieck_preview_page_134242
GG
On the sporting meme, are the AFL teams political, as in left-wing and right-wing? In Adelaide, we view things as: Collingwood seem to be the neocons and Freo the hapless loony left. Carlton are the establishment born to rule right. Port are the working class union left. Adelaide are the chardonnay socialists.
Growler – are you one 2 ‘e’s or 3 today?-
I’m never quite sure which one is the real you. Apart from the rude and cranky one.
Reposting……
New game for all to join in on…..
People’s thoughts on the signature song to be used at the respective conventions…..
The 1984 Republican selection of Springsteen’s brilliant “Born In The USA” was a classic example of misinterpreting a song and then politicising it in a way the authour never intended…..in that spirit my first nomination is for the Republican convention…..this one needs no re-interpreting – seems to fit the McCain / Bush experience very nicely.
“Political Science”
by Randy Newman…(special thanks to Randy for sparing us and our kangaroos).
“No one likes us
I don’t know why.
We may not be perfect
But heaven knows we try.
But all around even our old friends put us down.
Let’s drop the big one and see what happens.
We give them money
But are they grateful?
No they’re spiteful
And they’re hateful.
They don’t respect us so let’s surprise them;
We’ll drop the big one and pulverize them.
Now Asia’s crowded
And Europe’s too old.
Africa’s far too hot,
And Canada’s too cold.
And South America stole our name.
Let’s drop the big one; there’ll be no one left to blame us.
Bridge:
We’ll save Australia;
Don’t wanna hurt no kangaroo.
We’ll build an all-American amusement park there;
They’ve got surfing, too.
Well, boom goes London,
And boom Paris.
More room for you
And more room for me.
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town.
Oh, how peaceful it’ll be;
We’ll set everybody free;
You’ll have Japanese kimonos, baby,
There’ll be Italian shoes for me.
They all hate us anyhow,
So let’s drop the big one now.
Let’s drop the big one now.”
This selection just pipped McCain’s personal re-writing of the Beach Boys’ “Barbara-Ann” which McCain himself sang as “Bomb, bomb, bomb – bomb,bomb Iran.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAzBxFaio1I
to listen to Randy Newman….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fl5zf8_VmAo
Any other ideas…….
C’mon people! Things are getting a bit boring…..
Bonjour Ecky -
I’m still trying to believe that we may not only get a black, liberal POTUS , but that George and his band of murderous Bastards may actually get investigated and held to account.
I can feel a global tsunami coming on as the trickle gets faster.
Obama can lose as he is the known unknown, the Ning Nong.
McCain can’t win as he is the known known, the Nong Nong.
So we end-up with Obama’s pathetic ping pong,
and McCain’s phoney ding dong.
Bring back Hillary, all is forgiven!!!
EC @ 352:
As an ex-Hammond player, I salute you! Rockin’ clip!
Diogenes: “In Adelaide, we view things as: …..Adelaide are the chardonnay socialists”
So the Ivory Towers are in Adelaide. And the “elitist” group amongst Obama supporters all live in Adelaide , and support the Adelaide Crows. This explains it all
ps/ GG , I’ve downgraded Collingwood by recalculating from 1960 , making just 1 in 48 , just to cheer the Collingwood set up
Jen,
That’s right, George W ordered those lovely Islamo Fascists to fly those aeroplanes in to those buildings. Osama and his merry band of freedom fighters are just warm cuddly funsters who like to play fancy dress. They are completely misunderstood by the Western mainstream.
363 Ron
In Adelaide, we have to put up with all these feral, bogun Port wharfies. If they moved Adelaide to the US, the Port supporters would be “bitter” and clinging to their guns and religion, living in them there hills.
In Adelaide, they cling to their football team and V8 cars and live down in the boon docks. Here they vote for Foley and Rann, in the US they’d be Hillary’s demographic.
I don’t think there are any of them on PB (most can’t use a computer). But if there are, I can expect more hate mail.
Salute freedom fighter President George W. Bush
Punish islamo-facists with death
GG
#354
yes , a few Obama supporters last nite had a discussion about our literary styles
First one: “The both use the same type of language”
Second one :”they don’t use exactly the same kind of language , but if you’re as practised as I am at analysing language..”
In addition , j/v has posted his analytical of Ron. I’ve had in adition a personal , in fact a detailed personal dressing down on my lacks of education , poor spelling , commas , synntaxs s , character etc from Ferney , Pancho , Cat , k/r , Andrew , HarryH , Robert etc etc and now style Its sort of like Ron is in a Blogosphere makeover TV show Can Diogenes our poster , who really is a brain surgeon , be far hehind with a “Ron” analysis’s ?
Political Science is a great song, Optimist, particularly the version by The Duhks, but it’s not anthemic. It doesn’t induce, as The Seps say, chicken skin. What’s required is a song that’s not a cliche, yet is widely known, a song that instanly “strikes a chord” with the collective snake-brain.
“Who’ll Stop The Rain” by John Fogarty has possibilities for Dems, something that crackers, a demographic that the Dems need to do better with, could cotton on to; a powerful, plain, elemental message. A message that the woman Digby of Hullaballo blogsport, ant many others have been banging on about for years, ie, “We’ve had a gutful and we ain’t gonna take it no more”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ua8XP0hSILE&feature=related
or, although a bit cliched but still good,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I_yC9_Aj7_A
(even oldies know Mario Bros.)
GOPpers would be best served by anything Death Metallish, or even a rousing oom-pah, oom-pah, teutonic/WASP brass band.
Looks like the Simiamese cheer squad are at it again.
Spell check Siamsese cheer squad.
Spell check Siamese Third time lucky.
Optimist – for the RNC?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nntWQOO_2Ws
Two nice Rasmussen polls
Iowa Obi 45% Bush III 38%
North Carolina Obi 43% Bush III 45%
ESJ-Did we have a bet about Virginia and NC? I’m betting Obama wins both.
Dio – I think you’re misunderestimating tabithas position. He doesn’t think Obama will lose those states, he’s just hoping ‘the turkey doesn’t get basted’ in November.
373 Diogenes I like that Bush III. Good one Diogenes. There in Red States as well.
Talking about Collingwood. I was up in Cairns the other day. I went on a crocodile tour, as I was leaning to one side of the boat and I fell out. Shortly afterwards I was surrounded by ten crocodiles. They were about to eat me when I said Collingwood will win a premiership this year. Not even a crcodile will swallow that!!!
This is disgusting:
RCP National Average 46.3 42.7 Obama +3.6
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
Considering the unpopularity of Dubya, the state of the US economy, the Iraq war, and dead-man walking McCain, Barack Obama should be be at least +15. Come on Barack, pull your oily fingers out from your office2008 and start uniting the Democrats and occupy the centre.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/a_realigning_mood.html
Chris B at 369,370, & 371.
Dyslexia is “KO” on PB.
378 Greeensborough Growler Yes I caught it from George Bush.
377 The Finnigans Yes I agree with you on that, but for some reason some parts the polls are lagging behind the main indicaters.
Ron @36.7,
Beware of all the adulation. I fear there is a hidden agenda to mount and stuff you (not necessarily in that order).
Finns @377 – nice parsing of the article! But when you put the link up, context is only a click away. You’ll have to hide the tracks leading to your shadenfreudesque (new word?) posts a little better. Let me post the next sentence for you:
Chris B,
There you go again. George retires at the end of the year. Who will you have to blame for all your personal failings after that.
The way you rant, George W is responsible for everything bad up to and including paper cuts.
Isn’t he?
Ron, beware false solidarity. People who repeatedly pat you on the head just may believe you are a monkey.
On the other hand …
Pancho, awaiting your explanation on this:
RCP National Average 46.3 42.7 Obama +3.6
382 Pancho Its amazing how context can be manipulated.
344 Dio
Agree with you about that lickspittle Colin Powell.
From My Lai to Panama to Iraq , and everywhere in between, he’s always been a cold hearted, rigid toe-the-line company man for the MIC.
P.O. into ignominity Colon Powell.
382 Pancho “The Democratic advantage reaches 13 points.” Thats almost the 15% that Finns was asking for.
388 HarryH Yes, but then if he is seen to support Obama, how many swaying right wingers will follow? It doesn’t matter who the originally supported as long as they change to Obama.
Meanwhile, some commentators think that Iraq could be a winning issue for McCain. I know the open minded here will consider this point of view.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/what_obamas_been_missing_in_ir.html
GG – No! A Krauthammer piece talking about what a success the war he was gunning for for years is, and how it could be a winner for McCain? I know I’m not as fair and balanced as the reputable Krauthammer, particularly on issues to do with the war, but I am prepared to stake out a diametrically opposite position: the more coverage the war gets – a humanitarian, strategic and economic disaster (arrange those in whatever order you wish) – the worse McCain will fare. And the Democrats aren’t afraid to hit him on it. Wesley Clark yesterday: http://youtube.com/watch?v=c5bYzL2y7xQ
GG 391
Krauthammer has been out of step with public opinion for ages now and is a marginalised voice in the wilderness. Anyone stupid enough to vote for McCain because of his Iraq policy is in the Repug camp anyway. The question is how many votes Bush III will lose because of Iraq.
One thing that Obama must do is to visit Iraq again soon. His policy would have a lot more credibility then. He could take Hillary along with him in case there’s any sniper fire.
Pancho
That MSNBC interview beautifully demonstrates the media’s obsession with McCain. Look at that silly cow’s face when Clark dares to criticise McCain. She says but you can’t criticise him, he’s a war hero, he was tortured. She DOES NOT UNDERSTAND that being a brave POW DOES NOT MAKE YOU A FOREIGN POLICY EXPERT.
How dumb are these people? McCain repeatedly gets a free pass on almost any issue because he was tortured as a POW. Thousands of POWs were tortured. Should they all be made POTUS due to their war experience?
Diogenes says,
“Krauthammer has been out of step with public opinion for ages now and is a marginalised voice in the wilderness”.
Hyperbolic is you?
He writes a syndicated op ed piece most weeks and appears regularly on Fox. How many people you reckon read his stuff. More than read PB I am sure.
Is there a doctor in the blog, Diogenes’ gone all delusional.
GG
The MSM love putting on marginalised extremists. It generates ratings because they are controversial. The US public likes sound bites and Manichean arguments which keep it simple. It’s infotainment. That’s why retards like Coulter and Krauthammer are offered refuge on Fox, which is pure infotainmant.
But they are not so stupid (mostly) that they actually believe what they’re being fed. And when you are the extremist view on an extremist network, you are out on the periphery ie marginalised.
I would have thought the marginalised periphery would be no one watching and no one reading.
Not the case with Krauthammer.
A lot of people in the US draw their political information from Fox. Fact.
Just because you don’t like it personally, does not mean it isn’t influential.
GG
That’s true but even if he appeals to say 10% of the population, they are still going to be the fairly hard-line right. Those guys are always gonna vote for the Repugs. It takes a huge wash-over effect for someone out there to affect the 20% or so in the middle. Although I didn’t take the voluntary voting into account which means that even the extremists can change things by encouraging non-voting extremists to vote.
BTW Are we so horrible that William needs to warn bloggers off about playing with us? I’m quite offended!
Influential? Let’s see what the voters think:
“NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Neil Newhouse (R). June 6-9, 2008. N=1,000 registered voters nationwide. RV = registered voters
.
“In general, do you approve or disapprove of the job that George W. Bush is doing in handling the situation in Iraq?” Half sample (Form B)
.
Approve 33% Disapprove 64% Unsure 3%”
http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
There’s plenty more polling on the above link. The message running through it all is that the wider population is pretty thoroughly sick of the war. It will take a set of skills as yet not exhibited by the Republicans, Bush, McCain, and other war cheerleaders to turn that all around into something pro-McCain before November.
I’m pleased to see GG has finally unmasked as the McCain supporter I knew he was all along LOL
#401 – Your insecurity has just been unmasked.
It always sems the barbarians lingo of political antennas sits in a different zone here with the trends so reflecting. Not sure that the Media & here descriptions of Obama as the “generational” candidate and McCain as “Bush 111″ are reality. Of course politically if those themes can be the whole election Agenda then the result is more overwhelmingly likely for the former & also likely to be also entrenched months out Whether either the MSN or here want to come from the clouds & join the barbarian zones to see what these 2 guys are & what you’d get is another thing but then both candidates don’t want that either , but it for diferrent reasons
I notice the siamese twins are working together again.
399 Pancho And we’ll take that into fight Bush III.
399 Pancho The 33% is probably the audience of Fox viewers.
401 Progressive I stand corrected siamese triplets.
In defense of William and his good job this site is down right tame compared to the genealogy groups. From what I have seen it’s down right vicious and libelous compared to William’s pussy cat site. There’s one fellow who trawls all the genealogy sites from England to Australia. He particularly attacks newbies.
Diogenes: consider this your hate mail. There is at least one of them here on PB.
To those who claim that McCain is Bush III: I respectfully choose to disagree with that assessment.
Environment: McCain is committed to cap-and-trade programmes. As a student of economics (with interest in environmental economics), I commend the implementation of market-based environmental programmes. They have a habit (as shown in Indonesian forest policies 1994-5 and 2000-01) of getting the job done cheaper, faster and better than rules and regulations.
Mind you – I’d have to see the details before I gave it my seal of approval. It could just be a furphy.
Iraq: McCain favours complete withdrawal – AFTER the Government is fully secure there, the Iraqi economy is restored, and political reunification has been achieved. Along the principles of “you break it, you bought it.” He appears to be uninterested in sticking around for the oil. I will acknowledge, however, that he’d hardly openly admit it if he was interested in the oil.
Health Care: While McCain’s plans aren’t up to Obama’s, they are about 10 steps beyond those of Bush, with the declared goal being universal coverage and reduced costs.
Budgeting: McCain has a long record on eliminating wasteful, “pork-barrel” spending. Bush, (duh!) does not.
I need not point out the contasts between these policies (all of which are from McCain’s website) and Bush’s.
Overall, I consider Obama’s policies to be superior, which is why I’m leaning towards supporting him. But please don’t make the mistake of calling McCain another Bush. He isn’t, and that comparison is grossly unfair.
No need for others to make too much of a case on the issues like war, torture, Guantanamo, economics. Take it away John:
“SEN. McCAIN: No. No. I-the fact is that I’m different but the fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I’ve been totally in agreement and support of President Bush.
…I will argue my conservative record voting with anyone’s, and I will also submit that my support for President Bush has been active and very impassioned on issues that are important to the American people. And I’m particularly talking about the war on terror, the war in Iraq, national security, national defense, support of men and women in the military, fiscal discipline, a number of other issues. So I strongly disagree with any assertion that I’ve been more at odds with the president of the United States than I have been in agreement with him.”
Link, with video and the cuddle photo here: http://suzieqq.wordpress.com/2008/06/12/mccain-i-totally-support-bush-on-the-transcendent-issues-2005-video/
If you’re so fond of quotes, here are a few:
McCain on Iraq:
“There’s not enough (troops), and we are in a very serious situation, in my view, a race against time. We need to spend a whole lot more money to get the services back to the people. We need to get the electricity going, the fuel, the water. And unless we get that done and get it done pretty soon, we could face a very serious situation,” McCain on NBC’s Meet the Press, Aug. 24, 2003. (source: http://politifact.org/truth-o-meter/statements/99/ )
Clear-cut disagreement with Bush’s Iraq strategy, I’d say.
On agreement with President Bush:
“Obama voted to support President Bush between 40 and 50 percent of the time over the past two years.”
PolitiFact rating: True. Obama is not one of the Bush Administration’s top-10 opponents. Source: http://politifact.org/truth-o-meter/statements/513/
On the use of “coercive interrogation techniques” (a.k.a. torture):
” … following World War II war crime trials were convened. The Japanese were tried and convicted and hung for war crimes committed against American POWs. Among those charges for which they were convicted was waterboarding.”
“If the United States is in another conflict … and we have allowed that kind of torture to be inflicted upon people we hold captive, then there is nothing to prevent that enemy from also torturing American prisoners.”
This statement should make it clear that McCain is opposed to at least some civil-liberties violations being carried out by Bush et al.
In addition, McCain has a long record of bipartisanship in the Senate, which would promise a style of leadership significantly different to that of Bush, who was always rabidly partisan (even as the Governor of Texas).
Ultimately,, I’m not stumping for Mccain – I’ve already said that I lean towards Obama. But to say that he’s “Bush III” is grossly inaccurate.
409 Al
Bugger. I thought I’d got away with it.
Actually, I’m unusual amongst Crow supporters in having Port as my second favourite team. They need a good ENT doctor to look down their throats to see what they keep choking on though.
Matthew-
nice try.
McCain is a warmongerer and unlike Bush he can be credited with having at least 4 functioning neurones. Which could actually make him more culpable if he continues to try and defend the illegal and immoral invasion and decimation of Iraq.
And saying he supports the idea that the Iraqis should have water and power does not absolve him whatsoever.
Sorry to say Buddy, but he is Toast. And deservedly so. We are talking about hundreds of thousands of dead , injured and grieving people here.
F@#k the Republicans.
“Overall, I consider Obama’s policies to be superior”
Do not make the mistake of saying so Instead encourage the Obama supporters to persuade you on Obama’s domestic policys from what Obama has actually said (rather than from the generic site , even some policys on Romney’s site appear attractive)
I guess it is the behaviour of a maverick to say one thing and do another. Even morning McCain doesn’t know what evening McCain will do (although it will probably have something to do with appeasing right wing nuts). McCain on torture and waterboarding:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/15/AR2008021503318.html
I also note, MC, that you see Obama voting in a bipartisan fashion 40-50% of the time as some sort of negative (maybe I misread your tone?) but note that McCain’s bipartisanship is worthy. It is a fact that McCain’s fabled bipartisan behaviour has been pretty thin on the ground since he got over Bush’s disgraceful slurring of him and wanted the neo-cons behind him again. Here are some ideological rankings based on Senate voting by a San Diego Professor (http://voteview.com/sen110.htm), with analysis here (http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/liberal-conservative-rankings-done.html) which reads:
McCain is the one who has decided that he wants to cosy up to Bush, over a number of years. It is not just a liberal fallacy, and it is not unreasonable for Democrats to point this out.
Matthew
I could be facetious and point out that Bush III doesn’t stand for anything as he has flip-flopped so often on every issue that he is a policy vacuum so it’s impossible to decide where he stands. In fact, I just did.
I could point out these facts:
1. He makes Bush II look like a pacifist hippy on Iraq and Iran
2. When asked if he’d have Cheney in his Administration he said “Hell yeah”.
3. He is now pro-torture
4. He’s squealing like a pig that the SCOTUS had the temerity to vote for habeas corpus
5. He thinks Intelligent Design should be taught in schools
6. He is now pro-tax cuts
7. He is pro-life
8. He is anti-gay marriage
But I think I’ll let the man speak for himself.
“The fact is that I have agreed with President Bush far more than I have disagreed. And on the transcendent issues, the most important issues of our day, I have been totally in agreement and support of President Bush. So, have we had some disagreements on some issues – particularly domestic issues? Yes, but I will argue my conservative record of voting with anyone’s, and I will also submit that my support for President Bush has been active and very impassioned on issues that are important to the American people. And I am particularly talking about the war on terror, war in Iraq, national security, national defense, support of men and women in the military, fiscal discipline, a number of other issues; I strongly disagree with any assertion that I have been more at odds with the President of the United States than I have been in agreement.”
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/6/12/21211/8266/934/509602
The” War on Terror”-
ie: bomb the crap out of people who hate you so that they will …what?
learn to love you?, disappear?, find the True God??
This is the most inane, stupid piece of propaganda I have ever come across – even worse than Working Families.
There is no War on Terror – only an increase of every reason to hate the west. Undeservedly for most of us, but we are soooo badly represented.
Which is why i support Obama – it’s a values thing, it’s way too late for “policy”.
McCain – defending America
Obama – surrendering America
Fck me, Tabitha, -where have you been??
…and all this time they were wasting the money on Hillary.
Tabitha – defending Glen
Jen – for president
Dio, I can’t hate the Crows too much; my other half is a Crows supporter, and we enjoy watching either team play.
When will Obama supporters post pro Obama policys that Obama has personally argued for this year , rather than initially anti Hillary and now anti McCain posts
(and a p/s for those interested in National security matters , Pancho as usual selectively quoted. The legislation was not only to do with waterboarding. The Bill would force the CIA to follow the rules in the Army’s field manual for interrogations No other technique whatsoever and no non torture technique could be used by the CIA The Army field manual techniques only could be used by the CIA That was what was actually proposed in the Bill IF any poster wishs to support that entire Bill , than fine do so. I suspect the Dems cleverly supported a Bill knowing it would lose to win libetarian votes and the Dems will win votes from it and thats clever politics Does Obama have the whole of that Bill in his FA policy)
410 Mathew Cole Bush III follows Bush II’s policies. The one’s he doesn’t are only for election expediency. He belongs to the Republican Party. I doubt weather he is getting rid of the hayseeds that the Repugs employ. Unless he completely purges the Repug Party of Troglidytes, then he is Bush III.
Bill Maher
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8lTd42mptfY
Monica Goodling
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=gRLiy-XFPgc
Pat Robertson
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=WynH9nJuSuk
President Bush & President McCain – strong leadership in a dangerous world
John Kerry & Barak Husseyn Obama – weak defeatists who hate america
Jen you’re wrong about Tabitha being ESJ. (I have my own theory that, given his problem with women and sustaining an argument, ESJ is actually Tony Abbott.)
The judge is closer to it. I think I might have posted during the Oz 07 election that Tabitha is really a spam machine invented by the more nerdy Young Libs. (Quite possibly Howard Jr might have brought it back from his work with the Repugs.) ……The aim is to provide some respite for Glen who faces a monumental task in holding the fort for the Libs.
This latest model -Tabitha II – is a modification to the original, which you remember mostly posted in pointless rhymes, along the lines of
“Libs are sugar ‘n spice and all things nice
Lab are snicks and snails and puppy dogs’ tails.”
Nowadays you’ll notice that Tabitha II occasionally posts something referring to another PB poster. It is still pretty senseless, but it is a big advance on Tabitha I, which couldn’t communicate at all with other PB posters.
So that’s why they’ve been able to allow Glen a holiday.
29% of Americans think G.W. Bush is doing a good job.
25% of Americans think the second coming of Jesus Christ will occur this year.
Does anyone think there is a correlation here?
And does that mean only about 4% of sane Americans approve of Dubya?
What a Man…what a Great Man.
I think Americans will see that famous pic of the Once Maverick John McSame fawningly hugging the Great Decider a hell of a lot before November.
Diogenes,
This is nothing more valid than one man’s opinion, but I’d say the breakdown by class and politics of Victorian football teams is something like this (analysis largely based on geography, and very much affected by traditional support bases – now significantly modified due to impact of “new money”, which is pervasive in modern football).
Western Bulldogs, North Melbourne – almost exclusively working-class;
Richmond, Collingwood predominantly working-class;
Essendon, Carlton – middle-class at board level, working-class support (Carlton especially strong ethnic element)
St. Kilda – middle-class
Hawthorn, Melbourne – middle-class, private school element dominant.
Geelong – every-one in Geelong (deliberate exaggeration) supports them, so cross-class support, but strong remnants of squattocracy from elsewhere in Victoria especially the western district.
Martin Flanagan asserts that the Perth teams divide on class lines, which I’d also assume is largely true in Adelaide.
Diogene,
Sorry about disappearing so quickly yesterday, I was unceremoniuosly dragged into a teenager’s birthday party.
The proof that Krauthammer is not marginalised as you claim is demonstrated as follows: From the article at 391:
“It is a position so utterly untenable that John McCain must seize the opportunity and, contrary to conventional wisdom, make the Iraq War the central winning plank of his campaign. Yes, Americans are war-weary. Yes, most think we should not have engaged in the first place. Yes, Obama will keep pulling out his 2002 speech opposing the war.
But McCain’s case is simple. Is not Obama’s central mantra that this election is about the future not the past? It is about 2009, not 2002. Obama promises that upon his inauguration, he will order the Joint Chiefs to bring him a plan for withdrawal from Iraq within 16 months. McCain says that upon his inauguration, he’ll ask the Joint Chiefs for a plan for continued and ultimate success.
The choice could not be more clearly drawn. The Democrats’ one objective in Iraq is withdrawal. McCain’s one objective is victory”.
This of course is one man’s opinion. However, the latest polls are asking just that question: From 343:
“A question in state-by-state general election match-up polls by Rasmussen is whether voters care more about getting the troops out of Iraq by the end of the next President’s first term or wi