snood
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 07:53 pm
Foxfyre:
Quote:
If Obama is able to bring that sort of thing to a halt and actually effect open, honest, and civil debate on the issues, however, I'll vote for him for President or King or head angel. I'm not going to hold my breath, however, nor should anybody be surprised if he is persuaded to resort to some negative campaigning himself.


"Bring that sort of thing to a halt"? A halt? Pretty tall order there- and unrealistic to put at the feet of any one person. If Obama can sucessfully wage a whole campaign without himself being sucked into the smearing of opponents would be a big enough accomplishment.

And if he did, I doubt he'll be receiving your vote for head angel, king or president. Some cute hyperbole, is all that is.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 08:06 pm
Unrealistic yes. Impossible? No. All he would have to do his convince YOUR party that this would be a profitable thing. The other party would then have to follow suit or look awful.

The motives don't have to be pure. Only the desire of outcome. You never watched "The Miracle of 34th Street" huh.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 08:12 pm
Yeah wasn't that the story about a supernatural being who flies around bringing gifts to all the word's good little boys and girls? Yeah, I see what you're saying about Obama revolutionizing campaign rhetoric - it could happen.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 08:52 pm
The most compelling message in that movie, however, was what happened between Macy's and Bloomingdales. But one of them had to start it.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 09:17 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I'm well aware of your denial, and distain for the forwarding of the opinion that the left was mostly campaigning on ABB lines, but I maintain it was a talking point because of it's concrete foundation in observable fact. Obscure pronouncement's that Kerry will magically bring the world community around isn't a solid platform.

I agree with what Soz implied, more politely: that the fact that you still believe there was no solid Kerry platform beyond "magically bring[ing] the world community around" shows nothing except that you bought into that Republican talking point, as well.

There were reams of concrete policy proposals from even the Kerry camp - and much more still from, for example, the Edwards camp. Soz was indeed angelic in her patience about bringing the corresponding info and links. Yet you people kept saying, "they are only ABB", "they have no platform", "they stand for nothing". Yet a talking point was all that was: for those who cared to click a few links, the refuting evidence was there to see.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 09:18 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
The most compelling message in that movie, however, was what happened between Macy's and Bloomingdales. But one of them had to start it.

And since we all know that the Republicans wont be the first to clean up their act...
0 Replies
 
MizunoMan
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 09:53 pm
nimh wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
I'm well aware of your denial, and distain for the forwarding of the opinion that the left was mostly campaigning on ABB lines, but I maintain it was a talking point because of it's concrete foundation in observable fact. Obscure pronouncement's that Kerry will magically bring the world community around isn't a solid platform.

I agree with what Soz implied, more politely: that the fact that you still believe there was no solid Kerry platform beyond "magically bring[ing] the world community around" shows nothing except that you bought into that Republican talking point, as well.

There were reams of concrete policy proposals from even the Kerry camp - and much more still from, for example, the Edwards camp. Soz was indeed angelic in her patience about bringing the corresponding info and links. Yet you people kept saying, "they are only ABB", "they have no platform", "they stand for nothing". Yet a talking point was all that was: for those who cared to click a few links, the refuting evidence was there to see.


I remember seeing several instances of this kind of statement throughout the campaign, as well as witnessing folks just scratching their heads when asked about Kerry's views.

Quote:
At this point in the campaign, it has been Bush that has pushed voters one way or the other, not Kerry's platform, Shanks said.

Kerry's lack of a defined stance on issues could lead people to turn elsewhere for candidates with alternative policies, Shanks said.

http://www.dailycal.org/sharticle.php?id=16116


I think people mostly remember him talking endlessly about his military service. And who could forget this published in the NYTimes with them saying "the resulting photo made him look like the sperm played by Woody Allen in "Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Sex but Were Afraid to Ask."

http://graphics10.nytimes.com/images/2004/07/28/politics/28points2.184.jpg
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Tue 19 Dec, 2006 10:07 pm
MizunoMan, Welcome to a2k. Kerry was a lost cause from the very beginning of his campaign. He let the Swiftboaters kill his "service to country" by not responding early enough with evidence to show otherwise. He sat there like a lame duck. He's too slow upstairs to win any vote; it was a slam dunk when he lost the debate with Bush.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 04:44 am
In spite of Obama's charisma, the proverbial San Francisco liberals mostly seem to stick with Hillary Clinton for now, says the San Francisco Chronicle.

[url=http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/12/20/CLINTON.TMP]The San Francisco Chronicle[/url] wrote:
The "Obama-mania" wave may be hitting other shores, but in the fundraising Democratic stronghold of Northern California, it's not nearly big enough yet to swamp Sen. Hillary Clinton -- the former first lady who has cultivated the state's voters and donors for years.

Barack Obama, the junior senator from Illinois, has generated enormous buzz in recent weeks as a possible presidential candidate, and "people are very, very excited about him as a great, up-and-coming Democratic personality,'' says Susie Buell, one of the country's leading Democratic donors and a loyal supporter of Hillary Clinton.

But on Obama as a presidential candidate, she says, "not now.''

"We are in a terrible time right now, between Iraq and global warming, and there's no messing around,'' says Buell, who -- along with her husband, Mark Buell -- has contributed more than $160,000 to Democratic causes since 2005. "It's not just about charisma, but about capability.''

Buell's strong words on behalf of the former first lady are echoed by Eleni Tsakopoulos-Kounalakis, president of Sacramento-based AKT Development Corp., another leading party donor who has been a stalwart Clinton supporter. "I would love to see Barack Obama -- as the vice presidential candidate,'' she says.

She calls the current hoopla surrounding Obama natural and welcomes it as "part of the natural dialogue'' when a party begins considering potential presidential candidates.

But Hillary "has been through the gamut, the intense public scrutiny -- and she's survived it,'' says Tsakopoulos-Kounalakis. "She's been in and out of the frying pan and she knows how to stick to a positive message.''

Source
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 06:43 am
nimh wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
The most compelling message in that movie, however, was what happened between Macy's and Bloomingdales. But one of them had to start it.

And since we all know that the Republicans wont be the first to clean up their act...


Amazing, isn't it? Who, among the Republican hopefuls, would Foxfyre deem capable of carrying off this thing she so freely suggests Obama might take on?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 06:45 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
it was a slam dunk when he lost the debate with Bush.

Which debate was that?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 07:12 am
thomas

There are a lot of dems, at the organization/fund raising levels, who have been gearing up towards a Hillary run for a long time. They probably constitute the most formidable political machine in the US now around any candidate. That's Obama's first hurdle and I think it is his biggest. Hillary doesn't have to go at him via negatives beyond the differences between the two of them in experience (and perhaps suggestions that she's tougher...a bit of Thatcher and Golda in her, perhaps). All she really has to do is scoop up control at the party machinery level to create advantage. The Obama threat to her is essentially the threat that the cogs in her machine will shift loyalties over to him because of his compelling charm and his unusual promise.

Re the PR stuff... a fundamental trick when you want to do something naughty is to disguise agency...the front group trick or the "People everywhere are now saying that..." trick. Last week, the Wash Times had a piece suggesting that Hillary's campaign would do dirties to Obama. This week, the WSJ's John Fund plays along...
Quote:
Mr. Obama knows that Hillary Clinton is a vulnerable front-runner. But he also knows that her side will haul out the brass knuckles to stop him. "Just a little while ago, he was in Springfield worrying about license-tag fees," is how one Hillary advisor told Newsweek magazine described one of the attack lines that would be used against him. "There's a fine line between an empty suit and an empty vessel into which people want to pour their hopes," says one national political journalist.
He goes on to helpfully recommend that Obama avoid all the pain of such personal attacks that will emanate from Hillary's camp and not bother running at all. He's a very compassionate man, John Fund.

This is fairly benign in itself (though we'll note the complete opacity and potential false impression of "one Hillary advisor"...parse this sentence a certain way and Dick Morris fits the definition) but this is a vector for doing dirty work which (like Foxfyre's cartoon) would work to slime both Hillary and Obama even while the real agency is a malice-intent and greatly invisible third party. We ought to note that Okie forwarded this same vector a couple of weeks past. One would like to know where he bumped into the idea.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 07:47 am
Thomas' quote is, I suppose, more a "about-Clinton-supporter's" report - as indicated not only by the headlines but by the photos as well (from frontpage and page A11):



http://i12.tinypic.com/351u4k9.jpg

http://i13.tinypic.com/2h4kjv5.jpg
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 07:57 am
Are you talking to me, german person?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 08:00 am
Although there are at least two German persons on this thread, I suppose, you're asking me.

No, just had no-one who wants to listen to me and so I posted something here.

Glad, you noticed me, mountie.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 08:02 am
LOL! I love you, german person (1 of 2).
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 09:06 am
snood wrote:
nimh wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
The most compelling message in that movie, however, was what happened between Macy's and Bloomingdales. But one of them had to start it.

And since we all know that the Republicans wont be the first to clean up their act...


Amazing, isn't it? Who, among the Republican hopefuls, would Foxfyre deem capable of carrying off this thing she so freely suggests Obama might take on?


I haven't claimed superior moral status, rock star quality, or unimpeachable credentials for any Republicans that I know of. Nor have I suggested that Obama take anything at all on.

I see I need to repost some suggestions for remedial reading courses for some on the Left who seem unable to read what is written instead of what they want to see.

I would also like to see Nimh post any verification for his assertion that "we all know" that the GOP will not be the first to clean up its act--presumably the Democrats are more likely?--even while he argues his observations of how the GOP repeating certain phrases reinforces negative impressions in people's minds. (Presumably the Democrats don't do that if you read between some of the lines, but that's probably just the impression I'm getting from reading those little digs those on the Left poke at the GOP to reinforce negative images.)
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 04:56 pm
Quote:
I haven't claimed superior moral status, rock star quality, or unimpeachable credentials for any Republicans that I know of.


Strawman. Who here has claimed any of that for Obama?

Just because he's been a media darling of late is no reason to suggest he carry any kind of ethical or moral burden that you're not willing to burden anyone on the right with.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 05:02 pm
THIS ONE comes highly recommended, Snood. I believe it also helps folks put a statement into context before drawing conclusions about it.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Wed 20 Dec, 2006 05:10 pm
Well that was certainly low and unnecessary.

This is interesting, more about how Hillary is (or might be) reacting to Obama:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/20/wusirq220.xml

As an aside, one thing I find extremely encouraging is that every time I want to find a news item about Obama to get things back on track (AHEM), there always is one. Any random time, there's something interesting and current (within 24 hours) when I check Google news. That's good.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 123
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.28 seconds on 07/10/2025 at 11:21:04