Obama '08?

Obama is a very liberal Democrat, perfect for Illinois. He's no stranger to special interest groups and is supported by crooks like George Soros, by teacher's unions, pro-abortion groups and People for the American Way.

A 'balanced budget amendment' is Democrat code for raising taxes, which is exactly what Obama would do.

He's anti-war and anti-military and that alone would work against him. I don't think an anti-war candidate has ever been elected while we're engaged in a war. Add to that the fact that he's a Senator. Senators don't exactly have the best track record for being electable to the presidency.

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. is unelectable.

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

Obama is a very liberal Democrat, perfect for Illinois. He's no stranger to special interest groups and is supported by crooks like George Soros, by teacher's unions, pro-abortion groups and People for the American Way.

According to Voteview.com, Obama is a bit more liberal than the median Democrat, but pretty much in the center of that party, so I don't see how you conclude he is "very liberal". (Voteview.com ranks Congressmen according to a peer-reviewed methodology; it is operated by Sociology professors from UC San Diego, University of Huston, and Carnegie-Mellon University.) As to your unsubstantiated labelling of George Soros as a "crook" and of some Obama supporters as "pro-abortion", I will ignore it. Finally, I don't see why support by teachers unions and People for the American way would count against ones electability.

Sierra Song wrote:

A 'balanced budget amendment' is Democrat code for raising taxes, which is exactly what Obama would do.

That must be why Republicans from Nixon to Gingrich campaigned for it first, against Democrats from Johnson to Clinton.

Sierra Song wrote:

He's anti-war and anti-military and that alone would work against him. I don't think an anti-war candidate has ever been elected while we're engaged in a war.

In 1968, Richard Nixon campaigned on a platform of "ending the war and winning the peace". I have no reason to believe that he wouldn't have accused Johnson of lying about the casus belli if he could. But the New York Times published that fact after the election, so he probably couldn't make it a campaign issue. More generally, why would opposition to an unpopular war make someone unelectable?

Sierra Song wrote:

Add to that the fact that he's a Senator. Senators don't exactly have the best track record for being electable to the presidency.

That is a valid point.

0 Replies

Insider Trading Conviction of Soros is Upheld

When Black Commentator magazine labeled Barack Obama a "mainstream Democrat", he was so disturbed he wrote them a letter, saying in part:

Quote:

"To begin with, neither my staff nor I have had any direct contact with anybody at DLCI don't know who nominated me for the DLC list of 100 rising starsI certainly did not view such inclusion as an endorsement on my part of the DLC platformI spend much of my time with audiences trying to educate them on the dangers of both the Patriot Act, Patriot Act 2, and the rest of John Ashcroft's assault on the ConstitutionIn the last three months alone, I passed and sent to Illinois governor's desk 25 pieces of major progressive legislation, including groundbreaking laws mandating the videotaping of all interrogations and confessions in capital cases; racial profiling legislation; a new law designed to ease the burden on ex-offenders seeking employment; and a state earned income tax credit that will put millions of dollars directly into the pockets of Illinois' working poor."

http://www.blackcommentator.com/47/47_cover.html

You are welcome to your opinion as to whether he's electable.

He's not (in my opinion), and that's why I'm hoping he throws his hat into the ring. :wink:

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

Insider Trading Conviction of Soros is Upheld

That was nearly twenty years ago!

From your link:

Quote:

The highest court in France [..] rejected a bid by George Soros [..] to overturn a conviction for insider trading in a case dating back nearly 20 years, leaving the first blemish on his five-decade investing career.

"a case dating back nearly 20 years, leaving the first blemish on his five-decade investing career" - doesnt sound like the decisive proof somebody is "a crook" to me...

Also:

Quote:

Ron Soffer, his lawyer, said Soros planned to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights [..] "The appeals trial occurred in 2004. How can you call witnesses and ask them about what happened in 1988?" The French stock market regulatory authority investigated the matter separately and concluded that Soros had not violated the law or any ethical rules, Soffer said.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

SierraSong wrote:
Insider Trading Conviction of Soros is Upheld

That was nearly twenty years ago!

From your link:

Quote:
The highest court in France [..] rejected a bid by George Soros [..] to overturn a conviction for insider trading in a case dating back nearly 20 years, leaving the first blemish on his five-decade investing career.

"a case dating back nearly 20 years, leaving the first blemish on his five-decade investing career" - doesnt sound like the decisive proof somebody is "a crook" to me...

Also:

Quote:
Ron Soffer, his lawyer, said Soros planned to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights [..] "The appeals trial occurred in 2004. How can you call witnesses and ask them about what happened in 1988?" The French stock market regulatory authority investigated the matter separately and concluded that Soros had not violated the law or any ethical rules, Soffer said.

So the fact that he was able to stretch the 'appeals' process for two decades means he's innocent? Maybe to you.

Heh. Take it up with the French, they're the ones insisting he's a crook.

The dirtbag also said:

Quote:

"As he has from the beginning, George Soros maintains that he engaged in no illegal or unethical conduct," Vachon said in a statement

That's because pond scum like him have their own, ahem, "code of ethics".

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Thomas wrote:
Interesting -- I'm not. The Republicans are just as incongruous as the Democrats, and the only thing holding them together is winning. If their winning streak ends in this year's Congress elections -- and I'm fairly optimistic about that -- 2008 will be completely open. There seems to be a meme propagating through the press: "No matter how lousy the shape of the Republicans is, those Democrats just can't seem to make it". I can see where it's coming from -- witness those quibbles betwen Dean and Schumer over strategy. But for the most part I think it's pessimism feeding on itself through thoughtless repetition.

Hey, sure hope so. The good news is, the midterms are in just a few months (~4.5), so we'll know the answer to that one reasonably soon.

Interesting point about the meme, not sure if I agree or not (whether the problem is the meme or the problem is the Democrats).

Eric Bohlert's take on this question and I think he's gets it right.

Quote:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3449870/

Because "the dems have no plan" is a fundamental republican talking point, it won't matter a quince what any dem or group of dems say or lay out, that talking point will be repeated as if it were a truth-bearing statement rather than what it is - a slogan.

And it is certain (as close to absolutely as we might get) that they will continue to use the slogan because of what Bohlert speaks to above and because this slogan gets a lot of conceptual work done.

What else can the Bush administration say about Iraq (particularly) other than 'we do it for an increase in overall good in the world' or 'we do it to protect you' or 'things are going well'? They can no longer say their plan was a dilly as things continue to go to shitt in almost all direcions. So they have to differentiate by saying 'at least WE have a plan' (while pretending that slogans actually constitute plans...on Jon Stewart two weeks or so past, Mehlman acknowledged that "we'll stand down when they stand up" was just a slogan...tip of the hat to such rare honesty and to Stewart for facilitating it).

And he 'dems have no plan' meme is useful in a very important conceptual framing - always, always, always the present republican crowd promote the suggestion that they are strong, masculine, dependable father figures and that the dems constitute the opposite of those characteristics. To have no plan is to be confused, flighty, in need of stern direction...in other words, it is to be womanly (like the french are).

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

So the fact that he was able to stretch the 'appeals' process for two decades means he's innocent? Maybe to you.

I didnt say he was innocent.

I did say that one transgression, nearly twenty years ago, in a five-decade investing career, doesn't immediately reduce someone to just "a crook" in my eyes. Let alone "a dirtbag" and "pond scum".

I'd suggest you might get some interesting results if you applied the same standard to some conservative investors, politicians, etc.

But I suspect you wont.

Face it, you think Soros is "pond scum" because he dared to put $$s into anti-Bush campaigns, not to mention campaigns that support gay groups, minority groups, ecology groups and such liberal causes. Thats why conservatives hate him. You would have thought the same if he hadnt been declared guilty in France for a twenty-year old case. And you wont be rushing in to declare any conservative who was convicted for one 20-year old transgression "dirtbags", either.

Never mind that Soros has done more to support those very democracy activists in "New Europe" that conservatives love to praise, constituting a more US-friendly alternative to German and French voices as they do, than any other single person. Pumping billions into projects that have helped to create a new class of pro-Western, anti-communist, anti-nationalist thinkers, activists and rulers, including those now newly in power in Georgia and those who helped bring about change in Ukraine and Serbia.

He supported the Dems, so he must be a crook. Any 20-year old case from a prior career will do as a stick to beat that dog with.

0 Replies

Good post, Blatham.

0 Replies

No plan is just a slogan? Laughing

That isn't clever enough by half to convince anyone but the choir. You know what would be? A Plan.

Where is the Democratic version of the PNAC? Where is their version of the "Contract with America?" Why not illustrate this plan so Americans can sink their teeth into it?

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

Insider Trading Conviction of Soros is Upheld

When Black Commentator magazine labeled Barack Obama a "mainstream Democrat", he was so disturbed he wrote them a letter, saying in part:

Quote:
"To begin with, neither my staff nor I have had any direct contact with anybody at DLCI don't know who nominated me for the DLC list of 100 rising starsI certainly did not view such inclusion as an endorsement on my part of the DLC platformI spend much of my time with audiences trying to educate them on the dangers of both the Patriot Act, Patriot Act 2, and the rest of John Ashcroft's assault on the ConstitutionIn the last three months alone, I passed and sent to Illinois governor's desk 25 pieces of major progressive legislation, including groundbreaking laws mandating the videotaping of all interrogations and confessions in capital cases; racial profiling legislation; a new law designed to ease the burden on ex-offenders seeking employment; and a state earned income tax credit that will put millions of dollars directly into the pockets of Illinois' working poor."

http://www.blackcommentator.com/47/47_cover.html

You are welcome to your opinion as to whether he's electable.

He's not (in my opinion), and that's why I'm hoping he throws his hat into the ring. :wink:

This is a misleading characterization of the exchange between Obama and Black Commentator. the words you posted did appear, but they are taken out of context. You make it sound as if he had some kind of hysterical reaction from being referred to as a "mainstream democrat" - and that's not what happened.

You're sure going to a lot of trouble to make Obama seem a lot more fringe and 'out there' than he in fact is. Calling him a name connecting him to Sadaam Hussein, and such. You might protest too much.

0 Replies

It's his name.

It seems metaphoric to her opinion of public perception of his possibilities.

0 Replies

Barack Obama's name has no connection - either metaphorical or grammatical, to Sadaam Hussein's. Perhaps the (reaching and smarmy) "ironic" connection that was intended was (the unoriginal) Barack Osama...

0 Replies

snood wrote:

This is a misleading characterization of the exchange between Obama and Black Commentator. the words you posted did appear, but they are taken out of context. You make it sound as if he had some kind of hysterical reaction from being referred to as a "mainstream democrat" - and that's not what happened.

You're sure going to a lot of trouble to make Obama seem a lot more fringe and 'out there' than he in fact is. Calling him a name connecting him to Sadaam Hussein, and such. You might protest too much.

In my opinion he is a very liberal senator. The only trouble I went to was to check out his voting record and the many special interest groups that have contributed to his campaign. I was interested because of the comments made by some here.

I think I read that his dad named him - I have no idea if Hussein is an old family name or not. Speaking of Barack's father, he didn't "grow up as a goat herder" as he stated in his speech to the Dem convention. I believe he was a Harvard-educated economist, although Obama was raised by his white mother (and grandparents, I think).

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Barack Obama's name has no connection - either metaphorical or grammatical, to Sadaam Hussein's. Perhaps the (reaching and smarmy) "ironic" connection that was intended was (the unoriginal) Barack Osama...

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. is the name given to him at birth.

So far, you're the only one that's made a "connection" to Saddam.

0 Replies

From today's Chicago Tribune, page 3 (online version)

Quote:

Well, hopefully some hear it.

0 Replies

Yeah, "Hussein" is actually his middle name. See:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1924133#1924133

Walter, nice article. That's definitely something I've really liked about Obama. Jim Wallis made a gigantic impression on me with his analysis after the 2004 election, I've really wanted the Democrats to take that to heart.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Barack Obama's name has no connection - either metaphorical or grammatical, to Sadaam Hussein's.

Couldn't speak to a "grammatical" connection. Maybe you can explain that one. However, I'll have to press the issue about a metaphoric,...but moreso, a LITERAL connection to Saddam Hussein's name. Man, just a tiny google could have saved you from that humiliation.

snood wrote:

Perhaps the (reaching and smarmy) "ironic" connection that was intended was (the unoriginal) Barack Osama...

I think SierraSong deserves an apology from SnoodWrong.

0 Replies

Quote:

Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. is unelectable.

Gratuitous slime. Does your mother find you offensive too?

Last night, Hardball had a segment labeled "Obama for President?". I didn't get to hear more than a sentence or two, but noted the raised profile of this possibility.

As soz knows, I've been hoping/clamoring for this candidacy for a while now. Obama is a truly exceptional political figure with the potential to turn American political discourse in a much needed positive direction (the need being evidenced by the slime above).

0 Replies

I think it will be rather difficult to make anyone feel badly about calling the man by his name.

0 Replies

SierraSong wrote:

Speaking of Barack's father, he didn't "grow up as a goat herder" as he stated in his speech to the Dem convention. I believe he was a Harvard-educated economist

Not going to check it out, but re the insinuation that Barack lied, the man can of course easily have been both. Having grown up as a goat herder and moved on to become a Harvard-educated economist. That would be a striking life story, but then again that would be why Obama used it in his speech, obviously.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know