Obama '08?

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Hillary voted for the war.... as did many other people/... but that doesn't mean she's a supporter of it. there are people right here on A2K that have changed their minds about many thing dickhead george has said and done in the last 7 years....I am happy to say that time has proved me out and I started screaming from the rooftops that he was disastrous screwup in 1999....

She hasn't changed her mind, though, or at least hasn't said any approximation of "I messed up and I realize that" that I know of.

I will say that while I may have strayed off topic a bit, I have not said one bad thing about Obama on A2K or anywhere else.

Yeah, Bush had experience too! Texas gov, oil company boss, and two terms in the white house.

cjhsa wrote:

I will say that while I may have strayed off topic a bit, I have not said one bad thing about Obama on A2K or anywhere else.

That's mighty "white" of you, cjhsa. Thanks. :wink:

cicerone imposter wrote:

Yeah, Bush had experience too! Texas gov, oil company boss, and two terms in the white house.

Far more experience than the Senator from Illinois, who bought real estate from a first class criminal, who incidentally is now in jail.


Obama lacks experience. Of course if you consider his social work on the SouthSIde of Chicago among welfare families, then so be it...

However, thousands of Chicago Public Health Nurses and Social Workers have had far more experience working with the impoverished of Chicago than has Hussein Obama.

Hussein Obama.

cicerone imposter wrote:

Yeah, Bush had experience too! Texas gov, oil company boss, and two terms in the white house.

Far more experience than the Senator from Illinois

"If you choose to believe the proven lie that Obama was raised a Muslim and fear--in spite of twenty years of consistent profession of Christian faith--that he will suddenly 'revert' to his (non-existent) Muslim belief, then you demean and dishonor the redemptive power of Christ's sacrifice on the cross. In effect, you say the blood of Christ isn't strong enough to redeem him. Perhaps you need a good review of, well, pretty much the entire New Testament--much of which was written by no less a persecutor of believers than Saul of Tarsus, who became [in an adult conversion] the Apostle Paul."

Story from BBC NEWS:
Published: 2003/05/29 11:54:47 GMT

Clinton calls for third term
Former US President Bill Clinton has called for a change to the constitution's 22nd Amendment which prevents a person from being elected president more than twice.
"I think since people are living much longer... the 22nd Amendment should probably be modified to say two consecutive terms instead of two terms for a lifetime," he said.

Speaking at the John F Kennedy Library and Museum in Boston, the former president said such a change probably would not apply to him but would benefit future generations.

The amendment was passed after Franklin D Roosevelt was elected to a record fourth presidential term in office.

"There may come a time when we elect a president at age 45 or 50, and then 20 years later the country comes up against the same kind of problems the president faced before," said Mr Clinton.

"People would like to bring that man or woman back but they would have no way to do so."

Most Oppose Allowing President Third Term
Thursday , June 05, 2003

By Dana Blanton

But should the Constitution be changed? In a recent speech, former President Clinton commented that he thought the 22nd Amendment (search) to the Constitution "should probably be modified" to allow an individual to serve more than two terms as president. In the latest FOX News poll, conducted June 3-4 by Opinion Dynamics Corporation, most Americans oppose making such a change to the Constitution.

Only 20 percent of the public supports changing the 22nd Amendment, while the more widely held opinion (75 percent) is that the Constitution should not be modified to allow for a third presidential term. Partisanship is not an issue here, as Democrats and Republicans equally oppose allowing a third term. Men are slightly more opposed to making the change than women (78 percent and 73 percent respectively). Some of Clinton's fellow baby boomers (age 51-59) are the strongest opponents at 82 percent.

Why the Constitution permits a Gore-Clinton ticket
by Michael C. Dorf
FindLaw Contributor
Special to CNN Interactive

August 2, 2000
Web posted at: 3:20 p.m. EDT (1920 GMT)

Language of the 22nd Amendment
Tremulous Republicans and other naysayers will no doubt claim that the 22nd Amendment would bar a Clinton vice-presidency. This amendment, enacted after FDR was elected president for the fourth time, imposes a two-term limit on presidential candidates.

Now, the language of the amendment certainly does not expressly apply to a vice-presidential candidate. But other constitutional provisions guarantee that the vice-president becomes president upon the death, incapacity, impeachment, or resignation of the president.

Thus, if a two-term president like Bill Clinton became vice-president, that would raise the specter of a possible third Clinton presidential term, a specter that would become a reality if any of these unfortunate events were to befall a President Gore. Some might argue that, as a result, a Clinton vice-presidency (and that of any two-term president) would be unconstitutional.

In support of this argument, one might also cite the 12th Amendment, which provides, in pertinent part, that "no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States."

President Clinton is certainly ineligible to be elected to another presidential term, based on the 22nd Amendment. Some might infer from the 12th Amendment that he is therefore also ineligible to be elected to a vice-presidential term.

Constitution permits a Clinton vice-presidency
But these naysayers would be wrong. The Constitution permits Clinton to be elected vice-president, and if necessary to ascend for a third time to the presidency as careful attention to the language of the 12th and 22nd Amendments shows.

The 12th Amendment would allow a Clinton vice-presidency. Its language only bars from the vice-presidency those persons who are "ineligible to the office" of President. Clinton is not ineligible to the office of president, however. He is only disqualified (by the 22nd Amendment) from being elected to that office.

This is no mere semantic distinction. Article II of the Constitution carefully defines exactly who is "eligible to the Office of President": anyone who is a natural born citizen, at least 35 years old, and has been a U.S. resident for at least 14 years.

For example, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright is ineligible for the office of president because she is a naturalized, rather than a natural born, citizen. Accordingly, the 12th Amendment renders her ineligible to the office of vice-president as well.

But Bill Clinton can serve as vice president, because the 22nd Amendment's prohibition on running for a third presidential term is not a condition of the office of president.

The 22nd Amendment states: "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person [who has served more than half a term] shall be elected to the office of the president more than once."

The language is quite clear. It places no limits whatsoever on how many terms someone may serve as president, only how many times he can be elected.

In other words, the 22nd Amendment does not set conditions on what the 12th Amendment calls eligibility to the office of president. Anyone who is born here and has lived here for 14 years becomes eligible to be president on his or her 35th birthday and is then so eligible forever.

Thus, if. Clinton were to be elected vice president and ascend to the presidency based on, for example, Gore's resignation, then nothing unconstitutional would have occurred. Clinton would have been elected to the presidency only twice though he would serve as president thrice. Under the 22nd Amendment, that is perfectly permissible.

The spirit of the 22nd Amendment
Nonetheless, it could be argued that permitting Clinton to run for, and be elected to the office of, vice president violates the spirit if not the letter of the 22nd Amendment.

The argument is a weak one, however. The 22nd Amendment was adopted in part simply to formalize the tradition unbroken until FDR that American presidents should not seek a third term.

It was also a reaction to the growth in the power of the president in the 20th Century. But in seeking the vice-presidency, a job in John Nance Garner's unforgettable phrase, "not worth a bucket of warm spit," Clinton would hardly be bidding for dictatorial powers.

Furthermore, Republicans trying to fend off the winning Gore-Clinton team lack moral standing to invoke the spirit of any constitutional provision, in preference to its plain language.

George W. Bush proudly calls himself a "strict constructionist" who hews to the letter of the Constitution. And the exegesis of the 22nd Amendment that I have provided here is exactly the sort of "textualism" that Bush's judicial heroes Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas routinely applaud.

Of course, even if Gore were to offer him the number two spot, Clinton might turn it down. That would be a mistake for Clinton and for the country. He thrives on campaigns and we, as a people, thrive on him.

Do as Obama Says, Not As He Does?

Jake Tapper
Blogs @ ABC News
January 23, 2008 9:15 AM

Our friend Ben Smith at Politico reports

sad.

The amount does not include a new television ad that began airing this week in California on cable television and some broadcast stations. Obama, who has criticized spending by outside groups, unsuccessfully asked Phillips to halt the effort in December.

[...]

Obama's campaign on Friday released a letter dated Dec. 28 written to Phillips by his campaign lawyer, Robert Bauer, asking Phillips to stop their efforts to help Obama.

"And independent effort such as yours ... is simply not consistent with the senator's clearly stated commitment to complete accountability and transparency in the financing of campaigns for public office," Bauer wrote.

Phillips, in an interview Friday, said he planned to continue promoting Obama's candidacy.

"I am aware that the senator has been a leading voice in trying to restrict outside money and we appreciate that," Phillips said. "Yet we're equally aware that close to $6 million has been spent by outside groups in support of his opponents. So we have no qualms about evening the playing field."

Hate mongers will use anything in their arsenal to perpetuate lies and innuendos of fear because it works.

Democratic Race Heats up in the Southland

Last Edited: Monday, 28 Jan 2008, 8:37 PM PST
Created: Monday, 28 Jan 2008, 8:37 PM PST

Los Angeles -- The Democratic race for president heated up in the Southland, as Barack Obama's campaign announced a "truth squad" and Hillary Clinton's campaign chided Obama for allegedly accepting PAC money.

Illinois Sen. Barack Obama's California Truth Squad is made up of four California members of Congress and two high-profile state legislators -- Assembly Majority Leader Karen Bass, D-Baldwin Vista, and Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles.

San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris and Maria Elena Durazo, executive secretary of the Los Angeles Federation of Labor, are also on the squad, which is meant to respond to "misleading negative attacks from the Clinton campaign," according to the campaign.

"We're here today because we know Californians are tired of the same divisive politics that failed in South Carolina," said Rep. Barbara Lee, D- Oakland. "We are organized to make sure that the truth is shared with Californians and to respond to the same type of negative attacks that the Clinton campaign tried, and the voters rejected, in South Carolina."

Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, were accused of injecting race into the campaign, which generated criticism, even among fellow Democrats.

Meantime, New York Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign issued a statement slamming the Obama campaign for allegedly accepting support from two San Francisco-based political action committees while criticizing his rivals for doing the same.

"The first thing the `Truth Squad' should clarify is how Senator Obama can condemn 527s in Iowa knowing full well about Vote Hope, the 527 helping the Obama campaign here in California," said Luis Vizcaino, the Clinton campaign's California spokesman.

Nimh, have you looked at the two websites side by side? Can you honestly say they have an "uncanny resemblance?"

A lot of the criticism of Edwards' 527 ads was that the 527 was run by Edwards' former campaign manager. It wasn't just that it was a 527, it was that it was difficult to believe that it wasn't coordinating with Edwards' campaign at all.

Obama's campaign on Friday released a letter dated Dec. 28 written to Phillips by his campaign lawyer, Robert Bauer, asking Phillips to stop their efforts to help Obama.

"And independent effort such as yours ... is simply not consistent with the senator's clearly stated commitment to complete accountability and transparency in the financing of campaigns for public office," Bauer wrote.

Ah, this is where that stuff about the Vote Hope group is coming from...

More of the same half-truth politics...

http://www.myfoxla.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=5613805&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

Quote:

[..] "The first thing the `Truth Squad' should clarify is how Senator Obama can condemn 527s in Iowa knowing full well about Vote Hope, the 527 helping the Obama campaign here in California," said Luis Vizcaino, the Clinton campaign's California spokesman.

BARACK TOPS TOPLESS BRITNEY

Barack Obama's South Carolina victory speech skyrocketed to the top of YouTube on Monday, shooting past new footage of a topless Britney Spears and netting over 323,000 views so far.

Obama and Britney have actually been battling on YouTube since last week, when he shot past two videos of a (fully clothed) Spears trailed by paparazzi. Obama's speech is also the second most "favorited" video of the day on YouTube, just behind a personal message from Ron Paul. (Paul does not draw as many overall viewers, but he has the most views of any Republican candidate, and his motivated supporters consistently choose his clips as their favorites.) And today the Obama Campaign rushed out another video of his endorsement event with Ted Kennedy -- we'll see if the liberal lion can also rival the pop culture competition.

The Kennedy and Paul videos are below. If you want Britney, go find her yourself. [..]