Obama '08?

I think attempting to conquer bigotry and misogyny in the same election would be setting the bar unnecessarily high.

IMO, the General Wesley Clark is the right guy. Rather than allowing the Right to distract with Wright-issues and other such nonsense; Obama would fare much better pounding McCain's position on an unpopular war, while Wes tirelessly illuminates the flaws in Bush's policy. His team has already struck brilliance with "allowing John McCain to serve out Bush's third term" (that line wouldn't work on me; but it should be devastating in the minds of many moderates).

His game plan should be tightly focused: Hammer McCain relentlessly on Iraq, Bush's tax cuts, and National Health Care. (and see how long the BPB's can continue pretending they no longer care about those issues. :wink:)

Then, if he starts to slip (which could only be on the account of Moderates and Independents like myself) hit hard on the issues of Abortion and making birth control available in schools. This will put McCain in a position where he can please Independents or the Religious Right… but certainly not both (and there in lies the problem with pandering). Pollingreport.com shows that Americans favor both of these issues by healthy margins.

so, occom smug... if I don't support Obama I don't care about these important issues.... thanks for defining me.

roll your eyes all you want... on this issue you are marching in lockstep... and insisting that anyone who doesn't march with you doesn't care about the party and wants John McCain to be elected.... on this issue it's strictly you're with me or against me.... Washington politics as usual.... lockstep defines it perfectly.... from Obamas lips to your ears and back out your lips....

So, are you staying home or voting for McCain in the general now?

neither.... I wonder just how many times I'll need to state that before someone notices....

certainly possible and actually probable.... but he'll be getting swift boated right left and center 24/7 to a degree that is practically incomprehensible with or without her... so it's not important IMO.

Good idea of having General Wesley Clark for VP running mate.

Clark is a horrible choice...he's a gaffe a minute.

Also choosing him would be tantamount to Kerry showing up at the convention, saluting and saying, 'Reporting for duty'.

Stupid

"It is wonderful to be back in Oregon," Obama said. "Over the last 15 months, we've traveled to every corner of the United States. I've now been in 57 states? I think one left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit, but my staff would not justify it."

Boy imagine how senile Obama will be when he's 71. Or did he just 'lose his bearings'.



http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05/barack-obama-wa.html

I don't care who you are... where you're from or what party you represent..... that's funny

yea that is funny.

If Obama had Wesley Clark who has served his country well over the years it would offset the inexperienced question people have for Obama. It is a good choice. Murtha would not be because he is already talked about too much in a negative way and would provide fodder to distract. Clark has not been talked about and I can't think of too much anyone can say about him as he hasn't been in the news that much since the last election cycle. I remember being impressed with him then.

Actually that's exactly my concern with Clark. He's old(er) and experienced in terms of the military, but he has precious little political experience except for his 2004 presidential run. Never held elective office, etc.

I'm still semi-liking Biden, not sure. He could do the attack-dog-with-integrity thing -- attack McCain hard but on issues -- and has experience up the wazoo. But he has some skeletons and may be too establishment.

I've reluctantly moved my support for Clinton to Obama. He is the inevitable nominee; might as well accept it and get on with defeating McCain.

You may be right sozobe; after writing that post; I started looking around for any negative news about Wesley Clark and right off the bat I found quite a bit about the near high noon show down with the Russians. Probably won't be good to have that in the press all the time.

Hey edgar. Hope Obama pleasantly surprises you...

Right of the top of my head I would think of Biden too but his image doesn't really mess very well with Obama's. Biden is more of an old-time, behind-the-scenes power broker and that sort of conflicts with the "change" message.

IMO, Kennedy's interview yesterday was his play for the VP nod. I think it would be a disaster but he seems to be making public statements about who should/shouldn't get the VP nod framed around his own qualifications.

I still like Senator Jim Webb. He is a highly decorated Vietnam combat veteran; he has a son who is a corporal in the Marines and has had boots on the ground in Iraq, so he would have some credibility in matters of National Defense and security - areas where there is trepidation about Obama. Also, if you've seen him speak, you'd know he'd have no problem at all being the 'attack dog' to Obama's 'good cop'. That might also be his biggest liability - he might be someone who's hard to reel in.

I think Clark is as wishy-washy a stuffed shirt of a "military-leader/politician" as I've ever seen. I don't think Obama would take him on as Veep after he's campaigned so hard for Clinton, or at least I hope not. I don't trust him.

link

You know, this may be true from a logic point of view. If this statement is true [If A, then B] then the contrapositive is also true [If not B then not A]. If you care about Senator Clinton's positions on healthcare, the war in Iraq, abortion rights, etc, then you should support Obama in the fall since he supports those positions the way Clinton did. From a logic point of view, if you don't support Obama in the fall, you must not support Clinton's positions.

Bear, we don't want you to join a Barak love fest, just vote your beliefs on the issues.