Clinton, Obama try to appeal to working class ahead of next week's primaries
The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.
JAPAN NEWS AND DISCUSSION
-
Australia's most populated state lifts uranium mining ban
( 2 )
-
Israel blames Iran for series of blasts
( 22 )
-
Obama: Strong U.S.-China ties help rest of the world
( 6 )
-
Santorum surging in Republican presidential race
( 17 )
-
Private funeral Saturday for Whitney Houston
( 2 )
-
- English Instructor (Osaka, Kyoto, Kobe)
- Berlitz Japan, Inc. (ベルリッツ・ジャパン株式会社), Kansai
- Salary: ¥125,000 ~ ¥250,000 / Month
-
- FT English Teachers for Kids - Osaka
- Kohgakusha Co., Ltd. （株式会社興学社）, Osaka
- Salary: ¥255,000 ~ ¥275,000 / Month Travel Expenses, Encouragement of Japanese learning*
-
- Translator
- ZAIHON, Inc. (日本財務翻訳株式会社), Tokyo
- Salary: ¥6.0M / Year Negotiable
Order by Time Order by Popularity
47 Comments
Login to comment
0
RomeoRamenII
“I will tell you this. If Senator Obama is the nominee, you better believe I’ll work my heart out for him.”
Heh .... if that happens, barack better hire a professional car starter.
RR
0
RomeoRamenII
Why are the troops still in Iraq? In 2006, the democrats promised voters to bring the troops home. Guess not. They must have lied.
Why is gas so expensive? In 2006, the democrats promised voters to bring Big Oil to its knees and force them to lower gas prices. Guess not. They must have lied.
Why doesn't Congress work a 5-day work week like the rest of America? In 2006, the democrats promised to work a 5 day work week? Guess not. They must have lied.
Why are there still earmarks? In 2006, the Democrats promised to cut out the earmarks. Guess not. They must have lied.
So the real question for Americans is, will we be able to trust either hillary or barack to keep any of their campaign promises?
RR
0
Everton2
Rev Wright is deliberately trying to undermine the Senator from Illinois. We have seen this before in American politics where preachers become intoxicated with their importance and make statements that are just so ridiculous.
0
RomeoRamenII
"He attempted to dispel suggestions that he is elitist"
That "suggestion" was entirely of his own making. When he got caught belittling the small town America while kow-towing to a bunch of known elitists at a billionaire's home in San Francisco, he merely added to the number of those who accurately perceive him as being elitist.
Seems like barack is asking what the country can give him, not what he can do for the country.
RR
0
RomeoRamenII
The democrat Punch and Judy show rolls on.
Just heard this on NPR about an hour ago:
Aside from pledged delegates and superdelegates the dems also have "add-on" superdelegates.
Here's a rundown on this bit o' news:
http://www.politico.com/superdelegates/title_11.html
One person, one vote? Heh .... now I better understand why dems loath the U.S. Constitution. The socialists running the democrat party always wanted a House of Lords. Looks like they achieved that dream with this convoluted selection process.
RR
0
super delegate
"Aside from pledged delegates and superdelegates the dems also have "add-on" superdelegates."
I resemble that remark!
0
SezWho2
RomeoRamenII,
Obama neither "belittled" small-town America nor "kowtowed" to his financial supporters. Your characterization of him as doing that is what constitutes the suggestion. It's the old sleight of hand: He said, "A" and A, my friends, means B.
Hillary has done a good job of poisoning Obama's campaign by joining McCain in making that accusation. However, if she is the nominee, she'll be singing a different tune come September. For republicanism is more at home with elitism and democracy is more at home with demagoguery. Or, to put it another way, if Obama truly is an elitist, he's in the wrong party.
0
VOR
The only thing Clinton and Obama are interested in is making more Americans dependent on the government. The less dependent Americans are on the government, the more interested they are in solving their own problems and keeping the government out of their lives. Translation, get your dirty Democratic paws out of my pocket.
Social Security/Medicare, Welfare, Public Education all poorly managed, all very expensive, all failing miserably.
Now they want to grab a major portion of the economy under the guise of National Health care?
Whats next, Global Warming Legislation?
0
super delegate
Neither Hillary or Obama has ever really worked in the private sector.
Only a democrat could believe they understand "the working class" or even want to deal with the great unwashed.
0
RomeoRamenII
Sez:
Saying that Americans living in fly over states cling to guns and "their" religion (though he seems to have no problem still clinging to a racist religious sect) to a group of billionaires in an oil baron's San Francisco mansion is not elitist? Heh ... time you to take off your barack-colored glasses and see this snake oil salesman for what he reallly is: A woefully underqualified candidate for leader of my country.
RR
0
anderstungtwist
Absolutely. Obama! will soak the rich until the unemployment rate rises to about 10%.
0
SezWho2
RomeoRamenII,
I don't think he used the dismissive term, fly-over states. You did that. Even if he did, no, it's not elitist even if he is talking to the wealthy and offering an explanation of why he doesn't do better in certain states.
Apparently there are various shades of barack-colored glasses. I think my lenses are slightly less shaded.
0
GW
romeo
are you saying your looking for someone who has qualifications similar to gwb......... I dont think the US or the world can survive another well meaning simpleton like that, will either bankrupt the US or sell more shares(ie US debt) to the likes of the Chinese
0
RomeoRamenII
Sez,
When you try to come across as just plain folk by complaining to abandoned manufacturing towns in the Midwest about your inability to afford $10K per year for piano lessons for your private-school educated kids, you're going to be perceived as "elitist".
barack is never responsible for anything he does. He is always a victim and at least half the democrat party promotes this. What's interesting is the dems originally created the SuperDs to keep unelectable candidates from getting the nod. Yet, this time, that's exactly what's happening.
The ONLY positive thing to say about hillary is that she's already been vetted. No one even knew who barack was five years ago. If the dems are stupid enough to give him the nod, Ayers, Rezko and Wright will be big problems for barack. And who knows how many more skeletons will fall out of his closet between now and Nov. 4.
Looking at their track record since the turn of the century, it seems the democrat party now exists only to keep the Republicans in the White House.
RR
0
SezWho2
RomeoRamenII,
Being perceived as an elitist and being an elitist are two different things. You can be an elitist without being perceived as such and you can be perceived as being an elitist without being such.
In political campaigns, most candidates work very hard to create negative perceptions of their opponents. Thus we tend to get presidents who are more successful at dodging negativity than they are at using wisdom, displaying sound judgment and exercising leadership.
It really doesn't matter to me which party is in the White House as long as it is someone who uses the office in a constructive and non-partisan manner. Bush has been a terrible failure in this regard. Of the three candidates now, Hillary is the least qualified in terms of being capable of using the office in that manner. Obama, I believe is the only candidate who offers a much needed difference.
McCain is not a bad choice except for his age and his temperament. He does have the ability to work both sides of the aisle and he has shown that. Kerry even wanted to make him his VP. However, he is saddled with Bush's agenda and he's not really conservative. He has no plan for Iraq and his economics are just plain loopy.
0
Sarge
Sez - "his ( McCain's ) economics are just plain loopy"
Explain!
0
sailwind
Sezwho,
Very good post! Have to agree with most of it. Part company with you though on Obama. I think the problem that he's having is this. He doesn't want to be be seen as 'selling out' the more liberal wing of the party as he tacks more toward the more moderate left of center wing of the party to prove that he is capable unifying all under one message. He's failed pretty bad so far the past couple of weeks and has not been able to close the deal with the real heart and soul of the party, the moderates who are thinking as they do right now, if he can't close the deal with us he sure isn't going to capture the moderate left and right of center independents were the General election is going to be won, depending on their votes. He's got time to recover from the past few weeks but I haven't been real impressed with the way he is trying have it both ways in the way he's been potraying himself to the electorate lately. I have my doubts also now if he is truly going to be a President for all of us or a President with a very narrow activist view of Government more rooted in 60's type big Government, which I don't support at all. I believe most folks want good Government not more Government and feel it is to big already. I still can't believe GWB added another bureaucracy on top of other bureaucracies and made it a bloody cabinet post calling Homeland Security, instead of just streamlining the existing agencies involved in a more efficient manner to handle the new threat, and GWB called himself a conservative that was a laugh, but that is what my point is about. What I believe Americans from both sides of the aisle really want. A Government able to deliver within its own budget and deliver services effectly without raising taxes. Obama has a big problem if he doesn't really have anything to back up his slogan of change other than big governmnet is the solution when most blue collar Democrats and Moderate independents have come to the conclusion the big government is the problem instead. Reagan rode that message to a 49 state landslide Obama needs to realize nothing has changed since then. The jury is still out and he is going to have to do some serious show of substance as to what he really is about before he can lock this thing up. If he turns out to more Al Sharpton than Colin Powell then forget it, McCain wins.
0
change
I don't get the point why some one like RR, who hates dems so much is trying to to advise dems to choose Hillary over Obama? Could u explain, Mr/s RR? You are now the biggest contributer on JT now. Any reason behind that too? Or just your fear of him winning in Nov?
0
SezWho2
Sarge,
I'd much rather have you take issue with the statement and explain why you think it's wrong. I dislike doing all the work.
But let's take, for example, his summer gasoline tax holiday. It encourages gasoline consumption when we need to be conserving. It threatens a loss of jobs which would otherwise be funded by the tax and, in the alternative, forces us to borrow from China to pay Saudi Arabia to maintain those jobs. On top of that, there is no appreciable benefit to the American worker.
As another example, McCain, who originally opposed making the Bush tax cuts permanent is now in favor of making them so. On top of that I understand that he wants to cut the corporate income taxes. It isn't clear how he's going to make up for what I think is an almost $400B shortfall except that he is talking about creating a taxation system that is meaningfully more simple--and he means "meaningfully", whatever that means. This is a prayer, not a program. We cannot belt-tighten our way to a good economy any more than a corporation can become profitable by obsessing over meal allowances.
He wants to create an individual account system to supplement Social Security and to reduce the benefits payable under the system but he does not know how yet. That's fair. However, an individual account system only offers the advantage of possibly providing a better retirement income for workers. People who don't know better than to try to cash a forged $360B check do not have the financial sophistication to manage their portfolios, and most people who know better don't either. Individual accounts generate profits for portfolio managers--not for most people. The individual account idea has already been tried and found wanting and he does not have any significant changes to it.
His health care plan is almost non-existent but it's good for the insurance industry. Yes, insurance is a good idea--especially for insurance companies. It is a very poor model for providing health care for people as it is loaded heavily for non-medical expenses. This is a doctrinaire non-solution.
He supports NAFTA, which I think is good. I don't think it will significantly hurt the American worker. I think American workers have already taken that hit (not that others aren't coming) and that they stand to benefit marginally. However, I don't think NAFTA will bring the benefits that its supporters imagine. If it is successful, any benefits will be short-lived as China and India begin to see the advantages. Folks in Colombia do not want an American refrigerator, they want a low cost refrigerator that works.
I know that McCain has spent a lot of time on his economic program, but to me it looks worse than no program at all.
0
SezWho2
sailwind,
I agree that Obama needs to show more substance. Ultimately we need to know what he intends to do.
However, I don't think he needs to show that until after he wins the nomination--if he wins it. It is at that time that he needs to build consensus within the Democratic party. Of course, that would be true for Hillary, too, except to a lesser extent.
I see Obama's big problem against McCain as the similarities between them. Both are--or want to be--consensus builders. And in that regard, McCain has much more practical experience.
0
Sarge
Betzee - We don't need to be conserving gasoline, we need to be drilling for more oil and and refining it into more gasoline! Face it, conserving / driving hybrids is not going to solve the problem. With current technology, gasoline is going to be the, ahem, driving fuel for our vehicles for probably the next 30 years or more. I've said before that I hope gasoline prices keep going up and up because that would speed up the development of alternative fuels. But that should be the result of demand and supply, not high taxes! McCain is right on this.
0
Sarge
Sez - Sorry! I got you and Betzee mixed up - gee, I wonder how that happened... tee hee!
0
RomeoRamenII
barack's problem is that he is a relative unknown to the American voter, so people need to get a feel for his beliefs, character and integrity before they elect him to the highest office in the most powerful nation on the planet.
So issues like his association with Wright for 20 years and his on-again-off-again defense of the man does put doubts in the minds of many as to what really goes on in the man's head.
If barack had come straight out with the facts and his opinions of Wright at the very beginning, this would not be as big an issue. But he didn't as he kept changing his story about his knowledge of Wright's opinions and now when it has come back to bite him in the polls, barack finally gets worked up and complains about and condemns Wright like the rest of us have from the start.
However, this is too little and way too late (considering the U.S. media first exposed Wright in 2007) and casts a cloud of doubt over barack's integrity. Because he voted "present" 137 times since becoming a U.S. senator, barack's integrity is the only thing U.S. voters have to judge him by.
RR
0
SuperLib
Sez, McCain has been a big supporter of reducing government spending, especially government waste, as a means to balancing the budget. He's actually pretty famous for it. Clinton's idea of a windfall profit tax on oil companies is just shifting the tax burden from one group to another. That doesn't address all of your concerns, but assuming all of his plans require borrowing more money from China (my my my that's a catchphrase that keeps on giving) seems a bit of a lazy assumption to me.
His position about the Bush tax cuts changed over the last few years because of the downturn in the economy. I've never really faulted politicians for changing their minds if the situation has changed over time. The ones I'm more concerned about are those who stubbornly stick to a position even when the situation has changed, all so they can avoid the charge of being a flip-flopper.
0
RomeoRamenII
"Sez - Sorry! I got you and Betzee mixed up - gee, I wonder how that happened."
Betzee just cuts and pastes passages without offering his/her opinion; which is why I always scroll past those posts. Sez, on the other hand, offers up his/her view on things which makes me stop to see what he/she has posted.
RR
0
Betzee
Is there anyone on either side of the aisle who is on record as supporting "government waste." Don't think so....
Elected politicians, however, have to bring home the bacon to their constituents in terms of jobs and federal largesse. What may make sense for the district, however, can appear wasteful from the national perspective. Britian, for example, is now consolidating rural post offices which will save the government money. But this won't happen in the USA where every town has its own post office because residents of those communities are accustomed to the convenience. Plus, it provides at least one government job where the opportunities provided by the private sector may not be that good. To cover the costs of this inefficient mail delivery system, however, the cost of postage is higher than it would be if efficiency, rather than convenience, drove such decisions.
As for the rescinding collection of the federal gas tax, it's estimated savings to motorists will be around 30 bucks for the summer. For some that may be a more important than for others. Since Uncle Sam is running deficits, it will force Washington to borrow to cover the loss which will eventually have to be repaid with interest. We are only able to run these deficits because of the power of the dollar in the international economy. But that is changing. Notice the dollar slides every time the price of a barrel of oil inches up? This is a precarious situation which the next president, whoever it may be, will need to address.
0
RomeoRamenII
Obama grapples with controversy stemming from the rhetoric of his former pastor
It's controversy that barack has created. But, don't take me word for it:
"These days, [Obama] says, he attends the 11 a.m. Sunday service at Trinity ... every week. ... His pastor, Wright, has become a close confidant." (Chicago Sun-Times, April 5, 2004)
"Senator Obama is proud of his pastor and his church." (Obama campaign statement reported in the New York Times, April 30, 2007)
"[Wright] is like an old uncle who sometimes will say things I don't agree with." (February 25, 2008)
"I can no more disown [Wright] than I can disown the black community." (March 18, 2008)
"I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday. The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago." (April 29, 2008)
So, what barack is now saying it took him more than two decades to realize that the man who married him and baptized his two daughters is a racist conspiracy theory-lover? Heh ... says alot about barack's judgment.
RR
0
Betzee
Gee RR, that's mostly cut-and-paste isn't it? BTW what do you think of the Reverend Hagee's endorsement of John McCain, an endorsement the Senator sought incidentally. In case you are unfamiliar with the preacher's views, he equated Catholism with Hitler. As Frank Rich observes....
Mr. McCain says he does not endorse any of Mr. Hagee’s calumnies, any more than Barack Obama endorses Mr. Wright’s. But those who try to give Mr. McCain a pass for his embrace of a problematic preacher have a thin case. It boils down to this: Mr. McCain was not a parishioner for 20 years at Mr. Hagee’s church.
That defense implies, incorrectly, that Mr. McCain was a passive recipient of this bigot’s endorsement. In fact, by his own account, Mr. McCain sought out Mr. Hagee, who is perhaps best known for trying to drum up a pre-emptive “holy war” with Iran. (This preacher’s rantings may tell us more about Mr. McCain’s policy views than Mr. Wright’s tell us about Mr. Obama’s.) Even after Mr. Hagee’s Catholic bashing bubbled up in the mainstream media, Mr. McCain still did not reject and denounce him...Mr. McCain instead told George Stephanopoulos two Sundays ago that while he condemns any “anti-anything” remarks by Mr. Hagee, he is still “glad to have his endorsement.”
I wonder if Mr. McCain would have given the same answer had Mr. Stephanopoulos confronted him with the graphic video of the pastor in full “Great Whore” glory. But Mr. McCain didn’t have to fear so rude a transgression. Mr. Hagee’s videos have never had the same circulation on television as Mr. Wright’s. A sonorous white preacher spouting venom just doesn’t have the telegenic zing of a theatrical black man.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/opinion/04rich.html?hp
0
Everton2
Betzee you are so right about your observations, but then again, this election is not about policies but more about Obama's preacher connections and an off the cuff statement about bitterness. That is what it has boiled down to. White Americans just cant bring themselves to support a black candidate so they cling to these statements and connections. Martin Luther King did talk about America in similar vain to Rev Wright and he is a hero and a day has been put aside to celebrate his life.
0
Betzee
Thanks Everton. As Frank Rich goes on to observe with respect to these two men of cloth who've come to wider attention, "it is disingenuous to pretend that there isn’t a double standard operating here. If we’re to judge black candidates on their most controversial associates — and how quickly, sternly and completely they disown them — we must judge white politicians by the same yardstick."
My point, and I'm sorry I used the word "however" three times in one paragraph to make it, is simply to point out that although Americans of all political stripes want reduced government spending in the abstract, actual cuts may provoke constituent complaints, threatening the reelection prospects of their national representatives.
It's very unlikely the USA will follow the UK's lead in closing down rural post offices and consolidating services in outlying communities. Yet if you asked patrons emerging from those post offices (or other federal offices) if they favor reduced government spending they would probably say "Yes." But what they mean is the money which flows into other communities, not their own.
0
SezWho2
Sarge,
Taxes on gasoline in the US are some of the lowest in the industrialized world. You are right that conservation alone and driving fuel-efficient vehicles will not solve the problem. However, conservation will alleviate the problem and help to raise consciousness to the critical level which is necessary before solutions will be demanded.
If you really want to try to reduce things to an absurdity, I think you should focus more on the absurdly small relief that McCain's summer tax holiday would give to the American worker--and even then only to those who drive, not to Americans who have to earn their living by taking public transportation.
0
SezWho2
SuperLib,
George W. Bush is also a supporter of small government. Yet here we are with Homeland Security and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. McCain's emphasis on belt-tightening is fine and it is helpful, but I think it will not solve our fundamental problems. Like oxen which are gored, it rather depends on whose belt is taken in a notch or two.
I don't think I said, did I, that McCain's entire economic strategy involves borrowing from China. I think what I said was that his plan for summer gasoline tax relief provided no way to fund necessary projects except through borrowing. As far as his other plans, I think I said that he seemed vague as to how he was going to pay for shortfalls--or cut services.
0
SezWho2
RomeoRamenII,
I agree with your first three paragraphs completely. Barack is not well-known, his relationship to Wright has put doubt in the minds of many, and, politically at least, he should have handled the problem differently.
However, I'm not sure what you mean by your fourth paragraph and Barack's integrity. My brother, for example, had been a Clinton supporter until the Wright episode. Now he supports Obama precisely because he sees integrity in Obama's response and none in Hillary's attacks.
0
skipthesong
White Americans just cant bring themselves to support a black candidate" Ok, I knew that was going to come up.. depending on which media outlet you get your news from, Obama has won Upper Middle Class white males, Middle class F/M's, and college aged whites. Where Obama is failing is lower class whites. Some will say because they are racist, as I see your post leaning to, but in talking with people, most have come the conclusion that lower class whites have been pretty much pushed aside and most of the urban lower income whites live side by side with African Americans. There are too numerous issues that do fail to bring people together and actually cause flights, but the Government leaders seem to not "waste" their time on poor whites as most do not vote. We are talking about white men who work at factories, construction jobs, police, fire, etc.. The type of whites liberals refer to as white trash! Now, for once in a long time, they seem important. Even Hillary, who was basically the leader of the pack in her "positive discrimination policies" has put a lot whites on guard. In all actuality this particular primary should not be "appealing to working class" but instead appealing to people who were never appealed to before; thus it is appealing to race. For African Americans, the unity in the voting drives lead by leaders such as Jessie have proved to be so politically strong, same for women, Hispanics, and gays.. This has left lower income whites, who have no unity nor do they really have an identity. They are usually the first to get hit hard by disasters as there are no organizations to help them out specifically, there are no organizations to help them out for college, jobs, and the incarceration rates for them are much higher than what most believe. For once, they have an importance in an election and while most that I do know say they don't like McCain nor Hillary but they do like Obama however they were prefer him to have some guts and come out and spell out their bitterness.. He did at least come out about it slightly, more than any other candidate in recent history, once the Rev.Wright fiasco came out but quietly many are waiting for much more.
0
Betzee
I'm not sure how much longer we can depend on the Bank of China to purchase US treasury bonds to keep Uncle Sam afloat. At some point they will want to diversify their portfolio, particularly if the USD doesn't regain some of its value.
The attraction of the United States as a place to put money rests on the perception that ours is a transparent, and therefore safe, investment environment. The imploding financial services sector has predictably shaken foreign investor confidence. I wish the candidates would address the issues surrounding this type of reliance on outsiders, including much maligned China, rather than simply putting forward competing bail-out plans.
0
SezWho2
skipthesong,
I don't think liberals refer to as "white trash" white men who work at "factories, construction jobs, police, fire, etc." I think conservatives use those terms, too. I don't think whether one is liberal or conservative is central to the point you are making--which I take it is that "lower class" whites have been ignored but have a chance to make a difference in this election and are waiting for a candidate who will really speak for them.
0
RomeoRamenII
Sez,
Point taken. "Integrity" might have not been the best word. "Judgment" in choosing whom he associates with ("Rev." Wright; unrepentant terrorists Ayres, Dorhn; Syrian mafioso Rezko, ect.) is what I should have written.
Afterall, early in his campaign barack was selling himself on the idea that by being a relative outsider to inside-the-Beltway politics he is better able to judge what's good for the American people. He is now showing that that is not true as he continues to be slow on the upswing about really knowing who his friends and associates are.
Since he's proving that he cannot sell himself to the majority of democrat voters -- the ones who will cast their ballot for him in the General Election (or else he'd have the delegate count needed to carry the convention today) -- imagine how the Republicans will vote should he be chosen as the jackass party's candidate this time around.
RR
0
skipthesong
sezwho: No, I do believe liberals have come down hard on poorer whites for the actions of wealthy whites as well as the actions of the US government. I had a white dad who was very liberal and some of the comments I heard from him in those days I do feel are unfounded and incorrect. Most urban poor whites don't attend church nor do they get involved in civil activities mostly because nothing is really for them so basically it has been hard in rounding them up and trying to find something for them to identify with. They are usually the ones the bear the brunt of any racial discontent that may happen. I do feel that Obama is over all welcomed by them more than any other candidate at the moment, but still he has not gone far enough and how is he going to handle when things blow up in communities where they are a large minority? Is Obama going to "have to" take the side of the blacks because they are his largest base? Or is he going to look at things middle row and try to bring whites and blacks together on find common ground instead of blame? They do have a legitimate concern. I don't think we are going to see any major movement from them until the general elections. One Point: In talking with white friends living in areas where they are the minority, they are hoping Obama remains what he is and that is black and white. If there is ever a way to fix the urban problems in the US, one major factor is going to be having both black and white finding common ground. Once that is achieved, bringing in all others together is going to be a lot smoother.
0
SuperLib
Betzee, the man has won accolades for his work on reducing government waste, especially pork. Your above words are petty and misguided.
I've already said that I'm not voting for him, Obama still has my vote. But you appear to be on some kind of personal mission against the man, spreading negative information or flat out disinformation at every possible opportunity. What's your angle? Pure politics? Or is it something person you don't like about the guy?
0
SezWho2
RomeoRamenII,
You're right. "Judgment" is a much better--i.e. fairer--word.
You choose to judge Obama harshly for his lack of judgment in associating with a University of Chicago professor. You call Ayers an "unrepentant terrorist". I think that's over the top. Might it be the case that you were looking for dirt when you found it and might it be the case that a plate that is not squeaky clean is still clean enough to eat off of?
In my opinion, Obama made no error in judgment in his association with Wright. He demonstrated loyalty to the person who brought him to his faith and he demonstrated loyalty to the church of which he is a member. I think Wright has been retired for some years now hasn't he?
Obama did in fact recognize that Wright could be used as ammunition against him and that is why he decided to rescind his invitation to Wright to deliver the invocation at his candidacy announcement. Wright seems to have taken umbrage at this and his remarks have certainly damaged Obama--particularly among those who have seen only snippets of his remarks.
The biggest error in judgment that Obama made with Ayres and Dohrn is possibly in believing that Americans had the capacity to forgive people who turned themselves in to the justice system, were not prosecuted and went on to hold respectable jobs. If it turns out that we can forgive alcoholics and druggies but not people who befriend reformed radicals Obama will have been wrong. And Americans will get what they deserve. People ultimately do.
I don't think it matters much what Republicans will do come November. America is still horribly fractured along party lines. The only things that really matter are whether the Democrats can get the vote out for the Democrats and who the Independents vote for. This Independent is voting for McCain or some viable 3rd party candidate (Ralph, where are you?) if Clinton is nominated, Obama otherwise.
0
SezWho2
skipthesong,
I wish you would use paragraphs. It's difficult for me to follow the flow of your thought.
You seem to be arguing from experience. In regard to that, I can only say that my experience is different from yours. Maybe I just don't know what you're trying to say. But I don't remember hearing anyone that I can identify as a "liberal" referring to people with steady jobs in factories, in construction or in emergency services as "white trash".
Again, even if this were true that liberals more than others are hard on this group of people, I don't see how it would speak to your point. It seems to me to be more a slur against liberals.
0
super delegate
"You call Ayers an "unrepentant terrorist". I think that's over the top."
Failed terrorist-turned-yuppie William Ayers (planted bombs in one of the women's restrooms at the Pentagon - really fightin' da man there, Bill) and his wife Dohrn (who "mentored" Obama's wife at the law firm of Sidley Austin) is unrepentant.
Listen and judge for yourself, some of the recordings linked below are as recent as 2007 - -
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/04/020362.php
Again, as with his choice for a pastor either Obama is a horrendous judge of character - far too naive to be president - or he is as duplicitous as they come.
0
skipthesong
Sez, sorry but this is a tiny keyboard.
I wasn't calling you a liberal. And it wasn't a slur either - today' liberal is tomorrow's conservative!
I'll try to put it a different way. The so-called white-trash, who have been left out to dry mostly by their own kind in liberal form do seem to have negative view of Hillary. It was her after all who stated that "whites" should tolerate some forms of discrimination (nice of her since she has her millions).
These people could provide Obama a very large block. However, if he wants them, he will need to reach out to them! Hillary is trying but reading local papers, she is being viewed as a snake.
0
skipthesong
Again, as with his choice for a pastor either Obama is a horrendous judge of character - far too naive to be president - or he is as duplicitous as they come." We all have friends who have screwed up.. I think most people can let Obama off on the Ayers thing.. The Rev Wright thing however has hindered his relationship with disenfranchised whites. Again, if he cares about it, he'll figure out ways to get around it but if he doesn't then ....
0
Betzee
Government waste generally falls into two categories: 1) inefficient delivery of services; 2) wasteful programs which benefit tiny constitutencies.
Yes, McCain has been proactive in publicizing the problems associated with earmarks, which fall into the latter, and not been afraid to take on his own party over particularly outlandish examples, e.g., a rainforest in Iowa.
I don't know where he stood on GWB's prescription drug coverage. While it's true the cost of such drugs for senior citizens has become prohibitive, particularly as seniors live longer thanks to those drugs, no program such have been implemented requiring Uncle Sam to buy drugs at the retail price. This is the most expensive new entitlement program in decades and it was heavily promoted by GWB who would not entertain any changes to it.
If you were interested in an honest debate you would address the issue of McCain's seeking the support of Reverend Hagee who opined Hurricane Katrina was God revenge's for NO's hosting a gay pride parade. Instead you are simply looking for something to hang on Obama. What does this have to do with anyone's ability to confront the very real problems GWB is bequeathing his successor such as runaway government spending and a no end in sight occupation of Iraq? I look forward to debates focused on the issues, not character assassination owing to poor choices of personal pastor or seeking the campaign support of similarly minded bigots to get a particular group to the polls. I mean is that duplicitous or what?
0
SezWho2
super delegate,
I don't know how well you remember those times, but the Weather Underground was always more bark than bite. There were some truly violent members among them. I think, however, Ayers and Dohrn were always more into blowing up symbols than people. The statements in which they talk about attacking symbols of government were, I believe, from 1970, the same year that the Ohio National guard was taking deliberate aim at college students. I don't find it at all odd for a group of students to have believed that government was its enemy.
On the other hand, the statements from today are sober, reasoned and rational. They are exactly the same kind of statements that many of America's critics make. I think politicians in America should be listening to what these people have to say and not dismissing them as terrorists or unrepentant terrorists or whatever. I personally find no error in what they say about American government today although I do think it is heavily weighted by their previous experiences.
Moreover, having listened to all their clips, I've now listened for about what? 4 minutes? Do you ever feel that you're missing something about these people? Or is it that you've heard all you need to and you don't need to confront what they're actually saying. They've just given you enough code words to dismiss them out of hand.
0
SezWho2
skipthesong,
I didn't think you were calling me a liberal. I call myself a progressive, by the way.
I notice that when you tried again, you still stuck in that word "liberal". What I am saying is that this word is contentious and the excellent point of your post is diminished by what seems like a need to put a name on things.
As for what he should now do in the wake of the Wright thing, I'm not sure. Maybe I'll think about that when I send him my contribution.
Back to top