home

Charlotte Observer Endorses Obama

Charlotte Observer:

The choice between Sen. Obama and Hillary Clinton is not easy. She is indeed ready to be president on day one. After two terms with her husband in the White House and almost eight years in the Senate, she knows how things work. Smart and tenacious, she offers a progressive agenda. There are many reasons to think she'd be a good president.

More...

. . . As to Sen. Obama, he's one of the most powerful, effective speakers to seek the presidency in years. He offers a different vision of politics. Is he ready for to be president? His relative inexperience is reason for concern. He has been a U.S. senator for three years, an Illinois state senator for eight. He has no executive experience. . . . Nominating Sen. Obama would send a powerful message to the world. He's the son of a white mother from Kansas and an absent father from Kenya. His personal story would make it plain that America is changing for the better. His appreciation of the need for international cooperation is a welcome change from the Bush administration's know-it-all, go-it-alone tendencies.

. . . Early in the campaign, Sen. Obama said, "We want a politics that reflects our best values. We want a politics that reflects our core decency, a politics that is based on a simple premise that we stand and fall together." Yes, we do.

< Presidents and Young Children | Campaign Notes From Indiana and North Carolina >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    He offers a different vision of politics (5.00 / 3) (#1)
    by nellre on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:23:30 AM EST
    But does not deliver.

    Because he has been president now (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:35:13 AM EST
    for four years and he has done nothing!  :)

    You could say that AFTER he has had a chance. LOL.

    Parent

    No, because of his record (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:37:24 AM EST
    in his other jobs.  Not much there.  

    Parent
    More because of his campaign (5.00 / 7) (#15)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:59:53 AM EST
    smearing good Democrats as racists in order to get votes.

    ""We want a politics that reflects our best values. We want a politics that reflects our core decency, a politics that is based on a simple premise that we stand and fall together."

    Yeah.  Right.  The man is a stone phony and blatant liar.


    Parent

    Your last sentence (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:06:15 AM EST
    I have crossed over to that territory so it's hard to believe anything Obama says.  It's just not believable.  If he wins the nomination, wait and see, it will be the biggest implosion ever.  

    Parent
    Is This Some Kind Of A Joke..... (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:41:04 AM EST
    This paper's reasons for backing obama are weaker than obama's character, campaign and platform.  Honestly, what the hell were they thinking?

    Parent
    You gotta wonder (5.00 / 1) (#192)
    by vigkat on Sun May 04, 2008 at 08:00:48 PM EST
    It didn't make sense to me either.  It seems to be premised upon that visionary thing, and I have never been able to grasp that particular part of Obama's message.  I view it as a personal failure because everyone else seems to know exactly what it means.

    Parent
    he's a second rate speaker (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:09:09 AM EST
    Content free motivational pablum.

    Many sentences contradict the previous sentences.  There must be a German word for it but here's the pig latin: Auto-lexical-annihilation.

    He's still maintaining that Wright is a misrepresented Marine by the looping comments even though he's now denounces Wright in the next sentence.

    MTP: It's comedy gold.

     

    Parent

    DULL (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:10:44 AM EST
    Really dull.  No energy.  

    Parent
    There is a German word: Quatsch (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by bridget on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:35:18 PM EST
    The operative word Offers not has done can do will (5.00 / 2) (#102)
    by Salt on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:58:09 AM EST
    do has a record of.

    This Gas tax discussion has further disquieted my view of the Dem Party's ability to lead, I don't even believe most GET it its not the 30 cents it's the beginning of REAL change on who carries the burden in the country, certainly Pelosi doesn't get it, Americans come first over any Pet Highway project or discretionary earmark and she says dead on arrival and oh by the way we want them to reduce how much they drive.  Yet for some odd reason Pelosi leadership has failed to reign in or pass comprehensive environmental regulation or revoke the Energy giveaways raise now the energy standards and just general impression that tax revenue is an entitlement for a Dem Congress to blow on what mama Pelosi believes is the right thing to do.  That's not elitist that just plain arrogance.

    Parent

    This is an endorsement? (5.00 / 9) (#2)
    by pie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:27:40 AM EST
    . . . As to Sen. Obama, he's one of the most powerful, effective speakers to seek the presidency in years. He offers a different vision of politics. Is he ready for to be president? His relative inexperience is reason for concern. He has been a U.S. senator for three years, an Illinois state senator for eight. He has no executive experience.

    Damning with faint praise.

    "Speaker"... (5.00 / 10) (#4)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:29:52 AM EST
    Thank you Bush, after you, the only qualification for a president seems to be speaking skills.  Wow.  The bar has been lowered.

    Parent
    After Bush a paper sack (5.00 / 1) (#93)
    by Radix on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:54:37 AM EST
    doesn't look to bad.

    Because there are no facts, there is no truth, Just data to be manipulated

    Don Henley-The Garden of Allah

    Parent

    Don't let ChOB do my milestones or obit, please (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Ellie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:57:53 AM EST
    Is this lightweight recommendation inspired by Obama's frailty of credibility and record,

    a perfunctory, pre-emptive strike against TeamO's Persuasion by Pestering campaign strategy, or

    simply the Observer's inability to find much beyond the well worn Inspiration Points?  

    Parent

    A new slogan for NC tourism (5.00 / 4) (#35)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:21:47 AM EST
    "Charlotte -- a Nice Place to Visit, But Don't Make News Here."

    Parent
    I had the same reaction. (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by Shainzona on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:14:31 AM EST
    I mean, they endorse HRC in the first paragraph...how could you NOT want this person as POTUS?

    And then they "endorse" BO 'cause he talks a good game?

    Raleigh is a college-town, right?

    Figures.  Everyone having a latte at their local Starbucks is smiling happily right now.  (That's not intended to be a put-down...just a demographic fact!)

    Did you read MoDo this AM?  TALK ABOUT ELITIST! She talks how poor pitiful BO has to be FORCED to STOOP (so low...although she doesn't finish that phrase in print) and be photographed with cops in Dallas as a stupid photo op.  

    Bet those cops are really thrilled to have a picture of themselves with the jerk.

    And he, the poor soul who was raised by a single mother who was on food-stamps.

    I about hurled my breakfast when I read that tripe.

    Parent

    Heck, the cops oughta be happy (5.00 / 4) (#36)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:22:55 AM EST
    that Obama posed for a picture.  Ask the mayor of San Francisco, whom Obama shunned lest he get gay germs.

    Parent
    Charlotte is more Nascar than Starbucks. (5.00 / 1) (#107)
    by Joan in VA on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:01:17 AM EST
    Not a college town like Raleigh-Durham area.

    Parent
    Thanks for the correction... (5.00 / 1) (#118)
    by Shainzona on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:05:27 AM EST
    I gfot it wrong in my original comment.

    Parent
    lol...fortunately I hadn't had breakfast yet.... (5.00 / 1) (#154)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:45:33 AM EST
    Dowd cannot write a column, no matter what the subject, without inserting smarmy remarks about The Clintons.  She is shameless and has lost any modo she had.  Really no need to read her column anymore.....obama is toast based on her praise of his ideas of having something in common with blue collar workers.

    Parent
    I agree (5.00 / 1) (#176)
    by nycvoter on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:00:17 PM EST
    it seems pretty weak.  Why bring up their concern with his lack of experience and offer his ability to speak as a reason to endorse.

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:28:57 AM EST
    It is their endorsement of Obama.

    They can explain themselves.

    Parent

    Compared to that writer (5.00 / 3) (#12)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:49:02 AM EST
    your tepidity is overwhelming.

    Parent
    I'd have to read te whole thing, (none / 0) (#7)
    by pie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:33:25 AM EST
    but I believe they're making themselves clear.

    Parent
    Congratulations to Obama... (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by white n az on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:31:05 AM EST
    I'm sure he's pleased.

    He sure was flummoxed in the early goings on MTP this morning.

    i agree (1.00 / 1) (#13)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:57:40 AM EST
    but he's gotten a lot better as it's moved along.

    The gas tax issue is such a gimmick and silly of Clinton to push it.  The more one learns, the more idiotic it gets...

    Parent

    lol (5.00 / 5) (#31)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:19:23 AM EST
    but he's gotten a lot better as it's moved along.

    No he hasn't. MTP looks terrible.

    The gas tax issue is such a gimmick and silly of Clinton to push it.  The more one learns, the more idiotic it gets...

    Hope and Change are a gimmick. BS speeches in Phillie that are contradicted a week or two later are gimmicks. Proposing to suspend a tax is dollars  cents. Presidencies rise and fall on commodity prices. To think it doesn't matter is evidence of social and economic insulation.

    The more I learn about Obama's interests and commitements the more distant and Olympian he sounds.  The more obvious that it becomes McCain can play Patriot Games in 2008. He's been framed by MTP and it's going to be painful when they read back Dreams of My Father to Him and he blabbers on about "Patton's Army"...Jeremiah is the George Allen of the Obamacratic party.

    Parent

    The gas tax proposal... (5.00 / 6) (#37)
    by white n az on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:23:43 AM EST
    was originated rather cleverly by McCain who has been engaged in a rather pathetic tour across the US pandering to lower income people. Clearly he sees this as where he can beat Obama.

    So he spawns this notion that rolling back the Federal taxes on gasoline helps the working class (which it clearly does) and he gets a substance-free benefit because he knows that even if this legislation actually made it through the House and Senate, it's a certain Bush veto.

    Now Hillary gets this and so she signs on but then figures that she can pay for this tax loss (and the highway funds hit) by instituting a 'windfall profits tax on the oil companies' - brilliant.

    So Obama sees that there isn't any room to improve on it so he just disses it as being the typical stuff that emanates from Washington.

    While it never was much of an issue in an of itself, it's rather telling as to where each of the candidates actually stand...

    McCain, the panderer for working class votes

    Clinton, the policy wonk for trying to build a program for a policy that panders to the working class votes.

    Obama, the pragmatist that shows neither the desire to pander to working class votes nor to find a policy that works.

    You clearly do yourself a disservice by dismissing the discussion out of hand because it's prima facie evidence that Obama doesn't care about the working class and completely lets both Clinton and McCain speak to their concerns.

    Parent

    it has exposed (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:29:21 AM EST
    what each of them is.

    Obama is simply pleasing Journalists.

    (although he's now on record opposing a tax cut on a fuel commodity.)

    The Journalists will eat his liver in November on the issue.  I can't see how the Teamsters endorsed Obama, the rank and file won't lift a finger to help him if he's like this on gas prices.  He sounds like Bush these days.

    Parent

    really? (none / 0) (#69)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:36:45 AM EST
    (although he's now on record opposing a tax cut on a fuel commodity.)

    The Journalists will eat his liver in November on the issue.

    understand gas prices, what the taxes are used for, general industry dynamics, retail price manipulation, etc....

    It is a poor economic AND energy policy to suggest a gas tax "summer suspension' is a worthwhile.  counter productive and consumers don't actually benefit.  There are any number of better "taxes" or policies to peddle.  

    Parent

    Who cares...!! (5.00 / 3) (#75)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:40:38 AM EST
    It's a political tactic.  She out politicked him.  So get over it.  She took the wind out of McCain.  Now Obama is fighting windmills.  Heck politicians pander.  Obama tells people he will unite them, that is pandering.  He has no clue or history how to do it.  

    Parent
    Obama hit his pander quota last week... (5.00 / 4) (#79)
    by white n az on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:43:26 AM EST
    when he disowned Reverend Wright whom he could no more disown than the white grandmother who raised him.

    If he had bought into the gas tax pander, his he would have exceeded his quota and it would have necessitated disowning his white grandmother too.

    Parent

    As usual, Stellaaa nails it. (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by oldpro on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:15:51 AM EST
    Political.  Tactic.  One-upped McCain!  Brilliant.

    Sheesh.

    Parent

    She is targeting her base (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:49:14 AM EST
     CNN just said:  Pandering is like Santa Claus, guess what, people love Santa Claus.  

    Yes, it's about winning.  What is the problem with that?  You think Obama is not doing that?  They are there to win.  And I want the best one at it to go up against McCain.  

    The other brilliant thing she did is put the windfall tax on the table.  Obama is wrong, she is not spending that twice.  She taps two things, the windfall tax for the gas tax break and the "tax break" Bush gave, that Obama voted for.  

    Parent

    Ummm, Stellaaa? (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by oldpro on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:19:06 PM EST
    I'm agreeing with you...

    The 'sheesh' was for the person you replied to...

    Not only is the gas tax issue legit as policy, it is legit as political symbol...and in a campaign, that can be even more important to some voters.  People who think that symbols don't matter in politics are clueless re elections.

    Parent

    stay on message! (5.00 / 1) (#183)
    by boredmpa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:00:53 PM EST
    He's tilting at waffles

    ---

    Yes yes, offensive/offtopic.  Rate me 1.

    Parent

    Thanks for the truth (1.00 / 1) (#91)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:53:22 AM EST
    Anything to get the nomination, whether the policy is good or not.

    Parent
    I'm Sure You Are Referring To Obama (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:32:09 AM EST
    in that comment. I totally agree that he will do anything to get the nomination whether it is good for the party or the country.

    Parent
    No, the poster said that Hillary pandered (1.00 / 1) (#150)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:39:16 AM EST
    and that it was a good pollitical decision.

    If you were following the thread you would know that.

    Parent

    And If You Have Been Following This (5.00 / 2) (#161)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:04:42 PM EST
    primary cycle you would know that Obama will also do anything to win and many of the things that he and his surrogates have done have been harmful to the party and the country.

    Parent
    Oops, once again you didn't stick to topic (none / 0) (#175)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:53:43 PM EST
    You changed the subject again because you have no answer. A commenter here admitted that the gas tax holiday is pandering but it was good politics. sigh

    Parent
    Your Comment That I Responded To (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:24:10 PM EST
    was about a candidate who would do anything to win. I agreed that there definitely was a candidate in the race who would do anything to win and his name is Senator Obama. Of course, anyone who believes that Senator Obama voted against going to war as you stated earlier might not be expected to understand that.  

    Parent
    But I didn't say that (1.00 / 1) (#178)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:34:37 PM EST
    you must have assumed I thought that but I didn't say she would do anything to win, was that someone else?

    I just said she was pandering with the gas tax.

    Parent

    Are you barking again? (1.00 / 1) (#179)
    by feet on earth on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:18:22 PM EST
    Grow up. (1.00 / 1) (#180)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:28:25 PM EST
    The tone on this site gets very childish.

    Parent
    This is what you said in another message: (1.00 / 1) (#182)
    by feet on earth on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:52:26 PM EST
    Shocking.
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 02:14:08 PM EST
    If you can't see the danger of McCain as president through the veil of your tears over Hillary, then you should never vote again because you don't have the sense god gave a dog.

    Now you are telling me to grow up.  When you stop offending people, I will stop coming after you for barking

    Parent

    Are you purposely ignoring (5.00 / 2) (#109)
    by Radix on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:01:43 AM EST
    the windfall profit portion of Clinton's suggestion?

    understand gas prices, what the taxes are used for, general industry dynamics, retail price manipulation, etc....

    Because there are no facts, there is no truth, Just data to be manipulated

    Don Henley-The Garden of Allah

    Parent

    Obama is the most (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:05:33 PM EST
    pandererous there.

    He's suposed to be the anti war candidate.

    His difference with Mccain amounts to 20,000 troops. 100,000 McCain v 80,000 Obama

    An entire campaign run on the backs of trusting antiwar dems.

    Shame on Obama for misleading about the war plan.

    Parent

    economics isn't a science (none / 0) (#113)
    by bigbay on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:02:26 AM EST
    no matter how many big words they use

    Parent
    Probably why it's a BA degree, not a BS. (none / 0) (#122)
    by Radix on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:06:22 AM EST
    Because there are no facts, there is no truth, Just data to be manipulated

    Don Henley-The Garden of Allah

    Parent

    With A Nice Chianti & Some Fava Beans?? (none / 0) (#156)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:48:42 AM EST
    How does Obama not get that the gas tax (5.00 / 9) (#59)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:32:53 AM EST
    is not simply an economic measure.  Of course, it would not effect major change; it is temporary.

    But it is is a message of hope, a message that the public is being heard, and it could have an effect on the consumer confidence index.  That is an assessment mechanism that always baffles economists, because it is a measure of an intangible -- of emotion . . . of hope for the future.

    A politician who truly understood how to instill hope would study how FDR did it, instilling hope to revive a discouraged country that then supported his next measures, the New Deal.  FDR's first steps were  dissed by economists, too, as only short-term measures -- and they dissed many of his next ideas, too.  

    But by then, the public knew to ignore economists who didn't understand how politics works and go with the guy who understood that -- and them.

    The public wants a president with ideas to help them, because it shows that their desperate situation now is recognized and that there will be some relief of some sort on the way.  If not this idea, then another idea -- but not a guy who just disses other ideas and offers no short-term relief plan of his own.

    Parent

    And when the holiday is over (1.00 / 2) (#90)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:52:40 AM EST
    and goes back up 18cents a gallon, what then? Doesn't Hillary care about people past September?

    Parent
    You really have to read all that I wrote (5.00 / 4) (#94)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:55:47 AM EST
    to understand next steps and how they are won.

    Parent
    Many economists (5.00 / 2) (#120)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:05:53 AM EST
    say that FDR on balance did nothing for the economy.

    And they might be correct.  

    Teh New Deal was neutral in many ways.  

    Some economists (rukheyser) said the NEw Deal Prolonged the depression.

    You are arguing against yourself and your party.

    Parent

    many economists also (5.00 / 0) (#163)
    by kangeroo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:09:22 PM EST
    consistently downplay market failures and deride the importance of regulation.  it's not in their professional interests to favor increased economic regulation.  and um, frankly, i think that often makes their viewpoints on this particular subject skewed and rather unreliable.

    Parent
    p.s. the same goes for the WSJ. (none / 0) (#164)
    by kangeroo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:12:48 PM EST
    it seems as hard to find truly progessive economists these days as it is to find truly progressive politicians.

    Parent
    Many historians argue with economists (5.00 / 4) (#174)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:51:44 PM EST
    who say such stuff in ignorance of the historical record.  And I'm a historian.  

    Interestingly, I also have economists in the family as well as friends who teach it.  We have good discussions.  They always end up deciding to read more history.

    Parent

    Maybe she just wants her name on the gas (5.00 / 4) (#152)
    by rooge04 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:41:13 AM EST
    pump. Like Obama did back when he was FOR the gas tax relief in IL. Before he realized he was against it because Hillary was for it.  

    Parent
    funny (5.00 / 3) (#159)
    by Kathy on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:50:31 AM EST
    Like Obama did back when he was FOR the gas tax relief in IL

    He didn't really remember that he'd "learned" from all those votes for tax relief that the tax holiday was a bad idea UNTIL people pointed out those past votes to him.

    And now he tells us it was a learning period.  He voted for tax holidays--what?--six times?

    Took him a while to learn, didn't it?

    Parent

    Gas Tax should be raised (none / 0) (#95)
    by pluege on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:55:51 AM EST
    the gas tax "holiday" is bull. If the gas tax had been incrementally raised since 1980 to something like $2.00 per gallon now, we wouldn't have an oil problem or an energy problem and we wouldn't have America going to war in the Middle East unnecessarily killing hundred's of thousands and wasting trillions to protect oil sources.

    What should be done:

    1. raise the gas tax, not lower it
    2. place a huge windfall profits tax on oil companies worth billions and give the proceeds to the lower middle class and poor to offset their gasoline and oil purchases.

    I know, I know, donahgonnahappin...America doesn't  do wisdom.

    Parent
    You want to raise gas taxes (none / 0) (#133)
    by my opinion on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:19:31 AM EST
    drastically and then place big windfall taxes on the oil companies that are distributed back to the middle class and poor. That is an odd cycle since the middle class and poor are hardest hit by any gas tax increase so why increase the gas tax and then give it back to those paying it. Second, if you think that a big gas tax will cut gas consumption (unlikely for many since the average person doesn't have a lot of options to get to the places they need to go to survive) greatly how are you then going after windfall profits of the oil companies that are not selling much gas?

    Parent
    Not so silly to a lot of people... (5.00 / 3) (#99)
    by Shainzona on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:57:36 AM EST
    Clinton's gas tax holiday proposal is an improvement (a big improvement) on McCains and it does something that I think some people miss...IT ADDRESSES A PROBLEM that a lot of Americans are experiencing.

    Did you see the elderly women tell Obama that she doesn't see anything wrong with it?  Listen to her - not just her words.  But who she is.  Her tone.  Her entire being!

    It's psychological - we want to know that someone somewhere is worrying about "us".  It's only $25 a month, but I know what even that would have meant to my 93 year old mother...and my brother, who has had to stop going to our family's week-end place because he can't afford the gas.  Those little amounts ACTUALLY MEAN THINGS TO SOME PEOPLE.

    I suspect most of the people here throw $25 dollars away a week on stupid things.  But not every American is so lucky.

    Instead, Obama et al, are screaming about things that are important from an intellectual and elite standpoint (yup, I did use that word).

    Democrats used to support ideas and options that helped the less blessed among us.

    I am very blessed.  I don't need that $25.  I don't need my Michigan tax return (which I felt guilty about receiving).  I am one of the lucky among us.

    I know a gas tax holiday will not solve the incredible energy problems we face, but it would be nice to have for millions of Americans.


    Parent

    In addition Clinton's plan includes raising (5.00 / 2) (#140)
    by my opinion on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:29:22 AM EST
    taxes on the oil companies. That is what really has everyone in the corporate media and Congress pushing back. If I remember correctly, one candidate voted for a pro-oil company bill a year ago. He is defending that position by being against any tax increase for oil companies.

    I am tired of the argument that it will provide negligible help to people but will cause a massive increase in usage. That makes no sense. You can't have it both ways.

    Parent

    How much driving does your 93 year old (1.00 / 1) (#181)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 03:30:35 PM EST
    grandmother do?  c'mon!!

    Parent
    My grandmother's are dead. What is your point? (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by my opinion on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:25:35 PM EST
    The best I can tell is that you are trying to argue the same argument that I have proven to be a fallacy.

    Parent
    You talked about how much gas money (1.00 / 1) (#189)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:08:07 PM EST
    your grandmother would save and how important that would be to her.

    Now you say you have no 93 year old grandmother?

    Parent

    I made no statement about how much money (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by my opinion on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:23:39 PM EST
    my grandmother would save.

    Parent
    Obviously (none / 0) (#191)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 07:52:17 PM EST
    my comment was supposed to be to the larger post above you. So sorry.

    Parent
    Great. If he gets elected... (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by dianem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:34:49 AM EST
    ...then he will probably be able to start learning out how to govern the nation. Heck, by the time he's running for his second term he might even know how to be President.

    Parent
    IF BO wins in 2008, I forsee no second term... (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by Shainzona on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:45:28 AM EST
    as his goose will be cooked by then.  (Similar to chickens coming home to roost!).

    In fact, it will probably take another 12 years before another Dem will get another shot at the WH.

    Parent

    Comparing him to Bush (5.00 / 3) (#6)
    by pie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:32:17 AM EST
    and saying he'd be different and better is a no-brainer.

    . . . Early in the campaign, Sen. Obama said, "We want a politics that reflects our best values. We want a politics that reflects our core decency, a politics that is based on a simple premise that we stand and fall together."

    Doesn't Sen. Clinton want those things?

    Yes, she does.

    "Stand and fall together" (4.50 / 4) (#8)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:33:55 AM EST
    I guess some of you will get a slight push from Obama along the way towards the moving bus.  

    Parent
    Lincolnesque; again. (none / 0) (#89)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:51:55 AM EST
    America The Land Of The Carefully Crafted (5.00 / 5) (#11)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 09:41:25 AM EST
    Sound Bite.

     We need to eliminate primaries and the GE campaigns altogether and go for a straight "American Idol" format. It will eliminate wasting tons of money and we will get the same type of president. One that sounds good regardless of what he would actually accomplish.

    Apparently (5.00 / 2) (#16)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:02:12 AM EST
    The Charlotte Observer has been caught in the hopey-change magic?  They truly sound like that caricature Obama supporter depicted on Boston Legal the other night.

    MTP (5.00 / 5) (#19)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:07:47 AM EST
    How many times did he say:  "bring the country together".  Wow, did a great job with the Democratic party, lets see what he does with the rest of the country.  

    An endorsement based on hope (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Burned on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:08:14 AM EST
    Clinton gets a bulleted critique.
    Obama got a pretty song.

    i missed the beginning of MTP (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Kensdad on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:11:50 AM EST
    but from mid-way through this is ridiculous...  in russert's own words before the commercial break "our conversation with barack obama"...  since when is MTP a "conversation"???

    how about russert asking obama why he supported gas tax relief back in 2000 when he was a state senator?

    please, timmy, anything...  you got nothin' today for obama?

    The early part made Obama look clueless. (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:25:23 AM EST
    Of course Russert didn't play what Wright actually said.

    Russert did bring up the gas break, but he suggested to Obama that "spo you learned from a mistake?"

    "yes I learned from a mistake."

    That was softball stuff.

    But there's McCain saying I proposed billions in tax cuts Obama opposed those cuts.

    Parent

    That's not even softball (none / 0) (#148)
    by dianem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:36:55 AM EST
    It's feeding him answers. "You contradicted yourself, but I'm sure you had a good reason, right?" And he conveniently provided the reason, too, so as not to challenge his interviewee.

    Parent
    How about asking Hillary (1.00 / 1) (#85)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:50:36 AM EST
    why she fought against a gas tax holiday in the past??

    Obama learned from the IL experiment that it doesn't work.

    Parent

    Strange... (5.00 / 1) (#142)
    by kredwyn on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:31:42 AM EST
    I've heard the "IL failed" claim before. But I've yet to see any definitive evidence to support the claim.

    Do you have it? Cause last I heard, the jury was still out re: actual failure.

    Parent

    ABC George (1.00 / 2) (#86)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:51:36 AM EST
    was part of the Clinton campaign in the past but I am sure he will be very tough on Hillary!!!

    Parent
    ABC George (1.00 / 2) (#87)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:51:36 AM EST
    was part of the Clinton campaign in the past but I am sure he will be very tough on Hillary!!!

    Parent
    Stephanopoulous famously (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by eleanora on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:00:26 AM EST
    loathes Hillary and is torn between admiring and hating Bill, and his low regard is cordially returned. He wrote a nasty tell-all after he left the White House post the 96 election. If you want to hear real "Judas" remarks, get Carville started on George.  

    Parent
    Huh? What an empty endorsement (5.00 / 8) (#26)
    by goldberry on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:12:21 AM EST
    So, the Charlotte Observer says, "Oh, sure she'd be ready to take over on day one and she's smart and tenacious and experienced and everything we want in a president.  But what we really need is a good speaker with a mixed race background who we freely acknowledge isn't ready to be president. By golly, if it was good enough for the past eight years, it will be good enough for the next four!"

    Talk about cognitive dissonance.  It's like picking the green pepper over the red one, the hard peaches over the juicy ones, the pulp fiction over the classic, the colorful new Sketchers over the engineered Nike Airs.

    hey, if they want flashy but tastless, nothing under the hood product that will take years to break in when what is really needed is a well designed reliable Swiss Army knife, great!  I just wish they didn't have the power to drag the rest of us with them in front of the speeding train.

    You know, if I were Obama (5.00 / 2) (#38)
    by akaEloise on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:23:49 AM EST
    I would hate to think that that people were voting for me only in order to send the rest of the world a message that America was willing to elect a biracial man.

    Of course, I think we'd send the rest of the world a much better message by electing President Hillary Clinton and Vice President Barack Obama.

    i think if you can win then you should win (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by Kensdad on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:31:18 AM EST
    an obama quote from the Chicago Tribune.  so, i don't think he has any problem getting elected because he's biracial, or because he can get all four of his primary opponents knocked off the ballot with legal maneuvers as he did when he first ran for state senate in IL (and that's when he made that not-yet-famous quote above!)

    Parent
    Sounds like "doing anything to win" (5.00 / 4) (#67)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:35:29 AM EST
    doesn't it?  And that was Obama from 'way back?  Interesting.

    Parent
    Read it for yourself (5.00 / 2) (#128)
    by Kensdad on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:14:31 AM EST
    here's a 2007 story on the obama that we don't really know:

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-070403obama-ballot,0,6422746,full.story

    you'll find that quote about doing anything to win about halfway down.  why doesn't any of this ever come up when obama is talking about a "new kind of politics"???

    Parent

    So everyone that has (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by rooge04 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:25:59 AM EST
    a white mother (preferably from uber-white Kansas) and a black father will send a strong message to the world???

    I did not realize a Madame President for the first time in our history who is also better qualified is diddly squat.  

    Apparently the Dad must be absent (5.00 / 1) (#119)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:05:40 AM EST
    and from Kenya.

    Parent
    Hillary is so clever... (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:27:04 AM EST
    She stood up to show the world that even she is taller than George.  Ha...ha.

    Is this for real? (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Steve M on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:27:46 AM EST
    It's like a parody.  Our goal here is to elect the best President, not to apologize for voting for Bush.

    With a weak endorsement (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by zfran on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:28:09 AM EST
    like this, who is doing the "pandering" now!!! If They couldn't be more enthusiastic, the newspaper should not have endorsed at all.

    Never fear. (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by pie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:32:51 AM EST
    They'll be endorsing McCain in the GE.  Then you'll really see some real slobbering.

    Parent
    That editorial board was split (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:37:10 AM EST
    and no question about it.  But all votes are not equal on ed boards.  Sounds like a fiat from the publisher or the like, and then it was left to an unenthusiastic ed writer to frame "just words." :-)

    Parent
    Do you always have to insult? (5.00 / 1) (#48)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:28:46 AM EST


    It's the Kool Aid (5.00 / 1) (#64)
    by Josmt on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:34:29 AM EST
    Side effects...

    Parent
    Yes he does (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by Marvin42 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:34:40 AM EST
    I have tried this before, it didn't have any results...

    Parent
    Yes, AtD does (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by waldenpond on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:49:27 AM EST
    Always.

    Parent
    pointing out ignorant statements (1.00 / 1) (#53)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:31:23 AM EST
    is no insult.  constructive criticism i suppose.  honestly, i apologize if it was taken as something different.  the poster's language was ill-informed and certainly no better...

    Parent
    "ignorant" (5.00 / 2) (#62)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:33:09 AM EST
    is as ignorant does..

    Parent
    No - you're wrong (5.00 / 4) (#71)
    by white n az on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:37:20 AM EST
    You think you are arguing factual items (for which you provide no factual rebuttal) when in fact you were responding to opinion.

    It's evident that you think all opinion that believes Hillary is a better candidate is ignorant and I wonder what benefit you think you are bringing to TalkLeft by coming here.

    Do you think you are doing your chosen candidate any favors? I would submit not.

    Do you think you are enlightening the ignorant few who post here? I would submit not.

    Do you think your purpose here serves any greater good? I would submit not.

    Do you think that your dismissive, insulting response actually could be considered as constructive criticism?

    Parent

    i wouldn't (4.00 / 1) (#78)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:42:26 AM EST
    say she's that much better. Certainly far from a first preference.

    Obama's Olmypian attitude is obviously shared by fans lower down the movement.

    Parent

    Perhaps you could point out (5.00 / 1) (#81)
    by Kathy on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:48:19 AM EST
    constructively, of course, the difference between Clinton's current tax holiday and the one that Obama voted for several times as a state senator?

    I think that would be a good starting point for an open and honest discussion.

    Parent

    Kool-aid is cheaper than gas now (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:53:55 AM EST
    so try it in your tank and tell us how it goes. :-)

    Parent
    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by kenoshaMarge on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:02:40 AM EST
    they do have to insult. Because if we poor ignorant little stupes don't agree with them then we are hardly worth bothering with. Which makes me wonder why this particular Obama supporter continues to show up.

    Some may still be able to hold their nose and vote for him if he's the nominee. But keep insulting them and annoying them and inserting trite comments and that may not continue to be true.

    I know that I have lost all objectivity and can no longer tell who I dislike more, Obama or his supporters. It's a tossup.

    Parent

    could you please... (5.00 / 1) (#51)
    by white n az on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:30:48 AM EST
    not be so entirely dismissive of people?

    It is possible to disagree without being so disagreeable. Figure out a way to do that please.

    It's hard not to be dismissive... (5.00 / 1) (#136)
    by dianem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:22:13 AM EST
    ...when an editorial spends an entire paragraph talking about how one candidate is qualified to be President and another isn't but endorses the unqualified one because he's more charismatic and has a more compelling "personal story". How on earth do you spin that as logical? We're electing a person to run the nation, not be class President.

    Parent
    ok. (1.00 / 1) (#56)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:32:22 AM EST
    fair enough.  but seems like if someone calls someone on here for silly statements, he's called mean.  but will do.  

    Parent
    You just did it again (5.00 / 1) (#84)
    by waldenpond on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:50:08 AM EST
    What's silly about discussing tax policy? (5.00 / 1) (#96)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:56:19 AM EST
    It's one of the most important functions and tools of government.

    Tax Policy is also the great political advantage that the GOP always have over the Democrats.

    Parent

    What Is Silly Is Thinking That Insulting People (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:02:53 AM EST
    is a productive way to advocate for your candidate.

    Parent
    Part of Obama's appeal with MSM more to do (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Serene1 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:31:26 AM EST
    with the fact that he is not Hillary.

    Increasingly I get the feeling that the MSM love for him is because they mostly hate Hillary and are rooting for Hillary's defeat more than Obama's win. Right now the MSM are willing to do anything to make Obama's life easy but the moment he is face to face with the other media darling McCain, then as Obama says the claws would come out.

    Tell this to a truck driver. (5.00 / 2) (#57)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:32:47 AM EST
    Nay, walk into a truckstop/diner on the I70 and yell what you just yelled to me.

    I'm happy in my ignance, O' Diagreeableagreement.


    ok... (1.00 / 2) (#76)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:41:30 AM EST
    I'm happy in my ignance

    the truck driver doesn't benefit FYI (and his boss only marginally assuming it actually gets passed onto the consumer, which no evidence it does, especially a 3 month suspension).  i could get into negative externalaties, supply and demand, false incentives, etc. but hard to argue with the uninformed.  evidence: your statments.

    Parent

    There Are Quite A lot Of Truckers Who Are (5.00 / 2) (#101)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:57:51 AM EST
    independent operators who own and operate their own rigs. You might just want to inform yourself about truckers before you accuse others of being uninformed.

    Also, while we are at it. Do you really think it is productive to spend your time insulting the very people that your candidate will need to win over if he is the nominee? Do you think insults generate support or could you possibly think that your actions might have an adverse effect on the candidate that you support?

     

    Parent

    World view of his personal story (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by sleepingdogs on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:35:13 AM EST
    Nominating Sen. Obama would send a powerful message to the world. He's the son of a white mother from Kansas and an absent father from Kenya. His personal story would make it plain that America is changing for the better.

    I'm not clear about this at all.  Is there evidence that others around the world view his story as inpirational?  How does his personal story affect foreign relations?  Is his racial heritage his accomplishment or that of his parents?

    Troll prophylactic- I am not bringing race into this.  I am responding to the specific mention of his racial heritage as mentioned in the endorsement we are discussing.

    Message (5.00 / 1) (#72)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:38:34 AM EST
    Kerry and many others believe that.  The president of the US, is the president of the US.  The world does not care what color, sex or shape he/she is.  It's a matter of US policies and US history.  He owns it and he cannot claim he is not part of it because he is not white.  That is just over simplification.  

    Parent
    The coronation of Septimius Severus... (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:51:53 AM EST
    ...sorted out all of Rome's troubles in the Imperial world didn't it?  New harmony.

    It settled the German tribes, defeated the Hun and the Parthian raiding. Or not.

    Parent

    According to Wiki, he was (5.00 / 1) (#146)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:36:46 AM EST
    what the Roman empire needed at the time.

    WIKI

    BTW:  did you write this article?  I just saw his arch in the Forum but didn't realize he was Rome's first ruler born in Africa (although his "roots" were clearly Roman).  Also, he instituted a kind of "Don't ask don't tell" policy for dealing with Christians. Except, in this case, if asked, a Christian had a choice:  renounce Christianity or be killed.

    Parent

    I think he was just an expat Roman. (none / 0) (#165)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:16:08 PM EST
    The African part is spurious.

    It's like calling Wellington Indian or Irish.

    Parent

    there is evidence (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:42:06 AM EST
    Just Google Obama +world opinion. this is from the Sacaramento Bee:

    The buzz on Obama was that his victory would revive America's sinking image abroad. Typical were the remarks of Musallam Ali Musallam, the Saudi managing director of Skab Group; he holds a doctorate in international relations from Georgetown University.

    We (alumni of U.S. universities) are the ambassadors for the United States," he continues. "But George Bush made it so hard. Bush destroyed so much of the good will toward America. It will take a long time to repair."

    Obama, says Musallam, would present a dramatic contrast to President Bush's style of unilateral military action. "Obama's conciliatory approach is much more of a change than someone who is part of the old system." Musallam included Clinton in the latter category.

    India's Shashi Tharoor, a widely published author and former United Nations undersecretary, was even more emphatic: "Of course, Obama's election would change the perception of America. My kids all see this as an enormously exciting transformation in how Americans see themselves."

    Singaporean Kishore Mahbubani, dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, spelled it out even more dramatically, saying an Obama victory would "eliminate at least half the massive anti-Americanism felt around the world."

    Mahbubani said that, even though Obama was a Christian, the election of someone whose middle name was "Hussein" would make young Muslims ask why their countries were stuck with autocratic leaders.

    Parent

    this is why the foreign policy establishment (5.00 / 2) (#80)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:47:08 AM EST
    have rallied around him.  They want to rebrand the American "empire".

    Personally I think China,  Russia and  India will see it for the PR move that it is.   They will also note the  crisis in American confidence that this PR represents.

    Seeing the weak kneed rebranding could just as easily trigger the long awaited challenge that these countries have prepared for--not mollify it.

    Parent

    Exactly... (5.00 / 1) (#97)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:56:38 AM EST
    rebranding imperialism and somehow the world will believe it.  

    Parent
    Rebranding AMERICA, the symbol (1.00 / 1) (#100)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:57:47 AM EST
    of freedom, rule of law and human rights you mean.

    Where are Obama's policies imperialist?  Do you have any evidence of this?

    Parent

    lol (5.00 / 1) (#172)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:02:19 PM EST
    America is a hegemonic Imperium delivering a Pax Americana to a grateful and not so grateful world.
    Obama can't change that.  He can mask it for a few years, but America is what it is.  

    Hardliners in various foreign policy establishments can take Kerry's word at face value. Obama's there to make American dominion a bit more palatable. All his FP actions will be interpreted according to American National Interest--military security, defending resources, expanding economic domination etc.

    Human Rights are a good tool for invading sovereign nations too.

    Parent

    WWIII if Obama is elected!! Warning!! (1.00 / 1) (#98)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:56:43 AM EST
    Wow, I never thought of that.

    Elect Obama and we get attacked by China and Russia and India?

    Scary fantasy world you live in!

    Parent

    Tell me you aren't the one (5.00 / 1) (#135)
    by waldenpond on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:20:26 AM EST
    who just threatened those that don't support Obama with the Supreme Court?

    Parent
    YES I DID (1.00 / 1) (#147)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:36:49 AM EST
    I wouldn't call it a threat, just saying that a vote for McCain is a vote for conservative court.

    If that isn't clear I don't know what is.

    Parent

    Didn't we (5.00 / 1) (#188)
    by misspeach2008 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 06:45:44 PM EST
    shoot this down yesterday?

    Parent
    Cripes, lilybart, stop putting words (5.00 / 1) (#141)
    by lookoverthere on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:31:40 AM EST
    in other people's comments.

    B.R.I.C.: Brazil, Russia, India, and China make up an economic bloc that has moved aggressively against U.S. interests. The bloc will continue to move agreesively against our interests because it benefits those countries to do so. The issue is about money and trade, and access to capital liquidity (capital) and markets.

    No one will be able to smile a policy into place so these countries' governments or capitalists will start being nice to us and remove barriers to trade. This is business and it requires a multi-pronged approach to cut deals that take in all of our interests (including protecting the environment and workers rights, etc.).

    If you were to do a little reading on the subject you may find it interesting (especially Brazil no longer being dependent on foreign oil and how they got there), how capital is flowing from this country to these others (cross-reference the Opium Wars to understand how dangerous this is), currency manipulation, asset loss (the buying of our banks, etc.), environmental damage (especially in China) in exchange for economic power, and a bunch of other stuff.

    Oh, yeah, you can also find out how Russia and Iran work together uneasily to maintain high oil prices since both are exporters and are raking it in---this is an economic partnership, not an ideological one. Unfortutunately, this economic relationship may pave the way to the selling of one of Russia's aging nuclear weapons to Iran.

    Parent

    The Chinese Russians (5.00 / 1) (#166)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:24:37 PM EST
    Indians and possibly Brazil are poised to do all sorts of things. It's no fantasy.  Just history reasserting itself.

    China practically run East Africa now (amazing if you stop to think about it). Russia is getting ready to be something like it's former self and is teh geostrategic equal of the EU. India--God only knows, the sky's the limit for them. The Brits funded the Empire based on the methodical exploitation of their potential, if they ever unlocked their potential they'd run asia.

    Parent

    I didn't say attack. (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Salo on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:54:16 PM EST
    Please don't put words in my mouth.  

    China is being pressured by the US in three areas.
    Taiwan, Tibet and a Western province that is engaged in guerilla warfare with Islamic groups.
    Russia is always being pressured by The US in the Caucus, and central asia. Brazil is probably covering Venezuela and is looking like a formidable autarky these days. India would probably crush Pakistan if they couyld get away with it.

    Each nation has their own ambitions independent of American interests.  Some interests conflict with American interests.

    it's got nothing to do with the Identity of the man or woman occuplying the Whitehouse.    

    If our foreign policy establishment keeps repeating the idea that Obama's identity will settle the popular greivances of religions or nations in the world; it will be seen as a transparent pathetic PR exercise by the diplomats in most nations (they won't publically state it of course).  The argument will be interpreted by hardliners as a failure of nerve of the Foreign Policy Community in the US. It will almost certainly be interpreted as patronizingly shallow. It will almost certainly turn out to be wrong--at some point Obama will commit to a fight somewhere and people who thought his Identity would make a difference will be angry and dissapointed at the warmongering.  Hardliners will use it as a cudgel to show that Obama is a just a mask for more imperial belligerance.

    I stated that if foreign policy wonks think that promoting a PR exercise in rebranding will reduce popular international animosity to America, they should consider the other psychological possibility. The plan will be read as a general Foreign  Policy failure of nerve.

    WW3 is your own fantasy.  

    Parent

    I would find it more interesting (5.00 / 4) (#105)
    by Cream City on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:00:37 AM EST
    as a story if it was balanced -- by also asking about the message that electing Clinton also would send the world.

    And then it would be really interesting if it included interviews with women ambassadors and women leaders.

    So when I taught journalism, I would have sent this back to the student with "good first step, keep going to get the rest of the story."

    Parent

    I have to say (5.00 / 4) (#111)
    by Kathy on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:02:19 AM EST
    that is such utter crap.  What kind of message would it send 52% of the world's population to see a woman as leader of the free world?  There are many, many studies about how, when women are in power, the neighborhood/community/village/country becomes a better place, whether we are talking about micro-loans in Indonesia or Merkel in Germany.

    What the "Obama will bring hope to the world!" crap represents is a manifestation of wishful thinking.  It is "hope" that he will change America's image just by virtue of being himself--as if Clinton would not do the same, if not more for humanity.

    If you want to talk about real-world implications, what sort of message will a woman US president send to Saudi Arabia's women?  To the opium bridge of Afghanistan, thirteen year olds sold into "marriage" to pay off family debts?  To beaten, battered and tortured women in Iraq who can be burned alive for angering their husbands?  To Egyptian girls who are castrated with the broken end of Coke bottles?  To eastern bloc women who are sold into white slavery?  To anyone forced to wear a burkha or head scarf or who has to hide in the trunk of her brother's car to be driven to work?

    I am so sick of this straight man crush bullsh*t with Obama.  He has absolutely no experience, no leadership abilities and no real power in the political arena.  The intelligencia should be asking themselves what it will mean to the world if a weak, aa version of Jimmy Carter gets one term and screws the democratic party back into the Reagan years (which, according to his own words, would please Obama)

    If you want to make an argument for reaching out to the world, why is it that 52% of the population has to be discounted for your argument to stick?

    Parent

    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:16:29 AM EST
    We're so about women's issues in Afghanistan, but we reject a woman presidential candidate here.

    Not only do we reject her, we make fun of her, trash her, smear her.

    Yep, I'm sure that sends a message heard round the world.  It's certainly sent a message to me, one I won't reward with my vote.

    Parent

    How fortunate for Obama. We have (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by Joan in VA on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:26:40 AM EST
    always elected a white man never worrying what the world would think of him. Now that we have a Black candidate, the world's opinion is of utmost importance. On the other hand, what would the oppressed women of the world think of a woman as the leader of the free world?

    Parent
    What a BS endorsement that is (5.00 / 4) (#68)
    by pluege on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:36:07 AM EST
    good speaker?

    absent father?

    no executive experience?

    How are these qualifications for POTUS?

    If they read their own paper they should be ashamed of themselves. That is just plain awful illogic.

    Interesting endorsement... (5.00 / 2) (#74)
    by kredwyn on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:40:22 AM EST
    Both of these candidates have compelling personal stories that would "make it plain that America is changing for the better."

    The plural of anecdote (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by Fabian on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:03:25 AM EST
    is NOT "data".

    Or so the old saw goes.

    Kind of a sick joke really.  You have two successful people - graduated high school, college, law school and went on to influential careers.  What the H311 do their stories have in common with the factory workers whose plant closed down, or the returning vets, or the kids that think college is for other people?

    Pundits - where stupidity and cupidity are assets, not liabilities.

    Parent

    One thing (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by oldpro on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:29:37 PM EST
    Hillary's story would have in common with them is public school...and a girl who not only went to college but got into law school when that was NOT common...when the average law school student was male and white.

    Parent
    the DC/Dem establishment supports Obama (5.00 / 3) (#108)
    by Josey on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:01:33 AM EST
    because they really really really need a newbie senator to "change Washington."
    ha!

    On the campaign trail during his U.S. senate race, Obama opposed the war funding bills passed by Congress.
    But a few months later he was on the Senate floor voting to fund the war.

    Obama = another faith-based candidate


    More than change (5.00 / 4) (#124)
    by zfran on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:07:59 AM EST
    Washington, I think they want him because they don't like Sen. Clinton and perhaps they can control him!!!

    Parent
    "my dna" On MTP (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:05:59 AM EST
    Finally got it.  He basically is saying that because he is biracial he can bring people together.  Now that to me is the most arrogant thing I have ever heard in my life.  What does this imply?  The white people or black people do not have that in their DNA therefore they cannot do it?  Wow...that is such BS.  I am sorry the guy is nuts.  

    Well If You Judge By What Has Been Going (5.00 / 1) (#149)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:39:14 AM EST
    on during the primaries there is no way anyone could think that he is capable of bringing people together period. In fact, I would say that if we elect Obama to bring people together, we are the ones who are nuts.

    Parent
    Ahem... (5.00 / 1) (#125)
    by Andy08 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:11:23 AM EST
    .
    . . Early in the campaign, Sen. Obama said, "We want a politics that reflects our best values. We want a politics that reflects our core decency, a politics that is based on a simple premise that we stand and fall together." Yes, we do.

    It is not who says it or who says it  best. It is who can make the decisions and draft the policies that can best reflect who we are a as nation. We are not who we say but what we do.

    Based on that, and what Obama has so far "done" , Obama cannot deliver his own rhetoric.

    The label "Endorsement" on the package (5.00 / 1) (#126)
    by feet on earth on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:11:35 AM EST
    seems like the surprise packages you get at charity events.

    You peel the label, through out the wrapping paper and ... oh... you actually like the content:  She is solid, he is hope.

    Maybe the content sticks in people's minds more that the label, like the nice deodorant I got last week at the local school fundraising event.

    I can't believe that they said it (5.00 / 3) (#132)
    by dianem on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:18:51 AM EST
    "Nominating Sen. Obama would send a powerful message to the world. He's the son of a white mother from Kansas and an absent father from Kenya. His personal story would make it plain that America is changing for the better."

    What could they possibly mean by this other than "vote for Obama because he's black and his father was a Muslim and it will show the world we're not racists"? If a person from Clinton's team said something like this they would be excoriated. I know that with absolute certainly, because it is similar to what Ferraro said, and she was. This supports my premise that the only "change" Obama is offering is his skin color. His policies and politics are as old as the hills. The fact that Obmaa grew up without his father present is not new.  His "personal story" is not that different from millions of other American's, none of whom are qualified to be President based on their story.

    These idiots actually spend a paragraph talking about how qualified Clinton is and how Obama is not but he's a good public speaker with a good "personal story", so we're endorsing him. Maybe we should just abandon both of them and nominate Stephen Covery.

    Clinton's personal story (5.00 / 6) (#155)
    by Kathy on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:47:38 AM EST
    to me is extremely compelling.  She came from a solidly middle class background.  She got into and excelled in some of our finest schools when women were not encouraged to do so.  She worked in an Alaskan fishery one summer.  She was on the cover of (was it?) Time for being a young American to watch.  She was actively involved in government from an early age.  She married a man and helped him become governor.  She campaigned to help poor women and children in her state.  She wrote several internationally bestselling books.  When the Clintons entered the White House, they were the "poorest" occupants in modern history and now they are millionaires.  She went through one of the most horrendous marital betrayals a woman can imagine IN FULL VIEW OF THE ENTIRE WORLD, and withstood it all and worked to keep her marriage.  She raised a beautiful, stable, and intelligent daughter (stable being the operative word) and she is now a likely contender for the presidency of the United States.  MY GOD, talk about accomplishments.

    Obama?  His mom was single for two years, he was shifted off to his grandparents, he was elected president of the Harvard Law Review, where he became the first such president to never publish any articles, and Rezko helped him buy a mansion.  Oh, and now he's running for the nomination.

    Yeah, the American dream.

    Parent

    Don't forget (none / 0) (#194)
    by BrandingIron on Mon May 05, 2008 at 01:04:14 AM EST

    Obama also got handed a bunch of primo bills that other people toiled over/took the heat for in his last year in the Ill. State Senate so that his mack daddy Majority Whip Jones could "make a Senator"!  That's an accomplishment, too!

    </snark>

    (P.S.  I believe it was Life magazine, re: Hillary at Wellesley giving the commencement speech criticizing Senator Brooke)

    Parent

    Honestly (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by IzikLA on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:16:29 PM EST
    This is exactly what I hate about these endorsements.  They quite clearly state how great Clinton would be as a President but then turn around and use totally useless reasons for endorsing Obama.  I do not think he should be President just so that America can send an image into the world of hope or change or unity, and I think it's quite shallow to suggest that Obama sends this message just because of his own personal narrative and background.  I completely reject this notion.  He has to prove himself in my book.

    We all (1.00 / 2) (#18)
    by coolit on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:06:59 AM EST
    need to go ahead and start supporting Obama.  Hillary's only chance was to:

    a) win big states and make the election about electability.

    b) change the tone of the primary and make herself seem like the front runner.

    c) win the popular vote.

    The media is still squarely in Obama's corner.  I have never seen Russert offer up such softballs to anyone. Never.

    The delegate and popular vote is not getting close enough.  There has not been a major shift.  Obama is just gonna ride this out and we're stuck with him.

    I guess it's just time to be happy with that, because the alternative is muuuuuch worse.

    No thank you. (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Shainzona on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:20:25 AM EST
    I have no intention of ever getting behind Obama.

    That means that he may not even get my vote - the way things are going.

    But not one dime.  Not one blog posting for him.  Not one discussion on his behalf for him.  Not one bumper sticker.  Nothing.  Nada.  Zip.

    And if I should be extremely busy on election day and not be able to go and vote, well, so be it.

    Parent

    Really? (1.00 / 3) (#82)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:48:34 AM EST
    Do you not even care abou the Supreme Court and other court picks??

    That alone is reason to vote for whomever the DEM nominee is.

    Totally irresponsible not to vote because your candidate might not be on the ballot. I will vote for Hillary happily to prevent McCain from ruining the Judiciary for a generation. If you had any idea how much more important this is than sitting home pouting over Hillay, you wold never say that.

    Parent

    Can you tell me one thing (5.00 / 5) (#117)
    by Kathy on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:03:49 AM EST
    Obama has fought for, other than the dem nomination (which he seems to have gotten a tad tired with lately)?

    I mean--one issue, one vote, one stand he took that was not politically expedient?  One time when he risked his neck and went on the record to support something he thought was right?

    Parent

    He is against the gas tax holiday (1.00 / 1) (#123)
    by lilybart on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:06:36 AM EST
    that is a good test.

    How about the VOTE AGAINST THE WAR POWERS?

    Parent

    You do realize (5.00 / 6) (#127)
    by Marvin42 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:12:31 AM EST
    He wasn't a senator back then, right? He never voted on it.

    Also the gas tax position is smart policy for him, but its the exact kind of dumb positions that democrats take and get destroyed by republicans. So we end up with BAD energy policy but we can soothe ourselves that we took a principled position.

    Sometimes I don't know why I am a democrat anymore.

    Parent

    Please tell me you're kidding (5.00 / 3) (#129)
    by xspowr on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:14:38 AM EST
    Obama cast no such "vote."

    Parent
    Bill Clinton correctly (5.00 / 1) (#137)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:23:29 AM EST
    deemed the Obama spin on Obama's position on Iraq war as "fairytale."

    Parent
    your mistake about the war powers (5.00 / 4) (#145)
    by Kathy on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:36:15 AM EST
    "vote" sort of drummed out your belief that Obama is taking a huge stand on the gas tax holiday--something he voted for, like, six times, as a state senator but now seems to think is a bad idea.

    Just words, and hollow ones at that.  I mean, seriously--I ask you to name one thing he took a stand on, one issue where he got political heat for his vocal support or opposition, and all you can come up with is that he doesn't support the gas tax holiday?

    Can't you see a problem with that?  Doesn't it bother you that any one of us here can name a number of issues where Clinton took votes and hard stances and got heat for them, and all you can come up with for Obama is, "he said the gas tax holiday is a bad idea!"  It's right up there with, "You forgot Poland!"

    Logic and common sense: just two more things thrown under the Obama bus.

    Parent

    Obviously (5.00 / 6) (#134)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:19:43 AM EST
    the Democratic establishment didn't care about the Supreme Court or other court picks, or they wouldn't have tacitly helped Obama block a revote in Fl/MI.  If they don't care about it, why should I, a 40-something low information voter, care.

    And BTW, Obama would have voted for Roberts if his advisor hadn't stopped him.  I have zero -- no -- less than zero confidence that he would appoint judges that care about Democratic principles.  He certainly is the first to abandon Democratic principles and to praise Republicans over Democrats.  

    Parent

    But McCain has promised he will (3.00 / 1) (#138)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:24:47 AM EST
    about justices in the mold of Alito and Scalia.  I'm going with the devil I don't know.

    Parent
    McCain (4.00 / 1) (#157)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:48:44 AM EST
    has promised many things that are contrary to his character before this election cycle.

    No, I'm not advocating for McCain.  I'm in fact advocating for neither McCain nor Obama.

    I believe Obama will be another Carter, meaning 4 years of Obama, followed by at least 12 years of Republican.  Lots of judges will be appointed during the 12 years.

    Republicans can get away with electing sub-par candidates.  Democrats, who don't have the "blessing" of the media, can't.

    Parent

    I know you aren't advocating for McCain (5.00 / 1) (#160)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:54:03 AM EST
    and certainly not for Obama.  Just giving my opinion it is important to vote Dem. in the GE due to judicial nominations by new Pres.  I don't think Obama will be a one term Pres.  I don't think he'll be elected.

    Parent
    IF Obama Is The Nominee, (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by MO Blue on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:20:50 AM EST
    I'd have to think about it. I would have to think about his policies, his approach, his tone..........

    Parent
    Not so fast, jack. (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by pie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:24:50 AM EST
    The fat lady ain't singing.  That noise you hear is the sound of your own caterwauling.  :- )

    Parent
    All Obama has to do... (5.00 / 1) (#44)
    by white n az on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:27:05 AM EST
    is to win Indiana...

    Doesn't look like that's gonna happen though...

    Another opportunity for Obama to close down the drain?

    Parent

    You must have missed the latest: goal (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:02:01 AM EST
    posts have moved to Oregon.

    Parent
    You realize it has been like this all along (5.00 / 2) (#63)
    by Marvin42 on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:33:49 AM EST
    And it is no longer helping him? So why concerned all of a sudden. Let's talk Wed morning. The media did this with Wright too and see how well that worked out!

    Parent
    I may vote for Obama. (4.66 / 3) (#27)
    by Fabian on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:12:34 AM EST
    But my actual support requires a whole lot more than I've seen so far.

    I'm both jazzed and nervous about going to see Gore today.  Jazzed because I expect a discussion of Issues and Substance.  Nervous because I think I'm going to want to bang my head against the nearest wall when I realize how weak the presidential contenders are in comparison.

    Parent

    well... (1.00 / 2) (#23)
    by AgreeToDisagree on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:10:46 AM EST
    true.  He is our nominee... I think it will still take a few more weeks to convince everyone though, which is just the way it is.  But when it is clear, I hope we objectively look at the race and make sure we get him in and keep McCain far away from the WH.

    Parent
    HE IS NOT OUR NOMINEE (5.00 / 6) (#25)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:11:53 AM EST
    STOP IT.  

    Parent
    I wish it weren't so..... (1.00 / 1) (#30)
    by coolit on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:18:47 AM EST
    Are you watching meet the press?   Russert is ushering him to the finish line.  The American people are so enamored with the media's take on things that I don't see how she can overcome that. The superdelegates are not swinging to her in this environment.

    The press is ripping her and is all about Obomentum.  I can't handle politics in this country.  She would make such a better president, but the press is in love with Barack Obama.

    Parent

    Russert speaks to Beltway (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by Stellaaa on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:21:09 AM EST
    Corporatist America does not want Hillary, the voters do.  

    Parent
    MTP...yes, I'm watching.... (5.00 / 1) (#168)
    by oldpro on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:38:46 PM EST
    and noticing (not for the first time) how very often Obama looks down and/or looks away when talking to his questioner...

    It is striking.  And revealing.  Not straightforward.

    Parent

    Sorry to point this out to you (5.00 / 1) (#185)
    by IzikLA on Sun May 04, 2008 at 04:26:47 PM EST
     But Tim Russert does NOT pick our nominee.  The American people do.  All of them.  So let's have them finish voting and then decide this.

    Parent
    maybe i'll vote for obama, but (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Kensdad on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:14:51 AM EST
    i'm not feelin' it here at all...  i don't know how i'm gonna force myself to vote for obama.  maybe disgust for the republican party and its policies are enough?  still deval patrick 2.0 for president isn't very appealing!

    Parent
    Obama is the mediaq darling (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by pie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:28:47 AM EST
    until he gets, if he gets, the nomination.

    Then McCain will assume that role.

    Just watch.

    Good bye, White House.

    Parent

    Wait till he is the nomine please (5.00 / 4) (#61)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:32:56 AM EST
    you are trolling with that one.

    Parent
    Except Hillary Clinton didn't (none / 0) (#103)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:59:38 AM EST
    make the cut in today's AP piece about the candidates' dealings with the press:

    AP

    The writer clearly favors McCain's style.

    Parent

    Is this the Weekend at Bernie's scenario? (5.00 / 2) (#73)
    by Ellie on Sun May 04, 2008 at 10:39:03 AM EST
    Just get wheezing CampaignObama over the finish line (while "bored" Obama's slouches under his own view of his Senate obligations as annoying and his "boring" campaign matchup as "Spring Training")?

    Sorry, sports fans. He's got to close it on his own steam. He's got to win it on his own cred. He's got to earn and earn back voters he's made skeptical and alienated by presenting his own record, words and actions to them.

    Astro-trolling and pestering doesn't figure into it and makes Obama look even less qualified to lead.

    Parent

    He has a comfortable lead (4.00 / 2) (#106)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:00:39 AM EST
    at the top of the ninth inning though.

    Parent
    Don't head for the parking lot (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by oldpro on Sun May 04, 2008 at 12:43:55 PM EST
    just yet.

    The winning run is on second and Ichiro is coming to the plate.

    Parent

    As my jr. hi music teacher (5.00 / 2) (#171)
    by oculus on Sun May 04, 2008 at 01:01:47 PM EST
    often sd.:  anything can happen and probably will.  

    Parent
    What they said (none / 0) (#112)
    by Manuel on Sun May 04, 2008 at 11:02:25 AM EST
    I may vote for him if he gets the nomination but I won't be able to support him among friends and relatives.  I will also stop supporting the Democratic party and its undemocratic candidate selection process (particularly if they don't resolve FL and MI).

    I almost wish for an idependent third party candidate.  Unfortunately, I don't see anyone with the guts, the cash, and the support.


    Parent

    this

    Nominating Sen. Obama would send a powerful message to the world. He's the son of a white mother from Kansas and an absent father from Kenya. His personal story would make it plain that America is changing for the better.

    What, because he's biracial?  WHO CARES?  They JUST questioned his inexperience, and said that Clinton would make a fine President.  I HATE that whole sentiment "Oh, I love Clinton, she'd make an awesome president, but I'm supporting Obama anyway."  WTF.  WHAT is going on in these peoples' heads???