Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Why Barack Obama should NOT be the Nominee..

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:04 AM
Original message
Why Barack Obama should NOT be the Nominee..
What's Happened to Barack Obama?

I had high hopes for Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), and not just because he gave one good convention speech at the Democratic National Convention. As a civil rights lawyer who represented a working class urban district in the Illinois state legislature, Obama has all the trappings of a leader who could break conventions and be a serious voice for progressives on the national stage. Unfortunately, his first six months in office have given progressives a reason to be worried that he will be just another cog in the Establishment's machine, throwing his significant political capital behind some of the worst initiatives to move through Congress.

Despite his anti-war positions as a candidate in 2004, Obama's second vote as a U.S. Senator was in support of confirming Condoleezza Rice as Secretary of State.

He also voted to confirm John Negroponte as Director of National Intelligence, despite Negroponte's involvement in Iran-Contra and other situations that clearly raise questions about his ethics and discretion.

Obama also voted for a bill to limit citizens rights to seek legal redress against abusive corporations.

During the bankruptcy debate, he helped vote down a Democratic amendment to cap the abusive interest rates credit card companies could charge. And now, Obama cast a key procedural vote in support of President Bush's right-wing judges.


Sure, sure - some other Democrats have cast some of these votes as well. Doesn't that mean I'm just picking on him? No, of course not. Obama was supposed to be different - he was supposed to be a real progressive champion. Isn't that why so many liberals/progressives are so excited about him?

Speculation about why Obama has cast these votes centers around the typical posturing that has created the soulless image the last few years - namely, that he's just opportunistically angling for higher office.

One political scientist said "I think he’s moving to the center to position himself to perhaps run for president in 2012." Another said Obama "does not want to be seen as a maverick." If this speculation is really true, it's just another sad commentary on the state of the Democratic Party today. Did John McCain teach Democrats nothing about the potential appeal of a "maverick?" Do polling numbers teach Democrats anything about what the "center" really is? Do the Democrats not understand that their biggest challenge is convincing the public they stand for something more than just political calculation/aspiration?

Obama is a very smart guy - so let me say that I'm not sure higher office is the motivation for his votes. But if it's not, what is? Is it just that he's far more conservative than he let on? In many ways, that would be worse. I don't know which to hope is true. All I know is that his short time in office is a cause for great concern - or at least reason to limit my previously boundless optimism about a person who should be one of our next great leaders.

http://www.davidsirota.com/2005/02/class-action-sellouts.html


So, Obama's campaign speech given yesterday on the stump pointing out there is no difference in replacing Republican corporatists with Democratic corporatists rings hollow in the face of his senate vote limiting citizens rights for seeking legal redress from abusive corporations.

When Obama had a chance to cast his vote doing something to actually help citizens, Obama cast his vote exactly "like" the Republican corporatists he is now bashing and distancing himself from, as he has demonstrated himself to be their twin Democratic corporatist..

Just as during the Bankruptcy debate he voted down a Democratic amendment putting caps on interest rates credit card companys could charge cardholders. Just as his bud, John Edwards did.

Besides which Obama cast a key procedural vote appointing a Right Wing Judge.. I thought we were concerned about getting Liberal Judges appointed not have one of our presidential candidates helping Bush appoint another RW Judge.

In hindsight, the similarities between Edwards and Obama's Congressional votes pre 2005 give the impression there has been quite a bit of planning going on between Edwards and Obama, at least two years in advance, for a presidential run in 08'. Confirming, Obama's spontaneity was at best staged, when he announced in Feb of 2007 saying, "pressure from public opinion convinced him to run."

Obama's Congressional votes confirm, especially with his RW Judge confirmation vote, he is more a Naderesque candidate rather than a true representative of the Democratic candidate we so desperately need to represent us this next election cycle.

Obama showed his true colors and sold us out early on with his first and second congressional votes.. All the hype about his "new" politics of Hope is just another perceptual theme based production for public consumption, motivated by an ego driven politician's undeserved lust for power.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Perry Logan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:05 AM
Response to Original message
1. Sounds like a corporate shill to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:12 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Longer than we thought..
Maybe he was cutting his teeth on his alignment with Rezko before he jumped full force from dirty Chicago Politics to Dirty DC Politics as the precursor to the Politics of Lies, he is now promoting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EV_Ares Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
3. LOL, you are saying not to vote for Obama and talking about a voting
record of which you should put down Hillary's voting record as well plus her vote to enable Bush with his wanted attack on Iran which doesn't look too good on her part right now. Not sure about his votes but I would say if you want to get conservative, would be hard to beat Hillary plus her connections to Rupert Murdoch.

Regardless, nothing there that will change my mind about him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:34 AM
Response to Original message
4. I'm not a big fan of Sirota's as relates to this race for the nomination
He's openly supporting Edwards and thus it is to be expected that he'd go full out against Obama and Clinton and others. If Biden moves up, expect Sirota to go after him. It's ironic to see a Clinton supporter posting this; Sirota reserves the bulk of his wrath for her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
5. you *DO* realize that if Hillary became president
she would be just as hawkish, if not more so, than Bush.

I'm not saying she would be just like him, she's obviously smarter and more competant, but in terms of saber-rattling and resisting the impulse to threaten agression against other entities, she's be just like Bush.

She'd have to. She's a woman. And a Democrat.

She doesn't want to be perceived as weak, so she'd be in a constant credibility-building mode of talking tough with foreign nations to prove her strength.

That's something all the other candidates wouldn't have to do. Just based on their gender alone.

Now, I'm not saying anything about her domestic agenda, which will be pretty much in line with what everyone else on our side would be, but foreign policy-wise, she'd be a hawk. A very big hawk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. I don't agree at all. And her rhetoric doesn't support your claim
I find the comparisons to bush not only spurious but funny. And I find your comments sexist as well. You're claiming that a woman, any woman, would have to be a hawk if she was elected president. I don't buy it. I think she's long positioned herself for the general election- and Edwards and Obama's positions differ very little from hers. I don't think hew IWR vote is any different from Biden's or Dodd's. Edwards vote was different, because he co-sponsored and advocated NOT waiting for the U.N. to finish their inspections. The others advocated for further inspections and diplomacy.

I do agree she's positioning herself now as strong on national defence, but I don't see her as saber rattling if she gets into the White House. If Edwards or Obama gets the nomination, expect them to stress how strong they are on national denfence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:16 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. before she said
she wouldn't directly negotiate with Iran. Obama said he would.

Now it comes out that Iran isn't close to a nuke.

And Hillary looks like a stubborn hawk.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:26 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Actually, she said she wouldn't talk directly with Ahmadinejad
She has long advocated diplomacy with Iran. And people like Durbin who voted against the IWR voted for K/L. Do I disagree with those who voted for it? Yes, but not because it authorizes anything- it doesn't, but because it sends a bad message. However, Edwards, Obama and Clinton have almost exactly the same positon on Iran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MNDemNY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:27 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. Wrong.
She said she would not pledge to sit down with achminijad (sp)in the first few months in office, with out preconditions. BHO said he would...that is ignorant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #14
65. well, we can quibble on whether its ignorant or bold
the bottom line is that Hillary would be in a position where she couldn't meet with a advesarial leader because she'd be perceived as weak. Obviously, Obama doesn't care how he's perceived, as long as he achieves results - that's what I gleamed from that exchange.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #65
66. No that's not true at all,
she won't let herself be used for propaganda purposes, but she will meet with him for serious diplomatic negotiations. The president rarely if ever meets with unfriendly foreign leaders without high level state dept. officials setting some ground rules first.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
69. I would expect
...more unquestioned and unqualified support for the Right Wing Likud government of Israel from Hillary than any of the other candidates.

Thats what these people DO.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
19. Wow--the idea that Clinton would be hawkish is based on propaganda
She has always said she was for diplomacy over war. You are buying the lies that Obama is telling.

Obama screwed up during the first debate and said that he would personally meet with the Iranian leader. That is not the process--and that shows inexperience. YOu are misunderstanding what happened. Clinton, Biden, Dodd, Richardson, Edwards all agreed on how diplomacy works and ya don't start out by having the president meet with him personally.

Obama twisted the mistake to suggest that Clinton does not believe in diplomacy. That is a lie.

And you are basing your definition of Clinton on a lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #19
64. oh yeah, because I haven't watched Hillary the past 7 years
and know noting about her other than the "propoganda"

because I'm so easily influenced by that, you know.

and of course, I know nothing of how politics works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-07-07 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #64
100. since I don't know you, I must go by your words.
And the example you used to explain why you think Clinton is "hawkish" is based on lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #5
20. They're both all wet
The so-called "Second teir" is looking better and better.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:44 AM
Response to Original message
6. Hillary voted for Condi, Negroponte, Bush wars...
and skipped the vote for the bankruptcy bill, which Obama voted against... (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0312-03.htm)

I guess she's eliminated from your list too.

:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:56 AM
Response to Reply #6
22. Clinton isn't campaigning to reform to system or as something "New"
Obama is
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #22
28. Nitpicking meaningless votes is the first sign of a losing campaign.
Now, voting for something that actually caused tens of thousands of innocent people to get killed is something entirely different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #28
34. Obama nitpicks about his non-votes
and Obama has voted to fund the war every time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #34
81. Obama has voted to fund the troops.
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 01:55 PM by Dawgs
You may want to get yourself informed before posting.

And, Obama has said his non-vote on K/L was a mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #22
73. Ah. So the key is to not even make any pretense of being anything but a hack pol
That's a fine endorsement.

She's the poster person for the same-old same-old, and that's somehow a point of pride for many of her supporters. Portrayed as realism, somehow this mechanistic maneuvering of convenience is a virtue, and by a twisted set of justifications, the undeniable fact that she's calculated and evasive when not grandstanding PROVES that she's really an idealist: her endless compromising and favor-currying literally prove that she's steadfast and unable to be bought.

This is absurd.

Since she doesn't make much of a deal out of poverty, she's not at risk of being slagged for very expensive haircuts or extremely nice houses. Since she's not pointing her finger at the corruptness of the system, she's free to be as tainted as she pleases. Now, if we could actually get footage of her eating a hamburger, we could prove that she's a vegetarian.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:42 AM
Response to Reply #6
36. Your divisive jibberish is enough to turn off even the most ardent of Obama fans
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 09:43 AM by mtnsnake
Instead of always running from thread to thread spreading the seeds of divisiveness & apathy, why not try something constructive and meaningful for once in your life?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #36
70. Informing us of Clinton's votes is "divisive"
While the fiercely anti-Obama OP is not?

Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Qutzupalotl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #36
71. How is zulchzulu's post any more divisive than the OP?
All he did was say Clinton voted the same way that Obama is being criticized for. He points that out, and he's "divisive"? What is this thread about, then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #71
75. "What is this thread about, then?"
Unless you're wearing rose colored glasses, you'd know that it's a response to another thread that was about Hillary.

What, it's alright with you that only Hillary can be bashed to death, and nobody is supposed to say anything about it? Gimme a break.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Qutzupalotl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #75
83. Why is Tellurian's "divisive gibberish" better than zulchzulu's?
And if this is a response to another thread...why not post it there?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #36
77. You're a one trick pony
People can tell you about the many problems that the Hillary Clinton campaign is bringing (like Kindergarten papers, disenfranchising voters to caucus, war votes...) and all you got is "eeeww, you're being divisive..." or "eeww, you're not very much fun..."

Ya got nuttin.

:crazy:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:50 PM
Response to Reply #77
79. blah blah blah
Tell it to the neocons. You sound just like them. Hope that helps....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:52 PM
Response to Reply #79
80. Oh... I forgot...
You also go "eewww, tell it to the neocons...you sound just like them..."

Hint: now try the "sexist" card... bring it home with "eeewww, you're a Hillary hater...."

:rofl:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #80
82. All you do is turn people away from Obama instead of towards him. Congratulations!
BTW, whenever I see you using that "laughing" emoticon I know it means that you're really pissing and moaning and stomping your little feet. That much is obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #82
85. That ain't true and you know it...oh, I forgot...
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 02:27 PM by zulchzulu
When faced with scrutiny by the Hillary camp, pull out the Ol' Dusty Excuse: "eeeewwww, you're jus' makin' people get turned off to Obama..." Any criticism of Hillary is met with this typical ruse.

Again, very predictable on your part.... this is my last comment on this pitiful thread. I ain't kickin' it no mo', bro.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #85
87. When you have to resort to lying, then it's time for you to find a better way to waste your time
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 02:32 PM by mtnsnake
I'm not saying nobody has never said anything similar, but I've never heard anyone using these particular "ruses" you speak of, although they certainly apply to you at this point and any point in the past...and most likely the future because you really do turn off people to Obama, you're that friggin obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
39. Obama voted down the Amendment capping Interest Rates on Credit Cards
You always try to turn a criticism against your boy to somehow absolve his vaunted "NEW" politics as actually something new..

"Obama was supposed to be different - he was supposed to be a real progressive champion. Isn't that why so many liberals/progressives are so excited about him?"

Pretty obvious his campaign speeches speak nothing but FRAUD and duping the American People into thinking his politics are different from everyone else. My point is...here are several examples showing there is nothing new about Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #6
68. More on bankruptcy bill
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 12:34 PM by SOS
The OP states: "he helped vote down a Democratic amendment to cap the abusive interest rates credit card companies could charge."

Conveniently omitted is the fact that the rate in question was a loan sharking 30%.
What Democrat would vote for legalized usury?
As you mentioned, Obama voted no on this disgusting bill.

Clinton voted for the bill in 2001.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MethuenProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
7. Getting in bed with the bigot wing of his church crossed him off my list.
Obama/McClurkin
Pft.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
durrrty libby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:50 AM
Response to Original message
8. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mass Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:58 AM
Response to Original message
9. Coming from you, it is hillarious... \nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rock_Garden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
11. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:40 AM
Response to Original message
15. Why only speak of the votes he took? What..
about the ones he didn't take? I am so pissed about him not voting on the latest Iranian Revolutionary Guard. What, he didn't think it was important enough to be on the record?

Unlike you I support JRE but if my only choices in this primary were Obama or Hillary she would win hands down!
I like to see her showing her warts. That way I know what I'm buying. I do not like to be conned by anyone and one good way to pull of a con is to keep votes off the official record. That way you can just say how you felt and about how wrong everyone else was with their votes.

I'm just a flip flopper I guess, because at the Democratic National Convention, when he spoke I was overwhelmed with hope.

Now, I wouldn't pay a penny to see the man with the silk voice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #15
43. Obama's words are empty words..
and as the self-proclaimed "clean hands" politician who is in politics to HELP People. We know thats a LIE!

Obama and Edwards voting record are shameful. Notice Edwards never refers to his Senate voting record...

These two candidates are Parasitic Twins...they exist because they subsist on Politics as usual. Neither one is a candidate I would consider as Presidential Timber in the forthcoming election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:42 AM
Response to Original message
16. Oh, I forgot. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeStateDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
17. He cannot win the general election .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. Baloney. He certainly can
and seeing as this may be the weakest and most damaged field of candidates ever put up by either party, I expect that whoever the dems nominate will win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:58 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. I disagree
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 08:59 AM by Evergreen Emerald
We have the media to contend with. Right now, because the right-wing propaganda machine is after Clinton, Obama is getting a free pass. He will not once the general starts. It would be all negative all the time. And Obama has made some huge gaffs that the media let him get away with.

He won't be able to, once the media finishings picking the dem. candidate.

And of course we have diebold to deal with .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:03 AM
Response to Reply #24
26. utter nonsense.
he can win and the trends in this country demonstrate that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #26
30. "trends?"
He has not been vetted. He has not had to deal with any pressure on the campaign trail. And when he has had the least bit of pressure, he folds.

Trends: the media is helping him. All negative all the time does stuff to your numbers. That is what Clinton is going through. Obama will go through it after they are done with her. Watch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scriptor Ignotus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #24
51. gaffes?
he's been ahead of the curve on numerous issues so the mainstream media attacked him. Like the issue of going into Pakistan to hunt Bin LAden or Al Qaeda. People on DU ridiculed him, people in the MSM questioned him. Well, it turns out many in the intelligence community support Obama's position and it's since become clear Musharraf is no great ally or friend of democracy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vssmith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #21
29. I expect that whoever the dems nominate will win...
When people start thinking like this it scares me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Evergreen Emerald Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #29
31. Me too
Now: the dem should win. But, Gore and Kerry should have won too. (and likely did).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JPZenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #17
38. What Matters, Again, Are the Swing States
The November election will again come down to Ohio, Florida and a few other swing states. Therefore, national polls are irrelevant. I don't particularly care whether Obama would do well in South Carolina - the Dems don't have a chance there anyway.

A mid-Nov. poll in Ohio compared Clinton vs. Giuliani and Obama vs. Giuliani. Clinton only did 3 percentage points better than Obama. Obama is not well known by many Republican and independent voters. The more you know about him, the more you like him. In many ways, he can only go up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SIMPLYB1980 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:47 AM
Response to Original message
18. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Czolgosz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 08:58 AM
Response to Original message
23. If we can't elect Kucinich (and I agree we can't) & if Edwards doesn't win, Obama is the next best
choice by far.

Of course, Obama admittedly lacks experience as first lady, and his triangulation skills are not the equal of Hillary's, but Hillary is a lukewarm Lieberman wannabe who would inspire Republicans to show up at the ballot box (and depress the Democratic vote) and her nomination WOULD COST US DOZENS AND DOZENS (IF NOT HUNDREDS) OF DOWN BALLOT RACES IN CONGRESS, IN STATE LEGISLATURES, IN JUDICIAL ELECTIONS AND EVEN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS ACROSS THE WHOLE COUNTRY!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #23
44. Hillary IS the one!
I know this post is going to rub you the wrong way, Czolgosz. However, I'm sure you noticed Kooch likes Hillary. He defends her at every debate..pointing fingers at Edwards and Obama. I think DK is trying to point out, that of all in the field of candidates running, Hillary IS the best candidate, of course, beside himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #44
48. Kooch and Hillary would make a great team
If Hillary becomes President, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the Goddess of Peace makes a spot available on her cabinet for the king of diplomacy, Dennis Kucinich, even if she has to create a Department of Peace like he would want. Hillary has always been a true leader in diplomacy herself (despite the lies and bullshit that people on this forum spew about her daily), so it's no small wonder that the two of them get along so well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #48
53. I think you may be onto something..
afaics...Kooch is a good endorsement for Hillary..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
25. I smell desperation, but thanks for the laugh. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #25
32. i got my laugh today too..seems the "H" tag team has several of these type posts today..
it is a daily thing now...

duck and cover!!

fly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BeyondGeography Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #25
33. It's morning, too, isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #25
46. Sister, what you "smell" is nuance.. far safer than saying anything credible..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dawgs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:07 AM
Response to Original message
27. DESPERATE!!! If this is your reasoning then Hillary must really be out of it for you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:31 AM
Response to Original message
35. Thank you for this post. This is truly an eye opener.
When I first heard Obama speak at that Keynote Address in 2004 I thought he'd have a shot to become a future President. I'm still keeping my hopes up that sometime down the road it still might happen, but with all these reveleations coming out about him everyday, I'm not so sure now. Being as pro-corporation as he is doesn't bode well for his chances to impress the base of the Party. He might make Iowans happy with his pro-corporate attitudes, but he sure won't make many friends in the more liberal sections of the country. Yikes
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #35
47. You're welcome snake..
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 10:50 AM by Tellurian
I guess we all thought Obama was something or someone who would uplift the masses. His voting record shows he's nothing new to Main St. politics. It's business as usual in DC for Obama. The only thing about him that is different, he can LIE 24/7 and never be called on it by his supporters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JPZenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
37. Rice Was the Best We Could Get from Bush
Condi Rice was the best nominee for Sec. of State that we could expect from The Asshole. Condi would not have been my choice, but she has helped to off-set the push for war with Iran. Condi seems to have a better chance of standing up to Cheney than Powell, who was too accustomed to following orders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clintonista2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:11 AM
Response to Original message
40. Obama would be eaten alive in a GE
Give him another 20 years and maybe he'll be ready. I think Democratic voters are smart enough to choose Clinton over Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. Not the ones who have their eyes and ears open; you should try it! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #42
49. Whats with the ear thing?
You said something similar to me yesterday..

Far be it from me to criticize fetishes. To each his own.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nedsdag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #40
61. Another 20 years and he'll be ready?
Oh, you mean like John Kerry?

I love when Hillbots use the "not ready" excuse on why Obama shouldn't run for president this year. They want him to sit down and shut up.

Well, with apologies to Cynthia McKinney, he will not sit down and he will not shut up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alamom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
41. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #41
45. I love that picture
I also love that video I saw of him endorsing Hillary, where he praised her leadership skills. The guy knows a winner when he sees one, I'll give him that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #45
50. Gen Clark is a TOP Shelf endorsement for Hillary..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:04 AM
Response to Reply #50
52. Wow that is one powerful video of Clark endorsing Hillary. Thanks for that video link
His last sentence says it all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:15 AM
Response to Original message
54. I'm okay with Obama winning the nomination.
I used to argue that Obama doesn't have quite the experience to become President but then I thought of Bush being up there and Obama, imo, would do a better job than that bozo.

May the best man or woman win!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PresidentObama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:27 AM
Response to Original message
55. The OP isn't surprising coming from someone with an His44 banner.
Yawn.

Attack, attack, attack.

Having nothing good to say about Hillary, so let's attack!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cuke Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #55
56. Your post hypocritical is also an attack
that contains no defense for Obama's lies and distortions
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #55
60. um, perhaps you missed this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3799105

Are you going to yawn and complain about "attacks" there? In fact, that thread is an attack based on someone's opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tellurian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #60
67. Yep, sounds like the RW Kangaroo Court..
Two lines of summary with little extrapolation or evidence backing up a claim, makes their attack threadworthy?

Somebody said, that he said = so it's bad/wrong/lie/immoral!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #55
92. Oh, please.
And a well-known Obama supporter posted the mirror image of this thread ("why Hillary should not be the nominee") yesterday and ended the post with "Gobama!"

The double-standard is appalling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:34 AM
Response to Original message
57. Fair's fair on this board
and since someone so 'graciously' posted a thread like this about Clinton, I'll K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CyberPieHole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:45 AM
Response to Original message
58. K&R. Pandering to religious bigots crossed him off my list. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cameron27 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #58
59. Well, the way he handled Kyl/Lieberman
gave me doubts, but McClurkin sealed the deal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CyberPieHole Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #59
62. Same here. Not voting for legislation is NOT the same as voting "NAY"...
but, strangely, many of his supporters seem to ignore the issue.

Mcclurkin was true pandering and Obama's reason for doing so is obvious: Obama wants the support of religious conservatives at the expense of GLBT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:15 PM
Response to Reply #62
63. Aint that the truth
Only two people in the entire Senate weren't willing to put their asses on the line for that important vote.

many of his supporters seem to ignore the issue


Many of his supporters on this forum are so full of hatred that it's enough to drive some of the more sensible ones to another candidate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
72. Those waters muddied enough, yet?
Posts like this are why I hate the Clinton machine.

Posts like this are why I think the Clinton machine will win the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. What about the other thread?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #74
76. First-degree campaign nonsense.
Throw a pack of slurs at your opponent, hoping some stick.

This here is second-degree campaign nonsense. You know, muddying the waters. Rather than address bogus arguments or counter them with support for her achievements, the OP turns it around and accuse Obama of the same. To combat allegations, they post a pack of verbiage that cannot reasonably be entirely countered. It's a combination of tu quoque (ironically, often tu quoque that would apply equally well to Hillary) and argument by inundation. It happens all the time in campaigns--when a campaign doesn't like the direction the conversation is headed, they flood the conversation with so much shit that nobody can tell what's what any more, and the voters either shrug and move on or they form an opinion at random.

I don't like it, because it's fundamentally dishonest, and even more dishonest than a lie is--it's not aimed to persuade, it's aimed to make persuasion impossible. I believe it's abuse of the public trust in political dialogue.

At the same time, it's also very effective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
78. HOW DID HILLARY VOTE?
You might as well at least be honest with yourself and with others. Hillary voted for everything that Obama did, as well as a LOT of stuff that was much worse. Iraq War Resolution, anyone?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SIMPLYB1980 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #78
86. At least Hillary will take a vote.
Better than voting present.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #86
90. So in other words, you have nothing but myths for defense.
Never mentioning the fact that "present" was exactly the vote that the Illinois Planned Parenthood Council was lobbying people for.

And you never acknowledged the point. Pray tell, what has Obama voted for that Clinton didn't? Not the war, certainly, and not the Kyl-Lieberman amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SIMPLYB1980 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-07-07 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #90
103. Thats not the only time Obama voted present.
He does it all the time on any issue that might let the voters actually know where he stands on important issues. All you can go on is what he says he will do, with very little evidence supporting what he actually believes in.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/02/the_everpresent_obama.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maximusveritas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
84. What would Sirota says about Hillary?
You realize he's an Edwards supporter right?
Do you also trust what he says about Hillary?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:36 PM
Response to Original message
88. I disagree, Hillary has proven she represents old school politics while Obama has clearly
shown that he represents REAL new change in the way this government should be run.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
89. But what did HRC do?
Edited on Thu Dec-06-07 03:02 PM by karynnj
On the confirmation of Dr Rice, HRC voted to confirm. Here are the people who voted against her.
Akaka (D-HI)
Bayh (D-IN)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00002

HRC also voted to confirm Negroponte, who was confirmed 89-2.

As to the Bankruptcy bill, Obama never voted for it - HRC and Edwards did in 2001.

This is a smear piece by Sirota in support of Edwards, who he now sees as to left of everybody in DC.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #89
93. Op-Eds provide the opportunity to hop on somebody else's opinion
... with little regard for the facts, and no doubt the factual information you provided here will be either impugned or ignored by those content to ride the wave of someone's else bias.

Thanks for posting. The truth matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
91. Obama doesn't have what it takes to beat the Republican machine.
That, among many reasons, is why he should not be our nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreeState Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #91
95. I agree he is too green - Id like to see him run in a few more years n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 06:35 PM
Response to Original message
94. John Edwards was not in Congress when the 2005 Bankruptcy Bill passed
Why do people keep saying this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calteacherguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:48 PM
Response to Original message
96. The #1 Hillary supporter here worried about "another cog in the Establishment's machine"?"
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl

TRY AGAIN!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sandaasu Donating Member (268 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-06-07 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
97. Hillary supporters really need to educate themselves about the whole "glass houses" concept. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BenDavid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-07-07 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
98. Obama is running because he believes he is not the most
qualified of the candidates but honestly believes he is owed this postion simply because of his race. Now if you do not believe me then go and read what Mrs Obama said about black folks not voting for her husband.

"Michelle Obama, the wife of Senator Barack Obama, the reason for her husband's lag is the "fear of possibility" owned by those hold-out blacks; scared flesh in their racial memory from being told too often that we are "not ready" to achieve. For Michelle Obama to claim that in terms of voting for her husband black America will one day "wake up and get it" is to imply that any person of color who does not vote for Obama is somehow slumbering or stupid. That Obama need not earn the black vote, but rather our votes must be given out of racial fidelity."

"Michelle Obama: If You’re Black, Vote for Barack. Because He’s Black.
When Sen. Barack Obama inevitably loses in his bid to become the next President of the United States (whether that be in the Democratic Primary or in the General Election), his wife has already started laying the foundation of blame.

And who is Michelle Obama laying the early blame on? Black people.

Michelle Obama thinks that if her hubby doesn’t win, it’s because black folk don’t have enough self-esteem:

Reporter: “The polls are showing your husband is trailing Hillary by 46% to 37% in the African-American community. What’s going on here?”
Mrs. Obama: “First of all, I think that that’s not going to hold. I’m completely confident: black America will wake up, and get . But what we’re dealing with in the black community is just the natural fear of possibility.

Riiiiigggghhhtttt….

Read the entire thing — in addition to blaming black people’s low self esteem for her husbands failed popularity — Michelle also tells the black community that they should be voting for her hubby for no other reason than they share the same color skin.

Now imagine that the white wife of a white senator blamed their campaign woes on the low self esteem of the black community…
urbangrounds

Voting for a person because of the color of his skin is racist.It also is stupid.

Ben David



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-07-07 04:02 AM
Response to Original message
99. Oh STOP!
As if Hillary isn't a corporate shill. This post from a Hillary supporter is laughable. If all you can do is berate Barack over something Hillary is the best in the business at I'd suggest finding something more to do with your time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanielleClarke Donating Member (7 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-07-07 09:01 AM
Response to Original message
101. BARACK OBAMA SAYS:
BARACK OBAMA SAYS:
TOP PRIORITIES:
My top priority as president will be ending this war
in Iraq, a war that should have never been authorized
and never been waged. In doing so, I will work to keep
our country safe from terrorists and to restore
American credibility around the world. Providing
universal health care to the 47 million Americans who
currently do not have it will be another top priority
of my administration, as will combating global warming
and putting our country on the path toward energy
independence. But all of the issues that I have
focused on in this campaign -- whether it's creating a
21st century education system and fighting poverty or
achieving comprehensive immigration reform and
strengthening our economy -- are vitally important and
must be prioritized by the next president. And all of
these issues share one thing in common: in order to
fully address them, we have to do more than change
political parties. We have to fundamentally change our
politics and transform the way business is done in
Washington.

IRAQ WAR:
I opposed this war from the beginning, when it was
unpopular to do so, in part because I believed it was
a diversion from the real threat of al Qaeda and that
giving this President the authority would lead to the
open-ended occupation we find ourselves in today. Now
our soldiers find themselves in the crossfire of a
civil war and our military is stretched thin. I
support beginning the withdrawal of our troops from
Iraq immediately, and under the plan I introduced in
January 2007, we would have begun withdrawing forces
engaged in combat operations on May 1, 2007. A
withdrawal of our troops is the best leverage we have
to press the Iraqi political leaders to make the
political compromises necessary to end their civil
war.

IRAQ WAR 2:
What distinguishes my plan from nearly all the other
candidates is that I was among the few with the good
judgment to have opposed the war from the beginning.
Now that we must correct the mistake of authorizing
and waging this war, there are only bad options and
worse options. Under my plan, we would begin
withdrawing troops immediately. I would maintain a
follow on force in and around Iraq to protect ongoing
U.S. interests there, including counter-terrorism
operations, training and force protection. Since
success in stopping this civil war requires a
political solution among Iraq's leaders, I have
proposed a diplomatic surge in Iraq and in the
neighboring countries. My plan to end the war also
seeks to use policy measures now to ensure that our
troops are not confronted with destabilizing ethnic
strife that undercuts regional stability later. To
that end, I have proposed that we condition any future
assistance to Iraq on human rights performance, that
we aggressively seek to assist Iraq's internally
displaced now, that we increase funding for refugees
in neighboring countries, and that we declare the
international community's intention to hold the
perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity,
and genocide accountable for their crimes.

SECURITY:
My first priority would be to end the war in Iraq. It
has cost America dearly in terms of blood and
treasure, been a diversion from the fight against al
Qaeda, stretched our military, and undermined the view
of the United States the world wide. Ending the war in
Iraq will permit us to develop a comprehensive
strategy against terrorism, which will be another
chief national security priority of my administration.
I will ensure that we are taking sufficient action
against the terrorists on the right battlefield in
Afghanistan and Pakistan; that we develop the
capabilities and partnerships we need to counter the
terrorist threat in other parts of the world; that we
engage the world to dry up support for terrorism and
extremism; that we restore for the rule of law and our
values; and that we secure a resilient homeland. My
administration will also make it a priority to marshal
a global effort to meet a threat that rises above all
others in urgency -- securing, destroying, and
stopping the spread of weapons of mass destruction. As
president, I will lead a global effort to secure all
nuclear weapons and material at vulnerable sites
within four years -- the most effective way to prevent
terrorists from acquiring a bomb. We should fully
implement the law I passed with Senator Dick Lugar
that would help the United States and our allies
detect and stop the smuggling of weapons of mass
destruction throughout the world. While we work to
secure existing stockpiles of nuclear material, we
should also negotiate a verifiable global ban on the
production of new nuclear weapons material. As
starting points, the world must prevent Iran from
acquiring nuclear weapons and work to eliminate North
Korea's nuclear weapons program. We must also dissuade
other countries from joining the nuclear club.
Countries should not be able to build a weapons
program under the auspices of developing peaceful
nuclear power. That's why we should create an
international fuel bank to back up commercial fuel
supplies so there's an assured supply and no more
excuses for nations like Iran to build their own
enrichment plants. And if we want the world to
deemphasize the role of nuclear weapons, the United
States and Russia must lead by example. President Bush
once said, 'The United States should remove as many
weapons as possible from high-alert, hair-trigger
status -- another unnecessary vestige of Cold War
confrontation.' Six years later, President Bush has
not acted on this promise. I will. We cannot and
should not accept the threat of accidental or
unauthorized nuclear launch. We can maintain a strong
nuclear deterrent to protect our security without
rushing to produce a new generation of warheads.

HEALTH CARE
Every American has the right to affordable,
comprehensive and portable health coverage. My plan
will ensure that all Americans have health care
coverage through their employers, private health
plans, the federal government, or the states. My plan
builds on and improves our current insurance system,
which most Americans continue to rely upon, and
creates a new public health plan for those currently
without coverage. Under my plan, Americans will be
able to choose to maintain their current coverage if
they choose to. For those without health insurance I
will establish a new public insurance program, and
provide subsides to afford care for those who need
them. My plan includes a mandate that all children
have health care coverage and I will expand
eligibility for the Medicaid and SCHIP programs to
help ensure we cover all kids. My plan requires all
employers to contribute towards health coverage for
their employees or towards the cost of the public
plan. Under my plan a typical family will save $2,500
each year. We will realize tremendous savings within
the health care system from improving efficiency and
quality and reducing wasted expenditures system-wide.
Specifically, these savings will result from
investments in health information technology,
improvements in prevention and management of chronic
conditions, increased insurance industry competition
and reduced industry overhead, the provision of
federal reinsurance for catastrophic coverage, and
reduced spending on uncompensated care.

EDUCATION:
The goal of the No Child Left Behind Act is the right
one -- ensuring that all children can meet high
standards -- but the law has significant flaws that
need to be addressed. However, unfulfilled funding
promises, inadequate implementation by the Department
of Education, and shortcomings in the design of the
law itself have limited its effectiveness and undercut
its support among many people who care deeply about
our schools and our students. The shortcomings of
NCLB, however, shouldn't end the conversation. They
should be the start of a conversation about how we can
do better. One of the greatest troubles of No Child
Left Behind is that we have spent too much time
preparing students for tests that do not provide any
valuable, timely feedback on how to improve a
student's learning. We need tests and measurements,
but we should ensure that they are useful to improve
student learning. As president, I will support the
creation of testing models that will: provide
educators and students with timely feedback about how
to improve student performance instead of arriving
with too little too late; measure readiness for
college and success in an information-age workplace by
testing reading comprehension, writing skills, and
other critical thinking skills; and indicate whether
individual students are actually making progress
toward reaching high standards. Good teachers with the
tools to do their jobs should not have to teach to the
test. They should be able to teach a rich curriculum.

CHANGES IN EDUCATION:
As President, I'd launch a campaign to recruit and
support hundreds of thousands of newteachers across
the country, because the single most important factor
inside the school building for a student's achievement
is the person standing in front of the classroom. I
will treat teachers like the professionals they are,
making sure they get the pay they deserve, while
working with them to develop the high standards we
need. We need to create real career opportunities that
reward successful teachers, motivate them to stay in
the profession, and take advantage of their skills to
help mentor new teachers. Teachers and educators need
time to plan lessons and learn. That time should be
made available each week and in the summer time. And
teachers and principals should be paid for this
additional work. We can't ignore that the achievement
gap is a problem across the country. To tackle this
problem, the first thing we have to do is close the
gap that exists between children before they enter
kindergarten by providing high-quality preschool
opportunities to all children. Far too few Latino and
African-American children are enrolled in early
childhood education programs, despite the proven
successes of such programs. As president, I will
increase funding for Head Start and expand access to
Pre-K. My plan to attract and retain high-quality
teachers in high-needs districts will also go a long
way toward closing this achievement gap. I have
proposed grant funding for prospective teachers to
serve residencies with school districts similar to
training in other professional fields like medicine.
Prospective teachers will learn from mentor teachers,
with stipends provided to teachers-in-training in
exchange for a commitment to teach in that district
once they complete the program. This will provide
effective training of new teachers in high-needs
districts.


GAY MARRIAGE:
I oppose the Federal Marriage Amendment.

CIVIL UNIONS:
I support civil unions.

ABORTION:
I have been a consistent champion of reproductive
choice and will make preserving women's rights under
Roe v. Wade a priority as president. I oppose any
constitutional amendment to overturn the Supreme
Court's decision in that case.

POOR:
The federal government has a critical role to play in
eradicating poverty. It's a moral outrage that in the
richest nation on earth, 37 million Americans are
living in poverty. I will increase federal funding for
anti-poverty programs. In addition to passing my
universal health care plan, I will fully fund the
Community Development Block Grant program and create
an Affordable Housing Trust Fund. I will increase
funding for transitional jobs and career pathways
programs and I'll provide greater supports for
exoffenders and their families. I will ensure that
minimum wage is indexed for inflation. And I will
expand eligibility and increase the Earned Income Tax
Credit to benefit 12 million Americans. Additionally,
I have called for the creation of a new program that
replicates the success of the Harlem Children's Zone
-- an all-encompassing, all-hands-on-deck anti-poverty
effort that is literally saving a generation of
children in a neighborhood where they were never
supposed to have a chance. As president, an important
part of my plan to combat poverty will be to replicate
the Harlem Children's Zone in twenty cities across the
country. These 'Promise Neighborhoods' will focus on
addressing concentrated, intergenerational poverty in
our cities. We'll train staff, we'll have them draw up
detailed plans with attainable goals, and the federal
government will provide half of the funding for each
city, with the rest coming from philanthropies and
businesses. I will also create a White House Office of
Urban Policy and have the Director of that Office
report directly to me. Finally, I will provide
families the support they need to raise their
children. I will provide more financial support to
fathers who make the responsible choice to help raise
their children and crack down on the fathers who
don't. And I'll help new mothers with their new
responsibilities by expanding a pioneering program
known as the Nurse-Family Partnership that offers home
visits by trained registered nurses to low-income
mothers and mothers-to-be. My plan will assist
approximately 570,000 first-time mothers each year.

GUNS:
Yes, I do think that reasonable gun control measures
reduces violent crime and saves lives. I respect the
constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. But
we can't deny that gun violence has taken the lives of
too many Americans. I believe that through
common-sense measures, we can keep guns from those who
may pose a threat, while also protecting the rights of
legitimate hunters and sportsmen.

GUN CONTROL:
I support reasonable, common-sense measures to limit
such occurrences. I would close the gun-show loophole
and require mandatory background checks on purchasers
at gun shows. That loophole has been exploited by
everyone from foreign terrorists to the Columbine High
School shooters. Closing it would not impair the
rights of hunters and other lawful gun owners. I also
believe that we should make the expired federal
Assault Weapons Ban permanent. Those weapons belong on
a foreign battlefield, not on our streets. Finally, I
support making guns in this country child proof. This
is, again, a common-sense solution: guns and kids
don't mix.

STEM CELL RESEARCH:
No. Each year, 100,000 Americans will develop
Alzheimer's disease, with impaired memory, ability to
understand, and judgment. Over 1 million adults will
be diagnosed with diabetes this year, and risk
complications that include blindness, damaged nerves
and loss of kidney function. We all know or have met
individuals with spinal cord injuries, including
national celebrities, local war heroes and loved ones
from our own families and circles of friends, who are
struggling to maintain mobility and independence. For
most of our history, medicine has offered little hope
of recovery to the 100 million individuals affected by
these and other devastating illnesses and injuries.
Until now. Recent developments in stem cell research
may hold the key to improved treatments, if not cures,
for those affected by Alzheimer's disease, diabetes,
spinal cord injury and countless other conditions. For
this reason, I am a proud supporter of the Stem Cell
Research Enhancement Act. The president was wrong to
veto it, and I will make sure that it is finally
signed into law when I'm president.


ENERGY:
Global warming is not just the greatest environmental
challenge facing our planet -- it is one of our
greatest challenges of any kind. Combating global
warming will be a top priority of my presidency, and I
will attend to it personally. Putting a price on
carbon is the most important step we can take to
reduce emissions. I will enact an economy-wide
market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce U.S.
carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050. I will devote
significant resources from a permit auction toward
accelerating the development and deployment of low
carbon technologies and addressing the economic
challenges imposed on key industrial sectors. Another
top priority for my energy and global warming agenda
will be changing the cars we drive and the fossil
fuels we burn. I will increase fuel efficiency
standards by 4% per year, lift the
60,000-per-manufacturer cap on buyer tax credits to
encourage more Americans to buy ultra-efficient
vehicles, and encourage automakers to make fuel
efficient hybrid vehicles. Domestic automakers will
get either assistance shouldering their health care
legacy costs in exchange for investing 50 percent of
the savings into technology to produce more
fuel-efficient vehicles or generous tax incentives for
retooling assembly plants. I proposed a National Low
Carbon Fuel Standard to reduce the lifecycle
greenhouse gas emissions of passenger vehicle fuels
sold in the U.S. by 10 percent in 2020 and require
additional reductions of 1% annually thereafter.

ENERGY 2:
Yes, I will dramatically increase federal investment
in advanced clean-energy technologies and energy
efficiency. I believe that the U.S. can and should be
a global leader in the development of alternative
energy sources, such as ethanol and other biofuels, as
well as wind and solar. We should set benchmarks for
production so that more companies will invest in
production and create distribution facilities where
the average consumer can access biofuels for cars
designed to run on them. And I believe nationally we
must get more energy from renewable sources and
support a goal of 20% renewable energy by 2020. We
have vast potential in this country to produce clean
renewable energy and reduce our reliance on dwindling
domestic natural gas reserves. The investment
certainty provided by a significant RPS will encourage
innovation, bring down the costs of renewable power,
encourage necessary investment in new transmission,
inspire new domestic industries, and strengthen rural
economies. I will also create the 5-E (Energy
Efficiency, Environmental Education and Employment)
Disconnected Youth Service Corps. This program will
directly engage disconnected and disadvantaged youth
in energy efficiency and environmental service
opportunities to strengthen their communities while
also providing them with practical skills and
experience in important career fields of expected
high-growth employment. The program will engage
private sector employers and unions to provide
apprenticeship opportunities.

IMMIGRATION:
I was very disappointed by the Congress's failure to
pass comprehensive immigration reform. This crisis
demands that we take action. Holes remain in our
borders. Millions of undocumented immigrants persist
in the shadows. I will work to pass comprehensive
reform that protects our security, bolsters our
economy, and preserves America's tradition as a nation
of immigrants who are welcomed as long as they work
hard and play by the rules.

IMMIGRATION 2:
We need to work in a bipartisan way to achieve
comprehensive immigration reform. First, on security,
comprehensive reform has to mean gaining operational
control of our borders by using better technology,
improving infrastructure, and making smart choices
about where we deploy resources on the Southern and
Northern borders. These actions can strengthen our
security while discouraging people from taking the
risk of crossing the border illegally. Second, at the
workplace, we need a simple, but mandatory electronic
system that enables employers to verify the legal
status of the people they hire. Third, we need to
bring the 12 million undocumented people out of the
shadows. We need to be realistic about the fact that
they are here, we can't deport them, and they have
become an integral part of our society. We need to
give this population a chance to pay a fine, to have
provisional status in the country, and to get into the
back of the line for citizenship.

AFFIRMIATIVE ACTION:
I support affirmative action. When there is strong
evidence of prolonged and systemic discrimination by
organizations, affirmative action may be the only
meaningful remedy available. Affirmative action
programs, when properly structured, can open up
opportunities otherwise closed to qualified minorities
without having an adverse impact on the opportunities
for whites. And while I support affirmative action for
minorities, I also support efforts to increase
opportunities for qualified students from low-income
college to attend colleges and universities --
regardless of their race.

BUDGET ISSUES 1
I am committed to restoring fiscal discipline and
reforming our current budget and tax system. The most
important first step we can take on that path is to
restore pay-as-you-go spending rules so that we do not
dig ourselves into deeper debt. My priorities will not
increase the deficit. I will pay for each of the
investments I call for by either cutting other
spending or finding new revenue sources. If in the end
I can't find enough offsets to fund all of my
priorities, I will prioritize them. I will protect the
tax cuts for the middle class, but I will repeal the
unnecessary tax cuts for oil and gas companies and for
the wealthiest Americans.

BUDGET ISSUES 2
Yes. I support the tax cuts for low and middle income
families and will work to make them permanent in a
fiscally responsible way. These are the families
facing the greatest economic challenges and anxiety,
and they are the ones who should benefit first. I do
not support making permanent Bush's tax cuts for the
wealthy. Rather than providing expensive,
deficit-financed tax cuts that benefit the wealthiest
Americans, we should be working to fix our tax system
to help the middle-class. Extending the Bush tax cuts
for the wealthy simply does not do that.

ECONOMY:
Today's economic growth and federal economic policies
disproportionately benefit the wealthiest of
Americans, many of whom have armies of lobbyists and
political fundraisers at their disposal. Special
interests that have spent billions of dollars lobbying
Washington have received preferential tax treatment,
scores of congressional earmarks and favorable
regulatory decisions at the expense of low and
middle-income Americans. My top priority in Washington
is to put America's interests before the special
interests and ensure that the benefits of
globalization and economic growth are distributed more
fairly in our society.

ECONOMY 2:
First, I will make strategic, long-term investments
into American infrastructure to create more high-wage
jobs. I will expand federal funding for basic
research, make the tax credit for research and
development permanent, and expand the deployment of
broadband technology, so that businesses can invest in
innovation and create high-paying, secure jobs. And I
will make investments in education, training, and
workforce development so that Americans can leverage
our strengths -- our ingenuity and entrepreneurialism
-- to create new high-wage jobs and prosper in a world
economy. Second, I will fight against trade agreements
that undermine American competitiveness and use trade
as a tool to grow American jobs. I will use trade
agreements to spread good labor and environmental
standards around the world and stand firm against
agreements like the Central American Free Trade
Agreement (CAFTA) that fail to live up to those
important benchmarks. Third, I will promote digital
inclusion. Getting broadband Internet access into
every home and business in urban America at an
affordable rate could give low-income people increased
opportunities to start businesses and engage actively
in our communities.

SOCIAL SECUIRTY:
No, I do not support the privatization of Social
Security. I opposed President Bush s privatization
scheme because it would have undermined -- not
strengthened - Social Security. We should not add
greater risk or debt to the system. Otherwise, workers
who contribute to the Social Security System may face
the prospect of inadequate benefits when they retire
or if they become disabled if their investments go
sour. Workers have lived up to their end of the
bargain. Surely, the federal government can do the
same. Social Security is one of the most important
government programs ever created; it provides a vital
safety net to millions of seniors and Americans with
disabilities. The long-term problem with this program
is real but manageable. With a little genuine
bipartisan leadership, we can make the necessary
adjustments without gutting the system with
privatization, as President Bush has proposed.

SOCIAL SECURITY 2:
Social Security is indispensable to our workers and
seniors. It is a great reflection of our values and
commitments, and I want to make sure it is solvent and
viable for the American people, now and in the future.
The focus of reform options should be on protecting
the basic integrity and fairness of Social Security. I
will work in a bipartisan way to maintain Social
Security's solvency for future generations. I believe
everything has to be on the table that is genuinely
intended to strengthen the program. We can close the
gap with an equitable mix of benefit and tax changes
similar to those recommended by the bipartisan
Greenspan Commission in 1983.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Progress And Change Donating Member (617 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-07-07 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
102. don't forget his bigotry tour in SC!
Obama exposed himself as, like Reagan, Nixon and others who used the "Southern Strategy", having no qualms about using bigotry to satisfy his lust for power. It is even worse considering this is a man who vowed to transform politics...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:16 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC