2008 Presidential Election

[MaN]

Of course, they should properly move closer to each other and the center...

Dude Griff. I know the differences but what I quote from you is exactly what I see happening even now. I think that Obama had some almost revolutinary ideas that he backed away from and if he continues to do so then he will be just another politician come time for elections. I think the thing that bothered me the most was his pandering to AIPAC... Isn't it time that America does what is good for America and not just its only ally? Speaking of backing away from things, he backed away from the undivided Jerusalem about two days after that speech.....

McCain? Who is this McCain fellar?

I watch and I wait.. Although I am not very hopeful. I might still have to write in come November....


www.democracynow.org

 

[Griffith]

I know the differences but what I quote from you is exactly what I see happening even now. I think that Obama had some almost revolutinary ideas that he backed away from and if he continues to do so then he will be just another politician come time for elections.

True enough, but I think it's important to keep in perspective that he is a politician and to not be too disappointed at the times when the nature of that fact becomes most clear. Of course, I'm not the best person to ask, as I've said, I don't put a lot of stock in campaign promises one way or another. Politicians are always going to pander to whoever they happen to be talking to at that moment. I think they are who they are and that's what's really going to govern their policy despite what they say or promise, so you just have to decide who they are for yourself. Anyway, I don't think Obama'll ever live up to this idea of him, and such high hopes can obviously lead to a disproportionate level of disappointment. Anything and everything can get stale, and worse, leave you feeling disillusioned for it. Again I'll emphasis the mantra not to sacrifice the good in the pursuit of perfection, or worse, forsake it in vain. If you ever found him refreshing or revolutionary in the first place, don't forget that even if it just doesn't feel the same now, or overlook how revolutionary he still is or could be.

Anyway, speaking of Obama, here's an interesting vid of him speaking to his staff after securing the nomination. Though still basically a photo op, it's interesting to see him speaking in a more intimate and personal setting rather than giving a big speech or talking to the media.

https://donate.barackobama.com/page/contribute/HQvidmatch?match_campaign_id=10&source=20080624_SH_ND

Full version, minus the obnoxious DONATE options:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnhmByYxEIo

 

[Okin]

Its clear now that Barack Obama has all the progressive votes. His only logical action before the election right now is to therefore appear more conservative to gain as many votes as he can. Polls have shown that Barack Obama only holds about a 5% lead against McCain.

 

[MaN]

and the trend continues.....

Obama May Consider Slowing Iraq Withdrawal
Sen. Barack Obama raised the possibility of slowing a promised gradual, 16-month withdrawal from Iraq if he is elected president, saying that Thursday he will consult with military commanders on an upcoming trip to the region and "continue to refine" his proposals.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/03/AR2008070303919.html?hpid=topnews

whatever the motive may be.... we WILL be splitting hair between the candidates. I suspect that the next thing to take a 'refinement' will be the health care system and then taxation after that.


Independence = Independents ?

 

[Griffith]

Its clear now that Barack Obama has all the progressive votes. His only logical action before the election right now is to therefore appear more conservative to gain as many votes as he can. Polls have shown that Barack Obama only holds about a 5% lead against McCain.

Quiet you, stop using common sense and start reading editorials. Unfortunately, it may not be so simple as him having the progressive vote if the so-called progressives are still more foolish than conservatives are naive to believe that one of the most liberal senators, if not thee most liberal senator, in Congress suddenly isn't because he's actually trying to be electable. Stranger things have happened these past 8 years though, haven't they.



REVIVE

'Time' Publishes Definitive Obama Puff Piece

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/time_publishes_definitive_obama

 

[Vampire_Hunter_Bob]

I find this highly relevant to the election.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/maliki_obama

Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki says U.S. troops should leave Iraq "as soon as possible," according to a magazine report, and he called presidential candidate Barack Obama's suggestion of 16 months "the right time frame for a withdrawal."

 

[Vampire_Hunter_Bob]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20080729/pl_bloomberg/anghcq5adqhu

The shortfalls Obama would produce don't approach the size of the deficits John McCain's budget threatens to bring. The Republican candidate's tax cuts alone would increase the debt by $5 trillion by 2018, compared with $3.4 trillion for Obama, says the Tax Policy Center, another nonpartisan group.

 

[Griffith]

Haha, we're doomed!

Speaking of...

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=10309

If this article's premise comes true, Hell will at least drop temperature a few degrees. Interesting perspective though, sure to ruffle a few feathers. I've had this debate about Bush's legacy before where the Truman example has been cited. Which I don't quite buy working out in this day and age.

 

[Sanguinius]

Haha, we're doomed!

Speaking of...

http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=10309

If this article's premise comes true, Hell will at least drop temperature a few degrees. Interesting perspective though, sure to ruffle a few feathers. I've had this debate about Bush's legacy before where the Truman example has been cited.

I think Bush gets more reasoned support from elements of the British Press than he gets from his own. And funny enough they tend to be self styled "higher class" publications rather than populist publications. To me it's making two huge flaws though, it's saying Iraq is only a side show in the larger war but surely any other US President would have made a response after 9/11? Going into Afganistan was hardly something Bush had to push for it had wide spread support and still does. Surely you have to look at what is truly the Bush idea and not what most people thought. It was a Bush administration idea to go into Iraq and the article is misleading by saying terrorism is largely confined to Iraq and Afganistan now. From that you'd think it was a problem in Iraq before the US went in but there was no Al-Qaeda in Iraq and it was probably the most secular arab government in the region. That's not even to mention the other distinctly Bush ideas that he's made somewhat mainstream such as guantanamo; extraordinary rendition and the huge extension of survellience powers to the security services within the US and the extension of executive power.

Caesar's methods beat those pesky Gauls like Aaz but by the time he was finished Rome was no longer the country it once was. Victory at war shouldn't and need not come at any price especially when as in this case the threat is so small. This tiny threat of terrorism seems to be affecting people more in more ways than the threat of nuclear armageddon from the soviets did. Just to keep it in mind more Americans die in car crashes than from terrorist attack, yet I don't see a huge anti-car effort.

In case you doubt that here's a statistic from the "fair and balanced" news network

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,146212,00.html

 

[Griffith]

I think Bush gets more reasoned support from elements of the British Press than he gets from his own. And funny enough they tend to be self styled "higher class" publications rather than populist publications.

Of course, it's from an American author. I'll play devil's advocate, though I really rather literally do it for the Devil...

To me it's making two huge flaws though, it's saying Iraq is only a side show in the larger war but surely any other US President would have made a response after 9/11? Going into Afganistan was hardly something Bush had to push for it had wide spread support and still does. Surely you have to look at what is truly the Bush idea and not what most people thought.

That's having it both ways though, and in line with the popular thinking Luttwak is criticizing. How we look at these things in many cases comes down to whether we like Bush or not, and right now nobody likes him, long after he's out of office though, who knows? His Legacy still hinges on the future, one, as you point out, he may have a large hand in framing. It's hard to predict how perceptions could change and why, however bad it looks for him now.

It was a Bush administration idea to go into Iraq and the article is misleading by saying terrorism is largely confined to Iraq and Afganistan now. From that you'd think it was a problem in Iraq before the US went in but there was no Al-Qaeda in Iraq and it was probably the most secular arab government in the region.

That's true, though I think his, rather favorable to Bush, point is that it's been concentrated to those places rather than gaining even further strength throughout the Mideast. Arguable since no one can prove the results of the alternatives now; one's truth on the matter is as good as another.

Anyway, I'm done playing devil's advocate. I take Luttwak with a grain of salt these days (his Obama piece is certainly embarrassing). Although I respect him as a historian and military strategist, he definitely has a perspective, and a longstanding relationship with the US military (though he did fall out of favor after writing a critical book analyzing their faults; funny, they loved his books criticizing the Soviet Army =). His criticism of the Iraq War here can be best described as lipservice to make his praise of Bush more credible, and even by the piece's end he's turning Iraq into some half-assed triumph (which it could still possibly be framed as one day). I have no doubt he believes in what he writes though, I don't think it's just a matter of him liking Bush and trying to portray him best, though whether one believes him or not probably hinges on their own feelings.

Personally, I'll believe it when I see it.

That's not even to mention the other distinctly Bush ideas that he's made somewhat mainstream such as guantanamo; extraordinary rendition and the huge extension of survellience powers to the security services within the US and the extension of executive power.

"Whatever happened to the American dream? It came true. You're lookin' at it."

Caesar's methods beat those pesky Gauls like Aaz but by the time he was finished Rome was no longer the country it once was. Victory at war shouldn't and need not come at any price especially when as in this case the threat is so small. This tiny threat of terrorism seems to be affecting people more in more ways than the threat of nuclear armageddon from the soviets did.

Or we all just lack perspective. It overly affects people who come down on either side of the issue.

Just to keep it in mind more Americans die in car crashes than from terrorist attack, yet I don't see a huge anti-car effort.

In case you doubt that here's a statistic from the "fair and balanced" news network

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,146212,00.html

See, that just proves how well Bush is protecting us all!

 

[_Noone_]

The number of deaths from car crashes would be higher if it weren't for Ralph Nader.

 

[Okin]

I wonder how many people will think invading Afghanistan solved anything either in 50 years?

 

[Griffith]

50 years later most people don't really understand what invading Germany in World War II solved, save for "defeating evil." It would be easy enough to gloss over far less worthy Afghanistan as "defeating terrorism," even if it's total rubbish, because people don't think much of anything that happened 50 years ago. Better examples are WWI and the Korean War, no need for us to get involved there, very unpopular at the time, but you don't hear anybody bitching about them today.

 

[Vampire_Hunter_Bob]

Better examples are WWI and the Korean War, no need for us to get involved there, very unpopular at the time, but you don't hear anybody bitching about them today.

Well they are also classified as forgotten wars, which I've heard people refer to Afghanistan as.

 

[Aazealh]

Better examples are WWI and the Korean War, no need for us to get involved there, very unpopular at the time, but you don't hear anybody bitching about them today.

People still bitch about the Korean war in Korea.

 

[Griffith]

Well they are also classified as forgotten wars, which I've heard people refer to Afghanistan as.

It certainly seems that way, strangely.

People still bitch about the Korean war in Korea.

I'd imagine so. Here it's basically totally lost between WWII and Vietnam. I guess that's the thing though, people that had no business being in a war in the first place tend to forget about it once it's over unless it really cost them. Brings the whole thing back around to Truman/Korea and Bush/Iraq.

Afghanistan and Iraq won't be remembered after WWIII against the Neo Russian Empire. =)

 

[Walter]

Obama has tapped Biden for VP.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/23/biden.democrat.vp.candidate/index.html

I already forgot who Biden was. So he's a perfect VP candidate.

 

[Escalus]

"Hahahahahaha! Obama, the Candidate of Change, has chosen one of the oldest, whitest, most ridiculous and longest serving political hacks in Washington as his running mate--Joe Biden. And who, oh who, could forget his eloquent discussion about the contribution of East Indians to the culture of Delaware. The culture of 7-11s and Dunkin' Donuts, that is. Absolutely, totally much, much better than that woman who received 18 million votes in the primary and essentially tied him in the popular vote."---Tammy Bruce

For those who haven't seen it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIT3jUrNTX0


And this is equally heartening...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XberX_t-WvI&feature=related

 

[Vampire_Hunter_Bob]

For those that haven't been to Delaware, there's nothing there. Nothing at all. Just corn.

All of that aside Tammy Bruce is a hag.

 

[Griffith]

For those who haven't seen it...

And this is equally heartening...

Interesting thoughts.


Anyway, I'm on the fence, it helps Obama on foreign policy and Biden's criticism of him earlier could be used for or against the pick (contradiction? or has Obama now proven himself to his harshest critics!? =), but it sure doesn't secure any electoral votes off the bat. I do think it's a good counter to McCain's feisty old white guy with "experience" angle, and he's someone who will get out there and say some shit to the Republicans if need be, while Obama can stay above the fray and smooth things over when Biden does go overboard and sticks his foot in his mouth. At the end of the day though, barring horrible gaffes or age concerns, the VPs are much ado about nothing.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/biden_world_reaction

Too bad they can't vote, huh?

I like how the anti-American Shiite cleric is more thoughtful and well-reasoned on these subjects than most American commentators, or people in this thread for that matter. =)

 

[Okin]

I couldn't help but notice how much they were tooting Biden's contribution to women in America when they officially choose him yesterday at the Democratic Convention. Maybe it will help fool all those upright soccer moms who are just trying to prevent an evil secret-muslim from taking office and destroying our country by meeting middle eastern leaders rather than automatically declaring them our enemy.

Well, in short Biden seems like a good candidate to bring back some of the Hillary supporters. I remember being at capitol hill this July for a Pakistani doctors' convention (it's one of the biggest Muslim communities in America, and since they're all doctors they're suppose to be intelligent rational people who can create change ). Biden happened to be one of the few senators who met with us, and we pretty much made a fool of ourselves when some ignorant fool mentioned his views on Israel. Basically, he's willing to talk to slightly crazy Muslims, so that's a start.

Oh, Bob! I was in Delaware for about an hour the other week! My brother was moving to Baltimore, and I needed to pass through to get there! It was the coolest hour ever, corn everywhere!

 

[Vampire_Hunter_Bob]

Oh, Bob! I was in Delaware for about an hour the other week! My brother was moving to Baltimore, and I needed to pass through to get there! It was the coolest hour ever, corn everywhere!

Told you! The only thing worth going to in Delaware is their totaly awesome IHOP and Playa Del Fuego.

 

[Painkiller Jane]

im new to the this forum so i know im sticking my nose where it doesnt belong but i guess i had to put my two worthless cents in... and they are that im leaning toward Obama... ill admit that im a crazed liberal nut case... and thats part of my reasoning but im mostly leaning his way cause i just dont want another bush jr... and thats what im seeing from mc cain...

pkj

 

[Griffith]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/29/palin.republican.vp.candidate/index.html

John McCain is a clever man, I wonder how that'll work out for him.

 

[Guts intestines]

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/29/palin.republican.vp.candidate/index.html

John McCain is a clever man, I wonder how that'll work out for him.

I kinda saw this coming once McCain commented on Obama not choosing Hillary as his running mate, so basically it seems like he chose her in order to appear a little more liberal, whereas Obama chose Biden to counter McCain.

On a sidenote, this is farfetch'd but it wouldn't surprise me if some racist ass klan member(s) would attempt an assassination on Obama if he were to become president simply because if they're successful Biden would take his place.