Who Are We to Believe, the President or that Lying Dictionary?

Well, Clinton had problems with the meaning of “is”, a mere two-letter word.  Obama has stepped up to three letter words, like “tax”.  Rock on, Dude!

Apparently, there’s some big hoo-ha going on about the cover of the new Rolling Stone magazine that features a new Shepard Fairey illustration of the President.  At issue, apparently, is whether or not Fairey’s portrait bestows the Commander in Chief with angelic powers via a halo.

The New York Daily News thinks so, but the artist says “Halo no!”

I say, first, who really cares?  When you consider the kinds of Obama images that conservatives are spank-banking these days, a halo seems pretty normal.

The first time I saw the cover, before I heard the “halo” angle, the picture didn’t remind me of an angel, or Jesus.  The first thing I thought of was this:

The cover art for George Clinton’s “R&B Skeletons in the Closet” album.  Maybe Fairey was trying to subliminally get us all to tear the roof off the sucker.

In diretta da Kabul il problema Afghanistan – 15/07/’09

da Kabul 1

A persona amica, che lavora a Kabul e pratica giornalismo, avevo scritto:

“Mi piacerebbe – sempre che tu lo possa – sapere da te come è il popolo afghano, visto che nessuno si preoccupa dell’anima di questo popolo antichissimo, posto proprio – come dici tu – sull’ombelico del mondo. E poi – sempre che tu lo possa – mi piacerebbe sapere:

1. quanto e come gioca nella situazione afghana l’industria del riciclaggio, delle armi e della droga;

2. se, quanto e come la politica estera di Obama-Clinton si pone nei confronti di questa industria, in particolare in ottica afghana;

3. quanto giocano la finanza americana e la sua crisi nella situazione afghana.

Con le due foto qui pubblicate ricevo questa nota:

“Le domande che mi fa sono un sacco complicate, potrei scrivere pagine, ma ho deciso che rispondo in poche e concise parole:

Il popolo afghano è furbo, testardo e scontroso, ma anche caldo abbraccio materno, sguardo vivace e sopravvivenza fantasiosa. Il popolo afghano sono pasthun, di almeno 10 gruppi diversi, sono hazara, sono uzbeki, sono kuchis. Sono tante anime diverse. Di continuo sradicati eppure con radici profonde. Sono Gengis Khan, Ahmad Shah, Daud, Massoud, Rabbani e Karzai. Sono la guerra civile e la lotta contro i talebani. Ce l’hanno sempre con qualcuno: britannici, pakistani, sovietici, talebani, americani. Ma senza questo qualcuno che fine avrebbero fatto le anime diverse di questo popolo?

Quanto alle tue tre domande:

1) l’afghanistan è reciclaggio, armi e droga. Uno stato cuscinetto creato per tutto questo. E fa comodo a tutti che sia debole.

2) i britannici, dopo il 2001 e la conferenza di Bonn, si sono presi a carico la politica anti-narcotici. Hanno fatto un disastro, chiunque l’avrebbe fatto. Prima la coltivazione di oppio serviva solo per mangiare, ora è legata alla criminalità organizzata. Dove c’era criminalità organizzata adesso c’è traffico. Hanno anche imparato a trasformare il papavero in eroina, con tanto di rafffinerie chimiche, perchè hanno capito che si guadagna di più. Dove non esisteva l’oppio, ora ci sono belle piantagioni di cannabis. Legato ormai a doppia mandata con talebani, al-Qaeda, criminalità organizzata. Dove lo Stato non arriva, al di fuori dei confini di Kabul, tutti loro hanno ormai sostituito le infrastrutture statali e consentono la sopravvivenza della popolazione. Così il militante si mischia con il civile, così accadono le stragi di civili a seguito di bombardamenti NATO: come distingui il civile dal militante? E così, Obama-Clinton possono fare poco. Ora tentano con l’invasione di terra. Perchè per dare credibilità alle elezioni di agosto devi controllare il territorio. Le manovre al momento però sono limitate. Un cane che si morde la coda.

3) L’economia americana in Afghanistan si auto-alimenta: ciò che qui viene speso per finanziamenti sia militari sia allo sviluppo, rientra tutto negli States sottoforma di lavoro e produzione. L’economia di guerra moltiplica le entrate. Questo per gli States. Invece, gli altri paesi donatori, soprattutto quelli europei, il cui mercato non è così ampio, si trovano a dire: «noi questo progetto non lo finanziamo perché non abbiamo più soldi»”.

da Kabul 2

Der Rahmen für die allgemeine Erregtheit ist derzeit die Debatte um die Finanzmärkte. Barack Obama will trotz genauem Hinsehen seine Gegner und Armageddonbeschwörer noch nicht zufrieden stellen. Nein, er wagt es, etwas zu sagen, wofür man ihm wieder ungemeine Intelligenz unterstellen wird, was jedoch jeder normale, ungebildete Mensch an seinem Wohnzimmer tagtäglich äußern wird: Es sei “beschämend”, dass die Banken 2008 noch Milliarden an Bonusprämien ausgeschüttet hätten und zeitgleich Staat und Steurzahler um Geld angebettelt hätten. Obama hat sich während dieser Äußerungen zu offensichtlicher Erregtheit hinreißen lassen, mit welchen Folgen?

Es ist ein Krux dieser Zeit, die Presse- und Meinungsfreiheit garantiert, dass Äußerungen wie diese an die Bürger gelangen, registriert werden und dann: Puff… Die Deutung der Welt wird dermaßen intellektualisert, dass der normale Menschenverstand den Dienst quittiert. Wenn dann, nach langem hin und herdebattieren, die eigentlichen Wahrheiten das Licht der Welt erblicken, klingen sie, wer hätte es gedacht, nach gesundem Menschenverstand. Dann wird der Intellektuelle oder Politiker auf ein Podest gehoben dafür, dass er sich nicht länger in der Blase der Ideenwelt bewegt und sagt, was alle ohnehin wissen. Kaisers neue Kleider hängen noch immer auf den Stangen der Haute Couture.

Der Ökonom Noruiel Roubini sagte auf dem letzten Weltwirtschaftstreffen in Davos die Finanzkrise voraus. Zu seinen Ergebnissen kam er, weil er sich die Weltwirtschaftskrisen des vergangenen Jahrhunderts in Argentinien und anderen Teilen der Welt genau ansah. Seine Kritiker werfen ihm vor, die Methodik stimme nicht, sei zu untheoretisch, unnachvollziehbar ect pp… Doch wer Recht hat, den belohnt ihn diesem Fall das Leben: In Zeiten der Rezession expandiert Roubinis Unternehmen. Die aufgeklärte Welt habe sich so sehr in ihren Theorien verloren, dass sie Indizien der realen Welt nicht mehr zu lesen wußte. So einfach erklärt Roubini seinen Erfolg: Hinsehen. Als er in Davos referierte, löste das allgemeine Erregtheit aus, niemand nahm ihn ernst, Dr. Doom sein Spitzname, Berufspessimist.

Jetzt ist in Davos ein anderer Herr aus der Haut gefahren. Der türkische Ministerpräsident Erdogan verlässt Davos, als man ihm nach einer Rede von Israels Präsident Peres das Wort abschneidet. Erdogan provoziert, kritisiert, nimmt Stellung. Im eigenen Land empfangen ihn Menschenmassen am Flughafen. Erdogan beschwichtigt sofort, er habe sich nur über den Moderator aufgeregt und die Redezeit, die ihm nicht vergönnt war. Peres habe sich längst entschuldigt. Viele Türken stehen hinter seinen Aussagen in Davos. Manche kritisieren ihn dafür, dass nun ganz Europa weiß, dass die Türkei einen Ministerpräsidenten ihr eigen nennt, der sich nicht beherrschen kann, schließlich habe er ein gutes Anliegen, die Kritik an den Angriffen auf die Zivilbevölkerung, schlecht vertreten.

Die Frage nach der Beherrschung ist eine langwierige und komplizierte. Beherrscht- und Erregstein in der Öffentlichkeit ist ein heikles Thema, vor allem, wenn es um Krieg geht. Erwartet wird, das alle Beteiligten ganz beherrscht darüber reden, wie Kinder hingerichtet werden. Man sollte sollte solche Diskussion führen wie eine wöchentliche Gesamtlehrerkonferenz, auf der im Minutentakt lauwarmes Wasser mit dem Duktus höchster Brisanz hin und her gereicht wird.

Was von Deutschland aus ins Auge sticht ist die Ankunft Erdogans in der Türkei: Menschenmassen jubeln ihm am Flughafen zu. Ein fast instinktives Misstrauen beim Anblick solcher Menschenmassen jenseits der Fussball-WM… Entfesselter Nationalismus oder nur Interesse? In jedem Fall fühlen sich die Menschen betroffen von dem, was ihr Ministerpräsident in Davos zum Krieg am Gazastreifen zu sagen hatte, besser, zu sagen gehabt hätte, wenn man ihm den Raum gelassen hätte. Irritierend, von hier aus gesehen, die Tatsache, das etwas in der Öffentlichkeit geschieht, die Bürger ihre Meinung dazu öffentlich äußern wollen.

Hierzulande herrscht die Angst vor der Straße, die Angst vor Erregheit im Allgemeinen, das historische Mißtrauen gegen Massenansammlungen, emotionale Agitationen in öffentlichen Räumen. Die Lösung liegt derzeit im Versuch, sich in Privatheit zu verlieren, das Private über das Öffentliche zu erheben, als wäre es nicht verwoben. Debatten über die Erziehung der eigenen Kinder, das Leiden an der angeblichen Finanzkrise, die ich gerne erst dann zum abendfüllenden Thema gemacht wüßte, wenn all die Läden, die nur der schönen Dekorationen wegen ihre Ware drei Mal so teuer verkaufen wie andere, schließen. Philosophieren und reden als Handlungsersatz. Angst, dass einen die emotionale Unbeherrschtheit in die falsche Richtung trägt? Kann man Menschen wie Erdogan, die sich emotional leiten lassen und das Gespräch in dem Moment nicht weiterführen möchten, einfach ein “Sie sind kein Europäer- Attest” ausstellen?

Das öffentliche Leben ist hier von einem Handeln zum Beurteilen verkommen, weil sich die Menschen noch immer vor ihrem Handeln fürchten. Während in Frankreich schon wieder eine Millonen Menschen auf der Straße stehen wegen weiß der Himmel was schon wieder, während Griechenland sich seiner hoffnungslosen und gewalttätigen Jugend stellen muss, geschieht hier, wenn in Berlin ein junger Mann zu unrecht von einem Polizisten erschosschen wird: genau, es geschieht gar nichts.

Nein, man wünscht sich keine Aufstände und Aufruhr als Ventil für Aggressionen, aber man wünscht sich doch Reaktionen auf Ereignisse, die öffentliches Leben darstellen, Reaktionen, die über feuilletonistische Debatten, die ohnehin bald aus den Zeitungen gekürzt werden, hinausgehen. Jetzt sitzt einer kleiner Teil des Volkes in den Leserkommentaren der Tageszeitungen und der Rest: Puff…

Weitere Links für Interessierte:

Ein sachlichere Zusammenfassung findet sich unter unter diesem Link zur Tagesschau

Einen kritischen Artikel zu Erdogans Wutausbruch finet man hier bei Spiegel Online

Einen unkritischen findet man auf der extra eingerichteten Fansite für Erdogan

Die kontroversesten Leserkommentare finden sich bei den Lesern des Tagesspiegels

Anregungen für die “Dürfen wir etwas gegen Juden sagen” – Debatte , auch im Tagesspiegel

Und, nicht zu vergessen, wir sind das Volk: BILDpunkt

]]> http://jagodamarinic.wordpress.com/2008/12/08/how-fooling-around-with-hillary-can-blow-your-job/ Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:05:53 +0000 jagodamarinic http://jagodamarinic.wordpress.com/2008/12/08/how-fooling-around-with-hillary-can-blow-your-job/

Jon Favreau, so der Name des jungen Mannes, der während des Wahlkampfs von Barack Obama die Reden schrieb. Im Hintergrund, jung, genial, ein Vertreter der intellektuell frühreifen Hochzucht. Gerade hat er seine Bewerbung als Redenschreiben fürs Weiße Haus abgegeben, wartet gemütlich, als er für zwei Stunden in die Falle des Facebookdaseins fällt: er postet Bilder von sich, wie er mit einer Hillary Clinton Pappfigur durch den Raum tanzt, auf einem anderen wird Hillary mit Bier abgefüllt und eine Hand liegt auf ihrer Brust. Nachnur zwei Stunden waren Spuren beseitigt, doch das Internet lässt einen nicht aus der Schuld. Das Bild kursiert, Frau Clinton wird von Feministinnen zu einem Statement gezwungen, das sie sich erspart. Trocken weist sie darauf hin, dass man seine Bewerbung nochmal überprüfen werde…

Sei dahingestellt, welche moralischen Debatten das auslöst: Darf ein 27jährer sich betrinken? Darf er die Pappe von Mrs. Clinton durch den Dreck ziehen, darf er, darf er, darf er? Und vor allem: Darf er dann Reden schreiben für das mächtigste Land der Welt? Mr. Obama will not be pleased, heißt es.

Den “Skandal”, das Bild und die über 700 Kommentarte findet ihr unteri CNN Politicalticker:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/12/06/obama-speechwriter-favreau-learns-the-perils-of-facebook/

Wow. AFL-CIO Secretary-Treasurer Richard Trumka speaking at the Steelworkers convetion in August.

From Hillpac.com. Hillary’s on the campaign trail in Michigan.

Many people were stunned when they heard Joe Biden’s comment concerning Hillary Clinton, “Make no mistake about it Hillary Clinton is as qualified as or more qualified than I am” to be vice president, Biden said. “And quite frankly, she may have been a better pick than me.”.

I agree with Joe Biden’s comment but it was a rather odd thing for him to say. But, not so odd if the rumors should be true. Here is an email I received earlier today:

We have received information from sources high in the Democratic Party that , in a total desperation move, Hillary Rodham Clinton will replace the hapless Joe Biden as V-P candidate on the Obama ticket.

Now, no offense to the people who sent this to me, but I didn’t give the email a lot of credence (although they did get the Sarah Palin as VP thing right).  But, a couple of hours later as I was watching Lou Dobbs wrap up his Independent Convention, Michael Goodwin said something to the effect of we haven’t seen the last of Hillary Clinton ON THIS TICKET.

Who is Michael Goodwin you might ask.

Michael Goodwin has won virtually every top award in American journalism. In a career that spans 30 years, he has edited and written for newspapers and magazines and has offered expert commentary on television and radio.

Since 2004 Mr. Goodwin has been the lead political columnist for The New York Daily News and nydailynews.com. His columns appear twice a week on the Op-Ed Page and additional columns are carried in the news section. He is a twice-weekly contributor to Lou Dobbs Tonight on CNN, and he appears frequently on national radio programs.

I find nothing in my search on Goodwin to indicate he has a proclivity for tin foil hat conspiracies.  Sure, it could be a coincidence that his comments came just a few short hours after I received that email, but it certainly got my attention.

Why would the Democratic Party at this point even consider replacing Joe Biden with Hillary Clinton? Democrats are worried about down ticket and well they should be. In a Gallup poll released today there is a shift showing the Democrats leading the Republicans by just 3 percentage points in generic races….down from consistent double-digit leads for the Democrats. And Sarah Palin has given McCain a 20 point lead among white women.

Can it be done? Can a VP pick be replaced? Yes, there is a precedent for such a move. In 1972, hastily chosen by McGovern VP pick Senator Eagleton was on the ticket for a mere 18 days. After the news of Eagleton’s shock treatments for depression hit the press many Democratic donors and strategists became worried and McGovern asked Eagleton to withdraw. The DNC, under it’s rules, replaced Eagleton with Sargent Shriver.

Is it possible Hillary Clinton could replace Biden? Well, yes it’s possible. There is precedent and there is grave concern in the Democratic Party that the Obama/Biden ticket is not helping down ticket Democrats and the polls in some key states show McCain/Palin edging out Obama/Biden. Of special concern are Ohio with McCain leading Obama by 7% and Virginia with McCain leading Obama by 2% according to Rasmussen. Rasmussen’s daily tracking report today shows McCain up by 3.

What would Hillary  Clinton bring to the ticket that Biden cannot?  Women voters.  In a Sept. 3 poll Rasmussen found that in a hypothetical head to head match up between Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin for president Clinton 52% to 41%.  Some polls put Hillary Clinton supporters who will not for Obama as high as 25%.  Putting Hillary Clinton on the ticket would likely significantly reduce that number.

The sender of the email I received goes on to say (on their blog):

When Sharon (OK), Jean (WA), and I figured out the story of the Sarah choice, I sent out e-mails that said “I hope I’m right . . .” Now, I know I’m right, even though you’re not hearing it on CNN or MSNBC. Those people couldn’t break an egg. My sources are from central Texas, Washington, DC, and elsewhere, and they are consistent truth-tellers and fact-knowers.

I personally don’t know that there is any chance that Biden could be replaced….I can’t imagine what excuse could be used that would be even remotely believable. What I find amazing is the talk that maybe Hillary Clinton should replace Biden. I think a VP nominee change is risky at best, and rather unlikely but this is politics and stranger things have happened.

UPDATE:  Let me share some info with you that i have gotten from excellent sources within the DNC:
On or about October 5th, Biden will excuse himself from the ticket, citing health problems, and he will be replaced by Hillary. This is timed to occur after the VP debate on 10/2.
SOURCE

Politico reports in its article Tensions boil between Obama-Clinton camps that bitterness between the Obama and Clinton camps has escalated. Similarly ABC is reporting that the roll call vote promised to Senator Clinton may be pulled – Stephanopoulos: No Roll Call Vote for Clinton?

Politico states…

DENVER — As Democrats arrived here Sunday for a convention intended to promote party unity, mistrust and resentments continued to boil among top associates of presumptive nominee Barack Obama and his defeated rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

One flashpoint is the assigned speech topic for former president Bill Clinton, who is scheduled to speak Wednesday night, when the convention theme is “Securing America’s Future.” The night’s speakers will argue that Obama would be a more effective commander in chief than his Republican rival, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.).

The former president is disappointed, associates said, because he is eager to speak about the economy and more broadly about Democratic ideas — emphasizing the contrast between the Bush years and his own record in the 1990s.

This is an especially sore point for Bill Clinton, people close to him say, because among many grievances he has about the campaign Obama waged against his wife is a belief that the candidate poor-mouthed the political and policy successes of his two terms.

Some senior Democrats close to Obama, meanwhile, made clear in not-for-attribution comments that they were equally irked at the Clinton operation. Nearly three months after Hillary Clinton conceded defeat in the nomination contest, these Obama partisans complained, her team continues to act like she and Bill Clinton hold leverage.

After a period earlier this month when the two sides were working collegially over strategy, scheduling, and other convention logistics, things turned scratchy again in recent days.

Some senior Obama supporters are irritated at how they perceive the Clintons fanned — or at a minimum failed to douse — stories that she was not even vetted as a possible vice presidential nominee. This is because she told Obama she preferred not to go through the rigorous process of document production unless she was really a serious contender, an Obama associate noted.

One senior Obama supporter said the Clinton associates negotiating on her behalf act like “Japanese soldiers in the South Pacific still fighting after the war is over.”

A prominent Obama backer said some of Clinton’s lieutentants negotiating with the Obama team are “bitter enders” who presume that, rather than the Clintons reconciling themselves to Obama’s victory, it is up to Obama to accommodate them.

In fact, some senior veterans of Clinton’s presidential campaign do believe this.

“He has not fully reconciled,” said one political operative close to the Clintons, “and he has not demonstrated that he accepts the Clintons and the Clinton wing of the party.”

While the Clintons have a relatively easy job in Denver — to deliver gracious speeches and accept what are likely to be loud cheers from their supporters — it is “Obama who has the heavy lifting” this week, this aide said.

This is because large numbers of Clinton backers — 30 percent in a recent ABC/Washington Post poll — are still not backing Obama over McCain.

---

While Bill Clinton remains angry about how he and his wife were treated by both Obama backers and the news media — and he is particularly resentful at what he sees as unfair allegations that he tried to exploit racial divisions for political advantage — he has made the decision that he will put forward a positive face for Obama’s benefit at Denver.

It is harder to do that when the topic is foreign policy and national security, which lends itself to restrained, rather than boisterous, partisan rhetoric.

“That puts him in a terrible bind, because you can’t give a ringing endorsement when you’re talking about foreign policy,” a longtime Clinton adviser said. “Obviously, the hard thing to talk about with Obama is commander in chief, of all his many talents.

“You don’t rah-rah about commander in chief. You rah-rah about hope and change and a new party and all that. So no matter what he does, somebody will find fault with it.”

Meanwhile the party line is unity, yet their is no real evidence that tensions have really ever subsided. Polls show Clinton supporters have not warmed to the Obama campaign, while groups like Puma actively seek Obama’s defeat. This could all make for an interesting convention, as the script does not appear to match prevalent feelings of discord.

I don’t know why everyone’s all complaining that they didn’t their text messages from Barack Obama the other night when he chose Senator Joe Biden as a running mate. I mean, yeah, the story hit the internet fast and everything, but Christine and I got our text message from Obama just fine. See…

Ah, well, I guess he just loves us more. In any case, can’t wait to get our cool Obama-Biden bumper stickers! And though I still think an Obama-Clinton ticket would kick ass, we both actually dug much of what Biden had to say in the democratic debates earlier this year and his selection makes a lot of sense.

Plus, Biden has the all-important tragic backstory that wins us over every time. Biden’s first wife and infant daughter died in a car accident on their way to celebrate his first Senate win many years ago, and Biden was actually sworn in at the hospital bedsides of his two surviving sons. Wow…if we’d known that sad-ass story, we probably would have voted for him in the primary!

Seriously, that’s political backstory gold, baby. Man, I sure hope McCain likes the view from his seven houses, because something tells me he’s gonna be spending a lot of time in them come 2009.

Anyway, here’s hoping our guys have a rocking time at the Democratic National Convention in Denver this week. Christine and I loved that town almost as much as Nashville. Oh, and Barack, if you and Joe need any recommendations on where to eat or drink in Denver, text us, dude. We’ll totally hook you guys up. L8ter!

Considering Obama is running as a uniter it’s bizarre that he seems incapable of treating Hilary Clinton and her supporters with respect. It’s no shock that Obama didn’t pick Senator Clinton as VP, however, he couldn’t have much less gracious if he had tried. Shortly after Senator Obama became the presumtive nominee, he told Clinton supporters to ‘get over it’. Then he says that Senator Clinton would be on anyones short list, but doesn’t vet her.  He apparently never even gave her the courtesy of a phone call to ask her on her take on the VP pick, or to give her a heads up about who he had chosen.  Finally, he announces his pick at 3 a.m. in what appears to be a completely unnecessary poke in the eye to the Clinton campaign.   This seems less like the  politics of hope and change and more like school yard antics.

Wow, this is good stuff.  Clinton camp playing dirty, who would have thought.  Politico gave us a sneak peak into what the leaked Clinton campaign memos that were obtained by the Atlantic said during the campaign and about Obama. Juicy Alert.

Heres some Juicy Details from the memos

The magazine reports Penn suggested getting much rougher with Obama in a memo on March 30, after her crucial wins in Texas and Ohio: “Does anyone believe that it is possible to win the nomination without, over these next two months, raising all these issues on him? … Won’t a single tape of [the Reverend Jeremiah] Wright going off on America with Obama sitting there be a game ender?”

Then Clinton gets mad,

Green reports that on a staff conference call in January where Clinton received “little response” or “silence” to several of her suggestions for how to recover from the Iowa loss and do better in New Hampshire, “Clinton began to grow angry, according to a participant’s notes,” Green recounts. “‘This has been a very instructive call, talking to myself,’ she snapped, and hung up.”

Clinton poor manager

“The anger and toxic obsessions overwhelmed even the most reserved Beltway wise men,” Green writes. “[H]er advisers couldn’t execute strategy; they routinely attacked and undermined each other, and Clinton never forced a resolution. … [S]he never behaved like a chief executive, and her own staff proved to be her Achilles’ heel.

“What is clear from the internal documents is that Clinton’s loss derived not from any specific decision she made but rather from the preponderance of the many she did not make.”

Staffers Blaming Staffer

Geoffrey Garin, a well-known Democratic pollster who helped direct the campaign’s strategy team for Clinton’s presidential campaign during its final two months, wrote in a memo to at least 10 top campaign aides that he wanted to stop “end runs” around communications director Howard Wolfson.

“I don’t mean to be an asshole, but … changes to important statements and other critical campaign communications simply have to go through Howard,” Garin wrote on April 12. “Howard is the person who is ultimately responsibility for making sure that we deliver our messages the right way, and I hope everyone will support and respect him in that role.”

Race baiting, making Obama look foreign

The Penn memo suggesting that the campaign target Obama’s “lack of American roots” said in part: “All of these articles about his boyhood in Indonesia and his life in Hawaii are geared towards showing his background is diverse, multicultural and putting that in a new light.

“Save it for 2050. … Every speech should contain the line you were born in the middle of America American to the middle class in the middle of the last century. And talk about the basic bargain as about the deeply American values you grew up with, learned as a child and that drive you today. Values of fairness, compassion, responsibility, giving back

“Let’s explicitly own ‘American’ in our programs, the speeches and the values. He doesn’t. Make this a new American Century, the American Strategic Energy Fund. Let’s use our logo to make some flags we can give out. Let’s add flag symbols to the backgrounds.”

What everyone suspected, playing politics with MI and FL

“They proposed that Clinton, from a position of strength immediately after her wins, challenge Obama to accept Michigan and Florida revotes. Such a move ‘preempts Obama’s reiteration on March 5 that they are still up 100-plus delegates and that we can’t win,’ they noted. ‘The press will love the rematch, like Rocky II.”

Bill Clinton making the 3am phone call decision….I thought Hillary was supposed to be running the campaign

The famous 3 a.m. ad, written by Penn and approved by Clinton, almost didn’t run: “In the days leading up to Ohio and Texas, the campaign kept arguing over whether to air the [3 a.m.] ad. With the deadline looming, Bill Clinton, speaking from a cell phone as his plane sat on a runway, led a conference call on Thursday, Feb. 28, in which he had both sides present their case. As his plane was about to lift off, it was Bill Clinton — not Hillary — who issued the decisive order: ‘Let’s go with it.’ ”

Knowing they were going to LOSE after the first primaries

Of all the materials The Atlantic received, the first mention of delegate counts came in a memo that senior adviser Harold Ickes sent out just 12 days before the Iowa primary, after the campaign had nearly run out of money campaigning in Iowa, where Clinton would finish third. He predicted, correctly, as it turned out:

“Assuming after Iowa and New Hampshire the presidential nominating contest narrows to two competitive candidates who remain locked in a highly contested election through 5 February, the focus of the campaign will shift to the delegate count.” But the campaign, Green notes, had already ceased polling in states they didn’t expect to win, so it had a limited ability to narrow the margins in states that favored Obama.

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

The Obama Agenda

(CNN) — After the longest primary battle in modern U.S. history, Barack Obama will campaign with former rival Hillary Clinton on Friday for the first time since the New York senator abandoned her presidential bid.

Sen. Barack Obama will make his first campaign appearance with Sen. Hillary Clinton on Friday.

Their joint appearance will be at a rally in Unity, New Hampshire, a small town on the state’s western border where the two candidates tied in the January primary.

“It is not only well-named, but in the New Hampshire primary both of us received exactly 107 votes,” Clinton said Thursday in Washington. “So it pretty much mirrored the rest of the campaign, where it was right down the middle.”

Clinton and Obama endured a protracted and, at times, fierce primary season. After months of divisive contests that took them through every state, the two are now focused on uniting their party in order to defeat the Republicans in November.

MORE

Today, Bill Clinton’s spokesperson issued a one sentence statement, saying:

Convinced?…..I’m not…..

THIS……..McCAIN ENDORSEMENT, FROM BILL CLINTON, IS MORE CONVINCING……..

THIS…….. McCAIN ENDORSEMENT, FROM BILL CLINTON, IS MORE CONVINCING……..

THIS…….. McCAIN ENDORSEMENT, FROM BILL CLINTON, IS MORE CONVINCING……..

Coincidently, on a conference call this afternoon, Senator Obama asked his top contributors to help retire Senator Clinton’s debt (press release here).

This is the second of a weekly series of public forums on TMB. Watch for a new round every Monday (used to be every Wednesday). The schedule and important comment rules regarding these forums are available here.

The big question right now regarding the presidential election concerns the vice-presidency. Obviously, the dominant issue is the Obama-Clinton situation. For Latter-day Saints, there is also the issue of a possible McCain-Romney (or McCain-Huckabee) ticket. In our previous forum, some had expressed that a certain VP choice from their preferred candidate would cause them to withdraw their support. Clearly, there is a lot to talk about.

There’s a nice interactive summary on CNN that highlights the pros and cons for each candidate’s prominent VP choices.

Here are some of the names that stand out to me:

McCain

• Mitt Romney (helpful economically, and for votes in Nevada and Michigan — but the Bible Belt?)
• Charlie Crist (he’s just a friendly looking guy isn’t he? it doesn’t hurt that he’s the Florida guv either)
• Bobby Jindal (Anderson Cooper: he embodies the 3 things McCain needs: conservative, youthful, diverse)
• Mike Huckabee (the darling of the evangelicals–not to mention Chuck Norris — I love that guy!)
• Condoleeza Rice (oh yeah, well we have an African American and a woman! never mind what she has actually done…)
• Joe Lieberman (excellent icon for post-partisanship — but what happens to the social conservatives?)
• Mark Sanford (a “rock solid conservative,” according to CNN)

Obama

• Hillary Clinton (dream or disaster?)
• Bill Richardson (helpful for Hispanic and New Mexico vote)
• Jim Webb (Huffington Post’s frontrunner — a clear match for Obama’s message)
• Joe Biden (a credible voice for foreign policy — perhaps too tough a talker, though)
• Chuck Hagel (an anti-Iraq Kansas senator — oh, by the way, he’s a Republican)
• Kathleen Sebelius (female replacement for Clinton? would this be a boon or backfire?)
• Mike Bloomberg (pro: he’s a billionaire; con: he’s a billionaire)
• Ed Rendell (Obama needs all the help he can get in PA)

What are your thoughts on the VP hunts? What should the candidates consider? Who would be a great choice? A huge mistake? Who would you like to see, and why? Your predictions? (I predict Bill Richardson and Bobby Jindal, but I’m not all that confident in my choices.)

Also, by way of keeping this somewhat LDS focused: Do we really want Romney back in the spotlight? Would this be good or bad for the Church? Does it matter?

Just a reminder: Stay on topic and be respectful (comment policy). Also, it’s fine to continue to comment on previous forums. They are meant to be ongoing.

Please don’t be afraid to chime in with your thoughts!

Email a friend

As I have been asked by many, if this site will stop now that Hillary has suspended her campaign….

the answer is a definitive NO.

This site was started for one reason……

TO EXPOSE BARACK OBAMA FOR WHAT HE IS…..A TYPICAL CHICAGO MACHINE POLITICIAN.

To those unfamiliar with Chicago-area politics, you may not know much about the 77-year old Chicago political machine…about what it does, and how it operates.

But when I see Barack obama give his,generic, and nuanced speeches in front of his wide-eyed YES WE CAN! contingent……and talk about bringing change to Washington……and how he is the only one who can do this……I feel nauseous….how do people not realize that he has had numerous opportunities to change Chicago, and has never done anything…..

For the last 20 years Obama has had a chance to shake the Chicago Political Machine, which has controlled Chicago’s neighborhoods for 77 years……he has had a chance to stand up to the crooked Alderman….he has had a chance to stand up against Todd Stroeger and the corrupt Cook County government…..but….he hasn’t….in fact, he’s appeased, and appeases, the existing machine….he continues to allow alderman to accept bribes….he’s allowed our cities’ health care system to collapse……he’s allowed our vital public transportation system to deteriorate to a point of no return…….he’s watched a mayor destroy a city airport in the middle of the night, without permission…..he’s watched, and continues to watch Chicago’s county President abuse his power, and misuse our tax dollars…….which is hard to do, considering Chicagoans pay the highest sales tax in the country.

And, to the Obama supporters that are supporting him because he did not vote for the war in Iraq.

WELL THAT’s JUST A FAIRY TALE……..

While it is true that he didn’t vote for the war………. Neither did I………..see Barack, like myself, and anyone who is probably reading this, was not in the US Senate when the vote was taken…….Obama wasn’t a Senator…..he was a schmo…a part-time politician, otherwise known as an Illinois state senator……he didn’t have a vote, he didn’t have the national intelligence data to make an informed decision….he had no say….ie. the vote is a fairy tale….

Not to Mention…………after seeing Obama’s preacher speak…one can get a grasp on the turf Obama was representing back in 2002, in the State Senate, when he spoke against the war…….Barack’s standing up against the war was about as courageous as my eating a bagel for breakfast this morning……I mean, when your preacher is equating the USA w/ Al Qaeda, in front of a cheering audience, 5 days after 9/11…….to stand up against the war, in fact any war…….is sort of a no-brainer.

So in Summation…..

THIS SITE IS NOT STOPPING….TRAFFIC IS AT AN ALL TIME HIGH….AND POSTS WILL CONTINUE TO COME EVERYDAY…UNTIL THE ELECTION IS OVER…WITH McCAIN AS THE VICTOR.

AS BOTH BILL AND HILLARY HAVE SAID MANY TIMES BEFORE…….JOHN MCCAIN IS A MAN OF INTEGRITY, A GREAT BI-PARTISAN POLITICIAN, AND TRUE AMERICAN HERO……

As to Barack Obama…..well, he can give a speech…….that’s about it………..and that isn’t enough for me…..

Sometimes I vote Republican; sometimes I vote Democratic. It all depends on the issues at hand. This time, I felt the domestic threats (economy, health care, energy, etc.)  are far greater than the foreign threats (Iraq/Afghanistan). So, I started out thinking that perhaps Hillary Clinton would be best for the the nation. (The girl does have a beautiful mind!)

But as time went on, I realized that Hillary also suffered from “the smartest person in the room syndrone”. Beautiful minds usually know they are smart, but fail to realize that they don’t know everything. They are right so often that they have a really hard time admitting error or accepting defeat. They end up fighting for the sake of their egos. The input of others is considered a waste of their time.  And, they always over play their hands. 

I had to ask myself if we could really solve this nation’s problems with an autocratic leadership style that comes with such an attitude. The answer is “NO”. We’d have “gridlock” of major proportions in the largest sandbox in the nation. (After all, Hillary has been working on healthcare since 1992, and still millions are lacking still.)

Then, I looked around and realized there was another “beautiful mind” who also had a “beautiful heart” and was willing to work with others toward real solutions — Barack Obama.

So, I began to wonder if these two beautiful minds could work together. I’m not sure.

What do you think?