ELECTION 2008  
Huffington Post / By Arianna Huffington
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 471

Memo to Obama: Moving to the Middle Is for Losers

Realpolitik is one thing. Realstupidpolitik is quite another.
July 5, 2008  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Election 2008 headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

Last Friday afternoon, the guests taking part in Sunday's roundtable discussion on This Week had a pre-show call with George Stephanopoulos. One of the topics he raised was Obama's perceived move to the center, and what it means. Thus began my weekend obsession. If you were within shouting distance of me, odds are we talked about it. I talked about it over lunch with HuffPost's DC team, over dinner with friends, with the doorman at the hotel, and the driver on the way to the airport.



As part of this process, I looked at the Obama campaign not through the prism of my own progressive views and beliefs but through the prism of a cold-eyed campaign strategist who has no principles except winning. From that point of view, and taking nothing else into consideration, I can unequivocally say: the Obama campaign is making a very serious mistake. Tacking to the center is a losing strategy. And don't let the latest head-to-head poll numbers lull you the way they lulled Hillary Clinton in December.



Running to the middle in an attempt to attract undecided swing voters didn't work for Al Gore in 2000. It didn't work for John Kerry in 2004. And it didn't work when Mark Penn (obsessed with his "microtrends" and missing the megatrend) convinced Hillary Clinton to do it in 2008.



Fixating on -- and pandering to -- this fickle crowd is all about messaging tailored to avoid offending rather than to inspire and galvanize. And isn't galvanizing the electorate to demand fundamental change the raison d'etre of the Obama campaign in the first place? This is how David Axelrod put it at the end of February, contrasting the tired Washington model of "I'll do these things for you" with Obama's "Let's do these things together":
"This has been the premise of Barack's politics all his life, going back to his days as a community organizer," Axelrod told me. "He has really lived and breathed it, which is why it comes across so authentically. Of course, the time also has to be right for the man and the moment to come together. And, after all the country has been through over the last seven years, the times are definitely right for the message that the only way to get real change is to activate the American people to demand it."

Watering down that brand is the political equivalent of New Coke. Call it Obama Zero.



In 2004, the Kerry campaign's obsession with undecided voters -- voters so easily swayed that 46 percent of them found credible the Swift Boaters' charges that Kerry might have faked his war wounds to earn a Purple Heart -- allowed the race to devolve from a referendum on the future of the country into a petty squabble over whether Kerry had bled enough to warrant his medals.



Throughout the primary, Obama referred to himself as an "unlikely candidate." Which he certainly was -- and still is. And one of the things that turned him from "unlikely" upstart to presidential frontrunner is his ability to expand the electorate by convincing unlikely voters -- some of the 83 million eligible voters who didn't turn out in 2004 -- to engage in the system.



So why start playing to the political fence sitters -- staking out newly nuanced positions on FISA, gun control laws, expansion of the death penalty, and NAFTA?



In an interview with Nina Easton in Fortune Magazine, Obama was asked about having called NAFTA "a big mistake" and "devastating." Obama's reply: "Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified."



Overheated? So when he was campaigning in the Midwest, many parts of which have been, yes, devastated by economic changes since the passage of NAFTA, and he pledged to make use of a six-month opt-out clause in the trade agreement, that was "overheated?" Or was that one "amplified?"



Because if that's the case, it would be helpful going forward if Obama would let us know which of his powerful rhetoric is "overheated" and/or "amplified," so voters will know not to get their hopes too high.



When Obama kneecaps his own rhetoric and dilutes his positioning as a different kind of politician, he is also giving his opponent a huge opening to reassert the McCain as Maverick brand. We know that McCain has completely abandoned any legitimate claim on his maverick image, but the echoes of that reputation are still very much with us -- especially among many in the media who would love nothing more than to be able to once again portray McCain as the real leader they fell in love with in 2000. And the new Straight Talk Express plane has been modeled on its namesake bus, decked out to better recreate the seduction.



The transition between the primaries and the general election -- and from insurgent to frontrunner -- is tricky. Even a confident campaign can be knocked off course. So this is when Obama most needs to remember what got him to this point -- and stick with it.



In a Los Angeles Times article detailing Obama's attempts at "shifting toward the center," Matt Bennett of the centrist think tank Third Way says that Obama is a "good politician. He's doing all he can to make sure people know he would govern as a post-partisan moderate."



But isn't being a "good politician" as it's meant here exactly what Obama defined himself as being against? Instead of Third Way think tankers, Obama should listen to this guy:
"What's stopped us is the failure of leadership, the smallness of our politics -- the ease with which we're distracted by the petty and trivial, our chronic avoidance of tough decisions, our preference for scoring cheap political points instead of rolling up our sleeves and building a working consensus to tackle big problems.... The time for that politics is over. It's time to turn the page."

That was Barack Obama in February of 2007, announcing his run for the White House. "I know I haven't spent a lot of time learning the ways of Washington," he said that day, "but I've been there long enough to know that the ways of Washington must change."



Was that just "overheated and amplified" rhetoric?



The Obama brand has always been about inspiration, a new kind of politics, the audacity of hope, and "change we can believe in." I like that brand. More importantly, voters -- especially unlikely voters -- like that brand.



Pulling it off the shelf and replacing it with a political product geared to pleasing America's vacillating swing voters -- the ones who will be most susceptible to the fear-mongering avalanche that has already begun -- would be a fatal blunder.



Realpolitik is one thing. Realstupidpolitik is quite another.


AlterNet is a nonprofit organization and does not make political endorsements. The opinions expressed by its writers are their own.

  • 1
View as a single page
 
Find more Arianna at the Huffington Post.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Election 2008 headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: obama, election 2008, centrist

comments COMMENTS ( 471 )
READ COMMENTS
LOGIN OR REGISTER TO POST A COMMENT
 

Comments are closed-

Arianna is right on the money ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mmckinl on Jul 5, 2008 12:28 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether you liked Obama or not you had to respect him. Folks know we need changes, they are ready for real ideas. They are not ready for a BS ballet. With all these "nuances" and "clarifications" his respect is going by the wayside like a used condom.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We knew him before he was a Barack Star Posted by: Starfall Deception
» Clarification on point #2 Posted by: bthespoon

Comments are closed-

The warning word was "bipartisanship"
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Zenobia on Jul 5, 2008 1:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why are people so surprised? All along B.O. has talked about fairy land "bipartisanship." You only attempt to reach that by shooting straight down the middle. And then you end up pleasing nobody and pissing off EVERYBODY.

The scarier problem is, today's "center" is still far right. Mainstream Dems are GOP lite. The right wing is fascist. Therefore, todays "center" is midway between moderate Republican and fascist.

This is why we need someone who is NOT afraid to be partisan, someone who will keep repeating and repeating and repeating progressive ideals until they become common thought, i.e., normalized. We need someone who has the guts to stand firm on progressive principles and reframe things so that these positions seem like plain old common sense.. Constant repetition and reframing is how the GOP took the country gradually gradually rightward rightward rightward over 30 years.

It's way past time to yank it back! Even if we only successfully yank to what center was before Bush II--that would place us in the ideological zone of Clinton I--it would FEEL far left compared to what we have grown used to waking up to each day.

I tried to tell everyone around me. They all insisted on following Obama's pretty flute music, and condescending anyone who heard some bitter notes in there. Sigh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Kinda Simonist
[Report this comment]
Posted by: talkville on Jul 5, 2008 2:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Slip sliding away; slip sliding away; the closer your destination the more things keep sliding away." -- Paul Simon.

Right smack in the middle, at the core so to speak, are the same old shysters, corrupt ones, wheelers and dealers and misguided thiefs, liars and all around hucksters that are steering this country (very pragmatically and efficiently one might add) into the realms of madness. The World, the Whole World and Nothing but the World, so help me God! And by any means necessary. Inside and Outside the "Homeland". And to that Obama gravitates; by any means necessary.

A neo-fascist Police State need not exist at any particular time or place; but, indeed, it has to be ready; and 'security' and 'preparedness' sure does. We're already there. In a "bi-partisan" way of course.

At the "extremes" alarm bells are sounding, it's hectic and noisy and voluminous. But at the Core is a sound-proof Wall where this 'middlesome' bunch of thugs happily goes on. Right smack in the middle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kinda Simonist Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

Obama’s hope and change may be a myth
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Richard House on Jul 5, 2008 2:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just when everyone thought Obama was a patriotic leftist politician he changed course and has taken on the appearance of an imitation faith-based-initiatives religious man of the right; the rhetoric has turned out to be empty and as thin as his silhouette. Unless this is some astute move (but really a tactically fatal act to gather middle-class highly pliable swing-voters who would fall prey to Swift Boat tactics anyway and meat for McCain strategists), congratulations to Obama who is now hedging on all his past positions. Will he continue Bush’s brand of global messianic militarism in a new style in order to do what’s best for America?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The John Kerry Trap.... Posted by: CatDad

Comments are closed-

Democrats
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Jul 5, 2008 3:09 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Typical insecure Democrat. They'll say and do anything in a desperate attempt to fit in.

This article is giving me flashbacks of high school...Maybe Obama should get his tongue pierced...or paint his hair purple...or get a really cool car.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Smoke and Mirrors...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Turiye on Jul 5, 2008 3:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I watched him speak 18 April at Independence Hall, I said, "Oh, he's tired I suppose", I kept trying to reassure myself, I was there alone so nobody else I was speaking to at the moment. I needed definitive answers, re; war, troop withdrawal, FISA, Impeachment, the F$$KING Constitution and Bill of Rights and habeas[habeas wasn't decided at thet date] so I still didn't know. I wouldn't vote for Hillary because of the "obliterate Iran" remark. I couldn't vote GHASP Republican, never have, Nader was an Economist not a President, Nader is an advocate, not a President. McKinney, I don't like her at all. Barbara Lee now that's a different story, I'd vote for her, I trust her. I heard the FISA lie and I said here it comes...Refining Iraq, WTF is that supposed to mean?
Beginning to go back to what I was going to do in the 1st place, _________.
Dennis Kucinich, don't care what anyone tries to use to console themselves with, Dennis Kucinich is going on that line with my #2 pencil. Call it a wasted vote? It isn't if everyone did the same thing, only honest politician. Walking, Talking oxymoron.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: bbfmail
» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: beautifulady2003
» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: kungfuma
» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: lively56

Comments are closed-

In any event, let's root out the dead wood in Congress!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: TarryFaster on Jul 5, 2008 3:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In a five hour fit of anger and frustration, I dug up the names and contact information on the "Democratic" House & Senator traitors who voted to approve the latest version of the "Compromise FISA bill" -- which destroys our Fourth Amendment.  I put the two lists up on the Net as websites and will now go about "promoting" them.  Ideally, with your help, we could bring these sites to the attention of enough people to develop a viral network that could then gain critical mass among voters to remove these traitors.

Here are the sites: 

For House "Representatives": http://www.cloudbyte.com/traitors.html
For "Senators": http://www.cloudbyte.com/senatetraitors.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sorry about the dead links! Posted by: TarryFaster

Comments are closed-

Losing Confidence in the man of steel
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Kelli B on Jul 5, 2008 4:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The one dumb move the neo-right was praying for Obama so made. He just anounced a move to pander to the right wing religious. I just gave 50 more bucks to him. I feel like I was duped. Thanks alot Obama, it was nice for a while.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

I quit the Democratic Party
[Report this comment]
Posted by: aahpat on Jul 5, 2008 4:15 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in 1996 over this running to the right crap that the Democrats ALWAYS DO.

And yes Arianna is right about this run to the right, it is why the Democrats lose major elections.

No party can win without an activist base to pound the streets for them in the months leading up to the election. But the Democrats have been driving the left leaning social justice activist base out of the Party since the early 1990's in a concerted effort to instead pander for the votes of a Jim Crow white right-wing that hates all things liberal/left/progressive/moderate.

Why I, a social justice, civil liberties, human rights loving American, refuse to vote for Obama and McCain:
Traitors:Bush, Walters, McCain & Obama

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I quit the Democratic Party Posted by: scootmandubious
» YES! Posted by: aahpat
» RE: I quit the Democratic Party Posted by: helenwheels
» No! Posted by: aahpat
» RE: No! Posted by: grkjr
» RE: I quit the Democratic Party Posted by: impeachbushandcheneynow

Comments are closed-

You are mistaken.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: davescott on Jul 5, 2008 4:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I deplore some of the recent tacking to the center by Obama. His praise for the awful gun decision, or his criticism of a rare case the Court got right, when it overturned a death sentence for a nonlethal crime. But when you say moving to the center doesnt work, I beg to differ. Bill Clinton preached welfare reform and, during the 92 campaign, flew back to Little Rock to sign a death warrant for a mentally disabled inmate. He is the only Dem since FDR to win twice. You say Gore's centrism didn't work, but he got more votes than the other guy did, and he had an albatross not of his making in the Lewinsky mess. Walter Mondale said he'd raise taxes and got clobbered. Dukakis was pilloried as "too liberal."

There is a common notion among the left that Dems would win lots more elections if they were just more outspokenly left-wing. I have seen absolutely no evidence to support that premise, and Ralph Nader's abysmal showings suggest otherwise. Candidates run to the center because this is a centrist nation -- and on issues like crime and welfare, a dumb, mean and nasty little nation.

To coin a phrase, you go into a presidential election with the electorate you've got. I'd rather see more truth-speaking. I'd rather see the real leadership Americans need, starting with a call for making the rich pay their share for once, and a quick end to fossil fuels. But when you state that tacking to the center is for losers, history just doesnt support that claim. If you toss out 1976 as a post-Watergate fluke, the ONLY Dem to win in 44 years was DLC member, middle-hugging Bill Clinton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Shey
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: davescott
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Lauren
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: davescott
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Lauren
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Scientz
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: robbb3rt
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Lauren
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: CatDad

Comments are closed-

RealAbortionPolitik
[Report this comment]
Posted by: hysperia on Jul 5, 2008 4:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let me just say to begin with that anyone who thinks that RealPolitik isn't RealStupidPoltik to begin with is RealStupid. RealPolitik leads exactly and precisely to where Sen Obama has found himself - in a land where he has no clear supporters, no clear constituency. He's trying to build a new one and it won't work.

Why has no one noticed that Obama has reversed his position on late term abortions, saying on July 3rd that he wouldn't support them except in cases when a woman's physical health was in jeopardy and not when her mental health was in jeopardy, as if physical and mental health can actually be divided anyway?

I can't believe how little people seem to care about this issue and about the meaning of this serious reversal. He lost me completely on this one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ealAbortionPolitik Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: ealAbortionPolitik Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

Obama started in middle then moved more to the right
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bthespoon on Jul 5, 2008 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is not the hero we need to fix health care or the mess in Iraq. He is against uniting all Americans into one protective, nondiscriminatory health coverage pool, and will bring all but 50-80,000 of our troops out of Iraq "unless the situation on the ground changes". He says nulclear power, corn-based ethanol and coal are clean alternatives. Sigh.

He talks a (really, truly) great talk but his walk is as crooked as the next.

"Better Than McSame" and Supreme Court are two good reasons to vote for him, but mark my words: Obama will break real progressives' hearts.

PS- I also knew when Bush was appointed President that we'd be in a deep recession if we had to endure his PSBW (Parallel Simultaneous Backwards World) economic policies. I made this prediction to everyone who would listen. Obama also definitely will be better (not nearly as good as he could be) for the economy than more of the same.

We've never needed another FDR more than we need one now, and Obama is not even close.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Amen, bthespoon! Posted by: patsy6
» RE: Amen, bthespoon! Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Amen, bthespoon! Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

Arianna Huffington, as usual,
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Shey on Jul 5, 2008 4:53 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.... hit the nail on the head. I for one don't want a bipartisan love fest with the Republican extreme right-wing (i.e. the vast majority of Republicans in the federal government today).

They are war criminals, corporate criminals, liars, thieves and Fascist Plutocrats. I don't want a candidate who is willing to have a dialog with these evil fucks, I want to see them run out of town on a rail at best and some of them in jail, where they belong.

Please, Senator Obama, listen to the brilliant Ms. Huffington and don't sell us out. You may well be our last hope for salvaging what's left of our Democracy and beginning to rebuild what we've lost.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Arianna Huffington, as usual, Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: Arianna Huffington, as usual, Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: Arianna Huffington, as usual, Posted by: scootmandubious
» RE: enuf said. Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

Realpolitik in Amerika 2008
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Last Chance on Jul 5, 2008 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is just trying to avoid assassination, and after all, he is the star of the Chicago political machine which really knows how to elect its own. I hope he wins, just to see what he will and will not do. Meanwhile, the federal government plunges toward bankruptcy and the nation towards another big Depression. If so, it might put Obama in a similar position as FDR in the 1930s. Hmmmmm. Now there's an intriguing scenario !!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ealpolitik in Amerika 2008 Posted by: VZEQICVA
» Realpolitik in Amerika 2008 Posted by: Last Chance

Comments are closed-

The lesser of two evils game...again!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: margo1 on Jul 5, 2008 5:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you think Kucinich would have done what Obama is doing? America, you voted and this is what you get when you swallow the line that someone is unelectable. I guess when you repeat the word change enough it convinces people in this country that you will get change. If you are marginalized by your party, ignored during the debates and treated as if you were some sort of a nutcase or sideshow by the likes of Letterman, Stewart and Colbert, Americans will all agree that you do not have a chance. For the past two elections, Democrats have failed you. I remember the fake enthusiasm of '04 when Kerry was the man and people went to Michael Moore rallies smiling when they were really grinding their teeth knowing they were doomed to four more years of Bush. I hate to say it, but the same poor souls who are driving around today with the Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers will be driving around with Obama '08 stickers six years from now, wondering what went wrong. And yes, it would be the same thing if it were Hillary. I have voted for Kucinich twice and I am glad to have done so. I do not believe in a wasted vote. What I do not believe in is a country where your choices are Coke and Pepsi. So what is it going to be America, will you be having Coke or Pepsi for the next four years?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Saw Ralph on C-SPIN Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: Saw Ralph on C-SPIN Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Saw Ralph on C-SPIN Posted by: lenioui
» RE: The lesser of two evils game...again! Posted by: beautifulady2003

Comments are closed-

FMA in Massachusetts
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FMABBI on Jul 5, 2008 5:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I consider myself an independent and an Obama supporter because he is our best hope for change in general. The Republicans in the white house and in Congress have made such a mess of this country's economy, the environment, our credibility among other nations, the country's military lack of readiness, and have highlighted the federal government's inability to deal with crisis at home.

Amazingly, there still has yet to be a comprehensive, independent, adequately funded investigation of the attacks on 9-11-2001. The "official" report was underfunded - $6 million compared to $40 million spent on "Whitewater" - is full of holes and improbabilities - doesn't even address Building 7 and approached the project with the conclusions already accepted as "truth". (google "9-11 truth" and do some homework) The attacks of 9-11 resulted in our loss of our basic freedoms, a fear filled citizenry who vote for someone they perceive will prevent other attacks, and a never ending (unjustified) "War on Terror" (anywhere in the world including here at home) which is bankrupting our treasury, spilling the blood of tens of thousands of innocent people, and making us far less safe than before 9-11 because everyone else in the world sees the error of our ways and become sympathetic to the extremists willing to fight the big global bully - that is us!

People, wake up! Our government is in shambles! What ever happened to the Constitution? What ever happened to the rule of law? This administration (including John McCain) is in essence pissing on these precious concepts which have made our country great to begin with! Where's Congress in all of this? Aren't they supposed to check the power of the executive branch to prevent these atrocities from happening in the first place? Or are they complicit?

Instead of complaining that Obama is only a perfectly fallible politician who is moving to the right in order to win the general election which may be a mistake (he will make mistakes in the future too), let's focus on the bigger picture. Let's fix this government and vote for folks who will turn this around - including your representatives in Congress. Let's educate ourselves about the Constitution and what we Americans should expect from our government as stated in the Constitution/ Bill of Rights and the laws of the land. Let's hold our politicians accountable and let them know that they will NOT get away with murder, lies, and/or treasonous acts. For this country's sake - whether Democrat, Republican or Independent - whether Black, White, Asian, Hispanic or whatever - whether male or female - whether blue collar or well educated elite - let's get the politicians out of office who are complicit in the destruction of this great country before it's too late! Let's get people in there who represent us and not BIG MONEY! Let's get people in there who will deal with the big problems (and they are HUGE) like global warming, energy independence, health care, and getting our people back to work.

Just who are we Americans? Are we really more interested in what someone's preacher says or if someone wears an American Flag lapel pin? Here's something you can and should be afraid of - losing the basic precepts of what our country is and stands for - who WE are as Americans. Once we've lost our core identity (and we're very close indeed), we will lose the basic freedoms we hold so dear (and take for granted) like freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to bear arms (to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government - God forbid!), the freedom to bar someone from entering our houses without consent, the right to a trial by jury, etc. www.consource.org/index.asp?bid=574

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That was just plain Posted by: bthespoon
» EncinoM is . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» sgtmajor Posted by: seazen

Comments are closed-

What choice?...They're all similar...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: myanh44 on Jul 5, 2008 5:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberals, Conservatives.....Democrats, Republicans....don't you all know by now that it's ONE BIG PARTY with two different names? You are all fooled to think you have two choices when in fact you have none! Liberty and freedom, traits which separate this country from the rest of the world, are slowly being eroded and have been exacerbated since the 70s, regardless of who was in charge.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Obama presidency would be a failure just like Pelosi's Congress
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jul 5, 2008 5:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'cause neither have any real agenda for change. Democratic leadership and most elected officials are part of the status quo, and hence we haven't had any progressive changes since 2006 election.

To expect anything better from Obama is to live in a fool's paradise.

As I posted elsewhere, Obama isn't even pretending to be liberal. Lately, he has been revising or 'refining' his positions over all major issues, including Iraq.

So who expects that Obama is the agent of change?

FISA position before:
"To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."
-- Obama spokesman Bill Burton, Oct. 24, 2007

FISA position today:
Obama now says he'll vote in favor of the new FISA bill that gives the telecom companies blanket immunity for post-Sept. 11 eavesdropping.

NAFTA position before:
Obama thoroughly trashed the North American Free Trade Agreement, pledging to force a renegotiation, take "the hammer" to Canada and Mexico and threaten unilateral abrogation.

NAFTA position today:
Obama calls his previous NAFTA rhetoric "overheated" and essentially endorses what one of his senior economic advisers privately told the Canadians: The anti-trade stuff was nothing more than populist posturing

Public financing of elections position before:
Obama pledged to stick to public financing.

Position today:
Obama has opted out of public financing of elections.

On Iran, his position was meetings without preconditions. Today he claims to have "preparations", which according to his aides are functional equivalent of preconditions.

On SCOTUS ruling on 2nd amendment:
In November, the Chicago Tribune quoted the Obama campaign as saying, “Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.”

On Thursday, the Obama campaign told ABC that the statement was “inartful” and does not fully explain Obama’s “consistent position.”

As of Thursaday he has started to move away from his earlier position of 16 month combat troop removal from Iraq.
And now he says that his "original position" on withdrawal has always been that "we've got to make sure that our troops are safe and that Iraq is stable." And that "when I go to Iraq . . . I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies."

So even on Iraq his flip has began. By the time he comes back from his Iraq tour, the 16-month timetable will be out the window.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: emmas
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: Lauren
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: emmas
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: emmas
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» What was his motive? . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: What was his motive? . . . Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: What was his motive? . . . Posted by: carbon-based
» PS Article on Patriotism Posted by: emmas

Comments are closed-

Right
[Report this comment]
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Jul 5, 2008 5:38 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[Yawn] Time to feed the Sheeple. Here sheeple, sheeple sheeple. LOL

JT
Is your ISP watching?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ight Posted by: Turiye
» RE: ight Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ight Posted by: Dboy
» RE: ight Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

ALL You Had To Do...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: loxias on Jul 5, 2008 5:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Was ask these questions a few months ago. You all got suckered, so blatantly and willingly it was a sad disaster in slow motion. And if there was a "biggest unquestioning cheerleader" then Alternet was the one. That's why you don't believe words, but look at action. And if there are no actions to look at, perhaps you're making a hasty decision. This guy is going to be eaten alive, all because of his political ties, lack of experience, and big mouth. And the country will continue to be ravished to feed the wealthy, and the entire world will suffer. Faith and hope don't re-allocate resources, nor regulate business conglomerates. And Alternet will pretend they knew it would happen all along, and never really liked Obama, and put a lot more links to TMZ up so you forget about the whole thing during McCain's Iran debacle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ALL You Had To Do... Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ALL You Had To Do... Posted by: loxias
» RE: ALL You Had To Do... Posted by: cmaciain

Comments are closed-

FUNDAMENTAL CON JOB @ the KOOL-AID STATE
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Jul 5, 2008 5:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And isn't galvanizing the electorate to demand fundamental change the raison d'etre of the Obama campaign in the first place?"

What "fundamental change"?

Obama is the DC version of Denzel Washington with talking points provided by ruling class paymasters that bankrolled his campaign. By voting record, performance or any other measure that means anything Obama is a Stepford actor playing his part for the usual suspects.

Obama may be somewhat "better" than troglodyte McCain but the difference is far more charisma and flash than it is substance.

At the end of the day, the same corporate crime Fascists will be pulling the strings on Obama or McCain whichever one of them "wins".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Getting the "Leaders" We Deserve
[Report this comment]
Posted by: phshafe on Jul 5, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We accede to the wholesale slaughter of Iraqi children so that we might get the oil to prolong our distinctive suburban lifestyle just a bit. We fail to even acknowledge the energy armageddon about to consume us, much less sign up to immediate and escalating sacrifices needed to deal with it head-on. Most of us haven't read any of even the best (truly outstanding) books available documenting any of these momentous events of our time.

And then we scream because our "leaders" mirror ourselves? Is it not clear that an empire like ours whose decline is so advanced has deeply embedded mechanisms for preventing real leaders and visionaries, and anyone with balls and guts (figuratively speaking) from ascending to the helm?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

"Ending the politics of partisanship."
[Report this comment]
Posted by: davescott on Jul 5, 2008 6:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No one can win enough states to win the presidency without compromises that many of us find repulsive. That said, there's been a fundamental cynicism in Obama's message from Day One. A central premise is that he would end the politics of partisanship -- as if the only reason Dems can't work with Boehner, McConnell, Inhofe and their ilk is that us silly products of the baby boom haven't tried hard enough to talk nice to them. That's insulting gibberish. These people are criminals. And Barack Obama is a smart enough man to know it. His pandering started a long time ago. I will vote for him gladly, given the alternative, but anyone who thinks he isn't selling himself like another box of soap is kidding themselves. And the larger problem isn't just the message. It's the supine, right-coddling media and the largely uninformed electorate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

troll alert
[Report this comment]
Posted by: seazen on Jul 5, 2008 6:16 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We should all read these posts carefully and understand that this internal bickering and false indignation at Barack for not doing every exactly the way we would every day are just setting them up to promote added divisiveness. We should be clear that this is what we are doing - and be careful of what we are creating with our own trek down the slippery slope of "I know better how to run the campaign than Obama does."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: troll alert Posted by: Last Chance
» I'll support Obama AFTER Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: I'll support Obama AFTER Posted by: VZEQICVA

Comments are closed-

Arianna, Still working for the Neo CONS??
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Purple Girl on Jul 5, 2008 6:18 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I used to read the Huffpo,but got kicked off when I went after Investment Bankers and stated they should be handed over to those they have been borrowing money from while undermining our economy.
I seriously doubt Arianna ever gave up her Neo Con membership card-covert operative?
FISA leaves Criminal Prosecution open- far more satisfying then mere money hand slaps for treason
"Will not get out of Iraq as recklessly as we Got in"Same line he's always had- nothing new
Public Election finanacing- 90% are donors of $200 or less,individuals.Told DNC to Not except PAC money.
Handguns- not AK47's - If we can't own them legally the criminals will be the only ones who do
Let's not forget how the 527's won their smear campaigns on Kerry- by persauding and utilizing the so called 'Lefty's'
So Arianna what's your Rovian Point?? That we should vote for Mac because he does not move to the middle- Are you Drunk or just so indoctrinated you actually think we are stupid enough to fall for this BS? Mac has not only moved towards the Bush/Cheney doctrine He has brecome one of it's Zombie Puppets!
Arianna Your 'Double Speak' is obvious and Disgusting!Get a Clue folks she and her website are nothing more than mind Fuckers - playing 'Reverse Psychology' games 101!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» sgtmajor Posted by: seazen
» The smart ones . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» Operation Mockingbird 2.0 Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: mick3 Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

Somebody hasn't been listening
[Report this comment]
Posted by: nellie blogger on Jul 5, 2008 6:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Huffington's "memo" makes me wonder whether she ever really paid any attention to Obama's politics or his speeches. He has been stating plainly some of these supposed "moves to the right" since he started his campaign. Many people, like myself for example, supported Edwards because we wanted a truly progressive candidate. Although I'm squarely behind Obama now, I have always thought of him as a centrist. A sensible and humane one, but a centrist nonetheless.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Somebody hasn't been listening Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: Somebody hasn't been listening Posted by: scootmandubious

Comments are closed-

I have liked Obama all along
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bobsays on Jul 5, 2008 6:43 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He has charisma and struts with the glide of a leader. And now that he is fully signed up to taking on terrorists and their nation-state supporters, I like him more. His rather scrumptious former foreign policy adviser Samantha Power laid it down: robust liberal interventionism is the order of the day. What will that mean? It means Ahmandinajad's days are numbered no matter who wins in November (or maybe he will go before then?). It also means Robert Mugabe better watch his back, and so should Hugo Chavez.

We now face a deciding point in human history: do we stand up for free markets, global security, uphold the law, or do we allow gangsters, terrorists and thugs to rule the day?

I think Obama understands these things.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Don't Compare Chavez with Mugabe. Posted by: rgoalierob
» Nothing stupider than... Posted by: Bobsays
» She!! Posted by: emmas
» RE: I have liked Obama all along Posted by: honestlyoutraged
» What free market? Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

The smart $$ is on Obama
[Report this comment]
Posted by: carbon-based on Jul 5, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arianna Huffington is wrong on many things and this is just another.

Obama's political strategy closely resembles Clintons very successful campaign and has even been compared to Nixons (primaries he was right wing and general he moved moderate).

Primary's Clinton was left of center and in the general he moved to the center. America is a moderate nation at best, even right leaning. For Obama not to recognize that would be a big mistake.

As a moderate conservative he has attracted mine and many other moderates vote with his statements and positions.

He already has the liberal vote - the battleground is the moderates and independents.

America has NEVER elected a "liberal" (how ever that is defined) President! Obama knows he has to represent the nation, not one group!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» FDR was a liberal President Posted by: bthespoon
» Wrong Posted by: Bobsays
» RE: Wrong Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: Wrong Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Wrong is wrong Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: Wrong is wrong Posted by: Bobsays
» Right is right Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: ight is right Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ight is right Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Wrong Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Wrong Posted by: carbon-based
» FDR - what you want him to be Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: FDR - what you want him to be Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: FDR - what you want him to be Posted by: carbon-based
» Half true Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: Half true Posted by: carbon-based
» You say potatoe, I say potato Posted by: bthespoon

Comments are closed-

Arianna
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CoatesMoe on Jul 5, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
George Stephanopoulos is a Clinton man and of course will use every chance to listen to his master´s voice. You have been successful with your concept, but give some credit to Obama and company. They have lead the successful campaign according to the DNC and also according to the broad public. He has a clear message and it is coming across. He is also seeing that the chances of getting elected is being influenced by the mass media of yesterday who resent losing their power to the Blogs and You Tubes. He has still got to be elected and even with John McCain looking like his days are numbered the CNN, ABC, NBC and yourself are trying to generate content to help sell your ad space to the top bidder. Accept the fact that he has the lead and I feel is not about to lose that lead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Arianna Posted by: Dboy

Comments are closed-

Arianna is right on the money
[Report this comment]
Posted by: ptrmlr on Jul 5, 2008 6:44 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would urge everyone that agrees with this article to take a minute, and forward it to the Obama campaign. I'm sure they'd appreciate a comment or two on why this shift to the "center" is not what we signed on for. I'll still vote for him, but if I've got to hold my nose to do it you can bet it'll be my "small contibutor" hand doing the holding.

P.L. Miller

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Is there any Left left?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bthespoon on Jul 5, 2008 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just like Neo-Cons are to the right of conservative, Neo-Liberals are to the right of liberal. Obama is a Neo-Liberal.

I wish the Democrats would come back to the Left where I think they belong. By running Republican Lite time after time, they're leaving true Progressives in the lurch.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Is there any Left left? Posted by: Turiye
» RE: Is there any Left left? Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: Is there any Left left? Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

There Are People in this ROOM from the OBAMA Campaign, causing us to not even believe each other now
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Turiye on Jul 5, 2008 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That is why they want a copy forwarded, to show them at the campaign we're screwing with each other which in turn will calm everyone down, thereby still trust obama, trust whomever you want, vote for anyone you want, NOT GOP, because I'm sick of being paranoid all the damn time. I don't give a shit anymore.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Enough of this article
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JohnJlws on Jul 5, 2008 7:00 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, I've seen this article enough. I've seen it on Huffington, another mainstream, right-leaning, website and now here. Keep it up folks and we'll have a McCain presidency. As a republican, until Obama, I can see very clearly why democrats rarely win the White House. Many don't know how to win.

You have great discussions, entertaining, if inordinately long, local conventions, wonderfully diverse candidates (in race, gender and thought), but republicans vote and support the republican candidates. Some dems, usually just enough, get all mad and take their ball and go home.

Another republican administration will about do this country in, so our choice.

Yes We Can!

Obama '08

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: nough of this article Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

seazen
[Report this comment]
Posted by: seazen on Jul 5, 2008 7:11 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder if you all could help me out a little here because I think we are getting all tangled up in the machinations of this campaign and losing sight of the big picture and our priorities.

My sense is that Obama triggered a deeply felt need in this country to move toward a society (not just a government) that we could ALL be proud of again. This is a bold undertaking given the magnitude of the problems we face and the extraordinary level of divisiveness that exists today.

To me, his vision is "outside" of the traditional labels of "liberal", "left", center" etc and are closest to "progressive." This resonates partly because of the Rovian scheme to create a "permanent Republican Majority" and the constant loyalty tests associated with "with us or against us."

If this is a close approximation, then, what we are seeking is "inclusiveness", "openness", "compassion", "equity," "cooperation," "honesty", etc. Too much of what I have been seeing from our side sound like petty. old-time "political" competition where we want power for our particular party or wing of the party.

Are we seeking victory for "my group" or for the country??

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: seazen Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: seazen Posted by: beautifulady2003
» RE: seazen Posted by: Lauren
» RE: seazen Posted by: beautifulady2003
» RE: seazen Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: seazen Posted by: beautifulady2003

Comments are closed-

Obama has always been a centrist
[Report this comment]
Posted by: chlamor on Jul 5, 2008 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and that is in a political system where the center has been pushed to the far right. Guess what that makes him folks.

Put away the illusions and face what many of us have been saying for months. Obama is a faithful corporate militarist in a bi-partisan empire.

Just one example here:

"By the way, I would reach out to the first George Bush. You know, one of the things that I think George H.W. Bush doesn't get enough credit for was his foreign policy team and the way that he helped negotiate the end of the Cold War and prosecuted the Gulf War. That cost us 20 billion dollars. That's all it cost. It was extremely successful. I think there were a lot of very wise people. So I want a bipartisan team that can help to provide me good advice and counsel when I'm president of the United States."

- Barack Obama on LARRY KING LIVE: March 20, 2008

There it is.

Obama lauding the way GHW Bush "prosecuted" the Iraq War. Incredible huh? Not really.

"Iraqi army massed on the Saudi border" when we had a treaty to protect the Saudis. Only, many years later, declassified satellite pics show nothing but endless miles of empty desert on the border. Saddam stopped in Kuwait and never for a minute threatened the Sauds.

In the war itself, the massed column of the defeated Iraqi army was retreating toward Bagdhad. We bombed and napalmed the essentially undefended column to charred wreckage. 100-200 thousand died on that road, apparently.

After the war we incited the Shiites to rebel, then looked the other way as Saddam ruthlessly reestablished "proceeded to victory" in the brief civil war.

If anyone doesn't like these examples, there are sufficient others to prosecute GHWB, if such things were ever done anymore.

Maybe Obama can keep Dick Cheney on board the bi-partisan team as Cheney was Sec. of Defense during those heady days of Desert Storm.

Oh wait and by the way Obama is praising a war criminal.

Can't wait to hear the rationalizations not that substance is of import here but hey it's election time in The Empire kids, get on board the crazy train.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Obama is a company man
[Report this comment]
Posted by: chlamor on Jul 5, 2008 7:36 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"This “new Democrat” Barack Obama is engaged in the exact same “juggling act” as the “old Democrats” i.e. Clinton. He likes to call himself a “progressive” and to identify himself with “the principles of equality,” the “Golden Rule” and the cause of “social justice,” citing as evidence his youthful experience as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago. Still, Obama is a freshly minted millionaire who recently purchased an opulent Georgian Revival Mansion below price at $1.65 million thanks to some help from the felony-indicted political fundraiser and longtime Obama friend and campaign finance pivot man Tony Rezko.

Obama is a company man. He knows the language, the subtle and overt signals, and emits them like a beacon. Ruling circles have gotten the message, and that is why corporate media have made him a contender, and corporate billfolds have financed him. The "skinny kid" made his bones at the Democratic National Convention, in August, 2004, while he was still an Illinois senatorial candidate - a shoo-in against the hopeless and deranged Black Republican Alan Keyes. Obama put all white fears to rest: "There is no white America. There is no black America. There is no Latino America. There is no Asian America. There is only the United States of America." Hallelujah!

The scam of this still-new century enthralls and envelopes the nation, a narrowly-packaged farce in which political candidates are joined at the hip on every public policy issue that has been allowed to enter the corporate media-vetted discourse: health care, Iraq, trade. Even these points of (non)contention disappear in the din of purely commercial marketing mantras with infinitely malleable meanings: "Change," "Hope," "Reform."

When no real change is offered - when both frontrunners are wedded to a lingering presence in Iraq and to reestablishing U.S. hegemony in the world; when insurance and drug companies are left virtually untouched by duos' tepid forays into broadening health care coverage; and when neither offers a whisper of an idea on halting the corporate-engineered global Race to the Bottom, then it is certain that, although "change" may come, it will be at the direction of the rich who have brought the nation and planet to the very brink of catastrophe.

But then, Obama would never have risen so quickly and remarkably to his current position of dominant media favor and national prominence if he was anything like the egalitarian and democratic “progressive” that some liberals and leftists imagine. In the corporate-crafted and money-dominated swamp that passes for “representative democracy” in the U.S., concentrated economic and imperial power open and close doors in ways that preemptively suffocate populist potential. Big money is not in the business of promoting genuine social justice or democracy activists (so-called “gadflies” like Wellstone, to use Obama’s description).

Understanding public policy as a mechanism for the upward distribution of wealth, it promotes empire and inequality by underwriting the smothering K Street culture and the revolving door that feeds it—not just lobbyists themselves but the entire interconnected world of campaign consultants, public relations agencies, pollsters, and media strategists—without whose favor and assistance serious presidential bids are next to unthinkable."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Obama is a company man Posted by: beautifulady2003
» RE: Obama is a company man Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

What shame is there being left-of-center?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: scootmandubious on Jul 5, 2008 7:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think one of the biggest failings of the Democratic majority is that they have allowed the 'conservative' branding to remain untarnished.

It was Reagan, with the help of morally repugnant pols like Jesse Helms, who transformed 'liberal' into a dirty word. How bad did it get? So bad that today, instead of using the 'l' word, we trot out 'progressive' as another way of saying the same thing.

One would think that with the disastrous consequences that conservative policies have brought to bear on America, we would take pride in identifying ourselves as being on the left. After all, it is no accident that more people now choose to identify as Democrat and that traditional right-wing positions poll in the nether regions.

Yet, the Democrats still behave as if they have an inferiority complex, and still allow the right-wing to define them. Unfortunately, it looks as if Senator Obama is buying into that fear.

I would, for once, like to see a proud stance from somebody on the left, who isn't ashamed to take on, and expose, conservative values for the sham that they are.

I hope Obama comes to his senses, in this regard.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

SMG
[Report this comment]
Posted by: SMGroce on Jul 5, 2008 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is only ONE idea & mantra ANY Democrat, Independent, or disinchanted Republican MUST keep at the forefront of this year's election :

" FIRST, YOU MUST GET ELECTED. "

We have shot ourselves in the foot , while standing by spouting the sort of drivel that Huffington is espousing . . . and WE HAVE LOST. Regardless of how you regard Bill Clinton and his tenure, he DID get elected. . TWICE. . by moving toward the middle.

We CANNOT afford another loss. . . it will be not just a loss to our country, but close to our demise. It doesn't take a political genius to figure this out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: SMG Posted by: scootmandubious
» RE: SMG Posted by: Lauren
» RE: SMG Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

Whiners and Complainers
[Report this comment]
Posted by: freshlemon on Jul 5, 2008 7:54 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I remember an eighth grader attacking another eighth grader and giving as his reason,"He was looking at me funny."
As I read through all of the previous comments I was reminded of the fact that it takes very little to put people on the attack. We have learned from Bush Inc. that the best defense is a good offense that takes words and actions out of context to demean and destroy those who disagree with their perception of what is right and wrong.
Individual perception is what its all about. Obama has always been in favor of using compromise to reach goals. This is a big country with each person having his own "wish list". Not every wish on your list can be accommodated. Obama has also spoken often about bipartizan action being essential. To believe that any individual is going to be the super-hero who makes sweeping changes over night is incredibly naive. To expect a candidate to always do what you perceive to be right is also naive. People all have the capacity to change their minds and opinions.

All of you who are now whining and complaining need a dose of reality. The first step we need to take is to get the fear and hate-mongering
control freaks out of office. That means voting for Obama. A third party or write-in weakens your vote and gives the Republicans a toe in the door.

We all need to start listening to the candidates themselves more closely instead of jumping on a few words out of context and the appraisal of the talking heads who fancy themselves as experts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fighters and Truth Tellers Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: Whiners and Complainers Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Whiners and Complainers Posted by: Saitia
» RE: Whiners and Complainers Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: Whiners and Complainers Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: Theocrats!!! Posted by: emmas
» RE: Whiners and Complainers Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

She nailed it!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mountainmama on Jul 5, 2008 7:57 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arianna hit the nail on the head and this is exactly how I have been feeling the last week or so, as a up-to-now supporter of Obama. I am completely fed up with American government and politics!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Some cheap shots here.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: davescott on Jul 5, 2008 8:02 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some of the posters here get carried away with themselves. Obama has committed to getting us out of Iraq, introducing national health insurance leglisation and doing something about global warming. He is hardly a "right wing" candidate as that term is defined in US politics. And he would govern far differently from McCain -- the specter of McCain Supreme Court appointments alone are reason to send Obama money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Some cheap shots here. Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: Some cheap shots here. Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

The ONLY way Barack can win the presidency
[Report this comment]
Posted by: HughScott on Jul 5, 2008 8:03 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
An Obama-Hillary ticket with Bill Clinton announced as our UN ambassador plus Jim Webb to be Secretary of Defense and Joe Bidden Secretary of State.

There is NOTHING Republican schemers could do to stop that magical November juggernaut! It would be the mother of all landslides. Conversely, if Obama doesn't pick Hillary as his Veep, he will LOSE!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

What Angers Me
[Report this comment]
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jul 5, 2008 8:04 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What angers me is that BOTH John McCain and Barack Obama have shifted to the right, FAR to the right.
It looks like the choice this November will be between the fascist and the ultra-fascist. (As for voting third party, don't make me laugh. There is nobody I like running for president from ANY party.)

The popular view is that liberals and even centrists can't get elected in America. Only right-wingers can get elected here. And you know, since Americans are pretty dumb and morally corrupt in general, that popular viewpoint may be absolutely true.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

We put you where you are, do not betray us!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Jerry on Jul 5, 2008 8:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You expressed in magnificent prose oratory the hopes and dreams, we, your base, have for this country. The first time since Kennedy we came out in droves. Our dollars via Internet built you a war chest. It is we who will carry you to the White House, not independents, not "blue dogs", not Reagan Democrats. It is Hyde Park Liberals, it is left wing Progressives, it is people who struggle to free the oppressed, workers for slave wages. Do not betray us. If you do, we will all suffer 4 more years of Corporate, right wing religious Fascism. Do not stumble, your chance is now!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Franny
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Franny on Jul 5, 2008 8:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately if you want to be elected president of the United States you have to move to the center. Consistently about 30% of the American public is conservative and about 30% is progressive. To win, and get power to influence the direction of the country, you have to get that great, remaining middle. The voter has to decide which candidate you can trust most to make the right decision and to surround him/herself with the wisest advisors. In this case, you have, on the one hand, a candidate who reacts to every challenge with an expansionist, aggressive "bomb, bomb, bomb." On the other hand, you have a candidate who might equivocate, but who has the right instincts. I say let Obama move toward the right. If, in the process, he hauls in the center, he can lead this country as he chooses. If the progressives desert him, or if they force Obama to turn his back on compromise, they have no one to blame except themselves if the supreme cournt continues to be packed with conservatives, and if this country continues on its present imperialistic path. A two party system is about compromise. Obama's initial message was about being able to work with the Right. Apparently progressives ignored that. Compromise means nobody gets everything. But, with Obama, at least the left gets something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Franny Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: Franny Posted by: StillStanding

Comments are closed-

You can't tell two candidates in the middle appart.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: reelectnoone on Jul 5, 2008 8:18 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama edges to the right, toward the middle.
McCain edges to the left, toward the middle.

Now instead of a clear choice it comes down to a coin toss.

Is this what you REALLY want Senator Obama? It would be good for McCain, Bad for you and America to remove clear choice from the election.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Good Advice
[Report this comment]
Posted by: radical53 on Jul 5, 2008 8:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think Ms Huffington's article is good advice to the Obama campaign. Even though Obama's "change" is really more about methods than ideology (a point a lot of people have forgotten), he needs to stick with the basic policies he stressed in his primary campaign. The supposedly wise course of moving to the center only invites questions about flip-flopping, "core values", and trustworthiness. There have been no changes in the political landscape to warrant significant shifts in Obama's major policies.

The seemingly complicated situation in Iraq is perhaps the best example. Democratic strategists are worried that the successes of the "surge" are making Obama's withdrawal strategy a potential liability. I don't believe it. The Iraqis still have not tackled the major issues of oil revenue sharing and reconciliation with the Sunnis. Obama's policy of setting a timetable to try to force the Iraq government to come to terms with the issues is still a viable strategy. Furthermore, the surge will continue to be effective only as long as it is based on offensive military operations to weed out insurgents wherever they organize. American voters remain opposed to a strategy that is based on continuing offensive combat operations indefinitely. McCain's pronouncements that the surge will defeat the insurgency and allow troops to come home just after the next election (his target now is conveniently 2013) is an out and out lie.

My advice to the Obama campaign is to play their best game and let the chips fall where they may. A crass attempt to fool or manipulate the electorate is a bad idea.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Dockside
[Report this comment]
Posted by: rtmyth on Jul 5, 2008 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not to worry. The power elite will remain in control of the masses and everything else. Both partys and their candidates are of the power elite. Only if and when the masses get organized and protest vigorously can any changes be expected.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Bent-over is as Bent-over does
[Report this comment]
Posted by: JackonFire on Jul 5, 2008 8:32 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is only the beginning of the curtain being drawn away from the corporate whore that is Obama. Go Toto! Go!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The Media Let Us Down
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Southern Gal on Jul 5, 2008 8:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are accustomed to the commercial media feeding us propaganda from the power elite. I thought that alternative media was different, that we would get facts and helpful information. What we got during this primary campaign was Obama's rhetoric on hope with little substance on issues. Many of us asked for information on issues and questioned the lack of vetting going on from alternative media regarding Obama. Alternative media gave him a honeymoon before he was chosen the Democrat presidential candidate. The whole thing reminds me of a well planned marketing campaign for a movie with the candidate taking on the establishment and inspring the people. Now we are are learning the reality. Obama's betrayal of the progressives is even more painful because he did inspire people to think that change was coming. How do you trust him now?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The Media Let Us Down Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: The Media Let Us Down Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: The Media Let Us Down Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: The Media Let Us Down Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

Franklin Delano Roosevelt
[Report this comment]
Posted by: droscify on Jul 5, 2008 8:53 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Was not an idealist. The only reason the New Deal was created was to prevent unrest. Then we involved ourselves in World War II which allowed us to forget our economic hardships for a while. FDR, like Obama, was a pragmatic centrist. At least have a grasp of political history before you start citing these "idealistic" politicians of years past as being somehow more "honorable" and action oriented. I'm not trashing the New Deal. I'm just saying things could have gone much farther than they did, if we lived in a perfect world. We don't.

The only real actionable alternative to Obama is not Nader; its revolution towards a leaderless society. I don't see many folks advocating for such an outcome however, just that "our" candidate be more progressive, more in tuned to "our" demographic.

Yes, I agree that our system is rather poor at representing our collective needs. It always has been. But to those of you unwilling to to commit to an actual revolutionary struggle, I'd advise you to vote for Obama. Because after 4 years of Mccain, we might all be revolutionaries whether we like it or not

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Franklin Delano Roosevelt Posted by: helenwheels
» Revolution Posted by: imors
» RE: evolution Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

When will we learn
[Report this comment]
Posted by: grkjr on Jul 5, 2008 9:12 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It isn't strange or different that obama has moved towards the center.. the domocratic strategists never seem to learn that this nation of progressives would prefer to fight the right head on... But no they still think the election is won by catering to the middle and thus they lose the progressives via they not turning out to vote.. most do not vote for the opposition they simply throw in the towel with disgust... or vote for a nader... which is what i will do. I would rather lose fighting the good cause than cater to the "least of the two evils" at least i sleep at night. One more time.. it is time for the progressives to leave the democratic party and start a new progressive party... what better time than now. it appears that at least 1/2 the democrats on the hill would follow a new leader. The result would be a splitting of the vote almost 3 ways and however it turns out we would all get some sleep by following our "moral compass" versus what is most expedient.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Goodby middle Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: When will we learn Posted by: Shey

Comments are closed-

Great article
[Report this comment]
Posted by: helenwheels on Jul 5, 2008 9:23 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arianna does indeed hit the nail on the head. I've been seething ever since the FISA bill passed in the house, and it's been downhill ever since with Obama caving in just like the rest of those dems who are basically just in collusion with the rethugs. The only many who could have actually changed things was Kucinich, but our corporate-controlled mainstream media can't have that, so they made sure they ridiculed him, made him look like a nut (remember Russert with the UFO question at the debates?), and then finally didn't allow him to participate in televised debates at all.

Our C-CMSM tells us who we WILL vote for. They tell us who we will NOT vote for. Most of us comply. Didn't you see them picking OUR candidates? The process was systematic and planned. WE didn't have much of a say at all.

I am not voting for either Obama or McLame in this election. I will either vote for McKinney or lost my vote by writing in Kucinich as a form of protest.

No matter who gets in the WH, the next four years will be a nightmare anyway. I don't even know if Kucinich would have been able to, in 4 years, clean up the destructive policies and illegal attacks on our rights & the Constitution that have taken 30 years to put into place.

That being said, what's to stop the neocon machine from stealing another election? They get better at it every time.

In any case, either candidate is more of the same; the dems are in collusion with the rethugs, and we have a fascist in the WH that probably doesn't have any intention of leaving.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

IT'S NOT JUST ME AFTER ALL
[Report this comment]
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Jul 5, 2008 9:24 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I began to think I was just being contrary. But the man has done an 'about-face'. Quite honestly I don't care what happens to him. What's going to happen to the rest of us. Is this the CHANGE he talked about? He gets to change his mind? Who got to him? He decided to take public campaign funds. Did he know that the donors he clearly took advantage of would stop sending checks? The man had a plan, no doubt about it. I thought he had the right stuff. Guess not. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: IT'S NOT JUST ME AFTER ALL Posted by: StillStanding

Comments are closed-

kudhrdan1
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kuhrdan1 on Jul 5, 2008 9:29 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Senator Obama is a fraud! His appeal to "CHANGE" rests on his "Audacity of BS." He cloaked himself as an African-American persona, when in fact he is bi-racial. This is an important subtlety. This primary cycle has underscored the veneer of "enlightened liberals," who have no compunction to perpetuate myths, unreasoned information, and distortions to lob to one of their own, Senator Clinton. The enlightened left, who decried the years of Bushisms likewise have no qualms to excercise their brand of nepotism. But I have to thank the "abandoned" enlightened creatures, robbed of their hope and change for generating in me a more balanced view of the Republican party. I also want thank these selfsame enlightened liberals that I am one Democrat that will NOT/NEVER vote for Senator Obama's "Audacity of BS."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: kudhrdan1 Posted by: Shey

Comments are closed-

Liam on the Left
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Liam on Jul 5, 2008 9:54 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh Lo! the poor bleeding heart hand wringing liberals..compassion for child rapists - take those guns away - damn the churches...yada..yada!

Obama is not a social worker he is an organizer! As a retired union organizer of 25 years I know from experience liberals and organizers do not think the same. Social liberals have screwed up just about every institution (and allowed the cons to use it against real progressives for years) by approaching every problem as a "social problem". Organizers see the economy as the problem and the economy as the solution - that is how Obama sees the world. The Democrats problem has been their abandonment of the working class and an economic based philosophy for the past 40 years. Hopefully Obama is setting the party back on its foundation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Liam on the Left Posted by: Shey
» RE: Liam on the Left Posted by: Liam

Comments are closed-

Obama, Oh Obama, say it isn’t so!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: libertybill on Jul 5, 2008 9:55 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You are our hero, our guiding light. The one and only one to show us the green pastures of Hope. You, who we believe will still the troubled waters of democracy and show us the true, new, shining democracy of Democratic Principles and Decency. The one who will leadeth us away from the shadow of the George W. Bush and his evil.

Today to my dismay I learned that you are studying “triangulation” under your new mentor William Jefferson Clinton and also he is to hopefully impart a bit of his technique in the art of swaying women, namely Hilliary’s followers but not limited to. Did this check out okay with Michelle? Isn’t “triangulation” somewhat synonymous with “strangulation”? I mean ‘The network of triangles so laid out’ or “depending on the meaning of IS” is in a manner of speaking and “to compress or constrict, so as to prevent circulation or suppress function” can be construed in a clintonistical way to mean ‘if ya can’t beat ‘em, then join ‘em’. When Hilliary was in her prime and she decided to use Bill’s technique of ‘triangulation’ I wrote her a letter which I’m sure she never read but the gist of it was beseeching her to, “No, no, no, don’t do it, Hilliary. Moving one inch to the RIGHT is undemocratic or un-Democratic (either applies)! Now our messiah has decided that the path through the GOP like swamp is the true path to righteousness. Again I say, “No, no, no, don’t do it, Obama. Moving one inch to the RIGHT is undemocratic or un-Democratic (either applies)!

While sipping my Alka-Seltzer to relieve a seminal migraine, today’s email disclosed that Barack is ‘triangulating’ his opinion on the FISA bill. He knows that it is unconstitutional, unnecessary, and feeds the Chimp but he will vote for it anyway and desert 15 Honorable Senators with a lame excuse that he will try to change it later.

After mixing another A-S spiked with a couple aspirin, I read about Obama’s new take on NAFTA. During the battle of Ohio a ubiquitous flyer from the Pied Pipers campaign headquarters read "Only Barack Obama consistently opposed NAFTA," Now I suppose that NAFTA is no longer “devastating and a big mistake” that causes our good jobs to go overseas and ocean hopping corporations are no longer cheating on their taxes. You know at first it was bad, bad, really bad. “Now it’s not really that bad. There are some good things about it.” ‘I said that? I’m a politician and politicians lie. Get over it! As FISA goes so goes NAFTA! Flip-flop, fizz, fizz oh what a jazz it is!

As a Constitutional professor at the University of Chicago Law School, Obama understands and believes in what he preaches but once again I smell ‘triangulation’. Obama gave a fine speech on making government ‘open and accountable’ to commence after he becomes President Obama but not before. He also can not say, "Yes. I will aggressively investigate all criminal activity by the Bush Administration and bring the perpetrators to justice." But he does say Bush made, "really dumb policies and policies that rise to the level of criminal activity." But, he said he would not want "my first term to be consumed by what would be perceived by Republicans as a partisan witch hunt."

What was that!? Did our Constitutional professor just say that the perception of his persona, when he becomes President, is more important than obeying the dictates of his oath of office? It seems to me that if he doesn’t honor his oath of office then we will be back to square one because his persona will radiate the same stink as that of George W. Bush! There is only on correct answer here, Impeach, impeach, and impeach, George W. Bush and all his cohorts.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

reality from the trenches - it's a big tent
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mortar on Jul 5, 2008 9:55 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been a county chair fo the democratic party in a rural midwest county and professionally I work as a consultant with state government on healthcare reform. First of all, the Huyffington post is not a precise or accurate report of Obama campaign positions. He commented more on states rights from a constitutional law perspective than his own beliefs...which is what politicians do. Second, I am constantly impressed by how little progressives understand the current party system. The Democratic party is a big tent. Often at the helm of local leadership are lefty progressives like me. We come in green and rightous, thinking that we need to take over the party and make it a progressive party. But then we meet our constituents and we learn that there are many perspectives and experiences on both sides of a two party system. And what happens when we make the party our progressive project, we lose lots of people to the other side. So we lay low and keep to the "safe" topics and work on winning or recruiting good candidates. AND...working on change in an existing government system, is a thoughtful gradual process. As a consultant, I constantly look for opportunities to work with my opponents and find consensus, because it works. I don't agree on every move or position made by the Obama people, but it's not as shocking as many posters are saying. We have an opportunity to take back our government and work on the desperately needed changes. Screaming traitor and jumping ship is dramatic and may feel good personally, but it won't make a difference at all. Slow down and give a moment time to an issue that matters to you. Work with your opponents to understand their perspective and I promise you will effect change. Screaming in to the wind (or voting for Nader) may feel good but you won't accomplish much.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» It's a big tent Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

Gimme my 25 bucks back!!!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: libertybill on Jul 5, 2008 10:01 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Friday, June 20th, I got a letter from Barack Obama telling me that he is, quote “Choosing not to accept these taxpayer funds was not an easy decision. I remain committed to fundamental campaign finance reform, and as president I will work to fix this broken system.” Then he asked me to make a donation because, quote “But we're facing opponents who have become masters at gaming the broken system as it stands today -- collecting money from Washington lobbyists, special interest PACs, and relying on so-called 527 groups that can take unlimited contributions to peddle lies and smears” And he really needed the money.

So just like Sandra I donated $25 bucks.

Sandra from Tennessee:

"I'm on disability and can't afford to give much but I figure the $10 is worth it. This is the first time in a long time that even the ones who can't afford it are giving, and are excited about a candidate and excited about the process."

The news today tops it all like an unexpected Mel Gibson castration. Obama is making a plea to his donors to help poor old Hilliary pay off her campaign finance bill because she is about 20 mill in arrears and most of that is her own bucks. Gee, that’s about 20% of the Clintons net worth. Now poor Bill will have to work overtime a couple weekends to make up for it. Ouch!

But wait it gets worse! The talk on the web is that if the tight asses don‘t kick in then Obama has enough chips in his war chest to make her whole again. I would like to echo the sentiment of the all the blogs that I’ve read, ‘Not with my money he better not!!!!!!’

Dear Barack, as I see it, you have completely screwed up. You will of course be a better choice for President than John McCain, I think, but you sure as hell don‘t represent my values. Poor Sandra and I are in the same boat and since I obviously need financial help more you then I’m asking you to give back my $25 donation!

I think George Carlin had it right when he explained in a routine that challenged all the premises of today's half-a-loaf reformers.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

When Did She Get a President Elected
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Gravitas on Jul 5, 2008 10:12 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Does she have political experience or is this just another opinion off the top of her head. She doesn't seem all that in touch with the public, remember it was her magazine that suggested people should not cash their rebate checks to get back at Bush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

BA
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mnstra on Jul 5, 2008 10:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Boy ,Altenet writers got the shaft.
For months I cant recall reading anything negative about Obama. It seemed that he was honest and untarnished.I recall saying that Obama is above all else a new age politician, And like any politician he does what he needs to do to get votes. What is new.?
Remember It was the Democratic leadership that go us into Vietnam. I would see him continuing the republican agenda disguised as a liberal way into hi first term. So Why are you all surprised?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

speaking just for myself......................
[Report this comment]
Posted by: peridot on Jul 5, 2008 10:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am one of those who had pretty much given up the game until Obama rolls in. I heard from him a subtext that WAS profoundly Rooseveltian. A fighter, with a pragmatic progressive vision. When at long last he defeats Clinton, his first stop was to go pledge fealty to AIPAC. I just about shit a brick. Then comes NAFTA, and FISA.
Bipartisanship. What a load of crap. What we need is an irrefutable PARTISAN! But if he wants to be in the pocket of the powers that be...screw him. I'll set this one out

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

alovesupreme
[Report this comment]
Posted by: alovesupreme on Jul 5, 2008 11:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You're spitting in the wind. The Obama campaign is as resolute in their general election campaign as they were in their primary strategy. They are assuming an "always" voter electorate and their strategy will, unfortunately, dampen any hopes for an explosion of new voters.

Despite Obama's monomania about control (over the DNC, $) over 527 committees, the umbrella of a 527 organization will be the only home for serious agitation about the economy, the war, health care and the environment. There needs to be a campaign organization for voters who don't want McCain but can't honestly campaign for Obama.

We may as well get our chops ready to deal with President Obama and a very centrist, Democratic majority.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: alovesupreme Posted by: StillStanding

Comments are closed-

Senior Cynic
[Report this comment]
Posted by: rdodell on Jul 5, 2008 11:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is NOT just Obama; Over the past 40 years, the Democraticic Party has decomposed to the status of a maggot-infested "Alternative Right-Wing Party".
This Nation has lived the majority of a lifetime under a Republican "neocon regime".
The result? "Neo-Leftists" (the new Democrats) now seem to have no idea what the former "Party of the People" once stood for.
Due to their our lack of conviction, they have adopted far too much of the insane, self serving agenda of their elitist political foe. Republican political stratigists must be fondly amused as their masters of propaganda spin some minor occurence into a national incident to divert public attention from their criminal plot against America and the world. Pathetically, Dem's always seem to take the bait, flocking to the defense of some candidate's "fist-bump" or the like rather than spend that time and energy blasting a criminal administration which has hijacked our Constitution, defied international law, raped the planet of resources and committed countless other crimes against humanity...all for personal gain. The conservaive propoganda mill has the Dem's wallowing in trivia while meaningful issues are blown in the wind.
What they are dealing with here is a BULLY...the full fledged neocon monster flush with power, wealth and an agenda designed to make the rich richer and keep the other 98 percent of us as their destitute serfs.
At what point will Democrats realize that one does not reason, negotiate, compromise or otherwise bargain with the bully? The only way to deal with him is a punch squarely in the face. He must be confronted; not appeased. Democrats must defy the Republican dynasty
openly and directly. It is impossible for the neocon regime to explain away, much less to justify their policies of the past four decades. They must be challenged publicly on those issues and held accountable for the death and devastation their reign of greed has caused.

A caution: Don't play by their rules...the game is rigged; it's a no-winner.

A special caution: Don't buy into the idea of "political correctness". It is a brilliant concept for those who govern by lies, hate, bias, deceit, distortion war-mongering and other immoral acts and attitudes. "Political Correctness", then, involves dressing an atrocity formally in white tie and tails complete with cumberbund and presenting it to the public as "lofty", "idealistic", "patriotic", or even
"holy". Any who then questions the the concept can be automatically labeled "low-life, "ignorant", "un-American", "Godless", or all of the above.
Perhaps Democrats might consider launching a true offensive for the first time in a couple of genetations. Dismiss or completely ignore trivia thrown your way. Re-direct the attention of America from trivia to the many serious crimes and diverse failings of the conservative agenda over the last 40 years. Drill Republicans on the issues, counter their lies with facts, expose them for the hypocrites they are and do so without apology. You may hold the fate of this great nation in your hands. Decide if it is worth getting your nose bloody; if not, get out of the political arena. Let us choose someone willing to take them on nose-to-nose. You will then be free to join the conserve movement in their determination to steer our ship of State onto the rocks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Senior Cynic Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: Senior Cynic Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: Senior Cynic Posted by: StillStanding

Comments are closed-

Losing it
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Jeanne on Jul 5, 2008 11:56 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Last night, prior to watching rugby on the internet, our two sons, both voting age, expressed their disillusionment with Obama. Both had favored other candidates early in the primary process, but neither had wanted Clinton (and not because of gender). Our family now will likely not vote for Obama. At this juncture our votes will probably go -- no vote; Nader; Barr. That is a reflection of the diverse constituency Obama has lost by his recent tactic of trying to woo the right by abandoning his progressive base. We will not be scorned. You can't betray the principles you (apparently pretended to) stand for and expect unquestioning support.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Losing it Posted by: FMABBI
» I think it's your fault Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

Great Article and Well-written!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: johnwatson on Jul 5, 2008 11:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is not only a terrific article in terms of content, and absolutely true, but it is concise, funny, and well-worded. Thanks, Arianna!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Public Policy tends to conform to the main Economic Trends The State can rarely reverse their course
[Report this comment]
Posted by: yellow on Jul 5, 2008 12:08 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama will surely raise both taxes and interest rates. An accomidation will be reached for holders of ARM mortgages so as to prevent the collapse of the housing market and a major credit contraction and depression. There will also be some stimulus oriented spending to prevent the recession from deepening from higher interest rates.

This policy will be adopted to save the US Treasury Bond market upon which the US economy has come to rely. Currently, the financial sector is coping with negative real interest rates as in the 1970s. When combined with high and rising energy costs we have stagflation. Higher interest rates will also stop the precipitous decline of the US dollar and encourage further foreign capital inflows to sustain consumer spending.

The US economy is locked into deficit financing through the US Treasury Bond market. According to the Bureau of Public Debt of the US Treaury Department, government borrowings through these debt instruments total about $5 trillion annually. Until recently the inflation adjusted rate of increase of net capital inflows to the US bond market have been significant from year to year. As of 2007, daily average global trading in government bonds has easily exceeded $900 billion most of it in US Treasury bonds. The US Treasury relies more upon investment in treasury securities than tax receipts to finance its spending. This is evidenced by the rapidly growing deficit. The idea that growing deficits are a political issue is wrong. The US federal government has operated at a deficit since 1901 with the US federal deficit first exceeding a billion dollars in 1911. The real problem is not "pork barrel" politics, but the tendency toward chronic stagnation in late capitalism which requires the ever increasing growth of the public sector to both stabilize and sustain the overall economy.

Taxes have been regressive since the Reagan tax cuts of 1981. What little gains were made by the working poor and middle classes were eroded by increases in local, state, sales and property taxes since that time. Income and wealth has concentrated at levels not seen since the 1920s. The trillions in deficits have functioned mostly as a subsidy to the very rich whose income has tripled since 1980 while everyone else's has remained stagnant or even declined. The supply side strategy has failed. It was soon clear that average annual GDP growth over the course of the full business cycle was far lower than for earler phases of the post WWII period. In the 1980s, tax savings by corporations were used to pay stock dividends and create mergers not add new output capacity and create new jobs. Globalization marched in lock step with financialization, deregulation and the freeing up of global capital mobility. Speculation as a driving force, has overtaken long term investment. Poverty and stagnation have resulted.


Obama's policies will mitigate the current crisis but not resolve it. He can't reverse the financialization trends of the US economy nor those of the rest of the world. Further stagnation in the economies of US trading partners will result from the same trends afflicting the US economy. The financial meltdown from the US housing market has gone global. Developing countries have adopted recessionary policies by developing their own high interest government bond markets to slow capital flight and inflation and to strengthen local currencies to ease foreign debt service. Currently, over 60% emerging market debt is held as government bonds down from 13% in 1980 resulting in monetary policies that have led to a global slowdown in GDP growth, world trade and job growth.


The current stagnation of global capitalism has restricted state policy free market solutions. Reversing this policy will unfortunately take a catastrophic crisis and subsequent restructuring of capital on a global basis.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Let's stand for something
[Report this comment]
Posted by: robchapman on Jul 5, 2008 12:52 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is easy to criticize candidates from the position of not running. There is a difference between being a reporter and observer and having your own name on the ballot.

In this case, it is Barak Obama who took the risk and put himself forward to take on the immense powers of the status quo.

Barak Obama can win the Presidency. Barak Obama can use the powers of the Presidency to improve life for America's masses and restore the principle of equality before the law.

The GOP has major weaknesses with its down ballot candidates and has an ineffectual candidate at the top of the ticket.

The economy is in shambles and the GOP President has exhibited an Alfred E Neuman attitude that makes his Katrina performance look engaged and powerful in comparison.

Instead of devising a plan to implement Iraqi sovereignty and limit our exposure to disaster in Iraq, Bush is expanding the war in Afghanistan and threatening to open hostilities with Iran.

Given these circumstances, it is easy to conclude that there is no need for Obama to mollify voters' anger and frustration.....

but such a conclusion is short-sighted and wrong. Barak Obama cannot merely consider the actions needed to win the election. For him there is a need to look beyond November and to think of a governing strategy.

It is important for Obama to assure the public that his government will not engage in social engineering but instead that he will pursue poliicies that will ease our pain and restore prosperity.

Looking at the election from a cold eyed political strategist's perspective is what Bush and Rove have done for the past eight years. This obsession with politics is the major factor in their inability to govern effectively.

Barak Obama appears to have recognized that as President he will responsible for the welfare of all of the people and not merely for his supporters. This is an element of growth that GW Bush failed to achieve. Bush's failure to see beyond the interests of his supporters has lead him to policy decisions that have seriously eroded all aspects of the American nation.

Barak Obama is different from GW Bush and from John McCain in that he has a truly national perspective and in that he has a lifetime record of committment and effective implementation of policies that enhance social equity and economic justice.

It is important for us activists to continue to advocate for leftist policies as they will advance both justice and prosperity.

But it is also important for us to support Barak Obama and to give him the flexibility, time and support needed to bring his policies to fruition.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Let's stand for something Posted by: StillStanding

Comments are closed-

Enough!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kmcd on Jul 5, 2008 12:51 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm so tired of pundits -- big and small -- telling Barak Obama what he's supposed to do. Talk about race. Talk about sexism. Stay to the left. Go to the center. Do this-do that.

The fact remains that Barack Obama is a really intelligent guy -- and he continues to be a transformational leader. His leadership qualities have nothing to do with his age and can not be defined by traditional definitions of "experience" and will be the reason why Americans will/should vote for Obama in November. The so-called experience of McCain (and Hillary) will be useless for the problems in the 21st century (just like Hillary's campaign experience was useless to her in the primary -- and so will McCain's in the presidential election). Obama changed the paradigm of campaigns and he'll change the paradigm for our government.

Grow up and realize that Obama is not going to adhere to every position of the Democratic Party or those on the left. I'd encourage those pundits and weary whiners to try listening to what Obama's saying -- the message is in the subtleness. He's not pandering to the "...political fence sitters..." Listen to what he's saying -- and if you have any sense at all, do whatever you can to get him elected because if we have 4 years of McCain -- YOU will be responsible for the continuation of the decimation of our economy, our environment -- and our children's future.

Grow up, Arianna -- you're wrong this time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: nough! Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: nough! Posted by: Democritus
» RE: nough! Posted by: StillStanding

Comments are closed-

Change
[Report this comment]
Posted by: aahpat on Jul 5, 2008 1:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Needs to be more than just skin deep.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Harriet Green
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Truelass on Jul 5, 2008 1:16 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Representatives in Public Office are given much "stuff" to read to prepare them for debate. So much "stuff" that they usually try to avoid reading any of it and back in the Primary campaign I soon came to the conclusion that neither Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama took the time to read the NAFT Agreement. I have added John McCain to my list given his recent boo-boo's. I have read the whole document albeit my job to have done so, and I am very much aware of the mechanics of operation, forget the weighted statistics, and refer to empirical data. The tri-partisan agreement between the US (Clinton) Fox (Mexico) and Mulroney (Canada's pro-US leader of the day) made Canada the loser and the United States and Mexico the big winners. It infringed on Canada's Auto-Pact, on Canadian sovereignty, on Canada's resources and worst of all on Canada's dignity. Canada lost five times more good paying jobs as the United States, in other words more Canadian workers per capita were displaced. The big winner was and is, the US Companies who opted for Mexico and lower paid manufacturing jobs and the establishment of an extensive base.I don't believe that either tweedledee or tweedledum running for President are naive but they do believe that the voters' are and so talk about Free Trade, never about Fair Trade, and fuel the fires of discontent. Obama rehtoric on the NAFTA SIX MONTH OPT OUT CLAUSE is a smokescreen over reality and when it clears everything will look the same. Canada would be th only beneficiary of such an action and there is no one in the US Corporate heirarchy, who back both candidates, who would agree to anything that stopped them from bleeding the resources of their northern neighbour.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

He's lost my vote
[Report this comment]
Posted by: texshelters on Jul 5, 2008 2:51 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was once willing to give him a chance to be president. Now I feel that with candidates like Obama, who needs Republicans. And I don't want to hear this crap about the Supreme Court. What good is the court when are rights are going to be giving away to corporations (se FISA). Certainly, there is the right to chose and gay rights to considered. But...

Obama stands for nothing and I once thought he might stand up for some principles.

Fool me once, shame on you...fool me twice...uh...we won't get fooled again.

Tex Shelters

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: He's lost my vote Posted by: FMABBI
» RE: He's lost my vote Posted by: Frostman

Comments are closed-

Stop giving your vote away.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: powerofbelief on Jul 5, 2008 3:19 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read through most of the comments and first let me say I am pleased with all the concern about Obama's, not so surprisingly, shift toward the right.

I think the problem lies with progressives giving their vote away for Obama with little to no expectations. I have heard several times, even from Arianna Huffington, that they will vote for Obama regardless of whether Obama's goes progressive or not.

With that kind of attitude, Obama can and will take take the progressive communities vote for granted. We've seen this with Bill Clinton in the 1990's and it will happen again.

Obama will not change until the progressive community makes demands and stops giving their vote away. Sadly, people like huffington are way too naive to grasp this. They think Obama will take orders from the progressive community. Obama was never a progressive and should have never been labeled one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Ah, for Camelot
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Democritus on Jul 5, 2008 3:55 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ms. Huffington expresses the hopes of all us progressives out there who wish Obama were really one of us. Well, he's not. He told us that much in his book, The Audacity of Hope, that Bible of centrist politics.

But for all those who, seeing what they consider Obama's swing to the right, and are not going to vote, or for those who pinned their hopes on Hillary, and are going to vote for McCain out of spite--I've got a message for you. Either John McCain or Barrack Obama will be inaugurated as President next January. The question then is, whom do you want sitting in the Oval Office? Any refusal to vote, or any vote cast for McCain out of spite, will help inaugurate four more years of Bush-style leadership.

It's crunch time. Of course, if one candidate is clearly better than another, then the better candidate should get your vote. But if there are two bad candidates, then the moral choice should go for the one who is the lesser evil. We make choices like this all the time. Voting should be no exception. The lesser of evils in this election is Barack Obama. Voting any other way would be an exercise in self-delusion.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ah, for Camelot Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: Ah, for Camelot Posted by: Democritus
» RE: Ah, for Camelot Posted by: powerofbelief
» RE: Ah, for Camelot Posted by: YogiBear
» 1 votes Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

He's been fully vetted by America Inc.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: chlamor on Jul 5, 2008 5:15 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
On the other hand, it wouldn't matter if Obama actually was J.C., the Lord Buddha, Albert Schweitzer, and the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, all rolled into one. In some ways, it is irrelevant that he is a corporate tool with no program. We have before us the actual process of "vetting" and if he had been somethin' before, he ain't nothin' now.

Are you or have you ever been a Black Power guy? Yes? You're out.

Are you a practicing moderate Christian guy? No? You're out.

Are you naive about America's role in the world? Yes? You're out.

Are you for Israel? No? You're out.

Do you support the notion that the business of America is business? No? You're out.

Can you raise tons and tons of money? No? You're out.

Can you get the support of a majority of the existing moribund party hacks (doesn't matter which one)? No? You're out.

Can you recite the catechism ("There is no such thing as 'blowback'. Our policy is to bring Democracy to the World." ...57 other slogans)? No? You're out.

Are you mad at "us"? Yes? You're out.

Where does the "choice" part come in again?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Obama is pro-war, pro American Empire
[Report this comment]
Posted by: chlamor on Jul 5, 2008 5:23 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here are some highlights from a summary of Obama’s U.S. Senate voting record:

1/26/05: Obama voted to confirm Condoleezza Rice for Secretary of State. Rice was largely responsible…for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent victims in unnecessary wars...Roll call 2

2/01/05: Obama was part of a unanimous consent agreement not to filibuster the nomination of lawless torturer Alberto Gonzales as chief law enforcement officer of the United States (U.S. Attorney General).

2/15/05: Obama voted to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture...[and a] man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By Roll call 10.

4/21/05: Obama voted to make John ‘Death Squad’ Negroponte the National Intelligence Director. In Central America, John Negroponte was connected to death squads that murdered nuns and children in sizable quantities. He is suspected of instigating death squads while in Iraq, resulting in the current insurgency. Instead of calling for Negroponte's prosecution, Obama rewarded him by making him National Intelligence Director. Roll call 107

4/21/05: Obama voted for HR 1268, war appropriations in the amount of approximately $81 billion. Much of this funding went to Blackwater USA and Halliburton and disappeared. Roll call 109 [W FOR PRO-WAR VOTE]

7/01/05: Obama voted for H.R. 2419, termed ‘The Nuclear Bill’ by environmental and peace groups. It provided billions for nuclear weapons activities, including nuclear bunker buster bombs. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a threat to food and water in California, Nevada, Arizona and states across America. Roll call 172 [W].

9/26/05 & 9/28/05: Obama failed and refused to place a hold on the nomination of John Roberts, a supporter of permanent detention of Americans without trial, and of torture and military tribunals for Guantanamo detainees.

10/07/05: Obama voted for HR2863, which appropriated $50 billion in new money for war. Roll call 2 [W].

11/15/05: Obama voted for continued war, again. Roll call 326 was the vote on the Defense Authorization Act (S1042) which kept the war and war profiteering alive, restricted the right of habeas corpus and encouraged terrorism. Pursuant to his pattern, Obama voted for this. [W].

12/21/05: Obama confirmed his support for war by voting for the Conference Report on the Defense Appropriations Act (HR 2863), Roll call 366, which provided more funding to Halliburton and Blackwater. [W]

5/2/06: Obama voted for money for more war by voting for cloture on HR 4939, the emergency funding to Halliburton, Blackwater and other war profiteers. Roll call 103 [W].

5/4/06: Obama, again, voted to adopt HR4939: emergency funding to war profiteers. Roll call 112 [W].

6/13/06: Obama voted to commend the armed services for a bombing that killed innocent people and children and reportedly resulted in the death of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi… Michael Berg, whose son was reportedly killed by al-Zarqawi, condemned the attack and expressed sorrow over the innocent people and children killed in the bombing that Obama commended. Roll call 168 [W].

6/15/06: Obama voted for the conference report on HR4939, a bill that gave warmongers more money to continue the killing and massacre of innocent people in Iraq and allows profiteers to collect more money for scamming the people of New Orleans. Roll Call 171 [W].

6/15/06: Obama, again, opposed withdrawal of the troops, by voting to table a motion to table a proposed amendment would have required the withdrawal of US. Armed Forces from Iraq and would have urged the convening of an Iraq summit (S Amdt 4269 to S. Amdt 4265 to S2766) Roll Call 174 [W]

Much, much more...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

I smelled the B.O. from the get-go
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fifthworld on Jul 5, 2008 5:49 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama sucks. He's a shill, a sellout, a Manchurian Brzezinski puppet. Don't support him, don't work for him, fuck him (or not).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Buyer's Remorse?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jul 5, 2008 5:56 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Please, folks....When you are finished reading all on the great pieces and comments on AlterNet, have a look at what I wrote on this very subject. Here is a link:

Buyer's Remorse?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Buyer's Remorse? Posted by: Democritus
» RE: Buyer's Remorse? Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: Buyer's Remorse? Posted by: Shey

Comments are closed-

Same shit, different blog.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Longdream on Jul 5, 2008 6:01 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not bothering to read through all three hundred-odd posts.

It's the same old crap. The trolls and self-centered idiots have no doubt piled it on: Obama said this, he didn't do that, I'm not withholding my vote out of spite, uh-uh, I'm not voting for him because he didn't ask ME personally exactly what he ought to say and do. That's because ~I~ know so much more than Obama does what will get this country out of the hole it's in.

What bullshit. You're all brilliant political scientists and policy-makers, for certain.

Then there are a few folks who say, "Just wait, he's lying now so he can get into the White House! When he's elected he'll become the old robot that we can put the nickel into so what we want to hear comes out.

More crap.

All in response to Huffington's sweaty, overwrought rehash of stale, ill-considered opinions.

I'm sure the same few voices of reason are here, too. I'm just too tired to rebut or make sense of the same old vanities.

You know who's manipulating you? It's not Obama. It's AlterNet, Huffington and whoever else is putting up articles containing the speculative innuendo that sows the seeds of doubt, dissension and fear. You want to know why? Three hundred-plus posts of people all hot and bothered to vent the suspicion and fear they started out with. I don't know how Huffington, et.al. gets paid, but if you said it was by the column inch I'd believe it.

I thank God that AlterNet isn't the real world, and that I can shut down my computer, stop reading purposeless drek, and go and talk to some real people.

And Huffington should talk. She's reinvented herself more times than Madonna.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Same shit, different blog. Posted by: StillStanding
» Doubt Isn't The Problem Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Doubt Isn't The Problem Posted by: StillStanding
» It's the Forced Choice. Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: It's the Forced Choice. Posted by: StillStanding
» Your Vote Isn't An Endorsement Posted by: pdxstudent
» RE: Your Vote Isn't An Endorsement Posted by: StillStanding
» Your writing your delusions Posted by: aahpat

Comments are closed-

What's the big fuss?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Mr. Heathen on Jul 5, 2008 9:48 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All he has to do is emit audible bleats and scratch his name in the dust.
Likely, these high standards may outdated be.
But, it seems all this ugly truth is passed mid-flush. Best vote for the one with the least dangerous potty training now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Christ
[Report this comment]
Posted by: YogiBear on Jul 5, 2008 10:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't think I can take another Democratic wuss-out. Nothing like being associated with the party of fraidy-cats to inspire you to vote for them again.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Christ Posted by: Dboy
» RE: Christ Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: Christ Posted by: CosmoViking

Comments are closed-

How to hold Obama's feet to the fire
[Report this comment]
Posted by: PhiloPsych on Jul 6, 2008 1:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm very disappointed with all the ways Obama has tacked to the right. On Democracy Now a while back, Ralph Nader said that his candidacy pulls Obama to the left while so many other forces are pulling Obama to the right. I think this is right. If Obama had to debate not just McCain, but also Ralph Nader, he couldn't move to the right to decrease McCain's margin with out also increasing Nader's margin. So I think the best way to hold Obama's feet to the fire is to support Nader's campaign--at least to help get him into the debates.

While the Commission on Presidential Debates won't let Nader into their debates, Google / YouTube are now planning a debate for September 18. The website is here:

www.neworleansdebate.org

Unfortunately, right now a candidate must be at 10% in national polls to be included. Nader is doing better this year than in any previous year--he's at 6% nationally. But he will probably be excluded by this rule. Go to the debate website and click on the "Contact Us" link; tell them to lower the requirement to 5%.

This would get in Nader--and also Bob Barr (the Libertarian Party nominee). This is important because if Bob Barr gets votes that might otherwise go to McCain, there is less worry about Nader getting votes that might otherwise go to Obama. But it still puts Nader into the debate where he can hold Obama's feet to the fire. Barr is also anti-war, so this also pulls Obama in that direction--and it makes it three anti-war candidates against McCain.

So the best way to hold Obama's feet to the fire, I think, is to support Ralph Nader's campaign and effort to get into the Google / YouTube debate.

(Also watch the series of videos on YouTube linked below about the role of third parties in our current system; it makes a pretty convincing case for third parties playing to kind of role I am arguing that Nader's campaign should play this year.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw1Aji8FzJc

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Nader, huh? Posted by: antiapathy

Comments are closed-

The national Tightrope.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: CosmoViking on Jul 6, 2008 2:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's important that reporters like Huffington sound off on these matters because even though a contender for the Presidency has to appeal widely, I think it would be crucial mistake to take the standard approach. The corporate mass media will beat the drums for NO REAL CHANGE and continued foreign interventions and wars even though the rest of World don't want your pathetic empire building.
John F Kennedy did NOT take the road down the middle, he DID want to take on the powers that be and he is the ONE president the entire world misses and still grieves for.

The United States is now so far behind the rest of the "developed world" in all social, economic, crime, human and civi, rights and health care issues that Barack Obama MUST show his progressive side or Washington will beat him into submission. Or you can let Cheney and the Contituity of Government gang start the third world war. Which of course would make you the fourth reich, and you really don't want that to happen.

Also, you simply have to stop electing members of the criminal Bush family...read a book about them for fucks sake and turn off the TV.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

bw
[Report this comment]
Posted by: marygold on Jul 6, 2008 6:04 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Actually...When one practices open mindedness and respect for those with differing views...it pulls him toward the middle. He's walking the talk, he's what America and the world needs... When your mind is open, taking in new and often competing information, your opinion is constantly evolving....makes it easy for your enemies to accuse you of being a "flip flopper or wishy washy".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: bw Posted by: powerofbelief

Comments are closed-

Thank you, Ariana, for confirming for others what some of us already know
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Blink on Jul 6, 2008 6:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
-- That BO is a loser. And I'll add "con man" and "sock puppet" to that, as well.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Snatching Near Defeat From The Jaws Of Sure Victory
[Report this comment]
Posted by: NoPCZone on Jul 6, 2008 8:14 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama's a DLC-type Dem for sure, which means he's about 85% Repugnican at his core. If it were not for the Celebutard voters, The Big O and Billary would not ever even come close.

It is so damn stupid to run to the right in such a year. How could any candidate claim a mandate for anything after standing for nothing? Wes Clark tells the truth about McCain's non-experience and this gutless turd runs away from him. I smell Al From and his ilk.

It's basically in the bag unless they give it away and it is time to ask for a mandate- otherwise Double-Down. Reagan understood this and drew his ability to cow Congress because he wasn't afraid to. Like him or dislike him, Reagan was a leader. What Obama is doing tight now is far from leadership.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Huffington is responsible for agressively shilling Obama
[Report this comment]
Posted by: redfrog on Jul 6, 2008 9:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to the exclusion of all other candidates, including Kucinich, who she all but ignored. It is a little late for her to be showing up and acting like a political virgin now.

Who, among us Progressives/Liberals, did not get it early on that Obama was not the candidate who spoke our language or embraced our beliefs? I will vote for him, but I am voting political reality--no more damned greedy, reprobate republicans--not my heart. Obama will be better, but maybe just by degree. He wants a new coalition among the Democrats and he has not been shy about it. So my heart is not broken and I am not going to cry and rend my garments as if it was.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Memo to Ariana: Staying to the Left is for Losers. . .
[Report this comment]
Posted by: SkeeterVT1 on Jul 6, 2008 10:06 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Ariana:

As an independent voter, I can tell you that Barack Obama has little choice but to move toward the center. Ditto for John McCain.

Why?

Because independents -- the vast majority of whom are right-of-center moderates, as demonstrated in opinion poll after opinion poll -- outnumber both Democrats AND Republicans and will hold the balance of power in the November 4 election.

For Obama to stay to the left would be as suicidal as McCain staying to the right. Neither candidate can win the White House without the support of independents, thus they MUST move to the center in order to win them over.

Progressives like to believe that most Americans today feel as they do. Truth be told, most Americans are moderates. They got sick of the Right in 1960 when they voted in John F. Kennedy. They got sick of the Left in 1980 when they voted in Ronald Reagan and in 1994 when they gave Republicans control of Congress for the first time in 40 years. Now, in 2008, they're sick of the Right again.

Notice that an entire generation was born and raised in the years between Kennedy and Reagan. Now, it's been a generation since Reagan.

That, to me, is solid evidence that America moves from one direction to the other ideologically once every generation. But one thing has remained constant: the extremes of the Left and the Right have never gained full electoral dominance without the support of the moderate middle.

Like it or not, America -- contrary to the assertions of progressives and conservatives alike -- is a centrist nation whose political moods change with each succeeding generation.

And, like it or not, the hard-line passions the left have always been largely confined to the young -- their passions always held in check at the ballot box by the centrism and even conservatism of the older voters who for decades dominated the electorate.

2008 may prove to be different, as almost everyone save for the almost cult-like die-hard followers of the right have turned so firmly against Bush and the Republicans -- combined with a burning desire by young people to be full participants in the electoral process at a level not seen in 40 years -- that nothing can prevent a Democratic landslide this November.

By moving to the center now, Obama is not only seeking to reach out across the political divide to ensure his election in November, he's also obviously thinking ahead four years to his re-election in 2012. Bush has inflicted so much damage to America's prestige in his eight years in office that it's going to take a full eight years for Obama to undo the damage.

Plus, Obama is being very far-sighted: He fully expects to inherit a war against Iran when he's sworn in next January. A war with Iran before Bush leaves office is pretty much a foregone conclusion; if Bush doesn't start it, the Israelis certainly will -- especially if there's an early election in Israel and Benjamin Netanyahu's hard-line right-wing Likud Party wins.

This is an unpleasant reality that progressives -- indeed ALL Americans -- are going have to prepare for, whether we like it or not. If the war with Iran doesn't start by the end of October, I'll frankly be surprised.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

If Democrats would fight half as hard
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bthespoon on Jul 6, 2008 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
for what is right and true as Republicans fight for the opposite, then Truth and Justice would stand half a chance again in America.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Barack going soft?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: PressurePoint on Jul 6, 2008 10:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I completely agree with Ms. Huffington. BO will lose his base and momentum if he starts to go after the red states by giving in to their citizen's fears of real change. The "Aw shuck Cletus, I didn't really mean to scare you." rap is a definite warning sign and has got my antenna twitching. The progressive wing of American politics, which includes independent voters like me, is so justifiably pissed at this point that my guess is that substantial numbers of us will sit out the GE rather than vote for yet another ambitious whore/windsock. We owe NOTHING to the democratic machine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Were Toast!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bh on Jul 6, 2008 12:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's over everyone, we are screwed this fall. Another failed opportunity....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Weak-kneed Dems deserve to be thrown into the dustbin of history
[Report this comment]
Posted by: chlamor on Jul 6, 2008 5:00 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These are intended to sharpen the Dems' message, defining what they stand for and how they’re different from Republicans.

1. "We Surrender."

2. "Please don't yell at us, we're frightened."

3. "Would you like us to roll over on our backs now, or do you prefer that we remain on our knees?"

4. "Let's bomb Iran."

5. "We stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the President."

6. "We stand for rule by a kinder, gentler military-industrial complex."

7. "What's good for MobilExxon, Citicorp, and Northrop-Grumman is good for America."

8. "If you like venal cowards and betrayal, vote for us!"

9. "Please don't ask us to stand up to the Republicans. They get very angry if anyone opposes them -- and it's really scary!!"

Anyone who votes for a Dem or A Repub is complicit in the Slaughterhouse.

It's way past time for people to Wake Up!! and stop sponsoring State terror which is part and parcel of the US Political Apparatus and it's ONE-PARTY SYSTEM of Corporate technocrats.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

He has to meet them to push back
[Report this comment]
Posted by: GPFrank on Jul 6, 2008 8:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read a few days ago OBama was meeting with right wing ministers and their emissaries in their offices, including a high deputy of Dobson
I made a comment to Washington Post that was following up on Obama's quest to the Evangelists:
"In a metaphorical sense you are Daniel in the lion's den and then Shadrac,Meshach and Abendego in the fiery furnace. I would have said, "Don't do it"" But I need to consider further that Christianity and celebrating in churches is part of the American Black culture. Without getting into how that comes to be in a different way from the old white Puritans, the
Afro-American Jesus is in a different theology;
it is totally soul and not an embarrassment
. Of course Obama needs to assert that form of truth within his framework of activism. He has to recognize those who say they are believers as persons because they vote too. There is no other ethics, really if one believes in (that)
Jesus. By this he also has to push back in that no one can judge another person's Christian belief.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

On the Phone Company Immunity
[Report this comment]
Posted by: GPFrank on Jul 6, 2008 8:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fight on the immunity is not over yet as far as I see at this time Sun , 11:30 PM. However this business is simply not getting enough press as an issue, even though I hope a motion to close debate fails, in other words filibuster it to keep shortening the time until the election when we hope this whole cockanamie spy scheme can be thrown out in favor of something that gives people
and business security from fear mongers within.
Obama's vote not withstanding I hope he says as little as possible on it and I hope he has enough logic to support debate by saying, he voted but the issue is debatable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Frostman
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Frostman on Jul 6, 2008 9:20 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You can't unite our country without playing to both sides. The 'my way or the highway' attitude prevalent in these posted remarks isn't going to work. It never has and it never will. Barak is the best hope we have. Give him a chance and stop whining.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Frostman Posted by: progdem
» We're not whining. Posted by: bthespoon

Comments are closed-

Nader, huh?
[Report this comment]
Posted by: antiapathy on Jul 7, 2008 8:01 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What about the Green Party? Unlike Nader, they actually have an organization going to create change at all levels of government. Nader is only in it for the ego...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Molly Ivins made this same point several years ago
[Report this comment]
Posted by: fanny666 on Jul 7, 2008 5:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]

Comments are closed-

Obama says he'll "accept the DNC nomination of his candidacy in August in DENVER.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Jul 7, 2008 6:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Clintons were LEFT of the position they claimed--the Centrist position. They were Left, and for that the Right never forgave them.

Barack is to the CENTER now,--and heading very clearly, rightward. God knows where he's gonna go if nominated--(he has yet to accept the nomination, which he plans to do in Denver; but only if the retards of the DNC WITHDRAW their nod to him, and give it instead to the one who should have got it to start with--Hillary Clinton.. Most of us already know that he was chosen for one reason and one only--to derail another Clinton Presidency.

Clinton #1 was everything that Bush #2 is NOT.

Clinton #2 (Hillary) would also be everything that McBush IS NOT.

Since Obama has tacked so far rightward AND HE'S STILL NOT OFFICIALLY THE CANDIDATE--there's still time for the DNC to withdraw his nomination and give it to who should have had it to start with--Hillary Clinton.

But the chicken$%&t Democrats will stay with their bad choice--Obama--and lose the Presidency that was in their pocket--everyone was looking forward to another Clinton Presidency. We remember how, in 1998, Bill talked to Big Oil when they wanted to raise the price of gas at the pump, from 99 cents/gallon, on upward: he invoked the gas reserves, and Big Oil shut up.

So--Big Oil was afraid of only one thing--another Clinton Presidency. Now, they don't have to worry, and gas at the pump is approaching $5/gallon.

So who do we nominate? A non-Clinton! OF COURSE! Boy...is History gonna laugh at us! Like Charlie Black--McCain's adviser--said, when asked by some talk-show host, I forget who, what he thinks of Democrats, he said:

"Why, we call the Democrats, "the party that keeps on giving." How frickin' TRUE!. These retards gave away the ONLY CHANCE THERE WAS--(Barack resuming his true colors,--and I don't mean by that, his skin color)--of nominating another Clinton and thereby putting a lock on the White House this year.

Me? I'm tired of being jerked around by these morons who call themselves "Democrats" but dance to Karl Rove's tune. If O "BUM" A is still the Dem Candidate in August--I'm switching to the Independent Party.

Karl Rove must be laughing, so-o-o-o...HARD!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Obama Mafia
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mkcrime on Jul 9, 2008 6:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
http://www.mafiacrime.org/r.php?id=5320

Come check out Mafia crime!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

The Constitution has been Murdered
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Enkidu Nwyvre on Jul 10, 2008 2:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not once in all the commentary is there one statement about the fact that the Constitution prohibits Ex Post Facto laws. To make a law that "retroactively" changes the law was correctly recognized to DESTROY the Rule of Law. If the Law does not mean what it says at the time it says because it can be Ex Post Facto changed then there is NO LAW....

That above all makes this law a GRAVE CRIME. The Democrats have shown themselves to be as bad as Bush and the Conservatives, what they are conserving I do not know because it isn't the Constitution, Obama unfit for any office and McCain a coward....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What laws Posted by: bthespoon

Comments are closed-

This is the most troll infested thread I've seen since the one on Kevin B. MacDonald at Cal State
[Report this comment]
Posted by: yellow on Jul 11, 2008 2:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is a centrist Clinton/Blair era style "New Democrat." Fair enough. But as Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont advises, it is possible to push Obama toward a more progressive stance on many issues.

We can't have any more Bush Administration policies. Voting for McCain would absolutely guarantee exactly that. He wants to cut the top federal income tax margin another ten percentage points. What would the rich do with several hundred billion more in tax cuts to add to the $4 trillion they've already received since 1981? They certainly wouldn't create jobs and economic expansion. The rarely have since 1981 from which time onward we have seen comparatively slow average annual GDP growth rates. And the average real median income has declined in inflation adjusted terms since 1981 as well as average unemployment rates have increased since the early 1970s when a major recession began.

The deficit and national debt would only worsen due to lost revenue and the fact that billions once collected as taxes are now going to flood the ten year treasury bond market which will cost the government high interest rate. What a great plan. The Republicans want to return massive tax revenue to the rich and borrow it back at a high rate of interest. And they expect to continue conducting an expensive war at the same time!!

Obama may not be perfect but he's much better than McCain. The trolls who attack Obama are not to his left but are simply right wing Republican trolls who want McCain to win.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

GIVE ME A FREAKIN BREAK! HE HAS ALWAYS BEEN CENTRIST!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Clockwise Cat on Jul 12, 2008 3:28 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
AlterNet, how can you be so progressive and so deluded simultaneously? Obama has NEVER been progressive! He has merely been one tip-toe to the left of the neo-cons! When are you people gonna wake up and smell the stench of fascism pervading BOTH parties? When are you actually gonna give coverage to third party candidates like McKinney and Nader who are TRUE progressives and who actually mirror EXACTLY the ideals you claim to cherish!

YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM ALTERNET! WAKE THE HELL UP!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

McBama/O'Cain III
[Report this comment]
Posted by: lorenbliss on Jul 12, 2008 3:58 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama’s FISA proves he is as much an enemy of the Constitution as the Bush Dynasty, Bush-surrogate McCain or any other politician whose ultimate loyalty is exclusively to capitalism, Big Business and the Big Business ruling class.

Indeed the total and absolute betrayal of popular expectations -- in this instance the popular expectations that earned Obama the presumptive Democratic nomination -- is standard Democratic bait-and-switch. Its Big Lie strategy dates back to Lyndon Baines Johnson, who disguised himself as the peace candidate but was in fact the ultimate warmonger: the president who fabulated the Gulf of Tonkin incident and started the Vietnam War.

Now Democratic history repeats itself, and we see in Obama’s FISA the beginning of yet another presidency that will fill the air with words to conceal the fact that whomever is elected -- Demican or Republocrat, McBama or O'Cain -- we voters are reduced to nothing more than the powerless subjects of a fascist, increasingly theocratic empire.

Though our vote is obviously meaningless, multitudes nevertheless cling moronically to the Democrats in deluded conviction: “at least they are for Choice.”

But even this is yet another Big Lie. Sure the Democrats call themselves "pro choice." But in truth every Democratic vote for NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT, WTO (and all the other job-stealing measures of the Global Sweatshop Economy) is a vote against reproductive freedom. This is because in the U.S. -- unless you’re a fat-cat member of the ruling class -- the loss of our jobs means the loss of our health insurance. And without health insurance there is neither access to abortions nor -- given skyrocketing contraceptive prices -- to any other birth control.

Meanwhile thanks to creeping theocracy, even if we're flung into poverty so deep we qualify for Medicaid, the federal funding of abortions was outlawed by the theocrat Carter in 1977. Years of increasingly theocratic Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush governance have gradually expanded that ban into total prohibition against funding any contraception save abstinence: just as the ruling class surely said in the antebellum South, “gotta keep them slaves a-breedin.”

Increasingly, the only people allowed reproductive freedom are the plutocrats -- the pampered rich -- who are already above the law and would thus have no difficulty obtaining abortions even if they were strictly outlawed.

Which is the real reason women’s hard-won reproductive rights are so quickly disappearing: whether Democrat or Republican, the politicians represent only the ruling class, and the ruling class is indifferent to affordability or legality. Moreover, in recent years the ruling class has become overtly antagonistic -- murderous even -- toward the rest of us.

And once again, the only real difference between Democrats and Republicans is rhetoric.

Both parties serve Big Business and Big Business only -- the ruling class. Both parties undermine the Constitution, working to impose a new Dark Age of slavery and serfdom on all the rest of us, complete with the inescapable shackles of fascism and theocracy -- shackles that are intended to last forever: that is, until humanity itself becomes extinct. Thus our only remaining instrument of empowerment is Marxism. All else -- just as history has repeatedly proven -- lacks the insight, discipline and strength necessary to resist the capitalist onslaught. Marxism thus offers -- ironic as it may seem to those who have been denied knowledge of its true principles -- our last remaining chance to save our liberty and our Constitution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Just suppose....
[Report this comment]
Posted by: nomomorons on Jul 12, 2008 11:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
FISA was/is a fiasco but, just suppose that it turns out that several (more than 10) Democratic Senators were fully briefed and did not oppose the Bush-telecom conspiracy. Now how do the Senate Democrats--and,especially, their Pary's candidate for the Presidency--nail the Bushies without dealing with their compatriots' complicity?

Obama just lost his virginity, but he's still the only hope we have and the problem is not with his values or courage; it is with a system so corrupted it may be beyond redemption.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

RE: Obama’s hope and change may be a myth
[Report this comment]
Posted by: zoonerian on Jul 13, 2008 5:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I dislike very much about Obama is the manner in which he tends to straddle the fence on important. It is the only thing I really dislike about him yet to me it is the most important and it bothers me because it says that Obama is a crowd-pleaser who waits to see which side of the fence will end up with the majority before he makes a choice. In many key issues he may well have to cast a vote on as president, this may prove to be a fatal error at the expense of the American people as usual.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Elaine in Mpls.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: trees&water on Jul 13, 2008 5:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arianna,
Well, Arianna, first you kicked Hillary Clinton in the rear. You were a big help in getting us Barack. Barack was not my first choice. Now, he is my first choice. Yes, FISA
shocked me. I knew that everybody in Barackamania was going to be megadisappointed when he moved toward the center. Hillary started her campaign more in the Center so got more Progressive. Arianna, it is not a misperception that the US has a Centrist population. Yes, it is changing. We are not sure how much yet. The caucuses gave us a skewed sense of that. Thank, God, Barack is not playing only to the hope of change. In case you haven't noticed, his poll numbers are not safe.

FISA would have passed without Barack's vote. Tell me, would you rather have Barack as your President or would you rather have John McCain?
Gosh, I heard you make a strong speech at the Media Reform Conference telling us how we needed to do everything we can to defeat McCain.
The end result of articles like yours is to build support for John McCain; maybe you can get alot of people to vote for Nader and have a replay of the 2000 election.
Arianna, your strategy in politics leaves a lot to be desired. The issue is that No ONE Person can embody it all and get elected. WE NEED TO DEVELOP MOVEMENTS AND STRONG CONSTITUENCIES THAT HOLD ANY PERSON'S FEET TO THE FIRE. THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE NEED. PLEASE WORK ON THAT INSTEAD OF BASHING OUR CANDIDATES.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Arianna is right on the money ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: mmckinl on Jul 5, 2008 12:28 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whether you liked Obama or not you had to respect him. Folks know we need changes, they are ready for real ideas. They are not ready for a BS ballet. With all these "nuances" and "clarifications" his respect is going by the wayside like a used condom.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We knew him before he was a Barack Star Posted by: Starfall Deception
» Clarification on point #2 Posted by: bthespoon

Comments are closed-

The warning word was "bipartisanship"
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Zenobia on Jul 5, 2008 1:40 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why are people so surprised? All along B.O. has talked about fairy land "bipartisanship." You only attempt to reach that by shooting straight down the middle. And then you end up pleasing nobody and pissing off EVERYBODY.

The scarier problem is, today's "center" is still far right. Mainstream Dems are GOP lite. The right wing is fascist. Therefore, todays "center" is midway between moderate Republican and fascist.

This is why we need someone who is NOT afraid to be partisan, someone who will keep repeating and repeating and repeating progressive ideals until they become common thought, i.e., normalized. We need someone who has the guts to stand firm on progressive principles and reframe things so that these positions seem like plain old common sense.. Constant repetition and reframing is how the GOP took the country gradually gradually rightward rightward rightward over 30 years.

It's way past time to yank it back! Even if we only successfully yank to what center was before Bush II--that would place us in the ideological zone of Clinton I--it would FEEL far left compared to what we have grown used to waking up to each day.

I tried to tell everyone around me. They all insisted on following Obama's pretty flute music, and condescending anyone who heard some bitter notes in there. Sigh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Kinda Simonist
[Report this comment]
Posted by: talkville on Jul 5, 2008 2:19 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Slip sliding away; slip sliding away; the closer your destination the more things keep sliding away." -- Paul Simon.

Right smack in the middle, at the core so to speak, are the same old shysters, corrupt ones, wheelers and dealers and misguided thiefs, liars and all around hucksters that are steering this country (very pragmatically and efficiently one might add) into the realms of madness. The World, the Whole World and Nothing but the World, so help me God! And by any means necessary. Inside and Outside the "Homeland". And to that Obama gravitates; by any means necessary.

A neo-fascist Police State need not exist at any particular time or place; but, indeed, it has to be ready; and 'security' and 'preparedness' sure does. We're already there. In a "bi-partisan" way of course.

At the "extremes" alarm bells are sounding, it's hectic and noisy and voluminous. But at the Core is a sound-proof Wall where this 'middlesome' bunch of thugs happily goes on. Right smack in the middle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kinda Simonist Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

Obama’s hope and change may be a myth
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Richard House on Jul 5, 2008 2:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just when everyone thought Obama was a patriotic leftist politician he changed course and has taken on the appearance of an imitation faith-based-initiatives religious man of the right; the rhetoric has turned out to be empty and as thin as his silhouette. Unless this is some astute move (but really a tactically fatal act to gather middle-class highly pliable swing-voters who would fall prey to Swift Boat tactics anyway and meat for McCain strategists), congratulations to Obama who is now hedging on all his past positions. Will he continue Bush’s brand of global messianic militarism in a new style in order to do what’s best for America?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The John Kerry Trap.... Posted by: CatDad

Comments are closed-

Democrats
[Report this comment]
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Jul 5, 2008 3:09 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Typical insecure Democrat. They'll say and do anything in a desperate attempt to fit in.

This article is giving me flashbacks of high school...Maybe Obama should get his tongue pierced...or paint his hair purple...or get a really cool car.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Smoke and Mirrors...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Turiye on Jul 5, 2008 3:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I watched him speak 18 April at Independence Hall, I said, "Oh, he's tired I suppose", I kept trying to reassure myself, I was there alone so nobody else I was speaking to at the moment. I needed definitive answers, re; war, troop withdrawal, FISA, Impeachment, the F$$KING Constitution and Bill of Rights and habeas[habeas wasn't decided at thet date] so I still didn't know. I wouldn't vote for Hillary because of the "obliterate Iran" remark. I couldn't vote GHASP Republican, never have, Nader was an Economist not a President, Nader is an advocate, not a President. McKinney, I don't like her at all. Barbara Lee now that's a different story, I'd vote for her, I trust her. I heard the FISA lie and I said here it comes...Refining Iraq, WTF is that supposed to mean?
Beginning to go back to what I was going to do in the 1st place, _________.
Dennis Kucinich, don't care what anyone tries to use to console themselves with, Dennis Kucinich is going on that line with my #2 pencil. Call it a wasted vote? It isn't if everyone did the same thing, only honest politician. Walking, Talking oxymoron.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: bbfmail
» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: beautifulady2003
» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: kungfuma
» RE: Smoke and Mirrors... Posted by: lively56

Comments are closed-

In any event, let's root out the dead wood in Congress!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: TarryFaster on Jul 5, 2008 3:31 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In a five hour fit of anger and frustration, I dug up the names and contact information on the "Democratic" House & Senator traitors who voted to approve the latest version of the "Compromise FISA bill" -- which destroys our Fourth Amendment.  I put the two lists up on the Net as websites and will now go about "promoting" them.  Ideally, with your help, we could bring these sites to the attention of enough people to develop a viral network that could then gain critical mass among voters to remove these traitors.

Here are the sites: 

For House "Representatives": http://www.cloudbyte.com/traitors.html
For "Senators": http://www.cloudbyte.com/senatetraitors.html

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Sorry about the dead links! Posted by: TarryFaster

Comments are closed-

Losing Confidence in the man of steel
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Kelli B on Jul 5, 2008 4:10 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The one dumb move the neo-right was praying for Obama so made. He just anounced a move to pander to the right wing religious. I just gave 50 more bucks to him. I feel like I was duped. Thanks alot Obama, it was nice for a while.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

I quit the Democratic Party
[Report this comment]
Posted by: aahpat on Jul 5, 2008 4:15 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in 1996 over this running to the right crap that the Democrats ALWAYS DO.

And yes Arianna is right about this run to the right, it is why the Democrats lose major elections.

No party can win without an activist base to pound the streets for them in the months leading up to the election. But the Democrats have been driving the left leaning social justice activist base out of the Party since the early 1990's in a concerted effort to instead pander for the votes of a Jim Crow white right-wing that hates all things liberal/left/progressive/moderate.

Why I, a social justice, civil liberties, human rights loving American, refuse to vote for Obama and McCain:
Traitors:Bush, Walters, McCain & Obama

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I quit the Democratic Party Posted by: scootmandubious
» YES! Posted by: aahpat
» RE: I quit the Democratic Party Posted by: helenwheels
» No! Posted by: aahpat
» RE: No! Posted by: grkjr
» RE: I quit the Democratic Party Posted by: impeachbushandcheneynow

Comments are closed-

You are mistaken.
[Report this comment]
Posted by: davescott on Jul 5, 2008 4:23 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I deplore some of the recent tacking to the center by Obama. His praise for the awful gun decision, or his criticism of a rare case the Court got right, when it overturned a death sentence for a nonlethal crime. But when you say moving to the center doesnt work, I beg to differ. Bill Clinton preached welfare reform and, during the 92 campaign, flew back to Little Rock to sign a death warrant for a mentally disabled inmate. He is the only Dem since FDR to win twice. You say Gore's centrism didn't work, but he got more votes than the other guy did, and he had an albatross not of his making in the Lewinsky mess. Walter Mondale said he'd raise taxes and got clobbered. Dukakis was pilloried as "too liberal."

There is a common notion among the left that Dems would win lots more elections if they were just more outspokenly left-wing. I have seen absolutely no evidence to support that premise, and Ralph Nader's abysmal showings suggest otherwise. Candidates run to the center because this is a centrist nation -- and on issues like crime and welfare, a dumb, mean and nasty little nation.

To coin a phrase, you go into a presidential election with the electorate you've got. I'd rather see more truth-speaking. I'd rather see the real leadership Americans need, starting with a call for making the rich pay their share for once, and a quick end to fossil fuels. But when you state that tacking to the center is for losers, history just doesnt support that claim. If you toss out 1976 as a post-Watergate fluke, the ONLY Dem to win in 44 years was DLC member, middle-hugging Bill Clinton.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Shey
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: davescott
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Lauren
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: davescott
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Lauren
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Scientz
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: robbb3rt
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: Lauren
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: You are mistaken. Posted by: CatDad

Comments are closed-

RealAbortionPolitik
[Report this comment]
Posted by: hysperia on Jul 5, 2008 4:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let me just say to begin with that anyone who thinks that RealPolitik isn't RealStupidPoltik to begin with is RealStupid. RealPolitik leads exactly and precisely to where Sen Obama has found himself - in a land where he has no clear supporters, no clear constituency. He's trying to build a new one and it won't work.

Why has no one noticed that Obama has reversed his position on late term abortions, saying on July 3rd that he wouldn't support them except in cases when a woman's physical health was in jeopardy and not when her mental health was in jeopardy, as if physical and mental health can actually be divided anyway?

I can't believe how little people seem to care about this issue and about the meaning of this serious reversal. He lost me completely on this one.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ealAbortionPolitik Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: ealAbortionPolitik Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

Obama started in middle then moved more to the right
[Report this comment]
Posted by: bthespoon on Jul 5, 2008 4:46 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is not the hero we need to fix health care or the mess in Iraq. He is against uniting all Americans into one protective, nondiscriminatory health coverage pool, and will bring all but 50-80,000 of our troops out of Iraq "unless the situation on the ground changes". He says nulclear power, corn-based ethanol and coal are clean alternatives. Sigh.

He talks a (really, truly) great talk but his walk is as crooked as the next.

"Better Than McSame" and Supreme Court are two good reasons to vote for him, but mark my words: Obama will break real progressives' hearts.

PS- I also knew when Bush was appointed President that we'd be in a deep recession if we had to endure his PSBW (Parallel Simultaneous Backwards World) economic policies. I made this prediction to everyone who would listen. Obama also definitely will be better (not nearly as good as he could be) for the economy than more of the same.

We've never needed another FDR more than we need one now, and Obama is not even close.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Amen, bthespoon! Posted by: patsy6
» RE: Amen, bthespoon! Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Amen, bthespoon! Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

Arianna Huffington, as usual,
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Shey on Jul 5, 2008 4:53 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
.... hit the nail on the head. I for one don't want a bipartisan love fest with the Republican extreme right-wing (i.e. the vast majority of Republicans in the federal government today).

They are war criminals, corporate criminals, liars, thieves and Fascist Plutocrats. I don't want a candidate who is willing to have a dialog with these evil fucks, I want to see them run out of town on a rail at best and some of them in jail, where they belong.

Please, Senator Obama, listen to the brilliant Ms. Huffington and don't sell us out. You may well be our last hope for salvaging what's left of our Democracy and beginning to rebuild what we've lost.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Arianna Huffington, as usual, Posted by: StillStanding
» RE: Arianna Huffington, as usual, Posted by: helenwheels
» RE: Arianna Huffington, as usual, Posted by: scootmandubious
» RE: enuf said. Posted by: Lauren

Comments are closed-

Realpolitik in Amerika 2008
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Last Chance on Jul 5, 2008 4:56 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama is just trying to avoid assassination, and after all, he is the star of the Chicago political machine which really knows how to elect its own. I hope he wins, just to see what he will and will not do. Meanwhile, the federal government plunges toward bankruptcy and the nation towards another big Depression. If so, it might put Obama in a similar position as FDR in the 1930s. Hmmmmm. Now there's an intriguing scenario !!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ealpolitik in Amerika 2008 Posted by: VZEQICVA
» Realpolitik in Amerika 2008 Posted by: Last Chance

Comments are closed-

The lesser of two evils game...again!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: margo1 on Jul 5, 2008 5:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you think Kucinich would have done what Obama is doing? America, you voted and this is what you get when you swallow the line that someone is unelectable. I guess when you repeat the word change enough it convinces people in this country that you will get change. If you are marginalized by your party, ignored during the debates and treated as if you were some sort of a nutcase or sideshow by the likes of Letterman, Stewart and Colbert, Americans will all agree that you do not have a chance. For the past two elections, Democrats have failed you. I remember the fake enthusiasm of '04 when Kerry was the man and people went to Michael Moore rallies smiling when they were really grinding their teeth knowing they were doomed to four more years of Bush. I hate to say it, but the same poor souls who are driving around today with the Kerry/Edwards bumper stickers will be driving around with Obama '08 stickers six years from now, wondering what went wrong. And yes, it would be the same thing if it were Hillary. I have voted for Kucinich twice and I am glad to have done so. I do not believe in a wasted vote. What I do not believe in is a country where your choices are Coke and Pepsi. So what is it going to be America, will you be having Coke or Pepsi for the next four years?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Saw Ralph on C-SPIN Posted by: bthespoon
» RE: Saw Ralph on C-SPIN Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Saw Ralph on C-SPIN Posted by: lenioui
» RE: The lesser of two evils game...again! Posted by: beautifulady2003

Comments are closed-

FMA in Massachusetts
[Report this comment]
Posted by: FMABBI on Jul 5, 2008 5:18 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I consider myself an independent and an Obama supporter because he is our best hope for change in general. The Republicans in the white house and in Congress have made such a mess of this country's economy, the environment, our credibility among other nations, the country's military lack of readiness, and have highlighted the federal government's inability to deal with crisis at home.

Amazingly, there still has yet to be a comprehensive, independent, adequately funded investigation of the attacks on 9-11-2001. The "official" report was underfunded - $6 million compared to $40 million spent on "Whitewater" - is full of holes and improbabilities - doesn't even address Building 7 and approached the project with the conclusions already accepted as "truth". (google "9-11 truth" and do some homework) The attacks of 9-11 resulted in our loss of our basic freedoms, a fear filled citizenry who vote for someone they perceive will prevent other attacks, and a never ending (unjustified) "War on Terror" (anywhere in the world including here at home) which is bankrupting our treasury, spilling the blood of tens of thousands of innocent people, and making us far less safe than before 9-11 because everyone else in the world sees the error of our ways and become sympathetic to the extremists willing to fight the big global bully - that is us!

People, wake up! Our government is in shambles! What ever happened to the Constitution? What ever happened to the rule of law? This administration (including John McCain) is in essence pissing on these precious concepts which have made our country great to begin with! Where's Congress in all of this? Aren't they supposed to check the power of the executive branch to prevent these atrocities from happening in the first place? Or are they complicit?

Instead of complaining that Obama is only a perfectly fallible politician who is moving to the right in order to win the general election which may be a mistake (he will make mistakes in the future too), let's focus on the bigger picture. Let's fix this government and vote for folks who will turn this around - including your representatives in Congress. Let's educate ourselves about the Constitution and what we Americans should expect from our government as stated in the Constitution/ Bill of Rights and the laws of the land. Let's hold our politicians accountable and let them know that they will NOT get away with murder, lies, and/or treasonous acts. For this country's sake - whether Democrat, Republican or Independent - whether Black, White, Asian, Hispanic or whatever - whether male or female - whether blue collar or well educated elite - let's get the politicians out of office who are complicit in the destruction of this great country before it's too late! Let's get people in there who represent us and not BIG MONEY! Let's get people in there who will deal with the big problems (and they are HUGE) like global warming, energy independence, health care, and getting our people back to work.

Just who are we Americans? Are we really more interested in what someone's preacher says or if someone wears an American Flag lapel pin? Here's something you can and should be afraid of - losing the basic precepts of what our country is and stands for - who WE are as Americans. Once we've lost our core identity (and we're very close indeed), we will lose the basic freedoms we hold so dear (and take for granted) like freedom of speech, freedom to assemble, freedom to bear arms (to defend ourselves against a tyrannical government - God forbid!), the freedom to bar someone from entering our houses without consent, the right to a trial by jury, etc. www.consource.org/index.asp?bid=574

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» That was just plain Posted by: bthespoon
» EncinoM is . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» sgtmajor Posted by: seazen

Comments are closed-

What choice?...They're all similar...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: myanh44 on Jul 5, 2008 5:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Liberals, Conservatives.....Democrats, Republicans....don't you all know by now that it's ONE BIG PARTY with two different names? You are all fooled to think you have two choices when in fact you have none! Liberty and freedom, traits which separate this country from the rest of the world, are slowly being eroded and have been exacerbated since the 70s, regardless of who was in charge.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Obama presidency would be a failure just like Pelosi's Congress
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jul 5, 2008 5:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
'cause neither have any real agenda for change. Democratic leadership and most elected officials are part of the status quo, and hence we haven't had any progressive changes since 2006 election.

To expect anything better from Obama is to live in a fool's paradise.

As I posted elsewhere, Obama isn't even pretending to be liberal. Lately, he has been revising or 'refining' his positions over all major issues, including Iraq.

So who expects that Obama is the agent of change?

FISA position before:
"To be clear: Barack will support a filibuster of any bill that includes retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies."
-- Obama spokesman Bill Burton, Oct. 24, 2007

FISA position today:
Obama now says he'll vote in favor of the new FISA bill that gives the telecom companies blanket immunity for post-Sept. 11 eavesdropping.

NAFTA position before:
Obama thoroughly trashed the North American Free Trade Agreement, pledging to force a renegotiation, take "the hammer" to Canada and Mexico and threaten unilateral abrogation.

NAFTA position today:
Obama calls his previous NAFTA rhetoric "overheated" and essentially endorses what one of his senior economic advisers privately told the Canadians: The anti-trade stuff was nothing more than populist posturing

Public financing of elections position before:
Obama pledged to stick to public financing.

Position today:
Obama has opted out of public financing of elections.

On Iran, his position was meetings without preconditions. Today he claims to have "preparations", which according to his aides are functional equivalent of preconditions.

On SCOTUS ruling on 2nd amendment:
In November, the Chicago Tribune quoted the Obama campaign as saying, “Obama believes the D.C. handgun law is constitutional.”

On Thursday, the Obama campaign told ABC that the statement was “inartful” and does not fully explain Obama’s “consistent position.”

As of Thursaday he has started to move away from his earlier position of 16 month combat troop removal from Iraq.
And now he says that his "original position" on withdrawal has always been that "we've got to make sure that our troops are safe and that Iraq is stable." And that "when I go to Iraq . . . I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies."

So even on Iraq his flip has began. By the time he comes back from his Iraq tour, the 16-month timetable will be out the window.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: emmas
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: Lauren
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: emmas
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: emmas
» RE: SURPRISE! Posted by: carbon-based
» What was his motive? . . . Posted by: dustdevil
» RE: What was his motive? . . . Posted by: carbon-based
» RE: What was his motive? . . . Posted by: carbon-based
» PS Article on Patriotism Posted by: emmas

Comments are closed-

Right
[Report this comment]
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Jul 5, 2008 5:38 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[Yawn] Time to feed the Sheeple. Here sheeple, sheeple sheeple. LOL

JT
Is your ISP watching?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ight Posted by: Turiye
» RE: ight Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ight Posted by: Dboy
» RE: ight Posted by: helenwheels

Comments are closed-

ALL You Had To Do...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: loxias on Jul 5, 2008 5:44 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Was ask these questions a few months ago. You all got suckered, so blatantly and willingly it was a sad disaster in slow motion. And if there was a "biggest unquestioning cheerleader" then Alternet was the one. That's why you don't believe words, but look at action. And if there are no actions to look at, perhaps you're making a hasty decision. This guy is going to be eaten alive, all because of his political ties, lack of experience, and big mouth. And the country will continue to be ravished to feed the wealthy, and the entire world will suffer. Faith and hope don't re-allocate resources, nor regulate business conglomerates. And Alternet will pretend they knew it would happen all along, and never really liked Obama, and put a lot more links to TMZ up so you forget about the whole thing during McCain's Iran debacle.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ALL You Had To Do... Posted by: Lauren
» RE: ALL You Had To Do... Posted by: loxias
» RE: ALL You Had To Do... Posted by: cmaciain

Comments are closed-

FUNDAMENTAL CON JOB @ the KOOL-AID STATE
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Mister_PsyOps on Jul 5, 2008 5:47 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"And isn't galvanizing the electorate to demand fundamental change the raison d'etre of the Obama campaign in the first place?"

What "fundamental change"?

Obama is the DC version of Denzel Washington with talking points provided by ruling class paymasters that bankrolled his campaign. By voting record, performance or any other measure that means anything Obama is a Stepford actor playing his part for the usual suspects.

Obama may be somewhat "better" than troglodyte McCain but the difference is far more charisma and flash than it is substance.

At the end of the day, the same corporate crime Fascists will be pulling the strings on Obama or McCain whichever one of them "wins".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Comments are closed-

Getting the "Leaders" We Deserve
[Report this comment]
Posted by: phshafe on Jul 5, 2008 5:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We accede to the wholesale slaughter of Iraqi children so that we might get the oil to prolong our distinctive suburban lifestyle just a bit. We fail to even acknowledge the energy armageddon about to consume us, much less sign up to immediate and escalating sacrifices needed to deal with it head-on. Most of us haven't read any of even the best (truly outstanding) books available documenting any of these momentous events of our time.

And then we scream because our "leaders" mirror ourselves? Is it not clear that an empire like ours whose decline is so advanced has deeply embedded mechanisms for preventing real leaders and visionaries, and anyone with balls and guts (figuratively speaking) from ascending to the helm?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 -