Topic: Presidential General Election News & Discussion Center
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Because it is a reinforcement of the lesson to declining superpowers that Imperial overextension has its unforseen consequences for them and the rest of the world, a rapid withdrawl of American strength too fast and too soon may cause instabilities elsewhere, its a domino effect. Chop off the finger to save the hand, no need to hack off the arm.
IP: Logged |
posted
When they talk about generals for VP candidates, I think they are mostly talking about Wesley Clark, but I'm sure there are other dark horse candidates. I think the actual list of candidates is down to like 20 people.
I hope for the country's sake that Ron Paul doesn't return to obscurity. I might not agree with his minimalist policies entirely, but he talks a lot sense, and he deserves a seat at the table.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: They blamed much of the decay on shortsighted thinking by local, state and federal officials.
So all the money we have spent so far has been misspent on who knows what and to solve the problem we are going to give the people who created the problem even more money????
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by DarkKnight: From Lyrhawn's link
quote: They blamed much of the decay on shortsighted thinking by local, state and federal officials.
So all the money we have spent so far has been misspent on who knows what and to solve the problem we are going to give the people who created the problem even more money????
Hm.
I wonder if they plan to request supplemental funding?
From what I've read in numerous other articles, that's largely because the Fed or states will never provide enough money to actually do a real long term project that could last awhile. So instead, they provide just enough money to patch things up and last a little bit longer instead of spending more to do it right. It's a huge problem from top to bottom that requires some serious investigation and fixing, and much more money.
Noemon -
That's disappointing. It's widely assumed that Obama has nothing to gain in such a setting since he has so much more money, McCain needs the free media, plus it's his home turf. But I think Obama absolutely needs the format, both because of his message and because of his percieved lack of hard policy. Hopefully something will change soon and we'll get a couple of these. 10 seems unnecessary. I mean, I just don't think they need that many. But three or four, and then the formal debates if they are really necessary in the Fall, would be sufficient.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, I agree--10 would probably have been overkill, but a handful of them would have been good. I'm not sure that I agree with you that Obama needs these; given the cash advantage he's got, I think that he'll probably just be able to outspend McCain and win that way. However, I wish that he'd have them anyway. I'd like him to win because the majority of Americans are pursauded by his vision rather than the depth of his war chest.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I'd like him to win because the majority of Americans are pursauded by his vision rather than the depth of his war chest.
I think you've got an overly optimistic view of how American elections work.
There's a chunk of people out there who won't vote for Sen Obama because he's a Muslim.
---
DK, I'm not sure I understand your comment. The mayors mentioned in the article aren't the same people who have been making poor, short-sighted decisions on infrastructure.
Also, the article talked about people trying to move away from the short-sighted system into one where infrastructure would hopefully be treated as a long-term investment.
I'm just not sure what you'd like to have happen with infrastructure problems. Could you explain?
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
I agree that that's how I'd like this election to go as well. I think Obama probably could get by just from outspending McCain all over the board. But I also think he underestimates himself if he thinks he can't take McCain in an open forum.
But really, he's opening himself to a lot of damage by not doing more than one. He says he'll debate "anytime anywhere," attacks the politics of the past, and that he's looking forward to debating McCain, and then only one townhall and the rest are the chereographed debates that we're all grown tired of for 40 years? If I were an independent, that'd push me towards McCain.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I cannot BELIEVE that Fox News called Michelle Obama Barack obama's "baby mama."
It's so racist and disrespectful at the same time I'm shocked it went on the air.
They're the same people who labeled their fist bump a "terrorist fist bump".
It's Fox News. They don't have a sense of decency. That's one of the reasons that a big chunk of their target demo tunes in.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
RIP. Russert had his detractors, but I always liked the guy. He got massive kudos from me last month for being the first prominent newscaster (well, after Olbermann perhaps) to bluntly point out that Obama was, short of complete self-annihilation, going to be the Democratic nominee.
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that going back on what he said and limiting the town hall debates reflects pretty poorly on Sen Obama. I hope that this is just developments along the way and not the final state of things.
10 debates does seem excessive, but 1 seems too few, especially when it is intentionally set for a time where there would be many fewer people watching.
If Sen Obama does have the substance that many people seem to believe he lacks - and I think he does - this is a good way for him to show it. It is also something I think we should expect from our candidates, especially one who has said he would do it anywhere, anytime.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jesus, that's sudden. I liked Russert. I agree that it'll likely have no effect on the final outcome, but it's sad, both because it's sudden and tragic, and also because we have one less good reporter talking about the process and only more bloviating to fill the void.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky: If Sen Obama does have the substance that many people seem to believe he lacks - and I think he does - this is a good way for him to show it. It is also something I think we should expect from our candidates, especially one who has said he would do it anywhere, anytime.
Depends. If they toss him only softballs, like they've done before, it won't highlight anything.
And I don't think he lacks substance. It's that his substance is simply more of the same. There's no "change" here at all.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you claim you're for change, the burden of proof is on you. You have to say what kind of change you're for. You can't just throw around the word and have it actually mean something.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I think there is more then abundant proof discussed on these very forums that reiteration is unnessasary.
If you say the sky is green when it is obviously blue it is up to you.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Irami: I still think that American whites have Manifest Destiny sensibilities and had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, towards the appearance of decency.
You are a racist. How about that?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: I cannot BELIEVE that Fox News called Michelle Obama Barack obama's "baby mama."
It's so racist and disrespectful at the same time I'm shocked it went on the air.
Well, it is worth mentioning that Michelle Obama has used the term 'baby's daddy' in reference to Barack at a stump event. Clearly, she doesn't find it to be overwhelmingly offensive.
Posts: 433 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure how the two are equivalent. "baby moma" is a derogatory slang term applied to black single mothers. Does "baby's daddy" have a similar connotation of which I am not aware or do they just sound similar to you?
Posts: 12591 | Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:My husband, my man, my honey, my babies' daddy, Barack Obama!
"Baby momma" has a bunch of bad connotations to it. "Baby daddy" does too, for similar reasons. "Babies' daddy" does not in the context of her statement. The two aren't even comparable.
quote:Originally posted by The Rabbit: I'm not sure how the two are equivalent. "baby moma" is a derogatory slang term applied to black single mothers. Does "baby's daddy" have a similar connotation of which I am not aware or do they just sound similar to you?
Why is this relevent to this thread? Remember awhile ago when Obama said he'd attack inside Pakistan if he had actionable intel? Remember when he was roundly criticized for it by members of this Administration, and Republicans everywhere?
President Bush this last week in Europe also promised that diplomacy was the best way to go with Iran, despite the fact that he with others have roundly criticized Obama for wanting to meet with their leaders.
We don't yet know whether or not any Pakistanis were actually killed, but it seems like it may have been bungled, and possibly at the worst possible time for US/Pakistani relations that are already frayed very, very thin.
I guess my point is twoful: Interesting that so many would criticize Obama on one hand and trumpet the President on the other when they seem to have similar ideas. On the other hand, Obama would hardly want to say "hey, the President and I are buddy buddy on military issues!" considering the railing he's doing against the President.
Though he might get by on something close to "the President is finally starting to make some good choices..." to change the dialogue to his favor. Bush is taking a dramatically different track with Europe recently to try and get stuff done, even showing remorse over his previous "tough talk" style of "diplomacy."
The President certainly doesn't have a problem being in the limelight during the election.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I'ld consider the violation of territorial sovereignty a big no-no irregardless of the circumstances, isn't this a casus beli in most circumstances?
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I'ld consider the violation of territorial sovereignty a big no-no irregardless of the circumstances, isn't this a casus beli in most circumstances?
Casus beli is often whatever the country that declares war says it is. In today's world, no, that isn't casus beli, at least not to most nations.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:My husband, my man, my honey, my babies' daddy, Barack Obama!
"Baby momma" has a bunch of bad connotations to it. "Baby daddy" does too, for similar reasons. "Babies' daddy" does not in the context of her statement. The two aren't even comparable.
--j_k
Agreed. Here it's obviously a pop culture reference, and not some kind of racial gaff. As part of a list of appellations, it's tame.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'll agree it's disrespectful. I don't think it is (necessarily) racist.
I think it's pretty dumb of FOX to have done but not necessarily any dumber than letting Michelle Malkin be a regular guest.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It is racist, because "baby mama" is a woman who has children with a man who is not her husband or boyfriend or partner. It means that not only did she have kids while not married, she had them with someone with whom she was not even romantically involved.
There was no context, and it was not respectful. For MO's comment, calling Barack her babies' daddy was part of a long list of traits that started with "my husband." Not even comparable.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn:
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I'ld consider the violation of territorial sovereignty a big no-no irregardless of the circumstances, isn't this a casus beli in most circumstances?
Casus beli is often whatever the country that declares war says it is. In today's world, no, that isn't casus beli, at least not to most nations.
So if Russia launched a conventionally armed ICBM and destroyed what they considered a terrorist target within US borders this would be COMPLETELY fine with you?
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Blayne Bradley: I'ld consider the violation of territorial sovereignty a big no-no irregardless of the circumstances, isn't this a casus beli in most circumstances?
Casus beli is often whatever the country that declares war says it is. In today's world, no, that isn't casus beli, at least not to most nations.
So if Russia launched a conventionally armed ICBM and destroyed what they considered a terrorist target within US borders this would be COMPLETELY fine with you?
If the terrorists were fleeing through the mojave desert when they were hit with said ICBM, sure why not? You afraid the cacti will form a PAC?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by katharina: It is racist, because "baby mama" is a woman who has children with a man who is not her husband or boyfriend or partner. It means that not only did she have kids while not married, she had them with someone with whom she was not even romantically involved.
There was no context, and it was not respectful. For MO's comment, calling Barack her babies' daddy was part of a long list of traits that started with "my husband." Not even comparable.
You've completely neglected to explain why this is 'racist'. Disrespectful, sure. Baby-mama is not an exclusively black term.
Posts: 433 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
But it did start in the black community to address a rampant, complicated problem in the black community, a profound problem with the state of black love, and one that in no way touches the Obama family. You can talk about Obama this and Obama that, but he seems every bit the good husband and father. It's as if someone said that Obama got his domestic policy ideas from the 48 Laws of Power, looking passed his background as a constitutional scholar and a legislator. It's disrespectful and it's racist, but it's not a big deal. The guy is running for president, people are going to call him names.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: It also looked calculated to spark debate on the future of the Supreme Court – one of the most important election issues for many conservative voters.
I suspect that this is a miscalculation on McCain's part, if this is really his intent. The future of the Supreme Court is important to many people across the political spectrum. I could see this turning moderates away from his camp, and I could certainly see it being enough to drive disenfranchised Clinton supporters to hold their noses and vote for Obama.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree. I think it'll play excellently with his base, but this election is largely I think going to be won in the middle, as much as it will be about bringing out voters from their respective bases, and for all his tough talk, this is EXACTLY the sort of thing the Supreme Court is supposed to rule on. I think if McCain and his ilk had their way, they'd do away with the Supreme Court entirely.
At the same time, Obama has to be careful with his rhetoric, or McCain will easily paint him as a terrorist appeasor. Still, I lean heavily towards agreeing with Obama. We're a nation of laws. We've already experienced a degree of, for lack of a more potent phrase, inter arma enim silent leges, but when we deny these rights that we consider fundamental not just for Americans but for ALL people eveywhere, you have to really start wondering who we are as a people. The Founders talked about inalienable rights for all men, not just for Americans. I think that'll be the best argument for him to use against McCain's "but Obama wants to give special rights court dates to people who just a few months ago were killing Americans!"
Blayne -
quote:So if Russia launched a conventionally armed ICBM and destroyed what they considered a terrorist target within US borders this would be COMPLETELY fine with you?
In Blackblade's hypothetical, I wouldn't be completely fine with it, but I certainly wouldn't declare war on Russia over it. There are, by the way, lots and lots of degrees between "COMPLETELY fine" and war.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Al Gore is endorsing Obama tonight in Detroit.
I was going to go see it, it's at the Joe (Joe Louis Arena) and it's free, but my grandpa is coming into town tonight and I'm not even sure I'd be able to get in anyway. I wouldn't be able to leave until 5 and doors open at 6. Much as I'd love to see Gore and Obama, I think I might pass.
Interesting though that a second major endorsement is being done in Michigan. Obama is certainly taking our "battleground" status seriously.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tough luck, Blayne, ya hafta root for McCain. China's official news organ, the People'sDaily has slammed Obama. OTOH, Irami's gained support for his contention that Obama is "just another whitey dedicated to keeping the black race down."
Posts: 8501 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
I read the article aspectre and unless our understanding of english is radically different from each other it didn't "slam" Obama it merely cautioned its possible American readers to not hold to high of expectations of wide ranging reforms.
IP: Logged |
quote: New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg urged Congress to abandon the tradition of earmark spending, in which individual lawmakers often deliver dollops of taxpayer money to small local projects that don't provide much help for the long-term needs of their districts.
"We're as guilty as anybody," Bloomberg admitted. "We ask for money for things that are totally local, and why the federal government does it, I don't know. They shouldn't be doing it, although we will continue to ask as long as they are giving it out. Our senators have the obligation to bring home the bacon like everybody else does. ... Seems to me the Senate should get together and say together, 'We're not going to do it anymore.' "
quote: OTOH, Irami's gained support for his contention that Obama is "just another whitey dedicated to keeping the black race down."
The greater danger is ceding whites the power to pick and choose black leaders. It's like the Archbishop of Canterbury picking the Pope.
Posts: 5600 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
. . . I really don't know what you mean by that, because the most obvious way I can interpret that in the context of Obama is that you think any black President would need to be elected by black people but not white people, and I think that is too absurd even for you.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Russert had his detractors, but I always liked the guy. He got massive kudos from me last month for being the first prominent newscaster (well, after Olbermann perhaps) to bluntly point out that Obama was, short of complete self-annihilation, going to be the Democratic nominee.
