# Barack Obama!



## Doris (11 December 2007)

Does anyone disagree that Barack will be the next US president?  

I first saw him on 'Oprah' whilst I was in Canada a year ago.   I sat glued and I rarely watch the show!  He was so inspiring that I bought his book 'The Audacity of Hope'.  This was his second book.  The first was 'Dreams from My Father' which earned him enough to pay off his law school debts and buy him a house as he worked in Chicago for a pittance.  I predicted the sales of his second book would help finance a run for president and I was chuffed when he nominated!  He's not accepted any donations from lobbyists but from public donations which IMO give ownership by the donors to 'the cause'.  A brilliant strategy!

My Canadian friends tell me Barack is the favourite in Calgary.

My best friend is American and lives in Orange County CA and insists Hillary will win and Barack will be VP.  "We are ready for a woman as president but not a black man!"  

David E Kelly dedicated an episode of Boston Legal last season to promote Obama, where the theme was basically about racism and 'political correctness' when Denny Crane was impressed with a black law graduate and told him he spoke like a white man.  During the balcony epilogue segment Denny Crane announced Obama would be make a good president.  "Anyone but Hillary".  So it's not just Oprah who believes in Obama and has promoted him to the voter reluctant American public.

Below is the link to Oprah's speech yesterday (Sunday US time) at Obama's rally:

http://www.barackobama.com/oprah


----------



## Whiskers (11 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I reckon it will be between Hillary and Barack. Oprah's influence on the black and female voters has got to be a big plus.

Bit hard for me to pick though... I don't think much like a yank  have to work on it for awhile :


----------



## So_Cynical (11 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hillary FTW

Barack has a snowball in hells chance of winning.


----------



## Julia (11 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Whiskers said:


> I don't think much like a yank  have to work on it for awhile :




Please don't, Whiskers.  Much prefer you as you are.


----------



## coolcricket (11 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I actually hope Clinton gets it, as I think Barack and Oprah are running a rather racist campaign.


----------



## Doris (11 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Whiskers said:


> I reckon it will be between Hillary and Barack. Oprah's influence on the black and female voters has got to be a big plus.
> 
> Bit hard for me to pick though... I don't think much like a yank  have to work on it for awhile :




Too true... possibly not many blacks usually bother to vote.

Wasn't it 40% of eligible voters who turned out for the last election?  I recall reading how Bush's machine stirred up two states who had a lot of colleges (total number of college votes wins) with the gross fear that if a Democrat were elected he would legalize abortion and gay marriages.  People who had never voted in their lives came out of the woodwork for Bush.

Y'all I was in Huston in February and every local I spoke to said they would never vote for a black man.  In California, one woman I met said she wouldn't vote for Obama because he was a muslim and he smoked!

The fact that the second Tuesday in November when they vote is a working day...  most employers insist people use their lunch break or after work to vote... does not help the low turnout at their polls.

He is so articulate and his books are light, entertaining, informative reading.  'The Audacity of Hope' gives such an insight into the man as he highlights problems and solutions for the Hispanic, illegal immigrants and African-American situations.  Costco (in OC) was selling it for US$10 in Feb when I paid $33 in Canada last December.  They were snapped up!  You cannot read his work and not be impressed.  

I really believe he will unite his country and the world.  Maybe even the muslims?   Hope is not audacious!

We'll know in a few weeks!


----------



## Doris (11 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



coolcricket said:


> I actually hope Clinton gets it, as I think Barack and Oprah are running a rather racist campaign.




Why do you think that?  Because Oprah is forever promoting black success?

Obama's mother was white.  He's half white and he's never been racist.


----------



## DJZ (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Ron Paul is the man you have too look at Seriously, the American Economy is in crisis and this is the only man who has the answers. Plus he is one of the few who will withdraw troops from most places.

Barrack and Hillary will both continue America's path towards a police state.


----------



## coolcricket (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Why do you think that?  Because Oprah is forever promoting black success?
> 
> Obama's mother was white.  He's half white and he's never been racist.




Why is Oprah supporting Obama? 
She didn't come out and support Kerry in '04 (and obviously, if she's supporting Obama, she's either a dem or clearly voting down racial lines) back when it was MOST IMPORTANT.

And after the racial speech from Oprah....she played the race card for Obama and he let her do it. That makes him ivolved in a racist campaign imo.


----------



## Whiskers (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Please don't, Whiskers.  Much prefer you as you are.




Augh, thanks Julia.

Just for you I won't think about it


----------



## wayneL (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Please don't




Seconded.


----------



## Kimosabi (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*




Doris said:


> Does anyone disagree that Barack will be the next US president?






Doris said:


> I first saw him on 'Oprah' whilst I was in Canada a year ago. I sat glued and I rarely watch the show! He was so inspiring that I bought his book 'The Audacity of Hope'. This was his second book. The first was 'Dreams from My Father' which earned him enough to pay off his law school debts and buy him a house as he worked in Chicago for a pittance. I predicted the sales of his second book would help finance a run for president and I was chuffed when he nominated! He's not accepted any donations from lobbyists but from public donations which IMO give ownership by the donors to 'the cause'. A brilliant strategy!
> 
> My Canadian friends tell me Barack is the favourite in Calgary.
> 
> ...




Forget Barack Obama and Billary, they are nothing but CFR Shills who will continue endless wars, Ron Paul is the only candidate who should be President...

Best Video about Ron Paul



Ron Paul has got a *HUGE* Grassroots Movement behind him. They've even raised +$200,000 to get a Blimp for him.


----------



## wildkactus (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama and Hillary, I Don't think they have the legs, they are the money mouths for the democratic party. Plus i don't think america will vote for either a female or black president just yet.

Ron paul is the best candidate and would be my pick for the 2008 poll, but i think his idea's are a little to big for the average american, for him to get the nod.

we will proberably end up with thompson or gulliani as the next president or someone who will put their hand up next year just before the primaries and will walk in with all the money already raised and a nice run to the polls.
But i guess we will see in time.

Anyway who ever it is, is going to get one hell of a mess to sort out, after the current guy.


----------



## BradK (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Its a difficult one. 

Hopefully the grassroots movement will win the day. I like Ron Paul, but I obviously do not have a vote. However, it would be good to see then moneyed elite lose out. 

Although I think Americans are sick of money in politics, unfortunately I just think they are too disengaged and apathetic to really make a change. 

My 

Brad


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama has no chance.

The US only 1 year ago elected their 2nd black governor; the chances that they are capable of overcoming the colour issue enough to elect a black president are zero.

The republicans would love the democrats to put him up - that would be their best chance of winning next year.


----------



## Arturius (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I'm not sure why you guys are jumping on this 'black' thing.

He's not really considered 'black', because he wasn't a descendant of slaves. That sub culture isn't really tagged to him, thus he's more like a white guy with darker skin, as far as most groups are concerned.


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Arturius said:


> I'm not sure why you guys are jumping on this 'black' thing.
> 
> He's not really considered 'black', because he wasn't a descendant of slaves. That sub culture isn't really tagged to him, thus he's more like a white guy with darker skin, as far as most groups are concerned.




mmm I think a large majority of white americans will disagree with you on that one.

PS Calling someone an egg plant is considered very racist eg "he's more like a white guy with darker skin" - just kidding, but you did set yourself up on that.


----------



## chops_a_must (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> mmm I think a large majority of white americans will disagree with you on that one.
> 
> PS Calling someone an egg plant is considered very racist eg "he's more like a white guy with darker skin" - just kidding, but you did set yourself up on that.




No. It seems to be that Obama is actually quite unpopular with the african-american community. He is, and is regarded, as a silver bum. He wasn't exactly a child of hardship. 

What is interesting is the quietness regarding his academic career and his reasons for his move into politics. From what I understand he chose to run for the Senate because he was going to be booted from his college position due to non-performance. Not exactly the sort of person you want running an administration. But I'm sure that will come out if he is the democrat nominee.

Aside from that, as a fellow liberal, some of his policies are just completely stupid. He should have got into PR, or been a used car salesman rather than a politician... hmmm.... actually, you could say that about most politicians. Just all talk, absolutely no substance I think. His misdirection on a lot of issues purely irritates me.


----------



## Doris (12 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> No. It seems to be that Obama is actually quite unpopular with the african-american community. He is, and is regarded, as a silver bum. He wasn't exactly a child of hardship.







Arturius said:


> I'm not sure why you guys are jumping on this 'black' thing.
> 
> He's not really considered 'black', because he wasn't a descendant of slaves. That sub culture isn't really tagged to him, thus he's more like a white guy with darker skin, as far as most groups are concerned.






Interesting summary by Marie Claire Bretana: 

http://ezinearticles.com/?expert=Marie_Claire_Bretana 

"Although Barack was born in Hawaii and later in his adolescence grew up there with his maternal grandparents, he wasn't considered by many Blacks as African American or Black enough since his family history did not extend as far back as the slavery years.

The discrimination on Obama is not about skin color or race, but rather that of culture and life experiences. What those Blacks who are unsupportive of Obama's presidential campaign are concerned about is how well Barack can relate to the authentic African American experience. Having a Kenyan father, a White mother, and growing mostly in Hawaii and for some time in Indonesia, Barack is viewed mostly by Blacks as "not Black enough" to understand what most Blacks of this country are going through or the history they have living in America.

According to his biography at Wikipedia, after high school, Obama studied for two years at Occidental College and then transferred to Columbia University, where he majored in political science with a specialization in international relations. After receiving his B.A. degree in 1983, Obama worked for one year at Business International Corporation. In 1985, he moved to Chicago to direct a non-profit project assisting local churches to organize job training programs for residents of poor neighborhoods.

Obama entered Harvard Law School in 1988. In February 1990, The New York Times reported his election as the Harvard Law Review's "first black president in its 104-year history." He obtained his J.D. degree magna cum laude from Harvard in 1991. On returning to Chicago, Obama directed a voter registration drive, then worked for the civil rights law firm Miner, Barnhill & Galland, and taught constitutional law at the University of Chicago Law School from 1993 until his election to the U.S. Senate in 2004."


I like his attitude of listening to others' opinions and integrating their ideas into his platform, giving people problems and potential solutions to think about.  I think he has captured the aspirations of the younger generation just as Kevin Rudd did here.  

He was innately political in having Oprah answer Hillary's attacks on his lack of Washington experience, hence competence, thus preserving his image in not lowering himself to join the bickering.  Politics can be nasty.  Don't mention the war!


----------



## Doris (28 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Will this man win in Iowa in two weeks' time?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5h95s0OuEg&feature=related


Barack on religion.  He sounds like a president with a sense of humour instead of a source of humour!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35sGJrWKcmY&NR=1


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (28 December 2007)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> No. It seems to be that Obama is actually quite unpopular with the african-american community. He is, and is regarded, as a silver bum. He wasn't exactly a child of hardship.
> .




Chops, dont fall for the line that Baracks team is keen to push, that being he is not really black blah, blah. In reality the Barack team knows this plays well with the middle ground and that those blacks inclined to vote for a black man will not be put off by the ' he aint got slave ancestory '.

I agree with your other comments.

Doris, should he win in Iowa all it offers is focus of the press, it offers the winner credibility. Many have won Iowa and not even come close to winning the nomination. The exception will be Hillary - she will win Iowa....just.

Should Hillary win the nomination he will not be the Vice Presidential candidate - guaranteed.


----------



## Doris (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Chops, dont fall for the line that Baracks team is keen to push, that being he is not really black blah, blah. In reality the Barack team knows this plays well with the middle ground and that those blacks inclined to vote for a black man will not be put off by the ' he aint got slave ancestory '.
> 
> I agree with your other comments.
> 
> ...




We shall see within an hour or two!  Some polls have all 3 democrats neck and neck... some have Barack ahead. Some have Hillary coming third!

"A Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll showed senator Obama leading senator Edwards by four percentage points, 31 per cent to 27 per cent.

Senator Clinton, a former first lady who would be the first woman president, fell to a potentially damaging third at 24 per cent. The survey carries a statistical margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.

While there is nothing technically preventing candidates who poll poorly from continuing on in the race, early disappointment usually send donors running to the frontrunners, making it virtually impossible for campaigns to stay alive.

For the winner in Iowa, the prize is valuable momentum and at least a temporary claim to the front-runner's slot in their party's nomination battle' "


25% have not made up their mind yet

Go Obama!


----------



## Doris (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Waytogo!    He did it.  I knew that...

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23005994-38198,00.html 

Obama win shows he's a real contender

by Stephen Collinson in Des Moines

January 04, 2008 02:00pm
Article from: Agence France-Presse

VICTORY in the Iowa caucuses has sent Barack Obama rocketing into a new political stratosphere, after a stunning rise from unknown to hot tip for the possible Democratic nominee in less than four years.

His defeat of Hillary Clinton in the key state is a powerful vindication for the 46-year-old freshman senator's soaring message of hope and generational political change, which thrills huge crowds wherever he travels.

It also confirms senator Obama, son of a Kenyan father and white American mother, as a genuine contender for the Democratic nomination, boosting his quest to become the first black president of the United States.

Senator Obama's express charge to the top of US politics, has been built on dazzling rhetorical skills and blazing charisma and a flashing smile, and attracted legions of young supporters embittered by the grime of modern politics.

He exploded onto the scene with a stunning speech at the Democratic national convention in 2004, and drew immediate comparisions with civil rights pioneer Martin Luther King, and Democratic icons John and Bobby Kennedy.

Since then, he has developed his mantra of hope and change, and portrayed senator Clinton as a symbol of a fractured, political system desperate for renewal.

"There is a moment in the life of every generation when, if we are to make our mark on history, this spirit must break through," senator Obama said last week.

"This is the moment. This is our time."

Senator Obama often marvels at campaign events at how his life has changed, when just a few years ago he finished paying off his student loans and was able to shop for groceries in anonymity.

Now, he travels in Secret Service motorcades, jets around America trailed by a voracious media pack, and bears the political hopes of millions, in his crusade to do no less than redefine American politics.

After only two years in Congress, and time as a local legislator in Illinois, even senator Obama admits some see his campaign as premature. His latest book was called The Audacity of Hope.

Explaining why he did not wait his turn before running for president, senator Obama says he is driven by what King referred to as the "fierce urgency of now" - a fervent desire to ignite a grass-roots movement of political change.

He has often mused on the price he pays in running, given his idyllic home life with wife Michelle, and two young daughters Malia and Sasha.

Senator Obama has the best chance of all of the black Americans who have taken a run at the White House.

He bills himself as a spokesman for a new generation, implicitly separating himself from the civil rights leaders like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, whose past presidential runs foundered on a lack of appeal to whites.

Born in Hawaii in 1961, senator Obama had an intriguing view of mainland America as he grew up, spending large periods of time in Hawaii and Indonesia.

The product of a broken marriage between his Kansas-born white mother and Kenyan economist father, he was shuttled between homes as a boy.

He said life in Indonesia opened his eyes to the extremes of poverty and wealth around the world, and the wrenching effect of political upheaval on ordinary people.

"It made me mindful of the huge gaps in opportunity that exist in many countries of the world. It also made me appreciate how deeply impoverished people can be - how issues of corruption can thwart opportunity," he said.

After graduating from high school, he attended Columbia University and then went to the elite Harvard Law School, where he was the first black American to hold the prestigious post as president of the influential Harvard Law Review.

While in university he also worked as a community organiser in New York's Harlem and Chicago's South Side, two of the country's toughest neighborhoods, all the while starting a family.

He plunged into politics in the midwest state of Illinois as a civil rights lawyer, spending three terms in the state senate before jumping at the chance to run for the US Senate in 2004 when a vacancy opened up.

His electrifying convention speech put the world on notice of a rising political star.

"There is not a black America, and a white America, a Latino America, and Asian America - we are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America," he declared to roaring applause.


----------



## Doris (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wasn't Abe Lincoln a senator from Illinois?

Didn't he say 'We are not a Black America and a White America!  

We are the United States of America!' in his speech for the primaries??!!!!!!!

When I read his book 'The Audacity of Hope' a year ago, in Canada where I first heard of him, I knew Barack Obama could unite the ethnic factions in the US.  

This is good news people!  Glenfiddich for all!


----------



## Doris (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

IS THIS A JOKE?  Huckabee to replace Bush?  Omigod!  

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23005980-38198,00.html 

Barack Obama, Mike Huckabee win Iowa vote

From correspondents in Des Moines

January 04, 2008 01:46pm
Article from: Agence France-Presse

ILLINOIS Senator Barack Obama beat his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton in the Iowa presidential caucuses, while Republican Mike Huckabee has come from nowhere to win over Iowans.

Mr Obama, 46, who has created a sensation since bursting onto the US political scene in 2004, had won some 36.37 percent of the vote for the Democratic presidential nomination, according to the website www.iowacaucusresults.com.

Coming in second was John Edwards with some 30.47 percent with some 80 percent of the 1781 precincts having tallied their votes, the website said.

Hillary Clinton, the former first lady, was trailing in third with 30.15 percent.

God-fearing ordained Baptist preacher Mike Huckabee pulled off a stunning upset in the first lap of the 2008 White House race to come from nowhere to win the Iowa caucuses.

With little money in his campaign coffers and no foreign policy experience, Mr Huckabee relied on his famous wit and his Christian faith to win over the notoriously independent-minded Iowans.

In just weeks, the 52-year-old former Arkansas governor went from being a rank outsider with just four per cent support to securing the all-important first nod for the Republican ticket in November's presidential polls.

His main rival, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney threw millions of dollars of his own money into the Iowa race in a bid to rein in Mr Huckabee's surge. But he had to settle for second place.

"Congratulations to Mike and we'll go on to New Hampshire," Mr Romney said on Fox News.

Mr Huckabee, who has built his campaign on the slogan "Faith. Family. Freedom", powered to victory partly by exploiting discontent among Christian conservatives at the splintered Republican field.

His brand of populist politics - vehemently opposing abortion, any tightening of gun control laws and urging tougher immigration rules - hit home here.

The wise-cracking, guitar-playing Mike Huckabee, who says he believes every word written in the Bible, also relied on his folksy charm in the battle to win over voters.

His solution to stemming illegal immigration for instance would rely on sending in his star supporter, the karate-kicking television actor Chuck Norris, he quipped.

But some of his views plunged him into hot water. He became embroiled in a row over comments he made in 1992 suggesting AIDS patients should be quarantined, later telling Fox News he would probably "say things a little differently" now.

And Huckabee was also forced to apologise to Mr Romney for an implied attack on the latter's Mormon faith when he was quoted in the New York Times magazine saying "don't Mormons ... believe that Jesus and the devil are brothers?"

Despite his Iowa triumph, Mr Huckabee still remains a long shot for the Republican nomination with all eyes now be on the more liberal New Hampshire, which holds the first primary vote on Tuesday, and where his Christian-based politics may find less resonance.

However, the one-time rank outsider is now increasingly being mentioned as a possible vice-presidential pick.


----------



## dhukka (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> IS THIS A JOKE?  Huckabee to replace Bush?  Omigod!
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23005980-38198,00.html
> 
> ...




It is frightening that a bible beater can gain so much support. I don't know if that's a reflection of the weak opposition or a weak minded population or both.  Anyone who admits to believing every word of the bible should be committed. Sign of the times perhaps?


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



dhukka said:


> It is frightening that a bible beater can gain so much support. I don't know if that's a reflection of the weak opposition or a weak minded population or both.  Anyone who admits to believing every word of the bible should be committed. Sign of the times perhaps?




Well done Doris, you picked the winner of Iowa.

Huckabee, is a nice guy and that could translate to votes in the more important states, but they are alot less religous that in Iowa. I expect Romney and McCain will do better there.


----------



## Julia (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Huckabee, is a nice guy and that could translate to votes in the more important states, but they are alot less religous that in Iowa. I expect Romney and McCain will do better there.



I hope so. I didn't think anyone could be worse than George W. but this bloke seems even more wacky.


----------



## Doris (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Yahoooo!

D 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Friday, 4 January 2008 3:01 PM
To: Doris Freeman
Subject: Turn on your television



Doris --

We just won Iowa, and I'm about to head down to talk to everyone.

Democrats turned out in record numbers tonight, and independents and even some Republicans joined our party to stand together for change.

Thank you for everything you've done to make this possible.

Barack








Paid for by Obama for America

This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



dhukka said:


> It is frightening that a bible beater can gain so much support. I don't know if that's a reflection of the weak opposition or a weak minded population or both.  Anyone who admits to believing every word of the bible should be committed. Sign of the times perhaps?




It was pretty frightening when I talked with locals in Texas in Feb.  (Huston, Galveston)  They all said the US went into Iraq to stop the terrorists after 9/11.  One man raised his voice to me and denied oil had anything to do with it!  In this day and age!  
They loved Bush:  "He's a good bible-fearing man".

I don't feel comfortable with religious fanatics who preach kindness and love yet believe 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth'. Guess they're the old testament kind.  Gives me a shudder as I recall Richard Dawkins' doco on the rise of mass religious hysteria in the US.  They get lonely people who need to feel they belong in a group like sects of old.  They were so biased and unforgiving of people who were not 'in their group'. 'If you're not with us then you're against us!' Compassion?  It seemed so extremist.  I'm not saying Huckabee is one of these fanatics but maybe they would support him.

Good to see that the young are getting out to vote!  Do you know they vote on the second Tuesday of November?  This is a work day and unless their employer gives them time off to go vote, most people don't bother.  After work it's cold and they just want to get home!

David E Kelly has done a lot with his show Boston Legal... with Denny often reflecting what the world thinks of their country (government).  Don't know why they have it on so late here!  

But we shall see what happens next Wednesday... Tuesday US time.


----------



## cordelia (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The poorer people become the more they turn to religion to give them hope. There are many poor people in the US. When religion and soveriegnty become aligned it is a dangerous situation


----------



## wildkactus (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

it's going to be interesting in New Hampshire for the next couple of days, all that money and politicing.
This is going to be a long race home, we will see after a few more rounds where the money and support is.


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Do you know they vote on the second Tuesday of November?




Actually it is the Tuesday following the first Monday of November, normally the first week of November; as a bit of trivia the first sitting of the US Supreme Court is traditionally the first Monday of October.


----------



## profithunter (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What a great win by Huckabee! I listened to this guy talk with Kenneth Copeland the other week...he has great values and immense wisdom.  America needs some righteous leadership as times become more turbulent.  Like it or not church and state are becoming more enmeshed.


----------



## cordelia (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



profithunter said:


> What a great win by Huckabee! I listened to this guy talk with Kenneth Copeland the other week...he has great values and immense wisdom.  America needs some righteous leadership as times become more turbulent.  Like it or not church and state are becoming more enmeshed.




r u being sarcastic


----------



## Kimosabi (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



profithunter said:


> What a great win by Huckabee! I listened to this guy talk with Kenneth Copeland the other week...he has great values and immense wisdom. America needs some righteous leadership as times become more turbulent. Like it or not church and state are becoming more enmeshed.



God Help Us if your serious...

Only two Presidents who've won Iowa have gone on to be POTUS.

New Hampshire is where it really counts.

BTW, Ron Paul Raised 20 Million in the last quarter including two Money Bombs organised by the Grassroots, $4.2 Million on Guy Faulks days and $6 Million on the Boston Tea Party Day.

The Ron Paul Supporters got the $400,000/Month Blimp off the ground and they have just launched the Ron Paul Airforce...

Obama and Ron Paul won the recent MySpace Poll ==> http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23005353-1702,00.html


----------



## Julia (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



profithunter said:


> What a great win by Huckabee! I listened to this guy talk with Kenneth Copeland the other week...he has great values and immense wisdom.  America needs some righteous leadership as times become more turbulent.  Like it or not church and state are becoming more enmeshed.



I have the awful fear you are actually serious with this comment!
Please say it's not so.  This character wants to put everyone suffering from AIDS in quarantine!!!
This sort of religious quackery is just as dangerous as the Islamist fanatics.


----------



## Julia (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Yahoooo!
> 
> D
> 
> ...



Doris, do you live in Australia?  America? Canada?  You seem to have a very personal stake in this candidate.  If it's not an intrusive question, could you tell us why?


----------



## visual (4 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> I have the awful fear you are actually serious with this comment!
> Please say it's not so.  This character wants to put everyone suffering from AIDS in quarantine!!!
> This sort of religious quackery is just as dangerous as the Islamist fanatics.




This sort of religious quackery is just as dangerous as the Islamist fanatics 

Julia so glad you made that point, which unfortunately is a point that often goes over peoples' head.


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wildkactus said:


> it's going to be interesting in New Hampshire for the next couple of days, all that money and politicing.
> This is going to be a long race home, we will see after a few more rounds where the money and support is.




As an American journo said (from Iowa) on 7:30 report tonight, you can have a lot of money for fuel but if the car is not designed to run well, the fuel is of no use.  This was proven by the $millions of his own money that Romney spent in the last few weeks on this initial caucus.  Huckabee spent peanuts.

Hillary has spent $millions too!  Her donations come from factions and lobbyists whereas Barack has built his from almost 500,000 individuals' donations of $25 or more.  This was smart.  When he first announced he'd do this I thought that every donor would feel they own his campaign... be a part of it.  He has a set up where people agree to match donations of others and his outfit sets them up to talk to each other about why they donated.  This gives more momentum.  Brilliant strategies.

So the amount of money and the support do not necessarily go hand in hand.

I watched a movie (circa 1939) about Abe Lincoln the other night.  He was also a senator from Illinois.  He campaigned on unity.  Blacks and Whites for him... Blacks, Whites, Latinos, Asians and Blue and Red states for Obama: The United States of America.  

At the end of the film, when he was voted president, as he boarded a train to Washington, Abe Lincoln told the crowd he had to go and give the lobbyists what they'd paid for to get him there.  He found a balance in this of course as history tells us. My dread is this comparison with Lincoln and recently with the young JFK does not give him the ultimate in common with them.

Obama has always listened to and observed people as he tried to figure out where he fitted in the world.  He applied this in his compassion from when he was in law school.  He really listens and hears.  His experiences as a kid in Indonesia with his mother and step father imprinted on the mind of a boy who would one day change the world. His book "The Audacity of Hope" give an incredible empathy with and potential provision of, the needs of all ethnics.  I convinced Angus & Robertson bookstores to import it when I got back to Oz in March. It took a few months but they got it here. (I don't have shares in this company!  

I hope the Oprah episode where she interviewed Barack and Michelle in 2006 is found and aired here soon.  It would be good ratings now!  I saw a repeat of it in Canada in January last year.  I sat glued!  I had this awesome premonition that this man was special.  Unique.  He was what America needed in a president.  I signed up!  Unfortunately, as I'm not a US citizen nor a legal resident there, I cannot donate to his campaign. But my dream is that his dream comes to fruition.


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



cordelia said:


> The poorer people become the more they turn to religion to give them hope. There are many poor people in the US. When religion and soveriegnty become aligned it is a dangerous situation




And the evangelist movement has them. Millions of them. It gives their lives  meaning and purpose to feel they belong and are loved. (Dawkins' _God Delusion_) 

Bush got in last time when his machine convinced the bible basher belt to come  out to vote for the first time to stop a Democrat winning and thus not allowing abortion on demand, gay marriages, stem cell research...  

Less than half the eligible voters in the country turned out.

But let's hope that millions of normal people inspired by Barack make an effort to  get to the polls this time.  

It happened in Iowa...  It must happen in all states.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> And the evangelist movement has them. Millions of them. It gives their lives  meaning and purpose to feel they belong and are loved. (Dawkins' _God Delusion_)
> 
> Bush got in last time when his machine convinced the bible basher belt to come  out to vote for the first time to stop a Democrat winning and thus not allowing abortion on demand, gay marriages, stem cell research...




thanks for the commentary, doris (appreciated).

Hey ! - think you're Robinson Crusoe! 




> From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Friday, 4 January 2008 3:01 PM
> To: 2020hindsight
> Subject: Turn on your television
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Just a thought ...  we should have a poll - 
would you prefer that Aus had an electoral system like USA
"AND NOW THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL HEADS TO THE TASMANIAN PRIMARIES IN MARCH ..... ! "  

i.e. all those little idiosyncrasies
almost 100% up-to-minute poll driven
(now I'm being hypocritical and/or kidding myself that we aren't already there - almost, lol)     

costing the sort of money that would get half the world out of debt 
etc 

(to be honest, I'm damned if I know how they can make it so damned difficult).

Personally I think they'd do better to have a system like ours!! lol,
PARTICULARLY compulsory voting.  (nearly compulsory at least).


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Kimosabi said:


> God Help Us if your serious...
> 
> Only two Presidents who've won Iowa have gone on to be POTUS.
> 
> ...




Aah... but now Barack has the attention of those who have never heard of him... and there are many in the US who haven't.  Ostrich syndrome like Texans.  Now he's been noticed he has a chance to be POTUS!

I'd never heard of Ron Paul until DJZ and you posted him on this thread.  I checked out your videos. 
...thought he was a lot of fun, but a joke! 

But then I thought about his crazy plan to abolish income tax and the IRS and thought maybe it was not so crazy.  Even Huckabee said tonight he looked forward to abolishing the IRS.

I'm pretty sure the highest income tax level is 25%

But then... you buy something for $x and they add on 7.5% tax at the till.

When you dine out the food is huge and cheap.  But when you pay the check they add on the tax and of course the obligatory tip of 10 to 20% of the bill depending on the standard you thought of the service and the quality of the restaurant.  And most people eat out.
_
We_ know up front an item's total cost!

I used to resent and avoid tipping until I found out that wait staff get paid $5 an hour and the tip is their salary.  In fact, the IRS looks at the turnover of a restaurant and assumes the wait staff have earned 15% in tips and they have a system of checking staff's tax declarations to look for anomalies!  And they are billed for shortfalls even if they declare their records are correct.  The IRS would cost a lot to run.

My friends in Orange County own three houses.  One to live in, a cabin in Big Sur to escape to on weekends, and one they rent out.  When I was aghast that they got $4k a month in rent, my girlfriend outlined the local, state and federal taxes they have to pay to own a house!  A huge total!  And we just pay local council rates!  Just...  

The highest level of 25% income tax is minor compared to the total tax they gather as money is spent.  Like our GST!  

Alberta (Canada) gets massive royalties from oil and gas so they have no provincial tax. (They had a surplus in 2006 so early in 2007 they gave every citizen $500 each! Even new-borns! They are short of nurses and doctors but hey...) They do have to pay a Commonwealth GST (about 8%).  But all other provinces add on the state sales tax then the GST then you tip if you're in a restaurant.  And you pay land taxes (rates) according to the value of your house... not the unimproved value of the land as we do. (So people don't line their basements.)

btw... 
Q: what did the Albertan say to the Frenchman when he saw the Eiffel Tower?
A:  How many barrels do you get a day?  


Maybe Ron Paul's idea is not a joke.  It's hard for me (a boomer) to think outside the box easily.


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> thanks for the commentary, doris (appreciated).
> 
> Hey ! - think you're Robinson Crusoe!




lol...

Brilliant!

Thanks for the illustrious illustrations!  Clever!


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Thought for the day ... If Bill Clinton is related to Thomas Jefferson, does that mean that Hillary can claim to be related as well?

Bill Clinton:-


> "You can't say you love your country and hate your government."
> - William Jefferson Clinton (1995)
> 
> "I did NOT have sex with that woman"  ....




Thomas Jefferson:-


> "When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty"
> 
> "Be polite to all, but intimate with few.”
> "Honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.”




http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/t/thomas_jefferson.html
Jefferson on armies conquest war :-


> We did not raise armies for glory or for conquest.
> The spirit of this country is totally adverse to a large military force.
> Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government.
> I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind.




Jefferson on religion :-


> I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.
> 
> I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.
> 
> ...




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson


> Biographer Merrill Peterson summarizes Jefferson's theology:
> 
> “ First, that the Christianity of the churches was unreasonable, therefore unbelievable, but that stripped of priestly mystery, ritual, and dogma, reinterpreted in the light of historical evidence and human experience, and substituting the Newtonian cosmology for the discredited Biblical one, Christianity could be conformed to reason. Second, morality required no divine sanction or inspiration, no appeal beyond reason and nature, perhaps not even the hope of heaven or the fear of hell; and so the whole edifice of Christian revelation came tumbling to the ground.[42] ”
> 
> The Declaration of Independence incorporates concepts from Deism.Jefferson used deist terminology in repeatedly stating his belief in a creator, and in the United States Declaration of Independence used the terms "Creator" and "Nature's God." Jefferson believed, furthermore, it was this Creator that endowed humanity with a number of inalienable rights, such as "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." His experience in France just before the French Revolution made him deeply suspicious of Catholic priests and bishops as a force for reaction and ignorance. Similarly, his experience in America with inter-denominational intolerance served to reinforce this skeptical view of religion. In a letter to Willam Short, Jefferson wrote: "the serious enemies are the priests of the different religious sects, to whose spells on the human mind its improvement is ominous."[43]






> *He (Jefferson) made his own condensed version of the Gospels, omitting Jesus' virgin birth, miracles, divinity, and resurrection, primarily leaving only Jesus' moral philosophy, of which he approved. This compilation was published after his death and became known as the Jefferson Bible.
> 
> “ [The Jefferson Bible] is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call me infidel and themselves Christians and preachers of the gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw.[*46]






> His letters contain the following observations: "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government,"[51] and, "In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own."[52] "May it be to the world, what I believe it will be, (to some parts sooner, to others later, but finally to all), the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which monkish ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government."[53


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS Then again , maybe Bill just .. sorta ... misunderstood Jefferson ?  


> Jefferson :- Leave all the afternoon for exercise and recreation, which are as necessary as reading. …




THIS is the quote I really like and look forward to more than anything  - as it applies to GWB of course.  


> No man will ever carry out of the Presidency the reputation which carried him into it. - Thomas Jefferson




btw also, here's a quote that could apply around here sometimes  :-


> Resort is had to ridicule only when reason is against us. - Jefferson




final thought ... gee I wish the Dow wouldn't take this Iowa thing so bad !!   (down 167 or whatever lol)

I go to bed like a helpless pawn
and I sleep whilst the Dow “does it’s thing”
If the Dow goes down I wake forlorn
If up then I wake like a King
I wish that I knew what awaited at dawn
but prior to evening or nightly moon 
and I wish that I knew whether bloom or thorn
awaited – but knew the prior afternoon.


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Actually it is the Tuesday following the first Monday of November, normally the first week of November; as a bit of trivia the first sitting of the US Supreme Court is traditionally the first Monday of October.




You are perfectly correct A2A!  I stand corrected!  err... sit corrected.

From my soul-mate girlfriend in Orange County just now:

[Yeah, we’ll see how it goes.  Right now, we need competence.  I don’t think racism is our biggest issue in the US and I don’t think we are ready to compare Obama to Lincoln!  I worry more about the worldwide rise in Nazism than prejudice against the blacks.  Lots of dirt poor blacks AND whites.  More blacks are middle class than it appears from the news.  The middle class is pretty silent relative to the two extremes, which is a bigger problem.  Why in Australia are you concerned about US elections?  Our politics does not dictate your future as you have your own Prime Minister and are more closely linked to Britain.  Not that it doesn’t make for great entertainment… ] 

Debbie and I had not discussed UK vs US influence on Oz before tonight!  And we chat by email daily and by phone for a few hours most weekends!  How could this have escaped our chat?!

I've now let her know that I didn't think Obama was like Lincoln because he'll free the slaves (ethnics) and that we're in Afghanistan and Iraq!  That the NAB has raised their variable rate because of the US sub-prime fallout... That billions are wiped from our bourse after the Dow drops badly... that we don't really have much to do with Britain except the news on the royals and when they change PMs... that I can't wait for season 4 of Desperate Housewives ( I do adore British comedies on ABC) and the next run of Criminal Minds!  

Poor Debbie.  She's said all year that the US is ready for a female president but not a black one.  But he is but a man!  Debbie's opinion and hope is that Hillary will win and Obama will be his running mate.  I have to admit Hillary was VERY sporting tonight celebrating the belief that a Democrat will be the next president (even if it is Obama). She won my admiration for her front as the pain of coming third showed in her eyes.  She'll make a great running mate for Obama!


From a friend in Calgary at whose home I watched Barack on Oprah:

"Congratulations! 

Looks like it may be hucklesberry versus obama.

I haven't endorsed anyone, only because I haven't been up on it. Good on you Dori!"


Canadians don't really care.  They don't like Americans, just tolerate them in case they need them in a war one day!  
Sound like us?


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Why in Australia are you concerned about US elections?  Our politics does not dictate your future as you have your own Prime Minister and are more closely linked to Britain.  ...




lol
well tell her we'd kinda appreciate it if the US didn't declare war on people all the time ...

as "a refusal may offend" 

PS 
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock". - Jefferson

PS.  Tell her they can sign up to Kyoto is they like as well 
- might go a fraction of the way to helping the "Coalition of the Willing" crawl out from under our log with our collective reputation. 

PS
And unless the US does something about CO2 - and signing up - there won't be a future to "dictate". 

but say it nicely - don't give her a hard time ok? - not her fault if she's caught in the middle of a political "circus" lol


----------



## Superfly (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Why in Australia are you concerned about US elections?




Good question... Probably many answers but it sure gets all the lefties excited...like the past Labour leader Mark Latham, who mouthed off with his Labour left bubbies about President Bush, then meekly shook the Presidents hand in the Australian parliment, at least B Brown had the guts to stick to his game ( even though it was a shameful act of no respect )...anti-Americaism gets you some votes. There are many wars going on around the world at anytime, but its only if America is involed that the lefties in Australia care... but if the US President makes one comment on Australia, all hell breaks loose..even if President Bush was simply replying to a question from an Australian reporter. One only has to look at this thread to see how keen the left in Australia is to see a democrat win.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I could say ...
as my leftie mate Bob Menzies used to say ..
we should have spent more money on education...
but I won't


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Doris, do you live in Australia?  America? Canada?  You seem to have a very personal stake in this candidate.  If it's not an intrusive question, could you tell us why?




Hey Julia...

My son tells me I 'discharge'...  
I should make a NY resolution not to discharge!  

My best friend on the planet is American and lives in Orange County CA.  Second best friend is Canadian and lives in Calgary.  My favourite place on Earth is Lake Louise!  Summer or winter.

It's so easy with the internet and their cheap cell phone contracts to keep in touch.  Indeed I spend more time talking with them than with local friends!

I go up and spend time between them every second year. As a teacher I get 6 weeks summer holdays. Last Dec, Jan, Feb I was up there on long service leave.  OC... Calgary etc... then went to Texas for a few days en route a Caribbean cruise... then OC again.

I'd scan their newspapers each day to get a feel of what was happening and in Canada at least, news from Oz.  No-one watches TV (it's a waste of good conversation time) but one afternoon someone put it on and Oprah was just starting.  My friend said I should look at it... a repeat that had impressed her.. during their TV silly season. 

It was an interview with Barack and Michelle and I was instantly glued.  It was incredible how this guy presented himself and his philosophies and attitudes.  It's one thing for people to complain about situations but he made statements of concerns and then proposed ideas for solution.  I fell in love!  He is what I would call my ideal man.  Sensitive, considerate, funny, rational, articulate, compassionate, composed, decisive. Love his voice.  His mannerisms! He seemed so much more mature tonight... amazing how he's developed the aura of a statesman over this past year.

He was also a guest on Letterman.  I bought his book, _The Audacity of Hope_, and devoured it.  So easy to read as it was entertaining and enlightening.  I liked everything I read. He made me think. He made me care. I just had this instinct that this man could clean up the mess GWB has made over his time at the controls.  He doesn't need much sleep so he wrote his books at night whilst his family slept.  He treasures the time with his family.

I was impressed that he wrote his first book _Dreams From My Father_ to establish his identity. I bought it to find out more about his background.  I believed his experiences gave him a grounding that as US president, the leader of the free world, he could gain the world's respect, including of muslims.  He used the proceeds to pay off his college debts and buy a house in Chicago.  He was no 'silver bum'!  They lived frugally.

I googled him and listened to all his podcasts.  In OC in Feb, I signed up as a supporter and have been getting emails from him, his campaign manager and Michelle since.  About one a week.  I only wish I could donate to his campaign!  When I got requests to join rallies, I wish I could have gone to support.

The world is one village.  I feel such sympathy for Africans as they're run by dictators who are corrupt, from getting into power to fleecing their countries' resources and their people live in poverty and fear.  I studied up on Nigeria when my oldest daughter chose to marry a Nigerian.  My two gorgeous grand children are thus half Nigerian but I would not want them to visit their father's country of birth.  I feel anguish and no doubt Barack does too, about the Kenyan situation.  People sheltering in a church which became their funeral pyre in the aftermath of a purportedly democratic election!  

I really believe Obama has the potential to do what 'the most powerful nation' could do.  Foster world peace. When I think of the trillions the US owes China for funding the Iraq war I feel anguish for the waste of resources and lives.  The US has been a blatant bully under GWB.  Obama has rational ideas developed from a lifetime and a lifestyle of really listening to others' concerns and ideas and is the man to right the wrongs!  I hope he wins again next Wednesday our time!  
Now you know why I'm obsessive.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris]1. Why in Australia are you concerned about US elections?[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Superfly said:


> 2. Good question...
> 3. Probably many answers but it sure gets all the lefties excited .........
> 4. One only has to look at this thread to see how keen the left in Australia is to see a democrat win.





2020hindsight said:


> 5. as my leftie mate Bob Menzies used to say ..




1. and 2.  It's a ripper question ! 
3. should be for both left right and centre of thinking Aus observers  - although the good news is 
a) that whoever gets in next, the US public are much more wary of BS a la GWB. 
b) the aus public will never again blindly follow their leader into a war.

Superfly, 

is a "leftie" defined as "anyone left of you" ?
do you consider that would be roughly (two party preferred - as against first "primary" vote ) 50% of the aus population? 70%? 90%? 

have you ever considered voting something different to "other than leftie", let's call that "rightie"? centre for instance?

incidentally,  75 (house of reps) seats in 2007 won on primary vote, 75 won on preferences. 

4.  As for the topic ...   I still think this bloke (Ron Raul) would be the best of all ...  but I also suspect he has the proverbial "snowball's chance on earth, post 2050" - so atypical of US.   - since "Jimmy Who?" I guess.  

Having said that , on 16Dec last,  "supporters for Ron Paul raised the greatest on-line contribution to his campaign ($6mill) in one day - smashing the funddraising record of any republican candidate "

Herewith some graphs from that youtube - including the results of straw polls by state.  
The graph is only the popularity on Facebook apparently - Ron Paul miles out in front . 
(PS don;t confuse the colours for the graph and the map - Paul is doing well on the map straw poll result - as well as on the barchart facebook result. 

Sure he lost Iowa, but Iowa never liked him much it seems. - including dirty tricks by "Christians".   . This from 6 months ago. 
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2007/06/20/111439.php


> Iowa Presidential Debate Organizers Snub Ron Paul
> Few examples of the behind-the-scenes power exerting its authority over the people are more impactful than the deliberate stranglehold on the free speech of candidates running for office. Today, Ron Paul finds himself in the chokehold of a couple of Iowa organizations that have refused to allow his message to be heard on the same stage as other Republican candidates. Ironically, one of the groups claims to be Christian.




 Ron Paul Rising


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Note on that previous map that Iowa straw poll result was always for Huckabee. 

btw, this youtube seems to highlight the topics that decided Iowa - wheat, some local business closing,  blatant flattery to Iowans 

I can identify with an Iowan - I owe n I'll be paying it off for bludy years. 

 Iowa Presidential Panderfest '07: The Democrats


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris etc al 
Here's a theory ok?
That youtube is a major political infliuence these days - agreed ?
(even Johhy Howard had to concede that - tried it even - "Good morning fellow Australians"  lol )

That young people are more likely to go there 
That the big challenge in USA is to get people off their backsides and be bothered to vote (as against those "paid to vote" on a raft of selfish promises)

Now
Throw into that formula that Ron Paul is very popular on 
a) youtube
b) facebook
c) myspace.


(I'm guessing that applies for both democrats and republicans) (?) 
Hard to see him being ignored that's for sure.

(PS refer back to barchart two posts back)


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



visual said:


> This sort of religious quackery is just as dangerous as the Islamist fanatics
> 
> Julia so glad you made that point, which unfortunately is a point that often goes over peoples' head.





Yes, but unfortunately its the sort of stuff that US republican candidates get elected on.

I still think that McCain will make a come back. I hope so, at least as he is the most middle ground candidate out of the republican field.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> That young people are more likely to go there
> That the big challenge in USA is to get people off their backsides and be bothered to vote (as against those "paid to vote" on a raft of selfish promises)
> 
> Now
> ...




More on that Facebook poll, "Election pulse", and the trend to internet in elections (especially for youth / students - although Facebook originally set up at Harvard apparently fwiw)  :-  True,  Facebook seems to be 20 year olds (if that) ... but still relevant - and the future!  

I embolden the fact that you can Email it etc ! - which is the point I was trying to make. 
Gee I love the internet 

http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=515727


> Life Imitates Virtual Reality
> Facebook feature was the writing on the wall for Republicans this fall
> Published On Tuesday, November 14, 2006  2:46 AM
> By ALEXANDRA HIATT
> ...



 (more or less what you'd expect since this is the Harvard magazine lol )

Strange that kids would back Ron Paul -  graph already posted - refer Johnny Cash song "what is Truth" I guess 
- ALSO , for the democrats, Obama 60% beating Hillary 20% :- 
http://www.sci-tech-today.com/story.xhtml?story_id=11200DOT6LLC


> Elections 2.0: ABC News and Facebook Sponsor Debates
> By Frederick Lane
> November 27, 2007 4:53PM
> 
> Facebook's US Politics page offers a running summary of voter preference in a section of the page titled "Facebook Election Pulse." Among those who expressed a preference on Facebook for a *Democratic candidate, Barack Obama has a huge lead, nearly 60 percent, with Hillary Clinton second in the Facebook polls at just under 20 percent.* ...




Re Straw polls ...
Likewise the speed of voluntary posting straw poll results on line - e.g. for Ron Paul  :-
(allegedly something the other pollsters treat with derision  - EXCEPT that voting is likewise voluntary ) 

http://www.usastrawpolls.com/


> Ron Paul moves out in front of Fred Thompson with the most number of straw poll wins.
> 12/11/07
> Ron Paul is the candidate that is dominating straw poll after straw poll at the moment. But because Paul supporters are very reliable in posting Paul's straw poll victories we tend to be able to update Ron Paul victories faster than those of other candidates. i.e. Fred Thompson may have won straw polls that we are still unaware of at the moment.
> 
> ...



  Facebook.com Attitudes

 What is Truth? Johnny Cash

 "Hurt" by Johnny Cash 


> photo montage of 9/11 protesters, Iraq war, Soldiers, Family, set to music by Johnny Cash- Hurt
> support our troops , Ron Paul 08!!, preserve the constitution




PS have a look at the growth of Facebook  - 30 millions!!


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

who called it a circus lol?

This from Iowa address

 Obama and Oprah: The Moment is Now 

throws in the odd Biblical quote or two


----------



## Julia (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> I still think that McCain will make a come back. I hope so, at least as he is the most middle ground candidate out of the republican field.



Am I right in thinking he supports the Iraq war?


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris et al
> Here's a theory ok?
> That youtube is a major political infliuence these days - agreed ?
> 
> ...






Barack has many sites registered where you can be entertained all day and night and end up with educated authentic opinions of him:


http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=BarackObamadotcom

Road to Change:New Hampshire clip...  good to introduce him...   
Mandatory viewing for his views. Especially on his education policy.  
It was posted an hour ago. 


http://www.facebook.com/s.php?q=barackobamadotcom&n=-1&init=s

http://www.myspace.com/barackobama 

http://www.blackplanet.com/barack_obama/ 

http://www.barackobama.com/index.php 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/barackobamadotcom/

Dare to be inspired to check them all out!


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Barack has many sites registered where you can be entertained all day and night and end up with educated authentic opinions of him:
> 
> Dare to be inspired to check them all out!



Lol - wilco.

btw, I didn't mean to infer that Obama wasn't also doing well with the youth - in fact I posted that he is whipping Hillary in that respect (60% to 20%). 

Maybe he could do with Colin Powell as his running mate - just to add some experience 

Might try to learn more about that Facebook website and "pulse" polling results - maybe extract a similar "pulse graph" for Democrats  (??) if available.  My kids are in Facebook - share photos of various parties with their mates - but won't tell me their passwords lol.  Looks like I have to register there - no biggie.


----------



## Doris (5 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Electoral College Voting:

Map of number of college votes each state has:

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/electorl.htm 


USA Electoral College System

In each state, whichever party garners a majority of popular votes, regardless of how narrow the margin, wins all the electoral votes. By forcing residents in each state ultimately to vote as a block, the system is supposed to ensure that small states' interests are not drowned out by those of larger states.

In all, there are 538 electoral votes and the number given to each state reflects the sum of the representatives and senators it sends to Congress. It takes 270 or more electoral college votes to win the election.The biggest states - California (54), New York (33), Texas (32), Pennsylvania (23) - have the most impact on the result of the presidential election.

Usually, the result is nearly the same as it would have been if the election were direct. Yet the system has produced presidents who received a minority of the popular vote but a majority of the electoral votes, including Harry S Truman, Woodrow Wilson, Abraham Lincoln and John Quincy Adams.

President Bill Clinton was also elected in 1992 with only 43 percent of the popular vote, but 370 electoral votes. Several times in recent electoral college history, a relatively small shift in voter preference in key states would have reversed election outcomes.


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Am I right in thinking he supports the Iraq war?




Yes he does, as an ex-vietnam POW and a republican, it comes with the turf.

In the end I dont think it really matters who the republican nominee is as the dems will win the presidency, the house and maintain control of the senate.

FYI, for all of those excited by the result in Iowa, Obama only has a one delegate lead out of his win. The take out of Iowa is Obama 18 delegates, Edwards 17 and Clinton 16.


----------



## Doris (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> In the end I dont think it really matters who the republican nominee is as the dems will win the presidency, the house and maintain control of the senate.
> 
> FYI, for all of those excited by the result in Iowa, Obama only has a one delegate lead out of his win. The take out of Iowa is Obama 18 delegates, Edwards 17 and Clinton 16.





Our Westminster system is simple hey A2A! 


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hY742M_s1ttD_ycf2Zusn1o1fD3QD8TV78A80 

_Clinton Leads Delegate Race

By The Associated Press – 20 hours ago_

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton claimed one fewer delegate than Sen. Barack Obama in the Iowa caucuses Thursday night, but she still has the lead in the overall race for delegates because she has a commanding lead among superdelegates.

The Democratic National Committee has allotted states a total of 796 superdelegates to the party's national convention this summer. Those delegates, mainly members of Congress, other elected officials and DNC members, are free to support any candidate at the convention, regardless of the outcomes of the primaries and caucuses.

Most superdelegates contacted by the AP before the Iowa caucuses were undecided. However, among those who have endorsed a candidate, Clinton leads with 160, compared to 59 for Obama and 32 for former Sen. John Edwards.

Those numbers could change dramatically if Obama continues to win at the ballot box, which could lead to more endorsements by superdelegates.

An AP analysis of the Iowa caucus results showed Obama winning 16 delegates, followed by Clinton with 15 and Edwards with 14. In the overall race for delegates, Clinton leads with 175, followed by Obama with 75 and Edwards with 46.

A total of 2,025 delegates is needed to secure the Democratic nomination.


Understand caucuses and primaries:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/LIVING/studentnews/01/03/one.sheet.caucus.primary/


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Our Westminster system is simple hey A2A!




For sure our system is easier, but Americans will argue that at least all of them have a say in who will be their leader as opposed to Australia, where the leader is decided in a smoke filled back room and by 60,000 people in one electorate.

The picture from this campaign will change significantly over the next month. Personally I am not an Obama fan, simply because he is a populist, a feel good candidate - I think America needs more than just that at the moment.

There will be a decisive winner for the democrats; as for the republicans, my bet is that it will be so tight and with no clear winner that it will need to be hammered out on the floor of the convention.


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Gee I love the internet
> 
> What is Truth? Johnny Cash
> 
> "Hurt" by Johnny Cash





A2A With attitudes like this, (refer attached jpegs) you'd have to be right (predicting Democrat victory).   I wonder is Ron Paul a democrat in a republican's suit. (at least as far as human rights goes) 

PS How does that quote of GWB's (re Iraq) go again ? "I don't give a flying f*** what the polls say - I'm the president - and (I'll do it my way / I know best - whatever)   etc etc "


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Rather that leave with those rude gestures (GWB started it lol) 
maybe I should add a bit of decorum 

Doris - maybe ask your US friend can she identify with this song ? ...
"loves her country, sings its praises, but still not necessarily happy with what it has become, and longs for "something" better"  

 Anthem, from Chess, Tommy Körberg -Benny Andersson supervising


> Tommy Körberg in the studio recording this beautiful version.
> Chess is a musical with lyrics by Tim Rice and music by Björn Ulvaeus and Benny Andersson, formerly of ABBA.



PS hell,  I love this song    - (and I sure as hell identify with it  )


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> ...  but Americans will argue that at least all of them have a say in who will be their leader as opposed to Australia, where the leader is decided in a smoke filled back room and by 60,000 people in one electorate.



A2A
I seem to recall that both the recent elections in USA could / should have been challenged further in the courts  and/or by new elections in Florida etc 

I'm surprised you say that it's the Aussie system (rather than the US) that is clouded in smoke (and/or mirrors) ? 

As soon as Bush heard that the 2000 election came down to Florida - and his brother was Governor there - he claimed (informally) victory (Fahrenheit 9/11)  - yet it was totally line ball?    I just don't trust that US system (not that I fully uinderstand it) - just totally over-complicates things to my unexpert eye.


----------



## Doris (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> For sure our system is easier, but Americans will argue that at least all of them have a say in who will be their leader as opposed to Australia, where the leader is decided in a smoke filled back room and by 60,000 people in one electorate.
> 
> The picture from this campaign will change significantly over the next month. Personally I am not an Obama fan, simply because he is a populist, a feel good candidate - I think America needs more than just that at the moment.




But...  would Americans argue that they should have a system whereby, should the winner prove to be incompetent, the back room could vote him out?  Rather than have to lie in their bed...  

Costello didn't try it but he could have!

C'mon A2A!   It feels good to feel good!

America has had too long feeling the pain of GWB's _Schadenfreude!_

And the election is shrouded in Schadenfreude!

...a German word meaning 'pleasure taken from someone else's misfortune'.
It derives from Schaden (damage, harm) and Freude (joy).

The Buddhist concept of mudita, "sympathetic joy" or "happiness in another's good fortune," is an example of the opposite of schadenfreude.

Hillary's camp will give Obama plenty of airtime to advertise his policies over the next few days, as she challenges him to elucidate them, as she attempts to achieve Schadenfreude!


----------



## Doris (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Democratic Debate: Edwards Backs Up Obama

MANCHESTER, N.H. -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) cast off the magnanimous, above-the-fray approach she had used up until now in the campaign, aggressively challenging Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) and former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) over which of the three can truly bring about change.

The problem for Clinton is that Edwards has decided that his best chance to be one of the last two candidates standing is to knock her out in New Hampshire. Edwards' campaign believes that if he can do that -- perhaps with a close third place finish -- Clinton will be a non-factor and allow him to debate Obama over which man is the true change agent.

Edwards repeatedly cited his agreement with Obama and savaged Clinton as a defender of the status quo, making it very difficult -- as we noted earlier -- for Clinton to score a direct hit on Obama. Edwards' argument throughout the debate was that while he and Obama differ over the proper method to bring about change, he and Obama are far more capable to bring about that change than Clinton.

Obama seemed to come into this debate determined to show that he is presidential and he did that nicely. He avoided engaging Clinton on a personal level and insisted that their policy disagreements were legitimate and fair game. That is the strategy of a confident candidate.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/?hpid=topnews
Posted at 10:45 PM ET, 01/ 5/2008


----------



## Doris (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

NH Debate: 

_Health Care:_

Challenged on health care, Obama acknowledged that he has said if he were designing a system from scratch, he would set up a single-payer system that would give coverage to all. He said that is impractical, given the current system in which so many people receive their insurance from employers.

Obama's health care plan relies on government financial incentives and cost-cutting to help the uninsured afford coverage. But unlike Clinton and Edwards, he does not require adults to buy coverage or pay a penalty if they fail.

"I disagree with that because as I go around, I don't meet people who avoid getting health care. The problem is they can't afford it," he said.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g0_Gqy82V2iM8iwU-FPjci9kFX9QD8U04PU80 
Released 1 hour ago.


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> A2A
> I seem to recall that both the recent elections in USA could / should have been challenged further in the courts  and/or by new elections in Florida etc
> 
> I'm surprised you say that it's the Aussie system (rather than the US) that is clouded in smoke (and/or mirrors) ?
> ...




The most recent election was not likely to be challenge as the result in Ohio was clear cut.

Florida was decided by the Supreme Court as it should have been and this would also be the case should an Australian election be contested. Bush did win and arguments about hanging chads, was irrelevant.

CNN actually called the election for Bush based on what they thought the result in Florida was.

In Australia, our only contribution to electing a Prime Minister is by electing an entire mob. We have no say in who is going to be the leader of any party; at least in the US everyone has that opportunity.


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

A2A,
I thought they were more controversial than that - 
either way you can't deny that they were controversial to a significant degree.

Ahhh - good point about picking the leader.

so, lol
We need another thread maybe on the best proposal for the next republican debate / referendum for aussies to select their first President


----------



## ormond (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Latest Centrebet odds-President winner.
Clinton,Hillary-2.50
Obama,Barack-2.50
Giuliani,Rudolph-8.00
Mccain,John-8.50
Romney,Mitt-12.00
Huckabee,Mike-14.00
Bloomberg,Michael-17.00
Paul,Ron-26.00
Edwards,John-34.00
Gore,Al-41.00
Thompson,Fred-44.00
Rice,Condoleezza-151.00


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ormond said:


> Latest Centrebet odds-President winner.
> Clinton,Hillary-2.50
> Obama,Barack-2.50
> Giuliani,Rudolph-8.00
> ...




Would not mind having a bit of that McCain.....anyone but Giuliani and Thompson.

Gore and Rice are in there just to make it interesting, not even candidates.

Doris, I suspect we will have a referendum on the republic sometime over the next 3 years. If Rudd is really smart he should tie it in to  the next election eg. vote Labor and we will give you a vote on a republic or if he can (not sure it is constitutionally possible) have it at the same time as the election and tag his campaign with the whole vote yes proposition.


----------



## Doris (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> The most recent election was not likely to be challenge as the result in Ohio was clear cut.
> 
> Florida was decided by the Supreme Court as it should have been and this would also be the case should an Australian election be contested. Bush did win and arguments about hanging chads, was irrelevant.
> 
> CNN actually called the election for Bush based on what they thought the result in Florida was.




One SC used lack of counting time to veto the recount!

btw...
Q:  How do you save a lawyer from drowning?
A:  Take your foot off his head!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000

United States presidential election, 2000 Florida results

At approximately 7:50 pm EST on election day, 10 minutes before the polls closed in the largely Republican Florida panhandle, some television news networks declared that Gore had carried Florida's 25 electoral votes. They based this prediction on exit polls. However, in the actual vote tally Bush took a wide early lead in Florida, and by 10 pm the networks had retracted their prediction of a Gore victory and placed Florida back into the "undecided" column. At approximately 2:30 am, with some 85% of the votes counted in Florida and Bush leading Gore by more than 100,000 votes, the networks declared that Bush had carried Florida, and had been elected President. However, most of the remaining votes to be counted in Florida were located in three heavily Democratic counties - Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach - and as their votes were reported Gore began to gain on Bush. By 4:30 am Gore had narrowed Bush's margin to less than 2,000 votes, and the networks retracted their predictions that Bush had won Florida and the Presidency. Gore, who had privately conceded the election to Bush, now withdrew his concession and announced that he would wait for a recount in Florida before any further action. By the morning of Wednesday, November 8 Bush's margin in Florida had dwindled to about 500 votes, narrow enough to trigger a mandatory recount in that state. In addition, Gore asked for hand recounts in four counties (Broward, Miami Dade, Palm Beach, and Volusia), as provided under Florida state law. This set into motion a series of recounts (portions by machine, and portions by hand), questions about portions of the Florida vote, and finally lawsuits.

These ultimately resulted in a December 12 7-2 United States Supreme Court decision that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional, as well as a 5-4 United States Supreme Court decision that ended the Florida recounts and allowed Florida to certify its vote. The vote was certified by Katherine Harris, the Republican Secretary of State who had been the Florida co-chair of Bush's own campaign. Because Bush's younger brother, Jeb Bush, was the governor of Florida, there were allegations that Harris and Bush had somehow manipulated the election to favor the governor's brother. Bush's margin of victory in Florida was officially placed at 537 votes (out of more than 5.8 million cast), making it the closest presidential election in the history of the state. The nine members of the Supreme Court voted along ideological lines in the split decision with the two usually conservative swing voters (Justices O'Connor and Kennedy) siding with the three conservatives (Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justices Scalia, and Thomas) outvoting the Court's four liberals (Justices Ginsburg, Souter, Stevens, and Breyer). Due to all of these factors, the 2000 presidential campaign has become one of the most controversial, and disputed, elections in American history.

 Post recount

After Florida was decided, Texas Governor George W. Bush became President-elect and began forming his transition committee. In a speech on December 13, Bush said he was reaching across party lines to bridge a divided America, stating that "the President of the United States is the President of every single American, of every race, and every background."

On January 6, 2001, a joint-session of Congress met to certify the electoral vote. Twenty members of the House of Representatives, most of them Democratic members of the Congressional Black Caucus, rose one-by-one to file objections to the electoral votes of Florida. However, according to an 1877 law, any such objection had to be sponsored by both a representative and a senator, and no senator would co-sponsor these objections. Therefore, Gore, who was presiding in his capacity as President of the Senate, ruled each of these objections out of order.

Bush took the oath of office on January 20, 2001.

In the aftermath of the election, independent recounts were conducted by The Miami Herald and USA Today, concluding that Bush would have won in all legally requested recount scenarios, and in all other scenarios except for "a fresh recount in all counties using the most generous standards,” which would have gone to Gore.

Additionally, The Media Consortium hired the National Opinion Research Center to examine 175,010 ballots that were never counted in Florida. The investigation took 8 months and cost $900,000. Their results showed that the winning candidate varied based on the method used to include or interpret ballots. For cases where all of their examiners agreed, the nine different recount scenarios resulted in Bush prevailing four times, and Gore prevailing in the other five. Ironically enough, under the recount rules initially requested by Gore, Bush would have won, and under the rules requested by Bush, Gore would have won.

National results

Though Gore came in second in the electoral vote, he received 543,816 more individual votes than Bush. Gore failed to win the popular vote in his home state, Tennessee, which both he and his father had represented in the Senate. Had he won Tennessee, he could have won the election without Florida. Gore was the first major-party presidential candidate to have lost his home state since George McGovern lost South Dakota in 1972.

Electronic voting

Since the Presidential Election was so close in Florida, the United States Government and state governments pushed for election reform to be prepared by the 2004 United States Presidential Election. Many of Florida's year 2000 election night problems stemmed from voting machine issues like rejected ballots, "hanging chad", and the possibly confusing "butterfly ballot". A proposed solution to these problems was the installation of modern electronic voting machines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butterfly_ballot


The United States Supreme Court voted 7–2 to end the recount on the grounds that differing standards in different counties constituted an equal protection violation, and 5–4 that no new recount with uniform standards could be conducted within the time available. The 7–2 ruling was more important as the votes had already been counted several times with uniform standards. However, the 5–4 decision became extremely controversial due to the partisan split in the court's 5–4 decision and the majority's irregular instruction that its judgment in Bush v. Gore should not set precedent but should be "limited to the present circumstances". Gore publicly disagreed with the court's decision, but conceded the election.


----------



## Julia (6 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> The picture from this campaign will change significantly over the next month. Personally I am not an Obama fan, simply because he is a populist, a feel good candidate - I think America needs more than just that at the moment.



Agreed.  There is rather more to being President than emotional rhetoric and charisma.  I can't help getting the sense that many people, including some ASF members, are getting caught up in the almost hysteria of Obama, and thus losing their perspective and objectivity.


----------



## Doris (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Doris, should he win in Iowa all it offers is focus of the press, it offers the winner credibility. Many have won Iowa and not even come close to winning the nomination. The exception will be Hillary - she will win Iowa....just.
> 
> Should Hillary win the nomination he will not be the Vice Presidential candidate - guaranteed.




After the debate in NH this morning it seems like John Edwards will be Barack's running mate!

Hillary is o u t...  her claws have torn her chances.  

People want a leader who is nurturing.


John McCain will be their adversary in November.  But who will be his running mate?


----------



## Doris (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Agreed.  There is rather more to being President than emotional rhetoric and charisma.  I can't help getting the sense that many people, including some ASF members, are getting caught up in the almost hysteria of Obama, and thus losing their perspective and objectivity.




Now don't you worry about that!
It gets mighty uncomfortable for people who sit on the fence.

Sir Joh Bjelkie-Petersen


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> After the debate in NH this morning it seems like John Edwards will be Barack's running mate!
> 
> Hillary is o u t...  her claws have torn her chances.
> People want a leader who is nurturing.
> ...



They pick their running mate early yes? 
Based (partly) on funding potential maybe?

(PS Vote for Obama , hic - he'll build a dish tillery 
life's a bitch, hic  - and so ish Hillary  ) 



Doris said:


> Now don't you worry about that!
> It gets mighty uncomfortable for people who sit on the fence.
> 
> Sir Joh Bjelkie-Petersen




some classics (you never knew when he was spoonerising or being punny)

eg You can lead a horse to drink but you can't make him water?


----------



## chops_a_must (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Agreed.  There is rather more to being President than emotional rhetoric and charisma.  I can't help getting the sense that many people, including some ASF members, are getting caught up in the almost hysteria of Obama, and thus losing their perspective and objectivity.




I stand by everything I have said about him. He is a fraud. Even as an academic he was a fraud. Hopefully the campaign shows him to be the used car salesman he is.

If he does win the candidacy, I may be in a position I never thought I would be in - barracking for a Republican win! Me?


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

speaking of running mates 
I remember when Ge Bush (senior) chose Dan Quayle - now that HAD to have something to do with funding potential !!

either that or trying to win over the farmers who grew potatoooees

ps chops - must admit I don't feel I know the man yet (despite a couple of videos watched)
But I think I know Oprah Winfrey 

(PS better do Doris the courtesy of watching more of those videos before I decide  - but I kinda wish he had someone like Colin Powell as running mate - as if lol)


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> After the debate in NH this morning it seems like John Edwards will be Barack's running mate!
> 
> Hillary is o u t...  her claws have torn her chances.
> 
> ...




If Obama, should he win, will not have Edwards as his running mate.

It would be very, very unusual to have two contenders for nominee for President take the role of Pres. and VP candidates. The last time I can think of this happening was with Kennedy and Johnson. The main reason for this is that there are way to many quotes from the primaries of one bashing the other; bit hard selling a team to the entire population when you have previously slagged off at the other.

Honestly, I still think Guiliani will be a force to reckon with over the next month....watch this space/thread.


----------



## Doris (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Released 30 minutes ago:

NASHUA, N.H. ”” Amid frenetic last-minute campaigning, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll finds the onetime front-runners in New Hampshire lagging as Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain have surged to leads before Tuesday's primary.

Obama vaulted to a 13 percentage-point advantage over New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton three weeks after they were tied here. McCain gained a four-point edge over Mitt Romney, a former governor of neighboring Massachusetts who has campaigned almost as a favorite son.

The poll results spotlight the phenomenal rise of the 46-year-old senator from Illinois, who would be the first African-American nominated by a major party for president, and the 71-year-old senator from Arizona whose cash-short campaign was dismissed as all but over last summer.

"New Hampshire always has this insurgency bias," says Joe Keefe, a former state Democratic chairman who backs Obama. "The voters decide they're going to upset the conventional wisdom and, given the opportunity, they will change the page of history."

Huckabee ranks third in New Hampshire. Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani is tied with Texas Rep. Ron Paul for fourth.

In the poll, taken Friday through Sunday:

•McCain and Romney divide Republicans about evenly. McCain owes his lead to independents, who back him by 2-1 and can vote in either primary. In a USA TODAY poll in December, Romney had led McCain by seven points overall.

•Obama and Clinton divide Democrats evenly, but he leads by 2-1 among independents. Female voters split between them equally; he leads by 2-1 among men. 

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-01-06-poll-newhampshire_N.htm


----------



## Doris (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> I stand by everything I have said about him. He is a fraud. Even as an academic he was a fraud. Hopefully the campaign shows him to be the used car salesman he is.




Hey Chops!
Your passion is fired.  Great to see you are not prickled by the fence barbs! 

However, mere innuendo mate...  

One of my biggest challenges, as a high school teacher, is to develop students' skills in explaining and justifying how they reached a conclusion. e.g. Pluto is not a planet.  OK... justify this! 

Even in maths they must show the working out and not merely the correct answer or they will not past the test.

btw:
Innuendo:  an indirect intimation about a person or thing, esp of a derogatory nature.


----------



## Doris (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Barack Obama on education*

On No Child Left Behind law
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was not in office when Congress passed an education bill in 2001 that requires states to annually test students, known as the No Child Left Behind law. He has said it is a well-intentioned attempt to erase long-standing achievement gaps between white and minority students, but he believes the Bush administration ruined it through inflexible application. Obama wants more money for schools and to move away from traditional testing to judge schools.

On making college affordable
Obama has been pushing for an increase in the federal Pell grant awards that students can get to pay for college. That increase was part of a wide-ranging college funding bill that the Senate passed in September 2007. Obama was a co-sponsor of legislation that President Bush signed in September 2007 lowering fees and cutting interest rates for student loans by half, to 3.4%, and increasing Pell grant awards from $4,310 in 2007 to $5,400 by 2012. 

Other education priorities
Obama says he wants to improve teacher quality and increase pay, especially for those teachers who also mentor students or boost achievement. Obama has said, however, that improvements in achievement shouldn’t be based “on some arbitrary test score.”  
(THIS IS CURRENT THINKING IN AUSTRALIA!)

*Barack Obama on abortion:*

On Roe v. Wade
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has said a woman's right to decide how many children to have and when is one of the nation's most fundamental freedoms. Obama opposes a constitutional amendment or federal law banning abortion.

At a forum in July conducted by the Planned Parenthood Action Fund, Obama implied that he would appoint Supreme Court nominees who support Roe v. Wade, the 1973 decision legalizing abortion.

"With one more vacancy on the court, we could be looking at a majority hostile to a woman's fundamental right to choose for the first time since Roe v. Wade, and that is what is at stake in this election," Obama said. "It is time for a different attitude in the White House. It is time for a different attitude in the Supreme Court."

In the U.S. Senate, Obama voted in 2005 to minimize cuts to Medicaid, a move that Planned Parenthood said would prevent cuts to services such as family planning.

In 2006, Obama voted against making it a federal crime for anyone other than a parent to accompany a minor across state lines to get an abortion. The bill did not become law.

The National Right to Life Committee, which opposes abortion rights, said Obama never voted with the group's interests in 2005 and 2006. Planned Parenthood, which supports abortion rights, said Obama voted 100% of the time with the group's interests in 2006.


*Barack Obama on Iraq:*

On going to war
Democrat Barack Obama was an Illinois state senator in 2002 when Congress voted to give President Bush the authority to use military force against Iraq. “I don’t oppose all wars. “What I am opposed to is a dumb war,” Obama said at the time. He predicted that even a successful war in Iraq would require “a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at an undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences,” and “fan the flames of the Middle East.”

On Bush's troop increase
Obama, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was opposed to Bush’s plan in January 2007 to temporarily build up U.S. troop levels in Iraq to combat sectarian violence and help Iraqis achieve independence. In September 2007, Obama also criticized Bush’s proposal to withdraw those additional troops by summer 2008 but leave behind about 130,000 forces. “He is bound to the same failed course that we have seen for the last several years,” Obama said of Bush.

On moving forward
Obama proposed in September 2007 to remove all U.S. combat troops in Iraq by the end of 2008. He called for a “new approach” on achieving reconciliation among the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds in Iraq. Obama’s plan also would escalate diplomatic efforts to engage Iraq’s neighbors and the United Nations to help stabilize Iraq, and provide more humanitarian aid to the war-torn country.

*Barack Obama on immigration:*

On border security
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said in 2006 that dealing with border security is “only one side of the equation.” He voted for final passage of a bill in September 2006 that called for 700 miles of fencing along the U.S.-Mexican border, after opposing a version in May of that year. The measure, signed into law by President Bush, was an alternative to a broader approach on border security and immigration that died from lack of consensus.

On immigration overhaul
Obama supported the 2007 comprehensive bill that would have established a “guest-worker” program, provided a path to citizenship for most of the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants in the USA, emphasized worker skills for visas instead of family ties and beefed up border security. That measure never got an up-or-down vote, but Obama voted for a similar bill in 2006.

“For the millions here illegally but otherwise playing by the rules, we must encourage them to come out of hiding and get right with the law,” he said on his campaign website. That means, he said, paying a fine, learning English, not committing any crimes and then going “to the back of the line” to apply for citizenship.

Obama also has advocated that employers need to do more to check the legal status of their workers. His plan calls for a new employment eligibility verification system, according to his campaign website.

http://asp.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/issues.aspx?i=4&c=12


----------



## Doris (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> I stand by everything I have said about him. He is a fraud. Even as an academic he was a fraud. Hopefully the campaign shows him to be the used car salesman he is.
> 
> If he does win the candidacy, I may be in a position I never thought I would be in - barracking for a Republican win! Me?




Onya mate! 

Barracking is the waytogo!   

... Baracking ?


----------



## ithatheekret (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

No child left behind .........

Which pollie hasn't come out with that one ?

Load of codswallop .


----------



## roland (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well, Bush is certainly past his use by date. A new leader with new ideas generally does good things for an economy.


----------



## Doris (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ithatheekret said:


> No child left behind .........
> 
> Which pollie hasn't come out with that one ?
> 
> Load of codswallop .




Well Bush did!
At least it attempted to redress inequity!

Note:

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was not in office when Congress passed an education bill in 2001 that requires states to annually test students, known as the No Child Left Behind law.

Obama criticized it too!

_He has said it is a well-intentioned attempt to erase long-standing achievement gaps between white and minority students, but he believes the Bush administration ruined it through inflexible application. Obama wants more money for schools and to move away from traditional testing to judge schools._


----------



## trading_rookie (7 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Americans have already had a black President...Bill Clinton (source: Meet the Press, Channel 7) 

Obama would be more appealing to blacks if he could dunk! (source: David Letterman Show, Channel 10)


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (8 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well Doris, the moment of truth is soon to arrive. Looks like your guy has the momentum and could well pull off an upset over the next few weeks.

Must say and dont want to wish him ill, but I would not like to be him when campaigning. I think it is only a matter of time before a crazy, particularly as he heads south, tries to put a bullet in him.

I think he would be under serious threat as he becomes a more likely nominee.


----------



## Julia (8 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hillary Clinton imo has reduced her chances significantly by being almost tearful and clearly upset in a broadcast today.

Lays herself open to accusations of "an emotional woman", the last thing which is appropriate  in a President.


----------



## sam76 (8 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Hillary Clinton imo has reduced her chances significantly by being almost tearful and clearly upset in a broadcast today.
> 
> Lays herself open to accusations of "an emotional woman", the last thing which is appropriate  in a President.




Agreed. Perhaps a last ditch effort before the polls?

Who knows what spin doctors come up with these days!?


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Hillary Clinton imo has reduced her chances significantly by being almost tearful and clearly upset in a broadcast today.
> 
> Lays herself open to accusations of "an emotional woman", the last thing which is appropriate  in a President.




I felt so sorry for her!  But then I watched her eyes and they were conniving. Devious.  Was it a ploy for women's votes?
As if one might then vote for her as she was the under dog and they felt sorry for her??

I agree Julia!
How could she?  Women are emotional.  But a president has to keep it together... or at least be seen to.


I think NH is 9 (?) hours ahead of us... the day before...  (California is 6 hrs ahead... the day before)

All towns with fewer than 100 residents were allowed to open their polls at midnight.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gig84Ukt0T-BpyFQGC6Ll5aLYUBg 

Polls opened in the tiny resort village of Dixville Notch, New Hampshire at midnight (0500 GMT), and closed minutes later after all 17 of its registered voters had cast ballots, in keeping with an eccentric tradition.

Results written on a board showed Obama with seven votes; former senator with John Edwards with two; and New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson one, on the Democratic side.

McCain was the Republican victor with four votes, while Romney took two and former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani, one.

There were no votes for Clinton or Iowa Republican victor Mike Huckabee, who has vaulted to pole position among Republicans nationally in the latest polls.


----------



## wayneL (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> I stand by everything I have said about him. He is a fraud. Even as an academic he was a fraud. Hopefully the campaign shows him to be the used car salesman he is.
> 
> If he does win the candidacy, I may be in a position I never thought I would be in - barracking for a Republican win! Me?



Haven't really followed him much, but I've got my doubts about him too. The hyperbole emanating from this chap is chunderous.

But a republican? Only Ron Paul will do. If McCain or Guiliani get up, I'm shifting to Pluto.


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Well Doris, the moment of truth is soon to arrive. Looks like your guy has the momentum and could well pull off an upset over the next few weeks.
> 
> Must say and dont want to wish him ill, but I would not like to be him when campaigning. I think it is only a matter of time before a crazy, particularly as he heads south, tries to put a bullet in him.
> 
> I think he would be under serious threat as he becomes a more likely nominee.




Yes A2A... a real concern!

From latest Washington Post:  (would make supporters more circumspect of people around them?!)

The Illinois senator's security now rivals that of President Bush, with a dozen Secret Service agents wearing dark suits and earpieces leading bomb-sniffing dogs through event venues, sweeping all equipment brought by journalists and flanking the candidate as he plunges into crowds of supporters.

"For many black supporters, there is a lot of anxiety that he will be killed, and it is on people's minds," said Melissa Harris-Lacewell, a Princeton University professor of political science and contemporary black culture.

"You can't make a prediction like this ”” like he has 'a 50 percent chance of getting shot.' But the greater his visibility and the greater his access to people, there is a danger," she said.

Another black presidential candidate, Jesse Jackson, drew Secret Service protection because of violent threats during his campaigns in the 1980s. And former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell ruled out a presidential run in part because his wife expressed fears he would be assassinated.

Mr. Obama, who reportedly resisted asking for Secret Service protection but personally requested a detail of agents after friends insisted, has been under federal watch since early last year. No one will say whether he has received an explicit death threat ”” his campaign said yesterday only that "we don't comment on security" ”” but officials have tracked racist chatter on white-supremacist Web sites.

The Internet is rife with theories that someone may try to assassinate the senator ”” typing into Google "assassinate Obama" brings up more than 2,000 hits. Anyone from Islamist terrorists to racist Americans to operatives of Halliburton and Blackwater are speculated about, but other, more nefarious Web sites are for real, according to reports from the Associated Press.

At his first morning event yesterday, at least a dozen plainclothes Secret Service agents, most with yellow pins on their lapels, stood guard in and around the Palace Theater, and, unlike other candidates touring the state, uniformed police were also on hand. The theater was emptied early so bomb-detecting dogs could sweep through, and journalists covering the event were corralled for inspection.

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080107/NATION/415598644/1001


----------



## ithatheekret (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Crocodile tears .

I remember this bloke called Bob , he could ball for the camera .......


he wasn't going to leave kids behind , no child in poverty , blah , blah , blah .

I know what the tears were about too .


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I'm sure she meant to pass this on to you 2020!    ... and to you A2A  
This came in 20 minutes ago (QLD is an hour behind you guys down south!)
________________________________________
From: Michelle Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, 8 January 2008 11:19 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: What it looks like in New Hampshire

Doris --

The lines have been out the door and around the block.

Undecided voters are coming out of our events decided.

I've been in New Hampshire a few days, and the crowds and energy have been incredible. 

You can feel it in our campaign offices and at rallies all across the state -- this is something more than a typical political campaign.

Today is Primary Day, and our momentum has hit New Hampshire. Thousands of people are realizing that fundamental change is within reach. The improbable is now possible. 

It's critical that we build a national campaign infrastructure in the next few weeks if we are going to compete.

My husband is a special leader. He has an amazing ability to bring people to the table and create real change.

But he is the first to admit that this is bigger than him.

Americans are ready for change and ready to work together to make it happen.

It's humbling and inspiring, but more than anything, it's an awakening for each one of us.

It's a wonderful thing to see what's happening here in New Hampshire.

But we are taking nothing for granted, working hard to get every last vote out today in the Granite State, and we have to keep the momentum going in Nevada, South Carolina, and the 22 states on Feb 5.

We can't let up for a minute.

Iowa was a good beginning. But the pace has intensified, the campaign has become more fluid, and our challenges have become even more complex.

It's going to take a commitment from each one of us to make this happen. 

Thank you for all you have done for the campaign -- we will be thinking of you tonight in New Hampshire.

Michelle

P.S. -- Check out these photos from events around New Hampshire:





Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Haven't really followed him much, but I've got my doubts about him too. The hyperbole emanating from this chap is chunderous.
> 
> But a republican? Only Ron Paul will do. If McCain or Guiliani get up, I'm shifting to Pluto.





lol...

You'll be _off the planets_ all together eh!   

(I'm taking it that you're being facetious as Pluto is no longer considered a planet)

Desperate times in the US atm...
  ( don't we know it with $37 billion wiped from our bourse yesterday alone!)

Recession fears could be realized by November although their RB seems to be doing its utmost to avert it.

I have to admit that I don't know much about Barack's economic policies except for removing the high tax on big income earners that Bush increased.  (and supporting college students with loans)

Less tax does mean though that they'll then risk making more money by investing more in expanding their businesses and thus increase employment!  

Good start as working people are better able to pay their bills and generate more production...

(Hillary has been rightly stressing the need to rebuild the middle class)

I think his immigration policy is propitious.  
If the 12 million illegals _come out_ and pay their fine, seek and achieve residency status, they will earn the going rate instead of the meager cash-in-hands they get now.  Then they can pay their medical bills (free for emergency cases e.g. maternity, by law) as well as more consumer goods and the money goes around in the cycle.  

Except a lot of Americans will resent having to pay more for their illegal alien employees!


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

For those who have not seen the video:

"I Got a Crush...On Obama" By Obama Girl

a bit cheeky!  



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wKsoXHYICqU&NR=1


Lovitt!

or...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENCRu-2d35g&watch_response 

Obama Girl Returns for Iowa! (Why Obama Won)


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

 The Chaser - US opinions on Iraq and Obama (from May)



> Charles Firth from "The Chaser's War on Everyth.
> Added: May 09, 2007
> Charles Firth from "The Chaser's War on Everything" asks ordinary Americans some questions about the Iraq war. Apparently the war was Barack Obama's fault.




check out between 0m55s and 1m30s
"Which Iraqi is most responsible for the country's upheaval ?"

Yuseph Islam (alias Cat Stevens)
Osama Bin Laden 
Barack Obama 

Obama responsible for the war etc 
Good news - the average ordinary American seems to have learnt a lot more about Obama since May  

 Hillary Clinton on the Chaser 


> Presidential hopeful Hillary Clint gets humiliated by a cigar wielding Charles Firth on the Chaser's War on Everything


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Hillary Clinton imo has reduced her chances significantly by being almost tearful and clearly upset in a broadcast today.
> 
> Lays herself open to accusations of "an emotional woman", the last thing which is appropriate  in a President.




Bit harsh Julia. Did you know that only moments before a few men were heckling her shouting "Iron my shirts", a clear reference to her being a female and that conservative view that women should stick to what they were made for.


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS A little known fact about Obama - did you know that he is a smoker!

By my reckoning, I dont think the US has had a smoker as President since FDR.

Barack brakes down another barrier!


----------



## Julia (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Bit harsh Julia. Did you know that only moments before a few men were heckling her shouting "Iron my shirts", a clear reference to her being a female and that conservative view that women should stick to what they were made for.




You've misunderstood what I meant.  Personally I absolutely understand how she must feel.  But I'm saying that she will be judged as "just a bloody emotional woman" with the obvious sequelae that you can't have someone emotional running America.


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Y'all I was in Huston in February and every local I spoke to said they would never vote for a black man.  In California, one woman I met said she wouldn't vote for Obama because he was a muslim and he smoked!
> 
> I really believe he will unite his country and the world.  Maybe even the muslims?   Hope is not audacious!




I put this on the first page of this thread A2A.

But how did YOU find out he was a smoker?   
Hey... Hillary hasn't condemned him for this (yet)!

... of course he is not a muslim though... his father was and his mother shunned religions citing their history of persecution.  He decided there was something missing in his life as he worked for the poor and unemployed in church groups in Chicago and spent time years ago checking them all out. He decided on joining the Church of Christ.  He is a Christian.  But not an evangelical.  I'm not religious but _thank God_!


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I put this on the first page of this thread A2A.
> 
> But how did YOU find out he was a smoker?
> Hey... Hillary hasn't condemned him for this (yet)!
> ...





I have been following the guy since he won his senate spot a couple of years ago. I remember, seeing a photo of him in a swimsuit and then a few months after he won read a story how he was at a meeting and stopped it so he could get a hit of nicotine.

I mention the swimsuit photo because at the time all the women were saying how good he loooked and I thought about the relatioship between keeping your weight down and smoking.

Do a google, the photo would still be floating around - you could print it off and stick it on the ceiling above your bed.


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

At about 2pm our time:  (3pm for southerners!)

Complete results
Democrats           Vote	      %             Del
Clinton               82,068            39             8
Obama               75,495            36             8
Edwards             35,042            17             0
Richardson           9,617              5             0
Kucinich               2,855             1              0
Total Write-ins      1,802             1              0
Biden                      619             0             0
•	75% of precincts
•	Updated: 10:51 PM

Republicans            Vote                %         Del
McCain                 62,262             37           6
Romney                53,740             32           3
Huckabee             18,888             11            0
Giuliani                  14,419              9           0
Paul                       13,044             8           0
Total Write-ins         2,937              2           0
Thompson                2,010             1           0
Hunter                        827             0           0
•	72% of precincts
•	Updated: 10:51 PM

A good game!   

8 delegates each for Barack and Hiliary!

Wouldn't line up on here...  Sorry!


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> I have been following the guy since he won his senate spot a couple of years ago. I remember, seeing a photo of him in a swimsuit and then a few months after he won read a story how he was at a meeting and stopped it so he could get a hit of nicotine.
> 
> I mention the swimsuit photo because at the time all the women were saying how good he looked and I thought about the relationship between keeping your weight down and smoking.
> 
> Do a google, the photo would still be floating around - you could print it off and stick it on the ceiling above your bed.




Was the pic of him in a swimsuit the one on _I Gotta Crush... on Obama _ by Obama Girl video?

I did find:
On the January 17 edition of Fox News' The Big Story, host John Gibson, during a discussion with Manhattan Institute senior fellow John H. McWhorter and Young Democrats of America's Malia Lazu about Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) -- who on January 16 announced his decision to form a presidential exploratory committee -- said: "And [Obama's] team works overtime trying to hide Obama's dirty little secret. He is -- get this -- a cigarette smoker. The point is: What else do we not know about Barack Obama?" Despite Gibson's claim that Obama's smoking is "a dirty little secret," Obama told the Chicago Tribune in December 2005 that his smoking is "an ongoing battle," and his cigarette use was, in fact, known during his 2004 Senate campaign, when his wife told the Chicago Sun-Times that he smokes "about three Marlboros a day."

He's allowed _four_ tonight I'd reckon!


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Could be, I have'nt looked. I had seen the video before, if he is running out of the surf, then yes.

Tried to upload for you so here is the link for you. 

Remember to print off on a mat paper surface as lip stick and a gloss surface will smudge.

http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/01/obama_the_swimsuit_issue


----------



## trinity (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/hillary-clinton-beats-obama/2008/01/09/1199554696621.html



> Democrat Hillary Clinton has defied the polls to upset Barack Obama narrowly in New Hampshire, breathing new life into her US presidential campaign after finishing third in Iowa.


----------



## Prospector (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Hillary Clinton imo has reduced her chances significantly by being almost tearful and clearly upset in a broadcast today.
> 
> Lays herself open to accusations of "an emotional woman", the last thing which is appropriate  in a President.




It seems the tears did the trick?:


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

so much for that old theory about big girls don't cry 

 Frankie Valli & The Four Seasons - Big Girls Don't Cry


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Could be, I haven't looked. I had seen the video before, if he is running out of the surf, then yes.
> 
> Tried to upload for you so here is the link for you.
> 
> ...




Yes... that's the one on the video!  Have a look!
Had to laugh at the blogs...  

Don't need Barack on my ceiling but thanks for trying to read my mind!  
I constantly see his eyes.  They are deep and meaningful eyes... look into your soul!  Like into an anemone...  

Too true that you can read people via their eyes. Like Hillary's... but did many notice her eyes _after_ her tear-welling last night?  She is good!   I'm happy for her. She has earned the _respite_.  

I wonder if Maggie Williams (The first Black woman to direct the operations of the first lady in the White House) suggested the tears strategy and how she will change Hillary's campaign persona!  
I read: _"Maggie uniquely combines a passion for social justice with strategic depth, political skills and natural managerial ability"_ 


Maggie Williams to Join Clinton Effort:
_
Even before the polls close in New Hampshire comes word of changes at the top of the Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's (N.Y.) presidential campaign.

Maggie Williams, a longtime Hillary Clinton confidante, is reportedly being brought on to coordinate the campaign's activities. Insiders have urged campaign manager Patti Solis Doyle to stay on, but no decision has been made, according to senior-level campaign operatives.

Williams has already been on a handful of strategy calls although no firm start date has been set.

Williams served as Hillary Clinton's chief of staff during Bill Clinton's first term and has remained close to the former first lady ever since._


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ..Don't need Barack on my ceiling but thanks for trying to read my mind!
> I constantly see his eyes.  They are deep and meaningful eyes... look into your soul!  Like into an anemone...




Maggie Thatcher wouldn't have been caught dead crying.  Then again she did 12 rounds with personal trainer every morning  

beware Doris, she who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare , she who has anenome will meet it everywhere. 

(interesting simile)


----------



## Julia (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Prospector said:


> It seems the tears did the trick?:




I wonder if indeed that was the reason for her success yesterday.
She has certainly been criticised for being cold and I guess the tears showed her to be a 'real person'.
Whatever, I'm really pleased she won NH.  Every good wish to her for the remainder of the campaign.  I just have a real sense of nervousness re Barack Obama, something to do with over the top rhetoric,  drama or something.


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Maggie Thatcher wouldn't have been caught dead crying.  Then again she did 12 rounds with personal trainer every morning
> 
> beware Doris, she who has a thousand friends has not a friend to spare , she who has anenome will meet it everywhere.
> 
> (interesting simile)




The iron maiden... yes.  But women in US would not have voted for her!  
Ever put your finger onto an anemone's tentacle?  Cool... Imagine the highs and lows of pleasure and pain they would have! All over!  

Jodie Foster, Jamie Foxx, Paul Newman, Joanne Woodward, Tom Hanks, Will Smith, Isaiah Washington all donated to Barack's campaign.

This system is so complicated!

Barack is actually winning the nomination!

Pledged delegate votes: (as of 30 minutes ago) 
Obama has 30:  18 + 12   Needs another 240 to win.
Hillary has 28:  17 + 11    Needs another 242 to win!

Interesting that she got only 11 from winning NH yet Obama got 12!

There are currently 4,049 total delegates to the Democratic National Convention, including 3,253 pledged delegates and 796 superdelegates. The total number of delegate votes needed to win the nomination is 2,025. 
(Republicans only need to get 1191 votes!)

If they get this number on Feb 5 from the big states then it's over.
But if they split the vote then they could have to keep polling the rest of the states until summer!  
Many states who do not usually get to vote will finally have a say!


Indicative pledges so far:

Clinton: 183
Obama:  78
Edwards: 52

Check out this site to see how many delegates and superdelegates have indicated their pledge.  The ticks are of course the confirmed pledges in Iowa and NH. Most delegates have not yet indicated their preference.  Thankfully they will wait until their people vote!?

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#D

Dates for the remaining primaries:
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/path.presidency/ 

#November 4 is Election Day in 2008, with polls opening as early as midnight in Dixville Notch, New Hampshire, and finally closing in Hawaii and Alaska.

# Although polls across the country are open on one day, the election is not a national poll but a series of 51 state-level elections that decide the members of the Electoral College. Technically, voters aren't choosing a candidate but a slate of electors who have pledged to vote for that candidate when the Electoral College meets.

# The candidate who wins the most votes in each state normally wins all of that state's electoral votes. With 538 electors up for grabs, the candidate with more than half -- 270 -- wins the presidency. The number of electors from each state equals the number of senators and representatives the state sends to Congress. If no candidate receives 270 electors, the House of Representatives decides who the next president will be.

I'm sure most Americans do not know all this! ??


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, all those stats lol - reminds me - this goes on until the end of the year !! sheesh  
think I prefer one Saturday morning -  get it all over and done with - result by that midnight  etc 



			
				Doris said:
			
		

> Ever put your finger onto an anemone's tentacle? Cool... Imagine the highs and lows of pleasure and pain they would have! All over!



So the implication is that it's a very sensual thing? a very painful thing? a very interesting thing? a hypnotic yet painful thing (like love maybe)?  a mysterious thing ? not sure what you meant that's all 

Guess Barack has a few highs and lows ahead of him as well  - as do they all.


----------



## Doris (9 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris, all those stats lol - reminds me - this goes on until the end of the year !! sheesh
> think I prefer one Saturday morning -  get it all over and done with - result by that midnight  etc




The selection could be over on Feb 5 but as competition is fierce the votes will be divided and thus not tally to the requisite 2,025.  
June is the date of the last voting state.

Don't you like the last part though... if, after all that, a clear winner isn't seen from Nov 4 then the house of Reps chooses!  Democracy?  
All that money and time wasted!

No wonder people don't bother going out to vote at all!

Says a lot for the youth of NH... attend the rallies for entertainment but don't show to vote!  Apathetic little buggers!  
And they complain about the immigrants getting the jobs!

Got to get back to reality.  Have been procrastinating too long methinks! 
I have a book to write!


----------



## Doris (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama ambush underway
Diane Francis, Financial Post  Published: Tuesday, January 08, 2008
*It is hardly surprising to learn that Barack Obama now enjoys the same level of Secret Service protection that President George Bush does*. It's also a necessary development.
The blogosphere is buzzing with *threats and fears about his safety* and the speculation has *more to do with his religion than with his race*. It represents a notably frightening development.
But the beefing up of his security -- which was initially resisted by him but brought about through monitoring the "chatter" -- is only the first of many hideous difficulties and trials that await Obama. Politics, even for those who, like him, try to stay above the fray, is a dirty business.
And it looks as though the beginnings of a sink-Obama Swiftboat ambush has started. In 2004, the Swiftboat veterans countered claims that John Kerry was a Vietnam war hero and helped defeat him.
This time -- naturally enough -- it begins again with those angry, middle-aged white guys who have run the United States and operate ultra-conservative mouthpieces like the Washington Times and Fox News.
The Times ran a piece in its Internet offshoot, called Insight, which *claimed Obama was raised a Muslim and attended a radical Madrassa while a child in Indonesia.*
Not true, said the Obama camp, as did CNN, which sent a team to Indonesia to investigate the school.
(*Obama's late father, a Kenyan, was an atheist, as was his American mother. His Indonesian stepfather was Muslim but secular, and his maternal grandparents, who raised him mostly, were non-practising Protestants. Obama is a member of the United Church of Christ, a liberal main-stream Protestant denomination*.)
Obama's spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said in response to these allegations: "If [Insight] or the staff at Fox had taken time to check their facts, or simply made a call to his office, they would have learned that *Senator Obama was not educated in a Madrassa, was not raised as a Muslim, and was not raised by his father -- an atheist Obama met once in his life before he died*."
Gibbs added: "All of the claims about Senator Obama's faith and education raised in the Insight Magazine story and repeated on Fox News are false. Senator Obama was raised in a secular household in Indonesia by his stepfather and mother. Obama's stepfather worked for a U.S. oil company, and sent his stepson to two years of Catholic school, as well as two years of public school."
"*To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago*. Furthermore, the Indonesian school Obama attended in Jakarta is a public school that is not and never has been a Madrassa."
Even so, it has all the earmarks of a smear job. It also raises another more important concern -- which *has led to the dramatic increase in Secret Service protection*. It would take only one crazed Islamicist to regard him as an "apostate," or fallen-away Muslim, which fanatics consider far, far worse than being an infidel.
Thank heavens the Secret Service is out in force.
_financialpost.com/dianefrancis_


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> .... speculation has *more to do with his religion than with his race*. It represents a notably frightening development.
> 
> ...Politics, ...., is a dirty business.
> 
> ...



oh my goodness - what an incredible story (or sadly too credible for USA  ) the press should be seriously hauled over the coals for that one  

"angry, middle-aged white guys who have run the United States" - like these maybe ? :-


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> like these maybe ? :-



No - That's the ASF mod team.


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> No - That's the ASF mod team.




Lol - you'd think they'd have an ASF flag somewhere - !? 

but off the record, I fear for his safety - don't trust those dudes and their spikey hats. 

nor, obviously, the press  - after an article like that - sheesh !



> "If [Insight] or the staff at Fox had taken time to check their facts, or simply made a call to his office, they would have learned that Senator Obama was not educated in a Madrassa, was not raised as a Muslim, and was not raised by his father -- an atheist Obama met once in his life before he died."


----------



## Doris (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Thanks you guys!  I NEEDED a laugh after cancelling my .044 sell on EXM seconds before it went through. Then consolidation happened!  
Hope or greed?  

*Barack's attitude is gratitude that his cup is half full*.  

But of course he still wants to fill it!  
I can hear his voice resonating with determination and belief.  
His articulation continues to astound me.  As in his books... his words are music.



________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 10 January 2008 4:20 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: We knew this would be hard

Doris --

There is something happening in America. 

A week ago we were 14 points behind, and no one imagined that we'd accomplish what we did in New Hampshire last night. 

There is something happening when Americans who have never participated in politics turn out in numbers we've never seen before. 

There is something happening when people vote not just for the party they belong to but the hopes they hold in common. 

Change is what's happening in America. 

We are ready to take this country in a fundamentally new direction, but we need your help to make it happen. 

We are about to enter the most decisive period of the campaign. We need to act immediately to build up our organization to compete in Nevada, South Carolina, and the 22 states that will hold their contests on February 5th. 

We can lead this nation out of a long political darkness. 

We can overcome the division and distraction that have clouded Washington.

Because when we challenge ourselves to reach for something better, there's no problem we can't solve -- no destiny we cannot fulfill. 

Thank you,

Barack 




Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******bigpond.com


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris,

Are you American?


----------



## noirua (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack Obama has the lack of experience tag on him and this is likely, to not stall his campaign, but make it highly unlikely that he will become the Democratic candidate.  Many would like to see her, Hillary Clinton, back in the Whitehouse, this time as President, and the experienced Bill Clinton there as well.


----------



## Doris (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Doris,
> 
> Are you American?




lol... no.  I'm from Earth!  

This planet has been devastated by the consequences of the immoral voting frauds (IMO) of the past two elections.  Both outcomes were highly controversial and still boil my blood.  Bludy system!  Bush should not have happened at all! (see posts on this thread) 

Their system is so complicated.  People do not bother to vote because the delegates decide for them!  e.g.  New Hampshire... both Hillary and Barack ended up with 9 delegate votes each.  So they tied!  People vote but all this does is give the delegates information with which to make their choice!

America sneezes and the rest of the world gets a cold!  

So it matters that someone who could improve America's health can help this planet.


----------



## Doris (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Barack Obama has the lack of experience tag on him and this is likely, to not stall his campaign, but make it highly unlikely that he will become the Democratic candidate.  Many would like to see her, Hillary Clinton, back in the Whitehouse, this time as President, and the experienced Bill Clinton there as well.




You are such a nice person Noirua.  So objective.  I enjoy all your posts!

After the upset occurred, the poll takers found Hillary won the popular vote in NH (but they tied where it counts... with the 9 delegate votes each) as a lot of 40+yo women changed their minds at the polls because of Hillary's ploy of softening her image and because the young did not bother to go to the booths.  Usually 60+yo independents vote for her.

The young (under 25) now realize they have to walk the talk and get to the booths!

Barack has experience... look at his solid record so far.  He has credibility with anyone who has been objective. Hillary had to change her focus from this tag, to copying Obama's *need for change* ploy.  I grimaced last night when I heard her say "I listened to you and found my voice".  People who don't like her say it's because she has a history of telling rather than listening! This is another example of her copying Obama's MO. He doesn't advertise listening... he just does it.  

I was impressed when I saw on the ABC news (7:30 report?) last night: a man collapsed at a rally and Obama saw him and stopped his spiel to ask if someone had water.  That was not planned. It's the nature of the man.

Do they really want:  Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton?


----------



## ithatheekret (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What about Senator John Sidney McCain III ?


----------



## noirua (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Do they want Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton?  Well, with the financial backing Hillary has "Yes". It would be Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton and Clinton.

I worked for a while in the US and often Americans would say a foreigner got a raw deal. Then comment "long may it continue".
Barak having relations in Kenya makes good reading for little guy made good. However, he is sadly seen as a foreigner by many and he may well get a raw deal.

McCain is a great guy but needs a great running mate. If Romney stands with him, I doubt he will, then he could have a good chance.


----------



## Doris (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Do they want Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton?  Well, with the financial backing Hillary has "Yes". It would be Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton and Clinton.
> 
> I worked for a while in the US and often Americans would say a foreigner got a raw deal. Then comment "long may it continue".
> Barak having relations in Kenya makes good reading for little guy made good. However, he is sadly seen as a foreigner by many and he may well get a raw deal.
> ...




One big concern is that Hillary would start with huge debt to the lobbyists and factions giving her the finance with their own agendas.  Barack's money has come from non-affiliated sources.  The hysteria and subsequent interest would increase private donations to his campaign.

I haven't heard of a 'foreigner' tag before.
I wonder if Barack's situation helped make an impact on that horrid Kibaki's ethnic cleansing spree in Kenya.

_The international media reported that the killer weapons were acquired in advance, which suggests a premeditated plan. It is terrible that people were being asked whether they were Kikuyu and those who were identified as such were brutally murdered. Others were asked to speak a few words so as to be condemned to death by their accents._ http://allafrica.com/stories/200801091047.html


7 hours ago:
*The government of Kenya and the Orange Democratic Movement have agreed on a power sharing deal* and the possibility of creating the post of prime minister. They, however, differed on whether the holder should be given executive or ceremonial roles.

This emerged as Ghanian President John Kufuor who held separate meetings with President Kibaki and ODM leader Raila Odinga shuttled between the two groups.

The developments came in the background of what was understood to be frank talks between President Kibaki on the one hand and US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs Jandeyi Frazer and US ambassador Michael Rannebagger on the other.

It was understood that the Americans protested at the decision to name half of the members of the government ahead of Friday's meeting and the mediation effort.

Shortly after the meeting, State House issued a statement in which President Kibaki committed himself to achieve a political solution to "the serious problems facing our nation".

*He committed himself to engage in constructive and inclusive dialogue.*

"I remain committed to dialogue with all parties in order to achieve a political solution to the serious problems facing our nation," the statement read.

"When my government is fully constituted as a result of dialogue, it will be broad-based and represent the will of the people of Kenya. It is envisioned that this government will be established as a result of a constructive and inclusive dialogue. Nothing is ruled out in this process." http://allafrica.com/stories/200801090948.html 

Knowing US methods of persuasion, they probably offered lots of financial incentives.  Now that'd be a better use of China's loan money!


----------



## Doris (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What audacity!  Obama is at work already and he is merely a candidate!

Didn't Oprah use a slogan, when she joined Obama at his rally, 'Now is the time'? 

He said, during his campaign, _Just because we disagree, this does not mean we have to be disagreeable_... but he was referring to competitors in NH!

Is this one of the Obama 'fairytales' Bill Clinton warned NH about?  :


January 8, 2008,  1:53 pm
Obama Reaches Out to Kenyan Leaders

By Jeff Zeleny

HANOVER, N.H. ”” As he campaigned for his presidential bid in the New Hampshire primary on Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama was following developments in Kenya and was working with the U.S. State Department to speak with Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki.

Mr. Obama, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee whose father was Kenyan, spoke Monday with opposition leader Raila Odinga in Kenya. Mr. Obama asked Mr. Odinga to meet directly with the president without any pre-conditions, a spokesman for Mr. Obama’s spokesman said.

“He said the country would see the message that both you and Kibaki do not want chaos and that violence on all sides must stop,” said the spokesman, Robert Gibbs. “If the country sees you talking and a willingness to resolve this political situation peacefully, a powerful message will be sent to the people.”

For the last week, as he campaigns for the Democratic presidential nomination, Mr. Obama has been involved in talks between the United States and Kenyan leaders. He spoke to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice a week ago, aides said, and on Saturday he discussed the conditions with Mike Rannenberger, the U.S. ambassador to Kenya.

Mr. Obama, whose grandmother and other relatives live in Kenya, visited the country in August 2006. He held meetings with several government leaders. *He spoke directly to the Kenyan people late last week in an interview on Voice of America radio.
*
“Despite irregularities in the vote tabulation, now is not the time to throw that strong democracy away,” Mr. Obama said. “Now is a time for President Kibaki, opposition leader Odinga, and all of Kenya’s leaders to call for calm, to come together, and to start a political process to address peacefully the controversies that divide them. Now is the time for this terrible violence to end.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/08/obama-reaches-out-to-kenyan-leaders/


----------



## wayneL (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Do they want Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton?
> 
> I worked for a while in the US and often Americans would say a foreigner got a raw deal. Barak having relations in Kenya
> 
> McCain is a great guy but needs a great running mate. If Romney stands with him, I doubt he will, then he could have a good chance.



noi
1. interesting - one for the guiness book of records - it's called a bi-dynasty

2. I imagine you're right - the black vote would ignore it, but he'll have the job ahead of him  (then again so will Hillary you'd think) 

3. Romney is an interesting one - ran the 2002 Winter Olympics - Mormon and all that, looks pretty confident to me. - not sure what right he has to be confident though - you could be right with the 2IC ticket (the Republicans  would need the combined forces of two candidates to win you'd think )


----------



## ithatheekret (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

bi-dynastySounds like a brand of washing powder , makes sense , each period took us to the cleaners .

Is America ready for a First Man ?   

If anything .......... this is going to be good .


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

itha - lol - taken to the cleaners indeed.

I loved hearing Bill Clinton badnaming Obama today, (not) - claiming he didn't vote against the war as he said ( during 2002- 2005 etc) - claiming he couldn't lie straight in bed etc - Immediately denied by Obama in a strong voice ( sounded like desperation tactics by Clinton, i.e. getting dirty) 

a) you'd think the voting record was easy to prove or disprove 

b) I just kept thinking of  "I did NOT make love to that woman !"  lol


----------



## ithatheekret (10 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Can you just imagine it , the First Man is asked to comment on the Presidents blah , blah , ............

He'd book the Hilton and charge $1500.00 a head for the answer .


Lying in bed ...... got to agree , it took Bill years to master that .


----------



## Doris (11 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> oh my goodness - what an incredible story (or sadly too credible for USA  ) the press should be seriously hauled over the coals for that one
> 
> "angry, middle-aged white guys who have run the United States" - like these maybe ? :-




Your KKK connection...   Loveditt 2020!

As I've said... You are goooood!  

I found this video hauling Fox News Network over the coals for their attacks on Obama.  
It includes Obama in his swim suit, his smoking, his supposed Muslim heritage and upbringing and CNN's negation of this...

Have to say I thought one part was so clever: 
*"Osama's bin laden with a name that causes Al-Qaeda *(all kinds of) *problems"*.
You do have to laugh and give credit for this pun...  

Obama's camp has frozen out Fox reporters and producers because of their smear campaign but the Nevada Democratic Party has lined up with Fox to host a democratic primary debate...  Hmmm..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms 


*Jay Leno Slams Dems*  ( related to the debate on Fox News)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BQs65xWW6UQ&feature=related


Also this one: *Obama Co-Chair Jesse Jackson, Jr. Questions Hillary's Tears*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNrlSn7ndAA&feature=user


----------



## Doris (11 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> itha - lol - taken to the cleaners indeed.
> 
> I loved hearing Bill Clinton badnaming Obama today, (not) - claiming he didn't vote against the war as he said ( during 2002- 2005 etc) - claiming he couldn't lie straight in bed etc - Immediately denied by Obama in a strong voice ( sounded like desperation tactics by Clinton, i.e. getting dirty)
> 
> ...




Have a look at this 2020!

A prelude to your Clinton quote above!  Gotta laugh!

John McCain is cute and lovable in this too...


*Barack Obama "I inhaled frequently" "That was the point"*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpBzQI_7ez8&feature=related


and a play on Clinton's denial again... on Jay Leno's show: (another laugh)

*The difference between Obama and Clinton*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vb0-FjPHvE&feature=related


----------



## Doris (11 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> And it looks as though the beginnings of a sink-Obama Swiftboat ambush has started. In 2004, the Swiftboat veterans countered claims that John Kerry was a Vietnam war hero and helped defeat him.
> 
> oh my goodness - what an incredible story (or sadly too credible for USA  ) the press should be seriously hauled over the coals for that one





What a man!  If only...  

I wonder if Americans deeply regret not letting this man lead them in 2004!  

This is an awesome video!  Six minutes long but worth every second.
Swiftboat references included...


* Kerry endorses Obama over '04 running mate*

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/10/kerry.obama/index.html?iref=mpstoryview#cnnSTCVideo


----------



## noirua (11 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> What a man!  If only...
> 
> I wonder if Americans deeply regret not letting this man lead them in 2004!
> 
> ...





Sounds very good, with one big but, Kerry is a loser who failed to go forward again for 2008. Having listened to a few discussions in the last few days, there are doubts over Obama this time round. He looks like the President in waiting for 2016.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitt_Romney
Is there any truth in the rumour that if Mitt Romney gets in, then polygamy will be legalised again.  - used to be big in Utah so I hear 

Or the rumour that the only reason Bill wants Hillary in there, he's missing the good old days maybe ??

Ahhh Sooo many interns !! ... so little time  !!


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (20 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

January 20, 2008

*Women turn on ‘traitor’ Oprah Winfrey for backing Barack Obama*

AMERICA’S favourite television presenter is paying a painful price for her intervention in the US presidential campaign last month. Oprah Winfrey has been dubbed a “traitor” by some of her female fans for supporting Barack Obama instead of Hillary Clinton. 

Winfrey’s website, Oprah.com, has been flooded with a barrage of abuse since the queen of daytime chat shows joined Obama on a tour of Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina in mid-December. 

Her intervention was widely credited with broadening Obama’s national appeal - especially among women - and with helping him to an upset victory over Clinton in the first vote of the election year in Iowa. 

Yet a backlash by Clinton supporters appears to have prompted a rethink by Winfrey, the African-American media titan who is routinely described as the most influential woman on television.

She did not reappear in the final days before the New Hampshire primary - which Obama lost to Clinton - and has been absent from the most recent campaigning in South Carolina, which votes next weekend. 

Obama aides believe that Winfrey will return to the campaign. Her own staff noted last week that in addition to her daily broadcasts on television and satellite radio, she has also been busy negotiating a multi-million-dollar deal with the Discovery cable network to create her own television channel, the Oprah Winfrey Network. 

Yet Obama’s rivals suspect that Winfrey has been startled by the virulent reaction to her previous campaign appearance. 

It started with a message on her website entitled “Oprah is a traitor” and rapidly expanded to include several discussions that attracted hundreds of comments. 

In the original post, a reader called austaz68 said she “cannot believe that women all over this country are not up in arms over Oprah’s backing of Obama. For the first time in history we actually have a shot at putting a woman in the White House and Oprah backs the black MAN. She’s choosing her race over her gender.” 

In a subsequent comment, 2nurselady wrote: “I don’t think Oprah is a ‘traitor’, but I do think she may be alienating a lot of her fans.” 

Others have accused Winfrey of racism for siding with Obama when such a well qualified woman as Clinton was running. 

Winfrey has built her career on empathising with women’s issues and offering a daily diet of redemption and hope. Her show typically focuses on women who have suffered but survived. 

So hostile has the response been that some suspect dirty tricks. “All the rude and hateful messages on here can’t be from Oprah fans,” another visitor noted. “Someone’s campaign (wonder who?) is sabotaging the message boards.” 

Winfrey received a rapturous reception when she campaigned with Obama last month. Yet several analysts warned that she might adversely affect his chances. 

Steve Ross, a history professor at the University of Southern California, said: “The moment a star opens their mouth and endorses one candidate, they alienate half their viewership.” 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3216586.ece


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> So hostile has the response been that some suspect dirty tricks. “All the rude and hateful messages on here can’t be from Oprah fans,” another visitor noted. “*Someone’s campaign (wonder who?) is sabotaging the message boards*.”



heck - you only have to look at the polls we had on ASF going into the election.

Until the elections, the biggest poll ( I think - might stand to be corrected) was "Is there a God", with totally unpecedented numbers voting (to that point of time - became emotive issue) :-
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6781&highlight=god
324 votes

But if you want "emotive", then try politics , lol.  (the new record 427 votes) . :- 



> Leading into the election - early days
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8231&highlight=election
> 157 votes
> 
> ...





Or even this one - yet another example of how you have to be suspicious of polls :- ...
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5658
should PMs pay for their own holidays ( back 12 months - MASSIVE votes for Johnny Howard lol)


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Thought for the day - 

Why dont the media analyse the massive amount of data they must have on polls ofthis nature and their ced - AND PUBLISH THAT as prime time news - call them for what they (frequently) are -  nothing but fodder for a gullible public - and a media who feeds on that gullibility (and could care less about real facts)

To say nothing of the emotive bludy polls they have on Channel 9 etc 
"Who would you prefer to rent your beach house to?   Ricky Ponting,  Ivan Molat, or Doctor Haneef ? " - etc

PS "Did you know that the word "gullible" isn't in the Macquarie Dictionary?


----------



## Doris (23 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Obama ambush underway
> Diane Francis, Financial Post  Published: Tuesday, January 08, 2008
> 
> And it looks as though the beginnings of a sink-Obama Swiftboat ambush has started. In 2004, the Swiftboat veterans countered claims that John Kerry was a Vietnam war hero and helped defeat him.
> ...




Has anyone received any of these emails?  I have...  
________________________________________
From: John Kerry [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 23 January 2008 11:01 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Swiftboating

Dear Doris,

I support Barack Obama because he doesn't seek to perfect the politics of Swiftboating -- he seeks to end it.

This is personal for me, and for a whole lot of Americans who lived through the 2004 election.

As a veteran, it disgusts me that the Swift Boats we loved while we were in uniform on the Mekong Delta have been rendered, in Karl Rove's twisted politics, an ugly verb meaning to lie about someone's character just to win an election. But as someone who cares about winning this election and changing the country I love, I know it's not enough to complain about a past we can't change when our challenge is to win the future -- which is why we must stop the Swiftboating, stop the push-polling, stop the front groups, and stop the email chain smears.

The truth matters, but how you fight the lies matters even more. We must be determined never again to lose any election to a lie.

This year, the attacks are already starting. Some of you may have heard about the disgusting lies about Barack Obama that are being circulated by email. These attacks smear Barack's Christian faith and deep patriotism, and they distort his record of more than two decades of public service. They are nothing short of "Swiftboat" style anonymous attacks.

These are the same tactics the right has used again and again, and as we've learned, these attacks, no matter how bogus, can spread and take root if they go unchecked.

But not this time -- we're fighting back.

And when I say "we," I mean that literally. I know Barack is committed to fighting every smear every time. He'll fight hard and stand up for the truth. But he can't do it alone.
We need you to email the truth to your address books. Print it out and post it at work. Talk to your neighbors. Call your local radio station. Write a letter to the editor. If lies can be spread virally, let's prove to the cynics that the truth can be every bit as persuasive as it is powerful.

The Obama campaign has created a place where you can find the truth you'll need to push back on these smears and a way to spread the truth to all of your address book.

Take action here:

http://my.barackobama.com/factcheckaction

So when your inbox fills up with trash and the emails of smear and fear, find the facts, and help defeat the lies.

Barack Obama is committed to bringing our country together to meet the challenges we face, but he knows that power gives up nothing without a struggle -- and to win the chance to change America, we must first defeat the hateful tactics that have been used to tear us apart for too long.

With your help, we can turn the page on an era of small, divisive politics -- but only if next time you hear these attacks on Barack, you take action immediately:

http://my.barackobama.com/factcheckaction

The fight is just heating up -- we won't let them steal this election with lies and distortions.

Thank you,

John Kerry


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (28 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I heard a news preview yesterday arv: ‘Obama takes out South Carolina’ but we never got to see it on the news!  Holidays!  
I was and am soooooo happy!

This man will change the world for the better!  I knew this the moment I first saw him speak 14 months ago!  

________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Sunday, 27 January 2008 1:38 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: A big win

Doris -- 

We've just won a big victory in South Carolina. 

After four great contests in every corner of this country, and another record turnout today, we have the most votes, the most delegates, and the most diverse coalition of Americans we've seen in a long, long time. 

More than 20 states will have their voices heard on February 5th, and we will need your help there, too. 

I'll be heading down shortly to thank our supporters in South Carolina. 

If you're reading this tonight, I hope you'll tune in at home so I can thank you, too. 

Barack


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (28 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Can’t you feel the vibes he exudes when he wrote this… the day before the vote in SC?  
Lovitt!

He’s the one!  A politician who says what he means and means what he says!
I shall sleep well tonight knowing the future! 

Barack's response to Bush's Stimulus Plan:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Saturday, 26 January 2008 6:00 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: What hope looks like

Doris --

In less than 24 hours, voters in South Carolina will head to the polls.

Before they do, I wanted to show you a bit about what kind of campaign we're running here.

When Michelle and I talked about my running for president, one of the core goals we both had for this campaign was to leave the political process better off than we found it. 

Here in South Carolina, a state with a history of some pretty divisive politics, ordinary people have challenged conventional thinking about the process and built a statewide organization based on local community organizing and neighbor-to-neighbor contacts.

Our supporters -- men and women of all ages, races, religions, and backgrounds -- have come together around the idea that we are one people, invested in each other and in our common future.

We've put together a few videos that will give you a sense of what we've built here -- please take a look:

http://my.barackobama.com/organize


In communities across this state, people who have never been involved in politics before -- or who had given up on what they saw as a broken system -- have built something special.

No matter what the outcome tomorrow, our work here will have a lasting impact on those communities and on the Democratic Party for a long time to come.

We're seeing the same story play out across the country as grassroots supporters in 22 states prepare to cast their votes or turn out to caucus on February 5th.

Remember that tomorrow night, after the votes are in from South Carolina, the playing field will expand dramatically as races in those states come into full focus.

There will be a lot happening, and the intensity will be ratcheted up.

But the spirit of the grassroots organizing we have done here -- of ordinary people taking back the political process -- will be apparent in thousands of communities across the country.

I believe more strongly than ever that this movement for change can do more than just win an election. Together, we can transform this country.

Thank you for being part of this,

Barack




Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (29 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hillary is winning: (from Washington Post)

Nearly complete returns showed Obama winning 55 percent of the vote, Clinton gaining 27 percent. Edwards had 18 percent and won only his home county of Oconee.

Obama also gained 25 convention delegates, Clinton won 12 and Edwards eight.

Overall, Clinton has 249 delegates, followed by Obama with 167 and Edwards with 58.

Obama also gained an endorsement from Caroline Kennedy, who likened the Illinois senator to her late father, President John F. Kennedy.

"I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them," she wrote on The New York Times op-ed page. "But for the first time, I believe I have found a man who could be that president _ and not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans."

All three contenders campaigned in South Carolina on primary day, but only Obama and Edwards arranged to speak to supporters after the polls closed. Clinton left for Tennessee as the polls were closing.


----------



## Doris (29 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

We're attracted to what supports what we think...

From a Canadian to a Jamaican newspaper: http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20080129/letters/letters4.html


* Obama seen as unifying force*
published: Tuesday | January 29, 2008

The Editor, Sir:

There is a strong wind blowing across America these days. It is a strong, refreshing, and unpolluted wind of unity and change, originating with Barack Obama, one of the three Democratic candidates vying for the presidency of the United States.

Barack Obama, an African-American in his mid- 40s, has certainly electrified and energised the American political landscape with his inclusive message of unity and change. There is no doubt whatsoever that the message of this inspirational leader has transcended the racial and generational divide to such an extent that Americans of all age groups and racial backgrounds have been captivated and motivated into action.

By stressing the politics of unity, change and reconciliation a unique mosaic of peoples are emerging across America, particularly in South Carolina where Obama won the Democratic Primary overwhelmingly. I have never witnessed a greater array of peoples from all walks of life as I watched the event on CNN on Saturday night.

*At Obama's victory rally, there were the rich and poor, old and young, black and white, Latinos and Asians all rubbing shoulders in an atmosphere of bliss*. It was indeed magnanimous when Obama genuinely asserted: "I do not see white Carolina, or black Carolina. I see Carolina" He then articulated the vision that "*The election is not about black versus white, the election is about the past versus the future.*"

We should all hope that Obama's clarion call for unity and change will resonate across the fifty states in America so that America can be restored to its former days of glory, international respect and admiration.

e-mail: r.b.johnson@sympatico.ca
Toronto, Ontario
Canada


----------



## Doris (29 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, 29 January 2008 3:51 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: The biggest day of the campaign

Doris --

Barack Obama won an overwhelming victory in South Carolina on Saturday.

People came out in record numbers and voted for change. Now, after four early state contests, Barack has the most votes, the most delegates, and the most diverse coalition of supporters we've seen in a long time.

But this is no time to rest -- the stakes will be even higher one week from tomorrow.

On February 5th, 22 states will hold primaries and caucuses.

We have exactly one week to prepare. 

Here are a few details about our victory in South Carolina. According to the official results and CNN exit polls, Barack won:

•	55% of the total vote, more than twice as many votes as any other candidate
•	57% of voters who had never voted in a primary
•	66% of voters who had never voted before at alla
•	Every type of community -- urban, suburban, and rural
•	58% of voters between ages 18 and 64
•	67% of voters between ages 18 and 29

The clear lesson from South Carolina is that voters are ready to bring this country together and solve the problems that matter to ordinary Americans.

This election isn't about race or gender, income level or education level.

It's about the past and the future.

The moment to act is now. We're campaigning from Alaska to Georgia, from California to New York. 

Thank you for your support,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

P.S. -- If you just received this message, Senator Ted Kennedy is going to be endorsing Barack live on MSNBC at 12:15 p.m. Eastern. Tune in and watch the event now.

Also, if you haven't had a chance to watch Barack's victory speech from Saturday night, watch it here:

http://my.barackobama.com/scvictoryspeech




Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (30 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Part* of Barack's SC Victory Speech:

He touches everyone in this speech!  And he has no cue cards!   
Would you vote for this man?


"After four great contests in every corner of this country, we have the most votes, the most delegates, and the most diverse coalition of Americans we've seen in a long, long time.

They are young and old; rich and poor. They are black and white; Latino and Asian. They are Democrats from Des Moines and Independents from Concord; Republicans from rural Nevada and young people across this country who've never had a reason to participate until now. And in nine days, nearly half the nation will have the chance to join us in saying that we are tired of business-as-usual in Washington, we are hungry for change, and we are ready to believe again.

But if there's anything we've been reminded of since Iowa, it's that the kind of change we seek will not come easy. Partly because we have fine candidates in the field - fierce competitors, worthy of respect. And as contentious as this campaign may get, we have to remember that this is a contest for the Democratic nomination, and that all of us share an abiding desire to end the disastrous policies of the current administration.

But there are real differences between the candidates. We are looking for more than just a change of party in the White House. We're looking to fundamentally change the status quo in Washington - a status quo that extends beyond any particular party. And right now, that status quo is fighting back with everything it's got; with the same old tactics that divide and distract us from solving the problems people face, whether those problems are health care they can't afford or a mortgage they cannot pay.

So this will not be easy. Make no mistake about what we're up against.

We are up against the belief that it's ok for lobbyists to dominate our government - that they are just part of the system in Washington. But *we know that the undue influence of lobbyists is part of the problem*, and this election is our chance to say that we're not going to let them stand in our way anymore.

We are up against the conventional thinking that says your ability to lead as President comes from longevity in Washington or proximity to the White House. But we know that real leadership is about candor, and judgment, and the ability to rally Americans from all walks of life around a common purpose - a higher purpose.

*We are up against decades of bitter partisanship that cause politicians to demonize their opponents* instead of coming together to make college affordable or energy cleaner; it's the kind of partisanship where you're not even allowed to say that a Republican had an idea - even if it's one you never agreed with. That kind of politics is bad for our party, it's bad for our country, and this is our chance to end it once and for all.

We are up against the idea that it's acceptable to say anything and do anything to win an election. We know that this is exactly what's wrong with our politics; this is why people don't believe what their leaders say anymore; this is why they tune out. And this election is our chance to give the American people a reason to believe again.

And what we've seen in these last weeks is that we're also up against forces that are not the fault of any one campaign, but feed the habits that prevent us from being who we want to be as a nation. *It's the politics that uses religion as a wedge, and patriotism as a bludgeon. A politics that tells us that we have to think, act, and even vote within the confines of the categories that supposedly define us. The assumption that young people are apathetic. The assumption that Republicans won't cross over. The assumption that the wealthy care nothing for the poor, and that the poor don't vote. The assumption that African-Americans can't support the white candidate; whites can't support the African-American candidate; blacks and Latinos can't come together.*

But we are here tonight to say that this is not the America we believe in. I did not travel around this state over the last year and see a white South Carolina or a black South Carolina. I saw South Carolina. *I saw crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children. I saw shuttered mills and homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from all walks of life, and men and women of every color and creed who serve together, and fight together, and bleed together under the same proud flag. I saw what America is, and I believe in what this country can be.*

That is the country I see. That is the country you see. But now it is up to us to help the entire nation embrace this vision. Because in the end, we are not just up against the ingrained and destructive habits of Washington, we are also struggling against our own doubts, our own fears, and our own cynicism. The change we seek has always required great struggle and sacrifice. And so this is a battle in our own hearts and minds about what kind of country we want and how hard we're willing to work for it.

So let me remind you tonight that change will not be easy. That change will take time. There will be setbacks, and false starts, and sometimes we will make mistakes. But as hard as it may seem, we cannot lose hope. Because there are people all across this country who are counting us; who can't afford another four years without health care or good schools or decent wages because our leaders couldn't come together and get it done.

...When I hear the cynical talk that blacks and whites and Latinos can't join together and work together, I'm reminded of the Latino brothers and sisters I organized with, and stood with, and fought with side by side for jobs and justice on the streets of Chicago. So don't tell us change can't happen.

When I hear that we'll never overcome the racial divide in our politics, I think about that Republican woman who used to work for Strom Thurmond, who's now devoted to educating inner-city children and who went out onto the streets of South Carolina and knocked on doors for this campaign. Don't tell me we can't change.

Yes we can change.

Yes we can heal this nation.

Yes we can seize our future.

And as we leave this state with a new wind at our backs, and take this journey across the country we love with the message we've carried from the plains of Iowa to the hills of New Hampshire; from the Nevada desert to the South Carolina coast; the same message we had when we were up and when we were down - that out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope; and where we are met with cynicism, and doubt, and those who tell us that we can't, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people in three simple words:

Yes. We. Can."


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ________________________________________
> From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com ....
> 
> Thank you for your support,
> ...




Doris
a) David Plouffe - he'd be Sue Plouffe's brother yes? lol
b) you sure you don't know this mob intimately?
c) Teddy Kennedy endorsing him - has to be a gee up you'd think 
"from sea to shining sea"

PS this is a long one - maybe you've got the gist after 30secs or so. 
NO - 1m 36s - He challenges Bill Clinton's allegedly slanderous claim that Obama was inconsistent on Iraq.

NO lol - Barack responds at 3m 30s

 Ted Kennedy Endorses Barack Obama


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I thought USA had had heaps of black Presidents
why - nearly every episode of "24" for a starter!! 

THIS ONE Definitely only 30s you get the ghist! lol

 24. President David Palmer Comedy Dub


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (30 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is why neither will be Vice-President to the other.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/01/29/us/politics/mills-sou-four.jpg


----------



## Doris (30 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> This is why neither will be Vice-President to the other.
> 
> http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2008/01/29/us/politics/mills-sou-four.jpg




non comprendes vous pas mon ami...

It is hard to imagine Hillary being VP after Bill's efforts. John Edwards may get the nod?

Barack's speech was brilliant. Love his imagery and metaphors!


----------



## Doris (30 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris
> a) David Plouffe - he'd be Sue Plouffe's brother yes? lol
> b) you sure you don't know this mob intimately?
> c) Teddy Kennedy endorsing him - has to be a gee up you'd think
> "from sea to shining sea"




Who is Sue Plouffe?
You are so eclectic 2020!

Can't help but think of Teddy and the Chappaquiddick debacle. In his 40 years in politics he has achieved more than his brother and I should know better!


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Who is Sue Plouffe?
> You are so eclectic 2020!



well you tell me how to pronounce it, and I'll tell you who she is lol.

(rats ! - that's the trubel with writing jokes - no one ever gets em !  )

Chappaquiddick debacle! - o boy  - those Kennedy boys sure like(d) the ladies. 
and John and Robbie sure knew Marilyn Monroe intimately.
In fact I read  a book on "The Assassination of Marilyn Monroe" which claimed that Robbie was present when she was injected with ( what turned out to be) a lethal injection .

Then again, the Russians and/or Cubans were indirectly getting to hear of a lot of juicy stuff disclosed in her conversations with the Kennedy's in her house. (as was J Edgar Hoover) ...  but once again :topic 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Assassination-Marilyn-Monroe-Donald-Wolfe/dp/0751526525


> Wolfe does not just highlight the famous people in her life, and goes into detail on her psychiatrist and doctor who were known to be Marxists in a time when they were being hunted down and also goes into detail about her many marriages as well as her flirtations with the likes of Frank Sinatra, which is very insightful on its own.
> For me I not only found the book to be very enlightening but also amazingly easy to read. I say amazingly, because the book is absolutely crammed with information which could have become quite tedious if it wasn't for Wolfe's engaging writing style. The initial chapters' surrounding her death plays out like a piece of crime fiction rather than a true story and really gets you hooked. On top of this the book includes a section of photos of prominent people in her life which really helped to make the people in the book come to life. Plus it also includes copies of official documents, including her autopsy report and a plan of her house so that you can really visualize the events surrounding her death as well as back up the beliefs put across in the book.
> 
> Although Wolfe puts across his beliefs in how Marilyn came to die, he never becomes blinkered in his view point and tries to show a balance in discussing all of the possibilities surrounding her untimely death. Personally I loved reading this book... etc




http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/celebrity/marilyn_monroe/index.html


> Exactly how and when Marilyn Monroe died sparked a debate that would last more than 40 years and generate many theories, including that of murder. Some of these theories even implicated John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert in the mysterious death.


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (31 January 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> non comprendes vous pas mon ami...
> 
> It is hard to imagine Hillary being VP after Bill's efforts. John Edwards may get the nod?
> 
> Barack's speech was brilliant. Love his imagery and metaphors!




Or Barack being her VP, I still dont believe Barack will win.

As for the Kennedy endorsement, well all that is left is Ted and Caroline....the family will be just a memory once Ted is gone, his endoresment will just encourage more moderates to go for Hillary as he is seen by many as way to "liberal".


----------



## Doris (2 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Can the media change the Californian poll trend?

*LA Times backs Barack, McCain*

February 02, 2008 10:18am
Article from: Agence France-Presse

THE Los Angeles Times today backed Barack Obama for the Democratic White House nomination, arguing he was the best qualified candidate to lead the United States into the future.

In a glowing endorsement on the Times website which will be published in Sunday's newspaper, the liberal-leaning daily said it preferred Obama to Hillary Clinton because of his promise and judgement over the invasion of Iraq.

On the Republican side, meanwhile, it gave the stamp of approval to John McCain, noting that while it disagreed with several of his positions, it admired his vow to close the Guantanamo Bay prison and opposition to torture.

*The paper said that with little to choose between Obama and Clinton policy-wise, it had considered the leadership potential of each candidate - and come down on the side of Obama.
*
While stating a Clinton presidency would offer experience and competence, the paper said "experience has value only if it is accompanied by courage and leads to judgment."

"Nowhere was that judgment more needed than in 2003, when Congress was called upon to accept or reject the disastrous Iraq invasion," the Times said.

"Clinton faced a test and failed, joining the stampede as Congress voted to authorise war ... but Obama was in public life, saw the danger of the invasion and the consequences of occupation, and he said so. He was right."

*The Times endorsement also said it was time for US politics to close the door on two decades of rule by the Clinton and Bush dynasties.
*
*"Obama is correct: It is time to turn the page," the paper commented.*

*Recent polls have given Clinton a double-digit lead over Obama in Democrat-dominated California*, which holds its primary on February 5, known as "Super Tuesday."

The Times meanwhile said McCain was the best Republican candidate even though the paper disagreed with his stance on abortion, gay marriage and Iraq.

"We do not agree with John McCain on every issue," the paper said. But we admire his conviction and stand with him on those that matter most right now."


----------



## Doris (2 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama Says He'd Be Better Against McCain*

By NEDRA PICKLER – 2 hours ago

LOS ANGELES (AP) ”” *Democratic Sen. Barack Obama sees one of the best arguments for his presidential candidacy in the rise of Republican Sen. John McCain.*

McCain has become Obama's favorite punching bag, an easier mark in front of partisan audiences than the rival Obama will have to beat first to get to the general election ”” Hillary Rodham Clinton. But he also likes to lump the two of them together as co-supporters of the war in Iraq.

"It is time for new leadership that understands the way to win a debate with John McCain or any Republican who is nominated is not by nominating someone who agreed with him on voting for the war in Iraq," Obama said during a speech in Denver Wednesday.

The pitch is a timely pivot back to the issue that helped fuel Obama's candidacy ”” his early opposition to Iraq. *Recently the war has become a secondary issue to the declining economy ”” an issue on which Clinton outdistances Obama in the polls as the more experienced hand to guide the nation though financial turmoil.*

Obama advisers have said privately for months that McCain would be their preferred opponent among all those who sought the GOP nomination. They said *a race between Obama, 46, and McCain, 71, would provide the starkest contrast between old vs. new, the future versus the past*. It's an argument that Obama also has been using against Clinton, but his campaign feels it would be even stronger against McCain.

Repeatedly during a debate with Clinton Thursday night, Obama brought up McCain as if he were the presumptive GOP nominee. McCain has yet to lock up the race, but a recent win in Florida has made him the front-runner.

"I respect that John McCain, in the first two rounds of Bush tax cuts, said it is irresponsible that we have never before cut taxes at the same time as we're going into war," Obama said. "And somewhere along the line, the `Straight Talk Express' lost some wheels and now he is in favor of extending Bush tax cuts."

Later in the debate, he turned to McCain's position that troops could be in Iraq for the long haul. "When John McCain suggests that we might be there 100 years, that, I think, *indicates a profound lack of understanding that we've got a whole host of global threats out there.*"

While Clinton voted for the war resolution in 2003 and has refused to apologize for it, *she has said she would never have given Bush the authority to go to war if she had known he would abuse it*. And she says she'll end the war if elected commander in chief.

"There is going to be a contest with John McCain potentially ”” somebody who's been very clear and firm about his position on the war," Obama told reporters. "If we go in there suggesting that it just was not managed well by George Bush, then Senator McCain I think will be able to come back and argue that in fact we have reduced violence in the surge."

"I think it's easier for me to dispute given it's my long-standing belief that it was a strategic error on the part of the Bush administration," Obama said.

*He also argued that he would be more electable in a general election matchup against McCain than Clinton.*

"I am attracting new voters and independent voters into the process in a way Clinton cannot do," Obama said at his news conference. "I think that'll be particularly important if Senator McCain is the nominee on the Republican side."


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris - this could be you. ..
(just a bit of superhero stuff ) 

 Obama Girl


----------



## Doris (3 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

David Plouffe sent:

"Making calls is fun and easy, and you can make a big difference in these crucial contests. Try making five phone calls, and I promise you'll want to make five more."

http://my.barackobama.com/Feb5calls 

This is the *online calling tool: * 



Introduction

_Hello, is _____ available?
_
_My name is _____ and I am a volunteer with Obama for America. I'm supporting Barack Obama for President because he has a plan to protect and create jobs in this country, restore fairness to the tax code, and lower the cost of gas and heating oil._

_Do you know who you plan to support in the primary on Tuesday?_
If 'Strong support for Barack' is selected, then go to *Planning to vote*
If 'Leaning towards Barack' is selected, then go to *Planning to vote*
If 'Undecided ' is selected, then go to *Undecided conclusion*
If 'Leaning towards other candidate ' is selected, then go to *Support Other conclusion*
If 'Strongly supporting other candidate' is selected, then go to *Support Other conclusion*
If 'Refuses to Answer' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*
If 'Leave Message' is selected, then go to *Leave Message*

Planning to vote
_Great! Are you planning on voting in the California primary this Tuesday?_
If 'Yes' is selected, then go to *Supporter conclusion*
If 'No' is selected, then go to *Not going to vote*

Undecided conclusion
_Well, I hope you'll consider him. Barack Obama knows how to bring people together to create the meaningful change we need. He will put the needs of middle class Americans ahead of special interests and big corporations, and give us the government we deserve._

_Do you think you will vote for Senator Obama on Tuesday?_
If 'Yes' is selected, then go to *Going to vote*
If 'No' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*
If 'Not sure' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*

Leave Message
_This is a message for _________. Hi, my name is _________ and I am a volunteer with Obama for America. I'm supporting Barack Obama for President because he has a plan to protect and create jobs in this country, restore fairness to the tax code, and lower the cost of gas and heating oil. But most importantly, he offers a vision for our country that puts politics as usual behind us and sets us on the track to real change, change that we can believe in. I hope you will join me in supporting him in the California Democratic primary this Tuesday._
If 'Next' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*

Support Other conclusion
_Well, thank you for your time. I really hope you will consider Senator Obama. He's a leader who will not only be ready to lead on Day One, but will have the judgment to make the right choices for everyday Americans like us._
If 'Next' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*

Supporter conclusion
_Thanks so much for your support. Remember to vote for Barack on Tuesday February 5th!_
If 'Next' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*

Going to vote
_I'm very glad to hear it. If you need any additional information or want to find your polling location, you can visit http://ny.barackobama.com._
If 'Next' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*

Not going to vote
_Oh, I'm sorry to hear that. I can't stress how important it is to get out and vote for Senator Obama on Tuesday. Every single vote brings us one step closer to actually changing this country._
If 'Next' is selected, then go to *Closing Script*

Closing Script
_Thank you so much for taking time to talk with me. Have a great day/evening!_



*So... after studying the 'calling tool' format you then click onto one name on the list of 20 people they've selected for you... and dial...*

You Say:
_Hello, is _____ available?

My name is _____ and I am a volunteer with Obama for America. I'm supporting Barack Obama for President because he has a plan to protect and create jobs in this country, restore fairness to the tax code, and lower the cost of gas and heating oil.

Do you know who you plan to support in the primary on Tuesday?
_

*Below this script are 7 buttons listed. You click on one that is relevant to carry on.*  The click brings up your next words and the button options for their response.  Brilliant idea and technology.
But unfortunately, I have 29 essays to mark and two friends coming up from Brisbane this arv to stay the night!  
Well... maybe ONE call... Tara wasn't home.      Well... maybe TWO calls...  
Hey!  This is fun!    And every call counts!


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> .. and lower the cost of gas and heating oil.
> 
> If 'Strong support for Barack' is selected, then go to Planning to vote
> If 'Leaning towards Barack' is selected, then go to Planning to vote



If "When are we gonna learn that we already use far more than our share, that gas and heating oil are in finite supply, are causing harm, and some should be left for the kids and the grandkids", then go to ...umm .. hang up I guess.


----------



## Doris (3 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> If "When are we gonna learn that we already use far more than our share, that gas and heating oil are in finite supply, are causing harm, and some should be left for the kids and the grandkids", then go to ...umm .. hang up I guess.




Too true!    Will this do 2020? 

*Plan for a Clean Energy Future*
“Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation. That's why I've fought successfully in the Senate to increase our investment in renewable fuels. That's why I reached across the aisle to come up with a plan to raise our fuel standards… And I didn't just give a speech about it in front of some environmental audience in California. I went to Detroit, I stood in front of a group of automakers, and I told them that when I am president, there will be no more excuses ”” we will help them retool their factories, but they will have to make cars that use less oil.”
”” Barack Obama, Speech in Des Moines, IA, October 14, 2007

At a Glance
•	Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050
•	Invest in a Clean Energy Future
•	Support Next Generation Biofuels
•	Set America on Path to Oil Independence
•	Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030
•	Restore U.S. Leadership on Climate Change

*The Problem*
Foreign Oil: America's 20-million-barrel-a-day oil habit costs our economy $1.4 billion a day, and $500 billion in 2006 alone. Every single hour, we spend $41 million on foreign oil. 
Climate Change: As a result of climate change, glaciers are melting faster; the polar ice caps are shrinking; trees are blooming earlier; more people are dying in heat waves; species are migrating, and eventually many will become extinct. 

*Barack Obama's Plan*
Reduce Carbon Emissions 80 Percent by 2050

•	*Cap and Trade*: Obama supports implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Obama's cap-and-trade system will require all pollution credits to be auctioned. A 100 percent auction ensures that all polluters pay for every ton of emissions they release, rather than giving these emission rights away to coal and oil companies. Some of the revenue generated by auctioning allowances will be used to support the development of clean energy, to invest in energy efficiency improvements, and to address transition costs, including helping American workers affected by this economic transition. 

•	*Confront Deforestation and Promote Carbon Sequestration*: Obama will develop domestic incentives that reward forest owners, farmers, and ranchers when they plant trees, restore grasslands, or undertake farming practices that capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. 

Invest in a Clean Energy Future
•	Invest $150 Billion over 10 Years in Clean Energy: 
•	*Double Energy Research and Development Funding*: Obama will double science and research funding for clean energy projects including those that make use of our biomass, solar and wind resources. 
•	Invest in a Skilled Clean Technologies Workforce: 
•	Convert our Manufacturing Centers into Clean Technology Leaders: 
•	Clean Technologies Deployment Venture Capital Fund: Obama will create a Clean Technologies Venture Capital Fund to fill a critical gap in U.S. technology development. Obama will invest $10 billion per year into this fund for five years. 
•	*Require 25 Percent of Renewable Electricity by 2025*: Obama will establish a 25 percent federal Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) to require that 25 percent of electricity consumed in the U.S. is derived from clean, sustainable energy sources, like solar, wind and geothermal by 2025. 
•	Develop and Deploy Clean Coal Technology

Support Next Generation Biofuels
•	*Deploy Cellulosic Ethanol*: Obama will invest federal resources, including tax incentives, cash prizes and government contracts into developing the most promising technologies with the goal of getting the first two billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol into the system by 2013. 
•	*Expand Locally-Owned Biofuel Refineries*: Less than 10 percent of new ethanol production today is from farmer-owned refineries. New ethanol refineries help jumpstart rural economies. Obama will create a number of incentives for local communities to invest in their biofuels refineries. 
•	*Establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard*: Barack Obama will establish a National Low Carbon Fuel Standard to speed the introduction of low-carbon non-petroleum fuels. The standard requires fuels suppliers to reduce the carbon their fuel emits by ten percent by 2020.
•	*Increase Renewable Fuel Standard*: Obama will require 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels to be included in the fuel supply by 2022 and will increase that to at least 60 billion gallons of advanced biofuels like cellulosic ethanol by 2030.

Set America on Path to Oil Independence
Obama's plan will *reduce oil consumption by at least 35 percent, or 10 million barrels per day, by 2030*. This will more than offset the equivalent of the oil we would import from OPEC nations in 2030. 
•	*Increase Fuel Economy Standards*: Obama will double fuel economy standards within 18 years. His plan will provide retooling tax credits and loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers, so that they can build new fuel-efficient cars rather than overseas companies. 

Improve Energy Efficiency 50 Percent by 2030
•	*Set National Building Efficiency Goals*: Barack Obama will establish a goal of making all new buildings carbon neutral, or produce zero emissions, by 2030. He'll also establish a national goal of improving new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade to help us meet the 2030 goal.
•	*Establish a Grant Program for Early Adopters*: Obama will create a competitive grant program to award those states and localities that take the first steps to implement new building codes that prioritize energy efficiency.
•	*Invest in a Digital Smart Grid*: Obama will pursue a major investment in our utility grid to enable a tremendous increase in renewable generation and accommodate modern energy requirements, such as reliability, smart metering, and distributed storage.

Restore U.S. Leadership on Climate Change
•	Create New Forum of Largest Greenhouse Gas Emitters: Obama will create a Global Energy Forum ”” that includes all G-8 members plus Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa –the largest energy consuming nations from both the developed and developing world. The forum would focus exclusively on global energy and environmental issues. 
•	Re-Engage with the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change: The UNFCCC process is the main international forum dedicated to addressing the climate problem and an Obama administration will work constructively within it. 

*Barack Obama's Record*
•	Renewable Fuels: Obama has worked on numerous efforts in the Senate to increase access to and use of renewable fuels. Obama passed legislation with Senator Jim Talent (R-MO) to give gas stations a tax credit for installing E85 ethanol refueling pumps. The tax credit covers 30 percent of the costs of switching one or more traditional petroleum pumps to E85, which is an 85 percent ethanol/15 percent gasoline blend. Obama also sponsored an amendment that became law providing $40 million for commercialization of a combined flexible fuel vehicle/hybrid car within five years.
•	CAFE: Obama introduced a bold new plan that brought Republicans and Democrats, CAFE supporters and long-time opponents together in support of legislation that will gradually increase fuel economy standards and offer what the New York Times editorial page called "real as opposed to hypothetical results."


----------



## noirua (3 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

...and here is Barack Obama about to play soccer, though this photo looks a bit suspect:  http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article732401.ece


----------



## Doris (3 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Here's a cutie noirua:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-obama01new20070323162657,0,2732825.photo 

A young Barack Obama is shown with his mother, Ann, in Hawaii shortly after his father, Barack Obama Sr., left the two to pursue his studies at Harvard.


----------



## Doris (4 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama, Clinton Are Even In Poll
McCain Now Clearly GOP's Front-Runner After Primary Wins*

Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama (Ill.) are running roughly even nationally as the battle for the Democratic nomination heads into Tuesday's big round of primaries and caucuses, while Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) has jumped to a dominating lead over his remaining rivals in the Republican race, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

*McCain's big lead in this new national poll matches a wave of increasing support seen in state polls, which, coupled with the GOP's winner-take-all rules, gives him the opportunity to effectively wrap up the nomination with a strong showing Tuesday.*

The Democratic contest is likely to keep going.

Democratic delegates are doled out based on complex formulas, with candidates picking up backers based on their performance within states and within congressional districts. The new poll underscores how competitive the race continues to be since Clinton and Obama split the first four sanctioned contests of the year. *Clinton's four-percentage-point edge in the survey is about the same as it was three weeks ago and does not constitute a significant lead, given the poll's margin of sampling error*.

The basic fault line between Clinton and Obama remains leadership and experience versus a new direction and new ideas. And since Edwards's exit on Wednesday, both candidates have worked relentlessly to remind voters of their apparent strengths. Three-quarters of voters who prioritize a solid resume said they back Clinton; 70 percent of those seeking a change-oriented candidate said they support Obama.

While Clinton has the edge on the issues voters say are most important to them, and enjoys a wide lead on the question of who is a stronger leader, *Obama now holds a seven-percentage-point advantage as the candidate who would do the most to bring needed change to Washington.
*
And Clinton's once-sizable lead as the Democrat with the best shot at winning the White House has shrunk significantly; in the new poll, 47 percent said she is the most electable, while 42 percent said Obama has the better chance.


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Too true!    Will this do 2020?
> 
> *Plan for a Clean Energy Future*
> “Well, I don't believe that climate change is just an issue that's convenient to bring up during a campaign. I believe it's one of the greatest moral challenges of our generation. That's why I've fought successfully in the Senate to increase our investment in renewable fuels. ........etc"



Thanks for that post Doris 

Just that we should be talking "user pays"
 or maybe "abuser pays" or whatever.  

Big day today eh? 
(both for superTuesday - and also for the bludy market. )


----------



## Doris (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Thanks for that post Doris
> 
> Just that we should be talking "user pays"
> or maybe "abuser pays" or whatever.
> ...




I agree fully in this moral... e.g. replacing the divots when you play polo!   

Half my stocks are black... is this an omen? 

Should be incredible to see what happens when California closes in five minutes!  I have to say any swinger would have leaned to Democrats with Arnie's cute admission that his daughter was wearing an Obama Tshirt today!  

Obama has today won 8 states, Hillary 6.  

But how will the delegates and superdelegates vote?  How will Californians vote... especially the Latinos?

No matter.  It'll go on to May...


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I agree fully in this moral... e.g. replacing the divots when you play polo!
> 
> Half my stocks are black... is this an omen?
> ..
> Obama has today won 8 states, Hillary 6.



The ABC were saying that one of his speeches has been set to music.... apparently a marketing bonanza!

We should find it on youtube soon enough. 

omens? 
o man! what next Charlie Brown lol

PS Americans don't pick up their polo divots!
they turn a blind eye to every second Mexican coming over the border 
and pay him 2 cents a divot


----------



## Doris (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Clinton And Obama Trade Victories in Super Tuesday Showdown*

By Chris Cillizza
washingtonpost.com staff writer

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) scored major wins yesterday in populous states including California, New Jersey and Arizona, while Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) amassed victories in smaller states throughout the Midwest and plains -- a mixed result that left both candidates declaring victory on Super Tuesday.

*Both candidates won their home states*. Clinton claimed contested races in New Jersey and Massachusetts but saw her northeastern streak broken when Obama won Connecticut. The two split the southern states, with Obama winning Alabama and Georgia -- both of which have considerable black populations -- and Clinton victorious in Tennessee, Arkansas, Oklahoma and Arizona.

Obama's strength in the Midwest -- particularly in states that held caucuses -- became clear as the night wore on as the freshman Illinois senator won in *Minnesota, North Dakota and Kansas, as well as in Idaho and Colorado*. He also scored a victory in *Delaware* - the home state of his campaign manager, David Plouffe, and communications director, Dan Pfeiffer. Obama came from behind to take the lead in the bellwether state of Missouri, although the race had not yet been called.

With the prospect of either a female or an African American heading the Democratic ticket for the first time in history, turnout and attention reached a climax in today's Super Tuesday proceedings, with 22 states casting ballots.

In an address just before 11 p.m. on the East Coast, Clinton proclaimed: "Tonight is America's night."

She touted her early state wins and urged supporters to vote in California. She added that she would not let anyone "Swift boat this country's future" - a reference to the attacks by independents groups on Sen. John Kerry's (D-Mass.) military record during the 2004 presidential election.

"There is one thing on this February night that we do not need the final results to know," said Obama at a raucous rally in Chicago. "Our time has come. Our movement is real. And change is coming to America."

Among states with polls that closed at 8 p.m. Eastern stime, Clinton led Obama, 53 percent to 44 percent in Missouri, with 59 percent of precincts reporting. Among 9 o'clock states, Clinton led Obama, 50 percent to 39 percent, in Arizona with 19 percent of precincts reporting. No results were available in New Mexico, which held a caucus. In Colorado's caucuses, Obama led 66 percent to 33, with 9 percent reporting. Clinton had a slim lead in Utah, 44-40 percent, with 2 percent reporting.

Because of the proportional manner in which Democrats award delegates, what was once expected to be the final day of the primary and caucus races was cast by both campaigns as simply a big battle in a larger war that could well extend into April and perhaps all the way to the Democratic National Convention in Denver late this summer.

Clinton's campaign hailed her victory in Massachusetts as "the upset of the night" in light of the high-profile endorsements Obama received last week from Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg and Sens. Edward Kennedy and John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick. Obama's campaign insisted that the Illinois Democrat had impressively closed the gap with Clinton in the Bay State in recent weeks and that his apparent narrow loss was a sign of strength, not weakness.

Obama has resisted putting his race front and center in the campaign in much the same way Senator Clinton has said she is not running as a woman for president but rather running for president as a woman. Still, the historic nature of the choice -- either Clinton or Obama would the represent a first -- has drawn massive amounts of attention and money to the nomination fight.

Early exit polling in nine battleground states -- Arizona, California, Georgia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey, New York and Tennessee -- in the Democratic race suggested an electorate, once again, focused on the need for political change. Half of voters in each of the nine states said change was the key attribute in choosing a candidate; 63 percent named change in Obama's home state of Illinois, while 48 percent chose it as the key factor in Arizona.

*The economy, too, continued to be a prime concern of Democratic voters in those nine states, far outdistancing the war in Iraq and health care on the minds of most voters.*

*At stake in today's contests for Democrats were 1,681 pledged delegates* -- more than half the total of those delegates nationwide. 

*A total of 2,025 delegate votes are needed to win the nomination at the party's convention.*

Of 4,049 total delegate votes to be cast at the convention, 3,253 will come from the "pledged delegates" that are awarded on a proportional basis to presidential candidates in the primaries and caucuses.

Heading into today's contests, Clinton was leading Obama, 261 to 196, in total pledged and unpledged delegates, according to a tally by the Associated Press.

Democrats use a proportional system to award their delegates, with any candidate taking over 15 percent in a congressional district qualifying.

What that system means in practical terms is that *unless either Obama or Clinton is able to overwhelmingly win a congressional district, the two candidates will receive the same number of delegates* -- ensuring neither builds too large a delegate lead.

To that end, the Clinton campaign announced it would participate in three upcoming debates -- Sunday on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanoulos," Feb. 27 in a CNN-sponsored debate in Ohio, and the next day in Houston with MSNBC as host.

"The campaign believes it's critically important that we continue the debates between Senator Obama and Senator Clinton," said Clinton lead strategist Mark Penn. "We think it's critically important that people get to see the candidates face to face."

On NBC's "Today" show this morning, Obama said: "I don't think that today's going to end up being decisive, but I think it'll give you a good sense of who's connecting with the voters' concerns right now."

Lost in the hubbub was Clinton's victory in American Samoa where 285 people gathered in a hotel in Pago Pago to cast their votes. Clinton claimed two delegates to one for Obama.


----------



## Doris (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> The ABC were saying that one of his speeches has been set to music.... apparently a marketing bonanza!
> 
> We should find it on youtube soon enough.
> 
> ...




Wow!  At last I know why they only have a Mexican woman and child on their signs on the freeways...  that is... to watch out for them... 

Yeah... A lot of folk don't want the illegals coming out so they can keep that cheap labour!

Romney went over the top in his victory speech this arv... listing all of Bush's shortcomings that he will fix!  $35 million of his own money spent so far!

The most incredible primaries campaign ever!
Even Huckabee sounded like he thought he was a winner!

Barack has won 11 states today whilst Hillary has 7.  

Now for the delegate count please!!


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

 Yes We Can Song - Barack Obama Song by Will.I.Am



> Song & video, featuring a star cast, by will.i.am of The Black Eyed Peas. Inspired by Barack Obama's 'Yes We Can' speech.   http://www.yeswecansong.com
> 
> It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the destiny of a nation.
> Yes we can.
> ...


----------



## tigerboi (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

BARACK 2008? WESTS TIGERS ,BALMAIN BOY ALWAYS!!

BACK TO THE RACE TO THE WHITE HOUSE,JOHN MCCAIN WILL ROMP IN..

YOU HEARD IT FIRST HERE FROM THE TIGER..


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Tiger - yep first to say Whitehouse and McCain in same sentence granted ..

then again A2A was pretty much on the money a month back ..
"McCain will make comeback" etc.  
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=241162&highlight=mccain#post241162

PS I read that Hillary appeals to the white women and the Hispanic
And Obama to the white men and the Black Americans,


who does that leave for McCain 
the injuns?


----------



## Doris (7 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Tiger - yep first to say Whitehouse and McCain in same sentence granted ..
> 
> PS I read that Hillary appeals to the white women and the Hispanic
> And Obama to the white men and the Black Americans,
> ...




Hey 2020... I read and heard white women *over 65*, especially in California.
...though Debbie is decades younger and she voted for her!  

Hillary urged a lot of seniors out to poll, for the first time in their lives, when she said her 'mother was born at a time when women did not have the vote and now her daughter is here on this stage...'

... and the Latinos from her record of helping them whilst first lady and a senator. 

Obama gets the vote from the educated young.

Yeah... Haven't seen Native Americans in the exit polls!!  Do they vote?  Nah... too busy with their casinos... in California at least.

Ten times the _normal_ volume of voters turned out! ... despite tornados and blizzards.  But hey... still low turnout figures.


----------



## Doris (7 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

5:10pm QLD time...
________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 6 February 2008 5:10 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Results

Doris --

The votes will be counted into the night and into tomorrow, but today we won states and we won delegates in every part of the country.

*As of right now, we have won more states and delegates than Senator Clinton*. It's a remarkable achievement we can all be proud of.

Tonight, we know one thing for sure -- our time has come, our movement is real, and change is coming to America.

At this moment in history, the stakes are too high and the challenges too great to play the same Washington game with the same Washington players and expect a different result.

This time must be different.

There will be those who say it cannot be done. But we know what we have seen and what we believe -- that when ordinary people come together we can still do extraordinary things.

Yes, we can.

Thank you so much,

Barack



Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (7 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

2020... would you believe Michelle sent your video to me!  Just checking my mail after two days in hosp for tests...



________________________________________
From: Michelle Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, 5 February 2008 11:49 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: You have to see this

Doris --

A friend sent me this video over the weekend.

After nearly a year on the campaign trail, I've seen a lot of things that have touched me deeply, but I had to share this with you:

http://my.barackobama.com/yeswecan

Sharing this video, which was created by supporters, is one more way to help start a conversation with your friends, family, coworkers, and anyone else who will be voting soon about the issues important to them in this election.

Right now people like you are making phone calls, emailing friends, and doing everything they can to reach voters before the big vote tomorrow.

This is our moment -- please do what you can to help.

Thank you so much,

Michelle




Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## trading_rookie (7 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*







@Doris, I think your friend Michele is telling porkies, Clinton is slightly in front. Obama might have won more 'smaller' states to Clinton but adding up the delegates that Clinton has won from the bigger states means it's gonna be neck and neck. I wouldn't be suprised if the Democratic caucus has to choose who their two canididates will be and what a waste of hundreds of millions of dollars for a country trying to keep out of a recession...


----------



## Doris (7 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



trading_rookie said:


> @Doris, I think your friend Michele is telling porkies, Clinton is slightly in front. Obama might have won more 'smaller' states to Clinton but adding up the delegates that Clinton has won from the bigger states means it's gonna be neck and neck. I wouldn't be suprised if the Democratic caucus has to choose who their two canididates will be and what a waste of hundreds of millions of dollars for a country trying to keep out of a recession...




Hey TR

You are sooo right!  What a waste of money on the media industry! (Unless Barack wins!)

Michelle just sent out the video.  *Her husband Barack said he'd won on Tuesday's polls both in terms of states and delegates*.

Here's part of an email from Barack's campaign manager today:

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2008 12:26 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Startling news

Doris --

I was writing a note to you about the state of the race after Super Tuesday when we got some startling news.

The Clinton campaign just announced that Hillary and Bill Clinton injected $5 million of their personal fortune into her campaign a few days ago.

This is a dramatic move, and a clear acknowledgement that our campaign has the momentum. We saw undeniable evidence of that last night as the results came in.

*Barack Obama won the most states and the most delegates on February 5th.*

We have gotten to this point thanks to an unprecedented outpouring of support from ordinary Americans.

The Clinton infusion of $5 million -- and there are reports it could end up being as much as $20 million -- will give them huge resources for the next set of primaries and caucuses.

We have raised more than $3 million since the polls closed on February 5th. But we have no choice -- we must match their $5 million right now.

Just two weeks ago we were behind by double-digits in many of the states that voted yesterday, but *Barack won 13 states to 8 states for Hillary* Clinton, with one state (New Mexico) still counting votes.

We won yesterday because thousands upon thousands of individual supporters canvassed their neighborhoods, talked to their neighbors and friends, and made phone calls to remind their fellow supporters to get out the vote.

And we accomplished all of this with a campaign funded by ordinary people giving only what they can afford.

Yesterday was proof that America is ready for change -- and that you are the force to make that change happen.

But there's still a long way to go before Barack becomes the Democratic nominee. *In the next week* alone, six more states will hold their primaries and caucuses.

We need to match this $5 million personal contribution from the Clintons immediately and put these resources to work in the states that will vote next.

Here are some details about yesterday's historic victory. According to official results and exit polls:

•	Barack won 2-to-1 in traditionally conservative states where Democrats are hungry for a nominee who can change the map and help Democrats up and down the ticket win in November
•	Our winning coalition included Americans of every race, background, and gender -- including 64% of women in Georgia
•	We scored wins in every region of the country -- New England, the Mid-Atlantic, the South, the Midwest, the Rocky Mountain states, and the West.

Americans had a clear choice to make yesterday, and they chose Barack Obama.

Now let's match this $5 million and take this campaign into the next stage.

Thank you,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America



Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (8 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Washington Post:

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton announced yesterday that she had *lent her campaign $5 million*, a remarkable twist for a candidate who raised more than $100 million last year that came as she and Sen. Barack Obama continued to spar over which of them was the Democratic winner in coast-to-coast Super Tuesday balloting.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...601306.html?tid=informbox&sid=ST2008020601923 


RESULTS 
The results left Clinton (N.Y.) and Obama (Ill.) roughly even in the number of pledged delegates accumulated during the first month of the Democratic presidential primary and caucus season. Through the first four party-sanctioned contests before Super Tuesday, *Obama had won 63 delegates to Clinton's 48.*

A total of *1,681 delegates were at stake Tuesday*, and the Associated Press reported yesterday that Clinton won 737, compared with 699 for Obama, with almost 300 still to be awarded.

Obama advisers said that he would *emerge from Tuesday's voting with 847 delegates to Clinton's 834, giving him a lead of 910 to 882 among pledged delegates.* The Clinton campaign said it did not have final projections but estimated that the margin between the two would be in the single digits.

Beyond the delegates awarded on the basis of the primary and caucus results, *Clinton has a lead among the 796 superdelegates* -- party officials, members of Congress, governors and others -- who automatically have voting status at the Democratic National Convention and are not bound by the results of contests in their states in deciding whom to support.

There is no official count of these delegates, but various news organizations are reporting that Clinton leads Obama by about 90 superdelegates, with about 450 not publicly committed. Clinton got an early jump on Obama in the competition for superdelegates, but the senator from Illinois has begun to catch up as he has amassed endorsements from mainstream party figures.

Given how competitive the race is, *many superdelegates may remain neutral to see whether one of the two candidates gains a clear advantage*. That, Democratic strategists said, would require Clinton or Obama to go on a lengthy winning streak that would include victories in the March 4 Ohio and Texas primaries. Obama is making a big play for Texas, with plans to open 10 offices there in the days ahead.

"If you notice, we have been closing the gap steadily," Obama said. "I think we will continue to close the gap."


----------



## agro (8 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I hope John McCain wins

according to wikipedia his policies are much in line with howard's i think (yes i am liberal)...conservative

it will be interesting though, Clinton Vs McCain in the primaries


----------



## wayneL (8 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Question for all:

Why do we who live outside of the evil empire give a $#@! who the American candidates are?

We can't vote, what's the point?


----------



## agro (8 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Question for all:
> 
> Why do we who live outside of the evil empire give a $#@! who the American candidates are?
> 
> We can't vote, what's the point?




it would have a rub on effect on australia indirectly

the economy etc of America > world


----------



## trading_rookie (8 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hey Doris, from a News report on Lateline ABC, it was stated that a NY publication (can't recall which one) had it up for all to see on their billboards (Time Square I presume?) that Clinton was slightly ahead. 

Clinton won NY and Cali...bigger states to those won by Obama on super Tuesday.

Personally I'd like to see Clinton win. I don't believe that a change of colour yet same gender is going to make that much of a difference. We've already had Ghandi, Gadaffi, Edi Amin, Hussien, etc. Maybe it's time for a woman to come in and give the place a 'clean' up 'cause after all, that's what women do best ;-) 



> I hope John McCain wins
> 
> according to wikipedia his policies are much in line with howard's i think (yes i am liberal)...conservative
> 
> it will be interesting though, Clinton Vs McCain in the primaries




News reports suggests McCain would prefer to face Clinton than Obama...


----------



## moneymajix (8 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama seems to represent a refreshingly, new energy.

His campaign seems to be gaining momentum.



*Small donors add up to $36b secret weapon for Obama*

February 2, 2008

http://www.theage.com.au/news/us-election/small-donors-aid-obama/2008/02/01/1201801037093.html




> The money was mostly collected from small donors, who represent an increasingly formidable force in presidential fund-raising. The Obama campaign is hoping many of its 650,000 contributors will continue to give more in the months ahead.
> 
> By contrast, the other contender for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton, has relied more on a smaller pool of big-money donors, many of whom have already given the maximum allowable under the law.
> 
> The $US32 million ($A35.7 million) is significant because no candidate who has yet to secure the party nomination has raised this amount in a single month.





Raising money from small donors is very good, imo. 
Large contributors (read lobbyists) are looking for something for their bucks.

Power to the People!


----------



## Agentm (8 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

anyone for KFC?

kentucky fried clinton??


----------



## Doris (9 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



agro said:


> I hope John McCain wins






trading_rookie said:


> Personally I'd like to see Clinton win. I don't believe that a change of colour yet same gender is going to make that much of a difference...




A lot of Americans believe the last thing they need is another white male president!


----------



## Doris (9 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



trading_rookie said:


> Hey Doris, from a News report on Lateline ABC, it was stated that a NY publication (can't recall which one) had it up for all to see on their billboards (Time Square I presume?) that Clinton was slightly ahead.
> 
> Clinton won NY and Cali...bigger states to those won by Obama on super Tuesday.




  TR... You are right! 

That would have been the total overall delegates whereas it seems the boys were lauding the Super TUESDAY polls:


http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#D 

*TOTAL DELEGATES TO DATE*

*Hillary Clinton*
Pledged:           840
Superdelegates: 193
*Total: 1,033*

*Barack Obama*
Pledged:           831
Superdelegates: 106
*Total: 937*

*1996 of the 4049* delegates have been pledged to date.  26 went to John Edwards.

Of course they need 2025 to win as there are 4049 delegates!


*Obama Campaign Adviser Welcomes Super Tuesday Results*

Former US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa in President Bill Clinton’s administration, Susan Rice, is an Obama supporter, adviser, and campaigner in this election year.  She says Senator Obama’s success on Super Tuesday keeps him very much in the running.           

“Senator Obama is on a very positive trajectory.  Electorally, *he won more delegates than Senator Clinton did on Tuesday.* He won more states than Senator Clinton did, and it is quite an extraordinary position for him to be in,” she said.

Ms. Rice, who is a Senior Foreign Policy Fellow on leave from Washington's Brookings Institution, refutes the notion that Senators Clinton and Obama take similar positions on most political issues and says there is a lot of room for discerning voters to make a choice.

“I think their differences are significant, both on policy and in terms of their character and orientation.  I was privileged to serve President (Bill) Clinton for eight years in the White House and the State Department, and I have considerable respect and admiration for President Clinton and Mrs. Clinton.  But *I am for Barack Obama at this point because I think he is precisely the sort of leader that the United States needs at this point*.  We need somebody who is focused on the future, who can bring our country together, who won’t be sidelined or trapped in the divisive politics of the past,” Rice reasons.

As for upcoming state primaries this month and next, Susan Rice expects the political momentum to keep building for her candidate because his message of hope and idealism appeal and rejuvenate voter enthusiasm,  not only among African-Americans and young voters, but also tap into a large number of voters once believed to be behind Senator Clinton.

“*What is dramatically clear is that the more the public and the American voters see of Barack Obama, the stronger his performance is at the polls*.  He has closed an extraordinary 30 point gap in the national polls.  When all the votes from Tuesday are counted, you will see that Senator Obama and Senator Clinton got virtually the same number of votes.  He is appealing to Americans’ desire to put division and discord behind us,” said Rice.

Named to Obama’s campaign team of national foreign policy experts before the current primary election season, former State Department official Rice notes that *one of the great strengths of an Obama presidency would be his ability to win respect and new friends for America around the globe*.

“Barack Obama is a man who has roots in many different quarters of the world, as well as obviously here in the United States.  He has a judgment and a temperament that enable him to see the danger and the folly of the war in Iraq from the start, enabled him to call timeout when the hawks in Washington were beating the drums for war with Iran.  He has a sensitivity and a sensibility about America’s relationship with the rest of the world that I think is very badly needed.  He recognizes that America’s security and well-being is inextricably linked to the security and well-being of people in Africa, in Asia, and Latin America and every other part of the world,” says Rice.


----------



## Martyn500 (9 February 2008)

*Ron Paul*

Ron Paul is the only candidate who should be President...

I like what this guy says.
This guy is leaning towards anti-capitalism though. Its capitalism that causes inflation with the principle of 'interest' on money borrowed and ever expanding 'growth' instead of moving towards sustainability.   We cant grow forever. that much is obvious. Capitalism has a finite life. There will be something to replace but i dont think we are ready yet.

Governments seem to think they should be like  capitalist business and grow.  I think they should be the opposite. they should to try to shrink. To become less of a burden on society. It is entirely possible for taxes to go down cosistantly in reak terms. But they continue to go up.

He wont get in though. It would take a revolution to apply even one of his ideas. 

( wasnt much in that about stocks and shares was there! )


----------



## vida (9 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I hope Obama prevails and is the new first ever black president of USA - what a coup that would be, so exciting. The old politics in usa needs a big buzz and people are starving for what he offers. they call him the new JFK and that is ok but ominous as such vibrant inspiring figures also trigger the flip side of the coin and we don't want to cope with another assassination.


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> TR... You are right!
> 
> That would have been the total overall delegates whereas it seems the boys were lauding the Super TUESDAY polls:
> 
> ...




http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/swing-to-obama-expected/2008/02/09/1202234232387.html 

*February 10, 2008*
"The final tally of delegates has still not been allocated following the Super Tuesday poll. Yesterday, the 2008 Democratic Convention Watch website gave Senator Clinton 862 elected delegates to Senator Obama's 883. But when super-delegates - the 700-plus members of Congress, governors and others who automatically have a vote at the conventions - are taken into account, Senator Clinton has 1065 delegates while Senator Obama has 996.

The race for the candidacy looks poised to swing Senator Obama's way after this weekend's round of voting in Washington State, Nebraska, the Virgin Islands and Louisiana.

Senator Clinton's campaign team anticipates that she will lose her lead this month but is banking on her regaining it in the mega-states of Texas and Ohio on March 4 and Pennsylvania on April 22."


Why don't they include Maine in their item?  
Obama Rally there today our time (voting tomorrow our time) in Bangor Maine!  

*Hey 2020...* Got a song on that?     King of the Road?    

________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:maine@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Friday, 8 February 2008 11:04 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: One last thing...

Doris --

Sunday is Caucus Day in Maine, and I'm writing to you with an important reminder to caucus and to make sure that your family, friends, and neighbors get out and caucus too.

When Michelle and I talked about my running for president, one of the core goals we both had for this campaign was to leave the political process better off than we found it.

You have challenged conventional thinking and built a grassroots movement for change that is sweeping this country.

I have no doubt that the election Sunday will be close. 
Our work here will have a lasting impact in Maine for a long time to come.

I believe that this movement for change can do more than just win an election. Together, we can transform this country.

Thank you for being part of this,

Barack

P.S. -- Here are a few details and rules that will help make the caucus process run smoothly. Make sure to share these with your friends:

•	Different caucuses will begin at different times. 
•	If you are not on the voter rolls, you can register on-site and participate in the caucus.
•	If you are not currently enrolled in any party, you can register at the caucus site.
•	If you will be 18 by November 4, 2008, you may register and take part in the caucus. 


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



vida said:


> I hope Obama prevails and is the new first ever black president of USA - what a coup that would be, so exciting. The old politics in usa needs a big buzz and people are starving for what he offers. they call him the new JFK and that is ok but ominous as such vibrant inspiring figures also trigger the flip side of the coin and we don't want to cope with another assassination.




You sound inspired VIDA!  Yes... he's caused a buzz and a feeding frenzy!

I have to say I don't even think of his colour.  I see the passion, intelligence  and determination in his eyes and feel so anticipatory about what he could do with this job.  His public persona is not a facade. 

He is always saying 'we', whereas Hillary is always 'I and you'. 

His secret service security is tight... and no bags nor placards allowed into rallies.  But yes it's a constant concern. 

Every $25 donation has another voter feeling as they own a part of his campaign.  His fund raising speaks volumes!


----------



## vida (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi Doris

Yes there is definitely something special about him, he comes across as brilliant, caring, uncorrupted and sincere. We don't normally find that in politicians usually the exact opposite. Then he isn't really black but half white so he crosses the divide, and then he is tall and handsome and has a nice family. His wife will clearly be an active participant and the white house will still have a woman in power who is probably also capable of becoming president one day in the far far future. So he opens the door to a big renaissance in usa and the world and I think he will win it. Its amazing how it seemed hilary had it in the bag with her massive funding but now he has it too




Doris said:


> You sound inspired VIDA!  Yes... he's caused a buzz and a feeding frenzy!
> 
> I have to say I don't even think of his colour.  I see the passion, intelligence  and determination in his eyes and feel so anticipatory about what he could do with this job.  His public persona is not a facade.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris
a couple of youtubes that your friend may enjoy 
by a bloke over here name of Hugh Atkin - genious at this stuff 
He won the ABC Innovative Sledge competition 

Do you think "change" is the buzzword maybe? lol 

(PS I just wish the coke machine at work would occasionally deliver "change"  )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEaS-K3j3M8

this one is ok also 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3enFIPvnFg

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/sledge/


> Hugh Atkin, 23-year-old law student from Sydney, is preparing himself for a big week with The Chaser following the announcement of his win in ABC Innovation's Sledge competition.
> We asked Australians to help lighten up the lead into this Saturday's polls by uploading their own satirical takes on politics, with the prize being a week spent in production with the Chaser team.
> Hugh will be thrown straight in to the lion’s den, as his first day with the team is this week, two days out from polling. He’ll stay on to Wednesday 28 November with the taping of the final episode of The Chaser Decides.
> Hugh's video "Kevin Rudd – Chinese Propaganda" featured a parody of Maoist political 'advertising'. It cleverly tied Rudd's well-known interest in China into a pastiche of political speak and imagery.
> ...


----------



## noirua (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> You sound inspired VIDA!  Yes... he's caused a buzz and a feeding frenzy!
> 
> I have to say I don't even think of his colour.  I see the passion, intelligence  and determination in his eyes and feel so anticipatory about what he could do with this job.  His public persona is not a facade.
> 
> ...




Hi Doris, Don't you think it is best for the Democratic Party for Obama to drop out of the race, afterall, Romney did the Gentlemanly thing and fell on his sword?


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Just in: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/livecoverage/?hpid=topnews 

*Obama Wins in Nebraska, Leads Clinton in Washington State*

Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) defeated Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y) in Nebraska and took a strong lead over Clinton in Washington state today, as the two combatants for the Democratic presidential nomination fought over delegates in the Midwest, the Northwest and the Gulf Coast.

With nearly two thirds of the Nebraska caucus vote counted, Obama led Clinton, 69 percent to 31 percent. In Washington state, meanwhile, Obama took about a two-to-one lead over Clinton, with about a third of the caucus votes counted.

In the wake of Tuesday's showdown in 21 states that left Clinton (N.Y.) and Obama (Ill.) roughly even in the number of pledged delegates, the two have lavished attention on Nebraska, Louisiana and Washington state, in a frenetic effort to bulk up their delegate counts.

Earlier today, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee delivered a humiliating defeat to Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) in the Kansas Republican presidential caucuses. Although McCain appeared to have locked up the nomination with a strong Super Tuesday performance and former governor Mitt Romney's announcement he was dropping out of the race, Huckabee beat McCain in Kansas, 60 percent to 24 percent, with 11 percent going to Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.)

At stake today were 36 of Kansas's 39 delegates to the Republican National Convention this summer, and *Huckabee won all 36.*



_I'm sure we don't have to worry about Huck.  Religious fanatics are parochial.

For those who said Obama didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting the nomination, this snowball is rolling down the hill and the momentum is awesome!

Why is the press NOT noting the Maine caucus is on?  Barack's main challenge this weekend is Maine.  
Hmmm... Ok... It's Saturday there... Maine is tomorrow!_


----------



## wayneL (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack puts on a great show. It reminds me of most current music videos.... Long on showmanship and special effects, short on talent. Likewise Obama is long on hyperbole, short on substance.

But the bloody Yanks like that... in music and politics.


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Barack puts on a great show. It reminds me of most current music videos.... Long on showmanship and special effects, short on talent. Likewise Obama is long on hyperbole, short on substance.
> 
> But the bloody Yanks like that... in music and politics.



hyperbowl ?
hey you keep grid iron out of this!


----------



## wayneL (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> hyperbowl ?
> hey you keep grid iron out of this!



Haha!

But it's  pronounced - hy-*pur*-buh-lee


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hey Vida...

When I read Barack's book, 'The Audacity of Hope', in December 2006, I felt Wow!  This guy should be president!  He could actually change the world by uniting all colours and creeds as he sees people as intrinsically valued individuals. He treated problems as opportunities to solve them and relished them as he has an innate talent of gathering information before drawing conclusions.  If you haven't read his book you have a treat in store.  So easy and enjoyable to read as you get inside his mind and his life.  

He is not just affecting the voters but gathering government leaders... uniting people augers well for implementation in 2009:


_Obama spoke at three major events in Seattle yesterday, where he picked up the *endorsement of Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire*.  Gov. Gregoire (D) threw her support to Obama late this week after speaking with the Illinois senator four times. *"He is leading us toward a positive feeling of hope in our country, and I love seeing that happen,"* she said.

The day before, he addressed big crowds in New Orleans and Omaha. 

Obama has Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), Omaha Mayor Mike Fahey and Lincoln Mayor Chris Beutler on his side. Nelson noted that Obama's Thursday visit to Omaha was the first time a high-profile presidential candidate had campaigned in a Nebraska primary since the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy appeared there in 1968._


I wonder if someone in the campaign noted and planned this... obviously good strategy for making Nebraskan voters feel valued!  

We like people who make us feel good!  The typical 'blame and attack' divisive campaign doesn't do this for most although some enjoy the Shaden Freude. 

Obama sells his product without denigrating the opposition's product.  This engenders voters looking to Obama for what appeals and makes them feel good, rather than being turned off by traditional continual political spite attacks.  He promotes their self-esteem in his hope theme.


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Do you think "change" is the buzzword maybe? lol
> 
> (PS I just wish the coke machine at work would occasionally deliver "change"  )




2020... you're the master for puns!  

But I'm shocked!  You gave up coffee... but your caffeine hit still comes!

Stick with coffee mate!  Up to three hits a day has anti-carcinogenic potential.  Coke has acids that (like excess caffeine) leech calcium from your bones.  If you eat salty food with it then it's excreted from the kidneys!  Osteoporosis is incurable!


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Osteoporosis is incurable!




ahh lol - now to give up coke as well - (I was joking btw - they took the coke machine away because we all refused to buy any lol) 

- PS so is stupidity incurable I'm told. 
 I trust you watched the youtubes...

witty - fair - without being nasty.

These by same author (student at Sydney Uni) - on local politics though. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fbc6Uvgjle4 Nelson ( posted elsewhere)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptccZze7VxQ Kevin Rudd - Chinese Propaganda Video 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rEVHZly21Kk ditto
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtFZ8oe8ouU John Howard's Orangutan Initiative 


This bloke (Hugh Atkin) could well be a guest on Chasers (reading between the lines somewhere there)


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hi Doris, Don't you think it is best for the Democratic Party for Obama to drop out of the race, afterall, Romney did the Gentlemanly thing and fell on his sword?




Huh?  

Losers never win (because they give up) and winners never lose (endurance of Obama and Hillary)!

*A Parting Gift for Romney*
Posted at 5:16 PM ET on Feb 9, 2008  (This morning our time)

Mitt Romney told conservatives at CPAC Thursday that he was dropping out of the race. Today, those same conservatives chose Romney as their choice for the Republican nomination.

More than three-quarters of the ballots cast in the CPAC straw poll were turned in after Romney's much-publicized announcement. But Romney still edged out Sen. John McCain, 35 percent to 34 percent, according to the CPAC web site.


_Romney did his maths and figured his $35 million personal contribution was enough outlay for the delegates he was getting.  He said he'll be back next time. He's a businessman who misread the maths in their complicated system when he bailed out, so he'd have been even more disastrous making decisions for the country IMO!_


*WHY POLLS VARY IN WHO IS WINNING:*

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/primaries/

_"We have earned more delegates, won more votes, and won more states [than the Clinton campaign]"
_
    --Obama campaign manager David Plouffe, conference call with reporters, Feb. 7, 2008. 


Most news organizations, including The Washington Post, are showing Hillary Clinton slightly ahead of Barack Obama in delegates to the Democratic Convention. *So how can the Obama campaign claim that it is ahead?*

The answer lies in the mind-boggling complexity of the Democratic nomination process, with rules that vary from state to state and several different categories of delegates. Some states that voted on Super Tuesday have yet to apportion all their delegates and it will take some time before anybody can come up with *precise* figures.


*The Facts*  (_Sunday morning our time_)

The Obama campaign is correct in claiming that it has won the most states.  

Hillary:  1064... 12 states
Obama: 1029... 18 states

The *total number* of a state's delegates *may not be allocated* at the time that state's winner is declared. 

Additionally, a state's "superdelegates" may commit to a candidate at any time until the party convention.


The Obama camp can also fairly claim to have *won the largest share of the popular vote:*

*7,825,466 for Obama and 7,734,770 for Clinton.* 


*The EARNED DELEGATE TOTALS are much more complicated*. 
As used by the Obama campaign, this term excludes unpledged delegates, or superdelegates. Here, everything depends on who is doing the counting.

Some delegates are apportioned by congressional district, while other delegates are apportioned at the state level.


The overall Associated Press figures also *include informal surveys of superdelegates*, mainly members of Congress and other prominent Democratic Party officials, *who are free to change their vote at any time.*

NBC has been showing a slight advantage for Obama in pledged delegates. *The NBC count excludes superdelegates.*

Websites to keep track of the delegate totals: They all report different figures, with NBC News the only one so far to put Obama ahead (in pledged delegates.)

Washington Post
New York Times
ABC
CBS
NBC
CNN

So... some news media take informal survey results on superdelegates and add this to their total... even though these superdelegates have not formally pledged and can change their mind up until the August convention.


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ahh lol - now to give up coke as well - (I was joking btw - they took the coke machine away because we all refused to buy any lol)
> 
> - PS so is stupidity incurable I'm told.
> I trust you watched the youtubes...
> ...





Nelson... well...       Won't tempt fate... touch wood.


Brilliant and innovative Hugh Atkin videos!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEaS-K3j3M8

The work that Hugh Atkin put into editing this!  Brilliant!  
Of course the others joined Barack's bandwagon of his slogan you know:
"Change we can believe in"...

Yes...There's often a thin line between being witty and being nasty...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3enFIPvnFg

To actually have a memory and neuron network so good as to link the idiosyncrasies of Cruise's interview on Scientology with Hillary's tear-jerker interview that tried to show voters she had a heart.  Brilliant!  

I won't tell Debbie (in OC) that it was B grade acting on Hillary's part when I send her the link.  

Cruise was credible...  Hillary's affectations were hyperbole!


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Barack Obama trounces Hillary Clinton*... Released 2 hours ago

*Barack Obama trounced Hillary Clinton in contests across America last night*, beating her by margins of more than two to one in Washington state and Nebraska and *winning the Louisiana primary by 53 per cent to 39 per cent*, with over two-thirds of the votes counted.

The scale of his triumph sent shockwaves through Clinton’s campaign, even though it was braced for a poor night. Obama won the Nebraska caucuses by *68 to 32 per cent* and Washington state by *68 to 31 per cent*. Obama led Clinton, *58 percent to 36 percent, in Louisiana*.  He won 90 per cent of the vote in the US Virgin Islands.

*Obama’s clean sweep will help him to catch up* with Clinton in the race to obtain the 2025 delegates needed to secure his party’s nomination. He now heads into the delegate-rich “Potomac” primary in Maryland, Virginia and Washington DC on Tuesday with vital momentum. 

Obama greeted the results at Democratic party dinner in Richmond, Virginia, last night, which was also attended by Clinton. She left the stage to chants of “Obama” before the arrival of her opponent.

“*I knew* I wouldn’t be Washington’s favourite candidate. *I knew* we wouldn’t get all the big donors or endorsements right off the bat. *I knew* I would be the underdog,” Obama said, referring to the start of his campaign a year ago. “*But then something started happening*.” 

Last night’s victories give Obama an edge in the most evenly matched Democratic presidential race in generations, proving that he can beat Clinton in organisation, fundraising and the popular vote. The New York senator was forced to loan her own campaign $5m last month to stay competitive with Obama, despite raising over $100m last year.

Clinton’s camp admitted that it was “dramatically outspent” by Obama in last night’s contests, an excuse it never imagined it would have to make when the battle for the nomination began.

The breadth of Obama’s success from the West Coast to the South and the white heartlands of Middle America will boost his claim to be the best placed candidate to beat John McCain, the near-certain Republican nominee. 

The exit polls in Louisiana showed the Democratic race remains polarised between race, gender and class in some states, with *Obama winning 82 per cent of the black vote and Clinton winning 70 per cent of the white vote*, according to CNN. He continued to attract well-educated voters of all races, while she scored well among blue-collar workers.

Clinton is hoping for a consolation victory when *Maine* holds its caucus today, but the fervour and commitment of his supporters could outmatch hers. 

_Obama is worried about Maine!_


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Roger Miller - King Of The Road*

"destination: Bangor Maine"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARj-sWYQs4Y

Will Barack make a clean sweep in Maine tomorrow? 


BANGOR, Me. ”” Both Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama campaigned in Maine today in advance of the state’s Democratic caucuses tomorrow.

Maine appears to be one of the post-Super Tuesday states where Mrs. Clinton is very competitive with Mr. Obama, although *there have been no polls*. A win here could help Mrs. Clinton blunt the edge of what many analysts suggest will be Mr. Obama’s expected victories in some of the other eight states that vote today and later this month before Ohio and Texas in March.

At stake in Maine are 34 delegates, 10 of whom will be unpledged superdelegates. *They are allocated proportionately*, and with the national delegate count neck and neck, each one matters.

*Analysts say that Mrs. Clinton could run well against Mr. Obama here because many of Maine’s voters fit the demographic profile of voters she has won elsewhere*: older, blue-collar and heavily female, in a state that is economically stressed. *It has a large population of people without college degrees and who make less than $50,000 a year*. Almost all voters here are white.

“The demographics don’t favor Obama,” said Amy Fried, also a political scientist at the University of Maine. “But there are other factors at work, like a populist, independent streak, that could work for Obama.”

After flying in from Chicago, Mr. Obama went to Nicky’s, a popular retro diner, for his first event, here in the northern half of the state. He held a roundtable discussion in which he talked about the economy, health-care costs and college tuition issues with four middle-class voters, at least three of whom make less than $44,000. 

“America needs a new generation of leadership that will push back,” Mr. Obama said to reporters before sitting down for the roundtable. He also took aim at Mr. McCain, saying that he had “embraced” President Bush’s tax cuts for the wealthy.

Then he offered his own tax-cut plan for the middle class, saying he would cut taxes for 150 million Americans, including 700,000 people in Maine. He also said he would eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000.

Afterward, he drew 10,000 people to a thunderous rally here at the Bangor Auditorium, where 7,000 people were packed to the rafters and about 3,000 others constituted an overflow crowd outside, according to official estimates.

He took some shots at Mr. McCain and Mrs. Clinton but fired up the crowd when he talked about hope. *When John F. Kennedy looked up at the moon, Mr. Obama said, “he didn’t say, ‘Ah, it’s too far.’ He said, ‘Let’s go!’”*

“This is our moment, Bangor” he declared. “This is our time.”

He was to fly later tonight to Virginia, where he is to speak at the Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner in advance of Tuesday’s primary there.


_ This is an example of the devious part of politics that needs eliminating:_

Hillary spoke highly of former Senator John Edwards, who dropped out of the race before the Super Tuesday primaries and who was relatively popular here. Both she and Mr. Obama are vying for his supporters.

“I want to compliment Senator Edwards, who is a fighter,” she said. “There is a lot that John and I have in common. And *I intend to ask John Edwards to be a part of anything I do.”*

*A campaign spokeswoman said later that Mrs. Clinton was not necessarily saying she would pick him as her running mate.*


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hi Doris, Don't you think it is best for the Democratic Party for Obama to drop out of the race, afterall, Romney did the Gentlemanly thing and fell on his sword?




Noirua, do you really see an analogy between Mitt and Barack?

My apologies for being attracted to what I want to hear:

*Romney Reaganesque Withdrawal*
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/08/romney-reaganesque-withdrawl/#more-4188

 Just before Mitt Romney made his exit yesterday, Laura Ingraham introduced him to a crowd of conservatives by asserting that Republicans had made a fateful mistake at their tumultuous convention in 1976 by nominating the incumbent President Gerald Ford, a moderate, over Reagan. Mr. Romney then took the stage and picked up on the same analogy, putting himself in the role of Reagan. “There is an important difference between now and 1976,” he said. “*Today we are a nation at war.” And for that reason, he said, he had to withdraw now so that the party could unify against the Democratic threat to withdraw prematurely from Iraq.*

Well, yes, the war is one difference between this race and 1976. Here’s another: In 1976, *Reagan was actually winning tons of delegates*. In fact, he came to the Republican convention very nearly poised to steal the nomination from a sitting president of his own party; *he had millions of followers who would have walked any distance to make it happen*. 

Mr. Romney, by contrast, was in third place, behind Mike Huckabee, who’s campaign has raised about as much money as the kid who just knocked on my door because his class is going to Florida. More than a quarter of the states Mr. Romney managed to win were those he had lived in, despite spending more than $35 million of his own money to attack his rivals everywhere else.

Here’s another small difference between Reagan and Mr. Romney: *Reagan was a serious bedrock conservative ideologue*, going back to his electrifying support for Barry Goldwater 12 years earlier. Mr. Romney, on the other hand, had said he was an independent during the Reagan years, and not so long ago he was on the record supporting abortion rights and gay rights. *It’s hard to be the standard-bearer for a conservative uprising if your own conservatism seems rooted in necessity.*

The way Mr. Romney justified his decision yesterday says a lot about why he wasn’t successful in the first place. *Rather than just own up to the situation ”” “We just didn’t win the states we needed to win,” or something like that* ”” Mr. Romney, ever the business consultant, *had to try to customize his message for the client*. My colleague David Brooks once wrote that Mr. Romney was running the perfect campaign for 1980, and in this way I think he was right: *in an era where voters send every sign that they are craving a sense of authenticity and conviction in their leaders*, Mr. *Romney always gave the sense that he was telling you what you wanted to hear, or at least what he thought you might believe*. He treated his campaign, from the start, less as an expression of self than as a reflection of what his methodical research had determined the market to be.

One of Mr. Romney’s worst moments as a candidate, and one of the most telling, came on Martin Luther King Day, when he greeted black voters in Michigan by chanting “Who Let the Dogs Out?” and complimenting one baby on his serious “bling bling.” It is, even now, excruciating video to watch, and that’s because *in it he is trying so darn hard to sound like the people whose votes he is courting*. To a lot of conservatives, Mr. Romney’s Reaganesque rhetoric sounded just as tinny””and no less needy. *That he went out casting his final concession as a sacrifice to the greater conservative cause, rather than as a bow to simple mathematics, just served to underscore the point.*


----------



## Doris (10 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama pummels Clinton in White House clean sweep*
one hour ago:

SEATTLE, United States (AFP) ”” Senator Barack Obama swept the board Saturday, pummeling Hillary Clinton in three Democratic nominating contests, as Republican Mike Huckabee gave John McCain a run for his money.

The Illinois senator, bidding to be the country's first black president, swept *Washington and Nebraska with a staggering 68 percent of the vote*. In Louisiana, with 98 percent of precincts reporting, he was on 57 percent.

"We won north, we won south, we won in between," Obama told 6,000 cheering guests in an electrifying speech at a Democratic dinner in Virginia.

"*People want to turn the page. They want to write a new chapter in American history. And today the voters from the west coast to the Gulf coast to the heart of America stood up to say yes, we can,*" Obama said.

Saturday's results give 46-year-old Obama a high-voltage burst of energy ahead of the next nominating contests: on Tuesday in Virginia, Maryland and Washington DC and then Texas and Ohio on March 4.

And the latest results will be a blow to New York Senator Clinton in her bid to be the first woman president, as she badly needs a win as the race moves to new battlegrounds after the Super Tuesday contests ended in a stalemate.

Clinton, 60, was also pumping up the crowds at the Jefferson-Jackson dinner in Richmond, Virginia, asking: "Are you ready to take back the White House and take back our country?" *She was warmly received, but it was Obama who raised the roof.*

Clinton and Obama are locked in a tussle for delegates to the party's convention in Denver in August, chasing the 2,025 delegates needed to win the party's nomination for November's presidential elections.

Thanks to the complex Democratic Party rules, it was not immediately clear how many delegates Obama picked up from his victories on Saturday.

But Washington state was the biggest prize with 78 delegates up for grabs, and a further *19 superdelegates who can vote for whom they like*. Louisiana has some 56 delegates; *Nebraska has 24*. Maine, which votes on Sunday, has 24 delegates and 10 superdelegates.

Three delegates were at stake in the Virgin Islands, a US possession in the Caribbean Sea east of Puerto Rico, which Obama won with 89 percent support, US media reported.

*A tally by independent pollsters RealClearPolitics late Saturday put Clinton only marginally ahead in the delegate count, with 1,112 to Obama's 1,096.*

A national Newsweek poll out Friday had Obama overtaking Clinton's once-commanding lead for the first time, with 42 percent to 41.

Obama late Saturday claimed as his own the Democratic Party's crown for the November polls.

"The Republicans in Washington are already running on the politics of yesterday which is why your party must be the party of tomorrow and that is the party I intend to lead as president of the United States of America," he said to deafening cheers.

Obama appears poised for victory in Virginia and Maryland, in part due to the large number of African-American voters.

*Virginia Governor Tim Kaine said he endorsed Obama because "he is a unifier in times of bitter division. He is an agent of change at a time when our nation needs change."*

Pete Crane, a Washington state caucus-goer for more than 30 years, said the turnout at a caucus in Bremerton was "by far" the biggest crowd he had seen.

"It was an incredible crowd, probably three times what it was four years ago," Crane told AFP. *The precinct went 32 to 12 to Obama.
*

“I believe John McCain is a good man and a genuine American hero, and we honor his half century of service to this nation. But understand in this campaign, in this year, he has made the decision to embrace the failed policies of George Bush’s Washington,” Obama said.

And continuing to talk more and more like a frontrunner, Obama outlined the differences between himself and McCain. “*It’s a choice between debating John McCain about who has the most experience in Washington, or debating him about who’s more likely to change Washington. Because that’s a debate we can win*.”

America needs a Democrat in the White House, Obama said. “We need to win. America needs us to win. Virginia Democrats know how important this is.”

Following his speech, the Obama campaign sent out emails to reporters, *claiming to have a 72 pledged delegate lead over Clinton after today’s wins*. And, they say, the Obama campaign has raised “well more” than the Clinton camp this month from more donors, although they did not put out a specific number to match Clinton’s $10 million since February 5th.


----------



## wayneL (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

We are all capable of being force-fed the US preselection nonsense from normal MSM sources.

:sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:

Wake me up when we can have a go at Crash Gordon.


----------



## Doris (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama Defeats Clinton in Maine Caucuses


*Obama won 15* of Maine's delegates. *Clinton won 9*. 

In the overall race for the nomination:

Clinton leads with 1,136
Obama has 1,108.


Colin Johnson, an Obama supporter in Portland, said the Illinois senator is not a typical politician. *"I'm convinced he's a once-in-a-generation leader,"* he said.

"He's young and energetic and Washington and the White House could benefit from some fresh air," said Joe Lewis, another Obama supporter. 




Doris said:


> Will Barack make a clean sweep in Maine tomorrow?
> 
> _ This is an example of the devious part of politics that needs eliminating:_
> 
> ...




Hillary threw the dog a bone but he knew it was plastic:

On Sunday, Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts visited Maine caucuses *on Obama's behalf*.

I still think JK will make a wonderful running mate for BO!


----------



## Doris (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> We are all capable of being force-fed the US preselection nonsense from normal MSM sources.
> 
> :sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:
> 
> Wake me up when we can have a go at Crash Gordon.




How can you sleep at one of the most pivotal times of this planet's history!?

Don't you know how life will change for the better with the leadership of this man?   

It is imperative that the momentum continues.  
It is imperative that Barack wins the nomination.  
It is imperative that he cleans up the mess made of the US and the world over the past seven years.  

Yes.  He.  Can.


----------



## arminius (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

yep, most of us are going for him, but you might wanna steady on a bit. 
im interested in what you and others say, not so much what some political hack from the states says. its february. early days. mcain v obama. mcain hamstrung by the bush legacy (dead and broke americans), and a divided party. obama will get 4 in 5 yanks scrambling to the polls in nov.

the world does indeed need him to win, and he shall.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> It is imperative that he cleans up the mess made of the US and the world over the past seven years.
> 
> Yes.  He.  Can.



LOL
you should be going for his 2IC doris 

Reminds me - we have "Clean UP Australia Day" coming up ....  (Ian Kiernan) - (Yes. He. Can. Also!!)
After which we give him a tika tape parade . 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clean_Up_Australia



> Clean Up Australia Day, which is held annually on the first weekend of March, began in 1989 with a clean up of Sydney Harbour in which 40,000 people participated.


----------



## wayneL (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> How can you sleep at one of the most pivotal times of this planet's history!?



a/ As a non US citizen (Thank the Lord above) I don't have a vote and no hand in influencing the proceedings

b/ Every presidential candidate since the Revolution has said spouted the same sort of nonsense.



Doris said:


> Don't you know how life will change for the better with the leadership of this man?



No. Explain this to me.



Doris said:


> It is imperative that the momentum continues.



Why?



Doris said:


> It is imperative that Barack wins the nomination.



Why?



Doris said:


> It is imperative that he cleans up the mess made of the US and the world over the past seven years.



Agree, but it goes back more than seven years and.... IF he had the personal wherewithal to achieve what his rhetoric has alluded to he still hasn't said how he'll go about achieving all this or how he will defeat those that want no change, and how he will avoid grassy knolls.



Doris said:


> Yes.  He.  Can.



 What? That is the question; can do WHAT?

If he becomes El Presidente, Godspeed to him. I hope he can do something positive. But all I have heard so far is rhetoric.


----------



## prawn_86 (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> But all I have heard so far is rhetoric.




Thats all i ever hear from any politician. They are all the same ultimately.

Or if not, the style of politics/decision making/slow progress etc etc will make them the same fairly quickly, as nothing can be achieved realistically


----------



## wayneL (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Thats all i ever hear from any politician. They are all the same ultimately.
> 
> Or if not, the style of politics/decision making/slow progress etc etc *will make them the same fairly quickly,* as nothing can be achieved realistically



'zactley.


----------



## wayneL (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Postscript: Whoever gets the Democratic nomination, I hope he/she kicks McCain's @ss.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> What? That is the question; can do WHAT?
> 
> If he becomes El Presidente, Godspeed to him. I hope he can do something positive. But all I have heard so far is rhetoric.



well Wayne, 
when you've seen as many episodes of "24" as I have - 
(and they're coming up 24-7   that's episode 7 of 24 btw) 
you'll know that the Black Presidents are always good guys
and the White presidents are always bad guys.  

But seriously, I think "24" will have helped Obama's cause (call it subliminal ) :-  

Logan:- "David Palmer was so popular, I was just a bridge to achieve that" ...

 24: President Logan is back! 

 24. President David Palmer Comedy Dub


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

bit of nonsense from the mid terms (or whatever) in 2006 (or whenever)
Hillary and Barak feature on #6 of this set of 10. 

 PTV'S TOP 10: The Greatest Political Web Videos of All Time


----------



## Doris (11 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> LOL
> you should be going for his 2IC doris




Do you think so 2020?  

All we can do is what we can do...   

Yes. We. Can!

It's 3.9 cents a minute to call the US from Aus... using a _Say G'Day card_... no flagfall!

And yes... it's so fun and worth the time!

________________________________________
From: Chris Hughes, My.BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Monday, 11 February 2008 10:00 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Special invitation: Join the National Call Team

 Dear Doris,

Thanks for stepping up and helping to call thousands of supporters before the crucial February 5th primaries and caucuses! 

Your calls made a big difference for Barack in close races like Connecticut and widened our margin in others like Colorado. 

With additional contests coming up in the next few days and weeks, we'd like to extend a special invitation to you. 

Join our National Call Team, a small group of Obama supporters committed to making at least 100 calls per week. 

You already know that making calls from home can be fun, but it's also one of the most effective ways to reach out to voters across the country. 

By signing up for the National Call Team, you'll get: 
•	Invitations to weekly conference calls with special guests and calling tips
•	Daily updates on which calling campaigns are the most important
•	Immediate notification when new campaigns are opened

You've been one of our most dedicated supporters, and with the race for the Democratic nomination still extremely close, now's the time to take the next step for Barack. 

Join the National Call Team today.

Thank you, 

Chris 

Chris Hughes
My.BarackObama.com


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com



> Reminds me - we have "Clean UP Australia Day" coming up ....  (Ian Kiernan) - (Yes. He. Can. Also!!)
> After which we give him a tika tape parade .




lol...

Hillary says it took a Clinton to clean up after the first Bush and it needs another Clinton to clean up after the second Bush!  

Daje vu for Ian Kiernan in Aus too?


----------



## wayneL (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris,

Looking forward to some answers to my questions... or are you happy to dwell in the realms of aforementioned and meaningless rhetoric.

Thanks


----------



## Doris (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> bit of nonsense from the mid terms (or whatever) in 2006 (or whenever)
> Hillary and Barak feature on #6 of this set of 10.




Loved #5.. and #3!  lol...

Onya 2020!


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

... lol
 well keep it up - just 310 days to go   (very approx)


----------



## noirua (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Doris,
> 
> Looking forward to some answers to my questions... or are you happy to dwell in the realms of aforementioned and meaningless rhetoric.
> 
> Thanks




Hi Doris, Fair comment the above...


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://politicalhumor.about.com/

because he can make people vote for a change
the lazy buggas just sit around most election days .


----------



## noirua (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Is this a Barak Obama "last chance coral" or is it the new guy on the block taking "the bull by the horns" and blasting his way to the Presidency??

Worth a look, me thinks, at the remaining caucuses. If Obama was a Republican, under, the winner takes all system, I'd back him for the nomination. BUT, do the figures for the remaining States really give him much of a chance?

It's easy to bluster and post information but, what is the State by State situation ahead?


----------



## wayneL (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I must admit that I've had this thought in the back of my mind, that if Obama wins, some right wing, rednecked nut-case would be incensed enough at the though of a black muslim president, to go and try to take him out.

NB: I know he's not muslim, but try telling the ignorant red necks that after the viral mudslinging campaign.

PS: Doris, still waiting for answers love.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

wayne, 
Back there, (#165) Doris went to the trouble of posting a heap of stuff on his alternative energy policies.   I'm guessing he's more into that stuff that mcCain is anyway.  

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=254634&highlight=energy#post254634

But you're right - I just wish they could harness the energy generated by the wagging of the collective tongues of all the politicians this year. 

(Just seems to be the way you gotta do things in the USA  )

As for the assassination thingo - unhealthy to speculate imo, and certainly shouldn't affect anyone's "how to vote" - well - sad day if it does.  BTW, We are all reeling here )unrealing here?) from the news on Jose Ramos Horte mate.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I think  XX   no , Some would say ( lol) that some of his speeches are pretty damned clever in the use of "generalities" .. 

I mean,  if JFK is remembered for his brother's eulogy .. "'Some men see things as they are and say why. I dream things that never were and say why not"

Apart from that fact (I think) that it was a GBShaw quote originally, but it is arguably pretty nebulous in itself.  I guess the stateman is hardly likely to say "Some saw the interest rate at 8%, and asked why not 7.75% etc"

PS I'm just having a bit of fun with this ok?



> On June 8th, 1968, the day of Bobby's funeral, another Kennedy brother, U.S. Senator Edward Kennedy, eulogized:
> 
> "My brother need not be idealized, or enlarged in death beyond what he was in life, to be remembered simply as a good decent man, who saw wrong and tried to right it, saw suffering and tried to heal it, saw war and tried to stop it.
> 
> ...


----------



## skint (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

In the eighties the yanks had a president who consulted his astrologer before major decisions were made. The incumbent is seriously stupid, and if Huckabee were to get up, they'd have a president who believes life, the universe and everything was created a few thousand years ago. Scary.


----------



## wayneL (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> wayne,
> Back there, (#165) Doris went to the trouble of posting a heap of stuff on his alternative energy policies.   I'm guessing he's more into that stuff that mcCain is anyway.
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=254634&highlight=energy#post254634




More rhetoric. In practice, this is nonsense unless there is a concrete plan.

Doris thinks Obama will make a difference to MY life.

He won't, it will be the same ol' same ol'.

:sleeping::sleeping::sleeping:


----------



## prawn_86 (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Doris thinks Obama will make a difference to MY life.
> 
> He won't, it will be the same ol' same ol'.




How true.

Even the politicians here in Aus dont make a difference to my life, because ultimately they do what they want without the public stopping them anyway. So there is no way my vote has any actual outcome. Especially when it is always a 2 horse race, here as in America.

Doris, I too am interested in how Obama will be so different and will not give in to the inefficient political system if he wins.

Reals answers, not words spouted from politicians


----------



## Julia (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> How true.
> 
> Even the politicians here in Aus dont make a difference to my life, because ultimately they do what they want without the public stopping them anyway. So there is no way my vote has any actual outcome. Especially when it is always a 2 horse race, here as in America.
> 
> ...



Yep.  My sentiments also echo those from Wayne and Prawn.

We are just into the beginning of the new parliamentary year here and already there is friction in both parties, the Libs because of dissension about the Sorry issue, and Labor because some of the darling pollies are aghast at their fearless leader's suggestion of reining in their pay increases.

Same old, indeed.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

well I'm finding it interesting. 
and lol if anyone suggests that we should elect our president by this system, I'll definitely vote "no way".

btw wayne, Doris likes Obama - you don't like McCain.
Do you have to match her in the explanation department?


----------



## wayneL (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> btw wayne, Doris likes Obama - you don't like McCain.
> Do you have to match her in the explanation department?




a/ He's duplicitous in internal matters.

b/ He's a foreign affairs hawk, a jingo. 

'nuff said!


----------



## vida (12 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I agree. As they say "only the good die young" and maybe Obama is too good to be president and too young to die.



wayneL said:


> I must admit that I've had this thought in the back of my mind, that if Obama wins, some right wing, rednecked nut-case would be incensed enough at the though of a black muslim president, to go and try to take him out.
> 
> NB: I know he's not muslim, but try telling the ignorant red necks that after the viral mudslinging campaign.
> 
> PS: Doris, still waiting for answers love.


----------



## Doris (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

One of my favourite songs atm is ‘Broke on a Wheel’ by Plug in City: 

*“It doesn’t matter what you want… it matters that you get what you want”*

http://www.kovideo.net/music/video/Plug-In-City---Broke-On-A-Wheel/1933.html


Too many people *complain* about their lot but *don’t make the effort to shift the focus to what they want*.

Such a waste of time and effort with no functional outcome!

When they do know what they want it doesn’t matter to do something about getting what they want because basically *some people are like elephants!*

They say an elephant never forgets.  The basis of this cliché is that if you chain a baby elephant to the ground, it will pull at it and pull at it until it eventually realizes it can’t do anything to free itself, so it acquiesces and lives its life within the parameters it knows.  It grows.  It becomes big and strong but it does not forget that when it tried to break free it couldn’t… so it doesn’t try.  An adult elephant can pull out the chain peg but it doesn’t know this.  It remembers it couldn’t.  So it doesn’t try.

Being cynical about politicians is a predisposition based on past experience.  Like elephants, we never forget.  
Prospective politicians promise what people want so they can get their votes and have the power to rule, then renege for a myriad of reasons. 

In the 1939 movie, Abraham Lincoln fare-welled his townsfolk, (after winning the presidency) and as he boarded a train to Washington said, “I must go now and do what they have paid for.”  The lobbyists were alive and well in 1860.  And they have thrived ever since.  If you had the money, you could buy influence and own the *figure-head politician*.  Barack is a maverick in refusing money from lobbyists and financing his campaign with individual donations of $25 to $2300 which, in effect, has created the groundswell of grassroot support turning this snowball into an avalanche.  Each supporter becomes part of the team.  This is unifying.  *A champion team will defeat a team of champions* any time.  A politician is historically divisive and a bully.  Obama is neither!

I was so frustrated and bewildered, three years ago, when I visited friends in Orange County.  They were not interested in politics nor would attempt to assuage my frustration about how over half their countrymen/women could glibly put their heads in the sand and blindly enable the re-election of Bush when his lobbyists provoked previous-non-voting religious extremists to come out of the woodwork to “prevent Democrats from legalising gay marriages and abortion”. They sidestepped their cynicism of politics by renouncing its very existence!   Now… people are getting out and voting!

For me, the greatest promise, of daring to imagine things could be different, is personified in Barack Obama.  When I watched an interview with Senator Obama and his wife on Oprah, in Calgary, in December 2006, my intuition and instincts were ignited.  There was no talk of his vying for president but I sat there shaking my head in awe and thinking that this man’s attitudes and aptitudes were unique and could make a difference by uniting all races and creeds.  When I read his book, _The Audacity of Hope_, I was inspired.  This was not rhetoric, this was written from his heart and soul and life’s experiences, as his wife and daughters slept at night.  When I read his book, _Dreams from My Father_, my instincts were justified as I read his efforts to comprehend where he fitted in the world.  His penchant for considering the situation and the plight of others was extraordinary.  He listens to people and gathers their concerns in his repertoire.  He listens and he hears.  He represents their hopes for a better future.  I fully believe his influence will extend far beyond the borders of the US and have a profound effect on the world for the better.  

What the poll results don’t overtly advertise, are the numbers of people who actually turn up to vote in proportion to the population of the states!  So, despite the huge turnouts, they are still a mere fraction. The votes are percentages of the turnout… not the population!  Too many are cynical about politics and feel any effort is inept.  Why should they bother when the delegates’ votes don’t necessarily reflect their choices?  Why should they make the effort and forego their lunch break or upset their after-work schedules, especially in freezing weather?  They are helpless. They don’t count.

Obama and Hillary have both made historic inroads into cracking and disintegrating the nonchalance and apathy.  They have both stimulated people to think it does matter that they want what they want.  The young turned up at earlier rallies for entertainment and announced their preferences to the press but failed to turn up at the voting booths.  This is changing. They queue for kilometres now to vote!  Obama has confronted the freedom of voter inaction which has allowed the economy, health and the global reputation of the US suffer.  Obama has proven what I suspected he could accomplish by putting his hand up.  *Obama has proven he is a leader* and like moths to a flame, people with experience and proven contributions have rallied around him.  He listens and has a critical intelligence to involve people as part of a team.  He is not out there issuing rhetoric except for those who read only the headlines and have not bothered to analyse and dissect his record and his philosophies. They see the iceberg and don’t even know it’s just the tip of it.

For those who choose to have a look below the surface and make up their own minds about Obama on 20 issues:  
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ 

There are three kinds of people in this world:  
Those who make things happen, those who watch things happen… and those who wonder what happened!

There are three more kinds of people in the world: 
Those who see the light, those who see it when it’s shown to them… and those who never see it.


Too many people complain about their lot but don’t make the effort to shift the focus to what they want.

Such a waste of time and effort with no functional outcome!


Another of my current favourite songs is ‘Touched by Love’ by Eran James- video clip:   Lovitt!

http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/e/eran_james/touched_by_love.html

_If you’ve been touched by love _
_Then you know exactly how I feel_   ... (in awe, inspired, excited, motivated, star struck)
_At the point of giving up- your words_ 
_pull my heart clear _  …. (he gives a belief that real change is possible.  He speaks the voters' language.)

_…You turn a half chance into one_
_you’ve waited your whole life for_   …  (his life has prepared him well to be a creditable leader of a population he has united)
_You feel as strong as superman_ 
_You take the world on ’cause you can_   ...  ( He is articulate, confident, passionate, genuine, with the wind behind his back)

_And in all my dreams_ 
_Never once did I_
_Ever dare to imagine you by my side_  ...  (imagine a man who could inspire and unite all races and creeds… to work side by side)
_Every breath I breathe_ 
_Tastes sweet for sure_    ... ( no more divisiveness nor ill-thought decisions, no more capitulations to lobbyists)
_I found me a reason to live and die for_  ...  (a reason to go out and vote… grassroots support to make life the way they want it to be)

_If you’ve been all strung out_ 
_Then you know exactly how I feel_  ... ( US economy in tatters… Iraq…)
_At the point of losing faith- your words_ 
_pull my heart clear _		… (It’s time to turn the page and write a new, different future)

_…The wonder of it all_ 
_Spells the fears I’ve had before_.   … ( cynicism/fears that all politicians are merely rhetoric)


… but the functional cynic dares to imagine HOPE, *remembering why an elephant never forgets*.

A bully uses actions or words to make the victim feel uncomfortable, belittled or afraid.
Such a waste of time and effort with no functional outcome!  Divisive. Dysfunctional. Destructive, Belligerent. 
There is too much of this in politics and in everyday life.
Should we sidestep this by renouncing its very existence?  Turn around and walk away?
I read Rev Jesse Jackson did this in his second attempt at nomination in 1988 due to his wife’s fears of an assassination attempt on his life.
Bhutto knew the risks she faced but kept on for what she believed she could do for her country.

Long Live Obama!


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

OK now we're getting somewhere. Obama certainly has an admirable platform for America. Like I said earlier I sincerely hope Hillary or Obama will give McCain a whopping at the polls. It remains to be seen if it's achievable.

I'm still not clear how Obama will affect MY life and why I and others outside of the evil empire should give a toss.

The reality is that US and multinational corporations have the most profound effect on my life, not their politicians (except in involving sycophantic gu'mints in illegal wars). How will Obama stop the insidious and profane export of American culture to other countries? How will Obama extricate us all from Iraq? How will Obama halt the Federal Reserve's economic hegemony over other other western central banks and their perverse Keynesian meddling?

How is he going stop stupid advertisers inflicting American accents in advertisemsnts on me as I watch TV?

Until there are answers to these questions, you or I or 2020 shouldn't give a fat rat's @rse. We should be taking notice of our own politics.

Like I said before, I'm more interested in seeing Gordon Brown's head on a stick, than what's happening across the pond. **** 'em, I'm not interested in Mexico's or Guatemala's politics either. We can't vote, we can only be passive amused or bemused observers.


----------



## trading_rookie (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Clinton looking to Texas...

@Doris, watched Eddie Murphy's Delirous on the weekend. Eddie had a gag or two re: racism and mentioned that he was told "don't go to Texas (if you're not caucasian)...they'll f%$@! you up down there"...Obama's camp must be more than a little nervous going down south considering all his fanfare and a real chance of winning not only the Democratic card but the presidency as well.


----------



## Doris (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



trading_rookie said:


> Clinton looking to Texas...
> 
> @Doris, watched Eddie Murphy's Delirous on the weekend. Eddie had a gag or two re: racism and mentioned that he was told "don't go to Texas (if you're not caucasian)...they'll f%$@! you up down there"...Obama's camp must be more than a little nervous going down south considering all his fanfare and a real chance of winning not only the Democratic card but the presidency as well.




I must check out that movie TR!  

I can't recall who said this but it's potent thinking:

*"We would accomplish many more things if we did not think of them as impossible."  *

I fully agree with your sentiment about Texas! I had a few days in Houston and Galveston before and after a cruise in the Caribbean this time last year. Of course I spoke to locals about their thoughts on Obama.  I had to stand back when someone had heard of him and they retorted "He's BLACK!"  GWB was a demigod in their eyes.  They were incredible as they edified me about how he was a very good Christian and how he had gone to Iraq to keep the terrorists out... nothing at all to do with oil. Maybe the fact that gas was about $1.90 a gallon there yet $2.20 in Orange County had a little to do with his lobbyists' support too? 

Today Obama said: "Though we won in Washington, D.C., this movement won't stop until there is change in Washington, D.C., and tonight we're on our way. At this moment, *the cynics can no longer say our hope is false*."

Barack is expected to win in Hawaii and Wisconsin next week so Hillary is focussing on Ohio and Texas.  Ohio because of its economic problems and sizable blue-collar population and Texas because of its large Latino vote which she has done well with.

The changes in demographic votes today were interesting:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...01901_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008021300052

Another interesting move today:

" Los Angeles County election officials will attempt to tally the ballots of tens of thousands of nonpartisan voters whose choice for president wasn't included in California's Feb. 5 primary result, as county officials vowed Tuesday to change the confusing ballot in the nation's largest voting jurisdiction to prevent such a mishap from reoccurring.

"In a political sense, will it likely change the outcome in the Democratic primary or in the delegate count? Probably not," said Tony West, a top official in Obama's California campaign operation. "But that doesn't mean it doesn't matter.

"We've seen that turnout has nearly doubled (in Democratic primaries) in every single contest from what it was four years ago," West said. "To tell those people who are new to the process that their vote doesn't count sends them a very bad message." 

(Last Tuesday's confusion was experienced mostly by California voters who registered as "decline to state" instead of affiliating with a political party.

Elsewhere in California, a decline-to-state voter only had to request a Democratic ballot at the poll on election day or in advance by mail. However, Los Angeles County required unaffiliated voters to fill in a bubble at the top of their ballot indicating that they would be participating in either the Democratic or the Independent primary. If they didn't fill in it, their presidential vote wouldn't be counted, but the rest of their state and local choices would.)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/13/MNS3V1BT1.DTL&type=politics

A simple life is its own reward...


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> How can you sleep at one of the most pivotal times of this planet's history!?
> 
> Don't you know how life will change for the better with the leadership of this man?
> 
> ...





Doris said:


> Today Obama said: "Though we won in Washington, D.C., this movement won't stop until there is *change in Washington, D.C.*, and tonight we're on our way. At this moment, *the cynics can no longer say our hope is false*."



Doris,

* What people say they will do, and what they actually do, is often divergent. What leads you to believe Obama is any different?

* You implied that an Obama presidency will change life for the better for all of us, yet Barack has only ever disgused change in the US legislature. How will this be the most pivotal time in the planet's history? That sound like more rhetoric to me.

* How will Obama work throuhgh the entrenched vested interests in the status quo, without being frustrated, hindered or destroyed?

* Why should we in Oz or elsewhere be interested?

I acknowledge your hope for Obama, but these are fair questions. I would appreciate answers.


----------



## Doris (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What a day!  What a man!  

*Total Delegates to Date:*

*Obama:*

Pledged: 1059
Superdelegates: 156
*Total: 1215*


*Clinton:*

Pledged:  956
Superdelegates:  234
*Total:  1190*

I will sleep well tonight. *Only 810 votes to go!* (and no calls to make!)  

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/#D



*417,133 donations to Obama’s campaign so far this year as of right now*!

These are the legal compliance statements of donating to ‘this movement’:

1.	I am a United States citizen or a lawfully-admitted permanent resident.
2.	I am at least 16 years old.
3.	This contribution is not made from the general treasury funds of a corporation, labor organization or national bank.
4.	This contribution is not made from the funds of a political action committee.
5.	This contribution is not made from the treasury of an entity or person who is a federal contractor.
6.	This contribution is not made from the funds of an individual registered as a federal lobbyist or a foreign agent, or an entity that is a federally registered lobbying firm or foreign agent.
7.	The funds I am donating are not being provided to me by another person or entity for the purpose of making this contribution.

*Note there is no room for a lobbyist but there is scope to increase one’s small donation!
*
Your contribution is not tax-deductible for federal income tax purposes.
An individual may contribute a maximum of $2,300 per election (the primary and general are separate elections). By submitting your contribution, you agree that the first $2,300 is designated for the primary, and any additional amount up to $2,300 is designated for the general election.

But ‘Big Brother’ is watching:

Federal regulations require that all contributors provide their employment information. If you are not employed, enter 'none' in the occupation and employer boxes.

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 13 February 2008 2:31 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: A big night

Doris --

Thanks to you, Barack won all three of today's contests decisively.

Virginia, Maryland, and Washington, DC join a sweep of eight straight victories since Barack won the most states and the most delegates on Super Tuesday.

But the race for the Democratic nomination remains close. It's going to be a fight for every vote and every delegate in the remaining 18 contests.

Each of us needs to take responsibility for getting as many people involved in this campaign as possible.

More than 400,000 people have donated to this campaign in 2008, and we are on course to reach half-a-million donors before the crucial March 4th primaries and caucuses.

The upcoming contests in Wisconsin, Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania will demand energy and resources on an unprecedented scale.

It's going to take all of us to keep these victories going. But if anyone is up to the task, it's this movement.

Thanks for your support,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.********@bigpond.com


----------



## noirua (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama had a good result in Virginia but the outcomes for Washington DC and Maryland were in line with expectations.
It will be the big States in March that will be decisive. Look more to States like Texas where the main delegate allocations are.


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Stop spamming and answer my questions.


----------



## Doris (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Doris,
> I acknowledge your hope for Obama, but these are fair questions. I would appreciate answers.




I have been up late at nights walking my talk by making phone calls.
I have been working all day with testosterone infested adolescents.
I am done.

Please DYOR and draw your own conclusions.  We each have this freedom.
Those who do not listen do not hear. 

________________________________________
From: Nikki Sutton  
Sent: Tuesday, 12 February 2008 11:11 PM
To: Phone Banking for Barack
Subject: [PhoneBankingforBarack] The polls are open!

National Call Team, 

Thank you for your incredible contribution to the sweeping victories this weekend!  Yesterday, we made over 45,000 calls to help get out the vote. 

We must keep the momentum going with Maryland, Washington DC, and Virginia.  If every one of us commits to making calls today, think what a difference we can make.  *Please help us reach a goal of 100,000 calls before the polls close.*

Now is our time!  The polls are open in Maryland, Washington DC, and Virginia!  It's time to get out the vote for Barack: 

Just select a state on the map, go to, "Click here to get started," login and then select the first name on your list.  You'll see their number and the script.  Remember to click, "Done" at the end of the call to go to the next number.  

Pick up the phone and get started calling.  Your voice can change the world!

Nikki 

PS - If you speak Spanish or know anyone who does, we need your help reaching out to Spanish speaking voters in Virginia. 

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to 3326 members of Phone Banking for Barack
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I have been up late at nights walking my talk by making phone calls.
> I have been working all day with testosterone infested adolescents.
> I am done.
> 
> ...




So you don't have the answers. Thanks, that's all I needed to know. 

Godspeed to you and this exercise in futility.


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> So you don't have the answers. Thanks, that's all I needed to know.  Godspeed to you and this exercise in futility.






wayneL said:


> a/ He's duplicitous in internal matters.
> b/ He's a foreign affairs hawk, a jingo.
> 'nuff said!




doris
using wayne's answer as a draft
you're allowed to say 14 words 

btw, don't ask wayne to agree that it's at all relevant to vote for someone who thinks green - 
 he prefers to walk to the pub and mumble about things under his breath


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> doris
> using wayne's answer as a draft
> you're allowed to say 14 words
> 
> ...



As per usual, you completely miss the point.

My answer was fair response and irrelevant in any case. I cannot vote in US elections.

However, I have asked fair questions and received nothing but double talk and amateur rhetoric in response. Ignoring questions doesn't make them go away, it amplifies them as it accentuates the lack of an answer.

Now you butt in with irrelevant ad hominem insults. Childish stuff.

Now butt out 2020, and let Doris, who has been the most verbose in this thread, to stick up for herself.


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> As per usual, you completely miss the point.
> 
> My answer was fair response and irrelevant in any case. I cannot vote in US elections.
> 
> ...



wayne
Lemme ask you a question then (in parallel if you wish) 
what's your opinion of this man
Is he relevant to the future of the world

and please don't just pass off a lot of jingoism


----------



## wayneL (13 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> wayne
> Lemme ask you a question then (in parallel if you wish)
> what's your opinion of this man
> Is he relevant to the future of the world
> ...



What has jingoism got to do with your question? Another tangent.

But FWIW (and it doesn't matter) is this:

He seems to be a decent guy with a genuine vision of where he wants Amerika to go. But I'm not one who is impressed with flashy rhetorical oratory. That's pure car salesmanship. Though it could be argued that that is the best way to market to the plebs.

I'm more on practicalities and details. HOW is he going to do all he claims? He will face real opposition from the KKK oriented part of white society as well as the scorched earth capitalists. It will NOT be easy and it will be personally dangerous.

If he pulls it off, I hope he can do something good, but I'm not betting on it.

I would however, be impressed if Amerika did elect a black president on merit, or a woman for that matter.

As I say, pure banter as it is irrelevant to me, you and Doris.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wayne
 I agree with you that Doris seems to be somewhat infatuated with the guy 
 but having said that she called it early and she seems to have called it right - so let's give her that bit of credit ( even if it was a fluke) 

but ( some thoughts for the day) 
1. Keating once said "you change a govt and you change a nation" 
2. We are experiencing JUST THAT at the moment 
3. Maybe USA will too  
PS I hope so - let's call it the age of enlightenment when GWBush leaves office - WHOEVER follows in his wake.


----------



## noirua (14 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

A Democratic President would have a great start, who ever it is, as Congess and the Senate have Democratic majorities. However, this is likely to change as Americans I've spoken to over the years vote for, say, a Democrat as President but a Republican as a Senate member.
This points to the eventual lack of power of the President. 

Growth in the US economy will be low and after George W Bushs' economy boost there isn't going to be that much room for manouvre.

The position in Iraq and Afghanistan is difficult.  Very easy to say what should or should not have been done, but now a position of being stuck in these countries with a zero  position to manouvre in Afghanistan, and only a reduction in troops in Iraq back to the levels of 2006.

Both Clinton and Obama talk about what they will do or what should be done.  In reality, the money isn't there for health care hopes and improving the lot of blacks and other groups in America.


----------



## trading_rookie (14 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> I must check out that movie TR!




Considering the sign of the times, it very much parallels Obama with then possible Presidential candidates Harold Washington and Jesse Jackson and a gag about dummy votes to Jackson which see's him becoming President and then dancing and sidestepping all over the stage to avoid a bullet...

Still I'm a Clinton fan...the world seemed more at peace the last time a Clinton was in the White House...


----------



## Julia (14 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



trading_rookie said:


> Still I'm a Clinton fan...the world seemed more at peace the last time a Clinton was in the White House...



Yes, agreed.  Hard to imagine now that the most newsworthy issue for months on end (rather than wars, subprime messes, credit squeezes etc.) at that time was Bill Clinton's sex life.


----------



## prawn_86 (14 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Those who do not listen do not hear.




All we are hearing is rhetoric spouted from the mouth of every single politician that has ever got into power.

I assure you that if you listened to politicians on the other side, or here in Aus, or even Hillary, there would be so many similarites its not funny.

I am with Wayne. I fail to see how Obama will change the world let alone America, and why we should even care since we dont have a say in it anyway.

Did you care about the British, Japanese, French etc etc elections? I certainly didnt. Hell i barely cared about the Australina elections, due to the fact that politicians do not and cannot ever achieve major strides in advancing a country


----------



## mayk (14 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Politicians do some time achieve greatness. JFK got us (or US) on the moon, name a single president who can spend 150B (catered for inflation) on a space program today. 

Political will, can make or break a country. Quaid made Pakistan, Ghandi made india and Kashmir was a lifetime gift from Britian...Still They changed the life of more than billion people on earth today. And you say politicians do not matter!

I am all for Obama, but I assume the hidden hatred (racism) will ultimately take its toll and he might be dropped out of the Whitehouse race. 

Obama can change history if he can put some long term peace solution in Iraq, make peace with Iran and stablize Afghanistan. World might see peace again. 
After repeating peace so many times I end my post with 

PEACE.


----------



## Doris (14 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*A new leader is what this is about*.  Dah…

The US is looking for a new leader.  In order to do this they have two major organisations that are steeped in history and habit.  Even back in the mid C19, money was needed to travel across the nation and to advertise/promote their candidates.  To do this, they accepted funds from lobbyists and were indebted to them once they took office. Hence they have been figure-heads for those who put them there.  
This was not being a leader of those who did the voting so the delegates could vote them in!  *Obama has no lobbyists on board!*

A leader is someone who guides and inspires others to follow.  They do not do all the work.  Right now, across Australia, schools are having their investiture ceremonies where their student leaders take their oaths.  They are not expected, nor should they, do all the work.  Consensus is reached by listening to other students and *representing* them.  They have all been voted into their positions because they inspired others to let them guide them.

Politics is, by definition, ‘compromise for survival’.  
This is one of the traits Obama seeks to change although flexibility is quite a different trait from ’selling out’:  
McCain first declared that President Bush's tax cuts were unwise but now favours making them permanent. 
"Somewhere along the line," Obama said, "he traded those principles for the nomination."

Obama is adamant on having an independent body to monitor Capitol Hill instead of “the toothless House Ethics Committee and its inability to punish members who break ethics rules”.   Read problems: http://www.commonblog.com/story/2007/5/16/13388/8551 

Clinton, speaking at a rally in Texas today, said: "I am in the solutions business. My opponent is in the promises business."
*This* is rhetoric!   Why is Obama so popular in Illinois if he has not proven himself in the ‘solutions business’?  DYOR

Today Obama’s proposed the establishment of a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank, which would spend $60 billion over a decade to rebuild deteriorating roads, bridges and waterways. Obama said the spending would generate 2 million new jobs, many of them in a construction industry that has been hard hit by the housing market downturn.

Obama chants about ‘unity’.  Why?
Even a five year-old knows a tug of war on a rope does not achieve anything but a passage of time, even if it is fun at the time.
If you are to pull down a wall that entraps you then all must pull in the same direction.
Obama has attracted a myriad of experienced, accomplished individuals who have banded together with the vision of shared values as their direction.

In a previous election when Kim Beazley was Opposition leader, listening to his election hype was painful because he constantly criticized and complained.  I sent his party an email a month before the election advising my opinion that Australians wanted a leader who portrayed a nurturing figure, one who would take care of the problems and find solutions and all the press interviews were showing were his whinging and whining with no real direction nor hope for change.  He needed to alter his image from someone who irritated the listener/viewer and focussed on negatives, to someone who could express empathy and offer an alternative.  I compared him to Qld’s Rob Borbidge who I switched off and refused to listen to because he was forever whinging and whining and irritating.  How can a potential voter bother to get involved in listening to policy when all they hear is complaining!  I have to say that two weeks’ later his public persona changed and he spoke with dignity and paternal concern.  I actually began to listen to him!  But it was too late.  Kevin Rudd, from day one, set himself up as nurturing and paternal.  We listened.  Can’t say the same of his deputy though!

To lead you must allow people to believe you care about them.  Hillary has worked hard and done immense good but she has not portrayed the image of someone who is imbedded in their lives but rather, that she is self promoting. I believe people have voted for her because they have hope that she will make things better FOR them… the blue-collar workers, ethnic minorities et al.  

Obama has always listened to gauge people’s concerns:

“… whether people were friendly, indifferent, or occasionally hostile, I tried my best to keep my mouth shut and hear what they had to say.  I listened to people talk about their jobs, their businesses, the local school; their anger at Bush and their anger at Democrats; their dogs, their back pain, their war service and the things they remembered from childhood.

… If anything, what struck me was just how modest people’s hopes were, and how much of what they believed seemed to hold constant across race, region, religion and class. Most of them thought that anybody willing to work should be able to find a job that paid a living wage.  They figured that people shouldn’t have to file for bankruptcy because they got sick.  They believed that every child should have a genuinely good education- that it shouldn’t just be a bunch of talk- and that those same children should be able to go to college even if their parents weren’t rich.  They wanted to be safe, from criminals and from terrorists; they wanted clean air, clean water and time with their kids. And when they got old they wanted to be able to retire with some dignity and respect.

That was about it.  It wasn’t much.  And although they understand that how they did in life depended mostly on their own efforts- although they didn’t expect government to solve all their problems and certainly didn’t like seeing their tax dollars wasted- they figured that government should help.”


----------



## Doris (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This time last night:



Doris said:


> *Total Delegates to Date:*
> 
> *Obama:*
> 
> ...




*Latest figures:*

*Obama:*

Pledged: 1096
Superdelegates: 157
*Total: 1253*

*Clinton:*

Pledged:  977
Superdelegates:  234
*Total:  1211*

*Only 772 to go to get to the magic number of 2025!*

Now y'all must think that is extraordinary given most people in Oz had not even heard of Barack Hussein Obama before 3 January in Iowa. 

*2020-- thought you might be interested:*
The Iowa Caucuses also give Iowa an opportunity to showcase the state’s strengths on a world stage. Most Americans know that the state is ‘first in the nation’ in the presidential campaign but may not be aware of Iowa’s leadership role in renewable energy, manufacturing and biosciences, or the state's top ranking in quality of life. The caucuses help Iowa enhance its image as the "renewable energy capital of the nation" and reveal to all Americans why Iowa truly is a surprisingly life-changing place to visit, live, work, and play.

*WayneL... just for you...*
When I make calls to Wisconsin over the weekend... ahead of the primary there on Tuesday... I shall ask them your questions.  
They are the voters.
Their opinions should be more relevant than a mere infatuated sheila eh?

Meanwhile, hear why Barack thinks someone in Hawaii should vote for him on Tuesday:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3GLyuVzIn8&eurl


----------



## wayneL (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wisconsin???

I didn't know they had telephones in Wisconsin. Do they speak English there?


----------



## ithatheekret (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

donde est'a Wisconsin ?  hable ingl'es por favor .


----------



## 2020hindsight (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Wisconsin???
> 
> I didn't know they had telephones in Wisconsin. Do they speak English there?



like Homer Simpson's quote 
"why would I want to study English?  - I'm not planning to go to England!"


----------



## wayneL (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> like Homer Simpson's quote
> "why would I want to study English?  - I'm not planning to go to England!"



Not much English is spoken here!


----------



## 2020hindsight (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *Obama:*
> 
> Pledged: 1096
> Superdelegates: 157
> ...



Doris
Thanks for this.
Your enthusiasm, like a smile, is somewhat infectious  - not that I really know the details, and I'm more interested in your enthusiasm lol.

Great to think there's a bit of discussion about renewable energy - coming as it is from the most energy greedy (and energy wasteful) nation on earth. 

And if McCain is excessive in the "hawk" department (as Wayne mentioned), you'd think the people would have had enough of that. 

Certainly I'd be willing to listen to Obama more than McCain (who is a loose cannon).  And Hillary seems to be using the old "vote for experience" call that Howard used here - and look where it got him.

The concept of "another Clinton" ( after the mistake of "another Bush")  has gotta be a negative for Hillary you'd think. (Think I heard that was becoming another factor).

I smiled at the comment by McCain (twigging to the fact that Obama is his most likely opponent) that "Obama is all spin" or words to that effect.    I was reminded of the riddle "what does it mean when someone who is all spin tells you that someone else is all spin"  

or "that someone who is a liar tells you someone else is a liar" for that matter. - meaningless!  or possibly means "the second person may or may not be a liar" I guess. 

(Actually the correct "riddle" is "what does it mean when a politician tells you that all politicians are liars" - but I'm taking the concept and running with it) 

PS How many delegates = a superdelegate I wonder.  
He grew up in Hawaii yes? - certainly a multiracial corner of the US, should be kind to him you'd think (?) 

PS I hope you at least get a green card out of all your work


----------



## noirua (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

As Mitt Romney teams up with the McCain bandwagon it looks increasing like the following battle:
(Obama versus Clinton) versus McCain backed by Romney and Guiliani.


----------



## moneymajix (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*


*


George Burns: *

Too bad that all the people who really know how to run the country are busy driving taxi cabs and cutting hair.


----------



## Doris (15 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris
> Thanks for this.
> Your enthusiasm, like a smile, is somewhat infectious  - not that I really know the details, and I'm more interested in your enthusiasm lol.
> 
> PS How many delegates = a superdelegate I wonder.




Hey 2020 --

The total number of elected (pledged) delegates is the *actual progress report*:

*Obama has 1096,  Clinton has 977.*

So Obama has, in actual fact, a substantial and growing lead.

*The superdelegate votes ONLY come into effect in August* at the convention if either candidate has not garnered the 2025 votes required. (half the total of 4049 D's and SD's).

The only reason it seems to be a close is when the superdelegates are added NOW although this does give an overall picture:  



> *Obama:*
> Pledged: *1096*
> Superdelegates: 157
> Total: 1253
> ...




Some SD's bought into the inevitability of a Clinton win too early but their pledges do not really count until August:


The Democratic nomination likely will be decided by the roughly *800 superdelegates*, which include party officers, elected officials and activists. 

*Obama's camp argues* the superdelegates should support the candidate with the most popular support, as indicated by a majority of pledged delegates going into the convention.

*Clinton's campaign, on the other hand, says* the superdelegates should support the candidate *they think* will be the best nominee in the general election as well as the best president.

MoveOn.org, an influential liberal activist group, on Thursday (14 Feb) said *it would launch a petition drive calling on the superdelegates not to go against the popular vote*. 

"The worst thing for the party and democracy is if all these new voters feel like the nomination was brokered in a backroom somewhere. The superdelegates have got to let the voters decide," MoveOn.org Executive Director Eli Pariser said in a statement."


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

doris, you'll enjoy this brief video on abc website 
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/#sledgePromo


----------



## noirua (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The battle of the Superdelegates is likely to run and run.  The number of superdelegates is 795 (includes 76 unpledged add-ons who have not yet been announced, and superdelegates from abroad only count 1/2 a vote.) and that does not include Michigan and Florida.
Hillary Clinton has yet to exhaust the Democratic appeals process about failure to include these States. She has also indicated that the matter will be taken to the US Federal Court.

The following link gives a list of superdelegates for the Democratic Convention and whom they support:  http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegate-list.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> 1. The superdelegate votes ONLY come into effect in August at the convention if either candidate has not garnered the 2025 votes required. (half the total of 4049 D's and SD's).
> 
> 2. Some SD's bought into the inevitability of a Clinton win too early but their pledges do not really count until August:
> 
> ...




1. see 3.  Unlikely that it wont go to 800 SDs for decision apparently. (?)

2. can they change their mind?

3. see 1. 

4. translating from poly-speak to English.. Obama: "listen to the people"  maybe ?  versus..

5. Clinton "listen to the wise old men of the party" (?)

6. "a petition drive calling on the superdelegates not to go against the popular vote".  wowo. a petition to suggest that the Democrats should be Democratic!?!?- crazy !! 

7. "The worst thing for the party and democracy is if all these new voters feel like the nomination was brokered in a backroom somewhere. The superdelegates have got to let the voters decide,"  

Doris, we await news of how you helped make the US truly democratic


----------



## Doris (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> doris, you'll enjoy this brief video on abc website
> http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/#sledgePromo




You were correct again 2020!

To get people to listen you need to first get their attention and interest.

Our own Allan Pease has taught many this fact: http://www.saxton.com.au/default.asp?sd8=149 

...then have them activate more than one nerve pathway by stimulating their mental senses to visualize what you are trying to communicate... then they'll enjoy listening... and if they like what they hear... and want to hear more!

Watch Allan Pease in action:
http://www.peaseinternational.com/

I like his philosophy of deciding '*what* you're going to do and worry about the *hows* later'... "*they will come*".  

Barack inspired people to want to get what they want.

Now people are listening, he is giving hows (the details) of what he will do.

Debbie compares him to Hitler who inspired his nation without their knowing what was to come.  But she has a high powered job and hasn't been motivated yet to put her scarce free time to gathering facts about him.  She will if he wins the nomination.


----------



## moXJO (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Is it true Obama was a cocain user?


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



moXJO said:


> Is it true Obama was a cocain user?



It's ok mate - he didn't inhale


----------



## moXJO (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> It's ok mate - he didn't inhale



Lol, someone shot this at me today. Not that I really care about US politics. Be interesting to see what happens if Obama gets in though. Not so much his policies more the reaction of the public to someone a little more peace driven.


----------



## Doris (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> 1. see 3.  Unlikely that it wont go to 800 SDs for decision apparently. (?)




2020... do you know it's an Australian idiosyncrasy to use double negatives to assert a positive? 
Debbie often picks me up on this... part of the different languages we speak despite our both speaking 'English'!  

It's expected there will be no clear winner after the Ohio and Texas primaries and that it *will* depend on the DNC.  But who knows?    



> 2. can they change their mind?



Superdelegates can change their minds any time until the Democratic National Convention in August. 



> 4. translating from poly-speak to English.. Obama: "listen to the people" maybe ? versus..
> 
> 5. Clinton "listen to the wise old men of the party" (?)




Will there be change if this is not changed?



> 6. "a petition drive calling on the superdelegates not to go against the popular vote".  wowo. a petition to suggest that the Democrats should be Democratic!?!?- crazy !!




lol... if only it weren't so serious!



> 7. "The worst thing for the party and democracy is if all these new voters feel like the nomination was brokered in a backroom somewhere. The superdelegates have got to let the voters decide,"




Yes... They are reveling in having people care to make the effort to get out and vote but if their voices are not heard, they'll be back to the reality that elections are an hypocrisy. And anger will soar. The LA County re-count this week sets a precedent for letting voters be heard.



> Doris, we await news of how you helped make the US truly democratic



Where did *this* come from?  
I'm just frustrated that in 1984 more than half did not voice an opinion.  Maybe they had one but they did not make an effort to express it and look what they got!  

I'm under no illusion of even contemplating making any hair-line scratch. The calls do not attempt to persuade, merely inspire people to think and subsequently act to want to get what they want. They could vote for Hillary. The hope is that they turn out to poll.

Re-read the script on #163 on page 9...


----------



## Doris (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



moXJO said:


> Is it true Obama was a cocain user?






2020hindsight said:


> It's ok mate - he didn't inhale




Confusing isn't it!  

I haven't dabbled but I don't think cocaine is inhaled!  

NO... Barack admitted he'd tried marijuana...

Bill Clinton was the one who said he did not inhale!  ...and did not have... 

Barack said 'this was the point'!  He opened his closet and gained respect from those who had also dabbled out of curiosity.  He was a kid at the time and we all know that teenage boys can't keep their hands off what is in front of them!


----------



## noirua (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Report on Barack Obama's books and comments on cocaine use 11 years ago:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/02/AR2007010201359_pf.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Here's a suggested election slogan for the "Bill for First Lady" Campaign.

In response to Obama's "Yes We Can", ....

Bill might consider "say you will - say you will - give me one more chance" - at least gimme time to change your mind.  time always seems to heal the wounds if I can't get you to dance".   

Ahhh - so many interns , so little time  

 Fleetwood Mac - Say You Will 

Speaking of cocaine,  Stevie Nicks got to the point where the divisions in her head between nasal cavity and brain were getting paper thin etc ... "one more snort and yu're dead" sor of thing ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stevie_Nicks



> Rumours
> Fleetwood Mac's second album with their new lineup, Rumours, began recording in early 1976 and continued until late in the year. Sessions were dogged by faulty drum tracks, disintegrating tapes, and the tension between the band members, which influenced the songwriting. Nicks' contributions were the jaunty, tight harmony "I Don't Want to Know" (intended for a second Buckingham Nicks album in 1974); the dark, mystical "Gold Dust Woman," a diatribe about the dangers of cocaine and the rock and roll lifestyle; the dramatic "Silver Springs," a b-side about her relationship with Buckingham; and the atmospheric "Dreams," which became the band's only Billboard Hot 100 #1 hit single.




And speaking of whether or not it is inhaled - seems it doesn't have to be (next extract) :- ...   (presumably if you had a flatulence problem, you'd exhale it as well  



> The high levels of Nicks's cocaine abuse at this time led to one of the more enduring rumours of her career when it was alleged that she favoured administering the drug anally with the assistance of a roadie employed for this purpose




Did Australia get her off drugs?


> A solo outing with Tom Petty and Bob Dylan in Australia came after, but Nicks was threatened by Australian authorities with expulsion from the country for not carrying a work permit. The tour marked a striking point in Nicks' career. Although she had achieved significant critical acclaim, drugs were taking a toll on her performing, limiting her vocal range and pitch severely and changing her on-stage persona. *It was at the end of the Australian tour that Nicks checked herself into the Betty Ford Center to recuperate and wean herself off of her all-consuming cocaine addiction*.






> Nicks' voice was more powerful and melodic than on her previous two recordings (solo and with Fleetwood Mac), but it also developed a nasal quality attributed to her cocaine abuse and subsequent dependence on tranquilizers.


----------



## Doris (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Report on Barack Obama's books and comments on cocaine use 11 years ago:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/02/AR2007010201359_pf.html




Aaah...  Noirua.  You had me thinking you meant he had done drugs 11 years ago!


"Senator Admitted Trying Cocaine *in a Memoir Written 11 Years Ago*"
(Wednesday, January 3, 2007)

... when the outing was '11 years ago'.  His book came out in 1995.

Thanks for the edification!

In this post I read:

Obama writes extensively about his struggle to come to terms with being a black man whose African father returned to Kenya when he was 2, leaving him to be raised by his white Kansas-born mother and grandparents in Hawaii. He describes an *identity crisis arising from his realization that his life was shaped by both a loving white family and a world that saw in him the negative stereotypes frequently ascribed to young black men*.

... In the book, Obama acknowledges that he used cocaine as a high school student but rejected heroin. "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he says.


_Hmm... ignorance! Why didn't I know until now that:  "Blow" is a street name for cocaine.  "Smack" is slang for heroin.  _


... In an interview during his Senate race two years ago, Obama said he admitted using drugs because he thought it was important for "young people who are already in circumstances that are far more difficult than mine to know that you can make mistakes and still recover.

"I think that, at this stage, my life is an open book, literally and figuratively," he said. "*Voters can make a judgment as to whether dumb things that I did when I was a teenager are relevant to the work that I've done since that time.*"

and...
Obama's supporters said his admissions in the book could work to his advantage.

"*I think it will be received as refreshing*," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin, Obama's fellow Democrat from Illinois. "If you compare similar books, many of us in the political business tend to have selective memories."


Have a look at:  http://www.mapinc.org/newsnorml/v03/n1786/a06.html 

"I was a confused kid and was making a bunch of negative choices based on stereotypes of what I thought a tough young man should be," he said of the period depicted in that section of the book.  "Those choices were misguided, a serious mistake. 

"Growing up to be a man involves taking responsibility," he said.  "By the time I was 20, I was no longer engaged in any of this stuff. 

"A lot of us make mistakes when we're kids.  Part of my campaign, I think, is to be as clear and honest about who I am and how I've grown as a person over time."

_So... will potheads and junkies take Obama on as a role-model to get off it?_

A few days after the WP item:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/BothSidesAllSides/story?id=2773754 
*Obama's Cocaine Confessional Won't 'Blow' His Chances*

George W. Bush refused to share specifics of his own drug experience beyond a general acknowledgment of a rowdy youth ("when I was young and stupid, I was young and stupid"). Still, he did little to contradict ubiquitous reports of his consumption of booze, marijuana and even cocaine.


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Report on Barack Obama's books and comments on cocaine use 11 years ago:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/02/AR2007010201359_pf.html




noi - you could be right, some might give him a tick for honesty -  some might give him a cross (... and probably the ones carrying crosses who preach forgiveness ) 



> In the book, Obama acknowledges that he used cocaine as a high school student but rejected heroin. "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he says.
> 
> In an interview during his Senate race two years ago, Obama said he admitted using drugs because he thought it was important for "young people who are already in circumstances that are far more difficult than mine to know that you can make mistakes and still recover.


----------



## noirua (17 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi Doris, I see you've done a lot of work on your last post about cocaine etc., and as said, it won't have any bearing on his efforts to become President. 
I believe the leader of the Conservative party, David Cameron, in the UK, had drug abuse accusations levelled at him and he survived it with ease 
Followed the approach that George W Bush took.


----------



## noirua (20 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Odds of becoming President of the United States:  http://www.oddschecker.com/specials...presidential-election/to-be-elected-president

Odds of becoming Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party:  http://www.oddschecker.com/specials...n/us-presidential-election/democrat-candidate


----------



## Doris (20 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Delegate scores updated 45 minutes ago:

*Obama:*
Pledged: 1140
Superdelegates:  161
Total: 1301

*Clinton:*
Pledged: 1005
Superdelegates: 234
Total: 1239

*So on pledged delegates Obama is ahead 135.*

Including superdelegates (who can change their mind up until the DNC in Denver in August)... Obama is ahead 62.

Only 724 to go to win the nomination.
________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 20 February 2008 3:36 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: What tonight's win means

Doris --

Today, the people of Wisconsin voted overwhelmingly in favor of a new kind of politics.

They rejected an onslaught of negative attacks and attempts to distract them from the common concerns we all have about the direction of our country.

No doubt we'll hear much more of these attacks and distractions in the days to come.

But the noise of these tired, old political games will not drown out the voices of millions calling for change.

We won't know until late tonight the results of today's Hawaii caucus, but we'll let you know how that turns out tomorrow.

If we win in Hawaii, it will be ten straight victories -- a streak no one thought possible, and the best position we can be in when Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island, and Vermont vote on March 4th.

Thank you for making this possible,

Barack


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (20 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Odds of becoming President of the United States:  http://www.oddschecker.com/specials...presidential-election/to-be-elected-president
> 
> Odds of becoming Presidential nominee of the Democratic Party:  http://www.oddschecker.com/specials...n/us-presidential-election/democrat-candidate




Thanks for this Noirua!

I can't make any money out of Obama!  
Wish I'd seen these sites a year ago!  

Kidding...  Not!   
A much better bet than my small cap specs have been!


----------



## wayneL (20 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well if Barrak isn't President at the next election, I'll run backwards to Warsaw in the nuddy in winter.

Let's hope he's a positive influence in the world and shows us cynics a thing or two.

Godspeed.


----------



## Doris (20 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama wins Hawaii caucuses*

(2 hours ago)

Maybe they should've called it " Hawaii 10-0," as Sen. Barack Obama now has ten straight wins after besting Sen. Hillary Clinton in Tuesday's Hawaii caucuses.

Neither Obama nor Clinton campaigned in person for Hawaii's 20 delegate votes, but both recently had surrogates in the 50th state -- Clinton employed daughter Chelsea and Obama had half-sister Maya Soetero-Ng appear on his behalf. Obama, who was born and spent part of his youth on Hawaii, ran radio ads in recent weeks stressing his "native son" credentials.

On Tuesday night, in an e-mail to his supporters before the Hawaii victory was announced, Obama said winning there could foretell future successes: "If we win in Hawaii, it will be ten straight victories -- a streak no one thought possible, and the best position we can be in when Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont vote on March 4th."

Ohio and Texas vote next on March 4 - 370 convention delegates in all - and even some of Clinton's supporters concede she must win one, and possibly both, to remain competitive. Two smaller states, Vermont and Rhode Island, also have primaries that day.

With the votes counted in all but one of Wisconsin's 3,570 precincts, Obama won 58 percent of the vote to 41 percent for Clinton.

With more than 70 percent of the vote counted in Hawaii, Obama was winning 75 percent to 24 percent for Clinton.

Wisconsin offered 74 national convention delegates. There were 20 delegates at stake in Hawaii.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/7323450
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-080220obama-hawaii,1,5423652.story


----------



## Whiskers (21 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Didn't know much about Obama, and nothing of his wife. Little I have seen they both look pretty good, sort of brimming with confidence.

Getting the impression Obama is being seen as a fresh new leaf whereas Hillary seems to be suffering a little from the 'estableshment' syndrome.

Assuming it is Obama v M'cain... probably landslide Obama, I think.


----------



## noirua (21 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Whiskers said:


> Didn't know much about Obama, and nothing of his wife. Little I have seen they both look pretty good, sort of brimming with confidence.
> 
> Getting the impression Obama is being seen as a fresh new leaf whereas Hillary seems to be suffering a little from the 'estableshment' syndrome.
> 
> Assuming it is Obama v M'cain... probably landslide Obama, I think.




John McCain should have more time than Obama to prepare for the Presidential Election and will also have a cash mountain left over. McCain will have to give the running mate factor a very careful look at, as Mike Huckabee isn't his favoured partner but may grab votes where he has no chance. Mitt Romney can raise loads of cash and may throw a bundle of his own in if he thinks the Vice-Presidential job could be his. 
Neither are favoured by the bookies though and Kathleen Sebelius looks favourite here.


----------



## wayneL (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Another view, from the Times (UK).

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article3412540.ece



> *Warning: Obama is dangerous*
> *The senator and his wife, as this week has shown, are classic European-style leftwingers*
> Gerard Baker
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hear from Michelle herself what she said and meant:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

Evil, nasty people pull words out of context and put their own slant forward to twist the words of honest decent people.

Usually they are people with dysfunctional, unfulfilled lives, with their own evil, nasty agenda... who feel they are a success if they can tear down someone who actually achieves something.

Michelle was proud of her country because people got off their backsides and went out and made an effort to get what they want... 
( IMO... instead of just wanting then complaining when they got what they did not want.)  

They turned out to vote!

It doesn't matter what you want.  It matters that you get what you want!


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Wisconsin???
> 
> I didn't know they had telephones in Wisconsin. Do they speak English there?



I think Wyoming and Wisconsin are only a couple of states apart, yes?

We have a bloke here name of Sol Trujillo from Wyoming - reckons he knows something about phones - 
- sure hope he does!
 he just put his salary up from 11mill to 20 mill 

PS he admits he's investing heaviliy (to the max allowable, lol $2500 - yeah right  ) in McCain's campaign


----------



## gordon2007 (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Just curious, why do people care so much about what happens in american politics? I understand what happens there can affect things here. But the fact is he hasn't even won his own party yet and there seems to be such a huge following of him. 

I guess what astounds me is so many people have a negative opinion of the states and so many of those same people say they don't care about the states or the people there and wish their news and things would stop be front press yet again here on an australian investment page there is a huge thread on american politics.


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



gordon2007 said:


> Just curious, why do people care so much about what happens in american politics? I understand what happens there can affect things here. But the fact is he hasn't even won his own party yet and there seems to be such a huge following of him.
> 
> I guess what astounds me is so many people have a negative opinion of the states and so many of those same people say they don't care about the states or the people there and wish their news and things would stop be front press yet again here on an australian investment page there is a huge thread on american politics.



honestly don't know gordon 
Maybe ask Sol Trujillo m8 lol

Are we allowed to say "just for fun" ? 

PS seriously though, we should surely have been more concerned when 
a) Bush won in such controversail circumstances, and
b) then proceeded to drag us and the world by the nose into Iraq and the biggest mess since ... no precedent .  humpty dumpty maybe? .  

reminds me of a Far Side cartoon .. this team of kings me trying to put these bits of eggshell together again ......  and the chief of the kings men says " ok the horses want to have another go now"


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS gordon, 
you got me thinking - 

I'm driving home , and ABC Radio National must have spent 10 minutes talking about Obama and Clinton's debate - and McCain allegedly having it off with a lobbyist (bit like "American President" I guess) 

still - news / entertainment - it all starts to merge after a while.


----------



## wayneL (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Hear from Michelle herself what she said and meant:
> 
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter
> 
> ...



Doris,

You've almost got religion over this guy. The author of that article certainly did have an agenda, that's clear as the adoration on your face. But a few points are fair nevertheless.

A little cynicism is healthy. _En masse_ it helps keep the bastards honest.

*gordon2007,*

I agree. I resent having US politics shoved down my throat ad nauseum. If there are agendas out there, is there an agenda in that? I'd much prefer to hear how the Tories have Gordon McBean on a skewer.


----------



## Julia (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Another view, from the Times (UK).
> 
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article3412540.ece




Thanks, Wayne.  Good article.
The extract below describes my feeling about Obama's campaign.

"......the growing sense of unease that even some Obama supporters have felt about the increasingly messianic nature of the candidate's campaign. There's always been a Second Coming quality about Mr Obama's rhetoric. The claim that his electoral successes in places like Nebraska and Wisconsin might transcend all that America has achieved in its history can only add to that worry."

His followers are becoming almost hysterical in their devotion.


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

If you folk want ASF to be a one-dimensional chatroom then delete threads like this.  

Maybe the ABC would be kind enough to delete 10% of their news items as well on the same grounds. 

sheesh - I'm getting tired of people saying they are getting tired of an interest in US politics - to each his own for chissake.


----------



## wayneL (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> If you folk want ASF to be a one-dimensional chatroom then delete threads like this.
> 
> Maybe the ABC would be kind enough to delete 10% of their news items as well on the same grounds.
> 
> sheesh - I'm getting tired of people saying they are getting tired of an interest in US politics - to each his own for chissake.




Oh please! You're tilting at windmills again. 

The truth is that there is more coverage of US politics than local. 

Answer me one question: This isn't even a presidential election, it is a preselection contest for candidacy. How much coverage of that is there in local politics? 

Not as much. Now the yanks can f-off and argue amongst themselves who they want to run for El Presidente. It doesn't warrant more than a brief report every now and then. When we get to the real game, the actual election, we might be a little more interested.

If you really want to be US-centric, go to CNNNNN FFS!


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wayne
that's your opinion - ok?
just one man's opinion


----------



## wayneL (23 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Wayne
> that's your opinion - ok?
> just one man's opinion




It's not just one man's opinion, believe you me. We get the same rubbish here and it is vociferously whinged about by all and sundry. We want to hear about the Northern cRock shenanigans, Gordon McBean's embarrassments, the true level of inflation, etc... real BRITISH news. Then maybe a brief update of around the world if there is something significant. But not some crap about Ohio primaries (whatever the hell they are) and the 4 out of 5 yankee tosspots who will never be president for half of the whole news broadcast.

It's nine out of ten people's opinion buddy!


----------



## websman (23 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama Is destined to be the next president.  I have no problem with it.  I think he'll be good for nternational relations...something we haven't had since Clinton.


----------



## gordon2007 (23 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

That's kind of my point, but not quite. Who's doing the shoving though? Certainly you cant' blame the yanks for the local presses here covering it so much. You say you don't like it being shoved down your throat yet you (not picking on you specifically) add your two cents to this thread. 

I don't care that there is a thread on american politics. The earlier post was not a complaint about american politics or this thread. Certainly one needs to talk about more than just the stock market. 

It just amazes me though that people can be so anti american yet they still cannot help themselves to talk so much about america. 



wayneL said:


> *gordon2007,*
> 
> I agree. I resent having US politics shoved down my throat ad nauseum. If there are agendas out there, is there an agenda in that? I'd much prefer to hear how the Tories have Gordon McBean on a skewer.


----------



## wayneL (23 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



gordon2007 said:


> That's kind of my point, but not quite. Who's doing the shoving though? Certainly you cant' blame the yanks for the local presses here covering it so much. You say you don't like it being shoved down your throat yet you (not picking on you specifically) add your two cents to this thread.
> 
> I don't care that there is a thread on american politics. The earlier post was not a complaint about american politics or this thread. Certainly one needs to talk about more than just the stock market.
> 
> It just amazes me though that people can be so anti american yet they still cannot help themselves to talk so much about america.



Soooooo... the anti-Islamists never talk about Islam?


----------



## Doris (25 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Would the Twin Towers or the Bali bombings have occurred if not for an American president that 'no-one elected' who is so arrogant and self-righteous?  

Would a new president who has an attitude of respect for all religions and all races and an ability to listen to others, be able to heal the rifts and the hatred the world has for his country?

Jobs in Ohio have been decimated due to sending jobs offshore... mainly to India... just as Australian jobs have been given away.  

"As Ohio's pivotal March 4 primary approaches, Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton have each called for significant infrastructure investment, development of alternative energy and other "green-collar" jobs, while promising to toughen environmental and labor standards that accompany free trade deals.

"Those ideas are welcome here in heavily unionized and heavily Democratic northwest Ohio, but at the same time, no one seems to believe they go far enough to reverse the powerful tide of globalization that many blame for the constant manufacturing job losses.

"They identify with the situation, but they don't do anything about it," said Rep. Marcy Kaptur, (D-Ohio), whose district includes Toledo. "They are descriptive, not prescriptive. We want more detail and we want it now."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/23/AR2008022302164.html?hpid=topnews


----------



## Doris (25 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama's Ohio Mailings Infuriate Clinton*
By BETH FOUHY
The Associated Press 
Sunday, February 24, 2008; 5:46 AM (3pm Sunday our time)

CINCINNATI -- Hillary Rodham Clinton angrily accused her Democratic rival Saturday of deliberately misrepresenting her positions on NAFTA and health care in mass mailings to voters, adding, "Shame on you, Barack Obama." 

Clutching two of Obama campaign mailings in her hand for emphasis, the former first lady said, "enough with the speeches and the big rallies and then using tactics that are right out of Karl Rove's playbook." 

(THE ABOVE IS THE ONLY PART SHOWN ON CHANNEL 7 NEWS TONIGHT. DRAMA & ENTERTAINMENT VALUE ONLY!
I had to wait until I got home from the Gold Coast to find *information*)  


Obama defended the mailings as accurate and rejected Clinton's complaint as a political ploy. He said that *despite her current criticism of NAFTA, she supported the trade agreement when it passed during her husband's administration. *

"*You can't be for something and take credit for an administration ... and then when you run for president say that you didn't really mean what you said way back then. It doesn't work like that*," he said to cheers at a rally in Akron. 

Clinton's frustration was evident as she criticized Obama in unusually strong terms _ a few days after ending a nationally televised debate by saying she was "honored to be here with" him in a historic race between a black man and a woman. 

She said by his actions, Obama was giving "aid and comfort to the very special interests and their allies in the Republican Party who are against doing what we want to do for America." 

"Meet me in Ohio," she said. "Let's have a debate about your tactics and your behavior in this campaign." The two are scheduled to debate Tuesday in Cleveland. 

In her criticism of Obama, she asked, "Since when do Democrats attack one another on universal health care?" 

Obama had a ready reply to that. "Well, when she started to say I was against universal health care ... which she does every single day," he said.

Since late last year, Clinton has consistently attacked Obama's health care plan, saying it would leave 15 million Americans uninsured. 

*One mailing *says her plan for universal coverage would "force" everyone to purchase insurance even if they can't afford it. Her plan requires everyone to be covered, but it offers tax credits and other subsidies to make insurance more affordable. 

Obama's plan does not include the so-called "individual mandate" for adults, and he has argued that people cannot be required to buy coverage if they can't afford it. He has said his first priority is bringing down costs. 

The Illinois senator's plan does include a mandate requiring parents to buy health insurance to cover children. 

*The second mailing*, on the North American Free Trade Agreement, quotes a 2006 Newsday article suggesting Clinton believed the agreement had been a "boon" to the economy. NAFTA and other trade agreements are extremely unpopular in Ohio, which has suffered an exodus of blue-collar jobs to other countries in part due to such agreements. 

It's a particularly sensitive matter for Clinton, whose husband championed and pushed for passage of the agreement as president. She is counting on the support of white, working class voters in the state. 

"I am fighting to change NAFTA," she insisted. "Neither of us were in the Senate when NAFTA passed. Neither voted one way or the other." 

As evidence of their concern about the issue, the Clinton campaign released two new ads in Ohio, including one featuring John Glenn _ a former astronaut and U.S. senator from Ohio for 24 years _ saying Clinton would fix trade agreements like NAFTA. 

Clinton said she felt good about her prospects in Ohio and Texas but refused to say whether she needed to win both states to stay in the race.  "Let's let the people of Ohio vote. Let's actually have an election and then we can look at the results," she said.


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris
Barack certainly seems the "cooler under stress" (recent accusations about health policies  - and responses thereto etc)


----------



## prawn_86 (25 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Once again,

Why does it matter? Even if it were my country, or i could vote.

Presidents have no real power anyway. They are controlled by big business with vested interests.

Doris (or others), can you please explain how Obama will be any different?

A president is just a public face who has no real influence over anything


----------



## Julia (25 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Once again,
> 
> Why does it matter? Even if it were my country, or i could vote.
> 
> ...




Ah Prawn, such unwarranted cynicism!  What is wrong with you?
This is pretty much like the Second Coming.  Where's your sense of messianic zeal?


----------



## wayneL (25 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Ah Prawn, such unwarranted cynicism!  What is wrong with you?
> This is pretty much like the Second Coming.  Where's your sense of messianic zeal?



Well I guess every messiah cops a bit of a shellacking. 

I wonder if Obama has done his 40 days and 40 nights in the desert yet.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Once again,
> 
> Why does it matter? Even if it were my country, or i could vote.
> 
> ...



prawn,
(just taking up that last point)
President of USA is an important dude though surely.  
He has power to veto etc - that's pretty significant surely (albeit subject to 2/3 majority of congress disagreeing) - not that I fully understand their system - and going on this article they don't seem to understand it too well either. 

He seems to be able to declare war with minimal support from Congress (unless I misread something there. ) 



> Yet by the late twentieth century, U.S. presidents had successfully asserted that this title empowered them to order American forces into battle *even if Congress had not used its undoubted constitutional right to decide whether or not to declare war*




They don't have separated powers (judicial, political etc that we have it would seem) 

http://www.answers.com/topic/president-of-the-united-states-2


> US History Encyclopedia: U.S President
> The president of the United States is by far the best known politician both within the United States and around the world. Americans who struggle to recall the name of their representative, senator, or governor almost certainly know the name of the president. Citizens of other countries from Iraq to China, Australia to Russia, are generally familiar with the president's name and photograph and have an opinion on his performance in office. The fame that U.S. presidents enjoy today is appropriate, for the person who holds that office is at the center of both American politics and world affairs. Yet the president is not all-powerful at home or abroad. U.S. presidents are of ten frustrated overseas (for example, in their attempts to bring peace to the Middle East or Northern Ireland), and domestically it is well to remember that, as the political scientist Charles O. Jones has emphasized, the United States does not have a presidential system of government in the sense that presidents are free to make and implement policy.
> 
> Powers of the Office
> ...






> In the case of other Constitutional grants of power, it has taken many years of practice and interpretation to define what they mean. At the time the Constitution was written, the role of the British king as commander in chief had become merely ceremonial and honorific. *Yet by the late twentieth century, U.S. presidents had successfully asserted that this title empowered them to order American forces into battle even if Congress had not used its undoubted constitutional right to decide whether or not to declare war*.   In the Cold War nuclear era, the implications were sobering.
> 
> On a less dramatic level, the question of which officers and officials of the United States the president can not only appoint but dismiss is similarly ambiguous in the Constitution. The matter was not fully settled by the Supreme Court until the twentieth century; for example, the president can fire the Attorney General or the Secretary of State, but cannot fire members of independent regulatory commissions or independent counsels. In important respects, therefore, the powers of the president have accumulated over the centuries rather than invariably originating unambiguously from the Constitution.
> 
> ...




as for the electoral system ... (which I concede is on first impression weird) ... even this apparently "plays into the president's hand" as well , in that he can claim to be the only one elected by all.



> This reflects the fact that, contrary to the plan for electing the president set out in the Constitution, the president is in practice elected directly by the people voting state by state. *Thus the president can claim with some plausibility to be the only politician to have been elected by all the people, in contrast to legislators elected by a single state or district*. Yet all these Constitutional advantages must be set against the constraints the Constitution provides and that we have discussed above. The most obvious are worth reiterating. Presidents cannot legislate without Congress.
> 
> Presidents cannot even implement established policies unless Congress, which has the power of the purse, provides the funding. *The contrast with a prime minister who can rely on a disciplined parliamentary majority (as is generally the case in Great Britain) is striking. *  etc


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

With the influence they have in times of crisis (eg the Cuban missile crisis) - You'd have to lean towards someone who wasn't trigger happy you'd think 

JFK did a good job there. avoiding WWIII (Cuba) , and also doing his best not to ramp up Vietnam
not that it did him any good in the long run 



> Fortunately for presidents, they enjoy a number of advantages not enumerated in the Constitution to help them in their attempts to persuade. *Particularly in times of acute crisis, such as the beginning of a war, the president's dual role as head of state as well as head of government causes a "rally effect" in which the public and other politicians unite in support of the nation's leader.* Presidents can reward support with government contracts for the legislator's constituency, appointments for friends, or support for the legislator's own favorite proposal. Most importantly, presidents have the ability to "go public" in the words of Samuel Kernell, appealing to the public for support over the heads of other politicians. The rise of the electronic media, first radio and then television, has enabled presidents to establish a direct, almost personal relationship with voters that skilled presidents such as Ronald Reagan or Bill Clinton have used to good effect. It is probably advisable for presidents to use this tactic on a limited number of important issues lest it lose its impact. If used wisely, it can be decisive.




" As Richard Neustadt argued, the power of the president is the power to persuade."
Question then is I guess, who would you prefer to be persuaded by?
Obama or Hillary - or McCaine. 

And over what duration of observing them (intensity of spotlight etc ) would you prefer to make that call.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

"Let's tone down Iraq" boomed the voice of Barack
"think big on destruction reduction".
What will Hillary say? while her eyelashes play?
perhaps ....  "try my weapons of mass seduction?"


----------



## Doris (27 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Once again,
> 
> Why does it matter? Even if it were my country, or i could vote.
> 
> ...




*A High Distinction to you 2020 for outlining the powers of The Commander in Chief!*

With just a week to go until Ohio, Rhodes Island, Texas and Vermont, according to the most recent polls, they're down in Texas and Ohio.

Today's update is clear about how Obama is different, even if the Democrat policies are similar, the attitude is *representing the people* rather than getting the job via divisive ploys and with the finances of special interest groups and lobbyists. 

_They are NOT controlled by big business with vested interests_:

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 27 February 2008 6:30 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Here comes the kitchen sink

Doris --

This morning, the New York Times reported that Senator Clinton is launching what even her aides admit is a "kitchen sink" bombardment of negative attacks against Barack.

This is the same stale, Washington playbook that has driven so many Americans away from the political process.

Yesterday, in a speech on foreign policy, Senator Clinton misrepresented Barack's positions and compared him to George W. Bush.

She questioned his "wisdom to manage our foreign policy and safeguard our national security," despite her support for Bush's war in Iraq -- a war that Barack showed the judgment to oppose before it ever began.

These negative tactics are exactly what voters have been rejecting this election season.

While others focus on trying to tear us down, we will continue to highlight what is most inspiring and most important about this campaign.

And while others may try to score cheap political points, millions of ordinary Americans are talking to their neighbors, knocking on doors, making phone calls, and turning out to primaries and caucuses in record numbers to support this movement for change.

Barack has organized and inspired what yesterday's Time magazine called a "new breed of grassroots campaign -- viral, internet-based, built from the ground up."

Today, we are within reach of a goal that is unprecedented at this point in a presidential primary -- one million people giving to this campaign.

Thank you for your support,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (27 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris
> Barack certainly seems the "cooler under stress" (recent accusations about health policies  - and responses thereto etc)




You are spot on 2020!  Is this a male thing? 
I find myself embarrassed at times when the 'feminine' emotional ploys are applied as mean and nasty.

Today was tough for me with a feral, testosterone-infested adolescent surreptitiously stealing a _small bird's eye chilli_ from my cookery demo bench and eating it to show off to his mates... then rubbing his eyes when they watered!  

I took a leaf out of Obama's book and calmly led him to a sink, wet his hands, sprinkled salt over them for him to rub it in, then held his head forward as I scooped water to wash out his eyes.  Entertaining for the class and a lesson for him.

Yes... 'cooler under stress' is a good trait to have... in many areas of life!


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> You are spot on 2020!  Is this a male thing?
> I find myself embarrassed at times when the 'feminine' emotional ploys are applied as mean and nasty.
> 
> Today was tough for me with a feral, testosterone-infested adolescent surreptitiously stealing a _small bird's eye chilli_ from my cookery demo bench and eating it to show off to his mates... then rubbing his eyes when they watered!
> ...



:topic 
doris, sounds like you could have poured a bucket of water over his head - then He'd have been a bit cooler under stress as well 
PS thanks for the updates.
PS My guess is that only a few are reading this thread though lol - or caring who wins.  
One theory about the apparent lack of interest could be that we're all so happy to see the end of GWB, that any which way, the world will win 
I think I'm agreeing with you though - Hillary is showing her claws a little too often.
She could take a leaf out of Penny Wong's book to advantage. - downright freezing under stress


----------



## Doris (27 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> :topic
> doris, sounds like you could have poured a bucket of water over his head - then He'd have been a bit cooler under stress as well
> PS thanks for the updates.
> PS My guess is that only a few are reading this thread though lol - or caring who wins.
> ...




I would have been happy if either won but her female dog traits have lost my respect although I give it to her that she's still fighting to the end.  She has stamina and has endured a lot over the years to win her white house dream.

Hillary sure showed her claws tonight in the Cleveland debate amid boos from the audience. Obama continues to gain respect whilst her campaign carries on with its desperate attacks.  He promotes and (successfully) defends his game whilst 
"national polls suggested Clinton's support was dwindling fast and as newspapers reported infighting among her campaign staff."

She suggested that Obama should "reject" rather than "denounce" the anti-Israel and anti-Jewish tirades of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who has endorsed the Illinois senator's presidential run.  

Obama, insisting that Farrakhan's backing was unwelcome and stressing his strong ties to the Jewish community, said Clinton was playing word-games.

Next Wednesday our time is the cruncher.

Yesterday a poll showed Obama leading in Texas for the first time.

A Rasmussen Reports survey showed Obama had cut her lead among Ohio Democrats to just five points, as she led 48 to 43 percent.

Next Wednesday will incite interest again...


----------



## wayneL (28 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Next Wednesday will incite interest again...



Or not, as the case may be.

Chillies are much more interesting.

The hottest chillies in the world are grown just down the road a bit.

Scoville Heat Units

Pure capsaicin: 15m to 16m

US Police-grade pepper spray: 5m

*Dorset Naga: 923,000*

Red Savina habanero: 577,000

Scotch bonnet: 100,000-325,000

Jamaican hot pepper: 100,000-200,000

Cayenne pepper: 30,000-50,000

Jalapeno pepper: 2,500-8,000

Tabasco sauce: 2,500

Pimento: 100 to 500

Bell pepper: 0

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article700700.ece


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

and I'm wondering what kind of chilli are we gonna end up with when we finally become a republic in year ???? ( 2360?) 

I personally wouldn't recommend the US type. 

PS we're probably waiting to announce our becoming a republic (still with ties to the Commonwealth etc) - in the reign of King Charles XVIII - or XIX maybe


----------



## wayneL (28 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> I personally wouldn't recommend the US type.



Why not? 

Everything else is American.


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Why not?
> 
> Everything else is American.



yes and no  - its full of contradictions 
Howard followed USA blindly, yet was a monachist.
probably just for pragmatic reasons, I doubt he was a Queen's man  in the same sense that Menzies was - Menzies would regularly sing the Queen's praises "I did but see her passing by, and I shall love her till I die" sort of thing.

Labour were certainly heading us towards a Republic - started by Gough who was an avowed republican - and was totally for independent Australian "spirit".  And until Gough we didn't even have an Australian dictionary for instance.  And with him big investiment in all things Aus, the Arts, etc - as well as pulling the troops out of Vietnam.  

Back to the Libs, had Costello been leader at the time of the Referendum, we could well be a republic by now as well (my guess). - just another legacy of Johnny Howard's : -    And now we have a chance with Malcolm Turnball knocking on the door (who knows where Nelson stands on this  - or on anything for that matter)? 

But to my recollection, no-one has ever suggested anything like the US primaries etc to model it on.  I'd say most Aussies would cringe at the thought of the various states of Aus carrying on like they do in USA for months and months.  At least with only 8 states/terrories, we'd be over and done with - probably one bit "Super-Saturday". (we always have elections on Saturday - gives you something to do on your day off - on your way to the races or the pub or whatever).   

Maybe delegation to Parliament to come up with a shortlist - and then another vote. etcetc. - by either the people or a select committee - If the powers of such a President are no more than the current GovGen, then no need to get too carried away sheesh.  I mean the GG (even under a new title El Presidente) would still not be capable of telling us we are at war - without partliamentary approval  - as Bush can do to the US public. And continuing at war " I don't give a flying f*** what the polls say about Iraq, I'm the president and what I say goes" etc.

Come to think of it I'd prefer even a re-incarnated Menzies to Bush 

(I'm sure others who have studied politics could offer more comment).  But I'm doubting it will look much like the US system (just imo) - espeially as the President will probably be just a figurehead  

PS maye we can copy the East Timorese consitution lol. At least with Zanana Gusmao and Jose Ramos Horta they have some true statesmen to emulate


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS You'd think NZ would have gone republic by now wouldn't you?


----------



## Doris (29 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama continues to lead by saying 'we'... compared to Hillary's 'I'.  *Unity versus ego*.  He has been inspiring and leading the masses from the ground up whilst Hillary stands on her pedestal always focused on inspiring voters to make history by helping her become the first female president (again in Tuesday's debate in Cleveland) rather than giving the illusion of leading them. Her personal attacks on him preclude any consideration as a running mate IMO.

It seems that Texas is behind him, for next Wednesday our time, judging by his rally videos.

State Rep. Senfronia Thompson of Houston *defected* from Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's presidential campaign and joined a *growing list of superdelegates to endorse Obama*.
Her defection was the second loss of the day for Clinton. Civil rights leader and Atlanta congressman John Lewis, a Democratic congressman from Atlanta, is the most prominent black leader to *defect* from Clinton's campaign in the face of recent near-unanimous black support for Obama.

"This is our time and if you will stand with me and you will hope for me then we will not just win Texas, we will win the nomination, we will win the general election and *you and I together, we will change this country and we will change the world*," Obama said.

"I am confident in my ability to lead this country in a new direction," Obama said. "But I have to tell you, Texas State, I can't do it by myself."

*Will Dodd be Barack's running mate?*  He has the personal integrity of Obama. 

Two days ago at a press conference in Cleveland, Ohio, Senator Christopher Dodd endorsed Barack Obama for president."The question has always been the same: "Yes, but is he ready?" He has been poked and prodded, analyzed and criticized, called too green, too trusting, too lofty. And for all of that, he's already won half of our nation's states and primaries and caucuses and the votes of more than 10 million Americans, *showing judgment, grace and poise in the process.*

"Over the past few years I've been watching, on the Foreign Relations Committee, on the Labor Committee in which we served, and as a fellow candidate for the presidency of the United States. I'm proud to be the first 2008 presidential candidate to endorse Barack Obama. *He is ready to be President.*

Obama replied:"But as passionate as Chris Dodd is about the causes he champions, *he also has that rare ability to disagree without being disagreeable*. He is respected on both sides of the aisle for his authenticity, reason, and civility. And that is how, time and again, he's been able to bring Democrats and Republicans together to make a real difference in the lives of the American people.

"He conducted his campaign for President with that same character. *He resisted the cheap and easy shots*, and elevated the debate with important ideas about how to address the great challenges we face. He and I share a deep commitment to take our country in a new direction, and I am grateful for his endorsement."

Two more superdelegates have endorsed Barack Obama. Shadow United States Senators Paul Strauss and Michael D. Brown endorsed Obama, citing his longstanding commitment to the rights of DC residents and his ability to unite Americans to bring change.

Ohio seems to be backing Obama too!  Texas and Ohio are the determinants.  If he wins them it's a done deal IMO.

A channel 10 spokesperson told me they will be airing the Oprah interview I saw in Canada Dec 2006... in about four weeks' time. That interview showed a man who was just what this world so desperately needed and he has grown so much since then. 
My own adult children are now asking me what he stands for!  I've directed them to his site to see what he stands for:

http://www.barackobama.com/index.php 

This gives you his stand on 20 issues:  (you have an intro for each then can click to read the rest on each issue)

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/


----------



## prawn_86 (29 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Yet more political propaganda.

No-one has answered as to why Australians should actually care about this


----------



## Doris (29 February 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> But to my recollection, no-one has ever suggested anything like the US primaries etc to model it on.  I'd say most Aussies would cringe at the thought of the various states of Aus carrying on like they do in USA for months and months.  At least with only 8 states/territories, we'd be over and done with - probably one bit "Super-Saturday". (we always have elections on Saturday - gives you something to do on your day off - on your way to the races or the pub or whatever).




At least they get to see how the candidates act under pressure.  They look for a tough leader who can run the distance. The difference is, of course, that this time they do not turn off their TV because the abuse is too depressing.  They listen and are increasingly inspired to _get out the vote_.  What a stark contrast to their last election.  And yes... put themselves out on a work day.

Our parties choose their leader and we vote for our preference lock stock and barrel.  
Then when one loses we find they didn't want that leader after all. 

How many would have liked to have been able to vote for the PM?  How many would have voted coalition but not for the leader?  

We have the same abusive campaigns that are depressing and show the dark side of human nature and make us cringe when the next election looms.  

Maybe they could take a leaf out of Obama's book where he does not make personal attacks but attacks issues.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Yet more political propaganda.
> 
> No-one has answered as to why Australians should actually care about this



prawn, maybe think back to Gore vs Bush - could have gone either way right?
Had Gore won, we'd be a greener planet.
And it's unlikely we'd be in the mess we are in in Iraq. 

And that goes for Aussie as well as USA, since we unthinkingly follow the US anywhere it seems, no matter how hairbrained they get. 

Now you can argue against those comments, by all means - but, in doing so, I would have thought that you would have to concede a passing interest in US politics 



			
				doris said:
			
		

> chance to observe them under pressure



doris, 
I'm obviously thinking ahead to the day we become a republic.  I mean the “leader” will (almost certainly / probably ) remain the PM. yes?  I personally don’t have a problem with the party electing the leader.  Sometimes I wish it was even less “presidential” than it already is. 

To give the new President a role significantly more powerful than the current GG would be too big a step to take or propose imo.  No referendum put to the Aussie people would approve it surely.   

In summary , what works for US won’t necessarily work here. 
But I’m sure the converse also holds true - and "hollywood theatre" seems to be the way they like it over there 

PS I agree with you that it's interesting btw. - for heaps of reasons lol. I'm also pleased I wake up each day in Aus


----------



## Doris (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Yet more political propaganda.
> 
> No-one has answered as to why Australians should actually care about this




Purely for soap opera appeal.  There is a hero and a villain and this first stage is casting for the main characters for stage two.  

Our genetic history has evolved from spectating (one would hope!) as the Christians fought the lions-- to the histrionics of power in the world's most powerful nation.  Two previous soapies starred a villain who slew his opponent because the audience didn't care to even watch. A hawkish and inept leader, around whom is a hawkish administration. Issues like social justice, environmental concerns, alternative energy development, global peace, education, poverty, employment... failed to reach the stage. 

If a hero enabled the US to develop peaceful, functional internal affairs where the populous is focused on being educated, earning a living, enjoying a healthy happy family life in a tolerant multi-cultural scenario, actually attempting to reduce global warming, watching sporting heroes combat each other, there may not be an attitude that a foreign war is necessary to con people into keeping a belligerent in power. Did you ever see the John Candy movie, 'Canadian Bacon'?  Brilliant satire.

Australians died in the twin towers and in two Bali blasts because of the animosity felt towards the US bully who was elected by a minority because the masses were disillusioned and disinterested.  We were made to feel unsafe in our own country because of our vulnerability due to our pragmatic support for them.  It caused suspicion and animosity towards resident ethnics in this country who did not deserve this.  The world will be safer if the most powerful nation is led by someone who does not think in terms of 'the mighty us' and 'them'; who props up the factions that paid to have him in his role.  The US minded its own business before WWII.  Now the in-house villain thinks its needs have priority over other countries and their assets.

Do you not realize the effects of the US economy taking a dive has a flow on effect here? Der... How much have Aussie companies lost because their economy is mis-managed?  Der...

The sub-prime traunches were set up because the US government does not have transparency and openness of their financial reporting... this will change!  The greedy who refinanced their mortgages for holidays and disposables, thinking the interest rates would remain static... this global economy happens to still be led by the USD and the villain's fiscal incompetencies. 

A close friend's daughter gave birth to her first child a week before her husband was shipped off to Iraq a few months ago.  Bush's ineptitude!

The US owes trillions to China for financing the Iraqi war.  What will this world be like when China is the most powerful nation?  The US economy is in a downward spiral partly due to jobs out-sourced to India and China. Too much of their GDP is being siphoned into unsustainable, unproductive areas. 

On a humanitarian level, the poverty amongst all ethnic groups in many states  has millions not living the American dream.  Subsistence is a nightmare for them.  And this is the forthcoming fate here.  If the parent is happy the children will be treated well and they too will be happy.  And thus too will be their neighbours.

Obama has the persona to get people to the table so that 'ready, fire, aim!' is not their internal nor foreign policy MO.


----------



## arminius (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

prawn, it truly is a v impoortant election for you. its even more crucial for your children, if and when you have them.
the world needs to be rid of the neo right, and the us needs to be seen disguarding it. think about this. obamas opponents have pilloried him because he is willing to 'communicate with his enemies'. can u imagine a society that doesnt do this? crazy stuff.
the o man will win though. 
hillary wont last another week.
mcain is detested by half of his own party.


----------



## arminius (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

disguard= discard. 
its early. havent had my cuppa.
the major powers may all be governed by the left soon. the pendulum of human reason has swung back to its rightful place.


----------



## Whiskers (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> No-one has answered as to why Australians should actually care about this




Probably the main reason I have a little interest is I'd like to see a US president doing more about his/her own economy and being less of an international policeman. 

Surely whoever the next president is out of the two or three left in the running, things can only get better from here can't it?


----------



## wayneL (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Yet more political propaganda.
> 
> No-one has answered as to why Australians should actually care about this



I wonder if there is an agenda in the blanket coverage of US politics.

Russian and Chinese politics have every bit as much impact (potential and actual) on we minor anglo-saxon countries as the US. 

Why don't we get as much coverage of these other major powers? Because we don't give a #$%&. Yet we have all this American tosh served up to us every 15 minutes! WTF?

I realize it's probably conspiracy theorism, but perhaps it's all designed to get the rest of the west to follow the US by becoming emotionally involved in their internal affairs.

Cynically yours...


----------



## happytown (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



arminius said:


> ...
> 
> the major powers may all be governed by the left soon. the pendulum of human reason has swung back to its rightful place.




[artlessly part-censored my own leanings], make no mistake, not without one hell of a fight, the beast does not give up its meal when as still yet unsatiated

for as previously spaketh

government is but the shadow cast by big business over society

some may say anarcho-syndicalism everybody

it interests me that, in the "developed world", the west, we prefer to be ruled by right/centrist-right wing overlords, whilst some in the "less-developed" or "under-developed" world prefer rule by leftist overlords

what is the difference really

is it a case of propaganda is to a democracy what a bludgeon is to a totlitarian state (internally)

is it just shades of sophistication, or 'development'

who is to become the figurehead (unkindly?) referred to as uncle scam is important to some, not to others

'tis maybe as the noamster said, every few years we get to say we want you to be our leader or no we want you to be our leader

is it just shades of sophistication

if it is, this post is not

cheers 







wayneL said:


> ...
> 
> Why don't we get as much coverage of these other major powers? Because we don't give a #$%&. Yet we have all this American tosh served up to us every 15 minutes! WTF?
> 
> ...




gleefully received in kind

have you ever noticed at the end of half-hour news 'shows' the last thing listed (in tiny type) is affiliations (station-wise)

the politics of the world can be summed up thusly

affiliations

indeed, could all humanity

vive la bagatelle

cheers


----------



## noirua (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Barrack Obama campaign raised over $50 million in February roughly in line with expectations. 
Hillary Clinton raised over $35 million in February that shows her campaign team is far from throwing in the towel.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Russian and Chinese politics have every bit as much impact (potential and actual) on we minor anglo-saxon countries as the US.
> 
> Why don't we get as much coverage of these other major powers? Because we don't give a #$%&. Yet we have all this American tosh served up to us every 15 minutes! WTF?
> 
> ...



http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/01/2177013.htm?section=justin


> Putin urges Russians to vote
> Posted 8 hours 2 minutes ago
> 
> With the campaign in Russia's presidential election in its last day President Vladimir Putin has been on television reminding Russians to vote.
> ...




http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/08/2157436.htm


> Putin, Medvedev courting Russia's green vote




I notice the chances of it being a fair election are a joke.  *The chief opposition chance (chess player, name escapes me) was banned from the election.  Heard him yesterday saying " You canot use the terms 'election' or 'free choice' etcetc - in the context of this fiasco" (paraphrased).  *

Observers boycotting it also. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/02/08/2157318.htm


> OSCE boycotts Russian presidential vote
> Posted Fri Feb 8, 2008 0:29am AEDT
> 
> The Organisation for Security and Cooperation (OSCE) in Europe on Thursday cancelled its observer missions to Russia's March 2 presidential election because of restrictions imposed by Moscow.
> ...




Summary. Not much reason to expect things to change in Russia for a while.  But USA at least feigns democracy once every 4 years.


----------



## prawn_86 (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Alright,

next question.

Aside from major affairs which "affect" a majority of the world, such as war on terror etc, 

How will the president of America effect my (or any other Australians)everyday life?

Also we cant vote anyway so who gives a toss, as Wayne has pointed out before.

And as i have said before, the president is just a puppet for those not in the public eye. Some here have pointed out that he has the power to do certain things (start wars etc), but surely you do not believe that ultimately it is his/her decision.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Alright,
> 
> next question.
> 
> ...



ok mate
lock the shutters
raise the drawbidge
Aussies only interested in Aus from now on 
happy now?


----------



## prawn_86 (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ok mate
> lock the shutters
> raise the drawbidge
> Aussies only interested in Aus from now on
> happy now?




Its just that as Wayne has also stated, we hear all this crap about american politics, when they havnt even decided who is going to be running for each party yet, so why does it even matter at this stage?

Do you think the US or other countries recieve daily updates on Aus politics?


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Its just that as Wayne has also stated, we hear all this crap about american politics, when they havnt even decided who is going to be running for each party yet, so why does it even matter at this stage?
> 
> Do you think the US or other countries recieve daily updates on Aus politics?



lol
Australia?
they think we are somewhere up there near Swizerland m8


----------



## prawn_86 (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

My point exactly.

Our politics do not affect thier day to day living, and vice versa

Hence the total apathy


----------



## wayneL (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ok mate
> lock the shutters
> raise the drawbidge
> Aussies only interested in Aus from now on
> happy now?



The old reductive fallacy trick, eh?

A favourite of yours?


----------



## Doris (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Its just that as Wayne has also stated, we hear all this crap about american politics, when they havnt even decided who is going to be running for each party yet, so why does it even matter at this stage?
> 
> Do you think the US or other countries recieve daily updates on Aus politics?




I really think you need to think! Below the surface.
What are the repercussions for you on a micro scale from the macro outlined?  _Think_ about the issues already presented! 
Don't just watch the soap opera.  Examine the plot and the themes. At least you're tuned in.

Australia is the best country in the world in which to live but it is a minnow. Our impact on the world is tourist and resource related!  
We are not a power force nor predatory, so why should the world care about our politics? We're a quaint little country 'down there'.
Yes 2020... Reminds me of Bush telling us at APEC (OPEC?)  how Howard had visited the Austrian troups in Iraq the week before.

I've liked all the major Democrat candidates.  

Can you imagine letting Huckabee loose as a final contender?
*The final selection is who they get to choose from!*  The choice is narrowed to specific characters and policies. 
The chaff is sifted from the hay. 
The cream has risen to the top... and the choices are not all rancid.
IMO only one rises to cater for all that one dares to hope will clean up the mess in most of the deleterious issues.

The cynicism about the Commander in Chief being a figurehead is ignorance especially after *2020's expose on the role*.  

The source of the money paying for advertising and general campaign expenses is directly related to paybacks! 
Obama is the only candidate NOT a prospective puppet.  
He is the change that would see democracy-- a representation of the populous, not the lobbyists. 
We cannot vote but we can hope!



			
				Whiskers said:
			
		

> Probably the main reason I have a little interest is I'd like to see a US president doing more about his/her own economy and being less of an international policeman.
> 
> Surely whoever the next president is out of the two or three left in the running, things can only get better from here can't it?




Exactly the point!  At last a leader in the post WWII era who will focus on this core goal.  Help has too often been incidental to vested interests rather than a transparent policing role. Individual American philanthropists have done more IMO for world aid then their government... Ted Turner, Bill Gates et al.



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> I realize it's probably conspiracy theorism, but perhaps it's all designed to get the rest of the west to follow the US by becoming emotionally involved in their internal affairs.




They need to clean up their own backyard instead of diluting the efficacy of their grass roots by poorly thought through efforts elsewhere.  If each family is functional then the neighbourhood is also.  World health begins with the health of the individuals en masse.  
Each grain of sand contributes to the beach.



			
				2020hindsight said:
			
		

> lock the shutters
> raise the drawbidge
> Aussies only interested in Aus from now on




Unfortunately too many have had their heads in the sand and hence the current pride and adulation that at last they are inspired to look around and want to get what they want.  And maybe we may benefit as the figurative pollution clears.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn]How will the president of America effect my (or any other Australians)everyday life?

Also we cant vote anyway so who gives a toss said:


> The old reductive fallacy trick, eh?
> 
> A favourite of yours?



I could say 
what a load of :bs:
but I won't.


PS prawn isn't interested in the next US president
because ?
he doesn't vote over there 
No need to lecture those of us who do find it both interesting and potentially extremely relevant btw.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS prawn, There have been other threads that looked into the impact and speculate on how the (midterm then) US election might affect (or effect if you prefer) the stock market. 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=87972&highlight=elections#post87972

I think the general concensus was probably that there would be no real difference between Democrats or Republicans in that regard -  eg this reply by billhill. - Much like no real difference between Labor and Libs here in Aus 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=88012&highlight=elections#post88012


----------



## wayneL (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> I could say
> what a load of :bs:
> but I won't.



That's good, because if you did, you would be indulging in yet another logical fallacy (perhaps argument by pigheadedness?) and look foolish. 

Cheers


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Its all hypothetical, McCain will hammer whoever gets up for the Democrats. good on him. 

What is a reductive fallacy? 

gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

One little anecdote of how the US presidencey can affect us.
Back in 1963 Kennedy was assassinated. 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy



> It remains a point of controversy among historians whether or not Vietnam would have escalated to the point it did had Kennedy served out his full term and possibly been re-elected in 1964.[23] Fueling this speculation are statements made by Kennedy's and Johnson's Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara that Kennedy was strongly considering pulling out of Vietnam after the 1964 election. In the film "The Fog of War", not only does McNamara say this, but a tape recording of Lyndon Johnson confirms that Kennedy was planning to withdraw from Vietnam, a position Johnson states he disapproved of.[24] Additional evidence is Kennedy's National Security Action Memorandum (NSAM) #263 on October 11, 1963 that gave the order for withdrawal of 1,000 military personnel by the end of 1963. Nevertheless, given the stated reason for the overthrow of the Diem government, such action would have been a dramatic policy reversal, *but Kennedy was generally moving in a less hawkish direction in the Cold War since his acclaimed speech about World Peace at American University the previous June 10, 1963.
> 
> After Kennedy's assassination, new President Lyndon B. Johnson immediately reversed his predecessor's order to withdraw 1,000 military personnel by the end of 1963 with his own NSAM #273 on November 26, 1963*.




You mightn't have been living in Aus then Wayne - but this egghead LBJ then came to Aus, and we were told to wave US flags and carry on like idiots, to shouts of "all the way with LBJ". Next thing Vietnam is totally out of control - and we'd followed an idiot. 

Not too dissimilar to the last invasion of Iraq in some respects.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Its all hypothetical, McCain will hammer whoever gets up for the Democrats. good on him.
> 
> What is a reductive fallacy?
> 
> gg



lol
 that's Wayne's way of obfuscating an argument gg 



> ob·fus·cate    –verb (used with object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing. 1. to confuse, bewilder, or stupefy.
> 2. to make obscure or unclear: to obfuscate a problem with extraneous information.
> 3. to darken.


----------



## wayneL (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> What is a reductive fallacy?
> 
> gg



"Over-simplifying. As Einstein said, everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. Political slogans such as "Taxation is theft" fall in this category."


----------



## chops_a_must (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Its all hypothetical, McCain will hammer whoever gets up for the Democrats. good on him.
> 
> What is a reductive fallacy?
> 
> gg




Economics is one giant one.

Reductio ad absurdum ad inifinitum... I think..


----------



## Doris (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Tally Update*

Obama is ahead of Clinton in count of delegates who will formally anoint the nominee, with 1,384 delegates to her 1,279. 

To reach the target 2025:

# 641 are needed for victory for Obama.
# 746 needed by Hillary.

*  Obama has a 48 to 42 percent advantage over Hillary in Texas.

*  In Ohio, Clinton is ahead of Obama by just 44 to 42 percent, a lead within the poll's margin of error, making the race too close to call.


John McCain is already anticipating a White House match-up with Obama, as he was poised to eliminate former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee and clinch the Republican nomination on Wednesday our time.


In the most explosive moment yet of the Democratic race, Clinton debuted a negative television ad, dripping with Cold War-style menace, suggesting Obama would be found wanting in a dead-of-night foreign policy crisis.

In the poignant Clinton ad, a telephone rings insistently over dreamy shots of young children sleeping soundly in their beds.

"It's 3:00 am and your children are safe and asleep. But there's a phone in the White House and it's ringing," the male narrator says.

"Something's happening in the world. Your vote will decide who answers that call."

The final shot of a business-like Clinton cradling the phone, suggested that only she could keep peril at bay.


Within hours, the Obama camp had cut their own spot, saying Senator Clinton was wrong in voting to authorize war in Iraq, deepening a row more reminiscent of a Republican general election tactic than a Democratic primary skirmish.

"We've seen these ads before. They're usually the kind that play upon people's fears and try to scare our votes," Obama told a rally in Texas.

"The question is, what kind of judgment will you exercise when you pick up that phone? In fact, we have had a red phone moment. It was the decision to invade Iraq," he said.

His response ad used the same cutesy images of sleeping children, but with a different message.

"Something's happening in the world. When that call gets answered, shouldn't the president be the one, the only one, who had judgment and courage to oppose the Iraq war from the start?" the ad asks.

"In a dangerous world, it's judgment that matters."



In a valuable boost to Obama, Senator Jay Rockefeller, chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, endorsed his colleague.

"What matters most in the Oval Office is sound judgment and decisive action. It's about getting it right on crucial national security questions the first time -- and every time."

"The indisputable fact is Barack Obama was right about Iraq when many of us were wrong. It was a tough call, and the single greatest national security question, and mistake of our time."


----------



## Doris (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> "Over-simplifying. As Einstein said, everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler. Political slogans such as "Taxation is theft" fall in this category."




I wonder if you can direct your thoughts to an objective critique.
If the election is of no interest to you why do you keep reiterating this?

If you have a constructive critique please focus on specifics instead of belligerent innuendo?  
This is reminiscent of my testosterone infested 14 year olds.  Ready... fire... aim!

Your amygdala is over-riding your frontal lobes which suggests you are under 25...??   (This is why car insurance is higher for this age)

If you look for positives you will feel positive and be a happier person.
Negativism as a sport increases your cholesterol and hypertension.  I fear for you.


----------



## wayneL (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I wonder if you can direct your thoughts to an objective critique.
> If the election is of no interest to you why do you keep reiterating this?
> 
> If you have a constructive critique please focus on specifics instead of belligerent innuendo?
> ...



Oh my Doris,

If you were paying attention, Garpal asked a question, my post you quoted was merely an answer to that. In fact, it was quoted from somewhere else.

As to your amateur psych analysis, you are so far off the mark, it is actually funny. In fact you are hoist by your own petard, in that you have gone all _ad hominem_. 

Why do I keep coming back here to this thread? It is as a moderator, to ensure the excessive propaganda is somewhat tempered with some balance and healthy cynicism.


----------



## wayneL (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol
> that's Wayne's way of obfuscating an argument gg




Once again, you have the wrong end of the stick. Obfuscation implies or obscure argument. Logical fallacies are not obscure even if one has not yet been introduced to these terms. However the act of logical fallacy is used every day in practice. You use many of them quite frequently.

Sorry 2020, your still rolling them in the gutter.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wayne I prefer the candidness of this post of yours from "Is America Bankrupt" thread..

including the Patriot Act (something else we've copied in part at least) 
why we should take an interest

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=19353&highlight=patriot#post19353


wayneL said:


> Just a bit of good humoured and pedantic one upmanship LOL:
> 
> 
> I can empathise withyour point of few. Many countries suck more than the US.
> ...


----------



## wayneL (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

That still doesn't say why Democratic Party candidacy contests are of more than a passing interest to non-Americans. As I've maintained, when we get to the real game, (ie the actual presidency) I'll be more interested. 

Until then, I wanna know about what that 15 minutes of BS per night is replacing in relevant (to me) news.

At least the news is now starting to look past the hysteria, euphoria, and unachievable rhetoric. That's something. But I'm really more interested in how Vince Cable has Crash Gordon dangling on the end of a skewer. I want to know what Boy Wonder Cameron is doing to get the bastard consigned the ranks of has been unelected PMs.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

To each his own then.:bier:
btw, I'm not spending 15 minutes a day listening to them (unless I'm captive audience in car driving to or from) 
But I'm still interested.
And I'm responding to people arguing that we shouldn'e be interested in observing the candidates for the most powerful position in the world.  
And that's despite the fact that I don't vote for them as prawn would argue. 

I probably wish I knew more about McCaine.  Some of his outbursts recorded on the internet suggest he's a real loose cannon - seriously superstititious to the point of absolute stupidity ( no way could I vote for someone that goes into a great tissie because he can't find his rabbit's foot or his lucky feather whatever) , and  subject to incredible rudeness (comments about why the Clinton's daughter is ugly :bad .  Just the man you need for the diplomatic tightrope we have to deal with - Bush's legacy. 

Here are a couple of thoughts on the topic of "Waterloo", one involving British politics ( Vince Gable as you say) 

....... the other involving the US hawks who have done their best to take the world into a mess out of which they/we are unlikely to crawl in the foreseeable future. 
 Waterloo A toe-tapping tribute to Dubya's legacy


----------



## noirua (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi Doris, you'r doing a great job banging the drum for Obama.  Will be interesting to see if he has the ability to keep it going as it's far more difficult when you'r out there in front.


----------



## Doris (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Its all hypothetical, McCain will hammer whoever gets up for the Democrats. good on him.
> gg




And would you like to see a cat and dog brawl between Hillary and McCain?

... or a snarling bully making vicious, erroneous attacks on a cool confident decisive nice guy?  

My bet is that this will this continue to make GOP members defect to the Democrats!


----------



## Doris (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Oh my Doris,
> 
> If you were paying attention, Garpal asked a question, my post you quoted was merely an answer to that. In fact, it was quoted from somewhere else.
> 
> Why do I keep coming back here to this thread? It is as a moderator, to ensure the excessive propaganda is somewhat tempered with some balance and healthy cynicism.




I realize that wayneL... but the buzzing of the fly finally could not be ignored.

*The quote was simply to indicate whom I was admonishing*.  

You purport to offer healthy cynicism when really you have very rarely  thought out your off the cuff remarks which appear to me to be like a schoolyard bully rather than a debater who has prepared his attack. It is not healthy to continually denigrate and insult merely for sport. This is Hillary's and McCain's style.  I feel uncomfortable with people who conduct themselves without dignity. I choose not to associate with people of this calibre in my private life.  I walk away and allow them to be who they choose to be without my life being tarnished by their toxic personalities.

I have endeavoured to elucidate so that others who may only read headlines can see the depth of the man who very few had heard about when I started this thread. *This has never been propaganda*.  You insult by shallow choice and it is not dignified.  I challenge you to identify anything that has been false, distorted or misleading.

My attitude is to justify my decision, in December 2006, that Barack's life has groomed him to be one of the most brilliant leaders in history.  

A decision is made when consequences have been analysed and evaluated.  
A choice is stabbing a pin onto a list.  And sometimes this is a pain for others!


----------



## wayneL (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I realize that wayneL... but the buzzing of the fly finally could not be ignored.
> 
> *The quote was simply to indicate whom I was admonishing*.
> 
> ...



Doris,

This man may one day be one of the greatest leaders in history. If so, I will readily dip my lid to his achievements, should they materialize.

But I must say, until that stage, the above is absolute nonsense. Forgive me for saying that I've heard it all before and sans any evidence of greatness thus far, I'd have to say you are having trouble separating rhetoric from reality. You are clearly infatuated with the man, and this is causing you to suffer from fuzzy thinking. I mean check back on this thread and dispassionately observe the amount of rhetoric you have posted here. It's sickening.

That said, if he's elected as president and as mentioned before, I hope he can do something good. I would much prefer him to McCain, and by a country mile. But he is human, and will suffer all the foibles that humans suffer.. even as president.

Let's just step back and see what he does.


----------



## Doris (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hi Doris, you'r doing a great job banging the drum for Obama.  Will be interesting to see if he has the ability to keep it going as it's far more difficult when you'r out there in front.




To be honest, it's the first time I've felt nervous Noirua!  
These caucuses are crucial. I'm making calls to Texas!

*13 hours ago*: (AFP)
A new Reuters/C-Span-Zogby survey found *Obama leading Clinton 45 percent to 43 percent in Texas. *
A previous poll by Zogby released Friday had Obama up 48 to 42 percent.

In Ohio, the rivals were *tied at 45 percent*, according to Saturday's poll.

*One hour ago*: (ABC News)
Polls show Clinton ahead in Ohio, while Texas is a virtual dead heat.

She says:
"His entire campaign is based on a speech he gave at an antiwar rally in 2002 -- a lot of talk, little action. Or as they say in Texas, all hat, no cattle," she said today aboard her campaign plane.

He says:
"We need leaders in Washington who say what they mean and mean what they say," Obama said. "I don't want to just tell everyone what they want to hear, I'll tell people what they need to know." 

They say:
With four states holding primaries on Tuesday, the Obama campaign believes any delegates Clinton may win -- even if she narrowly beats him in Ohio -- could be offset by huge Obama wins in Rhode Island or Vermont.

The Obama campaign sent out thousands of volunteers who plan to knock on one million doors by Tuesday.

Barack has an urgency in his 'voice' I have not felt before:
________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Sunday, 2 March 2008 3:13 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Will you make a call for me?

Doris --

I need you to make your voice heard today -- literally.

Over the past week, supporters have made more than 700,000 phone calls right from their own homes. They are reaching out to voters in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island, and Vermont before the March 4th primaries.

We've set a goal of 1 million calls to help Get Out The Vote for these critical contests -- will you help?

All you need is a few minutes, a phone line, and a passion for change. Start making calls right now:

We've identified likely supporters in Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island, and Vermont, and with our online phonebanking tool, you can start calling them right away.

It couldn't be easier.

Simply choose the March 4th state you'd like to call, and you'll get a list of phone numbers and a simple script you can use to start growing this movement, one person at a time.

Take a few minutes to make a call, and I'm certain you'll want to make five more:

We asked a few of the thousands of supporters who have already started making calls what they wanted to tell you about the experience. Here's what some of them had to say:

I am a fairly new caller from Texas and I wanted to pass on a few thoughts. I called this afternoon to some fellow Texans (mostly from the San Antonio area) ... one woman was initially undecided but now is definitely supporting Senator Obama and so is her husband! It was talking to her one on one that made a big difference. I explained the primary and caucus deal to her (which she did not know) and she was very appreciative. Please let the other callers know that voters in Texas are very willing to hear our message...please keep calling Texas! There are a lot of undecided voters here. Thanks so much for all that YOU do!!
-- Bonnie from Texas

Just want to mention that I had been wavering between Barack and Hillary for a long time -- I'd even donated money to both campaigns. However, over many weeks I received calls from Sen. Obama's volunteers ... Those calls from the phone bank volunteers went a long way toward finally helping me make up my mind. Their sincerity, their passion, and their loyalty to Barack really impressed me (and I don't impress easily -- I spent 20 years as a TV producer in LA). I'm a woman who's Hillary's age and the last campaign I volunteered for was (oddly) Bill Clinton's first run. Anyway, I will do my best to duplicate the passion of the Obama supporters who called me, as I pick up the phone to talk to others.
-- DeeDee from Arizona

Make some phone calls right now, and see just what Bonnie and DeeDee are talking about:

You have helped accomplish some extraordinary things during this campaign.

But the most extraordinary things happen at the personal level, when you can make that personal connection to a voter and discover that you share a common vision of what ought to be.

Make a call and make that connection today.

Thank you,

Barack


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Barack Obama vs Hillary Clinton on policy*   (7 of the 20 issues on Obama's website)

By Tim Shipman
Last Updated: 12:31am GMT 02/03/2008

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/02/wus202.xml

*So, what is the difference between them?*

CLINTON: Sells herself as experienced and ready to lead on day one. She promises hard work and a fight to win the nomination, to resist Republican attacks in the general election and to defend blue-collar workers as president.

OBAMA: Says America needs change in Washington, an end to partisan bitterness and new personnel. His focus is more on the power of his personality to bring people together - Democrat and Republican, black and white.

WHAT IT MEANS: Both have strong faith in the power of government, but Mr Obama's poetic message of hope has trumped Mrs Clinton's prosaic command of the issues.

IRAQ

CLINTON: An awkward embarrassment. Mrs Clinton would start withdrawing troops within six months. But her senate vote for war remains a handicap with those who now wish it had never happened. She has repeatedly refused to apologise, though she said last week she would like to take it back.

OBAMA: The big issue for Mr Obama, since he opposed the war from the start, speaking out even as he battled to win his senate seat. Claims superior judgment despite the disparity in experience. Backs a phased withdrawal.

WHAT IT MEANS: A vote-winner for Mr Obama among fiercely anti-war Democrat activists. But polls suggest the success of the troop surge would put both on the defensive against the Republican John McCain.

HEALTHCARE

CLINTON: Her signature issue, on which she has long and bruising experience. She will make every American buy health insurance, with subsidies and tax credits for those who can't afford it. Some 47 million currently have no such cover. She will require insurance companies to cover everyone who applies, even if already ill, and compel large businesses to cover their employees. Total cost: £55bn pa.

OBAMA: Will require adults to buy cover for their children but not for themselves. Instead, focuses on reducing costs so that more people can afford insurance. Stresses he would hold public meetings with the healthcare industry to avoid secret deals with special interests. Total cost: £25bn-£32bn.

WHAT IT MEANS: Mrs Clinton claims Mr Obama's plan will leave 15 million uninsured. He says she will force people to buy insurance they can't afford. Democrat voters prefer Mrs Clinton's plan but think Mr Obama's is good, too. Reminders of her failure at reform when first lady undermine her claims of experience.

FOREIGN POLICY

CLINTON: Outreach to allies. Stresses her experience of visiting more than 80 countries as first lady. She implausibly claims to have played a major role in the Northern Ireland peace process. Says "the era of cowboy diplomacy will be over" under her leadership.

OBAMA: Outreach to enemies. He is under fire from Mrs Clinton and President Bush for saying that he would meet with the leaders of Iran, Cuba and North Korea without conditions. Places more stress than Mrs Clinton on the importance of refocusing US efforts on Afghanistan.

WHAT IT MEANS: British efforts in Helmand province more likely to get a boost under Mr Obama, but he has visited Europe only once - and Mrs Clinton is closer to Gordon Brown.

TAXES AND ECONOMY

CLINTON: Cosying up to blue-collar workers. Would end the Bush tax cuts and spend the money on her expensive healthcare plan. She wants a 90 day moratorium on sub-prime mortgage foreclosures.

OBAMA: Classic tax-and-spend liberal. Also wants to end tax cuts on those earning £250,000 or more, to pay for healthcare. Advocates pumping £38 billion into the economy from tax cuts, with handouts to working families, pensioners, homeowners and the unemployed.

WHAT IT MEANS: The economy is now the top issue in the Democrat primaries and could hold the key in swing states in November's election. Mrs Clinton has the advantage here, especially among the less well-off, who are suffering from job losses and the sub-prime mortgage crisis.

FREE TRADE vs PROTECTIONISM

CLINTON: Bashing Bill. The one area where she distances herself from her husband, who was pro-free trade. She says she will rip up the North American Free Trade deal (Nafta) unless it is renegotiated. The deal is now widely blamed for costing American jobs.

OBAMA: Having it both ways. Also wants renegotiation of Nafta and says companies that move overseas would lose some of their tax breaks. But Canadian papers report that his aides have told the Canadian government not to take his rhetoric at face value.

WHAT IT MEANS: Anti-free trade message will help Mrs Clinton in Ohio, but Mr Obama's equivocation may help in Texas, where Nafta is popular.

ABORTION

CLINTON: Rock solid behind "right to choose" on abortion, the traditional Democrat mantra. Would write the landmark Roe v Wade Supreme Court ruling permitting abortion into federal law. Supports use of so-called partial-birth abortion, a controversial late?term procedure involving dismemberment of the foetus.

OBAMA: Although he, too, opposes attempts by constitutional amendment to overturn Roe v Wade, Clinton supporters say he is soft on abortion. He only voted "present" - refusing to commit - when abortion laws were debated in the Illinois state senate.

WHAT IT MEANS: Republicans see both candidates as boiler-plate liberals on abortion, but the innuendo about Mr Obama was credited with losing him the New Hampshire primary. The issue boosts Mrs Clinton's standing with women voters.

ENVIRONMENT

CLINTON: Committed to signing a successor to the Kyoto climate deal. Strong supporter of developing alternative energy to boost jobs and lessen dependence on foreign oil. She boasts that America will lead when "the two oilmen have left the White House".

OBAMA: Backs a cap-and-trade programme to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. He has pledged to put America at the head of an international global warming partnership.

WHAT IT MEANS: Promises here can hurt a Democrat with still-sceptical voters in the general election. Bashing the oil industry is not a winner in Texas.


----------



## Julia (2 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Doris,
> 
> This man may one day be one of the greatest leaders in history. If so, I will readily dip my lid to his achievements, should they materialize.
> 
> ...



I have to agree with this.  Can't help feeling the Obama fans are carried away with rhetoric which is less than surprising given the disillusioned state of American politics.

Doris, I don't think anyone is suggesting that what happens in the great US of A is irrelevant to us here in Australia.  Just perhaps that the minutiae of the primaries appears to be receiving more coverage in the thread "Barack 08"
than all the words contributed to "Kevin 07" which surely had more relevance to us here in Australia.

You seem like a really intelligent and mature person in other threads, but in this one it almost seems as though Mr Obama has you under some sort of spell which engenders utter devotion and adoration.  Almost as though you feel you are receiving personal emails typed by Mr Obama himself when you post them from his undoubtedly huge mailing list onto ASF.

I don't mean to be rude or insulting to you, but I'm honestly just puzzled about what appears to be a complete infatuation by an otherwise sensible person???


----------



## Doris (3 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Can't help feeling the Obama fans are carried away with rhetoric which is less than surprising given the disillusioned state of American politics.
> 
> Almost as though you feel you are receiving personal emails typed by Mr Obama himself when you post them from his undoubtedly huge mailing list onto ASF.




Maybe it's the teacher in me wanting to show how the groundswell is developed.

... what the technique is to the masses who are receiving the emails as this is his secret weapon.
... each donor, each volunteer, being made feel they are important. An integral part of the team.  And they are.  

The personal approach, one to one, builds and carries the momentum. 

Owning a part.  Not just listening to speeches and being uplifted to vote but being an instrumental part of his success as though they too are succeeding. Compare this to the autocratic leader.

This is the marketing secret that he has despite the money spent on mailing fliers, TV and radio advertisements. I find it fascinating.

My friend in California compares him to Hitler who swept to power on rhetoric without the voters knowing what he stood for.

Like WayneL, I look forward to see what he does once in office.


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> My friend in California compares him to Hitler who swept to power on rhetoric without the voters knowing what he stood for.



So should the Czechs be getting nervous?
(PS I hope your friend doesn't say that to rally the people lol. - not sure how many that would appeal to  then again, you never know in US)


----------



## Doris (4 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

No 2020.  She doesn't talk politics (let alone rally) except very rarely... and in private.
I discovered, on a trip three years ago, that the old folk (her parents-in-law) we visited, who I'd asked why the country had just voted in Bush (they 'didn't know') had been in the state caucus for Bush senior's election!  I do not talk politics with their friends now!  

The next 24 hours should be interesting. But it won't be conclusive. 
The media (via Washington Post this morning) have claimed they have been soft on Obama and too hard on Hillary and would redress this 'today'.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/03/04/clinton_obama_come_charging_into_crucial_day/

*13 minutes ago:*
With new polls out yesterday that suggested she had expanded her narrow lead in Ohio and is deadlocked with Obama in Texas, Clinton dismissed questions about whether she would give up her quest for the nomination if she does not win both states, despite suggestions from some of her most prominent supporters that she should consider withdrawing if that happens.

"I'm just getting warmed up," Clinton told reporters yesterday, saying she was planning on pushing ahead to the April 22 primary in Pennsylvania.

Under heavy pressure from Democrats in both camps to score wins today, the Clinton campaign stepped up its attacks on Obama yesterday, shifting from criticism of what it calls his lack of substance to an assault on his character and putting Obama on the defensive hours ahead of the voting.

The New York senator pointed to a memo - written by an official in Canada's consulate in Chicago after a meeting there last month - indicating that Obama's chief economic adviser told Canadian government officials that Obama's criticism of the North American Free Trade Agreement was directed at primary voters in Ohio and other states and did not represent his real position. *Obama's campaign had previously denied such conversations took place.*

"That's the kind of difference between talk and action that I've been pointing out in this campaign," Clinton told reporters while campaigning in Ohio.

Obama said his campaign never gave Canada back-channel assurances. The Obama adviser, Austan Goolsbee, disputed the account of his remarks. The Canadian embassy later issued a statement that the memo, obtained by the Associated Press, *did not intend "to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA."*

The Clinton campaign also attacked Obama for his relationship with Chicago businessman Tony Rezko, a friend and fund-raiser whose trial on federal corruption charges began yesterday. Obama has been questioned about a deal in which he purchased his home in Chicago at the same time Rezko's wife bought a neighboring lot.

Obama said yesterday that Rezko's problems are not his. "These charges are completely unrelated to me, and nobody disputes that," Obama told reporters. "There's no dispute that he raised money for us, and there's no dispute that we've tried to get rid of it."

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who has endorsed Clinton, yesterday became the latest Democrat to suggest she might need to drop out if she does not do well today. "Let's see how Tuesday plays out, and then let's start thinking about how we're going to get behind a candidate," Whitehouse told Providence radio station WPRO.

(As well as Texas and Ohio) Voters in Rhode Island and Vermont also go to the polls today, with a total of 370 delegates at stake in the four states and with Obama holding a 109-delegate lead, according to an Associated Press tally.


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (5 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The sad thing out of all of this is that if Obama does win the nomination he will not go on to win the White House - the truth is Americans will without doubt go for a POW, white and long term senator rather than a black populist like Obama. The Obama factor will have worn off by November and the Republicans will get another 4 years reward for all of their mismangement.

I repeat - Americans will not vote in a black president.

Without doubt, Hillary will at least give McCain a run.

Doris, he will break your heart as a corruption scandle will tarnish his image big time - he aint all sugar.


----------



## noirua (5 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Latest reports show a very big turnout at the four caucuses, that include the Texas two step voting system in that State. 

The original optomism of the Obama campaign two days ago has shown to have faltered following the appearance in court of a backer. Attendance at one rally was well below expectations.

Betting still shows that Obama would beat McCain and McCain would beat Clinton, however, betting has narrowed in the last few days.
Odds to become President:  Obama 11/8,  McCain 7/4,  Clinton 5/1.
Odds to win Democratic nomination:  Obama 1/6,  Clinton 5/1.


----------



## Doris (5 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Who WILL compete against McCain now he's the GOP's nomination?

*Clinton Takes Texas and Ohio in Major Comeback*

By Chris Cillizza
washingtonpost.com staff writer

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) roared back into contention for the Democratic presidential primary race Tuesday night after claiming primary victories in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island. These wins ensure that her challenge to Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.) will continue through Pennsylvania's primary on April 22.

Clinton's popular-vote margin in Ohio was larger than expected, while she appeared to eke out a very narrow win in Texas. Obama won an easy victory in Vermont, while Clinton cruised to a triumph in Rhode Island.

At issue is whether Clinton's popular-vote margins will translate into significant gains in the competition for delegates against Obama, who entered yesterday's contests with a lead of 162 pledged delegates, according to his campaign.

Clinton's convincing win in Ohio seemed almost certain to allow her to cut into Obama's pledged delegate lead. The close result in the Texas primary, combined with Obama's likely victory in that state's caucuses last night, insures that neither candidate will emerge with a significant delegate lead in the Lone Star State.

Clinton's near sweep of the states voting yesterday represented a marked contrast to the 11-contest winning streak Obama had enjoyed since the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday voting. Many observers saw yesterday's vote as the former first lady's last stand, but her victories suggest that Democratic voters are not yet ready to end the contest.

Her victories also followed a shift in tactics in which Clinton directly raised the question of whether Obama was equipped to handle a national or international crisis as commander in chief. Clinton's campaign also sought to draw attention to the ties between Obama and real estate developer Tony Rezko, who went on trial in Chicago this week on money-laundering and extortion charges.

Clinton declared victory during an address in Columbus last night, casting the votes of March 4 as a comeback for a campaign many had written off as dead a few days ago.

"For anyone in Ohio or America who's ever been counted out but refused to be knocked out, for everyone who has stumbled but stood right back up, for everyone who worked hard and never gives up, this one is for you," Clinton said.

She pledged that the campaign will continue. "We're going on, we're going strong and we're going all the way," Clinton roared as chants of "Yes she can!" filled the room.

Obama, speaking in San Antonio, congratulated Clinton for her victories in Ohio and Rhode Island but quickly shifted the subject to the general election. He praised Sen. John McCain's service for the country but tied the Arizona Republican to the Bush administration and its policies in Iraq. "He has seen where George Bush has taken our country, and he promises to keep us on the very same course," Obama said.

With nearly 90 percent of precincts reporting in Texas, Clinton led Obama, 51 percent to 47 percent. Exit polling showed roughly one in three voters were Latinos, and Clinton carried them by a better than two-to-one margin over Obama.

Clinton's victory in Ohio is less remarkable than the margin by which she won the contest. With more than 90 percent of precincts reporting, Clinton held a 55 percent to 43 percent lead over Obama -- a differential that, if it holds, could net her a double-digit delegate gain.

An important question raised by her showing yesterday is whether the results will influence the 800 or so superdelegates -- unpledged elected officials and party leaders --who had been moving strongly in Obama's direction since the Illinois senator's strong showing on Feb. 5 .

Clinton must stop that erosion in the coming weeks to remain mathematically viable in the chase for the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the Democratic nomination. If Obama continues to pick up superdelegates and claims wins -- as expected -- in Wyoming and Mississippi over the next week, the delegate math becomes more and more difficult for Clinton.

Clinton's campaign made no secret that it would be next to impossible to continue the race without strong showings in Ohio and Texas, and there were signs in the run-up to yesterday's votes that Clinton's aggressive attacks on Obama's trade policies and experience as a government leader were having some effect.

Former president Bill Clinton publicly acknowledged recently that his wife would have to win the two large states to remain viable and move on to the Pennsylvania primary in late April. "If she wins Texas and Ohio I think she will be the nominee," the former president said in a speech in Beaumont, Tex. "If you don't deliver for her, I don't think she can be. It's all on you."

Obama's strategists had predicted that the Illinois senator would have another good day at the polls, but noted that even if Hillary Clinton were able to pull out victories, she still would have little chance of overtaking Obama in the race for committed delegates before the nomination season ends in early June.

Obama began the day with a total of 1,386 pledged delegates and unpledged superdelegates, compared with Clinton's total of 1,276, according to an Associated Press tally.


----------



## Doris (5 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

UPDATE ON DELEGATES...

*Obama*

Pledged: 1257
Superdelegates: 194

*Total*:  1451


*Clinton*

Pledged: 1127
Superdelegates: 238

*Total*:  1365

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/


----------



## Doris (5 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> The sad thing out of all of this is that if Obama does win the nomination he will not go on to win the White House - the truth is Americans will without doubt go for a POW, white and long term senator rather than a black populist like Obama. The Obama factor will have worn off by November and the Republicans will get another 4 years reward for all of their mismangement.
> 
> I repeat - Americans will not vote in a black president.
> 
> ...




A2A... most political experts in the US seem to believe Obama will be a stronger opponent for McCain.  But I agree the scandals will be out in force now until the next caucus on April 22...  I will be turned off when the mud slinging escalates.  I shudder to think what can eventuate over the next six weeks!  My instinct was pricked yesterday that his path was no longer strewn with red roses.  But I can still hope his calm definitive road will prevail.

I think the momentum for Obama has shown he is seen as a man first and this in itself is uniting the ethnic factions.  

*Money-making media malice?*

It seems to me that the nomination race is now being run by the media... 
Above, I quoted 'the media' as saying, yesterday, that they had been soft on Obama and hard on Hillary and they would now redress this.

It occurs to me that if the campaign is protracted then the media circus also continues... maybe until the last caucus in June.  Thus it is certainly in their interests.  How many newspapers and TV channels have been raking in advertising bonuses in the past two months?  The more they can promote controversy, the more people will tune in for news, the more money they'll make.

My post last night featured claims of a NAFTA back-channeling assurance to Canada by the Obama camp... with, later in the item, almost hidden away, official Canadian refutation.  Rezko's curruption court appearance cast a slur on Obama... no relativity... yet enough impact to sway fence sitters.  Fear drives more than the market.

1 hour ago:  http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/05/MN9MVDQEU.DTL

Going into the Tuesday contests, the news was finally improving for Clinton.

"The momentum seems to have shifted to Clinton in the last few days," said James Taylor, a political science professor at the University of San Francisco. "If she can win both Ohio and Texas, the entire (political) conversation will be changed."


----------



## Doris (5 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is the persona I admire.  He can disagree without being disagreeable.  The world needs a leader like this! (IMHO)

For those who may be interested in what message Barack sent out late tonight (his time):  
________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 5 March 2008 6:16 PM
To: Doris ********
Subject: What happened today

Doris --

We may not know the final outcome of today's voting until morning, but the results so far make one thing clear.

When the dust settles from today's contests, we will maintain our substantial lead in delegates. And thanks to millions of people standing for change, we will keep adding delegates and capture the Democratic nomination.

We knew from the day we began this journey that the road would be long. And we knew what we were up against. 

We knew that the closer we got to the change we seek, the more we'd see of the politics we're trying to end -- the attacks and distortions that try to distract us from the issues that matter to people's lives, the stunts and the tactics that ask us to fear instead of hope. 

But this time -- this year -- it will not work. The challenges are too great. The stakes are too high. 

Americans need real change. 

In the coming weeks, we will begin a great debate about the future of this country with a man who has served it bravely and loves it dearly. And we will offer two very different visions of the America we see in the twenty-first century. 

John McCain has already dismissed our call for change as eloquent but empty.

But he should know that it's a call that did not begin with my words. It's the resounding call from every corner of this country, from first-time voters and lifelong cynics, from Democrats and Republicans alike. 

And together you and I are going to grow this movement to deliver that change in November. 

Thank you, 

Barack 


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (6 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 6 March 2008 8:56 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: The math

Doris --

Our projections show the most likely outcome of yesterday's elections will be that Hillary Clinton gained 187 delegates, and we gained 183.

That's a net gain of 4 delegates out of more than 370 delegates available from all the states that voted.

For comparison, that's less than half our net gain of 9 delegates from the District of Columbia alone. It's also less than our net gain of 8 from Nebraska, or 12 from Washington State. And it's considerably less than our net gain of 33 delegates from Georgia.

The task for the Clinton campaign yesterday was clear. In order to have a plausible path to the nomination, they needed to score huge delegate victories and cut into our lead.

They failed.

It's clear, though, that Senator Clinton wants to continue an increasingly desperate, increasingly negative -- and increasingly expensive -- campaign to tear us down.

That's her decision. But it's not stopping John McCain, who clinched the Republican nomination last night, from going on the offensive. He's already made news attacking Barack, and that will only become more frequent in the coming days.

Right now, it's essential for every single supporter of Barack Obama to step up and help fight this two-front battle. In the face of attacks from Hillary Clinton and John McCain, we need to be ready to take them on.

The chatter among pundits may have gotten better for the Clinton campaign after last night, but by failing to cut into our lead, the math -- and their chances of winning -- got considerably worse.

Today, we still have a lead of more than 150 delegates, and there are only *611 pledged delegates left* to win in the upcoming contests.

By a week from today, we will have competed in Wyoming and Mississippi. Two more states and 45 more delegates will be off the table. 

But if Senator Clinton wants to continue this, let's show that we're ready.

This nomination process is an opportunity to decide what our party needs to stand for in this election.

We can either take on John McCain with a candidate who's already united Republicans and Independents against us, or we can do it with a campaign that's united Americans from all parties around a common purpose.

We can debate John McCain about who can clean up Washington by nominating a candidate who's taken more money from lobbyists than he has, or we can do it with a campaign that hasn't taken a dime of their money because we've been funded by you.

We can present the American people with a candidate who stood shoulder-to-shoulder with McCain on the worst foreign policy disaster of our generation, and agrees with him that George Bush deserves the benefit of the doubt on Iran, or we can nominate someone who opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning and will not support a march to war with Iran.

John McCain may have a long history of straight talk and independent thinking, but he has made the decision in this campaign to offer four more years of the very same policies that have failed us for the last eight.

We need a Democratic candidate who will present the starkest contrast to those failed policies of the past.

And that candidate is Barack Obama.

Thank you,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

doris
interesting stuff
sounds like it's getting down to the short strokes 

(as they say in the single skulls)


----------



## Doris (9 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> interesting stuff
> sounds like it's getting down to the short strokes
> 
> (as they say in the single skulls)




... and to short on population 2020... but every grain of sand on the beach helps make it!  

Looks like Hillary is using Obama's popularity to her own advantage by stressing a vote for her is a vote for Obama too... as 2IC!


One hour ago:

*Obama wins Wyoming, gaining 7 delegates*
High turnout in sparsely populated state where Democrats campaigned hard 

Julie Bosman, New York Times

Sen. Barack Obama scored another convincing victory in a caucus state on Saturday, beating Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in Wyoming by a wide margin. The victory was welcome news for the Obama campaign as it sought to blunt any advantage Clinton might gain from her victories Tuesday in Ohio and Texas.

Obama had 61 percent to Clinton's 38 percent, with all 23 Wyoming counties reporting.

"This is a big win for us," said David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager. "You saw very furious campaigning by the Clinton campaign here." Coupled with victories in Colorado, Nebraska and Washington state, he said, the result in Wyoming "speaks to Senator Obama's strength in the West."

*Obama won seven delegates and Clinton won five*.

Bill Clinton, campaigning Saturday in Pass Christian, Miss., repeated the suggestion that Clinton would take Obama as a running mate if she won the Democratic nomination.

"She said yesterday and she said the day after her big wins in Texas and Ohio and Rhode Island that she was very open to that," the former president said, adding that a Clinton-Obama ticket would be "an almost unstoppable force."

But in an interview Friday in Wyoming with KTVQ-TV, a CBS affiliate based in Billings, Mont., Obama shied away from that possibility.

"Well, you know, I think it's premature. *You won't see me as a vice presidential candidate - you know, I'm running for president*," Obama told the television station. "*We have won twice as many states as Senator Clinton, and have a higher popular vote, and I think we can maintain our delegate count.*"

The campaign now moves to Mississippi, which holds its primary Tuesday, and both candidates are looking ahead to the bigger prize - delegate-rich Pennsylvania on April 22.

*Delegate Count *
Obama: 1,578
Clinton: 1,468
Needed to nominate: 2,025


----------



## Doris (9 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

4 Hours ago...

*Why Clinton-Obama team makes perfect sense*

After 42 state and territorial contests, which have yielded Barack Obama a modest lead in pledged delegates over Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, Democratic voters have made their decision: They want both of them.

...The Clinton folks have done the math. Even if their candidate runs the table in the remaining 11 contests between now and June, Clinton won't be able to win enough pledged delegates to secure the presidential nomination without resorting to the backroom tactics of strong-arming superdelegates.

 Too many Democrats want a woman to prove herself as president, and are convinced that Clinton has the temperament and experience to succeed as chief executive. Clinton's base of blue-collar workers and older women, Latinos and Asian Americans (whose children have gone for Obama) see in Clinton, 60, a battle-tested veteran of triumphs and setbacks whose youthful passion has long since been tempered by a pragmatic wisdom to which they can easily relate.

And too many Dems, tens of thousands of whom have been drawn into the political process for the first time by Obama, 46, think the first African-American head of government among industrial nations would be *uniquely suited to end the gridlock in Washington, with his conciliatory aptitude to broker legislative breakthroughs at home and mend fences abroad.
*
Clinton has run out of options. Going avowedly negative on Obama helped in last Tuesday's outcome. *But tearing down Obama risks a backlash in future contests, generating more unflattering press and firing up Obama supporters pitted against an arrogant "Clinton Machine."*

Yet reverting to the positive strategy of building up Clinton's qualifications, notably her edge over Obama in experience, is also out. It was by that strategy that Clinton has won only 14 contests to Obama's 27. Those Obama victories were in such crucial swing states as Missouri, Wisconsin and Colorado, in affluent Connecticut and multiracial Hawaii, and in the far-flung "red" states of Alaska, Kansas and Maine.

Most important, *Obama has won big in the Deep South*, *the G.O.P.'s most important stronghold*, by which Republicans have been able to dominate in presidential contests since 1968 despite chronically losing big coastal states such as New York, California and New Jersey. Partly by raising the voter-participation rate among the African-Americans who account for a significant portion of the Deep South electorate, Obama has won five southern states, and is heavily favoured in Mississippi this Tuesday. 

http://www.thestar.com/News/USElection/article/326553


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

.....
some interesting discussion on ABC... 

They suggest "No way" would Barack play second fiddle to Hillary. You look at the odds ( Barack better than evens, Hillary around 4 to 1) - Looked at that way, you'd have to say she has some gall to even suggest it. 

But perhaps Hillary is the only one who CAN win. 

They speculated on whether Barack will be forced to play dirty politics - and the loss of kudos if he does - a "no win" corner he might have painted himself into. - unless he can mobilise the younger voters.  

McCain was only "Mr 7%"  a while back -  they added  "maybe Brendan Nelson can take heart if he wins"    "Ahh McCain, you've done it again" 

http://www.betusa.com/odds/next_us_president_betting_754.html

Barack Obama 2-3  
John McCain 7-5  
Hillary Clinton 4-1 

http://www.online-betting-guide.co.uk/us-president.htm


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

As for the "could he handle a phone call at 3am" - 
If I were Barack, I'd have asked her, "well, you'd be ok there I guess - as long as you could find Bill in the Intern's wing in time to ask him for his opinion"


----------



## websman (11 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Yet more political propaganda.
> 
> No-one has answered as to why Australians should actually care about this




Because the U.S. and Australia are very strong allies.   Like it or not, we're friends. 

So....Buddy.  you wanna get together and put down a few Jim Beam and Cokes and listen to some Bocephus sometime?


----------



## Doris (12 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

He won of course...
________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 12 March 2008 1:00 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Victories and attacks

Doris --

It's tough to think of two states more different than Wyoming and Mississippi.

But we won Wyoming on Saturday, and we just learned that we won Mississippi by a large margin tonight.

Between those two states, we picked up enough delegates to erase the gains by Senator Clinton last Tuesday and add to our substantial lead in earned delegates. And in doing so we showed the strength and breadth of this movement.

But just turn on the news and you'll see that Senator Clinton continues to run an expensive, negative campaign against us. Each day her campaign launches a new set of desperate attacks.

They're not just attacking me; they're attacking you.

Over the weekend, an aide to Senator Clinton attempted to diminish the overwhelming number of contests we've won by referring to places we've prevailed as "boutique" states and our supporters as the "latte-sipping crowd."

I'm not sure how those terms apply to Mississippi and Wyoming -- or Virginia, Iowa, Louisiana, or Idaho for that matter.

I know that our victories in all of these states demonstrate a rejection of this kind of petty, divisive campaigning.

But the fact remains that Senator Clinton's campaign will continue to attack us using the same old Washington playbook. And now that John McCain is the Republican nominee, we are forced to campaign on two fronts.

Thank you,

Barack


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (12 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama was: 1579... now 1608

Clinton was: 1473... now 1478

417 to go... 

Six weeks' break (for us... not the US)


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				doris said:
			
		

> Paid for by Obama for America
> This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com



Doris
you're gonna have to find a new email address - one that doesn't trigger the cuss-word detector.  

PS I bet you are the only person this side of Hawaii doing what you are doing 
(or this side of Guam?)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_territory


> Other territories
> Puerto Rico
> U.S. Virgin Islands
> American Samoa
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/12/2187222.htm?section=justin


> Obama only a contender because he's black: Clinton adviser
> Posted Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:10am AEDT
> Updated Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:23am AEDT .. etc



as they say 
 life's a bitch, 
 and so is Hillary. (and her team)


----------



## websman (15 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/12/2187222.htm?section=justin
> 
> as they say
> life's a bitch,
> and so is Hillary. (and her team)




I think she's a Lesbian...


----------



## 2020hindsight (15 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

websman - howdy


> US presidential hopeful Barack Obama's camp has called on his rival Hillary Clinton to fire history-blazing supporter Geraldine Ferraro, after she put the Illinois Senator's stunning rise down to his race.



Sure enough Ferraro has had to resign. 

You gotta agee that since Obama came on the scene, there is at least a greater awareness of dirty electioneering tactics. 

Some comedian commented the other day ..
Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama together ?- is anyone else thinking that they would remind you of a pair of anchor newspeople. ?


----------



## wayneL (15 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



websman said:


> I think she's a Lesbian...




She certainly is dopey. What sort of pollie would play the race card in that way right now.

Unbelievable.

On another note. Isn't this all a bit damaging to the Dems? They rip each others liver out in public, and then try and contest an election after members of their own party have done their utmost to nuke their credibility.

I don't get that!


----------



## noirua (15 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Unfortunately, there are so many racists in America, playing the race card by any method, even if HC has to cast off Ferraro, may give them enough extra votes to get the nomination.
Playing the race card and then pretending your 100% against it, may be the right tactic in this anything goes election.


----------



## Doris (15 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Unfortunately, there are so many racists in America, playing the race card by any method, even if HC has to cast off Ferraro, may give them enough extra votes to get the nomination.
> Playing the race card and then pretending your 100% against it, may be the right tactic in this anything goes election.




You are so astute Noirua.

One of Obama's sayings is "I won't tell you what to think but I'll tell you what to think about."  

It seems Ferraro has been listening to him with her own agenda!

*"Geraldine Ferraro says the Obama campaign took her comments on race out of context and is appalled that they were used to attack Sen. Hillary Clinton."*  Video and article:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

Ferraro, 72 and feisty as ever, finally had enough and fell on her sword, sort of. She quit Clinton's finance committee, saying she wished to do her friend no harm. But she took back nothing. In fact, Ferraro has been on a multi-interview tear the past several days, *blaming the Obama campaign for spreading the controversy and causing all the trouble*. "I personally think that this is the last time that the Obama campaign is going to be able to play this type of race card," she said on "NBC Nightly News," "because I think that's what it is. I really do."

She then suggested that she was the one owed an apology for being implicated as "a racist," though it appears that no one in the Obama campaign actually called her one. 

"The truth is, I think that most people want to put this behind us and not turn up the heat on what already has been a pretty unfortunate situation," Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton said yesterday. *"No one on this campaign has ever accused her of being a racist. That is just completely ludicrous. I wish her well."*

Georgetown law professor Emma Coleman Jordan, an Obama supporter who sat on the fence for a long time because she so admired Hillary Clinton, sees the Ferraro episode as *"part of a systematic project" to raise Obama's negatives.* "It is so sad that we've come to this," she said, "that a Democratic Party liberal [Clinton] has chosen to pick up the dirtiest tool in the political box to win. I'm sad. You can put that in a quote. But it's no longer possible to avoid the conclusion that this string of events is not an accident."

Responded Clinton communications director Howard Wolfson: "Both campaigns have had supporters that have said things that each candidate has repudiated. Do I think it was part of a pattern when Samantha Power called her a monster, when Merrill A. McPeak mocked her for crying, that that says something about the Obama campaign?" Wolfson said that Clinton herself has "disagreed with" and "rejected" Ferraro's comments, and that there is really nothing more to add. 

Ferraro has since complained that her comments have been twisted out of context by those trying to gain political advantage. But she said much the same thing 10 days earlier, in a largely unnoticed radio interview. In fact, she made similar remarks about Jesse Jackson during his 1988 campaign, according to a Washington Post article. *Because of Jackson's "radical views," Ferraro said then, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."*

In the Feb. 26 interview, on Fox News Radio's "John Gibson Show," Ferraro sounded frustrated by the phenomenon of Obama and the fact that her candidate was behind.

She first took aim at some of Obama's prominent superdelegates. Of Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), once a Clinton backer who switched to Obama, Ferraro said: "I'm so disappointed in him I could die." She then chided Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) for not sticking with the sisterhood. Not only had she chosen to support Obama, Ferraro said, but she came to his defense when his abortion-rights voting record in the Illinois Senate was challenged. "Tell me why she is endorsing Barack Obama," Ferraro said. And finally, she expressed exasperation that Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) endorsed Obama after dropping out of the presidential race, saying "it's the guys sticking together, John."

Gibson asked her why wasn't it credible that these superdelegates had chosen to back Obama for good reasons. Did she expect them to just hand the nomination to Clinton?

"No," she said, "but I expect them to look very carefully at who has the experience, John. Between me and you and your millions of listeners, *if Barack Obama were a white man, would we be talking about this as a potential real problem for Hillary? . . . If he were a woman of any color, would he be in this position?"*


----------



## 2020hindsight (15 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				 Doris Obama said:
			
		

> Georgetown law professor Emma Coleman Jordan, an Obama supporter who sat on the fence for a long time because she so admired Hillary Clinton, sees the Ferraro episode as "part of a systematic project" to raise Obama's negatives. "It is so sad that we've come to this," she said, "that a Democratic Party liberal [Clinton] has chosen to pick up the dirtiest tool in the political box to win. I'm sad. You can put that in a quote. But it's no longer possible to avoid the conclusion that this string of events is not an accident."



Doris, it's getting curiouser and curiouser


----------



## Doris (15 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris, it's getting curiouser and curiouser




2020... you never cease to amaze me with your eclectic fun intelligence!  

Poor Hillary... she does think she is Alice in Wonderland.  Can't blame her.

I'm naive and impressionable enough to believe that Obama sacked Samantha Power because her 'monster' slip represented exactly what he is against in dirty politics and this was a message to his team.  

I can't help but agree with Noirua and Emma Coleman Jordan that the Clinton camp 'slips' are attempts to feed slurs and let the public swallow them with Hillary blithely denying involvement and attempting to appear righteous as 'she didn't condone it'.  

If she is not in control of what her camp publicizes how does this help her claim to control on the job she's after? 

Meanwhile Barack is busy working on his campaign against Hillary.  Being dignified and reasonable... of course!

Hillary is a mystery woman...too busy right now for details.  But she WILL release her tax details... and WILL release her earmarks:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) disclosed yesterday the more than half a billion dollars' worth of pet projects, or earmarks, he sought to fund during his first two years in the Senate, and he immediately called on rival Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) to do the same.

Obama released the list as Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, championed a one-year moratorium on earmarks, which the Senate took up yesterday. Obama and Clinton back the moratorium.

Philippe Reines, a senior adviser to Clinton, said in an e-mail that  she "will make public the requests she *submits this year*," though he did not say when that will happen. He noted that Clinton has announced the earmarks she has won, but he did not say whether she will match Obama's disclosure and reveal all of her requests.

Obama has pledged to make Washington more transparent if he is elected president, and his campaign cast the disclosure as *part of his call for more openness.*

But I am certain the trend for headline slurs... then fine print at the end, absolving any guilt on Obama's part... will be stepped up on a grand scale soon.


----------



## Doris (16 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Trouble for Obama:* 

# Obama's pastor attacks Clinton for being white

Rev Jeremiah Wright is “no longer serving on the African American Religious Leadership Committee”, a spokesman said in a brief statement as Mr Obama attempted to deal with *the most serious crisis* in his bid for the Democratic nomination. 

He also *hastily arranged a series of late-night television interviews* to denounce the “inflammatory and appalling” remarks of the man who inspired his Audacity of Hope memoir and the speech to the 2004 party convention that brought him to national attention.

Footage of Mr Wright's fiery sermons *dominated television network coverage* after tapes were acquired from the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where Mr Obama has worshipped for 20 years.

The clips show Mr Obama's spiritual mentor railing against Hillary Clinton because of her race, comparing Mr Obama to Jesus and blaming America for the Sept 11, 2001, terror attacks.

In one sermon he takes aim at former US president Bill Clinton's supposedly good relationship with the black community.

"Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain't! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty," the clergyman boomed.

As video of Mr Wright was widely aired on television and the internet, Mr Obama responded by posting a blog condemning Mr Wright's statements on The Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.html

"The pastor of my church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who recently preached his last sermon and is in the process of retiring, has touched off a firestorm over the last few days. *He's drawn attention as the result of some inflammatory and appalling remarks *he made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents.

"Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue.

... Rev. Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life. In other words, *he has never been my political advisor; he's been my pastor.* And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn.

... The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were *not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation*. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, *I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.*

Let me repeat what I've said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.

With Rev. Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good. And while Rev. Wright's statements have pained and angered me, I believe that Americans will judge me not on the basis of what someone else said, but on the basis of who I am and what I believe in; on my values, judgment and experience to be President of the United States.


----------



## noirua (16 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack Obama needs the likes of Senator John Edwards batting more solidly on his side. Backed Obama, yes, but not made his running mate. 
I wonder if Barack Obama has not made this move as he has not really believed, in his heart of hearts, that he'll get the nomination.


----------



## noirua (16 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The odds are changing for the presidential election in November.
Barack Obama evens.
John McCain 13/8
Hilary Clinton 7/2

Democrats to win 4/9
Republicans to win 13/8


----------



## websman (17 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I want to move to Australia... help.


----------



## noirua (17 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Problems for Barack Obama as his pastor Rev Jeremiah Wright speaks out:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2FCJ7zWEQ&feature=related


----------



## Doris (17 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Problems for Barack Obama as his pastor Rev Jeremiah Wright speaks out:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jc2FCJ7zWEQ&feature=related




Right again Noirua...

Released 1 hour ago:

What's new: Obama's church fires back at pastor's critics

Some of the campaign and political news making headlines this morning:

• The Chicago Sun-Times -- Obama's church defends Rev. Wright: "Sen. Barack Obama's church staged a strong defense of its senior pastor Sunday, comparing criticism of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to the assassination of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. ... 'Nearly three weeks before the 40th commemorative anniversary of the murder of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.'s character is being assassinated in the public sphere because he has preached a social gospel on behalf of oppressed women, children and men in America and around the globe,' the church said in a statement released Sunday."

Friday, after days of controversy stirred in part by video clips from some of Wright's sermons, Obama issued a statement calling the things Wright said "inflammatory and appalling." Obama said he "vehemently condemns" and "rejects" them. Among the statements Wright made were one in which he said blacks should sing "God damn America," not "God bless America." On Sunday morning's political talk shows, liberals and conservatives split over whether the Wright controversy will continue to follow Obama.


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

As someone said on the radio today, the race card was a Clinton invention.
Obama did particularly well in the near-all-white states of Wyoming etc .


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *"Geraldine Ferraro says the Obama campaign took her comments on race out of context and is appalled that they were used to attack Sen. Hillary Clinton."*
> .......
> Ferraro, 72 and feisty as ever, finally had enough and fell on her sword, sort of. She quit ...... "I personally think that this is the last time that the Obama campaign is going to be able to play this type of race card," she said on "NBC Nightly News," "because I think that's what it is. I really do."...........




btw, she has "form" with this little bit of bitchery...


> Ferraro has since complained that her comments have been twisted out of context by those trying to gain political advantage. But she said much the same thing 10 days earlier, in a largely unnoticed radio interview. *In fact, she made similar remarks about Jesse Jackson *during his 1988 campaign, according to a Washington Post article. *Because of Jackson's "radical views," Ferraro said then, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."*
> 
> ..... she expressed exasperation that Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) endorsed Obama after dropping out of the presidential race, saying "it's the guys sticking together, John."
> 
> ...




That is such a classic Doris 
lol
"for not sticking with the sisterhood", yet 
"it's the guys sticking together".  

As someone said, she was the "ultimate token" candidate - probably talking to herself when she somehow transfererred / deflected the charge to Obama. 

I mean, her resume hardly reads like a chapter of "My Brilliant Career" :-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geraldine_Ferraro



> In 1984, former Vice President and Presidential candidate Walter *Mondale selected Ferraro to be his running mate *in the upcoming election. The positive polling Mondale received when she joined him did not last until November, and they were *defeated in an electoral landslide *by incumbent President Ronald Reagan and Vice President George H. W. Bush. Following the 1984 election, *she ran two unsuccessful campaigns *for a seat in the United States Senate, but did not garner the nomination of her party in the primary in either attempt.
> 
> Ferraro was a member of the finance committee for Hillary Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign until leaving that post on March 12, 2008 after making a controversal[1] remark concerning Barack Obama's race and popularity as a candidate.[2][3]




When Geraldine Ferraro makes her claims about Barack
"he's only winning votes because he's handsome and he's black"
I wonder if she realises the ugly words she's spoken
Is she talking to herself perhaps? - where pot calls kettle "token"?


----------



## Aussie2Aussie (18 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> As someone said on the radio today, the race card was a Clinton invention.
> Obama did particularly well in the near-all-white states of  etc .




Thats because Wyoming is traditionally Republican state, they hate the Clintons and there are only 8,000 democrat voters in the entire state. Obama got the majority of the vote as he did elsewhere, through the young first time voters.

Ferraro is absolutely correct, although it could have been put differently; there is no way Obama would be where he is if it was not for his colour. Its like most things these days, dont say what is true if it is not deemed politcally correct.


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussie2Aussie said:


> 1. Thats because Wyoming is traditionally Republican state, they hate the Clintons and there are only 8,000 democrat voters in the entire state. Obama got the majority of the vote as he did elsewhere, through the young first time voters.
> 
> 2. Ferraro is absolutely correct, although it could have been put differently; there is no way Obama would be where he is if it was not for his colour. Its like most things these days, dont say what is true if it is not deemed politcally correct.



A2A, 
1. Now you mention it ,  8000 votes - big deal lol - still they were white votes for Obama not Clinton yes?  And there were other states as well in the same predicament - bigger than Wyoming. 

So I sorta agree with you on the first point

2. but no way on the second.


----------



## Sodapop (18 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack???

Ehud Barack???


----------



## Doris (19 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Released an hour ago:

By Mike Dorning, Chicago Tribune
March 18, 2008
MONACA, PA. -- In an attempt to move beyond the controversy over inflammatory sermons given by his longtime pastor, Sen. Barack Obama said *he would deliver a "major address" on race and politics in Philadelphia today.*

The Illinois Democrat has struggled for several days to deal with comments by the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., now retired, after videotapes of past sermons surfaced in which Wright said, among other things, that African Americans should sing "God Damn America" instead of "God Bless America." 

Obama ended a speech at a community college in western Pennsylvania on Monday morning with the words "God bless America" -- an atypical closing for him.

At a news conference later, *he repeated condemnations he made of Wright's remarks shortly after the videos were widely broadcast last week.
*
But he also said "the caricature that is being painted of [Wright] is not accurate."

Obama has portrayed Wright as a close spiritual advisor, crediting Wright with leading him from a secular lifestyle to church membership.

The title of Obama's book "The Audacity of Hope" is drawn from one of Wright's sermons.

Obama has been involved with Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where Wright was pastor, for nearly two decades. Wright presided at Obama's marriage and baptized both of the couple's daughters.

*Obama has cast himself as a candidate who can move beyond America's racial divisions. The controversy over Wright has challenged that image.*

Throughout his campaign, Obama has rarely addressed race directly, and he has sought to prevent his campaign from being consumed by the subject.

Aides said Obama's decision to deliver a speech on race was driven by the Wright controversy as well as by other developments that have heightened attention to issues of race.

These include recent comments by Geraldine A. Ferraro, the Democratic vice presidential candidate in 1984, in which she said in part: "If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position." Ferraro supports the candidacy of Obama's rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (R-N.Y.).

Clinton focused on the war in Iraq on Monday, delivering what was billed as a major policy speech on the conflict, which marks its fifth anniversary this week.

She said the war "we cannot win" may cost the nation $1 trillion and further strain the economy.

She blasted Obama and the Republican candidate, Sen. John McCain of Arizona, arguing that she is the only candidate with a withdrawal plan.

"Sen. McCain would gladly accept the torch and stay the course, keeping troops in Iraq for up to 100 years if necessary," she said in the address at George Washington University. "That in a nutshell is the Bush-McCain Iraq policy -- don't learn from your mistakes, repeat them."

Arguing that victory can only be achieved through political, not military, solutions, Clinton said, "Sen. McCain and President Bush claim withdrawal is defeat.

"Let's be clear: Withdrawal is not defeat.

"Defeat is keeping troops in Iraq for 100 years."

McCain, who was in Baghdad, told CNN that Clinton "*obviously does not understand nor appreciate the progress that has been made on the ground. . . . The surge is working."*

Clinton also faulted Obama, saying he had not worked "aggressively" to end the war "until he started running for president."

An Obama administration, she said, would not follow through on campaign promises to end the war.

"I have concrete, detailed plans to end this war, and I have not wavered on my commitment to follow through on them," she said.

Obama fired back during a town-hall meeting in Pennsylvania.

"I have been consistent as saying that we have to be as careful getting out as we were careless getting in," he said, adding that he would endeavor to withdraw U.S. forces while maintaining stability in Iraq. Clinton has not been consistent, he said.

Noting that he opposed the war in 2002 and each year since, Obama said, "I've been clear, unlike Sen. Clinton, who voted for war and has never taken responsibility for it."


----------



## Doris (19 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 19 March 2008 7:21 AM
To: Doris.******* 
Subject: Obama in his own words

Doris --

Barack Obama just finished a major speech on race in America and building a more perfect union.

You should see it and read it for yourself.

Here's the video and full text:


http://my.barackobama.com/hisownwords


Please forward this message to everyone you know.

Thank you,

David


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (19 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama chooses reconciliation over rancor*
Experts say 'nonpartisan' speech on race is almost without precedent

NEWS ANALYSIS
By Janny Scott  The New York Times
updated 4:56 a.m. ET March 19, 2008

It was an extraordinary moment — the first black candidate with a good chance at becoming a presidential nominee, in a country in which racial distrust runs deep and often unspoken, embarking at a critical juncture in his campaign upon what *may be the most significant public discussion of race in decades*.

In a speech whose frankness about race *many historians said* could be likened only to speeches by Presidents Lyndon B. Johnson, John F. Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln, Senator Barack Obama, speaking across the street from where the Constitution was written, traced the country’s race problem back to not simply the country’s "original sin of slavery" but the protections for it embedded in the Constitution.

Yet the speech was also *hopeful, patriotic, quintessentially American* — delivered against a blue backdrop and a phalanx of stars and stripes. Obama invoked the fundamental values of equality of opportunity, fairness, social justice. *He confronted race head-on*, then reached beyond it to talk sympathetically about the experiences of the white working class and the plight of workers stripped of jobs and pensions.

"As far as I know, he’s *the first politician since the Civil War to recognize how deeply embedded slavery and race have been in our Constitution*," said Paul Finkelman, a professor at Albany Law School who has written extensively about slavery, race and the Constitution. "That's a profoundly important thing to say. But what's important about the way he said it is he doesn't use this as a springboard for anger or for frustration. He doesn't say, 'O.K., slavery was bad, therefore people are owed something.' This is not a reparations speech. This is a speech about saying it's time for the nation to do better, to form a more perfect union."

*He faced a choice*: Having already denounced Wright's ferocious charges about white America, he could try to distance himself from the man who drew him to Christianity, married him and baptized his two children. Or he could try to explain what appeared to many to be the contradiction between Wright's world view and the one Obama had professed as his own.

To some extent, he did both.

In a setting that bespoke the presidential, he began with the personal: He invoked his own biography as the son of a black Kenyan man and a white American woman, grandson of a World War II veteran and a bomber assembly line worker, husband of a black American who carries "the blood of slaves and slave owners." Seared into his genetic makeup, he said, is "the idea that *this nation is more than the sum of its parts — that out of many, we are truly one*."

"Race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now," Obama said. He said the controversies over the past couple of weeks "reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through — a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And *if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges* like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American."

Julian Bond, the longtime civil rights activist, said the speech moved him to tears. Orlando Patterson, a professor of sociology at Harvard, said he believed the speech would "*go down as one of the great, magnificent and moving speeches in the American political tradition*."

"I hear so many people saying we want a national conversation on race but it’s never quite worked," he said. "He was able to do this in one speech. But *he was able to do it in a nonpartisan way in that he saw both sides*."


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wow!
Doris, you saying we have an American Statesman here ? - been a while


----------



## Doris (20 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Someone should tell the US that WWII began in 1939 not when they became embroiled!

"The threats of a new century have roiled the waters of peace and stability, and yet America remains anchored in Iraq."   ...  Great imagery!

A debate between McCain and Obama would be a sellout.  Will we see one?

"Invest in a clean energy future to wean the U.S. off of foreign oil"...  (including Iraq's... double reason to bring the troops home! )

________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 20 March 2008 9:22 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Five years later

Dear Doris,

Five years ago today, President George W. Bush launched a war that should never have been authorized based on faulty premises and bad intelligence.

This war has now lasted longer than World War I, World War II, or the Civil War.

Nearly four thousand Americans have given their lives. Thousands more have been wounded. Even under the best-case scenarios, this war will cost American taxpayers well over a trillion dollars.

And where are we for all of this sacrifice?

We are less safe and less able to shape events abroad. We are divided at home, and our alliances around the world have been strained. The threats of a new century have roiled the waters of peace and stability, and yet America remains anchored in Iraq.

I am running for President because it's time to turn the page on a failed ideology and a fundamentally flawed political strategy, so that we can make pragmatic judgments to keep our country safe.

That's what I did when I stood up and opposed this war from the start and said that we needed to finish the fight against al Qaeda. And that's what I'll do as President of the United States.

Senator Clinton says that she and Senator McCain have passed a "Commander-in-Chief test" -- not because of the judgments they've made, but because of the years they've spent in Washington.

She made a similar argument when she said her vote for war was based on her experience at both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

But here is the stark reality: *there is a security gap in this country -- a gap between the rhetoric of those who claim to be tough on national security, and the reality of growing insecurity caused by their decisions.*

It is time to have a debate with Senator McCain about the future of our national security. And the way to win that debate and keep America safe is to offer a clear contrast -- a clean break from the failed policies and politics of the past.

Nowhere is that break more badly needed than in Iraq.

The judgment that matters most on Iraq -- and on any decision to deploy military force -- is the judgment made first.

If you believe we are fighting the right war, then the problems we face are purely tactical in nature. That is what Senator McCain wants to discuss -- tactics. What he and the Administration have failed to present is an overarching strategy: how the war in Iraq enhances our long-term security, or will in the future.

That's why this Administration cannot answer the simple question posed by Senator John Warner in hearings last year: Are we safer because of this war? And that is why Senator McCain can argue -- as he did last year -- that we couldn't leave Iraq because violence was up, and then argue this year that we can't leave Iraq because violence is down.

*When you have no overarching strategy, there is no clear definition of success.
*
Success comes to be defined as the ability to maintain a flawed policy indefinitely. Here is the truth: fighting a war without end will not force the Iraqis to take responsibility for their own future. And fighting in a war without end will not make the American people safer.

When I am Commander-in-Chief, I will set a new goal on Day One: I will end this war. Not because politics compels it. Not because our troops cannot bear the burden -- as heavy as it is. But because it is the right thing to do for our national security, and it will ultimately make us safer.

Here are the core elements of my strategy to address our critical national security challenges in the 21st century:

•	End the war in Iraq, removing our troops at a pace of 1 to 2 combat brigades per month;
•	Finally finish the fight against the Taliban, root out al Qaeda and invest in the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan, while making aid to the Pakistani government conditional;
•	Act aggressively to stop nuclear proliferation and to secure all loose nuclear materials around the world;
•	Double our foreign assistance to cut extreme poverty in half;
•	Invest in a clean energy future to wean the U.S. off of foreign oil and to lead the world against the threat of global climate change;
•	Rebuild our military capability by increasing the number of soldiers, marines, and special forces troops, and insist on adequate training and time off between deployments;
•	Renew American diplomacy by talking to our adversaries as well as our friends; increasing the size of the Foreign Service and the Peace Corps; and creating an America's Voice Corps. 

We are at a defining moment in our history.

This must be the election when America comes together behind a common purpose on behalf of our security and our values.

That is what we do as Americans. It's how we founded a republic based on freedom, and faced down fascism. It's how we defended democracy through a Cold War, and shined a light of hope bright enough to be seen in the darkest corners of the world.

When America leads with principle and pragmatism, hope can triumph over fear. It is time, once again, for America to lead.

Thank you,

Barack Obama


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Doris (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama's lead over Clinton evaporates*

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080320.OBAMA20/TPStory/TPInternational/America/

WASHINGTON -- For Barack Obama, it hasn't been this bad since it started to get better.

Battered by primary losses, criticism of his lack of experience and a controversy over incendiary and racist remarks by his pastor, the Illinois senator's national *popularity is in danger of melting away*.

A Reuters/Zogby national poll released yesterday showed Mr. Obama holding *a paltry three-point lead* over challenger Hillary Clinton, which is within the poll's margin of error. Mr. Obama enjoyed the support of 47 per cent of voters, while Ms. Clinton claimed 44 per cent.

Only a month ago, the spread was 14 points.

This marks the first serious downturn in support for Mr. Obama since he began his rise in the polls last December, after languishing far behind Ms. Clinton in popularity throughout 2007.

Ms. Clinton is not the only beneficiary of Mr. Obama's fall from grace.

In essence, the popularity of Mr. Obama and Arizona Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, has *inverted over the past month.*

Whereas in a potential matchup between the two, Mr. Obama led Mr. McCain 47 per cent to 40 per cent, *now Mr. McCain leads Mr. Obama 46-40.*

By far the greatest damage, however, has come from revelations that Mr. Obama's mentor and pastor, Jeremiah Wright had, in some of his sermons, espoused incendiary sentiments, accusing the government of everything from deserving the attacks of Sept. 11 to unleashing the AIDS virus on the black community.

*Mr. Obama gave a masterful response*, Tuesday, in a speech on race relations in America that many commentators ranked as one of the finest political addresses in modern American history.

*Yet it is unknown whether this controversy will fade or fester*, for many commentators and critics remain unconvinced by Mr. Obama's apologia for Mr. Wright.

*"Barack Obama has already won the Democratic nomination. It's over*," declared Dick Morris, a pundit who strategized in the Clinton White House. Mr. Obama's lead in delegates cannot be overcome, he observed, and the superdelegates would not strip the leading candidate of his nomination *"unless Obama is in jail."*

Mr. Obama has also received good news from Florida and Michigan. Both states have been stripped of their delegates to the Democratic National Convention, for holding their primaries ahead of the deadline laid down by the Democratic National Committee.

Democratic strategists are *trying to figure out how to hold re-votes*. If they succeed, this would be splendid news for Ms. Clinton, who would be expected to do well in both states, increasing the plausibility of her argument to superdelegates that she is the more electable candidate.

*At this point, however, there appears little hope for a do-over in Florida. *Michigan Democrats have concocted plans for a new primary, to be held June 3, that they believe would be both legal and manageable.

But Mr. Obama's advisers, while not vetoing the proposal, have raised questions about possible legal challenges, *prompting Ms. Clinton to fly to Detroit, yesterday, where she demanded Mr. Obama give his support to the new vote.*

"Senator Obama speaks passionately on the campaign trail about empowering the American people today," Ms. Clinton told supporters at a rally.

"I am challenging him to match those words with actions to make sure that the people of Michigan and Florida have a vote in this election."

Even here, Mr. Obama must be careful. *His candidacy is, after all, about bringing people into the Democratic Party*.

If it becomes clear that his campaign actively colluded to prevent Michigan and Florida Democrats from casting a vote that counts, then Democrats everywhere might decide not to forgive him, eclipsing even these March stumbles.


*One hour ago:*

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1723990,00.html?imw=Y

As Obama's political career blossomed, he could have quietly left Trinity for one of those more staid black churches, but he chose to stay. In his speech, he said he disagreed with Wright strongly, and yet he didn't leave the church (or even criticize his pastor until Wright's sermons became a campaign issue). He didn't explain why he stayed, but *by trying to show black and white resentment as the backdrop for Wright's comments, Obama suggested that his response to controversy isn't to walk out of the room but to try to understand what's fueling the fire*. He also drew a distinction between political advice and spiritual guidance, arguing that many Americans know what it's like to disagree with something their pastor or priest or rabbi says.

By asking voters to understand the context of Wright's anger, though, Obama is counting on voters to accept nuance in an arena that almost always rewards simplicity over complexity. Politicians tend to offer deliberately banal choices: Either we move forward or we fall backward, either we let the economy falter or we help it grow, either we succumb to our enemies or we defeat them — the choice is up to you, America! Obama's formulation was different. *Explicitly asking Americans to grapple with racial divisions and then transcend them — that's a bolder, riskier request.*

After he delivered his speech, Obama found his wife Michelle backstage. She was weeping. He shared a quiet, emotional moment with her. Then Obama was all business again. "What's next?" he asked, as if anyone knew the answer.


----------



## noirua (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi Doris, lots of pasted information that looks a bit like you'r trying to hide away from the Obama negatives.
I put it this way, if the news and the questions are difficult to answer then just bombard them with information, so they have to stay quiet whilst having to read it and try and understand it all.


----------



## Doris (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hi Doris, lots of pasted information that looks a bit like you'r trying to hide away from the Obama negatives.
> I put it this way, if the news and the questions are difficult to answer then just bombard them with information, so they have to stay quiet whilst having to read it and try and understand it all.




Yeah.  Trying to put Obama's side for folk to read and draw their own conclusions as our own media coverage is meagre.  Overkill hey... but each has a different slant and my highlights infer and underscore what has drawn my attention as poignant.

Obama's negatives?  I'm blind. The slide in voter polls in the past week suggest his nomination is no longer a foregone conclusion.  He was comprehensive as he wrote his speech on that night when his wife and daughters and the country were sleeping.  I believe his attitude is, as he purports, to home in on looking for what can mend the rifts between ethnics... in the US and the world at large.  

Some reports in the US are suggesting he has a hidden agenda in wanting to get to the job to propagate black supremacy.  I'm naive.  I negate it.

This link gives a plethora of journalists' reactions to his speech and the reality of embedded racial conflicts in the US.

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003728319


----------



## noirua (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi Doris et al, I suppose this is a big test for Barack Obama and if he manages to move on despite the Reverend's revelations, accepting some of this is up to six years old, then he should move on and take the nomination. If he allows himself to get bogged down over it, then he wont make it to the finishing line. 

John McCain is spending his time in the U.K. seeing P.M. Gordon Brown, and the opposition party. He seems to be looking very Presidential and recent polls improving over Iraq, about 50% of Americans now say President Bush is right to keep the troops in Iraq, may give him the lift his campaign needs.


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hi Doris, lots of pasted information that looks a bit like you'r trying to hide away from the Obama negatives.
> I put it this way, if the news and the questions are difficult to answer then just bombard them with information, so they have to stay quiet whilst having to read it and try and understand it all.




Totally disagree noi. 
hey - if you don't want to read it, then don't.  Personally I'm enjoying the play unfolding.  Unique surely in US election campaign history. 

His speech alone.  That would be worth listening to for starters - given the rave reviews. 

but Doris's posts include emails from the Obama people - and surely you respect the fact that Doris is 
a) pretty intelligent and
b) has access to them at least when maybe you or I don't ?

PS he wrote it himself - that for a start is unique lol.  Wonder how many GWB wrote himself?

 Barack Obama Speech on Race (Tuesday, March 18, 2008)

 Barack Obama God Bless You 

millions more youtubes, including responses from the public - first impression majority are positive
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=obama+speech&search_type=


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

hell , he wrote that speech the night before
and he hardly looks at his notes 

skills no doubt perfected defending the underprivileged in his lawyer days – when he could have been making absolutely top dollar with his qualifications 

PS I note some comparing his speech with King's "I have a dream" speech - at least for its relevance, its oratory and its statesmanship, -  if not for the detail of its content.

This one worth a listen too 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzHm_kVTzPg&NR=1  Barack Obama Historic Speech On Race


> Barack Obama is the future - we need more people like him
> - not the likes of Fox News, trying always to divide us - giving us our daily meal of poison junkfood


----------



## noirua (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> hell , he wrote that speech the night before
> and he hardly looks at his notes
> 
> skills no doubt perfected defending the underprivileged in his lawyer days – when he could have been making absolutely top dollar with his qualifications
> ...



Hi 2020, Yes indeed, Barack Obama is an excellent speaker helped like President Clinton with a near photographic memory. They are all very clever people indeed and all three, including John McCain, would make an excellent President. Who is, however, more excellent than the other two?

Thanks for the video as it gave me a chance to hear the speech again. I think he neutralised the white voter affect but I wonder if it may have cost him some black votes. Will be interesting to see.


----------



## Doris (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

These are the latest poll results but the last (CBS) was two days ago US time so the next poll could say anything!  
Definitely a problem for the PA caucus on April 22 atm.  
I would trust the waters are roiled and muddied but voters will anchor when they become calm and clear and their gut instincts bubble up.  

These polls have a 3% inaccuracy.

I presume the 'other' are the undecided.

(Apologies for the poor table format... I don't know how to transfer the original)


Democratic Candidate  	CNN  	CBS  	Zogby
Pollster 	...CNN 	...  CBS 	...  Zogby
Date 	...  3/14-16 	~  3/15-18 	~  3/13-14
Obama 	   ...   52% 	...  46% 	...  47%
Clinton 	...45% 	...    43% 	...  44%
Other(vol.)      3%	...   11%	....  9%


Democratic Candidate 	PA 	PA 	PA 	NC
Pollster 	...Franklin 	...Qpac 	...PPP 	...PPP
Date 	..  3/11-16 	~  3/10-16 	~  3/15-16 	~  3/17
Clinton ... 51% 	...   53% 	.. ..   56%    .. . 43%
Obama 	...    35%    ...  41%     ..  ..   30%    ..  . 44%
Other(vol.)  14% 	... 7% 	 ..  ..    14% 	  ..  .  13%

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris - look forward to the post-speech poll    3/19?

PS here's the full speech :-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1uJztFbOk8 *Barack Obama Speech on Race - Part 1 of 4 *
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxZACaelHr4&feature=related  Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-EPJeTaaio&feature=related  Part 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGyELYLfuRI&feature=related  Part4


----------



## Doris (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> I think he neutralised the white voter effect but I wonder if it may have cost him some black votes. Will be interesting to see.




Yes... a lot of caucasians would have identified their own reflection with Obama's message either first hand or as offspring:



> "In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. *Their experience is the immigrant experience* - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. *They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away*; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college *because of an injustice that they themselves never committed*; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.




He seemed to be inviting whites to free themselves from personal guilt over history's promulgation of racial inequity...  "...as if our society was static." 

"What we have already achieved gives us hope - the audacity to hope - for what we can and must achieve tomorrow". 




> Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.
> 
> This is where we are right now. It's a racial stalemate we've been stuck in for years.




I am a firm believer in his purported philosophy that it is not the people but the system. Change the system if it isn't working!


*Barack assured African-Americans they did NOT have to be victims of the past. *  (Not this time) 

*Indeed, he was challenging them not to be!*

And IMO he was challenging ALL people not to be... whether white, black or brown.

*"They must never succumb to despair or cynicism; they must always believe that they can write their own destiny". *



> Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments - meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today's urban and rural communities.
> 
> A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.
> 
> This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up.




Has anyone heard of Hillary's reactions to 'The Speech'?


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Betting on two websites shows very little change (or no change) in the last 11 days :-

http://www.betusa.com/odds/next_us_president_betting_754.html
10 Mar :- 
Barack Obama 2-3  
John McCain 7-5  
Hillary Clinton 4-1  

today 21 Mar (no change):-
*Barack Obama 2-3 
John McCain 7-5  
Hillary Clinton 4-1* 

The other website :-
http://www.online-betting-guide.co.uk/us-president.htm

10 Mar (see post #377 if interested) :- 
Barack Obama 10-10    (= evens)
John McCain 42-24   (= 7-4)
Hillary Clinton 18-4  (= 9-2) 

today 21 Mar :- 
*Barack Obama 11-10 
John McCain 44-27  
Hillary Clinton 19-5 *

Looks like he's still the one to beat


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Has anyone heard of Hillary's reactions to 'The Speech'?




http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/hillary_im_glad_obama_gave_tha.php
*Hillary: "I'm Glad Obama Gave That Speech*"
By Greg Sargent - March 18, 2008, 1:48PM



> Hillary, in a speech broadcast on CNN moments ago, had this to say about Obama's big race speech:
> 
> "I did not have a chance to see or to read yet Sen. Obama's speech. But I'm very glad that he gave it. It's an important topic. Issues of race *and gender *in America have been complicated throughout our history, and they are complicated in this primary campaign.
> 
> "There have been detours and pitfalls along the way. But we should remember that this is an historic moment for the Democratic Party, and for our country. We will be nominating the first African-American *or woman *for the Presidency of the United States, and that is something that all Americans can and should celebrate."




Perhaps she'll try to match his speech - maybe titled ..
"Issues of gender in America have been complicated our history"


----------



## Doris (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris - look forward to the post-speech poll    3/19?
> 
> PS here's the full speech :-
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o1uJztFbOk8 *Barack Obama Speech on Race - Part 1 of 4 *
> ...




*2020*, my #403 post from Obama's campaign manager gave the video link to the full speech.
... below the screen is the script "As Prepared for Delivery"... so *you can read it as you listen*... and see his impromptu changes:

http://my.barackobama.com/hisownwords 


Your postings do make more digestible morsels of the 37 minute speech.

His speech is sans the political campaigning intonations.


1 hour ago:

The speech Senator Barack Obama delivered Tuesday morning has been viewed more than 1.6 million times on YouTube and is being widely e-mailed. While commentators and politicians debated its political success Wednesday, some around the country were responding to Mr. Obama’s call for a national conversation about race.

 Religious groups and academic bodies, already receptive to Mr. Obama’s plea for such a dialogue, seemed especially enthusiastic. *Universities were moving to incorporate the issues Mr. Obama raised into classroom discussions and course work*, and churches were trying to find ways to do the same in sermons and Bible studies.

The Rev. Joel Hunter, senior pastor of a *mostly white evangelical church* of about 12,000 in Central Florida, described Mr. Obama’s speech, in which the Democratic presidential candidate discussed his relationship with the former pastor of his home church in Chicago, as a kind of “*Rorschach inkblot test*” for the nation.

“It calls out of you what is already in you,” Dr. Hunter said, predicting that those desiring to address the topic would regard the speech as a spur, while those indifferent to issues of race might pay it little heed.

Dr. Hunter said the Obama speech led to a series of conversations Wednesday morning with his staff members. “We want for there to be healing and reconciliation, but unless it’s raised in a very public manner, it’s tough for us in our regular conversation to raise it,” he said.

 The Obama speech was also a topic of discussion on Wednesday at the Washington office of the National Council of La Raza, a *Hispanic advocacy and social welfare group*. Hispanics can be white, black or of mixed race. “The cynics are going to say this was an effort only to deal with the Reverend Wright issue and move on,” said Janet Murguia, president of La Raza, referring to the political fallout over remarks by Mr. Obama’s former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., which prompted Mr. Obama to deliver the speech.

But Ms. Murguia said she hoped that Mr. Obama’s speech would help “*create a safe space to talk about this, where people aren’t threatened or pigeonholed*” and “can talk more openly and honestly about the tensions, both overt and as an undercurrent, that exist around race and racial politics.”

On the Internet and in many areas of the traditional news media, such a discussion was already taking shape. Some four million people watched Mr. Obama’s speech live, and *it is now the top YouTube video. *

On the ABC talk show “The View” on Wednesday morning, the co-hosts discussed the substance of Mr. Obama’s speech and its impact on the presidential campaign. “*Finally we can talk about” race “without being afraid we are offending*” others, one co-host, *Barbara Walters*, said, while *Whoopi Goldberg* said she “felt he was talking about stuff that we tiptoe around.”

 “This has got to be more than a speech because these things don’t just happen spontaneously,” said Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of the* Jewish* magazine Tikkun and a founder of the Network of Spiritual Progressives.

“There needs to be some systematic, organizational commitment to making this happen, with churches, synagogues and mosques working out a plan for continued dialogue,” Rabbi Lerner said. 

For some, the timing of Mr. Obama’s speech was awkward. Spring break at many universities foreclosed the possibility of immediate discussions in classes and informal settings, and many churches are locked in to traditional Easter services.

Around the country, ministers of the *United Church of Christ*, which is Mr. Obama’s denomination, are recommending in Holy Week newsletters that their congregants read or view Mr. Obama’s speech.

One message, sent from the *Union Congregational Church* in Montclair, N.J., said, “No matter what your party affiliation or your political persuasion, *the conversations about race that have been elicited by the campaign are important*.” 

 Tufts University is on break this week, but Jennifer Bailey, a student there and the president of a group called Emerging Black Leaders, said that when she returned to classes next week, she hoped to encourage a frank discussion about race that would involve all of the many racial and ethnic groups and ideological tendencies on her campus.

Mr. *Obama’s speech “called everybody out*, and that is absolutely healthy and necessary,” Ms. Bailey said. 

 St. Edward’s University in Austin, Tex., is in session this week, and at Zak Fisher’s speech class Wednesday, Mr. Obama’s speech was discussed and analyzed, both for its content and as an example of persuasive and eloquent public discourse.

“We thought it was unprecedented,” said Mr. Fisher, a philosophy major. “We had never heard a politician be so open to the issue of race.

“*It’s always very important to question your own beliefs and always re-evaluate where you may stand on issues, based on new evidence.*"

He added: “I think that was the point of his speech.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/u...em&ex=1206244800&en=f8b1c84bc0471d27&ei=5087


----------



## Doris (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> PS he wrote it himself - that for a start is unique lol.  Wonder how many GWB wrote himself?
> 
> Barack Obama God Bless You
> 
> ...





I must be tired from end of term marking and reporting!  
*2020* this video of yours made my eyes well up!  

What an incredible guy!  How positive and refreshing to hear such passion on any subject but this one in particular!

Ditto for you.

I wonder how Barack is taking the fall-out.  I'd bet he feels the relief and satisfaction of finishing a marathon run!

He 'didn't leave the room but sought the cause of the fire' and actually inflamed it to light up the dark.
Instead of taking advice from his mentors to ignore it and wait for the furore to subside, he sat down and wrote and wrote. 

I've watched his speech several times and though I kept watching to see where the auto cue was, it was if there weren't one!  

I love Letterman's 'Great Presidential Speeches' segment.  GWB is not a statesman.  Der...

What you do today becomes the past which will back you or break you tomorrow.  
His ritual of writing at night, (whilst his wife and the girls slept; he needs little sleep) pouring out thoughts into his last book, was a second natured response to the catastrophe he was immersed in.  He was not going to drown!

Kind of like someone threw a lemon at him so he made lemonade!  What a role model for young people!  Indeed for us all!


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I must be tired from end of term marking and reporting!  ...
> 
> His ritual of writing at night, (whilst his wife and the girls slept; he needs little sleep)



doris
 speaking of statesmen - I knew Winston Churchill required little ( or no ) sleep...
just researched google ( god I love google lol) 
and I find that it's common amongst a lot of famous people ..
Edison,  Churchill , John F. Kennedy , and Napolean Bonaparte .. etc. 

http://dreamtalk.hypermart.net/teachers/fameslp.htm



> Sleep Habits of Famous People
> 
> Surrealist painter Salvador Dali created very dream-like works of art. According to legend, he claimed to be fully refreshed by a very odd, brief kind of nap. The story goes that he would put a metal pan on the floor, and doze off in his chair, holding a metal spoon above the pan. When he fell asleep, he would drop the spoon, and then wake up an instant later, when the spoon hit the pan with a clatter. Do you think such a short nap (scientists would call it a "micro-sleep") could possibly be refreshing? Try it!
> 
> ...




PS Doris, that bloke is almost as excited about the Obama speech as I was about the Rudd Sorry speech


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				doris said:
			
		

> I wonder how Barack is taking the fall-out. I'd bet he feels the relief and satisfaction of finishing a marathon run



 You'd have to guess he's first and foremost relieved - but gee you've got to admire his ability to calmly turn the near-disaster into arguably a positive  - rave reviews about his speech, etc.

SURELY that speech has whet a near-dead American appetite for this level of oratory - can't see it doing him any harm that's for sure .  

 George bush bloopers


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

:topic You wonder if this song almost applies - to USA as well as to Sth Africa ?- albeit a few years back prior to "bussing" etc.  
(and even AUS?) 

And let's not forget that the Abs who came back from the war were not allowed to drink a "welcome home" drink in the pubs with their mates-in-arms. 



2020hindsight said:


> Weeping


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

doris, or this brilliant song from the Civil War (or rather the musical of that name)
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=237756&highlight=civil#post237756
I never knew his name. - Linda Eder . 

PS I knew a girl from the South once - we went to see "Gone with the Wind" together - it was a truly emotional experience for her.  No way have those wounds healed yet


----------



## Doris (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> You'd have to guess he's first and foremost relieved - but gee you've got to admire his ability to calmly turn the near-disaster into arguably a positive  - rave reviews about his speech, etc.
> 
> SURELY that speech has whet a near-dead American appetite for this level of oratory - can't see it doing him any harm that's for sure .
> 
> George bush bloopers





Thanks for the laugh *2020*!

GWB did it hey!  "Fooled 'em twice!"  lol...  Shame on America! 



2020hindsight said:


> This one worth a listen too
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzHm_kVTzPg&NR=1 Barack Obama Historic Speech On Race




*2020* your youtube's bloggers were sure whetted.   Wow!  

The language and ignorance of some people on there!   I noted the incendiary posts were not barracking for Obama.  

Now.  Who were anti-Barack?  Do they sound happy, intelligent/well read, articulate people you'd want in your gene pool? 


1.  WOW WOW WOW!!!! WOW!!!!...... Barack obama is black..... when the fudge did this happen!!!

2.  This speech proves he is the best man for the job. This is the first time we have heard the TRUTH from a politician about race, and he put it so elegantly and perfectly that it inspires me and plenty of others to entertain serious discussions of race with whites, blacks etc. To look at not what is wrong, but how we can help, and to unite against those who oppress all Americans (namely corporations).

3.  It is Obama's intricacy that makes him a great candidate, he can see shades of grey. I like it much more than the current administrations "Our way or the highway" approach, where things are either fully one way or the other. The real world doesn't work that way. There are plenty of people who dislike Obama and they will vent that on here. But it doesn't change the fact that the man is saying the things that America has needed to be told for a long time now.

4.  A speech of complexity and nuance that *nails the issues* and articulates them beautifully. I hope we can rise to this occasion and really take in these words rather than twisting and pulling things from context. Obama didn't pander here or patronize. This is honest, and *honesty is desperately needed in our politics and our race relations*.

5.  Abraham Lincoln was a young lawyer with little experience when he came to office. John F Kennedy was attacked because of his young age when he was up for election.

6.  When he said they are stealing the future of our "black kids, white kids, latino kids". Why does he have to say black kids first. Is he racist? Why did he not say white kids first? Laugh, but that is how some of this arguments sound.

7.  he will win because he is black. obviously we owe black people something. Even though he is extremely lacking in experience he will win because we owe the black man something. He is using his race. If he were white Hillary would have won the nomination already.

8.  If Obama is so concerned about everybody, then why does he repress the right for the Michigan and Florida voters to vote. All he needs to do is say that he will support a primary like Senator Clinton. He is not genuine at all.

9.  Hey, lots of pi$sed off people on this little page of comments. Stay mad guys, it'll help you keep you warm at night while you're dealing with cold reality of a black fella in the White House.

10. This guy needs to shut his mouth, along with all the other blacks that have have the blame it on whitey attitude. White America is getting sick of it, and is very close to a breaking point.

11. (epilogue) Anyone who thinks Wright is a anti-American, pro-black racist has to listen to his entire sermon called "Audacity of Hope." I did this and was convinced that Wright is a true Christian who's not filled with hate. These sound bites paint a false picture of him. I don't say his statements in the sound bites were right, I say judging a person based on only a few phrases is all wrong.
As usual, we're being manipulated by the media.
Ask yourself, who gains from this particular media manipulation?


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> 6.  When he said they are stealing the future of our "black kids, white kids, latino kids". Why does he have to say black kids first. Is he racist? Why did he not say white kids first? Laugh, but that is how some of this arguments sound.
> 
> 11. (epilogue) Anyone who thinks Wright is a anti-American, pro-black racist has to listen to his entire sermon called "Audacity of Hope." I did this and was convinced that Wright is a true Christian who's not filled with hate. These sound bites paint a false picture of him. I don't say his statements in the sound bites were right, I say judging a person based on only a few phrases is all wrong.
> As usual, we're being manipulated by the media.
> Ask yourself, who gains from this particular media manipulation?



some good posts and some looney ones lol.
I liked #6 above lol - 

and #11 is so true it makes you want to stop watching the TV news - sheesh. 

ignoring #1 who has been nibbling some magic fudge by the sound of it lol. 
very very approx:-
70% (2,3,4,5,6,9,11) are typical of what I heard as well - "for"
30% (7,8,10) "against". 
Sounds like he's still roughly on track 

PS It takes a lot more energy to make one of those videos and post it to youtube than it does to make some ugly remark against it.   So if people who are pinning heaps of youtubes are predominantly pro-Obama, you'd think they'll probably even maybe come out to vote.  

BTW, hard to see any stereotypes there - instead a broad cross-section of middle aged whites, young blacks, hispanics etc. 

btw also ... Here's probably the next First Lady you reckon  - not that you don't already know all of this 
 Michelle Obama speech Delaware part1 (of 7 sheesh - one will do lol)


----------



## Doris (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I like Richardson.  He has good judgment and... he's a superdelegate!  One more point!  Yes!  ... Every grain of sand makes a beach!

He praises Barack as did the many fans of 'The Speech'.  All's well that ends well!   

Hillary's main criticism has been Obama's lack of experience.  She has never faulted his judgment so with yet another high profile experienced backer, Barack would indeed have a plethora of sound advisors from whom to gather intelligence to make 3am decisions.   

After all, listening to and being guided by a broad selection of voices defines a  democracy.  Like mainstream life today, success comes from judging what information is relevant. My initial impression of Obama was exactly what Richardson predicts:   

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...0353.html?wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

VP 2B?

SANTA FE, N.M. -- New Mexico Gov. *Bill Richardson, the nation's only Hispanic governor, is endorsing Sen. Barack Obama for president*, calling him a "once-in-a- lifetime leader" who can unite the nation and restore America's international leadership.

Richardson, who dropped out of the Democratic race in January, is to appear with Obama on Friday at a campaign event in Portland, Ore., The Associated Press has learned.

Richardson has been relentlessly wooed by Obama and Clinton for his endorsement. As a *Democratic superdelegate*, the governor plays a part in the tight race for nominating votes and could bring other superdelegates to Obama's side. He also has been mentioned as a potential running mate for either candidate.

"As a presidential candidate, I know full well Sen. *Obama's unique moral ability to inspire the American people to confront our urgent challenges at home and abroad in a spirit of bipartisanship and reconciliation*." 

Richardson's endorsement also could help Obama pick up support among Hispanics, who are the nation's largest and fastest-growing minority. Clinton has been the favorite of Hispanics in primaries and caucuses, according to exit polls. She won the New Mexico caucus in early February with a nearly 2-to-1 advantage among Hispanics. 

Richardson backed Obama despite his ties to Clinton and her husband, the former president. *He served as ambassador to the U.N. and as secretary of the Energy Department during the Clinton administration*. Last month, Richardson and former President Clinton watched the Super Bowl together at the governor's residence in Santa Fe.

Richardson praised Hillary Clinton as a "distinguished leader with vast experience." But the governor said Obama "will be a historic and great president, who can bring us the change we so desperately need by bringing us together as a nation here at home and with our allies abroad." 

"*There is no doubt in my mind that Barack Obama has the judgment and courage we need in a commander in chief when our nation's security is on the line*. He showed this judgment by opposing the Iraq war from the start, and he has shown it during this campaign by standing up for a new era in American leadership internationally," Richardson said. 

*Obama said he was "deeply honored" to have Richardson's support*. 
"Whether it's fighting to end the Iraq war or stop the genocide in Darfur or prevent nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of terrorists, Gov. Richardson has been a powerful voice on issues of global security, peace and justice, earning five Nobel Peace Prize nominations," Obama said in a statement.


----------



## Doris (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Michigan Ends Re-vote Bid*

Collapse of Effort to Hold New Primary Is a Setback for Clinton

The effort to schedule a June re-vote for the Michigan Democratic primary collapsed yesterday, dealing a potentially serious blow to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's bid for the White House.

Without the Michigan and Florida delegates, Clinton's odds grow longer. Both states had defied the Democratic National Committee by moving their primary dates forward and were stripped of their delegates in January.

Obama campaign strategist David Axelrod said, "We are for a resolution that gives Florida and Michigan representation at the convention [and] is fair and reasonable," *suggesting that seating the delegates from both states in an even split between the two candidates would be the most acceptable outcome.*

His morning address, at the University of Charleston:

"We know what this war has cost us -- in blood and in treasure," Obama said. "But in the words of Robert Kennedy, '*past error is no excuse for its own perpetuation*.' . . . John McCain is refusing to learn from the failures of the past. Instead of offering an exit strategy for Iraq , he's offering us a 100-year occupation. Instead of offering an economic plan that works for working Americans, he's supporting tax cuts for the wealthiest among us who don't need them and aren't asking for them."

"At a time when we're on the brink of recession -- when neighborhoods have 'For Sale' signs outside every home, and working families are struggling to keep up with rising costs -- *ordinary Americans are paying a price for this war*," he said. "When you're spending over $50 to fill up your car because the price of oil is four times what it was before Iraq, you're paying a price for this war. When Iraq is costing each household about $100 a month, you're paying a price for this war."

Meanwhile, in reports filed with the Federal Election Commission last night, the candidates stated how much money they had on hand as they headed into March.

McCain reported that he raised $11 million in February and had about $700,000 in cash to spend.  
Obama had $38.8 million on hand after having raised $56.8 million in February.
Clinton finished the month with $33 million in cash on hand after raising $34.6 million.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...sletter&wpisrc=newsletter&sid=ST2008032100018


----------



## Doris (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> some good posts and some looney ones lol.
> I liked #6 above lol -
> 
> and #11 is so true it makes you want to stop watching the TV news - sheesh.
> ...




I thought #1 was a hoot!  He'd got to know the man and race had NOT been an issue! Shock horror!  He hadn't noticed!

#6 certainly depicts and ridicules superficial thinkers wanting to create waves for their ego's minute of fame. I call this a see-saw syndrome.  Feel down... try to pull someone down and you'll feel better.  Shaden Freude. 

#9...  Being politically incorrect and not caring as it's the tone of words that is correct.  Affectionately politically incorrect to underscore the pride.  Words flaunted at the Shaden Freude hunger to lose their power.

Young bloggers were adament they would be out there supporting Obama by voting as the duty in being part of "we and us".

Michelle Obama, interviews with Katie Couric

This shows a fresh, passionate, young wife who emanates humility and approachability.  

  Maternal, proud and grounded


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> This shows a fresh, passionate, young wife who emanates humility and approachability.
> 
> .. proud and grounded



yep I don't think she need feel threatened by any competition from the White House interns. 

as you say she's grounded and proud to be so.
whereas with the Clintons - he was the one who was grounded - and not particularly proud of it, as I recall.


----------



## noirua (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

From the Baltimore Sun's "THE SWAMP" a very long article and interview headed "Rev. Wright touches a raw nerve":  http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/democratic_race_touches_a_raw.html

Takes a bit of reading and understanding but sets out how some may think.  Straight from the hip, I think they call it.


----------



## Doris (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Test your Barack Obama IQ*

Now that inevitability has (again) left the Democratic race, voters will be taking a fresh look at Barack Obama. The best place to start: the definitive profile on his public and private record, the Tribune's "Making of a candidate series." The following quiz, derived from that series, will test your Obama IQ and rank your score from "Yes, we can" to "No, we shouldnt." 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-obama-quiz,0,234858.triviaquiz


----------



## Julia (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, just wondering how you're ultimately going to feel if either Hillary or McCain becomes President?
What will you do with your obsession then?


----------



## Doris (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Doris, just wondering how you're ultimately going to feel if either Hillary or McCain becomes President?
> What will you do with your obsession then?




I won't worry about things that haven't yet happened.  

At least if he doesn't get the nomination I'll have an extra hour a day to work on a book I'm writing!  The publisher wants it by October.  
I'm taking three months LSL from July... just in case.

Just had a few hours chatting to my mate in OC.  When I said Happy Easter she sounded confused (Friday night there).  I'd forgotten their Easter is only the Sunday!  No long weekend in the US!  I asked her husband what he thought of Obama's speech and he said he hadn't heard it.  What did he think of Wright's comments?  He replied "Who's he?"  They just don't care about politics.  I don't normally.   

PS  I got 7/17 for the quiz.
... but 17/17 the second time!


----------



## metric (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

prefer RON PAUL....


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

prefer Michelle Obama


----------



## metric (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

prefer paragliding, at mt borah..


----------



## stockGURU (22 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Whenever I visit this thread it makes me think of Beatlemania.

I imagine Doris as a pimply faced teenage girl squealing hysterically at her pop idol Barak.


----------



## Doris (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Richardson did the honorable thing and told Hillary before he told Obama.
Honour in US politics!  It's good to feel good about politicians.
I have to say Anna Bligh and KRUDD have pleasant sincere dispositions that I enjoy watching.  The usual whinging and backstabbing nastiness is why most people turn off and don't care about who is up for election.  Politics *can* be so interesting and entertaining. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/u...em&ex=1206331200&en=dcc154d8e5570994&ei=5087


*First a Tense Talk With Clinton, Then Richardson Backs Obama*

Published: March 22, 2008  NY time

PORTLAND, Ore. ”” “I talked to Senator Clinton last night,” Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico said on Friday, describing the tense telephone call in which he informed Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton that, despite two months of personal entreaties by her and her husband, he would be endorsing Senator Barack Obama for president. 

“Let me tell you: we’ve had better conversations,” Mr. Richardson said.
“It was cordial, but a little heated.” 

The decision by Mr. Richardson, who ended his own presidential campaign on Jan. 10, to support Mr. Obama was a belt of bad news for Mrs. Clinton. It was a stinging rejection of her candidacy by a man who had served in two senior positions in President Bill Clinton’s administration, and who is one of the nation’s most prominent elected Hispanics. 

But potentially more troublesome for Mrs. Clinton was what Mr. Richardson said in announcing his decision. *He criticized the tenor of Mrs. Clinton’s campaign*. He praised Mr. Obama for the speech he gave in response to the furor over racially incendiary remarks delivered by Mr. Obama’s former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.

*And he came close to* doing what Mrs. Clinton’s advisers have increasingly feared some big-name Democrat would do as the battle for the nomination drags on: *Urge Mrs. Clinton to step aside in the interest of party unity.*

“I’m not going to advise any other candidate when to get in and out of the race,” Mr. Richardson said after appearing in Portland with Mr. Obama. “Senator Clinton has a right to stay in the race, but eventually we don’t want to go into the Democratic convention bloodied. This was another reason for my getting in and endorsing, *the need to perhaps send a message that we need unity.”*

*“There’s something special about this guy*,” Mr. Richardson said of Mr. Obama. “I’ve been trying to figure it out, but it’s very good.”

“Senator Barack Obama addressed the issue of race with the eloquence and sincerity and decency and optimism we have come to expect of him,” he said. “He did not seek to evade tough issues or to soothe us with comforting half-truths. Rather, *he inspired us by reminding us of the awesome potential residing in our own responsibility*.”

He added: “Senator Obama could have given a safer speech. He is, after all, well ahead in the delegate count for our party’s nomination.”

“I believe the campaign has gotten too negative,” Mr. Richardson said, speaking to reporters in Portland. “I want it to be positive. *I think that’s what’s been very good about Senator Obama’s campaign ”” it’s a positive campaign about hope and opportunity.”*

Mr. Richardson is the 62nd superdelegate to endorse Mr. Obama since Feb. 5, compared with fewer than five who have moved into Mrs. Clinton’s column since then.

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

*Obama*: 
Pledged: 1413
Superdelegates: 209
*Total*: 1622

*Clinton*:
Pledged: 1242
Superdelegates: 243
*Total*: 1485


*  Superdelegates who are overseas only get half a vote.  
    ... Only 2024 votes are needed now as two more have moved overseas. (4047 total delegates.)

*  Barack is 171 ahead in pledged delegates who cannot change their minds.
    ... 137 ahead on total count... but...

*  All superdelegates can change their pledge any time until the DNC in August.


----------



## 2020hindsight (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> “Senator Barack Obama addressed the issue of race with the eloquence and sincerity and decency and optimism we have come to expect of him,” he said. “He did not seek to evade tough issues or to soothe us with comforting half-truths. Rather, he inspired us by reminding us of the awesome potential residing in our own responsibility.”
> 
> He added: “Senator Obama could have given a safer speech. He is, after all, well ahead in the delegate count for our party’s nomination.”



Stroke of genius that speech !!

PS here's one to listen to while you apply your acne cream 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RuUhZxkr194


----------



## Doris (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



stockGURU said:


> Whenever I visit this thread it makes me think of Beatlemania.
> 
> I imagine Doris as a pimply faced teenage girl squealing hysterically at her pop idol Barak.




Isn't that when JFK was shot?  

I imagine I'm sitting back smiling as I watch the poll results in November, almost two years after first seeing him and knowing instantly that this man could change the world.  

I Imagine a future of international peace and cooperation.   

I imagine Michelle becoming the first female president.
...


----------



## wayneL (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I imagine I'm sitting back smiling as I watch the poll results in November, almost two years after first seeing him and knowing instantly that this man could change the world.
> 
> I Imagine a future of international peace and cooperation.
> ...



Nice thought, but it's not wholly up to Obama, even if he does have pure intentions. A future Mr Keonfxqcnhrkquov or Won Hung Lo might just mess up the party, or indeed factions inside the US.

Not everyone *wants* peace, particularly the US military/industrial complex.


----------



## noirua (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

An article last January from the UK's Daily Mail newspaper, "A drunk and a bigot - what the U.S. Presidental hopeful HASN'T said about his father...":  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=431908&in_pge_id=1770


----------



## 2020hindsight (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

lol - here's a book by a bloke name of Frank Luntz , "Words that Work"

http://books.google.com.au/books?id...cal+thinking"&sig=j_gh5q0XGxBhMq5p7kFosYbsE9I



> "A leading communications expert explains how the tactical use of words and phrases influences what we buy, who we vote for, and what we believe, in a volume that encompasses sections ranging from "The Ten Rules of Successful Communication" to "The 21 Words and Phrases for the 21st Century."




This bloke is or used to be a Republican pollster (apparently)...
Here's a review... I suggest by a Democrat



> so often in this book, you'd think that Republican pollster Luntz would have taken his own advice to heart. Yet in spite of an opening anecdote that superficially attempts a balanced tone, the book as a whole truly reads more like a manual for right-wing positioning. Even in the sections where he is less partisan, Luntz's advice is not particularly insightful.
> 
> For instance, his first chapter, on "Ten Rules of Effective Language," starts by *instructing readers to use small words and short sentences in their communications. *The least effective section in the book is the chapter on "Personal Language for Personal Scenarios," where Luntz advocates manipulative strategies for getting out of traffic tickets, boarding airplanes at the last minute and apologizing to one's wife with the "miracle elixir" of flowers. The most readable and redeeming feature is the two case studies, where Luntz demonstrates his skill as a communicator by identifying real-world communications successes and failures. Unfortunately, by the time nonpartisan readers reach these chapters, they will have already lost patience




"instructing readers to use small words and short sentences in their communications" ....
Ahhh, THIS is why GWBush's speeches use small words!! - shame he can't remember them and /or gets em mixed up.


----------



## 2020hindsight (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

lol - here's a book by a bloke name of Frank Luntz , "Words that Work"

http://books.google.com.au/books?id...cal+thinking"&sig=j_gh5q0XGxBhMq5p7kFosYbsE9I



> "A leading communications expert explains how the tactical use of words and phrases influences what we buy, who we vote for, and what we believe, in a volume that encompasses sections ranging from "The Ten Rules of Successful Communication" to "The 21 Words and Phrases for the 21st Century."




This bloke is or used to be a Republican pollster (apparently)...
Here's a review... I suggest by a Democrat



> so often in this book, you'd think that Republican pollster Luntz would have taken his own advice to heart. Yet in spite of an opening anecdote that superficially attempts a balanced tone, the book as a whole truly reads more like a manual for right-wing positioning. Even in the sections where he is less partisan, Luntz's advice is not particularly insightful.
> 
> For instance, his first chapter, on "Ten Rules of Effective Language," starts by *instructing readers to use small words and short sentences in their communications. *The least effective section in the book is the chapter on "Personal Language for Personal Scenarios," where Luntz advocates manipulative strategies for getting out of traffic tickets, boarding airplanes at the last minute and apologizing to one's wife with the "miracle elixir" of flowers. The most readable and redeeming feature is the two case studies, where Luntz demonstrates his skill as a communicator by identifying real-world communications successes and failures. Unfortunately, by the time nonpartisan readers reach these chapters, they will have already lost patience




"instructing readers to use small words and short sentences in their communications" ....
Ahhh, THIS is why GWBush's speeches use small words!! - shame he can't remember them and /or gets em mixed up. 

PS Trust the politicians to employ a wordsmith to do their polling (true, all polling is potentially a bit sus).  I wonder if he writes the answers as well as the questions?


----------



## Doris (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Nice thought, but it's not wholly up to Obama, even if he does have pure intentions. A future Mr Keonfxqcnhrkquov or Won Hung Lo might just mess up the party, or indeed factions inside the US.
> 
> Not everyone *wants* peace, particularly the US military/industrial complex.




Very sober comment Wayne!
All the more reason to have a 'conversationalist' as commander in chief.

On a micro level, I face ferals who don't want peace in the classroom. They are dysfunctional and I would get nowhere if I employed battle/war tactics.  I give them detention and spend the time listening to their lives to figure out why they're seeking disruptive attention. 'Treat people the way you'd like to see them' often works. When you hear their stories and then help them to divert their energy towards a constructive pay-off *for them*, or refer them on for professional help, they are grateful that someone cared.  
It's not always easy.  But someone has to be the adult.  
GWB reminds me of a Nun Hung Lo in the playground with his gang behind him to compensate for his inadequacies.


----------



## 2020hindsight (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Sorta off topic.  
Except that Barack is probably keeping his image cleaner than most pollies...
(PS I almost posted this on the Global Warming thread - as a reflection of some of the scientists in the pay of the oil companes - but this will do just as well I guess). 

A couple of quotes in general ...
by Robert Walpole, first PM of Gt Britain.. 

http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page174.asp


> 1. "*All those men have their price*." (His opinion of his fellow parliamentarians)
> 
> 2. To the Earl of Bath on their elevation to the House of Lords:
> "My Lord Bath, you and I are now as insignificant men as any in England."




ROBERT WALPOLE,  AND THE PRICE OF A MAN”S OPINION. 
It was Walpole’s words at first steps, as
the first democratic PM - 
as he stood in the stare of his house of reps
and he stared right back at them; 
"Let’s proceed with the work of governing, Gents
and honour each other’s advice
but never forget , (and to hell with offence)
that ALL YOU MEN HAVE YOUR PRICE". 



> Robert Walpole, 1st Earl of Orford,  KG, KB, PC (26 August 1676 – 18 March 1745), known before 1742 as Sir Robert Walpole, was a British statesman who is generally regarded as having been the first Prime Minister of Great Britain.
> Walpole, a Whig, served during the reigns of George I and George II. His tenure is normally dated from 1721, when he obtained the post of First Lord of the Treasury; …… Walpole continued to govern until he resigned in 1742, making his administration the longest in British history.




…….. (early share market ) 



> Soon after Walpole returned to the Cabinet, England was swept by a wave of over-enthusiastic speculation which led to the South Sea Bubble. The Government had established a plan whereby the South Sea Company would assume the national debt of Great Britain in exchange for lucrative bonds. It was widely believed that the Company would eventually reap an enormous profit through international trade in cloth, agricultural goods, and slaves. Many in the country, including Walpole himself, frenziedly invested in the company. By the latter part of 1720, however, the company had begun to collapse as the price of its shares plunged. Walpole was saved from financial ruin by his banker, who had earlier advised him to sell his shares; other investors, however, were not as fortunate.
> 
> In 1721, a committee investigated the scandal, finding that there was corruption on the part of many in the Cabinet. Among those implicated were John Aislabie (the Chancellor of the Exchequer), James Craggs the Elder (the Postmaster General), James Craggs the Younger (the Southern Secretary), and even Lord Stanhope and Lord Sunderland (the heads of the Ministry). Craggs the Elder and Craggs the Younger both died in disgrace; the remainder were impeached for their corruption. Aislabie was found guilty and imprisoned, but the personal influence of Walpole saved both Stanhope and Sunderland. For his role in preventing these individuals, and others, from being punished, Walpole gained the nickname of "Screenmaster-General".


----------



## Doris (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

It seems the media want Obama, by their tactics.  
I feel sad for Bill as they try to villainize him... promoting the twisting and colouring of his words.  I believe Bill's 'fairy tale' comment in South Carolina was also blatantly misinterpreted.  But the mud sticks...

DID Bill infer Obama was unpatriotic?  Were Bill's comments a reference to Obama's complicity with Wright's rantings... or simply his attempt to focus on a concept of objective unity and not divisiveness for the country, as he promoted his wife's candidacy?  

Is McPeak an opportunistic perpetrator of Chinese whispering?


*Did Bill Clinton Call Obama Unpatriotic?*

A new controversy flared up in the Democratic presidential race Saturday over remarks by former President Bill Clinton whom Barack Obama's campaign accused of using divisive tactics and unfairly trying to question the Illinois senator's patriotism. 

Retired Gen. Merrill "Tony" McPeak, a co-chair of Obama's campaign, said he was astonished and disappointed by recent comments the former president made while speculating about a general election between Obama's Democratic rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Republican John McCain.

Standing next to Obama on stage at a campaign rally in southern Oregon, the retired Air Force chief of staff repeated Bill Clinton's comments aloud to a silent audience.

The former president told a group of veterans Friday in Charlotte, North Carolina: "I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country. And people could actually ask themselves *who is right on these issues*, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics."

McPeak then said... "As one who for 37 years proudly wore the uniform of our country, I'm saddened to see a president employ these tactics. He of all people should know better because he was the target of exactly the same kind of tactics."

That apparently was a reference to Bill Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign, *when he was accused of dodging the Vietnam War draft.
*

Howard Wolfson, a spokesman for Hillary Clinton's campaign, said Saturday that McPeak's comments were a "deliberately pathetic misreading of what the president said." Wolfson said the remarks had nothing to do with Obama and were merely meant to underscore the need to keep the presidential race focused on issues. 

It was not the first time Bill Clinton has been criticized for comments while campaigning on his wife's behalf. Before and after South Carolina's primary in January, the former president was accused of fanning racial tensions for appearing to cast Obama as little more than a black candidate popular in a state with a heavily black electorate. 

McPeak also had made off-the-cuff remarks to reporters Friday in comparing the former president's comments with the actions of Joseph McCarthy, the 1950s communist-hunting senator.

"I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors, so I've had enough of it," McPeak said. 

Wolfson called that comparison outrageous and called for a retraction.

"I think most Democrats were shocked to learn that a two-term Democratic president was compared to Joseph McCarthy," he said. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/03/22/politics/main3960032.shtml


----------



## Doris (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama's acknowledgement of Richardson's endorsement seems to me like Obama's potential endorsement of him as his VP!

Sounds good to me!

2020... watch his hand movements.  This is one of the best techniques of a good speaker!


----------



## 2020hindsight (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ahh, lol 
 Taylor Mali runs rings around him 

 Totally Like Whatever by Taylor Mali

PS - you'll like this one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxsOVK4syxU&feature=related


----------



## Doris (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> An article last January from the UK's Daily Mail newspaper, "A drunk and a bigot - what the U.S. Presidental hopeful HASN'T said about his father...":  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=431908&in_pge_id=1770




A comprehensive and interesting article Noirua!  (January 2007... a year ago)

... the sins of the father.  What a sad story.  What a tragic waste of talent and opportunity.


Obama's book, _Dreams from My Father...a Story of race and Inheritance_, the source of article's comments, was first published in 1995... the year his father died. Re-published, unabridged, in 2004.


I so admire the way Barack's mother always gave him positive feedback on his father.  This is not the norm for divorced mothers!  
A boy _must_ respect his father, as he grows, for a healthy self concept.

Barack only met his father once, as a teenager, when his father visited.  He died when Barack was 21.


Isn't it ironic that Obama has been likened to JFK when he actually owes his life to him!

JFK Brought Obama’s Father to U.S. in 1960:

http://rfkin2008.wordpress.com/2008/01/12/jfk-brought-obamas-father-to-us-in-1960/


----------



## Doris (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ahh, lol
> Taylor Mali runs rings around him
> 
> PS - you'll like this one
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxsOVK4syxU&feature=related




So true!  Lovditt!

This one is hilarious too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjhOBiSk8Gg&NR=1

But this isn't:

1 hour ago:  http://www.dawn.com/2008/03/23/top15.htm

WASHINGTON, March 22: The Bush administration is involved in a new political storm following revelations that *State Department contractors* had improperly reviewed private passport files of three leading presidential candidates, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain.The scandal may further hurt the incumbent Republicans in an election year.

The news of prying into Mr Obama’s file came on Thursday evening and on Friday, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice publicly apologised to Senator Obama and revealed that Mrs Clinton’s passport file was also breached in 2007 but gave no details.

The State Department said later Friday that the same contract employee who examined Senator Obama’s file also looked at Senator McCain’s.


----------



## Julia (23 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I so admire the way Barack's mother always gave him positive feedback on his father.  This is not the norm for divorced mothers!
> A boy _must_ respect his father, as he grows, for a healthy self concept.



At the risk of perpetuating being off topic, I'd completely disagree with your comment that a boy must respect his father.  Don't you think it would be completely inappropriate for any child to attempt to feel respect for an abusive father?  There are plenty who fit this description.

And if Barack's mother gave him positive feedback about alcoholism I'd also have some doubts about her sense of values as well.


----------



## wayneL (24 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Feeling a bit infantile about the whole Hillary/Barrak schmozzle?

http://www.miniclip.com/games/street-fight/en/

The Hillary versus Barrak fight game.


----------



## noirua (24 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Feeling a bit infantile about the whole Hillary/Barrak schmozzle?
> 
> http://www.miniclip.com/games/street-fight/en/
> 
> The Hillary versus Barrak fight game.





Barack seems to be backing away from the fight and his wife is pushing him back in.  I can see who is the power behind the throne here. He's taken a terrible beating, when it's backs to the wall old Hillary can knock 'em cold, that's for sure.


----------



## 2020hindsight (24 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Don't know what you blokes thought of his "More Perfect Union" speech 
- being hailed as one of the best since Lincoln's "Gettysburg", or King's "I have a Dream"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/why-obamas-speech-on-rac_b_92374.html

"Why Obama's Speech on Race Was Such a Political Home Run ?"
 "Barack Obama showed America that he is the guy you want answering the red phone at 3AM."



> Barack Obama's March 18th speech on race in America was game-changing, and very likely will be remembered as historic. Here's why.
> 
> In electoral politics -- particularly presidential politics -- people don't vote based on the issues or positions of the candidates. *They vote based on their assessment of the qualities of the candidate. Their votes have much more to do with their assessment of candidate character than on 10 point programs*.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (24 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

But the other refreshing thing (accoring to this article) is that he is speaking to Americans as adults.. and demonstrating his skills as an inspiring and "a transformational figure -  both in America and on the world stage"



> But Obama's speech gave us insight into two other critical qualities as well.
> 
> *Obama talked to Americans as adults*. He presented a serious, no-holds-barred discussion of race in America. He showed he trusted the voters. Voters don't want leaders who patronize them like children -- who pander or sloganeer. They want leaders who treat them with respect.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (24 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> WASHINGTON, March 22: The Bush administration is involved in a new political storm following revelations that *State Department contractors* had improperly reviewed private passport files of three leading presidential candidates, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John McCain.The scandal may further hurt the incumbent Republicans in an election year.




http://www.newsday.com/news/opinion/ny-vpoba245624218mar24,0,4113753.story



> Editorial: Investigate passport-file breaches
> March 24, 2008
> 
> Dirty tricks? Say it ain't so. Better yet, *prove it ain't so*.



I like it 



> Right now, it's hard to believe that the three State Department employees caught snooping into Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's passport file were just gawkers. That's the administration's story. At least for now.
> 
> But Friday, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton revealed that her passport file had been rifled in 2007. And Republican nominee John McCain's file was accessed earlier this year. The Justice Department needs to investigate these breaches. The State Department's integrity is at stake. If the files of such high-profile people are fair game, how can anyone trust that their privacy will be respected?
> 
> ...




PS I'd love to know how long they spent looking at McCain's file - (ok next!) 
compared to Obama's file - or Clinton's file for that matter


----------



## noirua (25 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> PS I'd love to know how long they spent looking at McCain's file - (ok next!)
> compared to Obama's file - or Clinton's file for that matter




Spot on 2020, It seems far more likely that they wanted to look at Barack Obama's file only, and then decided to look at Hillary Clinton's file and John McCain's file, to make 3 wrongs look more right or at the very least, not one wrong on its own.


----------



## noirua (27 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Reverend Otis Moss III will replace Dr Jeremiah A. Wright Jnr as Senior Paster of Trinity United Church, according to Bloomberg, today. Details of the Pastors at the TUC Church:  http://www.tucc.org/pastoral_staff.htm


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 March 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

1. "No Hillary , the waltz goes  1 - 2 - 3,  1 - 2- 3 
... "Sorry Barack - I keep imagining I have to duck imaginary bullets here .. "

2. "Hey Hillary - wanna consumate this alliance - I've got some great Cuban cigars at home" 

3. "And what about that idiot Murdoch on Fox News - saying he'd go back to Australia if the Democrats win"

4. "What's that perfume Hillary? - lemme guess, lynx with a dash of hydrochloric acid ?"

etc 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/03/28/2202284.htm


----------



## metric (3 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Jesse Ventura Warns Of Obama Assassination Attempt
Former Minnesota Governor says government will target any independent who gets close to White House 


Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
 |  

Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura caused shockwaves during a national radio interview today when he warned Barack Obama to be wary of a potential assassination attempt, saying that the government would target any independent politician who got close to the White House. 

The last chapter of Ventura's new book, Don't Start The Revolution Without Me, is a fictional tale about an assassination attempt on his life following a run for President. 

The context of Ventura's warning was a discussion about new evidence concerning the assassination of Robert Kennedy, after it emerged that there were additional shooters to accused assassin Sirhan Sirhan.

to continue... http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2008/040208_ventura_warns.htm


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

good luck in Philadelphia Barack 

PS I think I've come to the conclusion that the other two contestants for the Whitehouse don't know what the truth means


----------



## Doris (24 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Last night, Senator Clinton used up her last, best chance to cut appreciably into Barack Obama's elected delegate lead. 

She came up short.

In fact, she barely made a dent. At most, she picked up a net gain of 12 delegates -- less than our gain, for example, in Colorado (where we gained 17) or Kansas (where we gained 14). Her gain in Pennsylvania was less than half of our gain in Virginia, where we added to our lead by 25 delegates.

But there is one measure by which her campaign's gains are real.

The Clinton campaign claims they've raised $3.5 million dollars since the polls closed yesterday.

We can't afford to let that go unanswered.


*Here's how it breaks out*:

After Pennsylvania, we have a lead of at least 159 elected delegates earned through all of the primaries and caucuses so far. We have a total of at least 1493 pledged delegates. 

Meanwhile, we've been rapidly gaining ground among the so-called superdelegates (elected leaders and party officials who get a vote to choose our nominee), cutting Senator Clinton's lead from more than 100 early this year to less than 25. We have a total of 238 publicly committed superdelegates. 

The total number of delegates needed to secure the nomination is *2,024*. That means we are only 293 delegates away from securing the nomination.


*Talking Points on the Pennsylvania Results *

Last night, Hillary Clinton used up her last, best chance to make significant inroads in our pledged delegate lead of 171 delegates--and she barely made a dent. 

Pennsylvania was considered a state tailor-made for Hillary Clinton, and all along she was expected to win. She has family roots in the state, which borders her own; she had the support of the Democratic establishment--including Governor Rendell's extensive network--and former President Clinton remains very popular there. And Independent voters--the group that will decide the general election and a group Obama is particularly strong with--were not able to vote in the primary. Not surprisingly, Senator Clinton led by as much as 25 points in the weeks leading up to the election. 

How did Barack Obama substantially reduce that lead and gain support among key voters in the face of long odds and unrelenting negativity from Senator Clinton? By talking about his plans to stand up to the special interests and bring people together so that we can change Washington to turn our economy around, make sure that every American has quality health care, and bring this misguided war to an end. 

As he has done in every state, Barack Obama campaigned hard to pick up as much support and as many delegates as possible.

You'll be hearing a lot from the Clinton campaign about "big states" and their bearing on the general election. The fact of the matter is that Barack Obama has won more key battlegrounds--states like Missouri, Colorado, Minnesota, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Iowa.

The bottom line is that the Pennsylvania outcome does not change dynamic of this lengthy primary. While *there were 158 delegates at stake there*, there are more--187 delegates--up for grabs in the North Carolina and Indiana primaries on May 6.

Senator Obama will continue to gain strength with Democratic superdelegates. He will maintain his position as the best candidate to take on John McCain. And he will be ready to unite the American people and begin a new chapter in our history.

We are already organizing vigorously in the remaining contests, opening local offices, canvassing, and engaging voters in this unprecedented campaign. We will have the financial resources we need to compete and win.

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


Interesting to see that most of the states Obama has won did not vote for McCain:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter


----------



## petervan (24 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Watched a live speech yesterday from Barack for the first time and was very impressed with his speaking skills and his message.Big money from oil, tobacco and other lobby groups in Whasington would be very concerned with a grassroots upsurge like this talking of shutting out the lobby groups.Always like to see the underdog get up but feel the rifles will be bought out if he gets too close to winning.Politics is universal that way in protecting power.


----------



## wildkactus (24 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I wounder with this fight draging on so long, is it effecting the main game, the november poll.
Also will the dems that back the lossing candidate be willing to show up and vote for the wining candidate?

The other thing is that the longer this goes on the less time they have to pick on McCain, at the moment the dems are doing him a big favour as he can just go about his campaigning with little to no opposition.


----------



## wayneL (24 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wildkactus said:


> I wounder with this fight draging on so long, is it effecting the main game, the november poll.
> Also will the dems that back the lossing candidate be willing to show up and vote for the wining candidate?
> 
> The other thing is that the longer this goes on the less time they have to pick on McCain, at the moment the dems are doing him a big favour as he can just go about his campaigning with little to no opposition.



That's a real worry for the Dumbocrats. Seems like a faulted system where the surviving candidate has been publicly trashed by many of those on their own side, handing fistfuls of mud to the opposition in the process.

I just don't get that.


----------



## wayneL (24 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*


----------



## Doris (25 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wildkactus said:


> I wounder with this fight draging on so long, is it effecting the main game, the november poll.
> Also will the dems that back the lossing candidate be willing to show up and vote for the wining candidate?
> 
> The other thing is that the longer this goes on the less time they have to pick on McCain, at the moment the dems are doing him a big favour as he can just go about his campaigning with little to no opposition.




Obama has been instrumental in making history in 'getting out the vote'.  Independents have made decisions to become involved.  GOP supporters have been swayed to change camps. Basic policy is similar thus I believe the magnetism towards Barack and his party will project to people who have voted for Hillary to turn out in November and see the Democrats win. 

Barack continues to hold a substantial lead over Clinton in the Democratic delegate count, despite her net gain of 12 delegates from Pennsylvania. He hopes on *May 6* to make up for the delegates and popular votes he lost Tuesday by winning big in North Carolina and by scratching out a victory in what is expected to be a highly competitive race in Indiana.

Indiana's balloting could prove pivotal. A win here would leave Clinton with virtually no chance to catch him in the delegate count.

*He says:*  "You can decide whether we're going to travel the same worn path, or whether we chart a new course that offers real hope for the future."

*She says:*  "I'm going to be here for the next two weeks, doing everything I can to help Hoosiers understand that I will be there for you and you can count on me."

It's no wonder the educated have turned to Barack and the working class go for Hillary.  The mentality represents those where some will help make things happen whilst others want someone to do it for them!  

Obama's funds continue to gather from 'grassroots' individuals whilst Hillary's continue from lobbyists.  She plays up the fact that he has outspent her but the bare facts are it is his supporters' money!  It reflects his support!  Her lack of money has reflected her lack of 'put your money where your mouth is' voter support. 

As time has progressed, Hillary has convinced many that she is dishonest, untrustworthy and bitter. I'm so sick of her continual contention that votes cast in Michigan, where her name was on the ballot but Obama's was not, should be counted. She also includes votes cast in Florida, where neither campaigned. Before the voting began in either state, the Democratic National Committee had announced that the results would not count because the states had moved their primaries up in violation of party rules.  These of course were in the days before voters really knew Obama.  So 'the rules' rule in his favour so the DNC cannot count them and if they do decide to give these states another go (to enable the 2024 target) then people would not vote now as they would have then.

Obama is campaigning against McCain (and Hillary) now.
McCain seems to be campaigning only against Obama... and we know the general public only read the headlines, so it will be tough.

I can only hope that the economic pain voters are feeling will result in their voting for change.


----------



## Doris (25 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> That's a real worry for the Dumbocrats. Seems like a faulted system where the surviving candidate has been publicly trashed by many of those on their own side, handing fistfuls of mud to the opposition in the process.
> 
> I just don't get that.





1.  Maybe they surfaced perceivable weaknesses so that any related mud that McCain slings will be 'been there... done that...' thus not worth noting?  

2.  If you can't win an argument in your 'own home' then you are not likely to win one 'on the streets'...   (preview of actions and reactions)


For sure, Barack has to keep his demeanor in his responses, to both Hillary and McCain, to retain his persona as a conversationalist strategist.


Some entertaining writing by Walter Shapiro:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/04/25/campaigns/

*Whose fault is the Clinton-Obama stalemate?*

Hillary's missteps are legion, but both candidates are flesh and blood, and their squandered opportunities have prolonged the race.


...  In truth, the Barack Bombers, like their counterparts in Hillaryland, may be closer to mere mortals than political demigods.

... No one can deny the potency of Obama's perpetual motion $1-million-a-day fundraising machine, nor his star-power capacity to fill the Grand Canyon, if necessary, with rapturous supporters. And, in case you have somehow failed to notice, Obama can also deliver a credible speech.

...  The problem that Obama has had with expanding his base in every primary since Wisconsin (Feb. 19) may boil down to the simple equation that either you get it (the young, the affluent and African-Americans) or you are tone-deaf (older voters, blue-collar Democrats, middle-class women and Hispanics). Trapped by the true-believer enthusiasm that the fledging Illinois senator arouses, the Obama campaign has become something of a Cool Kids Club. Either you are a full-fledged member (with the secret handshake and the decoder ring) or else you find yourself voting for a well-known, albeit flawed, alternative called Hillary Clinton.

...  Listing the mistakes of the Clinton team should have been one of those tasks reserved for Hercules after he finished cleaning out the Augean stables. From the ever-changing slogans (a personal favorite: "Turn Up the Heat," which was briefly, very briefly, unveiled in Iowa) to its fiscal mismanagement and its failure to effectively organize in the February caucus states, the Clinton campaign has offered a Ph.D. program in "Missed Chances." In fact, with a minimum of competence, it is easy to envision how Clinton could have been running close to even in the delegate fight right now.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/04/25/campaigns/


----------



## Doris (28 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



petervan said:


> Watched a live speech yesterday from Barack for the first time and was very impressed with his speaking skills and his message.Big money from oil, tobacco and other lobby groups in Whasington would be very concerned with a grassroots upsurge like this talking of shutting out the lobby groups.Always like to see the underdog get up but feel the rifles will be bought out if he gets too close to winning.Politics is universal that way in protecting power.




http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

Obama sits on 1724
Clinton has 1589

He has 233 superdelegates to 256 for Hillary and they can change their minds any time.  About 300 supers are yet to take sides.

He now has 300 to go to win the nomination.
Hillary needs 435 to win.

Financial reports for April will be filed this Wednesday at midnight US time. The media pundits and Washington insiders will be watching the results and judging the strength of their campaigns by the money they raise. The grassroots upsurge will be evaluated.

Next Wednesday (our time) will be the North Carolina and Indiana primaries.  Not enough delegates at stake to get the nod but enough to see how the trend is shaping.


----------



## Djayness (28 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/
> 
> Obama sits on 1724
> Clinton has 1589
> ...




Unfortunately most of the votes in the US are cast because you support that party, not because you really care whos running...


----------



## Doris (29 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Djayness said:


> Unfortunately most of the votes in the US are cast because you support that party, not because you really care whos running...




Aah... but that was the past DJ...
People now care:

*Democrats Registering In Record Numbers*
1 Million New Voters For Last 7 Primaries

By Eli Saslow
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, April 28, 2008; Page A01

RALEIGH, N.C. -- They lined up shoulder to shoulder inside the gray high-rise downtown, their politics as diverse as their backgrounds. An ex-felon who needs health insurance, followed by a high school student seeking empowerment, followed by a Marine Corps veteran who wants to prevent his country from crumbling.

Like hundreds of others, their quests led them to the Wake County voter services office this month to *register as Democrats for the first time.* The line of newcomers that snaked across the checkered tile floor was emblematic of those that have formed across the country this year: black voters, young voters, *lifelong Republicans switching parties* -- all registering in record numbers, and all aligning as Democrats.

Elections Director Cherie Poucher waited for them behind a counter with a jar of pens and a 10-inch stack of registration forms. She had hired 10 people from a temp agency to help handle the rush on this final day of North Carolina voter registration. Now, as she watched four more people file through the door, Poucher wished she had hired more.

"In 20 years," she said, "I've never seen anything quite like it."

The past seven states to hold primaries registered more than 1 million new Democratic voters; Republican numbers mainly ebbed or stagnated. North Carolina and Indiana, which will hold their presidential primaries on May 6, are reporting a swell of *new* Democrats that triples the surge in registrations before the 2004 primary.

The contest between Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama has engaged *enough new voters to change the political makeup of the country*, experts say. The next several months -- and the general election in November -- will reveal the extent of the shift. Is it a temporary increase in interest resulting from a close election between historic candidates? Or is it a *seismic swing in party realignment *that foretells the end of the red-blue stalemate?

"*We are likely to set an all-time record for primary turnout*," said Curtis Gans, director of the Committee for the Study of the American Electorate. "Whether this makes a major historical impact depends on who these voters are and whether or not they get what they want."

Read on to find who they are and why they are signing up:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter


----------



## Knobby22 (29 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The US surely needs a change in direction. The government does not look after its people.

The power of the establishment has yet to attack. Rupert Murdoch has shown just how powerful he can be and the court system is hopelessly politically compromised. I agree with Venturi that if Barack somehow overcomes these difficulties that then assasination is a real possibility. 

I really hope he gets through and the good thing is that it appears from this distance that the US people are becoming aware of how their country is being damaged by the present policies. 

The US has really fallen from its glory days of two decades ago. If Barack fails then I fear for them.


----------



## numbercruncher (29 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Baracks Pastor speaks .....



> Barack Obama's quest to become the first US African American president has suffered another blow from his pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who on Monday launched an all-out defence of his controversial views from the pulpit - and in the process repeated many of them.
> 
> These included: that the US Government was responsible for the AIDS epidemic among African Americans; that Zionism was racism; that Louis Farrakan, head of the National of Islam, was an inspiration to many in the black community; and that "You cannot do terrorism on other people and not expect it to come back on you."




http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/04/29/1209234801321.html

Hope he wasnt too brainwashed by this fella ...



> As for the most famous member of his congregation, Mr Wright appeared to imply that Senator Obama's public rejection of his views might not be his real views.


----------



## Doris (29 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



numbercruncher said:


> Baracks Pastor speaks .....
> 
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/04/29/1209234801321.html
> ...





Well I have to ask the obvious...  

Does the world en masse reject most of the pastor's comments?


*Obama Links Broad Ideas to Economic Specifics*

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...ewsletter&wpisrc=newsletter&wpisrc=newsletter

ANDERSON, Ind. -- Sen. Barack Obama came this past weekend to this factory town, where the loss of hundreds of jobs at the Delphi auto parts plant was only the latest blow, and told 2,000 voters that the way to fix things was not just to vote for him -- but to join a bottom-up mass movement to change the way government works.

He didn't put it that way exactly. But in a noteworthy shift, the Illinois senator is trying to reach working-class and middle-class voters by arguing more explicitly that the reform ideas driving his campaign can address the economic troubles that threaten their way of life. *Supplanting lobbyist influence with citizen activism, uniting the country beyond petty partisan gamesmanship and bringing more candor to government*, he argues, are not just abstract goals, but concrete steps that can level the playing field and lead to a more equitable distribution of the nation's wealth.

"When the American people work together, we cannot be stopped," he said in Marion. "When people are unified, ordinary folks -- black, white, Hispanic -- when they come together and decide that change needs to come, then change will happen."

He gave as an example his plan to broadcast on C-SPAN the meetings he would hold with industry representatives and congressional leaders to push health-care reform. "If you see a member of Congress who's carrying water for the drug companies instead of carrying your water, you'll be able to hold them accountable," he said in Anderson.

Obama uses this call for a permanent grass-roots mobilization to distinguish himself from Clinton, who he says is *too invested in the existing system.* "You know I will be fighting for you because I will be accountable to you," he said in Marion. "You funded my campaign, you created the political organization that got me here today, you brought me to this dance, and *I dance with the one that brung me*."


----------



## Doris (29 April 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

They are worried about the May 6 primaries.  

A free 'limited edition car magnet' to donors of $15 or more and a DVD of 'The Speech' for $30 or more to increase the tally by Thursday our time!

Donations will reflect support over this last month and be jumped on by the media and thus influence the superdelegates' impressions and votes.

He had been challenged to fight back about Hillary's comments to show he had the tenacity to stand up to her and to McCain and lead the nation but negativity ensued.  

Obama did not denigrate his ex-pastor in his reaction-speech so why is Wright now trying to destroy his campaign?!  

Hopefully his comments below will help tidy up those repercussions and the current Wright mess.  

Just out:  
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/04/28/obama_on_wright_he_does_not_sp.html


WILSON, N.C. 
-- Sen. Barack Obama wants everyone to know that he is not the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and the talkative Rev. Wright does not speak for him.

On a day when his longtime pastor at Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ seemed to pop up every five minutes in the mainstream media and the blogosphere, Obama emphasized the distance between them.

"I have said before and I will repeat again that *some of the comments that Rev. Wright have made offend me and I understand why they've offended the American people*," Obama said in a brief airport tarmac press conference in Wilmington, N.C.

"*He does not speak for me*," Obama said. "He does not speak for the campaign. He may make statements in the future that don't reflect my values or concerns."

Obama was asked if he felt betrayed by Wright, who played a significant role in Obama's spiritual life for 20 years, performed his wedding and inspired the title of Obama's most recent book, "The Audacity of Hope."

"I just want to emphasize that this is my *former* pastor," Obama said. "Any of the statements that he's made both to trigger this controversy and that he's made over the last several days are not statements that I've heard him make previously. They don't represent my views. And they don't represent what this campaign's about."

Obama did not mention Wright at the University of North Carolina-Wilmington, where he spoke and took questions for about 80 minutes. In response to a question about his faith Obama spoke at length, but did not use it as an opening to say yet more about Wright.

No one in the enthusiastic 5,000-person crowd asked him about the controversy, nor did anyone tonight among 1,900 people packed into a high school gym in Wilson. Obama is due to lead a rally later in Chapel Hill inside the Dean Smith Center, better known as the Dean Dome, during his third and final event of the day.

Focusing on the crucial days before the May 6 primaries in North Carolina and Indiana, Obama seemed determined to wrench his campaign back to the basic messages that propelled him to a strong lead in pledged delegates. He spoke of moving away from "distortions and distractions."

And he got a *standing ovation* after telling the crowd that he was determined to move beyond a rough stretch of the campaign that he described as overly negative, not to mention injurious to the health of his candidacy.

"Having politicians bickering back and forth doesn't help you," Obama said. "Having them worrying about superdelegates doesn't help you. This election is not about me. It's not about Senator Clinton. It's not about John McCain. *It's about you. It's about your struggles, your hopes and dreams*."

*The crowd roared.*

Obama said that his campaign in recent weeks got "sucked into this whole negative thing. *People throw elbows at you*. You start feeling like, 'Oh, I got to throw an elbow back,'" Obama said. "I told this to my team, that *we are starting to sound like other folks*. We're starting to run the same negative stuff and it shows that none of us are immune from this kind of politics."

He added, "For the next nine days, between now and May 6, and the next nine months between now and November, and the next nine years" -- and here he was interrupted by cheers -- "I am going to spend all my time talking about you."

On the tarmac in Wilmington, Obama was asked how he intends to move beyond Wright, with all the attention Wright is getting from the media, as well as from Clinton and presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain.

"What I think is interesting is none of the voters I talk to ask about it," Obama said. "Now, there may be people who are troubled about it and are being polite in not asking me about it. But that's not what I hear from the voters. *What I'm hearing is concerns about gas prices. I'm hearing from people concerned about their jobs being shifted overseas*."


----------



## Doris (4 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Latest delegate count*:  
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

*Obama*: 1734  (up 10) ... 290 to go!
*Clinton*: 1597  (up 8)  ... 427 to go!

Next Wednesday our time may be the cruncher.

*Clinton May Be Hopeful, but Obama Rolls On*

Mr. Obama continues to pick up the support of superdelegates — elected Democrats and party leaders — at a quicker pace than Mrs. Clinton. 

On Thursday, he got a boost from a high-profile defection: Joe Andrew, a former Democratic national chairman appointed by former President Bill Clinton, said *he had changed his mind and would back Mr. Obama*. Even after Mrs. Clinton’s victory in Pennsylvania, Mr. Obama has held on to a solid lead in pledged delegates, those selected by the voting in primaries and caucuses.

By and large, the group that matters most at this point — the uncommitted superdelegates, who are likely to hold the balance of power — still seem to *view their decision the way the Obama campaign would like them to see it*. They suggest that they are more sympathetic to the argument that they should follow the will of the voters as expressed by the delegates amassed by the candidates when the primary season is done rather than following Mrs. Clinton’s admonitions to select the candidate they think would best be able to defeat Senator John McCain and the Republicans in November.

“*It’s about the numbers, and the numbers are the numbers*,” said Chris Redfern, the chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party and an uncommitted superdelegate. “It’s not about hand-wringing. And Senator Obama has the lead.”

None of this is to say that Mrs. Clinton has run out of string. She has waged a spirited and focused campaign in the past month, a period in which Mr. Obama has at times seemed to lose energy. 

David Plouffe, the manager of Mr. Obama’s campaign, said that if Mrs. Clinton won 55 percent of the remaining pledged delegates — an assumption he called “overly generous” — she would still need about two-thirds of the remaining uncommitted superdelegates to reach the 2,025 delegates needed to secure the nomination. 

Mrs. Clinton’s advisers did not dispute Mr. Plouffe’s calculation, in effect acknowledging the enormousness of their task. 

Many superdelegates said they were queasy about Mr. Obama and his former pastor, and fearful of how the issue might be used in the fall. Still, they said they were *not convinced that that made him a weaker general-election candidate than Mrs. Clinton*, or at least not convinced enough to cast a vote that could be portrayed as overturning the will of Democratic primary voters and blocking the effort by Mr. Obama to become the nation’s first African-American president.

Mr. Andrew, the former national party chairman, said in an interview that Mr. *Obama’s response to his problems with Mr. Wright convinced him that Mr. Obama was the better choice*. 

“*What’s happened here is how he has handled each one of these crises* — because you know there are going to be crises — has made him an even stronger candidate,” Mr. Andrew said.

Mr. Obama has also picked up superdelegate support from Democratic members of Congress in relatively conservative districts — *despite efforts by Republicans to make Mr. Obama a liability for Democrats* running in competitive districts, including campaigns for two open seats in the South that are under way. 

Representative Baron P. Hill of Indiana and Representative Ben Chandler of Kentucky endorsed Mr. Obama, for example, and both face the likelihood of stiff Republican challenges in the fall. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/02/u...bl&ex=1209873600&en=943d4ecaa8fbba3b&ei=5087


...

May 2 (Bloomberg) -- Former Democratic National Committee Chairman Paul Kirk formally pledged his superdelegate vote to Barack Obama today, the *second former party leader to back the Illinois senator in two days*. 

Obama "has and will continue to expand the electorate beyond the traditional Democratic Party base and bring young and new and independent voters to the Democratic banner in November,'' Kirk, a party superdelegate from Massachusetts, said in a statement released by Obama's campaign. 

Kirk previously expressed support for Obama, though he hadn't publicly pledged to cast his vote for him at the party's national convention when the nominee will be chosen. 

He and former party leader *Joe Andrew, who switched his support from Hillary Clinton to Obama yesterday*, are among the 795 superdelegates who will have decisive votes at the nominating convention. The endorsements come just days before the May 6 Democratic primaries in North Carolina and Indiana. 

Clinton's campaign released a statement saying Kirk has been an Obama backer since at least February and the announcement was intended "to divert attention from their recent troubles.''


----------



## noirua (4 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Analysis: The Wright effect on presidential race:

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/5/03/analysis-the-wright-effect-on-presidential-race/

Questions the electability of Barack Obama as Hillary Clinton sees an opportunity.

Latest CNN Poll shows a 6% drop in support for Barrack Obama, but no increase in support for Hillary Clinton as the undecided numbers increase.


----------



## Doris (4 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*New Batch of Superdelegates to Choose a Candidate*

*76 New Delegates*: Not All Have Decided Who to Support


By DAVID WRIGHT, VIJA UDENANS and STEPHANIE DAHLE 
May 3, 2008 

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=4780121&page=1

Based on the ABC News Delegate Estimate, it now seems like the Democratic nomination rests in the hands of 218 uncommitted superdelegates.

[ _Obama has 1,742.5 delegates
- Clinton has 1,607.5 delegates_]

If the whole thing weren't complicated enough, there's a new wrinkle. *76 so-called "add-on superdelegates" are now thrown into the mix. *

"We came up with this idea late, literally in the middle of the night," Democratic strategist Tad Devine said. "This might satisfy both sides."

The idea was to *give each state a few extra superdelegates*, late in the game, who would be *chosen by local officials* to better reflect the results of a long nomination fight.

In Illinois, it's no surprise that all three add-ons — including Chicago Mayor Richard Daley — favor Obama, the favorite son.

Likewise, in New York, all four add-ons — including state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo — are for Clinton. 

*Clinton is not expected to win North Carolina*, but a Clinton defeat in Indiana would put new pressure on her to bow out of the race.

Joe Andrew, a superdelegate and former Democratic National Committee chairman, who backs Obama, said neither candidate can win the nomination through primary votes now, and it will come down to the party's so-called superdelegates.

"Millions of people are inspired by Barack Obama, just like millions of people were inspired by Bill Clinton back in 1992, when he was a candidate of hope, not fear," Andrew said today on "GMA." 


http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/wireStory?id=4778851

The Guam caucuses added two *pledged delegates* apiece for Clinton and Obama. 

Votes in Guam for party chairman and vice chairman *also added a superdelegate for Obama and subtracted one for Clinton* because the outgoing vice chair had endorsed the New York senator.

Obama had a total of *1,742.5 delegates*, including endorsements from party and elected officials who will serve as superdelegates. Clinton had *1,607.5 delegates*, according to The Associated Press tally. It will take 2,025 delegates to secure the Democratic nomination at the party's national convention this summer in Denver.

In the delegate competition, Obama picked up one each in Maryland, South Carolina and New Mexico. 
Clinton countered with one from Maryland.


http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_delegate_count.html

Upcoming States & RealClearPolitics Averages:

State	.........  Date	.. Delegates	Obama	Clinton
North Carolina	 05/06	... 115 		...* 48.8*	41.8
Indiana	......     05/06	 . . . 72 		. . .  41.5	...*47.5
*


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

good on you Doris.
As I mentioned once before - I hope he thanks you if he wins 

but then again ... maybe the old proverb will prove true.. "when two fall out, the third wins" 



noirua said:


> Analysis: The Wright effect on presidential race:
> http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/5/03/analysis-the-wright-effect-on-presidential-race/
> Questions the electability of Barack Obama as Hillary Clinton sees an opportunity.   Latest CNN Poll shows a 6% drop in support for Barrack Obama, but no increase in support for Hillary Clinton as the undecided numbers increase.




noi,   Actually there are a half dozen or so comments after that article, all pro Obama (and anti CNN)  - You'd have to assume that Obama would be a breath of fresh air to the USA,  starting with the press.


----------



## Doris (4 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> good on you Doris.
> As I mentioned once before - I hope he thanks you if he wins
> 
> but then again ... maybe the old proverb will prove true.. "when two fall out, the third wins"




2020... another old proverb states that *it is not having fallen down that counts.  What matters is how you get up*!

There is no debating that this arduous process peels off the superficial layers of its candidates revealing their true natures.  Barack has been challenged and shown to be human, but always stands up tall again and retains his innate dignity in being objective.  His inherent resilience strengthens his resolve to shake off the petty denigrating distractions as people 'throw elbows' at him.

Barack is a great role model for young and old. 

A lesser candidate might come out abusive and nasty.

Hillary continues to show her claws as she claws her way along.  Not a warm nurturing example of womanhood IMO. He is comfortable with people and ready for conversation, whilst she is fiery-eyed and belligerent, even when she smiles.  She loves to fight.  He likes to resolve. 

A good company promotes its own product without focusing on deviations in the opposition's.

BTW... why is it that most Australian journos continue to pronounce his name rhyming with BACK... when he was Christened to rhyme with ARK?!  All US releases pronounce his name Bah-rark.  It reminds me of an old aunt who used to read a lot.  One day she mentioned _tuber-col-o-sis_ and I had to laugh.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> 1 .  another old proverb states that *it is not having fallen down that counts.  What matters is how you get up*!
> 
> 2.  why is it that most Australian journos continue to pronounce his name rhyming with BACK... when he was Christened to rhyme with ARK?!
> 
> 3. It reminds me of an old aunt who used to read a lot.  One day she mentioned _tuber-col-o-sis_ and I had to laugh.




1. well I like the idea of someone telling the truth!
and here's another proverb for you ... "a man who speaks the truth is better than a hundred liars" 

2. don't know - you don't have to be Rhode Scholar to be a journo maybe? 

3. :topic lol - I sat opposite a lady with similar Maloprop-like tendencies in train once - long journey - I remember one comment she came out with ... ''and then there's this "marry-jew-arna" business! they say it makes you stupid!"


----------



## Doris (4 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> 1. well I like the idea of someone telling the truth!
> and here's another proverb for you ... "a man who speaks the truth is better than a hundred liars"
> 
> 2. don't know - you don't have to be Rhode Scholar to be a journo maybe?
> ...




Was she talking from experience?  

But seriously... Why DO Aussie journos mispronounce his name?
They say windshields... we say windscreens;
They say sidewalk... we say footpath;

but...
They say Ir-ack... we say Ir...ark.
They say Bar-ark... we say Bar-ack... go figure!   

Give me an honest person any day.  When someone lies to you once, it's their fault.  If they lie to you a second time, it's your fault... because you let them.  I can still see GWB trying to quote that in his inimitable way!

Well I have to say people who believe the 'Summer holiday' from a gas tax in the US is a good thing, may have succumbed to the weed!  

The tax pays for road and bridge maintenance.  Take away the tax and individuals don't save much (30c a day quoted) but tens of thousands will lose their road maintenance jobs!  

The press have not challenged Hillary as to IF and WHERE money will come from for repairs!  The gas tax issue is a big one for Hillary's low-income supporters.  I read Barack's comments about the jobs hidden away in ONE of a dozen items I read on the topic yesterday.   The press are simply quoting him as saying it's not a long-term solution but a political ploy.  Immediate gratification would be in many minds.  Even if Hillary did win, it's a year away from her first summer to apply it!  But she wants them to think this is the start of her being their saviour!  Politics...  

A new Hillary proverb: Fill their bellies today and they won't care if they're hungry tomorrow!


----------



## Doris (5 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Will the poll in two days reflect this one?

*CBS Poll: Support For Obama Rebounds*

*In Wake Of Controversy Over Former Pastor, Illinois Senator Builds Lead Over McCain, Clinton*

1 hour ago:

(CBS) Democrat Barack Obama appears to have rebounded from some of the damage caused by the controversy surrounding his former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, according to the latest CBS News/New York Times poll.

On one key measure, Obama has seen a big reversal since his denunciation of Wright’s remarks on Tuesday. He now leads presumptive Republican nominee John McCain in the hypothetical fall contest by eleven points, 51 percent to 40 percent. That *compares to a tied match-up* in a CBS News/New York Times poll that was *released last Wednesday.*

Positive assessments of how Obama has handled the situation with Wright are also reflected by a continued lead over fellow Democrat Hillary Clinton in his battle for their party’s nomination. Among Democratic primary voters (those who have voted or plan to vote in a Democratic primary) Obama’s lead over Clinton has increased -- he now leads Clinton by twelve points, 50 percent to 38 percent. That’s *up from his eight point lead in the poll released just a few days ago. *

...
However, some perceptions of Obama’s qualities have shifted in the last few weeks, and he has lost his edge over Clinton on some past strengths. He is behind both Clinton and McCain on the question of who is tough enough to make the hard decisions a president must. Seven in 10 think both Clinton and McCain are tough enough to make the right decisions a President has to make. *Fifty-eight percent say this about Obama.*

But *more voters, 52 percent, view Obama as the candidate who would unite the country*. Slightly fewer now say this about Clinton and *McCain is the weakest on this characteristic*. Obama has gone down in this measure from February when 67 percent said he would unite the country. 

...
The poll also asked voters about their opinion of lifting the federal gas tax over the summer, a proposal supported by McCain and Clinton, but *not by Obama*. Forty-nine percent think lifting the tax is a bad idea, while 45 percent approve of the plan.

Americans making under $30,000 a year approve of a gas tax “holiday” for the summer, but *most Americans making more do not*. 

The poll also found that many are skeptical of the motives of the public figures that support the idea of a temporary lifting of the federal gasoline tax: seven in 10 think they support the measure mostly to help themselves politically. Even most Americans who approve of the idea think so.

In this poll, Clinton is the candidate most viewed as pandering: Just 34 percent think she says what she believes, while *nearly two in three believe she says what people want to hear*. For both Obama and McCain, just over half say they say what he believes and four in 10 think they say what voters want to hear. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/04/opinion/polls/main4069259_page2.shtml


----------



## Doris (5 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

With two days to the next poll did Barack redeem his campaign whilst we slept here in Oz?


*'Meet the Press' transcript for May 4, 2008*
Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL)

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24445166/

Watch the netcast:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24452804#24452804

One good excerpt on this netcast:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24452804#24338024


----------



## noirua (5 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

If the Democratic vote was under Republican rules then Hillary Clinton would already be the Democratic nominee.
Much now depends on the voting in Indiana where Hillary Clinton just has to win.  Latest polls showed her position was improving, and she had levelled and could be a few points ahead going into the polls. 
North Carolina polls showed Barack Obama is still well in the lead but the 11% lead of a few weeks ago had come down to 8% last week. IF the movement continues Clinton could go into the vote just 5% behind with the gap narrowing.
My feelings are that Hillary Clinton will win Indiana by about 3 -5% and sneak North Carolina by a narrow margin.


----------



## trinity (6 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> "He does not speak for me," Obama said. "He does not speak for the campaign. He may make statements in the future that don't reflect my values or concerns."




He has sat in the same church for 20 years and hear this preacher and, separates himself from the preacher when convenient.  Politicians... 

http://www.smh.com.au/news/paul-sheehan/stupidity-foils-the-black-prince/2008/05/04/1209839444360.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1


See no evil... hear no evil...


----------



## noirua (6 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



trinity said:


> He has sat in the same church for 20 years and hear this preacher and, separates himself from the preacher when convenient.  Politicians...
> 
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/paul-sheehan/stupidity-foils-the-black-prince/2008/05/04/1209839444360.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
> See no evil... hear no evil...



The Rev Wright married the Obamas and baptized their children. Barack Obama is now having problems distancing himself from him.

Hillary Clinton is now ahead in Indiana, according to CNBC, and the gap is still closing in North Carolina. Barack Obama, having praised Rev Wright for years it is not seem credible to dump him now, and many don't believe he's genuine.


----------



## Doris (7 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama inching closer to Democratic presidential nomination*

Democratic results as of 11:55 p.m. yesterday US time:

*Barack Obama   -  Hillary Clinton*

North Carolina (115 delegates) *58% -  42%*

Indiana (72 delegates) *49% -  51%*

http://www.newsday.com/services/new...y-usanal075676315may07,0,5694474.story?page=2


It was a decisive win as expected in NC... but the double digit lead in Indiana shrank!  

Obama has *1836* delegates...  (1584 pledged, 252 superdelegates)
Clinton has *1681* delegates...  (1415 pledged, 266 superdelegates)

*Obama leads by 155 total delegates*.

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/


Clinton leads by 14 amongst superdelegates but these can change their vote any time until the August convention.

Obama email:
"Here's where we stand.

As of Tuesday morning, we needed just 273 delegates to clinch the nomination. When the votes are fully counted Wednesday morning, we will have gained more than a third of them in a single day."

http://www.newsday.com/topic/sns-ap-primary-rdp,0,3827521.story

"You know, there are those who were saying that North Carolina would be a game-changer in this election," Obama told a roaring crowd in Raleigh, N.C., on Tuesday night, referring to Clinton's hope that an upset there would recast the race in her favor.

"But today what North Carolina decided is that the only game that needs changing is the one in Washington, D.C."

At the moment Obama needs *188* to win the nomination.
Clinton needs *343* to win.



Doris said:


> http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/
> 28 APRIL:
> 
> Obama sits on 1724
> ...





*May the best man win next week in West Virginia!*


----------



## Whiskers (7 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Gees, one would have thought this would have been decided by now.

How long ago is it since the nomination race went to the last vote?

It looks like it will come down to the superdelegates.

Assuming that all Democrat voters will support Hilary or Barack... which they may not necessairly... I suppose logically it will come down to having to decide which canidate is more likely to steal some votes from Cain.

Has any surveys been done along those lines?


----------



## wayneL (7 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Whiskers said:


> Gees, one would have thought this would have been decided by now.
> 
> How long ago is it since the nomination race went to the last vote?
> 
> ...



I think it's all over bar the shouting, so yes indeed that is the next question.

Can the US overcome it's inherent racism and elect a black man with (tenuous) muslim connections.

I hope so, because from an outsiders perspective, that seems to be the best choice. 

I hope he has his security sorted.


----------



## Doris (7 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

FYI 2020...

Dissect the three nominees' stands on eight major issues!

Abortion, Climate change, Economy/taxes, Health care, Housing, Immigration, Iran, Iraq. 
(Links on the site below)


Stance on Global Warming and America's Role:

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/issues/climate.html

The Iran issue is interesting:

Who sounds egotistical?  Power hungry?  Like GWB?
Who would you want as president influencing the world?

*Clinton*:
Direct diplomacy without preconditions; use economic sanctions; would not meet with the Iranian president; military option not off the table, but would not consider without congressional approval.

"I will use a lot of high-level presidential envoys to test the waters, to feel the way. But certainly, we're not going to just have our president meet with Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez and, you know, the president of North Korea, Iran and Syria until we know better what the way forward would be."


*Obama*:
Engage in direct diplomacy; tighten economic sanctions with international cooperation; would meet with the Iranian president with no preconditions; military option not off the table.

"I would [be willing to meet separately, without precondition, during the first year of my administration ... with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea]. And the reason is this, that the notion that somehow not talking to countries is punishment to them -- which has been the guiding diplomatic principle of this administration -- is ridiculous."


*McCain*:
Form an alliance with European countries to put economic and diplomatic pressure on Iran; no unconditional diplomacy; military option not off the table, but would consult with leaders of Congress.

"The answer is not to enter into unconditional dialogues with these two dictatorships [Iran and Syria] from a position of weakness. The answer is for the international community to apply real pressure to Syria and Iran to change their behavior. The United States must also bolster its regional military posture to make clear to Iran our determination to protect our forces in Iraq and to deter Iranian


----------



## Doris (8 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Here's the maths 2020!

Obama will meet with undecided super delegates in Washington tomorrow!

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 8 May 2008 6:57 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: In sight

Doris --

News broke this morning that Senator Clinton made three separate loans to her campaign in the past 30 days -- including one as recently as Monday.

These loans total more than $6.4 million, which combined with her previous personal loans, add up to at least $11.4 million she's loaned her campaign since February.

A spokesman said she may continue to "loan the campaign additional money out of her jointly-held assets" -- which include more than $100 million in income since her husband left the White House.

Meanwhile, by winning a double-digit victory in North Carolina and closing the gap in Indiana, Barack won another 100 delegates.

Barack Obama is now just 169 delegates away from winning the Democratic nomination. It's within sight.

This is a decisive moment in this race.

Barack has already won more votes, more delegates, and more than twice as many states as Senator Clinton, whose path to the nomination has grown extremely narrow. But these loans show that her campaign will continue to contest the remaining primaries vigorously.

We need to show that the voices of more than 1.5 million ordinary people donating whatever they can afford are more powerful than one person giving more than $11 million to their own campaign.

*Here's the math of where we stand ...*

There are only six contests remaining on the Democratic primary calendar and only 217 pledged delegates left to be awarded. Only 7% of the pledged delegates remain on the table. There are 253 remaining undeclared superdelegates, for a total of 470 delegates left to be awarded.

With North Carolina and Indiana complete, Barack Obama only needs 169 total delegates to capture the Democratic nomination. *This is only 36% of the total remaining delegates.*

Conversely, *Senator Clinton needs 326 delegates to reach the Democratic nomination, which represents a startling 69% of the remaining delegates.*

With the Clinton path to the nomination getting even narrower, we expect new and wildly creative scenarios to emerge in the coming days.

While those scenarios may be entertaining, they are not legitimate and will not be considered legitimate by this campaign or its millions of supporters, volunteers, and donors.

We want to be clear -- we believe that the winner of a majority of pledged delegates will be and should be the nominee of our party.

And we estimate that after the Oregon and Kentucky primaries on May 20th, we will have won a majority of the overall pledged delegates.

Evidently, the Clinton campaign agrees. According to a recent news report, by even their most optimistic estimates the Clinton campaign expects to trail by more than 100 pledged delegates and will then ask the superdelegates to overturn the will of the voters.

But we have our own case to make: that millions of Americans volunteering their time and donating in small amounts have built a campaign that has won the most delegates, the most states, and the most votes.

And this campaign -- your campaign -- will be the one that wins the presidency in November and delivers a wave of support for Democrats at every level of office.

We'll be in touch as the situation evolves.

Thank you,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## Pronto (8 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> Although Barack was born in Hawaii and later in his adolescence grew up there with his maternal grandparents, he wasn't considered by many Blacks as African American or Black enough since his family history did not extend as far back as the slavery years.




It's remarkable that probably the two best known and successful black males in the USA are Obama and former general Colin Powell and neither has a slave heritage (Powell's parents are from the West Indies).

This unhappy factor seems deeply embedded in the African-American psyche. Condoleeza Rice is an extraordinary and inspiring exception.


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ... The Iran issue is interesting:
> 
> *Clinton*:
> Direct diplomacy without preconditions; use economic sanctions; would not meet with the Iranian president;
> ...




Could be worse I guess, we could have Giuliani still in the running 



> http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=726875
> In 1995, *Giuliani had late Palestinian Authority chairman Yasser Arafat ejected from a concert at the Lincoln Center in New York *






> http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=990CE7D6163DF936A15753C1A963958260
> THE U.N. AT 50: ARAFAT; White House Condemns Giuliani for Ejecting Arafat From Concert
> By DAVID FIRESTONE
> Published: October 25, 1995
> ...




http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1994/arafat-bio.html



> The period after the expulsion from Lebanon was a low time for Arafat and the PLO. Then the intifada (shaking) protest movement strengthened Arafat by directing world attention to the difficult plight of the Palestinians. In 1988 came a change of policy. In a speech at a special United Nations session held in Geneva, Switzerland, *Arafat declared that the PLO renounced terrorism and supported "the right of all parties concerned in the Middle East conflict to live in peace and security, including the state of Palestine, Israel and other neighbours".*
> 
> The prospects for a peace agreement with Israel now brightened. After a setback when the PLO supported Iraq in the Persian Gulf War of 1991, the peace process began in earnest, leading to the Oslo Accords of 1993.
> 
> This agreement included provision for the Palestinian elections which took place in early 1996, and Arafat was elected President of the Palestine Authority. Like other Arab regimes in the area, however, Arafat's governing style tended to be more dictatorial than democratic. *When the right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu came to power in Israel in 1996, the peace process slowed down considerably. * ....


----------



## Whiskers (8 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> I think it's all over bar the shouting, so yes indeed that is the next question.
> 
> *Can the US overcome it's inherent racism and elect a black man with (tenuous) muslim connections.*
> I hope so, because from an outsiders perspective, that seems to be the best choice.
> ...




Well since it appears the USA is suffering a bit of Stockholm syndrome re the distortion and over-reaction to the war on terrorism, it's probably the best choice and a good tactic.

And aparently if he's not decended from slavery and actually 'Hawain', not really considered black, it's probably easier for them to accept him than a woman as president.

The so called home of democracy, freedom and free speach will just about be the last to have a woman head of state.


----------



## sydneysider (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> 2020... another old proverb states that *it is not having fallen down that counts.  What matters is how you get up*!
> 
> There is no debating that this arduous process peels off the superficial layers of its candidates revealing their true natures.  Barack has been challenged and shown to be human, but always stands up tall again and retains his innate dignity in being objective.  His inherent resilience strengthens his resolve to shake off the petty denigrating distractions as people 'throw elbows' at him.
> 
> ...




I guess that explains why he he plans to pull government oversight from the teamsters union so that they can go back to their old mafia ways and he wants to do away with secret voting in union elections so that union members will vote (pressured) out in the open on a show of hands. He was pictured with Hoffa arm in arm with Hoffa the other day after this undertaking was given. This is just like the corrupt political machine politics that "nurtured" Obama in Chicago where he was groomed ((see Ryzko ( who financed Obama's home) trial for seedy details of Chicago's corruption)). He joined Rev Wrights "Church" twenty years ago to get the voter support of his congregation (probably over twenty thousand votes there when he ran for State office). Wright practices Liberation theology which teaches us that the black gods will kill the white gods (if u do not believe me then do some research on the web). When he ran for the U.S. senate he managed to get secret/ sealed transcripts from his Senate opponents divorce case and spill their contents all over the Chicago press just before the elections and his opponent went down in flames. He has been meddling in Kenyan politics for some time, he supported a Muslim Marxist named Odinga who lost in the December elections, his supporters then went on a rampage and burned about sixty Christians to death in a Kenyan Church in January. Do u want me to continue? there is a lot more of this stuff??


----------



## Superfly (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> I guess that explains why he he plans to pull government oversight from the teamsters union so that they can go back to their old mafia ways and he wants to do away with secret voting in union elections so that union members will vote (pressured) out in the open on a show of hands. He was pictured with Hoffa arm in arm with Hoffa the other day after this undertaking was given. This is just like the corrupt political machine politics that "nurtured" Obama in Chicago where he was groomed ((see Ryzko ( who financed Obama's home) trial for seedy details of Chicago's corruption)). He joined Rev Wrights "Church" twenty years ago to get the voter support of his congregation (probably over twenty thousand votes there when he ran for State office). Wright practices Liberation theology which teaches us that the black gods will kill the white gods (if u do not believe me then do some research on the web). When he ran for the U.S. senate he managed to get secret/ sealed transcripts from his Senate opponents divorce case and spill their contents all over the Chicago press just before the elections and his opponent went down in flames. He has been meddling in Kenyan politics for some time, he supported a Muslim Marxist named Odinga who lost in the December elections, his supporters then went on a rampage and burned about sixty Christians to death in a Kenyan Church in January. Do u want me to continue? there is a lot more of this stuff??




Great post...  hopefully will open a few eye's....


----------



## Doris (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> When he ran for the U.S. senate he managed to get secret/ sealed transcripts from his Senate opponents divorce case and spill their contents all over the Chicago press just before the elections and his opponent went down in flames.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_election_in_Illinois,_2004

The Illinois United States Senate election of 2004 was held on *November 2*, 2004. Democratic candidate Barack Obama defeated Republican candidate Alan Keyes by 70% to 27%. *The 43% margin was the largest in Illinois history in a U.S. Senate election.* The election was the first in which both major party candidates were African Americans. Obama succeeded Republican incumbent Sen. Peter Fitzgerald who announced on April 15, 2003 that he would retire upon the end of his first term in 2005.

The Democratic and Republic primary elections held on *March 16*, 2004 were contested by a total of 15 candidates who combined to spend a record total of over $60 million. The Democratic primary election, contested by 7 candidates who combined to spend over $46 million, was the most expensive U.S. Senate primary election in history.

Obama won the crowded Democratic primary with a clear majority of votes by a *landslide margin of 29% *over his closest Democratic rival and with a vote total that equaled that of all 8 candidates in the Republican primary combined. The victory made Obama the brightest new star of the Democratic Party and led to him giving the keynote address at the 2004 Democratic National Convention on July 27, 2004.

*Jack Ryan* won the crowded Republican primary with a plurality of votes by a substantial *margin of 12%* over his closest Republican rival, but three months later, on *June 25*, 2004 announced his withdrawal from the race -- *four days after the court-ordered release of previously sealed divorce records containing embarrassing allegations by his ex-wife.*

*Six weeks later*, on August 4, 2004, the Illinois Republican State Central Committee asked Alan Keyes of Maryland to replace Ryan as the Republican candidate. Keyes accepted four days later and moved into an apartment in Illinois four days after that, less than 3 months before the general election.


----------



## wayneL (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> I guess that explains why he he plans to pull government oversight from the teamsters union so that they can go back to their old mafia ways and he wants to do away with secret voting in union elections so that union members will vote (pressured) out in the open on a show of hands. He was pictured with Hoffa arm in arm with Hoffa the other day after this undertaking was given. This is just like the corrupt political machine politics that "nurtured" Obama in Chicago where he was groomed ((see Ryzko ( who financed Obama's home) trial for seedy details of Chicago's corruption)). He joined Rev Wrights "Church" twenty years ago to get the voter support of his congregation (probably over twenty thousand votes there when he ran for State office). Wright practices Liberation theology which teaches us that the black gods will kill the white gods (if u do not believe me then do some research on the web). When he ran for the U.S. senate he managed to get secret/ sealed transcripts from his Senate opponents divorce case and spill their contents all over the Chicago press just before the elections and his opponent went down in flames. He has been meddling in Kenyan politics for some time, he supported a Muslim Marxist named Odinga who lost in the December elections, his supporters then went on a rampage and burned about sixty Christians to death in a Kenyan Church in January. Do u want me to continue? there is a lot more of this stuff??




Can we have some substantiation of these claims please... links? 

These are fairly serious allegations to not back up with some evidence.

Thanks


----------



## Doris (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> I guess that explains why he he plans to pull government oversight from the teamsters union so that they can go back to their old mafia ways




*Teamsters union defends its endorsement of Obama*

By Steven Greenhouse
Published: May 5, 2008

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/05/05/america/05cndteamsters.php

The Teamsters union vigorously denied on Monday that its decision to endorse Senator Barack Obama in the presidential race was in any way tied to Obama's statement that federal supervision of the union had run its course.

The union also noted that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton suggested that she might also support ending the union's consent decree with the federal government when she spoke to the Teamsters' general executive board last year.

"You can't go around dragging the ball and the chain of the past," Clinton said on that occasion — the March 27, 2007, meeting of the board... "And I think that's true for anybody, any organization, any individual," she continued. "And so I would be very open to looking at that, and to saying, 'What are we trying to accomplish here?' and see what the answers were. At some point, you turn the page and go on."

Bret Caldwell, the communications director for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, said there was "no link whatsoever" between his union's endorsement of Obama and the candidate's statements about federal supervision.

*The decree is a 19-year-old agreement between the union and the federal government, under which government-appointed monitors have worked to root out mob influence from the union, which has 1.4 million members.*

Caldwell was reacting to an article in The Wall Street Journal on Monday, which said that Obama won the Teamsters' endorsement after he privately told the Teamsters, according to campaign and union officials, that he supported ending the federal oversight.

"Obama has indicated his support of the Teamsters' position to end their consent decree," Caldwell said. "*That's a whole lot different from saying he would end the consent decree*. No candidate would ever say that. It makes no sense that anybody would go there with that."

Caldwell added, "We believe there's only a *judicial* end to this process. It's not a *political* end to this process."

The official who has the power to end the consent decree is Judge Loretta Presca of the Federal District Court in Manhattan, who officially oversees the consent decree. Caldwell said that the question of whether to petition Judge Presca to end the decree would be decided by career anticorruption officials in the Justice Department, *not the White House*.

Appearing on the ABC program "Good Morning America" on Monday, *Obama denied that he had committed himself to ending the consent decree.*

"I wouldn't make any blanket commitments," he said.

He added: "The union has done a terrific job cleaning itself in-house, and the question is whether they're going to be able to get treated just like every other union, whether the time has come. That's something I will absolutely examine when I'm president of the United States."

Caldwell said that the consent decree was no longer such an important issue for the Teamsters because there was little mob influence or corruption in the union and because federal monitors had done little in the way of prosecuting such corruption in recent years.

*In 2001*, soon after Bush became president, James P. Hoffa, the president of the Teamsters, urged the Bush administration to move to lift the decree, saying that it was costing his union millions of dollars and that it was redundant in light of the union's own anticorruption efforts.

Caldwell said that if lifting the consent decree were so vital to his union, then the Teamsters would have endorsed Obama last summer when he originally made his remark about the supervision having "run its course." The Teamsters did not endorse Obama until February of this year.


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well done Doris
very polite of you to answer the unsubstatiated claims of those who would have the rest of us "open our eye's"


----------



## Doris (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> He has been meddling in Kenyan politics for some time, he supported a Muslim Marxist named Odinga who lost in the December elections, his supporters then went on a rampage and burned about sixty Christians to death in a Kenyan Church in January. Do u want me to continue? there is a lot more of this stuff??




The carnage in Kenya in January was truly heartbreaking...  but it was ethnic, not religious based.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22460182/



> The Kikuyu, Kenya’s largest ethnic group, are accused of turning their dominance of politics and business to the detriment of others.
> Odinga is from the Luo tribe, a smaller but still major tribe that says it has been marginalized.
> 
> There are more than 40 tribes in Kenya, and political leaders have often used unemployed and uneducated young men to intimidate opponents. While Kibaki and Odinga have support from across the tribal spectrum, the youth responsible for the violence tend to see politics in strictly ethnic terms.





Obama's 'meddling' was to try to get Kibaki and Odinga to TALK and thus stop the carnage!




> The European Union and the United States have refused to congratulate Kibaki, and the EU and four top Kenyan election officials have called for an independent inquiry. In Britain, Kenya’s former colonial ruler, Prime Minister Gordon Brown urged Kibaki and Odinga to hold talks.





http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007–2008_Kenyan_crisis



> The 2007–2008 Kenyan crisis refers to a political, economic, and humanitarian crisis that erupted in Kenya after incumbent President Mwai Kibaki was declared the winner of the presidential election held on December 27, 2007. Supporters of Kibaki's opponent, Raila Odinga of the Orange Democratic Movement, *alleged electoral manipulation*, a notion *widely confirmed by international observers*.[7]
> 
> In addition to staging several nonviolent protests, they went on a violent rampage in several parts of the country. Police shot a number of demonstrators, causing more violence directed toward the police. Violence escalated and at first was directed mainly against Kikuyu people – the community of which Kibaki is a member – living outside their traditional settlement areas, especially in the Rift Valley Province.
> 
> ...




If Obama's meddling helped achieve this, then perhaps he should meddle elsewhere too!


----------



## Doris (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Well done Doris
> very polite of you to answer the unsubstantiated claims of those who would have the rest of us "open our eye's"




2020... I so value other people's informed opinions!

The posts on this forum are often subjective but are usually information based.  
The best IMHO is the 'world food shortage' thread.

Obama once said he will not tell you what to think but will tell you what he thinks you should think about... and... he listens to what others think!

Can't help defending the man.  The world is a mess!  

Did you hear there were bomb scares in three of Obama's campaign offices in Indiana on Tuesday their time?  

http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008May06/0,4670,ObamaBombThreats,00.html

As Michelle said last weekend, Barack is a black man.  He can get shot going to the local gas station!  
But it must have hit home that people associated with him are targets of 'loose-cannons'.


----------



## sydneysider (9 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Well done Doris
> very polite of you to answer the unsubstatiated claims of those who would have the rest of us "open our eye's"




I will answer each comment that i made with references. For the current state of Union Corruption in the Teamsters Union please go to the National Legal and Policy Center / Union Corruption Update at http://www.nlpc.org
/artindx.asp#ibt. This lists all of the current criminal cases or reports of confirmed criminal activity from 2000-2008 for all unions in the USA. U will see that the teamsters renmain the most criminally active and corrupt union in the USA, there are over several hundred reported current cases from its members and management from all over the USA. The mere fact that Obama needs to be photographed arm in arm and smiling with their management tells u that he is totally clueless. All he is after their money and support.


----------



## Whiskers (10 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> The mere fact that Obama needs to be photographed arm in arm and smiling with their management tells u that he is totally clueless. All he is after their money and support.




I don't know about clueless, sydneysider. 

After all he is a politician and don't they do what they have to do, to get votes wherever they can. 

I've no idea about his sentiments toward the teamsters, but from a political perspective it may be one of his master-strokes, eh. 

Didn't Bush do something similar with the religious right... er, well maybe he is religious right!


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ... Did you hear there were bomb scares in three of Obama's campaign offices in Indiana on Tuesday their time?



so these bomb scares, - would they be by Moslim terrorists maybe? - or redneck terrorists? or racist terrorists? etc etc 

Couldn't be Moslim terrorists, because according to noirua, they want him to win 
(post #44 on the John McCain thread) 

and couldn't be the mafia, because according to sydneysider, he's "their sleeper"


----------



## noirua (11 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I notice that Barack Obama's book "Audacity of hope", was taken from a sermon by Rev Jeremiah A Wright.  The McCain camp are probably building up a campaign plan that heavily relies on extending the damage.  Obama's article "A politics of Conscience" asks as many questions as it answers.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

another (couple) for roy zimmerman fans  

 "Eine Kleine Barackmusik" by Roy Zimmerman

  "My TV" by Roy Zimmerman



> My TV
> words and music by Roy Zimmerman
> © 2004  (From "Homeland")
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (11 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> I notice that Barack Obama's book "Audacity of hope", was taken from a sermon by Rev Jeremiah A Wright.  The McCain camp are probably building up a campaign plan that heavily relies on extending the damage.  Obama's article "A politics of Conscience" asks as many questions as it answers.




The TITLE of his book was the TITLE of the first Wright sermon Obama heard. 

Obama had been trying to unite and help the poor and unemployed in Chicago and he needed organised groups to work with to achieve his goals.  These groups were churches.

Obama's speech was in June last year.  The following site offers an unbiased review of it:

http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/183357.aspx



> ... some pastors I was working with came up to me and asked if I was a member of a church. “If you’re organizing churches,” they said, “it might be helpful if you went to church once in a while.” And I thought, “Well, I guess that makes sense.”




Obama's intention was to put religious attitudes on the table.  
...To provoke conversation to promote a vision of unity, not division.



> Somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and started being used to drive us apart. It got hijacked. Part of it’s because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, who’ve been all too eager to exploit what divides us. At every opportunity, they’ve told evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their Church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage; school prayer and intelligent design. There was even a time when the Christian Coalition determined that its number one legislative priority was tax cuts for the rich. I don’t know what Bible they’re reading, but it doesn’t jibe with my version.




I'm sure Richard Dawkins would be the first to agree that amiable unity amongst religious groups in the US would be preferable to the status quo of the current alignment... or rather... misalignment. 

It never ceases to amaze me how some people claim to be religious yet carry and project such animosity and ill-will in their attitudes and actions towards others.  

Respect and tolerance are sorely needed in all aspects of life, in all parts of the world.


----------



## sydneysider (14 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Whiskers said:


> I don't know about clueless, sydneysider.
> 
> After all he is a politician and don't they do what they have to do, to get votes wherever they can.
> 
> ...




West Virginia votes/caucuses to-day. This State has two Democratic Senators and a Democratic Governor. How this state votes, and it is considered a bellweather state will determine Obama's fate in the coming elections. Current polls have Obama (v Hilary) in distant last place in a State that is very heavily Democratic. I suspect that he is toast.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> West Virginia votes/caucuses to-day. This State has two Democratic Senators and a Democratic Governor. How this state votes, and it is considered a bellweather state will determine Obama's fate in the coming elections. Current polls have Obama (v Hilary) in distant last place in a State that is very heavily Democratic. I suspect that he is toast.



As they said on PM
West Virginia is the whitest state. 
It is also one of the least educated states.
Hardly likely that Obama would do well there.

Having said that he remains frontrunner in the gambling.

sydneysider , Your idea of "toast" is the market's idea of an odds-on favourite.
If you're putting your money where your mouth is, you're either gonna be broke or real rich.

PS sad state of affairs if Hillary only does well (or rather, does best) where the level of education is down.


----------



## Doris (14 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama lost by 30 points.  He expected to win only 20!

28 delegates were at stake... He won 10 she won 23...  5 not allocated.

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

Obama: Total 1881... pledged: 1599... supers: 282
Clinton: Total 1713... pledged: 1440... supers: 273

* He has 144 to go
* She has 312 to go

Obama is 168 ahead.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article3701165.ece

 Wednesday, May 14, 2008
By Leonard Doyle in Washington



> "The White House is won in the swing states, and I am winning the swing states."




Clinton won impressively in *a* swing state, but Obama crushed her in the swing states of Colorado, Minnesota, and Virginia.



> Mrs Clinton is expected to make the case to the superdelegates that her success among working-class whites makes her indispensable to Democrats.
> 
> He left the state before the results came out last night to campaign in Missouri, an important election battleground. Then he will turn his attention to Florida and Michigan, two states where he did not campaign because of a dispute over the primary calendar. He will spend three days in Florida next week, trying to soothe the feeling of party activists who found their votes for Mrs Clinton disallowed.
> 
> 189 delegates left. Oregon and Kentucky vote next Tuesday, while Puerto Rico votes on 1 June and Montana and South Dakota on 3 June.




* He needs 144 
* She needs 312


----------



## sydneysider (15 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Obama lost by 30 points.  He expected to win only 20!
> 
> 28 delegates were at stake... He won 10 she won 23...  5 not allocated.
> 
> ...




Dear Doris,

Many of the states that Obama won with great margins were very early in the primaries (when he was being touted as the second coming of the Messiah) and before Reverend Wright (and Michelle, Weathermen etc etc) were exposed to the public. Many of these early primaries were true cauceses where he was selected by small groups of activists which he stacked with students and collected many delegates. Hilary completely missed this opportunity because she thought that her coronation was coming and was ill prepared. There is a lot more stuff coming down the pike about Obama's connections with nefarious groups. This morning there was a report out of Canada that his internet fundraising was taking in funds from overseas groups, which is illegal and connections to various muslim Marxist groups out of Africa and the Middle East. Reference was made to the fact that the Marxist Odinga used the same Obama slogans for change in his recent campaign (see Canada Free Press). I am looking for more press coverage on these issues. Obama continues to perform poorly in recent appearences, several days ago he told his audience that he had visited all of 57 US States in his campaign and yesterday he gave an off the cuff speech about the use of interpreters in Iraq and Afghanistan and was totally clueless about the various languages and dialects spoken in these areas. To-day he addressed a female reporter as "sweetie" before he refused to answer here question at a factory (very presidential). Dan Quayle was marked for life over his one potato remark, Obama has a steady litany of daily and silly comments.


----------



## Doris (15 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Silly me!  Back in February I thought Dodd might be the VP...

________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 15 May 2008 10:50 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: John Edwards

Doris --

I have some very exciting news.

My good friend John Edwards is endorsing our campaign and joining our movement for change.

We're here in Grand Rapids, Michigan -- and if you receive this message in time, you can probably turn on your TV and be part of the moment.

I'm deeply honored by John's support. He is a true leader who dedicated his career to improving the lives of ordinary Americans.

John ran a strong, principled campaign for president, focusing on a number of important issues where we share common ground -- universal health care, bringing our troops home from Iraq, and eliminating poverty in America.

The way he ran his campaign was also important. He ran in a way that reflected our shared conviction that we need to fundamentally change politics.

Like our campaign, John's campaign never accepted donations from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs.

Let's welcome John Edwards to the campaign with an outpouring of the kind of grassroots support that is bringing our political process back to the people.

Thank you for all that you're doing,

Barack


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## 2020hindsight (15 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Silly me!  Back in February I thought Dodd might be the VP...
> ________________________________________
> From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 15 May 2008 10:50 AM
> ...




Wow - spot on Doris 
Looking at the odds for a VP IF it's a democratic win .... (see jpeg)
http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html

Edwards has gone from 20-1 to 3-1 (new favourite VP ahead of Hillary).
You'd have to think that Hillary has been just a tad too negative in her campaigning - (even ads with Osama Bin Laden etc) to get the nod, despite the alleged "dream team".

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=291981&highlight=candidate#post291981


----------



## Doris (15 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*It is so nice to 'know' nice people.  What a team they'd make!*

Maybe Edwards could factor in including all adults in Obama's health plan?
... Edwards would attract white, working-class voters for him.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/05/15/edwards_rights_group_back_obama/?page=2

Edwards... still holds 19 pledged delegates who are not required to now back Obama, but many of them may do so. 



> Last night, Joshua Denton, a Democratic Party delegate from New Hampshire who had supported Edwards, said he will support Obama following Edwards's endorsement, the Associated Press reported.




What a nice, diplomatic guy Edwards is:



> Edwards made a point of praising Clinton last night before explaining his reasons for picking Obama. "We are a stronger party because Hillary Clinton is a Democrat, we are a stronger country because of her years of service, and we're going to have a stronger nominee in the fall because of her work," he said.




http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-campaign_15may15,0,3965798.story



> During his run for the presidency, Edwards had criticized Obama for not being tough enough to challenge the special interests in Washington and for proposing a health-care expansion plan that he said was not truly universal.
> 
> At the same time, Edwards had been critical of Clinton's acceptance of campaign donations from federal lobbyists—donations that Obama rejected in his presidential campaign.






> On CNN, Clinton said she agreed with one of her close friends and supporters, Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), who said that Clinton's use of the term "hard-working Americans, white Americans" to describe a key demographic that has been rallying to her side was the "dumbest thing" she could have said.




I read that if/when Clinton drops out she will no longer be able to raise funds to clear her $20+ million campaign debt... 
including the $11.5 million of her own loan to it.

Obama's camp is able to raise money to provide for her debt... precedents set.


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris - these might give you a smile to start the day .. 

 John Edwards endorses Barack Obama

 Obama Speech after John Edwards Endorsement


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

..since I copied that page from the gambling summary website, (back 3 posts) I notice they've (temporarily?) dropped reference to the probable Democratic VP candidate - although you can still bet on the Republican equivalent.    

You can only speculate that it might be getting too difficult to balance the book. (?) 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=293658&highlight=wow#post293658


----------



## noirua (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

An article headed "No surprise here", taken from the article however is "...-also believe Obama shares the views of his former, vociferous paster."
http://www.slate.com/id/2175496/


----------



## Doris (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris - these might give you a smile to start the day ..




I smiled inside too at Barack's speech!  Shades of JFK...

In December 2006, when I first saw him in Oprah in Canada, I thought OMG... this man should be president!  
... I *knew* he could do what he claimed he will do... at the end of your clip!

For you, 2020... you love 'the maths':

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/05/15/1024654.aspx


Edwards’ endorsement also did another thing: It undercuts Clinton’s Florida/Michigan argument. As we know by now, Obama will gain a majority of the pledged delegates after Tuesday’s contests in Kentucky and Oregon. But if you award Obama Edwards’ 18 pledged delegates -- who technically can vote for anyone at the convention, but whom you’d also expect to side with Obama -- then Obama, if he picks up about 50 delegates on Tuesday (less than half of the delegates up for grabs that night), he would obtain a majority of pledged delegates even if you include Florida and Michigan’s entire delegations. 

*Here’s the math*: *4,051* (the DNC convention voting total) minus *797* (superdelegates) equals *3,254* plus FL’s (185) and MI’s (128) delegates equals *3,567*. Divide that by two (and round up), and *here’s the number needed for a majority: 1,784. *

Obama currently has *1,599* pledged delegates. Add in those 18 Edwards delegates, add in our low estimate of 50 for him Tuesday and that gets you to *1,667*. 

Now, add in the Clinton best-case scenarios in MI/FL, giving her the delegates with the voting as is, Obama would then reach a majority of the pledged delegates OVERALL. Assume a 105-67 split in FL and a 73-55 split in MI. 
*That gives Obama a grand total of: 1,789.*

*The numbers*: Obama picked up 4.5 superdelegates delegates yesterday to one for Clinton.  

*PLEDGED*: Obama 1599 to 1447; 
*SUPERDELEGATES*: Obama 287.5 to 276.5; 
*TOTAL*: Obama 1,886.5 to 1,723.5. 

There are 233 superdelegates who remain undecided of the 797 total. 

Obama needs 139.5 to reach the magic number of 2,026; Clinton needs 302.5. 

Since last Tuesday, Obama has picked up 31 superdelegates to Clinton's 1.5.

Yes 2020... I'm smiling!


----------



## wayneL (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Times columnist Gerard Baker is overtly to the right of Genghis Khan... even though I'm centre-right, I'm usually infuriated by his neo-con rantings. He is mean spirited and covertly racist.

But he hits the mark with this article with his observations; something that is infecting this very thread:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article3941450.ece



> Barack Obama: the new Great Redeemer
> *First it was Kennedy... now the US media are prostrating themselves before the saviour*
> Gerard Baker
> 
> ...






> SNIP:
> 
> Mr Obama is portrayed throughout as an immanently benevolent figure. Not human really, more a comforting presence, a light source. He is always eager to listen to all aides of an argument, always instilling confidence in the weak-willed, resolutely sticking to his high principles and tirelessly spurning the low road of electoral politics. I stopped reading after a while but I'm sure by the end he was healing the sick, comforting the dying, restoring sight to the blind and setting prisoners free.






> SNIP:
> 
> *If the past 40 years have taught us anything they have surely taught that premature canonisation is an almost certain guarantee of subsequent deep disappointment.*


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Times columnist Gerard Baker is overtly to the right of Genghis Khan... even though I'm centre-right, ....



:topic
Just thought I'd twig this old thread....
must admit, I found it fascinating - 
I'm around where Nelson Mandela is, a bit left of the Dalia Lama    That was left of where I believed I was. 

Incidentally Wayne, you obviously came out left of where you think you are as well 

PS Bush and Mugabe are about equal on the Fascism scale
...
and the Pope is in the same quadrant as Mugabe - except he's half as bad 


https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=148164&highlight=political#post148164


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I am at the intersection of a right angled triangle whose hypotenues is a line between the Dalai Lama god bless his soul and the midget sarkozy. BTW the point is to the direct right of The DL , Right libertarian., not up in the Fascist zone. !!


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I am at the intersection of a right angled triangle whose hypotenues is a line between the Dalai Lama god bless his soul and the midget sarkozy. BTW the point is to the direct right of The DL , Right libertarian., not up in the Fascist zone. !!




lol
quite right 
 there are two right angled triangles that would match your first sentence - 
one at 10 o'clock (halfway between Mugabe and the Pope ) - and one at 4 o'clock 

PS damned lonely down there at 4 o'clock


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol
> quite right
> there are two right angled triangles that would match your first sentence -
> one at 10 o'clock (halfway between Mugabe and the Pope ) - and one at 4 o'clock
> ...




At least we can see each others point of view  lol  

gg


----------



## wayneL (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Incidentally Wayne, you obviously came out left of where you think you are as well



Interesting as that test is, I think its conclusions are flawed. On takingthe test again, many of the questions can be answered on a purely ideological, or purely pragmatic basis, with the answers diametrically opposed.

In the real world, listening to leftist politicians enrages me as much listening to the extreme right. In a very encaspulated nutshell I fundamentally believe in free enterprise with checks and balances to protect those without market power and reasonable protection of the environment... capitalism with a social payoff, rather than purely a profit motive.

Center-right seems to be the best fit for that.


----------



## Julia (16 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> (Wayne)I fundamentally believe in free enterprise with checks and balances to protect those without market power and reasonable protection of the environment... capitalism with a social payoff, rather than purely a profit motive.
> 
> Center-right seems to be the best fit for that.




Great description, Wayne.  Add a chunk of scepticism and I'll sign up for that.


----------



## Aussiejeff (17 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol
> quite right
> there are two right angled triangles that would match your first sentence -
> one at 10 o'clock (halfway between Mugabe and the Pope ) - and one at 4 o'clock
> ...




Damned HOT at 6 o'clock rock..... LOL


AJ


----------



## 2020hindsight (17 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Aussiejeff said:


> Damned HOT at 6 o'clock rock..... LOL AJ



:topic  

not so lonely if you can make it to daylight and tap dance your way home up George St you reckon  

definition of a bachelor ?
a bloke who comes to work from a different direction every morning


----------



## noirua (17 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Edwards’ endorsement also did another thing: It undercuts Clinton’s Florida/Michigan argument. As we know by now, Obama will gain a majority of the pledged delegates after Tuesday’s contests in Kentucky and Oregon. But if you award Obama Edwards’ 18 pledged delegates -- who technically can vote for anyone at the convention, but whom you’d also expect to side with Obama -- then Obama, if he picks up about 50 delegates on Tuesday (less than half of the delegates up for grabs that night), he would obtain a majority of pledged delegates even if you include Florida and Michigan’s entire delegations.
> 
> *Here’s the math*: *4,051* (the DNC convention voting total) minus *797* (superdelegates) equals *3,254* plus FL’s (185) and MI’s (128) delegates equals *3,567*. Divide that by two (and round up), and *here’s the number needed for a majority: 1,784. *
> 
> ...



Yes, it does look curtains for Hillary, but she must be hoping that history will smile on her as it did Sam Houston (twice President of Texas), even if she has no chance of having a Capital State being named after her. 
Hillary Clinton needs a massive win in Kentucky to throw doubts on a Barack Obama ability to beat McCain. I suppose we need to look at the face of husband bill when she makes her victory speech there. Then she has to do far better than anyone expects in Oregon.
Even if Hillary does outstandingly well she will have to wait and see if any super-delegates change allegiance to her and if any of the 50 delegates, Doris speculates that Obama will get from next Tuesday, decide to back her.
Some may be counting their or the chickens, before the're hatched.


----------



## wayneL (20 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama seems to have a problem with Jewish voters.

http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/05/will-the-jews-s.html


----------



## noirua (20 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

US General Election Polls for California, from USAelectionpolls.com:

Obama - 48.5%
McCain - 35.4%
Nader -- 5.10%
Paul --- 4.10%
UNDECIDED - 6.9%

Clinton - 50.6%
McCain - 36.7%
Nader -- 3.9%
Paul 5.3%
UNDECIDED - 18%


----------



## sydneysider (21 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> US General Election Polls for California, from USAelectionpolls.com:
> 
> Obama - 48.5%
> McCain - 35.4%
> ...




Obama got skunked again by Hillary in Kentucky tonite, she won by a margin of 35%. meanwhile Obama was giving a victory speech in Iowa. He is getting very tiring, as he has lost most of the recent primaries.


----------



## Doris (21 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well...  the beat goes on... yeah the beat goes on...

*Obama plans general election team*

9 hours ago 

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gX-nWtXeO51gDrCSShgEZErApEsAD90PO62O0



> Obama needs 2,026 delegates to clinch the nomination, and he moved within 100 of that goal after contests in Kentucky and Oregon Tuesday. Clinton was more than 250 delegates back.





http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaign21-2008may21,0,4376045.story



> The New York senator commended Obama and called for a cessation of hostilities after the nomination is settled. "While we continue to go toe-to-toe for this nation, we do see eye-to-eye when it comes to uniting our party when it comes to electing a Democratic president," Clinton said.
> 
> She defeated Obama 65% to 30% in Kentucky. Obama was leading 58% to 42% in Oregon, with about three-quarters of the returns counted.
> 
> ...




http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05/clintondebt.html

*Hillary Clinton's campaign debt soars to $31 million*



> McCain disclosed he had $21.7 million in the bank at the end of April, compared to....
> 
> ...Obama’s $46.5 million.




Guess some are putting their money where their mouths are!


----------



## Doris (23 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Adoring crowd in Tampa roars for Obama*

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/elections/article518636.ece

Barack Obama in his first Florida campaign rally since the Democratic presidential candidates boycotted the state during the primary season.

* 25 metal detectors at the entrance.



> As Obama made his way to the podium just before 1 p.m., the cheers reached rock-concert decibel levels.
> They stood and cheered wildly when he promised to unite the country. And they pumped their fists in the air and chanted "Yes we can" when Obama pledged to bring together all Americans — black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, gay and straight.




Obama focussed on McCain:



> "He has been spending the last week describing his foreign policy by describing who he won't talk to," Obama said. "That's your foreign policy?"
> 
> Obama said he would meet with both friends and enemies.
> 
> "We have to communicate with countries if we want to make a difference," he said. "That's what John Kennedy did. That's what Ronald Reagan did. That's what Barack Obama will do."




 Obama outlined key components of his own platform, including:



> • A $1,000 per family tax cut paid for by closing corporate tax loopholes.
> 
> • A $4,000 yearly college-tuition credit to every student in exchange for community service.
> 
> ...






> Investing in alternative energy will create new jobs, protect the environment and lessen the country's dependence on foreign oil, he said.
> 
> Obama also said he would put 2-million people to work by investing in improvements to roads, bridges and mass transit. How to pay for that?
> 
> "If we can spend $10-billion a month in Iraq we can spend $10-billion a month right here in the United States of America," he said.




Infrastructure has been ignored under GWB... such logical logic!

The blogs at the end of this article are inspiring. Not all positive but hey...



> by Donna   	 May 22, 2008 2:30 PM
> I'm a Trinidadian and I've been following the American Elections for some time. I believe that Obama as president can not only unify Ameria, but the world. I have been so excited about this I wish I could go out and vote for him. Obama 08. Yes We Can
> 
> by jaymzz 	May 22, 2008 1:50 PM
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (23 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Just bringing those odds up to date ....

Best odds:-
Barack Obama 8/11 = $1.73   (varies down to $1.55)
John McCain 19/10 = $2.90  (varies down to $2.25)
Hillary Clinton 12/1 = $13.00 (varies down to $9.00)

The Democratic VP candidate is anyone's guess.  
Hillary Clinton back to favourite at 4/1
John Edwards now 5/1 etc 
http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html


----------



## Doris (24 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*HILLARY RAISES ASSASSINATION ISSUE
DEFENDS LONG-RUNNING CAMPAIGN*

http://www.nypost.com/seven/0523200...ll_wont_drop_out__bobby_kennedy_wa_112232.htm

May 23, 2008 --

Hillary Clinton today brought up the assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy while defending her decision to stay in the race against Barack Obama.



> "My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it," she said, dismissing calls to drop out.






> Obama, the first African-American to advance so far in the race for the White House, has faced threats, sources have said.




http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/23/clinton_invokes_rfk_assassinat.html



> But in a campaign in which voters have voiced concerns about the safety of the first African American front-runner in history, it was a surprising choice of words by Clinton, whose best hope for seizing the nomination now would be a major setback for Obama. Clinton has already faced harsh criticism for allegedly exacerbating racial divisions in the nominating process.




Argus Leader executive editor Randell Beck issued a statement clarifying the context of Clinton's remarks to his editorial staff:



> "The context of the question and answer with Sen. Clinton was whether her continued candidacy jeopardized party unity this close to the Democratic convention," he said. "Her reference to Mr. Kennedy's assassination appeared to focus on the timeline of his primary candidacy and not the assassination itself."




Video clip of Hillary's context:

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/23/clinton_invokes_rfk_assassinat.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (24 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *HILLARY RAISES ASSASSINATION ISSUE
> DEFENDS LONG-RUNNING CAMPAIGN*
> ...
> Hillary Clinton today brought up the assassination of Sen. Robert Kennedy while defending her decision to stay in the race against Barack Obama.



yuck!!!   :bad:

She probably thinks there's some lunatic out there that will unveil her "innocent" veiled suggestion into reality.

PS We are talking about the fight to be Democratic candidate, right  -   
the electioneering for President is way out there in the future...

... Imagine if Turnbull speculated publicly that Nelson might be assassinated, (??) and therefore he wanted to remind everyone on a daily basis that he was available to fill the role


----------



## Doris (24 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Just bringing those odds up to date ....
> 
> Best odds:-
> The Democratic VP candidate is anyone's guess.
> ...





When asked about his criteria for choosing a vice president: 



> "My goal is to have the best possible government," Obama responded. "I am very practical-minded." He noted that one of his heroes, Abraham Lincoln, named political rivals to his Cabinet. "How can we get this country through this time of crisis? That has to be the approach that one takes."
> 
> He added: "By the way, *that does not exclude Republicans, either. The best person for the job is the person I would want*."




17 potential VP's are in the running.

Hillary has been winning the working class votes...
McCain dotes on Obama's lack of military experience...

Webb seems to provide for these deficiences:



> Sen. James Webb (Va.) is another potential prospect, a *decorated Marine* and *former Republican* with *strong working-class support* in his GOP-leaning state.




But then he has to appease the female-in-power issue:



> Some Obama insiders think he will consider a number of female candidates, including Kansas Gov. Kathleen *Sebelius*, Arizona Gov. Janet *Napolitano* and Sen. Claire *McCaskill* (Mo.). All three endorsed Obama early in his campaign.




http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/22/AR2008052204145.html?nav=hcmodule

BTW... Obama: 1969 (57 delegates to go)
........... Hillary: 1779 (247 to go)


----------



## 2020hindsight (24 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> McCain dotes on Obama's lack of military experience...
> 
> Webb seems to provide for these deficiences



yep that makes sense...
then again Hillary saw active service in Bosnia didn't she? - had to run for her life across the tarmac etc 

ahh hang on... she clarifies that she flew in on a plane that was designed to take off quickly ...
near enough I guess 

 Hillary Clinton .. About Her Bosnia Trip


----------



## ZzzzDad (25 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

McCain will win.  

Seems Doris has a crush, Michelle better watch out!!

America is not ready to put an inexperienced, far left man in the white house.  Has nothing to do with race, but extreme left policies that he would implement would completely bankrupt America.

Landslide ahead for McCain.  McGovern....oops Obama doesn't have a chance.

McCain will win all the current red states, plus Michigan, Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and New Hampshire.


----------



## Doris (25 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> McCain will win.
> 
> Seems Doris has a crush, Michelle better watch out!!
> 
> ...




There is sound reasoning for Obama attracting the college educated.  *They have learned to think! *

*The job is for a leader* of the people who vote.  
No-one can deny that GWB has been a puppet of the oil companies and lobbyists.

Obama's *vast experience in leadership efficacy*, as a community organizer, is reflected in his entire campaign. He has attracted a team of varied brilliance and experience in all facets of government tiers.  He has attracted people who share his values and ideals and they are the ones he represents and will be answerable to.  Sure he is liberal and this is a much-needed breath of fresh air in comparison to the stench of the GOP's erroneous administration.

Please explain (to use an Aussie 'Hansen' vernacular).  How would Obama's policies facilitate GWB's momentum towards bankruptcy? Infrastructure, in all states, has been neglected since Clinton left office and urgently needs the services of the unemployed who will stimulate the economy with their remunerations.

The US is presently mass importing small cars to offset the $4 a gallon for gas (double the cost when I was in the states early last year).  General Motors is thus losing customers despite working on fuel efficient and hybrid cars and needs government incentives which have been non-existent thanks to the greed of the oil companies GWB succumbs to. 

Schools have been dumbed-down for years.  Incentives for education are a panacea for developing any economy.  The man in the street is being awakened to what he wants and invigorated to have a go.  This attitude will permeate and rehabilitate the economy.


http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5i1RD9k-YXI0_Su-B9v80PUh0acug



> McCain is painting Obama as naive, weak and dangerous, arguing he is an opportunist whose poetic rhetoric masks inexperience and no record to back up his promise to drain US politics of partisan bile.




*Naive* to think that talking with people and listening to their qualms will gather information to repudiate their trepidations about their futures.  
...Kenya ...the grassroots identification and adulation that has projected him.

*Weak* as he listens to those who are knowledgeable in their own areas of expertise instead of disregarding their qualms or solutions and implementing the pay-backs of the lobbyists and special interest groups that, historically, have perpetually bought their puppet's office.

*Dangerous* because the bully wants supreme power and the victim to acquiesce to their demands. We will give you aid but you will give us this in return.  Obama wants win-win solutions. ...Kenya. How weak is that! 



> "For a young man with very little experience, he has done very well," McCain sarcastically told supporters in Florida last week.
> 
> Stressing Obama's inexperience is also a veiled way for McCain to defuse the age question -- turning 72 in January.




Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.  Nasty.

Obama has experience where it counts.  

*A leader coordinates and contributes judgment and does not need to be a master of all trades.  
*
*But they do need to  collaborate and conciliate and arbitrate with intelligence and fairness.
*

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7418941.stm



> A group of Cuban dissidents has backed a call by the US presidential hopeful, Barack Obama, for direct talks with the new Cuban President, Raul Castro.
> 
> The current confrontation (with the US) is used by the authorities in Havana to justify their repression.
> 
> In one recent swipe, McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds responded to Obama's idea for an easing of restrictions on contacts between Americans and Cubans as "weak" and "reckless" and reeking of "political expediency."




Incredible.


----------



## Doris (25 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Slowly slowly, softly softly, catchy catchy, monkey monkey  (PNG saying)

*Obama picks up 4 delegates*

2 hours ago



> ATLANTA (AP) ”” Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton each picked up a delegate in Georgia on Saturday as state Democrats selected their delegation to the party's national convention in Denver this summer.
> 
> Obama picked up another superdelegate later Saturday in Wyoming, then one more in Alaska. Obama also took a pledged delegate from Clinton at Alaska's Democratic party convention Saturday.
> 
> That brings Obama's overall delegates to *1,974 *”” only *52 shy* of the 2,026 needed to secure the presidential nomination ”” to Clinton's *1,779*.




http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hY742M_s1ttD_ycf2Zusn1o1fD3QD90SDTLO1


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> McCain dotes on Obama's lack of military experience...
> Webb seems to provide for these deficiences:




gee doris,
the punters must be reading your opinion here  - and the bookies trying to keep up. 
Webb suddenly jumped to second favourite for VP  

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html

btw, here's Olbermann on Hillary's speculation that she might pick up the Democratic nomination if she waits around - after all Robert Kennedy was assassinated etc 

insensitive, heartless,  "and certainly to invoke it 3 days after the awful diagnosis and heartbreaking prognosis for Senator Ted Kennedy. ... and both actions open a door wide into the soul of someone who seeks the highest office of this country, and through that door shows something not only troubling but frightening - and politically explicable...

"what Senator do you suppose would happen if you withdrew from the campaign, and then Sen Obama formally became the presumptive nominee, and then suddenly left the scene? ... it doesn't even have to be the dark curse upon the land you implied today senator, or even an issue of health, ...

"what would happen then senator,    you are not allowed back in to the race?? 
your delegates and your support vanish??
the Democrats don't run ANYOBODY for president??

"what happens of course....  if someone has to withdraw - you simply get another (nominee) etc "

Summary - he's pretty offended by her (repeated) references to Bobby Kennedy's assassination. 

  Coutdown: Special Comment May 23, 2008 Part 1

Keith's Special Comment on Hillary's assassination remark


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

oh boy - and this one, where he really calls a spade a spade 

(PS I agree with him)

 Coutdown: Special Comment May 23, 2008 Part 2

"anyone who's just sticking around in case the other guy might get shot has no business etc "


----------



## Doris (29 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Remarks of Senator Barack Obama*
Wesleyan University Commencement
Sunday, May 25th, 2008
Middletown, CT

As Prepared for Delivery:

http://wesleying.blogspot.com/2008/05/obamas-speech-as-prepared.html


Barack is a master of imagery/metaphors:



> I have the distinct honor today of pinch-hitting for one of my personal heroes and a hero to this country, Senator Edward Kennedy. Teddy wanted to be here very much, but as you know, he’s had a very long week and is taking some much-needed rest. He called me up a few days ago and I said that *I’d be happy to be his stand-in, even if there was no way I could fill his shoes*.




Humour to appease all factions:



> I did, however, get the chance to glance at the speech he planned on delivering today, and I’d like to start by passing along a message from him: “To all those praying for my return to good health, I offer my heartfelt thanks. *And to any who’d rather have a different result, I say, don’t get your hopes up just yet!*”




Barack's words are like brush strokes unifying life's reality onto canvas...



> At a time of war, we need you to work for peace. At a time of inequality, we need you to work for opportunity. At a time of so much cynicism and so much doubt, we need you to make us believe again.
> Now understand this - *believing that change is possible is not the same as being naÃ¯ve*. Go into service with your eyes wide open, for change will not come easily.




Inspiring and motivating unified action...



> ... you are about to enter a world that makes it easy to get caught up in the notion that there are actually *two different stories at work in our lives*. The first is the story of our everyday cares and concerns – the responsibilities we have to our jobs and our families – the bustle and busyness of what happens in *our own life*. And the second is the story of what happens in the life of our country – of what happens in *the wider world*. It’s the story you see when you catch a glimpse of the day’s headlines or turn on the news at night – a story of big challenges like war and recession; hunger and climate change; injustice and inequality. It’s a story that *can sometimes seem distant and separate from our own* – a destiny to be shaped by forces beyond our control.
> And yet, the history of this nation tells us this isn’t so. It tells us that *we are a people whose destiny has never been written for us, but by us *–




Wisdom for these students graduating:



> I realize that none of you can probably relate to this, but there were many times when I wasn’t sure where I was going, or what I would do.
> 
> But during my first two years of college, perhaps because the values my mother had taught me –hard work, honesty, empathy – had resurfaced after a long hibernation; or perhaps because of the example of wonderful teachers and lasting friends, I began to notice a world beyond myself.






> Each of you will have the chance to make your own discovery in the years to come. And I say “chance” because you won’t have to take it. ...You can take your diploma, walk off this stage, and chase only after the big house and the nice suits and all the other things that our money culture says you should buy.
> 
> But I hope you don’t... Because thinking only about yourself, fulfilling your immediate wants and needs, *betrays a poverty of ambition*. Because it’s only when you hitch your wagon to something larger than yourself that you realize your true potential...
> I ask you to seek these opportunities when you leave here, because the future of this country – your future – depends on it.
> ...




And homage paid:



> It is rare in this country of ours that a person exists who has touched the lives of nearly every single American without many of us even realizing it. And yet, because of Ted Kennedy, millions of children can see a doctor when they get sick. Mothers and fathers can leave work to spend time with their newborns. Working Americans are paid higher wages, and compensated for overtime, and can keep their health insurance when they change jobs. They are protected from discrimination in the workplace, and those who are born with disabilities can still get an education, and health care, and fair treatment on the job. Our schools are stronger and our colleges are filled with more Americans who can afford it. And I have a feeling that Ted Kennedy is not done just yet.




Worth a read...


----------



## wayneL (30 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This exercise in futility has Obama as a shoe-in; but Europe doesn't count in US elections does it?

Obama disciples will enjoy however.


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html

thanks wayne,
Can't help Obama's campaign though.  Nor the chances of some international cooperation in 2009 (you'd think).

meanwhile USA odds are pretty much unchanged  - not quite as bad for McCain back home ...
Obama 4/6 = $1.66      (57% approx )
McCain 13/8 = $2.62    (36%)
Clinton 12/1 = $13.00   (7%)


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

 Rupert Murdoch on Obama



> Conservative media mogul and Fox News Corp founder Rupert Murdoch talking about Obama, McCain and the elections




PS You'd have to assume that this next one is pretty accurate on Murdoch and his tactics  Murdoch's Fox News has OReilly for instance.  

  Hell Has Frozen Over - Rupert Murdoch Supports Obama


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Michigan should be sorted this weekend...

http://www.mlive.com/elections/index.ssf/2008/05/obama_clinton_dispute_over_mic.html



> Obama, Clinton dispute over Michigan's delegates could be settled Saturday.
> ........
> Proposals for a second Michigan contest -- a caucus or state-run primary -- felt apart when officials for the two campaign could not agree on a format.
> 
> ...




If the 40% who voted for 'uncommitted' could be bothered voting - that would appear to be a protest vote of some sort, yes?



> Clinton has been pushing to count the results, which would give her an 18-delegate edge, 73 to 55, if all the uncommitted delegates were awarded to Obama.
> 
> Obama has proposed splitting the delegation 50-50, while the state party has proposed a compromise between the two, giving 69 to Clinton and 59 to Obama.






> Tuesday's contests in Montana and South Dakota end what has been one of closest presidential contests in Democratic history.




re previous post but one...


2020hindsight said:


> Can't help Obama's campaign though....ant to say
> "can't hurt... ":2twocents
> doh.


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 May 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Which only leaves good old Florida .. 

http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN2426696820080525



> Obama says Clinton "stirring up" Florida controversy
> 
> CHICAGO, May 24 (Reuters) - Democrat Barack Obama accused rival Hillary Clinton on Saturday of "stirring up" a controversy over the disqualified Florida primary election because it was her last hope of winning their party's presidential nomination.
> ...........
> ...




Obama has had to be / will have to be super careful not to offend any of the Clintophiles.  

As for the VP question ...


> He said on Saturday he would need to "pivot quickly" in June, if he obtains the number of delegates to secure the nomination, to engage in a search for a vice presidential running mate.
> 
> "I think we'll have ample time, should I be the nominee, to engage in that process."


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/u...em&ex=1212379200&en=393fad3614090350&ei=5087




> Democrats Approve Deal on Michigan and Florida
> 
> WASHINGTON — *To jeers and boos that showcased deep party divisions, Democratic party officials approved a deal Saturday to seat delegates from the disputed Florida and Michigan primaries with half a vote each, dealing a blow to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton*.
> 
> ...






> *Hundreds of demonstrators chanted outside, until torrential rains drove them away*. But all eyes were on 28 members of the party’s rules committee, who sat under the lights at a U-shaped conference table, driven by *candidate loyalties that pitted them against erstwhile allies even as they tried to reach for compromise.*




o boy - they 've got a long way to go before this little tiff is healed - good luck Barack  - you'll need it


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

just a song ok?
 Why Can't We Be Friends?



> Unadulterated, slapstick, silly political humor set to the music of War


----------



## Doris (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> just a song ok?
> Why Can't We Be Friends?




Lovitt!

Taped in October last year:

 Some cool moves!




Woman: No!
Barack: Yes
Woman: No!
Barack: Yes
Woman: Oh my God!
Barack: Yes

Love his quip about 'public housing'!


----------



## Doris (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/u...em&ex=1212379200&en=393fad3614090350&ei=5087
> 
> 
> To jeers and boos that showcased deep party divisions, Democratic party officials approved a deal Saturday to seat delegates from the disputed Florida and Michigan primaries with half a vote each, dealing a blow to Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.
> ...




Not happy!
The only resolution is... yes, let them have a punitive half vote... but a new ballot is essential for fairness!
What about those who did *not* turn out because it had been decided by the DNC that they would not count?  
... those who 'did the right thing' and accepted the ruling and did not vote?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a4VPMVZ0uRYE&refer=home

Obama's diplomacy comes to the fore again:



> The party's rules and bylaws committee voted 27-0 to seat Florida's delegation and give *Clinton 52.5 *delegates; *Obama would get 33.5*. The panel voted 19-8 to similarly seat the Michigan delegation, giving *Clinton 34.5* delegate votes and *Obama 29.5*.
> 
> Obama, 46, applauded today's solution.
> 
> ...




*2,118 delegates are now needed* to secure the nomination.

Before today: Obama 1,984.5 ...   Clinton 1,784.5  ...   (Obama needed 41.5)

Today-  
*Obama:* 2047.5... additional 33.5 votes in Florida and 29.5 in Michigan.
*Clinton:* 1,871.5 ... 52.5 in Florida and 34.5 in Michigan.

Half-votes for superdelegates add 7.5 to Clinton's total and 3 to Obama's, bringing Obama within *67.5* delegates of securing the nomination. 

Only 86 pledged delegates remain to be awarded:
55 in tomorrow's Puerto Rico primary and 
31 total in the June 3 Montana and South Dakota primaries. 



> Clinton is favored to win Puerto Rico, where a poll by the newspaper El Vocero and Univision conducted May 8-20 showed Clinton leading 51 percent to Obama's 38 percent. Obama is favored in South Dakota and Montana, with polls showing him leading by more than 10 points in each state.
> 
> Given the Democrats' system of allocating delegates proportionately, Obama *may be within 30 delegates of securing the nomination after the three primaries*, with the possibility that some of the more than *180 remaining uncommitted superdelegates* may back him in the next week.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Not happy!
> The only resolution is... yes, let them have a punitive half vote... but a new ballot is essential for fairness.



weird
lot of people not happy by the sound of it.
Before the meeting this was discussed...( just talking about Michigan...)



> 1. Clinton has been pushing to count the results, which would give her an 18-delegate edge, 73 to 55, if all the uncommitted delegates were awarded to Obama.
> 
> 2. Obama proposed splitting the delegation 64-64,
> 
> 3. while the state party proposed a compromise between the two, giving 69 to Clinton and 59 to Obama.




As I understand it ( just talking about Michigan...

option 1.  (Clinton) 
 HC 73 : BO 55,  Hillary gets 18 delegate advantage

Option 2. (Obama) 
 HC 64 : BO 64,  all square

Option 3. state party compromise 
 HC 69 : BO 59,  Hillary gets 10 point advantage

So they end up with option 4 which treats the ompromise delegates as if they were half-votes .  
option 4.  HC 34.5	 : BO   29.5,  Hillary gets 5 point advantage. 

of course people who voted for Hillary are gonna be pissed off that their votes have been "re'allocated".
Though likewise I see your point that the ones that were told by the party not to vote would also be pissed off.  What a screw up lol.  

Summary - a) please don't try to convince me that the US presidential voting system is superior to ours,  and
b) if we can't come up with a better way to elect a president (in duke horse), I'll be a monkey's great-great nephew.   

PS I agree with you - the only fair thing is a new ballot surely.


----------



## Doris (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama Quits His Church After Months of Criticism*

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/01/u...em&ex=1212465600&en=77fc38fafcb7eaa6&ei=5087


Published: June 1, 2008

Barack is diplomatic as he asserts he is doing the parishioners a favour...



> Senator Barack Obama has resigned his membership in Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ, which he attended for nearly two decades, following months of controversy about pastors and their political views.
> 
> Mr. Obama said he and his wife, Michelle, wrote a letter on Friday to the church’s pastor, the Rev. Otis Moss, explaining that their estrangement from Trinity took root in controversial remarks by the church’s former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., who once was Mr. Obama’s spiritual guide.
> 
> ...




2020... there was a cartoon depicting the following on your clip on #555



> The storm flared anew last Sunday when the Rev. Michael Pfleger, a Catholic priest, gave a guest sermon mocking Mr. Obama’s rival for the Democratic nomination, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, for crying in New Hampshire. The priest, known as a radical gadfly, accused Mrs. Clinton of feeling she was entitled to the nomination because she is white.
> 
> “While Hillary was crying and people said that was a put-on, I really don’t believe it was put on,” said Father Pfleger, who is white. “I really believe that she just always thought this is mine. I’m Bill’s wife, I’m white and this is mine.”
> 
> ...




No doubt when they live in 'public housing' in Washington DC.

They say the only constant is change.

... 'Change you can believe in'     (sic)


----------



## Doris (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> weird
> lot of people not happy by the sound of it.
> 
> Summary -
> ...




It's interesting to watch the net population of the US increase by one every *10 seconds* as people are born/die/immigrate:

http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.html


... ditto for the world:  6,671+ million  ...though no immigration we know of!  

http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html


The clock ticks slower for Australia:

http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/abs@.nsf/0/1647509ef7e25faaca2568a900154b63?OpenDocument


*The US has 304 million* people (plus the illegals...)

*Australia has 21.3 million* ... one more (net) every 1 min 37 sec.

So we are not likely to have the problem the US does, in *assuring the voters know the nominees* they may vote for. 

Their method did not work in 2000 or 2004 because no-one cared to care so they didn't know what they'd get.  
Now they care!

2020...
You have to admit though, if they had our Westminster system, Hillary would be the nominee!  

Who knew Barack when this started?  
So their system works for them!

Our media scrutiny suffices in our little country!
...and we have to vote.


btw... I chatted with James Valentine (ABC Sydney) at a dinner a few weeks ago (Gold Coast) and he assured me that he would inform his colleagues that Barack's name rhymed with 'ark' so they would pronounce it correctly!  
... he had pronounced 'Barack' to rhyme with 'tack'.

He said China should be changed too as they don't call themselves 'China'...


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> 2020...
> You have to admit though, if they had our Westminster system, Hillary would be the nominee!
> 
> Who knew Barack when this started?
> So their system works for them!



doris - 
good point I guess
except when states vote earlier than they are allowed to 

btw, the news says superdelegates are expected to flock to Barack (or Barark if you prefer )  after Tuesday...

so - why not be generous about the Michigan and Florida fiascoes (fiasci?) - appease the Clintophiles !!

They really shouldn't be mean spirited about this (imho)


----------



## Doris (2 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Yesterday:



Doris said:


> Not happy!
> The only resolution is... yes, let them have a punitive half vote... but a new ballot is essential for fairness!
> What about those who did *not* turn out because it had been decided by the DNC that they would not count?
> ... those who 'did the right thing' and accepted the ruling and did not vote?
> ...




Today:

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

Revised total needed *2,118*  (previously 2026) 

Puerto Rico: Obama - 17  ...  Hillary - 38 

*Obama*: 
pledged: 1741
Superdel: 329
*Total:  2070*  ( *48* to go )

*Hillary*:
Pledged:  1624
Superdel: 291
*Total:  1915*  ( *203* to go )


The Obama camp expected the Puerto Rican outcome as Hillary draws the Hispanic vote.  

But they don't get to vote in November... so the superdelegates should not be swayed by this outcome!

Phew!  
*Barack needs 48* to cross the line and *31 pledges* are left in the primaries.

*169 superdelegates are left* to choose sides.  
(The others can still change their minds up until Denver in August!)

Even if Hillary secured all the remaining pledges she would still come up 3 short.

Will it be finally over in two days?!


----------



## tigerboi (2 June 2008)

*Re: Barack longshot to win the white house..*

Obama has got no chance of beating mc cain,hilary clinton is the democrats only chance & a slim one at that,remember this fact..its a 50/50 split that will ruin any chance either had of winning...clinton voters will back mc cain so its all over red rover...tb

my odds...president...

mccain....$1.50...4/6

clinton.....$2.60...13/8

obama.....$3.00...2/1


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 June 2008)

*Re: Barack longshot to win the white house..*



tigerboi said:


> Obama has got no chance of beating mc cain,hilary clinton is the democrats only chance & a slim one at that,remember this fact..its a 50/50 split that will ruin any chance either had of winning...clinton voters will back mc cain so its all over red rover...tb
> 
> my odds...president...
> 
> ...




tb, 4/6 is strictly $(1+4/6)  = $1.67

But let's use your TAB -like odds...

those odds m8 ... 
 To win $1, you have to invest

mccain....$1.50... invest 1/1.50 = 67c
clinton.....$2.60...invest 1/2.60 = 38c
obama.....$3.00...invest 1/3.00 = 33c

i.e. invest $1.38 to win  $1.00
m8, that isn't "margin" , that's extortion!


----------



## wayneL (2 June 2008)

*Re: Barack longshot to win the white house..*



tigerboi said:


> clinton voters will back mc cain



I very much doubt that.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 June 2008)

*Re: Barack longshot to win the white house..*



tigerboi said:


> Obama has got no chance of beating mc cain,hilary clinton is the democrats only chance & a slim one at that,remember this fact..its a 50/50 split that will ruin any chance either had of winning...clinton voters will back mc cain so its all over red rover...tb
> 
> my odds...president...
> mccain....$1.67...
> ...



Very generous odds for Obama

The other way to look at it I guess...
bet on all three  - take your odds for Obama
but take the internet rates for McCain and Clinton...

Internet rates 
mccain....$2.62...
clinton.....$13.00...
obama.....$1.67

Final choice..
mccain....$2.62  (invest $38 to win $100)  (with internet)
clinton.....$13.00   (invest $8 to win $100)  (with internet)
*obama.....$3.00  *(invest $33 to win $100) (with you)

i.e. Invest (38+8+33 =) $79 - 
and whoever wins, get $100 back. 
I'm tempted to say "you're on" 


PS Incidentally, I notice you can get 18 to 1 on Hillary at the moment


----------



## Doris (2 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> Obama has got no chance of beating mc cain,hilary clinton is the democrats only chance & a slim one at that,remember this fact..its a 50/50 split that will ruin any chance either had of winning...clinton voters will back mc cain so its all over red rover...tb




Tigerboi...  

It's one thing for hysterical women to say they will vote for McCain if they can't have Hillary and another entirely to vote for the opposition!  

What values they (don't) have!

Hillary must be praying hard for something bad to change the minds of the superdelegates!  
If she capitulates before 'the end' and out comes bad Obama news, she'll regret it.

Never regret what you do... just what you don't do...

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121236384098736405.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


----------



## Doris (2 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> btw, the news says superdelegates are expected to flock to Barack (or Barark if you prefer )  after Tuesday...
> 
> so - why not be generous about the Michigan and Florida fiascoes (fiasci?) - appease the Clintophiles !!
> 
> They really shouldn't be mean spirited about this (imho)




Wow you have insight/insider knowledge 2020!

Your reflection was exactly what Obama planned!


http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/...hance-at-more-delegates-looks-to-heal-wounds/

*Obama Forgoes Chance at More Delegates, Looks to Heal Wounds*



> Democratic party rules-committee members said *Barack Obama turned down two chances to increase his share* of the disputed Florida and Michigan delegates. He instead instructed his supporters on the committee to agree to seating plans for the two states that allowed Hillary Clinton to narrow his lead by perhaps 19 votes, they said.
> 
> Committee members said *there were enough votes to pass a motion splitting the delegation in half* ”” giving each candidate 64 delegates and 32 votes. But they said *the Obama campaign*, which has long argued for the even split, *urged his supporters to drop that plan and vote instead for one that slightly benefited Clinton*.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Wow you have .. insider knowledge 2020 (?)



doris 
think I read it somewhere - like reading about shares, then buying XYZ, but forgetting why 

probably in a negotiation book called .. err, something about "Getting to Yes" 
- or was that "Getting to 'Yes We Can' "


----------



## Doris (4 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Revised total needed *2,118*  (previously 2026)
> 
> *Obama*:
> pledged: 1741
> ...




FINALLY!
Over 100 superdelegates to yet side officially...
Hillary takes SD with 8; Montana results not in...

*2118 needed*:

*Obama*: 
pledged: 1753
Superdel: 366
*Total:  2119* 

*Hillary*:
Pledged:  1632
Superdel: 289 (2 have opted to swap to Obama)
*Total:  1921* 

http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/

Now finally, for a victory speech!
Will Hillary let go?


----------



## Doris (4 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> doris
> think I read it somewhere - like reading about shares, then buying XYZ, but forgetting why
> 
> probably in a negotiation book called .. err, something about "Getting to Yes"
> - or was that "Getting to 'Yes We Can' "




Isn't 'gut instinct' a wonderful thing?!

Especially when the cognitive reasoning also agrees!

Lovitt!


----------



## Doris (4 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What a wonderful day!
ALL my stocks are UP av 8+% except SDL... steady...

Note:  'We' have won...

... not 'I'.  Typical.  


________________________________________
From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 4 June 2008 1:16 PM
To: Doris *******
Subject: It's our time

Doris --

I'm about to take the stage in St. Paul and announce that *we have won the Democratic nomination for President of the United States.* 

It's been a long journey, and we should all pause to thank Hillary Clinton, who made history in this campaign. Our party and our country are better off because of her.

I want to make sure you understand what's ahead of us. Earlier tonight, John McCain outlined a vision of America that's very different from ours -- a vision that continues the disastrous policies of George W. Bush.

But this is our moment. This is our time. Our time to turn the page on the policies of the past and bring new energy and new ideas to the challenges we face. Our time to offer a new direction for the country we love.

It's going to take hard work, but thanks to you and millions of other donors and volunteers, no one has ever been more prepared for such a challenge.

Thank you for everything you've done to get us here. Let's keep making history.

Barack


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## wayneL (4 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

OK it's all over bar the shouting. Kaloo kalay! Oh hip hip hooray! Frankincense and Myrrh this instant!

Can I have some news relevant to my country now?


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

.......


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama has a 5 month job ahead of him 
 fighting off the attempts of the Republicans to sabotage his popularity.

I notice McCain immediately on the attack .. viz...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x98354



> McCain welcomes Obama with fresh criticism
> By LIBBY QUAID – 7 hours ago
> 
> NEW ORLEANS (AP) ”” Republican John McCain welcomed Democrat Barack Obama to the fall campaign for the White House on Tuesday with a blistering attack on his judgment and a charge that he "voted to deny funds to the soldiers who have done a brilliant and brave job" in Iraq.
> ...


----------



## sam76 (4 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack Obama: Can he win? 



Stick a fork in Hillary Clinton. She’s done. At the time of writing Barack Obama is just a few delegates away from securing the leadership of the Democratic party and becoming the first black candidate for the US presidency. 

So what next? Well, barring an act of a God with a twisted sense of political humour, Americans will choose beteween Barack Obama and John McCain in November. There’s a long campaign ahead and some of the key issues are summarised below as starting points for - have a look at each, and discuss below, adding any other issues you think will really matter. 

Age v experience 
A key theme will be Obama’s youth and relative inexperience next to the 71-year-old war hero and veteran Senator McCain. 

Turnout 
Americans are not compelled to vote. Obama will turn out a different vote than the traditional blue-collar white workers that traditionally carry states like Ohio and Pennsylvania for the Democrats (if they win there). He will also be counting heavily on a youth vote, although youngsters are known for being keen to take part in campaigns in rallies and then suddenly disappear or forget to vote on election day. As always, getting out the right vote will be crucial for both sides, but Obama changes the game by attracting new types of voters. 

Race 
Yes, it will be an issue. McCain is strong with Hispanics and will have the support of Arnold Schwarzenegger, potentially putting California - almost always a gimme for the Democrats - in play. But other states will follow. Then there’s the southern states with large black populations such as Georgia, where the Democrats will have a renewed strengths. And we are almost guaranteed racial slurs from players in the margins over the coming months which could dramatically alter the course of the campaign - if one side is seen to be playing the race card strongly, it could drastically affect voting patterns. 

Iraq 
The war is costing US$12 billion a month. Over 4000 US troops have been killed. Americans are tired of the war. Obama has a quick exit strategy; McCain leans towards staying and securing Iraq’s future. This will be a core issue - who will have the strongest, clearest, most reassuring message on America’s role in Iraq? 

The economy 
America is struggling. Houses are being repossessed. People are losing their jobs. Obama has not been strong on the economy (in fact his policies are unclear in many areas); but then voters are angry at the Republican administration for presiding over the current malaise - this in itself might be enough to force a change at the White House. 

http://blogs.news.com.au/news/news/..._the_nomination_what_happens_next_can_he_win/


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I notice the odds for McCain going out slightly. while Obama has firmed slightly. 
McCain has a pretty big job ahead of him to catch up. 
http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html

Obama 4/7 = $1.57  (=64%)   (prev $1.67)
McCain 1.75/1 = 7/4 = $2.75  (=36%)    (prev $2.62)

sheesh, Hillary firmed bigtime for VP . (odds for democratic VP candidate I mean)
http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html

Hilary 3/1
Jim Webb 6/1
John Edwards 6/1


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS 
A. Just looking at those odds, if one horse is scratched, odds should go out.  Hence you'd have to assume that Obama's odds coming in means that he has picked up Hillary's backers.   

B. And also , given that Hillary has firmed in the VP stakes, you'd have to think that the smart money (or at least the big money lol  )  is assuming that she will be the running mate,  will be "on the ticket" as they say  

C Maybe A follows from B ? 

If I was a punter, I'd guess Obama will pick someone else, and to hell with the odds - leastways i hope so


----------



## wayneL (5 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

yep - 
those cartoonists can say it all in one word. 

This cartoon is a couple of days old now ...  (but first the original Monty Python  )

  Black Knight Monty Python


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

a poem on the subject of Hillary's gradual starting to think about maybe giving a provisional concession - "but first I have to really rally the troops and gee up my supporters to fight to the bitter, bitter - (like,  sulphuric acid bitter) - end."  
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=301091&highlight=murder#post301091

http://donlmartin.newsvine.com/_news/2008/06/04/1538081-obama-pass-over-hillary-clinton-for-vp



> I believe if Obama chooses Hillary Clinton as his V.P. He will get the majority of her "Eighteen Million Voters" that she is demanding be "Respected" I don't believe Obama has disrespected anyone democrat or republican. *Hillary Clinton is telling Barack Obama: "Give me the V.P. job or you will be disrespecting my Eighteen Million Voters" *
> 
> What good is it to gain Eighteen Million Hillary Voters and lose Eighteen Million of his own? Many if not all of Obama supporters are radically anti-Hillary. They never want to see another Bush-Clinton near the White House.  etc




Conclusion :
"Obama, Pass Over Hillary Clinton For V.P.!" 
:iagree:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/05/2266568.htm?section=world



> Hillary Clinton says she will bow out of her marathon campaign for the White House on Saturday, and throw her full support behind Democratic rival Barack Obama.
> ....
> The New York Senator had so far refused to concede defeat, saying she would deliberate in the coming days.  "I will be speaking on Saturday about how together we can rally the party behind Senator Obama. The stakes are too high and the task before us too important to do otherwise," the letter said.
> .....
> ...


----------



## wayneL (7 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama groupies will like this:

Bob Dylan likes Obama: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4076339.ece


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Obama groupies will like this:
> 
> Bob Dylan likes Obama: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4076339.ece




I was gonna say... Dylan speaks for the youth again.
Then I realised he's just turned 67 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dylan

"uummm  come grandmothers and grandfathers throughout the land......
errr - I forget the rest of the words - la da da da" 

poem posted here :-
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=301753&highlight=dylan#post301753



> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7441708.stm
> Dylan 'hopeful' over Barack Obama
> 
> Democratic White House contender Barack *Obama is "redefining what a politician is", musician Bob Dylan has said*.
> ...




That quote above... that he is "redefining politics from the ground up" ...
I liked a quote on the radio this morning ... that his leadership is all about top-down idealism.   Hopefully he achieves (even) half of what he wants to.


----------



## wayneL (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Re things changing:

Consider this scenario, which is very possible considering the latest sabre rattling:

* Obama is elected El Presidente

* Israel Attacks Iran

* Iran retaliates

Where does the US stand, under an Obama administration?

How much will change?


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Re things changing:
> Consider this scenario, which is very possible considering the latest sabre rattling:
> * Obama is elected El Presidente
> * Israel Attacks Iran
> ...




gee but jim webb for VP would make sense yes? - but he's reluctant apparently 

I mean this bloke is a serious hero (from the Vietnam days) - two Purple Hearts etc...

 Countdown: Jim Webb Interview May 21, 2008

 "Hero" - Jim Webb For Obama's Vice President

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Webb


> Webb received the Navy Cross for actions on July 10, 1969. The citation read:
> 
> “ The Navy Cross is presented to James H. Webb, Jr., First Lieutenant, U.S. Marine Corps, for extraordinary heroism while serving as a Platoon Commander with Company D, First Battalion, Fifth Marines, First Marine Division (Reinforced), Fleet Marine Force, in connection with combat operations against the enemy in the Republic of Vietnam.
> 
> ...


----------



## wayneL (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> gee but jim webb for VP would make sense yes? - but he's reluctant apparently
> 
> I mean this bloke is a serious hero (from the Vietnam days) - two Purple Hearts etc...
> 
> ...



What has that got to do with the question?


----------



## So_Cynical (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



So_Cynical said:


> Hillary FTW
> 
> Barack has a snowball in hells chance of winning.




Oh well...he still has to actually make it to election day, the red necks of
middle America will be queuing up to take shots at him.


----------



## Julia (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> What has that got to do with the question?



Gee Whiz, Wayne.   Don't have unrealistic expectations!


----------



## Julia (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Re things changing:
> 
> Consider this scenario, which is very possible considering the latest sabre rattling:
> 
> ...



Good question.  This would be when we might see what is or is not behind all the fancy rhetoric.  What do you think would happen, Wayne?


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



So_Cynical said:


> Oh well...he still has to actually make it to election day, the red necks of
> middle America will be queuing up to take shots at him.



:bad:  I would call that a sick post, so cyn



			
				wayneL said:
			
		

> What has that got to do with the question?



depending on what hypothetical question you want to put forward, but I'd trust Webb's opinion before McCain's any day


----------



## wayneL (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Good question.  This would be when we might see what is or is not behind all the fancy rhetoric.  What do you think would happen, Wayne?



I think there is much more to the Israel/US relationship than meets the eye.

I think (and this is based on Obama's first speech on foreign affairs) that all the fancy rhetoric will be quickly forgotten, and we will again find that nothing really changes at all.


----------



## prawn_86 (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> I think (and this is based on Obama's first speech on foreign affairs) that all the fancy rhetoric will be quickly forgotten, and we will again find that nothing really changes at all.




Call me cynical (i like to think as it as realism  ) but i think your right Wayne.

There are greater powers at work than actual politicians. Realistically the president is just a puppet for others...


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

If anyone is interested in learning more about Jim Webb ..... in this youtube he responds to some personal attacks, and summarises some of his novels - eg on the Vietnam war,   eg A Sense of Honour et al - typical critiques:-



> Houston Post: "few writers have portrayed men at war with such a steely truth" etc etc
> 
> Time Magazine: "the unmistakable sound of truth"...
> 
> ...



 Jim Webb Responds Vigorously to False Personal Attacks

He also wants out of Iraq incidentally....

And he is very critical of the current (over) commitments of the US military....
let alone taking on more..


----------



## Doris (12 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Luck is 'when preparation meets opportunity'.

The preparation for the opportunity in November is a major effort... again using grass roots.  

Every great school I've worked in has been led by a principal who has encouraged staff and students to take ownership... then they worked hard to promote and achieve common goals.   Dictatorial 'leaders' have always created division and provoked transfers to 'a better place'.

People take ownership of their little effort, as part of a team and enrich their self-esteem and social life in the process.

This is a logistically awesome yet simple preparation:  (the 'bolding' is my effort)


_______________________________________
From: Jon Carson, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 12 June 2008 12:03 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Are you up to the challenge?


Dear Doris,

This has been a 50-state campaign from the very beginning. *A year ago this week, our grassroots supporters organized a nationwide canvass in more than 1,000 cities to introduce people to Barack Obama. *

Since then, we've had an unprecedented primary season that built a grassroots infrastructure in all 50 states -- not just for Barack, but for all of the Democratic candidates. 

Now it's time to bring all of that energy together for our common cause of change. 

All across the country, Democrats, Independents, and even Republicans are tired of the politics of the past and are looking for new solutions to the challenges we're facing. 

That's why we're launching a nationwide day of action on Saturday, June 28th called "Unite for Change" -- and asking you to host a Unite for Change meeting in your neighborhood. 

In all 50 states, *supporters like you -- seasoned veterans and first-time volunteers alike *-- will host house meetings to reach out and bring together folks who supported all of the Democratic candidates (and those who are just tuning into the process now). 

The goal is to come together and use the common values we share to build a united volunteer organization in your neighborhood that will register new voters and build support locally. 

It's going to be an amazing time, and *hosting your own event is easy*. We'll provide all the tools and resources you'll need. Here are the details: 

Unite for Change Meetings
Saturday, June 28th
Host one in your community

Learn more and sign up to host a Unite for Change meeting:

http://my.barackobama.com/unite

We're heading into a battle against John McCain, and the stakes are higher than ever before.

*But the path to victory is as simple as talking to your friends and neighbors*.

*From the beginning, this campaign has been about ordinary people reaching out and building the bonds of community -- empowering one another by coming together to make change.*

With the general election approaching, it's more important than ever to keep this momentum going. And there's no better way to make this happen in your community than hosting a Unite for Change event.

You'll gather -- not just with Obama supporters, but with anyone who's tired of the politics of the past and ready for something new -- to share your stories and lay the plans for how to build this movement locally in the weeks and months ahead.

It requires some responsibility, but don't worry -- our team will be here with all the support and resources *you need to make your* Unite for Change event a big success.

Yesterday, our deputy campaign manager, Steve Hildebrand, announced that this will be the first campaign in a generation to put staff in all 50 states.

It says a lot about our movement -- and about the enthusiasm and resources *people like you* have supplied -- that this is possible.

But being in every state will not be enough.

In order to succeed in every community in America, it's going to be *up to you to take the lead*. Everyone who hopes for real change after November is *counting on you.*

Thank you,

Jon

Jon Carson
National Voter Contact Director
Obama for America



Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## wayneL (12 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Luck is 'when preparation meets.... etc etc etc etc etc etc etc




Ho Hum.

:sleeping: until November.

UK politics is much more interesting atm


----------



## trinity (12 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> There are greater powers at work than actual politicians. Realistically the president is just a puppet for others...




So, who is really the one pulling the strings of the puppet?


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> That's why we're launching a nationwide day of action on Saturday, June 28th called "Unite for Change" -- and asking you to host a Unite for Change meeting in your neighborhood. ..




a) so there's a prawn and beer night at your place on June 28th  Doris?
and Bara(r)ck picks up the tab?
sounds ok by me 

b) like that old quote .. "Dyslexics of the world, Untie !!"


----------



## Doris (14 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Call me cynical (i like to think as it as realism  ) but i think you're right Wayne.
> 
> There are greater powers at work than actual politicians. Realistically the president is just a puppet for others...




Prawn you are talking in the present tense and I cannot agree more!

But change where the president is a puppet of the people, not lobbyists and special interests, is on the way:


*Obama sends out army of volunteers*

Barack Obama is to send thousands of campaign volunteers across the US this weekend as part of an urgent effort to create one of the most sophisticated political operations ever to contest a White House election.

Around 3,600 volunteers are being dispatched to reinforce advance staff deployed in 17 swing states... identified as ones that could determine the outcome of the November 4 general election.

Obama's 3,600 volunteers have given a commitment to do *at least six weeks of unpaid political work*. He put out a call for volunteers in April and more than 10,000 replied.

He is to move large parts of the Democratic headquarters staff from Washington to his campaign headquarters in his home town, Chicago.

Obama wants to try to *avoid the kind of unnecessary duplication* that hampered John Kerry's failed 2004 bid for the White House, when he won 251 electoral college votes, 19 short of the 270 needed to beat George Bush.

The latest opinion poll, published by NBC and the Wall Street Journal on Wednesday, puts *Obama on 47% and McCain on 41%*.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jun/14/barackobama.johnmccain


----------



## wayneL (14 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> But change where the president is a puppet of the people, not lobbyists and special interests, is on the way:]


----------



## wayneL (14 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


>




http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4122437.ece

This writer is a Bush1te (and for that I hope his chooks turn into emus and kick his dunny down), but as far as I'm concerned, he is laying a fair amount of leather on the expectations of an Obama Presidency.

How much can change... really?

The foreign relations speech I heard him give was indiscernible to the current policy on the ME... i.e. Christian Zionism.

Ergo, nothing will change.


----------



## Doris (17 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Al Gore endorses Barack Obama*


DETROIT - Al Gore made his debut in the 2008 presidential campaign Monday night, encouraging voters to back Barack Obama because "take it from me, elections matter."

The former vice president's speech was part endorsement and part blistering attack on the man who denied him the White House eight years ago.

"After eight years of incompetence, neglect and failure, we need change," Gore said. "After eight years when our Constitution has been dishonored and disrespected, we need changes.
... McCain's 'age and experience' aren't the same as Obama's judgment."

In 2000, Gore won the popular vote but lost the disputed election to George W. Bush, who captured Florida and its electoral votes after a divided Supreme Court ended the re-count of ballots. Since then, Gore has made combatting global warming his signature issue, and has been recognized worldwide for his effort — from an Academy Award to the Nobel Prize.

Obama stoked lasting Democratic anger over the 2000 outcome when he recognized Gore as "the winner of the popular vote for president."

"You remember that," Obama said as the crowd of 20,000 erupted in raucous applause. 

It's the second time Obama has rolled out a major endorsement in Michigan, where he did not campaign during the primary because its election violated the party rules. Obama is counting on a win in Michigan in November, but brought Gore and 2004 vice presidential nominee John Edwards to help validate him among Democrats in the state after skipping their primary.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25198995/


----------



## OnceBitten (17 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Who really gives a hairy rats a**e?  Hillary, Barack or John?  Black, white, man or woman?  Does it really matter? Are any of these three potential US presidents going to correct the two biggest lies the world is currently being fed?  I don’t think so. 

Lie no 1 – The firmly entrenched myth of the US Federal Reserve Bank and the concept known as “Fractional Reserve Banking”. Ever come across this quote? “Permit me to issue and control the money of the nation and I care not who makes its laws.” ”” M.A. Rothschild

Lie no 2 - The staggering inconsistencies surrounding the official version of the 11 September, attacks in the USA.  The large majority of US citizens now believe that the official story is false.  So what is the US Government hiding?

Forget Watergate, Contra’s, & JFK. These two stories will dwarf any before. Take Fractional Reserve Banking. By itself, it has indirectly contributed to incalculable deaths, poverty, misery, and human rights violations. Mostly through unnecessary wars and conflict. Meanwhile the Halliburtons, Lockheeds and Rockerfellers of the world just keep getting wealthier and wealthier.

So why is the world not outraged by these lies? Probably because they are not aware of, or refuse to believe them. But more astonishing (if anything could possibly be) is the blatant refusal by the worlds media to fully investigate them. There is enough “underground” evidence out there already to, at the very least, arouse media curiosity to see if there is any basis for investigation. Both of these lies are well documented on the internet, and a quick glance into any search engine will keep you reading for months. Just Google some of these words: Fractional Reserve, Bilderberg, Trilateral Commission, 911 truth,  PNAC. Unfortunately for those of us seeking the truth, these stories can be easily dismissed by the media as “crackpot conspiracy theories”.  Behind the scenes back scratching between media owners, politicians (of both parties), top level business and other interested parties, means they may never be correctly investigated and corrected.  So who cares who goes into the white house? Not much will change.


----------



## wayneL (18 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				The UK Telegraph said:
			
		

> President Barack Obama would be bad for Britain
> 
> By Irwin Stelzer
> Last Updated: 12:01am BST 18/06/2008




And equally so for the rest of the western world.



> If this country's voters could vote in America, John McCain could take the summer off. So thorough would be his drubbing that no campaigning on his part could save him from an enforced return to the Senate.
> 
> President Barack Obama would be bad for Britain
> Barack Obama has pledged to turn down new trade deals, on the general theory that free trade has cost America jobs
> ...




I don't necessarily agree with the article, but up for discussion.

... It would be nice to have discussion actually, rather than one eyed cheerleading.


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Will the US economy go downhill with the Democrats?
Is it going downhill as we speak (under the Republicans)?
What are the chances they will have a recession?
What are the chances they are already in recession (but are in denial and/or hiding the facts with bogus statistics)? 

  The Economy

 History of recessions, then & now

At the 6 minute mark, they virtually admit that the US is virtually in recession as we speak  .

btw in January, Stelzer said that the US was not in recession -  but he went on to claim there was a 50-50 chance of a recession irrespective of who was in (although, true, he prefers the Republicans to the Democrats )

  Irwin Stelzer discussing Fed


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html

Jim Webb moves up to favourite for VP position - 
probably (guessing here) the more that McCain hammers the "military general" leadership role - where he considers himself superior to Obama - the more likely Webb is to get the VP candidate position 

But no change to the odds for the outcome
Obama 4/7
McCain 7/4


----------



## Doris (20 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

_Pretty risky decision... but what's a mere $80 million... to say 'no thanks' to and give the "power to the people"!

It seems to me that if he raises the money, he's got the ticket as the people in the street again feel they 'own' their piece of the campaign._



From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Friday, 20 June 2008 7:23 AM

*Barack announced an important decision for our campaign today*.

We have made a crucial decision that will impact how we compete in the general election, and it's important that you understand the decision, its implications, and the challenge ahead.

I want to add a little context to the video message you received earlier announcing that we will not participate in the public financing system for the general election. 

Even though we stood to receive more than $80 million in taxpayer funding for our campaign, the system has been so gamed and exploited by our opponents that it is effectively broken. 

John McCain, the Republican National Committee, and their allies in so-called 527 groups that raise and spend unlimited contributions are dedicated to manipulating this broken system to raise as much money as possible -- and they've proven that they're very good at it. 

A top McCain adviser told MSNBC earlier this month, "now that we're in the general election, the RNC money counts, the DNC money counts. So the truth is today, John McCain has more cash on hand and more money than Barack Obama does." 

In April alone, they raised nearly $45 million. That's more than our campaign and the Democratic National Committee combined. And that doesn't include the plans of 527 groups like the one called "Freedom's Watch," which has said it will spend as much as $250 million under Karl Rove's direction to attack and defeat Barack Obama. 

To compete, Barack has put his faith in ordinary people giving only what they can afford. That's been the strategy of this campaign from the beginning, and more than 1,500,000 supporters like you have gotten us this far. 

We have an historic opportunity to prove that a movement of ordinary people has the power to change the way political campaigns are funded. And we have a clear goal as we begin this new challenge: *50,000 people declaring their independence by making a donation before July 4th*. 

Opting out of public matching funds was an extremely difficult decision, and frankly we are at a disadvantage when it comes to raising money. Unlike John McCain, *this campaign has never accepted donations from Washington lobbyists or special interest PACs*. 

While McCain has built his fundraising strategy around high-dollar donors giving huge checks to the RNC, you are creating a new model for publicly financed campaigns. 

Thank you for your support and for taking on the masters of a broken system,

David 

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html

Obama 8 / 15 = $1.53   (in a whisker from 4 / 7 = $1.57) 
McCain 7/ 4  = $2.75  (steady)

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html
As for VP Democrat Candidate

Jim Webb  7/2  (tightening)
Hillary Clinton  5/1
Kathleen Sebelius 6/1


----------



## Doris (27 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama donates $4,600 to Clinton's debt relief*  ....(6 hrs ago)

WASHINGTON (AP) ”” Barack Obama announced Thursday that *he will help pay off Hillary Rodham Clinton's more than $20 million debt*, personally writing a check in a gesture meant to win over her top financial backers.

Obama received a standing ovation from the crowd of more than 200 when he said *he would enlist his supporters to help pay off her debt*.

In a symbolic gesture, Obama delivered a personal check for $4,600, for himself and his wife, Michelle. 
The maximum individual donation allowed by law is $2,300.

*Clinton's debt includes $12 million of her own money.* She has said she is not asking for help paying that back.

She told her donors they must make electing Obama a priority, as she acknowledged that hard feelings remain on both sides.

An Associated Press-Yahoo News poll out Thursday shows *Obama has won over slightly more than half of Clinton's former supporters. *About a quarter of Clinton's backers say they will support McCain over Obama.


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5izQosMtCfjNjE1uAP6fQV2BZ_qWwD91I5PMO0


----------



## Whiskers (27 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> An Associated Press-Yahoo News poll out Thursday shows *Obama has won over slightly more than half of Clinton's former supporters. *About a quarter of Clinton's backers say they will support McCain over Obama.




Bludy turncoates! 

Who needs friends like that eh!


----------



## wayneL (27 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> [/B]About a quarter of Clinton's backers say they will support McCain over Obama.




These people are idiots. 

Mind you, after hearing Obama's foreign affairs agenda, there will be no difference in practice. 

Both are Christian Zionists.

Both are trouble for the world.


----------



## Whiskers (27 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html
> 
> Obama 8 / 15 = $1.53   (in a *whisker* from 4 / 7 = $1.57)
> McCain 7/ 4  = $2.75  (steady)
> ...




Hey 2020... you be careful you don't slander my name... or I'll have you up for copy right or animal vilification or sompthin.


----------



## Doris (27 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Whiskers said:


> Bludy turncoates!
> 
> Who needs friends like that eh!




Makes you wonder what *political party* some Americans *believe in *eh!

But the groupies from Hillary's bandwagon might just join the new trend:



> Hannah Simone, a Washington energy lobbyist and top Clinton donor, said she entered the meeting undecided but is now ready to help. *She can't donate herself because Obama does not accept lobbyists' money, but she said she'll start raising from others.*
> 
> "It was a big step forward for some of us who *were* very passionate about her campaign," she said.




_From the AP item I quoted above_


----------



## ithatheekret (27 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hey , it could be worse , Hank or Ben could be running , even worse again Martha , Letterman or eek heaven forbid Murdock or aaaargh Bloomberg .


----------



## wayneL (27 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ithatheekret said:


> Hey , it could be worse , Hank or Ben could be running , even worse again Martha , Letterman or eek heaven forbid Murdock or aaaargh Bloomberg .




 When you look at the US political landscape _in toto_... they're ####ed.

Disturbing.


----------



## Doris (28 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Buffett Will Be Main Draw at Fundraisers for Obama Next Week *

Billionaire investor Warren Buffett will be a main draw at two *$28,500 per-person* fundraisers for Barack Obama in Chicago next week.

Buffett will be part of an *economic panel discussion* on July 2 at Ariel Capital Management LLC, a Chicago-based money manager with more than $11 billion in assets. The firm's chief executive, John Rogers Jr., is the Obama campaign's co-chairman in Illinois.

Buffett will help host a *dinner* later the same day at the Chicago home of Penny Pritzker, *the Hyatt hotel chain heiress who is Obama's finance chief.
*
Buffett, chairman of Omaha, Nebraska-based Berkshire Hathaway Inc., is *backing Obama over McCain*.

"He will have more concern for the people who don't get the lucky breaks in life like I've gotten,'' Buffett, the world's richest man according to Forbes magazine, said yesterday in an interview with Bloomberg Television.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=audYbqCkIZps&refer=home


Well, they do say it's not _what_ you know but _who_ you know...
Barack has come a long way as an organiser!
Strangely... I thought Buffet made his own luck!


----------



## saiter (28 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Christian Zionists.




Is that even possible...?


----------



## wayneL (28 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



saiter said:


> Is that even possible...?




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Zionism


----------



## Doris (29 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Clinton, Obama try being allies for a change*



> Clinton -- who, with her husband, sent the Obama campaign a pair of $2,300 checks, reciprocating a donation made Thursday by the Obamas to ease her campaign debt -- stressed that her mission is now Obama's. And she urged her supporters to join her in helping put a Democrat in the White House.





More have joined the bandwagon... up from 'just over half' for Obama and 25% to McCain:



> The latest Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll found that only *two-thirds of Clinton's supporters said they would support Obama*;
> *11% said they would choose McCain* and the rest were undecided or supporting other candidates.





http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/politics/la-na-campaign28-2008jun28,0,1938678.story


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> * Buffett Will Be Main Draw at Fundraisers for Obama Next Week *
> 
> Billionaire investor Warren Buffett will be a main draw at two *$28,500 per-person* fundraisers for Barack Obama in Chicago next week.
> 
> ...




Good to see the Clintonophiles coming round..  illogical not to you'd think.  

PS As for Buffet, I'm guessing you can be rich with 'skill' (and a bit of ruthlessness).
But to be the world's richest man, you probably need a whisker of luck (make that a fraction of luck - sorry whiskers ) as well. 

PS Barrie Cassidy in US today (like 2 or 3 minutes time) to cover the US political situation.  Should be worth the watch.  

"takes the spin out of politics" - good luck m8. 


> TV guide
> Insiders
> Time: Sunday, June 29, 9.02am
> Channel: ABC1
> ...


----------



## wayneL (29 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Good to see the Clintonophiles coming round..




'cept ol' man Clinton himself:



> *Bill Clinton says Barack Obama must 'kiss my ass' for his support*
> By Tim Shipman in Washington and Philip Sherwell in New York
> Last Updated: 11:23PM BST 28/06/2008
> Bill Clinton is so bitter about Barack Obama's victory over his wife Hillary that he has told friends the Democratic nominee will have to beg for his wholehearted support. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...Obama-must-'kiss-my-ass'-for-his-support.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

nice one bill..
sounds like the democrats need you like a hole in the head .
PS careful the wind doesn't change. 

Back to the candidates ...
it seems (from Insiders) that it's a forgone conclusion that whoever wins president, (Obama or McCain), they'll have a Democratic Senate and Congress to deal with.


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

My mate reckons the only chance McCain has of winning - is if he takes Hillary Clinton on as his VP running mate  

PS after Bill Clinton's "he can kiss my ass" comment - I notice he's gone out to 200:1 for the Democrat VP position with Obama, lol.

I'd be looking for more like 10,000 to 1 

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html


----------



## Boggo (30 June 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Relevant (or irrelevant joke)

A man goes to a public golf course. He approaches the man behind the counter in the pro shop and says, "I would like 18 holes of golf and a caddie."

The man behind the counter says, "The 18 holes of golf is no problem, but all of the caddies are out on the course. What I will do for you is this: we just received 8 brand new robot golf caddies. If you're willing to take one with you out on the course and come back and tell me how well it works, your round of golf is on me today." The golfer obviously accepted the man's offer.

He approached the first tee, looked at the fairway and said to himself, "I think my driver will do the job." The robot caddie turned to the man and said, "No sir. Use your 3 wood. A driver is far too much club for this hole."

Hesitantly, the golfer pulled out his 3 wood, made good contact with the ball, and the ball landed about 10 feet to the right front of the hole on the green. The golfer, delighted, turned to the robot and thanked him for his assistance.

As the golfer pulled out his putter he said, "I think this green is gonna break left to right." The robot then again spoke up and said, "No sir. I do believe this green will break right to left". Thinking about the last time the robot corrected his prediction, he decided again to listen to the machine. He made his putt and birdied the hole thanks to the robot and his advice.

But his luck didn't end there. His entire game was the best game he ever played, thanks to the assistance of the new robot golf caddie.

Upon returning to the clubhouse, the man behind the counter asked, "How was your game?" The golfer stated, "It was, by far, the BEST game I ever played. Thank you very much for letting me take one of your robots. See you next week."

A week passed, and excited, the golfer returned to the pro shop. Upon entering, he turned to the man behind the counter and said, "I would like 18 holes of golf and one of those robot golf caddies, please."

The gentleman from behind the counter turned to the man and said, "Well the 18 holes is no problem. However, we had to get rid of the robots. We had too many complaints." Confused, the golfer cried, "COMPLAINTS? Who in the heck could've complained about those robots? They were incredible" The man sighed and said, "Well, it wasn't their performance. It was that they were made of shiny silver metal, and the sun reflecting off them was blinding to other golfers on the fare way."

The golfer said, "So then why didn't you just paint them black?" The man nodded sadly and replied, "We did. Then four of 'em didn't show up for work, two filed for welfare, one of them robbed the pro shop, and the other is running for the Presidency of the United States."


----------



## sydneysider (1 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I thought that I should share the following photo of Obama. He is holding a small whitey puppy and standing in front of the statue of Lincoln at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington. When I saw it i almost fell off my chair in laughter. I am still trying to learn if the photo is a fake as it is so ridiculous but it comes with a story about puppy mills which seems legit. Maybe someone can shed some more light on this photo? IF it is a true rendering of Obama then his campaign have truly devolved into total absurdity in keeping with much of the absurd commentary this man makes each day. To-day Obama mounted a spirited attack on John McCain's war record and patriotism using one of his surrogates that fizzled out by mid afternoon. Last week another Obama surrogate attacked McCain because he does not pump his own gas at the gas station (not realizing that his arms and shoulders were brutalized and permantely damaged when he was a POW).  Obama spent most of last week telling us that we cannot drill our way out of high gas prices even though the U.S. is an extremely rich nation in unexplored hydrocarbon resources. In support of this effort Pelosi shut down attempts to open up resources of Federal Lands in the Congress to energy exploration. That follows on from the flap about his redesigned Presidential Seal that had everyone in fits of laughter (it has now vanished but u can still find copies on the web). More comedy later


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Boggo said:


> Relevant (or irrelevant joke)...



Oooooooooooooo... very UN-PC.....

...but hilarious!


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				boggo said:
			
		

> The golfer said, "So then why didn't you just paint them black?" The man nodded sadly and replied, "We did. Then four of 'em didn't show up for work, two filed for welfare, one of them robbed the pro shop, and the other is running for the Presidency of the United States."



boggo - reminds me of the one where they painted the black robots white  - and the white collar crime skyrocketed – to say nothing of the racism


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> To-day Obama mounted a spirited attack on John McCain's war record and patriotism using one of his surrogates that fizzled out by mid afternoon.



ss, here’s your “sprited campaign”…. 
btw, the “surrogate” you refer to was General Wesley Clark, former Allied Commander of NATO , who incidentally has been shot down 4 times.  Anyway he made the comment (correct surely) “Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be President”

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2008/s2290557.htm


> War record remark upsets Republicans
> AM - Tuesday, 1 July , 2008  08:06:00
> Reporter: Michael Rowland
> TONY EASTLEY: In the United States, a row has erupted after a spokesman for Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama questioned the military record of Republican candidate John McCain.
> ...




Perhaps McCain will be the exception - if being shot down is so important to a political career, maybe he'll make one quarter the politician that Wesley Clark would


----------



## wayneL (1 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> boggo - reminds me of the one where they painted the black robots white  - and the white collar crime skyrocketed – to say nothing of the racism




Let me get this straight 2020... racism is the sole preserve of whitefella?

That seems to be what you're implying.

Man, Socrates would have a ball with you and your leaps of (il)logic.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

well wayne
why did you call it politically incorrect 
 if it wasn't for the fact that it was racist ?


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> well wayne
> why did you call it politically incorrect
> if it wasn't for the fact that it was racist ?



2020

Once again you draw erroneous conclusions from available data. Whether or not the joke was racist or not, is not the issue, and nothing whatever to do with my question to you which you are attempting to duck.

Let me ask the question again, this time more directly: Do you believe that only whitefellas are racist?

If you do, that would seem to implicate you as a bona-fide racist... racism against your own race (presuming you're a whitefella) is still racism and typical leftist gross hypocrisy.

If you found the joke offensive, then you should find yourself offensive.

Catch 22 for you and others of such preposterous and faulted logic.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

btw wayne, the other thing that the white robots did in that "hilarious" joke back there that the black ones were less inclined to do, was to threaten to blow up the "other colour" candidate's office  (as for the speculation of personal threats - I'd prefer not to go there)


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Let me ask the question again, this time more directly: Do you believe that only whitefellas are racist?



a more direct answer then - no.
but 
 that isn't going to make me inclined to encourage racist jokes of either persuasion.

PS as if these jokes haven't been dragged up each time a black has run for high office in USA.


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> a more direct answer then - no.
> but
> that isn't going to make me inclined to encourage racist jokes of either persuasion.
> 
> PS as if these jokes haven't been dragged up each time a black has run for high office in USA.



But you are racist against whites. As a hypocrite, this disqualifies you from comment.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> But you are racist against whites. As a hypocrite, this disqualifies you from comment.



wayne
I have no idea what yuo are talking about
I am against all racism

PS I do know that you're a bit shakey on simple compound interest calculations


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> I am against all racism



From your post about white collar crime, this is clearly a lie. 



> PS I do know that you're a bit shakey on simple compound interest calculations



From whence did this delusion emanate?


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> From whence did this delusion emanate?



https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=275590&highlight=wayne#post275590


----------



## Doris (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> well wayne
> why did you call it politically incorrect
> if it wasn't for the fact that it was racist ?




I am not at all impressed with the (lack of) moderation of this forum atm!

I sent a msg to 'the moderator' stating that I had found the robot 'joke' to be offensively bigoted and racist.  
I said I had thought it would have been pulled.

I was appalled that the calibre of this forum had been tainted and even more so to suppose that my msg was taken by wayne and his irreverent immaturity and lack of common decency prevailed.  
*He should be sacked poste haste from his role as moderator!*

One of my daughters married a Nigerian and my two grandchildren are thus half African. Their father has an MBA and a high status career.  Their mother has a Masters in Accounting.  They are wonderful, successful people. 
How dare they be inadvertently stereotyped as lazy, welfare bludgers and criminals on this forum!  

 These children deserve to live in this country *without cowardly crass comments deriding their ethnic heritage.
* 
How dare you infringe upon common decency in a public arena!

It is obvious to me that inferiority complexes drive some people to cast aspersions on anyone if they can feel some semblance of sick sadistic pleasure. Shame on you both!  I have seen some intelligent comments from you Wayne but this attempt at creating a sick bait for 'discussion' has depleted any fragments of respect I have had for you.

Political correctness demands people be judged for who they are and not be denigrated by pathetic ignorant stereotyping that is illegal in this country!


Joe...

I ask that this robot joke and all references to it be deleted.


----------



## Agentm (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

100% behind you on that one doris..

every word of it..  

two comments.

1/ put the person who posted it on ignore.. takes care of the offensive and rascist post.. there is no apology that i can see, clearly a bigot..

2/ keep up the protest, do not be intimidated by the obvious supporters..


great post...


----------



## Boggo (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

You need to get a hobby Doris darling, lighten up honey, or better still go and read the political history of Rhodesia, oops sorry, Zimbabwe.

I could tell you about "The gang of 41" that are terrorising the northern suburbs of Adelaide or why they have armed guards on duty 24 hours a day at building sites in Port Augusta, or why its no longer safe to walk through Port Lincoln at night but then again _some_ people consider facts to be racist attacks.

It was a bloody joke Doris... chill out.

Mike


----------



## prawn_86 (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *He should be sacked poste haste from his role as moderator!*




Can one actually be "sacked" from a volunteer role? I would have thought "let go" or "removed" would be the PC term


----------



## juw177 (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The joke was lame.

Having said that.... despite the professionally marketed slogans for the Obama campaign, the only change the Obama will bring to the white house is a racial one.

It is clear he is not willing to challenge the status quo of the US government putting the interest of the powerful before the interest of the public.


----------



## doctorj (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*




Doris said:


> II sent a msg to 'the moderator' stating that I had found the robot 'joke' to be offensively bigoted and racist.






Doris said:


> I said I had thought it would have been pulled.
> 
> I was appalled that the calibre of this forum had been tainted and even more so to suppose that my msg was taken by wayne and his irreverent immaturity and lack of common decency prevailed.
> He should be sacked poste haste from his role as moderator!




For the record, your message was sent to all moderators, so given the inaction we can conclude either that we agree with wayne or his assessment was reasonable.

For the record, I believe that a joke cannot be inherently racist.  The people snickering in the corner thinking to themselves something along the lines of 'damn those thieving black scum' are the racist ones.

For me, the intent and context of the joke is important.  If it was malicious, then yes, without doubt, it should be removed.  But, I think it was quite cleverly used to point out that these stereotypes are still quite common and the race card is something that is very much in play here in this election.




Doris said:


> One of my daughters married a Nigerian and my two grandchildren are thus half African. Their father has an MBA and a high status career. Their mother has a Masters in Accounting. They are wonderful, successful people.



No doubt they are and I don’t see anyone questioning that.  Nor do I see how their race has in impact on their ability to be any of those things.  It really sounds like you may have witnessed or been told of some very unfortunate events that have negatively impacted your family and that is horrible, but to be honest these are your issues to work through.  Censorship is not the answer here. 

It’s a shame you found the joke offensive to the point of calling for somebody’s head (merely for disagreeing with your point of view) rather than for seeing it in the context it was presented.




Doris said:


> How dare they be inadvertently stereotyped as lazy, welfare bludgers and criminals on this forum!






Doris said:


> These children deserve to live in this country without cowardly crass comments deriding their ethnic heritage.
> How dare you infringe upon common decency in a public arena!




People make jokes about blondes, accountants, Aussies and the Dutch all the time... I'm a blonde dutch australian accountant and I still don't wind up crying myself to sleep at night. Why is it ok to make a joke at the expense of some groups not others?




Doris said:


> Political correctness demands people be judged for who they are and not be denigrated by pathetic ignorant stereotyping that is illegal in this country!



Political correctness has had a recent thread of its own and many believe it’s gone too far.

In the mean time, take two of these and call me in the morning…


----------



## Doris (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



prawn_86 said:


> Can one actually be "sacked" from a volunteer role? I would have thought "let go" or "removed" would be the PC term




Prawn... your PC is PC!


Tell me...

Q1.  How do you get a lawyer out of a tree?

Q2.  How do you stop a lawyer from drowning?


One of my best friends is a lawyer and he laughed at these jokes.

But if I told that rancid robotic joke to my son-in-law he would not laugh!

Individuals are responsible and answerable for their own behaviour and consequences.


A1 Cut the rope...
A2 Take your foot off his head.


----------



## prawn_86 (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Im sure there are some lawyers who if you told them those jokes would take offense.

Point is, it is up to the person who reads the jokes to decide their opinions of the person who posted it. A joke is a joke, and within reason, i see no need for them to be removed. Otherwise there would be no jokes whatsoever posted as every joke makes fun of something and/or someone.


----------



## Agentm (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What are some examples of ‘racial hatred’?

The prohibited behaviour can be using speech, images or writing in public ”” for example: 

writing racist graffiti in a public place ”” including school playgrounds or bus stop shelters 
making racist speeches at a public rally or assemblies 
placing racist posters or stickers in a public place 
making a racially abusive comment, joke, song or gesture in a public place ”” including shops, workplaces, parks, public transport, and schools 
offensive racist comments or drawings in a newspaper, leaflet, website or other publication..


----------



## doctorj (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Agentm said:


> What are some examples of ‘racial hatred’?
> 
> The prohibited behaviour can be using speech, images or writing in public — for example:



You'll note this refers to the medium of communication, not what it actually said - clearly all material that refers to a particular race isn't 'racial hatred'. You'll have to try again.

Also, how do you account for the prominence of race-based material in stand-up comic routines, much of which is regularly broadcast on commercial television?


----------



## Agentm (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



doctorj said:


> You'll note this refers to the medium of communication, not what it actually said - clearly all material that refers to a particular race isn't 'racial hatred'. You'll have to try again.
> 
> Also, how do you account for the prominence of race-based material in stand-up comic routines?





its clear that the person who posted and the supporters who think its absolutely hilarious, would only have to ask themselves if this joke is so funny, would they go into a black neighbourhood and say that joke, post that joke on billboards, at public places, in the schools, in the newspapers with their names written and address available on it..  

or is it only posted and supported in a forum where they cannot be identified!


clearly the answer is no one would go into a black district and repeat that joke..


----------



## Doris (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Agentm said:


> What are some examples of ‘racial hatred’?
> 
> The prohibited behaviour can be using speech, images or writing in public — for example:
> 
> ...







> You'll note this refers to the medium of communication, not what it actually said - clearly all material that refers to a particular race isn't 'racial hatred'. You'll have to try again.




No...   Read AgentM's post again doctorj. 

'Behaviour'!  NOT merely the medium used!

I have zero tolerance for racist remarks or indeed bullying of any kind!


Doctorj... for your edification:



> *Racial vilification* is a compendious term which has been used to describe “*all acts, conduct, behaviour or activity* involving the *defamation of individuals and groups on the ground of their colour, race or ethnic* or national origins, as well as those which constitute the incitement or stirring up of hatred or other *emotions of hostility and enmity* against these individuals and groups” (Gibson 1990, p. 709).
> 
> A broad spectrum of behaviour is included within this definition *ranging from so-called “ethnic jokes” and offensive words, to stereotyping*, inflammatory media reporting, historical “revisionism” and racist hate propaganda disseminated by poster campaigns, pamphlets, graffiti and public broadcasts.
> 
> ...




Australian Institute of Criminology:
http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/tandi/ti79.pdf


----------



## doctorj (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Doctorj... for your edification:



You're still missing the point.


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Picking up on Doc's point:

All humour is something-ist. Humour pokes fun at human foibles, failings idiosyncrasies and customs. Blacks, Whites, Orientals, Indians, men, women, Aussies, Poms, Yanks, Germans, Russians, football players, old people, middle age people, teenagers, infants, lawyers, accountants, politicians, Muslims Christians, Jews, etec etc bloody etc are all the butt of jokes every single day of the week.

Moderate political correctness does have a place in my view. We shouldn't call black people "N*****s" for example, as they find it offensive and is usually delivered with derogation in mind.

Unfortunately, as evidenced by how this thread has turned out, it has gone way too far. One member feels, despite suggestions to the contrary, to bombard us with leftist American political propaganda, quoting _in toto_, emails issued to campaign supporters, yet calls for my "sacking" because I found a joke amusing.

So what's worse? Propaganda (basically, lies in order to get elected) or a joke about stereotypes? 

Well let me tell you something Doris, Propaganda is a far darker influence in this world. Your precious Obama, as a Christian Zionist, inherently supports *real* racism. Support of Israel is support for racial and religious Apartheid. If you support Obama's foreign affairs policy, then you are inherently racist in a far more sinister way than anyone laughing at a joke.

This is how far we can draw the line, if you so desire.

Let me tell you an incontrovertible fact. We are all racist!!! You me 2020 everybody. We all treat members of different races differently, it may be positive, it may be negative, it may be both at different times. It's natural and you will never train it out of people.

Most of us, including me, are agin negative forms of racism. However some people aren't mature enough to handle multiculturalism properly (whether or not MC is a good or bad thing, we all must deal with it). Those on extreme left of politics, deal with this by oppressing the local native/dominant culture. Here in Britain, people are sick of it, sick of petty minded jobsworths cancelling Christmas, and any festive forms of white indigenous culture.

This is causing two things 1/ The complete obliteration of the Labour (with the u here) Party, and 2/ a shift of the working classes to the far right. Yes, in a recent by-election, the British National Party (basically neo-Nazis) got more votes than Labour. Why? Because of the most recent Labour Party legislation enshrining "positive" discrimination.

Push people one way to far, and they'll push back.

Doris, 2020, by labelling moderate folk who have a laugh at a joke, or celebrate Christmas in view of Muslims as racists, you push them in a way you never intended. People see it for precisely what it is - reverse racism.. or just plain racism when it all boils down.

*In conclusion, save the "racist" tag for bona fide cases, of which their are many for you attention, including that of your own candidate.*

Playing the racism card for such insignificant cases such as this is nothing more than petty political ammunition for debate, both counterproductive and as disgraceful as REAL racism.


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=275590&highlight=wayne#post275590




I thought you were having delusions. You must be to skewer yourself with your own example. If you reread the thread, my issue was with your incorrect use of the symbol "^" and nothing whatever to do with my ability, or lack thereof, in calculation compound interest. It was never at issue.

Once again, hoist by your own petard.

Once again, unbelievable!!!!

...and absolutely irrelevant to the current topic.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> I thought you were having delusions. You must be to skewer yourself with your own example. If you reread the thread, my issue was with your incorrect use of the symbol "^" and nothing whatever to do with my ability, or lack thereof, in calculation compound interest. It was never at issue.
> 
> Once again, hoist by your own petard.
> 
> ...



perhaps you could explain why it's incorrect 
(I post a jpeg of the examples of rule of 72. together with "^" and "*" etc ) 

I agree it's irrelevant to the current thread - except that you keep claiming to be the king of logic ...

At least this post of yours you were honest enough to ask what "^" meant 



wayneL said:


> OK, I getting confused!
> 
> What does "^" signify in these equations? It seems to metamorphose its function throughout this thread.
> 
> Doh!


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

[exasperated sigh]

How tiresome. As you cannot argue on the actual issue at hand, we must go off at a completely irrelevant tangent, huh? 

Defeated on one point, only to bring up another point to be defeated on. OK let's boogie.

You said:


> I do know that you're a bit shakey on simple compound interest calculations



Insinuating mathematical deficiency. However, my question in the thread, as per your example, was the about the function  of the symbol "^" whose function differed according to the poster. A completely logical question in the circumstances.

You used ^ to signify multiplication, whereas others used it to signify power. The usual convention is to use * as multiplication, as evidenced in Excel and various other softwares.

To use this to make the insinuations about my mathematical prowess, is absolutely illogical... and in fact shallow attempt to discredit by an intentionally inaccurate interpretation of the discussion in question. That is a disgrace and you should give yourself an uppercut.

Now, if you are at all capable, please keep to relevant factors in this discussion.


----------



## Julia (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> [exasperated sigh]
> 
> H
> Defeated on one point, only to bring up another point to be defeated on. OK let's boogie.




I'm not quite sure why, but I'm falling off my chair with laughter at the "let's boogie"!  

Just reading the recent posts on this thread I just can't believe how damn precious some of us have become.  For heaven's sake, just lighten up a bit.

Imo all this PC stuff ties in with the nanny state, all the endless rules, judgements and censorship.  We are not free to say anything any more.
I just lost all respect for anything PC when a couple of Christmases ago, many shopping centres which for years and years had put on a Nativity Scene, declined to do so "because it might offend Muslims".  Oh, fergawdsake!
How utterly submissive and stupid.

I hold no brief for religion of any kind, and would never pause to look at a Nativity Scene.  But a lot of people really like it, it has been a tradition in our predominantly Christian country, and I'm damned if I find it acceptable that it should be wiped in case it might cause offence to a minority religion.

As Wayne has said, push too hard and eventually sane people will push back.


----------



## wayneL (2 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Just reading the recent posts on this thread I just can't believe how damn precious some of us have become.



Here's an example: I wrote this in another forum some time ago.






My comment was a matter of fact and had no possible racist or derogative connotations. If there was a target, it was the companies who offshore everything possible these days.

But you guessed it, I was accused of being a racist. 

The situation has turned into extreme farce.

Here's a true story:

A good friend of mine is a very dark skinned Indian who used to work at Merryl Lynch in Melbourne. When their Australian broking operations were closed down a few years ago, the message was delivered via video, by a person who happened to be an African American... basically informing them that they were all sacked.

My Indian friend who was sitting at the back shouted out - "Black b@stard!!"

The room fell about in laughter. So was that racist? Of course it was, but the situation of a very dark man shouting it out made it extremely funny. The whitefellas would never have gotten away with it. There are valid reasons for that of course, but there you go - harmless humour.

Thank God some petty left wing, quango inhabiting, humourless jobsworth wasn't there to prosecute him.


----------



## doctorj (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Just reading the recent posts on this thread I just can't believe how damn precious some of us have become.  For heaven's sake, just lighten up a bit.
> 
> Imo all this PC stuff ties in with the nanny state, all the endless rules, judgements and censorship.  We are not free to say anything any more.



It's actually law.



> EXTRAORDINARY new powers will allow police to arrest and fine people for "causing annoyance" to World Youth Day participants and permit partial strip searches at hundreds of Sydney sites, beginning today.
> The laws, which operate until the end of July, have the potential to make a crime of wearing a T-shirt with a message on it, undertaking a _Chaser_-style stunt, handing out condoms at protests, riding a skateboard or even playing music, critics say.



Full article - http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...formhtmlbpollba/2008/06/30/1214677946009.html


Defenders of the laws say they don't actually expect the police to use the law - but then question is why have it.


What's next? Having to invite everyone to your birthday party so you don't offend anyone.  _Oh wait..._


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wayne if you want to defend racist jokes of ASF, then that’s your prerogative.

But equally, the majority of (serious) white collar crime is committed by whites – hence the reverse “joke” also applies.    

(PS definition of white collar crime varies , and only 20% of complaints are even looked into btw)


----------



## wayneL (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Wayne if you want to defend racist jokes of ASF, then that’s your prerogative.
> 
> But equally, the majority of (serious) white collar crime is committed by whites – hence the reverse “joke” also applies.
> 
> (PS definition of white collar crime varies , and only 20% of complaints are even looked into btw)



So if it's OK to label whites with stereotypes, then it's Ok to label blacks with stereotypes according to your rules.

...and if you have a joke about whites and white collar crime, tell it. We will laugh if it's funny. 

Checkmate.


----------



## Doris (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hillary has spring cleaned, washing away all attacks on Barack Obama from her Web site and YouTube page.

Long gone are the accusing ads and press releases. 
They are *replaced with feel good moments* from her campaign and testimonials of her goodness by supporters.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/jul/02/clinton-attacks-against-obama-vanish-web/


----------



## Boggo (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Just wondering if this joke is ok with you Doris...

For those of you who may not be completely aware of John Hinckley, who he is, what he did, and why, here's a little history. 
John Hinckley was a seriously deranged young man who shot President Reagan many years back. John was absolutely obsessed with movie star _Jodie Foster_, and extremely jealous as well, and in his twisted mind, loved Jodie Foster to the point that to make himself known to her, attempted to assassinate President Reagan.

With that in mind...the staff at the mental facility treating John Hinckley reports intercepting the following letter from Bill Clinton.

_To: John Hinckley

   From: Bill Clinton

   Dear John,

   Hillary and I wanted to drop you a short note to tell you how
   pleased we are with the great strides you are making in your
   recovery. In our country's new spirit of understanding and
   forgiveness, we want you to know there is a bilateral consensus of
   compassion and forgiveness abroad throughout the land.

   Hillary and I want you to know that no grudge is borne against you
   for shooting President Reagan. We, above all, are aware of how the
   mental stress and pain could have driven you to such an act of
   desperation. Hillary and I are confident that you will soon make a
   complete recovery and return to your family to join the world again
   as a healthy and productive young man.

   Best wishes,

   Bill & Hillary Clinton

   PS: Barack Obama is screwing Jodie Foster.
_


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> So if it's OK to label whites with stereotypes, then it's Ok to label blacks with stereotypes according to your rules.
> 
> ...and if you have a joke about whites and white collar crime, tell it. We will laugh if it's funny.
> 
> Checkmate.




No - the way it works wayne is that we should all be wary of telling racial jokes when we are as vulnerable as white folks are.  (ignoring the fact that that joke was a big hit down at KKK HQ btw). 

What would that joke be? 
 - pretty much the same, except that they painted the silver robots white I guess.    Gee that’s hilarious isn’t it .  

btw, speaking of checkmates , 
a)	you are proved wrong with your understanding of those math equations (which remain on that thread and this one as testimonial to the fact that you don’t understand much about such equations, 
b)	you invite a discussion of it - "let's boogee" as I recall - despite the fact and in full knowledge of the fact that it is on the wrong thread
c)	you then delete the post when I prove you wrong - you PM me that it is on the wrong thread 
d)	 I post on the correct thread that you are wrong 
e)	you delete that as well

So I guess I checkmate you twice,  once for the maths , and once for hypocrisy - can be second order I guess, since you constantly accuse me of the same “of the highest /first order”.


----------



## Sean K (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The reason that any joke is funny is because it's racist, sexist, biased, chauvinistic, intolerant, bigoted, prejudiced, dogmatic, and/or xenophobic. 

And ironic, perhaps.

Like this argument.

Geeeesh!!!


----------



## prawn_86 (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*puts mod hat on*

Arnt we getting way off topic re: Obama.

Perhaps a new thread should be started if people wish to continue this discussion.


----------



## Agentm (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

its kinda half half,  

it offended me, but others loved it..  

i thought it was outright racist, if it was purely a joke about obama i would perhaps considered its humor,  but it was more than just about obama, it was precluded by a string of derogitory remarks about the black race.

i googled where it came from, and  noticed it appears prodominantly of very extremist and rascist anti obama sites.. they love it too..

its part of the debate on obama whether the US are infact not going to vote for obama on the color of his skin..  or turn against the party and vote for mccain.. 

this election is certainly bringing out more than any other, its revealing the "kkk" in a lot of folk.. maybe its good to see who they are and where they sit. "better the enemy you know..........."


----------



## professor_frink (3 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> d)	 I post on the correct thread that you are wrong
> e)	you delete that as well




Nope. That was me.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Boggo said:


> Just wondering if this joke is ok with you Doris...
> 
> ..  John Hinckley was a seriously deranged young man who shot President Reagan many years back.




Boggo,
here's my thoughts on that one .... I'm guessing it originated "somewhere" that has a motive 

btw, I had a post deleted for adding "etcetera, so many interns , so little time" to Bill Clinton's quote "yuo can kiss my ass" -  so hopefully I'm not in for a lecture about "prudish left wing greenies not being able to take a non PC joke etc" 
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=310311&highlight=motive#post310311


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Boggo,
> here's my thoughts on that one .... I'm guessing it originated "somewhere" that has a motive
> 
> btw, I had a post deleted for adding "etcetera, so many interns , so little time" to Bill Clinton's quote "yuo can kiss my ass" -  so hopefully I'm not in for a lecture about "prudish left wing greenies not being able to take a non PC joke etc"
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=310311&highlight=motive#post310311




I dislike posting on the Obama site as it might encourage one American to vote for him, they don't as a rule vote much I am told.

I am however struck by the mass anxiety affecting posters which is manifest in jokes and a reaction from the pc crowd in relation to Obama's racial background.

Freud wrote much on the role of humour and jokes in our internal life.

Perhaps he should have been a member of ASF.

Did you hear the one about the one legged deaf black jewi......

Sorry Siggy

gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

gg, I recall you saying military service helps to make good politicians (seriously paraphrased) - or words to that effect...

what was that one about "how many gears does an Italian tank have?" 

PS As you said somewhere, Rome under the Caesars did ok for a while - that was until they started eating grapes to excess - fed to them by half nude concubines etc ...

see that's what happens when pollies stay in power too long - one thing leads to another - and grapes just lubricate the downhill slope.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> gg, I recall you saying military service helps to make good politicians (seriously paraphrased) - or words to that effect...
> 
> what was that one about "how many gears does an Italian tank have?"
> 
> ...




Post on the McCain thread mate and I'll answer, otherwise people might think this Obama jerk has a chance.

gg


----------



## wayneL (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Some excellent analysis on Obama policy flip-flops.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4264994.ece



> Having campaigned for the past year as the agent of transformation, the man who would lead an historic shift in America's political direction, Barack Obama is discovering that there is quite a lot he likes about the way things are.
> 
> Since securing the Democratic nomination a few weeks ago, the only change coming from the Illinois senator has been in what he seems to stand for.






> If next week he named Dick Cheney as his running-mate and revealed that he spends his spare time drilling for oil in wildlife habitats, the only surprise would be that it took him so long.






> Of course there's nothing much new in what the senator has done. In the lexicon of modern American politics, it's called a pivot. You campaign hard to the party's extreme in the primary election, where the base voters tend to be. Then, when the nomination is secure and there are no more idealists to be humoured, you pivot back to the centre. The only difference is that in Mr Obama's case the pivot is so hard and so fast that the entire Democratic Party is suffering from whiplash.






> *Conservatives, meanwhile, led by John McCain's Republican campaign, say that the presumptive Democratic nominee's pivot shows that, for all his talk of offering a new kind of politics, he is really just another cynical politician who will say anything to get elected.*



Agreed.

The "yes-we-can-istas" will be severely disappointed if this man is elected; nay, humiliated.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> ....people might think this Obama jerk has a chance.



odds on an Obama win keep tightening  (without any assistance from lobbyists - first time since ?? - abe lincoln?) 

At least he'll be free to be his own man 

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html
President:-
Obama 1/2  = $1.50 (in from $1.55)
McCain 7/4 = $2.65 

Winning Party :- 
Democrats 9/20 = $1.45
GOP (sic) 2/1 = $3.00


----------



## wayneL (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> At least he'll be free to be his own man




But who is the the man? That is the question.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> But who is the the man? That is the question.



Well my money's on the one who is able to speak without looking up to see what his puppetteer wants him to say


----------



## wayneL (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Well my money's on the one who is able to speak without looking up to see what his puppetteer wants him to say



Is this the same one who is flip-flopping on policy? The same one beholden to Zionism?


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Is this the same one who is flip-flopping on policy? The same one beholden to Zionism?




well wayne
 based on past posts - i think both you and I would vte for him , 

and I guess time will tell if he is as good as the hype.

mind you if he's half as good as the hype - he'll still be three times better than Bush  

(and twice as good as McCain)


----------



## wayneL (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> well wayne
> based on past posts - i think both you and I would vte for him ,
> 
> and I guess time will tell if he is as good as the hype.
> ...




I am very happy NOT to be voting, but based on what I now know, US foreign policy could be MORE aggressive under Obama than McCain. The withdrawal from Iraq policy is a red herring and a slimy subterfuge in my opinion; possibly undeliverable in any case .

That's all I'm prepared to say on the matter at this stage.


----------



## Doris (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Well my money's on the one who is able to speak without looking up to see what his puppeteer wants him to say




He'll have listened to people on the street as well as intelligent, experienced advisers and remained *flexible* as complex issues, like free-trade agreements with Columbia and changes to NAFTA, are fully considered, before he speaks.  

He will sidestep issues he considers irrelevant or in need of more consideration but he does not have an egotistical attitude of not being mature enough to change his mind if new relevant, crucial, information is drawn to his attention... e.g. 16 months to withdraw all fighting forces in Iraq.

Being *flexible* and *adapting* to issue enlightenment is the mark of a good leader.  
The ignorant call it flip flopping.  An Aussie might say 'thonging'.  
(Americans call 'thongs' flip flops.  A 'thong' is like a g-string)  

Attracting experienced advisers who share his values of what is best for the people who 'paid to get him the job' is a mark of a good leader. 


His 'having conversations' would not be gathering conspirators like GWB did:



> at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.






> President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14).




http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/Default.aspx?source=home&context=overview&id=945

BTW 2020, 
Has any president ever NOT been financed by lobbyists and PACs before?

Abe was financed by lobbyists but he did rise above their pressures in using the authority they bought for him.  
In his speech, as he boarded the train for Washington, he told the send-off crowd:  "I must now go and do what they have paid me to do".


----------



## Doris (4 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Some "ad hoc quotes" to dispute Obama's 'thonging' as claimed by the GOP...



> Obama said what he learns from military commanders on his upcoming trip (to Iraq) will refine his policy, but "not the 16-month timetable" for withdrawing U.S. troops from combat in Iraq. He said what he learns could affect *how many residual troops might be needed to train the Iraqi army and police*.
> 
> "I have said throughout this campaign that this war was ill-conceived, that it was a strategic blunder and that it needs to come to an end," he said. "I have also said I would be deliberate and careful about how we get out. That position has not changed. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position."
> 
> He promised to summon the Joint Chiefs of Staff on his first day in office "and I will give them a new mission and that is *to end this war, responsibly and deliberately, but decisively*."





http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/07/04/america/NA-POL-US-Elections.php


----------



## Doris (5 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Being *flexible* and *adapting* to issue enlightenment is the mark of a good leader.
> *The ignorant call it flip flopping. * An Aussie might say 'thonging'.
> (Americans call 'thongs' flip flops.  A 'thong' is like a g-string)
> 
> ...





*Candidates Should Never Flip-Flop*
By Jonathan Darman | NEWSWEEK
July 7-14, 2008 issue 



> It is worth remembering, before the depression sets in too deep, that flip-flopping has a noble history in this country.
> 
> In his first run for the presidency, Abraham Lincoln vowed not to force the end of slavery in the South. But by his second Inaugural, he could swear that, God willing, "every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid with another drawn by the sword."
> 
> ...






> *Yet it is dangerous to ask for a president who never changes his mind.*
> A flip-flop or two from George W. Bush might have gone a long way.




http://www.newsweek.com/id/143864


----------



## wayneL (5 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris,

There is a considered change of mind over a wrong position, then there is cynical political expediency.

If you'll notice Kennedy et al changed their position over time, Obama flipped overnight.

We had a dove that was going to change the world not 6 weeks ago. Now we have a foreign affairs hawk who wants to push the agenda way past Bush. WTF?

Who the hell are we going to have if he gets into power? Attila the Hun?

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200807/POL20080703d.html


----------



## Doris (5 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Doris,
> 
> There is a considered change of mind over a wrong position, then there is cynical political expediency.
> 
> If you'll notice Kennedy et al changed their position over time, Obama flipped overnight.




What are you on about?  
Not taking public money for his campaign?  He's not a woman but he can change his mind!



> We had a dove that was going to change the world not 6 weeks ago. Now we have a foreign affairs hawk who wants to push the agenda way past Bush. WTF?
> 
> Who the hell are we going to have if he gets into power? Attila the Hun?
> 
> http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200807/POL20080703d.html




What are you on?

From your article:



> *Obama: Service To Be A Cornerstone of Presidency*
> 
> Obama said the quiet following Friday's Independence Day celebrations would be a good time to consider how to contribute "to our most pressing national challenges," whether in the military, overseas or just next door.
> 
> ...




Did you misinterpret the concept of 'service'?
Do you think he meant to rapidly increase the size of the armed forces to plunder and pillage foreign soils?

This was a continuation of his theme in his address to the college graduation when he replaced Ted Kennedy.  See #548 



> Obama talked in almost achingly intimate terms about the impact service had on him, as a boy who "spent much of my childhood adrift" and often had little idea "who I was or where I was going" because of his father's absence. But early in college, he said, *values like hard work and empathy* instilled by his mother and grandparents resurfaced "after a long hibernation." He eventually found himself working as a community organizer in a devastated South Side Chicago neighborhood, and said he was transformed.
> 
> One new piece announced Wednesday would create a new "Green Vet Initiative" offering counseling, job placement and mediation with industry for veterans wanting to enter the rapidly expanding renewable energy field.
> 
> Other highlights include: increasing the all-volunteer military, expanding AmeriCorps, doubling the size of the Peace Corps, expanding service programs involving retired people, and *creating a tax credit making the first $4,000 of college tuition free for students who conduct 100 hours of public service a year.*




I realize I don't proactively look for faults but he's more like the Pied Piper than Attila.

Attila was cruel and rapacious.  Do you really see Obama with these latent traits?
Would he have checked on and spoken to, at the site, the policeman who crashed his motorbike during that motorcade?


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What will it be like with a black president?
well we are gonna find out according to the pundits.

I agree, no question there wll be SOME "expectation letdown" - especially as everyone is getting hyped up to the sky.   But at least there's a positive mood apparently permeating the country - and there will definitely be change in many directions (we've already had his speech on race which was heiled as a watershed etc) - and that can only be a good thing (imo)

 Kat Edmonson- Be The Change (OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO)


----------



## Doris (6 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Schools have long been relegated what have traditionally been, and should be, parental responsibilities.  
Schools have poor behaviour management systems, don't teach kids basic social skills... don't inspire them to have a work ethic...

As a teacher I'm so glad to read Obama is endeavouring to promote 'active faith"!  
... don't just pray but *act*!
... don't just *want* something but *do* something to get it!

This is reminiscent of his early Chicago work in getting members of organizations to work together to achieve a common societal need/goal.

Will his words be taken as telling African Americans they have been irresponsible parents?
... or an inspiration for all parents to be more responsible?



> St. Louis: Obama celebrated "active faith" as an obligation of religious Americans and a chief agent of societal change while speaking Saturday to a nearly all-black roomful of churchgoers, but hoping to reach far beyond them.
> 
> He preached individual responsibility, saying he knew he risked criticism for "blaming the victim" by talking of the need for parents to help children with homework and turn off the TV, to pass on a healthy self-image to daughters, and teach boys both to respect women and "realize that responsibility does not end at conception."
> 
> ...




http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD91O1D780


----------



## wayneL (6 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> What are you on about?
> Not taking public money for his campaign?  He's not a woman but he can change his mind!
> 
> 
> ...



Doris,
What am I on? I'm high on the prrospect of the utter and deserved destruction of the "NewLabour" and Gordon Clown. But that's another story.

Over my life I have learned to read the truth behind the euphemisms used by politicians and the press. I look for correct interpretations to "spin", that late 20th and now 21st century curse; that used to be called propaganda.

Believe me, Obama is a Hawk. There will be no peace on earth and goodwill to all under his stewardship,one need only listen to his policy on Israel to see that. The effect of the same is the support of cruelty and rapaciousness, ergo, the tag is accurate.

Re flipflopping. I admire a politician that can change his/her mind. But that is not what Obama has done. He has promulgated a set of policies to secure the Democrat nomination, never intending them to be carried through to the presidential campaign. Political cynicism of the first order.

What is worse is the tribal acceptance of Obama acolytes and spinning it as something else. That is a disgrace.


----------



## Superfly (6 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Whooooo... descent... careful... OBAMUNISM is strong on this thread, even with his promised troop withdrawl for Iraq, when pressed he will not say 100% that he is going actually to do that withdrawl. So Barack is just taking, telling the left what they want to hear, very dangerous. Barack makes a good first impression, but if one really listens to him for a while he doesn't really have much substance, little like, but not as bad a Kevin Rudd. 

The left wants to withdraw troops out of Iraq... 

You can not win a war with no troops on the ground....

... which is exactly what the left wants.. then they can say Iraq was a defeat, Vietnam was a defeat ( which is was not )... rah rah rah from the left....

Remember the "Surge"... it worked to a great extent...


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Superfly said:


> Vietnam was a defeat ( which is was not )... rah rah rah from the left....



and rant rant rant from Superfly


----------



## Doris (6 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Superfly said:


> Whooooo... descent... careful... OBAMUNISM is strong on this thread, even with his promised troop withdrawl for Iraq, *when pressed he will not say 100% that he is going actually to do that withdrawl*. So Barack is just taking, telling the left what they want to hear, very dangerous. Barack makes a good first impression, but if one really listens to him for a while he doesn't really have much substance, little like, but not as bad a Kevin Rudd.




Perhaps you should watch and really listen to his speeches!

Check out his policy stands on his website.

Read my post on #678:



> Obama said what he learns from military commanders on his upcoming trip (to Iraq) will *refine his policy*, but "not the 16-month timetable" for withdrawing U.S. troops from combat in Iraq. He said what he learns could affect *how many residual troops might be needed to train the Iraqi army and police.*
> 
> "I have said throughout this campaign that this war was ill-conceived, that it was a strategic blunder and that it needs to come to an end," he said. "I have also said *I would be deliberate and careful about how we get out*. That position has not changed. I am not searching for maneuvering room with respect to that position."
> 
> He promised to summon the Joint Chiefs of Staff *on his first day in office* "and I will give them a new mission and that is to end this war, responsibly and deliberately, but decisively."


----------



## Superfly (7 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Perhaps you should watch and really listen to his speeches!
> 
> Check out his policy stands on his website.
> 
> Read my post on #678:




.... saw and heard this on CNN ... CNN !!! and CNN can't get enough of the Barack show !!
On Friday / Saturday at a press conference Barack when pressed by a clued up reporter who pushed for an answer on the 16 month withdrawl, Barack admitted that if for the safety of all troops that if troops could not be pulled out without creating a security threat to remaining troops then the troops would stay in Iraq till a safe time, be it 16 months or longer....

And why would I say that he has no substance in his speeches if I haven't heard any... I have and it's easy to say "change"... it's easy and sometimes it fools the public, ask St Kevin Rudd...  at least John McCain can stand up and make this unpopular decision with some of the electorate for the greater good, not just engage in endless populist policy ( like "Rudd/Swan/Gillard" do in Australia )...we have a PM down in Australia now, that can not even get a national ban on plastic shopping bags to happen  in Australia which was an election promise, but the thinks he can tell OPEC to raise output !!!! 

Would OBAMUNISM really leave Iraq unstable just to satisfy the left... very dangerous... 

Again... the left wants troops withdrawn for Iraq..

You can not win a war with no troops on the ground. ..!!!!! 

Which is what the left wants, then they can cry ...Lost in Iraq, lost in Vietnam etc etc..

.. not an American, but watching with interest... John McCain will be a strong President... in 5 months it will be "Barack who" ...


----------



## Superfly (8 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Boggo said:


> Relevant (or irrelevant joke)
> 
> A man goes to a public golf course. He approaches the man behind the counter in the pro shop and says, "I would like 18 holes of golf and a caddie."
> 
> ...




LOL.... Gold ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Superfly said:


> LOL.... Gold ...



Superfly - the fact you like it makes me relax. 

The good news is that the US voting pubic are getting smarter than these GOP joke campaigns


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> odds on an Obama win keep tightening
> 
> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html
> President:-
> ...




And continue to tighten further..

President:-
Obama 2/5  = $1.40 (in from $1.50 above)
McCain 2/1 = $3.00 (out from $2.65 above) 

Winning Party :- 
Democrats also 2/5 = $1.40 (in from $1.45 above)
GOP still  2/1 = $3.00

Explanation ?
Probably this ... 

http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-campaign12-2008jul12,0,5449634.story?track=rss


> McCain hoped for a better week
> Instead, a series of fumbles handed opportunities to Barack Obama.
> By Cathleen Decker and Maeve Reston, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> July 12, 2008
> ...






> All candidates, including Obama, have had worse weeks. But, behind in the polls, the Arizona senator can hardly afford such diversion. His campaign remains frustrated by its central conundrum: Free-wheeling, unscripted events show McCain at his best, but are also most likely to spin off-kilter.
> 
> At a time when a candidate -- like a telemarketer -- must relentlessly repeat his theme in order to clinch the deal, McCain's message has been erratic.
> 
> "He can still fix it, but it appears that given his temperament and his personality it's hard for him to fix these problems," said Linda Fowler, a Dartmouth College government professor who is closely watching the presidential contest. "The spontaneity of what he says, the fact that he's unscripted -- at some point that begins to work against him in a general election where discipline is important."


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

As for the Democrat VP running mate ...

Wow! - Jim Webb off the radar all of a sudden - Kathleen Sebelius the new leader.  

And Barack has publicly stated that Hillary is definitely still in the running.  

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html

Jim Biden ?- looks pretty good to me - in that his experience would complement Obama's.  - but apparently he is equally likely to "drop them into it".  Who nose?.  Time will tell.


----------



## Doris (12 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama accused of trying to win the election*



> Suspicions about Obama's true motives have been building during the past few weeks, but not until today have the bloggers called him out for betraying the Democratic Party's losing tradition.
> 
> "Increasingly, Barack Obama's message is becoming more accessible, appealing and, yes, potentially successful.
> Any Democrat who voted for Dukakis, Mondale or Kerry should regard this as a betrayal."




http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2008047020_borowitz12.html


----------



## Doris (13 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama Says Forcing Russia to Leave the G-8 Would Be a `Mistake'  *

I welcome your comments Wayne!  

Obama's penchant for opportunities of 'conversation' is evidenced IMO.

CNN, 3 hours ago, released some transcripts of an interview they will air tomorrow:



> McCain had pushed for Russia to be excluded from last week's G-8 summit in Japan, saying membership should be limited to countries that "believe in free and open'' economies, societies and elections.







> "It would be a mistake," Obama said.  "The amount of loose nuclear material that is floating around in the former Soviet Union, the amount of technical know-how that is in countries that used to be behind the Iron Curtain would pose a greater threat without Russia's cooperation," Obama said.






> There are 'a lot of problems' with Afghan President Hamid Karzai's administration.
> "I think the Karzai government has not gotten out of the bunker and helped to organize Afghanistan, and the government, the judiciary, police forces, in ways that would give people confidence,'' Obama said.




http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aHOTdQOtFl0M&refer=home


----------



## wayneL (13 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *Obama Says Forcing Russia to Leave the G-8 Would Be a `Mistake'  *
> 
> I welcome your comments Wayne!
> 
> ...




Obama will be pleased to know that I agree with him on this point.


----------



## Doris (13 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Obama will be pleased to know that I agree with him on this point.




I'm so glad I was sitting down when I read that!   
You're starting to wish you could vote for him eh? 

*Obama Picks Senators as Iraq Partners*



> All three senators share similar views – critical ones – of the administration’s Iraq policy.
> 
> “Senator Hagel and Senator Reed may be coming with us. Look, they are both experts on foreign policy. They reflect, I think, a traditional bipartisan wisdom when it comes to foreign policy,” he said. “Neither of them are ideologues but try to get the facts right and make a determination about what’s best for U.S. interests – and they’re good guys.”
> 
> ...




http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/obama-picks-senators-as-iraq-partners/?hp


----------



## Doris (14 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I like the way Obama has stirred the pot 'from the ground up' about filial responsibilities.

*Obama 'Won't Back Off One Bit' on His Tough-Love Message*



> "Americans need to recognize that there is a problem when more than a half of African American children are growing up without a father in the house".
> 
> Obama’s tough love message to African American fathers came most notably in a Fathers Day speech last month in which he told fathers that *“any ol' fool” could conceive a child –- but it takes a man to be father*.




Maybe I should post this on Kennas' thread...  

Of course he stirred Jesse Jackson into claiming he was 'talking down to black people', hence Jackson's slip, when he thought the microphone was off, that he 'could cut his nuts off'... but Obama was addressing a predominantly black audience at the time. 

His message applies to all fathers -- world wide -- in Aus too.

Wouldn't it change the world if these men were prescient enough to consider the product of their imminent 'exchange' would live in poverty! 

... if 'nature' had to consider and take responsibility for 'nurture'.



> “My argument is simply that it’s not an 'either-or' proposition, it’s a 'both-and' proposition," Obama said. "*The government and society as a whole has an obligation to deal with poverty*, particularly poverty that’s deep-rooted not just in the inner cities, but in rural communities all across America.”




http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/07/obama-wont-back.html


----------



## Doris (14 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

An hour ago:

*Britain's backing Obama: Democrat beats McCain by five votes to one*



> Barack Obama is overwhelmingly Britain's choice to be the next US president, five times more popular than his Republican rival, John McCain, a Guardian/ICM poll shows today. Carried out ahead of the Democratic candidate's visit to Britain next week, the poll reveals that 53% feel certain he would make the best president, with only 11% favouring McCain; 36% declined to express an opinion.
> 
> Overall enthusiasm for an Obama presidency is solid across people of all ages and backgrounds.
> 
> ...




http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/14/barackobama.johnmccain


----------



## wayneL (15 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Oooops!

The New Yorker kicked over a Wasp's nest with this cover:

LOLLL!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (15 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Oooops!
> 
> The New Yorker kicked over a Wasp's nest with this cover:
> 
> LOLLL!




Lets hope some gun loving American nutter doesn't see it and do a Hillaryhope on him.

gg


----------



## Doris (15 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Oooops!
> 
> The New Yorker kicked over a Wasp's nest with this cover:
> 
> LOLLL!




Onya Wayne!  

As a satire, as it's meant to be, I think it's quite clever!  

- in the Oval Office:

... portrait of Osama bin Laden  ( 'Osama' sounds like... )
... Michelle as a terrorist  (gentle, sweet protective first lady)
... Barack as a Muslim  (his name is Muslim... but he is Christian)
... the burning of an American flag  (he used to refuse to wear the flag lapel badge)

-- scare tactics and misinformation being used to try to derail Obama's campaign!

Some people actual believe those rumours so maybe this will actually defuse them!?

I wonder how many will buy it and read the two serious articles inside the magazine:
on Obama's political education and rise in Chicago?


----------



## 2020hindsight (15 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Onya Wayne!
> 
> As a satire, as it's meant to be, I think it's quite clever!
> 
> ...



Doris , howdy 
Yep
and all the signs/reports are that it will backfire against the intended "message / propaganda".  

PS only 4 months to go 

PS Based on those odds posted in #692  (unchanged btw), you'd have to assume it will be a woman for VP runnning mate
cheers


----------



## Doris (15 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris , howdy
> Yep
> and all the signs/reports are that it will backfire against the intended "message / propaganda".
> 
> ...




Yes 2020... you had the prescience to pick the VP back in May!

(I edited my post as you can see.  Is that a flip flop? )

But Kathleen Sebelius will be a gutsy choice by Obama. 

She has a brilliant record as governor of Kansas, especially in education which is one of Obama's priorities and she fulfills the dream of a woman in high power.  

He'd be gutsy in overlooking Jim Webb's war experience to support his lack.  But then Webb is so boring to listen to!  
And who knows what confidence Obama will ignite from his forthcoming trips.  

As I've argued, he will choose top advisers who are experienced and it is the decision making role that needs Obama!  

Capitulate Wayne...


----------



## wayneL (15 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Capitulate Wayne...



Eh??

Over what?

Let's see what he achieves as El Presidente... if anything.


----------



## Doris (15 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Eh??
> 
> Over what?
> 
> Let's see what he achieves as El Presidente... if anything.




Can't wait!  

Are you going to London in ten days to catch a glimpse of him?  ..


----------



## wayneL (16 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Can't wait!
> 
> Are you going to London in ten days to catch a glimpse of him?  ..



No. 

David Cameron is more who I'd like to meet. Or Vince Cable, but he went and joined the wrong party.


...and of course, Boris.


----------



## Doris (16 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Senator Barack Obama’s New Strategy for a New World*

Barack delivered a major speech today on national security and the war in Iraq...  _Washington, D.C._

2020, I think this speech depicts _Obama doesn't (politically) need Webb as VP, for his military history!_ 

Sebelius for VP!


Watch the speech, or listen as you read the full text:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/newstrategy




> As I have said many times, our troops have performed brilliantly in lowering the level of violence. General Petraeus has used new tactics to protect the Iraqi population. We have talked directly to Sunni tribes that used to be hostile to America, and supported their fight against al Qaeda. Shiite militias have generally respected a cease-fire. Those are the facts, and all Americans welcome them.
> 
> In the 18 months since the surge began, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated. June was our highest casualty month of the war. The Taliban has been on the offensive, even launching a brazen attack on one of our bases. Al Qaeda has a growing sanctuary in Pakistan. That is a consequence of our current strategy.
> 
> In the 18 months since the surge began, as I warned at the outset - Iraq's leaders have not made the political progress that was the purpose of the surge. *They have not invested tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues to rebuild their country*. They have not resolved their differences or shaped a new political compact.






> Let me be clear: *we must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in*. We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months. That would be the summer of 2010 - *one year after Iraqi Security Forces will be prepared to stand up*; two years from now, and more than seven years after the war began. After this redeployment, we'll keep a residual force to perform specific missions in Iraq: targeting any remnants of al Qaeda; protecting our service members and diplomats; and training and supporting Iraq's Security Forces, *so long as the Iraqis make political progress.*






> It is unacceptable that almost seven years after nearly 3,000 Americans were killed on our soil, the terrorists who attacked us on 9/11 are still at large... And yet today, we have five times more troops in Iraq than Afghanistan.
> 
> Senator McCain said - just months ago - that "Afghanistan is not in trouble because of our diversion to Iraq." *I could not disagree more*. Our troops and our NATO allies are performing heroically in Afghanistan, but *I have argued for years* that we lack the resources to finish the job because of our commitment to Iraq. That's what the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said earlier this month. And that's why, as President, I will make the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban the top priority that it should be. This is a war that we have to win.






> *One of the most dangerous weapons in the world today is the price of oil*. We ship nearly $700 million a day to unstable or hostile nations for their oil. *It pays for terrorist bombs going off from Baghdad to Beirut. It funds petro-diplomacy in Caracas and radical madrasas from Karachi to Khartoum*. It takes leverage away from America and shifts it to dictators.
> 
> This immediate danger is eclipsed only by the *long-term threat from climate change*, which will lead to devastating weather patterns, terrible storms, drought, and famine. That means people competing for food and water in the next fifty years in the very places that have known horrific violence in the last fifty: Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia. Most disastrously, that could mean destructive storms on our shores, and the disappearance of our coastline.
> 
> Never again will we sit on the sidelines, or stand in the way of global action to tackle this global challenge. I will reach out to the leaders of the biggest carbon emitting nations and ask them to join a *new Global Energy Forum* that will lay the foundation for the next generation of climate protocols. We will also build an *alliance of oil-importing nations and work together to reduce our demand*, and to break the grip of OPEC on the global economy. We'll set a goal of an 80% reduction in global emissions by 2050. And as we develop new forms of clean energy here at home, *we will share our technology and our innovations with all the nations of the world*.






> *Now is the time for a new era of international cooperation*. It's time for America and Europe to renew our common commitment to face down the threats of the 21st century. It's time to strengthen our partnerships with Japan, South Korea, Australia and the world's largest democracy - India - to create a stable and prosperous Asia. It's time to engage China on common interests like climate change, even as we continue to encourage their shift to a more open and market-based society. It's time to strengthen NATO by asking more of our allies, while always approaching them with the respect owed a partner. It's time to reform the United Nations, so that this imperfect institution can become a more perfect forum to share burdens, strengthen our leverage, and promote our values. It's time to deepen our engagement to help resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, so that we help our ally Israel achieve true and lasting security, *while helping Palestinians achieve their legitimate aspirations for statehood.*
> 
> And just as we renew longstanding efforts, so must we shape new ones to meet new challenges. That's why I'll create a *Shared Security Partnership Program* - a new alliance of nations to strengthen cooperative efforts to take down *global terrorist networks*, while standing up against torture and brutality. That's why *we'll work with the African Union to enhance its ability to keep the peace*. That's why we'll build a new partnership to roll back the trafficking of drugs, and guns, and gangs in *the Americas*. That's what we can do if we are ready to engage the world.






> For eight years, *we have paid the price for a foreign policy that lectures without listening*; that divides us from one another - and from the world - instead of calling us to a common purpose.


----------



## Doris (18 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Cast of 300 Advises Obama on Foreign Policy*

Experienced and competent advisers  with intelligent judgment made by Obama.    

An hour ago:



> WASHINGTON ”” Every day around 8 a.m., foreign policy aides at Senator Barack Obama’s Chicago campaign headquarters send him two e-mails: *a briefing on major world developments over the previous 24 hours* and a set of questions, accompanied by suggested answers, that the candidate is likely to be asked about international relations during the day.
> 
> Behind the e-mail messages is a *tight-knit group of aides* supported by a huge *300-person foreign policy campaign bureaucracy*, organized like a mini State Department, to assist Obama whose limited national security experience remains a concern to many voters.
> 
> ...





http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/18/us/politics/18advisers.html?ref=politics


----------



## ZzzzDad (18 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

For the life of me, I can't understand how anyone on a STOCK FORUM  could be for Obama.  The guy wants to almost double long term capital gains rates from the current 15% to 28%, increase taxes on social security, move the top rate from the current 36% to 39.6%, etc., etc.  All of his proposals are economy killers.

The current troubles in the stock markets will be minor compared to what will happen if Obama gets his way.

This guy is an extreme leftist, who is blatantly attempting to fool the American public that he is middle of the road, now that he has the Democrat nomination.

Obama will not win.  McCain is tied or just slightly behind in the polls in July.  Democrats are almost always further ahead in the polls at this stage, and only fall behind once the general election sets in, and the people open their eyes to see what extreme leftists the Democrats have put up for election.  Obama is McGovern and Carter wrapped into one, and will lose by at least a 55% to 45% margin - mark my word.

There is a small, but mobilized group of Obama supporters that will continue to be deluded that Obama has a chance, and the media is touting him as the messiah.  

I know of many staunch Democrats, especially working class that have shocked me when they tell me that they cannot, and will not, vote for Obama.  

Many on this site do not truly know the American public, nor understand American politics.


----------



## ZzzzDad (18 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I meant to also point out that Obama has no ideas on how to increase oil supplies, and cut the price of oil.  America has 3 times the amount of oil than Saudi Arabia locked up in the shale oil deposits in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming.  Another huge deposit in North Dakota.  He sides with the environmental extremists against exploiting these deposits.  America has more coal deposits than any country on earth, again, the environmental extremists won't allow this to be exploited, even though clean coal technology is very advanced.  He is against drilling on the outer continental shelfs of the East and West coasts of America, despite the fact that there has not been an oil spill since 1969.  Even Hurricane Katrina didn't cause a single drop of oil to be spilled when it came up against all the oil rigs in the Gulf coast.

His "yes we can" is really "no we can't" when it comes to solving the energy crisis.  The oil crisis is really starting to be noticed here in America, and the people are finally learning that the Democrats and environmentalists are the problem.

Again, McCain is going to win.  He is no great candidate, but he is middle of the road, and at leasts tries to work with both sides of the political divide in America.  Obama has always voted left, left, and extreme left.

Doris, this is not a slam at you, I've read most of your posts, and you seem like a nice person and a true and passionate and sincere Obama supporter.  I just think you are misreading the American people.


----------



## Doris (18 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> For the life of me, I can't understand how anyone on a STOCK FORUM  could be for Obama.  The guy wants to almost double long term capital gains rates from the current 15% to 28%,* increase taxes on social security*, move the *top rate* from the current 36% to 39.6%, etc., etc.  *All* of his proposals are economy killers.




Thanks for your comments 'sleeping' Dad.
... you've pulled me away from my book (The Peaceful Warrior) to analyze them.

Inherently, the GOP is full of big business and big employers.  

*Barack Obama on Tax Reform* 
http://www.issues2000.org/Economic/Barack_Obama_Tax_Reform.htm



> Raise capital gains tax for fairness, not for revenue:
> 
> Q: You favor an increase in the capital gains tax, saying, "I certainly would not go above what existed under Bill Clinton, which was 28%." It's now 15%. That's almost a doubling if you went to 28%. Bill Clinton dropped the capital gains tax to 20%, then George Bush has taken it down to 15%.
> 
> A: What I've said is that I would look at raising the capital gains tax for purposes of fairness. The top 50 hedge fund managers made $29 billion last year--$29 billion for 50 individuals. Those who are able to work the stock market and amass huge fortunes on capital gains are paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries. That's not fair.



Source: _2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary Apr 16, 2008 _



> Tax cut for seniors and those making $75,000 a year or less:
> 
> Everywhere you go, you meet people who are working harder for less, wages and incomes have flatlined, people are seeing escalating costs of everything from health care to gas at the pump. In some communities, they have been struggling for decades now. This has to be a priority of the next president. We have to restore a sense of fairness & balance to our economy. We've got to stop giving tax breaks to companies that are shipping jobs overseas and invest those tax breaks in companies that are investing here in the US.
> 
> ...




Seniors in Australia sure wish our new federal government provided some help atm!



ZzzzDad said:


> This guy is an extreme leftist, who is blatantly attempting to fool the American public that he is middle of the road, now that he has the Democrat nomination.




Yes... he's mellowed since winning the nomination I grant you but I'm betting this is based more on his flexibility from listening to others, as he *represents*, rather than represents a dictator-puppet.



ZzzzDad said:


> Obama will not win.  McCain is tied or just slightly behind in the polls in July.  Democrats are almost always further ahead in the polls at this stage, and only fall behind once the general election sets in, and the people open their eyes to see what extreme leftists the Democrats have put up for election.  Obama is McGovern and Carter wrapped into one, and will lose by at least a 55% to 45% margin - mark my word.




The last two elections were aberrant... Florida debacle + the bible belt coerced by the GOP machine to come out of the woodwork to vote for the first time to prevent abortion and gay marriage. Meanwhile, way more than half the eligible American voters chose not to bother.



ZzzzDad said:


> There is a small, but mobilized group of Obama supporters that will continue to be deluded that Obama has a chance, and the media is touting him as the messiah.




'The messiah' is what I felt after I first watched him almost two years ago, although I didn't label it!

What good do you think he could do if he were to beat McCain?



ZzzzDad said:


> I know of many staunch Democrats, *especially working class* that have shocked me when they tell me that they cannot, and will not, vote for Obama.






> There has to be a restoration of balance in our tax code. We are going to offset some of the payroll taxes that families who are making less than $50,000 a year get a larger break.
> 
> 
> Q: If either one of you become president, and let the Bush tax cuts lapse, there will be effectively tax increases on millions of Americans.
> ...



Source: _2008 Democratic debate in Los Angeles before Super Tuesday Jan 30, 2008 _




ZzzzDad said:


> Many on this site do not truly know the American public, nor understand American politics.




You are quite correct!  
And we welcome your insights into the debate as it affects us all.

Your voting and your tax systems are so complex! 
I appreciate our simple ways, e.g. we pay rates (housing tax) to our local government only.  
You guys also pay to your state and federal governments.
Your income tax is lower but the plethora of additional taxes is crippling!  

You obviously will vote for McCain... but:

*McCain and Obama on Tax Reform*

http://www.businessweek.com/investo...10.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_top+story



> McCain's tax cuts would help those with very high incomes;
> Obama would offer breaks to low- and middle-income earners and increase the burden on the rich.
> 
> Hardly anyone disagrees with this statement: The nation's tax system is a mess. The U.S. tax code is riddled with far too many deductions, credits, exemptions, exclusions, phase-ins, and phase-outs.
> ...




*McCain vs Obama on taxes*
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/06/mccain_vs_obama_on_taxes.html



> In order to substantiate its claim that large numbers of ordinary Americans will be worse off under the Democrats, the McCain camp points to an Obama proposal to *raise tax rates on dividends and capital gains*. Obama advisers argue that any tax increases will be offset by credits for lower-income families.
> 
> The claim that Obama will "enact" the largest tax increase since World War II is also overblown. *The Bush tax cuts will expire automatically at the end of 2010*, so it is hardly a question of "enacting" a new tax increase. According to Obama's new economics adviser, Jason Furman, the revenues raised from letting the tax cuts expire will be returned to middle and low-income tax payers in the form of tax credits to pay for health insurance, so the overall effect will be revenue neutral.
> 
> They also point out that most middle and low-income families invest in the market through 401 (k) plans that are *exempt from capital gains taxes*.




No doubt you are living up to your namesake at this hour ZzzzDad, but don't you think that many people have been victims of scare tactics by McCain?


----------



## ZzzzDad (19 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris - thanks for your respectful reply.  Just a few points about two things that you might like to think about.  Low capital gains rates are a money maker for the federal government coffers.  Barack Obama even made the astounding statement that even if raising the capital gains tax rate garners less money for the federal government, that he would *still* raise it out of fairness.  Does that make any sense?  That was probably one of his worst blunders ever.  Bill Clinton, even though I'm no fan of his, at least understood that lowering capital gains rates was what helped balance the budget during the late 1990s.  Raising the long term rates to 28% would also be unfair to the middle class, because their *top* rate in most cases is 28%.  Many middle class Americans own stocks and other investments that qualify for capital gains.

Second point, as a father of 4 and quite middle class, the big lie is that George Bush cut taxes only for the wealthy.  GWB isntituted tax cuts at every level.  The biggest cut was a $1000 a child *tax credit*, not tax deduction.  As a father of 4, this put an extra $4,000 per year back into our pockets.  Additional cuts, like lowering the lower rates has meant about an additional $1,000 dollars.  Believe me, that extra $5,000 a year has helped this middle class family of six very much.

The other point I'll make is that the Republican party is not the party of the wealthy as the media would like people to believe.  It is primarily the party of the middle class, and families.  

George Soros is one of those wealthy hedge fund directors that Obama mentions in your above example.  In fact, Soros made the second most of any hedge fund managers last year - over 2 billion dollars.  He has many ways of avoiding taxes, especially with his many off shore operations.   9 out of top 10 wealthiest Senators in the U.S. Senate are Democrats.  In fact, you might be surprised to find out how many of the wealthiest people in America are Democrats - Warren Buffet, and Bill Gates are two examples.

Anyway, time for dinner.  Talk to you later.


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/07/19/2308566.htm?section=justin

McCain's offsider Phil Gramm claims US  is only in "mental recession" 



> 'Whiners' advisor resigns from McCain campaign
> Posted 3 hours 22 minutes ago
> 
> Former US senator Phil Gramm says has resigned as co-chair of Republican White House hopeful John McCain's campaign after calling the United States a "nation of whiners".
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris,  - 
sorry but I couldn't resist - 
heck if you can laugh at yourself, you're miles ahead of the other mob 

 best movie line ever


----------



## Doris (19 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris,  -
> sorry but I couldn't resist -
> heck if you can laugh at yourself, you're miles ahead of the other mob
> 
> best movie line ever




That unexpected line made me break up! 10/10 2020!  

So now Barack is in Afghanistan after a stopover in Kuwait to see troops.  

He's to visit Iraq next.  Whatever happened to his secret schedule for security?

One learns more when one listens:



> "I'm looking forward to seeing what the situation on the ground is,'' Obama said yesterday in Washington before boarding his flight. "I want to, obviously, talk to the commanders and get a sense, both in Afghanistan and in Baghdad of what their biggest concerns are. *I'm more interested in listening than doing a lot of talking*.''




It seems he's a popular fella here:



> Afghans who follow U.S. politics support Obama more than McCain because the Democrat has put emphasis on Afghanistan from the start of the presidential campaign, according to Moshtaq Ahmad Qadari, an official at Herat University in western Afghanistan who said he saw reports of both candidates' speeches.




Saad Mohseni, director of the Moby Media Group, Afghanistan's largest multi- media conglomerate said today:



> He has been in contact with both presidential campaigns and has been impressed by the number of South Asia experts on Obama's foreign policy team compared with McCain's.
> 
> Afghans appreciate that Obama has been very critical of their government because they are very frustrated right now, but they were particularly impressed that very early in the campaign he was very harsh with Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, which drew a rebuke from Musharraf.
> 
> ...




http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aAUkmJGVuiKQ&refer=home


----------



## Doris (20 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Barack Obama even made the astounding statement that even if raising the capital gains tax rate garners less money for the federal government, that he would *still* raise it out of fairness.  Does that make any sense?  That was probably one of his worst blunders ever.  Bill Clinton, even though I'm no fan of his, at least understood that lowering capital gains rates was what helped balance the budget during the late 1990s.  Raising the long term rates to 28% would also be unfair to the middle class, because their *top* rate in most cases is 28%.  Many middle class Americans own stocks and other investments that qualify for capital gains.




He's aiming at the over $1 million level for capital gains from what I've read.
Isn't it fairer that big earners are caught as they have dodging skills and usually pay less tax than their office staff?
Are you saying the exact details are out now?  

I'd be happy to pay 28% capital gains tax!  Here it's at your threshold tax level. This is reduced by half for stock held over a year.  But then I'm also happy not having to pay the other complex taxes you have!

So how does investing in the market through 401 (k) plans, that are exempt from capital gains taxes, work?



> Second point, as a father of 4 and quite middle class, the big lie is that George Bush cut taxes only for the wealthy.  GWB instituted tax cuts at every level.  The biggest cut was a $1000 a child *tax credit*, not tax deduction.  As a father of 4, this put an extra $4,000 per year back into our pockets.  Additional cuts, like lowering the lower rates has meant about an additional $1,000 dollars.  Believe me, that extra $5,000 a year has helped this middle class family of six very much.




Yes.  We call that a tax rebate.  The amount is returned, not taken off assessable income.  
Are you saying Obama intends to cancel this?  

You would welcome his policy on making changes to the 'no child left behind' farce that makes schools 'dumb down' their students by teaching for the tests?  And funding college support?



> The other point I'll make is that the Republican party is not the party of the wealthy as the media would like people to believe.  It is primarily the party of the middle class, and families.
> 
> George Soros is one of those wealthy hedge fund directors that Obama mentions in your above example.  In fact, Soros made the second most of any hedge fund managers last year - over 2 billion dollars.  He has many ways of avoiding taxes, especially with his many off shore operations.   9 out of top 10 wealthiest Senators in the U.S. Senate are Democrats.  In fact, you might be surprised to find out how many of the wealthiest people in America are Democrats - Warren Buffet, and Bill Gates are two examples.




So it would seem that Soros would be one of Obama's targets... especially businesses that send jobs offshore?
... or do you just mean offshore via a tax haven?

Perhaps people who have made themselves a fortune in the real world are those best to be elected and pass on their expertise?  They surely would not be there for the money if they are wealthy?

Buffet and Gates are also philanthropists.  Obviously there is no line drawn dividing the rich into one particular party but it sure seems as though the lobbyists and PACs have prospered from their investment in GWB.

But what is Obama pushing for that you feel is the direction needed?


----------



## Doris (20 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I have to say I've enjoyed the 'mature' campaign now that the nastiness left with Hillary.
McCain's comments like: 'He's done well for his age and lack of experience' are sarcastic but relatively altruistic. 

But now his integrity has degenerated into mischief making IMO.  



> "*I'm more interested in listening than doing a lot of talking*," Obama told reporters before leaving Washington for a trip cloaked in secrecy because of security concerns. "*And I think it is very important to recognize that I'm going over there as a U.S. senator. We have one president at a time*."






> *MCain*, whose campaign spokeswoman suggested that Obama was embarking on a "campaign rally overseas," *said his rival was not going to Afghanistan and Iraq with an open mind*. "Apparently," McCain said in his radio address, "*he's confident enough that he won't find any facts that might change his opinion or alter his strategy. Remarkable*."




At least the White House is still (accidentally) altruistic towards Obama:  



> The White House also made clear Saturday that it was monitoring Obama's travels; it accidentally sent e-mail to a broad list of reporters with the news report that *the Iraqi prime minister supported Obama's proposed 16-month timeline for withdrawing combat troops from Iraq*.




http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/07/20/america/20obama.php


----------



## Doris (25 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Barack in Berlin*

This has been anticipated by the press to be an historic speech.
Video and the transcript.  Watch or read or read as you watch:

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Friday, 25 July 2008 10:04 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: VIDEO: Barack in Berlin


Dear Doris --

As you may have heard, Barack has been in Europe, the Middle East, and Asia this week.

Today, he spoke in Berlin, Germany.

In a city where a wall once divided the free from the oppressed, he talked about tearing down the walls that divide all peoples so we can address our common problems -- the threats of terrorism and nuclear weapons, global warming and genocide, AIDS and poverty.

Watch Barack's historic speech and share it with your friends:


http://my.barackobama.com/berlinvideo

Please forward this email to your friends, family, and colleagues.

Thanks,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: doris.*******@bigpond.com


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> And continue to tighten further..
> President:-
> Obama 2/5  = $1.40 (in from $1.50 above)
> McCain 2/1 = $3.00 (out from $2.65 above)
> ...



Doris, Big decision / gamble to do that talk in Berlin, yes? - still he seems to be able to get away with it. (another first for a mere candidate).  

McCain made a pretty politically clever speech to Vets this morning.  "He was right with the surge, etc" -  I would have thought he would have caught up a whisker, especially as the press keeps sayings it's close.  Yet the gap between Barack and McCain ( Barack as favourite) keeps widening with the bookies .   

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html
President:-
Obama 4/11  = $1.36 (in from $1.40 - which was in from $1.50)
McCain 5/2 = $3.50 (out from $3.00 - which was out from $2.65) 

You'd have to assume that will get much closer before November.  
But having said that only a rich man could afford to bet against Obama surely.  

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/110924-234-3.html
PS Winning Party :-
Democrats still at 2/5 = $1.40 (unchanged)
GOP now 5/2 = $3.50 (out frrom $3.00 above)

Barack's most likely running mate keeps changing lol. 
Evan Bayh now favourite.  - yet more reading up to do.


----------



## wayneL (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Comment in the Telegraph re the Berlin speech



> Obama’s Kinnock moment in Berlin
> 
> On my visits to America this year for their elections I have been impressed by the rhetorical skills of Barack Obama only slightly less than I have been impressed by his ability to talk complete flannel in his handsomely crafted speeches.
> 
> ...


----------



## wayneL (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *Barack in Berlin*
> 
> This has been anticipated by the press to be an historic speech.
> Video and the transcript.  Watch or read or read as you watch:



I listened to the whole thing, even managed not to scream at the screen, even though my bullsh!t meter was registering maximum.

How can the world trust a man who has such poor grasp of the real issues of this planet and indulges in such populous, syrupy sweet platitudes that makes any pragmatist want to vomit? Yet reading between the lines, there is a dangerous agenda for liberty loving humanity.

This man speaks with forked tongue.

And the problem is, the alternative is not very palatable either.


----------



## Julia (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> His whistlestop tour of the Middle East and Europe has only reinforced my view that he is nothing more than a charismatic charlatan who would be gravely out of his depth if elected leader of the free world.




The "out of his depth" sentiment resonates with me.  It's one thing to be able to look personable and use a good speaking voice to mouth platitudes, but quite another to actually take responsibility for such a huge position as President of the USA.

His quasi hysterical following is reminiscent of that following a rock star but I wonder if the great American public are just indulging themselves with him at this stage, but will ultimately opt for the age (and presumed wisdom) of McCain.  He is less than appealing also.  I'm glad I don't have the responsibility of choosing one of these two totally  unattractive candidates.


----------



## skint (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> I listened to the whole thing, even managed not to scream at the screen, even though my bullsh!t meter was registering maximum.
> 
> How can the world trust a man who has such poor grasp of the real issues of this planet and indulges in such populous, syrupy sweet platitudes that makes any pragmatist want to vomit? Yet reading between the lines, there is a dangerous agenda for liberty loving humanity.
> 
> ...




I can't recall an American president or candidate who doesn't deliver speeches full of "populous, syrupy sweet, platitudes". The best clues are what those platitudes are directed at. Although his ablitiy to address the issues can only be viewed historically, the issues are bang on the money. Whereas McCain's focusing on continueing the Bush administration's efforts at decimating the American economy by "Bomb, bomb, bombing Iran", and so on, further increasing a catastrophic debt, at least Obama is proposing to address the real issues. Take a couple of other examples:

Health - the States is the only modern economy that I can think of that does not have a national health system. From either a humane or economic perspective, access to health care is vital and a given in just about all developed countries.

It is also one of the greatest impediments to social mobility. American's regard their country as 'the land of opportunity, however it has lower social mobility than pretty much anywhere in the developed world ie. an expensive entrenched underclass. At least the Democrats are talking about addressing the issue.

Climate change - save for a few who regard themselves as more qualified to comment than the near consensus in the scientific community who are qualified, it's generally agreed the costs of inaction are far greater than the costs of action. Again, McGoat is silent. 

Remains to be seen how he does if/when he achieves office. I shudder to think how much further the US and the rest of the world will suffer if the neo-cons (in whatever clothing) continue their hatchet job on everything from health to world peace to the economy.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



skint said:


> ...Health - the States is the only modern economy that I can think of that does not have a national health system. From either a humane or economic perspective, access to health care is vital and a given in just about all developed countries.



well skint , we  have Gough to thank for that


----------



## wayneL (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> the near consensus in the scientific community who are qualified, it's generally agreed the costs of inaction are far greater than the costs of action. Again, McGoat is silent.




Near consensus does not indicate intellectual integrity, particularly in something so successfully contested by the great body of dissenters (which actually shows less consensus that portrayed), it shows that there is a great political/financial/social expediency, ergo, a gravy train.

There are great costs of inaction, but there may be greater cost with wrong-action. Obama, just like the other compartments on the gravy train propose wrong-action. This will be at great cost to liberty and paradoxically,  the environment as well.


----------



## Doris (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris, Big decision / gamble to do that talk in Berlin, yes? - still he seems to be able to get away with it. (another first for a mere candidate).
> 
> Barack's most likely running mate keeps changing lol.
> Evan Bayh now favourite.  - yet more reading up to do.




Loved how he began and ended his speech with 'improbable':
"The journey that led me here is improbable."
"We are a people of improbable hope."

Loved his use of alliteration and imagery: 
'From Kiev to Cape Town, prison camps were closed, and the doors of democracy were opened.'

'The streets where we stand were filled with hungry families who had no comfort from the cold.
But in the darkest hours, the people of Berlin kept the flame of hope burning.' 

Loved his dig at GWB and Guantanamo Bay:
'Will we reject torture and stand for the rule of law?'



> At least he didn't speak before 200,000 people in Paris, because Americans are suspicious of the French as we know. Oh, but then President Nicolas Sarkozy said those things in an interview with Le Figaro. "*Obama? He's my pal. Unlike my diplomatic advisers, I never believed in Hillary Clinton's chances. I always said that Obama would be nominated*." The Hillary folk are going to love that.




His aim was to establish a rapport with the leaders he met and revive the memory of historic symbiosis... WWII:  



> This city, of all cities, knows the dream of freedom. And you know that the only reason we stand here tonight is because men and women from both of our nations came together to work, and struggle, and sacrifice for that better life.
> 
> Look at Berlin, where Germans and Americans learned to work together and trust each other less than three years after facing each other on the field of battle.




He made them see that he had listened and heard and understood what Europeans thought:



> In Europe, the view that America is part of what has gone wrong in our world, rather than a force to help make it right, has become all too common.




I thought McCain would castigate him over this!  Isn't this comment reminiscent of Rev Wright's rants about '9/11 and chickens coming home to roost'?  He was brave enough and honest enough to acknowledge animosity towards the foreign policies of his country.  

(Sulky sour-grapes McCain said he would like to give a speech in Berlin.
... as president of the US not as a contender. Humph!):

And then Barack planted the seed for their cooperation:



> Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. *But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together*. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more – not less. *Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.*




He encapsulated the crises facing common humanity:



> As we speak, cars in Boston and factories in Beijing are melting the ice caps in the Arctic, shrinking coastlines in the Atlantic, and bringing drought to farms from Kansas to Kenya.
> 
> Poorly secured nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, or secrets from a scientist in Pakistan could help build a bomb that detonates in Paris. The poppies in Afghanistan become the heroin in Berlin. The poverty and violence in Somalia breeds the terror of tomorrow. The genocide in Darfur shames the conscience of us all.
> 
> In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided.




He made them feel important and valued... reminded them that the US had helped them in the past:



> *America has no better partner than Europe*. Now is the time to build new bridges across the globe as strong as the one that bound us across the Atlantic. Now is the time to join together, through constant cooperation, strong institutions, shared sacrifice, and a global commitment to progress, to meet the challenges of the 21st century. It was this spirit that led airlift planes to appear in the sky above our heads, and people to assemble where we stand today. And this is the moment when our nations – and *all nations – must summon that spirit anew*.




McCain rattled for Barack to go to the front and discard his neophyte label. 
Then the media jumps on his absence for all this time!  A week!  
They want him to save the US - not the world!



> The word from the "fly-over states" – otherwise known as the heartland – meanwhile, was *"What about us?" "What about our economy?" *Or as one Pennsylvania voter put it, it's great if the Germans love him but they ain't voting in November.
> 
> Obama found himself defending spending so much time abroad. He has used it to lobby for more European troops in Afghanistan, he told CNN. That will mean fewer American troops there, "*which means we are spending fewer billions of dollars and we can invest those billions of dollars in making sure that we providing tax cuts to middle-class families struggling with gas prices*".




How would Europeans view this statement?  Was he merely manipulating them?!

Now he’s a tall poppy will the press continue these recent chops? 
His charismatic trip is criticized as though they own him - not the world! 



> *Dallas Morning News: "The Obama speech no doubt played well in Berlin – but what about in Peoria? The Obama campaign ran a real risk scheduling this address in a European capital *at a time when Americans are suffering from the worst economic crisis in at least a generation* ... After all, Mr Obama is running to be president of the United States, not king of the world."





http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ockstar-moment-in-berlin-backfire-877802.html


----------



## skint (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> well skint , we  have Gough to thank for that




Hi 20/20...and free education, no fault divorce, ended concription, reduced tarriffs, opened relations with China etc..

He tried to do a bit but much too soon and foreign policy unfortunately wasn't his strong suit, but the progressive reforms way outshine the shortcomings IMHO. BTW, In the last half of the Howard years, thay were  the only government who managed to outspend Whitlam in relevant terms!


----------



## wayneL (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



skint said:


> Hi 20/20...and free education, no fault divorce, ended concription, reduced tarriffs, opened relations with China etc..
> 
> He tried to do a bit but much too soon and foreign policy unfortunately wasn't his strong suit, but the progressive reforms way outshine the shortcomings IMHO. BTW, In the last half of the Howard years, thay were  the only government who managed to outspend Whitlam in relevant terms!




...and the ideologue doth reveal itself.


----------



## skint (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> This will be at great cost to liberty and paradoxically,  the environment as well.




Sounds like a "syrupy sweet platitude" to me. It reads like "if we recognise that a healthy environment is inextricrably linked to a robust economy, it will be the end of Truth, Justice and the American Way and life as we know it." Bit of catastrophising there. Care to expand on what you meant?


----------



## skint (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> ...and the ideologue doth reveal itself.




No, an idealogue would not recognise the failings.


----------



## Doris (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Barack's most likely running mate keeps changing lol.
> Evan Bayh now favourite.  - yet more reading up to do.




Me too...

He certainly has all the symptoms of Obama's values:


> His signature legislative efforts are aimed at *strengthening national security*, *creating more jobs* through the growth of small businesses, protecting American workers from unfair trade practices, *encouraging responsible fatherhood* and providing *tax-relief for families* struggling with the rising costs of college, retirement and the long-term care of a loved one. Bayh has taken the lead in providing our troops with the armored vehicles they need and has visited Iraq and Afghanistan several times for a first-hand look at the progress on-the-ground. He has also led the fight to cut through the mire of bureaucracy to ensure our nation's *wounded soldiers receive the high quality care they need and deserve*.




His record looks good experience for hard economic times!



> Before his election to the Senate, Bayh was elected in 1988 to the first of two terms as Governor of Indiana, where he established the state as one of the strongest, most financially secure economies in the nation.
> 
> Stressing fiscal responsibility, lower taxes, job creation and lean government, Bayh's list of achievements include: eight years without raising taxes; the greatest single tax cut and largest budget surplus in state history; national leadership in moving people from welfare to work; more dollars for schools every year; high academic standards and new college opportunities for all, including low-income students; more than 350,000 new jobs; tougher laws on crime; and improved environmental quality.




http://bayh.senate.gov/about/biography/

But he could make a top adviser.  I'd prefer Kathleen Sebelius... need a woman at the top!


----------



## Doris (26 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> I listened to the whole thing, even managed not to scream at the screen, even though my bullsh!t meter was registering maximum.




Now Wayne... it's OK to reveal your emotions!  
But it's admirable that you kept your mouth shut and listened. 



> How can the world trust a man who has such poor grasp of the real issues of this planet and indulges in such populous, syrupy sweet platitudes that makes any pragmatist want to vomit? Yet reading between the lines, there is a dangerous agenda for liberty loving humanity.
> 
> This man speaks with forked tongue.
> 
> And the problem is, the alternative is not very palatable either.




What issues did he omit?

Spit them out!

... forked tongue and all.   


Do you think his speech was a sinister prelude to mandatory involvement in his future battle scenarios?  

I have to say I admire his public introduction of himself outside his own country and his simultaneous achievement of introducing his concept of mustering the free countries of the world to be more involved in the solutions for the down-trodden ones... Darfur, Zimbabwe, Burma, Somalia etc

Perhaps a hidden agenda is pragmatically to enable him to focus on re-building the health and strength of his own country, thus saving many billions by organizing the rest of the world to do their share?  

Note he focused on their supporting Afghanistan... not Iraq!

As I've said, I'm a David E Kelly addict.  He's had several episodes of Boston Legal where Alan Shore has decried the billions the US has spent on aid to the rest of the world whilst millions of Americans are living in poverty.  
Also the conditions the US has demanded in return for monetary favours.

Hmmm...  Maybe Kelly is one of Obama's advisers...


----------



## Doris (27 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*German Government Sees Obama Speech as "Positive Signal" *



> The German government sees the Berlin speech by US Senator Barack Obama as "a positive signal to Europe".
> 
> *Obama's call for close international cooperation in dealing with global challenges* was in line with the views of Chancellor Angela Merkel and her broad coalition government.






> Eckart von Klaeden, foreign policy spokesman, said the speech had been *in the best tradition of US foreign policy.*
> 
> Speaking to German media, Von Klaeden said the speech could as well have been made by Obama's rival for the US presidency, Republican Senator John McCain.




Howzat for having an impartial each-way bet!  

Other German politicians said:



> "It was the speech of a man of the world that was directed not only at Germans and Europeans, but also at Americans."






> "*Obama had raised outstanding issues that Germany and Europe had to respond to*, for example the German contribution to the NATO effort in Afghanistan."




http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3514249,00.html



> Mr McCain is hoping that by touring small towns in the US and focusing on domestic issues, he will score points with voters who care little about foreign policy.




http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7524300.stm

*Obama Gives A Speech We All Can Agree With*



> In his speech the Illinois Senator went through a whole laundry list of international hotspots. From Amman to Iran, from Belfast to Burma, from Darfur to Pakistan. *No crisis left behind* seemed to be the unspoken motto of the speech. And the solution offered to the various global problems was always the same. *If we all work together, overcome our differences of the past we can succeed*.




http://blogs.dw-world.de/acrossthepond/michael/1.6844.html


----------



## wayneL (27 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Now Wayne... it's OK to reveal your emotions!
> But it's admirable that you kept your mouth shut and listened.
> 
> 
> ...




Doris, I have a feeling you would even be impressed if he jumped up on a hickory stump, pulled out a golden fiddle and a band of demons joined in. (God bless Charlie Daniels)

As for David E Kelly, fantastic producer and always with a pertinent message, but David E Kelly, Obama is not.

There is a striking discord between his populous rhetoric and the policy he has thus far revealed. Think of Bob Hawke and his ludicrous "no child living in poverty" corker. It's all rubbish.

This is America we are talking about and the military/industrial complex has more power than all the Obamas in the world. Even if his intentions match his rhetoric, which his policies say will not happen, he won't get past the faceless billionaires of said establishment... and I think he is actually playing his hand directly to them while deceive the plebs.

You will be dissappointed and disillusioned in 4 years time... possibly very bloody angry.

Mark my words.


----------



## ZzzzDad (27 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

A humorous, and basically spot on commentary on the Messiah from Gerard Baker:

by
Gerard Baker 

And it came to pass, in the eighth year of the reign of the evil Bush the Younger (The Ignorant), when the whole land from the Arabian desert to the shores of the Great Lakes had been laid barren, that a Child appeared in the wilderness. 

The Child was blessed in looks and intellect. Scion of a simple family, offspring of a miraculous union, grandson of a typical white person and an African peasant. And yea, as he grew, the Child walked in the path of righteousness, with only the occasional detour into the odd weed and a little blow. 

(read the rest on the link below)

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article4392846.ece


I have a few Democrat friends who have totally surprised me that they are voting for McCain over Obama.  These are staunch Democrats, but they don't think Obama is fit to be President with his extreme left wing values, connections (Rev. Wright, et al), and no credentials.

Many on this forum will be surprised when McCain wins fairly easily.  Not quite a landslide, but a very healthy margin.  This election is for President of the United States after all, not President of the World.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The two favourites for VP Candidates , GOP and Dems ...:-

  Vintage Romney on McCain's chances against Obama

Prior to looking to the Republican VP position, Romney was fairly pessimistic on McCain's chances against Obama.  

 CNN - Bayh defends Obama's patriotism



> If Obama had had his way, we wouldn't even be facing these problems today in Iraq  - Also he's right about withdrawal strategy in Iraq - even Bush is coming around to that point of view.....etc


----------



## Doris (28 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wayne you are just going to have to stop your negative vibes! 

Poor Barack came back exhausted no doubt from eight days visiting Afghanistan, Iraq, Jordan, Israel, the West Bank, Germany, France and Britain to a slur that he didn't include injured soldiers.  

Shame Obama!  What were you thinking!  You visited troops on the ground but not the wounded in Germany!

Could have been worse... McCain could have complained that Obama ate local food.  

But you can't really blame McCain as nobody cared when he travelled to the same countries earlier this year.  

*Obama returns to rocky homecoming after overseas trip*



> Obama faced accusations of placing photo-ops with world leaders ahead of visiting injured U.S. soldiers.
> 
> McCain unleashed a weekend television commercial that derided Obama for not visiting U.S. soldiers at the Landstuhl military hospital... accused Obama of making time "to go to the gym" rather than meet with injured U.S. troops in Germany.
> 
> ...




But Barack has the knack for not playing spurious side-tracking games.



> During a speech Sunday in Chicago, Obama defended foreign policy gains from his trip that he said helped the U.S. re-engage with allies.
> 
> "If we can get more support for actions in Afghanistan, those are *fewer troops from the United States we need to send*," he said.
> 
> Obama also told NBC's Meet The Press on Sunday that he would be meeting with top economic advisers on Monday including the noted investor and philanthropist Warren Buffet and Paul Volcker, the former Federal Reserve chairman.




http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=8f95b7a1-a426-4406-8214-21304f84820d


----------



## wayneL (28 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Jayzuz!!! 

Tough gig this Messiah caper!


----------



## Doris (28 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Jayzuz!!!
> 
> Tough gig this Messiah caper!




Too true!  

Glad you kept your butterfly still...



> IT'S official: *God is on Barack Obama's side*. How else to explain a global voyage through some of the world's worst trouble spots that went glitch-free and provided oceans of media coverage? TV pictures showed the senator *looking commander-in-chief-like* in Afghanistan and Iraq, *statesmanlike* in Israel and Palestine and *adored* in Europe.
> 
> By luck or judgment he arrived in Iraq just as the prime minister, *Malaki, agreed that US troops should be out within 16 months*, undercutting John McCain's call for a military presence of "100 years".
> 
> ...




http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/Chris-Stephen-How-Obama-dazzled.4329510.jp


----------



## Doris (28 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wayne, maybe he didn't offend Mohammad?   



> He rejected allegations that his sharp defense against rumors about his faith has offended Muslims. "If you were a Muslim and somebody consistently said you were a Christian, I suspect that you would want to have that corrected, because that's offensive to your faith," Obama said.




Obama said he was pleased with his trip, though he acknowledged that it does not make him a foreign policy expert.



> "I don't think that you ever stop learning," he said. Yet the world leaders he met, Obama said, "feel confident that I know what I'm talking about and what I'm doing" despite his inexperience on the world stage.
> 
> Nevertheless, the next president must "make certain that we project ourselves on the world stage with *a sense of humility, a sense that we are listening to others*," Obama said. America, he added, has been "very clear about our own interests, but not so clear about other people's interests."




And he diffused McCain's slur:


> "We can't keep spending $10 billion a month in Iraq at a time when we've got enormous pressing needs here in the United States of America - including, by the way, *taking care of veterans* who are coming home with post-traumatic stress disorder, disabilities, and they are still not getting a lot of the services that they need," Obama said.




In Chicago he looks like he *didn't* eat local food whilst away!

http://www.boston.com/news/politics...ays_us_must_reassert_world_leadership/?page=2


----------



## Doris (29 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

McCain seems caught in a trap vilifying Obama rather than raising his own profile. 



> ABC World News reported that McCain continued to condemn Obama's opposition to the surge, saying, "If we had done what Senator Obama wanted done, it would have been chaos, genocide, increased Iranian influence, perhaps al Qaeda establishing bases again."




I've read that the Sunnis decided to cooperate three months before the surge began. Now at last it's out:



> On NBC's Meet the Press yesterday, Obama defended his stand on the surge, downplaying its impact and saying, "There's no doubt, and I've said this repeatedly, that our troops make a difference. ... But, for example, in Anbar Province, where we went to visit, *the Sunni awakening took place before the surge started, and tribal leaders made a decision that, instead of fighting the Americans, we're going to work with the Americans against al Qaeda."*




From Africa: http://www.nationmedia.com/dailynation/nmgcontententry.asp?category_id=25&newsid=128070



> Watching TV, I was amazed by the rock star reception Barack Obama received on Wednesday in Germany. All over Europe, it seems, Obama is the craze. The mood is no different on other continents.
> 
> Obama is becoming more of an idea, a concept, beyond the man himself.
> 
> ...


----------



## wayneL (29 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				Doris' quote said:
			
		

> Watching TV, I was amazed by the rock star reception Barack Obama received on Wednesday in Germany. All over Europe, it seems, Obama is the craze. The mood is no different on other continents.
> 
> Obama is becoming more of an idea, a concept, beyond the man himself.
> 
> In Africa, you and I are excited because America has clearly gone a step further in appreciating a person of colour beyond his presumed prowess in sports or music. Europeans are simply delighted because the Senator represents the antithesis of George W. Bush.



And therein lies the danger.

It is impossible for Obama to live up to the expectations of his own electorate much less the rest of the world. The man does not truly represent those expectations, even as he milks them for all they're worth. 

I predict, like that previous messiah, he will come to an untimely (hopefully only political) end and will be figuratively nailed to the cross for double-
crossing his worshipers. 

There will be no resurrection however.


----------



## wayneL (29 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> A humorous, and basically spot on commentary on the Messiah from Gerard Baker:
> 
> by
> Gerard Baker
> ...




See Gerard Baker himself witness to us his testament about the Messiah:


----------



## ZzzzDad (30 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

If anyone believes that the Obama team is different, please read this entire article:

http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/13021.htm

Paper, rapped for outing Obama note, claims campaign pre-approved leak

What initially seemed to be a journalistic scoop of dubious moral propriety now seems to be a case of an Israeli paper being played by the Barack Obama campaign. Maariv, the second most popular newspaper in Israel, was roundly criticized for publishing the note Obama left in the Kotel. But now a Maariv spokesperson says that publication of the note was pre-approved for international publication by the Obama campaign, leading to the conclusion that the "private" prayer was intentionally leaked for public consumption. 

SNIP

[Update as to Maariv's statement as published in Haaretz on July 28]: "Obama's note was published in Maariv and other international publications following his authorization to make the content of the note public. Obama submitted a copy of the note to media outlets when he left his hotel in Jerusalem."] 

If correct, It appears that Obama made Maariv and other media an instrument of his will. The media, of course, was a most willing tool


*The entire article is quite revealing about how the Obama campaign tries to manipulate everyone.*


----------



## wayneL (30 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> If anyone believes that the Obama team is different, please read this entire article:
> 
> http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/13021.htm
> 
> ...




Well firstly, this doesn't surprise me. He is a politician, not the messiah.

Secondly, I wouldn't be surprised that any politician pulls stunts like this... they all do


----------



## chops_a_must (30 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Well firstly, this doesn't surprise me. He is a politician, not the messiah.
> 
> Secondly, I wouldn't be surprised that any politician pulls stunts like this... they all do



Including that 'Major league ******** from the New York Times'?


----------



## chops_a_must (30 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Or perhaps Downer leaving top secret documents lying around?


----------



## Doris (30 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> If anyone believes that the Obama team is different, please read this entire article:
> 
> http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/13021.htm
> 
> ...




Who is being manipulated?  Don't believe all you read. 

Obama is too astute for such an obvious ploy.  What would he have to gain??!!

*If *a campaign member leaked it they would be sacked on the spot... a fate worse than death!

1 hour ago:

*Western Wall rabbi apologizes for publication of Obama’s note*

Published: 	07.29.08, 19:36 / Israel News (one day after the item linked above)


> The rabbi overseeing the Western Wall, Shmuel Rabinowitz, sent a letter on Tuesday to US Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama, in which he expressed his sorrow over the removal of the note written by Obama from the wall and its subsequent publication in local media.
> 
> In addition, *the Yeshiva student who removed Obama’s note from the Wall also apologized and asked for Obama’s forgiveness.* He said the note had been returned to its place with Rabinowitz’s help.
> 
> ...




http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3575001,00.html


----------



## Doris (30 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Republican National Committee has launched a new web ad called “Obama TV Ad In Berlin."

Set to a techno dance beat, the web ad mocks Obama's appeal to Europeans, highlighting interviews with European Obama fans, including one man who sees parallels between Obama and Che Guevara.

The ad is 1 min 8 secs (You'll lovitt Wayne and ZzzzDad)

http://blip.tv/file/1125713


----------



## ZzzzDad (31 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Good ad, and resonates with American voters that are very wary of the European love affair with Obama.

Obama made a big mistake having a campaign rally, drawing 200,000 plus Germans.  This is the first time in my memory that any candidate has had a campaign rally OUTSIDE of the U.S.

Will come back to haunt him.


----------



## Doris (31 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Good ad, and resonates with American voters that are very wary of the European love affair with Obama.
> 
> Obama made a big mistake having a campaign rally, drawing 200,000 plus Germans.  This is the first time in my memory that any candidate has had a campaign rally OUTSIDE of the U.S.
> 
> Will come back to haunt him.




Well it wasn't a campaign rally except for the US voters to see he had clout with world leaders. (Silence McCain)

Do you think it will haunt him when the Europeans realize he was manipulating their egos - for the US to save some of the $10 billion a month on the war in Iraq... to get them to share more of the cost (including human) so he has the $$ to spend on the US economy?

I see his aim as fully focused on infrastructure and the economy to re-build the health and strength of the US.  
World cooperation will enable this focus to be applied.

I noticed one of his goals is to reduce middle income tax...  You should be relieved?


----------



## ZzzzDad (31 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Well it wasn't a campaign rally except for the US voters to see he had clout with world leaders. (Silence McCain)
> 
> Do you think it will haunt him when the Europeans realize he was manipulating their egos - for the US to save some of the $10 billion a month on the war in Iraq... to get them to share more of the cost (including human) so he has the $$ to spend on the US economy?
> 
> ...




Barack Obama has no intention on actually delivering on a middle class tax cut.  He has too many projects planned to be able to accomplish that.  On top of that, he wants the Bush tax cuts to expire, which (despite what the media and Democrats would have you believe) contains numerous middle class tax cuts.  Many of us middle classers have investments in stocks (and not just in our IRAs or other retirement accounts).

As for trying to fool the Europeans, that is a laugh.  He is of the same mindset as them, socialism economically, and appeasing the Islamic extremists when it comes to foreign policy.

Just out of curiosity Doris, why are you so enamored with Obama.  I saw in one of your earlier posts that because of your grandchildren, you feel a connection with him.  But that is no reason to support someone in and of itself.  I have interracial children myself, but that would not be a reason to vote for somebody.  With me, I can't agree on almost all of his positions.  I don't think he has the experience needed and you can't just rely on aides or advisors to gain that experience.  On top of that, he can't ever admit when he is wrong, such as on the success of the surge, etc.

As others have noted, and I tend to agree, he reminds me of Jimmy Carter, - idealist, and very naive.


----------



## wayneL (31 July 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The thing that annoys me is the American voter's need to have a president who is iconic. Policy and long term vision have no place in American presidential races. They just want, having been brought up to do so, somebody they can worship in a rock-star, celebrity, glossy magazine manner.

What I find sooooo disappointing is that so many Europeans, having been bathed in an imported and poisonous American pseudo-culture via TV and the Internet, are looking for the same thing.

Why else would European plebeians give a **** about some cliche creating, Baptist minister style politician from the evil empire, which they all despise despite metamorphosing into, by osmosis. (sorry for the mixed metaphors)

What the world needs from America is an iconoclast - the one thing it will never get.

Until then, Europeans should stay at arms length from smooth talking Anthony Robins clones and they should stay at arms length from an America that elects them... friends, allies, traders, but not this cultural homogeny(if that's a word) as evidenced by Europeans actually campaigning for a bloody US presidential candidate, that none of us can vote for. WTF?

I really like most Americans, there are many beautiful people there, I was partly raised there, it has the potential to be the greatest nation on the planet (and I'll talk about that some other time), but I wish they would **** off from the cultural life of the rest of the world. And I wish Europeans (and Australians for that matter) would pay attention to the diabolical and scandalous state of their own politics and do something about it.

Go home Yankee politician!!!


----------



## Doris (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama Ad*- 31 seconds

What he says he will do:




*McCain Ad*: 32 seconds

Very informative campaign message of a worthy future president: 

_I missed the bit about what he said he will do_ 




*Barack responds to McCain's ad*: 1:15



*McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said*:



> "Barack Obama has played the race card, and he played it from the bottom of the deck."
> "*It's divisive, negative, shameful and wrong*."




*Obama's "Race Card"*:



> Obama began his day Wednesday, charging: "Nobody really thinks that Bush or McCain have a real answer for the challenges we face, so *what they're going to try to do is make you scared of me*. You know, he's not patriotic enough. *He's got a funny name*. You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on those dollar bills, you know. *He's risky*."







> *McCain defended the more aggressive strategy* at a town hall meeting in Wisconsin, where a young woman asked him why he had launched an ad juxtaposing Obama with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. "What we are talking about here is substance, and not style," he said. "*Campaigns are tough, but I am proud of the campaign we have run, I'm proud of the issues we have raised*."




http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080102970.html?hpid=topnews


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

lol
well Doris, I reckon we are gonna find out how good he is.
cos the bookies all reckon he's gonna win


----------



## Doris (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol
> well Doris, I reckon we are gonna find out how good he is.
> cos the bookies all reckon he's gonna win




Well, 2020... *Barack Obama's Iowa crowd elects him president already!*

"Apparently we missed a little something, like the next three months and that bothersome thing called Election Day".

Cedar Rapids, Iowa Thursday:



> The crowd was an enthusiastic one, like so many of Obama's gatherings.
> Its members were ready to see and cheer their leader.
> 
> But before listening to his usual stump speech, the crowd sang "Happy Birthday" to him.
> ...




http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/08/president-obama.html


----------



## Julia (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I wonder how the competition would be stacking up had the media got behind McCain to the extent that they have been all over Obama?

Personally I don't really care.  Don't like either of them.


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> The crowd was an enthusiastic one, like so many of Obama's gatherings.
> Its members were ready to see and cheer their leader.
> 
> But before listening to his usual stump speech, the crowd sang "Happy Birthday" to him.
> ...


----------



## Doris (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol
> well Doris, I reckon we are gonna find out how good he is.
> cos the bookies all reckon he's gonna win




Well he's won support for his stand on Iraq so the economy/oil costs are next on the agenda to defeat McCain.



> McCain has his sights squarely on Obama's opposition to offshore drilling, labeling him "Dr. No when it comes to energy production." The tactic is not surprising, because polls have shown that consumers ”” even in environmentally sensitive states like Florida ”” are desperate for politicians to do something about energy and favor offshore drilling by big margins.






> "*I'm in favor of solving problems*," Obama responded.
> 
> "What I don't want to do is say something because it sounds good politically."
> Obama seeks to turn the issue on its head, arguing that McCain and Bush are practicing the old politics of simply promising people something that's symbolic without addressing the real problem.
> ...




http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g3jYOLGEhVkPK4v-HWPexFIrGDYAD929CBF80



> *Even Big Oil Admits Off-Shore Drilling Would Yield No Results For Up To 10 Years*.
> “Opening America’s coastal waters to oil drilling, as John McCain urged in an address Tuesday, is unlikely to provide Americans with more oil for at least seven to 10 years.  That’s the estimate from the American Petroleum Institute, the oil industry trade group.”




Obama wants complex tax laws simplified and made *fair*.
He contends that McCain panders to the oil men.  This backs that up:



> McCain’s Tax Plan Gives *Top Five Oil Companies $3.8 Billion A Year In Tax Breaks*. According to a study conducted by the Center for American Progress, “The McCain plan would deliver approximately *$170 billion a year in tax cuts* to corporations, including some corporations that are very large and profitable. *Just one of the proposals* -cutting the corporate rate from 35 percent to 25 percent-would cut taxes for five largest U.S. oil companies *by $3.8 billion a year*.” [Center for American Progress, 3/27/08]




Not surprisingly, Al Gore supports Obama's solutions:



> *Gore: “When You’re In A Hole, Stop Digging!” *
> 
> Former Vice President Al Gore said, “There used to be an old-timey remedy for hangovers called ‘the hair of the dog that bit you.’ They’d recommend going in and just having another drink in the morning if you had a hangover.
> 
> ...



*

http://progressiveaccountability.org/*


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Not surprisingly, Al Gore supports Obama's solutions:



...and in one fell swoop, Obama loses all credibility with thinkers. The Al Bore kiss of death.

Look, Lucifer dressed in his normal red and carrying his pitchfork could beat McCain with one hand tied behind his back. The sheeple will vote for Obama, but that won't make Obama a good pres.

Stand by for extreme disappointment when this clown turns out to be human AND a typical politician.

You cannot polish a turd.


----------



## Doris (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> I wonder how the competition would be stacking up had the media got behind McCain to the extent that they have been all over Obama?
> 
> Personally I don't really care.  Don't like either of them.




I don't like the way the mess in the US over the past year has been dragging the world down!  
... A global economy led by US special interest corporations and an inept government.

I heard tonight that our Reserve bank is considering dropping interest rates to avert a recession in Australia.
We'd be a banana republic without our iron and coal!

At least the price of oil has dropped again due to the reduced demand by the slowing economies in the US and Europe.  

Note the AUD has concomitantly dropped.


----------



## wayneL (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I don't like the way the mess in the US over the past year has been dragging the world down!
> ... A global economy led by US special interest corporations and an inept government.



...and you expect Obama to change that? 




























AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!


----------



## Doris (1 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> ...and you expect Obama to change that?
> 
> 
> 
> AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!




Wayneepoo... I see you've polished your emoticons!  

Do you actually read his policies?  I've put many of them on here.  http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

Don't you get the message that this man is the first in history to try to change the abhorrent wiles of politicians and actually represent what people want and need?  He listens.  His photographic memory assimilates and recalls as his advisers tout their wisdom.  He will be the puppet of the millions of donors who own his campaign.  

Today he told supporters, "WE have a good chance of winning".  
He is not a dictator.  His payoff is success in reform by cooperation.

He will turn the corporations on their heads.  (Or is it ears?)

Do you watch video clips of his stump and public speeches and watch his eyes and his body language?

Oh ye who have little faith!  Put some of your energy into audacious hope!  Yes... you can!


----------



## wayneL (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> He will turn the corporations on their heads.  (Or is it ears?)



He can try... but he will have to avoid all grassy knolls from thenceforth.


----------



## ZzzzDad (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama has sunk in the daily Gallup tracking polls.  That trip around the world is coming back to haunt him:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109219/Gallup-Daily-Race-Tied-44.aspx

August 1, 2008
Gallup Daily: Race Tied at 44%Registered voters evenly split in their support for Obama versus McCainUSA Election 2008 Gallup Daily Americas Northern America PRINCETON, NJ -- According to Gallup Poll Daily tracking from July 29-31, John McCain and Barack Obama are now tied at 44% in the preferences of national registered voters.
This is not much different from the results reported in Gallup Poll Daily tracking on Thursday, when the two were nearly tied with 45% for Obama and 44% for McCain. However, it is a substantial turnaround from earlier this week when Obama held a statistically significant lead coming off his high-profile trip to Europe, Afghanistan, and the Middle East.

Obama and McCain were closely matched in each of the three nights of interviewing included in today's result, with neither candidate ahead by more than three percentage points. This suggests that the recent surge in voter support for Obama has truly subsided.

The contrast between Obama's recent advantage over McCain (ranging from six to nine points) and today's result is particularly notable because this is McCain's strongest showing in over a month. The last time Gallup found the race exactly tied was in late June. By contrast, in the weeks just prior to Obama's overseas trip, he had led the race by an average of four points. (To view the complete trend since March 7, click here.) -- Lydia Saad



Survey Methods

For the Gallup Poll Daily tracking survey, Gallup is interviewing no fewer than 1,000 U.S. adults nationwide each day during 2008.

The general-election results are based on combined data from July 29-31, 2008. For results based on this sample of 2,680 registered voters, the maximum margin of sampling error is  ±2 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.


*By the way, this is even more ominous for Obama because this is among registered voters, not likely voters. *  Obama is not wearing well on the American people.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> He can try... but he will have to avoid all grassy knolls from thenceforth.




Which has gotta be the saddest post I've read for a while.  
Probably why McCain won't take the oil companies on for instance.
(was that why LBJ was so gung ho about gearing up in Vietnam? - and as I recall there was speculation that the oil companies benefitted with his ascension to the throne)


----------



## ZzzzDad (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Much of the commentary on Barack's sudden loss of momentum focuses on three issues:

1) His refusal to consider new drilling on the outer continental shelfs of the Pacific, Atlantic, and Gulf of Mexico.  Along with complete "no we can'ts" on nuclear energy, clean coal, and the enormous oil shale deposits in Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah.  (By some estimates the oil shale deposits equals more than 3 times the oil in all of Saudi Arabia)

2) His "world tour" that seemed to care more about being President of the world than President of the United States.

3) The fact that he just can't help from inserting race into every one of his speeches, therefore implying that McCain and many Americans are racist (which they are not - despite what many non-Americans think). 

All of these, plus the constant media attention is causing the American people to wake up and reject him.  3 months from now, many people in America and the world will wonder "What happened to President Obama"? There will be much gnashing of teeth and excuses made.  And of course, they will blame it on race.  But the real blame will be on Barack Obama himself.


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

well ZZzdad,  a few months ago when Doris started this thread, she was greeted by copious yawns ....   you gotta admit that it's getting curiuouser and curiouser by the day    If it goes down to the wire, it will be worth following (imo).   But watch for GOP tricks - they are good (at that at least).

And you're right that Obama has not taken the easy road, and has had to talk his way out of some tricky situations - Rev Wright etc - turning that for instance into a watershed speech that all thinking Americans seemed to enjoy.

applauded by black and white alike. 

This from mid March :-


> Obama's lead over Clinton evaporates
> 
> WASHINGTON -- For Barack Obama, it hasn't been this bad since it started to get better.
> 
> ...




He came through then (to beat Hillary).  Worth watching to see how they go in the next 100 days whatever to election day.

Back to the speech on race,  ... he wrote that overnight himself.   You'd have to believe he believes it.

 Obama's race speech


----------



## ZzzzDad (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Looks like Mr. Obama is feeling the heat, and looking at his poll numbers drop.


*Obama shifts, says he may back offshore drilling*

ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday he would be willing to support limited additional offshore oil drilling if that's what it takes to enact a comprehensive policy to foster fuel-efficient autos and develop alternate energy sources.

Shifting from his previous opposition to expanded offshore drilling, the Illinois senator told a Florida newspaper he could get behind a compromise with Republicans and oil companies to prevent gridlock over energy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080801/ap_on_el_pr/obama

*Oh yeah, that Barack Obama is really a man of principle, right?  Al Gore is probably gnashing his teeth at this very moment - seems he is the latest to be thrown under Obama's bus.  Yep, Obama is really a different kind of politician*   LOL


----------



## Doris (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I said no and I mean no! 
I will not listen to you.  I've made up my mind.
So there are other parameters I should consider?
No. I won't make the effort to listen.
I will not be seen as backing down.
To the electric chair he goes!
Oh... DNA evidence proves he was innocent?
Well... I was seen to be consistent... a man of my word.
His death proved that!


----------



## wayneL (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> *Oh yeah, that Barack Obama is really a man of principle, right?  Al Gore is probably gnashing his teeth at this very moment - seems he is the latest to be thrown under Obama's bus.  Yep, Obama is really a different kind of politician*   LOL




Let him gnash them! (While he fills up the limo as he's speaking to his broker about getting on the the IPOs)


----------



## Julia (2 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I said no and I mean no!
> I will not listen to you.  I've made up my mind.
> So there are other parameters I should consider?
> No. I won't make the effort to listen.
> ...



Doris, presumably the above is directed at others.
Have you considered it could equally be directed at you?
You are less than objective about Obama.


----------



## Doris (3 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Doris, presumably the above is directed at others.
> Have you considered it could equally be directed at you?
> You are less than objective about Obama.




*Julia* - as well as illustrating a preference for a president who has the guts to change his mind on policy:

It was a soliloquy of an arrogant, egotistical president not acknowledging others.
... _not at all intentionally directed at 'others'_.

I had GWB in mind... not flexible, ego driven, even though he is doing flip flops now!

Last Tuesday, GWB approved the execution of an army soldier on death row since 1988 after a military court conviction.  US law requires the president's signature for his execution to go ahead.  

*Twenty years and five presidential terms later*, it seems odd to me that GWB suddenly now signs his death warrant. 

The last president to approve a military execution was Dwight Eisenhower in 1957!  

JFK was the most recent president asked to approve a death sentence and he commuted it to life imprisonment.

In his six years as governor of Texas, GWB signed for 152 executions, more than any governor in recent history.  
This leader of the free world is barbaric. No wonder Guantanamo happened. 

Believe me, I do have private thoughts when I read Obama's campaign emails updating news and strategies and I actually resent the _'donate $5 and you may be one of ten supporters to be flown to Denver, put up in a hotel and get to meet Barack backstage'._  But it keeps up the momentum on donations.

I resent the attempts to con... raffling a reward for donating. 

But I have not as yet seen any reason to doubt my original gut instinct, almost two years ago now, about Obama being who that country, and consequently the troubled parts of the world, need to lead.


----------



## Doris (3 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Protesters Interrupt Obama Speech*

At a town hall meeting yesterday, three African-American men stood up the back holding a banner and called out 'What are you going to do for the black community Obama?'

The crowd tried to drown out the protesters by chanting 'Yes we can'...

Obama didn't have his security people haul them away -



> “It’s okay, you can ask a question later,” Obama said to the men.
> 
> “Yeah, that’s right,” they said. And Obama went back to delivering his speech on the economy.






> The main protester got to ask the first question. He cited the way blacks were treated in post-Katrina New Orleans and other current events. “In the face of the numerous attacks that are made on the black community by the same U.S. government, the same government you want to be…Why is it you haven’t not one time spoken in the interests or even on behalf of the oppressed and exploited African community, the black community?”




The man was booed but Obama tried to silence the crowd. 

“*This is democracy at work. He asked a legitimate question.”*



> “*I think you’re misinformed when you say not one time*. Every issue you’ve asked about, I have spoken about,” Obama said. “That doesn’t mean I’m going to always satisfy the way you want these issues framed. It gives you the option of voting for someone else. It gives you the option of running for office yourself. But the one thing that I think is important is that we are respectful towards each other and what is true is that I believe…*the only way we’re going to solve our problems is that everyone comes together, black white*.”




This altercation was handled amicably... phew!
Three months to go...


----------



## Doris (3 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

It is intriguing to see what the McCain camp comes up with as negativism sure helped win GWB's two terms!  

I have to say they evoke a chuckle rather than a gnashing of teeth that Hillary provoked with her negativism. 



> John McCain’s campaign is *sticking with its argument that Barack Obama is an aloof celebrity*, as aides privately acknowledge that previous efforts to label Obama as a flip-flopper have been nowhere near as effective.
> 
> After Obama’s campaign announced Saturday it would accept *three presidential debates with McCain* — and not the kind of town hall meetings McCain had wanted — McCain spokesman Brian Rogers again invoked the comparison.
> 
> ...






> Obama said Saturday he doesn’t think McCain is racist, only cynical. He ridiculed McCain for the celebrity ads.
> 
> “You’ve got statistics that say we’ve lost another 50,000 jobs, that Florida is in a recession for the first time in a decade and a half and what was being talked about was Paris and Britney,” Obama said.
> 
> ...



http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/02/mccain-aims-to-drive-home-obama-celebrity-label/


*McCain's new cynical ad mockingly compares Obama to Moses:*

*Subtle subterfuge*. Quite clever and entertaining.


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris
You would have to agree (I believe) that the youtube age will mean that there's a lot more discussion of dubious political stunts - especially amongst the young who are obviously more computer-literate, and a good nose for Dodgey Bros tactics. (?)   Politics has entered a new age.  Dirty tricks campaigns will be less effective you'd have to assume.   Then again, lol, with USA you never know which way they'll jump.  

Bludy hard to generalise across a country where the education standard ranges from Einsteins to illiterate.  Sometimes I sit in awe at how Americans in the street can answer questions so articulately; sometimes, they are even worse than Aussies lol  - on average they're probably like me , lol  

(btw, how is the book coming along?  )


----------



## ZzzzDad (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Talking about dirty tricks, it is Obama that is the culprit.  "He doesn't look like all those Presidents on the dollar bill" - the same thing he said earlier when he said "and did I mention he's black", etc., etc.

John McCain has never been that way, and even Obama has had to completely back off this after the backlash by claiming they didn't mean what they inferred.

The Obama campaign is using race and claiming he is not..  All this stuff is causing quite a backlash here in America.

The Democrats are the true master of the dirty trick, and claiming that the Republicans are "going to give us the dirtiest campaign in history".  The Dems accuse the Republicans in advance every time.


----------



## Doris (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Talking about dirty tricks, it is Obama that is the culprit.  "*He doesn't look like all those Presidents on the dollar bill*" - the same thing he said earlier when he said "and did I mention he's black", etc., etc.
> 
> John McCain has never been that way...
> 
> ...




Subtle subterfuge is the name of the McCain game.

*How subtle is what was inferred in this McCain ad*?

With all this false hoopla raised by McSame's folks about Obama's being racist, 

... here is the McCain Ad that *Obama was responding to when he said his face didn't look the same!*


   (25 seconds)


*Have a look at the McCain ad I inserted three posts back.*

*  The quote about himself being the 'symbol of America returning to its best traditions' was *out of context* and exactly the opposite of what  they're trying to make it look like.  

*It was about the crowd in Berlin not being about HIM, but about AMERICA, and his being merely the symbol of it.*


*  When Obama was asked "do you have any doubt?" ...* watch his mouth say 'NO'* 
... and yet *they have adulterated it to say 'NEVER*'!


----------



## Doris (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Rove protege unleashing Obama attack*



> DEMOCRATS are worried Barack Obama is not doing enough to hit back at John McCain in the face of a barrage of personal attacks mocking the candidate - *crafted by the same people who helped scuttle John Kerry's presidential ambitions in 2004*.
> 
> The McCain camp's tactical move in the past week to negative campaigning with biting advertisements has dominated the airwaves and is credited to Steve Schmidt, who is leading McCain's new push after formally taking up a role in the campaign last month.
> 
> Mr Schmidt, 37, was a chief player in the George W. Bush re-election campaign in 2004 and seen as a Karl Rove protege, who President Bush dubbed "the architect" of his victories. *Mr Schmidt was one of the masterminds of the attack ads on Senator Kerry in 2004, including the infamous windsurfing advertisement, which portrayed him as a weak leader going where-ever the wind blowed. *






> "Some Obama backers are right to worry the relentless daily attacks on the candidate will take their toll on the campaign," says Donna Brazile, Al Gore's campaign manager in 2000.
> 
> "These types of campaigns - which the media often helps to drive as it analyses the effectiveness of the attacks before questioning the accuracy of the information - will continue from now until election day (on November 4)," she said.
> 
> "And it's time for the Obama campaign to build a political firewall by using outside surrogates unaffiliated with the candidate to debunk these misleading attacks."




http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24122281-26397,00.html

Swiftboating was always expected.  

I can't help thinking this is merely another tactical drama to sidestep.  It will pass.

The main problem is with those who do not seek information and just believe what they are force-fed.


----------



## ZzzzDad (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Another example of Obama changing his mind on one thing after another, depending on where, and what group he is speaking to:

http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/08/03/obama-wants-us-to-be-first-in-space/

Obama Wants U.S. to Be First in Space
Amy Chozick reports on the presidential race.

Barack Obama was accused of pandering to the space set in Cape Canaveral on Saturday.

During a town-hall-style event on Florida’s so-called space coast, the Democrat said he no longer favors slashing NASA’s budget, declaring that the U.S. “cannot cede our leadership in space.”

Obama had previously supported delaying NASA’s manned missions in order to pay for early childhood education programs. Aides say he has now found other means to pay for his education plans.

John McCain’s campaign immediately jumped on the announcement labeling it a flip flop. “Barack Obama once again demonstrated that his words don’t really matter,” the campaign said in a press release. 

An Obama aide calls the criticism “a complete exaggeration” saying Obama found an alternative means of payment through reducing earmark spending and reforming federal contracting procedures. This frees the Illinois senator up to say he would continue to fund the space program.

“Sen. Obama supports the constellation program and he understands how critical NASA is to America’s scientific and economic edge,” a spokesperson for the campaign says.


----------



## Doris (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Common sense seems to be evolving in the media as they take a serious look at McCain's humor of late.
Perhaps Obama's dignity will prevail over the joker?

*Obama's crime? Acting too presidential*



> We have reporters, columnists and TV talking heads to thank for exposing these outrageous displays.
> So apparently the verdict is in: Sen. Barack Obama, too confident to govern.
> 
> *It all would be quite funny if many people didn't seem to be inhaling this multimedia stink bomb as if it were fragrant truth*.






> Recall the pundits demanding the freshman Illinois senator prove he could be presidential in the foreign arena?
> 
> So he appeared at ease with world leaders, talked animatedly with beaming American troops and drew huge civilian crowds.
> 
> ...






> "There's an interesting line building on Obama that *somehow success and intelligence are a handicap*,"  said Mark Sawyer, a UCLA political scientist.
> 
> "If he wasn't extraordinary, he wouldn't be there.
> But then he is extraordinary and it becomes, 'He is just too good, too well spoken, too accomplished.' "
> ...




http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-onthemedia4-2008aug04,0,2648035.story


----------



## Doris (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama leads McCain among low-wage workers: poll*

Mon Aug 4, 2008 1:59am EDT



> WASHINGTON (Reuters) - *Obama holds a two-to-one lead over McCain among low-wage workers* according to a new poll by The Washington Post, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard University.
> 
> Obama's advantage is due largely to overwhelming support from African Americans and Hispanics, but even among *white voters*, he leads McCain *47 percent to 37 percent*.
> 
> ...




Looks like Bara(r)ck doesn't need Hillary as VEEP to attract low-income earners.

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0339387820080804


----------



## Doris (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

How boring.  Not humorous like McCain's ads.  An ad on policy!  Shame Obama. Shame! 

*Obama ad to target McCain's energy policies*



> "After one president in the pocket of big oil we can't afford another," says the ad.
> 
> "A windfall profits tax on big oil to give families a thousand-dollar rebate," an announcer in the ad says.
> 
> ...




http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/08/04/eco.obama.oil.ap/


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/51363-234-3.html
> President:-
> Obama 4/11  = $1.36 (in from $1.40 - which was in from $1.50)
> McCain 5/2 = $3.50 (out from $3.00 - which was out from $2.65)
> ...



back to 
Obama $1.40  ( in fact $1.521
McCain $3.25

PS Why would that website (comparing odds) embolden 2:5  = $1.40 as best odds for Obama; 
when you can get $1.51? 

Bayr favoured as Dem VP.  - But Biden tightening (makes sense )


----------



## wayneL (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Messiah has a fight on his hands:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...h-Barack-Obama-after-bold-strategy-shift.html


----------



## Doris (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*2020*... Better place your bet ASAP!  


*Obama Will Name Bayh his VP Choice on Wednesday*

Bil Browning from The Huffington Post has made this prediction because:

1.  The Olympics start Friday US time and run until the DNC so Obama will have 
- - two days before having to compete against the Olympics for press coverage.

2. Obama will be in Indiana Tuesday afternoon for a campaign stop with Evan Bayh. 
 - - The press has been told to plan on staying until Wednesday afternoon/evening. 

3.  Staying around Indiana allows Obama and Bayh to travel to Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio 
- - all important states in this election... Bayh's reputation will help the most in those states.

4.  The website www.ObamaBayh08.com is taken... *you'll be forwarded to the Democratic Party website*.

5.  







> I just got an invite from the Obama campaign to attend an appearance on Wednesday that isn't on Obama's official calendar. Why not? The campaign said, "I can't tell you what the event is about, but we want to make sure you have a ticket so you can cover it for the Bilerico Project. We want Bilerico Project to be there for this one."




Bil Browning asks:


> So what do you think? Is my thinking flawed or have I reached the logical conclusion?... Evan Bayh -- *foreign policy experience*, former Clinton supporter, *popularity in the Midwest*, not a media wh***, *experience as a popular former Governor* and his youth and good looks -- it seems like a slam dunk to me.



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bil-browning/obama-will-name-bayh-his_b_116752.html



> *Update*: Brian Howey has a solid commentary on the Howey Political Report that I wanted to point out. Brian waffles between an announcement this week or the week leading up to the convention. Two other journalists have chimed in to say they've been told to expect the announcement in that last week as well. Am I off on my timing and this is just another test balloon?




http://www.bilerico.com/2008/08/obama_will_name_bayh_his_vp_choice_on_we.php


----------



## wayneL (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

@ 9/4 McCain looks to be the bet of the freakin' millennium!

I'll be putting a fiver on that for fun.


----------



## Doris (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hmmm...  In the order of 2020's odds post:


www.OBAMABAYH08.COM = Taken  (*forwards to the Democratic Party website*.)

www.OBAMABIDEN08.COM - - (forwards to http://www.politics2008.com/)

www.OBAMASEBELIUS08.COM = Taken - - ("This page is parked free, courtesy of GoDaddy.com.")

www.OBAMACLINTON08.COM = Taken  ("under construction")

www.OBAMADODD08.COM - - ("This page is parked free, courtesy of GoDaddy.com")

www.OBAMARICHARDSON08.COM - - ("This page is parked free, courtesy of GoDaddy.com.")

www.OBAMAGORE08.COM - - ("This is a future home page")

www.OBAMAKAINE08.COM = Taken - - (empty)


----------



## Doris (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> The Messiah has a fight on his hands:
> 
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...h-Barack-Obama-after-bold-strategy-shift.html




- - and the Obamamaniac media
- - and the typical supporters who think their vote won't count... they'll _have_ to get out and vote now!
- - and supporters of the underdog


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, .. 
and I notice
www.OBAMADORIS08.COM = forwards to ASF 

PS don't have any money spare at the moment to bet on Bayr - or anyone for that matter lol.


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> don't have any money spare at the moment to bet on Bayr -



but he's down to 2/1.  
(3 or 4 weeks ago he was 16/1 )


----------



## wayneL (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Shouldn't there be 12 VP candidates?


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

twenty odd Dem VP candidates still on the books, 
and 30 odd GOP's.  
Ron Paul there at 100:1.  (maybe I'll wait till that goes out to 1000:1 lol)

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115075-234-3.html

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/115077-234-3.html


----------



## Doris (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

You have to laugh:

McCain supporters handed out free tire pressure gauges to the Obama crowd at the Lansing Center, mocking Obama's comments that Americans can reduce gas consumption by keeping their car tires properly inflated. 

Michigan should have loved this today:



> Obama called for $4 billion in guaranteed loans and tax credits to help U.S. automakers retool for more fuel-efficient cars and to develop batteries for plug-in hybrids that get up to 150 m.p.g.
> The new breed of automobiles would fetch a *$7,000 federal tax credit for buyers.
> *
> He predicted that 1 million plug-in hybrids -- such as the Chevrolet Volt set to debut in 2010 -- would be produced within six years.
> ...




http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080805/NEWS06/808050359/1014/BUSINESS01


----------



## wayneL (5 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> Obama also called again for an immediate $1,000 "energy rebate" to U.S. families, *paid for with higher taxes on oil company profits*.




Beggorrah!

Never mind grassy knolls, Barack will need one of these:


----------



## Doris (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Beggorrah!
> 
> Never mind grassy knolls, Barack will need one of these:




Good one Wayne!

An American presidential _pope mobile_!

... but is it a hybrid?


----------



## Doris (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Paris Hilton responds to McCain ad with her own:*

Note the _logistics_ of her 'energy plan'...   
... she'll paint the white house pink. 
Lovitt!



> In less than two minutes, she accomplished not one --
> but FIVE things McCain himself has been unable to do in two years of campaigning:
> 
> 1) Come off as intelligent and self-effacing.
> ...




*Can't wait to hear "that wrinkly white haired guy's" response to her response!* 
*Paris has done well! *


Article & video clip:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/seth-grahamesmith/hilt-owned_b_117162.html

Her site for video clip:
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/64ad536a6d


----------



## Julia (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> [
> 
> 
> *Can't wait to hear "that wrinkly white haired guy's" response to her response!*



*
Doris, I would have thought - given your obsessive adoration for Mr Obama and your unfailing belief in him and his policies - you really wouldn't need to get into snide remarks about McCain's personal appearance.  I guess if you'd put in the years he has and spent time as a POW, you'd have a few wrinkles also.*


----------



## Doris (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Doris, I would have thought - given your obsessive adoration for Mr Obama and your unfailing belief in him and his policies - you really wouldn't need to get into snide remarks about McCain's personal appearance.  I guess if you'd put in the years he has and spent time as a POW, you'd have a few wrinkles also.




Whoa Julia...

*Note my quotation marks* on those words!  

Watch Paris' video clip...  Her effort to get back at him after accusing her of being a celebrity with no credentials.


----------



## Julia (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

My apologies, Doris.  Didn't take in the quotation marks.  Glad to know you haven't descended to that level.


----------



## wayneL (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The presidency ain't about policy. It's about anything but, it seems.



> Barack Obama needs some fat friends fast. US pundits claim that he is "too thin to win", and is alienating the vast, waddling hordes of Americans nurtured on mega Macs and super Subs. The two thirds of voters who are over-weight - 30 per cent of them classified as obese - are turned off by the Democratic contender's lean and hungry look.
> 
> So Obama should take heed of new British research. Scientists at Warwick University reported recently that surrounding yourself with fat people makes it more likely you'll pile on the pounds too. Skinny Gwynnie Paltrow, the star of a new advertisement aimed at galvanising ex-pat Americans to vote for Obama, is not much use to him. He'd be better off relying on the chunkier charms of long-term supporter Oprah Winfrey. After the passionate, issue-led debate that dominated the Obama vs Hillary Clinton contest, and the high-minded rhetoric of Obama's world tour, we are entering a new, unedifying but highly entertaining phase of the US election. It's been triggered by the Republicans "attack ad" strategy that so far has ridiculed Obama's messianic appeal, and likened him to Paris Hilton.
> 
> As a result, John McCain is neck and neck with his rival. But if Obama fails to make the White House, it will have less to do with his physique than with his colour. That's what the racist underbelly of America, yet to emerge in all its ugliness, simply can't stomach. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/08/06/do0602.xml&page=2


----------



## Doris (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> My apologies, Doris.  Didn't take in the quotation marks.  Glad to know you haven't descended to that level.




Julia - I can empathize with you.  I abhor condescending rudeness!

I was downloading several audible books last night and decided to check out some US newspaper blogs. 
(7:30am on... their time) This one "journo" had written two pages of out-of-context and right malicious things about Obama so I *had* to edify him and the supportive bloggers! I had fun for a few hours!  

Some comments were really nasty.  These were mild:


> # it was so nice of Obama to come visit us in Boston where we drive around in our cars and melt the ice caps
> 
> # How gross is the logic that because Germans love anything, we should. The USA's own citizens are the ones to decide what is best for them and not anybody else. Think for yourself.
> 
> # one more thing before you stomp off in your prius to a Fauxbama Kool Aid rally.....OBAMA'S POLL NUMBERS ARE DROPPING FASTER THAN BILL CLINTON'S DRAWERS IN THE WHITE HOUSE........sniff, sniff.....I guess socialism doesn't play well to those of us knuckle draggers, clinging to our guns and religion.....




I just couldn't keep my fingers still... So I registered and jumped in: 



> I quite liked McCain until he let Steve Schmidt loose on his nasty war-mongering campaign which has created animosity instead of informed opinion. Where is the fun in setting voters against each other?
> - Obviously, to stir the pot to get some attention as the media haven't found McCain policies news.
> - and to stir people so they will be inspired to get out to vote?
> 
> ...




Well... this brought finally brought lots of Democrats out! 



> # Only 168 days of Bush left. Yay!!!! Is it so wrong to have a popular, intelligent president? McCain might want to bomb bomb bomb more than Bush did! Yikes. Please no. Think long and hard before poking the hole next to Dr. Strangelove. The man is certifiable.
> 
> # That's great that GWB got Osama bin Laden, isn't it? Oh, wait, he didn't! But he got 4000 soldiers killed in the wrong country instead. Because that bad man Saddam "tried to kill my daddy". That's the real reason we are there, after all.
> 
> # McCain a down to earth guy? With his millionaire wife and jet set friends( Arnold, Warren Beatty, etc.) He's the real Mr. Hollywood. And the mouth on that guy, I've heard what he called his own wife. Obama may be a socialist but doesn't that mean he cares about society, not just corporations






> I am so sick of people talking about "the race card" and every other subject that detracts from the important question: If we are to choose between McCain and Obama, which one will be the best president? McCain still subscribes to the erroneous "trickle down" theory of economics, and he is a computer illiterate. And on and on and on. I admire his service to our country, but that doesn't qualify him to be the president. Obama is a true leader, has a good character and is outrageously intelligent and well-educated. McCain has been shown on video to be a nasty hot head. We don't need some guy with a very bad temper in the White House. Meanwhile, Obama is right when he points out that some people have a problem with his name, background and race. How is this playing the race card? He's just stating the obvious.



Amen to that!  



> an endless stream of airhead moonbats...just when you think you've given them enough facts to chew on for a while...one of their "intellectuals" throws the un-debateable...on and on and on argument at us...it's righteously comical, and at the same sadly telling of the cultists delusions



So then I googled 'moonbat'... then crashed.  It was fun!  
There were many quite civil, logical, intellectual discussions on this blog when I woke this morning!


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

As they say Doris
The entire election is about one man - 
 and that is OBAMA and his ideas.

Obama talks ideas - and McCain does what he does best and flings mud. 

McCain can't think of anything positive to say. 

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2326414.htm



> Professor Geoffrey Garrett is the chief executive of the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney.
> 
> GEOFFREY GARRETT: Well, all the research tells you that negative campaigning really doesn't work very effectively, but as I said I think the thing that's emerging that makes this campaign look quite different is it's not an up or down referendum on the Bush administration *and it's not really a contest between the ideas of McCain and the ideas of Obama. It's all about Obama*.
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (7 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

2020...  Yes - much easier to criticize - than create ideas!

I read tonight that fewer Republicans have registered to vote than last time.  So he's desperate!
Apparently 21 states don't register in a party... so they'll be surprising vote numbers.


This tidbit would not please Obama... with his focus on saving $US on the Iraq *war*... let alone rebuilding:  

In 2007 Iraq actually spent only *28 percent of its $12 billion* *reconstruction* budget!



> The soaring price of oil will leave the Iraqi government with a cumulative *budget surplus of as much as $79 billion by year's end.*
> 
> The unspent windfall, which covers surpluses from oil sales from 2005 through 2008, appears likely to put an uncomfortable new focus on the approximately *$48 billion in American taxpayer money devoted to rebuilding Iraq since the American-led invasion*.
> 
> ...




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/05/iraq-government-has-79-bi_n_117149.html


----------



## Doris (7 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

He's at it again... McCain feeding false fodder based on fear!  (1 hour ago)

*Jealousy is such a curse*! - This is not funny! - How can he sleep at night?

The new ad plays off a theme that the McCain campaign has been pushing ever since Obama's tour of Europe — that Obama is a worldwide celebrity but *not a leader ready to be president*. 

This was Hillary's theme. Will she be able to neutralize McCain when she starts her campaigning for him in a few days?

An announcer poses the question, "*Is the biggest celebrity in the world ready to help your family?*" 
The ad goes on to criticize Obama as promoting higher taxes, more government spending, both leading to fewer jobs.

This is why the world so dislikes nasty Americans!  

Putting Obama on the back foot is going to make his team have to work hard to dispel it as too many people can only absorb 30 seconds of information and will not look for policy facts or statements on how he intends to fund new jobs!  Whatever Obama says will be ridiculed.  If he can survive these assaults he'll find Osama! Swiftboating in full throttle.


----------



## ZzzzDad (7 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> He's at it again... McCain feeding false fodder based on fear!  (1 hour ago)
> 
> *Jealousy is such a curse*! - This is not funny! - How can he sleep at night?
> 
> ...





Doris, unfortunately *anyone* that disagrees with Obama on *anything* is a nasty American according to you.  It is a political campaign for goodness sakes.  Some of the things you say are untrue are *your opinion, not gospel*.  You are biased in Obama's favor, and I am biased in McCain's favor, that is what democracy is all about.  

It sounds like you just have blinders on.  Let's look at things more realistically.  I surely do not think McCain is perfect.  Very far from it.  But he is the better of the two alternatives.


----------



## Doris (7 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

When my kids were small, I broke up an argument between two of them.
"I hate her!"
'No you don't.  You love your sister.  What is it she has done that you hate?'
It was sorted out and they quickly became friends again.

Emotionally healthy people do not need to band together in gangs and do whatever it takes to feel they belong as part of the group by adopting an _us versus them_ gangland killing spree mentality.  They develop their own values and are respected and accepted for them.  

Psychologically healthy people discuss issues and respect the right to agree to disagree.  You sell your product by promoting its positives so the consumer knows what they are getting... showing it is a better product... not by denigrating your competitor's choice of tie.  Buy from a sleaze and you may own a white elephant or a lemon. 



> Mr Obama said his campaign was engaged in a "constant internal debate" on how to respond to attack advertising.
> 
> "[McCain] brought in a team that is adept at this kind of politics," he said.
> 
> ...



http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bb4b2f38-6417-11dd-844f-0000779fd18c.html


----------



## Doris (7 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

It is so refreshing to finally see a mature and responsible ad from McCain!

Now this is what POLITICS *should* be about! 

A new 30-second television ad out today dubs McCain 'The Original Maverick'



> "*Washington is broken*," the phrase that opens the ad, became former McCain rival (and current potential running mate) Mitt Romney's catch phrase in the run-up to the New Hampshire primary.
> 
> *Romney was looking to make the case that it would take a Washington outsider like himself – not a "lifelong politician" like McCain – to fix Washington's problems.*








The Obama campaign quickly released a new ad responding to 'Original Maverick'. 

It contains a video of McCain saying in 2003, "The president and I agree on most issues. 

*There was a recent study that showed that I voted with the president over ninety percent of the time…" *




http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/08/06/politics/horserace/entry4324527.shtml


----------



## Doris (8 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I've always had in the back of my mind, the fact that *superdelegates can change their mind... right up until the DNC convention*... which is less than three weeks away!

McCain's negative campaign against Obama has to be overturned or else I can see Hillary putting her hand up again. 

I've just found this item (out an hour ago) and reading between the lines, I think she is intending to do just that:

*Clinton to supporters: 'Yell and scream,' then back Obama*



> Clinton said she wanted her supporters to leave the convention *feeling as if their voices were heard and satisfied with Obama as the nominee*.
> 
> "I mean everybody comes, and they want to yell and scream and have their opportunity, and I think that's all to the good, because then, you know, everybody can go, 'OK great. *Now* let's go out and win.' "
> 
> ...






> The grass-roots group _18 Million Voices Rise Hillary Rise_ is planning a big march in Denver, Colorado -- where the convention is taking place. *The group is coordinating the march with others across the country* as well as planning a festival in downtown Denver.
> 
> The group said its goal is to celebrate Clinton's achievement and advocate for women's rights. *The group also said it is dedicated to seeing Clinton in the White House.*
> 
> *Because Clinton suspended her campaign instead of dropping out, she held on to the pledged delegates she earned in the primaries and caucuses*. The superdelegates -- a group of party officials and leaders -- can endorse any candidate at any time.




http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/07/clinton/


----------



## ZzzzDad (8 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Who's that "Praising McCain"?

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/08/whos-that-prais.html


ABC News’s Bret Hovell Reports: Who said it?

"I admire Senator McCain greatly."

"I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House."

"I believe the right approach begins with the proposal put forward by…Senator McCain." 

Do names of Republicans pop to mind?

Would you believe Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, respectively?

A new web-only ad from the McCain campaign compiles seven quotes from seven prominent Democrats, each one offering compliments for the presumptive Republican nominee. 

*Watch it here:*

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


***** *This is what ALL the Democrats were saying about John McCain during the last 7 years while he was poking GWB in the eye over that time*

The last quote by Hillary is interesting.


----------



## wayneL (14 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is much more fun than arguing or voting:

http://www.miniclip.com/games/presidential-pounding/en/


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> back to
> Obama $1.40
> McCain $3.25
> 
> Bayr favoured as Dem VP.  - But Biden tightening (makes sense )



Just recrding this snapshot in time.  In case things change with the worsening situation in Georgia.  

Obama 9/20 = $1.45  (out from 1.40)
McCain 9/4 = $3.25  (unchanged)

Biden continues to improve - also Wesley Clark (i.e. the worse the world scene gets, the better the more experienced senators / generals will go you'd think )


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Heck - compare Wesley Clark with McCain - one valedictorian of his class at West Point, was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship to the University of Oxford etc

the other graduating 894 th in a class of 899 . 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wesley_Clark



> Wesley Clark
> Born December 23, 1944 (1944-12-23) (age 63)
> 
> General Wesley Clark
> ...




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_mccain


----------



## Doris (19 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Check out my post #809 11 days ago.*




Doris said:


> I've always had in the back of my mind, the fact that *superdelegates can change their mind... right up until the DNC convention*... which is less than three weeks away!
> 
> McCain's negative campaign against Obama has to be overturned or else I can see Hillary putting her hand up again.
> 
> ...




My gut instinct then, reverberates now:

I've been reading blogs on http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...y-about-a-clinton-roll-call/?iref=werecommend



> (CNN) — New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said he’s now comfortable with Sen. Hillary Clinton placing her name in nomination at the Democratic convention, but he admitted *he was uneasy about the move at first*.
> 
> “It's going to be placed in nomination in recognition of the 18 million votes that she got — her historic candidacy. *But then she is going to pledge her delegates to Sen. Obama so that it's a unanimous — a unanimous election*.




*Really? 
Blogs:*



> Is anybody else concerned about a *back-room double cross* here? How many superdelegates have been bought to switch from Obama to the Clintons? It would be their style to suddenly have more votes and rub Obama's face in it.






> *Obama's a fool to trust Clinton*. Either of them. The Clinton's have only one credo: by any means necessary. Hillary's going to Pearl Harbor Barack at the Convention. She's not going to endorse him. *She's going to try and supplant him in a coup*. It's going to wreck the Democratic Party and put John McCain in the White House, but it's going to be great television. Primary Colors 2 might be just as good as the original. Stay tuned America!






> *We should all be cautious and apprehensive when it comes to the Clintons*. After all, this is the dual that can't seem to digest the word "loss." Bill is still pouting, and Hiliary until recently seemed to be permanently in seclusion. We can only hope.






> *We are all worried by The Clintons*; first bully into the Convention, then demand primary speaking time, then insist on husband Bill with his own timeline the following night, then amend the Convention platform to include language to "recognize" and give "respect" to Hillary and her voters and then, the final insult - *a roll call vote with the 'backdoor' attempt to nominate Hillary Clinton as the Democratic Nominee*….






> I pray that Richardson is correct on his theory that Hillary will hand over her delegates..*I still will not believe that until the convention is over*!!! I do not have the faith in the Clinton's that Richardson does..I pray he is on the mark with this one.






> YOU were a little uneasy? *It will probably take a stake to the heart or silver bullet to get rid of this woman*. I think she is hoping that somehow she will become the nominee. If she steals this from Mr. Obama, I will just simply stay home. I will not be an enabler. I was on her side until she started that 'hardworking, white nonsense' as though the rest of us don't work hard to make it. And she managed to 'tear up' which won her a primary. Sweetie, if you are going to join the boys club, you need to grow a pair.


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

doris , howdy 

gee with fronds like the Clintons, who needs an anemone 



> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_anemone
> anemones are a group of water dwelling, predatory animals of the order Actiniaria; closely related to the jellyfish...


----------



## Doris (19 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> doris , howdy
> 
> gee with fronds like the Clintons, who needs an anemone




lol...

You'll never need to fear dementia 2020 - with your brain always working outside the square!   Lovitt!  

Love your frond analogy too.  And their rhizomes are hard at work... how low will they go?

Michelle has the first speech at the DNC and she may just sway the fence sitters.


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Senator Joe Biden chosed as VP nominee by B. Obama.

What was he thinking?

Excerpt from the Wikipedia article on Biden:

Then in September 1987, the campaign ran into serious trouble when he was accused of plagiarizing a speech by Neil Kinnock, then-leader of the British Labour Party.[26] Though Biden had correctly credited the original author in all speeches but one, the one where he failed to make mention of the originator was caught on video.[27]

Within days, it was also discovered that as a first-year law student at Syracuse Law School, Biden had plagiarized a law review article in a class paper he wrote. Though the dean of the law school in 1988 as well as Biden's former professor played down the incident of plagiarism, they did find that Biden drew "chunks of heavy legal prose directly from" the article in question. Biden said the act was inadvertent due to his not knowing the proper rules of citation, and Biden was permitted to retake the course after receiving a grade of F, which was subsequently dropped from his record.[28] Biden also released his undergraduate grades, which started off poorly and remained unexceptional.[28] Further, when questioned by a New Hampshire resident about his grades in law school Biden had claimed falsely to have graduated in the "top half" of his class, (when he actually graduated 76th in a class of 85) that he had attended on a full scholarship, and had received three degrees.[29] In fact he had received two majors, History and Political Science, and a single B.A., as well as a half scholarship based on financial need.[29]

Faced with these revelations, Biden withdrew from the nomination race on September 23, 1987, saying his candidacy had been overrun by "the exaggerated shadow" of his mistakes.[30] After Biden withdrew from the race it was learned that the Dukakis campaign had secretly made a video showcasing the Biden/Kinnock comparison and distributed it to news outlets. Dukakis fired John Sasso, his campaign manager and long-time Chief of Staff.[


_____________________________________________

He is gaffe prone, arrogant, and smiles with those veneered twinkle teeth.


Republicans are celebrating, it is a gift from the Messiah!!!


*


----------



## Calliope (24 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I have been watching this thread and the McLain thread for some time now and I am now prepared to jump in at the deep end and say what most people know, but are frightened to say for fear of being called racist.

Obama will not be elected president while he accepts the appellation of being an African-American. The description is one that can hardly be worn with pride. Most African countries these days are totalitarian basket cases, and the blame for this can be squarely laid at the feet of Africans, not Europeans. They have managed to turn their countries with rich resources into economic wrecks. On the other hand countries in Southern Asia with fewer resources are prospering.There would be very few black Americans who would rather have been born in Africa than America.

If I were an American I would want to vote for somebody who called himself "American"...without an appelation such as African, European, Indian, Hispanic, Chinese or anything else. To stand any chance Obama should now stand up and say "I am a proud American like John McCain, and I don't need any other labels". The only votes he would lose are those of the bigots.


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> I have been watching this thread and the McLain thread for some time now and I am now prepared to jump in at the deep end and say what most people know, but are frightened to say for fear of being called racist.
> 
> Obama will not be elected president while he accepts the appellation of being an African-American. The description is one that can hardly be worn with pride. Most African countries these days are totalitarian basket cases, and the blame for this can be squarely laid at the feet of Africans, not Europeans. They have managed to turn their countries with rich resources into economic wrecks. On the other hand countries in Southern Asia with fewer resources are prospering.There would be very few black Americans who would rather have been born in Africa than America.
> 
> If I were an American I would want to vote for somebody who called himself "American"...without an appelation such as African, European, Indian, Hispanic, Chinese or anything else. To stand any chance Obama should now stand up and say "I am a proud American like John McCain, and I don't need any other labels". The only votes he would lose are those of the bigots.





Thanks for this post.

I am an American.  The Democrats continuously try to split the American people into minority groups, and gather them into the Democrat party.  

I happen to be a white person, married to an Asian woman.  Our kids are being brought up as Americans, not - as the Democrats would like to call them - Asian Americans or Filipino Americans. They are proud of their half Filipino background, and have been there several times to meet relatives, etc.  But they love being AMERICANS.  We live in Tennessee, and believe it or not, they have not experienced any racism whatsoever.  They have lots of friends who are color blind.  The world gets the wrong impression of what Americans are really like.  It is the race hustlers like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, and others that have to keep this thing going and going and going.  Most Americans are getting sick of the racial politics, and want to vote for the person they think is best without being called racist.


----------



## Doris (25 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> If I were an American I would want to vote for somebody who called himself "American"...without an appellation such as African, European, Indian, Hispanic, Chinese or anything else. To stand any chance Obama should now stand up and say "I am a proud American like John McCain, and I don't need any other labels". The only votes he would lose are those of the bigots.




So you would agree with this ad?  Obama has long called for change in unity:


"Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or do we participate in a politics of hope?"


----------



## noirua (25 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama has the Presidency in his pocket IF he can get all Democrats to vote for him.
Hillary Clinton would have no chance of becoming President for eight years with Barack Obama in the Whitehouse. Therefore, many of her supporters may see more in having an elderly Republican in the Oval Office and the chance of another punt in 2012.


----------



## ZzzzDad (25 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> So you would agree with this ad?  Obama has long called for change in unity:
> 
> 
> "Do we participate in a politics of cynicism or do we participate in a politics of hope?"




This slick commercial is just absurd.  The Democrats are the party of divide and conquer.  Handouts to every minority group to get it to join their coalition.  Republicans are the doers.  They are the color blind.  They believe in one America.  Republicans don't believe in White America, Black America, Hispanic America, Asian America.  We don't believe in John Edwards' two Americas either.

This commercial is so absurd - it is pathetic.


----------



## Calliope (25 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The short answer to your question Doris is "no". The term African-American is divisive, and until Obama comes out and condemns its usage he will never be president. But even if he does he is too long on rhetoric and too short on substance. McCain will win by default.:headshake


----------



## wildkactus (25 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hillary Clinton would have no chance of becoming President for eight years with Barack Obama in the Whitehouse. Therefore, many of her supporters may see more in having an elderly Republican in the Oval Office and the chance of another punt in 2012.




This is the one point a friend of mine in new york brought up the other day, she mentioned that a lot her friends (All Dems) are going to vote for McCain to hope to see just this happen, as they see it Hillary was robbed of the nomination.

This weeks DNC convention should be interesting to see where all the Hilary supporters fall. 
I bet most of the Hillary states will have the floor space at the back as far from the podium as possible.


----------



## ZzzzDad (25 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

To get an idea who Obama picked, look at this video of Biden, it is hilarious:

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/...bably-have-a-much-higher-iq-than-you-do-clip/


Count the known lies:

From an E.J. Dionne, Jr. article (Dionne is a Democrat by the way)

In addition to claiming he has a higher IQ than the questioner (unprovable either way without getting test scores for them both) and lying outright about his law school class rank, Biden insisted that he had three degrees from college (when in fact he had only one, albeit that with a double-major). He claimed to have been recognized as the “outstanding student” in his college political science department, when in fact he had only been nominated for an award (which he didn’t win). Biden claimed to have had a full academic scholarship to law school, when he actually had only a half-scholarship based on financial need. And rather than graduating in the top half of his law school class, Biden graduated 76th out of 85 — an abysmal class rank that’s only partly explained by the F he got in one course after being caught plagiarizing five times from a law review article. Bad grades weren’t new to Slow Joe in law school, though: “In his first three semesters [at the University of Delaware], his grades were C’s or D’s, with three exceptions: two A’s in physical education courses, a B in a course on ‘Great English Writers’ and an F in R.O.T.C.”


There is lots more to come.  This guy is known to runoff at the mouth, a human gaffe machine that will keep giving and giving.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> .. at this video of Biden, it is hilarious:
> 
> ... And rather than graduating in the top half of his law school class, Biden graduated 76th out of 85 — an abysmal class rank ...




yeah but let's not forget ...
a) that was law degree not Naval Academy
b) McCain graduated from the Naval Academy in 1958; he was sixth from the bottom in class rank, 894th out of 899
c) Biden's only going for VP
d) Biden doesn't prevent others from finding out about their MIA and POW's loved ones - and in the process conveniently hiding his wartime history.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=282197

I mean,these youtubes aren't hilarious, they are deeply worrying (and include considerable criticism of McCain by fellow Republicans) ...

  Vietnam Veterans Against McCain


----------



## ZzzzDad (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

First of all, McCain never lied about his degrees, or grades, or anything else.  He admits that he was not the best of students.  But he was a military hero, and that, no one doubts.  

Second, and most "worrying" is those people that are trying to imply that John McCain doesn't or didn't care about POW/MIA are wrong.  John McCain has done more than anyone else in America to resolve the issues of POW/MIA.  Everyone here knows that.  You, in Australia, don't know that.  You believe whatever the other side puts out there on youtube.  John McCain has been to Vietnam many times in the last 20 years to get accountability.  It is a smear on McCain, and those making the accusations have no shame.

Senator Bob Smith was defeated for re-election because quite simply he was a nutcase.  He was on the far right fringe of the Republican party.  Do some research on him, and you will find out that.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> ...Senator Bob Smith was defeated for re-election because quite simply he was a nutcase.  He was on the far right fringe of the Republican party.  Do some research on him, and you will find out that.




ok zz, but now you have to also try to discredit :-

Dr Joseph Douglas Jr 
Tracey Usry fmr Chief Investigator , US Senate Minority Staff
Delores Apodaca Alfono – Chairperson, National Alliance of Families
Lynn OShea Dir of Research National Alliance of Families
Al Santoli, American Foreign Policy Council
Rep, Bob Dornan (R-CA)
Cpl Bob Dumas, POW
Dr James Lucier Former US Senate Chief of Staff

Here's a transcript of that youtube :-

  Vietnam Veterans Against McCain



> Dr Joseph Douglas Jr – Author “Betrayed - Americas Missing POWs”
> Senator McCain seemed to be one of the people that was an obstructionist
> who was not interested in the truth coming out
> who tried to attack people rather than learn what they had to say
> ...


----------



## ZzzzDad (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

You're being pathetic with this line of criticism of McCain.  Obviously you don't know who some of these people are.  Many are the nut right wing fringe of the Republican party.  The aforementioned Sen. Bob Smith, and Rep. B1 Bob Dornan (incidentally also defeated in his Congressional district).

Criticize him on his economic policy, foreign policy, etc., but to criticize him on his commitment to the POW/MIA issue is just plain ignorant of the actual facts.  Do your own homework why don't you.  I get the sense you are just going to the Moveon and DailyKos websites to dredge this stuff up.

You are better than that.  It would be as if I were bringing crazy issues like Barack is a Muslim, or all the other nut wing stuff.  I am against Obama because he is the most liberal member of the Senate, and the people he has associated with over the years.  Because he want to almost double capital gains taxes, wants to raise other taxes *during* a recession.  Because he is soooooo inexperienced in foreign affairs etc.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> You're being pathetic with this line of criticism of McCain.  Obviously you don't know who some of these people are.



well maybe you are being pathetic to criticise the National Alliance of Families and/or their then Chairperson, Delores Apodaca Alfono – who McCain happily reduces to tears.  

when he "singlehandedly" quashed that Bill to give easier access to such organisations.  - For reasons known only to himself 



			
				Zzdad said:
			
		

> John McCain has done more than anyone else in America to resolve the issues of POW/MIA. Everyone here knows that. You, in Australia, don't know that.




Well you might know that ZZ, but the National Alliance of Families seems to disagree.   I'm sure a few other indoctrinated people like yourself still disagree with the NAF however. 



> Delores Apodaca Alfono – Chairperson, National Alliance of Families
> I mean he was yelling and screaming at me
> he had me in tears
> 
> ...




http://www.nationalalliance.org/home1.htm

As for accusations of bias - why not watch BOTH those youtubes in #826 - watch the man at work.  See what you think.   Forget about attacking me personally.  Get some facts. - like the raw footage for instance.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

btw, here's the second half of the transcript of that youtube - to go with #828  



> Where are those transcriptions - believe me they are in the archives of the museum
> the bragging military museum in Hanoi
> and McCain could not have wanted one of those to turn up in the middle of a presidential race
> he knows that , I know that, a few other people know that
> ...


----------



## Family_Guy (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I saw somewhere on a news site today that they arrested 4 people in connection with a 'perhaps' hit on the next President.

Got me thinking, what would happen if he got murdered before the election? What would happen?

I know this is a terrible thing to ask as i dont condone it at all.....thought just passed my mind.


----------



## Calliope (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris. It is obvious that you started this thread in order to pay homage to Barack Obama whom you admire. It has overtones of "kevin 07" whom you probably admire too. I am a conservative and see many flaws in Rudd but that is another story. I think Obama is a decent man and your support for him is well based on ethical and moral standards. However the Democratic party is not the sole repository of decency.
Quite often decent politicians aspiring to higher office have to make compromises and accept endorsements from others who are far from decent. I have no doubt that Obama will be delighted to accept endorsements from Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton. These two men are highly regarded in the Democratic Party, but in my opinion their morals and ethics are of a very low standard, even for politicians. As George Orwell said in another context "once a ***** always a *****." Hillary of course is no better. She condoned her husband's disgusting behaviour in exchange for his support for her political future. She will dump him as soon as she realises she has reached a dead end. The point I wish to make is that Barack is not the Messiah. He should be steering clear Clinton and Kennedy. They are tainted. :bad:


----------



## wildkactus (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Family_Guy said:


> I saw somewhere on a news site today that they arrested 4 people in connection with a 'perhaps' hit on the next President.
> 
> Got me thinking, what would happen if he got murdered before the election? What would happen?
> 
> I know this is a terrible thing to ask as i dont condone it at all.....thought just passed my mind.




From what I can gather the nomination would pass to Hillary


----------



## Julia (26 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Why would it pass to Hillary?

Now that Obama has nominated his potential VP, wouldn't it pass to him, just as it would in the event of his actually having been elected?


----------



## ZzzzDad (27 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Biden on personal wealth: “I don’t have Barack Obama money”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ0dVrNRJOc


Seems in the Democrat party, it is admirable to be poor?  What is Biden really saying?  He is 65 years old, has been in the Senate for 36 years, and his net worth is between 75 and 150 thousand dollars?  And we want him helping to run the economy?


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

zz, 
yeah but McCain is self confessed blind ignorant about the economy ..

 McCain on the Economy


----------



## Doris (27 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Doris. It is obvious that you started this thread in order to pay homage to Barack Obama whom you admire.
> ... I think Obama is a decent man and your support for him is well based on ethical and moral standards.




Michelle's keynote address last night highlighted the values I've always seen in her husband.  


* *work hard for what you want in life* - rather than expecting handouts... ( a leg-up is good )

* *your word is your bond* - do what you say you're going to do... ( but be flexible and listen and learn )

* *treat people with respect and dignity*, even if you don't know them.  Even if you don't agree with them

* *don't accept and settle* for the distance between the world as it is and the world as it should be.

* *listen to your hopes instead of to your fears*; ( you will find what you seek )

* *stop doubting and start dreaming*. ( If you don't dream, you cannot have a dream come true )


Yes Calliope, there are parallels with Rudd.  He's trying.  Give him time... 

I still hold my breath until Friday our time... 100% behind you Calliope on Bill and Hillary!  Will she mount a coup?  
If not, will her machine promote McCain so she can have a go in 2012?

I look at the whole picture with Ted, even with the Chappaquiddick shadow.


Michelle says her brother Craig was 'not looking down on me - he was watching over me'.  Lovitt.


----------



## ZzzzDad (27 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Choice of Biden sinks Obama even further.  Americans are finally starting to pay attention to Obama and his positions.  He is beginning to implode.

Prediction:  At least a 55 to 45 margin by election day.  Obama just to extreme and risky for the American people.


Gallup Daily Tracking poll


PRINCETON, NJ -- It's official: Barack Obama has received no bounce in voter support out of his selection of Sen. Joe Biden to be his vice presidential running mate.

Gallup Poll Daily tracking from Aug. 23-25, the first three-day period falling entirely after Obama's Saturday morning vice presidential announcement, shows 46% of national registered voters backing John McCain and 44% supporting Obama, not appreciably different from the previous week's standing for both candidates. This is the first time since Obama clinched the nomination in early June, though, that McCain has held any kind of advantage over Obama in Gallup Poll Daily tracking.


----------



## Calliope (27 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Thanks for your response Doris. You speak with the voice of reason and compassion. Your students are fortunate. You have probably converted a few naysayers along the way. As for Ted Kennedy, i'm afraid it's in his genes.


----------



## Doris (27 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Coup imminent?

Have a look at this clip of the last 2:39 of Hillary's speech today: 

http://www.latimes.com/video/?slug=la-na-hclinton27-2008aug27-vid


I'm switching off again.  Until tomorrow night!  I am paranoid!


* I FELT *Hillary was campaigning for herself!*

 - Her emotions (eyes, body language, voice tone) seemed to me to have a cocky *hidden agenda*.



> I haven't spent the past 35 years in the trenches - to see...
> 
> - - You haven't worked so hard for 18 months and endured the last 8 years *to suffer through more failed leadership*...




- - then quite a resonating pregnant pause - - before her 'No way' chant.


* I SAW Michelle's face frozen in distrusting fear.  Even after a forced smile at the end.

* What will happen when the vote is taken tomorrow in Denver?

See my post #809


----------



## sydneysider (28 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Both Gallup and Rasmussen polls now show that Obama poll numbers are going South. This is during their big convention in Denver which IMHO has been very boring. Watch the talking heads on CNN all have long faces, meanwhile on MSNBC they are having a giant catfight started by Joe Scarborough over the extreme bias towards Obama on his owh channel. 

Obama is going to have his acceptance speech on Thursday outside in a Greek Temple setting looks a little too Hitlerian who loved these type of settings. His next major problem will be Bill Eyers and all of his old "unrepentent terror" connections. Eyers has a long association with the Weathermen and SDS (i remember SDS at Sydney University during the Vietnam War days) and launched Obama's political career from his home some years ago. Eyers and his group have long time links to both Obama and his wife. From getting hi paying positions at Chicago Universities, attending conferences to working on the Annenberg Foundation in Chicago. 

Ayers was involved in a host of bombings of US facilities and some of his followers including a girlfriend were blown up by a home made nail bomb intended for a US army base. Another group of associates killed three (cops) people in a armed holdup of a Brinks truck. Ayers followers had a three fingered salute derived from the killing of Sharon Tate when the killers stuck a fork in here.  

I am not making this stuff up, it is widely circulating on US web sites and starting to hit the airwaves via FOX news. Reporters have just accessed the Annenberg papers via Chicago University. I understand that Obama blew thru about $50 million running this organization with his mate Ayers. This is where Obama's experience as a "social organizer" comes from. This stuff following on top of Trinty Church will sink Obama like a stone. Just watch. I suspect that this will have a major impact on the Democratic Party as most voters are totally unawre of the level of terror and radical connections lurking around Obama.


----------



## ZzzzDad (28 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Now this one is just funny, whether you are a McCain or an Obama supporter:
(if anyone can give me a pointer on how to inbed the video, I'd be thankful)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ted9Hzn8foY


----------



## wayneL (28 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Now this one is just funny, whether you are a McCain or an Obama supporter:
> (if anyone can give me a pointer on how to inbed the video, I'd be thankful)
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ted9Hzn8foY





```
[media=youtube]Ted9Hzn8foY[/youtube}
```

But use the square bracket on the end.


----------



## Calliope (28 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hillary's screaming hordes of pant-suited macho-feminists will have to vent their rage on somebody and I don't think it will be John McCain. Michelle Obama has good reasons to look fearful.


----------



## Doris (28 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama has the ticket*



> Obama was *chosen by acclamation* after his rival for the Democratic nomination, former first lady Hillary Clinton, took to the convention floor and *moved to suspend the traditional state-by-state rollcall vote.
> *
> "With eyes firmly fixed on the future, in the spirit of unity, with the goal of victory, with faith in our party and our country, let's declare together in one voice right here right now, that Barack Obama is our candidate and he will be our president," Clinton said, triggering a deafening roar.
> 
> ...




http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story.html?id=8d016860-2981-4871-b07a-d54420160cdb



> The scene for the closing of ranks around Obama was set in motion earlier today when *Clinton formally released her delegates, freeing them to vote for Obama.
> *
> "You've come here from so many different places having made this journey and *feeling in your heart what is right for you to do*," she told the crowd in emotional scenes.
> 
> ...




http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/28/uselections2008.democrats20081


----------



## wayneL (28 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

from The Times


----------



## dotocom (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

why do so many people say he's gonna get shot?


----------



## wayneL (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



dotocom said:


> why do so many people say he's gonna get shot?




Because the US is full of racist, red-necked, nutters, who think that blacks should still be picking cotton. Confederate flags still fly down south.

...and they all own guns.


----------



## dotocom (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ROFL from true facts


----------



## ZzzzDad (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Because the US is full of racist, red-necked, nutters, who think that blacks should still be picking cotton. Confederate flags still fly down south.
> 
> ...and they all own guns.




I hope you were joking on this one Wayne, or at least exaggerating.  I know that is the southern stereotype, but it is so far from reality, it is laughable.

This southern man is for McCain, but none of us want anything bad to happen to Obama.  We just want him to lose because he is wrong on the issues.  By the way, if you check the left wing blogs like DailyKos, Moveon, or Huffingtonpost, you will find the biggest nutcases of all.  Most of the fury is on the left at this point in history.


----------



## ZzzzDad (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Bad News for Obama: The Economy is Better than Expected 

From a New York Times article today:

The economy expanded faster from April to June than originally thought, the government said on Thursday, catching many economists off-guard and cheering investors on Wall Street.


Gross domestic product rose at a 3.3 percent clip in the second quarter, the Commerce Department said, a significant jump over the original estimate of 1.9 percent growth. G.D.P., the broadest measure of the nation’s economic activity, is considered a good barometer of America’s economic health.

On Wall Street, the markets surged on the strength of the report. The Dow Jones industrial average was up more than 190 points, or 1.65 percent in afternoon trading, and the broader Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index was up 1.16 percent.

The revised G.D.P. figure suggests resilience in the economy, especially compared with the anemic 0.9 percent growth rate from January to March, and a contraction in the final three months of 2007. Still, spending by American consumers stayed relatively soft, despite the infusion of the government’s tax stimulus program. Corporate profits remained weak.


----------



## wayneL (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> I hope you were joking on this one Wayne, or at least exaggerating.  I know that is the southern stereotype, but it is so far from reality, it is laughable.
> 
> This southern man is for McCain, but none of us want anything bad to happen to Obama.  We just want him to lose because he is wrong on the issues.  By the way, if you check the left wing blogs like DailyKos, Moveon, or Huffingtonpost, you will find the biggest nutcases of all.  Most of the fury is on the left at this point in history.




Only partly joking. I was raised in the US and I have relatives in North Carolina and Georgia so I do know the situation.

Most American folks are intrinsically, but unintentionally racist. They don't consciously mean to be, but they are in lots of ways that are not lost on non-whites. Some are consciously racist, but not violently so. I have a cousin who is like this who cannot disguise her revulsion at non-whites. Quite proud of the fact that the Chinese family on their street was effectively forced to move by being kept in Coventry by all the whites.

This is the same person who goes to a Baptist church every Sunday plus Bible study etc.

There is small but sizable minority who are malevolently and overtly racist such as the folks in the photo.

C'mon Zzzzzzz, you know as well as I do that the Old Boys are frothing at the mouth over the possibility of a black president. It wouldn't be much of a stretch to imagine some of these clown wishing to inflict harm on Obama.

It wasn't that long ago that MLK was bumped off for speaking out too much.


----------



## Calliope (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Good old Wayne We are now seeing the real you. I will leave you with a thought. "The last refuge of the bigot is to accuse his critics of being racist" (with apologies to Samuel Johnson)


----------



## wayneL (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Good old Wayne We are now seeing the real you. I will leave you with a thought. "The last refuge of the bigot is to accuse his critics of being racist" (with apologies to Samuel Johnson)



Calliope,

An observation on racism doesn't make me a racist you Bozo.


----------



## ZzzzDad (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Only partly joking. I was raised in the US and I have relatives in North Carolina and Georgia so I do know the situation.
> 
> Most American folks are intrinsically, but unintentionally racist. They don't consciously mean to be, but they are in lots of ways that are not lost on non-whites. Some are consciously racist, but not violently so. I have a cousin who is like this who cannot disguise her revulsion at non-whites. Quite proud of the fact that the Chinese family on their street was effectively forced to move by being kept in Coventry by all the whites.
> 
> ...




Okay Wayne, you are right, there are some bigots as there are in every country on earth.  I would say southerners are not any more bigoted than say the English (I've seen lots of skinheads and such make the news over there - not to mention what goes on at some of the soccer games, etc.)  You don't see too many of those types here, unless you watch a lot of Hollywood movies that thrive on stereotypes.

My wife is Filipino and we live in Nashville Tennessee where I was born and raised.  I can quite honestly say that she and our four children have never been harrassed in any way - quite the opposite - the exception being a black man that wondered if she was a prostitute originally when she lived in the Philippines.  You might actually discover that many blacks are more the racist ones. 

By and large, the good ole boys are dying out in the south.


----------



## wayneL (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Zzzzzzzzz,

Yes, racism is certainly not exclusive to whites. So-called "reverse racism" is just as ugly. And yes, agree the situation is nowhere as bad as it used to be.

The very fact that a black man is running for president and stands a chance of winning, says America has come a long way, whether or not one agrees with his policies.

Calliope,



> Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel: Samuel Johnson




Interesting bastardization of an otherwise worthy quotation.

I'll leave others to conclude what they will.


----------



## Calliope (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Calliope,
> 
> An observation on racism doesn't make me a racist you Bozo.




Tut tut. Name calling is not nice. I'm sorry if I upset you to that extent.


----------



## websman (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I just want to state for the record, that I consider myself as a redneck and I'm proud of it...This doesn't mean I'm a racist though.


----------



## dotocom (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



websman said:


> I just want to state for the record, that I consider myself as a redneck and I'm proud of it...This doesn't mean I'm a racist though.




would you shoot me if i trespass onto your land?


----------



## deadset (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I thought redneck simply describes a lifestyle in the USA, whereas here it implies racism as well.

To say all Southerners are racist though, I've heard the same thing said many times about Australians and I know that to be the complete opposite of the truth.  I grow very tired of constantly being referred as a racist by simply being Australian myself.  I imagine alot of Southerners would feel the same.

Southerners seem to be the most polite and curteous of all people really.  They seem loathe to criticise other people, and would rather encourage.
-----------------------------------
Anyway, I did notice Obama declare the firm intention for energy independance.


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Biden on personal wealth: “I don’t have Barack Obama money”
> 
> Seems in the Democrat party, it is admirable to be poor?  What is Biden really saying?  He is 65 years old, has been in the Senate for 36 years, and his net worth is between 75 and 150 thousand dollars?  And we want him helping to run the economy?




yep much better to go with McCain - one of the Keating five - he's much wealthier  

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=274651&highlight=whiz#post274651

gee whiz, how do you link - in one answer - being a POW , and being investigated for corrupt / negligent behaviour  



> McCain: *I learned from Keating Five case*
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) ”” Sen. John McCain's ethics entanglement with a wealthy banker ultimately convicted of swindling investors was such a disturbing, formative experience in his political career that he compares the scandal in some ways to the five years he was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Denver today... The crowd at Invesco Field was the largest for a U.S. political rally since John F. Kennedy's accepted the Democratic presidential nomination before 80,000 people at the Los Angeles Coliseum in 1960.

http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix/news/story.html?id=7fb8cf28-9ae1-4af9-bfea-c776c1f44cb4



> "I stand before you tonight because all across America something is stirring," he said. "What the naysayers don't understand is that *this election has never been about me. It's been about you*."
> 
> On Nov. 4, we must stand up and say: '*Eight is enough*.' "
> "America, we are better than these last eight years. We are a better country than this."
> ...




Dissection/analysis of Barack's acceptance speech...
Scroll down for the prepared-for-delivery speech text: 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/28/barack-obama-democratic-c_n_122224.html


A live analysis/review/critique of the speech: by a Ranting Republican...  Lovitt!



> Talking about being at war, “the economy’s in turmoil,” and other struggles.
> Talking about not being able to afford credit card bills - WELL THEN DON’T BUY WHAT YOU CAN’T AFFORD!
> Blaming it all on “the failed policies of George W. Bush.”  Because it’s all Bush’s fault.
> 
> ...



http://inkslwc.wordpress.com/2008/08/28/live-analysis-of-barack-obamas-acceptance-speech-at-the-dnc/


----------



## ZzzzDad (29 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well delivered speech tonight by Obama.  Truly a great orator.

Too bad for him though that he can't take that teleprompter into the debates with him.


----------



## websman (30 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



dotocom said:


> would you shoot me if i trespass onto your land?




Not unless you shoot first.


----------



## websman (30 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Well delivered speech tonight by Obama.  Truly a great orator.
> 
> Too bad for him though that he can't take that teleprompter into the debates with him.





I onkly wish that Bob Barr had a chance against Obama and McCain.  barr would make a great President, in my opinion.
http://www.lp.org/


I do prefer Mccain over Obama though.


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger (not sure I believe those bookies either lol) 

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

Be interesting to see if these odds change (up or down) after McCain gives his acceptance speech  next week. 

PS  Promptcards or no promptcards, and allegedly so much content in his character (and in his speeches), I'm betting McCain doesn't go for 45 minutes whatever (as Obama did) - unless he talks really slowly  

Then again, time.....(applause yeah yeah) ...  will ....... (applause yeah yeah) ...tell. 

PS I hope when we get our Presidential selection procedure up and running, it doesn't go the route of the US model 
(obviously it won't lol)


----------



## wayneL (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

In Saturday's Times:


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, I recall we were discussing the positives of the US Presidential voting system - that - IN THEIR CASE (only) - the duration of the scrutiny on the Presidential hopeful was a positive yes?

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=264146

Conversely  it must be true, surely, that the possibility of a total unknown appearing within a few weeks of the election - who will stand in for the President in the event of his being hit by a bus in the next 4 and a bit years - 

..... who might be the most nuclear-trigger-happy person on earth for all we know .......

is equally a weakness ? 

Imagine if Dan Quayle had become president?? :silly: the mind boggles


----------



## Calliope (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I don't think it really matters who the vice president is long as they are not complete idiots like Dan Quayle or Al Gore. Truman was totally unprepared when he assumed the Presidency at a very crucial time and he had big shoes to fill. He did a good job under the circumstances and was even re-elected in 1948. Before being elected Senator he ran a haberdashery shop in Independence, Missouri. Hardly a background for running a country you might say. On the other hand Obama has never run anything.


----------



## Doris (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> On the other hand Obama has never run anything.




What do you call all the years of work organizing organizations in South Chicago changing the unemployment scenarios?  REAL work helping REAL people on the ground? Changing attitudes and lives to be functional? 

POTUS is a mere extension of this.

Look at the election this year... Obama's campaign has Obama as the leader!  
* Historic rollouts
* Leader of millions donating to fund his campaign
* NO PACs nor lobbyist nor taxpayers' public money

His campaign is OWNED by grass root individuals.  Not monied corporate stake-holders.

Only a brilliant leader could have run this.


----------



## Doris (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

New 30 sec ad by Obama campaign after Palin's appointment:

Note how Palin is insignificant.  No critique on her.  Best leave that to voters...

"Well, he's made his choice", the announcer says. "But, for the rest of us, there's still no change". 

McCain doesn't get it, calling this broken economy 'strong'.


----------



## ZzzzDad (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

He can ignore her at his own peril:

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews1547.html

8/30/2008

Zogby Poll: Equilibrium in the POTUS Race!
Brash McCain pick of AK Gov. Palin neutralizes historic Obama speech, stunts the Dems' convention bounce


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UTICA, New York - Republican John McCain's surprise announcement Friday of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin as his running mate - some 16 hours after Democrat Barack Obama's historic speech accepting his party’s presidential nomination -  has possibly stunted any Obama convention bump, the latest Zogby Interactive flash poll of the race shows.

Data from this poll is available here 

The latest nationwide survey, begun Friday afternoon after the McCain announcement of Palin as running mate and completed mid-afternoon today, shows McCain/Palin at 47%, compared to 45% support for Obama/Biden. 

In other words, the race is a dead heat.

The interactive online Zogby survey shows that both Obama and McCain have solidified the support among their own parties - Obama won 86% support of Democrats and McCain 89% of Republicans in a two-way head-to-head poll question not including the running mates. When Biden and Palin are added to the mix, Obama's Democratic support remains at 86%, while McCain's increases to 92%.

After the McCain "Veep" announcement on Friday, Palin was almost immediately hailed as a strong conservative, and those voters have rallied to the GOP ticket, the survey shows. Republicans gather in St. Paul, Minnesota this week to officially nominate McCain and Palin as their presidential ticket.


----------



## Calliope (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> What do you call all the years of work organizing organizations in South Chicago changing the unemployment scenarios?  REAL work helping REAL people on the ground? Changing attitudes and lives to be functional?
> 
> POTUS is a mere extension of this.
> 
> ...




OK. He is a great organiser and demagogue. Lack of substance will be his downfall. You forget that the business of America is business. This is something he knows little about.


----------



## Doris (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

A great speech!

Oh how I enjoy positive, intelligent, inspiring people.  (When this side of them is disclosed)

He would make a great president!


----------



## Doris (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Rasmussen Poll* of the vote nationwide: 

Barack Obama:47% 
John McCain: 43%. 

When "leaners" are included: 
Obama - 49% 
McCain - 45%


http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

*Gallup*:

Obama: - 49%
McCain: - 41%

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109900/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Continues-Lead-49-41.aspx


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris 

She's just gonna have to do a more revealing photo I guess 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=329832&highlight=hoaxes#post329832


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ...
> *Gallup*:
> Obama: - 49%
> McCain: - 41%



Doris, thanks for the links - wowo - averaged over the last few (6) months it comes out as seriously line ball (much closer than the bookies have been saying for instance).  

You'd have to say it's really closer than 49-41 surely !  - They say it includes a 5 day rolling average, and yet it does a sudden divergence in the last few days - no way could it take into account Palin's influence for instance ( up or down) , you'd think 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/109702/Conventions-Typically-Result-FivePoint-Bounce.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx


----------



## 2020hindsight (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ok - correction - a 3 day rolling average since 9 June. 
Still, the next week or two will be fascinating


----------



## Doris (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ok - correction - a 3 day rolling average since 9 June.
> Still, the next week or two will be fascinating




One of those three days was after Palin's announcement.

Polls in two days' time should give a clearer effect.

SBS at 4:30 tomorrow... GOP Day one.  I'm excited!  Well... I must do balanced research.


----------



## Doris (31 August 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Doris
> 
> She's just gonna have to do a more revealing photo I guess
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=329832&highlight=hoaxes#post329832






2020hindsight said:


> PS ref last post, that stomach doesn't look like it belongs on a mother of 5 to me




2020... look at her neck and cheeks. This is how we women judge others' ages. 
No jowls yet either, in the swimsuit pic!

Your photo must have been taken 20 years ago when she was advertising for the beauty pageant.  
No mother of four (at the time) would expose herself like this unless she were doing a calendar.  

The GOP will have her speech ready for her to read at the convention.  Will be interesting to see how she delivers it!
.


----------



## sydneysider (1 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Yesterday Obama and Biden were in Beaverton PA. Biden was doiiinnn... the intoduciiin....and this has been recorded on YouTube for everyone to see...he was slurring his words and bumbling around the stage looking like he was two sheets to the wind. His commentary was woeful AND Obama wants to put this guy a "heartbeat away from the Presidency"? The YouTube commentary with the video indicates that Biden may have a drinking problem. 

The funniest thing about all of this is that Obama said yesterday that Biden was one of Washington's greatest politicians, but then the old boys network in Washington is full of this type of stuff, remember Chris Dodd and Kennedy doing the waitress sandwich routine? No wonder approval of the Dim controlled Senate and Congress has dropped to 9%. 

I suspect that the McCain / Palin ticket will be an equal opportunity destroyer of Washington mores. Palin has gone after the corrupt Republican old boys network in Alaska claiming a number of scalps and McCain will do the same in Washington to both sides of the fence. 

The debate between Biden and Palin will be very interesting. Palin is one of the VERY FEW politicians in the US to do something about the current energy crisis. She just rammed thru an Alaskan bill to approve the construction of a $40 billion gas pipeline to the lower 48. Biden is on record as voting to block such a pipeline. He is also on record as advocating the partition of Iraq into three mini states and bloviating about the failure of the surge. So much for his experience in the Senate. I suspect that the pressure of running for the VP slot is a little too much for him, might explain why he is already stumbling and slurring his words.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> No mother of four (at the time)....



doris, think I twigged to that one myself 
careful though with the calaculation of how many kids etc, ZZdad will work it out to the month and set you straight there - probably discover she was pregnant at the time 

PS Maybe Julie Bishop could take some electioneering tips from her - might help her leadership aspirations lol.


----------



## ZzzzDad (1 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Rasmussen tracking poll narrows to Obama 3 point lead, with one more day to go before the "Palin effect" fully comes into focus:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Sunday, August 31, 2008
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Sunday—the day before the Republican National Convention is scheduled to begin—shows Barack Obama ahead of John McCain by three percentage points both with and without leaners. That’s exactly the same edge Obama enjoyed a week ago on the eve of the Democratic National Convention. 


*Today’s numbers show a one-point improvement for McCain, but Obama still leads 47% to 44%. When "leaners" are included, it’s Obama 49%, McCain 46% (see recent daily results). Obama is now viewed favorably by 57% of the nation’s voters, McCain by 56%. Tracking Polls are released at 9:30 a.m. Eastern Time each day and a FREE daily e-mail update. is available. 

There have been significant changes in perception of John McCain in the two days of polling since he named Alaska Governor Sarah Palin as his running mate. Since then, 49% of Republicans voice a Very Favorable opinion of McCain. That’s up six percentage points from 43% just before the announcement. Also, 64% of unaffiliated voters now give positive reviews to McCain, up ten points since naming his running mate. *

There has been little change in perceptions of Obama since his Thursday night speech and the Palin announcement (see trends and other recent demographic observations). 

*Palin herself made a good first impression and is now viewed favorably by 53% of voters nationwide. Her counterpart, Joe Biden, is viewed favorably by 48%. While Palin has made a good first impression, the more significant numbers will come a week from now after the nation has a chance to learn more about her. *

*And the Republicans haven't even had their convention yet!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## ZzzzDad (1 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> The debate between Biden and Palin will be very interesting. Palin is one of the VERY FEW politicians in the US to do something about the current energy crisis. She just rammed thru an Alaskan bill to approve the construction of a $40 billion gas pipeline to the lower 48. Biden is on record as voting to block such a pipeline. He is also on record as advocating the partition of Iraq into three mini states and bloviating about the failure of the surge. So much for his experience in the Senate. I suspect that the pressure of running for the VP slot is a little too much for him, might explain why he is already stumbling and slurring his words.




Sydneysider,
Biden has been in Congress so long that he also voted against the original Alaska pipeline back in the 1970's.

Can you imagine what oil prices would be today if there were no Alaska pipeline?  
He voted against ANWR 10 plus years ago, one of his excuses besides the "environment" was that it would take at least 10 years to get production.  Well, we are ten years later, and because of his vote we are still 10 years away from production  (Although most real experts say it would only take 3 to 5 years, because so much of the infrastructure is already in place)


----------



## ZzzzDad (1 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Another poll - from the lefty CNN/Time

August 29-31: Obama 49%, McCain 48%

Again, and that is before the coming Republican convention.  Where is that Obama bounce?

By this time next week, McCain/Palin will be ahead by at least 10 points.  Sarah will WOW the country.

She has a wonderful American story behind her - along with more executive experience than Obama.

I can't wait to see Olbermann's head explode on November 4.  The leftwing nuts are convinced that America has turned left.  They will be crying and saying "the election was stolen, the election was stolen wah wah wah".


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Where is that Obama bounce?



 Well Gallup suggests a bit of a bounce (graph on post # 878)
Then again, the timing of the Sarah Pa(y)lin announcement may have affected it, true.   Far be it for me to suggest that her announcement was planned that way lol.  Or that these blips and bounces make any difference on polling day surely.    

But ZZdad, I agree that Sarah bounces better than Joe Biden


----------



## Doris (1 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Gustav gives the nominees the chance to show their commandant strategies (or are they tactics?)



> The Republican National Convention will cut back most of its activities Monday because of Hurricane Gustav, Sen. John McCain said Sunday.
> 
> "*This is a time when we have to do away with our party politics and we have to act as Americans*. We have to join the 300 million other Americans on behalf of our fellow citizens. It's a time for action. So, we're going to suspend most of our activities tomorrow except for those absolutely necessary," said McCain, speaking from St. Louis, Missouri.




Now this is good timing!  
God must be on McCain's side to bring Gustav now, enabling his patriotism to shine.
... _Forget my convention. I am needed in the field! _

Lots of delegates/governors including Arnie (and Bush... and Cheney) were not going anyway.
... they have 'more important' demands on the use of their time.  

The last time an incumbent president skipped his party's convention was in 1968, when President Lyndon Johnson stayed at his Texas ranch while Democrats met in Chicago, Illinois.  Why would Bush not be there now?  


Good reaction:
They now know they should have done this for Katrina.  
And ordinary people can afford to give needed aid more than the government! 



> A senior McCain source said Saturday that *officials were considering turning the convention into a massive telethon to raise money for the Red Cross and other agencies to help with hurricane aid*.
> 
> "*He wants to do something service oriented* if and when the storm hits and it's as bad as it's expected to be now," the McCain source said.
> 
> *They are also hoping to get McCain himself to a storm-affected area as soon as possible*.



http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/31/rnc.gustav/index.html


*How did Obama react?*



> "Even if you've ridden out this storm before, even if you think that it may pass over, even if you think that you can wait until the last minute, this is going to be, potentially, very, very serious," said Obama. "For your own safety and your family's safety, people have to *follow the instructions of the officials there to make sure that this evacuation is going smoothly*."
> 
> Obama says they're monitoring the situation and *urged continued cooperation between FEMA and the Gulf Coast states*, noting that not just Louisiana is likely going to be affected but Mississippi, Alabama and parts of Texas.
> 
> ...




Will Obama be criticized for choosing not to interfere with evacuations by going there for a photo shoot?

Was he ineffective urging FEMA and the gulf states to cooperate and get the people out instead of going there himself?  

Would it help or hinder, putting his entourage in the 'eye of the storm'?

*Biden?*



> "*Those folks who rode out, do not ride out again, ride out of town*. Get out of town. Do what the governor is suggesting, what the mayor is suggesting, what the senators are suggesting. *Get out of town*," said Biden.




http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/31/obama-and-biden-urge-gulf-coast-evacuation/


----------



## ZzzzDad (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Excerpt from the NRO Corner blog*

She Is a Small-Town Mayor. She Is Not ”” Repeat, Not ”” the Governor of Alaska.   [Byron York]


In an interview of Barack Obama last night, CNN's Anderson Cooper mentioned Sarah Palin's experience as a small-town mayor and as governor of Alaska.  Obama, hewing to his campaign's talking points, ignored the governor part:


COOPER: And, Senator Obama, my final question ”” your ”” some of your Republican critics have said you don't have the experience to handle a situation like this. They in fact have said that Governor Palin has more executive experience, as mayor of a small town and as governor of a big state of Alaska.  What's your response?

OBAMA: Well, you know, my understanding is, is that Governor Palin's town of Wasilla has, I think, 50 employees. We have got 2,500 in this campaign. I think their budget is maybe $12 million a year. You know, we have a budget of about three times that just for the month.

So, I think that our ability to manage large systems and to execute, I think, has been made clear over the last couple of years. And, certainly, in terms of the legislation that I passed just dealing with this issue post-Katrina of how we handle emergency management, the fact that many of my recommendations were adopted and are being put in place as we speak, I think, indicates the degree to which we can provide the kinds of support and good service that the American people expect.

Just for the record, Alaska's FY2008 operating budget is $11.2 billion, and the state employs approximately 15,000 people.  Those certainly aren't huge numbers in federal terms, but they're a good bit bigger than the Obama campaign.

*Obama again not telling the truth about Sarah Palin*


----------



## Doris (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Polls taken to 31 August:*

The latest USA Today/Gallup poll has *Obama ahead of McCain 50-43 percent*.... up from a four-point lead before the convention.

Voters now see Obama as the "*strong and decisive leader" by a margin of 46-44* percent, a huge contrast to pre-convention perceptions that had McCain leading on the question by eight points. 
He also *nearly doubled his lead* on "shares your values," trouncing McCain by 13 points.

A new CBS survey also says Obama has gained some support nationwide because of the Democratic National Convention. He is the top candidate, *48-40 percent*, up from his 45-42 percent lead earlier.

"tough enough": up from 48 percent early this month to *58 percent*. 
Obama has also erased McCain's 12-point lead among independents and now leads the group, 43-37 percent.
Margin of error is 3 points.

http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7012145473


----------



## Doris (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I have to say that this election has been a learning curve for me.
The one discrepancy about Obama (for me) has been his history of voting 'present' so many times.  
*I'm finally edified as to why*: 



> "When she was taking tough positions against her own party, Senator Obama was voting 'present' 130 times in the state legislature, on every tough issue, whatever it was," McCain said.
> 
> It's true that Obama voted "present" dozens of times, part of the thousands of votes he cast in an eight-year span in Springfield. Illinois lawmakers commonly vote that way on a variety of issues, and *he has countered that many of those votes were cast because of technical or legal considerations about the underlying legislation.*
> 
> ...




http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hj0INfou9GhMYE2nyalH5O9dKRUwD92UPOLG5


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.gallup.com/video/109969/More-Clintonites-Backing-Obama.aspx


> Gallup Poll Daily tracking finds more former Hillary Clinton backers currently supporting Barack Obama (81%) than prior to the Democratic convention (70%).




PS All this polling is surely pretty approximate, considering the small percentage of Americans who end up voting. 

:topic Hey Doris , I was wondering , do you happen to know if Sarah even had a fish-shop in Alaska ?


----------



## Doris (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> :topic Hey Doris , I was wondering , do you happen to know if Sarah even had a fish-shop in Alaska ?




Nah... not with her delectation with moose meat... she's had other fish to fry:



> It was reported that she accepted at least $4,500 in campaign contributions in the same fundraising scheme at the center of a public corruption scandal that led to the *indictment of Sen. Ted Stevens**.
> 
> *Since Palin's nomination last week, these issues also are raising eyebrows*:
> 
> ...



http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/09/03/america/NA-POL-US-Elections-Palin.php


----------



## kam75 (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wouldn't it be nice if they could make a decision in one day like here.  Then we could all just get back to our trading.

Regards
kam75
_____________________________
http://www.sharesmadeeasy.com


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Let's hope they make the right decision - for the sake of world peace for starters  (and other reasons - including conservation, environment etc)   

I mean Bush is suddenly trying to talk the Middle East into some sort of Peace Treaty before the end of his warlike sabre-rattling term(s) - even talking to people etc    - he has a hypocrite's chance in hell of achieveing anything of course. 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=161227&highlight=fables#post161227

 Stop the Clash of Civilizations


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.gallup.com/poll/election2008.aspx


> Obama Gains Overall, McCain Among GOP Women NEW September 3, 2008
> Barack Obama has gained significant support among white men since the Democratic Convention, but his support level among white women has remained the same. The reason: Republican white women have slightly increased their support for McCain, offsetting Obama’s gains among independent and Democratic women.


----------



## Calliope (4 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

To  an interested observer one outstanding feature of the Democrat's campaign and of their admirers, is their blatant hypocrisy regarding women's rights. The democrats are always banging on about the rights of  women and about cracking glass ceilings. But let any woman whose values do not coincide with theirs put up her hand for higher office, then the party's dirt machine swings into action to discredit her, and with the support of the left-liberal media, pour out a stream of lies, innuendo, and slurs. On the internet they vie with each other to see who can put out the nastiest doctored images and misinformation.


On the other hand these staunch advocates of women's rights have a different attitude to the less savoury males in their own party. Three stand out.

John Kennedy,who was a serial womaniser with no respect for women, is put on a pedestal as a great Democrat and admired role model.

Bill Clinton, a serial womaniser who treated women as chattels, received a standing ovation at the Denver convention, by the pant-suited women's rights supporters.

Ted Kennedy fled the scene of his crime without any thought for his girl companion. He would have been jailed if he was not a Kennedy. He too was lauded at the convention as a respected elder of the party.

To me Palin's offences against the women's movement seem minor in comparison to those of these three Democrat icons.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger (not sure I believe those bookies either lol)
> 
> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html




well the odds have tightened for Obama  , current odds as follows:- 
Obama now 9/20 ($1.45) in from 8/15 ($1.53)
McCain now 7/4 ($2.75) out from 13/8 ($2.62)


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What a difference a week makes.

Obama has flagged that he is going to use Democrat women to go out and counter Sarah Palin.

However , Hillary Clinton says she is "too busy".

Oh dear.

quote
_
Advisers to Clinton, who has been on vacation this week, said that she stands ready to help the Obama-Biden ticket, but they urged not to overestimate the effect she could have, noting that she had other commitments this fall, like campaigning and raising money for Senate candidates._

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/09/05/america/05dems.php


gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> What a difference a week makes.
> 
> Obama has flagged that he is going to use Democrat women to go out and counter Sarah Palin.
> 
> ...




gg 
I find no reference whatsoever to your allegation that she claims she is "too busy" .  Just that she is back from leave this week   (ok has other commitments as well) - but There's 2 months to go .  (?)


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> gg
> I find no reference whatsoever to your allegation that she claims she is "too busy" .  Just that she is back from leave this week   (ok has other commitments as well) - but There's 2 months to go .  (?)




She is too busy mate.

The Clintons play for keeps.

Cross them and you are history.

gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> well the odds have tightened for Obama  , current odds as follows:-
> Obama now 9/20 ($1.45) in from 8/15 ($1.53)
> McCain now 7/4 ($2.75) out from 13/8 ($2.62)




lol 
 damned if I know , but here's what the bookies are saying ...
http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

Obama now 1/2 ($1.50) out from 9/20 ($1.45)
McCain now 34/20 ($2.70) in from 7/4 ($2.75)


----------



## ZzzzDad (10 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Need to update those odds 2020 - not looking as good for you.

Also, the poll of polls, on real clear politics has McCain ahead by 48.0 to 45.6.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Need to update those odds 2020 - not looking as good for you.




Obama now 4/7 ($1.57) out from 1/2 ($1.50)
McCain now 6/4 ($2.50) out in from 34/20 ($2.70) 

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

like I said somewhere else, about the same as the odds for the NZ Allblacks (about $1.50)   vs the AUS Wallabies (about $2.50). (Rugby Union this weekend).  

And like I added there, I wouldn't be putting my money on the Wallabies (this weekend anyway).


----------



## Knobby22 (10 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What's happened to Doris?


----------



## 2020hindsight (10 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

....


> Washington Post,  Mon 08 September 2008
> 
> Rumours abound since the arrival of a mystery woman with a strange accent wearing an Obama T-shirt and no less than eight other items of Obama regalia.  Apparently the Obama campaign has been watching what has been going on with the Republicans and the impetus injected into their campaign since the choice of Sarah Palin of Alaska.
> 
> ...


----------



## wayneL (10 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The first campaign photos show Doris in action with her Toad Wedge.


----------



## sydneysider (10 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama said yesterday that u can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig and he was referring to Palin. He is a blatant sexist. Another million moms just crossed over to vote for McCain / Palin. Last nite he was on O'reilly who took him to task for hanging out with a bunch of ultra radicals and hatemongers in Chicago, including Ayers, Rev Wright and Daily Kos. He recently went to a Kos Convention. O'Reilly told him flat out that America will not vote for someone who hangs out with a bunch of radicals. 

The air is rushing out of the Obama balloon. No-one is (yet) talking about the effect down the ticket in Senate and Congressional races but IMHO it will be very interesting and throw panic into the Dem ranks. There are also several scandals breaking on the Dem side about their good ole boys. 

Why am i posting on this thread? because Obama is very funny in a dark titanic kind of way and the market has /is tanking like Obama. No stocks worth talking about.


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Here is an example of the "change" candidate being a hypocrite.   Obama is just the same ole same ole typical Democrat politician we've always had.   Airdropping 30 Democrat lawyers and investigators on little Sarah.  Can you say desperation?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122098190668515511.html?mod=opinion_journal_political_diary

The Hunt for Sarah October

by John Fund

Democrats understand Sarah Palin is a formidable political force who has upset the Obama victory plan. The latest Washington Post/ABC Poll shows John McCain taking a 12-point lead over Barack Obama among white women, a reversal of Mr. Obama's eight-point lead last month.

It's no surprise, then, that Democrats have airdropped a mini-army of 30 lawyers, investigators and opposition researchers into Anchorage, the state capital Juneau and Mrs. Palin's hometown of Wasilla to dig into her record and background. My sources report the first wave arrived in Anchorage less than 24 hours after John McCain selected her on August 29.

The main area of interest to the Democratic SWAT team is Mrs. Palin's dismissal in July of her public safety commissioner. Mrs. Palin says he was fired for cause. Her critics claim he was fired because he wouldn't bend to pressure to get rid of a state trooper, Mike Wooten, who had been involved in a bitter divorce battle with Mrs. Palin's sister. Mr. Wooten is certainly a colorful character. He served a five-day suspension after the Palin family filed a complaint against him alleging he had threatened Mrs. Palin's father. They also accused him of using a Taser on his 10-year-old stepson, drinking in his patrol car and illegally shooting a moose.

Mrs. Palin will return to Alaska for the first time in nearly two weeks on Wednesday night, when she is scheduled to arrive in Fairbanks. Local Republicans will hold a "Welcome Home" rally for her. You can bet some of the Democratic opposition research contingent will be in the audience taking notes. They'll be the ones arriving in rental cars and wearing fancy dress shoes from back east.


----------



## wayneL (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Certainly an interesting US election that becomes all about the potential Vice President. 

Is there any precedent for this?


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Airdropping 30 Democrat lawyers and investigators on little Sarah.  Can you say desperation?



lol 
so you're happy ZZ that you know all about her?
this known unknown from the back of Bourke?
who leaps from a cake at the eleventh hour?

Big weakness in your system there ZZD, such an unknown with a good chance of becoming president


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol
> so you're happy ZZ that you know all about her?
> this known unknown from the back of Bourke?
> who leaps from a cake at the eleventh hour?
> ...




I am very happy with what I know about her.  Americans have a better system than you give it credit for.  In America, you don't neccessarily have to work your way through the political bureaucracy to become President, and that is a good thing.  Otherwise, we wouldn't have had Lincoln, Grant, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, etc.  Some of those wound up being a bad President, but some were very good.  None of them had much political experience.

Everything I've already known, and have since found out about Sarah Palin points to the potential to being a great Vice-President, and if neccessary a great President.  She is closer to the people than McCain, Obama, or Biden.  You also forget that if McCain should die, all his advisors will still be in place, and Palin will be able to draw their counsel.  

Our system has served us VERY well for the last 232 years, and will continue to do so.  Heck, we survived Clinton and Carter, we will certainly survive a Presiden Palin if that happens.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> ....  Otherwise, we wouldn't have had Lincoln, Grant, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Carter, Clinton, etc.  .



Lincoln, .... Kennedy,  .... Quayle...  etc 

true you survived Quayle as well - Thanks cryse George Bush senior didn't die in harness


----------



## Doris (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Under Obama's plan, taxes would only go up if you make more than $603,000 per year. 
McCain plans to further reduce taxes for the richest 1% at the expense lower and middle income workers.

.............................. MCCAIN ....................... OBAMA
Income ................. Avg tax bill ..................Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M ....... -$269,364 (-4.4%)...... +$701,885 (+11.5%)
$603K and up...... -$45,361 (-3.4%)...... +$115,974 (+8.7%)
$227K-$603K...... -$7,871 (-3.1%)................. +$12 (+0.0%)
$161K-$227K...... -$4,380 (-3.0%)............ -$2,789 (-1.9%)
$112K-$161K...... -$2,614 (-2.5%)............ -$2,204 (-2.1%)
$66K-$112K ....... -$1,009 (-1.4%)............ -$1,290 (-1.8%)
$38K-$66K ........ -$319 (-0.7%)................ -$1,042 (-2.4%)
$19K-$38K ........ -$113 (-0.5%)................... -$892 (-3.6%)
Under $19K ......... -$19 (-0.2%)................... -$567 (-5.5%)

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/?postversion=2008061113

Yes, I'm OS but not OB!


----------



## Doris (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack on Letterman tonight:

"*If That's What I'd Meant, Palin Would Be the Lipstick, ‘McCain's Failed Policies’ the Pig*".  


It should be interesting to see if Palin is allowed to talk when she returns to Alaska today. 
After those 2+ days with her holed up in a hotel, to teach her McCain's policies and write her speech, the GOP Machine has not allowed her to campaign alone, nor use words not contained in her convention speech.  Regurgitation is it!

Her reception should be that of an oscar winner or an _Obama in Berlin_ IMO.
... funny how the GOP Machine keeps using Barack's material and experiences, trying to match him.

Palin has an interview on ABC tomorrow. Will it be pre-taped to ensure any off-the-cuff comments were deleted?  
Can't have any gaffs to show up her ignorance!

Hopefully the GOPM're right that she's a quick learner and can think on her feet by her one-and-only debate with Biden next month.  It would be interesting to hear what she has to say without her being pre-programmed!


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Democrats are falling into the trap again and again.  The above post is just an example of it.  Sarah Palin is a great debater, the excerpts I've seen of the Alaska Governor's race debates are proof of that.  The Dems have lowered the expectations level of Sarah, they will be surprised when people find out how smart and articulate and knowledgeable she is.

Additionally, the McCain people want to keep her campaigning with McCain, not to keep her under their control.  No, they don't want to be embarrassed that Sarah will draw tens of thousands of people at each event, and McCain will draw way less than that.

You better believe that Joe Biden will be the one that makes the gaffes at any debate.

Did anyone see Biden's appearance yesterday at an event?  He asked a man in a wheelchair to stand up to be recognized, Sarah Palin is shaking in her snow shoes to debate this genius.


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Joe Biden telling a man in a wheelchair to "stand up".




Sarah Palin is really scared of this gaffe machine.


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack's army of dirt diggers:




An army of lawyers and private investigators descend on Wasilla, Alaska.


----------



## Doris (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hey 2020... *Pigs will fly!!*

*Obama on O'Reilly!!!*



*Part One*

... a long time coming!





*Part Two*

The audacity of showing an interview with Obama during McCain's speech!




*Part Three*

Love Bill's intro:





*Part Four*

I have to say O'Reilly did well... a pooh bear!  (Sorry Waynee)


----------



## wayneL (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

God I hate Bill O'Reilly.

Let the man talk FFS!!!!


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Thanks Doris !

 and wayne, we agree lol - God I hate OReilly too. 

I mean, you feel like you're watching one man of IQ 150 vs another of IQ 15!


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Thanks Doris !
> 
> and wayne, we agree lol - God I hate OReilly too.
> 
> I mean, you feel like you're watching one man of IQ 150 vs another of IQ 15!




Give Barack some credit, his IQ is probably a little higher than 15.    I'd say at least 50.  But with all those uhs and ahs and no teleprompter..... not so bright.


----------



## wayneL (11 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Give Barack some credit, his IQ is probably a little higher than 15.    I'd say at least 50.  But with all those uhs and ahs and no teleprompter..... not so bright.




Let's be sensible, both are highly intelligent men. I wanted to hear what Obama had to say, but Bill wouldn't let him flow.

It is O'Reilly's attitude that gets up my nose. It was a hatchet job. (And I'm not an Obama fan... or a McCain/Palin fan either)


----------



## ZzzzDad (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Let's be sensible, both are highly intelligent men. I wanted to hear what Obama had to say, but Bill wouldn't let him flow.
> 
> It is O'Reilly's attitude that gets up my nose. It was a hatchet job. (And I'm not an Obama fan... or a McCain/Palin fan either)




Wayne, you are right of course.  I've said as much about O'Reilly many times, he needs to let people talk.  But, he is the ONLY one in the American media that will ask him the tough questions.  Everyone else gives him softball questions, and no followup.  If you want to see the other side of the equation, you should watch the Olbermann/Obama interview.  I thought they were going to kiss each other.  Olbermann fed Obama his own talking points - it was too easy.

The funny thing in the Olbermann interview - when Palin was mentioned, Obama said "when you have Palin on" or something like that.  Doesn't Barack know that Olbermann NEVER puts anyone on his show that doesn't agree with him?  NO ONE.  Olbermann would hide under his desk before he would give Palin and interview.


----------



## Doris (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Thanks Doris !
> 
> and wayne, we agree lol - God I hate OReilly too.
> 
> I mean, you feel like you're watching one man of IQ 150 vs another of IQ 15!




O'Reilly often backed off, actually listened intently and respectfully despite his signature attempts to be a know-it-all. 

*He asked some penetrating questions and Barack held his own*, kept his composure and dignity and thus exemplified diplomacy for future Putins.

Wayne - I thought that O'Reilly *genuinely was impressed that he couldn't rattle Obama* and this shone through. 

He was lauded by Obama as he *disarmed his pit bull attacks* by giving him credit where he could to foster and maintain an amicable attitude.  

Obama *found common ground and acknowledged it* giving O'Reilly the self esteem boost he continually craves.  
_Obama personified the conversational style of diplomacy he has preached is needed with adversaries. Discuss -- not fight!_

I have not seen this with any O'Reilly interviewee in the past.

Good to see some real debate at last without distractive, small minded, irrelevant muck raking.


----------



## ZzzzDad (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Olbermann interviews Obama





You could even see how uncomfortable Obama felt with all the softball questions.

"I'm sure she'll be appearing on your show" comment at the end of the second one.  Yeah, right.


----------



## Doris (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Barack was a guest on Letterman tonight in the US but this interview will screen in Aus tomorrow night.*

The transcript can be read:

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/09/barack_obama_on_david_letterma.html


Some good fun... e.g. about Obama's grandmother voting for him:


> Dave: "At 87, are you worried that she may not vote for you and vote for someone maybe closer to her own age?" (audience, Obama laugh; audience applauds)
> 
> Obama: "You know, I, uh, I have been sending her out to some of her bridge partners trying to peel off votes from that demographic." (Dave, audience laugh)




...and serious strategies:


> Dave: "Is there a way for this country to do that without pushing people around and being resented?"
> 
> Obama: "Well, no, I think that if we send a signal, and this is true whether it's in Africa or the Middle East or anywhere in the world, *if we say we want to be a partner with you, we respect you, but if you're getting our help, then we've got certain expectations, that we're not just helping the wealthy or the people who are going to send the money to Swiss bank accounts, we expect to actually see results on the ground.*
> 
> *Just holding people accountable but doing it in a respectful way, I think that could make a big difference*." (audience applauds)


----------



## Doris (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Three new polls from Quinnipiac University out today:

*Florida*: McCain 50-43

*Ohio*: Obama 49-44

*Pennsylvania*: Obama 48-45

That means Obama is ahead in two of the Big Three... historically essential to win POTUS.

With Hillary and Bill campaigning in Florida this may change.


Obama and McCain are patriotically off the campaign for 911 remembrance while the GOP prepare their new 'puppet':



> The next two days, at least, figure to belong to Palin:
> She's home now, ready to see her son off to Iraq -- and sitting down for interviews with ABC's Charles Gibson, spread over two days. (The first piece of it will air on "World News" Thursday, with more to come on "Nightline," "Good Morning America," and a special "20/20" Friday night.)
> 
> "The sessions could be the first test of Ms. Palin's ability to *parry substantive questions on foreign and domestic policy*, and as she flew back to Alaska on Wednesday, *she brought with her a squad of McCain's top policy advisers to help her prepare*."
> ...




http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/Story?id=3105288&page=2


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> Obama said yesterday that u can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig and he was referring to Palin. He is a blatant sexist.




1. Obama wasn't refrring to Palin - he was referring to McCain policies.

2. in any case McCain was first to use the phrase in relation to Hillary Clinton's campaign , three months ago:-

(McCain squealing like a pig, more like it - fabricated penalty  )

  John McCain likes "Lipstick on a Pig" references too

  McCAIN: SQUEAL LIKE A PIG 



> Oh, that John McCain - *you'd think he'd at least remember he used the phrase "Lipstick on a Pig" when it was a mere 3 months ago - but this old fuddy duddy is losing his brain*.
> 
> John McCain is showing that dispite the boost they got to their base from Sarah Palin's nomination as VP, the numbers still aren't in their favor for the election and they will play the victim to try and get sympathy votes for their ticket.
> 
> ...






			
				Doris said:
			
		

> Barack on Letterman :  "If That's What I'd Meant, Palin Would Be the Lipstick, ‘McCain's Failed Policies’ the Pig".


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Joe Biden telling a man in a wheelchair to "stand up".
> 
> 
> 
> ...





ZZD,   I don't believe this is a gaffe as such - he makes an honest mistake, and quickly realises, and shows that he is not confined to a carefully crafted script.  He's natural, he's human, he can ad lib.


----------



## wayneL (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Yanks are sucked in again.

The election has become about -isms, he said she said, MILFs, race etc.

Who's worried about policy?

Not the Yanks.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Vote 1, Lipstick!


----------



## Doris (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama Leads In Foreign Policy, Bush Follows*

Judgment is the key to being a leader...



> American officials say that they will notify Pakistan when they conduct limited ground attacks like the Special Operations raid last Wednesday in a Pakistani village near the Afghanistan border, *but that they will not ask for its permission.*
> 
> It is worth recalling that in his first major foreign-policy address, in August 2007, *Barack Obama proposed raids against al-Qaeda in Pakistan without consultation,* and making the hundreds of millions of dollars in U.S. military *aid to Pakistan conditional*. 'I would make our conditions clear: Pakistan must make substantial progress in closing down the training camps, evicting foreign fighters, and preventing the Taliban from using Pakistan as a staging area for attacks in Afghanistan'.






> People ridiculed the Obama proposal at the time, on the grounds that no nation violates the territorial integrity of an ally, even if that ally is problematic.
> 
> *Will McCain now condemn the Bush administration's decision to go into Pakistan*?
> Or was this idea only naive ten months ago?  *Was it only naive because it came from Obama? *
> ...




http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/jpodhoretz/29322
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/09/a-first.html


----------



## noirua (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *Obama Leads In Foreign Policy, Bush Follows*
> 
> Judgment is the key to being a leader...
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *Obama Leads In Foreign Policy, Bush Follows*
> Judgment is the key to being a leader...
> (then follows an example of Bush following Obama)





noirua said:


> Sorry Doris, I think that is a load of kibosh.




So noi,  is it hogwash, sorry kibosh,  that Obama leads and Bush follows, 
or that Judgment is the key to leadership?
or both?


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama steps in it AGAIN:

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTliMTNiZjg5ZDEwZWNiZDYwZWFjN2JlNjNjNjkxZmM=

*WONDERING NO MORE*[Jonah Goldberg]


Yep. The day after 9/11, as part of its "get tough" makeover,  the Obama campaign is mocking John McCain for not using a computer, without caring why he doesn't use a computer. From the AP story about the computer illiterate ad:

"Our economy wouldn't survive without the Internet, and cyber-security continues to represent one our most serious national security threats," [Obama spokesman Dan] Pfeiffer said. "It's extraordinary that someone who wants to be our president and our commander in chief doesn't know how to send an e-mail."

*Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "extraordinary." The reason he doesn't send email is that he can't use a keyboard because of the relentless beatings he received from the Viet Cong in service to our country. From the Boston Globe (March 4, 2000):*

McCain gets emotional at the mention of military families needing food stamps or veterans lacking health care. The outrage comes from inside:*[The outrage comes from inside: McCain's severe war injuries prevent him from combing his hair, typing on a keyboard, or tying his shoes * Friends marvel at McCain's encyclopedic knowledge of sports. He's an avid fan - Ted Williams is his hero - but he can't raise his arm above his shoulder to throw a baseball. 

In a similar vein I guess it's an outrage that the blind governor of New York David Patterson doesn't know how to drive a car. After all, transportation issues are pretty important. How dare he serve as governor while being ignorant of what it's like to navigate New York's highways. 

------------------------------------

*Where is your research Obama?  Didn't you know the reason John McCain can't use a keyboard to send email?  His war injuries have been common knowledge for many years.  Obama certainly needs to apologize for this one.*


----------



## noirua (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> So noi,  is it hogwash, sorry kibosh,  that Obama leads and Bush follows,
> or that Judgment is the key to leadership?
> or both?



Come on now, be fair, Obama was weak on foreign policy until his running mate appeared on the scene. 

Judgement, again, come on now, "the act of judging"; "the comparing of ideas to find out the truth, the faculty by which this is done"; "an opinion formed"; "an estimate"; "an arbitration"; "discrimination, good taste"; ...and so it goes on.

Whilst Obama is doing all this judgement he may end up making no decision at all, as committees talk and talk,.
No, it's all about DECISION making by the Commander in Chief. Not about being "all things to all men". 

In 8 years time he will make a good President. Unless Hillary returns, afterall, if the rules for voting were the same as the Republicans she'd be heading for the Whitehouse.


----------



## jeflin (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sydneysider said:


> Obama said yesterday that u can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig and he was referring to Palin. He is a blatant sexist. Another million moms just crossed over to vote for McCain / Palin. Last nite he was on O'reilly who took him to task for hanging out with a bunch of ultra radicals and hatemongers in Chicago, including Ayers, Rev Wright and Daily Kos. He recently went to a Kos Convention. O'Reilly told him flat out that America will not vote for someone who hangs out with a bunch of radicals.
> 
> The air is rushing out of the Obama balloon. No-one is (yet) talking about the effect down the ticket in Senate and Congressional races but IMHO it will be very interesting and throw panic into the Dem ranks. There are also several scandals breaking on the Dem side about their good ole boys.
> 
> Why am i posting on this thread? because Obama is very funny in a dark titanic kind of way and the market has /is tanking like Obama. No stocks worth talking about.




It is a colloquial expression and McCain has used the same words on Hillary Clinton before to great applause. 

However, Obama is viewed as a sexist by saying it. The Republicans are working up people's emotions, especially white females which swing their votes towards Palin.


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Obama steps in it AGAIN:
> 
> ....
> The reason he doesn't send email is that he can't use a keyboard because of the relentless beatings he received from the Viet Cong in service to our country. ...
> ...




ZZD see if you can pick a trend in these excerpts ...



> McCain told New York Times ..in Saigon that, "It's a difficult thing to say. But now that I've seen what the bombs and the napalm did to the people on our ship, I'm not so sure that I want to drop any more of that stuff on North Vietnam."



but he did ....



> He was flying his 23rd bombing mission over North Vietnam, when his A-4E Skyhawk was shot down by a missile over Hanoi.[30][31] McCain fractured both arms and a leg, and then nearly drowned, when he parachuted into Truc Bach Lake in Hanoi.[30]



He broke both arms, his right in three places, when he struck part of the aircraft
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23301752-663,00.html



> So at 1000m, I released my bombs, then pulled back the stick to begin a steep climb to a safer altitude. In the instant before the plane reacted, a missile blew my right wing off.
> 
> I knew I was hit. My A-4 aircraft, travelling at about 900km/h, was spiralling violently to Earth. I reacted automatically the moment I took the hit, reached up and pulled the ejection seat handle.
> 
> I struck part of the aircraft, *breaking my left arm, my right arm in three places and my right knee*, and was briefly knocked unconscious.






> After four days, McCain made an anti-American propaganda "confession".[30] He has always felt that his statement was dishonorable, but as he would later write, "I had learned what we all learned over there: Every man has his breaking point. I had reached mine."




http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcprsrel.htm


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Continued from previous... 



> McCain: I learned from Keating Five case
> 
> WASHINGTON (AP) ”” Sen. John McCain's ethics entanglement with a wealthy banker ultimately convicted of swindling investors was such a disturbing, formative experience in his political career that he compares the scandal in some ways to the five years he was tortured as a prisoner of war in Vietnam.
> 
> "*I faced in Vietnam, at times, very real threats to life and limb," McCain told The Associated Press. "But while my sense of honor was tested in prison, it was not questioned. During the Keating inquiry, it was, and I regretted that very much." *




gee whiz, how do you link - in one answer - being a POW , and being investigated for corrupt / negligent behaviour 

I mean, being a POW is allegeldy a legitimate excuse for corrupt behaviour (according to McCain). 

But now, he can't even type on a keyboard?



> And for *much of this election year Senator McCain's military record has been off limits*. That was until General Wesley Clark fired this broadside on Sunday talk show: Face the Nation.
> 
> WESLEY CLARK: He hasn't held executive responsibility. That large squadron in the navy that he commanded wasn't a wartime squadron. He hasn't been there and ordered the bombs to fall.
> 
> ...




Wesley Clark is allowed to say this surely,  After all, he was shot down not once but four times.  



> Clark was valedictorian of his class at West Point, was awarded a Rhodes Scholarship to the University of Oxford etc
> 
> McCain graduated 894 th in a class of 899 .




Presumably his excuse for (self-admitted) knowing very little about economics is similar. (?) 
Good to know he can remember footballer's name though 

PS I've already posted this one a few times.. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFM1xqqTX_g


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Wesley Clark is allowed to say this surely,  After all, he was shot down not once but four times.




You know what 2020, you really don't know anything about Wesley Clark, do you?  First of all, he wasn't shot down 4 times, he was an army officer.  You have probably misconstrued this:



> Clark was then given command of A Company, 1st Battalion, 16th Infantry of the 1st Infantry Division in January 1970. In February, only one month into his command, he was shot four times by a Viet Cong soldier with an AK-47




Are you embarassed?  Probably not, because you are a liberal.    He was not shot down 4 times (not a pilot), he was shot with an AK-47 4 times by the same soldier.

Hopefully, you won't use this false information again, you've used it many times, time to do real research for a change.


----------



## Calliope (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What Obama groupies like Doris and hindsight have yet to come to terms with is that Obama is not the Messiah. He is a smooth talking salesman. D & h and a small band of admirers and imitators are so keen to save the world from the evil Republications that they are keen to buy this bright shiny new untested model. They are not all that different from the Sarah Palin admirers. The only reasons they have both been nominated by their parties is because they are both demagogues with the ability to attract bigots and muckrakers. But that is America's problem not ours.


----------



## wayneL (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> because you are a liberal.



Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz,

Just to confuse you, and point out a curiosity of Australian politics, a "Liberal" here is a conservative like your Republicans. What 2020 is Aussie terms is a Laborite.

Liberal = Republican

Labor = Democrat

Strange, but true.


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> You know what 2020, you really don't know anything about Wesley Clark, do you?  First of all, he wasn't shot down 4 times, he was an army officer.  You have probably misconstrued this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



ok I stand corrected - unreservedly. (a peripheral point surely). 

Now will you admit you stand corrected about the Vet's opinion of McCain? 

and the shadows that hang over his alleged hero status. 

And his habit of using those arms for an excuse for anything from corruption to lack of knowledge of keyboards and the internet (which you seem to think is a criminal slur by Obama )


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz,
> 
> Just to confuse you, and point out a curiosity of Australian politics, a "Liberal" here is a conservative like your Republicans. What 2020 is Aussie terms is a Laborite.
> 
> ...



For this one wayne, I'm an ex- military officer who's looking for the truth - 

and who smells a rat when someone uses the excuse of POW status to try to wriggle out of corruption charges . 

and PS I voted green 
like I imagine you would have.


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ok I stand corrected - unreservedly. (a peripheral point surely).
> 
> Now will you admit you stand corrected about the Vet's opinion of McCain?
> 
> ...




You apparently still haven't done research on the fact that McCain has the Veteran vote, and the current military vote in his corner.  Pointing out one vets opinion does not mean all the other vets agree.  Far from it.


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz,
> 
> Just to confuse you, and point out a curiosity of Australian politics, a "Liberal" here is a conservative like your Republicans. What 2020 is Aussie terms is a Laborite.
> 
> ...




Wayne, I did know that, after watching the 2007 elections in Australia.  I knew Howard was the Liberal.  I'm probably more informed than the average American.  But, I should have remembered I was posting on an Australian forum.


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> You apparently still haven't done research on the fact that McCain has the Veteran vote, and the current military vote in his corner.  Pointing out one vets opinion does not mean all the other vets agree.  Far from it.





hey don't get me wrong 
 he's done a brilliant job of covering it up.  

btw, that was an official veteran's website - (not one man's opinion) - just like the other posts I've posted here which you've ignored , or blamed on  "lunatic right wing GOP elements dobbing on him" - (for reasons that defy logic)

PS And it's a clever political ploy - noone is allowed to challenge whether the king's clothes are real or not.  It would be "unpatriotic".


----------



## wayneL (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> But, I should have remembered I was posting on an Australian forum.



I have to do the same now that I live outside Oz... after suffering acute confusion at first.

I kept referring to the Tories (Conservative Party) here as Liberals at first... and getting very strange looks.


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> hey don't get me wrong
> he's done a brilliant job of covering it up.
> 
> btw, that was an official veteran's website - (not one man's opinion) - just like the other posts I've posted here which you've ignored , or blamed on  "lunatic right wing GOP elements dobbing on him" - (for reasons that defy logic)





Ha, an OFFICIAL veterans website?  No such thing.  Provide the link, and you will find it is a left leaning source, and there are many more veterans websites that are on the center and right.

Official vets website?  Ha!


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ok here it is again (in fact for the third time, since I also posted this on the McCain thread - where it probably belongs. 

It's from the era when McCain singlehandedly stopped release of info into POWs and MIA's - much to the total disbelief of people wanting such info about their loved ones who had gone missing.  

http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcprsrel.htm

Then there's this one (non official obviously) .
"Hell hath no fury like a veteran spurned". 

One says McCain's codename was "songbird" etcetc 


Jack McLamb (veteran) :- "His arms are broken because he didn't pull him arms in properly when he ejected." 

"All the POW's I've spoken too talk about MvcCain as a lying skunk" etc  
"32 propaganda videos for the communists etc"
"What won't be spoken about is how much Vets hate John McCain"

"In fact US Veterans Dispatch  is an organisation of Vietnam veterans that just detests John McCain for being a traitor tho the country , and then we have other orgabisations , eg "Vietnam Veterans against McCain" that talk about him being a manchurian candidate. and how he was the worst one in the house and the senate to trample on and to disparage and to ridicule any POW family that came forward to the Congress and Senate who wanted them to find the POWs that were missing ... etc 

 POW's Say John McCain Is A Lying Skunk !!!!! HTS 020908 p2


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

A little research on Ted Sampley came up with this:

MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell exposed Ted Sampley's anti-McCain attacks


As a guest on MSNBC's Scarborough Country (with guest host Pat Buchanan), MSNBC senior political analyst Lawrence O'Donnell exposed Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry co-founder Ted Sampley's attacks on Senator John McCain (R-AZ) in 2000, which Media Matters for America has previously documented.

From the August 10 edition of MSNBC's Scarborough Country:

BUCHANAN: What did they say? 

O'DONNELL: Ted -- Ted --

BUCHANAN: What did they ...

O'DONNELL: Ted, after you were convicted of assault and battery on a Senator McCain staffer and you said that Senator John McCain was a member of the KGB, is there anything about that that you'd like to retract to show us what journalistic standards you want to use today?

SAMPLEY: If you would like to invite me on this show to talk about John McCain, let's do it. I can back everything I say about -- I'm here to talk about --

O'DONNELL: We have to talk about you.

SAMPLEY: I'm here to talk about John Kerry.

O'DONNELL: When you come forward to criticize someone else, we then have to talk about you.

SAMPLEY: Let's ask about --

O'DONNELL: You said John McCain -- you said John McCain was brainwashed and is a "Manchurian Candidate" and is an agent of another government. That's who we now have. That's who we're sharing this broadcast with right now. 

SAMPLEY: Let's ask about --

O'DONNELL: You've said those things, haven't you?

SAMPLEY: Let's ask about John Kerry in Kansas in 1971.

*Apparently, Mr. Sampley hates veterans from the right and the left.  This is from Media Matters, 2004.  2020, can you admit this guy is NUTS?*


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> http://www.usvetdsp.com/mcprsrel.htm




This is not an OFFICIAL vets website, it is a nutcase's website.


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Ah, bad news 2020, Ted Sampley also hates Obama too:

http://michellemalkin.com/2008/06/28/your-genius-grant-dollars-at-work/



> But enough with the snark. As Dr. Allen pursued her cutting-edge google search across the interwebs, a familiar name emerged in connection with the Obama-is-a-Muslim smear: Ted Sampley.
> 
> Around the same time Ted Sampley, a North Carolina man who runs his own Web site, published a similar piece. In an interview, he denied authorship of the e-mail, but said he did not doubt that his article had provided source material. “That’s the miracle of it,” Sampley said. “Once it takes off, and people start posting it on Web sites, you really have no idea how far it goes or who reads it. You get a ripple effect. It’s like a little pebble and then it gets bigger and bigger.”
> Sampley is the fantasist who says (and has said for years) that John McCain is a Manchurian Candidate, reprogrammed by Hanoi to…I don’t know, do something Communisty when he gets into power, I guess. Sampley also formed an anti-Kerry group of Vietnam Veterans in 2004 that is often confused with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, and in fact is usually lumped in with them on lefty websites in order to discredit the actual Swift Boat Veterans led by John O’Neill. (Dean Esmay explained the difference in those groups here.)
> ...




*Can you stop using this guy to smear John McCain now?  If not, I might have to counterpost with his Obama smears*


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

...
 John McCain,The Manchurian Candidate?


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Ah, bad news 2020, Ted Sampley also hates Obama too:... If not, I might have to counterpost with his Obama smears[/B]





ZZD - your talents for ad hominem are showing. maybe try answering the facts - video statements from witnesses from the Saigon Hilton days (and subsequent Senate hearings etc).  

You still have to reply properly to my post #828..   (and #831)



2020hindsight said:


> ok zz, but now you have to also try to discredit :-
> 
> Dr Joseph Douglas Jr
> Tracey Usry fmr Chief Investigator , US Senate Minority Staff
> ...


----------



## Calliope (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> For this one wayne, I'm an ex- military officer who's looking for the truth.




In the gutter?:headshake


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ZZD - your talents for ad hominem are showing. maybe try answering the facts - video statements from witnesses from the Saigon Hilton days (and subsequent Senate hearings etc).
> 
> You still have to reply properly to my post #828..   (and #831)




I replied, you just didn't like my reply.  There are no ad hominem attacks in my above posts.  You just have gotten off onto a tangent on John McCain, and when it is clearly pointed out that your main source is an equal opportunity hater - John McCain and Barack Obama, you ignore it.  So, why aren't you posting the same guy's Obama smears?  If he is telling the truth about McCain, then surely he is telling the truth about Obama too?  Right?


----------



## 2020hindsight (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> In the gutter?:headshake




It sure seems to hold out the most promise, especially intertwining his POW status with the fact that he was being investigated for corruption .  

calliope, given your attention to any detail whatsoever,  other than personal attacks on posters,  I'm guessing your level or research into this bloke resembles this bird here ...

btw, you know what a Manchurian Candidate is?  Hell,Bush was surely planted in the whitehouse by AQ.  He played right slap bang into their hands   And question is, is McCain any better? - (if he can be blackmailed for instance).


----------



## Calliope (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

2020. I think I now have you pegged as to why you have such a large chip on your shoulder. You are a war hero who never got the recognition he deserved.

And as for personal attacks on posters, that is what you do.

All I am trying to do is to prick the arrogance of know-it-alls and smartarses. This is not easy when they have hides like a rhinoceros, and some of them are just ignorant. But I will persevere.


----------



## Doris (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> _Judgment is the key to being a leader..._
> 
> Sorry Doris, I think that is a load of kibosh. The most important factor is being able to make the correct decisions *without delay*.
> Unfortunately, trying to be the good judge or the wise old sage, ends up not looking like a wise old sage but instead,  a worn out sag.
> So, to say Obama leads in foreign policy, is only on the back of his Vice-Presidential running mate.




My post #933 cites four (4) stands that Barack took that the Bush administration ridiculed yet has now implemented.

Four decisions Obama made *after gathering and listening* to intelligence.

Four strategies Obama urged his country's leaders to consider, from his 'low' position in the hierarchy.

Four examples of good judgment based on intelligent decision making that Bush delayed adopting.

Four examples whereby a bi-partisan-respect philosophy would have yielded wiser decisions by this country.

If you're a Palin you'll make a *choice* without 'wasting a blink'!
* she has done well listening and memorising with her GOP trainers...
* she considers she's _ready_ to make CinC decisions without a blink!

A decision is made when *all available information and consequences* are considered prior to judgment.

All four of these cited examples, of Obama's prescience, dated pre-VP 
... but yes, Biden will be a valuable source of intelligence gathering and consideration prior to making decisions.


----------



## ZzzzDad (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ... but yes, Biden will be a valuable source of intelligence gathering and consideration prior to making decisions.




Doris - Biden has made many bad decisions over the years.

He voted AGAINST the Alaska pipeline in the 1970's - imagine what America's energy situation would be without the Alaska pipeline.  Instead of importing 70% of our oil, we would be importing more than 80% of our oil.

He voted against the Kuwait war, but voted FOR the Iraq war.

He wanted to divide Iraq into 3 countries - Shia, Sunni, and Kurd.  Apparently not realizing that the Sunnis and Shia in many parts of the country overlap.  There would have been no way to draw lines for that.  Massive uprooting of the populations would have taken place with this plan.  Civil war for territory would have been inevitable.

Biden's main claim to fame is asking 25 minute questions in Senate hearings, and giving the person less than 5 minutes of answer time.  He loves to hear himself talk - the ultimate Senate blowhard.


----------



## Calliope (13 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The s--t has hit the fan now. Biden says that Hillary would have been a better choice for VP than he. Apparently it's the Palin factor.


----------



## ZzzzDad (14 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

A pretty objective analysis of the uphill struggle that Obama now faces:

Barack Obama under fire for ignoring advice on how to beat John McCain 
By Tim Shipman in Washington


The Democratic presidential candidate's slump in the polls has sparked pointed private criticism that he is squandering a once-in-a-generation chance to win back the White House.

Party elders also believe the Obama camp is in denial about warnings from Democratic pollsters that his true standing is four to six points lower than that in published polls because of hidden racism from voters - something that would put him a long way behind Mr McCain.

The Sunday Telegraph has learned that senators, governors and union leaders who have experience of winning hard-fought races in swing states have been bombarding Obamas campaign headquarters with telephone calls offering advice. But many of those calls have not been returned.

A senior Democratic strategist, who has played a prominent role in two presidential campaigns, told The Sunday Telegraph: "These guys are on the verge of blowing the greatest gimme in the history of American politics. They're the most arrogant bunch Ive ever seen. They won't accept that they are losing and they won't listen."

After leading throughout the year, Mr Obama now trails Mr McCain by two to three points in national polls.

Party leaders and commentators say that the Democrat candidate spent too much of the summer enjoying his own popularity and not enough defining his positions on the economy - the number one issue for voters - or reaching out to those blue collar workers whose votes he needs if he is to beat Mr McCain.

Others concede that his trip to Europe was a distraction that enhanced his celebrity status rather than his electability on Main Street, USA.

Since Sarah Palin was unveiled as Mr McCain's running mate, the Obama camp has faced accusations that it has been pushed off message and has been limp in responding to attacks.

A Democratic National Committee official told The Sunday Telegraph: "I really find it offensive when Democrats ask the Republicans not to be nasty to us, which is effectively what Obama keeps doing. They know thats how the game is played."

(the rest of the article linked below)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...noring-advice-on-how-to-beat-John-McCain.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				2020hindsight on 10Sep said:
			
		

> Obama now 4/7 ($1.57) out from 1/2 ($1.50)
> McCain now 6/4 ($2.50) out in from 34/20 ($2.70)
> 
> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
> ...





http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

Over the last 4 days .... 

Obama now 7/10 ($1.70)... out from 4/7 ($1.57) out from 1/2 ($1.50)
McCain now 5/4 ($2.25)..... in from 6/4 ($2.50) in from 34/20 ($2.70)

btw the wallabies lost (after a nail-biter)   
And likewise, looks like this election will go down to the wire as well . 


http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (14 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> A pretty objective analysis of the uphill struggle that Obama now faces:
> 
> Barack Obama under fire for ignoring advice on how to beat John McCain
> By Tim Shipman in Washington
> ...




Agree, Obama needs to listen to the Democratic party machine if he has any hope of winning.

It would have been like little Kevvie not listening to the unions and NSW Labor during the last Fed election.

These party machines know better than the pollies what is going on in voters' minds.

Folk in polls traditionally hide their racism and sexism, so I would believe he is 6 or 7% behind the published figures.

That is why the figures for McCain have increased, it is now seen as acceptable and respectable for people to openly support him.

Now that the pivot turn has occurred with only 7 or eight weeks left Obama would be a good bet to take money on, i.e  for losing.

gg


----------



## IFocus (14 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I enjoy Jim Lehrer talking to Mark Shields and David Brooks. Brooks had trouble defending John McCain and the current ads Shields told it as it is

"Dishonest and dishonorable. And that's not the kind of campaign that one expected from John McCain. It is certainly not John McCain's lifetime. And one hopes that he is not going to trade his self-respect for political victory, because I will tell you, it will be ashes if he does win that way. It will be ashes. There will be no chance of bipartisanship."

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec08/sbcampaign_09-12.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

gr8 post focus.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7FyrXkwWdo&feature=user

Joe Biden announces he's pregnant.


----------



## Doris (14 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack talks to some students a few days ago. Some good advice for our students too!  A leader leads...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (17 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama's smoozing with the Hollywood elite, an herpetic mob given to narcissistic beliefs , bodes ill for his chances of election.

Why do the left associate with wankers who doom their campaigns.

Next he'll cut a cut a song with U2 and whattisname, the Irish git with the sunnies.

gg


----------



## cordelia (17 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Obama's smoozing with the Hollywood elite, an herpetic mob given to narcissistic beliefs , bodes ill for his chances of election.
> 
> Why do the left associate with wankers who doom their campaigns.
> 
> ...




Bono is who you are refering to I think.....

Obama has been groomed to come across as a Hollywood celebrity but its a mistake.....

Americans are happy to elect a celebrity to office if they are already celebrities....for they are humbling themselves to serve God and country (music playing in the background).....Arnie terminator, Regan war hero.....

Appearing as a celebrity by hanging around with the Hollywood elite without having earnt it paints a visual picture that is hard to ignore....

Also the "pig with lipstick" comment was just horrible...


----------



## IFocus (17 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Obama's smoozing with the Hollywood elite, an herpetic mob given to narcissistic beliefs , bodes ill for his chances of election.
> 
> Why do the left associate with wankers who doom their campaigns.
> 
> ...




And Ronald Reagan was a.......


----------



## cordelia (17 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



IFocus said:


> And Ronald Reagan was a.......




Oh...don't you know who Ronald Regan was...

He was the 40th president of the United States of America born on February 6th 1911.

In 1937 he took a screen test for Warner Brothers and won a nine year contract. In the same year he signed up for the Army Enlisted Reserve but it wasn't until 1942 that he was called up for active duty...

His political career began in the early 1950's and culminated in his election as President in 1981....For a comprehensive account of his life here is the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_Reagan


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
> 
> Over the last 4 days ....
> 
> ...



and over the last 4 days 

Obama now 4/6 ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70) 
McCain now 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)

Gallup confirms that things are still "up and down"  (changes and leads barely within margin of error surely) ...

The Palin factor is surely a thing of the past - it's getting down to serious consideration of the economy.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (18 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> and over the last 4 days
> 
> Obama now 4/6 ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70)
> McCain now 7.5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)
> ...




Whatever you say 2020.

Mines a VB by the way.

gg


----------



## Doris (18 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama has a five point lead*:



> In a sign that John McCain's convention bounce has dissipated, Barack Obama has taken a 48 percent to 43 percent lead over his Republican rival among registered voters in the latest CBS News/New York Times poll.



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/17/opinion/polls/main4456249.shtml?source=mostpop_story



> The survey has some disturbing news about the Palin pick.
> 
> More than 6 out of 10 voters surveyed said they would be concerned if McCain couldn't finish his term, and Palin became president.
> 
> ...



http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/149045.asp


Matt Damon: _She's gonna have the nuclear codes_!


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Matt Damon: She's gonna have the nuclear codes




gr8 post doris 
Damon sounds like he's a Bourne-again Democrat since this bird turned up 



> you do the actuary tables, there's a 1 in 3 chance he doesn't survive his first presidency
> 
> … It's like a really bad Disney movie ...
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/17/opinion/polls/main4456249.shtml?source=mostpop_story
> 
> http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/149045.asp




McCain blames "a casino culture" for the current Wall St problems - yet lol , he's an avid casino attendee (provided he has his favourite rabbit's foot)  

http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/149045.asp



> According to a national CBS News/New York Times poll, Sen. John McCain has not succeeded in convincing Americans that he is an agent of change, and Sen. Barack Obama is seen as more likely to shake things up in Washington, D.C.
> 
> The poll puts Obama ahead by a margin of 48 percent to 43 percent, a figure virtually unchanged from a mid-August survey completed before the Democratic and Republican conventions.
> 
> ...




Other polls agree ....


> Several opinion polls on Wednesday indicated that McCain's "bounce" from the GOP convention is over.
> The Gallup daily tracking poll put Obama two points ahead, 47 percent to 45 percent, his first lead since Republicans convened in St. Paul two weeks ago.
> 
> A poll for the national political Hotline gave Obama a one-point lead.
> ...


----------



## Doris (19 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Damon sounds like he's a Bourne-again Democrat since this bird turned up



Lovitt... lol...

The debates start in a week and will be interesting to say the least.  
McCain wanted weekly town hall squables but they will consist of:

1. First Presidential Debate: – Date: *September 26*– Site: University of Mississippi – 
Topic: *Domestic and Economic policy* – Moderator: Jim Lehrer – 
Staging: *Podium debate* – Answer Format: The debate will be broken into nine, 9-minute segments. 
*The moderator will introduce a topic and allow each candidate 2 minutes to comment*. 
After these initial answers, the moderator will facilitate an open discussion of the topic for the remaining 5 minutes, ensuring that both candidates receive an equal amount of time to comment.


2. Vice Presidential Debate – Date: *October 2nd* – Site: Washington University (St. Louis) 
– Moderator: Gwen Ifill – Staging/Answer Format: To be resolved.


3.Second Presidential Debate – Date:* October 7 *– Site: Belmont University 
– Moderator: Tom Brokaw – Staging: Town Hall debate 
– Format: *The moderator will call on members of the audience* (and draw questions from the internet).
*Each candidate will have 2 minutes to respond to each question. *
Following those initial answers, the moderator will invite the candidates to respond to the previous answers, for a total of 1 minute, ensuring that both candidates receive an equal amount of time to comment. 
*In the spirit of the Town Hall, all questions will come from the audience (or internet), and not the moderator.*


4. Third Presidential Debate – Date: *October 15* – Site: Hofstra University 
– Topic: *Foreign Policy & National Security* – Moderator: Bob Schieffer – Staging: *Candidates seated at a table*
– Answer Format: Same as First Presidential Debate – Closing Statements: At the end of this debate (only) each candidate shall have the opportunity for a 90 second closing statement.


All four debates will begin at 9pm ET, and last for 90 minutes. 
Both campaigns also agreed to accept the CPD’s participation rules for third-party candidate participation.

Each debate will be broadcast on the major broadcast networks, including CBS, NBC, ABC, and FOX. 
They will also be aired on cable news channels such as CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, and C-SPAN. 

http://www.youdecide2008.com/2008/08/21/official-2008-obama-mccain-presidential-debate-schedule/

Will Barack remain cool and calm with his photographic memory on any topic thrown out?
Will McCain lose his cool? ... talk in rhetoric with a lack of details?


----------



## Doris (19 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Date:  	 Friday, September 19, 2008 4:53 AM  
From: 	Barack Obama <info@barackobama.com> 
To:  	  <doris.********@bigpond.com>
Subject:  	 Solving our financial crisis 

Doris --

The economy hit a new low this week, and in every part of the country, people like you are feeling it.

The recent financial disasters -- from the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to the historic drop in the stock market -- are not just a string of bad luck. *They are the result of years of bad decisions made in favor of big corporate special interests instead of America's working families.
*
More than 600,000 Americans have lost their jobs since January. Home foreclosures are skyrocketing, and home values are plunging. Gas prices are at an all-time high, and we're still spending more than $10 billion every month on a war in Iraq that should never have been waged.

*John McCain's campaign is doing everything it can to focus attention on false personal attacks and distractions -- but there's too much at stake for that kind of politics.
*
I need your help to get the conversation back on track.

I recorded a two-minute TV ad about our economy and my plan to solve this crisis. Please watch the ad and share it with everyone you know.

For eight years, *Bush-McCain economic policies have favored reckless deregulation and huge tax loopholes for big corporations. Now, as these corporations crumble, American taxpayers are facing costly bailouts.
*
More of the same failed ideas are not going to solve our economic problems.

I'm calling for a $1,000 tax break for middle-class families -- not just because they need help dealing with the rising costs of gas, food, and health care, but also because *our economy needs to be reinvigorated from the bottom up, not the top down*.

*I'm proposing a second stimulus package to save over one million jobs and provide immediate relief to struggling families.*

And I'll end the "anything goes" culture on Wall Street with real regulation. We can see clearly that our economy is stronger when we protect investments and pensions, and avoid devastating bankruptcies and bailouts.

This is no ordinary time, and it shouldn't be an ordinary election. Help keep the discussion focused on the issues.

*Please watch the video and share it with your friends today:*

http://my.barackobama.com/economyvideo

Thanks for helping to bring the change this country needs,

Barack


----------



## Calliope (19 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Date:  	 Friday, September 19, 2008 4:53 AM
> From: 	Barack Obama <info@barackobama.com>
> To:  	  <doris.********@bigpond.com>
> Subject:  	 Solving our financial crisis
> ...




Good for you Doris. You have come out of the closet and declared yourself as the agent of a foreign politician.


----------



## mit (19 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The polls are moving back in Obama's favour. I think that the reason for this is twofold:

1. Palin - She is such an appalling candidate for most Americans. The far right love her but I think that most Americans are sick of the lies and the attitude she had as Governor an Mayor. I wouldn't be surprised if she has to pull out for some trumped up reason.

2. Obama ignoring the Democratic party machine. The unfortunate thing about the democrats is that they really hate to insult people and back down. A prime example is when Gore was looking to enter the present race, he told the truth and had to withdraw. Obama, on the other hand is holding the flame up to McCain and Palin.


----------



## ZzzzDad (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mit said:


> The polls are moving back in Obama's favour. I think that the reason for this is twofold:
> 
> 1. Palin - She is such an appalling candidate for most Americans. The far right love her but I think that most Americans are sick of the lies and the attitude she had as Governor an Mayor. I wouldn't be surprised if she has to pull out for some trumped up reason.




It is more likely that Joe Biden (the human gaffe machine) will withdraw for some nefarious reason than Sarah Palin.  In fact, Intrade has a bet on it.  Still not likely, but some whispers are that Biden will withdraw and Obama will put Clinton on the ticket.  This is all because Palin has REALLY energized the base of the Republican party.  You don't know how much the grassroots Republicans are ecstatic over Palin.  She will bring McCain millions of voters that he wouldn't have gotten otherwise.


----------



## mit (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> It is more likely that Joe Biden (the human gaffe machine) will withdraw for some nefarious reason than Sarah Palin.  In fact, Intrade has a bet on it.  Still not likely, but some whispers are that Biden will withdraw and Obama will put Clinton on the ticket.  This is all because Palin has REALLY energized the base of the Republican party.  You don't know how much the grassroots Republicans are ecstatic over Palin.  She will bring McCain millions of voters that he wouldn't have gotten otherwise.




I don't doubt that Biden is a lame duck and I think that the issues with Palin have probably stopped the media putting a lot of the spotlight on him.

However, the polls are steadily moving away from the republicans.

I think that Palin only energised the people who were going to vote Republican anyway or at least never vote for Obama. She is a right wing Christian Fundamentalist, which is going to turn off the people who are more in the middle.


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

could this be deja vu all over again ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_the_economy,_stupid



> "*It's the economy, stupid*" was a phrase in American politics widely used during Bill Clinton's successful 1992 presidential campaign against George H.W. Bush. For a time, Bush was considered unbeatable because of foreign policy developments such as the end of the Cold War and the Persian Gulf War. The phrase, coined by Clinton campaign strategist James Carville, refers to the notion that Clinton was a better choice because *Bush (Snr) had not adequately addressed the economy, which had recently undergone a recession.*
> 
> In order to keep the campaign on message, Carville hung a sign in Bill Clinton's Little Rock campaign headquarters that said:
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mit said:


> 1. I don't doubt that Biden is a lame duck and I think that the issues with Palin *have probably stopped the media putting a lot of the spotlight on him*.
> 
> 2. However, the polls are steadily moving away from the republicans.
> 
> 3. I think that Palin only energised the people who were going to vote Republican anyway or at least never vote for Obama. She is a right wing Christian Fundamentalist, which is going to turn off the people who are more in the middle.



mit I absolutely agree on 2 and 3 , but , as for Biden avoiding being put under the spotlight! 

Here's his resume mate lol....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden


> Biden was first elected to the Senate in 1972; *sworn in 1973 at the Constitutional minimum age of 30, he became the fifth-youngest senator in U.S. history.*
> 
> He was *reelected to the Senate in 1978, 1984, 1990, 1996, and 2002*.
> 
> ...






> Since 1991, Biden has also served as an *adjunct professor at the Widener University School of Law.[3] There he teaches a seminar on constitutional law*.[3]
> 
> *Biden's elder son, Beau,* had been a partner in a Wilmington law firm until he was elected Delaware Attorney General in 2006. He is a captain in the Delaware Army National Guard, where he serves in the Judge Advocate General's Corps, and *is set to be deployed to Iraq in October 2008*.[30]
> 
> ...




I think you'd agree that his experience stacks up against Palin , yes? lol
The media would know him as well as his wife would


----------



## noirua (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Democrats are to be more trusted with the economy and the Republicans if the war situation needs tough players.

McCain may have to move closer to George Bush if he is seen to have done well in this crisis and his ratings improve.

Obama may yet have to offer Hillary a high profile position if the going gets tough.


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> Biden's elder son, Beau, had been a partner in a Wilmington law firm until he was elected Delaware Attorney General in 2006. He is a captain in the Delaware Army National Guard, where he serves in the Judge Advocate General's Corps, and is set to be deployed to Iraq in October 2008.[30]



Oct 2008 apparently - Maybe that will nullify Pailn's son going to Iraq. - somehow being a reason we should suddenly elevate her to being a heartbeat away from the presidency.


Close at the moment, but plenty of time in this race for the logical choice to sink in.. 



noirua said:


> The Democrats are to be more trusted with the economy and the Republicans if the war situation needs tough players.
> 
> McCain may have to move closer to George Bush if he is seen to have done well in this crisis and his ratings improve.
> 
> Obama may yet have to offer Hillary a high profile position if the going gets tough.



Maybe Obama could have two running mates ? 
Bit like the Hash House Harriers lol


----------



## mit (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> mit I absolutely agree on 2 and 3 , but , as for Biden avoiding being put under the spotlight!
> 
> Here's his resume mate lol....
> 
> ...




I think that the experience is there but I think that some of his decisions are questionable. I don't think, however, that Clinton would ever be Vice President, because the shadow of Bill and Hilary would be too much for any president. It would be like sharing a room with your mother-in-law.

Apparently, the republicans are starting to worry about Palin and she is being dropped from their adds and the posters are back to McCain from McCain/Palin.


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mit said:


> 1.  because the shadow of Bill and Hilary would be too much for any president. It would be like sharing a room with your mother-in-law.
> 
> 2. Apparently, the republicans are starting to worry about Palin and she is being dropped from their adds and the posters are back to McCain from McCain/Palin.



1. great analogy - but a bit unkind to mothers-in-law lol
2. wow - appreciate any links


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mit said:


> I think that the experience is there ...



mit - to reinforce the idea how long he's been around - does anyone remember the days of real progress in the middle east - the Anwar Sadat days?


----------



## mit (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> 1. great analogy - but a bit unkind to mothers-in-law lol
> 2. wow - appreciate any links




http://www.alternet.org/election08/99424/polls_show_palin_is_starting_to_drag_down_mccain/


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mit said:


> http://www.alternet.org/election08/99424/polls_show_palin_is_starting_to_drag_down_mccain/



Thanks mit ...

(I was aware of the trend in the polls, but not the trend away from her in the ads ... thanks) 


> Over the course of a single weekend, in other words, Palin went from being the most popular White House hopeful to the least.
> 
> The trendline is indisputable (it was just picked up by CBS). And just as Palin's initial popularity bolstered McCain, her sudden faltering is now bringing him back down to earth. *You might have even noticed that the latest round of McCain ads don't even feature her or refer to "McCain/Palin." It's back to just "McCain." She was starting to drag him down.*
> 
> Palin will continue to excite and energize the wingnut base. She was designed for that purpose, and won't fail at that task. But her cratering popularity now hampers McCain's efforts to expand beyond that core base.


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> and over the last 4 days
> 
> Obama now 4/6 ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70)
> McCain now 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)
> ...



http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

3 more days down the road ..

Obama now 8/13 ($1.62)... in from  4/6 ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70) 
McCain now 6/4 ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)

Gallup (surely) out of the realms of "margin of error".. 

Doris, 
Of course you are right ,  next week will be the interesting stuff.


----------



## Doris (21 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Obama now 8/13 ($1.62)... in from  4/6 ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70)
> McCain now 6/4 ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)
> 
> Gallup (surely) out of the realms of "margin of error"..
> ...




Too true, 2020.
But the Palin one will be the most interesting.



> *Pressure on Obama to hit hardest in first face-to-face showdown*
> 
> THE pressure is on Barack Obama to crush John McCain, his Republican rival, in the first face-to-face presidential debate at the University of Mississippi on Friday.
> 
> ...



http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4794817.ece

BTW... has a VP choice ever been swapped?


----------



## jeflin (21 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I can't recall any of Obama's memorable slogan for this election... besides the pig on a lipstick. He has to do better than this, and with America lurching into one of its worst crisis, there are plenty of opportunities to be cast as the savior.

Instead, his messages are now being drowned out by the weekly Sarah Palin hubris.


----------



## Doris (21 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



jeflin said:


> I can't recall any of Obama's memorable slogan for this election... besides the pig on a lipstick. He has to do better than this, and with America lurching into one of its worst crisis, there are plenty of opportunities to be cast as the savior.
> 
> Instead, his messages are now being drowned out by the weekly Sarah Palin hubris.




Have faith...

*Obama gets big welcome in Republican Country*



> JACKSONVILLE -- To an amped and overflowing crowd *in a Republican stronghold*, Democrat Barack Obama stepped up his attacks on John McCain, saying Saturday that the Republican in these tough economic times "wants to do for healthcare what Washington did for banking.''
> 
> The overflow crowd at Jacksonville's Metropolitan Park -- *capacity 13,000* -- ate it up.
> *McCain could barely muster 3,000* when he spoke nearby on Monday.
> ...



http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/campaign-2008/story/694958.html


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Have faith...



... doris, I notice new ads appearing ...


----------



## Doris (21 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ... doris, I notice new ads appearing ...




LOL... 

Never a dull moment with you 2020.  Your wife must have a lot of laugh wrinkles! 

But it's McCain who's skating on thin ice with his political-gimmick-puppet backfiring.
Silly man.  He's following Dubya's model of being an alpha puppet.  Shows his method of decision making. 

Roll on Debate #1 next Saturday our time!  Make or break time!


----------



## Doris (21 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This was an interview on 31 August but look into those eyes and see they have it!  
Biden will 'catch any blind spots' he has...  

I noticed on Letterman last week that Barack's fast going grey at the temples. 

Barack on Biden and Palin:


----------



## Doris (22 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Received this morning:



> While Barack offered solutions, John McCain went before the nation to continue lying about Barack and to offer more of the same disastrous George Bush policies that got us here.
> 
> The Washington Post even said, "On Economy, Obama Offers Ideas, McCain Blames Rival."
> 
> ...




How can McPalin keep insisting - out of context - that Obama will "increase taxes"?

Do GOP supporters all earn over $250k thus will be included in the tax increases?


----------



## Doris (22 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*OBAMA: NO 'BLANK CHECK' FOR WALL STREET *

It's a busy week for both candidates in campaigning and preparing for their first debate on Saturday our time.  
Both may be diverted to Washington to vote on the rescue package - and analyse and dissect it before a vote.  
Luckily Barack only needs about five hours sleep a night!  



> Barack Obama said Sunday that the government’s $700 billion proposal to help stem the crisis on Wall Street should not be a “blank check” and *should include help for ordinary Americans*.
> 
> While saying that circumstances required decisive action and a bipartisan solution, because "your jobs, your savings, your economic security, your house" are at risk, the senator did not offer his explicit support for a plan that his campaign says he is still reviewing closely.
> 
> ...



http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/09/21/1430369.aspx


----------



## Doris (23 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama blasts McCain on economy* (2:59)

Barack Obama says John McCain fought against common sense rules on economy.

Good common sense assessment!

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/22/cnn.poll/#cnnSTCVideo


----------



## Doris (23 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama vows deep cuts in spending*

This will have a lot of folk watching their backs!

McCain has been using Obama's slogan of _change_.  Will he now adopt his White House Monitoring Team idea?



> Urging members of his own party to be *just as fiscally tough as the most conservative Republicans*, Obama said the $700 billion economic bailout plan proposed by the Bush administration and congressional leaders is forcing *a renewed look at federal spending*.
> 
> As president, Obama said he would create a White House team headed by a chief performance officer to monitor the efficiency of government spending.
> 
> ...



http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5isOFwdbq0tsqatW6vJpkDRTI1gMgD93C58C80


----------



## Doris (23 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

There'd be a lot of baby boomers approving this ad: (30 seconds)


----------



## Doris (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Did anyone see Bill Clinton on Letterman tonight?

IMO he did a brilliant job in clearly and succinctly explaining why the economy was in its current state - with the IT bubble burst in 2002 and money injected by the government as well as low interest rates, to offset a recession, used by the wealthy by investing in property (instead of green-energy-creating jobs) and the role of derivatives and subsequently the sub-prime financing. 
(He didn't mention household mortgages being re-financed for holidays)

He promoted Hillary twice as he mentioned her ideas over the past year for regulatory bodies, including one similar to one appointed in the 30's.

When Letterman suggested no-one would want to be president now, he insisted this was the perfect time: 
'But low - sell high'. lol. It can't get much worse so whoever wins should look at it with great relish.

"Anyone who has bet against the US in the past 200 years has lost."

His advice was financial regulation cleanup, re-mortgages and investment to create jobs.
- Invest money to make jobs not more money... (with derivatives).

He praised Biden's history and value as VP and close friend of theirs.

He predicted that Obama would bounce after the debates and win in November by a larger margin than would be expected now. He did well.


----------



## noirua (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Did anyone see Bill Clinton on Letterman tonight?
> 
> IMO he did a brilliant job in clearly and succinctly explaining why the economy was in its current state - with the IT bubble burst in 2002 and money injected by the government as well as low interest rates, to offset a recession, used by the wealthy by investing in property (instead of green-energy-creating jobs) and the role of derivatives and subsequently the sub-prime financing.
> (He didn't mention household mortgages being re-financed for holidays)
> ...



I think a main reason for the US problems was the sudden growth of China and Asia, that produced cheap goods for export.  Following this there was a great demand for commodities and prices rocketed.
Demand from Asian countries grew and grew and this eventually caused a rapid rise in oil prices.
The US dollar was sold down big time and the US cash headed out of the States for the middle-east.
War costs had to be met and this impacted further on America.

There is no way out of the war in Afghanistan and it will become as large as the budget expenditure in Afghanistan and Iraq before.

Who ever was President would have been stuck with the same problems, and they will travel on into the next President's domain and he will not be able to avoid them.


----------



## Doris (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

How many Aussies will hold Debate Watch parties this Friday night?

... should be fun to watch the debate at 5am Saturday morning... for those still standing... or sitting!  



> From: Michelle Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 September 2008 4:48 AM
> To: Doris *******
> Subject: The first debate
> ...


----------



## Doris (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack's strategy of having folk feel they are part of his campaign and have hope continues:



> From: Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 September 2008 12:51 PM
> To: Doris *******
> Subject: Greed and irresponsibility
> ...


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The gaffemaster (Joe Biden) strikes again:



Can you imagine if Sarah Palin (or McCain) had made this gaffe?  The media would feature it all day long.  But, not a peep from our Obamania media.

(Did you catch the gaffe?)



FDR was not elected until 1932 - the stock market crash was in 1929.

Oh, here is another point about that gaffe:



> If Hoover or FDR appeared on television in 1929 or even 1933, only a few hundred people would have seen it.  Television was still an experimental medium and wouldn’t be introduced to the public for at least another decade.





That Joe Biden - he sure is a treasure (for the Republicans).


----------



## Doris (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack leads in four battleground states.

The only poll that counts is on 4 November but like grains of sand on a beach, each one has potential.

This reminds me of a 100 metre sprint.  
- The second runner has to hold their breath and focus on that extra burst to pass the other guy.
- The leader has to not look around but focus on that finish line.

The big question is, what will they look like this time next week?


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Biden puts his foot in it again - will this potent issue kill Obama in Pennsylvania, southeastern Ohio, and the coal region of Virginia and West Virginia?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0908/Biden_No_coal_plants_here_in_America.html?showall

*Biden: 'No coal plants here in America'*



> Some great rope line video from Joe Biden's recent Ohio swing, where he was asked by an anti-pollution campaigner about clean coal -- a controversial approach in Democratic circles for which Obama has voiced support, particularly during the Kentucky primary.
> 
> Biden's apparent answer: He supports clean coal for China, but not for the United States.
> 
> ...






*Barack's head must be exploding in anger with this one!  Biden wrote McCain's next commercial for the battleground states of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia.  This is America's coal belt, that just happen to be battleground states.  Those coalminers are swing voters!!*

Thanks Barack, the gift of Biden just keeps on giving!!!


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wow, didn't even realize that Colorado and New Mexico (two more swing states) are also leading coal producing states:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/coal/statepro/imagemap/usaimagemap.htm


----------



## Doris (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Guess who said this today:



> "All of you know the history lesson that the last person who succeeded in becoming president of the United States without winning the state of Ohio was Jack Kennedy. And that's been a long time."
> 
> "Look, have no doubt about it, the capabilities of Senator Obama to a debate -- I mean, *he's very, very good.*
> *He was able to beat Senator Hillary Clinton*, who, as we all know, is very accomplished, very accomplished."
> ...




Jewish organizers of an anti-Iran rally next week have dropped Sarah Palin from the event, days after Hillary Clinton pulled out.

Clinton aides fumed over what they saw as a slight by organizers, because they had no idea until told by reporters that Palin was supposed to attend too.

Hillary had agreed weeks ago to attend the rally, but abruptly backed out late Tuesday after learning of the pairing.



> "Governor Palin was pleased to accept an invitation to address this rally and show her resolve on this grave national security issue."
> 
> He blamed "Democratic partisans" and Barack Obama's campaign for pressing organizers to dump Palin.




McCain's campaign did not explain why it thinks Democrats and the Obama camp were behind the rescinded invitation.


Guess who said this today:



> "The American people need to know that we feel as great a sense of urgency about the emergency on Main Street as we do about the emergency on Wall Street."
> 
> "We are all in this together, and we must come together as Democrats and Republicans, on Wall Street and on Main Street to solve it."


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

There may be hope for the Democrats yet.

The latest poll looks as if Obama is ahead.

Its from the Washington Post.

Although McCain/Palin seem to have more mongrel in them and you need mongrel to win an election.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/23/AR2008092303667_pf.html

gg


_Economic Fears Give Obama Clear Lead Over McCain in Poll

By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, September 24, 2008; A01

Turmoil in the financial industry and growing pessimism about the economy have altered the shape of the presidential race, giving Democratic nominee Barack Obama the first clear lead of the general-election campaign over Republican John McCain, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News national poll.

Just 9 percent of those surveyed rated the economy as good or excellent, the first time that number has been in single digits since the days just before the 1992 election. Just 14 percent said the country is heading in the right direction, equaling the record low on that question in polls dating back to 1973.

More voters trust Obama to deal with the economy, and he currently has a big edge as the candidate who is more in tune with the economic problems Americans now face. He also has a double-digit advantage on handling the current problems on Wall Street, and as a result, there has been a rise in his overall support. The poll found that, among likely voters, Obama now leads McCain by 52 percent to 43 percent. Two weeks ago, in the days immediately following the Republican National Convention, the race was essentially even, with McCain at 49 percent and Obama at 47 percent._

gg


----------



## Doris (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

On _Boston Legal_ this week, David E Kelly created a scenario for the Democratic Candidacy election.  
He must have thought Obama needed help to win the nomination when he wrote this! (We view 6 months behind)

Now, a delegate in Massachusetts intended to vote for Obama even though Hillary had won the popular vote.  
His character was 22 and achieved this position from volunteering for the party.   Cute.

He was taken to court but his argument was upheld, that, as a delegate, he had a conscience vote.  

*As he thought Obama would make the better candidate he was casting his vote for him, not Hillary.* 
He gave good reasons.   
Great show!


On to the presidential election: - *It takes 270 of 538 electoral votes to win*.

Currently predicted:
Obama: 202  
McCain: 163
Undecided: 173



> Since electoral votes are generally allocated on an "all or none" basis by state, the election of a U.S President is about *winning the popular vote in enough states to achieve 270 electoral votes*, a majority of the 538 that are available.
> 
> *It is not about getting the most overall popular votes*, as we saw in the 2000 election, when the electoral vote winner (Bush) and the popular vote winner (Gore) were different.



http://www.270towin.com/


*HOW TO VOTE* - For those who may not know:

Rather than directly voting for the President and Vice President, United States citizens *cast votes for electors*. 

*Electors* are technically free to vote for anyone eligible to be President, but in practice pledge to vote for specific candidates and *voters cast ballots* for favored Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates *by voting for correspondingly pledged electors*.


Most states allow voters to choose between statewide slates of electors pledged to vote for the Presidential and Vice Presidential tickets of various parties; *the ticket that receives the most votes statewide 'wins' all of the votes cast by electors from that state*. 

U.S. Presidential campaigns *concentrate on winning the popular vote in a combination of states that choose a majority of the electors*, rather than campaigning to win the most votes nationally.

My friends in Orange County are not usually interested in the election as the 270 electoral votes are usually reached by the time California gets to vote... so they don't need to, as the president is already decided. 
Their voting starts hours later due to the time differential.  This year they're hopeful they'll get to vote as it's so close.  


*If there is a tie in electoral votes*:

Under the constitution, the *election for president* is thrown into the House of Representatives.

* The House must vote by states, with each state delegation having a single vote, and a majority of the states (at least 26 of 50) required to agree on the winner.


*The Senate picks the next vice-president* (the Senate's presiding officer). 

* The Senate simply requires a majority of its 100 members to select the vice- president.


Hmm... *So theoretically you could have Obama for president and Palin as VP*? 

Hmm... *Perhaps they will get their first female president* if Nancy Pelosi has to care-take while they decide!


----------



## Julia (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, you'd have to say that in view of the current financial meltdown under the Republican watch, this election has to be pretty much unloseable for Obama.


----------



## 2020hindsight (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Concerning the USD700Gigadollars bailout bill -

a) Whoever stops it will be blamed if there is an immediate recession/ depression.  (no win for the Democrats) , and 
b) Whoever inherits the fallout (assuming it is passed - and assuming it is the Democrats), could well find themselves up against a worse recession down the track. 

Gotta be a no-brainer for Bush to help pass this bill (and retire claiming "all's well - so far at least" ) . 

and gotta be a poisoned chalice for the Dems 

The timing is atrocious (to my simplistic eye)


----------



## Doris (24 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Doris, you'd have to say that in view of the current financial meltdown under the Republican watch, this election has to be pretty much unloseable for Obama.




You'd have to think so Julia.

But too many people seem to believe McCain is a maverick and do not see him as being responsible for GWB's mess.

Not enough look behind the slurs he's made against Obama... They relish every chance to be aggressive.

Lots of young people (18 to 25) have enrolled but will they get out to vote? It's a work/school day!

But then the women who supported Hillary are now returning from McCain/Palin's camp.

This Saturday 5:00 - 6:30 am will turn the tide... you'd think.  But McCain has set 'the orator' slur too.


----------



## Doris (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Concerning the USD700Gigadollars bailout bill -
> 
> a) Whoever stops it will be blamed if there is an immediate recession/ depression.  (no win for the Democrats) , and
> b) Whoever inherits the fallout (assuming it is passed - and assuming it is the Democrats), could well find themselves up against a worse recession down the track.
> ...




Bill Clinton said on Letterman last night, both should relish the credit they will get for cleaning up as it can't get much worse. But they're now talking of needing follow-up gigadollars. 
Certainly over the next six weeks we'll see how bad it is so that Obama is seen as a saviour. 

I think a lot of folk will turn Democrat as a result of this... more people who need the government to help.  
Bill also said 2/3 of US households had mortgage stress.  McCain is known for war not budgets!


----------



## Doris (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Eight figures are being spent on these ads by the National Rifle Association. Where did this $$ come from? 

NRA Ad: *Obama Wants To Steal Your Guns*



> The NRA video shows a Virginia hunter and Iraq war veteran, Karl Rusch, complaining about the high cost of gas and accusing Obama of planning a "huge new tax" on "guns and ammo." "Where is this guy from?" Rusch asks. "He's probably never been hunting a day in his life."








> The Pinocchio Test:
> 
> The NRA video accuses Obama of voting "to ban virtually all deer hunting ammunition" and supporting "a ban on shotguns and rifles most of us use for hunting."
> *The deer hunting claim* is based on Obama's support for an  unsuccessful Senate amendment by Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) that would have expanded the definition of "armor-piercing" ammunition.
> ...




http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/nra_misfires_against_obama.html

*3 Pinocchios from The Fact Checker*


----------



## ZzzzDad (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> There may be hope for the Democrats yet.
> 
> The latest poll looks as if Obama is ahead.
> 
> ...




gg - don't let that poll get you down, there are lots of problems with this outlier poll:



> Two questions arise from the Washington Post/ABC poll.  Since they find an unusually high gap ”” an outlier from all other polling ”” what kind of sample produced it?  And does this really show a shift in likely voters to Barack Obama, when state-by-state polling shows the race tightening in the other direction?  The answer is that a poor sample still could show some movement:
> As some have already noted, the sampling in this poll could explain why.  In the raw numbers, the poll sample consists of 38% Democrats and 28% Republicans.  This doubles the actual spread on party affiliation, last surveyed by the more-reliable Rasmussen at 38.7%-33.6% D-to-R. When the WaPo/ABC poll takes leaners into account, the spread gets even more pronounced: 54-38.  That suggests a rather strong bias towards Obama, and an almost insurmountable hurdle for McCain.
> In contrast, the spread was smaller on 9/7, when McCain had a two-point edge.  The base number gave an eight-point advantage to the Dems, but only a nine-point advantage with leaners.  That’s a seven-point shift in two weeks within the sample, which would certainly account for a large shift towards Obama.
> But does it account for all of the shift?  That’s a tougher question.  The seven-point shift in leaners should only result in a seven-point shift, maximum, in the end result ”” but McCain lost eleven points.  The difference could be attributable to the margins of error that are built into the polling, or it could just be that Obama did really gain a few points, although not eleven as the WaPo/ABC poll suggests.
> We’ll have to watch other polling (and their samples) to determine whether this reflects reality or a pollster bias.  Rasmussen’s daily tracking poll has Obama up two points for the first time in a while, so there may be movement ”” but it still looks like anyone’s race.




This one is probably the least volatile, and over time and the last few election cycles, the most accruate:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll


----------



## Doris (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Some interesting, intelligent bloggers on cbsnews.com re the NRA TV ads:



> The NRA thrives on creating FEAR. Why don''t they get rid of their frustrations by doing something USEFUL like offering to mow their neighbor''s lawn? No wait, it''s not the same thrill as shooting bullets into a living animal and watching it drop dead to the ground, is it?






> Have any of you rednecks ever been to a big city? Have you ever witnessed a child or innocent adult get shot to death by gang bangers with an illegal semi-automatic gun? That is what Obama is trying to stop, not your stupid hunting rights.






> Cretins! All they care about is hunting while Rome burns. I support the Second Amendment but if your support makes you blind to all the Republican BS, you''re not doing yourself or any other American any favors. Think about your job, your kids'' education, your taxes (which will be cut by Obama if you make $250,000 or less).






> LOL - The gun lobby that was just caught planting spies in anti-violence non-profit organizations is preaching sanctimonious about Obama/Biden. Send the NRA the same way as the other corrupt lobbyists in Washington - to hell! Get your blood money out of my government.






> The lies of George Bu**** and the Neocons are a bigger threat to our freedom than all the Dianne Feinsteins on the planet.
> 
> The right to bear arms is significant only in the context of preserving our freedom. The Republicans want to take all our other freedoms away then pretend that gun ownership is significant.
> 
> If you have no freedom of speech or right to privacy, all the guns in the world are nothing.






> Shouldn''t the NRA be more focused on keeping the assault rifles out of the hands of the ''"bad guys?" by helping to shut down the gun shows that sell to anyone who walks up? Obama , nor any proponent of gun control want to take away anyone''s guns who can prove that they are responsible enough to own one. What they really want to do is keep them out of the hands of children, teens, the unstable and, of course, "the bad guys".






> With people like these in this AD, no wonder that our economy is melting down.
> 
> Lies and more lies will destroy America.
> 
> ...






> The NRA is lying. Bigtime lying.
> 
> Obama/Biden do not have any plans to do ANY of the things that the NRA claims. Completely ridiculous and even if they did want to try any of the things the NRA claims, they could not pull it off.
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama outlines plan for economy
*He urges cooperation in dealing with crisis; McCain criticizes lack of leadership*

By Bob Drogin and Peter Nicholas | Los Angeles Times
    September 24, 2008

 -Obama outlined yesterday how he would deal with the current economic crisis, *hours after McCain again criticized him for failing to show leadership.*

Obama explained his proposals, many of which are similar to McCain's. Despite his earlier comments that the harsh economy might delay some of his plans, Obama insisted that the core elements of his campaign - middle-class tax cuts, education aid and energy spending - would not be affected.

Obama also *strongly pushed his plan for a second economic stimulus package* and for *a bipartisan approach to deal with the current problems*.

"The American people need to know that we feel as great a sense of urgency about the emergency on Main Street as we do about the emergency on Wall Street," Obama said. "*We are all in this together, and we must come together as Democrats and Republicans, on Wall Street and on Main Street to solve it*."

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/politics/bal-te.campaign24sep24,0,2224005.story

Obama was the first to address the shortcomings of the plan, saying on Wednesday that the proposal needed to include a payback plan for taxpayers, a bipartisan board to provide oversight, restrictions on any federal money used to pay Wall Street execs, and help for homeowners who have been hit hard by the mortgage crisis, reports The New York Times.

While he didn’t say he’d object to the plan without those conditions, according to The Times, he did say he’d recommend that government officials “go back to the drawing board” if the proposal failed to include them. 

http://www.collegenews.com/index.ph..._outline_their_plans_to_fix_the_economy_8888/


----------



## Doris (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Will the debate go on or will McCain's 'Drama Queen' chickening out prevail?

... after all it is only 90 minutes on one night.  Surely they're both prepared - after all the notice they've had.


By  ASSOCIATED PRESS:

*Republican John McCain on Wednesday said he was suspending his campaign and would return to Washington to focus on the roiling US financial crisis*. He said he asked Democratic opponent Barack Obama to join him in the nation's capital and to agree to a delay in Friday's first presidential debate.

*Obama's campaign said he was inclined to go ahead with the debate*.

*The University of Mississippi, which was hosting the event, said it too was moving ahead with preparations because it had "received no notification of any change in the timing or venue."*

Even before the Obama campaign said it was inclined to go forward with the face off, Obama spokesman Bill Burton issued a statement saying that *McCain made his announcement unilaterally moments after agreeing to joint action by both candidates that was initiated by Obama in a personal phone call to McCain.*

"*At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal*.

At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details," Burton's statement said.


----------



## Calliope (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, I have to admire your work ethic. Do you ever get any sleep? Seven Obama posts yesterday and today looks like you may break your record. Already posts at 12.03, 1.05, 1.29, 1.45, 6.34, 7.20 and still counting. That's dedication!!!


----------



## Doris (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Doris, I have to admire your work ethic. Do you ever get any sleep? Seven Obama posts yesterday and today looks like you may break your record. Already posts at 12.03, 1.05, 1.29, 1.45, 6.34, 7.20 and still counting. That's dedication!!!




lol...
Such dedication on your stalking my posts!   

They're mental breaks as I work on writing a book.  Gotta work when the brain is astute!  
My orders are placed for today so it's now time for a cat nap!


----------



## noirua (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> lol...
> Such dedication on your stalking my posts!
> 
> They're mental breaks as I work on writing a book.  Gotta work when the brain is astute!
> My orders are placed for today so it's now time for a cat nap!



Hi, Is your book "How to get Barack Obama elected in 500 espicate lessons."?


----------



## Calliope (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> lol...
> Such dedication on your stalking my posts!
> 
> They're mental breaks as I work on writing a book.  Gotta work when the brain is astute!
> My orders are placed for today so it's now time for a cat nap!




Stalking:headshake. I am now a dedicated follower. A disciple of a disciple you might say. I have had an epiphany. As a follower of your teachings I now know that the future of America depends on one man.

Only Obama can provide the caring and uplifting government that can unite people to despise greed and look after the needy. McCain on the other hand offers a descent into to a nether world of the seven deadly sins.

It is a shame that we cannot vote. In a matter as crucial as this, the whole world should get a vote.

I can't wait for your book.


----------



## IFocus (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Stalking:headshake. I am now a dedicated follower. A disciple of a disciple you might say. I have had an epiphany. As a follower of your teachings I now know that the future of America depends on one man.
> 
> Only Obama can provide the caring and uplifting government that can unite people to despise greed and look after the needy. McCain on the other hand offers a descent into to a nether world of the seven deadly sins.
> 
> ...





Given the fact of the US impact on world affairs both from war and financial issues the matter is very crucial. 

Recent history shows Republicans fighting wars for the wrong reasons (Iraq) and sitting by watching the destruction of not only the US economy but taking everyone else down also. 


I agree with Doris if only that there needs to be a change a real change not the phony change McCain proposes.

Is Barack better who knows but it would be very very hard to achieve the failing's currently happening.


----------



## TheAbyss (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Not sure if this is the correct thread for a joke at Obama's expense but here it is.


----------



## Doris (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is a diplomatic, intelligent press conference held today.  

Barack spoke for 4 minutes then answered critical questions.

Barack gave an honest, *objective*, profound insight of the devious cunning of McCain as he explains their telephone conversation. 

HOW COULD *ANYONE* TRUST McCain now?    

What a blatant back-stabbing coward.  McCain should be tried for treason!  He is as low as it gets.


If *anyone* needed proof that Obama is a great statesman and will be a magnificent president - here it is:



> From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 25 September 2008 3:02 PM
> To: Doris *******
> Subject: VIDEO: Barack's latest remarks about the economy
> ...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> This is a diplomatic, intelligent press conference held today.
> 
> Barack spoke for 4 minutes then answered critical questions.
> 
> ...




Doris you are bit one eyed here. There is no need to deify poor old Obama.

All politicians are untrustworthy. 

Its perception that counts.

gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> 3 more days down the road ..
> 
> Obama now 8/13 ($1.62)... in from  4/6 ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70)
> McCain now 6/4 ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)




http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

4 more days down the road ..

Obama on 8/13 ($1.62)... steady from ($1.62).... in from ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70) 
McCain now 7/4 ($2.75) ... out from ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Doris you are bit one eyed here. There is no need to deify poor old Obama.
> 
> All politicians are untrustworthy.
> 
> ...



so much for your sense of ethics gg lol
that was blatantly dishonourable behaviour by McCain.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> so much for your sense of ethics gg lol
> that was blatantly dishonourable behaviour by McCain.




Its all tactics now mate, it doesn't matter how you get the job, the most important thing is getting elected. 

Imagine if Obama had been going up against Joe Stalin, there would have been an East and west France with a Paris wall. 

Obama is wet as.

gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

and mcCain is a cunning conman .. lol
fall for him if you wish 
 but to claim it was his idea to "approach Obama" - is just :bs:


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> and mcCain is a cunning conman .. lol
> fall for him if you wish
> but to claim it was his idea to "approach Obama" - is just :bs:




To be honest 2020 I think I'll be buying you the beer, but don't let Letterman or any of the pinko media know my thoughts, I'd hate to sway the election. lol 

Obama and McCain are probably the best candidates we have had in the US for a while.

I'd prefer McCain. I like Palin.

I do not trust the leftie orthodoxy on everything, everything 

They are godbotherers in humanistic clothing, nagging and telling us ordinary folk they are our betters, what we should be driving, mining, farming, eating, how we should deal with our lovely earth, how we should reproduce, how many kids we should have, and all the time lining their own pinko pockets with largesse, bribes and super.

Now after that epiphany you have got buckleys, (remember buckley) of getting Obama over the line. 

but I will defend your right to get the poor wet bastard over that line.

gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

hell, I don't even trust Bush's motives for tomorrow for instance - i.e. his invitation to Obama (triggered - let's face it -  in the first instance by Obama approaching McCain ) ..

now how will they exploit that do you reckon?  Some press conference that makes him look out of place somehow? .. 

I mean, I wouldn't put it past them to put up pink (as in white-skinned) White House curtains behind Obama for instance .


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hi, Is your book "How to get Barack Obama elected in 500 espicate lessons."?




Please edify me Noirua...

What does *espicate* mean? 

My dictionary is replete but alas - didn't incorporate it.

A google brought it up... Your ASF quote was fourth from the top of the list!
However, the other sites were in Italian, French or Spanish. 'Translate to English' - translated to English!

The internet's language dictionaries didn't recognize it either.

I can't even interpret it in context even though I know you would mean to be facetious! 

How can I sleep not knowing what it means?


----------



## wayneL (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Suspect - *auspicate*        /ˈɔspɪˌkeɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[aw-spi-keyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used with object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing.
to initiate with ceremonies calculated to ensure good luck; inaugurate.
[Origin: 1595–1605; < L auspicātus consecrated by auguries (ptp. of auspicārī), equiv. to auspic- (s. of auspex) + -ātus -ate1]


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Doris you are bit one eyed here. There is no need to deify poor old Obama.
> 
> All politicians are untrustworthy.
> 
> ...




Your eyes seem to be wide shut.

Did you listen to that press conference I posted today and watch his eyes for validity of integrity?  
Do you bother to gather facts and interpret them or just look at pretty pictures of Palin?

It irritates me when people make stark generalizations.  It is intellectual ignorance. Sad.

Sure, perception counts.  Not all politicians are transparent.  It's bigotry to say none are.

Politics: compromise for survival. 
The calibre of a politician should be judged by his actions not by stereotype. 
Vince Lester was a friend and a fine, honest minister under Joh.  Both individuals were individual. 
Dorothy Pratt is a current poli with the highest of integrity and hard effort for her salary.

It is almost two years since my first impression initiated a lasting impression.
As a woman I am perspicacious and my X-chromosome instincts have not disappointed.

Bias based on knowledge is opinion.  
Shallow grunting may be an opinion but has no discernible substance. 

I cringe when people grunt statements devoid of application of salient knowledge for the purpose of hollow argument.

If Obama did what McCain did to him yesterday... or to Letterman... I would drop him instantly but the man has the gift of integrity and a masterful strength that is unique.  

McCain is a prime example of your stereotype.  And the world does not deserve him.

Trains are annoying if you live near a track. But if you compete to see who can hear one coming first, they can be fun.

It's perception that counts.


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



TheAbyss said:


> Not sure if this is the correct thread for a joke at Obama's expense but here it is.




I laughed out loud when someone emailed me this a few weeks ago.  Hilarious!
This is indeed an attitude of far too many - including Caucasians - so immigrants thrive. (in Oz too)

Responsibility and self-sufficiency are values Obama has strongly advocated, that make so many (Republicans too) have hope in Obama making a difference. 

The US has our problem with so many lethargic students who grow into adults who don't make an effort. 
No passion to work on so they can make money as a bonus!  Schools have their work cut out.

Hope. Change. Yes!


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Obama and McCain are probably the best candidates we have had in the US for a while.
> 
> I'd prefer McCain. I like Palin.
> 
> ...




WHY would you prefer McCain?
WHY do you like Palin?
Can you justify your claims of denigration by Democrats?

Your arguments are ramifications of inefficacy of the Republican government!

Did you see Boston Legal this week?  Cloned pigs are sold as food in the US and not labelled.  They are now trying to clone beef cattle for meat... to 'purify' it.

Eating?  The Republicans have not initiated dietary education and have millions of diabetics flatlining the economy as they die miserable deaths after limb amputation, blindness and painful kidney failure.

Reproduce?  No sex-ed in schools - 3 in 10 teenage pregnancies... breeding perpetual poverty. 

Don't you know Obama is fighting lobbyists and PACs having ANY puppetry influence in his new government?


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Agreement Reached on Bailout Ahead of High-Level Meeting*

Proposal Breaks $700 Billion Into Installments

The agreement could require all companies participating in the program to agree to limits on executive pay—such as restrictions on "golden parachutes." 
It is also likely to give the government equity warrants in all participating companies.

Still unresolved is whether or not to include changes to bankruptcy law that would give judges the right to change the terms of mortgages. Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois made a plea for it to be included, even though many lawmakers and the White House are hotly opposed.

Emerging from the meeting, Sen. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.) said: *"I believe that we will pass this legislation before the markets open on Monday."*

Messrs. Frank, Dodd and other key lawmakers were scheduled to *meet with President Bush and the two U.S. presidential candidates late Thursday to discuss the bailout plan*. The White House said earlier Thursday that "significant progress" had been made on the legislation, which many policymakers hope calm the tumult in the credit markets.

Mr. Frank, discussing the White House meeting, said lawmakers will be able to offer good news when they meet with the President. "We will be able to go and tell them that there really isn't much of a deadlock to break."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122235295272975207.html


Hmmm... so maybe Friday night will be free for a debate?

Maybe McCain will look a fool for his errant, impulsive, maverick unethical  behaviour?  Redundant SuperMac.


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The debate will go on... or McCain will look a fool IMO.

Obama, who delivered closing remarks via satellite to the same session, said he also plans to head to Washington Thursday to help craft bailout legislation -- 
and *then head to Oxford, Miss. for the debate.*

"The American people deserve to hear directly from myself and Senator McCain about how we intend to lead our country," Obama said. "The times are too serious to put our campaign on hold, or to ignore the full range of issues that the next president will face."

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-usdeba0926,0,5325928.story


Barack Obama's September 24 Economic Crisis Remarks: 
*5 Communication Best Practices*

Whether one is Republican, Democrat or Independent, most people agree that Barack Obama is a master of highly effective communication.

Well worth a read... based on the press conference Obama gave yesterday.
A 'how to succeed like Obama in a speech'.

http://www.fastcompany.com/blog/she...ptember-24-economic-crisis-remarks-5-communic


----------



## Calliope (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Whoa Doris, your proselytizing is becoming very boring. It is not wise to adopt your school ma'am attitude to dissenters. I hope your book is in a lighter vein.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> (espicate?)
> Suspect - *auspicate*
> –verb (used with object), -cat·ed, -cat·ing.
> to initiate with ceremonies calculated to ensure good luck



or explicit maybe?
but, as you say wayne, "good luck" sounds more appropriate


----------



## ZzzzDad (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Maybe McCain will look a fool for his errant, impulsive, maverick unethical  behaviour?  Redundant SuperMac.




McCain has come out looking like a leader.  He has again put country first.  He has shaken up the establishment to get off their butts and make an agreement.

The American people are watching, McCain is working on the problem, and Obama is clueless.

Overnight polling, for what it is worth, has taken McCain's side on this.  Did you see today's Gallup tracking poll?  It is back to even, with just one third new people added in.  McCain was behind by 3 yesterday, which would be an effective 9 point swing if you multiply by 3.  

The American people are expecting action, and will reward the person that shakes things up and gets this problem solved - NOW.


----------



## ZzzzDad (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Did you see Boston Legal this week?  Cloned pigs are sold as food in the US and not labelled.  They are now trying to clone beef cattle for meat... to 'purify' it.




You sincerely need to get your news from somewhere besides Boston Legal.  It is a TV show, entertainment.  I've seen this show several times, and it is really more of a comedy than a serious legal show.  Please come back to reality.  Those shows EXAGERATE things to try to make a Hollywood liberal point.


----------



## noirua (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Please edify me Noirua...
> 
> What does *espicate* mean?
> 
> ...




Espicate means, well researched and well written, expert knowledge and a great deal of thought put in.  It is on page 522, volume 2 of my dictionary.


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> You sincerely need to get your news from somewhere besides Boston Legal.  It is a TV show, entertainment.  I've seen this show several times, and it is really more of a comedy than a serious legal show.  Please come back to reality.  Those shows EXAGERATE things to try to make a Hollywood liberal point.




Have I given the impression I don't read news reports widely or daily watch several news programs, current affairs programs, interview programs, topical debate programs for my edification?  How remiss of me!  

David E Kelly *uses* his (comedy/satire) show to target social/political issues.
There are one to two *serious* issues in each one that provoke any mindless TV addicts to sit up and take notice. These issues often challenge what many take for granted as mandatory acceptance.  They challenge the viewer to think outside their box and develop an educated opinion.

Every targeted issue is thoroughly researched and all sides are projected.
Alan Shore's character is brilliant in his arguments and summations.

Past issues include:
* fine print in credit card contracts which allow higher interest for simply inquiring about a loan
* The US govt's use of Guantanamo Bay's illegal abuse of innocent detainees
* The sub-prime trap for mortgagees whose interest rates automatically trebled after three years
* Farming of salmon creating diseases that proliferate in waterways to destroy indigenous salmon
* The right of employers to sack workers who smoke due to their increased healthcare charges from their illnesses.
* The use of high-fructose corn syrup in food to addict consumers to their products.

The latter is a particular concern of mine as fructose is promoted as a low GI ingredient in food that purports to be an aid to satiety. I noted last year that Canada has bright labels on juice etc: "Contains NO high fructose corn syrup".

Fructose is not metabolized into glucose until it reaches the liver.  Meanwhile, when it's in capillaries, cells prefer it to glucose and their uptake leads to their demise.  This is similar to carbon monoxide.  When it's breathed in, body cells prefer it to oxygen which they ignore and because it's not an oxidation source, they consequently die. Sugar digests into one molecule of glucose and one molecule of fructose.  So high sugar intake is almost as bad as ingesting high fructose corn syrup of which the targeted company in this show had research conclusions of its addictive traits... hence its addition to their products.  Just as cigarette manufacturers increased nicotine content for addictive success.  It also bears mentioning that high sugar intake progressively kills brain cells which cannot be regrown.

This reflects the ignorance of many who read headlines and do not delve further... to their demise.


----------



## Green08 (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Larry King had Chris Rock on to talk about Obama and McCain.  Chris put it like this - 'the American people are broke now McCain is worth 100 Million and has 12 houses, Obama has one house he can't afford to lose his house.  McCain could lose 6 and still have some where to live.

Which guy do you think is in touch with the public?

When McCain can back from the war his wife had had an accident and was wheel chair bound.  He left her for Cindy whom he meet during the War and whose family had a huge beer empire of which she was to inherit. So you leave the wife because it's too hard and marry the rich girl.  What does that say?? No Commitment, lack of empathy, selfishness, money over responsiblity.

Obama for the most part of his life has been poor and had to work to where he is.  He has become a wonderful example of manners, morality, empathy and intelligence.  

If the Clinton's put alot of their own money in why hasn't McCain?  But uses public money to fund this campaign - and at this stage isn't turning up to his debate which many people are disappointed in and some already saying they have changed sides to Obama.   Yes a President has to do more than one thing, two things or three or more.  McCain is very much like Bush Old, running out of ideas, bactracking and pulling a distraction out constantly.

CHANGE change bring it on.


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Great post Green08!  So true!

McCain has said his biggest regret was his behaviour with his first marriage... as though forgive and forget.

"Bring it on"... isn't that what Palin said about Troopergate? 

Barack is so cool and calm under pressure.  I'm surprised McCain hasn't criticized this as a fault yet!


----------



## Doris (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hmmm...

The start of things to come?  McCain got into a shouting match and said it's Obama's fault!  Democrats differed.

Did his mom kiss him better?  He should have been given time-out when he was a boy!

Should someone tell McCain he is not the president nor a member of congress?
... Obama said they needed to be careful not to complicate talks between the administration and Congress.



> A session aimed at showing unity in resolving the financial crisis broke up with conflicts in plain view. McCain would not commit to supporting a plan worked out by congressional negotiators, said people from both parties who were briefed on the exchange.
> 
> McCain's campaign said the meeting "*devolved into a contentious shouting match*" and implied that Obama was at fault ”” on a day when McCain said he was putting politics aside to focus on the nation's financial problems.
> 
> ...




Lovitt.


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Just some general stuff, including the history of these debates ...

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/news/articles/2008/09/26/20080926debate0926.html



> McCain's call to postpone the debate, *and whispers from other Republicans of scratching the vice-presidential debate, too*, may now cast him in a harsh light, said Paul Levinson, a communications professor at New York's Fordham University.
> 
> McCain, ... has suggested delaying the debate in the spirit of putting aside politics while Washington negotiates a plan. Obama has said this is exactly the time voters should hear from the candidates and assess their differing positions.




Tomorrow's debate still in doubt (less than 12 hours to go 



> In 1980, then-President Carter skipped the first debate against former California Gov. Ronald Reagan and John Anderson, a Republican Illinois congressman running as an independent. Carter showed up for a second debate with Reagan - one week before the election - did poorly and decisively lost what had been a close campaign.
> 
> "The combination of not showing up and him not doing well in the debate really buried him," Levinson said of Carter. "*If (McCain) doesn't show up, it's going to hurt his campaign even further*. McCain has gambled a lot already. He could lose everything."
> 
> ...




the first presdidential debate gets the highest ratings ..



> The first in the series of presidential debates usually gets the highest ratings, according to Nielsen Media Research. This suggests tonight's debate could be especially important for McCain and Obama.
> 
> *After record-breaking TV ratings for both conventions and intense voter registration nationwide, it is likely these debates will keep viewers watching*.
> .......
> "*If the first debate is a disappointment ... people start to disconnect," she said*.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Tomorrow's debate still in doubt (less than 12 hours to go)
> 
> the first presidential debate gets the highest ratings ..




No... 

Mississippi is 9 hours ahead of us -- the day before.

So 9pm Friday there -- is 12:00 noon here -- on Saturday.

Will Obama star alone?  ... or will McCain pull his socks up?

I got confused when I first tried to work it out... thought 8 hours (but... no daylight saving yet) and added it on!  
... figured 5am Saturday. - - I always do things backwards when I'm tired!


----------



## noirua (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

McCain will come out of this as the new power behind the thrown.  If he can be seen as a strong steady hand, once the dust has cleared, then Obama will be on the ropes.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> McCain will come out of this as the new power behind the thrown.  If he can be seen as a strong steady hand, once the dust has cleared, then Obama will be on the ropes.




Do you really think people won't see through him?  Read his 'negotiations' statement and weep!


*NOW THE DEBATE IS ON* ... today at noon our time...


Will John McCain hold his temper?
Will Barack live up to his reputation as a great orator?

... when they face off in 8.5 hours for their first debate?

$5.5 million to stage this debate... now it will have the biggest ratings in American TV history!

Ah McCain... you've done it again!


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Smoke and mirrors >


*McCain Agrees to Debate, Citing Progress on Bailout*


Obama campaign officials dismissed as a political stunt Sen. McCain's vow to suspend his campaign in order to deal with the financial crisis. "I went on TV with [McCain spokeswoman] Nicolle Wallace today, *so if they suspended the campaign, she didn't get the memo*," senior Obama aide Robert Gibbs said at a breakfast with reporters on Thursday.


"Make no mistake. John McCain did not "suspend" his campaign," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in a memo to reporters. "*He just turned a national crisis into an occasion to promote his campaign*."


Who could possibly believe McCain has not been taking catnaps to prepare for *NOON our time* today?
.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Thanks Doris

PS I notice SBS coverage starts at 10.55am - 
So I'll probably tune in then and doublecheck. 
(Sorry I'm being too lazy to work it out - but I'll trust SBS on this one  )

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx
just before the debate gallup has it Obama 48 ; McCain 45.

The graph is dancing around bigtime - and as ZZd argues -  that's a rolling 3 day average - so there must be big swings going on on a daily basis


----------



## Green08 (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The debate is ON!!


11 am Sydney Time on CNN


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
> http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx
> 
> 4 more days down the road ..
> ...




2 more days down the road :-
Now 
Obama on ..... 1/2 ($1.50).. in from ($1.62)... steady from ($1.62).... in from ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70) 
McCain now 39/20 ($2.95).. out from ($2.75) ... out from ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)



Green08 said:


> The debate is ON!!
> 11 am Sydney Time on CNN



Thanks green
PS I wonder will they have a worm?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> 2 more days :-
> Now
> Obama on ..... 1/2 ($1.50).. in from ($1.62)... steady from ($1.62).... in from ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70)
> McCain now 39/20 ($2.95).. out from ($2.75) ... out from ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)




He's the favourite alright.

gg


----------



## noirua (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

People are only interested in the financial situation, for the moment. The debate may not be able to get away from that.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Thanks Doris
> 
> PS I notice SBS coverage starts at 10.55am -
> So I'll probably tune in then and doublecheck.
> (Sorry I'm being too lazy to work it out - but I'll trust SBS on this one  )




What happened to Miss time being 9 hrs ahead... the day before???

Yes... on SBS live now. Hot!


----------



## sam76 (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

OMG! How much is Obama killing him!

'using a hatchet where you need a scalpel.' 

Awesome!


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I like that post-debate comment ... All those international leaders' names ...  Palin must be getting "really nervous".   Remembering she got her first passport a year or two (or whatever - recent) ago. 

I'll indulge and enter the world of hyperbole that our McCain supporter friends might use ...  that famous American phrase of when someone is "really nervous"    i.e "she'd be unsure on whether to **** or go blind" as they say.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sam76 said:


> OMG! How much is Obama killing him!
> 
> 'using a hatchet where you need a scalpel.'
> 
> Awesome!




I loved that metaphor too!

Barack was so frustrated at the lies and misconceptions that McCain kept throwing up but he contained himself and only corrected him on essential points.  A lesser opponent would have been consumed and misled from the salient issues.

How wearisome was McCain in his condescending, patronizing histrionic verbals.

And history.  He spoke more about Reagan than he did about his policy plans!

I'm old and wise.  Obama's a pup.  

What a ploy to assure veterans he loves them and will take care of them!  As Obama highlighted... no help is being given for their post-traumatic stress conditions.

Obama won hands down on the economy, resounded more common sense on foreign affairs and I think won this debate because he did not get sidetracked with ego and histrionics.


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I was disgusted with what Obama said about Pakistan. I don't agree that a country like the US should cross boders into another country like Pakistan UNLESS Pakistan agrees and authorises their presence.

Anything else is essentially 'invasion'.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/27/2375920.htm

On Pakistan's lack of action against AQ/Taliban :-


> Senator Obama defended his vow to launch military attacks on extremists in Pakistan if Islamabad was unwilling or able to act  (*in fact he said if the US had Osama Bin Laden in their sights*)...
> 
> McCain.. "You don't say that out loud," he said.
> 
> ...




  Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran

As for McCain's.. "You don't say that out loud," he said. 
I guess he'd argue you just bomb Cambodia - without saying anything whatsoever. 
http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/2582

On Russia :-


> Senator McCain also accused Senator Obama of being wrong on Russia, seeing he had been too soft on Moscow over the showdown with Georgia.
> 
> "Again, a little bit of naivete there, he doesn't understand Russia committed serious aggression against Georgia," he said.




Obama responded that he treated it as aggression as well.

I was surprised neither mentioned that Georgia had started it


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



alwaysLearning said:


> I was disgusted with what Obama said about Pakistan. I don't agree that a country like the US should cross boders into another country like Pakistan UNLESS Pakistan agrees and authorises their presence.
> 
> Anything else is essentially 'invasion'.




This is not as simple as being preemptive on 'any' country.

Pakistan has accepted $millions in US aid in return for their cooperation in finding bin Laden but have not bothered to try.  Bush has said they will attack Al Qaeda strongholds and tell Pakistan as they do it.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> On Russia :-
> 
> I was surprised neither mentioned that Georgia had started it




Me too... but then that's another debate - - as McCain's mob orchestrated it.

After the past few days, who could not have an open mind on this?


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> This is not as simple as being preemptive on 'any' country.
> 
> Pakistan has accepted $millions in US aid in return for their cooperation in finding bin Laden but have not bothered to try.  Bush has said they will attack Al Qaeda strongholds and tell Pakistan as they do it.




I still don't like it and nor do I accept it. Big deal if you capture and kill Osama Bin Laden. USA has now made thousdands of enemies of people who HATE the US. Capturing Bin Laden would only be a symbolic achievement. It won't wipe out terrorism. They obliterated the infrastructure and hurt many innocent people with their war in Iraq in the name of Oil. I'm sure there are LOTS more potential terrorists originating from Iraq now given the damage they inflicted on that country's infrastructure and the innocent civilians who were either hurt or killed.

By invading the borders of yet another country is not going to improve the reputation of the US around the world which is something that Obama preached at the end of his speech.

Let me be clear. I don't like either canditate. I think they are both hopeless on the issue of war. The US is likely to enter a depression from an economic stand point AND surprise surprise they are talking up the prospect of war or conflict with a number of countries including, Russia, Iran and Pakistan. They would talk up this confilict because IF they get into a economic depression THEN by going to war would create jobs and act as a stimulas to their economy.

All of these types of comments disturb me greatly.  

Please correct me if I'm wrong guys. I only want to learn.

edit: where I mention killing Bin Laden, I'm also referring to the attacking of terrorist cells in Pakistan. I think that there will always be these types of cells operating throughout the world. If they are so keen to destory them then they need to work with Pakistan in a join military initiative to do this. NOT just invade a country. Furthermore it does not take a terrorist cell in Pakistan to cause the big damage to the US. All it takes is a suit case and the US is a vulnerable as ever to this type of attack. By invading a country they only worsen their reputation around the world. 

Also it is a bit rich for the US to critisise Russia given what they did in Iraq and Afghanistan recently along with many other wars where the US went to war with someone. Also is a joke that the US doesn't want nuclear weapons for other countries like Iran etc when they themselves obviously have them. The whole thing is a joke.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Poll Results Suggest More Uncommitted Voters Saw Obama As Debate Winner*



> 66% of uncommitted voters think Obama would make the right decisions about the economy.
> 44% think McCain would.
> 
> 39% of uncommitted voters who watched the debate tonight thought Barack Obama was the winner.
> ...




MLive.com has tallied 73% saying Obama won.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/09/26/politics/horserace/entry4482028.shtml


----------



## Julia (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I watched most of the debate, trying to be quite objective.   I thought they both had their moments of strength, but McCain did tend to waffle, particularly when attempting to score a point in referring to his past experience.  Given the chaos over which his Party reigns right now, I'm not sure that doing that would have worked for him.

Obama came across to me as measured in his responses and definitely better on economic issues.

One thing I did notice was that when the moderator continually asked the two candidates to address their remarks to each other, Obama did do this, and referred to McCain as 'John', while McCain clearly had difficulty in dropping his more aggressive stance towards Obama, continued to address the moderator and maintained the "Senator Obama".  It may be quite unimportant, but it reinforced for me Obama's apparent willingness to engage verbally with an opponent, something which perhaps can be extrapolated to his approach to difficult negotiations with other countries.

I'm very nervous that Mr McCain would regard war as a first option, apparently rejecting any suggestion of discussions with Iran and/or North Korea.


----------



## mayk (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

alwaysLearning

You are right in pointing out that attacking another country is a blatant breach of UN chartered law for the respect of other nation's soverignity.

I think they don't understand the situation in FATA afghan/Pakistan border. They will create a disastrous situation soon. Already skirmishes are happening between US and Pakistani forces on the border. When some US troops will die then that will give them reason to launch an attack on Pakistan. Which can be avoided if US can abstain from attacking another sovereign nation especially their "so called" ally on war on terror.   

I think preemptive strike (Bush's  new paradigm) is something we have to live with. Kill the sucker first and ask questions later. Typical American way to solve delicate matters.

I don't think there is much of a difference between the two candidates and I seriously doubt president can do much in US. It is all a hog wash to keep the sheeple happy and think that their voices matter.

The only candidate who make any sense at all is Ron Paul IMHO.


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/09/27/2375920.htm
> 
> On Pakistan's lack of action against AQ/Taliban :-
> 
> ...





That's a very disturbing video


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



alwaysLearning said:


> By invading the borders of yet another country is not going to improve the reputation of the US around the world which is something that Obama preached at the end of his speech.
> 
> They are talking up the prospect of war or conflict with a number of countries including, Russia, Iran and Pakistan. They would talk up this conflict because IF they get into a economic depression THEN by going to war would create jobs and act as a stimulus to their economy.
> 
> ...




The whole world is disturbed - - that is why this election is critical (economically too) to us all.

You are right about bin Laden being a relatively minor player now.
As Obama said... Al Qaeda is in fifty countries...

But you have to agree with Obama's stance on negotiation and not ignoring adversaries, having merit of resolution rather than inflammation.

Maybe having nuclear weapons might be the US's wild card and saviour. 
I wondered if terrorists listening to the debate would chuckle as they plan an imminent attack with their suitcases!


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mayk said:


> alwaysLearning
> 
> You are right in pointing out that attacking another country is a blatant breach of UN chartered law for the respect of other nation's soverignity.
> 
> ...




I agree with what you say here regarding the situation in Pakistan and is what scares me. I imagine that China would not like this either along with other powers such as India and Russia.


----------



## Green08 (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I was impressed with Obama who stood talk and looked at McCain when addressing him.  Julia you are so right.  All the little nuances of tone, behavior, body language said just about as much as what both of them had to say verbally.

I am sure this did not go unnoticed by many in America or Globally.

I was impressed as others were to Obama's self control when McCain openly lied about some of Obama's bills, opinions, or "Senator Obama said....."

Sometimes it is just best to be quite and let the other person die their grave.

Example. The Tax issue of Obama raising them (on the rick which McCain keeps bringing up) That as been flogged to death by McCain's camp!

Obama gives credit where it is due no matter friend or foe, McCain is resistant


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> The whole world is disturbed - - that is why this election is critical (economically too) to us all.
> 
> You are right about bin Laden being a relatively minor player now.
> As Obama said... Al Qaeda is in fifty countries...
> ...




It is a critical point at which the USA is at a cross road. They face an economic depression. You have China and India BOOMING from an economic stand point. 

All of this has a motivation from an economic stand point. Bush used the 9/11 attacks as an excuse for getting some oil. It backfired and has cost the US a lot of money and its reputation around the world.

I think that Obama's stance on engagement with some of these 'bad countries' is a good idea but the whole thing is spin anyway. I mean, there is an economic or vested interest in everything that the USA or any other country like Iran do. The 'negotiation' aspect is good and feel good on the surface but I don't know that it would accomplish much.

The US did not negotiate with Iraq before they invaded it. Instead they invaded based on bad intelligence with a cover story of terrorism that they were trying to save themselves and the world from when in reality they just wanted the oil.

So imagine how the US could have negotiated with Iraq. They want the oil and fake the WMD story and take what they want anyway. Am I wrong here? Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they really did think that Iraq had WMDs and felt threatened. I don't know. But something doesn't sit right with me now. maybe it is that I'm getting older and more critical. I always believe that where there is a war then there HAS to be some kind of economic or political incentive for a country to go to war.

Look at the war in geogia vs russia. There is an Oil channel that goes through georgia I think that links up at a station where oil is distributed to the Western countries. There is now conflict between russia and geogia. USA supports georgia.

I'm rambling now 

To get back to your post, yeah it is important for the new president to fix things and make the USA a good country with a good reputation. My fear is that neither candidate can pull it off because they aren't ultimately in control of their country anyway. These days I just see the president of a country or prime minister as a PR guy for their country.

Damn I have become cynical these days


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> I watched most of the debate, trying to be quite objective.   I thought they both had their moments of strength, but McCain did tend to waffle, particularly when attempting to score a point in referring to his past experience.  Given the chaos over which his Party reigns right now, I'm not sure that doing that would have worked for him.
> 
> Obama came across to me as measured in his responses and definitely better on economic issues.
> 
> ...




You are astute Julia!  Well said!

McCain hardly even looked at Obama - a total lack of respect and common decency.
... was continually denigrating in debating his calibre and not the issues.

And Obama was the one to offer to shake hands at the end as McCain walked away!

Maybe next time the moderator can get McCain to 'engage' and thus maybe lose his temper?  

Had to laugh at Cindy's red, full length, evening gown.   McCain says Obama is elite?
Michelle wore a conservative dress that would have identified with the middle class!


----------



## Green08 (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

One thing stood out to me was that the USA owes China $500 Billion.  Could be more.  If this debate was translated into Chinese and the average person just found that out, linked with the calamity of Wall Street, the level of resentment towards the USA is mounting.

War with Russia could be a different story these days.   With the oil they have and money from resources they could well have increased the strength of the army and facilities - straight out war could leave the USA on the crushed end of the stick.  Never under estimate anything - that is a human flaw.

They need a leader who is calm under the most trying of times and a well spoken, dignified speaker who can negotiate.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



alwaysLearning said:


> I think that Obama's stance on engagement with some of these 'bad countries' is a good idea but the whole thing is spin anyway. I mean, there is an economic or vested interest in everything that the USA or any other country like Iran do. The 'negotiation' aspect is good and feel good on the surface but I don't know that it would accomplish much.
> 
> Yeah it is important for the new president to fix things and make the USA a good country with a good reputation. My fear is that neither candidate can pull it off because they aren't ultimately in control of their country anyway. These days I just see the president of a country or prime minister as a PR guy for their country.
> 
> Damn I have become cynical these days




What you see is what you get with Obama.

He argued logically and inclusively in his speech in Germany.
He was open and honest when he said they needed Europe's help in Afghanistan to save them money they needed for their economy.  He provoked and promoted a willingness to 'work together'.  The world wants Obama!

The way he has run his campaign screams of the PR he will have as president.  From the start he insisted on the integrity of his aides and campaign members and simply stated that this and congenial relations amongst them was the only mode acceptable if they wished to remain involved. 

Disagree, but be agreeable.  This debate reflects he practices this trait.

Obama will not be a lame duck president.  He will be the commander as he is with his campaign.


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> One thing stood out to me was that the USA owes China $500 Billion.  Could be more.  If this debate was translated into Chinese and the average person just found that out, linked with the calamity of Wall Street, the level of resentment towards the USA is mounting.
> 
> War with Russia could be a different story these days.   With the oil they have and money from resources they could well have increased the strength of the army and facilities - straight out war could leave the USA on the crushed end of the stick.  Never under estimate anything - that is a human flaw.
> 
> They need a leader who is calm under the most trying of times and a well spoken, dignified speaker who can negotiate.




The US is boxed in a corner in many ways now. From an economic standpoint their influence is reducing. China and India are emerging as powerful economic centers. Indeed Asia really is coming along well now and is MUCH less affected by the sub prime loans than the USA or Euro Zone. But that's another issue.

So, anyway, the US is enemies with  Iran, North Korea, doesn't like Russia now, happy to cross borders into another country like Pakistan and exert their military force on these 'terror cells'. Afghanistan they are not friends with along with Iraq. 

Maybe I'm crazy but that is a lot of enemies for the US. Also, China and India are going to be far larger growth centers from an economic stand point. I think there is going to be a shift of power from the US and Eurozone back into Asia over the next 100 years. 

I know I sound really negative towards the US but it's just their foreign policy that irritates me. To look at things from another perspective though...lets me fair. The US is doing whatever it can to maintain it's super power status around the world. But the catch here is that all countries are trying to do the same thing as well. It is a dog eat dog world and if given half a chance I'm sure that other countries would do the same as the US if they were in the same position or be even more extreme than the USA's foreign policy. 

So I'm not sure how to look at these situations because human nature is inherrently flawed from the point of view of fear and greed. Not only does fear and green drive economic markets around the world it drives human behaviour in general and is reflected at a micro and macro level in our world today.


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> What you see is what you get with Obama.
> 
> He argued logically and inclusively in his speech in Germany.
> He was open and honest when he said they needed Europe's help in Afghanistan to save them money they needed for their economy.  He provoked and promoted a willingness to 'work together'.  The world wants Obama!
> ...




I hope that you're right if he does become president. I think that Obama is a great communicator. But the thing is that no president or prime minister or leader is ever really in control of anything. Things need to be passed in congress etc. There are many competing vested interests with a lot of people.

I hope that if he is elected that he can make a positive difference to the world though. Maybe I'm over reacting. I've had a tough week personally and it could be leaking into my posting today.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



alwaysLearning said:


> That's a very disturbing video



AlwaysL, 
here's McCain's response... "fooling around with vets" 

I personally wouldn't trust the man with negotiating anything trickier than an under 8 footy match 

 McCain Responds to "Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran" Video

PS as for your nicname, - gotta be a great motto in life lol - thanks.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> 2 more days down the road :-
> Now
> Obama on ..... 1/2 ($1.50).. in from ($1.62)... steady from ($1.62).... in from ($1.67) ... in from ($1.70)
> McCain now 39/20 ($2.95).. out from ($2.75) ... out from ($2.50) ... out from 7/5 ($2.40) ... out from ($2.25)



If anyone is interested, those odds have BOTH tightened
Obama now 4/9 = $1.44
McCain now 7/4 = $2.75

(PS it's possible for that to happen, -  i.e. both to tighten  -  since we are talking about the best adds available ... and there is still only 5.6% bookies margin in those odds)

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

Guess, based on that, you'd call the debate a draw ... EXCEPT that foreign policy was supposed to be McCain's big strength - and he was supposed to win that one 'easily' (the next debate more on the economy) ...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> If anyone is interested, those odds have BOTH tightened
> Obama now 4/9 = $1.44
> McCain now 7/4 = $2.75
> 
> ...




I missed the debate, it was a draw, was it?

gg


----------



## alwaysLearning (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> AlwaysL,
> here's McCain's response... "fooling around with vets"
> 
> I personally wouldn't trust the man with negotiating anything trickier than an under 8 footy match
> ...




Yeah it's poor form. Having said that I have lost faith on political leaders and politics in general.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

Madeleine Albright:


> Tonight was a breakthrough for Senator Obama, who showed himself truly ready to be president. He responded knowledgeably, thoughtfully and confidently to the toughest questions on the economy, Iraq, and terror.
> 
> Meanwhile, Senator McCain spent so much time attacking his opponent, he neglected to show how a McCain-Palin administration would differ from Bush-Cheney. As a result, Obama answered the threshold question about his candidacy; McCain did not.




A blogger:


> Those predisposed to voting for either candidate would do so regardless of how well they did. I personally am voting for Obama because I feel he has the *best temperament for leadership.
> *
> Obama exhibits the personality traits I acquit with great leaders: the profound ability to **listen* to the point of view of everyone--even one's opponent*; an innate dignity which isn't self-serving or coming from an assumption of entitlement; *a graceful self-confidence*; a complete acceptance of responsibility; *patience in the face of insult*; above all, *the inward quiet of a man who, while focused on the goal, has the intellect to consider he might be wrong about a given situation*.




Robert Shrum: CNN


> Barack Obama was crisp, reassuring and strong -- in short, presidential, as he has been throughout the financial storm of the past two weeks. McCain was not as bad as he has been recently; but much of this debate was fought on what was supposed to be his high ground. As the encounter ended, Obama not only controlled the commanding heights of the economic issue -- and he not only held his own on national security -- but clearly passed the threshold as a credible commander-in-chief. McCain kept repeating that Obama doesn't "understand." But he clearly did. McCain made up no ground. That's similar to what happened in 1960 when Nixon ran on the slogan "Experience Counts" but found it didn't count that much when voters decided JFK was up to the job after the side by side comparison they saw in the first debate.



A bogger:


> I agree with your article. Obama held own regarding National Security. Especially, when he mentioned the peace keepers in Georgia was Russian and that may be a problem! He was right! McCain did do better than I expected - but my expectations weren't high. *Obama came out on top because he showed he is not "ready to lead" but is already a Leader*. McCain consistently failed to answer the fundamental question and resorted too often to talking points. Obama had clear, concise answers that proved his ability to both lead and inspire this country back to greatness. My only real disappointment was that when McCain brought up his support of veterans, Obama didn't go after him. McCain has an abysmal record in this area and Obama shouldn't have let him get away with claiming otherwise.




Arianna Huffington:


> It was a good night for Obama because, when 83 percent of the country believe we are on the wrong track, standing toe-to-toe with McCain on foreign policy is all you need to do. And Obama clearly did that -- scoring strong points on the lessons of Iraq, where he pointed out all the ways McCain had been wrong on the war. He even landed a zinger: "*John, you like to pretend the war began in 2007*."
> 
> It was a good night for McCain because, after a week in which he'd been *bleeding like a hemophiliac in a barbed wire factory*, tonight stanched the bleeding. He was able to keep the debate about the economy focused on taxes and cutting spending, as opposed to *the crisis brought on by the free market, deregulation religion of which he is a devout follower*. And he was able to interject himself into the major foreign policy decisions of the last 20 years.
> 
> But it was a bad night for reality. *Did John McCain really try to reclaim the high ground on torture after having caved on the issue earlier in the year*? And did he really profess his love for veterans after having fought against the new GI Bill?




Blogger:


> I was so angry at Lehr. Obama was about to nail McCain on using Arizona as a depository for radioactive waste from all the nuclear power plants McCain wants to build and Lehr shut him down.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I missed the debate, it was a draw, was it?



Lol, not from where I was sitting ...

McCain never looked at Obama once. Nor the camera.  
delivered all his comments to "the chair" like a robot.

If he is trying to paint himself as "the President"  ....... whose main role in life is to convince the American people of his point of view through future (unknown) crises with his persuasive powers.... then I personally think he failed bigtime.   

Meanwhile Obama looked straight at the camera several times on important points  -  and many times he spoke to McCain directly - 

and Obama took every chance to correct the spins that McCain (and his recent ads) have been saying - I think he made a few good points there as well.  Obama far more at ease - or perhaps that should read "less spivvy".

Neither made any gaffs - But as I say, I think McCain was very "liberal with the truth" - and shown to be so (imo) - but others might disagree. 

PS  And just reading something IFocus said on the McCain thread,  ... I kept thinking , as McCain was talking ... heck this man is 72 years old... In 4 years he's gonna be right gargar...  And the difficult points being discussed (by both him and Obama)  about Russia, Iran etc -  hell, as if you'd let Sarah Palin anywhere near those issues :silly:


IFocus said:


> Afghanistan is not the issue Russia's rise is a much bigger deal a vote for McCain is a vote for president Palin who is not an experienced steady hand


----------



## ZzzzDad (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/
> 
> Madeleine Albright:
> 
> ...




Wow Doris - you picked some very unbiased sources there - LOL

You should check more sources than the leftist blogs and talking heads.

Our side is totally unanimous that McCain won the debate.  Not even close.

McCain is going to win because in the end, he is the safe choice.  Obama is too unknown and risky to Americans.

Just a warning to you, don't get too invested in our election.  You are going to be disappointed in the end.  America generally goes for the safe choice in times of war or crisis.  McCain is moderate enough, and experienced enough to fit the bill.


----------



## Green08 (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Wow Doris - you picked some very unbiased sources there - LOL
> 
> Our side is totally unanimous that McCain won the debate.  Not even close.
> 
> ...




One area that Americans seem to completely miss the point is not just who you think can run your country and is a "safe choice".

The rest of the world is watching and you should be considering who will be the most appropriate person to deal with other world leaders. Your safe choice is not the safe choice for most leaders globally.  

The world is over hearing "the greatest country".  There are many rising powers and not everyone wants to fight and drop bombs.  

There are many who would welcome open discussion and negotiation with a person they could respect, who would honor agreements and show strength which may not be always favored for his country but the world.  Obama is well respected with a strong support base in Australia.  I grew up in the USA and Australia and have friends in both countries who welcome Obama.

There are many global issues and articulate leaders with intelligence and tolerance are needed.  

McCain has a history of fighting; tonight’s behavior reinforced his arrogance and inability to even look at his opponent despite their differences. You are going to need more in your future other than "experience" if American is to be respected globally.


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I feel saddened by a lot of journalistic comments that Obama was too easy on McCain, especially in agreeing with him so often. But these points were applicable and IMHO demonstrated his innate ability to be bipartisan... to listen and give credit where credit was due. He walked the talk. I'm thinking his well-mannered style is what prompted McCain to feel he had the upper hand, hence his denigrating him. Storming out your view is not defeating the topic.  The Australian commercial media homed in on these making Obama look foolish.

Obama cannot be seen as 'an angry black man'... not that he would rant and swear as McCain is famous for.  He has been widely respected for his demeanor during the debate.  But I really think he needs to up the ante next time and pre-caution the moderator to do his job.  It is not up to Obama to stop McCain when he interjects.  Jim Lehrer could have done a better job.  Obama showed strength not weakness in allowing McCain to be a buffoon in a debate but with a rogue nation leader - he needs to show more authority.  No doubt he does this with his staff. Respect, but stand up more forcefully.

Polls on the debate from http://mediacurves.com

Obama won overall 164 to 135.  Tight - but a clear winner!


----------



## Doris (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

For those who missed the debate or want to review it:

First pres. debate, Part 1 ...24:22
Sen. John McCain and Sen. Barack Obama debate the financial crisis and foreign policy.
• Candidates debate earmarks, spending

http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/politics/2008/09/26/debate.entire.part1.cnn

Parts 2 and 3 are clickable on this site.


----------



## mayk (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, I feel you are emotionally involved in US politics, especially with Barak Obama. I don't think he will win the race, because of his race. It is sad but true and will be proved in November.

McCain for all his fault is a guy most Americans perceive as a safe bet as pointed out. You can judge that republicans only supported the safest candidate. People don't care about Palin and every thing associated with it. He is like a hedge against unknown. Just as investors run to safer bets in case of market turmoil, they will vote in favour of McCain.

I am not a supporter of McCain or Obama. I admire the view of Ron Paul, but not being a US citizen my 3 cents do not count...


----------



## noirua (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Having listened carefully to the debate, as a neutral, it became obvious that both sides were treading carefully with the decisions in Washington upper most in their minds.

It was expected that Barack Obama would have a resounding victory but he seemed unable to slam home his points. Or  putting it another way, the goal was wide open but he couldn't score. 

I got the idea that Obama supporters were a little disappointed with the final result and McCain supporters very relieved indeed, in the end. 

McCain should be able to claw back more supporters in the coming polls.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ...Polls on the debate from http://mediacurves.com
> 
> Obama won overall 164 to 135.  Tight - but a clear winner!



howdy doris 
Interesting that according to that poll, just looking at the "Independents",  Obama won every issue, (although only a few percentage points in it in a few cases),  viz

61/39 Financial Recovery Plan  
56/44 Economic Plans 
53/47 Govt Spending 
60/40 Lessons Learnt from the iraq War 
57/43 Sending More US Troops to Afghanistan 
62/38 Threat of Iran 
67/33 US Relationship with Russia 
57/43 Liklihood of another 9-11 Attack 
61/39 Who won the Debate


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> just before the debate gallup has it Obama 48 ; McCain 45.





http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

odds : 
Obama now 4/9 ( $1.44) .... steady from ($1.44)... in from ($1.50) just before debate
McCain now 39/20 ($2.95) .... out from ($2.75) ... in from ($2.95) just before debate

And going by this graph (which I'm assuming was polled after the debate), Obama sure didn't lose anyway ... - but nothing dramatic, and (given the 3 day average) time will tell .


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Having listened carefully to the debate, *as a neutral*... waffle waffle etc etc





noirua on another thread said:


> In these difficult financial times, and with the war in Afghanistan set to intensify, the world needs a strong experienced steady hand to take over from President Bush.
> John McCain is that person.




Hmmmmmmm


----------



## noirua (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Having listened carefully to the debate, as a neutral, it became obvious that both sides were treading carefully with the decisions in Washington upper most in their minds.
> 
> It was expected that Barack Obama would have a resounding victory but he seemed unable to slam home his points. Or putting it another way, the goal was wide open but he couldn't score.
> 
> ...




Howdy, I guess we must wait 'n see how it goes, and only the pols carried out in a weeks time will give us the whole story.

The strong steady hand of John McCain may win out in a war situation and he needs President Bush to win through well on the $700 billion financial bail out.

Barack Obama has the voice and the ability to sound Presidential and will win if the American people buy it.


----------



## mayk (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Just a different observation. An American Opinion...
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2203693365670985925&vt=lf&hl=en


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mayk said:


> Just a different observation. An American Opinion...
> http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2203693365670985925&vt=lf&hl=en



lol - classic may. Hope they made it to the pub on that bike 

I won't ask you to listen to the middle of that youtube to prove it, (it's like some sort of torture on the ears listening to her),  but she says she was for Hillary, lol.    

BUT ... it does bring up an interesting point - if he's favourite to win (albeit narrowly, cliff hanger, etc ) with a name like Barack Hussein Obama ....  Imagine what he'd have won by if he was christened Barry Hank O'Brien


----------



## noirua (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Hmmmmmmm




There are very many meanings for neutral "a person who takes no part in a contest or war", is is the one that applies here.


----------



## Doris (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Sunday, 28 September 2008 9:21 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: In case you missed it

Doris --

We put together an ad today that captures Barack's victory in last night's debate in *30 seconds*.

After his erratic and reckless response to the economic crisis, McCain needed a game-changer last night to restore his campaign. He didn't even come close.

In a CBS News poll, uncommitted voters see Barack as the debate winner. When it comes to the economy, 66% say Barack would make the right decisions versus 42% for McCain.

The CNN poll results are also clear:

Who did the best job tonight?
Barack: 51
McCain: 38

Who would better handle Iraq?
Barack: 52
McCain: 47

Who would better handle the economy?
Barack: 58
McCain: 37

These are not the kinds of reviews John McCain needed, but they show that Barack is offering the change we need.

Barack broke through last night with voters who were watching -- but we need to get the word out to the millions who didn't tune in. 

Please watch our latest ad:

https://donate.barackobama.com/debatevideo

Thank you for everything you are doing,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


----------



## wayneL (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> There are very many meanings for neutral "a person who takes no part in a contest or war", is is the one that applies here.



Ahhh thanks for clarification. So you're neutral in the sense of being a spectator at a football game but barracking for one of the teams over the other.


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Ahhh thanks for clarification. So you're neutral in the sense of being a spectator at a football game but barracking for one of the teams over the other.






> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/neutral
> neu·tral    –adjective
> 1. not taking part or giving assistance in a dispute or war between others:
> a neutral nation during World War II.
> ...



wayne, :iagree:

noi
1. yes  (unless posting "gee-ups" on an international website is considered as "giving assistance")
2. no - suspect your alignment is clear 

nice play on words (and/or subtle meanings) , lol
keep that up, you'll get a job with the McCain spindoctors lol



> "If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken,
> twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools" .. Kipling's "If"


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

noi
re that quote from Kipling 
maybe accidental in your case 
but intentional in theirs


----------



## Doris (28 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama Is Right: McCain Was Wrong*

Some accusations by Barack in the debate, that are proved correct, using past news footage:

If only McCain had to prove his accusations.  There should be a legal obligation to prove false claims.
Obama has serious disagreements with John McCain, starting with Iraq - where John McCain was unequivocally wrong:

  1 min 22 secs


----------



## noirua (29 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Sunday, 28 September 2008 9:21 AM
> To: Doris *******
> Subject: In case you missed it
> ...




Thanks for the DONATION add Doris.  Isn't it an offence to advertise for donations outside the United States or for the campaign to accept donations from foreigners?????????????


----------



## noirua (29 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Ahhh thanks for clarification. So you're neutral in the sense of being a spectator at a football game but barracking for one of the teams over the other.



No need to thank me as I offer assistance where ever I can. 

A neutral person, an examiner for instance, may well be sent to a football match to watch and report the performance of the referee.
In doing so, that person would make a report and may well 
say that the referee would do well in a higher position within the game, and what that persons strengths and weaknesses are. THAT does not mean he is a supporter of the referee.

So you see, I remain neutral but feel free to put forward my report of what, imho, were the strengths and weaknesses on the day.

I think I must agree, however, with the quote by 2020 from Rudyard Kipling's poem "if".  Yes indeed, you have misrepresented what I said.


----------



## wayneL (29 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> No need to thank me as I offer assistance where ever I can.
> 
> A neutral person, an examiner for instance, may well be sent to a football match to watch and report the performance of the referee.
> In doing so, that person would make a report and may well
> ...



Interesting spin on the facts there. 

Because I'm a nice guy, and intelligent folks can discern for themselves, I'll let that one go through to the keeper.


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
> http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx
> 
> odds :
> ...



Just a quick correction ..
actually I was wrong when I assumed that that yesterday's gallup poll would include some effect of the debate (if indeed there was any effect). 
Turns out today's is the first chance for that ... gone from 49-44 to 50-42., i.e. 5 points to 8 points. 

Odds unchanged, although I notice you can get McCain at $3.05 , where that website shows 39/20 (only $2.95) as best odds 
Likewise you can get $1.49 on Obama where they show 4/9 (only $1.44 ) as best.


----------



## noirua (29 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> noi
> re that quote from Kipling
> maybe accidental in your case
> but intentional in theirs




I don't know about the above. If I had the walrus on my side he'd have them all fast asleep with a very long poem.


----------



## ZzzzDad (29 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Could this be the "October Surprise"?

*Rezko talked with prosecutors, may aid probe, sources say*


By David Kidwell, John Chase and Jeff Coen


> Antoin "Tony" Rezko, a convicted influence peddler who was once one of Gov. Rod Blagojevich's most trusted confidants, has met with federal prosecutors and is considering cooperating in the corruption probe of the governor's administration, sources told the Tribune.
> 
> Rezko's possible change of heart—after years of steadfast refusal—has sent ripples through a tight circle of prominent defense attorneys who represent dozens of potential witnesses and targets in the wide-ranging probe.
> 
> ...




rest of the article here: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-rezko-flip28sep28,0,2882759,print.story

*Rezko knows where all the "bodies" are buried in Chicago, and Barack must be sweating.  This is the same prosecutor that got Scooter Libby of the Bush Administration.  Right now, he is going after corrupt Chicago officials.  Barack is joined at the hip with this guy.  Rezko is the guy that gave Barack the corrupt sweetheart deal on his mansion in Chicago.  Mr. Obama ain't no angel.*


----------



## Doris (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Ohio is, of course, the most critical of the critical states.

*Ohio voters correctly picked the winning presidential candidate in the last 11 elections.* 
However, in 1960, Ohioans chose Richard Nixon, but John F. Kennedy was elected president.

*Ohio Now a Toss-up*

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey in *Ohio* finds:
John McCain with *47%*
Barack Obama picks up *46%.* 

*That's a slippage of 3% for McCain since Sunday night*. 
In four previous surveys conducted over the past month, McCain has held an advantage ranging from 3 to 7 points. 


*McCain Only Ahead By One Now in Florida*

The race for Florida's Electoral College votes is closer now than it was just a few days ago. 
The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey finds McCain on top 48% to 47%.

*McCain Holds 8-Point Lead in West Virginia*

*McCain Maintains Solid Lead in Arkansas* 

*McCain Holds Solid Lead in Louisiana*

*Obama Takes 5-Point Lead in Virginia*

*Obama Takes 4 -Point Lead in Pennsylvania*

*Obama 58%, McCain 38% in Massachusetts*
This is to be expected in Mass... the influence of _Boston Legal_!


----------



## noirua (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama's luck may turn as votors see it was the Republicans that stopped the bill going forward. A smart move by McCain here could turn things to his advantage, as it needs a tough guy now, proven that is.


----------



## kgee (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I watched most of the debate between Obama and Mcain over the weekend and was very impressed with both candidates and the way in which the debate was formatted and carried out.

One thing of interest for me was where Obama was talking about Iraq.
In gist he stated the US. had put all its chips into Iraq and not looked at the bigger picture, then he went onto say, meanwhile China is in Africa, Iran (? i think) and venezuela.

It was a strange comment to tag along with the topic of US involvement in Iraq
To my mind it's nearly an admission that Iraq was all about securing energy needs

Did anyone else pick up on this or have any thoughts about it?


----------



## IFocus (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



kgee said:


> I watched most of the debate between Obama and Mcain over the weekend and was very impressed with both candidates and the way in which the debate was formatted and carried out.
> 
> One thing of interest for me was where Obama was talking about Iraq.
> In gist he stated the US. had put all its chips into Iraq and not looked at the bigger picture, then he went onto say, meanwhile China is in Africa, Iran (? i think) and Venezuela.
> ...




This is the part the Republicans don't want the US public to know what a disaster Iraq is.

A resurgent Russia will be working hard to use this window to destabilize US borders to take the pressure off its own. Wars ships to Venezuela anyone, you can bet money / weapons to support drugs and guerrillas south of the border all the way to Bolivia etc.

China will be working hard to secure raw material supplies for its expansion, read much bigger and increasingly high tech military.

This is happening because the Republican administration has bogged the US  down in a war that will not secure anything as the Iraq government has already made clear it wants Independence and it will get it. 

Add financial melt down and Russia / China will never have a better opportunity to disrupt US / Europe / world security.

Will Barack be better? answer is really simple its impossible for him to be as bad........


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



kgee said:


> ... To my mind it's nearly an admission that Iraq was all about securing energy needs
> 
> Did anyone else pick up on this or have any thoughts about it?



kgee - howdy,
missed that in the debate, 
but here's a gaffe ... by McCain - on the same subject.  (similar to Brendan Nelson) 
Unequivocal - they went in for oil.  (at least one of the factors)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0GWoxbMs1k


----------



## kgee (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hey 20/20 
It surprises me that more isn't been said about this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0GWoxbMs1k

The actuall debate was a bit of an eye opener for me... I was expecing to hear a lot of rhetoric about "building a better US" and the usual buying vote BS. Which I thought Mcain was a bit guilty of when getting emotional and talking about war veterans.

But besides that it really did give an insight into where the US is right now and what its major challenges are
IraQ
Russia
The Economy
and even though China wasn't a subject they were often referenced

+ there was Iran which is another thread altogether...but interestlingly relates to the resource grab subject ....where both Russia and China have stong ties to Iran

Very interesting times we live in....I kinda wonder where Australia lies in it (ps just passed my australlian citizenship test)....And if we find even more gas reseves in the nor west shelf where will that put us?


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

kgee, 
I guess the next debate is more likely to discuss domestic porkbarrelling - 
but neither can afford to appear irresponsible for sure - 
 bit like our last election in Nov - except 20 times worse lol.  

changing direction, 
http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
wow, McCain's odds going out to the right bigtime ... up to $3.50

odds : 
Obama now 9/20 ($1.45) .. steady from ( $1.44) .... steady from ($1.44)... in from ($1.50) just before debate
McCain now 5/2 ($3.50) .... out from ($2.95) .......... out from ($2.75) ....... in from ($2.95) just before debate

Speaking of arbitrage (= guaranteed safe) bets
Put $690 (= 1000/1.45) on Obama will win you $690+ $690 x 9/20 = $1000
Put $286 (= 1000/3.50) on McCain will win you $286 + $286 x 5/2 = $1000
hence for outlay of $976, you win $1000 either way. 
Guaranteed 2.4% win


----------



## kgee (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

You don't see that often... free money that is...are you sure your calculations are correct?
Been a gambling man I'll probably put $10 down on Mcain, due mainly to me being a cynic and believing people are more racist than they would like think


----------



## Awesomandy (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

In elections, I would just go with the flow. People are more likely to vote for someone if they are going to win money by doing so.


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



kgee said:


> ... I'll probably put $10 down on Mcain, due mainly to me being a cynic and believing people are more racist than they would like think




But even entrenched (minority ok) racism might get a hiding here - which can only be a good thing


----------



## Doris (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Oh I do like this man!  

Zbigniew Brzezinski, the national security advisor to former president Jimmy Carter,
... currently a professor of international studies at Johns Hopkins University.
... is in Vancouver to deliver a speech on foreign affairs ... *is impressed by Obama*:

"I've known every Democratic candidate for president since 1960 and a number of them wanted me to be their foreign policy coordinators," Brzezinski said. "And I can tell you that he is one of two that impressed me the most on first meeting. The other one was John Kennedy."

Brzezinski dismissed criticism that Obama lacks the foreign policy experience necessary for the White House, saying that "ultimately, *it's a sense of judgment that is the test of leadership and that's what differentiates people who are leaders from people who simply spend a lot of time doing things*."

He applauded Obama's "eminently sensible" willingness to negotiate with states and leaders that disagree with American policy.

"I think we can prevail if we are smart politically, but that means less emphasis on militarizing the problem and more emphasis on political and financial accommodation on a decentralized basis."

*The choice of Palin* is "hard to understand on rational grounds unless one seems to think that *anything goes in order to win elections*."

"I do not see how in any fashion it is possible to argue that McCain took the *long-term interests* of the United States at heart in his choice." "He chose someone who is literally unequipped to be vice-president, not to mention being president. - *her selection stems from the reckless leadership style*." 

"*Decision-making entails* much greater need for knowledge, sensitivity and an instinctive awareness of what is important and what isn't." 

"And there is not the slightest bit of evidence that Mrs. Palin has ever spent any time thinking about either foreign policy issues or national economic issues."  ... he compared seeking Palin's advice on international affairs to canvassing people at a gas station for their thoughts on foreign policy.

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=4c7c5709-18ad-4eeb-95b4-986545b6e956


----------



## IFocus (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



kgee said:


> You don't see that often... free money that is...are you sure your calculations are correct?
> Been a gambling man I'll probably put $10 down on Mcain, due mainly to me being a cynic and believing people are more racist than they would like think




Fair bet and realistic reasoning unfortunately I think you are right


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 September 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

not a bad interview, even if a bit :topic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=598o1tuYuPI ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI AND HENRY KISSINGER ON LATE EDITION pt1  Sep 23, 2007


----------



## Doris (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*McCain vs. Obama: The Great Nonverbal Debate*

_You can print this out and use it when you watch the Palin-Biden confrontation on Friday!_ 

People say much more than words when they appear before an audience. 
The most effective leaders are those who convey charisma and confidence. They are inspirational. 
They *connect with others* and stimulate interest. They show emotion. They are labeled "visionaries." 

Here's how our Presidential candidates fared in their first debate:

* Senator Obama *talked straight into the camera during his opening statement*. Via eye contact, he was clearly attempting to communicate his message not just to the audience in a Mississippi hall, but also to the millions watching on TV. Obama also looked straight into the camera near the end of the debate, when he talked about his father, how he got his name, and how Americans can make it if they try. 

McCain addressed the moderator and the audience in the hall.  
The next President, like any leader, must connect with his followers. 
*Obama did a better job of connecting with the TV audience. *

* *The tones of voice* McCain and Obama used were strikingly different.
Several times during the debate, McCain's tone of voice was softer, lower, and calmer than Obama's. Leaders often use such a tone to lessen the worries and fears of those listening. Given the anxiety, tension, and uncertainties many Americans face, I believe McCain did this to ease voters' fears and *to show them that he is not the hot-tempered, impulsive person some have made him out to be*.

By contrast, *Obama had a more urgent, harsh, sharp, and serious tone*. 
Leaders take this tone when an important point must be made. 
I believe Obama used it to *emphasize* that this is a critical time for America, and he was *trying to show the steadfast confidence that leaders must have during such uneasy times*. 

*Debaters are always "on*:" Even when they don't utter a word, they are communicating. 
* When Obama spoke, McCain mostly looked straight ahead patiently, posture straight, sometimes smiling—*trying not to look flustered or angry*. However, during several instances when McCain was speaking, Obama stared him down, sometimes looking condescendingly at his opponent. Obama looked perturbed. 
(Why not?  McCain had blatantly lied and misrepresented him!)

* Overall, *Obama seemed more polished and practiced than McCain*. 
This, along with the fact that he was better able to connect with the TV audience, leads me to believe that he slightly edged McCain as "winner" from a nonverbal perspective. 
But this by no means implies that Obama is guaranteed to be our next President. 

*History and research both show* that it's more likely that the candidate with the biggest nonverbal mistake will lose the 2008 election. Just ask Nixon, Dukakis, the elder Bush, or Gore. 

http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/sep2008/ca20080929_440972_page_2.htm


----------



## ZzzzDad (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I would encourage everyone (or anyone with an truly open mind) to watch the video in the link below:

http://www.rightsidenews.com/200809...he-house-what-caused-our-economic-crisis.html

This election is too important for closed minds.  If you seek truth please take the time.  Perhaps your eyes will be opened.

Thanks.


----------



## noirua (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.bio-chart.com

Yes, yes indeed. This is a warning to Barack Obama (born 4th August 1961).
Your intellectual well being is "critical",  only do anything today if you have the chance to repeat it later.  Your mind will be foggy.
After all Doris has posted, and she misses this very important factor. "Tell him Doris, don't go out on Thursday!"


----------



## wayneL (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> I would encourage everyone (or anyone with an truly open mind) to watch the video in the link below:
> 
> http://www.rightsidenews.com/200809...he-house-what-caused-our-economic-crisis.html
> 
> ...



What a load of duplicitous piffle. Again, it must be pointed out that the greatest acceleration of the trend as outlined in the video happened on Bush the Dumber's watch. 

I remember Art Laffer (member of Ronnie's policy advisory board and Keynesian) shouting down Peter Schiff not even a year ago on this very topic. This was as much Republican policy as Democrat, otherwise it would have been repealed or more severely regulated in the last few years.

The GOP could have done something, but they facilitated it to the max.


----------



## 2020hindsight (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> http://www.bio-chart.com
> 
> Yes, yes indeed. This is a warning to Barack Obama (born 4th August 1961).
> Your intellectual well being is "critical",  only do anything today if you have the chance to repeat it later.  Your mind will be foggy.
> After all Doris has posted, and she misses this very important factor. "Tell him Doris, don't go out on Thursday!"



trouble is with astrological forecasts and the like - they can't tell you whether it's Thursday Hawaii or Thursday NZ time. Surely the effect (or the peak of the effect)  of "Uranus lining up with Mars or Venus or Pluto" (whatever) occurs at a point in time, not a calender day that blurrs into two days as it wipes the globe , first 1am in NZ to last 11pm in Hawaii?


----------



## Calliope (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> The most effective leaders are those who convey charisma and confidence. They are inspirational.
> They *connect with others* and stimulate interest. They show emotion. They are labeled "visionaries."




Or they are labelled "conmen". Nevertheless after watching the debate I think you are on the right track. America is now in a deep crisis and although neither candidates could come up with any answer (who could?), I am fairly sure that in times of crisis Americans will pick the man with the rhetoric.

There is a parallel here with Reagan. He succeeded a weak president (Carter) in a time of crisis, and although, like Obama, he had no substance, he could talk the talk. He could say the right things at the right time. During his presidency the world pulled back from the brink of nuclear disaster and the "evil empire" imploded.

In this financial world crisis Americans desperately need a president who can say the right things, and with good advisers can probably do the right things and restore confidence. He does however have a problem Reagan didn't have. Most of Reagan's political enemies liked him personally. Republicans hate Obama.


----------



## Doris (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> trouble is with astrological forecasts and the like - they can't tell you whether it's Thursday Hawaii or Thursday NZ time. Surely the effect (or the peak of the effect)  of "Uranus lining up with Mars or Venus or Pluto" (whatever) occurs at a point in time, not a calender day that blurrs into two days as it wipes the globe , first 1am in NZ to last 11pm in Hawaii?




2020 - Your in-depth insight is infallible and has indicated inept indeterminism of astral ascendancy initially could incongruously inject innumerable inconceivable incoherent incogitable and inconsistent, incompatible indelibles in indiscriminately including inarticulate and inept indiscreet indiscretions which may not be innocently innocuous and inculpable hence inconsequential for this incomparable indomitable insurgent icon, incurring inconvenient indecorous ineludible inefficacy that is ineradicable. 

Noi... the world needs your adjudicative edification!  

When will Barack's mind be foggy?  

When should the ineludible inducement be inferred - or deferred, to inflict infractions on the inexpugnable infidels?


----------



## ZzzzDad (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> What a load of duplicitous piffle. Again, it must be pointed out that the greatest acceleration of the trend as outlined in the video happened on Bush the Dumber's watch.
> 
> I remember Art Laffer (member of Ronnie's policy advisory board and Keynesian) shouting down Peter Schiff not even a year ago on this very topic. This was as much Republican policy as Democrat, otherwise it would have been repealed or more severely regulated in the last few years.
> 
> The GOP could have done something, but they facilitated it to the max.




Wayne, you have truly lost your former objectivity on this.  The Republicans could certainly have done more, for sure, and I've said that, but the Democrats and their media friends were more than willing to use the race card to keep this scam going.  When the race card gets pulled out, the Republicans run for cover.  Cowardly, but it is an American fact of life that once race gets injected into an issue, the issue can no longer be discussed.

You say it accelerated under the Republicans, well the acceleration started under Clinton, and as with any government program, it multiplies later, until it is no longer sustainable.\

Barack and his Democrat cohorts are benefiting from something they began.  All I can do is point it out, and let people make up their own minds.  Some people's minds are closed right now, unfortunately.

Perhaps you have to be an American to realize what I am talking about.


----------



## ZzzzDad (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Another good read for the open minded:

*Wrecks, Lies and Barney Frank*

Democrats have a lot to hide about their role in creating the current financial crisis and are doing their best to appear blameless with charges directed elsewhere.


Within hours of the fall of their affirmative-action-lending-policies house-of-cards, they rose united to wag accusing fingers at Wall-Street greed and the failures of an unregulated free market.  And even as new transcripts and videos surface daily revealing an irrefutable connect to a decades-old liberal push to increase availability of home mortgages to high-risk minority borrowers, the counterfeit clarion call against "predatory" capitalism continues.  This fraudulent tactic is meant to not only exonerate accountable Democrats -- and one Massachusetts congressman particularly -- but to provide them cover to insist the same quixotic liberalism fueling the problem be included in any government-sanctioned solution.

Continued:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/wrecks_lies_and_barney_frank.html

*Go ahead Obama cheerleaders, be for him if you wish, but the rest of you, please educate yourselves about the reason we got into this mess we are in today*


----------



## ZzzzDad (1 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Here is an eye opening paragraph from the above linked article:



> In truth, the Bill that would have likely averted the Fannie/Freddy failure -- the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005 (S. 190) -- was Republican legislation introduced by Sen. Charles Hagel [R-NE] in January of 2005.  And it was the Democrats who opposed it in committee, fearing that its restrictions and portfolio caps might impair mortgage market liquidity, and subsequently, affordable housing.  Despite the "nay" votes of all 9 Democrats on the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, the bill moved to the Senate floor, where it died in limbo lacking a filibuster-proof majority.  The Bill was reintroduced in the 110th Congress as S. 1100, but was kept on ice by committee chairman Chris Dodd, who, coincidently, received $133,900 in grease from Fannie and Freddie over the past decade.




The Republicans could not pass this bill, because the Democrats filibustered it until it died on the floor.  No Democrats (including Barack Obama) would cross the aisle in order to break the filibuster.  The Republicans had 56 Senators at the time, so they needed the help of 4 Democrats to invoke cloture.  Harry Reid ordered them not to do so.


----------



## Doris (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*New strategy for Obama to promote policy awareness and to gather support:*


From: Obama for America [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 2 October 2008 7:36 AM


We're proud to announce a new way to get involved in this movement for change: *Small Business for Barack Obama*. 

In times of economic uncertainty, it's more important than ever that small businesses have everything they need to thrive. American small businesses will be a key part of our nation's economic recovery, and we are doing all we can to let their voices be heard. 

Across the nation, more than 25 million local entrepreneurs and employers are creating jobs and opportunities. Small businesses keep communities growing, foster innovations that change the world, and sustain the American promise generation after generation. 

But in the last eight years, Bush-McCain economic policies have driven up the costs of health care and energy, and given tax breaks to multinational corporations that ship jobs overseas. 

*Barack Obama will cut taxes on American small businesses with a Small Business Health Tax Credit that stands to cut employee health care premium costs by half. He will eliminate all capital gains taxes for small and start-up firms, and offer a $500 "Making Work Pay" tax credit for employees. *

And Barack wants to make sure opportunities reach every community. He is committed to broadening access to capital and contracting opportunities for *women*- and *minority-owned* small businesses. 

John McCain's record on small business is clear. He voted against $11 billion in tax relief for small businesses, against tax credits that provide health insurance for employees, and against targeted cuts in the capital gains tax for small businesses. 

His economic plan would reward America's 200 largest corporations with almost $45 billion each year in tax cuts. *And it would -- for the first time in history -- tax employee health premiums*. 

It's time to bring change to Washington and invest in the small businesses that are the foundation of our economy. 

Sign up with Small Business for Obama today: 

http://my.barackobama.com/SmallBusiness 

As Barack said, "We measure the strength of our economy not by the number of billionaires we have or the profits of the Fortune 500, but by *whether someone with a good idea can take a risk and start a new business*, or whether the waitress who lives on tips can take a day off to look after a sick kid without losing her job-- an economy that honors the dignity of work." 

We need your support to grow this movement for change. 

Thanks, 

Obama for America


----------



## Green08 (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I list I found which is just the begining. Some Actors of Substantial talent

Sen. Barack Obama

Singer and actress Barbra Streisand
"Scrubs" star Zach Braff
Actor Morgan Freeman
Actor Tom Hanks
Actor and former "24" president Dennis Haysbert
"Spiderman" actor Tobey Maguire
Actor and comedian Eddie Murphy
Actor Edward Norton
"Heroes" co-star Adrian Pasdar
Actor and director Mario Van Peebles,
Actor and comedian Ben Stiller and his wife and sometimes-co-star Christine Taylor
"Gilmore Girls" co-star David Sutcliffe
The original Willy Wonka, Gene Wilder, and his wife Karen Wilder 
"Amen" co-star Anna Maria Horsford
"Star Trek" actor Leonard Nimoy and his wife Susan Nimoy 
"Friends" star Jennifer Aniston
Actress Rosanna Arquette
Actress Angela Bassett
"Sabrina the Teenage Witch" co-star Beth Broderick
Film director and producer Steven Spielberg and his wife actress Kate Capshaw
Dreamworks SKG co-founder David Geffen
Dreamworks SKG co-founder Jeffrey Katzenberg, Marilyn Katzenberg and David Katzenberg 
Actress Jodie Foster
Actress Jami Gertz
Character actress Dana Ivey
"Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" Oscar-winner and "Roseanne" co-star Estelle Parsons,
"St. Elsewhere" actress Cynthia Sike
Actress Gabrielle Union
Dixie Chicks lead singer Natalie Maines
Talk show host Rosie O'Donnell
TV interviewer Byron Allen
Model Kate Dillon
Film producer Brian Grazer
Musician Branford Marsalis
Singer Barry Manilow,
Singer Graham Nash
TV producer Steven Bochco
Film producer Lawrence Bender
Motown founder Berry Gordy
TV producer Norman Lear
"Mad About You" star Paul Reiser
Actress Susan Sarandon
Hair products mogul Vidal Sassoon and Rhonda Sassoon
Songwriter Carole Bayer Sager
Reality show producer Mark Burnett
TV producer Marcy Carsey
Former Playboy bunny Kimberly Hefner, estranged wife of Hugh Hefner
"Friends" creator and producer Marta Kauffman
Philanthropist and former studio executive Sherry Lansing
Film and TV producer James L. Brooks
TV producer Paul Witt
Singer-songwriter Jackson Browne


----------



## deadset (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I thought Obama had a horror week, he's playing dumb to win votes.
Basically saying stuff that you know he couldn't possibly agree with, yet you know that the public would lap it up.  Starting to remind me of NSW Labor.

Pre-emptive strikes on Pakistan.
Opposing the plan when the public did, then switching at the right time.

He should walk it in eventually considering the mighty value placed by the public on the opinion of those that have appeared regularly on TV.  The Republican's say alot of vote winning things, it won't be a romp like the media here would have you believe.

The odds are 1.6:1 for Obama and getting tighter, anyone want to place a bet ?


----------



## Knobby22 (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I actually think Obama is a poor choice as President. He really hasn't got the correct experience.

McCain however is worse. His own party doesn't respect him and I think his nature doesn't suit the Presidential role. He will end up a lame duck within a year of winning.

Is this the best people that the USA can come up with? 

I really think that constitutional change is needed. They need to get their system closer to the westminister system.

Maybe these presidential elections are another sign of the decline of the USA.


----------



## Doris (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Remember... *Obama needs 270 electoral votes to become president.*
*
Each state gives ALL electoral votes to the popular candidate* (although they can conscience vote).


October 02, 2008 12:01am

*EARLY voting for the presidential election began yesterday in the key battleground state of Ohio.
*
The souring economy is expected to favour Democrats more than Republicans and could drive more people to the polls early, said Herb Asher, a political science professor at Ohio State University.

But Barack Obama will have to fight hard to win Ohio's hefty *20 electoral votes* from McCain.

Obama lost Ohio to Clinton by eight points in the Democratic primary.
Bush had his 2004 victory over Democrat John Kerry with a margin of less than 119,000 votes.

McCain is 1 per cent clear of Obama in Ohio, according to a RealClearPolitics average of recent polls.

Senator Obama yesterday made a fresh plea to supporters to *vote early*, using a video of young supporters who had camped out at Ohio polling station so they could be the first to cast their ballots.

*Seven other states have begun early voting*. A total of 34 states allow in-person early voting.

As many as *a third of the 130 million* people expected to vote *will cast their ballot early*.

"These are usually people for whom there is no reason to wait," Mr Chapin said. "*Osama bin Laden* could come out and offer to loan the US Government a trillion dollars to bail out Wall St, and they would still vote for the same candidate."

Ohio's 2004 presidential election was marred by long lines, electronic machine malfunctions and other problems that led some activists to allege that Republicans "stole" votes.

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24434485-401,00.html


----------



## Calliope (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The financial turmoil will still be a big factor right up to the election. The Wall street meltdown has been a godsend to the democrats and Obama. The nation is now in a climate of fear and uncertainty. 

The conditions are ideal for Obama to take advantage of these conditions to appeal the emotions of the electorate, and he is a virtuoso at this game. He works through the whole gammut of fear, ridicule, envy, hatred and revenge. Rational people might not be swayed by this but who is thinking rationally when their very livelyhood is at stake.

McCain cannot match this. Americans have always been suckers for smart talkers. It's no country for old war heroes. Especially those in lost wars.


----------



## Doris (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Knobby22 said:


> I actually think Obama is a poor choice as President. He really hasn't got the correct experience.




When you look at the culture of C21, no-one can have enough knowledge nor experience. 

Kids at high school now will have jobs using skills that don't exist yet.
Every day we glean new knowledge and experience.

Do you concede that Obama has the ability and the temperament to consult hundreds of highly experienced experts in all fields and make deliberated, intelligent decisions with good intentions?


----------



## Doris (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Out an hour ago:

*Obama has vaulted ahead of McCain, gaining ground in pivotal states and among women voters*:


*CBS poll*: Obama now enjoys a nine-point national lead over McCain - *49 to 40%*

*Time/CNN survey*: Obama has also widened his lead in crucial states -- including Florida, Virginia and Nevada.
 - Obama hit 50%, the first time a Democratic candidate has done for decades. *50 to 43%*
 - women overall: Obama 55 to 38%
 - white women: 48 to 45%

*Quinnipiac University poll*: Obama pulling ahead in the battlegrounds of Ohio and Pennsylvania, as well as Florida -- a state that only weeks ago appeared out of reach for the Democrat.


Pennsylvania, Florida and Ohio have a history of shaping presidential elections. 
No candidate has won the presidency since 1960 without securing two of the three battlegrounds.

*Pennsylvania*: Obama leads McCain by a gaping *54 to 39%* after the debate, 
 - compared to 49 to 43% before the debate.

*Florida*: Obama is up *51 to 43%* in this swing state,
 - compared to a 49 to 43% lead before Friday's first of three debates.

*Ohio*: Obama is *up 8%*

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jOdnz3bJ5GW04Ufj1CnHUtpuSZPg


----------



## Green08 (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Another list of prominent people with intelligence and critical analytical skills.
Not just movie stars!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama_endorsements

 Primary campaign endorsements 
1.1 U.S. Presidents & Vice Presidents 
1.2 U.S. Senators 
1.3 U.S. Representatives 
1.4 Governors 
1.5 Presidential staff and advisors 
1.6 Military 
1.7 National political figures 
1.8 Mayors 
1.9 State, local and territory officials 
1.10 Newspaper endorsements 
1.11 Writers 
1.12 Foreign Writers 
1.13 Academics 
1.13.1 Economists 
1.13.2 Scientists 
1.13.3 Other academics 
1.14 Businesspeople 
1.15 Labor unions 
1.16 Labor leaders & union officials 
1.17 Social and political activists 
1.18 Organizations 
1.18.1 Environmental organizations 
1.18.2 Other organizations 
1.19 Native American tribes 
1.20 Entertainers 
1.21 Athletes 
1.22 Family members of major political figures 
1.23 Other individuals 
1.24 Foreign political leaders


----------



## Knobby22 (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Do you concede that Obama has the ability and the temperament to consult hundreds of highly experienced experts in all fields and make deliberated, intelligent decisions with good intentions?




I do, but here I quote George Bush!!

"Good intentions aren't good enough!”

and one more:

 “You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on.”


----------



## Green08 (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Knobby22 said:


> I do, but here I quote George Bush!!
> 
> "Good intentions aren't good enough!”




I you believe one word of Bush you are living on another planet! If he had said that what a lie - what good has he done for his country or the world?


----------



## Knobby22 (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> I you believe one word of Bush you are living on another planet! If he had said that what a lie - what good has he done for his country or the world?




None, I agree, the worst President ever, read the second quote.


----------



## deadset (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

There's no doubt the Republicans have lost a heck of a lot of support over the 2 terms.  Their perceived better management of the economy is not a given anymore.  It may actually come down to the real issues and truth about that this time.

Basically, the Republicans have drawn alot of fire to themselves, so the typical attitude amongst voters would have to be "well we've given you guys a red hot go and you stuffed up, now we are giving the other guy a go regardless".

I can't understand these states that always vote a certain way.  That just seems stupid to me.  Surely there is bound to be a few upsets for the Republicans this time.

----
Just quickly on local politics, does anyone else get the impression that voting here is simply treated as a revenue raising exercise now ?  I've been fined alot for not voting in state and council elections and they cancel the rego and never respond to emails, even if you have a valid reason such as short notice oncall emergency work like repairing the government computer that just happens to go belly up on the weekend.  I even got the fined for driving unregistered unbeknowest to me.  I might move to Alaska and buy a shotgun for therapy. ahahaha.


----------



## xyzedarteerf (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack is a son of a white man from kansas? really


----------



## Doris (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



deadset said:


> There's no doubt the Republicans have lost a heck of a lot of support over the 2 terms.  Their perceived better management of the economy is not a given anymore.  It may actually come down to the real issues and truth about that this time.
> 
> Basically, the Republicans have drawn alot of fire to themselves, so the typical attitude amongst voters would have to be "well we've given you guys a red hot go and you stuffed up, now we are giving the other guy a go regardless".
> 
> I can't understand these states that always vote a certain way.  That just seems stupid to me.  Surely there is bound to be a few upsets for the Republicans this time.




Less than 40% of eligible voters took part last time and this time Obama has provoked the biggest turnout in history via his campaign methods.  GWB only crossed the line because his machine got the bible belt to come out at the last minute, most of whom had never voted ever before, to stop the Democrats who would legalize abortion and gay marriage.  Funny how a Republican governor of California did the latter a few months ago!

GWB did not win the popular vote in 2000. There were 'problems' with the new voting machines in Florida (his brother was governor - a mere coincidence!?) and the decision went to Congress - who used their 'conscience votes'.

This time more people have been motivated to have an opinion and actually get out on *their work day*, in cold weather, to record their opinion.

 - Oh - don't forget the Swiftboating contribution! Nasty Repug-lians!


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> @ 9/4 McCain looks to be the bet of the freakin' millennium!
> 
> I'll be putting a fiver on that for fun.



for fun ... ok fair enuf   

but it's up to 11/4 wayne..  = ($3.75) 
(to Obama's 9/20 = $1.45)

(whether or not it changes in the future.)  

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html


----------



## Doris (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



xyzedarteerf said:


> Barack is a son of a white man from kansas? really




lol.  Great post!

No wonder the Republicans don't want to legalize gay marriages!


----------



## Doris (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Knobby22 said:


> I do, but here I quote George Bush!!
> 
> "Good intentions aren't good enough!”
> 
> ...




2020 -  Can you find this quote on youtube?:

Bush also said, 'Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, ah, ah - shame on you.' 

Can't recall the exact excerpt but it was based on:

_Fool me once, it's *your* fault.  Fool me twice, it's *my* fault - because I let you._


----------



## 2020hindsight (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> 2020 -  Can you find this quote on youtube?:
> 
> Bush also said, 'Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, ah, ah - shame on you.'
> 
> ...




lol
well here's the easy one ...  (fool me etc)
 Fool me once

and here's the BBC game on the subject...

 Bush Quotes (from "I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue")


----------



## ZzzzDad (2 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> GWB did not win the popular vote in 2000. There were 'problems' with the new voting machines in Florida (his brother was governor - a mere coincidence!?) and the decision went to Congress - who used their 'conscience votes'.
> 
> This time more people have been motivated to have an opinion and actually get out on *their work day*, in cold weather, to record their opinion.
> 
> - Oh - don't forget the Swiftboating contribution! Nasty Repug-lians!




Doris - you are really winging it.  You don't really know what happened in 2000, do you?  The decision did *NOT* go the *CONGRESS*, it went to the U.S. Supreme Court.  The reason it went to the U.S. Supreme court was because the Democrats took it to the Florida courts, and the Democrat appointed Florida Supreme court was going to allow the Democrats to do a partial recount in a few Democrat controlled counties, using inconsistent standards of what was considered a vote.  Hanging chads here, pregnant chads there.  The U.S. Supreme Court didn't *give* the election to Democrats, they required that they do a statewide recount, not pick and choose counties where they thought they could mine votes.  The Democrats didn't want that - because they knew they would lose.  After the election, a group of media outlets went down to prove Bush had really lost, but, lo and behold Bush won whatever way the vote was counted.

And *Repuglians*?  Thanks a lot for that.  Somehow, I thought the discourse on this board was above that.  At least I had hoped so.


----------



## deadset (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Nothing wrong with good intentions, only those that complain about them, that's when you say NO PROBLEM, and get out of there.  There are good intentions and conditional intentions with a mind to change course midstream, that's the difference.

"Good intentions line the road to hell"
and
"Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."

----------

I actually looked up the odds on betfair today, $1.60 for Obama, $2.52 for McCain.

Looks like an interesting rest of the year.


----------



## Doris (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

My mistake sleepy dad.  I was wrong on the arbitrator. It was the Supreme Court. 

It's convenient that the president appoints the Supreme Court judges!

On January 6, 2001, a joint-session of *Congress met to certify the electoral vote*. (see below)

In the aftermath of the election, independent recounts were conducted by The Miami Herald and USA Today, concluding that Bush would have won in *all legally requested recount scenarios*, and in all other scenarios *except for "a fresh recount in all counties using the most generous standards,” which would have gone to Gore.*

Grab a coffee, put your feet up and read:



Doris said:


> Q:  How do you save a supreme court judge from drowning?
> A:  Take your foot off his head!
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election,_2000
> ...


----------



## Doris (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> And *Repuglians*?  Thanks a lot for that.  Somehow, I thought the discourse on this board was above that.  At least I had hoped so.




Meant facetiously...

*But* I do reproach Republicans as repugnant and reprove their reprehensible reprimand for reproachful repression of respectable middle class and repudiate their reprobation of those they represent.

Too late.   Repentant reprisal required to reposit Democrats.


----------



## noirua (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Meant facetiously...
> 
> *But* I do reproach Republicans as repugnant and reprove their reprehensible reprimand for reproachful repression of respectable middle class and repudiate their reprobation of those they represent.
> 
> Too late.   Repentant reprisal required to reposit Democrats.



Hi Doris, I see you are really saying "up your's", to the Republicans.
A bit of naughty behavior by a certain lady in the upper house, tut tut, that's Democrats for you.
They only want the respectable middle class around to publicize future tax breaks, that goes for both sides.

Obama is happy with the system as he could propose, if future President, lots of tax breaks and an expensive health service option:  Knowing all the time that Congress won't vote it through.

McCain won't go for a health service option as he doesn't want to. It wouldn't get through anyway.

Who's being honest, "NO ONE".


----------



## 2020hindsight (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> My mistake sleepy dad.  ..



like the kids say ..
"my bad, dad ..."


----------



## Green08 (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

noirua

"Obama is happy with the system as he could propose, if future President, lots of tax breaks and an expensive health service

McCain won't go for a health service option as he doesn't want to. It wouldn't get through anyway."


With the amount of money they are printing 

(How many trees are felled for this and the amount of co2 in the air, they should be liable to pay carbon credits to print money!)

They could very well of set up a functioning health system.  Of course McCain won't support anything which would help the people.  Kill them in their own country or the next war, all he cares about is himself almost like a vendetta towards humans from his days in Vietnam.  Remember his personal millions courteous of Cindy's family.  And the WIFE he left in a wheel chair.

Wouldn't it be nice if he ended up in hospital next to a real worker as in the
Bucket List.


----------



## noirua (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> noirua
> 
> "Obama is happy with the system as he could propose, if future President, lots of tax breaks and an expensive health service
> 
> ...




Hi Green08, not all banknotes are made of paper. Australian notes are made of polymer, for instance. 

I'm sure the time spent by John McCain in captivity was enough time in prison. Barack Obama has stated his respect for the man in acknowledging him and what he suffered.

All of us are flawed in some respects and the Presidential candidates also.


----------



## Green08 (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> not all banknotes are made of paper. Australian notes are made of polymer, for instance.




They say you can't do much to the Australian Note. Though I did iron one once and it shrank!  Just like Monopoly money thanks goodness it was a $5


----------



## Doris (3 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Obama is happy with the system as he could propose, if future President, lots of tax breaks and an expensive health service option:  Knowing all the time that Congress won't vote it through.
> 
> McCain won't go for a health service option as he doesn't want to. It wouldn't get through anyway.
> 
> Who's being honest, "NO ONE".




Have you looked at Obama's health plan on his website?
Barack uses his time efficiently - what a croc that he would waste time playing games with bills!

I knew that McCain's plan was to tax employers' health care fees for their employees but was interested to hear the figures from Biden in the debate.

Tax employers on the $12k benefits package - that's a neutral fiscal deal!   Not!
But as Biden claimed, employers would abandon the inclusion of health care in their employees' contracts. 
People would thus be replacing their current $12k medical insurance with McCain's $5k tax credit.

This does not solve the hospital crisis, especially in emergencies, for the unemployed.
This doesn't solve the crisis for people who don't have employer-sponsored  health insurance.

Doctors in Australia are paid for their overtime but in the US they aren't.  
Fair pay for doctors! Health insurance for everyone in America!


----------



## noirua (4 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Have you looked at Obama's health plan on his website?
> Barack uses his time efficiently - what a croc that he would waste time playing games with bills!
> 
> I knew that McCain's plan was to tax employers' health care fees for their employees but was interested to hear the figures from Biden in the debate.
> ...



Interesting, however, there will not be any money available for the health service options, what ever they are. Japan has tried to rid themselves of a 20-odd-year decline and has not succeeded yet. Stock market index hit 38,000 and all this time later is only around 15,000.


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

might as well post this - polls immediately before the VP debate.. 
Obama with a handy lead... 

Incidentally, bookies' odds remained unchanged "through" the VP debate.  

Maybe a tennis anology...
Like Wimbleton, looks like it was "one of those games played on the outer courts".   Although it may well affect things in the future when the teams stand together for "the doubles". OBama / Biden side by side ;  and McCain/ Palin ditto. 

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
Obama 9/20  ($1.45)
McCain 11/4  ($3.75)

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx


----------



## ZzzzDad (4 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama Youth



Poor sweet innocent children.


This is scary stuff folks.  Look at the faces of some of these sweet innocent children.  What are their parents thinking?

I've got four children, and of course they know my viewpoints, but I would NEVER make them do something like this.

Someone on another forum said this reminded him of the Pied Piper.  It is even worse - this is real.


----------



## Knobby22 (4 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Obama Youth
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Have to agree. 
Amaturish but nevertheless wrong. Young children shouldn't be used like this.


----------



## Doris (4 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama, McCain help House pass financial bill*

Numerous lawmakers said it's far from clear that the bailout plan will work and politicians who support it may have a lot of explaining to do if it falls flat.

Obama and McCain helped House leaders round up votes for Friday's passage of a $700 billion financial rescue plan, and Obama's role seemed particularly energetic, Democrats said.

Obama "made numerous calls" and "helped us gather the votes on the Democratic side to pass this legislation," said Rep. Rahm Emanuel, D-Ill., chairman of his party's House caucus. 

Rep. John Yarmuth of Kentucky, another Democrat who switched after talking with Obama, said the presidential nominee had described the bill as "*just patching up a hole in the boat to get it to port*."

Reps. Elijah Cummings and Donna Edwards, both Maryland Democrats, were among several members of the Congressional Black Caucus who decided to back the bill after talking with Obama.

Cummings said Obama told him that, if elected president, he would direct a *Treasury Department official to work with homeowners in foreclosure to restructure their loans*. Obama also said he would *seek changes in bankruptcy laws allowing judges to reduce the amount that borrowers owe on their home loans*, Cummings said.

"It's not too often you get the future president telling you that his priority matches your priority," he said.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gMTux__tYFdM9y-JnbKpzQbc_OtQD93J9AQ00


----------



## Doris (4 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack Obama said he doesn't lose sleep over losing the presidential election:

"What keeps me up at night is winning the election."

The next president will face daunting problems: two wars, the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, terrorist threats, a militarily resurgent Russia and pressing needs for education and health care.

He also left open the possibility that he would name his treasury secretary before the election."This is going to have to be someone who knows their stuff and part of a larger economic team that can help drive an agenda I put forth."

Obama said he would probably appoint Republicans to his cabinet. He also hinted that he'd consider Gov. Jennifer Granholm for a federal appointment, praising her work as governor and adding, "*I'm somebody who appreciates talent. I'll leave it at that*."

Obama said he would end the practice of using signing statements that give the president power to enforce laws -- or not -- *despite Congress' wishes*, a practice that the Bush administration has used 150 times.

He said he chose Biden to help him navigate the nation's many issues, *not because of what he brought to the ticket in vote-getting power*. 

Asked if he had considered a female running mate, he said Clinton was "on my short list," as was Sebelius.

"The question is who has the judgment to surround themselves with good managers, to identify the core issues facing country, to project a vision of where we need to go, to be able to delegate power to move the country in that direction."

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20081003/NEWS15/810030387/1008/news06


----------



## Doris (5 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

McCain Loses More Ground on Electoral Map as he Waves White Flag in Michigan

This brilliant clip today shows Obama: 229, McCain: 174 electoral votes atm based on polls.

Watch the journo use the interactive whiteboard to show likely trends to 264 for Obama.  270 needed.

The six embattled states are either tied or leaning to Obama -
Obama must win Ohio, Florida now McCain has conceded Michigan.


----------



## ZzzzDad (5 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Knobby22 said:


> Have to agree.
> Amaturish but nevertheless wrong. Young children shouldn't be used like this.





This was in a Hollywood executives house in Venice California.

From the original poster of this video


> Kids sing for Obama: 'Change it and rearrange it' The paragraph and lyrics below are from Obama's official campaign website. The video was produced by NBC Universal CEO Jeff Zucker, Holly Schiffer, Peter Rosenfeld, Darin Moran, Jean Martin, Andy Blumenthal, and Nick Phoenix. "Sing for Change chronicles a recent Sunday afternoon in Venice, when 22 children, ages 5-12, gathered to sing original songs in the belief that their singing would lift up our communities for the coming election."


----------



## ZzzzDad (5 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is pretty freaky too:

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slideshow/photo//081003/481/b9bd8c072fdd4d8da8a10d013c9fe226/


----------



## ZzzzDad (5 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Cummings said Obama told him that, if elected president, he would direct a *Treasury Department official to work with homeowners in foreclosure to restructure their loans*. Obama also said he would *seek changes in bankruptcy laws allowing judges to reduce the amount that borrowers owe on their home loans*, Cummings said.




All responsible homeowners should be raging mad at this proposal.  All of us that bought houses we could afford should be angry.  Why should those irresponsible home buyers get their home loan principal amounts reduced, and those that did not buy more house than they could afford get nothing?

I have a friend that bought a $500,000 dollar house on the same income as me.  He is in foreclosure.  Why should the government come in and bail him out?  That is ludicrous.  He should have bought a $250,000 house like I did.  If he had, he would not be in foreclosure.

This is crazy, and, if the average American finds out about it, they will be MAD.  Can I have my $500,000 house at a discount?

I would think that even the leftists would be against this crazy proposal.


----------



## wayneL (5 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> All responsible homeowners should be raging mad at this proposal.  All of us that bought houses we could afford should be angry.  Why should those irresponsible home buyers get their home loan principal amounts reduced, and those that did not buy more house than they could afford get nothing?
> 
> I have a friend that bought a $500,000 dollar house on the same income as me.  He is in foreclosure.  Why should the government come in and bail him out?  That is ludicrous.  He should have bought a $250,000 house like I did.  If he had, he would not be in foreclosure.
> 
> ...



Yep totally agree there (but I'm not a leftist).

A total outrage, I would be spitting with rage if I was still living there.


----------



## Knobby22 (5 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Yep totally agree there (but I'm not a leftist).
> 
> A total outrage, I would be spitting with rage if I was still living there.




I agree there should be an opportunity to restructure the loans. The original loan sharks put clauses in that keep you in a dud loan though you are paying too much. Reduction in loans though is wrong. Banks took stupid risks because it expected the government to bail them out. The same mentality should not occur among the middle class. Secondly it is unfair and (worse) visibly unfair to the people that did the right thing.  If the banks want to refinance and reduce the principal that's their decision.


----------



## noirua (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Having read through a lot of posts it still seems as if Barack Obama is going to spend and spend to improve the lot of the poor in America.  Unfortunately there will not be any money around for many years.
If unemployment continues to rise it will cost the whole country more in benefits.
Eventually interest rates will hit 1/4% and mortgage rates around 3.5 - 4%. Then at least it will cost home owners less.

Helping house owners on payments has to be the right course for America as a whole. There are always winners, losers and unfairness, so, just be humble and bear it for America.


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> might as well post this - polls immediately before the VP debate..
> Obama with a handy lead...
> 
> Incidentally, bookies' odds remained unchanged "through" the VP debate.
> ...




So far it looks like the VP debate was not significant for the pollsters.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/110935/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Leads-Ninth-Straight-Day-50-43.aspx



> This is the ninth consecutive Gallup Poll Daily report showing Obama leading by a significant margin, tying Obama's record frontrunner streak of nine days around the time of the Democratic National Convention in late August and early September. (To view the complete trend since March 7, 2008, click here.)
> 
> *Today's result includes two full days of interviewing after the Oct. 2 vice presidential debate between Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. Joe Biden,* as well as after the news on Friday, Oct. 3, that Congress had passed a revised economic rescue plan to help alleviate the Wall Street financial crisis.
> 
> ...




http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

Bookies' Odds now :-
Obama 2/7 ($1.29) ..... in from 9/20  ($1.45)
McCain 11/4  ($3.75) ......steady from 11/4 ($3.75)

Remembering that odds are instantaneous, (i.e. different from the 3-day rolling polls), it would seem that the "Obama - links to terrorist" claims have so far fallen on deaf and/or doubting ears.


----------



## Doris (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama said today:


> "Sen. McCain and his operatives are gambling that they can *distract* you with *smears* rather than talk to you about *substance*.  They'd rather try to *tear our campaign down than lift this country up*.
> 
> That's what you do when you're out of touch, out of ideas, and running out of time."




Forewarned is forearmed.

Obama will still have to fight back against the 'distractions'.

*1.  He had his stepfather's surname and 'muslim' on a school admission form.
 - Indonesia under military rule at the time precluded non-Indonesians attending school.
 - He was a six year old child!

*2. Obama was linked to Ayers.
  - He was born in 1961, has denounced Ayers' conduct and was a child during Ayers' radical years. 
He and Ayers met decades later, when they were working on education issues in Chicago. 
Ayers is now an education professor.

Palin noted that the New York Times had written about the Ayers-Obama link. 
The article concluded, however, that the men were not close.

*3. Rezko, his former fundraiser, was convicted in June of federal corruption charges. 
Obama is not implicated in Rezko's alleged illegal activities.

# Did Rezko help Obama buy a house? 
Between them they paid more than the asking price for the house and adjacent land... no 'funny deal'.


> In June 2005, the owners of the property wanted to sell both the house and the adjacent lot as a package deal, but the Obamas didn't want to buy the extra land.
> Obama consulted Rezko, who had once lived in the same neighborhood.
> In transactions that closed at the same meeting on the same day, Obama bought the house for $1.65 million—*$300,000 less* than the sellers had originally asked— Rezko's wife bought the lot next door for *$625,000*.
> Several months later Rita Rezko sold the Obamas a *strip* of the vacant lot for $104,500.
> ...



# Did Obama immorally accept campaign contributions from Rezko for his senate campaign?


> In a court filing, $10,000 of alleged finder's fee money was subsequently contributed to the campaign of an unnamed "political candidate" for whom Rezko was a fund-raiser.
> 
> There is no allegation that Obama knew the money was tainted. The senator's campaign says he has since donated to charity $160,000 worth of contributions he had collected over the years from Rezko and his associates.



http://www.newsweek.com/id/117851

*4. McCain has now stated that Obama has violated campaign-finance laws by accepting donations from foreigners and allowing donors to give more than the $2,300-per-person limit!

Is Obama's campaign to be judged guilty without evidence from McCain for his allegations? Mud and smoke!



> Obama has shattered fundraising records, raising more than $450 million, with more than half the donations in increments of less than $200.
> 
> Bill Burton, Obama's spokesman, said the campaign has "gone above and beyond" disclosure requirements.
> 
> "We constantly review our donors for any issues," Burton said. "And while no organization is completely protected from Internet fraud, we will continue to review our fundraising procedures to ensure that we are taking every available to step to root-out improper contributions."




Anyone can put false information onto the site and make a donation - with a US bank (only) credit card.
Legal warnings are there and repercussions for false eligibility.
The donation site system does not accept donations above the legal $2300.

Will McCain justify his claim of foreign and over-the-limit donations?


----------



## ZzzzDad (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Another scary video inspired by the cult of Obama - pretty scary:




Some of the things these kids are saying are not bad, it is just the way they are going about it - the "Hitler Youth" type methods, are just wrong.  This is not the way to go about trying to inspire kids.

Comments?


----------



## Doris (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Some of the things these kids are saying are not bad, it is just the way they are going about it - the "Hitler Youth" type methods, are just wrong.  This is not the way to go about trying to inspire kids.
> 
> Comments?




Not bad!  ... Good fun by a fraternity! 



> The only true distinction between a fraternity and any other form of social organization is the implication that the members freely associate as equals for a mutually beneficial purpose, rather than because of a religious, governmental, commercial, or familial bond, although there are fraternities dedicated to each of these topics.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraternal_organization

They are *inspired* to have confidence in achieving their careers not in massacring the GOP! 

What does Hitler have to do with these *college* 'kids' saying what their choice of candidate will achieve? 

It is a coincidence that 'Palin's youth', Track, left for Iraq on Hitler's birthday.
... the anniversary of 9-11.


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

aussies,
when you tire of the US press,  listen in to an in-depth aussie take on all this,   with Shaun Micallef  .... 
Episode 1 probably (just click the arrow, " >",   if you do it this week) 

.. (the first 40 to 50% of the time line is about olympics, wars, Afghanistan, Obama, race for the Whitehouse, and the economic crisis) 

http://programs.sbs.com.au/newstopia/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newstopia

(PS thanks to chops for this link in the first place - credit due where credits-a-must). 

Like -  "I'm here to check what happens when you put lipstick on a pig"  etc 

"I wonder what all those people are carrying in those boxes as they leave those banks ... Ahhhh,  I thought so .. "


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS towards the 60% point of that timeline, (Episode 1) , there is a comparison of Putin and Palin 

Note that Putin shoots tigers with tranquilisers - Palin prefers lead. 

http://programs.sbs.com.au/newstopia/

PS typical comment on that show from a blogger ...



> Craig,from Dubbo
> "Can I order a pizza using this web site?"
> 
> I Agree (2 people agree)


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Is it true that Obama when he was a Social Worker, hung out with a terrorist  in Chicago before he went to Law School to become a Professor?

The Weathermen were pretty heavy type of people in the 60's and 70's.

I can't imagine he could have been so stupid. 

Maybe he shouldn't be president after all.

At least McCain went to fight for his country.

gg


----------



## Doris (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

People warned Obama he had to get tough.  So he is, a day before the second debate.

"Fraud is the creation of trust and then its betrayal."

*The clip below* is 35 seconds long and introduces the documentary.
The video-link to the documentary - at the bottom, will be available from 4am tomorrow Sydney time. 


From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Monday, 6 October 2008 4:43 PM
Subject: What they don't want to talk about

Over the weekend, John McCain's top adviser announced their plan to stop engaging in a debate over the economy and "turn the page" to more *direct, personal attacks* on Barack Obama. 

But it's not just McCain's role in the current crisis that they're avoiding. The backward economic philosophy and culture of corruption that helped create the current crisis are looking more and more like the other major financial crisis of our time. 

During the savings and loan crisis of the late '80s and early '90s, McCain's political favors and aggressive support for deregulation put him at the center of the fall of Lincoln Savings and Loan, one of the largest in the country. More than 23,000 investors lost their savings. Overall, the savings and loan crisis required the federal government to *bail out* the savings of hundreds of thousands of families and ultimately cost American taxpayers *$124 billion*. 

Sound familiar? 

In that crisis, John McCain and his political patron, Charles Keating, played central roles that ultimately landed *Keating in jail for fraud* and McCain in front of the Senate Ethics Committee. The McCain campaign has tried to avoid talking about the scandal, but with so many parallels to the current crisis, *McCain's Keating history is relevant* and voters deserve to know the facts -- and see for themselves the pattern of poor judgment by John McCain. 

So at *noon Eastern on Monday, October 6th, we're releasing a 13-minute documentary* about the scandal called "Keating Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis" -- along with background information that every voter should know. 

The point of the film and the web site is that John McCain still hasn't learned his lesson. 

And this time, McCain's bankrupt economic philosophy has put our economy at the brink of collapse and put millions of Americans at risk of losing their homes. 

Watch the video to see why John McCain's failed philosophy and poor judgment is a recipe for deepening the crisis: 

http://my.barackobama.com/keatingvideo 

It's no wonder John McCain would rather spend the last month of this election smearing Barack's character instead of talking about the top priority issue for voters. 

But if we work together, we can make sure the focus stays on the economy -- and how to fix it. 

Please forward this email to everyone you know. 

Thanks, 

David 

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America

P.S. -- The documentary will be live at noon Eastern at www.KeatingEconomics.com.


----------



## Doris (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Is it true that Obama when he was a Social Worker, hung out with a terrorist  in Chicago before he went to Law School to become a Professor?
> 
> The Weathermen were pretty heavy type of people in the 60's and 70's.
> 
> ...




Oh golly gosh GG!

You didn't read about Obama and Ayers in my post #1185 above did you -- you naughty boy! 

* Obama was born in 1961... in Hawaii.  
* Ayers studied education - not law
* Obama studied law but not a PhD in it...
* Obama was not a 'social worker' even though he was a social-worker.  

btw... how long did McCain actually fight for his country before he bailed out?


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> gosh GG!  You didn't read about Obama and Ayers in my post #1185 above did you ..




think I mentioned it in #1184 as well doris 

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html



			
				2020 said:
			
		

> Bookies' Odds now :-
> Obama 2/7 ($1.29) ..... in from 9/20  ($1.45)
> McCain 11/4  ($3.75) ......steady from 11/4 ($3.75)
> 
> Remembering that odds are instantaneous ....  it would seem that the "Obama - links to terrorist" claims have so far fallen on deaf and/or doubting ears.


----------



## Doris (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> think I mentioned it in #1184 as well doris




In hindsight, 2020 - did you read my post #1185? 

* Obama was a baby/child during Ayers' terrorist career
* In Obama's adulthood, he and Ayers were officially not close. 

... not just the 'terrorist connection' falling on deaf or doubting ears.   tsk tsk


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> In hindsight, 2020 - did you read my post #1185?
> 
> * Obama was a baby/child during Ayers' terrorist career
> * In Obama's adulthood, he and Ayers were officially not close.
> ...



yep - amazing that he's a respected professor these days 

Palin is playing risky games (although nothing to lose obviously).  Sure to rebound if there's nothing in it.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Oh golly gosh GG!
> 
> You didn't read about Obama and Ayers in my post #1185 above did you -- you naughty boy!
> 
> ...




Sorry Doris,
I don't read long posts, Dostoevsky ain't my style. Though I enjoy very much your shorter ones.

I actually lived next door to a Weatherman many years ago in Atlanta Ga. We didn't know he was one until he was dragged away. He was bit weird though. I've never seen so many coppers in the one place in my life, then or since.

So, Obama was a social worker then, hyphens I believe are extinct on ASF from 2020's posts.

Obama does seem a bit light on work experience and life experience if he ended up social working with a convicted Weatherman. Lets hope he doesn't get the chance to do the same with an American Presidential Cabinet

Lastly I have no idea how long McCain served before he was captured. 
I knew not many, but a few  ex Changi prisoners and many of those served less than a few months before the Japs got them, if that helps. Length of service is no protection against capture by the enemy. 

gg


----------



## chops_a_must (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Is it true that Obama when he was a Social Worker, hung out with a terrorist  in Chicago before he went to Law School to become a Professor?
> 
> The Weathermen were pretty heavy type of people in the 60's and 70's.



Instant cred IMO.



2020hindsight said:


> (PS thanks to chops for this link in the first place - credit due where credits-a-must).



"The US jealous of Zimbabwean economy" equalled gold.


----------



## 2020hindsight (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> ... hyphens I believe are extinct on ASF from 2020's posts....



you still need thoses hyphens sometimes...
tell me, gg, which would you choose :-

a) shame there aren't more enlightened posters on this thread
b) shame there aren't more-enlightened posters on this thread ?





> "The US jealous of Zimbabwean economy" equalled gold.



yep, hell he's a funny man


----------



## Doris (6 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Sorry Doris,
> I don't read long posts, Dostoevsky ain't my style. Though I enjoy very much your shorter ones.
> gg




Post #1185

 Read *2.


----------



## Doris (7 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I actually lived next door to a Weatherman many years ago in Atlanta Ga. We didn't know he was one until he was dragged away. He was bit weird though. I've never seen so many coppers in the one place in my life, then or since.



This sounds a bit like those people who lived near the guys who lived in the US to learn to fly those planes into the Twin Towers.  People said they were weird but kept to themselves.



> So, Obama was a social worker then, hyphens I believe are extinct on ASF from 2020's posts.



lol... He wasn't a social worker in the sense of working with individuals. One of my daughters started Uni to be one but decided she didn't want to be a 'band aid' and changed to a Community Welfare degree. She is a senior manager now (30 yo), but introduced networking in the state (Dept of Housing then Dept of Child Safety) so all govt and private related organizations liaise and refer clients to each other in these areas. 

So she was similar to Obama in organizing groups to work together. He organized jobs for the unemployed and housing for the homeless.  It cut down on street violence by giving these folk direction and meaning to their lives. It wasn't easy for him to change the status quo. But he worked 'socially'.



> Obama does seem a bit light on work experience and life experience if he ended up social working with a convicted Weatherman. Lets hope he doesn't get the chance to do the same with an American Presidential Cabinet



Read his first biography (which paid off his college loan and his house) and you'll see how much hard work and life experience he had in being a community organizer. He went back to college to do Law as he felt he could make more of a difference with legal qualifications.

Ayers was never convicted of any crime as a weatherman but is unrepentant of his actions in the sixties.

Obama and Ayers were simply members of the board of the Woods Fund, an anti-poverty group, in Chicago, between 1999 and 2002.

Most people meet and deal with someone they later distance themselves from for reasons other than the work they did together. It's like driving a car - the more miles you do, the more likely you are to have an accident.  He's met and networked with thousands of people in his various roles.  

Ayers may have been a rebel in the sixties when Obama was 8 but is now a respected member of the Chicago intelligentsia. The president of the Woods Fund said he had been selected for the board because of his solid academic credentials and "passion for social justice."

Check out: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html



> The factcheckers have been all over Palin’s statement. “*Verdict: False*,” wrote CNN’s fact-checking unit. “There is no indication that Ayers and Obama are now ‘palling around,’ or that they have had an ongoing relationship in the past three years. Also, there is nothing to suggest that Ayers is now involved in terrorist activity or that other Obama associates are.”



http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDgxMGU1ZTNlY2Q4MmVkYWM2MGMyYTdhNTg2N2U1NzM=


----------



## noirua (7 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi Doris, The way the economy is going, I hear, the loser will become President, and George W may be given the option of an extra term.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> This sounds a bit like those people who lived near the guys who lived in the US to learn to fly those planes into the Twin Towers.  People said they were weird but kept to themselves.




Doris, Everyone in that street was weird. We rented for the summer from some hippies and kept their horticulture going while they went to San Fran. Nature couldn't keep up with consumption and myself and a mate were on the roof drying some produce when the police arrived and bashed in the door of the Weatherman. Luckily they were more interested in him than us. Never been more scared in my life.

You should try living in a poor neighbourhood. Its amazing who might be your next door neighbour. Weird doesn't mean terrorist, could be a warmener or even a tory lol.

gg


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				 Doris said:
			
		

> "Bush's margin of victory in Florida was officially placed at 537 votes (out of more than 5.8 million cast), making it the closest presidential election in the history of the state."



Let's hope it doesn't end up in another court battle ..

PS 
Obama on 2/7 ($1.29)... steady from ($1.29) ..... in from 9/20 ($1.45)
McCain on 10/3 ($4.33)... out from 11/4 ($3.75) ......steady from 11/4 ($3.75)


----------



## Green08 (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Debate between Obama and McCain begins at 11 am this morning CNN.
Should be very interesting


----------



## Doris (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Debate between Obama and McCain begins at 11 am this morning CNN.
> Should be very interesting




Why the hour difference with ABC and SBS at noon?


----------



## Green08 (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi Doris , They are running through the commentary first  it's quite intersting.

Yes will start very soon  Noon. Can you watch CNN? theygive great coverage.


----------



## Julia (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Watched it between noon and 1pm.  Was pretty boring.  Neither of them would have inspired me to vote for them on the basis of their performance today.


----------



## [t..o..m] (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I think it's funny that people actually think we live in a democratic society. In the US the candidate with the highest bankroll (i.e. largest budget to spend on advertising, buying votes, etc) wins the election. How is that democracy?

It's not like the president/prime minister can actually change anything anyway they are just a figure head put in place to make sure the current system continues to run smoothly.


----------



## Green08 (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama has raised his own money.  If he can inspire people to campaign that says alot more about his commitment to reach the people, if they didn't like him they wouldn't donate. Why would you? I'd only donate to someone I believed in.

McCain took public money despite the fact he is worth more than $100M, basically married into it DYOR.

I watched this with my 16 yr daughter and her comments, as the debate moved through were interesting.  I just let her interperate what was being said.  She was annoyed that McCain kept attacking Obama and Obama kept have to reiterate his stand and defend himself which wasted alot of time. She does know most of what is going on reading and watching at her time. She's also doing commerce and history so she checks up on facts herself.  

It may not have been 'riveting'.  But there were so many rules in place from both parties.  I liked Obama’s ease to approach people without getting to close.  McCain’s “Well my friend’s….” is irritating I don’t find it endearing at all.  I was watching a few people he went up close too and they looked unease – Personal Space Perspective is so important.


----------



## ZzzzDad (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Obama has raised his own money.  If he can inspire people to campaign that says alot more about his commitment to reach the people, if they didn't like him they wouldn't donate. Why would you? I'd only donate to someone I believed in.
> 
> McCain took public money despite the fact he is worth more than $100M, basically married into it DYOR.
> 
> ...




Green08 - Obviously I felt McCain was the winner of the debate- but that is up to each individual to decide.  

On the public financing deal, that is part of the McCain/Feingold deal that was supported by McCain, and was in concert with the Democrat party.  The majority of Republicans were against it, and Bush signed it only because he thought the Supreme Court would rule it unconstitutional.  He calculated wrong.

McCain and Obama had a gentlemen's agreement that both would accept accept public financing for the general election campaign.  Later on, when Obama was able to raise so much money from the internet and Hollywood, he cynically reneged on the deal.  IMO, that does not say too much about Obama's character, does it?

As has been pointed out many times, McCain is a man of his word, and honor means a lot to him.  He gave his word to Obama, and even though Obama reneged on an agreement for the fall campaign, McCain went ahead with his promise anyway.  That "my friends" is character.


----------



## Green08 (8 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Yes who won will always be a matter of personal opinion I really think you have to break it down to subject matter.  Each had their strength and weakness.  Hopefully the majority of people can be relatively objective and question both parties putting into perspective the meanings of both. No candidate is perfect they do the best they can.

Why does every one keep bring up Hollywood, You agreed they work.  They are entitled to donate to whom ever they want too. I gave a list for both sides which has probably changed considerably

"My Friends" is an Americanism like "folks”, there just not things we say here, that is my experience. So maybe it is fine where you are. 

I can't sway you and you can't sway me but we can respect each other’s opinions.


----------



## Doris (9 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Watched it between noon and 1pm.  Was pretty boring.  Neither of them would have inspired me to vote for them on the basis of their performance today.




Julia, did you notice how McCain prowled around the stage as Obama spoke?

This man will try anything.  He tried hard to put Obama off by wandering and not sitting on his stool! 

I loved the new idea McCain had in his proposal to buy failed mortgages and re-negotiate home values!  

But wait... *there's a thread on ASF on just this topic!*   He must have got Cindy to log on here! 
- he obviously didn't read the Bailout Package bill!

McCain exemplifies my abhorrence of GG's 'typical politician'. He didn't answer many questions but did his 'Palin trick of giving rote preparation' - in his case - history. He is not Reagan yet he continually basks in his idol's brilliance. He even tried Palin's 'seduction trick' in his demeanor... ugh! Every breathy 'my friends' grated.  Enough!

I really believe Obama needs a medal for his discernment in ignoring the irrelevant baits McCain threw to get off topic, give personal attacks and blatantly tell whoppers! He answered the questions and gave respect to the questioner as the audience seemed to appreciate.
*I was pleased he hit back* at McCain's solitary re-try of 'Senater Obama just doesn't understand...'

The transcript of the debate:
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/presidential.debate.transcript/


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html


well, gallup (up until the yesterday's debate) was diverging .. 52 -41 . 
and odds are now 2/7 vs 7/2 ($1.29 to $4.50)  - all about the economy obviously


----------



## noirua (9 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Come on be fair Doris, John McCain might suffer from piles and sitting down may be uncomfortable. Moving around does help.

Barack Obama shaded the latest confrontation but the fight now turns tougher. Maybe McCain and his running mate are succeeding, even if not that well so far, in turning this into a real scrap. Obama may be seen as a talking horse, in time, and less of a scrapper when things need to be done.


----------



## Green08 (9 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Come on be fair Doris, John McCain might suffer from piles and sitting down may be uncomfortable. Moving around does help.




Could very well be .  Though I noticed whilst stretching his legs at one point while Obama was address as lady in the group nearest them.  You can see McCain throwing his hand with thumb aimed at Obama like "Can you believe this guy!".  Obviously he is frustrated.

If people are going to go on about Hollywood - where did Regean hail from?


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Come on be fair Doris, John McCain might suffer from piles and sitting down may be uncomfortable.



not a good look for the commander-in-chief to have such an ailment 

isn't that what Napoleon had at Waterloo? 

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_Napoleon_lose_the_Battle_of_Waterloo_because_of_hemorrhoids



> Did Napoleon lose the Battle of Waterloo because of hemorrhoids?
> Piles have been written about this, and Piles of people all say the same thing, Napoleon did not lose the Battle of Waterloo because of hemorrhoids.  etc




http://www.canadafreepress.com/medical/gastroenterology050591.htm


> If cryosurgery had been available, would it have changed the outcome? No one knows the answer. But even when you're not on horseback directing a battle, *it's hard to concentrate *... etc


----------



## Doris (9 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Come on be fair Doris, John McCain might suffer from piles and sitting down may be uncomfortable. Moving around does help.
> 
> Barack Obama shaded the latest confrontation but the fight now turns tougher. Maybe McCain and his running mate are succeeding, even if not that well so far, in turning this into a real scrap.




Yeah... pay that. Or maybe his old war injuries... 

 - but why not prowl on his own side of the stage? 
... not back and forth behind Obama when he was acknowledging a questioner and then responding.
Sorry. I overanalyse but you can too...  
McCain looked out of the corner of his eye to see if Obama were watching him, on this example of his prowls.

He was kind to Obama when he said a CinC needed to be calm and decisive in a crisis.


----------



## Green08 (9 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> ... not back and forth behind Obama when he was acknowledging a questioner and then responding.




Positive thing is, Obama didn't let it deflect his focus.  A skill sorely lacking in humans I can't help but give him more cheer!  

Sure he has short comings AS DO THEY ALL.  They all have the assistance of advisors - level playing field.

So what they do in public, with out their hand being held is a show of true strength in character.  Especially in this type of debate with no boos or cheers. and Questions coming from all over the place.  Should be more of them.

What I revelation to me, When is Hank Paulson stepping down?  Gets what he wants then gets the hell out of there before the real **** hits the fan - true Coward!!


----------



## Doris (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

One has to ask:  Who is the socialist?


*Obama Keeps Focus on Economy in Ohio Push*

Obama blasted McCain's plan for the government to bail out troubled homeowners with new mortgages as an example of the "erratic behavior" the Arizona senator would display if allowed to govern the country.

McCain's *initial plan called for mortgage companies to absorb at least some of the cost of renegotiating the mortgages*. 

But now, his campaign says the government would pick up the full tab. 
"Now in the course of 12 hours, he's come up with a plan that punishes taxpayers, rewards banks and won't solve our housing crisis," Sen. Obama said.

McCain unveiled his plan during Tuesday's debate; it calls for using $300 billion in federal money to buy individual mortgages and restructure them to reflect current home prices and match homeowners' ability to pay. 

Obama criticized the plan as a taxpayer bailout of the financial institutions that sparked the credit crisis.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122360020180521585.html


----------



## Doris (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Saturday, 11 October 2008 5:23 AM
Subject: *Who is Barack Obama*?

John McCain keeps asking this question at his rallies -- *then he gives answers that are shockingly false and negative*. 

Voters won't know the truth about Barack unless supporters like you reach out to them. 

I also wanted to share a video of personal moments from behind the scenes at the Democratic National Convention in Denver, so you can see Barack and Michelle as they are -- decent, warm, and kind people with a loving family. 

Our opponents try to stir up doubt and fear by questioning who Barack really is -- as if after more than a decade in public office, *more than 20 months on the campaign trail*, dozens of debates, two books written by him and dozens more about him, people still don't have enough information to decide for themselves who should lead our country. 

Millions of Americans have gotten to know Barack Obama as an American who's devoted his life to things bigger than himself -- his community, his country, and ordinary citizens looking for a voice. 

These tough economic times make our cause more urgent and the stakes even higher. Barack needs your help to win this election and bring the change we need to Washington. 

Watch the video, share it with others, and get involved: 

http://my.barackobama.com/FourDays 

David 

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


I have to say I feel comfortable watching happy positive people interacting.
Just before the 9 minute mark... Obama is a doll.
At 13.30 - very effective.

GG... remember to start it, click 'pause', let it stream whilst you read posts, then it'll run well for you.


----------



## Julia (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Julia, did you notice how McCain prowled around the stage as Obama spoke?



Yes, I very much noticed this and thought it was a clear attempt at distracting not so much Obama as the audience.  I doubt that it would have worked except perhaps in reverse, in that Obama declined to do any similar distracting movements, and thus demonstrating more confidence.

Noirua, if Mr McCain has piles and is required to constantly move about to keep comfortable it might not go down too well in tight negotiations with foreign leaders.  Or even important social occasions.  Picture a swanky banquet with everyone politely conversing and trying not to notice the President walking around the room!

This election looks like Obama's to lose unless something very surprising happens.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I don't know what you girls and guys are going to do if Obama loses.

It sounds as if you are talking more about a movie star than a politician. 

Perhaps if Obama didn't move so much he could have that shaking disease that older people get, whats it called, the one that Michael Fox has, Parkiminism. That would be worse than a dose of the piles in negotiations.

gg


----------



## Doris (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Is this what the whole world needs to hear?

"The American people aren't looking for someone who can divide this country - they're looking for someone who will lead this country. They can run misleading ads and pursue the politics of anything goes, but it's not going to work. 
Not this time."

"The American story has never been about things coming easy," Obama said. 
"*It's been about rising to the moment when the moment is hard*."

"Now is not the time for fear," he said. "Now is not the time for panic. Now is the time for resolve and steady leadership. . . . We can renew that fundamental belief -- that in America, *our destiny is not written for us, but by us*. 
That's who we are and that's the country we need to be right now."

Obama offered a "small business rescue plan" of tax cuts and low-cost loans.
"We won't grow government," he pledged. "We'll work within the Small Business Administration to keep folks afloat, while providing tax cuts to lift the tide."

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-campaign11-2008oct11,0,49531.story


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Is this what the whole world needs to hear?
> 
> "The American people aren't looking for someone who can divide this country - they're looking for someone who will lead this country. They can run misleading ads and pursue the politics of anything goes, but it's not going to work.
> Not this time."
> ...




Democrats always increase the size of government, its a fact. They are well known for it.

gg


----------



## Green08 (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> It sounds as if you are talking more about a movie star than a politician.




Your perception.  Who was that guy? Oh Ronald Reagan from Hollywood the real deal political celebrity!!

Get your facts right.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Your perception.  Who was that guy? Oh Ronald Reagan from Hollywood the real deal political celebrity!!
> 
> Get your facts right.




Yes Green mate, he was a movie star, a republican, had alzheimers and still saw the USA through one of the greatest periods of economic and military success in its history. So don't be too scared about McCain's age. But I take your point. My point was that it seems to be mostly ladies on this forum who support Obama so there may be a fair amount of sexual energy invested in their support. Nothing wrong with that mind you. All sorts of energy go into making a pie.

gg


----------



## Green08 (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> scared about McCain's age. But I take your point. My point was that it seems to be mostly ladies on this forum who support Obama so there may be a fair amount of sexual energy invested in their support. Nothing wrong with that mind you. All sorts of energy go into making a pie.
> 
> gg




Not scared of his age or him.

Ladies on this forum, I think you could say male support for Sarah.

It is not a sexist issue from me but a serious change for the world.  Why do you hate Obama and Biden so much?


----------



## Doris (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is not a joke!  

What can they do about these?  Count them if ticked? 

*Candidate labeled 'Osama' on some absentee ballots*

TROY, N.Y. - Who is running for president? In an upstate New York county, hundreds of voters have been sent absentee ballots in which they could vote for "Barack Osama."

To Americans, the best-known individual named Osama is Osama bin Laden, leader of the Al Qaeda terrorist group behind the 2001 attacks that destroyed the World Trade Center in New York City.

The Rensselaer County elections office faxed a statement in which the two commissioners, Democrat Edward McDonough and Republican Larry Bugbee, said they regret the typographical error. 

"We wish we could turn back the clock, but we can't."

http://www.boston.com/news/politics...0/11/mccain_ad_deplores_obamas_ties_to_ayers/


----------



## Green08 (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Republicans will use any slight of hand to win 

We can't expect any integrity from them.  They play some nasty games which is interesting.  Politics brings out their true character.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Not scared of his age or him.
> 
> Ladies on this forum, I think you could say male support for Sarah.
> 
> It is not a sexist issue from me but a serious change for the world.  Why do you hate Obama and Biden so much?




I don't hate Barack or Joe mate. I think they are fine men who want the best for their country.

I'd just prefer to see John and Sarah leading it.

I also think you overestimate the "change in the world" that will occur after the election. Look what Osama did with a half dozen or so Islamist nutters. Now that has changed the world.

Now was it cold out there, you haven't answered my question in the previous post about the snow?

gg


----------



## Green08 (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> II also think you overestimate the "change in the world" that will occur after the election. Look what Osama did with a half dozen or so Islamist nutters. Now that has changed the world.
> 
> Now was it cold out there, you haven't answered my question in the previous post about the snow?
> 
> gg




If your group are so fine the R's, why is Bin Laden still walking around???  Your answer is on Palin's thread.  Is that the best you can do?


----------



## Doris (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

GG stop your stirring!  You're asking for the wooden spoon! 

Was good of your kind hero to get in early with his smears - helping people know more about Barack was bipartisan!  
 - at least for people who can read and seek to find answers.  Do Joe six-packs/rednecks? 

 * This reminds me how thieves lock up their own homes and cars securely.  Why? 
 * Imagine if McCain's men had put all this nastiness into something constructive, what might they have achieved?
 * McCain is a desperate puppet - looking low and cheap  - smashing Barack's leggos instead of building with his own. 


*On Obama, Acorn and Voter Registration*:

*Smear:* McCain’s campaign today stepped up its efforts to tie Obama to a community organizing group that has been accused of involvement in problematic voter registrations in several hotly contested states, including Colorado, Indiana, Nevada and North Carolina.

*Acorn*, the _Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now_, has long been a favorite target of conservatives.

*Facts:*


> CEO Ms. Lewis said it was Acorn itself that informed state officials about some questionable registrations collected by its employees that are now under investigation. Acorn said it had terminated the workers involved.




Rick Davis, McCain’s campaign manager, said:

 1. Obama had worked as Acorn’s lawyer 
 2. and conducted training events for its leaders. 
 3. He also noted a payment the Obama campaign made in February to an Acorn affiliate, Citizens Services Inc.


 1. In 1995, Obama was on a team of lawyers that represented Acorn in a lawsuit to compel Illinois to comply with federal laws intended to enhance access to the polls. The team also represented Equip for Equality, a group that promotes the rights of the disabled, and four individuals.

Davis said as their lawyer, Mr. Obama had “an intimate relationship” with Acorn “against the State of Illinois and the federal government.”

*Facts*: 


> the Justice Department was *on the same side as Acorn* in the lawsuit, as were other organizations, including the League of Women Voters. Those plaintiffs won the case.




 2. Davis urged reporters to question Obama about training sessions he had done for Acorn. 
“What were you teaching them?” Davis asked. “Were you teaching them how to evade the law?”

*Facts:* 


> Lewis Goldberg, a spokesman for Acorn, said Mr. Obama conducted *two leadership training* sessions of roughly an hour each for Acorn’s Chicago affiliate over a three-year period in the late 1990s. *He was not paid for that work*, Mr. Goldberg said.




 3. Even before today, Republicans had made much of an $832,598 payment made in February by the Obama campaign to Citizens Services Inc., a consulting firm affiliated with Acorn.

“This organization is not just related to but deeply ingrained in the Acorn organization, a front group for Acorn.”

*Facts:*


> The Obama campaign initially reported that the payment was for “staging, sound, lighting” and other advance work when it reported its expenditures with the Federal Election Commission. It filed amended reports in August and September to reflect that those payments were for get-out-the-vote efforts.




Note: Davis contended that the original filing was an effort to “hide the fact” that money was paid to Acorn. 
But F.E.C. officials have said such amended filings are common.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/11/us/politics/11acorn.html?ref=us


----------



## Doris (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Some basic facts FYI:

 * Obama earned a bachelor's degree in political science from Columbia University in 1983

 * spent a year working in a top corporation but needed to 'make a difference'.

 * worked for very low pay as a community organizer for a church-based group in Chicago 

 * earned his law degree at Harvard (financed by student loans)

 * In 1991, he returned to Chicago, where he practiced civil-rights law.

 * 1996: began eight years in the Illinois State Senate

 * was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004.

 * has served, since 1993, as a senior lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago (now on leave).


 - "Higher education is the long-term solution to reversing the income disparities that have stretched the middle class to the breaking point. We must increase access."

 - To help finance his education priorities, he supports cutting banks out of the student-loan system, thereby eliminating billions of dollars in government subsidies to private lenders. Some public-policy analysts have praised that proposal (also advocated by other Democrats), saying it would help reduce inefficiencies in the student-loan system.

 - He proposes creating a tax credit, worth up to $4,000 per year, for tuition. The credit would be refundable, so people would benefit even if their incomes were too low for them to owe taxes.

 - "We should work to build an America where the qualified white student from rural South Carolina who worked hard to beat the odds, and the qualified black student from the South Side of Chicago who did the same, can attend classes together, learn from each other, teach their classmates a thing or two and vice versa, and together go off into the world prepared for a diverse work force."


----------



## Doris (11 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama's record at Harvard provides an indication of how he might govern as president.

Gaining the support of both progressive and conservative editors, Obama was selected as *the first black president of the Harvard Law Review*. 

He had decided to seek the post believing that he might help ease ideological tensions at the journal even as the campus was embroiled in divisive doctrinal and political debates over issues like faculty diversity.

In the midst of those battles, Obama presided over difficult debates among intellectuals with wildly different and intensely held views. Yet he was able to *set an amicable tone* at the journal, according to Charles J. Ogletree Jr., a Harvard law professor who taught Obama and served as his mentor.

The editors of the law journal "saw him as a *coalescing force* around which they could come together and do high-quality work."  

"He was able to gently steer them without anyone feeling compromised or undermined in their views."

Compare this to someone who has lived his life fighting and dividing.  Enough!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris mate, its late.

I had a great night, and this post is written on the way to the fridge for a VB.

Met a hostie on a stopover  and I'm going back for thirds.

You are in love with Obama. Give him a call. It works.

gg


rederob , loved your post, a great put down.

gg

I also got some tags at the pub, so I may be off roo shooting Monday. Lets hope the market is allowed to find its equilibrium without interference from government.

gg

aint life good.

gg


----------



## Doris (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Republicans will use any slight of hand to win
> 
> We can't expect any integrity from them.  They play some nasty games which is interesting.  Politics brings out their true character.




Well McCain warned he'd go for the jugular... 
- to use a tactic to repudiate the country's trust in Obama's saving their economy... Fear of Obama! 

Why would Palin or McCain curb animosity in the crowd when it is the success of their ploy? 

Shaden Freude...  pleasure when the brain releases chemicals from joy at someone else's pain.

Republicans want to 'win' and people innately need to feel safe and belong - especially today.
Their character is depicted clearly in their group security of reviling Obama as the scapegoat for their woes.

Who will survive?



> At McCain-Palin rallies, the raucous and insistent cries of “*Treason!*” and “*Terrorist!*” and “*Kill him!*” and “*Off with his head!*” as well as the uninhibited slinging of racial epithets, are actually something new in a campaign that has seen almost every conceivable twist. They are alarms. Doing nothing is not an option.
> 
> *What makes them different*, is the violent escalation in rhetoric, especially (though not exclusively) by Palin. Obama “launched his political career in the living room of a domestic terrorist.” He is “palling around with terrorists” (note the plural noun). Obama is “not a man who sees America the way you and I see America.” Wielding a wildly out-of-context Obama quote, Palin slurs him as an enemy of American troops.
> 
> ...




http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/12/opinion/12rich.html


----------



## ZzzzDad (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Interesting article:*

Who Wrote Dreams From My Father?
Jack Cashell



> Prior to 1990, when Barack Obama contracted to write Dreams From My Father, he had written very close to nothing.  Then, five years later, this untested 33 year-old produced what Time Magazine has called -- with a straight face -- "the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician."
> 
> The public is asked to believe Obama wrote Dreams From My Father on his own, almost as though he were some sort of literary idiot savant.  I do not buy this canard for a minute, not at all.  Writing is as much a craft as, say, golf.  To put this in perspective, imagine if a friend played a few rounds in the high 90s and then a few years later, without further practice, made the PGA Tour.  It doesn't happen...
> 
> ...




Entire article here:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/who_wrote_dreams_from_my_fathe_1.html

*Obama almost certainly had a ghost writer.  This writer thinks that is was Bill Ayers, and makes a pretty good case.  I dare any good reporter to ask Obama directly "Did Bill Ayers help you write this book?*


----------



## Doris (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Yes Green mate, he was a movie star, a republican, had alzheimers and still saw the USA through one of the greatest periods of economic and military success in its history. So don't be too scared about McCain's age. But I take your point.
> gg




Reagan developed Alzheimer's during his second term but had gathered good people who supported and carried him for the good of the nation, successfully hiding his condition.  McCain tries to bask in his success - but he is not Reagan.

Did you know McCain's father and grandfather were both deceased at his age?
His mother's longevity genes are good but hey... she looks younger than he does!

McCain interjecting: _Senator... uh... Senator Oba... uh uh... Senator Obama doesn't... uh... _

Here is evidence to support my choice in less than a minute:


----------



## ZzzzDad (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Did you know McCain's father and grandfather were both deceased at his age?
> His mother's longevity genes are good but hey... she looks younger than he does!




Did you know that Barack Obama's father died at 46, younger than Obama is now?  And his mother at the ripe old age of 53?

And Obama was (and many speculate still is) a smoker all his life.  

I think I'll bet on McCain's genes.


----------



## Green08 (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Did you know that Barack Obama's father died at 46, younger than Obama is now?  And his mother at the ripe old age of 53?




Obama Snr. Barack's biological father (who *died in a 1982 car accident*).  That is not genetic

If he is smoking difficult to prove.  I do believe we have all committed some offence to our bodies one time or another.


----------



## ZzzzDad (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Obama Snr. Barack's biological father (who *died in a 1982 car accident*).  That is not genetic




Okay, I'll give you that one, but, since women generally live about 7 years longer than men, Obama's mom's age equivalent at death is *46*

There you go.


----------



## Doris (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> *Interesting article:*
> Who Wrote Dreams From My Father?
> Jack Cashell
> Entire article here:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/who_wrote_dreams_from_my_fathe_1.html
> Obama almost certainly had a ghost writer.  This writer thinks that is was Bill Ayers, and makes a pretty good case.




- McCain has to shift the focus of the election from relevant issues to assassinating Obama's character.
- Now he's whipped up his supporters, the Secret Service makes him halt his terrorist tactics.
- The race is on for someone to carry the baton before this foamy fraudulent momentum is lost.
- This article purports that Obama is a fraud and a conspirator, with domestic terrorists, to bring down America? 

Hmmm...
 * A Magna Cum Laude Harvard graduate and President of the Harvard law Review, writes his Memoir in *1995*.
 * *Before 1995*, Ayers, a dropout from college, had not written anything of literary merit.
 * Ayers - Member of the Weathermen when Obama was 8; Writes his memoir in 2001.


*The 'facts' - from this article*: 

 - Ayers' credentials make him the better writer so he writes Obama's memoir before he writes his own!  
 - Metaphors about the sea... only Obama and Ayers have ever written these!  
 - All great literary stylists speak the way they write!  - Written English and spoken English follow the same rules! 


*Some bloggers on that article site*:

 * There's no way a smart articulate man like Obama could write a smart articulate book like Dreams. LOL.

 * Your scribblings are of a madman. I'm sorry you spent time to create this piece of garbage, even sorrier that I read it.

 * Now I'm wondering who wrote Obama's famous speech years at the Democratic convention years ago? 
Why not do an analysis on that?

 * This is an absurd, unsupportable charge by an irrational political party watching its corrupt stranglehold on political control slipping rapidly away.

 * Perhaps this would be true of a man who finished in the bottom 1% of his class… (who does that sound like?)
but to suggest a former Magna Cum Laude - President of Harvard Law Review as “someone with no paper trail and an unschooled amateaur” is  - '*swiftboating*’ - *smear*… stuff only someone who is truly ignorant, illogical, and who revels in ideological masturbation could enjoy. 

 * There is not a person in politics today who uses high-level "SAT"-type words with as much precision and accuracy as Obama. If Obama speaks of a "chasm," he will use the word correctly and use an appropriate metaphor like "bridge" to describe how one would cross it.

He hesitates and pauses and "ums" around for the right word, but a lot of *brilliant* writers do that when speaking, since they often know there is a "mot juste" out there and want to reach for it for a minute to see if they can find it before giving up and saying something more pedestrian.

 * Wow. Have you ever read any of Abraham Lincoln's writing? Early poetry - sucked. Many of his speeches and articles - legalistic. But he had a few out-of-the-park moments of brilliance (Gettysburg, Second Inaugural). Maybe Frederick Douglass, radical abolitionist, escaped slave, and author of the eloquent Narrative, was his "ghost" writer? 
(But then, Douglass was black - could such eloquence really be his?) 

  * You know who was responsible for those butterfly ballots down in Florida that got George Bush elected president?
 Yup. *Bill Ayers again*. It was all part of the master plan: 
To elect Obama, they first had to put somebody in as president who would run the country into the ground and thoroughly discredit modern conservatism. - You don’t think this all happened by accident, do you?"

 * WOW! Amazing article. I hope to God this man (Obama) does not get elected. The American people can not possibly be that dumb. At least I hope not for their own sake.


----------



## Green08 (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Okay, I'll give you that one, but, since women generally live about 7 years longer than men, Obama's mom's age equivalent at death is *46*




Born	Stanley Ann Dunham   November 29, 1942 
           Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, U.S.A.
Died	November 7, 1995 (*aged 52*)  Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A.
           Cause of death	Ovarian and uterine canc

A bit more complex than pure genetics.  People can die at any age very suddenly with little or no symptoms.

As we know she didn't have health insurance and and struggled to pay her medical bills.  That is stress.

Yes that puts him in a slight higher risk category but very few would have perfect health.  

"The liberal lion's cancer diagnosis sent shockwaves through the US political scene, which the 76-year-old has bestrode for nearly a half century, and cast a shadow over the day's business over the US Congress. Preliminary results from a biopsy of the brain identified the cause of the seizure as a malignant glioma in the left parietal lobe," physicians Lee Schwamm and Larry Ronan said." "http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23734014-12377,00.htm

“The White House said yesterday, September 16th, that U.S. President George Bush (62-years-old), underwent minor surgery over the weekend to remove a benign tumor from his forehead. Some opponents of the U.S. President say that the main reason for Bush’s tumors are numerous, including the events of September 11th, his failure to kill or arrest Osama bin Laden, the political chaos of occupied Iraq, and the confusion of U.S"
http://themoderatevoice.com/politic...shs-benign-tumors-…-and-iraqs-malignant-ones/

"Not until the end had come for Senator Taft could the doctors be certain what type of growth had killed him. The autopsy showed that it had been carcinoma, which in the patient's last days had reached the brain."

"To reiterate with added emphasis, Senator McCain has a small but significant chance of occult metastatic disease. A regimen of skin examination and bloodwork every three months described by his doctors is grossly insufficient to provide the best assurance of a disease free state. Even though the odds of finding metastatic disease are as small as they are, the gravity of the office and the devastating prognosis associated with widespread disease makes it, in the opinion of this neurologist, imperative to have these tests performed and their results publicly revealed prior to acceptance of the nomination. To be blunt, if he has metastatic melanoma, he should not run."
http://hnn.us/articles/50761.html

I am extremely grateful that in Australia my family has Top Hospital Cover and Top Extra Benefits for $3800 a year.  That is my choice of Doctor in any Private Hospital for any surgery - not cosmetic surgury.  
Dental cover ie. braces up to $6,000 each, optical, speech therapy the list is extensive. Since I've always had private insurance as a kid and when I was 18 yr took out my own policy my government give me a 30% rebate on the cost.  Plus all Australian citizens are covered by Medicare.

I hope that in the USA one day you can have the same access to health cover and preventative cover we enjoy.


----------



## Doris (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> This is not a joke!
> 
> What can they do about these?  Count them if ticked?
> 
> ...




When they discovered the mistake, officials shredded the remaining “Osama” ballots and mailed correct versions to the roughly 300 people who had already received them.

The “Osama” mistake was made in only one of the 13 ballot versions mailed throughout the county.

Voters who received both versions will be allowed to send in either one and have it counted.


----------



## 2020hindsight (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> The “Osama” mistake was made in only one of the 13 ballot versions mailed throughout the county...



well Doris
If he wins, it will be despite these dirty tricks 

ahh don't you love the ethics of US elections   

PS current odds :- 
Obama is 1/7 = $1.14
McCain is 5/1 = $6.00

(not saying this won't change - but you'd be a brave man to bet on McCain)


----------



## Doris (12 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

When I was in Texas early last year I was astounded by the adulation for GWB. All I spoke to said they'd never vote for a black man.  Obama was muslim, Bush was a good god-fearing man, the fight in Iraq was protecting us from bin Laden.

So I've been looking at Texan newspaper reports on the election... Could Obama win Texas?

Texas (34 electoral votes) - In 2004 - voted: *Bush 61*% to *Kerry 38*% 
Rasmussen has today's Texas poll: - McCain *52* - Obama *43*...  

The Houston Chronicle obviously is pandering to hope for McCain supporters, in giving 10 key questions that will determine whether Obama hangs on or McCain comes back once again. 

There are a few bloggers who quote McCain's lies per se, but most are quite normal - in that they think rationally! 



> * Osama bin Laden has done less damage to and been the cause of fewer American deaths than the current GOP administration, and administration that McCain has supported 90% of the time. ANY October surprise regarding terrorist attacks or videos or any such thing should be examined very very carefully, because the GOP, that morally superior, ethically pure, God chosen party, ain't above pulling Nixonian type dirty tricks to win an election...






> * McCain and Palin have sown the wind with their hate speeches against Obama. They are generating an Aryan Nation, Skinhead response that is reminiscent of the Nazi rallies at Nuremburg and our own KKK lynch mobs. Shouts of Traitor, Kill Him! Off with his head! are frequently heard. McCain and his partner in crime are fully aware of the meaninglessness of their charges but it plays well to blood-thirsty rabid supporters who cannot accept McCain's impending defeat. McCain's campaign is a disgrace.



http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/politics/6053797.html

This site will give you the number of electoral votes per state and polling lineup:
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/battleground-polls.html


----------



## Doris (13 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

It seems the smear campaign didn't work so what will 'that one' try now? 

Obama was *on top in 7 of 11* new state polls, while McCain claimed the advantage in Alabama, and the two were statistically tied in Georgia, North Carolina and one Ohio poll. 

Obama's edge, on average, is now more than 7% in national polls, according to realclearpolitics.com. 

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aQsSC0B.93YQ&refer=home


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> It seems the smear campaign didn't work so what will 'that one' try now?
> 
> Obama was *on top in 7 of 11* new state polls, while McCain claimed the advantage in Alabama, and the two were statistically tied in Georgia, North Carolina and one Ohio poll.
> 
> ...




I suppose if the Americans want to vote in a Social Worker who associated with a terrorist, then that is their business, 

After all they voted in Jimmy Carter who had no commonsense, was a godbotherer in public and private, beggared the country and hadn't the balls to take on the Iranians. 

Back to the future. 

Not to mention Ole Joe !!

gg


----------



## Green08 (13 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

GG

As much as you despise the left you can't get away from the left.

Unless you're only right and have that duplicated which would be difficult.

You have a Left side which you maybe 'unconsciously' unaware of and use it to co-ordinate your Right side.   I assume you can walk so can co-ordinate the left and right spheres of your brain.


----------



## Doris (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

McCain was forced to quell the anger he and Palin had incited as the Secret Service were there watching.

Oh did it hurt!  But he quelled!  
Take a minute to see how hard it was for him to quell!


----------



## Doris (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama says it's time to put country first!

Now... who's slogan did he purloin? 

 1:37


----------



## Green08 (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> Looks like a good reason to have the secret inside US government to be so angry to orchestrate and do 911, blame outside terrorists and hope for the best...with their impending 700 billion scam to the american taxpayers.
> 
> http://money.cnn.com/2008/07/11/news/companies/indymac_fdic/index.htm?postversion=2008071120
> 
> ...




http://www.nowpublic.com/world/history-united-states-bank-failures


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Why did he not sign the letter in the link?

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=28973


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=TxgSubmiGt8

The link shows clearly what happened in the lead up to the troubles now happening. The 6 minute mark is interesting.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I suppose if the Americans want to vote in a Social Worker who associated with a terrorist, then that is their business,
> 
> After all they voted in Jimmy Carter who had no commonsense, was a godbotherer in public and private, beggared the country and hadn't the balls to take on the Iranians.
> 
> ...




Actually it is Bush who has beggared the country..and for what!


----------



## Doris (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Why did he not sign the letter in the link?
> 
> http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=28973




This site is Republican.  

ISP - Thanks for this!  I did wonder about this 'letter' when McCain mentioned it in the debate.
McCain's Keating corruption was 1989...

Only Republicans signed it - May 5, 2006 - thus it would seem to be an in-house action.
My question is - *is there any info on the Senate's response to this*? 
(I've emailed Human Events to inquire)

Was it indeed drafted and sent, or is it a cunning ploy to bolster support for McCain?  
My trust is lacking. 

*Do you think they have credibility*?  

Who they are - Some of their prior publications: 


> Indeed, at HUMAN EVENTS we plead "guilty" to compulsively digging up and revealing facts that mainstream reporters go to extraordinary lengths to keep you from ever learning about. Below is a quick sampling.
> 
> All of these revelations appeared in HUMAN EVENTS, but were virtually ignored by the regular media:
> 
> ...






> So, has HUMAN EVENTS begun to pique your interest? Then take this opportunity to judge for yourself with this special introductory offer that brings you a full 35-week trial subscription at the special price of just $39.95 — little more than a dollar an issue. You'll save more than $50 off the regular rate.
> 
> *Free Gifts When You Subscribe Today*
> A FREE copy of Ann Coulter's newest book, *If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans* - $24.95!
> ...




http://www.humanevents.com/about-he.php


----------



## refined silver (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Interesting read from someone who still supports Obama, but has now realised he's just as corrupt and principle-trading as any Washington insiders ever have been. 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-EDWARD-HEATHCOAT-AMORY-lost-Obama-mania.html


----------



## Green08 (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

No one is perfect,  media can be misconstrued and modified with software. Especially visual media.  

McCain may have more experience but lets turn it around.  He's had more experience to know how to slight the law, practicing lying speeches, connect with unsavoury people, learn how to get things passed by side stepping lines.

The guy is no saint.  He's done good things too as have they all.  Yes he fought in the Vietnam war so did tens of thousands of other soldiers.  Are they truely remembered for the horror of it. 

Do you honestly know one politician in the world who has a perfect record? 

The lack of clarity is interesting in sentences; perhaps, could be, maybe, possibility, or maybe rather this.  The list is endless.  

As Australian's we have had our fair share of innocuous innuendos coming to nothing.

The only thing they are certain about is that "they are the greatest nation on earth".    

That is the USA's biggest foe par the assumption of greatness over others.


----------



## 2020hindsight (14 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Human Events ... Some of their prior publications:-....



lol classic.  

"Evolutionists haven't won - yet"


----------



## Doris (15 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Some of these ads make me cringe so I can imagine their effects on Republicans!
I really do not know why they don't have an option of litigation of blatant lies!



> From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 14 October 2008 10:47 PM
> Subject: 100 percent negative
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (15 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



refined silver said:


> Interesting read from someone who still supports Obama, but has now realised he's just as corrupt and principle-trading as any Washington insiders ever have been.
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-EDWARD-HEATHCOAT-AMORY-lost-Obama-mania.html




Except for Obama playing 'legal' dirty politics to get into the state senate, the claims are mischievous in that they are false or out of context and have been refuted and diffused with actual facts by the media... and some of them on this thread by me.


----------



## Doris (15 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is a brilliant strategy for voters to see how they will be affected by Obama's plans!

People can calculate their potential tax savings 
- and the campaign may get more email contacts if they supply it, for these vital last 21 days.

My tax savings under Obama: $676  - Under McCain: $0
Plus: 50% tax credit for up to $1000 for retirement savings

The average one income family (50k-75k) with a $250k mortgage + 2 kids + paying super: 
Obama tax savings: *$1300* - McCain tax savings:    *$270*
Plus: 50% tax credit for up to $1000 for retirement savings.

A two-income family (75-100k) + 250k mortgage + 2 kids + daycare + paying super:  
Obama tax savings: *$1800* - McCain tax savings: *$120*

How would you fare?



> From: Obama for America [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 15 October 2008 10:59 AM
> Subject: *Tax Calculator: How much will your family save?
> *
> ...


----------



## Doris (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This 2 minute video clip, from Sky News in Washington, rounds up the current situation just before the debate in 2.5 hours (except Qld which will be an hour behind due to program scheduling with daylight saving.   )

Quite a good summary!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4951493.ece

I find it interesting that Obama supporters in the clip are happy and friendly yet McCain's are angry and miserable.


----------



## Doris (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*CBS Poll: Uncommitted Voters Say Obama Won Final Debate*

I can't believe the last two issues below.  
What part of 95% of people with reduced taxes from Obama did they poll?  

The handling of a crisis also amazes me!  



> In the first presidential debate, second presidential debate and vice presidential debate, more *uncommitted voters* said the Democratic candidate was the victor.
> 
> And tonight's results have, by a wide margin, made it a clean sweep.
> 
> ...




http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/15/politics/horserace/entry4525171.shtml


----------



## Doris (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

George Harris
Kansas City Star: (I fully agree!)



> McCain hasn’t learned how to disagree without being disagreeable.
> He was sarcastic, angry and condescending for the entire evening. We all get angry, but do we have to be constantly angry? If we want to restore civility in Washington D.C., Senator Obama is the better choice. Senator Obama looked more presidential than Senator McCain all evening.
> 
> What is also concerning about McCain's performance is that he didn't learn anything from the reactions to his anger in debates 1 and 2. Is he incapable of seeing the way people responded to him?
> ...



A blogger:
As of yet no one has challenged the Republican dogma about capital gains taxes. It assumes that wages earned by working people are less valuable to the economy than investment income. Isn't consumer spending one of the most influential segments in the economy?  Aren't working people the ones that create that investment income? I think it's time for demand-side economics to be acknowledged.

http://voices.kansascity.com/node/2447


----------



## Doris (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Some bloggers I agree with:



> McCain doesn't follow the rules of a debate, why should we expect him to play by the rules when he's president? McCain interrupts. He continually goes over the time limit. He laughs in the middle of Obama's turn. McCain doesn't even listen. He is only sitting there long enough to get his own talking points in.





> "Americans have gotten to know Sarah Palin." Did McCain honestly sit there and say that while blinking into the camera 3 dozen times?





> When talking about Palin, McCain just said "breast of fresh air" instead of "Breath of fresh air"...LOL, I knew he was hot on her!





> I really dont want to Hear McCain speak. Ever again.





> Do you remember the kid in school that was disruptive? It was always the one that had to be the center of attention, and would frequently get in trouble for acting out...that's John McCain. He doesn't care what Obama thinks, all he does is interrupt Obama and laugh and sigh when Obama is talking.





> The Palin selection was a deal breaker for many. Imagine how much stronger McCain would be with Romney on the ticket during an economic crisis. It's only a question of Obama's margin of victory. Too many mistakes, John. This is the guy who beat the unbeatable Hillary Clinton -- you needed an A game and barely got a B-.



http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article/comments/view?f=/n/a/2008/10/15/politics/p182146D98.DTL&o=33


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				Doris said:
			
		

> "When talking about Palin, McCain just said "breast of fresh air" instead of "Breath of fresh air"...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hTTY4uagTA
I believe, instead of "A breath of fresh air" 
he actually says "A bresh of freth air"... 

but no doubt it will introduce a bit of humour. 

PS Gallup polls 3 day average had (Obama - McCain) at (50-43) prior to the debate. (the next few days will see if any change there).

and the bookies are unchanged 
Obama is still at 2/11 ($1.18) 
McCain is still at   5/1 ($6.00) 

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

(PS Since only one bookie is offering 2/11, I reckon Obama will be tighter than that tomorrow )


----------



## Doris (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Except for Obama playing *'legal' dirty politics to get into the state senate*, the claims are mischievous in that they are false or out of context and have been refuted and diffused with actual facts by the media... and some of them on this thread by me.




These are those 'legal' dirty politics:

Palmer served the district in the Illinois Senate for much of the 1990s. Decades earlier, she was working as a community organizer in the area when Obama was growing up in Hawaii and Indonesia. 

*She risked her safe seat to run for Congress* and touted Obama as a suitable successor, according to news accounts and interviews. 

 But when Palmer got clobbered in that November 1995 special congressional race, her supporters asked Obama to fold his campaign so she could easily retain her state Senate seat. 

Obama not only refused to step aside, he filed challenges that nullified Palmer's hastily gathered nominating petitions, forcing her to withdraw.


----------



## 2020hindsight (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

See if you can see the inconsistency in McCain's words ( re funding for kids with autism) :-

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/15/debate.transcript/index.html




> McCain ... She's a reformer through and through. And it's time we had that bresh of freth air (sic) -- breath of fresh air coming into our nation's capital and sweep out the old-boy network and the cronyism that's been so much a part of it that I've fought against for all these years.
> 
> She'll be my partner. She understands reform. And, by the way, she also understands special-needs families. *She understands that autism is on the rise, that we've got to find out what's causing it, and we've got to reach out to these families, and help them, and give them the help they need as they raise these very special needs children*.







> Obama: ..... *I do want to just point out that autism, for example, or other special needs will require some additional funding, if we're going to get serious in terms of research. That is something that every family that advocates on behalf of disabled children talk about*.
> 
> And if we have an across-the-board spending freeze, we're not going to be able to do it. That's an example of, I think, the kind of use of the scalpel that we want to make sure that we're funding some of those programs.






> McCain:  ... But again, I want to come back to, notice every time Sen. Obama says, "We need to spend more, we need to spend more, that's the answer" --* why do we always have to spend more?*
> 
> Why can't we have transparency, accountability, reform of these agencies of government? Maybe that's why he's asked for 860 -- sought and proposed $860 billion worth of new spending and wants to raise people's taxes in a time of incredible challenge and difficulty and heartache for the American families.




then later ...  



> McCain : ....And I just said to you earlier, town hall meeting after town hall meeting, parents come with kids, children -- *precious children who have autism. *Sarah Palin knows about that better than most. And we'll find and we'll spend the money, research, to find the cause of autism. And we'll care for these young children. *And all Americans will open their wallets and their hearts to do so.*




PS McCain is all over the place like a dog's breakfast


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> http://www.nowpublic.com/world/history-united-states-bank-failures






Doris said:


> These are those 'legal' dirty politics:
> 
> Palmer served the district in the Illinois Senate for much of the 1990s. Decades earlier, she was working as a community organizer in the area when Obama was growing up in Hawaii and Indonesia.
> 
> ...




Doris and Green08, your obsessive excessive posting requires a ladder of laser proportions (no offence meant Green08 on your solution to your hairy legs) to read or analyse.

More is often less.

It reminds me somewhat of the winky wanky bird.

I will not describe his actions.

It was repetitive, and led nowhere, though I am told gave him some brief satisfaction.

2020 perhaps I should wrap your beer in a handkerchief, when as it appears you win your bet, you may need it, the handkerchief that is.

gg


----------



## Doris (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The source of McCain's *Joe The Plumber* rantings:

Joe was quite happy with Obama's answers to his questions.  

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...08022#27208022


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> The source of McCain's *Joe The Plumber* rantings:
> 
> Joe was quite happy with Obama's answers to his questions.
> 
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...08022#27208022




So I was right Doris,
You are on a mission.
Like the winky wanky bird.
Have you ever posted on a stock or share.
Its Aussie Stock Forums not an Obama fan Club Site.


gg


----------



## ZzzzDad (17 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*The race is tightening*

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Take a close look at the 7 daily tracking polls.

The Gallup traditional likely voter scenario now has it a two point race.

Gallup (traditional) Obama 49 McCain 47

and

the most accurate poll for the final result in 2004

IBD/TIPP Tracking  has Obama 45 McCain 42

If you are really a betting man 2020, those McCain odds from your bookie look very enticing.

I don't gamble though (unless you count the stock market)

This race is NOT over.


----------



## IFocus (17 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> So I was right Doris,
> You are on a mission.
> Like the winky wanky bird.
> Have you ever posted on a stock or share.
> ...




Hmmm when you get personal you know you have lost the...........


----------



## noirua (17 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack Obama is now seen to be taking a "be Presidential and don't get involved", approach, in this, the three week run in.

McCain is out to see that the blue collar workers know exactly what they are letting themselves in for under an Obama led spending spree.

I make no bones about it, Obama is out to achieve a great deal whilst the coffers are bare. Bad news for the workers of America.


----------



## Green08 (17 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Did anyone watch Larry King tonight with Bill Maher?

They were waiting for McCain and Obama to speak at an annual charity dinner.

They were at the same table with a Cardinal in the middle.  Senators everywhere.  If you can see it on a rerun or you tube do it, very insightful.

The speeches were quite funny on both sides, both having a laugh at themselves, bringing up toughy past subjects in wit.

Why is it that sometimes it takes point blank humour to get the point across. I've watch a few Bill Maher, Lewis Black and Carlin (from the past) and these men really challenge their guests.  It can be right on the knife edge but they turn it around quite quickly.


----------



## 2020hindsight (17 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Did anyone watch Larry King tonight with Bill Maher?
> 
> ....



yep thanks for the lead(s) there green  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2X3ZNt6r_Q 
Larry King Live: Bill Maher Oct. 16, 2008

some light hearted stuff for a change 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOSyFeELWu0 
John McCain at the Alfred E Smith Memorial Dinner pt 1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfFOqPH-RkM
Barack Obama-Comedian at Al Smith Memorial Dinner-Part 1


----------



## 2020hindsight (17 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Part 2 to those youtubes...
Definitely worth a listen 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AhGBI2Y3HBQ
John McCain at the Alfred E Smith Memorial Dinner 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8F355QBDBo
Barack Obama-Comedian at Al Smith Memorial Dinner-Part 2


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> PS Gallup polls 3 day average had (Obama - McCain) at (50-43) prior to the debate. (the next few days will see if any change there).
> 
> and the bookies are unchanged
> Obama is still at 2/11 ($1.18)
> ...




Today Gallup polling is still 50 - 43  (2 days since previous post).

Bookies have Obama slightly extending his lead ...
That site is having another blonde- XXX  bad-hair-day, lol - it highlights $1.125 as best bet, when it goes on to say that you can get $1.18 

Obama $1.18  ... steady from 2/11 ($1.18) 
McCain now 11/2 = $6.50 .... out from 5/1 ($6.00)


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> I make no bones about it, Obama is out to achieve a great deal whilst the coffers are bare. Bad news for the workers of America.



noi
You mean... Compared to good-news Bush ?

Obama has admitted that the program will have to go out to the right a bit - certainly can't and never could have been done overnight. 

Hopefully things will turn around significantly during a 4 year term yes?

I think it will be interesting to watch the mood of America (especially the workers / middle class) under new management.  Change of leader can help heaps.    (Just thinking back to Bob Hawke). 

PS Then again , Hawke was lucky that soon after his becoming PM we won the America's Cup - the entire country had a smile on its collective faces  XXX  on its collective face XXX   everyone was smiling.  

PS Maybe THAT's the answer for the world economy - for US to win back the Americas Cup from Switzerland 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americas_Cup


----------



## noirua (18 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi 2020, Barack Obama, if he becomes President, will he be stuck with an expanding war in Afghanistan, which he in fact agrees with. Troops have been reduced in Iraq but those numbers are unlikely to reduce as rapidly as the needs in Afghanistan.
Unemployment is set to rise and cost the country more. 

Where is the money coming from to pay for the welfare schemes proposed. One place for certain, the blue collar workers of America.

McCain has less ambitious plans and this alone would see the country more safely through the problems ahead.


----------



## 2020hindsight (18 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Hi 2020, Barack Obama, if he becomes President, will be stuck with an expanding war in Afghanistan, which
> he in fact agrees with. Troops have been reduced in Iraq but those numbers are unlikely to reduce as rapidly as the needs in Afghanistan.
> Unemployment is set to rise and cost the country more.
> 
> ...




Yep but a happy optimistic society will pull through this thing faster surely. 

Hell McCain would have the same problems with the war 
 and he only has one plan -  "Everyone (including the govt) - Batten Down ! - zip up your wallets!  " 

ok - throw in a gesture or two, give with one hand, take with the other, rob Peter to pay Peter stuff, ...


----------



## noirua (19 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> Yep but a happy optimistic society will pull through this thing faster surely.
> 
> Hell McCain would have the same problems with the war
> and he only has one plan -  "Everyone (including the govt) - Batten Down ! - zip up your wallets!  "
> ...



The polls are showing a slight recovery for McCain, as Obama appears to not  want to engage on the costs front in the present world decline.

Yes indeed, McCain and Obama have the same problems on the war front. Problem for Obama, on the run in, is the electorate realizing that his non-war enterprise is going cost them.


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> The polls are showing a slight recovery for McCain ...



you making that up noi? 

maybe some polls (but you give no facts) - and not gallup, anyway.. 



> Gallup Daily: Obama Maintains Lead
> Among registered voters, *Obama now leads 50% to 42%*
> 
> October 18, 2008 The latest Gallup Poll Daily tracking report from Wednesday through Friday, including two days of interviewing after Wednesday night’s final presidential debate, shows Barack Obama with a 50%to 42% lead over John McCain among registered voters.


----------



## 2020hindsight (19 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Rasmussen similar to Gallup ... 

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll



> Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
> Saturday, October 18, 2008
> 
> Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Saturday shows Barack Obama attracting 50% of the vote while John McCain earns 45%. *These figures reflect a remarkably stable race in which Obama has enjoyed a four-to-eight point advantage for twenty-three straight days. McCain has not been up by even a single point in over a month *(see trends).




http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...al_election/general_election_match_up_history

(PS I'm not saying it won't change - but at the moment it's "remarkably stable", with Obama enjoying a handy lead.)


----------



## derty (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

One of the few republicans I have any real respect for these days, Colin Powell, has publicly endorsed Obama. Quite a kick in the guts for the GOP campaign, though the GOP lost Powell after Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld's neocon machinations pushed Powell aside.

Barack would be wise to use Powell's counsel where he can, if he becomes President.



> (CNN) -- Former Secretary of State Colin Powell announced Sunday that he will be voting for Sen. Barack Obama, citing the Democrat's "ability to inspire" and the "inclusive nature of his campaign."
> 
> "I think he is a transformational figure, he is a new generation coming onto the world stage, onto the American stage, and for that reason I'll be voting for Sen. Barack Obama," Powell said on NBC's "Meet the Press." ...



http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/19/colin.powell/index.html?eref=rss_politics


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



derty said:


> One of the few republicans I have any real respect for these days, Colin Powell, has publicly endorsed Obama.



Far out! - thanks derty - what a classic


----------



## noirua (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hi 2020,  It is in fact the Gallup poll that showed Obama well in front but the gap narrowing: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aO7rVJj1pBGI&refer=home


----------



## Julia (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



derty said:


> O
> Barack would be wise to use Powell's counsel where he can, if he becomes President.





Agreed.  Always thought he was the only one in that administration with some integrity.

His endorsement is surely just a great boost for Obama and a huge smack in the face for poor McCain.


----------



## Bushman (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Agreed with all about Powell's endorsement. Interesting that he has zeroed in on Palin  not being ready for President (as have a few other Republican Party luminaries). Interesting and certainly is giving me renewed respect for the Republicans. The mantra of populism, nepotism, greed and religious fervour has damaged the reputation of their party and put the American populace in harms way.   

McCain's come back was to say that his old Vietnam war budy Kissinger had endorsed him. You know, he of the 'lets bomb Laos' infamy. 'Ol Man' rivers is now a very tired campaign.


----------



## Green08 (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Next President a World of Challenges

There was a screening Colin Powell, Madaline Albright, Kissinger,

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=gvuNcsOp21M&feature=related - Powell


http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6QS0kvjlVY&feature=related - Powell

Leaves McCain on Foregin Policy - forget Sarah in the dust.


----------



## ZzzzDad (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Released: October 19, 2008
Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby Poll: Obama 47.8%, McCain 45.1%

McCain slowly gains on Obama

http://zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1597



> UTICA, New York - Republican John McCain continued a slow advance on Democrat Barack Obama in the race for President, moving back within three percentage points as the race begins to head down the stretch run, the latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby daily tracking poll shows.
> 
> McCain now trails Obama by 2.7 points, down from the 3.9 point deficit he faced 24 hours earlier.
> 
> ...





Other polls here:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

As election day approaches, the race narrows, as people are slowly coming to their senses!!


----------



## Green08 (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ZD in which states is McCain gaining?


----------



## ZzzzDad (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> ZD in which states is McCain gaining?




Here's a good link to see who is "winning" each state:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/

The national number though is what matters most.  That is where you can see where the state races will trend.  If you win the national number by more than one percent, then you will almost certainly win the electoral vote too.

You can win the popular vote and still lose the electoral vote, but as I said, if you win the popular vote by more than one percent, the electoral vote ALWAYS follows.  Gore won the popular vote in 2000, but he was less than one percent ahead of Bush in the popular vote.

This is why I tend to follow the national poll number and ignore the state polls.


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Here's a good link to see who is "winning" each state:
> 
> http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/



thanks zzd,

Well I'm gonna go out on a limb .. and predict that the Dems will win Minnesota. (MN) lol. 

PS here's what happened in 1984   :-

and also what I predict for 2008 

I also predict that, should McCain/Palin win, they'll cut Alaska adrift and row it around to be closer to Arizona


----------



## Green08 (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> I also predict that, should McCain/Palin win, they'll cut Alaska adrift and row it around to be closer to Arizona




If you cut Alaska off the will be celebrating non stop:band.  That's what they have been on about for decades complete separation from the USA. A new country, a new currency, a new holiday destination!


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> If you cut Alaska off the will be celebrating non stop:band.  That's what they have been on about for decades complete separation from the USA. A new country, a new currency, a new holiday destination!



green  
you mean.. like West Australia? lol


----------



## 2020hindsight (20 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

:topic   ... speaking of seceding ... 

"... South Ossetia ... has as much right to secede from Georgia (as did Kosova from Serbia)." 

http://www.vtcommons.org/blog/2008/08/29/secede-survive-pro-secession-views-georgias-secessionists



> The drive to secede by Eric Margolis
> Edmonton Sun: Sun, August 17, 2008
> 
> ...U.S. money, military trainers, advisers, and spooks poured into the former Soviet Republic of Georgia. Israeli arms dealers, businessmen and intelligence agents quickly followed...The Bush administration brazenly flouted agreements with Moscow made by presidents H.W Bush and Bill Clinton not to expand NATO into the former U.S.S.R....
> ...







> Plucky little Georgia? No, the cold war reading won't wash
> Mark Almond,  The Guardian, Saturday August 9 2008
> 
> It is crudely simplistic to cast Russia as the sole villain in the clashes over South Ossetia. The west would be wise to stay out...Unlike in eastern Europe, for instance, today in breakaway states such as South Ossetia or Abkhazia, Russian troops are popular. *Vladimir Putin's picture is more widely displayed than that of the South Ossetian president*, the former Soviet wrestling champion Eduard Kokoity. *The Russians are seen as protectors against a repeat of ethnic cleansing by Georgians*.


----------



## noirua (21 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack Obama's triumphant supporters may yet regret their triumphalism as the, all but,  conceding strategy may yet surprise.


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

noi,
If you want to put money on McCain , you'll get $8.00.   
Meanwhile Obama is $1.14. 

And likewise the graphs seem to be speaking for themselves ...

- Sure the lead is slightly reduced if you use likely voters (expanded) (52-43) instead of registered voters (52-41),  but still a handy lead.  

Gallup-Daily-Obamas-Lead-Edges-Higher

http://www.gallup.com/poll/111274/Gallup-Daily-Obamas-Lead-Edges-Higher.aspx

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

A cynic (realist?)  might say that, with 2 weeks to go, GOP should consider keeping their money for the next challenge in 2012.  



> An alternative expanded likely voter model shows what would happen if turnout reflects voters' self-reported likelihood of voting and campaign interest, but is not assumed to be dependent on their voting history. Under that scenario, Obama leads by 9 points, 52% to 43%. -- Lydia Saad


----------



## noirua (21 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

2020, never count your pumpkins until they're picked.


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

true, true ... 
and stay the f*** away from Aunty Sharon when she's been drinkin


----------



## 2020hindsight (21 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

PS That goes for Aunty Sarah as well


----------



## noirua (22 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> 2020, never count your pumpkins until they're picked.



Reports that John McCain, though still 6% behind, is tightening his position.  Appears to like the struggle of being behind.

Palin factor... http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/21/palin.factor/index.html


----------



## ZzzzDad (22 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Reports that John McCain, though still 6% behind, is tightening his position.  Appears to like the struggle of being behind.
> 
> Palin factor... http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/21/palin.factor/index.html




Isn't if funny that Tina Fey did not appear on the air with Sarah Palin, except in passing each other?  The true story about this (from what I've heard) is that Tina Fey knows that Sarah Palin is waaaaaaaaaay better looking than her.  The side by side comparisons would have been brutal.

By the way, perhaps I'm one of the few, but I knew who Sarah Palin was two years ago.  I had never even heard of Tina Fey until Sarah Palin got the Republican nomination.


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/22/2398172.htm


> McCain just 'making stuff up': Obama
> Posted 6 hours 53 minutes ago
> 
> The Democrat, riding high in national polls and battleground states, hammered Senator McCain over the Republican's claims that he attacked 'Joe the plumber', the Ohio voter who has become an emblem of the middle class tax debate.
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (23 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The interview with Joe the Plumber ....  (the facts - as against the McCain version  )


Obama spends around 4 minutes answering this bloke.  
 Barack Obama's Encounter with "Joe the Plumber"


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ABC (PM) last night - fairly candid commentary :-
Biden is impolitic
Obama is confident, sticks to his guns
McCain is impulsive, unpredictable

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2008/s2400837.htm


> MICHAEL FULLILOVE: Well I think to put it into perspective this is the kind of excellent fodder that people like you and me are going to be expecting from Senator Biden for the next four years should Obama-Biden be elected on the fourth of November. *I mean Biden is known for speaking his mind and speaking before his mind catches up with him and this was obviously an impolitic thing to say.
> 
> It was impolitic because it's partly true.* There is, the international system is an unromantic place and the North Koreans and the Iranians and various other characters around the world are not very susceptible to Obama's personal history or his campaign rhetoric or anything like that.
> 
> ...


----------



## noirua (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ABC (PM) last night - fairly candid commentary :-
> Biden is impolitic
> Obama is confident, sticks to his guns
> McCain is impulsive, unpredictable/url]



I though Obama was against guns or at the very least was going to reduce "personal guns under cover" licenses.


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

not too much change in polls (50-42) ;  or in odds :-
(less than a fortnight to go etc) 

http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html

Incidentally, something you don't see too often is the same bookie offering odds with a negative bookie's margin / profit,  i.e. Betfair has best odds on both 
Obama ($1.14) and on 
McCain ($8.40) 

So if you bet $877 on Obama, you win $1000; 
and at the same time you bet $119 on McCain, you win $1000 ...

So for outlay of $996 you win $1000 (either way). 
PS Subject to a third horse winning of course. (?)


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> I though Obama was against guns or at the very least was going to reduce "personal guns under cover" licenses.



lol - ok , 
metaphor, for the following :-


> So those are the arguments for thinking that this is not a blushing wallflower you're dealing with, but a very confident person with both high intelligence and steely determination.


----------



## noirua (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol - ok ,
> metaphor, for the following :-



Sounds very good. I see you mentioned a horse?  Very ominous. One of the Late Queen Mother's horses "Devon Loch" was about to win a major race- many, many moons ago - and it suddenly sprawled legs sticking out at lost.


----------



## noirua (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> lol - ok ,
> metaphor, for the following :-



Sounds very good. I see you mentioned a horse?  Very ominous. One of the Late Queen Mother's horses "Devon Loch" was about to win a major race- many, many moons ago - and it suddenly sprawled legs sticking out and lost.


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Sounds very good. I see you mentioned a horse?  Very ominous. One of the Late Queen Mother's horses "Devon Loch" was about to win a major race- many, many moons ago - and it suddenly sprawled legs sticking out and lost.



yeah, but if you read my post (that particular post), you still win $4 nett, whoever wins  

PS I thought you were gonna tell us the one where, half way through the race, the horse turned round and ran the other way .... and Paddy sez to Seamus "well that's that then!" - "no, no!" sez Seamus, "I've backed him both ways !!"


----------



## Green08 (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> (from what I've heard) is that Tina Fey knows that Sarah Palin is waaaaaaaaaay better looking than her.




Now come on ZD  - we as humans find different people attractive!   Beautiful is in the eye of the beholder!  Imagine if all the women in your neighborhood  thought you were the next Brad Pitt!  Your wife would have you locked in the cupboard. 

I saw Tina on Saturday Night Live and thought she was gorgeous. Lovely fair skin - personally she has better legs!  And her personality is malleable!

You naught boy - can't assume the TRUE STORY as well you'd have to be there to know:.  Now stop talking appearance and lets get serious - Fashion.


----------



## noirua (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> yeah, but if you read my post (that particular post), you still win $4 nett, whoever wins
> 
> PS I thought you were gonna tell us the one where, half way through the race, the horse turned round and ran the other way .... and Paddy sez to Seamus "well that's that then!" - "no, no!" sez Seamus, "I've backed him both ways !!"




Very good - where ever I go the Irish get it taken out of them, strange that. Irish comedians are best at using it to maker a dollar or two, quite clever.
In Ireland they turn it round by doing a bit of research.  The true story of the pipeline to a reservoir, built by the Irish. That should have come out below the water line, came out 5 meters above it. It was designed by an Englishman, a Scottish firm was involved and the draughtsman on site was an Aussie who disappeared later with his swag.


----------



## 2020hindsight (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Very good - where ever I go the Irish get it taken out of them, strange that. Irish comedians are best at using it to maker a dollar or two, quite clever.
> In Ireland they turn it round by doing a bit of research.  The true story of the pipeline to a reservoir, built by the Irish. That should have come out below the water line, came out 5 meters above it. It was designed by an Englishman, a Scottish firm was involved and the draughtsman on site was an Aussie who disappeared later with his swag.



:topic  Much lighter talking Irish jokes than US politics 
Like the opening of quotes for the cross-Channel tunnel - 

Dragage-Coignet  $34 million
Kumagai-Gumi  $32 million
P.Murphy and Son  $850,000.

So they call Paddy in for an interview.  "We suspect you've made an error here Paddy".
"No, no" - he says - "just that we don't have any of those fancy overheads...  there's just me and the boy, you see - he starts one end with a pick and shovel, and I start the other".

"Ahhh - and what happens if you don't meet in the middle?"

"No problem " sez Paddy, "you get two tunnels for the price of one"


----------



## Green08 (25 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> Obama Leaves Hawaii, Bidding Goodbye to His Ailing Grandmother
> By Jeff Zeleny
> 
> HONOLULU – Senator Barack Obama slowly walked up the steps of his campaign plane here on Friday evening, his suit coat slung over his shoulder, as he concluded his one-day visit home to Hawaii.
> ...




Though sad he has tremendous empathy and love for a lady who raised him.  My thoughs are with him.  I wouldn't be surprised if this gives the largest pieces of fight in him we will see.


----------



## Doris (26 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*This TV Ad will start running in key states in a few hours.*

It's 2 minutes long - that's expensive! - Paid for by supporters, not tax money, lobbyists nor PACs.

 "At this defining moment in our history, the question is not, 'Are you better off than you were four years ago?' 
We all know the answer to that."

"The real question is, 'Will our country be better off four years from now?'
 How will we lift our economy and restore America's place in the world?"


There are three types of voters IMO:

* Those who are unhappy and angry and want Shaden Freude by chopping down the tall poppy
* Those who are like Nate Walsh and can't be bothered to get out of bed
* Those who are unhappy and want a better country

(Google Nate Walsh if you don't know who he is)


----------



## 2020hindsight (26 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Good article by Bob Carr in today's Sun Herald ...
Bob Carr, premier of NSW from 1995 to 2005, is a student of American political history



> http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/this-race-is-far-from-over/2008/10/25/1224351608124.html
> 
> [Initially] A narrow McCain win was - for realists and pessimists - more likely, especially as the incumbent party generally catches up in the last week of a campaign.
> 
> ...




Not sure what's going on in this photo - you'd have to ask McCain - maybe he's choking on his own lie XXX  half-truths


----------



## mayk (26 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> There are three types of voters IMO:
> 
> * Those who are unhappy and angry and want Shaden Freude by chopping down the tall poppy
> * Those who are like Nate Walsh and can't be bothered to get out of bed
> ...




It is not that black and white? Is it?


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

with 8 days to go - not looking good for McCain ...

Maybe it goes back to all those episodes of "24", where Palmer was the good guy, and Logan was the bad guy?

Odds? - 
Obama in to $1.13
McCain out to $9.20  

http://www.easyodds.com/compareodds/specials/Politics/m/147587-234-5.html
http://www.gallup.com/poll/107674/Interactive-Graph-Follow-General-Election.aspx

 24. President David Palmer Comedy Dub


----------



## Doris (28 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Canton, Ohio and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania today:

Barack Obama presented himself as a *unifier for an embattled country*, promising to deliver days of "hope over fear."

He said America is about "*seeing the highest mountaintop from the deepest of valleys*."

He used the moment to get beyond the sparring with John McCain and restore a theme of inspiration.

"In one week, we can *choose hope over fear, unity over division, the promise of change over the power of the status quo*." In one week, we can come together as one nation, and one people, and once more choose our better history. That's what's at stake."

His soaring language was a throwback to a time before the conversation drew more specific and ugly.

"The change we need isn't just about new programs and policies," Obama said to roaring crowds.
"It's about a new attitude, it's about new politics — a politics that calls on our better angels *instead of encouraging our worst instincts*."

"Sen. McCain might be worried about losing an election, but I'm worried about Americans who are losing their homes, and their jobs, and their life savings."I can take one more week of John McCain's attacks, but this country can't take four more years of the same old politics and the same failed policies. 
*It's time* for something new."


 Excerpts of today's rhetoric. What a statesman!


----------



## ZzzzDad (28 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama National Anthem
*






Is this really about to happen in America?  God help us.


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Is this really about to happen in America?  God help us.



zzd,
When you say "is this really about to happen?", I assume you mean ignorant unfounded fear-mongering, then it's been happening in Yankeeland for yonks.


----------



## noirua (29 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Come on now Doris, I watched the speech by Barack Obama today. Allowing for the cold, he seemed to be at a loss for words at times, certainly not enjoying it and really struggling. For the first time he appeared to be waffling on an on.
Very poor performance, know wonder McCain is closing the gap, admittedly from from way back. But who knows on the 7 day run in.


----------



## ZzzzDad (29 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I don't know how to attach pictures, but look at the most recent Gallup likely voter tracking poll graph.  If anyone can give me a hint on how to attach an image, I would appreciate it.  Thanks.

http://www.drudgereport.com/gp.jpg


----------



## derty (29 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

As you likely know Drudge is a conservative commentator and as such will usually present data that paints the best conservative light on the issue. What Drudge fails to note is that Gallup has several polling methods and his Likely-Traditional Voters is only one and is the one that least likely represents the composition of the current voting group.

(Zz, you add images by using the little paperclip icon to add an attachment immediately above the reply window)

As you can see the other methods paint a less rosy picture for McCain (the final poll is for registered voters):


----------



## ZzzzDad (29 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



derty said:


> As you likely know Drudge is a conservative commentator and as such will usually present data that paints the best conservative light on the issue. What Drudge fails to note is that Gallup has several polling methods and his Likely-Traditional Voters is only one and is the one that least likely represents the composition of the current voting group.
> 
> (Zz, you add images by using the little paperclip icon to add an attachment immediately above the reply window)
> 
> As you can see the other methods paint a less rosy picture for McCain (the final poll is for registered voters):




derty -thanks for the hint.

The (traditional) likely voter scenario is the one they have always used in the past, and worked pretty well, so, I'll go with that one. 

The polls are tightening though.  Lots of talk about Obama's redistribution comments he made in a PBS interview in 2001, along with calling the constitution a bill of NEGATIVE rights, etc.  If the media had done their job over the last two years to expose this guy, this race would be Hillary vs. McCain.  Hillary is a leftist, but not an extreme leftist like Obama.


----------



## 2020hindsight (29 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



			
				zzd said:
			
		

> The (traditional) likely voter scenario is the one they have always used in the past, and worked pretty well, so, I'll go with that one



Surely zzd you'll accept that the best evidence is the most recent evidence - (as in "Likely Voters Expanded") that more Dems will vote than previously - already form the majority of early voters  



			
				gg from Sarah Palin thread said:
			
		

> Won't you leftie MNBC watchers be so upset when McCain and Palin sneak over the line.
> Washington aristocrats and posting wannabees watch out.
> The polls are turning.




Well, all I can say to you blokes with such confidence in McCain's chances - you'll get odds of between $9 to $10 on him. - go for it - do it man !! - money where your mouth is !! - you'll be rich !!  

(compared to $1.11 on Obama). 

PS as derty posted ... younger voters are setting unprecedented voter turnouts - new trends for a new world


----------



## ZzzzDad (30 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Rasmussen:

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Obama 50 McCain 47

*Wednesday, October 29, 2008*



> The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows Barack Obama attracting 50% of the vote nationwide while John McCain earns 47%. This is the first time McCain has been within three points of Obama in more than a month and the first time his support has topped 46% since September 24 (see trends). One percent (1%) of voters prefer a third-party option and 2% are undecided.




The polls are tightening elswhere too:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html

Only one outlier poll has it in double digits.


2020 - I clicked on your signature and was pleasantly surprised at the video.  I've always been a big Roger Miller fan.  Polar opposites can sometimes have something in common, I guess.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (30 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjRjYzE0YmQxNzU4MDJjYWE5MjIzMTMxMmNhZWQ1MTA
From the above link:
_



			The real problem, we’ve been told, lay with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In fact, however, ACORN is at the base of the whole mess. ACORN used CRA and Democratic sympathizers to entangle Fannie and Freddie and the entire financial system in a disastrous disregard of the most basic financial standards. And Barack Obama cut his teeth as an organizer and politician backing up ACORN’s economic madness every step of the way.
		
Click to expand...


_
An interesting article.


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Rasmussen:
> 
> http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...ial_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
> 
> ...



gallup 51 to 42% 
or 51-44 for likely voters (expanded)
or 49-46 for likely voters (traditional)

odds $1.13 to $8.60

http://www.gallup.com/poll/111619/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Maintains-Edge-Over-McCain.aspx

I notice some reluctance to give one party control of govt

http://www.gallup.com/poll/111571/Voters-Eager-OneParty-Control-Government.aspx


> Voters Not Eager for One-Party Control of Government
> 
> ... McCain has tried to remind voters that electing Obama as president to go along with a Democratically-controlled Congress would give the Democratic Party control of the federal government.
> 
> That argument appears to resonate, as voters appear reluctant to want to give one party full control of the government regardless of who is elected president




PS ZZd - yep Roger Miller is great (had some James Last there prior to that) - if a bit hard to understand lol.  Some would call it jazz I guess - not sure.  I've added the word "signature=" just in case people thought that I was saying that roller skating in buffalo herds and politics had something in common.  - then again maybe they do lol


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (31 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Why has this thread gone quiet?


----------



## nick2fish (31 October 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Cause its clear that he is going to win


----------



## fimmwolf (1 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

On a lighter note:


----------



## gav (1 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

How funny is this?! I just wish Arnie called him a "girly man!" 

From news.com.au

"Schwarzenegger mocks 'skinny' Barack Obama"

November 01, 2008 12:06pm

MUSCLEMAN-turned-actor-turned-politician Arnold Schwarzenegger has called on Barack Obama to beef up his his policies - and his body - at a rally for Republican John McCain. 
Mr Schwarzenegger, the Hollywood action hero who is now the Republican governor of California, delighted a crowd of several thousand at a McCain campaign event in Columbus, Ohio, 
today by ridiculing both Obama's policies and his slender physique. 

The Austrian-born former Mr Universe has hosted a bodybuilding tournament in Columbus for several years, and opened his address by inviting Senator Obama to participate in the next event. 

"Every year in March I come here to organise the Arnold Classic, which is all about building the body and pumping," Mr Schwarzenegger said. 

"That's why I want to invite Senator Obama because he needs to do something about those skinny legs. I'm going to make him do some squats. 

"And then we're going to make him do some biceps curls to beef up those scrawny little arms. But if he could only do something about putting some meat on his ideas. 

"Senator McCain on the other hand is built like a rock. His character and his views are solid." 

Senator McCain and Mr Schwarzenegger rolled into the Nationwide Arena Hockey Stadium together on the Republican candidate's campaign bus the "Straight Talk Express". 

While Senator McCain received loud cheers, it was Schwarzenegger who provided some much-needed glamour and the biggest cheers with a searing attack on Senator Obama's economic policies.

He painted former Vietnam War prisoner and navy pilot Senator McCain as a "real-life American hero".


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (2 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,24584219-643,00.html

Protectionist policies were not too good in the Great depression. Is Obama really going to seek them?


----------



## Green08 (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



> "But the final day on the campaign trail was rooted in sadness. Obama learned early Monday morning that his maternal grandmother, the only survivor among the adults who shaped his young life in Hawaii, had died overnight at age 86."
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/03/AR2008110303464.html?hpid=topnews




Barack Obama's grandmother died early this morning.

I feel for him as she was like a mother to him for many years.  At a critical point in the campaign this happens 1 day before the election.

What this shows his tremendous ability to decompartmentalise
Doing what he has fought for over many years.
Grieving internally is hard enough let alone on the stage of the world.

This should show people that he is steady, focused, and able to lead with fortitude without coming apart.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Barack Obama's grandmother died early this morning.
> 
> I feel for him as she was like a mother to him for many years.  At a critical point in the campaign this happens 1 day before the election.
> 
> ...




A very predictable post.

We have all lost grandparents, parents or children.

You should be ashamed of yourself for using natural grief as a political tool.

gg


----------



## Green08 (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> A very predictable post.
> 
> We have all lost grandparents, parents or children.
> 
> ...




I'm not ashamed as this was not meant as a political tool.  You just love to twist words.

No one has raised this issue which Obama talks about at his last rally.  

All your comments to me have been nothing but derogatory.  Say what you want about me as it is rather revealing about yourself

You always have to attack me, can't find a pleasant word to say.  I had left a note on the South African Thread you began - did you read it?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

What about Obama's proposed policies?


----------



## Green08 (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Snake as you mentioned "proposed policies".  As proposed is not set in stone I believe he will adjust some to accommodate the current and future economic crisis or what ever changes in the future may occur to the USA.  Any responsible President would have to adjust to major changes.

I do favor most of them, though he will have a difficult time implementing many due to the economic outfall.  

I don't agree with clean coal as it isn't clean.

Should you wish to ask me specific questions I will do my best to answer them. Though they may conflict with your train of thought, that's OK


----------



## 2020hindsight (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ray for the good guys rayy
boo for the bad guys booo


----------



## im_daniel (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



So_Cynical said:


> Hillary FTW
> 
> Barack has a snowball in hells chance of winning.




I guess that the snowball is rolling in hell


----------



## Julia (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



gav said:


> How funny is this?! I just wish Arnie called him a "girly man!"
> 
> From news.com.au
> 
> "Schwarzenegger mocks 'skinny' Barack Obama"



Give me Obama's elegant form any day in preference to the unnatural looking Schwarzenegger.  
Not that's it's relevant to the qualities he might bring to the presidency.


----------



## mayk (4 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Give me Obama's elegant form any day in preference to the unnatural looking Schwarzenegger.
> Not that's it's relevant to the qualities he might bring to the presidency.




Come on this is natural ...









It is next generation steroid, genetically modified bulls, proud production of the great USA..


----------



## doctorj (5 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.7-election.com/

In the months leading up to an election, 7-11 gives its US customers the choice between Republican or Democrat coffee cups and the results are tracked.  They sell ~1mill cups of coffee a day and they've correctly predicted the past two elections (to a few percentage points in some states).

Currently tracking at 60-40 to Obama.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (5 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Go John McCain!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Give me Obama's elegant form any day in preference to the unnatural looking Schwarzenegger.
> Not that's it's relevant to the qualities he might bring to the presidency.




Agree Julia, ole small balls Arnie is an embarrassment. 

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (5 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Democrats are so hungry for power they will do anything to get there.

http://townhall.com/blog/g/cf47766b-5a6d-44ab-95e7-ce60631bcadc


----------



## Green08 (5 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I am so excited if Obama wins which looks likely.

My partner from SA grew up in segregation and hated it.  He was elated with Mandela.   From seeing the trauma of what occurred to the blacks is hopeful for Obama.  American needs this change.

My time in the USA was not segregated but and white people obviously looked down on them, coming from Australia as a child I could not understand it as many of my friends where of black origin.

GG should you want to say outlandish things as the democrats will pull no stops.

In the last hour of this election a robocall from McCain and Palin targeted at the Cuban population has just been released.  Claiming Obama will turn the USA in to the next Cuba.  What utter rubbish!  Some republicans are saying this is beyond the pale as an attack.


----------



## chops_a_must (5 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> The Democrats are so hungry for power they will do anything to get there.
> 
> http://townhall.com/blog/g/cf47766b-5a6d-44ab-95e7-ce60631bcadc




Lol.

Beyond funny GG. Even you must see the hilarity in the stupidity you just posted...


----------



## Mofra (5 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



doctorj said:


> In the months leading up to an election, 7-11 gives its US customers the choice between Republican or Democrat coffee cups and the results are tracked.  They sell ~1mill cups of coffee a day and they've correctly predicted the past two elections (to a few percentage points in some states).
> 
> Currently tracking at 60-40 to Obama.



That's not a far comparison, as you'd expect a fair proportion of McCain's "base" would prefer Bourbon anyway :


----------



## MrBurns (6 November 2008)

*Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

This is a real worry - 




> A few weeks ago Joe Biden, Barak Obama's running mate, predicted that an Obama administration would face a major foreign policy test within months.
> 
> That test has come within a day of the election - from Russia.
> 
> ...


----------



## Julia (6 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

And this, from Crikey's round of editorials around the world, from Russia's 'Pravda'.



> It is always interesting to note how much the world and its peoples like to believe in fairy tales and lies. Anything rather than face the truth. After living through eight years of the Bush incompetence and imperial hubris, Americans, the world and Europeans especially have once again deluded themselves in believing that the "new" wind in Washington, this time Obama, will some how change the way things have gone. Once more they are in for a post narcotic painful wakeup and it will not take long. When both candidates come from the One Party Two Branch Marxist system of America's so called democracy, where third parties and independents need not apply, nothing changes. If anything, American suffering under either of the two "candidates" (really this was just a bit more nerve racking than Soviet Politburo elections) will only escalate. -- Pravda


----------



## MrBurns (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

They didn't even congratulate Obama which is the protocol, seems like they are slipping back to the bad ole' you against us days, not good for the USA or us when there are other problems.

They are taking advantage of the current turmoil and disruption during the US elections. 

Maybe they see an opportunity, certainly the current Russian leader is an unfriendly character at best.


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

let's face it... the USA's reputation in Europe and the world in general has soared thanks to the election of Obama.  (to say nothing of their self-image at home).  I guess Russia preferred the status quo - the Bush days (only 11 weeks to go).


----------



## Aussiejeff (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

I wouldn't be surprised at all if other so-called "rogue" states also take the opportunity to stir up trouble while the US Presidency and Administration is effectively in the Twilight Zone.

They will undoubtedly try to call Prez Obama's bluff from day one. Fingers crossed, both he and his Admin will be up to the diplomatic and/or military challenges that could be gathering just around the corner.


aj


----------



## Calliope (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

Historically the Russian leadership has always regarded left leaning leaders in other countries with disdain. A compassionate and caring leadership is seen as weak leadership The Russians along with a lot of nasties are happy with Obama's win, which exposes America's soft centre.

Early probing for weaknesses will probably pay off. Poland will think twice before becoming part of the American defence shield. As usual they would be the first casualty of a miscalculation.


----------



## chops_a_must (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

It's got more to do with Putin's snookums not getting voted in IMO.


----------



## MrBurns (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

Thats not the only test for Obama there's an even more sinister challenge for him that makes Russia look like a weakling - 



> Rudd, Obama discuss future challenges
> By Online parliamentary correspondent Emma Rodgers
> 
> Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says he and US President-elect Barack Obama have committed to working together on the global financial crisis and the threat of climate change.
> ...




Bush must be pissing himself laughing.


----------



## robert toms (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

As I understand it when the Soviet Union broke up there were agreements from Nato,that they would not take advantage by moving in to the old soviet satellites.
This did not last long before advantage was taken of Russian weakness and the Russian ally Serbia was bombed....just to show Russia how powerless they were(Nato broadened the bombing from Kosovo to Serbia)
Then they armed and trained a hostile Georgia on Russian borders....this led to an attack on Russian interests.
The placement of so called defence system missiles in Poland was another provocation...no need to do that.
I see it as Russia trying to win back self-respect and it goes down well the Russian population as well.
To make too much more of it is an over-reaction.
Russia ,unlike the US,has a history of being invaded.The last by Hitler ended up costing nearly 20 million  Russian lives.
If they are paranoid about potential enemies getting too close...it is understandable.
Remember how we were going to have WW3 when Russia (as a retaliation for US missiles in Turkey)  put missiles into Cuba.
All of us little boys lived in fear !


----------



## long$$ (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

While Russia pushes US area of influence from the East, China pushes it from the west.

From ABC web site today

"Taiwan independence

China also urged Mr Obama to oppose independence for Taiwan, saying the issue is key to good relations between China and the US.

A Chinese foreign ministry spokesman has called on America to stop selling arms to Taiwan and to honour the one-China policy, which sees Taiwan as part of mainland China.

China and Taiwan have been holding landmark talks this week.

Earlier this afternoon, Taiwan's president became the first leader in Tapei to meet a senior Chinese official since the two sides split in 1949. "


My interpretation of this is, if US wants China to bail it out, the price is Taiwan independence.

Any comments??


----------



## DJZ (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

I agree with Robert Toms, the US has bought this upon themselves, they have been encircling Russia with arms and US Satellite states ever since the breakdown of the Soviet Union. The Russians have every right to be angered at the Actions that the US has taken. Just imagine if the shoe was on the other foot and Russia or China were setting up Alliances with Canada, Mexico, Cuba etc? I would have a guess that the Americans would not be very happy.

This Along with the fact that the US has openly stated in there Project for a New American Century (PNAC) that they will take all actions to remain the SOLE superpower of the world, I'm not surprised Russia has finally awoken and will not put up with Western Imperialism anymore.

The news that comes out of Russia has more truth to it than what comes from the US and the Rest of the Western World. I wouldn't be surprised if America, or the powerful men behind America, "Generates a crises" (as Joe Biden has said) that will put The West vs the Rest on a collision course for war (such as the Georgian episode), as a method of kick starting there economy once again, War makes for good profit!

With Obama at the helm and the backing of the people, it wouldn't be to hard to ramp up the populace to support a War in the name of "Freedom and Hope"   . . as if any war is actually fought for Freedom and Hope, what a joke this world is we live in.

Russia is making the most of the current US situation and I don't see why they shouldn't, seeing that the US would do the exact same thing.

Australia is in a very difficult situation if tensions between the East and West rise.


----------



## Calliope (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*

There is no evidence that in the matter of foreign policy Obama has any strengths. He gives every appearance of being weak in this area in the same mould as Jimmy Carter. The Iranians completely humiliated Carter over a long period during the American Embassy hostage fiasco and the country suffered a lot of angst. Just to rub it in the Iranians didn't release the hostages until Reagan had taken over.

The Iranians now have a stronger bargaining chip than hostages. They will do this bloke off a break.


----------



## Panacea (7 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*



DJZ said:


> With Obama at the helm and the backing of the people, it wouldn't be to hard to ramp up the populace to support a War in the name of "Freedom and Hope"   . . as if any war is actually fought for Freedom and Hope, what a joke this world is we live in.




Obama has a mandate to withdraw US troops from Iraq (since it was a core election promise). The American public realise that war is incredibly expensive and I don't think they would support an ideological 'nation-building' war at this time. Russia knows this.


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 November 2008)

*Obama's Team*

Let's start with an easy one ...  Lieberman is unlikely to feature in the top jobs 

 Lieberman Must Go!

"Revenge is a dish best eaten cold" ...  (first 2m30s)

Then at 3m :- "should they depoliticise intelligence issues?"
the PDBrief :-"here's the good news ... you're the President elect; 
now the bad news ... you're the President elect"  

 MSNBC / NBC Political coverage 11/6/08


----------



## Glen48 (7 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*

To day I got this warning from Nigerian Email Scam:



Today I received an email from a Little town called Washington DC asking for money.

Apparently they would accept anything even as low as a dollar.



So beware when the American Email Scam hits your inbox.


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*



Glen48 said:


> ... Apparently they would accept anything even as low as a dollar.
> So beware when the American Email Scam hits your inbox.



lol

here's White House Chief of Staff apointment , Rahm Emanuel - 
Lindsay Graham says its "a wise choice" (is that the first sensible thing Graham has said lol)
(refer second email on first post - about 9m30s mark)


----------



## Julia (7 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*

I hope Obama will find a place for Colin Powell.   Too much talent and experience to waste imo.

Maybe he could offer the job of floor sweeper or tea person to George W.
That would appropriately reflect his relevance.


----------



## 2020hindsight (7 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/maps/obama_vs_mccain/?map=5

I believe the following is correct (although possibly out by one or two votes ?)

Firstly the "latest polling" as per the Aust Financial Review on Tuesday morning

- and then the probable final result (although this may change) :-


----------



## chops_a_must (8 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*



robert toms said:


> As I understand it when the Soviet Union broke up there were agreements from Nato,that they would not take advantage by moving in to the old soviet satellites.
> This did not last long before advantage was taken of Russian weakness and the Russian ally Serbia was bombed....just to show Russia how powerless they were(Nato broadened the bombing from Kosovo to Serbia)



Huh?

I'm sure the genocide of a minimum 700,000 people and the likelihood of it happening again, amongst public outcry, had nothing to do with it. 

I wish they had done it earlier.

But no... it was to teach those russkies a lesson damn it!


----------



## mary white (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well I guess you all feel stupid, Barack Obama won the elected vote to become the president of the United States and he is going to prove to all the people with doubts that he is the right man for the job.  He's a black man come on guys they excel at everything they do. Tiger Woods Golf, Micheal Jordan Basketball, Serena Williams Tennis. Blacks are natural born leaders and after years of oppression are taking their rightful places in the world. And other nationalities/countries are noticing their greatness.


----------



## mary white (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

To all the people out there that didn't think Barack Obama was going to win don't you all feel stupid the man won.  He kicked Mccain ^&%$#@(* all the way down the street. Don't you people notice that when black people put their minds to something they accomplish what it is they are doing.  Basically speaking they are taking over everything from the white sports like golf and tennis to the white house. I think he is going to run the country well and bring back the respect for America that was lost when Bush was in office.


----------



## chops_a_must (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mary white said:


> To all the people out there that didn't think Barack Obama was going to win don't you all feel stupid the man won.  He kicked Mccain ^&%$#@(* all the way down the street. Don't you people notice that when black people put their minds to something they accomplish what it is they are doing.  Basically speaking they are taking over everything from the white sports like golf and tennis to the white house.



You mean like in Zimbabwe?


----------



## sinner (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> You mean like in Zimbabwe?




Very good example! One black man sets to dominate a whole country to the point of international ostracism, see how well he did with just a little bit of perseverance and dedication!


----------



## chops_a_must (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



sinner said:


> Very good example! One black man sets to dominate a whole country to the point of international ostracism, see how well he did with just a little bit of perseverance and dedication!




Lol. Yep.


----------



## caribean (8 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*



chops_a_must said:


> Huh?
> 
> I'm sure the genocide of a minimum 700,000 people and the likelihood of it happening again, amongst public outcry, had nothing to do with it.
> 
> ...



Umm, where did you get these numbers from? a hat??


----------



## caribean (8 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*



Calliope said:


> There is no evidence that in the matter of foreign policy Obama has any strengths. He gives every appearance of being weak in this area in the same mould as Jimmy Carter. The Iranians completely humiliated Carter over a long period during the American Embassy hostage fiasco and the country suffered a lot of angst. Just to rub it in the Iranians didn't release the hostages until Reagan had taken over.
> 
> The Iranians now have a stronger bargaining chip than hostages. They will do this bloke off a break.



It wasn't so much the Iranians that humiliated Carter...more so some of the 
Americans within USA


----------



## chops_a_must (8 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*



caribean said:


> Umm, where did you get these numbers from? a hat??




Sorry, 200,000.

I'm sure I have read and heard 700k elsewhere. Ah well, they are only people. Not like it's a big deal or anything.


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mary white said:


> 1. ..  Basically speaking they are taking over everything from the white sports like golf and tennis to the white house.
> 
> 2. I think he is going to run the country well and bring back the respect for America that was lost when Bush was in office.



1. lol, I've never seen running the White House juxtaposed with tennis before  - 
"Ok ball's in your court!" 

2. hope you're right - certainly getting some rave reviews.

PS I think the plan is to unify not to gloat lol. 

Looking back at those two electoral maps (post #1355) - the poll on election eve vs today - it would seem that 4 of the 5 states that they were calling a tossup went blue.   (IND, OHIO,NC, FLA) , while one went red (MO).  So even the polls were slightly underestimating the swing.


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mayk said:


> Come on this is natural ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




No question - there had to be some steroids involved to get a beer gut like that !


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

mary, Back to Tiger Woods for a second..
http://www.jonentine.com/reviews/UPI_commentary.htm



> When Woods became a superstar to even the non-golfing world by winning the  1997 Masters tournament by 12 strokes, much of the media wanted to define him as the first "black" to win a major championship. And Nike wanted to do with him what it does best -- market him as another black super-jock.
> 
> But Tiger refused to sell out his family's multiracial roots. He joked that he thought of himself as "Cablinasian." That was his boyhood shorthand for the fact that he is one-eighth Caucasian, one-quarter black, one-eighth American Indian, and one-half East Asian (a quarter Thai and a quarter Chinese).
> 
> ...



"formidable gentlemen, on and off the links"

You're right - so far you'd have to say that Obama has something in common with a great golfer 

Tennis? - yes in some cases (Arthur Ashe), no in others ( McEnroe) 

Some quotes by Arthur Ashe ..



> "Success is a journey, not a destination."
> 
> "From what we get, we can make a living; what we give, however, makes a life."
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

:topic PS 


> McEnroe has also been given roles in TV and film where he playfully acknowledges his well-known belligerence such as in his appearance in a 2005 car commercial for the SEAT Altea where he angrily shouts his trademark "Clearly inside the line" line at an officer who has ticketed him for parking incorrectly.
> 
> ... has a scene in the film Anger Management starring Jack Nicholson and Adam Sandler, most of which was cut””leaving only a short shot of him sleeping on the floor of the psychiatrist's office. The full scene is in the DVD special features.
> 
> ... McEnroe ... appeared in another commercial where he taught Pete Sampras how to throw temper tantrums on the court.



 etc


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

this article something similar mary.. 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/columnists/simon_barnes/article5101710.ece



> *From Jesse Owens to Barack Obama, via Muhammad Ali and Tiger Woods*
> Simon Barnes, Sports Columnist of the Year
> From The Times November 7, 2008
> 
> ...



Bit of controversy with Carlos and Smith..



> Tommie Smith and John Carlos won gold and bronze in the 200 metres at the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City and at the medal ceremony they staged their beautifully eloquent protest. Their Black Power salutes were an unforgettable statement of America’s divisions. Carlos and Smith were seen by many Americans as traitors; as truth-telling heroes by others. They became national treasures in retrospect, in the post1960s rewriting of history. There is now a statue commemorating that high-fisted ceremony at San Jose, Smith’s old university.
> 
> Now we come to the most complex figure of all. The story of Muhammad Ali ... Ali didn’t want civil rights, he wanted the partition of America.
> 
> ... Tiger Woods ... Golf was the white man’s sport: the sport of the rich, the sport of the boss. Now white golfers have a black role model – a black man to envy, for his game, for his wealth, for his quiet elegance, for his trophy family, for his ultimate plausibility. With Woods, race ceases to be an issue. *Woods, like his President-elect, seems neither black nor white. The question of colour is no longer asked, for it has found its ultimate answer.* ...



"The question of colour is no longer asked, for it has found its ultimate answer" - Wowo - now we're getting somewhere !!


----------



## Doris (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Does anyone disagree that Barack will be the next US president?
> 
> I first saw him on 'Oprah' whilst I was in Canada a year ago.   I sat glued and I rarely watch the show!  He was so inspiring that I bought his book 'The Audacity of Hope'.  This was his second book.  The first was 'Dreams from My Father' which earned him enough to pay off his law school debts and buy him a house as he worked in Chicago for a pittance.  I predicted the sales of his second book would help finance a run for president and I was chuffed when he nominated!  He's not accepted any donations from lobbyists but from public donations which IMO give ownership by the donors to 'the cause'.  A brilliant strategy!
> 
> ...




Well Debbie voted Barack.    Her husband Don was always going to.
My Canadian friends said they too had tears - and that they felt American as they watched his victory speech.

But I think it's a case of feeling world unity as the planet's new leader takes his place.

How thrilled I was/am with him today:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1857679,00.html

Well worth a read!

And of course:

http://thepage.time.com/full-transcript-of-obamas-first-presser-as-president-elect/


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*



2020hindsight said:


> here's White House Chief of Staff apointment , Rahm Emanuel



Somehow I can't see Australia ever following the US model 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Chief_of_Staff


> Most White House Chiefs of Staff are former politicians, and many continue their political careers in other senior roles.
> 
> Richard Nixon's Chief of Staff Alexander Haig became Secretary of State under Ronald Reagan.
> 
> ...


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Well Debbie voted Barack.    Her husband Don was always going to. ...
> 
> Well worth a read!



howdy doris,
You wonder what role(s) Hillary will get if any 

as for Obama joking at his own expense ,  lol, ... 


> "With respect to the dog, this is a major issue. I think it's generated more interest on our website than just about anything," Obama deadpanned. "We have ”” we have two criteria that have to be reconciled. One is that Malia is allergic, so it has to be hypo-allergenic. There are a number of breeds that are hypo-allergenic.
> 
> On the other hand, our preference would be to get a shelter dog. *But obviously, a lot of shelter dogs are mutts, like me. So the ”” so, whether we're going to be able to balance  those two things, I think, is a pressing issue on the Obama household*."


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> ...we have two criteria
> 1... it has to be hypo-allergenic. There are a number of breeds that are hypo-allergenic
> 
> 2. On the other hand, our preference would be to get a shelter dog



doris, next time you're talking to your m8, tell him to consider getting a rotty or a doberman - or a blend of the two for that matter - like this one, who was part of an abandoned litter - and we picked her up at the pound  ...

Here she is in early training to do the shopping - 
a) "attention"
b) "stand at .... ease"

PS I still get a buzz reading this old article about the doberman saving the child from the snake - a pound dog that had been in the family for 4 days   (posts #16 and #17 on that thread)
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=218214


----------



## gav (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



mayk said:


> Come on this is natural ...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The genetic mutation is a deficiency in myostatin, which is a growth factor that limits muscle tissue growth.  There are many cases of this worldwide - cattle, dogs, even humans.  

It has nothing to do with steroids, and shows you have a severe lack of knowledge on the subject.


----------



## jeflin (8 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*

Rahm(bo) is a tough enforcer but he will have to adjust his abrasive style if he wants Republicans to get on board with the policies.


----------



## Doris (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> howdy doris,
> You wonder what role(s) Hillary will get if any
> 
> as for Obama joking at his own expense ,  lol, ...




Howdy 2020.  
How diligent and refreshing you continue to be. Will recommend you for press secretary!    

I'd guess Hillary will get Health Care - but under Barack's scheme. 

She worked so hard on HC during Bill's watch but was not taken seriously as 'the wife' so not supported.

Here's the clip of Barack talking about his mutt.
The realization of humour in his comment by the two behind him is priceless.

http://abcnews.go.com/video/playerIndex?id=6209060

PS... Are rotties hypo?... or hyper as Princess Diana identified?  
Probably will be a Sh*tzu from Obama in Japan.  

(no pun intended - ASF auto is off the page for this breed!)


----------



## chops_a_must (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> But I think it's a case of feeling world unity as the planet's new leader takes his place.



Indeed.

Obviously why he has appointed a Zionist hard-liner as his chief of staff. Must be all that world 'unity' I'm hearing about. 

The more things "change", the more they stay the same hey?


----------



## chops_a_must (8 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*



jeflin said:


> Rahm(bo) is a tough enforcer but he will have to adjust his abrasive style if he wants Republicans to get on board with the policies.






2020hindsight said:


> lol
> 
> here's White House Chief of Staff apointment , Rahm Emanuel -
> Lindsay Graham says its "a wise choice" (is that the first sensible thing Graham has said lol)
> (refer second email on first post - about 9m30s mark)




I disagree on both counts.

He's more of a neo-con than the neo-cons. What a laugh.


----------



## Julia (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris, have you been in America?   I guess you are still swooning with joy, huh?

Re the dog;  if it has to be hypo-allergenic that eliminates most breeds.
They'll probably end up with a silly, wussy little poodle or something similar.

2020, your dog looks nice.  Can't touch a German Shepherd though!


----------



## Doris (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> Indeed.
> 
> Obviously why he has appointed a Zionist hard-liner as his chief of staff. Must be all that world 'unity' I'm hearing about.
> 
> The more things "change", the more they stay the same hey?




Do some research and not be seduced by 'fear/cynical' headlines.

Rahmbo will be the pit bull to enforce calm, cool Barack's agenda.

He knows Barack's values in his staff's inter-relating modes and I believe will modify his past temper rants. 

Barack has long known his strengths and that he will speak his mind and not be a lapdog.


----------



## gav (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> The more things "change", the more they stay the same hey?




Yep, he even speaks publicly like Bush! (57 states, LOL! )


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

hey gav, is this natural amongst bodybuilders?  lol
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8VSd-IykZBw&feature=related


----------



## Doris (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> Doris, have you been in America?   I guess you are still swooning with joy, huh?
> 
> 2020, your dog looks nice.  Can't touch a German Shepherd though!




Julia I couldn't resist it when QANTAS had QFF seats available - (go figure fate!)

In four weeks time, it will be two years since I first envisaged and hoped for this! 
So good to feel the joy around me that my own comfort zone is a given.

I'm swooning that at last my gut instincts are credible... 
I realized during the third debate why I detested McCain so much.  
He is a clone of my ex! 
- doesn't listen but tells you what you think, need and feel - way off the mark
- re-writes history with 99% of it from his imagination to suit his own agenda
- knows it all and everyone else knows nothing
- consumed with Shaden Freude
- what is projected in public is cover-up histrionics from the private person
- loves an argument instead of discussion

OC is so like Qld...  Lovitt!


----------



## gav (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> hey gav, is this natural amongst bodybuilders?  lol
> http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8VSd-IykZBw&feature=related




LOL I only watched the first 2 seconds of that video, but I know exactly where it leads.  I guess the only way to find out is to get in the gym, pump some weights and find out for yourself! :

That is from the 1979 documentry-drama "Pumping Iron".  I have it on DVD, watched it dozens of times.  Its a great flick, you should watch it 2020, you might like it   However, bodybuilding today is very, very different to Arnie's day...


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> 1... I'd guess Hillary will get Health Care - but under Barack's scheme.
> 
> 2. .. PS... Are rotties hypo?... or hyper as Princess Diana identified?



doris,
1. makes sense 
2. lol "Diana called Camilla the Rottweiler"




			
				julia said:
			
		

> if it has to be hypo-allergenic that eliminates most breeds.
> They'll probably end up with a silly, wussy little poodle or something similar.




julia, true, but wiki suggests that poodles are no better than other breeds  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypoallergenic



> Some dog breeds have been promoted as hypoallergenic because they do not shed their hair, shed very little, or have the same pH as human hair. However, no canine is known to be completely nonallergenic. Poodles and Poodle hybrids are commonly mistaken as being hypoallergenic, when in reality they are known to cause different forms of allergies, including bronchitis, as does any breed of dog.
> 
> Cat breeds ... etc



sheesh my heart goes out to people who have to have a cat eek because they 're allergic to dogs.


----------



## Doris (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



chops_a_must said:


> Obviously why he has appointed a Zionist hard-liner as his chief of staff. Must be all that world 'unity' I'm hearing about.
> 
> The more things "change", the more they stay the same hey?




Have a look at this clip of Barack 'roasting' him - from 3 years ago at a fund-raiser:

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6209060 

Barack's appreciation of the man holistically - the whole picture - makes it obvious why he chose him!

Gav - you'll laugh near the end...

"The Republicans have found out how to handle Rahm - they're steroid testing members.  
But they'll find out 'it's all natural'."

Barack concludes with: 'Thank God he is one of a kind.'

...ooops... (on this PC) this clip url keeps going to the previous clip on 'the puppy'.
- either watch this first or click on the relevant clip to the right.


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*



			
				CHOPS said:
			
		

> I disagree on both counts.
> He's more of a neo-con than the neo-cons. What a laugh.



I know nothing of the man - though his reputation is interesting. 
It's one thing to be a tough negotiator (which he apparently is in spades) and another to be a bigot or a war-monger.  I'm guessing for instance that people who want the best for Israel might also want peace (?).   

I was mainly commenting on Lindsey Graham's assessment of him (LG being so pro-McCain etc) 

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=fYGfshPN0Tk&feature=related   Who Is Rahm Emanuel?

"This says a lot about Barack Obama"
Emanuel is apparently (in the opinion of this "former special counsel to Clinton", Lanny Davis (?)) "totally loyal" at least, "strong, honest, reliable, also critical etc " ...  

PS chops, I imagine you are gonna enlarge on your theories / accusations? - that is if you wish us to take em seriously 

PS Herewith that youtube of "Obama Roasts Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel" - with the same jokes posted on the Obama thread. :-

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=palA9Oo2Cpo


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



gav said:


> LOL I only watched the first 2 seconds of that video, but I know exactly where it leads.  I guess the only way to find out is to get in the gym, pump some weights and find out for yourself! :
> 
> That is from the 1979 documentry-drama "Pumping Iron".  I have it on DVD, watched it dozens of times.  Its a great flick, you should watch it 2020, you might like it   However, bodybuilding today is very, very different to Arnie's day...




gav
"Bodybuilding today" - and Arnie - have probably moved on , you're probably right lol. 

In any case, I'll take your word for it.  

PS I wonder if he gets off on political speeches instead these days


----------



## 2020hindsight (8 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*

:topic
PS For some reason I'm imagining Michael J Fox's character in "The American President" - that old (1995) movie with Michael Douglas and Annette Bening   (The missus replays the video once a week at least lol - whilst cooking , ironing, you name it)

Here's an excerpt.  Looks more like the Clinton days lol. 

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=L2GqDrlZuGU&feature=related  The American President - Stay Away from Dupont Circle

PS I heard a quote the other day "Every man has his weakness - every Clinton has his Monica".  

PS How the White House really operates :-  

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=5UAWGN1Wmxc The American President - This is my President


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*

I hear he has RFK Jr. down for the Environment Post.

He doesn't believe in vaccinating children against disease I'm told. 

Lets hope its just a rumour.

gg


----------



## caribean (8 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*



chops_a_must said:


> Sorry, 200,000.
> 
> I'm sure I have read and heard 700k elsewhere. Ah well, they are only people. Not like it's a big deal or anything.



Lol...fair enough


----------



## Calliope (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> "The question of colour is no longer asked, for it has found its ultimate answer" - Wowo - now we're getting somewhere !!




Indeed you are, if divisiveness is what you are after.

There has been a lot of hype written and spoken about Obama's victory, including;  ushering in a new dawn - inspirational - agent of change - unity - togetherness - bipartisanship, and so it goes on.

The simple truth is that Obama won on racial lines. The vast majority of  blacks (95%) voted for him. This massive block vote combined with a large majority of Latino voters completely overwhelmed the 56% of whites who voted Republican.  These people are going to enjoy their gloating rights. Oprah Winfrey's gloating triumphalism on victory night says it all. 

As blacks and Latinos are the most rapidly increasing demographics in the USA, there will probably never be another white President. This should give you and Doris something to cheer about.

The Republican party is finished. They might just have a slim chance with a black female candidate.


----------



## Doris (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*This episode of South Park is brilliant*!  Yes!

Click 'play' and the advert will 'go'...

GG - with your slow telstra service -
Absolutely worth clicking on the pause button and letting it stream - then press play for uninterrupted viewing.

http://www.megavideo.com/?v=P8JIILWK
.
Barack will probably be inaugurated by the time it shows on TV in Oz...


----------



## rederob (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Indeed you are, if divisiveness is what you are after.




Your maths is as poor as your logic.
Top marks for racism.

Even George Bush was good at something; a disaproval rating unlikely to be rivalled.


----------



## skint (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Indeed you are, if divisiveness is what you are after.
> 
> There has been a lot of hype written and spoken about Obama's victory, including;  ushering in a new dawn - inspirational - agent of change - unity - togetherness - bipartisanship, and so it goes on.
> 
> ...




It's true that whilst 46% of the white vote was for the Democrats, and 53% of the white vote went to the Republicans, it is also true that the white vote also accounted for voting Bush in TWICE. As a pro-Republican could you shed some light on how you think Bush has been good for 1) the economy and 2) the standing of the US in the international community? By that I mean, not why Obama spells the end of the world as we know it, but how Bush has improved things on those two fronts? Curly one, I know.


----------



## 2020hindsight (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> The simple truth is that Obama won on racial lines. The vast majority of  blacks (95%) voted for him. This massive block vote combined with a large majority of Latino voters completely overwhelmed the 56% of whites who voted Republican.
> 
> .... As blacks and Latinos are the most rapidly increasing demographics in the USA, there will probably never be another white President. This should give you and Doris something to cheer about.
> 
> The Republican party is finished. They might just have a slim chance with a black female candidate.




I'd say it was the more important and increasing demographic - youth (18% of the electorate).    The old farts are dying and/or will die out 
66% of all youth votes (under 30) were for Obama, and 54% of white "youth"  - and there are tens of millions of them  

Mind you, Obama won only 24 percent of white evangelicals (which is a good thing lol)  

http://www.mlive.com/us-politics/index.ssf/2008/11/obama_has_historic_youth_manda.html


> *Obama has historic youth mandate*
> by Politico.com Saturday November 08, 2008, 7:04 AM
> 
> *Sixty-six percent of voters under age 30 preferred Obama* while just 32 percent favored McCain—nearly four times the size of John F. Kennedy's lead with the group in 1960, which led him to famously declare in his inaugural address that “*the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans*.”






> In other words, *never in post-war American politics have youth voted so differently than older generations as they did in 2008*.
> 
> Obama lead with the group this year is easily the largest of any newly elected president in the of modern polling.
> 
> ... Until this election, no Democratic presidential nominee had won more than 45 percent of young whites in at least three decades. *Obama won 54 percent of young white voters.*






> *The youth vote made up 18 percent of the electorate this year*, one point more than in the last three presidential elections. Young whites this year constituted 11 percent of the electorate, and young blacks and Hispanics 3 percent each.
> 
> Obama won precisely half of all young working class white men, ten points better than any Democrat since the Reagan era.
> 
> ...


----------



## Calliope (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



skint said:


> It's true that whilst 46% of the white vote was for the Democrats, and 53% of the white vote went to the Republicans, it is also true that the white vote also accounted for voting Bush in TWICE. As a pro-Republican could you shed some light on how you think Bush has been good for 1) the economy and 2) the standing of the US in the international community? By that I mean, not why Obama spells the end of the world as we know it, but how Bush has improved things on those two fronts? Curly one, I know.




You based your stupid question on a false premise. I am not pro-Republican.


----------



## derty (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> You based your stupid question on a false premise. I am not pro-Republican.



I didn't think there was such a thing as a stupid question. Just stupid answers.

At 12% and 15% of the population for African American and Hispanic respectively. They would be able to tip the vote one way or another, though to have a landslide you still need a large white participation in the Obama vote. And as 2020 stated the youth vote mobilised for Obama at a scale not seen before. I don't think the GOP is irrelevant, though they will have to re-invent themselves. The GOP is a party for the old white male and the younger generation have placed a vote of no confidence in the NeoCons and their politics of division, fear, greed and negativity.  

here are the demographics from wikipedia (didn't format correctly but you can work it out)
                                2008 2050
Non-Hispanic whites 	68% 	46%
Hispanic 	                15 % 	30%
African Americans 	12% 	15%
Asian American 	        5% 	9%


----------



## Doris (9 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

ICYDK (in case you didn't know) this is why the South Park episode suggested naming 'the puppy' *Sparkles*.



Hmmm... what SP episode? 
- what puppy?


----------



## chops_a_must (9 November 2008)

*Re: Russia greets Obama with first foreign policy test*



caribean said:


> Lol...fair enough



700k displaced is what I must have become confused with.


----------



## chops_a_must (10 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Have a look at this clip of Barack 'roasting' him - from 3 years ago at a fund-raiser:
> 
> http://www.abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=6209060
> 
> Barack's appreciation of the man holistically - the whole picture - makes it obvious why he chose him!



Right...

It certainly wouldn't have anything to do with the fact he needed his support, and had to reward him, because Obama would not have been able to get where he was without him. And he would have known that. 

It's just like the Brian Burke disasters in WA. The difference being, WA ministers at least didn't appoint Burke as their chief advisors. 


Doris said:


> Do some research and not be seduced by 'fear/cynical' headlines.



Perhaps you should also, or drop the teenage esque fan girling, and be able to look at things more objectively.

What gets me most is the non-stop rhetoric about Obama opposing Clinton, Bush and Mccain on the basis of the Iraq war. Yet, not only did Rahm Emanuel support the Iraq war, he actively opposed those against the Iraq war standing for election:



> He favored the war in Iraq, and when he was chairing the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 2006 he made great efforts to knock out antiwar Democratic candidates. On this site in October and November, 2006, John Walsh documented both the efforts and Emanuel’s role in losing the Democrats seats they would otherwise have won. http://www.counterpunch.org/




It's something I find particularly distasteful, and unforgivable.

As anyone on this site knows, I'm not exactly right wing, far from it, lol.

But I'm also no gullible idiot. I know when things are blatant back slaps and backhanders.

I also find it funny that the right had tried to dig up anything they could to do with Obama and "leftist terrorism". Yet it is the "fascist terrorism" that actually now _is_ in the white house that is the danger.

And that is so far from the campaigning rhetoric from Obama, it isn't funny. But you have obviously invested too much emotionally in this to ever see something like this for what it is. And really, that is just as bad as the mindset Obama was campaigning against.


----------



## ZzzzDad (10 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

It is also worth noting that Rahm "earned" 18 million from Freddie Mac from 1999 to 2001.

Jamie Gorelick, Obama's rumored pick for Attorney General "earned" millions from Fannie Mae.

But, of course the media didn't cover that BEFORE the election.

This is part of the team that is supposed to fix the economic mess.

Yeah, right.


----------



## ZzzzDad (10 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama's impression of Bush (from Obama's book)



> Bush and Obama: Their First Meeting
> by Jake Tapper, ABC news.
> November 09, 2008 8:38 PM
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (17 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack promised transparency if he won POTUS.

He began this yesterday by posting his first weekly radio address on You Tube:



Will Hillary have to sign up for transparency  if she is appointed as Secretary of State?
An announcement could come as early as this week as he forms his White House team.

Then comes more than 300 Cabinet secretaries, deputies and under-secretaries, and 2,500 political appointees.

Barack's propensity to make intelligent, informed decisions is the basic pre-requisite of a good leader.
His philosophy of choosing the best person for the job reflects bipartisan government.
- his role model is, of course, Lincoln in 1860.

Barack meets with McCain tomorrow to focus on how he can help on issues where there is common ground, including reforming government, tackling global warming, banning torture by US personnel, and closing Guantanamo Bay. 

How I would love to be a fly on that wall!


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*



sam76 said:


> Clinton Is Said to Accept Offer of Secretary of State Position
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/22/us/politics/22obama.html?_r=1&hp




As sam 76 posted elsewhere...  still unofficial but ...



> Mrs. Clinton came to her decision after additional discussion with President-elect Barack Obama about the nature of her role and his plans for foreign policy, said one of the confidants, who insisted on anonymity to discuss the situation.
> 
> Mr. Obama’s office told reporters on Thursday that the nomination is “on track” but this is the first word from the Clinton camp that she has decided.
> 
> ...




No formal announcement until maybe this time next week. (> 27 Nov)

Seem to recall hearing that the effect (if not the intent  )  of George W Bush appointing Colin Powell to Secretary of State was to neutralise him as a potential threat at the next election.  

So Hillary would presumably have a lot on her mind in deciding whether to take it or not 



> Mrs. Clinton would bring a distinctive background to the State Department. As first lady, she traveled the world for eight years, visiting more than 80 countries, not only meeting with foreign leaders but also villages, clinics and other remote areas that rarely get on a president’s itinerary. Mr. Obama during the primaries belittled that experience as little more than having tea and pointed to schedules showing many ceremonial events on those trips.
> 
> But more than any first lady before her, Mrs. Clinton delved deep into particular policy issues in the international arena, from women’s rights to microlending to alleviate poverty. As a senator for the last eight years, she served on the Armed Services Committee and continued her interest in foreign affairs.
> 
> She and Mr. Obama agree on the broad outlines of a new foreign policy for the post-Bush era, but they disagreed sharply in several crucial areas, particularly over how to deal with Iran and Pakistan. She characterized Mr. Obama as naÃ¯ve in his view of those two countries, while he criticized her judgment for going along with Mr. Bush on the war in Iraq at first.


----------



## Calliope (22 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*



2020hindsight said:


> Seem to recall hearing that the effect (if not the intent  )  of George W Bush appointing Colin Powell to Secretary of State was to neutralise him as a potential threat at the next election.




Its the old story. It's better to have your opponent inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.


----------



## 2020hindsight (22 November 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*



Calliope said:


> Its the old story. It's better to have your opponent inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in.




yep lol..

http://foxforum.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/11/14/atantaros_1114/comment-page-1/




> Hillary at State? *Keep Your Friends Close and Your Enemies Closer*
> By Andrea Tantaros
> Republican Political Commentator/Foxnews.com Contributor
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (24 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Well I haven't heard any whispers about what role McCain could have in the new year.  Thankfully!

The critics are out on limbs complaining that Obama promised change and he's recycling Clinton's people.  

But hey...  There were good people in the rank and file of the DEMOCRATS eight years ago.  
Just because they have held positions with Clinton does not mean there is no change.  
Appointees will have new roles and must conduct themselves according to Obama's 'change'.  
Out with old tactics not talented people!  

Barack's second youtube weekly radio address: re jobs for now and the future:


----------



## noirua (24 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Well I haven't heard any whispers about what role McCain could have in the new year.  Thankfully!
> 
> The critics are out on limbs complaining that Obama promised change and he's recycling Clinton's people.
> 
> ...



Interesting to see if America and many other countries see a sufficient rebound by the end of 2009 to make it possible for countries to claw back all these loans given to banks. 

Danger is, that all the effort ends up with a back to square one situation and carrying even greater debt in the  then near worthless companies.

Upside is they have sufficient success that they can then float off the assets that recover in value.

Upside risk is better but downside is worse.

Don't think it really matters now as Obama looks to be going for recovery or bust. Good luck to him - & Doris, 2020, Julia and co.


----------



## Green08 (24 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> Don't think it really matters now as Obama looks to be going for recovery or bust. Good luck to him - & Doris, 2020, Julia and co.




Hey you left me out!!

Been on extended holiday!  

He has a long road ahead but will do the BEST HE CAN.  Any president coming into this economical crisis would probably wish they had never put themselves up for crucifixion.

Keep your friends close and your enemies closer - his Cabinet will work - maybe a few weekend BBQ's socialising, amazing what humans are capable of in disaster. 

Give the Guy a break and see what happens over the next year/s.  Sure there will be questionable decisions. His intellect, contact and diplomacy will be tested.  He is President and also a human.  

You may go on about his past - if your's was on public display would you even consider running?  My hope is  improving the crisis to some degree however more so (fingers crossed) that a degree of racism and bigotry will be eased. 

I've been watching the Doha Debates from the Middle East.  They are in favor of him. However they are now pushing for alot of liberalization.


----------



## Doris (26 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Barack has sought "leaders who could offer both *sound judgment and fresh thinking*; 
both *a depth of experience* and *a wealth of bold fresh new ideas*".

Barack's summary of each of the four who will lead the economic team sounds brilliant.

Watch the video of Barack's announcement yesterday and learn more about the economic team:

If your internet connection is slow, press pause, let it stream - then watch uninterrupted.




Note how 'the campaign' didn't dump supporters after they'd won the election 
- but continues to make them feel a continuing part of the process:

________________________________________
From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, 26 November 2008 7:49 AM
To: Doris *******
Subject: Major announcement from Barack

Doris --

Today and yesterday, President-elect Barack Obama announced key members of an economic team tasked with creating jobs, stabilizing the economy, and getting our country back on track.

Barack is bringing together some of the best minds in the country to make swift progress on the economic challenges we face. 

Timothy F. Geithner, president and CEO of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, will serve as *Secretary of the Treasury*. Lawrence H. Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury under President Clinton, will serve as *Director of the National Economic Council*.

Christina D. Romer will serve as *Director of the Council of Economic Advisers*, Melody C. Barnes will serve as *Director of the Domestic Policy Council*, and Heather A. Higginbottom will serve as Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council.

Peter Orszag, currently Director of the Congressional Budget Office, will serve as *Office of Management and Budget Director*, and Rob Nabors will serve as Deputy Director. 

Barack's economic team has already begun work on a recovery plan, and he'll provide progress updates in the coming weeks. He'll also provide their initial recommendations to the incoming Congress.

You'll be instrumental in generating support to pass legislation that puts America on the road to recovery.

While we can't underestimate the challenge we face, we also can't underestimate the opportunity we have to bring the change our country needs.

Thanks,

David

David Plouffe
Campaign Manager
Obama for America


----------



## basilio (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Ever wondered why Obamas speeches sounded so good? Turns out much of the quality of his speech writing comes from the ancient Romans.  There is an excellent story examining the way Obama constructs his speeches and comparisons with  the styles developed in ancient Rome. 




> *The new Cicero*
> Barack Obama's speeches are much admired and endlessly analysed, but, says Charlotte Higgins, one of their most interesting aspects is the enormous debt they owe to the oratory of the Romans




http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/26/barack-obama-usa1


----------



## Doris (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



basilio said:


> Ever wondered why Obamas speeches sounded so good? Turns out much of the quality of his speech writing comes from the ancient Romans.  There is an excellent story examining the way Obama constructs his speeches and comparisons with  the styles developed in ancient Rome.
> 
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/26/barack-obama-usa1




Brilliant justification of a brilliant scholar, Basilio! 

Thanks! Your article elucidates and validates the wonder of Barack's wisdom conveyed by words.

I especially like:



> During the Roman republic (and in ancient Athens) politics was oratory. In Athens, questions such as whether or not to declare war on an enemy state were *decided by the entire electorate* (or however many bothered to turn up) *in open debate*. Oratory was the supreme political skill, on whose mastery power depended. Unsurprisingly, then, oratory was highly organised and rigorously analysed. The Greeks and Romans, in short, knew all the rhetorical tricks, and they put a name to most of them.
> 
> It turns out that Obama knows them, too. One of the best known of Cicero's techniques is his use of series of three to emphasise points: the *tricolon*. (The most enduring example of a Latin tricolon is not Cicero's, but Caesar's "Veni, vidi, vici" - I came, I saw, I conquered.) Obama uses tricola freely. Here's an example: "Tonight, we gather to affirm the greatness of our nation, not because of the height of our skyscrapers, or the power of our military, or the size of our economy ..." In this passage, from the 2004 Democratic convention speech, Obama is also using the technique of "praeteritio" - *drawing attention to a subject by not discussing it*. (He is discounting the height of America's skyscrapers etc, but in so doing reminds us of their importance.)
> 
> One of my favourites among Obama's tricks was his use of the phrase "a young preacher from Georgia", when accepting the Democratic nomination this August; he did not name Martin Luther King. The term for the technique is "*antonomasia*". One example from Cicero is the way he refers to Phoenix, Achilles' mentor in the Iliad, as "senior magister" - "the aged teacher". In both cases, it sets up an intimacy between speaker and audience, the flattering idea that *we all know what we are talking about without need for further exposition*. It humanises the character - King was just an ordinary young man, once. Referring to Georgia by name localises the reference - Obama likes to use the specifics to American place to ground the winged sweep of his rhetoric - just as in his November 4 speech: "Our campaign ... began in the backyards of Des Moines and the living rooms of Concord and the front porches of Charleston", which, of course, is also another tricolon.






> Obama entered politics without family backing (compare Clinton) or a military record (compare John McCain). Roman tradition dictated you had both. The compensatory talent Obama shares with Cicero... is a skill at "*setting up a genealogy of forebears* - not *biological* forebears but *intellectual* forebears. For Cicero it was Licinius Crassus, Scipio Aemilianus and Cato the Elder. For Obama it is Lincoln, Roosevelt and King."






> Obama's oratory conforms to the tripartite ideal laid down by Aristotle, who stated that good rhetoric should consist of *pathos, logos and ethos - emotion, argument and character*. It is in the projection of ethos that Obama particularly excels. Take this resounding passage: "I am the son of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas. I was raised with the help of a white grandfather who survived a Depression to serve in Patton's army during World War II and a white grandmother who worked on a bomber assembly line at Fort Leavenworth while he was overseas. I've gone to some of the best schools in America and lived in one of the world's poorest nations." He manages to convey the sense that not only can he revive the American dream, but that he personally embodies - actually, in some sense, is - the American dream.






> Obama's favourite tricks of the trade, it appears, are the related *anaphora and epiphora*. Anaphora is the repetition of a phrase at the start of a sentence. Again, from November 4: "It's the answer told by lines that stretched around schools ... It's the answer spoken by young and old ... It's the answer ..." Epiphora does the same, but at the end of a sentence. From the same speech (yet another tricolon): "She lives to see them stand out and speak up and reach for the ballot. Yes we can." The phrase "Yes we can" completes the next five paragraphs.


----------



## gav (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



basilio said:


> Ever wondered why Obamas speeches sounded so good? Turns out much of the quality of his speech writing comes from the ancient Romans.  There is an excellent story examining the way Obama constructs his speeches and comparisons with  the styles developed in ancient Rome.




Did the ancient Romans write speeches like this? :


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



gav said:


> Did the ancient Romans write speeches like this? :





As I've said before Gav, (you are proving pretty obstinate and/or  intolerant of slips of the tongue on this one) ... but if you are talking contiguous states, then he had been to 47 ( not 57).  Now that's hardly a hanging offence, lol. 

Hey , if you are so clever as to never make a slip of the tongue whilst making an "aside" comment - of absolutely no significance - and wish to attract great wit and wisdom to yourself by pointing this out .. .then maybe we can expect to see you running for President in 2012  

Alternatively we can treat your post as (also) having no significance 

Back to thread - and the wisdom of Latin speeches / quotes ..  (and arguably more applicable than ever to the market for instance ) ..

"Fortes fortuna adiuvat" 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortune_favours_the_bold



> Fortune favours the bold, Fortune favours the brave, Fortune helps the brave , and Fortune favours the strong are common translations of the famous and often-quoted ancient Latin proverb "Fortes fortuna adiuvat".
> 
> The phrase means that Fortuna, the Goddess of luck, is more likely to help those that take risks, take action, and develop their skills proactively. It was first written by Terence, who lived in the second century BC, in his play "Phormio" [1], but it has been quoted many times since. The phrase is often associated with Virgil's epic poem, the Aeneid, appearing in book 10 line 284, in the slightly different form "audentis fortuna iuvat." [2]
> 
> ...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama has a crowd of old dry hasbeens like Clinton and Biden on his team.

Thank g he's got a blackberry to keep him in touch with reality in 2009.

gg


----------



## Green08 (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



basilio said:


> Ever wondered why Obamas speeches sounded so good? ........the styles developed in ancient Rome.




Inspiration is a great thing. We all fall under the guise at some point.   Plagiarism is not.  My Year 10 child just had to 'legally; complete an understanding on plagiarism and copy write to pass the HSC ahead of her, as if she hasn’t adhered to the standard now!

He is far too bright to write or allow others to write recited speeches for him.


----------



## 2020hindsight (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Obama has a crowd of old dry hasbeens like Clinton and Biden on his team.



better hasbeens than a never-will-be's like Palin


----------



## Doris (27 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Thank g he's got a blackberry to keep him in touch with reality in 2009.
> 
> gg




Barack, even as president-elect, is not permitted a Blackberry! 
It's a high security risk!  Meh!


----------



## Doris (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> As I've said before Gav, (you are proving pretty obstinate and/or  intolerant of slips of the tongue on this one) ... but if you are talking contiguous states, then he had been to 47 ( not 57).  Now that's hardly a hanging offence, lol.
> 
> Hey , if you are so clever as to never make a slip of the tongue whilst making an "aside" comment - of absolutely no significance - and wish to attract great wit and wisdom to yourself by pointing this out .. .then maybe we can expect to see you running for President in 2012
> 
> Alternatively we can treat your post as (also) having no significance.




Hear hear!

If he'd listened to the words of the man who'd had three hours sleep a night for the previous few weeks - with his punishing schedule... and knew that there were 50 states - 'one to go' - he would have subtracted the two that Barack exempted and realized and respected his intention. 

But when a mere male is as perfect as BHO   it behoves a mere bully to find fault.  

This is the see-saw syndrome:  
The other person is up so you try to put him down hoping you will rise in stature.
Get a life.  Find a slippery slide, of your own, to play with.  

Better still, look at Barack as a role model for his genius in having lived his life to be the man he is today.


----------



## wayneL (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Hear hear!
> 
> If he'd listened to the words of the man who'd had three hours sleep a night for the previous few weeks - with his punishing schedule... and knew that there were 50 states - 'one to go' - he would have subtracted the two that Barack exempted and realized and respected his intention.
> 
> ...




I still think Man U can win the premiership next year.... Oh! Sorry, wrong forum. 

It must have been all the slagging off and cheerleading in this thread.

Look, it's time to stop all the tribalistic team play. It's now time, whether a supporter of Obama or not, to sit back and watch what this man does with his opportunity and gauge the results. He is now President of the US (a foreign country by the way ) and we should all hope that he can:


Improve US foreign policy in how it affects every one of us

Improve America's reputation (I think we all "want" to like the US, something that was not possible under the previous cabal of clowns and criminals)

Correct the financial mal-model currently wreaking havoc on the world economy

Prevent an almost inevitable economic war of some description 

Extract the west from the ludicrous military incursions currently embroiled in

...and more.

It's a tall order with certain failures. But we'll only see if he is, on balance, a force for good by giving him some room and some time.

Finally, may I suggest some study of human psychology on the part of the Obamaphiles. You will never win support from the other side with the extreme idolatry of the man. Balance would be good.


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> ... Look, it's time to stop all the tribalistic team play. It's now time, whether a supporter of Obama or not, to sit back and watch what this man does ...




Wayne we were just looking at his words and the way he constructs his speeches thassall 

Similarities with Romans, Shakespeare , ... GW Bush etc 

PS By comparison, here's GW Bush in one of his more expansive speeches (maybe not as powerful as the index finger of God,    but US president is still the most powerful bloke around this planet anyway ) :-


----------



## basilio (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Is this too off topic?

I visited 2020 hindsight signature tune out of interest. Absolutely brilliant. Highlights the potential power of the people. It is the Song from Angry men Les Miserables. 

Looks great as part of a musical. Think it might get close to the bone politically as economies crash and people get hungry. I suppose I am relating it to what Obama et al may face in the coming months. Really worth a look

_Civilization is 3 meals deep. _

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=x6-5g78Nr6Q&feature=related


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



basilio said:


> ..  Highlights the potential power of the people. It is the Song from Angry men Les Miserables.



:topic
bas, the other song there is about "empty chairs at empty tables" - after virtually all of em are killed at the barricade    Not sure I'd recommend it lol. 

But Les Mis is a ripper musical (sure many would agree).  This song is similar - on the eve of the battle ... what takes em out to Intermission I think.  :-

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=GuffHRacZMQ&feature=related

I think best example would be the People Power exercise in Philippines in 1986 against Marcos (who wanted to turn the tanks against the people).  Once it reached "critical mass" (plus the backing of the Church) - there was no stopping it. 

China tried to replicate it (Tiananmen, 1989) but that wasn't so successful (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989


----------



## 2020hindsight (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> :topic
> Les Mis is a ripper musical (sure many would agree).  This song is similar - on the eve of the battle ... what takes em out to Intermission I think.  :-
> 
> http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=GuffHRacZMQ&feature=related One Day More



Lol - I notice that the Obama campaign did a take on "One Day More" 
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=W3ijYVyhnn0&feature=related
embedded
 Les Misbarack 

No prize for guessing who plays the Thenardiers 

PS I heard that the people in Bangkok Airport are prepared to fight to the death    Gee whiz, - to unseat a democratically elected Govt ? - who would win another election if another was held now ?!! - weird.


----------



## Green08 (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



2020hindsight said:


> PS I heard that the people in Bangkok Airport are prepared to fight to the death    Gee whiz, - to unseat a democratically elected Govt ? - who would win another election if another was held now ?!! - weird.




At least they have passion and aren't scared to make a statement publically about it.  Not great for travel but it's a great way to get your message across.  I remember sleeping in that new airport (the one on the news it is absolutely massive) on some rather uncomfortable plastic seats so sleeping on the floor with mats shows great dedication to the cause.

The reason they wear Yellow is their devotion to the King of Thailand. Complicated as to why he can't actually rein in the country as the people would do anything for him.  

There is alot of corruption at government level.  Democracy in a developing country is questionable as to the honesty of the democratic process.

Wouldn't it be a strange sight to see that passion en mass here!


----------



## gav (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Hear hear!
> 
> If he'd listened to the words of the man who'd had three hours sleep a night for the previous few weeks - with his punishing schedule... and knew that there were 50 states - 'one to go' - he would have subtracted the two that Barack exempted and realized and respected his intention.
> 
> ...




You are too easy to stir up... My comment was tongue in cheek.  Obama obviously has a huge job ahead of him, and I really wish him all the best...

No need to tell me to get a life, I have a great one and I'm very thankful for it   Dont take everything you read on a forum so personally..


----------



## Julia (28 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> At least they have passion and aren't scared to make a statement publically about it.



Great.  No worries about the thousands of people they are inconveniencing.  Just so long as they make whatever their point is.  This remains obscure to me.



> The reason they wear Yellow is their devotion to the King of Thailand. Complicated as to why he can't actually rein in the country as the people would do anything for him.



Yes, we hear much about the Thais' devotion to the King.  If the King looks with equal fondness on these, umm, crusaders, why doesn't he persuade them to settle their concerns in a way that doesn't stuff up the lives of thousands of tourists, and pretty much at the same time stuff the Thai economy for some time to come, dependent as it is on tourism?
A 'complicated' explanation is fine.

Why is any semblance of authority 'reluctant to intervene'?  This is the phrase I heard on PM this evening.  The reporter suggested neither the police nor the army were prepared to become involved.  Why not?





> There is alot of corruption at government level.  Democracy in a developing country is questionable as to the honesty of the democratic process.



.  It certainly seems so.  Wasn't the last CEO of Thailand fired for corruption?




> Wouldn't it be a strange sight to see that passion en mass here!



Hopefully it would never be tolerated, and thank heaven for that.
What exactly are they being passionate about?


----------



## Doris (29 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



gav said:


> You are too easy to stir up... My comment was tongue in cheek.  Obama obviously has a huge job ahead of him, and I really wish him all the best...
> 
> No need to tell me to get a life, I have a great one and I'm very thankful for it   Dont take everything you read on a forum so personally..




lol...  Gav, mine was tongue in cheek too!  
I have always inferred Barack is perfect but NEVER blatantly stated this.  He is human after all.  

No personal attack intended, I just felt in the mood for metaphors.
Guess I'm also into anti-bullying. It is illegal yet it still happens daily in all walks of life and politics especially.

I enjoyed the inspiration that came with the scenario of bullies on a see-saw in a playground.
And the POSITIVE visualization of a NEW game (of a new 'life') on a slippery slide:

We all could/should be climbing one in life with the double concept (conundrum) of:
 *  _'reaching the top'_, enjoying the view and the achievement and 
 *  the choice or fate of enjoying the ride  - or - as in this market climate - 
 * going for a downward slide!  

... it's not the event (slippery slide outcome) that matters, but how we perceive it and then act.

Tomorrow is another day and offers new choices for us to try... Survival is essential.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama's cabinet appointments are well described by the currency lad...

"old session musicians get new gig"

Priceless.

Have a read.

http://thenewcurrencylad.blogspot.com/2008/11/retread-administration-far-from.html

gg


----------



## Doris (29 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

It is well known that anger and negative outlooks procreate the release of chemicals by the body's endocrine system causing detriment, such as cancer, whereas a positive attitude and a mind consumed with seeking and perpetuating happy thoughts, produce protective endorphins and happy feelings.  
Positive adds.  Negative takes away. (energy, health, happiness, amicability...)
Balance in all things is optimal GG!  

Barack Obama has given substantial shape to his top team, and every indication that he is a *hard-headed realist*, not a clueless liberal who will fumble while learning on the job about how a country can be run. 

His economic team is experienced and impressive-though that does not mean its members have career records that are free of blemish. 

Lawrence Summers, who will head the National Economic Council and be the next president's right-hand man for all economic issues, has held cabinet-level office before, is a respected economist and has the right instincts when it comes to marrying markets and public policy, *though* critics will remind him that it is his deregulation of financial markets in 2000 that has led to the current financial crisis. 

Timothy Geithner, who has been named head of the Treasury, also has a strong career record, *but *he too will have critics who will want to ask him about his role in the decision to allow Lehman Brothers to go bankrupt in September, which made the financial crisis much worse than it was until then. 

Paul Volcker as a former chairman of the Federal Reserve System is best known for having licked inflation in the 1980s, and he will bring his understanding of markets to Washington. 
Mr Obama has also announced a budget director and given him the mandate to achieve efficiency in fiscal spending.


*This is not a team of Obama groupies*; some are a hangover from the Clinton administration, and Mr Volcker goes back even further. *What the president-elect has shown is a willingness to seek out competence*. 

This is reflected most clearly in his decision to ask President Bush's defence secretary to continue in office for a year. Given that Mr Obama fought his election campaign on ending the Iraq war, which has not been Mr Gates' priority so far, it is clear that Mr Obama seeks to use accumulated experience to deal with a very difficult situation. 

There is also a *strong sense of realism* in his choice of Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff; Mr Emanuel is known for a "take-no-prisoners" kind of hard-ball style that is quite removed from the feel-good liberalism that marked the Obama campaign speeches. 

*Clearly, Americans have elected someone who can empathise with voters but also has the toughness to administer difficult policies.*

But most of all, Mr Obama has shown statesmanship in choosing his Democratic rival for the nomination, Hillary Clinton, as his secretary of state. 
Not only does this show an ability to reach out to people, it also shows confidence in himself that he can run foreign policy even with a strong secretary of state who is no one's puppet. 

If the rest of his cabinet has as much *competence* as these key appointments, Mr Obama's initial moves have been the *right ones.*


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (29 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Sorry if I upset you Doris with an alternate view on Barack's cabinet.

It is well known that anger and negative outlooks procreate the release of chemicals by the body's endocrine system causing detriment, such as cancer, whereas a positive attitude and a mind consumed with seeking and perpetuating happy thoughts, produce protective endorphins and happy feelings.
Positive adds. Negative takes away. (energy, health, happiness, amicability...)

Balance in all things is optimal Doris.

gg


----------



## Doris (29 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Sorry if I upset you Doris with an alternate view on Barack's cabinet.
> 
> It is well known that anger and negative outlooks procreate the release of chemicals by the body's endocrine system causing detriment, such as cancer, whereas a positive attitude and a mind consumed with seeking and perpetuating happy thoughts, produce protective endorphins and happy feelings.
> Positive adds. Negative takes away. (energy, health, happiness, amicability...)
> ...




Lol... 
I'm balanced firmly on both feet in the direction I've chosen by personal edification.
Never look back unless it's to learn OR you wish to go there.  

However...  You habitually do not proffer an alternative view, just a label for others to chew on.
Still, I accept this as it is you.  Can't teach old dogs new tricks.  

Prove me wrong and let yourself feel those endorphins flow warmly through your whole being:
Open your soul and divulge evidence for your _label_ conclusions. 
Positively.
Yes. You can!


----------



## Green08 (29 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> Open your soul and divulge evidence for your _label_ conclusions.
> Positively.
> Yes. You can!




Great posting Doris!  Your committed energy level is insipring.



> Barack Obama has given substantial shape to his top team, and every indication that he is a hard-headed realist, not a clueless liberal who will fumble while learning on the job about how a country can be run.
> 
> His economic team is experienced and impressive-though that does not mean its members have career records that are free of blemish.




Working with the best of the choices at the moment has been a continuing ability of Obama.  He is probably The most Hard Headed Realist President they've had.


----------



## Doris (29 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama has two chances, over the next two weeks, to prevent a GOP filibuster in the Senate.*

Obama's hit-the-ground-running, brook-no-opposition instincts demand a filibuster-free Senate. 

The Republicans, on 40, need just one more seat.

Votes are still being re-counted in Minnesota - probably for a few more weeks. 

Meanwhile, on Tuesday, Georgia will be re-run. 
Why? The State law prescribes the winner must take 50 per cent plus one of the vote.
At the general election the Republican incumbent, Saxby Chambliss beat the Democrat Jim Martin by 49.75% to 46.83%.

Up for grabs are the 128,000 votes cast then for the eliminated third candidate, but as he was a Libertarian his supporters are likely to increase the Republican majority.

GG... if you're still awake...  
Sarah Palin flies in for Sunday night and a barnstorming tour of the state on Monday, eve of poll. Wow hey!

Polls favour the GOP 50 to 47.  If this translates into votes will Palin take the credit? 

Do Georgians have faith in what they've seen Obama do as P-E?


----------



## Doris (30 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *Obama has two chances, over the next two weeks, to prevent a GOP filibuster in the Senate.*
> 
> Votes are still being re-counted in Minnesota - probably for a few more weeks.
> 
> ...




Good timing or what?
Monday - the eve of the Georgia poll, Obama will start introducing his new national security team.



> Barack Obama says he wants to lead an administration where *strong-willed senior officials are ready to argue forcefully for differing points of view*. It appears that in two months, he'll get his wish, and then some.
> 
> Clinton, Gates and Jones have worked smoothly, with the only visible clashes coming between Clinton and Gates' deputies over Iraq.
> 
> ...



http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-na-security30-2008nov30,0,7160819.story 

The crucial part of making a decision is having all the relevant information to consider.
Obama's style is listening to all sides then applying his informed intellect to a decision.

Republican senator John Warner said that Obama's national security team further strengthens what he calls "the growing respect" for Obama's courage and ability to exercise sound judgment in *selecting the best and the brightest* to implement the nation's security policies.

So... come Tuesday, will Georgians vote Democrat and prevent a GOP senate filibuster?


----------



## 2020hindsight (30 November 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Two ways to look at everything, Doris   I'm guessing you'll enjoy these even if others find fault. 

Is America ready? - for another WASP lol

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Un7D1MWFEN0
embedded :-
 "Is America Ready?" by Roy Zimmerman

(god this bloke's funny lol)
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr7fQp15Oyw
"I Approve This Message" - Sing Out the Vote Ohio

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=pxJYTaCXyjk
"Ninety Percent" by Roy Zimmerman


----------



## Doris (3 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*National security announcement from Barack* via David Plouffe

Barack and Joe have asked some of the country's most experienced leaders on national security, foreign policy, law enforcement, and military matters to come together to renew America's security and standing in the world.

*Hillary Clinton*, U.S. Senator from New York and former First Lady, will serve as Secretary of State.

*Secretary Robert Gates*, the current Secretary of Defense, will continue to serve in that role.

*Eric Holder*, former Deputy Attorney General and a former United States Attorney for the District of Columbia, will serve as Attorney General.[/B]

*Janet Napolitano*, Governor and former U.S. Attorney for Arizona, will serve as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security.

*Dr. Susan E. Rice*, a Senior Foreign Policy Advisor to the Obama for America campaign, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, will serve as Ambassador to the United Nations.

*General Jim Jones*, USMC (Ret), former Allied Commander, Europe, and Commander of the United States European Command, will serve as National Security Advisor.

Barack's national security team has been assembled to represent all elements of American power, diplomacy, and leadership that will be vital in overcoming the challenges of the 21st century.

Watch the video of today's press conference:


----------



## wayneL (3 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Green08 said:


> Working with the best of the choices at the moment has been a continuing ability of Obama.  He is probably The most Hard Headed Realist President they've had.



This may eventually be true, but don't think it's a tad premature to make such judgements?  He's not even in the White house yet. 

I'm happy Obama beat McCain, but I'm also very worried by his agenda.

First priority needs to be damage control, but not by the Keynesian path to certain depression and indebted generations. 

Unfortunately the path leads to depression no matter the economic _modus operandi_, but the correct path will have the US, and subsequently the world growing unencumbered by excess debt, the poisonous malinvestment of this credit binge having been cleared away.

More unfortunately, Obama appears to have chosen this Keynesian path. This augers extreme long term deleterious economic and sociological consequences for the entire world; his conception of "change" in danger of necrosis before it is even born, as the world loses hope due to economic apocalypse.

I strongly believe there is definitely a time for Obama, but this could be exactly the wrong time. The expectations of the overjoyed left will be dashed and disappointed, and the opportunity for a positive memory of the first minority president may go wanting.

The circumstances he finds himself in are impossible, but we need a pragmatist right now. 

President-elect Barack Obama proposes economic suicide for US


----------



## numbercruncher (3 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Hasnt the US already theoretically committed economic suicide ? She has liabilities that at todays prices are impossible to fulfill.

Its all an illusion, I think everyone is to paralyzed with fear to want to see through the smoke and mirrors ?

Only cure now is also the cause, more and more debt, scary thought really, its like a starving hungry insatiable beast .

If more debt becomes unavailable it surely collapses in a smoldering heap.


----------



## Doris (3 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The Georgia run-off today ended in a Republican victory.

The Democrats have 58 of the 100 senate seats. 
A majority of 60 would have allowed them to override Republican delaying tactics such as filibusters that could play havoc with Obama's ambitious legislative programme. 

Instead, the Democrats will have to rely on moderate Republicans to see their bills through.

Minnesota is still being recounted but the Georgia defeat makes that outcome less important.

With 96% of the vote counted, Chambliss took 57% to Democratic candidate Jim Martin's 43%. 
Martin benefited on November 4 from the big African-American turnout for Obama. 
*Turnout today, by contrast, was low.*

So in fact, the African American community lost Obama the chance of a "super-majority" in the Senate.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (3 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> The Georgia run-off today ended in a Republican victory.
> 
> The Democrats have 58 of the 100 senate seats.
> A majority of 60 would have allowed them to override Republican delaying tactics such as filibusters that could play havoc with Obama's ambitious legislative programme.
> ...




Its called democracy Doris.

You will have to live with it.

The people have spoken.

gg


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rst-campaign-promise-by-dropping-oil-tax.html



> Barack Obama breaks first campaign promise by dropping oil tax
> President-Elect Barack Obama has broken his first campaign promise by quietly dropping a profits windfall tax on oil companies that he promised on the campaign trail.


----------



## Doris (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Its called democracy Doris.
> 
> You will have to live with it.
> 
> The people have spoken.




LOL... American style!  Voting is not compulsory.  

Had the African Americans turned out as they did on Nov 4, then Georgia would have a Democrat senator.

But Obama did not urge them.  He's not concerned about potential filibusters.
He's focused on getting his team organized and confident enough in his ability to draw bipartisan support.

What is interesting to me is David Plouffe is organizing "Change is Coming house meetings".



> On December 13th and 14th, supporters are coming together in every part of the country to reflect on what we've accomplished and plan the future of this movement. Your ideas and feedback will be collected and used to guide this movement in the months and years ahead.
> 
> You can connect with fellow supporters, make progress on the issues you care about, and help shape the future of your community and our country.




So the 'ground up' soliciting approach continues... 'listening' and gathering information.
- letting people feel they are a part of the process.


----------



## Doris (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> AHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!
> 
> *Barack Obama breaks first campaign promise by dropping oil tax*
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...rst-campaign-promise-by-dropping-oil-tax.html




What a great headline to sell newspapers!  

I wonder if anyone will read the pertinent points in the article:



> An aide explained the change by saying: "President-Elect Obama announced the policy during the campaign because oil prices were above $80 per barrel. They are below that now and expected to stay below that."
> 
> The oil industry, however, welcomed the move. It had argued that a previous windfall tax under Jimmy Carter cost the country billions as suppliers spurned domestically-produced oil and looked overseas.




How much *profits windfall tax* would oil companies have lost when oil is USD45?
To me it shows that Obama is flexible to changing situations and it looks good for oil company PR!  



> In the summer he said the tax would "help families pay their heating and cooling bills and reduce energy costs".




Well... the 'cratering' economy did this for them!


----------



## 2020hindsight (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Thanks Doris 
Alan Kohler in the background saying oil has fallen 70% since 4 July etc. unbelieveable (sorta)


----------



## Calliope (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I hope that an African American leader can do a better job than African African leaders. The mendacious Hillary can't wait for him to stumble. She has been wearing that smug look ever since Obama picked her. His first major error.

He has taken on an almost impossible task, and if he can't live up to the expectations he has created he will be a one term president


----------



## Doris (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> I hope that an African American leader can do a better job than African African leaders. The mendacious Hillary can't wait for him to stumble. She has been wearing that smug look ever since Obama picked her. His first major error.




The world is watching Obama's decisions and the US-style democracy role model.
There's a journalist in Uganda who agrees with part of your hopes Calliope!

*Obama’s cabinet choice: A lesson for African leaders*



> The mere fact that in nominating candidates for Congress’s consideration, he has included known Republicans and some appointees of GW Bush, is an indication that Obama has gone for talent, competence and merit rather than loyalty or cronyism.
> 
> Looked at another way; both Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton were Obama’s rivals for the Democratic nomination. After he beat them for the Democratic ticket, he first picked Biden for running mate and after beating John McCain for the White House, he has now included Hillary Clinton in his top team.
> 
> ...



http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/20/662866


----------



## wayneL (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> What a great headline to sell newspapers!
> 
> I wonder if anyone will read the pertinent points in the article:
> 
> ...



Has Obama explained where he will replace the revenue from?

He is going to have to be VEEEEEEERY flexible, because the reason oil is now $45 is the same reason that gumint revenue is going to be torpedoed in a hundred different ways.

I repeat what I said before. The US needed an Obama, but now is the worst possible time. It is going to be a schmozzle; that's unfortunate.


----------



## Julia (5 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> L
> 
> 
> So the 'ground up' soliciting approach continues... 'listening' and gathering information.
> - letting people feel they are a part of the process.




If Obama fails as President, he'd clearly have a rosy future in marketing.
Probably be better paid too.


----------



## inenigma (6 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Julia said:


> If Obama fails as President, he'd clearly have a rosy future in marketing.
> Probably be better paid too.




Providing, of course, the KKK behave themselves.


----------



## Doris (8 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama to Name Shinseki Secretary of Veterans Affairs *

What a brilliant choice!  
He's the first Asian American on Obama's team - a Japanese American born in Hawaii.
Shinseki proved himself a strong character by never doing a public 'I told you so' to Rumsfeld.



> Mr. Shinseki is well known for having predicted that a much larger U.S. force would be needed in Iraq even as his civilian bosses argued that he was wrong. In 2003, he testified to Congress that it might require several hundred thousand U.S. troops to control Iraq after the initial military invasion.
> 
> Rumsfeld said at the time that his assessment was grossly exaggerated, and within months, Mr. Shinseki was forced out of his job. In June 2003, he retired after 38 years in the Army. But his prediction turned out to be prophetic, as President George W. Bush sent in a surge of forces in early 2007.




The way the vets are (not) treated, especially for post-traumatic stress, will surely finally be addressed.



> "He and I share a reverence for those who serve," Mr. Obama said. "So many veterans around the country are struggling even more than those who have not served -- higher unemployment rates, higher homeless rates, higher substance abuse rates, medical care that is inadequate -- it breaks my heart, and I think that General Shinseki is exactly the right person who is going to be able to make sure that we honor our troops when they come home."


----------



## noirua (8 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> *Obama to Name Shinseki Secretary of Veterans Affairs *
> What a brilliant choice!
> He's the first Asian American on Obama's team - a Japanese American born in Hawaii.
> Shinseki proved himself a strong character by never doing a public 'I told you so' to Rumsfeld.
> The way the vets are (not) treated, especially for post-traumatic stress, will surely finally be addressed.



All sounds very good, but, but, but, Obama will have to get legislation through with unemployment costing a great deal more and further bail outs of the unionized car companies costing a fortune.
Tax receipts set to bomb and costs rocketing, including Afghanistan. 
Not much left in the bankrupt American Federal Government for all the other promises!


----------



## basilio (8 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

With the economic and environmental world at a crossroads, what do people think of Obama's chances of making some really big decisions on the direction America is going. That is not just more of the same but fundamental rethinking? And if we couldn't/didn't do it now, when is there a realistic second opportunity?

I've posted the beginning of a long piece which outlines the big picture and suggests how Obama might tackle the problem. 

Any thoughts?


> *Memo to the President-elect on Energy Realism and the Green New Deal*
> by Richard Heinberg
> 
> December 2008
> ...




http://www.energybulletin.net/node/47404


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama could be the first President to have a scandal brewing even BEFORE he takes the oath of office.  Obama, the ultimate Chicago politician, didn't get where he did in Chicago politics with clean hands.  Let's see if Fitgerald will bag Obama.  Blago is not going to keep quiet.  He will show Fitz where the bodies are buried.  The question is, Will Obama make it through his first year in office?  I bet NO.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24781978-26397,00.html

*Haunting of the president-elect has begun*



> THE immediate problem for Barack Obama in the Blagojevich scandal is finding a quick and non-controversial way to fill the Illinois Senate seat that his rise to power has made vacant.
> 
> As it stands, Illinois law gives Governor Rod Blagojevich sole power to appoint Obama's replacement, a power unchanged by the extraordinary corruption charges laid yesterday by federal prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald.
> 
> ...


----------



## Knobby22 (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

You can bet Fox will do everything they can to insinuate.

If Obama is found to be corrupt then you have a lame duck President during the worst crisis the US has had since the Depression then that should finish the US as a world power. 

Don't wish it so!!!


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

This is Chicago politics - the same cesspool that Obama emerged from.  Hope and change - yeah right.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/ConductUnbecoming/Story?id=6431739&page=1

*Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. Is 'Senate Candidate No. 5', Says He Did Nothing Wrong*



> Chicago Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., D-Ill., is the anonymous "Senate Candidate No. 5" whose emissaries Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich reportedly offered up to $1 million to name him to the U.S. Senate, his attorney confirmed today after it was reported earlier on ABCNews.com "The Blotter".
> 
> According to the FBI affidavit in the case, Blagojevich "stated he might be able to cut a deal with Senate Candidate 5 that provided Rod Blagojevich" with something "tangible up front."
> 
> ...


----------



## noirua (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Knobby22 said:


> You can bet Fox will do everything they can to insinuate.
> 
> If Obama is found to be corrupt then you have a lame duck President during the worst crisis the US has had since the Depression then that should finish the US as a world power.
> 
> Don't wish it so!!!



I'm in no way a supporter of Barack Obama as I see his spending plans fraught with danger. However, I do not doubt his honesty and integrity even for one second.


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Knobby22 said:


> You can bet Fox will do everything they can to insinuate.
> 
> If Obama is found to be corrupt then you have a lame duck President during the worst crisis the US has had since the Depression then that should finish the US as a world power.
> 
> Don't wish it so!!!




Not saying I "wish" it, but if something emerges from this, then who is to blame?  The media totally was in the tank for Obama, and followed no leads.  The stuff was out there during the election, but was not amplified by the media.  Tony Reszko, Blogo, Ayers, Wright, etc., the media did all they could do to clamp down on any hint of scandal.  Now, this comes out, conveniently after the election.


----------



## ZzzzDad (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

http://www.theamericanprowler.com/blog/2008/12/09/did-obama-have-contact-with-bl

*Did Obama Have Contact with Blago or Didn't He?*



> By Philip Klein
> "I had no contact with the governor or his office and so I was not aware of what was happening," Barack Obama told reporters today in the wake of the Blagojevich arrest, the Chicago Tribune reports.
> 
> But Jake Tapper notes that on November 23, Obama adviser David Axelrod was singing a different tune. "I know he's talked to the governor," Axelrod said  on Fox News Chicago in response to a question about Obama's involvement in filling his Senate seat (see the 1:20 mark of the video below).
> ...


----------



## Doris (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



noirua said:


> I'm in no way a supporter of Barack Obama as I see his spending plans fraught with danger. However, I do not doubt his honesty and integrity even for one second.




You have good gut instinct noirua and hopefully your respect for Obama will grow with time.

Barack wanted to buy a house but it was on a large piece of land.
Tony Rezko's wife bought the land, enabling Barack to afford the house.
The media made this clear in their investigations. Smoke does not always reveal a fire.


----------



## Doris (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

*Obama avoids stain of Chicago's political scandals*



> In Chicago politics, the traditional route to political success has gone through the office of a ward committeeman, whose clout makes or breaks careers. But when Obama first ran, he was a lone wolf ”” a Harvard-educated, former community organizer *beholden to no one*. He drew support with the same undramatic, commonsense stump style he showed on the presidential trail.
> 
> Throughout his political career in Illinois, Obama has racked up wins *without big-name endorsements*. He won the Democratic primary for the U.S. Senate in 2004 *without* the support of many party power brokers. And he didn't get help from Mayor Richard Daley when he won his first election ”” his state Senate seat in 1996.
> 
> ...



http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ir_7l-VA-6OonV1wVsjpXOxPQ-AwD9505MBG0


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> You have good gut instinct noirua and hopefully your respect for Obama will grow with time.
> 
> Barack wanted to buy a house but it was on a large piece of land.
> Tony Rezko's wife bought the land, enabling Barack to afford the house.
> The media made this clear in their investigations. Smoke does not always reveal a fire.




Doris,

What are your views on the Chicago way?

And to what extent do you feel the democrats had nothing to do with the creation of the subprime rollercoaster?


----------



## GumbyLearner (11 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



It's Snake Pliskin said:


> What are your views on the Chicago way?




It would be interesting to know how much Australian superannuation fund money is tied up in the city of Chicago?


----------



## noirua (13 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> You have good gut instinct noirua and hopefully your respect for Obama will grow with time.
> 
> Barack wanted to buy a house but it was on a large piece of land.
> Tony Rezko's wife bought the land, enabling Barack to afford the house.
> The media made this clear in their investigations. Smoke does not always reveal a fire.



Smoke does not always reveal a fire, but it does make for a screen. Perhaps someone will buy a chunk of land so we can all afford a house, shucks no of course not, we're not in the running for PRESIDENT.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (13 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> You have good gut instinct noirua and hopefully your respect for Obama will grow with time.
> 
> Barack wanted to buy a house but it was on a large piece of land.
> Tony Rezko's wife bought the land, enabling Barack to afford the house.
> The media made this clear in their investigations. Smoke does not always reveal a fire.




Doris you are incredible.

You are so loyal to Obama.

As he would say in return to your undying love.

I'm a joker
I'm a smoker
I'm a midnight toker
I get my lovin' on the run
Wooo Wooooo 

gg


----------



## Calliope (13 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

The more things change, the more they stay the same.



> I did not have sexual relations with that woman Miss Lewinsky, I never told anybody to lie, not a single time, never






> I had no contact with the governor or his office, so I was not aware of what was happening


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (14 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

No?


----------



## rhen (18 December 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*

"Despicable"?
A series of five, "out of the mainstream", comments on Obama and his team:
Gerald Celente on US trends in 2009.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=d0lfoE6dNA0&feature=related

Don't expect to hear of the "Mr Mighty Guy" and "Savior of the USA" one gets in the media.


For some credibility perhaps:
http://www.trendsresearch.com/journal08.html


----------



## chops_a_must (18 December 2008)

*Re: Obama's Team*

Anyone laugh when John Sununu was appointed to one of the teams?

I did. I didn't think it was a real person, and thought it was just a Naked Gun joke. 

I also thought the name was Johnson Nunu, not, John Sununu...


----------



## Calliope (21 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Obama is already on the slippery slope and he hasn't been sworn in. America is going to commit a further 20,000 to 30,000 troops to Afghanistan in 2009. This will double the number already there.

Why are they ignoring history?


----------



## wayneL (21 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Obama is already on the slippery slope and he hasn't been sworn in. America is going to commit a further 20,000 to 30,000 troops to Afghanistan in 2009. This will double the number already there.
> 
> Why are they ignoring history?




I was worried about Obama's foreign policy during the campaign and said so earlier in this thread.

Change?

Nah!


----------



## noirua (21 December 2008)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Obama is already on the slippery slope and he hasn't been sworn in. America is going to commit a further 20,000 to 30,000 troops to Afghanistan in 2009. This will double the number already there.
> 
> Why are they ignoring history?



With unemployment rising and Obama likely to water down his plans with excuses. Sending as many troops as possible to far off lands may divert attention from the dire economy likely throughout all of his first term, and helps a bit on the increasing unemployment.


----------



## Doris (7 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Doris,
> 
> What are your views on the Chicago way?




Maybe Obama's family holiday across the US when he was ten - when he saw a shrunken head in a Chicago museum - had an impact on him to return there as a post graduate.  Obviously there was wide scope for improvement in the employment and health of the poor... his goal to explore and develop his bottom-up management thesis.  

_Mix with people who have the skills you wish for... Mix with eagles if you want to fly._

Obama was on record from Day One, in side-stepping ANYONE whom he deemed below his morality bench mark.  

_Lying down with dogs gives you fleas_ 
Obama chose to stand and walk away from the dubious... or have formal links only, in mandatory meetings.


I continue to be amazed in Barack's pristine choices of talent for prime posts.  Even a post vacant since 2006:

Will he choose "a reporter" for Surgeon General?  ... A post largely about informing the nation on public health.



> CNN reporter Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon who is among the nation's best-known physicians, is under serious consideration to be the next surgeon general.
> 
> Government experience:
> * a White House fellow in 1997
> ...




Lovitt!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123127633619058511.html?mod=article-outset-box


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris,

I hope you're around this forum in four years to review the disaster that will become of this Presidency. (probably much, but not all, beyond his control)


----------



## prawn_86 (7 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

I really couldnt give a toss about US politics, as i have no control over any of it, so why should i care, but:

Hasn't he just appointed the same (or same sort of) people as previous regimes?

I would be very surprised if he doesn't just get bogged down in the mire that is modern democracy, meaning he will not be able to achieve anything


----------



## Doris (7 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

You boys really must look into your crystal glass and see the part that's half full!  

I saw a quietly fierce determination on Obama's face in a news interview today when asked about the Gaza situation. He said he was concerned and would give his thoughts in two weeks.  Israel took the bait in firing on those UN schools.  They knew Hamas set up those kids for a wanton suicide mission.  They both are stubborn but the world needs a resolution. This will be as big an issue as the global economic crisis!

It is one concept to choose well known figures who have proven their ability in the past and quite another to appoint them in a related but new brief determined by a man who can see all his models arranged on his board.  New faces that are unproven is not wisdom! 

Only a whippersnapper ostrich says we are immune to US politics.  If you're like me you're feeling pretty good that you've recovered 30% of your stock losses in the past week!  Is it global confidence in an Obama administration that helped this?  Hello... the US (under GW) sent the market spiraling! 

I'm just relieved that the only politician who has ever impressed me, impressed me with his attitudes and intelligence, when he had not yet even done an exploratory on his candidacy two years ago, has the helm.  It won't be easy but he is the only man for the job. Yes. Some things will be beyond his control but he will make us all glad he's the leader.  It will be a testing four years.  I hope we're all around to see it!


----------



## wayneL (7 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> You boys really must look into your crystal glass and see the part that's half full!




Doris,

You don't understand that recession is the full bit.

We NEED a decent recession, perhaps depression to reset the western economies to a healthy path.

What Obama, Uncle Ben et al are indulging in, is "Hair Of The Dog Economics", or to use the Geordie alchoholics logic - "What made yer bad'll make yer better... aye yabbuggermar" (said with an almost Teutonic guttural growl).

They're trying to feed the alchos more bourbon. It won't work and will cause more problems.


----------



## Calliope (7 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Doris,

I posted this on another thread last week. I thought you might like it.  He really does have a halo


----------



## Doris (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Calliope said:


> Doris,
> 
> I posted this on another thread last week. I thought you might like it.  He really does have a halo




Lol...

Letterman said tonight that Obama has just been voted the most admired man in America.  

Wayne should tell them he hasn't started the job yet!

Someone sent me this cartoon of all the presidents of the US with the caption:

*Eye Test 

Can you spot the 44th president of the  United States of America in the chart below...
*
(the preview doesn't show the drawing!   Help Mods! )
You can imagine why this president is easily spotted.  
But it *is* funny!
.


----------



## chops_a_must (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> I saw a quietly fierce determination on Obama's face in a news interview today when asked about the Gaza situation. He said he was concerned and would give his thoughts in two weeks.  Israel took the bait in firing on those UN schools.  They knew Hamas set up those kids for a wanton suicide mission.  They both are stubborn but the world needs a resolution. This will be as big an issue as the global economic crisis!



If he had some balls, he would be speaking now.

Another president being in power now hasn't stopped him announcing other initiatives.


----------



## wayneL (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> (the preview doesn't show the rows of faces!   Help Mods! )
> You can imagine why the last president is easily spotted.
> But it *is* funny!
> .




Doris,

Save images as .gif .jpg or .png rather than .bmp and they will show up.


----------



## Doris (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Doris,
> 
> You don't understand that recession is the full bit.
> 
> ...




My intuition tells me this time maybe Darwinism will prevail... as each country dusts itself off, led by China.

It might look like bankers/consumers are being offered gin or vodka - but could it be water in this heat?


Must it be _flattening the storm-ravaged property and building again from scratch_ and not be curbed at recession status?

*That terrifies me Wayne!* 
Remember what followed the last two global *depressions* where this happened? 
Gaza is being set up in readiness for WWIII.
I vote recession only!


----------



## wayneL (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> My intuition tells me this time maybe Darwinism will prevail... as each country dusts itself off, led by China.
> 
> It might look like bankers/consumers are being offered gin or vodka - but could it be water in this heat?
> 
> ...



Well, I don't think there is a causal link between the great depression and WW2. It was essentially a continuation of WW1 and the armistice conditions Germany was forced to accept. 

Not say there couldn't be a causal link between depression and ww3, but it isn't a mandatory result.

Without at least a deep and prolonged recession, the masses of debt binge and boomer bubble malinvestment will survive, setting us up for certain depression at some later date.

That simply must be allowed to wither away for a healthy future economy.

Unfortunately, this is politically extremely unpalatable and administration endangering. Hence, we can expect wrong decisions from any incumbent.


----------



## ZzzzDad (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*

Wow - this article really inspires confidence.  Obama continues to insert foot into mouth:



> *Obama Predicts 'Trillion-Dollar Deficits for Years to Come'*
> 
> President-elect Barack Obama predicted Tuesday that the nation could see "trillion-dollar deficits for years to come," but said the country needs to continue spending taxpayer dollars to get the economy back on track.
> 
> ...




http://www.foxnews.com/politics/200...enes-confront-economic-crisis-obama-response/

*So there you have it - Trillion dollar deficits for years to come - just what the economy wants to hear right now.  This is the main reason the market tanked today.*


----------



## Bushman (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Without at least a deep and prolonged recession, the masses of debt binge and boomer bubble malinvestment will survive, setting us up for certain depression at some later date.
> 
> That simply must be allowed to wither away for a healthy future economy.
> 
> Unfortunately, this is politically extremely unpalatable and administration endangering. Hence, we can expect wrong decisions from any incumbent.




A recession will not change a thing. The 'big government, American democracy for the world' attitude first espoused by Wilson and Roosevelt during the unwinding of the last great debt binge needs to be curbed first. At the moment, America needs foreign debt to finance its 'control freak' tendencies both within its borders and abroad. 

Until they stop this dysfunctional behaviour and refocus on 'good 'ol American' enterprise and savings, you can forget about it.


----------



## Doris (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



wayneL said:


> Well, I don't think there is a causal link between the great depression and WW2. It was essentially a continuation of WW1 and the armistice conditions Germany was forced to accept.
> 
> Not say there couldn't be a causal link between depression and ww3, but it isn't a mandatory result.
> 
> ...




The Great Depression of the 1930's was named subsequent to the five 'depressions' of the C19. 
The depression of 1893-97 was a prelude to WWI as any academic historian will attest
... as was WWII a consequence of the Great Depression.

With the increased speed of action :: reaction,  WWIII will not take long to manifest. 

With the US going further into debt to foreign countries (especially China) with their economic woes, it will be more vulnerable to its potential aggressors wouldn't you think? It will be less likely to give aid to others.

I agree Obama must look to the future health of the US economy as well as the present debacle but the current domino effect on health and employment will make this an onerous task.  

Many in the US now know what 'a rainy day' means!  
Our X and Y generations (as well as boomers) have not had a hint of this as yet. 

I sense you are inferring my own opinion that when a current generation experiences the need to save for what they 'want' they will appreciate buying only what they 'need'... and not on credit.  When credit sources dry up completely they can taste this?

This may be of interest: http://history1800s.about.com/od/thegildedage/a/financialpanics.htm


----------



## Doris (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



ZzzzDad said:


> Wow - this article really inspires confidence.  Obama continues to insert foot into mouth:
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/200...enes-confront-economic-crisis-obama-response/
> 
> *So there you have it - Trillion dollar deficits for years to come - just what the economy wants to hear right now.  This is the main reason the market tanked today.*




Obama merely stated the obvious.

You cannot stop a semi-trailer heading downhill, immediately - even with functional brakes!


----------



## chops_a_must (8 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2008!*



Doris said:


> The Great Depression of the 1930's was named subsequent to the five 'depressions' of the C19.
> The depression of 1893-97 was a prelude to WWI as any academic historian will attest
> ... as was WWII a consequence of the Great Depression.



Rubbish!

You'd be far better off arguing the period of 21-23 as a bigger reason for WWII for one.


----------



## Doris (20 January 2009)

*Barack 2009!*

The new leader will lead and we'll be glad and grateful he did!

11th-December-2007, 09:39 PM


Doris said:


> Does anyone disagree that Barack will be the next US president?
> 
> I first saw him on 'Oprah' whilst I was in Canada a year ago.   I sat glued and I rarely watch the show!  He was so inspiring that I bought his book 'The Audacity of Hope'.  This was his second book.  The first... earned him enough to pay off his law school debts and buy him a house as he worked in Chicago for a pittance.  I predicted the sales of his second book would help finance a run for president and I was chuffed when he nominated!  He's not accepted any donations from lobbyists but from public donations which IMO give ownership by the donors to 'the cause'.  A brilliant strategy!




I have always asserted that a good leader did not have to be an expert on all topics, but rather, someone with the innate ability to gather experts, to really listen and to have a no-nonsense intelligence to make the decisions. 

I was relieved, rather than euphoric, on 4 Nov 2008 when Barack crossed the line ahead of McCain.

I have been impressed and my gut instinct justified as he presented each of his 'expert' choices to the country. 
These, in turn, lined up under the banner of working as part of Obama's team... Obama's rules.
- experts with differing ideas and opinions to provide a wide data base. 
- ready to hit the ground running with integrity, respect and transparency.

Would the world feel the hope they feel at this time had McCain succeeded in his vitriolic attacks?

What I'm so pleased about is the confidence I feel as Obama's major focus issues over the past year - education, health, employment, infrastructure, global warming - are those which he is now not only still supporting but asserting will help the US out if its mire.

'One president at a time' he has continually reminded the media.  
Tomorrow, at 2am Sydney time, the crown will be placed and the balls will be danced at. 
Then the carpet and sleeves will be rolled up and the work will start in earnest.

EVERY major decision will be sanctioned by Obama ... not by a senior head of department.
This is his presidency as the leader of the team; not the puppet of lobbyists and PACS.  
Even the inauguration was financed by public donations... owned by the citizens.

Barack said, a week ago, that in 2011 people would say he did not do everything 'right', he did not do everything he could have, but he did head America in the right direction.


----------



## Julia (20 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*

Dear Doris,

Please tell me you're not planning a new 2009 thread of "I Adore Obama".


----------



## prawn_86 (20 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Julia said:


> Dear Doris,
> 
> Please tell me you're not planning a new 2009 thread of "I Adore Obama".




Threads merged. Title changed. 

Doris can continue on with her adoration, and i'll drop in every now and then to show her how 'normal' he is and like any other politician is hamstrung and wont be able to make and decent changes


----------



## Doris (20 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



prawn_86 said:


> Threads merged. Title changed.
> 
> Doris can continue on with her adoration, and I'll drop in every now and then to show her how 'normal' he is and like any other politician is hamstrung and wont be able to make any decent changes




I'll hold you to that *prawn*!
But you must have genuine justification for any comments - not just apply the tall poppy syndrome! 

And he will not be hamstrung!  His whole campaign was built on the foundation to break those strings! 

Annoyance permeates and prickles when 'the first black president' is trumpeted.  
He is the best person for the job.  
Who would want it, granted, but he will do as he has encouraged others today to do: 
... work hard in adversity and you'll get there.

Yes *Julia* I do adore the man.  (great butt and eyes)  
I adore his philosophies. 
I adore the way his family relate to each other as though they genuinely like and love each other.  
There is a difference here. They will be a role model for all families.


----------



## prawn_86 (20 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Doris said:


> And he will not be hamstrung!  His whole campaign was built on the foundation to break those strings!




And yet he has been appointing the same lifetime advisors that have been round for years and all the previous administrations. 

Dont you realise that politicians are just puppets...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (20 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Doris said:


> Yes *Julia* I do adore the man.  (great butt and eyes)
> I adore his philosophies.
> I adore the way his family relate to each other as though they genuinely like and love each other.
> There is a difference here. They will be a role model for all families.




On behalf of all of those who backed John McCain, may I wish your man, Barack Obama all the best for his term as President, a long life, wise decisions and good health for him and his family.

The USA is a great country, able to re invent itself and move forward no matter what the challenges.

gg


----------



## sassa (20 January 2009)

Which headline pertaining to Obama and his inauguration will win the Oscar?
From MarketWatch-'World awaits Obama.'
From the NYTimes-'How Long Will The Honeymoon Last?'


----------



## noirua (20 January 2009)

Still a tragedy that the worlds economies are in such a terrible state. He will be forced into admitting he can do little for those who are unemployed in the worse off communities.

In Germany in the 1930's the economy recovered by getting the unemployed building roads etc., it did work and the economy recovered. A great pity AH had other plans going on from there.


----------



## GumbyLearner (21 January 2009)

*Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier?*

Hi guys 

Thought I would start a new thread

Does he care about us?
Is he a nice man?
Does he know that we are American allies?
Can he rescue the world ecomony?

Any contribution is welcome - Positive or Negative??


----------



## Aussiejeff (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



GumbyLearner said:


> Hi guys
> 
> Thought I would start a new thread
> 
> ...




All I know is that World Stock Market sentiments have failed to respond before, during and after his inauguration. I guess that's a big negative.

I presume he cares about us. In a small way.
He seems to be a "nice man". 
I'm confident he knows we are allies. 
I'm not confident he can rescue the world economy.


----------



## Aussiejeff (21 January 2009)

noirua said:


> Still a tragedy that the worlds economies are in such a terrible state. *He will be forced into admitting he can do little for those who are unemployed in the worse off communities.*
> 
> In Germany in the 1930's the economy recovered by getting the unemployed building roads etc., it did work and the economy recovered. A great pity AH had other plans going on from there.




Yup, and ironically it is most likely going to be predominantly black American workers and communities who will suffer more than any other demographic under BA in the coming months/years as the US economy tanks deeper.


----------



## Nyden (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*

He's nothing but a poster boy. No one can do anything about the markets - they'll sort themselves out after a while on their own, simple as that


----------



## sassa (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



Nyden said:


> He's nothing but a poster boy. No one can do anything about the markets - they'll sort themselves out after a while on their own, simple as that



The fear of losing money now seems to be greater than the greed for some,more.


----------



## wayneL (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*

He will go down as the greatest disappointment ever. Even if he does a good job under the horrible circumstances, the expectations are way to high.

Also, if you look past the fancy rhetoric, his foreign affairs agenda is no different to Bush and could actually be even more dangerous.


----------



## Nyden (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



sassa said:


> The fear of losing money now seems to be greater than the greed for some,more.




Yes, and as this fear spreads more rampantly - and a whole wave of punters opt to steer clear of the markets for a few years ... the bottom will then begin to show itself, hopefully :


----------



## wayneL (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*

At the inauguration luncheon Ted Kennedy has collapsed.

I am also hearing rumours that he's carked it and that a second senator has also collapsed.

Omen?

developing.....


----------



## Aussiejeff (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



wayneL said:


> At the inauguration luncheon Ted Kennedy has collapsed.
> 
> I am also hearing rumours that he's carked it and that a second senator has also collapsed.
> 
> ...




Well, the share market collapsed to the worst DOW opening, post inauguration, EVER.

Maybe the senators have significant shares in Bank of America?



Ironically, BA boasts in his speech, "America can now start to lead the world".

Where, exactly?


----------



## MrBurns (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*

This is a great moment for the USA, unfortunately it comes during a very bad moment for the USA.

Obama wont be able to fix things, no one can, but he just might change a few things to help shore up the future.

I agree that his foreign policy is a worry and if he gets too radical with his ideas, well.......remember JFK.


----------



## wayneL (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



wayneL said:


> At the inauguration luncheon Ted Kennedy has collapsed.
> 
> I am also hearing rumours that he's carked it and that a second senator has also collapsed.
> 
> ...



Teddie is apparently OK


----------



## Calliope (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*

http://www.eyeblast.tv/public/checker.aspx?v=yduzVr4znz


----------



## kincella (21 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*

barak obama...and his organisation ACORN were at the grass roots of the sub prime mortgage racket......

does a leopard change its spots ???

here is an extract.............................................
and link to the full article is at the bottom


ACORN showed its colors again in 1991, by taking over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA. Obama represented ACORN in the Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank, 1994 suit against redlining.  Most significant of all, ACORN was the driving force behind a 1995 regulatory revision pushed through by the Clinton Administration that greatly expanded the CRA and laid the groundwork for the Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac borne financial crisis we now confront. Barack Obama was the attorney representing ACORN in this effort. With this new authority, ACORN used its subsidiary, ACORN Housing, to promote subprime loans more aggressively.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html


----------



## sassa (21 January 2009)

Is it safe to turn the TV back on yet?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (21 January 2009)

sassa said:


> Is it safe to turn the TV back on yet?




Once Doris has finished her big O and had a smoke, a bex and a snooze she will be off again no doubt.

gg


----------



## sassa (21 January 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Once Doris has finished her big O and had a smoke, a bex and a snooze she will be off again no doubt.
> 
> gg



Probably have a headache tomorrow night.Apologies to Doris and Julia.Hope I haven't left anyone out.


----------



## Doris (21 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



prawn_86 said:


> And yet he has been appointing the same lifetime advisors that have been round for years and all the previous administrations.
> 
> Dont you realise that politicians are just puppets...




Prawn- 'there are none so blind as those who will not see'!

1.  He chose experienced people who will work in NEW jobs to his rules. He is the leader!  It is his game now!

He thanked Bush for 'his service' to the nation then decried its flaws:



> On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.
> 
> Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.




2.  Barack is no-one's puppet except to the people who donated their meagre cash to fund his campaigns.  

He studied Lincoln - even swore his oath today on Lincoln's bible - and one of the lessons he learned from old Abe was to not be a political puppet.  

Voters will be threatening if his platforms are not implemented but as I stated yesterday, these campaign issues are the ones he will attack and use to kick-start the US economy - as he reiterated in his speech today:



> The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act - not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.




I hope the ghost of *2020* was smiling at Obama's re-pledge for global health as underlined above.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (21 January 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Once Doris has finished her big O and had a smoke, a bex and a snooze she will be off again no doubt.
> 
> gg




She's off again, maybe he should be inaugurated every Tuesday to give us a break.

Was Sarah Palin invited to the inaug?

gg


----------



## noirua (21 January 2009)

I noticed Barack Obama struggled on the oath.  A bit unfortunate that after a flawless performance up to that point.

It would still be better in these hard times, some say desperate, to have a hard nosed President who gives nothing away. George Bush is being super friendly, I think, because he knows that Obama has little hope of for filling his dream, with the Federal Government coffers empty and the loan book stretched to melting point.


----------



## Largesse (21 January 2009)

the oldies on this board prob won't appreciate this as much as i do, but i can tell it is very funny for us youngin's

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Ha8GkzWtRHQ


----------



## Julia (21 January 2009)

sassa said:


> Probably have a headache tomorrow night.Apologies to Doris and Julia.Hope I haven't left anyone out.



Not sure what your apology is about, sassa.  Please don't count me in with Doris as one of the hysterical Obama fans.   I'd have voted for him had I been an American, but I don't regard him as the ultimate Saviour of the world.


----------



## Julia (21 January 2009)

sassa said:


> Is it safe to turn the TV back on yet?



No.  Maybe give it two weeks.


----------



## Glen48 (21 January 2009)

While we are on the topic of great leaders any idea what Krudd has in mind for bailout Mark 11?

Wonder how many B.O trinkets they sold in Alabama?


----------



## lucas (21 January 2009)

noirua said:


> I noticed Barack Obama struggled on the oath.  A bit unfortunate that after a flawless performance up to that point.




No, apparently it was the guy Roberts who fed him the line wrong...

http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2009/01/awkward_obama_i.php


----------



## Julia (21 January 2009)

Glen48 said:


> While we are on the topic of great leaders any idea what Krudd has in mind for bailout Mark 11?
> 
> Wonder how many B.O trinkets they sold in Alabama?



Well, let's see now.  How about vouchers for your local pokies venue, vouchers for families for a week at Dreamworld, vouchers for $1000 per family at David Jones since their profit report today was abysmal, and then vouchers for everyone receiving those preceding vouchers to go to Canberra, sit in parliament in rapt gratitude to Mr Rudd.  Whaddya think?


----------



## wayneL (21 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Doris said:


> Annoyance permeates and prickles when 'the first black president' is trumpeted.




What a disgracefully hideous and obnoxious inference. 

Apart from maybe the KKK, there would scarcely be a person in the world who would consider this as even a factor, apart from the historicality(?) of it.

It certainly has not been a factor here on ASF. Congratulations for playing the race card straight out from under the table.

If there is annoyance, it is at the messianic nature of the campaign and the slobbering adulation from certain sections of "sheeple".

Only sheeple are led, people will look to Obama with a critical eye.


----------



## MRC & Co (21 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



wayneL said:


> If there is annoyance, it is at the messianic nature of the campaign and the slobbering adulation from certain sections of "sheeple".




Only post on this topic, but oh god, and isn't that annoyance!  

Guess people have to look upto someone though, and his rhetoric is certainly persuasive.  The man probably has some good values, but putting them into practice (especially considering he probably doesn't even begin to understand the complexity of many of the things he is talking about), will be an entirely different story!  Unfortunately. 

The world goes on, and Obama becomes the next victim of a bad spell in the global arena.  Guess it will be blamed solely on Bush


----------



## So_Cynical (22 January 2009)

The media is driving me crazy with 24/7 Obama.

Hes a smarmy black politician...that's it, there will only be true change in America 
when they elect a black man that's an atheist, single and dating white women and 
admits to smoking crack and pot. :kiffer:


----------



## wayneL (22 January 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> The media is driving me crazy with 24/7 Obama.
> 
> Hes a smarmy black politician...that's it, there will only be true change in America
> when they elect a black man that's an atheist, single and dating white women and
> admits to smoking crack and pot. :kiffer:




...and so blows my hypothesis in one fell swoop.


----------



## disarray (22 January 2009)

pic related - washington at the inauguration


----------



## Happy (22 January 2009)

> From ABC, 22 Jan. 09
> OBAMA VOWS NEW 'ERA OF OPENNESS', FREEZES PAY OF TOP STAFF
> 
> President Barack Obama has vowed to forge a new era of government openness and froze the pay of top staff earning more than $US100,000 ($152,000) to show Americans their leaders could also tighten their belts amid economic crisis.
> ...




I would like to see it here including obscene superannuation for politicians and on ‘top jobs’ at Woolworths, Coles, all banks and you get the drift.

High prices brought crisis too, and high salaries and bonuses were part of the problem.

And all those hand picked geniuses brought on us this ugly mess, could we have our money back? Please.

But this is for another thread.

Shrinking economy must shrink everything and Obama looks to be heading in the right direction.


----------



## Aussiejeff (22 January 2009)

Happy said:


> *Shrinking* economy must *shrink* everything and Obama looks to be heading in the right direction.




Hey man!

Yo hit da hed on de nail!

Dat Unca Sam don' needa Prez-e-dent... jez a head _*Shrink*_! :silly:


----------



## Doris (23 January 2009)

Happy said:


> I would like to see it here including obscene superannuation for politicians and on ‘top jobs’ at Woolworths, Coles, all banks and you get the drift.
> 
> High prices brought crisis too, and high salaries and bonuses were part of the problem.
> 
> ...




Thanks for your intelligent post *Happy*!

There is no hysteria in my joy this week - even if I'm wearing an inauguration Tshirt as I type!

Obama had the theme in his campaign of no lobbyists nor PACs and your quote shows he's walking the talk.  

After two years of researching Obama I'm quietly ticking off the changes he envisaged and sought to set up. 
He is no overnight wonder. He has spent over 20 years planning to get to this job.

What has he done day one?
- talked by phone to Middle Eastern leaders
- given his intention to make political bribes illegal to implement his ethical government
- instigating the role-concept of service by politicians 
... this role modelling will keep kids off the streets and enhance their self esteem and reduce crime.  
- put a hold on Guantanamo trials for reorganisation and closure
- had closed-door talks with economic advisors

Obama's transparent government will be role modeling for other (world) governments too.
- hope for Africans especially.

The world should see his principles and methods embed what the common man would dare to hope politicians could do. Anyone who goes against integrity and transparency will be off his team.  As has happened in the past.

My purpose for returning to this sector of ASF was to foster mature discussion of whether indeed Obama was the politician I knew instinctively he would be.  If you wish to insult me again GG I will leave permanently. I have no desire to be in rude, denigrating company. My time matters.


----------



## wayneL (23 January 2009)

Notable is Obama's attempts to dehype his presidency and tone down expectations. A good step.

I noticed that the crowd on inauguration day, seemed to be expecting messianic pronouncements and quotable one liners.... "I have a dream:|" or "ask not what your country can do for you" etc.

The fact that the crowd (and media) seemed underwhelmed by Obama's speech is a tremendous positive and starting off on the right foot IMO.

In fact, I think there are several quotable quotes, just not what many wanted to hear.



Doris said:


> - had closed-door talks with economic advisors




This is the part that worries me though... which economic advisers? The predominantly Keynesian pork barrelers and vote buyers? Or from the more sensible and sound Austrian and Chicago schools. My fear is that the Keynesians will hold sway and this will ultimately frustrate the recovery and long term future growth of the US... and may even take it down altogether.


----------



## noirua (23 January 2009)

In the end!  President Obama will realize that he, like others increasingly, just have to save their own, America that is.
In times of recession smiles, great speeches - fine rhetoric, dashing around the Whitehouse and all over the country.  Just will do nothing to help unemployment or shore up the dwindling coffers of the Federal Government.


----------



## Ageo (23 January 2009)

What bothers me is that the whole world is looking at Obama to change and fix everything, i dont think 1 president has ever had so much influence? and considering most governments are corrupt (yes incase you have been living in a box) this seems to be potentially a worrying thing as Obama could win support for perhaps things that shouldnt be passed (starting off with his $1trillion dollar stimulus package that they cant afford).

Only time will tell what he does and sometimes its hard to not believe that he means well (especially when you see him with his family etc..) but remember the U.S arent going to put someone in power who isnt going to play ball (perhaps thats why J.F.K got assasinated??).

If i was part of a corrupted organization and i wanted to have things done Obama would be my ideal candidate to push those things through).

Only time will tell


----------



## Doris (23 January 2009)

Am I being paranoid?  Did Hillary really seem to be smirking as she announced, after a meeting with Obama today, that he wants her role as secretary of state to be based on diplomacy and development?

She has to adjust her attitudes from what she would have done as CofS.
Remember how she cynically charged that she would *smash* Iran whilst Obama would '*talk*'?

She must do as her boss says - *talk* - or she'll be off the team.  
Can Hillary work without the aggression she promised in her nomination campaign?

This is a first example of 'experts who have roamed the halls for years' having to change the way they do business!  Cynics note.


----------



## Doris (23 January 2009)

Ageo said:


> *What bothers me* is that the whole world is looking at Obama to change and fix everything, I dont think 1 president has ever had so much influence? and considering most governments are corrupt (yes incase you have been living in a box) this seems to be potentially a worrying thing as Obama could win support for perhaps things that shouldnt be passed (starting off with his $1trillion dollar stimulus package that they cant afford).




*Ageo* this is what Wayne and other serious posters have also been incredulous about.  Poignant point!

If you look at Obama in front of the camera, his demeanor is quite different from when aside with staff.  
He purses his lips and his facial expression says more than words could.  Don't do the wrong thing!

He has fought or side-stepped corruption without making enemies of the corrupt, in his life in Chicago.
He would remember ALL the self interested people he met on the way. Does he have the CIA on them?  
BTW the CIA, FBI etc are all finally being merged with a google-type setup right now.  9/11 demanded this! 

He declared yesterday, as *Happy* quoted in #1499:



> "For a long time now there's been too much secrecy in this city," said Mr Obama who was elected partly on a platform of purging big-time politics of influence peddling and corruption.
> 
> "*The old rules said* that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed.
> 
> ...




I like his Lincolnian tactic of justification via the constitution, as he presents laws that should have been!

Lovitt!
- and Hanoi Jane would love this.  I'd love to hear her comments on it!
I can imagine her soon demanding the Vietnam secrecy on her be unveiled.


----------



## Happy (23 January 2009)

Doris said:


> She has to adjust her attitudes from what she would have done as CofS.
> Remember how she cynically charged that she would *smash* Iran whilst Obama would '*talk*'?
> 
> She must do as her boss says - *talk* - or she'll be off the team.
> ...





Probably shows what we knew already, that politicians do what they have to do.

She would probably make better choice saying ‘No thanks’ to the offer; after all she knew that it would bite her, but thick skin protects even if there is inconsistency, could call it personal policy change.
Our Garret seems to have done bit of a policy flip himself as current example from our backyard and he didn’t even cringe.

But don’t we have a lot of ordinary people doing things against their grain just to keep a job?
So it is the same, just bit more public.


----------



## Doris (23 January 2009)

wayneL said:


> Notable is Obama's attempts to dehype his presidency and tone down expectations. A good step.
> 
> I noticed that the crowd on inauguration day, seemed to be expecting messianic pronouncements and quotable one liners.... "I have a dream:|" or "ask not what your country can do for you" etc.
> 
> ...




I agree fully with all the above!  

He didn't have to stir and impress the crowd.  They were ready, willing and able to listen.

He set out the sombre themes for his term with brevity, mild use of metaphors, hope and authority.

Did you see that China left out (censored) some important quotable quotes:-

The Chinese-language websites left out: 

"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist".

Silly me didn't think of Tiananmen's 20th anniversary this year - I thought Darfur, Burma, Zimbabwe, Kenya...


----------



## Doris (23 January 2009)

Happy said:


> Probably shows what we knew already, that politicians do what they have to do.
> 
> But don’t we have a lot of ordinary people doing things against their grain just to keep a job?
> So it is the same, just bit more public.




Yes. _Politics_ means 'compromise for survival'. 
Hillary was trying to show she was as tough/strong as a man... as a potential female president.

If she had been as nurturing, as parts of Obama's speech were, would she have been mocked as a woman?

She had long criticized Obama for being weak yet the solid, deep tone of his voice as he said: 



> for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, *we* say to you now that *our* spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast *us*, and *we* will defeat you.




... sent the message that he was was no wimp as he spoke for the most powerful nation in the world.


----------



## lucas (24 January 2009)

Is it even possible to be swayed by what a person says rather than by what sex they happen to be?

I think probably not in the local bar, but maybe in the election.

For some reason Obama's message got through, while Hillary's didn't. It isn't fair, but what do you do...

As a long time fan of Hillary - wow, now that would REALLY be America turning for the good (and I am male) - I would like for people to give her a chance at being the best possible Secretary of State.


----------



## noirua (24 January 2009)

All President Obama's decisions so far are well away from the economy and the serious Federal financial deficit. So far he's upset the Chinese who he needs to keep onside to fund the Treasury sales of debt. Early days but financial confidence is evaporating already.


----------



## Doris (24 January 2009)

noirua said:


> All President Obama's *decisions* so far are well away from the economy and the serious Federal financial deficit. So far he's upset the Chinese who he needs to keep onside to fund the Treasury sales of debt. Early days but financial confidence is evaporating already.




How can you say that *noirua*?  
You sound like you're chomping at the bit just as we and the rest of the world are.

Who can now say what happens in American politics does NOT affect us, so WHY should we be interested in them?

Obama's had closed meetings with his economic advisors...  Issues for decisions: 

There are bills before Congress shortly, on the bailout package. 

One would think the economic team has its brief to assess the bills, and amendments, in preparation for debate.

Certainly the republicans seem to feel miffed and unimportant, judging by a Jim Lehrer interview I saw, but Obama has continually stressed this is a post-partisan era.

Does Rudd listen attentively to what our opposition has to suggest?
Will he look to learn from Obama's bailout strategy when it's decided?


----------



## Julia (24 January 2009)

Doris said:


> ... sent the message that he was was no wimp as he spoke for the most powerful nation in the world.



Hmm, that may pretty soon be questionable.


----------



## Doris (24 January 2009)

lucas said:


> For some reason Obama's message got through, while Hillary's didn't. It isn't fair, but what do you do...
> 
> As a long time fan of Hillary - wow, now that would REALLY be America turning for the good (and I am male) - I would like for people to give her a chance at being the best possible Secretary of State.




1.  Well.  If Obama were not in the competition she would have won!
But there was no competition - - just loyalty for her past hard work.

2.  I honestly wish that Jill Biden had kept her mouth closed about this office... when she said:

Barack offered Joe the choice... but he preferred to stay home - work from home- for the first time in his career.

Hillary did not need to know this.  Cruel.  Some things do need to be kept secret IMO.


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 January 2009)

Doris said:


> Obama had the theme in his campaign of no lobbyists nor PACs and your quote shows he's walking the talk.







From the Politico:
*Obama flashes irritation in press room*
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17831.html



> President Barack Obama made a surprise visit to the White House press corps Thursday night, but got agitated when he was faced with a substantive question.
> 
> *Asked how he could reconcile a strict ban on lobbyists in his administration with a deputy defense secretary nominee who lobbied for Raytheon, Obama interrupted with a knowing smile on his face. *
> 
> "Ahh, see," he said, "I came down here to visit. See this is what happens. I can't end up visiting with you guys and shaking hands if I'm going to get grilled every time I come down here."


----------



## Doris (24 January 2009)

Julia said:


> Hmm, that may pretty soon be questionable.




*Julia* I forget who said he was talking to a leader in the Middle East in the past few days... and he said how Ireland had, after 800 years of fighting, from when the English tried to take possession, reached agreement.

The other guy said, 'They fought for 800 years?  800 years! ... That was a brief battle!'.

But you're right in being rational.  Who knows what goes through the minds of psychotic, necrotic men.  

Obama asserted 'they' were invincible. What wars could be invoked simply to prove him wrong?


----------



## Doris (24 January 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> From the Politico:
> *Obama flashes irritation in press room*
> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17831.html




OMG...  He let the deputy defense secretary in... after he'd lobbied?

Well...  He did lobby before Obama laid down his rule as President.

He had this rule for staff during his campaigns.

I'm interested in whether he succeeds in making this principle law- as he said- in keeping with the constitution.

How can this be argued?  Will it succeed as another 'first'?
Will it be a retrospective law?  Nah... Lincoln could not be defaced! 

But I am amused about the Blackberry.  The first president in history to be 'allowed' to have one!

How many past presidents had this opportunity?? 

Would GW have known how to work one?


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 January 2009)

Doris said:


> OMG...  He let the deputy defense secretary in... after he'd lobbied?
> 
> Well...  He did lobby before Obama laid down his rule as President.




No, Obama said before the election that he would have *NO Lobbyists* in his administration.  He lied.  This man is a politician.  Just one of many more lies to come with this bunch.  Stop being such a groupie.


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 January 2009)

Just 3 days into his administration, Obama is already*granting waivers to his executive order*

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/01/23/1758932.aspx



> *Obama admin gives waiver for Lynn*
> Posted: Friday, January 23, 2009 5:24 PM by Mark Murray
> Filed Under: Obama WH Transition, White House
> From NBC's Ken Strickland
> ...


----------



## Doris (24 January 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> No, Obama said before the election that he would have *NO Lobbyists* in his administration.  He lied.  This man is a politician.  Just one of many more lies to come with this bunch.  Stop being such a groupie.




*ZzzzDad* are you sure this is not semantics?

He HAD no lobbyists in his campaign team

He NOW will have no lobbyists in his presidential team.



> Those rules prohibit former lobbyist from working in the area they once lobbied, unless a waiver is given.




I know your mouth is full of sour grapes but please try to look for poignant points that will help your country rebound.  
As in Barack's reaction to the press, there are serious issues to be faced.  
He has no time for petty (even nasty) distractions - as he displayed time and time again against McCain. 

My country and yours share similar values and lifestyles and ours is now sliding into the mire with job layoffs and businesses closing to avoid future failure or bankruptcy. 

England has announced it is officially in recession.  We aren't... yet.

But you have an intelligent man who has been collating good minds to stem, then turn the tide coming at us.

I am not a groupie.  I 'found' the man before his first public utterance of trying for the job.

But I believe in him.  I will say, OK... he's made a mistake... when he makes it.

Meanwhile, surely we debated out the flip flop concept.  Semantics is a game leading nowhere.

Help us know what YOUR POLITICIANS are doing to clean up the mess made by YOUR POLITICIANS.


----------



## ZzzzDad (24 January 2009)

Doris said:


> *ZzzzDad* are you sure this is not semantics?




Doris, I know you are a good person, and I'm sorry I called you a groupie.  I want Obama to succeed.  I have four children, I care about their future.  He is now my President (something the radical leftists would have never said about GWB).  I respect him because he is our President.  However, granting a waiver to his executive order just a few days after making it is not a good decision.  Surely this man that he is appointing is not that invaluable that he could not have appointed someone else instead.  It doesn't look good.  

Barack Obama is my President and I wish him well, but I will vigorously criticize him when he is wrong.


----------



## Doris (24 January 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> I respect him because he is our President.  However, granting a waiver to his executive order just a few days after making it is not a good decision.  Surely this man that he is appointing is not that invaluable that he could not have appointed someone else instead.  It doesn't look good.
> 
> Barack Obama is my President and I wish him well, but I will vigorously criticize him when he is wrong.




*ZzzzDad* - always check the fine print... especially in Obama's transparent new rules.

In Barack's speech, setting the tone for his achievement hopes in this term, he said what matters is what works.  
... If yes, we intend to move forward. If no, programs will end.
He said:


> - spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day - because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government



Obama's new rules -


> ... ban lobbyists from working on issues they have lobbied for in the *two* years before entering government.




Don't you hate it when rules are black and white with NO option for grey?

But - a reasonableness valve was set in place - a waiver - IF warranted.



> Obama's order *also allows the administration to exempt people* from the rules.




I'm sure it will come to light why Lynn is seen by Obama to be the best man for the job of deputy Pentagon chief.

Remember that Obama has chosen people, in all areas, with differing points of view so that he can be presented with all sides/perspectives from which to make a final decision.  He will not tolerate 'yes' men.  

Defense Secretary Robert Gates gave strong backing to Lynn, saying the former Pentagon comptroller *came highly recommended* and was *the best candidate for the job*. 

Levin, the head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, has said he supports Lynn's nomination:



> Lynn would be held to previously existing ethics rules, which state that officials must get specific authorization to be involved in any decision related to their former employer for *their first year in government*.
> 
> "The decision of the administration to impose an additional set of requirements, *and then waive them for this nominee*, does not change the standards to which we hold all nominees."
> 
> The relationship between defense companies and the Pentagon has long concerned watchdog groups, particularly after a huge procurement scandal in 2004 sent a former top Air Force acquisition official and Boeing Co former chief financial officer to federal prison for ethics violations.



Thanks for airing this *ZzzzDad*.  We'll have to watch Lynn to ensure he did deserve Obama's choice and support!


----------



## noirua (25 January 2009)

*Re: Barack shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic.*

Doris et al, Yes, I would admit that if I was shoved into the Oval Office with all the terrible problems, I'd start shuffling away at those deckchairs, indeed I would.  But then I'm not there and sit back surprised that BO is doing that.  

"What can I do to show I've hit the ground running", questions BO to his new and not so new White house staff.

 His number one adviser says, "we've already found lots of little easy decisions for you to make Mr President, and that will allow you to make them thick and fast and put up a smokescreen around Afghanistan and the whole American financial system".  
"That's just great and then I can deal with those two main items just like George the 43rd. In fact I'll give him a buzz this evening", said BO.
"No need Mr President, as it's all contained in that parcel on your desk marked 44", said his adviser 2.
"Thank the Lord for that - glancing at the contents - George the 43rd seems to have it all covered, YES, YES, YES, and he says I can pretend it was all thought up by me", said  President Obama.
"Just like you did in that speech they told you off about Mr President", said advisor 3. 
Yes, and they all laughed heartily and raised their glasses...


----------



## GumbyLearner (25 January 2009)

"Change has come to the United States of America". - President Barack Obama

I think it's great that America has a new President. The only question remains is what does "change" entail.

Here's a few suggestions if your not too swayed by the lobbyists in WashingMachine:

Why dont you start with creating an Untouchables unit, similar to the Elliot Ness one in the times of Capone, to expose and bring to justice those who have been involved in the fraudulent deals on Wall Street! I mean it might be tough to build this kind of group, but surely there are people out there on good 6 figure salaries who cant be bought FIND THEM, build a crew and make a plan! 

Im very sure it will instill confidence in the average American who has lost their job as a result of the self-fantasizing and agrandizing hypnosis of those "grounded"  minds on Wall Street. Have them brought to justice through the rule of law and the administration of justice and duly tried for the crimes they have committed. You could put it on pay-per-view for 99 cents a day. Hint, hint say no more, say no more!

Mr.Obama you are the new Emperor and the bloodlust of sacrifice is growing by the minute of those who have lost their homes/jobs/source of income by the minute!

Bring these people to justice before the Rednecks blame you for everything thats gone down 6 to 12 months from now. Bush will be a forgotten hero by March! No :bs:! Really think about it Mr.Obama.

The scale of your inquiry should be comparable but of course not limited to the scope of McCarthy, Ollie North, Watergate etc.. do something now or you will be facing one-term. 

"Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes that you can do these things. Among them are a few Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or businessman from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid." 

President Dwight D. Eisenhower, l952----- 

and 

“The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it comes stronger than their democratic state itself. That, in its essence, is fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group,”

Franklin D. Roosevelt

JMO 

But then again if this is impossible for you and the lobbyists have your pocket like the pharmaceuticals industry have Hilary Clintons, well thats a real shame for equal and fair treatment of ALL that dwell on the planet.

If this is impossible save the diatribe for the "masses"


----------



## sinner (25 January 2009)

Doris said:


> I'm sure it will come to light why Lynn is seen by Obama to be the best man for the job of deputy Pentagon chief.




What a crock of ****....excuse the language.

Secretary of Defense is none other than Robert Gates, directly implicated in the whole Iran-Contra thing but nobody even cares about that anymore, why should we care that a Reagan/Bush/Bush appointee from the heart of the neocon agenda is sitting in Rumsfelds seat.

Now they want to put a stooge from Raytheon (i.e. the military industrial complex) in charge of day to day at the Pentagon? Why exactly? No justification has been provided. 

Gates got to stay on after Bush left. Even though there was a "mandate for change". Mandate for change, except where the guns are, right? Right?

Beware folks.



> This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence ”” economic, political, even spiritual ”” is felt in every city, every statehouse, every office of the federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society. In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. *Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together.*




Who spoke these words? Not some youtube 2012 the world is gonna end crazy nutbar. No, actually it was US President and former General of the US Army Dwight D. Eisenhower on his Farewell Address.

Looks like his words have come to pass and then some.


----------



## GumbyLearner (25 January 2009)

If Obama put the prosecutions of Wall St on pay-per-view it might be possible to generate nsome money to fund the failouts.

What do you put in a $1,405 trash can?

GARBAGE!

Obama Bashes   :Financial Giants for Squandering Bailout Money

One of Wall Street's biggest power players, Merrill Lynch's CEO John Thain, was abruptly ousted Thursday after it emerged he spend $1 million to decorate his office - including buying a $1,405 trash can.\

http://www.usnews.com/articles/news...ial-giants-for-squandering-bailout-money.html

Dont be such a bully Mr.Obama!


----------



## Wysiwyg (25 January 2009)

So_Cynical said:


> Hillary FTW
> 
> Barack has a snowball in hells chance of winning.




Lol, no stock tips from you thanks. 



chops_a_must said:


> No. It seems to be that Obama is actually quite unpopular with the african-american community. He is, and is regarded, as a silver bum. He wasn't exactly a child of hardship.




Lol, it seems to be to you. 



Aussie2Aussie said:


> Obama has no chance.
> 
> The US only 1 year ago elected their 2nd black governor; the chances that they are capable of overcoming the colour issue enough to elect a black president are zero.
> 
> The republicans would love the democrats to put him up - that would be their best chance of winning next year.




Lol, zero? not even  0.05 of a chance. 



wildkactus said:


> Obama and Hillary, I Don't think they have the legs, they are the money mouths for the democratic party. Plus i don't think america will vote for either a female or black president just yet.
> 
> Anyway who ever it is, is going to get one hell of a mess to sort out, after the current guy.




Hmmm, legs are fine cactus. 



Kimosabi said:


> Forget Barack Obama and Billary, they are nothing but CFR Shills who will continue endless wars, Ron Paul is the only candidate who should be President...




Hey Kimosabi, long time no seeee, lol


----------



## MrBurns (25 January 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Lol, no stock tips from you thanks.
> Lol, it seems to be to you.
> Lol, zero? not even  0.05 of a chance.
> Hmmm, legs are fine cactus.
> Hey Kimosabi, long time no seeee, lol




How's your new book "How the win Friends and Influence People" going ?


----------



## Wysiwyg (25 January 2009)

MrBurns said:


> How's your new book "How to win Friends and Influence People" going ?




Dale has the copyright on that title unfortunately and my friends ... well they are eternally forgiving.


----------



## Doris (26 January 2009)

Wysiwyg said:


> Lol, no stock tips from you thanks.
> Lol, it seems to be to you.
> Lol, zero? not even  0.05 of a chance.
> Hmmm, legs are fine cactus.
> Hey Kimosabi, long time no seeee, lol




Great work *Wysiwyg*!

Now... who were the ones who had open minds and didn't reject Obama outright by thinking like Neanderthals?  

Who... besides *2020*? 

Who continued to argue any case they could to down Obama without giving him a fair hearing?

Who finally listened and watched and read and saw the light - that he was intelligent and talented?

And after the fact...

Who watches his weekly press conferences and feels at last we have a US president worth listening to?

Who wants to hear what he has to say because he has something to say? 

Who would now like to see him falter, fall and fail to satisfy their 'I told you so's!'  Who would dare to?


----------



## wayneL (26 January 2009)

Doris said:


> Great work *Wysiwyg*!
> 
> Now... who were the ones who had open minds and didn't reject Obama outright by thinking like Neanderthals?
> 
> ...



Oh FFS Doris.

Plenty were with BO to a greater or lesser degree, but only you and 2020 were drooling apostolic sycophants, who were behaving (and still are) like obedient slave/servant shills.

The difference is that many, while supporting Obama have the capability of original thought and the emotional capacity to analyze the Obama Parables for hyperbole and political BS. 

For instance many support BO's social agenda but totally disagree with his fiscal and/or foreign policy agenda (and visa versa), and on balance, preferred him over the other guy.

People with puppy dog adulation of the man probably actually cost him votes, provoking a vomit inducing nausea whenever the "yes we can" quasi religious chanting started... totally sickening.

Doris, unquestioning fawning and slavish acceptance of all one man stands for, to the point of spinning negatives such as you are apt to do, is actually very dangerous... think Hitler and the ultimate result that is possible. (*Not suggesting for a moment that BO is a Hitler*) Fotunately, these days most educated people are sufficiently informed, sceptical and critical to not allow that to happen.

Bloody Hell!!!!!


----------



## GumbyLearner (26 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Doris said:


> Prawn- 'there are none so blind as those who will not see'!
> 
> 1.  He chose experienced people who will work in NEW jobs to his rules. He is the leader!  It is his game now!
> 
> ...




Your right Doris, he is the leader and has the power of the "colloseum" in his hands.

So why did he choose Geitner? 

Mr. Geitner failed to pay Social Security self-employment taxes when he worked for the International Monetary Fund. 

Don't forget Geitner also tried to claim overnight camp for his kids as a child care deduction. 

Does the "change" mentioned frequently in his campaigns encompass ethics? 

Can Obama save Geitner?

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17428.html

Anyway, doesnt look like a great start so far! JMO 

Neanderthal? Do you mean these guys?


----------



## MrBurns (26 January 2009)

wayneL said:


> Oh FFS Doris.
> 
> Plenty were with BO to a greater or lesser degree, but only you and 2020 were drooling apostolic sycophants, who were behaving (and still are) like obedient slave/servant shills.
> 
> ...





Go Wayne !


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Doris said:


> Great work *Wysiwyg*!
> 
> Now... who were the ones who had open minds and didn't reject Obama outright by thinking like Neanderthals?
> 
> ...




Doris how do you know what he has to say until after he has said it, unless he has said it before and will say it again and repeat, although if he had not said it before and it was known he would say it then I suppose its ok, although it is oft that what should be said never is and if it were it were better off not being said so it is understandable that you would wish to know what he will say, if in your own mind it is what should be said to you, although wishing to know is not the same as knowing and what is said can be misconstrued and I could go on but I won't.

Wayne got it in one above, is it love or political assessment.



GumbyLearner said:


> Your right Doris, he is the leader and has the power of the "colloseum" in his hands.
> 
> So why did he choose Geitner?
> 
> ...




Mr.Geitner is a crook, plain and simple, and he now heads Treasury, the world is in a recession and the head of the US Treasury is a crook.

So be it, but don't try to whitewash Obama's role in this. **** sticks.

gg


----------



## Geoff (26 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



MrBurns said:


> This is a great moment for the USA, unfortunately it comes during a very bad moment for the USA.
> 
> Obama wont be able to fix things, no one can, but he just might change a few things to help shore up the future.
> 
> I agree that his foreign policy is a worry and if he gets too radical with his ideas, well.......remember JFK.




I think assassination is a huge risk, foreign policy or not.  There are plenty of rednecks who'd like to take a shot just because he's black.

BA won't be able to perform miracles economically, and many people will see it as a disappointment but I hope he does as good a job as possible under the circumstances.  Certainly anyone is an improvement after Bush.


----------



## Wysiwyg (26 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Wayne got it in one above, is it love or political assessment.
> gg




It is unmanly to swear at a woman, don`t you think?


----------



## Doris (26 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



Nyden said:


> He's nothing but a poster boy. No one can do anything about the markets - they'll sort themselves out after a while on their own, simple as that




Careful.  *Wysiwyg* reads these posts.

He may bring your words back to haunt you!  

Do you *really* believe what you said?  If so, how long is 'a while'?


----------



## Doris (26 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier ?*



MrBurns said:


> Obama wont be able to fix things, no one can, but he just might change a few things to help shore up the future.
> 
> I agree that his foreign policy is a worry and if he gets too radical with his ideas, well.......remember JFK.




Remember, JFK was tied up with the Mafia.

Marilyn Monroe met JFK through her then boyfriend... from Chicago.

Perhaps BO will release secret documents from that too, in his new transparency mode, as well as on Vietnam?

Obama survived the mob unscathed.  Is this part and parcel of his basketball skills - besides slam dunking?


----------



## Calliope (27 January 2009)

*Re: Obama - World Saviour or Bush Baggage Carrier?*

Alfred meets Barack and Hillary.


----------



## sinner (30 January 2009)

Geithner taking a page from the book of Big Daddy Obama: if Big Daddy can scream "no lobbyists" then hire a lobbyist, why can't Geithner?

*Geithner Sets Limits on Lobbying for Bailout Money*
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/business/economy/28lobby.html?ref=politics

We can't have lobbyists anywhere near bailout money, but a former Goldman Sachs lobbyist can be chief of staff for Geithner, right, right?

*Ethics Order Affects Aide to Geithner*
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123309702282121649.html


> The new chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was a top lobbyist for Goldman Sachs Group Inc. until last year, and will have to recuse himself from some government duties under new White House ethics rules.


----------



## boundless (30 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Mr.Geitner is a crook, plain and simple, and he now heads Treasury, the world is in a recession and the head of the US Treasury is a crook.
> 
> gg




You have some nerve saying this in public. Don't be surprised if he sues you for defamation and I'm sure he has some high powered lawyers working for him. Who do you have?!


----------



## sassa (30 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



boundless said:


> You have some nerve saying this in public. Don't be surprised if he sues you for defamation and I'm sure he has some high powered lawyers working for him. Who do you have?!




Are you pitching for the brief?


----------



## wayneL (30 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



boundless said:


> You have some nerve saying this in public. Don't be surprised if he sues you for defamation and I'm sure he has some high powered lawyers working for him. Who do you have?!




His lawyers will be VEEEEERRY busy tracking town the 100's of 1000's of folks on the Internets calling him names. 

Honestly!


----------



## noirua (30 January 2009)

Nothing yet from Mr President on how he intends to deal with the second wave of mortgage defaults, forecast to exceed sub-prime, that are just starting to hit other areas of America and are set to continue for several years.


----------



## noirua (31 January 2009)

Will be interesting when this second package of US measures reaches the statute books, "The Obama Package".


----------



## Wysiwyg (31 January 2009)

*Re: Barack 2009!*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Mr.Geitner is a crook, plain and simple, and he now heads Treasury, the world is in a recession and the head of the US Treasury is a crook.
> 
> So be it, but don't try to whitewash Obama's role in this. **** sticks.
> gg






> Barack Obama picked Timothy Geithner to save the U.S. economy.




Did Barack pick Geithner or was he earmarked beforehand???


Timothy Geithner was one of the guests at the Bilderberg conference last year and strangely, invitees make it into high places after their visit to this conference.



> Timothy F. Geithner (2004, 2008), current President of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York




Tony Blair, James Callaghan and Gordon Brown attended the conference and became Prime Minister following it.So there is some connection with the attendees and getting a backscratch and nod from the power brokers of the world.Bit like friends in high places.



> Tony Blair (1993), former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
> Gordon Brown (1991), current Prime Minister of the United Kingdom
> James Callaghan (1963, 1966), former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom




The Bilderberg Conference ....



> The Bilderberg Group, Bilderberg conference, or Bilderberg Club is an unofficial annual invitation-only conference of around 130 guests, *most of **whom are persons of influence in the fields of politics, business and **banking*.


----------



## Calliope (1 February 2009)

The Octuplets

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00477/Cartoon_477652a.jpg


----------



## ZzzzDad (3 February 2009)

Ah the hope and change:




> The world has noticed the Obama hypocrisy on lobbyists
> by Ed Morrissey
> 
> Too bad the American media hasn’t kept as close an eye on Barack Obama and his promises to clean up government as the Times of India has.  Noting that Obama has already issues 17 exceptions to his no-lobbyist rules in the first two weeks of his inauguration, they wonder how it could worse:
> ...




The real Obama emerges.  Anyone still think he is a different kind of politician?


----------



## kincella (3 February 2009)

same way they closed their eyes and ears to ACORN...the group involved in the sub prime mess....obama was the lawyer that instigated the racist theme..so banks had to lend to the blacks...regardless of no income etc

and ACORN still benefits from all these bailouts.....wonder how much obama reaps from that deal alone....
aahhh chicargo...
this one carries far more baggage than any prior president


----------



## GumbyLearner (3 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> Ah the hope and change:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I noticed the lobbyists at Fraudie Mac and Flunky Mae paid him $100,000 in campaign contributions.

I have been impressed with this lady from Missouri though. Its well overdue, something had to be said.

http://www.kansascity.com/637/story/1010370.html

*McCaskill on corporate executives' pay: 'These people are idiots'*

Sen. Claire McCaskill — steaming mad and not going to take it anymore — on Friday called Wall Street executives “idiots” and proposed limits on some of their salaries.

Her proposal would force companies taking federal bailout money to limit compensation for any employee to what the president of the United States currently earns: $400,000 a year.

“Is that so unreasonable?” the Democrat from Missouri asked. “It’s eight times the median household income in the United States of America. … I don’t think that sounds like a bad deal.”

The idea lit up blogs, Web sites and TV screens across the nation, with many applauding her attack on wealthy bankers and investors.

“They don’t get it,” McCaskill said on the Senate floor. “These people are idiots.”

The compensation cap would cover salary, bonuses and stock options.

Critics quickly struck back, calling the plan shortsighted.

“It’s a stupid idea,” said Woody Cozad, a lobbyist, commentator and Republican from Missouri. “I don’t defend anyone who’s at those companies now, but if they all need to be replaced, you’re not going to replace them with anybody very good for $400,000.”

If these people were so good, why do they need public money to survive? :bs:


I notice no-one from the Republicans has uttered a murmur on the issue.


----------



## noirua (4 February 2009)

I notice that President Obama is falling into the same traps as President Bush as he fails to check out his appointments to senior office.  Is he appointing from the heart and checking later and coming to grief.  A bit like buying a stock first and then researching it.

Obama: 'I screwed up' on Daschle appointment: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/04/obama.daschle/index.html


----------



## Doris (5 February 2009)

noirua said:


> I notice that President Obama is falling into the same traps as President Bush as he fails to check out his appointments to senior office.  Is he appointing from the heart and checking later and coming to grief.  A bit like buying a stock first and then researching it.
> 
> Obama: 'I screwed up' on Daschle appointment: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/02/04/obama.daschle/index.html




This will sure make the high income potential candidates rush out to check and pay their taxes!

This reminds me of those footie stars who lost their contracts for being in a brawl - warning to others!


----------



## Doris (5 February 2009)

ATM I am so grateful I live downunder!
Krudd's packages are pre-emptive for Aus.
Obama's is to provide a solution for the US:

http://my.barackobama.com/recoveryplan



> Last night, President Obama recorded a series of national network and cable news interviews about the urgent need for an economic recovery plan.
> 
> President Obama discussed why we need an immediate effort to create millions of jobs while investing in long-term challenges like energy and health care.
> 
> He called for swift investment in job creation while continuing to assist those who are out of work, without health insurance, or in danger of losing their homes.


----------



## noirua (5 February 2009)

Doris said:


> This will sure make the high income potential candidates rush out to check and pay their taxes!
> 
> This reminds me of those footie stars who lost their contracts for being in a brawl - warning to others!



President Obama seems to be backtracking on his "buy American" stimulus package. A quick but uncertain start and even the package may be held up. What next?


----------



## Happy (5 February 2009)

noirua said:


> President Obama seems to be backtracking on his "buy American" stimulus package. A quick but uncertain start and even the package may be held up. What next?




If Obama was one man show, he could do whatever he wants and providing he would not share the same destiny as J F K he could even get second term.

But reality is that government consist of quite bunch of democratically elected politicians and some of them might not be squeaky clean.

>Democratically elected< does not mean too much, Lebanon springs to mind.


----------



## Doris (6 February 2009)

noirua said:


> President Obama seems to be backtracking on his "buy American" stimulus package. A quick but uncertain start and even the package may be held up. What next?




This is a tricky one isn't it?

Imagine if all countries did this... 'Buy Australian'...  Sounds good in theory.

What if the Chinese did it too, and Europeans...  would this improve their/our consumer crisis?

Producers earn money but so do the businesses that distribute it. It may be cheaper for consumers.
Don't trade agreements work both ways?

I remember well, Whitlam saying that subsidizing farmers to survive drought was a waste of taxpayers' money when the food could be imported cheaper.  Give me Aussie food anyday!  Except for US navel oranges in our summer and US cherries in our winter.  
Yesterday I needed kiwifruit. Produce of Italy!!


----------



## Doris (6 February 2009)

KRudd had his national gathering of minds to gather new ideas on where his gov't should focus its term.

Obama's ground-up approach not only involved people in the election, who had never got out the vote before, but raised unprecedented donated funds to ensure no PAC nor lobbyist owned a slice of his campaign. 
Each supporter had a sense of *ownership*.  If you feel you belong you will work for the good of the common goal of the group.  America will be even more patriotic!

He used the millions of email-linked supporters to pay for the inauguration - except for the security etc.

Now he has these millions actively involved with his policies and their passage through the House and the Senate.

If an individual has ideas or criticisms, there is a structure to be heard.
They will know what is happening and can lobby their senator to vote it in/out. 

Obama's genius in treating people 'the way they could be' has worked well.
He speaks to individuals and makes them feel vital and that 'they can'.
It projects confidence that something is being done and it can be seen to be done.

His philosophy is not to tell people what to think - but giving people something to think about.

His masterstroke of 'bringing people together' continues as Obama uses their 'social needs' as a tool:



> The economic crisis is growing more serious every day, and the time for action has come.
> 
> Last week, the House of Representatives passed the *American Recovery and Reinvestment Act*, which will jumpstart our economy and put more than 3 million people back to work.
> 
> ...


----------



## Doris (6 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> Ah the hope and change:
> 
> The real Obama emerges.  Anyone still think he is a different kind of politician?




The new rules need a transition phase.

Obviously the entrenched lobbyist activities involved high achievers who were sought to make things happen?

Just like the US getting out of Iraq... can't be done by the stroke of a pen.

When a Year 8 student presents with serious behaviour problems you cannot get them to solve them overnight.  
They have taken 13 years to learn that it is acceptable for them to behave this way... 
or - no-one suggested nor convinced them to behave otherwise.


----------



## Julia (6 February 2009)

> Obama's genius in treating people 'the way they could be' has worked well.



Has it really, Doris?  Could have fooled me!
Not a single Republican voted for his Bill in the House of Reps according to item on "PM" this evening.   And he's talking until he must be blue in the face in an attempt to persuade Senators to pass the legislation, so far with zilch results.



> He speaks to individuals and makes them feel vital and that 'they can'.



Well, on the evidence so far, maybe more like "they can indeed ignore his admonishments".



> It projects confidence that something is being done and it can be seen to be done.



So far wishful thinking on your part, Doris.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 February 2009)

Doris said:


> This will sure make the high income potential candidates rush out to check and pay their taxes!
> 
> This reminds me of those footie stars who lost their contracts for being in a brawl - warning to others!




Doris , I fail to see where you are coming from with these statements. 

It is reasonable to expect that a President should choose honest people for high office.

Obama had picked a number of crooks for, amongst others, the positions of Health and Treasury Secretaries. They were tax cheats. They committed offences against the public purse.

Are you implying that potential candidates are more likely in future to be honest in their affairs or that as appears more likely many of his picks are crooked and will be more likely to fess up and repay the state the monies they have filched.

The court of public opinion has decided that he has exhibited poor judgement in picking crooks in the first place for these important positions.

gg


----------



## Doris (7 February 2009)

Julia said:


> Has it really, Doris?  Could have fooled me!
> Not a single Republican voted for his Bill in the House of Reps according to item on "PM" this evening.   And he's talking until he must be blue in the face in an attempt to persuade Senators to pass the legislation, so far with zilch results.
> 
> Well, on the evidence so far, maybe more like "they can indeed ignore his admonishments".
> ...




*Julia* my words were directed at the people Barack's mass email was directed at.

It was an evaluation of the psychology at play, in the brilliant use of involving people on the ground.

If you have a boss who demands a hierarchy then the little man will work only for his pay.  
If all workers have a share of the company they are more likely to put in much more effort.

Read again and look for the progressive use of 'ownership' success.

The house meetings, which were used to elucidate policy and get out the vote, drew in even more supporters.

When I signed up on Barack's National Team, in Feb 2007, there were some 230 of us... There are 3 million now. 
Instant communication to supporters who can influence people who can influence the senators.

Read his email again: 


> I hope to sign the recovery plan into law in the next few weeks. But I need your help to spread the word and build support.




He needs the success of these housemeetings for people to know what is involved in the package and for them to canvass their senator to vote for it!  Of course amendments will be made in the senate and this is also part of this weekend's agenda - for ideas and criticisms to be offered up and heard.

... government of the people - by the people - for the people. (Is that quoted right *ZzzDad*?)

After these house meetings - which will gather more people into 'owning' the government - it may double!

My point is the brilliant psychological strategy being used.

Maybe I was obtuse in my analysis presentation?

My friend in Orange County, having voted against the GOP rather than for Obama, is still suspicious about Obama's motives and she is watching like a hawk for signs of a hidden agenda - that he is following Hitler's format further.  
Surely his 'transparency policy' should alleviate her concerns!

She still does not trust the mass hysteria which only Hitler has accomplished before.


----------



## Doris (7 February 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Doris , I fail to see where you are coming from with these statements.
> 
> It is reasonable to expect that a President should choose honest people for high office.




Do you really think these busy high flying people do their own tax?
Even I just give my stuff to my accountant and she does it.  She is the expert.



> Are you implying that potential candidates are more likely in future to be honest in their affairs or that as appears more likely many of his picks are crooked and will be more likely to fess up and repay the state the monies they have filched.




I think they will be giving harsher instructions to their tax accountants!

Just as footie fools are more circumspect when they go to pubs after the games!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 February 2009)

Doris said:


> Do you really think these busy high flying people do their own tax?
> Even I just give my stuff to my accountant and she does it.  She is the expert.
> 
> 
> ...




Doris that is a similar argument to a child telling the teacher that the dog ate the homework.

Surely you have put in a tax return?, it is the responsibility of the taxpayer to provide the information to the accountant to prepare the return. It is then signed off by the taxpayer.

I suppose though that being crooked in your tax return would not have the same gravity as signing off without reading an important treasury document. The Secretary of Treasury could always blame the bean counters if a few billion were missing for the Secretary of Health who would in any case be a few billion light for the same reason.

It still comes back to probity, and the Obama team has a smell about it, they can't be trusted to be honest in their affairs and the worry is they won't be responsible with Joe the Plumber's money either.

gg


----------



## noirua (7 February 2009)

The Barack Obama stimulous package will go through as they dare not stop it with a new President in office.  Games will be played and many have their own private agenda as to who they think should benefit from it. Just a few changes in the knobs and whistles and thats that, no worries really.


----------



## sassa (7 February 2009)

Doris said:


> Obama's genius in treating people 'the way they could be' has worked well.
> He speaks to individuals and makes them feel vital and that 'they can'.
> It projects confidence that something is being done and it can be seen to be done.




Interesting thoughts Doris.Perhaps you might like to read this person's thoughts about Obama.
http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/feb2009/ca2009024_301636.htm?link_position=link1
The lead in to the story may be a little overdone-


> President Obama has led a charmed life. Now it's time for him to resize his spectacular image and show that he can endure the everyday ups and downs of the Oval Office


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (7 February 2009)

sassa said:


> Interesting thoughts Doris.Perhaps you might like to read this person's thoughts about Obama.
> http://www.businessweek.com/managing/content/feb2009/ca2009024_301636.htm?link_position=link1
> The lead in to the story may be a little overdone-




Doris , I was going to give you a bit of space this weekend but the crooks and the spouses of crooks appointed by Obama are crawling out of the woodwork like an army of dishonest helminths.

This from the Wall St.Journal and Reuters

*Yet another cabinet nominee has tax problems, Reuters reports:

    A Senate panel delayed its vote on Labor Secretary-designate Hilda Solis after the newspaper USA Today reported that her husband paid about $6,400 on Wednesday to settle tax liens that had been outstanding against his business for as long as 16 years.

That's Wednesday of this week--i.e., roughly 24 hours after the defenestration of Nancy Killefer and Tom Daschle.

*

http://online.wsj.com/article/best_of_the_web_today.html


It does beg the question of Barack Obama's judgement in picking crooks and the spouses of crooks for high office.

gg


----------



## ZzzzDad (7 February 2009)

This has been the worst start of an Administration in American history.  The appointments, the porkiest "stimulus" bill in history.  He can't stand up to the likes of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.  This is looking so much like a replay of Jimmy Carter - except worse.  He really doesn't have a clue.  I wish he did for the country's sake.


----------



## Julia (7 February 2009)

Doris said:


> *Julia* my words were directed at the people Barack's mass email was directed at.



Well, all that's history now, Doris.  No one cares.

But what people do care about is the future.  Not shaping up too well right now.
To have picked several major appointees who are dishonest is a helluva bad start imo.


----------



## Doris (8 February 2009)

Julia said:


> Well, all that's history now, Doris.  No one cares.
> 
> But what people do care about is the future.  Not shaping up too well right now.
> To have picked several major appointees who are dishonest is a helluva bad start imo.




*Julia* did you read my post again as I urged? Out of context comments are irrelevant to my evaluation.  

It was an evaluation of Obama's people strategy in using mass emailing.

The latest email, as I said in that post, was sent Tuesday.

It is not history... not yet!   It is NOW. 

... Marshalling the grass-roots to glean knowledge of the package and arming them to canvass their senators.

It is this weekend - today and tomorrow US time:



> From: President Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, 3 February 2009 4:03 AM
> To: Doris *******
> Subject: What recovery means for you
> ...




Unprecedented transparency and accountability.

 * He will appoint an aggressive Inspector General and a cabinet-level Oversight Management Board to make sure this money is spent wisely when this package, 'a down payment on the American Dream' is passed through the senate.

 * When the package is signed www.recovery.com 'goes live to show where your tax $ are going'.

He also uses his people skills in this video that is being shown in these house meetings this weekend:



This video, responding to voter questions, is also being shown at these house meetings.


----------



## GumbyLearner (8 February 2009)

Is anyone out there?

The lobbyists have all confused me as to their purpose!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Doris (8 February 2009)

*The recovery package... "It's a work in progress. It's still cooking."*  AP - an hour ago



> WASHINGTON (AP) — On his first big test, Barack Obama made some rookie mistakes and strategic missteps. But he still appears headed for a win on the centerpiece of his agenda, a huge economic recovery program, with the fresh striking of a bipartisan deal in the Senate.




* Put together by congressional Democrats in partnership with Obama... begun during Obama's transition. 

* The administration decided against submitting its own detailed legislative package but stayed close to the process.

* In the Senate, an even larger package was considered, although the deal struck Friday pared it back some.

* The size and composition of the plan gave Republicans an opening to assert that Obama had given too much leeway to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and House Banking Committee Chairman Barney Frank. And they also could argue that, while Obama had offered to consider GOP suggestions for the package, none wound up in the legislation.

* *In not sending his own legislation to Congress*, Obama did the exact opposite of what President Bill Clinton did in 1993 when he tried to get Congress to swallow whole a detailed health care overhaul plan put together by a task force headed by his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton. That take-it-or-leave it approach alienated Congress.

* *Obama stumbled by ceding the debate to Capitol Hill and not stepping out more to explain the bill to the public.*

* A small percentage of this bill, the unnecessary spending, allowed Republicans — who have played politics on this from the beginning — to discredit it so public opinion is against it. "We can't just sit back and let them define us." 

* After his original outreach to Republicans, Obama late last week changed his tone and derided Republican ideas for putting more tax cuts in. Such ideas "have been tested and they have failed... the scale and scope of this plan is right."

* *He'll continue trying to regain momentum on economic policy*... first prime-time news conference on Monday after Treasury Secretary Geithner outlines details for a new financial-sector rescue plan. Then he'll participate in town hall-style meetings in towns suffering particularly hard times — Elkhart, Ind., Monday and Fort Myers, Fla., Tuesday.

* Obama's courtship of Republicans only to be rebuffed by them = "an early lesson for President Obama and his team."

* Obama set a particularly high bar for himself by "*promising to change the way Washington works*."

... He promised to make it a less partisan, post-partisan place. And so he has to do this. Can he hit the sweet spot on the stimulus package with *enough tax breaks and enough non-controversial spending* to get the votes? 

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gnO54HUvQBttRvPqNdNlVxiBZAIAD9672VDG0


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (8 February 2009)

Doris said:


> *The recovery package... "It's a work in progress. It's still cooking."*  AP - an hour ago
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Doris, there is no argument that Obama has done his homework, consulted with his supporters and with his side of politics in the Senate. All would agree with you on this.

He has also kept in touch with his supporters and you in particular which must be gratifying.

There is more to being President than sending out emails and implementing policies agreed in advance with your own side.

He needs to be able to pick people to implement the policies. The Democrats have a long history of sleaze in Chicago which emanates from there outwards.

This has resulted in a dearth of suitable candidates to fill Leadership  positions in his cabinet.

This lack of honest leaders is as big an impediment as not having policies in the first place.

And that is what is making his first few weeks a disaster for the US and the world.

The Global Crisis began with corrupt bankers and financiers and now the cure is being overseen by perceived crooks in high office.

gg


----------



## Julia (8 February 2009)

Doris said:


> *Julia* did you read my post again as I urged? Out of context comments are irrelevant to my evaluation.
> 
> It was an evaluation of Obama's people strategy in using mass emailing.



Doris, it's not people like yourself and the rest of the Obama fan club he needs to convince.

It's the Republicans.   He can have people like you spreading the joyous message until you're blue in the face, but unless the Republicans agree to pass the legislation, it ain't going to happen.

And giving them the very valid ammunition of some of the Democratic appointees showing up as dishonest or at least dodgy isn't helping.


----------



## sinner (8 February 2009)

An opinion piece by David Sirota, linking to nakedcapitalism instead of the original site to avoid page size ads for viewers.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/02/david-sirota-obamas-team-of-zombies.html

Worth a read. In my opinion Obama has had several chances to prove himself as an agent of change already and he is unfortunately falling very very short.


----------



## Doris (10 February 2009)

Julia said:


> Doris, it's not people like yourself and the rest of the Obama fan club he needs to convince.
> 
> It's the Republicans.   He can have people like you spreading the joyous message until you're blue in the face, but unless the Republicans agree to pass the legislation, it ain't going to happen.
> 
> And giving them the very valid ammunition of some of the Democratic appointees showing up as dishonest or at least dodgy isn't helping.




So true *Julia*

THIS was the content and point of that email.  

Did you actually read it?   
And my comments on his rallying the people to help him get their senator to think of their personal plights?

Below is part of the follow-up email that came today.  If Obama can get people to understand what the package will do for them they can canvass their senator.  *The Republican ones* - except the three who've voted for it already.  3/4 of Americans like Obama but only 1/2 believe his package.  Possibly that half are just quoting the partisan Republicans?? 

Note:  No-one is asked to contact their senator.  But it is implied.  Grass-roots in action.



> Americans have organized Economic Recovery House Meetings in all 50 states -- including 382 in California, 255 in Florida, 115 in Ohio, 199 in New York, 105 in Washington, and 149 in Texas.
> 
> That's more than 3,587 meetings in 1,579 cities and 429 congressional districts.
> 
> ...




Today at the first of two Townhall Style meetings (back on the campaign trail as Reagan had to do)  one woman asked how people can trust the Obama administration when they chose people who hadn't paid their taxes.

Obama said:  If people who had made mistakes were never appointed... you'd never lose your job.

I have a great rapport with most students as I see the whole picture.  If there are dark storm clouds, these need addressing but I focus on what they do well/right and promote their silver lining. Note those guys resigned.  They were not forced out despite their credentials to do the job.  They left to support the new bench mark.

I'm reading John Grisham's _The Appeal_ and am horrified by the truth behind the subterfuge of vested interests controlling elections and thus supreme court judges. (I never knew the US elected these!) 
Sure it's fiction, but like David E Kelly's _Boston Legal_, truth is stranger than fiction.


----------



## sinner (12 February 2009)

Bah Obama fail.

Guys, I urge you to actually click the link and read the article in full (there is a document image, 5 updates and a video which I have not included, all worth a read and watch).

Very disturbing.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/02/10/obama/index.html

*The 180-degree reversal of Obama's State Secrets position*



> From the Obama/Biden campaign website, mybarackobama.com, here was what the Obama campaign was saying -- back then -- about the State Secrets privilege:
> 
> Apparently, the operative word in that highlighted paragraph -- unbeknownst to most people at the time -- was "the Bush administration," since the Obama administration is now doing exactly that which, during the campaign, it defined as "The Problem," the only difference being that it is now Obama, and not Bush, doing it.  For journalists who haven't bothered to learn the first thing about this issue even as they hold themselves out as experts on it, and for Obama followers eager to find an excuse to justify what was done, a brief review of the State Secrets privilege controversy is in order.
> 
> ...


----------



## doctorj (12 February 2009)

Martin Wolf: Has Obama already failed?



			
				Martin Wolf said:
			
		

> Has Barack Obama’s presidency already failed? In normal times, this would be a ludicrous question. But these are not normal times. They are times of great danger. Today, the new US administration can disown responsibility for its inheritance; tomorrow, it will own it.


----------



## Doris (14 February 2009)

doctorj said:


> Martin Wolf: Has Obama already failed?




This has been the third week of the new administration! 

Obama said yesterday, 'Standing still is the surest way of falling behind.'

Last night at the Lincoln Tribute banquet in Springfield, he said:



> ...it is precisely when we are in the deepest valley, when the climb is steepest, that Americans re-learn how to take the mountaintop... by taking new trails.




No Republicans voted for the $787bn 1000+ page bill but three were expected to back it in the Senate.
It'll take years for this package to turn the economy around - are they hoping it will fail for a 2012 gain?
Do they think the economy is too far gone and this gives them an 'out' if it fails?

Democrats said the bill would save middle-class Americans from going under and millions from losing their houses.

A little-noticed amendment to the stimulus package is for top bankers working for financial groups that have received government aid. The new pay rules cap bankers’ bonuses to just a third of their total compensation and force them to take it in stock. 

Supporters and opponents of the package alike predicted full passage of the package - a blend of tax cuts, aid to the least well-off, and investment in infrastructure, education and energy - by President Obama’s February 16 deadline. 

I had to laugh at Letterman early this week when he said Clinton wouldn't have had this problem with the stimulus package.  'When he needed his package stimulated he just called an intern.'


----------



## Doris (17 February 2009)

What is Obama up to as he starts his fourth week as president?

Tomorrow:

1.  Obama will sign the Stimulus Package bill in Denver Colorado.  
*Why there*?
The Denver Museum of Nature and Science is powered by over 400 rooftop solar panels. 
This template says 'This is what this package is about'.
Every Republican in Congress except three GOP senators opposed this plan.
If the economy begins to rebound, even slightly, Democrats will get the credit.

2.  Deadline for GM and Chrysler to show their plans for profitability, reporting to a new presidential task force.

Thursday:

Obama will be in Phoenix to announce a plan to help homeowners avoid foreclosure, by re-working their loans.
*Why there*?
 - to touch base with the rest of the country at least once a week in hopes of staying in touch with ordinary Americans.
 - choosing a state hit hard by foreclosures. In January, more than 4,500 homes in Arizona were repossessed.

He’d push for a new law allowing judges to re-write the mortgage terms for homeowners who land in bankruptcy court:

- banks would accept lower payments from homeowners in return for an equity stake once housing prices recover.
 - He will pledge $50 billion to $100 billion to help to reduce mortgage costs and renegotiate home loans.

Without such a law, people are being forced into "foreclosure who potentially would be better off, and the bank would be better off, and the community would be better off if they're at least making some payments, but they're not able to make all the payments necessary”.

Interestingly, this was a sub-prime solution David E Kelly wrote in an episode of his _Boston Legal_ last season!


----------



## darnsmall (17 February 2009)

Doris said:


> So true *Julia*
> 
> THIS was the content and point of that email.
> 
> ...




Denny Crane for President!


----------



## classer (17 February 2009)

Doris said:


> What is Obama up to as he starts his fourth week as president?
> 
> Tomorrow:
> 
> ...




So let me get this straight. The Man is flying a Jumbo Jet  three quarters of the way across the country to sign a piece of paper to prove how much he cares about the environment?

Yes  "This is what the package is about"


----------



## investorpaul (17 February 2009)

classer said:


> So let me get this straight. The Man is flying a Jumbo Jet  three quarters of the way across the country to sign a piece of paper to prove how much he cares about the environment?
> 
> Yes  "This is what the package is about"




I thought he liked email (via his blackberry). Its cheaper and more environmentally friendly.


----------



## Aussiejeff (18 February 2009)

BO has trumpeted categorically at the signing of his US$1Trillion+ rescue package 

*"This is the beginning of the end."*

Hmmm. I think I know what he wishfully meant. But if the package fails???

I rather hope his *ominous* choice of words (given the current dire state of the world economy) doesn't come back to haunt him... and the rest of us 

[size=-2]PS: I get nervous when pollies make categorical promises...[/size]


----------



## prawn_86 (18 February 2009)

I saw that quote too

Perhaps this is the beginning of the end for Western civilisation

Or the beginning of the end for the USD

Or the beginning of the end of all jobs

So many possibilities...


----------



## Calliope (19 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> BO has trumpeted categorically at the signing of his US$1Trillion+ rescue package
> 
> "This is the beginning of the end."




Unfortunately he got that right. So where do we go from here? Obama created so many expectations that any rational person knew he couldn't deliver. His silver tongue and magical rhetoric has now descended to boring monotonous braying repeating the same warnings of doom over and over.

Afghanistan is a good example. Everyone knew there is no solution there. Ruddlike, he is going to have a "comprehensive review". But prior to that review he has committed a further 17,000 troops without the faintest idea idea of what they will do when they get there, or whether they can do anything at all.

But it is on the home front where he is really floundering. The American economy is well and truly screwed. One of the best indicators is new housing starts. This has now dropped *80%* from its highs in 2006. And the once great motor industry is rooted, just like the once great American steel industry.

 He has been forced to do what Rudd is doing and try to prop up the economy by borrowing massive amounts of money, and stooping to the level of trying to retain his popularity by using that borrowed  money to bribe the poor. 

Where does it stop. Obama doesn't have the answers. But neither does anybody else. In Eastern Europe the fallout from the US disaster is catastrophic. Countries like Poland and former Russian satellites can no longer bail out there own banks, which means they are virtually in a state of sovereign bankruptcy. And as for Japan :shake:

Sorry to sound so pessimistic. Doris is in constant communication with Obama. Maybe he has told her of a magic pudding that will help us to "pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and start all over again". I hope she can share it with us. Over to you Doris. I could do wth some cheering up.


----------



## MrBurns (19 February 2009)

I'm in contact with someone in the US who would back what you say they're **** scared over there that he will really stuff it up, well......... in fact they''re sure of it.

Stimulus packages dont work and only squander money and get votes, tax cuts is whats needed but the likes of Rudd will always go with the popular alternative.
So what do you do ? move up the bush ? there isnt any


----------



## Julia (19 February 2009)

Calliope said:


> Sorry to sound so pessimistic. Doris is in constant communication with Obama. Maybe he has told her of a magic pudding that will help us to "pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and start all over again". I hope she can share it with us. Over to you Doris. I could do wth some cheering up.



So could I.   Just so depressing to see so much hopeless mismanagement.
And if the Rudd Stimulus Mark II doesn't have any effect, well then, I guess we'll just borrow some more and move on to Mark III.



MrBurns said:


> Stimulus packages dont work and only squander money and get votes, tax cuts is whats needed but the likes of Rudd will always go with the popular alternative.



Yep, and it's working with the majority of the population so he'll just go right on doing it.


----------



## electronicmaster (20 February 2009)

Stand buy everyone.




Anyone think this will stop what is happening with market issues?

I'm still long in Gold and Silver

I think good news also happened before the great depression too.


----------



## Calliope (20 February 2009)

electronicmaster said:


> Anyone think this will stop what is happening with market issues




I wasn't so much interested in what he said. It still trips glibly off his tongue in front of the right audience.

I was more interested in the crazy, almost hysterical reception from the audience. These rusted on, starstruck followers apparently still think he is the messiah. Are they truly representative of the American Mid West? If so, I am very frightened indeed.

Again, over to you Doris, as our resident expert on all things Obama. At a rough guess you have made around 750 posts extolling his virtues. Are you aware of any shortcomings?


----------



## prawn_86 (20 February 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Stimulus packages dont work and only squander money and get votes, *tax cuts is whats needed *but the likes of Rudd will always go with the popular alternative.




Actually WayneL, and some economists, (and also my useless opinion) think that tax raises are whats needed.

If the US is ever going to get out of debt they need to rise taxes not cut them  Same as here in Aus really


----------



## ZzzzDad (20 February 2009)

Obama's new Attorney General has really got the country buzzing.  He says Americans are too cowardly to talk about race.  No one can quite figure that one out.  But, if a white person ever tries to talk about race, they are shouted down and called racists, etc.

This is a the most incredibly incompetent, clueless Administration since Jimmy Carter.  We are in for a rough 4 years.  Those Republicans that stood up against the "stimulus" monstrosity will be swept into power in the 2010 midterm Congressional and Senate races.  Just like in 1994.  There is a groundswell starting here about all this governement spending and handouts.  Did anyone check out the Rick Santelli of CNBC video today?  Check it out. 


http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/...go-traders-dump-on-obamas-mortgage-plan-clip/

I'm sure many of you have already seen it, but some of you may not have.  This is the buzz of America today - and I can tell you, 80% of Americans are in agreement with Santelli's tirade.

Obama's luster is really wearing off FAST.  He is an absolute disaster.


----------



## Bushman (20 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> This is a the most incredibly incompetent, clueless Administration since Jimmy Carter.




Let me guess - your hero is Ronald Regan. 

NFI.


----------



## ZzzzDad (20 February 2009)

Bushman said:


> Let me guess - your hero is Ronald Regan.
> 
> NFI.




As a matter of fact - YES!

Three greatest Presidents in American history

Washington
Lincoln
Reagan

I believe you are the one with NFI.


----------



## Doris (20 February 2009)

Calliope said:


> So where do we go from here? Obama created so many expectations that any rational person knew he couldn't deliver.
> 
> Afghanistan is a good example. Everyone knew there is no solution there. Ruddlike, he is going to have a "comprehensive review". But prior to that review he has committed a further 17,000 troops without the faintest idea idea of what they will do when they get there, or whether they can do anything at all.




How do you know these new troops, added to 36,000 there, don't know what to do when they get there? 

Have a look at this 'picture story':  http://www.time.com/time/photoessays/2006/afghanistan_yuri/   Press ENTER.

US commanders (who actually run the war) in Afghanistan asked for more troops months ago.
They have less than half the officers they need to train the Afghan army!

8000 marines from NC in their spring...
4000 army from WA in their summer.
... and 5000 army 'enablers' to give logistics support.

Obama's review of strategy cannot be done until these troops are there as any more will have to come from Iraq!

They somehow have to slow the Taliban insurgence and stabilize the situation before the August elections!   

Kyrgyzstan wasn't happy with their measly US$17 million/year rent from the US for the Manas airbase they've used since 2001, so sold out today - when their parliament voted to accept Russia's US$2 billion bribe of 'aid'.  
The US now has six months to exit their last air base in Central Asia. Russia is cheering!

If it becomes 'too hard' do you give up? In this case do you succumb to blackmail?  
Or work out a solution... they can rail supplies through other countries. (and save $17 million a year)

Gates decided over a week ago that Manas was important but not irreplaceable... 75% of troops and supplies to Afghanistan go via Pakistan. The Pakistani government is not really helping in Swat! Will they up their demand for aid from the US when they don't cooperate (in return for current aid) now?  Will The Bear extend its power lust and have designs on Pakistan too and try to destroy The Eagle?

A rational person knows the solutions to US (world) problems will not happen overnight! Obama is rational.
Have patience, patient.


----------



## prawn_86 (20 February 2009)

Doris,

No offence meant, but you may be the most one eyed person i have ever come across. I'm sure if Obama launched a war against Aus you would find a way to justify it.


----------



## Calliope (20 February 2009)

Doris said:


> > How do you know these new troops, added to 36,000 there, don't know what to do when they get there?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




 Ah. Now we have got to the economy. Obama obviously consults with you (as part of his think tank) on military strategy, so I am sure you must have some insider knowledge on where he is going with the economy. As our resident Obama expert I think you should share this knowledge with us.

 I know this places a big weight on your slender shoulders, but all your fairweather friends on this thread, who were sucked in by your glowing faith in this young Messiah, have now fled like stars in the night. 

That leaves only you to explain to us how your Barack intends to dig himself out of this massive hole he has dug for himself. As for patience, that wears thin when you get scared. I know that you are not worried. But you are still running on an adrenalin high.


----------



## wayneL (20 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> Did anyone check out the Rick Santelli of CNBC video today?  Check it out.
> 
> 
> http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/...go-traders-dump-on-obamas-mortgage-plan-clip/
> ...




Santelli was awesome! I posted it in another thread and I was hooting in my cave as I was listening (Missus was wondering WTF was going on LOL).

America (and Australia and UK) needs more opnions such as that, expressed freely and passionately, such as that.... a lot more.

Just don't let Cramer say it, all credibility will be destroyed.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (20 February 2009)

There would appear to be apoplexy amongst the left commentariat about the "monkey cartoon".



Obama has been depicted as "Travis" the recent deceased chimpanzee who decided the good friend of his owner would never appear on Facebook.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/new...off-womans-face/2009/02/19/1234632928597.html

Obama supporters need to harden up and stop whingeing.

George W Bush who history will record as one of the greater Presidents, had consistently been portrayed as a monkey due to his simian face.



Obama supporters need to quit the race card in argument with those who do not see him as a godlike figure.

He's the President and if you start attempting to smother comment it reflects on the value of the message he delivers.

gg


----------



## Calliope (20 February 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Obama supporters need to harden up and stop whingeing.




I think the chimp supporters have a stronger case. After all chimps have feelings too.

The civil rights people picketed the Post.  Where were the animal rights people?


----------



## Bushman (21 February 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> There would appear to be apoplexy amongst the left commentariat about the "monkey cartoon".
> 
> 
> gg




It is a ridiculous sideshow! If you had the smallest acorn of intellegence you would understand the link between a chimpanzee and the farcical machinations of the Obama/Geithner malarchy to date. It will indeed be a long four-years if the race card is reached for for every perceived double entendre. 

I mean - who is the racist here? The cartoonist, who was drawing an obvious parallel between the pop culture antics of a chimpanzee and the circus that is Obamanomics at its infancy, or the hysterical civil libertarians who are trying to shut down political debate because they equate a monkey with a black man. UFB. 

Sleepy - my apologies for the 'NFI' comment. It had been a long-week (there is life in the commercial property markets all of a sudden as interest rates plummet) and I must say I am becoming increasingly frustrated with bi-partisanship. This guy will take 12-18 months to get into the swing of things because, as Clinton said, he just ain't ready. But you, and due to the perversion of globalisation, us need the Yanks to get behind your leader and help pull us out of the mire. However I understand your frustration as it has been a case of Curly, Mo and Larry so far. No more thoughtful than Bush and Paulson.


----------



## Calliope (21 February 2009)

It was a popular pastime with our cartoonists to use every expression on John Howard's face to exploit his often simian looks. One Brisbane cartoonist loved to portray him as a rat...complete with tail.

I don't remember any Civil Rights protesters picketing the Courier-Mail.  Keating copped nasty treatment too. And Latham. But then, of course if you are a *white* politician it's open slather.


----------



## ZzzzDad (21 February 2009)

Another of Obama's great Cabinet picks: 

*Chu jumps in 'deep end of the pool'*
From NBC’s John Yang

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/02/20/1803006.aspx

Energy Secretary Steven Chu may be a Nobel laureate Ph.D. in physics, but his first forays into energy policy suggest he's a neophyte when it comes to the ways of Washington.

At a forum with reporters on Thursday, the head of the department that has traditionally taken the lead on global oil-market policy, was asked what message the Obama administration had for the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries at its meeting next month.

"I'm not the administration," the Cabinet secretary replied. "I will be speaking and learning more about this in order to figure out what the U.S. position should be and what the president's position is."

Chu, who is still without a deputy, said he feels "like I've been dumped into the deep end of the pool" on oil policy.

The day before, reporters asked him about OPEC output levels after a speech to a group of utility regulators. He responded that the issue was "not in my domain."

Later, in a conference call to reporters, he said his answer reflected "more of my naivetÃ© than anything else."

*NOT IN MY DOMAIN?   LOL (if it weren't so serious)*


----------



## Julia (21 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> Another of Obama's great Cabinet picks:
> 
> *Chu jumps in 'deep end of the pool'*
> From NBC’s John Yang
> ...



Oh Lord, that is seriously worrying.


----------



## noirua (21 February 2009)

I suppose sending hundreds of thousands more troops to Afghanistan may help the unemployment problem.
In due course, the American and Allied troops will stand on the borders of Pakistan, and this may well be towards the end of Barak Obama's second term of office. Then what?


----------



## sassa (21 February 2009)

noirua said:


> well be towards the end of Barak Obama's second term of office.



Ummm!What do you know?


----------



## Doris (21 February 2009)

Calliope said:


> Has it been decided what they will do? No it hasn't The ones who are there now don't know what they are doing. The Taliban can't be defeated with rockets, tanks, bombs and artillery. But the Americans know no other way. The Russians found that out.




*Calliope* my man, this is why I put the 'picture link' and an  with this.
I was being facetious to your claim that Obama was sending them without knowing what they will do!
That is... the _commanders_ DID know they needed more fighting and logistical troops months ago.

You are so right of course!  Look at the terrain and the climate in that 'picture story'!  
Not a level 'playing' field.  
- made me wonder if air missile threats from the Manas base was the only motivation for Russia's $2 billion of 'aid'. 
The paltry saving of US$17 million/year in Manas base rent to Kyrgyzstan was also facetiousness. 

Of course it is hard... and will hit us hard downunder too, although most of us feel we're far away from it.

The global economy tanked near the end of the campaign so now Obama's platforms have to be modified. Just as well he is flexible! He can't use tax penalties on companies that resource foreign labour as they'll face liquidation... more layoffs, not to mention layoffs in that foreign country as the domino effect escalates into the vicious circle. 

Donald Trump was astute on Letterman Thursday night when he stressed that unemployment is a third of what it was in the Great Depression... 'it will get much worse before it starts to get better'.  He gave no glimmer of hope nor did he brandish ludicrous judgments on those who are fighting to turn the tide.

All we can do is be frugal and look after our own debt. Even if it means we won't get the pest control man in for the spiders but use Mortein... and as a consequence he can't pay his bills.  
But wouldn't it be wonderful if people didn't pile up their trolleys with coke and chips? Buy food for actual nutrients?

BTW... why would a rational person build a new home when there are so many cheap foreclosed houses?
Why would they upgrade their car when they may become unemployed and have to pay their mortgage?


----------



## pacestick (21 February 2009)

donald Trump isnt he unemployed at the moment


----------



## pacestick (21 February 2009)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35sGJrWKcmY&NR=1

This link was posted on 28 December .It is taken terribly out of context when it is considered that it finishes with an adominition to the audience to read their Bibles (THE FAITH OF BARACK OBAMA by Stephen Mansfield p88).It is also inconsistent with his often repeated statement that it is impossible for him or anyone else to separate their faith from their public role


----------



## Doris (21 February 2009)

pacestick said:


> donald Trump isnt he unemployed at the moment




lol...  *pacestick* you are so right!   

He actually went on the show to promote his new 'Celebrity Apprentice' which is starting in the US next week.

... and he's employing his daughter on it.  

btw... He has no money in those casinos bearing his name, which went into liquidation this week.


----------



## Glen48 (21 February 2009)

I was watching a show on SBS about  Poppy growing over there for the drug trade and how poor farmers get about 100 buck a yr, the Yanks were digging up fields but left field's growing in other areas some times on the other side of the road, the USA excuse was they didn't have the authority to dig up certain fields. instead of giving each poppy farmer  a few more buck each year to grow other crop and stemming the drug trade in USA they just continue doing the same thing each year. Is it any wonder the locals look towards the Taliban?


----------



## lusk (21 February 2009)

Glen48 said:


> I was watching a show on SBS about  Poppy growing over there for the drug trade and how poor farmers get about 100 buck a yr, the Yanks were digging up fields but left field's growing in other areas some times on the other side of the road, the USA excuse was they didn't have the authority to dig up certain fields. instead of giving each poppy farmer  a few more buck each year to grow other crop and stemming the drug trade in USA they just continue doing the same thing each year. Is it any wonder the locals look towards the Taliban?





Afghanistan was the world's largest producer of opium 1997 to 2000 and in 2002, the Taliban banned opium production around 2001 when they took control of Afghanistan they started destroying poppy crops. Output of opium from Afghanistan went down 94% from around 3276 tonnes to 185 tonnes but when US invaded production went back to normal in 2002


----------



## Doris (21 February 2009)

pacestick said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35sGJrWKcmY&NR=1
> 
> It is also inconsistent with his often repeated statement that it is impossible for him or anyone else to separate their faith from their public role




Obama was playing politics and trying to unite factions in 2006 when this was recorded... 

Without faith you have no hope. The source of your faith is your own choice... well for the lucky ones.

It seemed to me that the mayors at the White House gathering had faith that Obama meant what he was saying:



> The American people are watching. They need this plan to work.
> 
> And they expect to see the money they worked so hard to earn spent in its intended purpose *without waste, inefficiency, or fraud*.
> 
> ...




I can still hear the warning tone of his voice as Obama said those words.
And that look in his eyes!  
They know he will go through every item!
... And who predicted he would be a wimp? 

After asking for economic help from the federal government for more than a year, mayors of *both political parties* are among the strongest supporters of Obama's stimulus package.

"We don't mind getting called out. ... We welcome that kind of accountability. 
*We're going to help get the job done*," said Trenton, New Jersey, Mayor Douglas Palmer.

So now he has the mayors working to oversee spending efficacy. 

Monday: Obama is hosting lawmakers, economists and representatives of business and labor groups at the White House for a "Fiscal Responsibility Summit" to rein in the budget deficit - expected to be about $1.5 trillion.
This includes the $700billion from the bank rescue plan but not Obama's stimulus plan.

Thursday: The White House is expected to unveil its budget proposal.

... The deficit in the previous fiscal year was a record-high $455 billion.


----------



## Julia (22 February 2009)

From today's "Courier Mail":



> President Barack Obama's job approval rating dipped in his first month in office amid ongoing economic woes and partisan battles over government spending plans, new polls show.
> 
> A CNN and Opinion Research Corporation survey conducted over February 18-19  said 67 percent of Americans approved of his handling of the job.
> 
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 February 2009)

I'm confused 

A day or two ago, BO and his henchmen are saying "we don't want to nationalize our banks".

Today, rumour has it the US gummint is about to take a massive 40% stake in Citibank.

Excuse me Mr BO, but if that is not part-nationalisation of what was once a 100% FREE MARKET bank, I don't know what is. 

Please explain.

PS: Will be interesting to see how the Great American Free Market views this tonight - the first big step by the US towards the winding up of free market capitalism?


----------



## Knobby22 (23 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> I'm confused
> 
> A day or two ago, BO and his henchmen are saying "we don't want to nationalize our banks".
> 
> ...




The bank is broke. Without government money they will be out of business.
I reckon they should nationalise them then float them on the stock market to get some of the money back.

Knobby


----------



## Aussiejeff (23 February 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> The bank is broke. Without government money they will be out of business.
> I reckon they should nationalise them then float them on the stock market to get some of the money back.
> 
> Knobby




Yeah. I know they're broke. So why make the statement yesterday that they weren't looking to nationalize? The DOW tanked until that "re-assuring" announcement was made, then rallied strongly to be only down 100pts or so at close last night. That's what is confusing about the sudden "flip-flop". 

If it took a "non-nationalization" statement to recover the freefall yesterday, surely making a "part-nationalization" statement on one of the biggest US banks (a pillar of free market capitalism) will trigger off another tumble?

I'm still confused. I guess the dwindling "remainder of the free market" will say something tonight.


----------



## Knobby22 (23 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> I'm still confused. I guess the dwindling "remainder of the free market" will say something tonight.




Yes, the world has "free" market banks that need to be paid to keep running


----------



## wayneL (24 February 2009)

FYI

http://whitewraithe.wordpress.com/2009/02/22/alan-keyes-stop-obama-or-us-will-cease-to-exist/



> “Obama is a radical communist, and I think it is becoming clear. That is what I told people in Illinois and now everybody realizes it’s true,” said Keyes, who ran unsuccessfully against Obama for the state’s open Senate seat in 2004. “He is going to destroy this country, and we are either going to stop him or the United States of America is going to cease to exist.”
> 
> Keyes also reasserted his belief that unless the question of Obama’s eligibility to serve as president is answered definitively, America may face the startling crisis of an executive branch run by a “usurper.”




I have some sympathy with this view.


----------



## Aussiejeff (24 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> I guess the dwindling "remainder of the free market" will say something tonight.




They certainly did...


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (24 February 2009)

It seems some are not impressed.

http://2gb.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5655&Itemid=134


> The world is going to pay an awful price if on the one hand, the electorate have made a mistake electing the inexperienced Barack Obama and on the other hand, the inexperienced President Obama has made a mistake in managing the economy.


----------



## rhen (24 February 2009)

11 Most Expensive Catastrophes in History

                    # 11. Titanic -$150 Million

                    The sinking of the Titanic is possibly the most famous accident in the world. But it barely makes our list of top 10 most expensive. On April 15, 1912, the Titanic sank on its maiden voyage and was considered to be the most luxurious ocean liner ever built. Over 1,500 people lost their lives when the ship ran into an iceberg and sunk in frigid waters. The ship cost $7 million to build ($150 million in today ' s dollars).http://groups.yahoo.com/group/babes_in_blue

                    # 10. Tanker Truck vs Bridge - $358 Million

                    On August 26, 2004, a car collided with a tanker truck containing 32,000 liters of fuel on the Wiehltal Bridge in Germany . The tanker crashed through the guardrail and fell 90 feet off the A4 Autobahn resulting in a huge explosion and fire which destroyed the load-bearing ability of the bridge. Temporary repairs cost $40 million and the cost to replace the bridge is estimated at $318 Million.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/babes_in_blue 

                    # 9. MetroLink Crash - $500 Million

                    On September 12, 2008, in what was one of the worst train crashes in California history, 25 people were killed when a Metrolink commuter train crashed head-on into a Union Pacific freight train in Los Angeles . It is thought that the Metrolink train may have run through a red signal while the conductor was busy text messaging.. Wrongful death lawsuits are expected to cause $500 million in losses for Metrolink. 

                    # 8. B-2 Bomber Crash - $1.4 Billion

                    Here we have our first billion dollar accident (and we' re only #7 on the list). This B-2 stealth bomber crashed shortly after taking off from an air base in Guam on February 23, 2008. Investigators blamed distorted data in the flight control computers caused by moisture in the system. This resulted in the aircraft making a sudden nose-up move which made the B-2 stall and crash. This was 1 of only 21 ever built and was the most expensive aviation accident in history. Both pilots were able to eject to safety.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/babes_in_blue 

                    # 7. Exxon Valdez - $2.5 Billion

                    The Exxon Valdez oil spill was not a large one in relation to the world ' s biggest oil spills, but it was a costly one due to the remote location of Prince William Sound (accessible only by helicopter and boat). On March 24, 1989, 10.8 million gallons of oil was spilled when the ship ' s master, Joseph Hazelwood, left the controls and the ship crashed into a Reef. The cleanup cost Exxon $2.5 billion.

                    # 6. Piper Alpha Oil Rig - $3.4 Billion

                    The world ' s worst off-shore oil disaster. At one time, it was the world ' s single largest oil producer, spewing out 317,000 barrels of oil per day. On July 6, 1988, as part of routine maintenance, technicians removed and checked safety valves which were essential in preventing dangerous build-up of liquid gas. There were 100 identical safety valves which were checked. Unfortunately, the technicians made a mistake and forgot to replace one of them. At 10 PM that same night, a technician pressed a start button for the liquid gas pumps and the world ' s most expensive oil rig accident was set in motion.

                    Within 2 hours, the 300 foot platform was engulfed in flames. It eventually collapsed, killing 167 workers and resulting in $3.4 Billion in damages.

                    # 5. Challenger Explosion - $5.5 Billion

                    The Space Shuttle Challenger was destroyed 73 seconds after takeoff due on January 28, 1986 due to a faulty O-ring. It failed to seal one of the joints, allowing pressurized gas to reach the outside. This in turn caused the external tank to dump its payload of liquid hydrogen causing a massive explosion. The cost of replacing the Space Shuttle was $2 billion in 1986 ($4.5 billion in today ' s dollars). The cost of investigation, problem correction, and replacement of lost equipment cost $450 million from 1986-1987 ($1 Billion in today ' s dollars).

                    # 4. Prestige Oil Spill - $12 Billion

                    On November 13, 2002, the Prestige oil tanker was carrying 77,000 tons of heavy fuel oil when one of its twelve tanks burst during a storm off Galicia , Spain . Fearing that the ship would sink, the captain called for help from Spanish rescue workers, expecting them to take the ship into harbour. However, pressure from local authorities forced the captain to steer the ship away from the coast. The captain tried to get help from the French and Portuguese authorities, but they too ordered the ship away from their shores. The storm eventually took its toll on the ship resulting in the tanker splitting in half and releasing 20 million gallons oil into the sea.

                    According to a report by the Pontevedra Economist Board, the total cleanup cost $12 billion.

                    # 3. Space Shuttle Columbia - $13 Billion

                    The Space Shuttle Columbia was the first space worthy shuttle in NASA ' s orbital fleet. It was destroyed during re-entry over Texas on February 1, 2003 after a hole was punctured in one of the wings during launch 16 days earlier. The original cost of the shuttle was $2 Billion in 1978. That comes out to $6.3 Billion in today ' s dollars. $500 million was spent on the investigation, making it the costliest aircraft accident investigation in history. The search and recovery of debris cost $300 million.

                    In the end, the total cost of the accident (not including replacement of the shuttle) came out to $13 Billion according to the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.. 

                    # 2. Chernobyl -$200 Billion

                    On April 26, 1986, the world witnessed the costliest accident in history. The Chernobyl disaster has been called the biggest socio-economic catastrophe in peacetime history. 50% of the area of Ukraine is in some way contaminated. Over 200,000 people had to be evacuated and resettled while 1.7 million people were directly affected by the disaster. The death toll attributed to Chernobyl , including people who died from cancer years later, is estimated at 125,000. The total costs including cleanup, resettlement, and compensation to victims has been estimated to be roughly $200 Billion. The cost of a new steel shelter for the Chernobyl nuclear plant will cost $2 billion alone. The accident was officially attributed to power plant operators who violated plant procedures and were ignorant of the safety requirements needed.

                      # 1. 2008 Presidential Election- $800 Billion in the first two months………..


----------



## Aussiejeff (25 February 2009)

BO urged to raise the spirits & hope of Americans with regard to the economy, in his first congressional address to the nation in a few hours time. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=amFYLTTmGlQI&refer=home

Methinks the Hindenberg could be re-floated on the amount of hot air coming out of Washington lately... 

Of course, being the patriotic mob that they are, the US markets will undoubtedly soar shortly before, during and even possibly for a brief period after BO's flood of rhetoric.

Whether his hot breath alone is enough to sustain the economy _in reality_ (not much else seems to be working) is another question entirely unanswered, except for the passage of a short period of time.

We shall see....


----------



## Bushman (25 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> We shall see....




First steps in cutting the bloated budgets in defence and agribusiness = good 

Err raise corporate taxes and cut education?  Not so good for long-term productivity!


M'watch: 

Obama says he's identified $2 trillion in savings

By Robert Schroeder
Last update: 7:34 p.m. EST Feb. 24, 2009Comments: 13
WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- President Barack Obama and his economic team have identified $2 trillion in savings over the next 10 years, Obama will tell a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. Obama says his fiscal 2010 budget will end some education programs and unnecessary direct payments to agribusinesses. The budget also aims to cut some defense contracts and end some tax breaks for corporations, he will say.


----------



## GumbyLearner (25 February 2009)

Bernie Madoff was a rather LARGE contributor to the Democratic Party over the years.  As was Scamford, he starting giving campaign contributions back in 1989.

News out is that Sir Scamford exclusively marketed hedge funds run by 
relatives of Joe Biden. 

Talk about the **** permeating through the whole system. This stinks!

*Stanford had links to fund run by Bidens: report*

(Reuters) - A fund of hedge funds run by two members of Vice President Joe Biden's family was marketed exclusively by firms controlled by Texas financier Allen Stanford, charged by regulators with an $8 billion fraud, the Wall Street Journal said.

The $50 million fund was jointly branded between the Bidens' Paradigm Global Advisors LLC and a Stanford Financial Group entity, and was known as the Paradigm Stanford Capital Management Core Alternative Fund, the paper said.

Stanford-related companies marketed the fund to investors and also invested about $2.7 million of their own money in the fund, the paper said, citing a lawyer for Paradigm.

Paradigm Global Advisors is owned through a holding company by the vice president's son, Hunter, and Joe Biden's brother, James, according to the paper.


----------



## Ageo (25 February 2009)

I heard he wants to cut the budget deficit by half? but how is this possible when your borrowing hundreds of billions at a time?

I must of missed maths in school


----------



## Aussiejeff (25 February 2009)

Ageo said:


> I heard he wants to cut the budget deficit by half? but how is this possible when your borrowing hundreds of billions at a time?
> 
> I must of missed maths in school




Oh.

You haven't sat Creative Accounting 101 yet?


----------



## Ageo (25 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> Oh.
> 
> You haven't sat Creative Accounting 101 yet?




Yep sounds very creative (i wonder what the merchant bankers are upto this time).


----------



## Doris (25 February 2009)

Ageo said:


> I heard he wants to cut the *budget deficit* by half? but how is this possible when your borrowing hundreds of billions at a time?
> 
> I must of missed maths in school




It IS very confusing *Ageo*!

*The Bush Administration's budget deficit is expected to be 'about' $1.5t trillion*.

This includes the bank rescue plan as this was done on Bush's watch.

So cutting this back by half means:  $750 billion.

But - it does not include the costs of the Iraqi and Afghanistan wars as they were not budgeted for!!!!



Doris said:


> Monday: Obama is hosting lawmakers, economists and representatives of business and labor groups at the White House for a "Fiscal Responsibility Summit" to rein in the budget deficit -* expected to be about $1.5 trillion.*
> This includes the $700billion from the bank rescue plan - - but not Obama's stimulus plan.
> 
> Thursday: The White House is expected to unveil its budget proposal.
> ...


----------



## MrBurns (25 February 2009)

Just watched half of his address to the nation, full of BS as usual with supporters clapping their sweaty little hands off at every chance.

The audience looked bored and wouldn't you be ? I've seen this move several times before.

If they want to know how good they have it we should send KRudd over to give them a serve of his own particular brand of verbal anesthetic.

He started to get a bit more meaty when I turned off, I think any decisions he will make to help things will be very unpopular so.......... we're still waiting Mr President !


----------



## Aussiejeff (25 February 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Just watched half of his address to the nation, full of BS as usual with supporters clapping their sweaty little hands off at every chance.
> 
> The audience looked bored and wouldn't you be ? I've seen this move several times before.
> 
> ...




BO is the Joker in the pack of world leaders atm.

He is playing a lay down misere - BUT, if his PROMISE to US citizens that he will slash the deficit and create a resurgent American economy by year's end doesn't actually materialize, he is fast going to become the lamest el Presidente ever and the US economy will be doomed to wallow in the cesspit for years.

He's playing for keeps with the US citizenry's chips.

Will he win?

aj


----------



## MrBurns (25 February 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> BO is the Joker in the pack of world leaders atm.
> 
> He is playing a lay down misere - BUT, if his PROMISE to US citizens that he will slash the deficit and create a resurgent American economy by year's end doesn't actually materialize, he is fast going to become the lamest el Presidente ever and the US economy will be doomed to wallow in the cesspit for years.
> 
> ...




He's playing the confidence card, it's the only one he's got really.


----------



## basilio (25 February 2009)

So exactly *who* would make a better American President right now?

America is in deep, deep, doodah. It has helped take the rest of the world into the pit. How the hell will we get out? God knows but it certainly won't be through following the last 20 years of consumption and financial BS programs.

Amercia and the world faces an immediate financial crisis with an imminent Peak Oil crisis as well as the real impacts of Global Warming to follow. We can't address these with a spendathaon at the MALL.

If Barack Obama can recognise all of these issues and turn America from a consumption economy into a green, sustainable investment economy and somehow keep the population alive and non feral there is a (slim) chance.

I think we should just pray for him because if he goes down we follow.


----------



## MrBurns (25 February 2009)

basilio said:


> So exactly *who* would make a better American President right now?
> 
> America is in deep, deep, doodah. It has helped take the rest of the world into the pit. How the hell will we get out? God knows but it certainly won't be through following the last 20 years of consumption and financial BS programs.
> 
> ...





It's out of his control.

He's a good motivator but that wont fix the problems they will have to take their course.


----------



## Doris (25 February 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Just watched half of his address to the nation, full of BS as usual with supporters clapping their sweaty little hands off at every chance.
> 
> The audience looked bored and wouldn't you be ? I've seen this move several times before.




*Do you know whom Obama was addressing?*

Did you know that he was interrupted 65 times by applause?

Did you know he had 37 standing ovations?

WHO applauded?
WHO gave standing ovations?


----------



## Doris (25 February 2009)

MrBurns said:


> It's out of his control.
> 
> He's a good motivator but that wont fix the problems they will have to take their course.




Did you hear the words of his speech or were you just listening to his music?

Did you read his speech?

Obama has brisk intelligence and his set-up of hand-picked advisors to make his informed decisions.  
I suggest you find out what he said and try to decipher his words. 

Please don't make empty statements without giving logical, supportive justification for them.

You would let a drowning child drown would you?  ... rather than call the lifeguard?


----------



## Ageo (26 February 2009)

basilio said:


> So exactly *who* would make a better American President right now?




Ron Paul


----------



## nunthewiser (26 February 2009)

YES WE CAN !


----------



## Doris (26 February 2009)

basilio said:


> So exactly *who* would make a better American President right now?
> 
> Amercia and the world faces an immediate financial crisis with an imminent Peak Oil crisis as well as the real impacts of Global Warming to follow. We can't address these with a spendathon at the MALL.
> 
> ...




*Basilio* you are so right that putting money into issues of future needs is paramount.
What a blow that the CO2 monitoring rocket failed to launch!

These are some of the issues Obama campaigned on for job creation that he set before Congress today:  

BIPARTISAN APPLAUSE for the following:

On Economic Recovery:


> I do not accept a future where the jobs and industries of tomorrow take root beyond our borders -- and I know you don't either. It is time for America to lead again.




On Corporate Greed:


> *I intend to hold these banks fully accountable for the assistance they receive*, and this time, they will have to clearly demonstrate how taxpayer dollars result in more lending for the American taxpayer. This time, CEOs won't be able to use taxpayer money to pad their paychecks or buy fancy drapes or disappear on a private jet. *Those days are over*.




On Health Care: 
(I enjoy the 'Lincolnian-trilogy' style that Obama uses...)


> So let there be no doubt: health care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year.




On Education: 


> And dropping out of high school is no longer an option. It's not just quitting on yourself, it's quitting on your country -- and this country needs and values the talents of every American. That is why we will provide the support necessary for you to complete college and meet a new goal: by 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates in the world.




On Terrorism: 


> And *with our friends and allies*, we will forge a new and comprehensive strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan to defeat al Qaeda and combat extremism. Because I will not allow terrorists to plot against the American people from safe havens half a world away.




On Tax Breaks: 


> But let me be perfectly clear, because I know you'll hear the same old claims that rolling back these tax breaks means a massive tax increase on the American people: if your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime.




SUSTAINED APPLAUSE: On Supporting The Troops: 


> As we meet here tonight, our men and women in uniform stand watch abroad and more are readying to deploy. To each and every one of them, and to the families who bear the quiet burden of their absence, Americans are united in sending one message: we honor your service, we are inspired by your sacrifice, and you have our unyielding support.




STRICTLY REPUBLICAN APPLAUSE... on The Deficit: 

"There is, of course, another responsibility we have to our children. 
And that is the responsibility to ensure that we do not pass on to them a debt they cannot pay".

FOLLOWED BY STRICTLY DEMOCRATIC APPLAUSE:

"With the deficit we inherited..."



> I have asked Vice President Biden to lead a tough, unprecedented oversight effort
> -- because *nobody messes with Joe*.


----------



## rhen (26 February 2009)

Doris said:


> *Do you know whom Obama was addressing?*
> 
> Did you know that he was interrupted 65 times by applause?
> 
> ...




Sorry Doris.
I truly do not wish to be rude, and please don't read this as such, but as you have expressed your opinions, so too must I make some response.
My answers to Questions 1, 4 and 5 are...
Probably a truly representative sample of those who raced lemming-like into the great recession (or worse) of 2009 and failed to listen to the few politicians who understood and warned them (and so rejected those politicians together with their solutions). Ron Paul comes to mind.
I wish Barack good fortune. I believe we depend on his success (whether we like it or not.)


----------



## Doris (26 February 2009)

rhen said:


> Sorry Doris.
> I truly do not wish to be rude, and please don't read this as such, but as you have expressed your opinions, so too must I make some response.
> My answers to Questions 1, 4 and 5 are...
> *Probably* a truly representative sample of those who raced lemming-like into the great recession (or worse) of 2009 and *failed to listen to the few politicians who understood and warned them* (and so rejected those politicians together with their solutions). Ron Paul comes to mind.
> I wish Barack good fortune. I believe we depend on his success (whether we like it or not.)




*rhen*, the speech was given 'before the Joint Session of Congress' today. (Thus *IMPORTANT*!)

- - to both houses of the United States Congress: *the House of Representatives and the Senate*.

Joint sessions are held on *special occasions* such as the State of the Union Address and presidential inaugurations.

A joint session of congress *requires a concurrent resolution* from both House and Senate to meet.

THUS:  Both houses had wanted the 'joint session' (NOT a mere 'joint meeting' of Congress).

Ignorance is not an excuse for an empty whine when this speech was waited on by the nation and the world to turn the tide of helplessness and hopelessness people were floundering in. It was not a state of the union address but was essential (as Bill Clinton, had urged) to give all Americans some semblance of *hope and how* for the future.

It is purported by 'experts' that the rest of the world will begin their economic recovery 6-12 months after the US.

If you click on the arrow beside MrBurns' name you will be taken to the source of his quote, although I put the relevant parts in my post.  He was talking as an authoritative critic and yet had no idea of the audience nor of the purpose of the speech which has already gone down, by academics, as one of the best speeches before a Joint Session IN HISTORY.  


The TEXT of the speech:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/02/obamas_speech_before_joint_ses.html

- many fine oratory and rhetorically talented excerpts can be found. (the English teacher in me)


----------



## MrBurns (26 February 2009)

Doris said:


> Ignorance is not an excuse for an empty whine when this speech was waited on by the nation and the world to turn the tide of helplessness and hopelessness people were floundering in. It was not a state of the union address but was essential (as Bill Clinton, had urged) to give all Americans some semblance of *hope and how* for the future.
> 
> It is purported by 'experts' that the rest of the world will begin their economic recovery 6-12 months after the US.
> 
> ...





Doris don't mistake your own bias for fact, it was a great speech but all his speeches are great, so what ?



> has already gone down, by academics, as one of the best speeches before a Joint Session IN HISTORY




Academics are a waste of space and public money, "academic" is a euphemism for "bludger" here Doris. so their opinion is of value only to other academics.

Please don't say i don't understand Doris I think you need to take a closer look and accept that opinions other than those of a teacher are relevant too and you're right 







> Ignorance is not an excuse for an empty whine



 so don't do it.


----------



## MrBurns (26 February 2009)

Doris said:


> *Do you know whom Obama was addressing?*
> 
> Did you know that he was interrupted 65 times by applause?
> 
> ...




The guy behind him woke up when he heard his cue and stood to applaud, they all followed as they would.

Very well stage managed, the *real *experts opinions ?

I dont see US stocks going anywhere on that pep talk.


----------



## Aussiejeff (26 February 2009)

MrBurns said:


> The guy behind him woke up when he heard his cue and stood to applaud, they all followed as they would.
> 
> Very well stage managed, the *real *experts opinions ?
> 
> *I dont see US stocks going anywhere on that pep talk.*




I do. DOWN.


IMO for BO to make unbelievably optimistic barefaced promises that may *in all reality* never have a chance to eventuate is a terrible gamble. 

His speech PROMISING to end the World Financial Crisis courtesy of a miraculous and imminent US economic recovery within a few months flies totally in the face of what most World economists & analysts are agreed on. That is, 

(1) US housing crisis is showing no signs of turning around either now or in the immediate future.  

(2) That Japan is heading into (if not already technically in) an economic DEPRESSION.

(3) That many European economies are close to insolvency & also technical DEPRESSION. 

(4) That the degree and time scale for China's recovery (IF and WHEN) is UNCERTAIN at best (given they like to fudge the scant gummint figures and economic stats they feel like releasing).

(5) That world trade has fallen off a cliff at the same time.


I would have preferred to see a much more sober, serious assessment of the current and future chances for the US economy rather than the expected pumped up rhetoric. The markets weren't impressed. When 600,000 extra unemployed Americans wake up in a months time and nothing much seems to have changed for the better, they might not be so impressed either. 

*Thanks to that speech, the rest of the world markets will now be on tenterhooks on a daily basis, terrified of the (in reality) many opportunities for "events" to cause BO to fail to deliver on his raft (more like a Supertanker) of PROMISES. *

Good luck, World, is all I can say.....


----------



## ZzzzDad (26 February 2009)

Doris apparently does not know that this is a yearly event, and the President is ALWAYS interrupted after every paragraph or point with standing ovations, applause etc.  Go back and look at GWB's addresses, and Clinton's, and on and on back - just as many standing ovations, applause etc. 

He has promised the earth and the moon to everybody, and his only plan to pay for it is to TAX THE RICH.  You could confiscate the entire net worth of the top 2 percent in America, and not have enough money to pay for all of these promises - Health care, free college, and on and on.

It is a joke, and everybody except for Obama fanatics know it.

We are witnessing the second term of James Earl Carter.  Remember the late '70s?  

Obama fanatics are in for a very rude awakening - their emperor has no clothes.


----------



## sassa (26 February 2009)

> Obama Budget Taxes Richest to Help Pay for Health Care




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/26/us/politics/26budget.html?_r=1&hp

Could be a case of "For whom does the bell toll?"


----------



## MrBurns (26 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> He has promised the earth and the moon to everybody, and his only plan to pay for it is to TAX THE RICH.




There's a lot of people very worried about this over there, he wants to "redistribute the wealth" which means take it off those who made it and give it to those that didn't. Scary stuff, have to wait till he shows his hand more clearly.


----------



## Calliope (26 February 2009)

MrBurns said:


> There's a lot of people very worried about this over there, he wants to "redistribute the wealth" which means take it off those who made it and give it to those that didn't. Scary stuff, have to wait till he shows his hand more clearly.




Karl Marx came up with that idea first. It's not a bad idea if you are running the show.


----------



## basilio (26 February 2009)

The health care issue  is one of key factors that is  destroying Americas chances of economic recovery.  Why ?

1) The current costs of health insurance are crippling businesses and individuals
2) Because this insurance is so expensive many people can't afford it. When they fall sick in any way the cost bankrupots them. Not a good look for the economy.
3) The private health system is just way too expensive. For whatever reason - greed, over servicing, too expensive drugs America pays far too much money for too little health. The  health system is a parasite which is killing its host. 

One way or another Obama's administration will have to reform this system. And with the budget deficit so bad  now is the time to kill the parasite.


----------



## Doris (26 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> *Doris apparently does not know that this is a yearly event*, and the President is ALWAYS interrupted after every paragraph or point with standing ovations, applause etc.  Go back and look at GWB's addresses, and Clinton's, and on and on back - just as many standing ovations, applause etc.
> 
> He has promised the earth and the moon to everybody, and *his only plan to pay for it is to TAX THE RICH*.  You could confiscate the entire net worth of the top 2 percent in America, and not have enough money to pay for all of these promises - Health care, free college, and on and on.
> 
> It is a joke, and everybody except for Obama fanatics know it.




You are so positively negative! 

Sorry, wrong! - the speech was *Obama's joint session speech of 2009*.  It was NOT a State of Union Address.

- as were Bill Clinton's 1993 Economic Address, George W. Bush's Budget Message of 2001.

Tomorrow Obama will present Congress with his budget *blueprint* - where the money is going.
*Details* will be in his WH summit next week.

*Healthcare* will be half funded by income tax increases (including Bush's 2010 lapses) and half from spending cuts in the Health care system.

But he does have a brilliant scheme being developed to abort the use of tax havens... e.g. Cayman Islands!

It's not how much money you have, but how it's spent.  Don't you think accountability is overdue:

Biden: 
 * administration poised to take back unused stimulus money if governors refused to spend it.
 * use television, radio and the media to embarrass them for not doing what they're supposed to do.
 * the money "cannot be squandered" - - states will be held accountable for what they do with the money.

It also makes sense for job retention and new ones to be developed for more tax income!

Do you not see real efforts being made? Would you really prefer McCain were at the helm?  Or Bush?


----------



## MrBurns (26 February 2009)

Doris said:


> Do you not see real efforts being made? Would you really prefer McCain were at the helm?  Or Bush?




McCain of course.


----------



## Doris (26 February 2009)

basilio said:


> The health care issue  is one of key factors that is  destroying Americas chances of economic recovery.  Why ?
> 
> 1) The current costs of health insurance are crippling businesses and individuals
> 2) Because this insurance is so expensive many people can't afford it. When they fall sick in any way the cost bankrupts them. Not a good look for the economy.
> ...




Yes! The US is like a caste system for education and healthcare, especially compared to Australia.
Our system overworks doctors/nurses but at least they are paid for their overtime.  Not so in the US!

A friend of mine's daughter had a sugar binging problem that spotted her face. Her mother took her to a doctor and got her $460 of creams, cleaners, ointments, pills - 100% refunded by her employer's healthcare scheme.  All she had to do was stop the coke, ice-cream, cookies and sweets!  Abuse?  Try getting those items on our scripts!

It's not just increasing taxes to fund Healthcare but slashing spending:

Prescription-drug manufacturers will be 'consulted' on their costs.

Plan costs proposal:


> Savings estimated at *$177 billion over 10 years*, from changing the pay structure for private managed-care plans that participate in Medicare.
> Under current law, payments for Medicare Advantage plans are set by a formula, so private companies are paid, on average, 14% more to care for a Medicare patient than the government would normally spend through the traditional Medicare plan.
> 
> Private plans would bid to offer coverage in geographic areas; paid based on an average of the bids.




The changes being proposed for hospitals:


> Create one bundled Medicare payment to cover both a hospital stay and care for the patient for 30 days after release, a change estimated to *save $17 billion over 10 years*.
> 
> Cut payments for hospitals that routinely readmit patients after they have been discharged, a sign that the original care was substandard. That change would *save $8.4 billion over 10 years*.





Obama's budget is looking at ten years to implement. This is a far cry from Bush's yearly one that didn't include Iraq!


----------



## Doris (26 February 2009)

*Obama's joint session speech of 2009*

To watch 9 minutes of highlights:

http://my.barackobama.com/presidentialaddress

... Yes the call of the wild can be felt by the listener! 

To watch the whole address:

http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/address/

To read the transcript of the speech:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press...k-Obama-Address-to-Joint-Session-of-Congress/



> From: President Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Thursday, 26 February 2009 7:29 AM
> To:
> Subject: My address to Congress
> ...


----------



## 2BAD4U (26 February 2009)

Here's an extract from Obama's speech:

_Today, we take a step forward_
....all stand up and applaud....

_and finally discover_
....all stand up and applaud....

_that congress is a joke_
....all stand up and applaud....

_because you all stand up and applaud_
....all stand up and applaud....

_everytime I say something_
....all stand up and applaud....

_even if it's crap_
....all stand up and applaud....


----------



## GumbyLearner (26 February 2009)

2BAD4U said:


> Here's an extract from Obama's speech:
> 
> _Today, we take a step forward_
> ....all stand up and applaud....
> ...




LMAO! Funny Post 2Bad


----------



## Glen48 (26 February 2009)

Hear is the answer is Blowing......in the Wind:
From New York Times.

LONDON: Want to help fund the bank bailout, ease the California budget crisis and shore up strained U.S. finances? Legalize drugs, tax the trade and save on interdiction, domestic enforcement and the prison and court system.

I'm only partly joking.

It would not solve all of the United States' problems and, lord knows, it would cause some new ones, but the money is undeniably big enough to make a dent.

After all, it certainly helped President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who legalized alcohol in 1933 in the midst of the Depression and after more than a decade of Prohibition, thus bringing a half a billion in 1933 dollars into public coffers in the form of tax revenue. By 1936, alcohol taxes were 13 percent of U.S. federal revenue.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California has a similar opportunity. He is facing a $42 billion budget deficit, his prisons are filled to bursting, in substantial part with people in on drug-related crime, and he will soon be forced by judicial edict to start freeing people.
More Coverage
James Saft
Today in Business with Reuters
Government gives details of plan to support U.S. banks
Tax suspicions grow on Swiss accounts
As Latvian economy falters, unrest grows

He also has an offer from a group call Let Us Pay Taxes, which claims to represent the marijuana industry and is willing to pay $1 billion annually in taxes if only he would legalize. No doubt they are low-balling. The United Nations estimates the value of the U.S. cannabis market at $64 billion annually, while a paper by Jonathan Caulkins and Peter Renter calculates that about half of the costs of drugs are in one way or another attributable to factors linked to interdiction and its perils.

But even if you cut the UN number in half and tax it at only 50 percent, a lower tax than many states and localities put on tobacco, you would still get more than $15 billion nationwide. If California consumes its 13 percent share, in line with GDP, and I am betting it does, you are looking at something on the order of $2 billion, even before you take account of lower costs.

The Harvard economics professor Jeffrey Miron has a lower estimate, at $7.7 billion annually in lower spending nationally and $6.2 billion in extra revenues.

Of course, these figures could fluctuate wildly, depending on levels of compliance and market factors.

But why stop at cannabis? Just as Roosevelt decided that prohibition of alcohol was a failed policy the United States could no longer afford, perhaps the costs of rebuilding the U.S. banking system and lifting the country out of a severe recession will prompt another radical plan. I would not bet on it, but strange things are happening all over.

And if we start including other drugs the billions will only mount. There is another $100 billion in annual illegal drug sales in the United States outside of cannabis, which might produce another $25 billion annually in revenue by the same math. The U.S. government spent $13 billion on the drug war in 2002, not counting prison costs.

Then there are other costs of the U.S. drug interdiction efforts internationally, not least in Afghanistan, where opium revenue fuels the Taliban. The United States spends more than $1 billion a year there on anti-drug efforts, but opium money undoubtedly raises the total costs for the United States by much more.

The stream of income from all of this extending into the future is very valuable indeed and would go a way toward paying the price of fixing the banking system.

This brings us to another point of weakness for the United States; namely its ability to fund all of the costs it has already taken on and is likely to have to shoulder in the next several years.

Not long ago, Moody's credit rating agency did what everyone has pretty much taken for granted, acknowledging that the United States' AAA credit rating is being "tested" and falls into a category below those on the top shelf like Canada and Germany.

It is not all wine and roses, though. Cheaper legal drugs might lead to a spike in use, which might hit productivity and impose many costs, like higher health and other welfare costs.

All of those prison, military and law enforcement jobs are a huge source of stimulus, and the cutbacks implied by legalization would raise transitional problems.

Moreover, drug legalization, just as for alcohol, is essentially a moral and political decision about which reasonable people can disagree. It is also, to put it mildly, not very likely.

Still the war on drugs rolls on, costing billions, creating huge incentives for violence and crime, imprisoning hundreds of thousands and seemingly never much closer to victory. The waste and misery must make it rival the sub-prime bubble as a misallocation of resources.

Perhaps one stone would end up killing two birds.


----------



## Doris (26 February 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Very well stage managed, the *real *experts opinions ?
> 
> I dont see US stocks going anywhere on that pep talk.




Did you notice the gold price fell - - and oil rose?

and most of our gold and oil stocks followed this pattern today?

An 'expert' in the WSJ yesterday foresaw gold rising to USD1300 within 6-12 months.  
THAT would be the time to get out of gold as the economy was recovering!


----------



## Doris (26 February 2009)

I have to say I had wondered how Osama bin Laden would have been frothing at the mouth over 'that speech'! 

Bush did well to keep Osama's spies out!  
What a massive security exercise to protect members of both houses for this session!


*Designation of the Presidential Address to a Joint Session of Congress as a National Special Security Event*

... designated by Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Why?  * *anticipated attendance by dignitaries* and the size and significance of the event. 

 - U.S. Secret Service assumes its legally mandated role as the lead federal agency. 
 - Federal resources deployed to maintain the level of security needed.

*The Secret Service* plans, coordinates, and implements security operations at designated NSSEs and, together with law enforcement, public safety, and military partners, *develops the overall security plan*. 

The U.S. Capitol Police, the Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, and a number of other federal and local agencies played an active security role. 

Assets from the Dep't of Defense, including the North American Aerospace Defense Command & the US Northern Command.

Since 1998 - 30 NSSEs, including, the 2008 DNC & RNC, the G20 summit and the 2009 Presidential Inauguration.


----------



## ZzzzDad (26 February 2009)

Doris said:


> You are so positively negative!




I fully understand that this was not technically a State of the Union - but in effect it was the equivalent of one for a new President.



> Do you not see real efforts being made? Would you really prefer McCain were at the helm?  Or Bush?




No - Mitt Romney.  He and Jindal will pick up the pieces of the New Jimmy Carter (Obama).  Just like Ronald Reagan had to do in 1981.  We will put an adult in charge then - unlike GWB or Obama.

The Republicans will sweep the House and Senate in 2010.  The out of control spending is the talk of the U.S.  This "stimulus" bill was a big mistake, just a pork laden Democrat wish list bill.  You are not here, you don't see what is happening at the grass roots level.  BO will be a lame duck in 2010, and back to Chicago in 2012.


----------



## Calliope (26 February 2009)

The big news is that the Obamas have decided on a  Portuguese Water dog  for family pet and America's *first dog.*

This is confidence building news and should give the market a kick along.


----------



## Julia (26 February 2009)

I had to Google this breed.  Apparently a bit like a water loving poodle.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (26 February 2009)

Doris said:


> I have to say I had wondered how Osama bin Laden would have been frothing at the mouth over 'that speech'!
> 
> Bush did well to keep Osama's spies out!
> What a massive security exercise to protect members of both houses for this session!
> ...




Doris, is there some deep significance to the underlying and bolding in your posts?

Me I'm a words man.

What is he saying he will do and what has he done to presuppose that he will do what he has said he will do?

I could put it in bold or underline it, but I'm a gint.

gg


----------



## Julia (27 February 2009)

gg, with apologies for my ignorance:  what is a 'gint'?

PS  I don't read anything with underlining.  Might be a solution for you too?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 February 2009)

Julia said:


> gg, with apologies for my ignorance:  what is a 'gint'?
> 
> PS  I don't read anything with underlining.  Might be a solution for you too?




A gint, or a jint, is a gentleman. A higher class of idjiit lol.

gg


----------



## Doris (27 February 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> I fully understand that this was not technically a State of the Union - but in effect it was the equivalent of one for a new President.
> 
> The Republicans will sweep the House and Senate in 2010.  The out of control spending is the talk of the U.S.  This "stimulus" bill was a big mistake, just a pork laden Democrat wish list bill.  You are not here, you don't see what is happening at the grass roots level.  BO will be a lame duck in 2010, and back to Chicago in 2012.




*ZzzzDad* if you'd read the thread you'd have realized my comment was related to *MrBurns*' denigrating presumption that the speech was made to converted fans whereas it was significantly to both houses of your federal gov't.  
You are right of course that it was a pseudo state of the union address despite his having been in office only a month... (thus a month early)  Did you note the new Israeli leader has six weeks to 'settle into office'?

You're on the page about the package being flagged as a wish list bill - most are from Obama's list of campaign pledges. 
 - he is putting up what he said he would despite the worsened economy.  Not a mean feat!

What IS happening at the grass roots level that you alluded to? 

I've seen interviews with young folk pleased that they've been able to buy a foreclosed house that was half the price it was a year ago.  They felt sad for the previous owner but pleased they had a house they thought they would never be able to afford. The fear of losing your job must permeate the grass roots as is happening here now.

My BFF in Orange County is the sales manager for a company owned by a German:



> I am working long hours - these idiots I work with seem to think that starting at 6AM and ending at 8 PM is normal and that a teleconference at 7 AM on a Sunday morning is normal - I am tired, irritated - none the less so that we are in a recession and everyone is taking advantage of the labor they 'own'.   Slavery is alive and well.  The difference between now and the Old South is that we choose who our slave owners are!




Have you noticed this 'slavery' in the workplace at grass roots level in your area?


----------



## Doris (27 February 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Doris, is there some deep significance to the underlying and bolding in your posts?
> Me I'm a words man.
> What is he saying he will do and what has he done to presuppose that he will do what he has said he will do?
> I could put it in bold or underline it, but I'm a gint.
> gg




*GG* - Simply to reduce the words needed to be read to get the significance of what went on behind the scenes.

What a huge operation and waste of money and resources to secure the house members and Obama from Osama!  

Just sit back with your beer GG, have a snooze and don't worry.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (27 February 2009)

Doris said:


> *ZzzzDad* if you'd read the thread you'd have realized my comment was related to *MrBurns*' denigrating presumption that the speech was made to converted fans whereas it was significantly to both houses of your federal gov't.
> You are right of course that it was a pseudo state of the union address despite his having been in office only a month... (thus a month early)  Did you note the new Israeli leader has six weeks to 'settle into office'?
> 
> You're on the page about the package being flagged as a wish list bill - most are from Obama's list of campaign pledges.
> ...




Doris I am glad you have decreased the underlines and bolding in your latest post.

Your love for Obama is admirable.

Please give us some idea of measures we can use to assess his success in the enormous task ahead of him.

I have many employees who would endorse your comments on the workplace by the way. Good on you.

gg



Garpal Gumnut said:


> Doris, is there some deep significance to the underlying and bolding in your posts?
> 
> Me I'm a words man.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bushman (27 February 2009)

Doris said:


> Have you noticed this 'slavery' in the workplace at grass roots level in your area?




LOL; don't leverage up to 100% against the 'equity' in your house and you won't have to be a wage-slave.


----------



## Doris (27 February 2009)

Bushman said:


> LOL; don't leverage up to 100% against the 'equity' in your house and you won't have to be a wage-slave.




Yes!  How awful for those who feel they have to work like Japanese to keep their jobs and thus their homes!  

I just wondered how many others were putting pressure on their employees - extra hours for no added $$. *ZzzzDad*?

Is this happening here?  But then our unions demand PAID overtime don't they - unless you're on a salary!

In my BFF's case, they own 50 acres at Big Sur (Ted Turner has the next allotment up the hill), a house they own and rent out in OC, as well as the one they own and live in.  So they are 'lucky'.

But it's a bit much when we can't have our weekly chat as she needs more yoga time due to company product stress!


----------



## MrBurns (28 February 2009)

What did I tell you ? 

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=402315&postcount=1642



> Obama's rude shock to six-figure earners -
> 
> What everyone's overlooking in the new budget: a stealth tax on people making more than $250,000.
> Shawn Tully, editor at large
> ...


----------



## Doris (28 February 2009)

*Yesterday, President Obama submitted his first budget to Congress*.



> As the President said, the budget isn't just numbers on a page. It establishes our plans and priorities as we confront some of the longest-standing challenges this country has ever faced.
> 
> With this budget, President Obama is asking Washington to do something it rarely does -- look beyond the next election and take the long-term steps to ensure America's future strength and prosperity.
> 
> ...




Brief video:

http://my.barackobama.com/thebudget


David is now campaigning for the next election!

The 'broad support' will be those who vote for Obama in 2012... as well as watching his implementations now.


----------



## Doris (1 March 2009)

*2020* in case you're lurking...

Obama has today asked (Kansas governor) Kathleen Sebelius to head the Health and Human Services Department
 - a major role to ensure all Americans have affordable health care.  

Sebelius previously served as the Kansas insurance commissioner... the first to reject a proposed conversion of a non-profit Blue Cross Blue Shield into a for-profit company, slowing the pace of such conversions nationally. 

Politically, she’s pretty savvy because she’s been trying to move a reform agenda thought a conservative state.

The Republican-controlled Kansas last year agreed to raise the income limit for the state’s subsidized insurance program for children whose parents earn too little to buy private coverage and too much to qualify for Medicaid.

The income limit for families of four was increased to $53,000 from $42,400.
The state still must find the necessary money to put the expansion into place but on Feb 5 Obama signed a law that more than doubles U.S. funding to about $12 billion annually from the current $5 billion. 



> She accepted, an administration official said. Obama will announce the nomination March 2 at the White House, the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said. Her nomination is subject to approval by the Senate.




I wonder if Obama will seek out the source of the 'anonymous leak'!


----------



## Julia (1 March 2009)

Doris, could you possibly give consideration to making a post without underlining?


----------



## noirua (2 March 2009)

Is the most important factor for America and the World the countries economy?  If so, President Obama has failed to stop the slide and seems to be at a loss to turn things round, so far.
http://compareshares.com.au/show_news.php?id=S-554747

Economic slump continues - 6.2% annualized drop.  Where is President Obama on this?
http://compareshares.com.au/show_news.php?id=S-554844


----------



## MrBurns (2 March 2009)

Saw an interview with Jim Rogers last night he blasted past and present Fed Reserve chiefs and Presidents for not understanding whats going on, Japan tried the bail out trick and it *DOESN'T WORK.*

The present strategy will only make things worse and they _will_ get much worse.

Don't suppose we can expect anything more from KRudd, he's way out of his depth.

Go here - 

http://news.sbs.com.au/dateline/

look at the right hand side see videos, Jim Rogers interview, stupid web site doesnt show direct links - worth a look - really...........


----------



## Calliope (2 March 2009)

Mr Rudd is going to America to hold talks with Mr Obama on the financial crisis and Afghanistan.  American officials say the success of the talks hinges on whether the Oval Office can find an interpreter proficient in Ruddspeak in time for the visit.


----------



## MrBurns (2 March 2009)

What a complete and utter waste of time, these guys do not listen to the real experts or they do and then massage it to get votes.

Rogers was right same as Schiff, these companies should be let go and then rebuild whats the point of propping up failures ??? so they can do it again ?


----------



## Julia (2 March 2009)

Calliope said:


> Mr Rudd is going to America to hold talks with Mr Obama on the financial crisis and Afghanistan.  American officials say the success of the talks hinges on whether the Oval Office can find an interpreter proficient in Ruddspeak in time for the visit.



Maybe offer your services, Calliope?   I reckon any of us here would do a pretty efficient translation job.


----------



## Julia (2 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Saw an interview with Jim Rogers last night he blasted past and present Fed Reserve chiefs and Presidents for not understanding whats going on, Japan tried the bail out trick and it *DOESN'T WORK.*
> 
> The present strategy will only make things worse and they _will_ get much worse.
> 
> ...




I just don't understand why - with the widespread acceptance that this policy has failed so utterly in Japan - the strategy is being continued.


----------



## MrBurns (2 March 2009)

Julia said:


> I just don't understand why - with the widespread acceptance that this policy has failed so utterly in Japan - the strategy is being continued.




Julia, I guess they just don't feel they can let companies like GM fail because of the unemployment consequences and the thousands of other business that rely on them.

From a purely economic viewpoint they should be allowed to fail, as Rogers said someone else better will come along to fill the gap but it's just too hard to let that happen politically.

It does have the real possibility to make things worse though because you're just propping up someone who has failed and the money will run out sooner or later. Are GM going to start selling more cars because they are being propped up ? No.

I think Rogers summed it up pretty well but to do what he says is just in the too hard basket I guess.


----------



## Aussiejeff (2 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Julia, I guess they just don't feel they can let companies like GM fail because of the unemployment consequences and the thousands of other business that rely on them.
> 
> From a purely economic viewpoint they should be allowed to fail, as Rogers said someone else better will come along to fill the gap but it's just too hard to let that happen politically.
> 
> ...




The loss of face for World Leaders (and our beloved Asian & Western pollies in particular) if they let Mega-companies "too big to fail" to actually do just that - would be excruciatingly unbearable. 

Gawd! Think how much their egos would be dented - let alone their non-existent next election chances.

No. AFATAC it's far, far better to just stick their heads up their collective bums and hope for the Rest Of The World to collapse first - then they can claim _"See! It wasn't our fault - it was the Evil Global Financial Crisis that did it!"_

They don't fool me one little bit.


----------



## noirua (2 March 2009)

Calliope said:


> Mr Rudd is going to America to hold talks with Mr Obama on the financial crisis and Afghanistan.  American officials say the success of the talks hinges on whether the Oval Office can find an interpreter proficient in Ruddspeak in time for the visit.




More likely that President Obama sees Prime Minister Rudd as the only English speaking useful contact in the Far East.  His sway with China makes him punch above his weight.  So don't underrate our man of the moment.


----------



## electronicmaster (2 March 2009)

Calliope said:


> Mr Rudd is going to America to hold talks with Mr Obama on the financial crisis and Afghanistan.  American officials say the success of the talks hinges on whether the Oval Office can find an interpreter proficient in Ruddspeak in time for the visit.




Keven Rud better not have any dumb ideas from the last stimulus laws.  I found some info on what is written in that TARP V2 stimulus.  Pray that it never comes here.

Here it is:-


----------



## Doris (2 March 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Please give us some idea of measures we can use to assess his success in the enormous task ahead of him.
> gg




I'd say when rednecks finish high school, the middle class has increased and people eat food instead of fat.  

The integrity of his campaigning and Budget & Package is so boringly transparent! Same old rhetoric. 

Listen to the man himself answer your question:





> "I know they're (special interests and lobbyists) gearing up for a fight as we speak.
> 
> My message to them is this: So am I!"




The Senate will pass this $3t budget - even if it takes until April. 
Who's the daddy?


----------



## electronicmaster (2 March 2009)

Doris said:


> I'd say when rednecks finish high school, the middle class has increased and people eat food instead of fat.
> 
> The integrity of his campaigning and Budget & Package is so boringly transparent! Same old rhetoric.
> 
> ...






It is evil I say 

Oh, I think Obama has spent $4T already by the way.  Its those little side walk deals that had escaped us all.


----------



## Julia (2 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Julia, I guess they just don't feel they can let companies like GM fail because of the unemployment consequences and the thousands of other business that rely on them.
> 
> From a purely economic viewpoint they should be allowed to fail, as Rogers said someone else better will come along to fill the gap but it's just too hard to let that happen politically.
> 
> ...



Yes, Mr Burns, I completely appreciate the political motivations.
I guess I just occasionally indulge in wishful thinking that governments would simply act in the long term interests of the country they represent, rather than short term political favour.
Sigh.


----------



## Aussiejeff (3 March 2009)

Looks like the world's stock markets have lost faith in BO's Gawd Almighty Plan already... 

Let's hope our Great Leader KRudd can talk some sense into him.


----------



## Calliope (3 March 2009)

The time has come for both Rudd and Obama to show if they have the ticker to stop being politicians and start to act like statesmen. American has produced many statesmen and Australia very few. Rudd, like Howard before him, has the handicap of his comic-book looks, and no boring politician can aspire to be a statesman.

Obama on the other hand, can look the part and talk the part. His problem is that he has never done anything, and the public have largely accepted him on trust based on his rhetoric and promises, and Bush's unpopularity.

If he can't throw off the baggage that got him elected and start making some of the hard and unpopular decisions about what to prop up and what to let fail, the future is bleak.


----------



## MrBurns (3 March 2009)

Calliope said:


> The time has come for both Rudd and Obama to show if they have the ticker to stop being politicians and start to act like statesmen. American has produced many statesmen and Australia very few. Rudd, like Howard before him, has the handicap of his comic-book looks, and no boring politician can aspire to be a statesman.
> 
> Obama on the other hand, can look the part and talk the part. His problem is that he has never done anything, and the public have largely accepted him on trust based on his rhetoric and promises, and Bush's unpopularity.
> 
> If he can't throw off the baggage that got him elected and start making some of the hard and unpopular decisions about what to prop up and what to let fail, the future is bleak.




He wont do it, he's not experienced enough to make calls like that.


----------



## Doris (3 March 2009)

Julia said:


> I guess I just occasionally indulge in wishful thinking that governments would simply *act in the long term interests of the country* they represent, rather than short term political favour.
> Sigh.




In his first five weeks, in his first budget and in his first address to Congress, Obama has made clear he's plowing ahead with his ambitious, big-ticket campaign promises. At the same time, he's trying to reverse a recession he inherited, by rescuing the banking, housing and financial sectors.

He wants to free the country from its foreign oil dependence, improve early childhood schooling, curb global warming, withdraw troops from Iraq, overhaul tax laws, fix transportation arteries, rehabilitate the U.S. image abroad and even find a cure for cancer. This week, he'll hold a health care summit to start a massive overhaul he hopes to complete in 2009.

*Julia* turn on Jim Lehrer's Newshour on SBS today at 4:30pm to hear Obama 'agreeing with you'  - as he says: 



> I think that we are at an extraordinary moment that is full of peril but full of possibility, and I think that's the time you want to be president.
> 
> I think there's a sense that right now we are having to make some very big decisions that will help determine the direction of this country, and in ways large and small the direction of the world for the next generation.
> 
> ...


----------



## Green08 (3 March 2009)

Calliope said:


> Obama on the other hand, can look the part and talk the part. His problem is that he has never done anything, and the public have largely accepted him on trust based on his rhetoric and promises, and Bush's unpopularity.
> 
> 
> > Obama was elected on more than Bush's unpoplarity.
> ...


----------



## Doris (3 March 2009)

Green08 said:


> Calliope said:
> 
> 
> > Obama on the other hand, can look the part and talk the part. His problem is that he has never done anything, and the public have largely accepted him on trust based on his rhetoric and promises, and Bush's unpopularity.
> ...




*Calliope*, Obama has set the wheels in motion on a range of long-festering problems.
Voters demanding immediate results may not see it that way.  Others may balk at his broad expansion of government.
As I have always asserted, he has the intelligence to make decisions and he has surrounded himself with experience.

Hey *Green08*!  Good to see a friendly face! 

Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel said late last year: "*You never want a serious crisis to go to waste*."  
He argued that the turbulent conditions opened doors for big changes in long-neglected areas.

Obama is of course a solid student of history and has sifted the grain from the chaff in his predecessors:

Franklin D. Roosevelt - during the Depression and a worldwide war - seized on the public's angst to: 
 - overhaul the banking and financial system, plow money into public works and create Social Security.

Lyndon B. Johnson took advantage of intense social unrest to move ahead with his Great Society programs. 
 - anti-poverty measures and a civil rights agenda granting blacks their first real entry into the political system. 
 - launching education and transportation initiatives. Medicare and Medicaid are among his legacies.

Ronald Reagan faced sky-high inflation and a growing Soviet threat. He used the public's anxieties over the Cold War and the economy to win support for an expanded military even as he limited the size of government, instituted across-the-board tax cuts and promoted supply-side economics.

If the recession doesn't turn around in the coming years, Obama will be accused of focusing too much on the long term. 
He recently acknowledged that his re-election prospects could suffer if the economy fails to rebound.

All I can say is that I trust Obama will explore and consider all avenues and what can be done best will be done.  
But I don't see us coming out of this recession until after we're in it... and 6-12 months after they're out!


----------



## Green08 (3 March 2009)

Doris, did you see in the Sydney Morning Herald last Saturday, I think it was the News Review.  The KKK?  The sad thing about this process is that they are burning effigies on nooses of Obama - as he is black.

These rednecks are increasing in numbers since his inauguration.  

Many Americans carry on how 'forward thinking' they are.  The lack of policy to irradicate this group is nausiating. Racism is alive and well in the USA. Great counrty to aspire to - not.


----------



## MrBurns (3 March 2009)

Green08 said:


> Doris, did you see in the Sydney Morning Herald last Saturday, I think it was the News Review.  The KKK?  The sad thing about this process is that they are burning effigies on nooses of Obama - as he is black.
> 
> These rednecks are increasing in numbers since his inauguration.
> 
> Many Americans carry on how 'forward thinking' they are.  The lack of policy to irradicate this group is nausiating. Racism is alive and well in the USA. Great counrty to aspire to - not.




Dont they have any racial vilification laws over there ?


----------



## gav (4 March 2009)

Green08 said:


> Doris, did you see in the Sydney Morning Herald last Saturday, I think it was the News Review.  The KKK?  The sad thing about this process is that they are burning effigies on nooses of Obama - as he is black.
> 
> These rednecks are increasing in numbers since his inauguration.
> 
> Many Americans carry on how 'forward thinking' they are.  The lack of policy to irradicate this group is nausiating. Racism is alive and well in the USA. Great counrty to aspire to - not.




Acts like this are disgusting, but surely they would be a very small minority - otherwise Obama would not have been voted in.  When you combine all races, Obama won 66% of the votes.

43% of white people voted for Obama
69% of Hispanics voted for Obama
63% of Asians voted for Obama
Yet *96%* of black people vote for Obama.  Why is that?

But I guess "you have to be white to be racist" 

The Ethnic Vote Goes to Obama in a Landslide
http://www.theroadtothewhitehouse.net/2008/11/ethnic_vote_results_2008_presi.html


----------



## noirua (4 March 2009)

gav said:


> Acts like this are disgusting, but surely they would be a very small minority - otherwise Obama would not have been voted in.  When you combine all races, Obama won 66% of the votes.
> 
> 43% of white people voted for Obama
> 69% of Hispanics voted for Obama
> ...



Age may also have come into the equation as George Bush managed to build on middle age voters to win his second term.

Where you list the ethnicity is of course quite correct but how the average age works out in each group I'm unsure?

Voters aged 65 or over voted for John McCain and the younger group, up to age 34, voted 66% to 31% in favour of Barack Obama. This meant that John McCain needed a big majority in the middle ground which he failed to achieve.


----------



## Doris (5 March 2009)

Today should see a healthy rebound here if we follow the US, which MUST rise after Obama said yesterday:



> Profit and earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you've got a long-term perspective on it.
> 
> I'm absolutely confident that credit's going to be flowing again, that businesses are going to start seeing opportunities for investment, they're going to start hiring again. People are going to be put back to work.
> 
> ...




Trouble is, how many people will wait to see it rise before they feel like risk taking? Institutions should be prescient.

Short-term traders will wet their feet but I can't see Mums and Dads getting wet when PE's are past and not future results. And 20% of mortgages are 'under water' now in the US. But it will be interesting to see how much his optimism will influence confidence.  He's holding a beacon.


----------



## Wysiwyg (5 March 2009)

> You will find what you seek!




I wish that were true.In my experience you find what other people want you to find.


----------



## classer (5 March 2009)

Doris said:


> Today should see a healthy rebound here if we follow the US, which MUST rise after Obama said yesterday:
> 
> *Profit and earning ratios *are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal.





Could you explain how the Great One  calculates his profit and earnings ratio?


----------



## ZzzzDad (6 March 2009)

Obama is fiddling while the stock market burns.  He doesn't care about the stock market - no socialist does.  Trillions of dollars of wealth are being destroyed every week.  No relief for at least 4 years.


----------



## noirua (6 March 2009)

Very tricky all this for President Obama as he has to smile and look to agree with foreign leaders, because he needs their support on President Bush's old policies that he's saddled with.
When you've got no bucks it's time to smile and agree with almost everyone.  Especially PM Kevin Rudd who has the ear of Chinese leaders, and they understand him.


----------



## Green08 (6 March 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> Obama is fiddling while the stock market burns.  He doesn't care about the stock market - no socialist does.  Trillions of dollars of wealth are being destroyed every week.  No relief for at least 4 years.




ZZZ I'm finding you comments and others like it shortsighted and annoying.

The guy has only been in less than 2 months. Becoming President on day one does not mean you start a run on the markets. 

Face the facts - If you have to Blame anyone it should be BUSH and his mob. But I've heard very little blame directed towards him in the USA. Or any legal action which should be following them for many problems you have.

You've had the worst reporting results across the board with the results pertaining before he was President.  If you have companies cooking books from years ago with the disasterous results bearing now. 

I've seen alot of blame, tears and "poor me" but very little self ownership of the greed from wall street to main street on conning each other and abusing credit.  THAT responsibilty is on the individual and the faster you admit and work with it the better.  Shoud be a basic rule. Borrow anything and know that you're the one on hook to pay it back.

On Bush's reign there was none of this antagonism or fury. Then you had no real idea of whole big a whole you had put yourself in. 

Everyone says they have never seen anything like it. 
Many have theories to fix it.
None have experience of this magnitude to hand a simple answer

Like new parents - the child didn't come with a book on how to raise it!!

Be grateful you have an intelligent, proactive (despite want you want to acknowledge) and vocal President.  If it was McCain and Palin - this would have been a 3 ring circus.


----------



## ZzzzDad (6 March 2009)

Green - sorry to annoy you - not my intent.

Obama has made all the wrong moves so far.  His budget - with over 9,000 earmarks, already breaking his promise to get all earmarks out of legislation.  His appointments have been a disaster - Tim Geithner was a horrendous pick.  EVERY time Obama and Geithner are on tv, the market tanks.  You can watch the ticker.

He wants to raise taxes in a recession, something so stupid, it boggles the mind.

The market has been straight down since inauguration day.  The stock market is forward looking and it does not like what Obama has planned.  

Obama needs to have a more pragmatic approach.  He is too much of an ideologue.  He needs to look at the situation as it is now and adapt.  Unfortunately, he is not willing to do that.

Despite what the media claims, the natives are starting to get restless.  

Take care.


----------



## Aussiejeff (6 March 2009)

Doris said:


> *Today should see a healthy rebound here if we follow the US, which MUST rise* after Obama said yesterday:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




That dead cat bounce must have disappointed you, Dorry.

BO's beacon is sputtering in a torrential downpour and he has run out of Redheads!


----------



## Green08 (6 March 2009)

> Obama has made all the wrong moves so far.  His budget - with over 9,000 earmarks, already breaking his promise to get all earmarks out of legislation.




Who was the idiot that voted not to have hundreds of $million dedicated to finding the indivudials involved with any fraud pertaining to this crisis removed from the Stimulus?



> Senate and House conferees removed a controversial provision from the economic stimulus package that would have required companies to verify the immigration status of their workers.



 ie keeping the jobs in citizens hands. http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/0209/021309cdpm1.htm



> The Republicans are also looking to reduce funding for public transportation by about $3.4 billion and school construction by about $60 billion. Instead, they believe a portion of the money saved through the cuts and reductions would be better spent on job creating activities such as defense operations and recruitment, state and tribal assistance grants and brownfield recovery



http://usconservatives.about.com/b/...ons-and-increases-in-the-stimulus-package.htm USA is paranoid and so it should be now.  Always military, always war, always better than.  



> He wants to raise taxes in a recession, something so stupid, it boggles the mind.




Raising taxes on the rich is fine with me.  It is a small percentage of your economy and more than likely the wealthier they are the more involved with scams, fraud etc they are.  Warren Buffet vocally said he pays less tax his secretary. 



> The market has been straight down since inauguration day.  The stock market is forward looking and it does not like what Obama has planned.




You've had jobless figures, corporate reporting and logically layoffs from companies in the gutter before he was president.  Of course the market is going to fall of its perch, it was ALWAYS going anyway.  Would you be this upset if it had happened on a Republicians watch? You don't think the natural washing out of excess spending by people who can't afford it needs to be curtailed? The result unemployment. 



> Despite what the media claims, the natives are starting to get restless.




Don't worry the GLOBAL natives are ardent for blood too. My Focus is on the cause not the symptom.  Fixing the symptom is crucial and always slower and riskier.  ie,   eat high cholestrol foods your whole life - easy.  Major triple bypass expensive and life threatening. We are going down with your ship. 

It is a matter of when China looses patience with the USA.


----------



## banjosmyth (7 March 2009)

Hi Guys

I heard an interesting opinion the other day about Obama and would love to know what you think.

"Obama was elected with the purpose of convincing the US public to accept a North American Union"

We all know Obama is an incredible orator (especially when compared to his predecessor)    It definitely makes sense - The US economy is in so much trouble and debt that perhaps the only solution would be to 'start again'?

The public out cry would be huge so he would need to build up his national army - Better get those soldiers home quick 

Love to know what you guys think - Is it just a silly conspiracy theory or could there be some truth?

Cheers 

Banjo



2008 Stock Market Crash? What Happened


----------



## white_goodman (16 March 2009)

*The Obama Deception*

hmmm it seems very credible....

maby a bit to conspiracy theoryish but makes sense...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQ...com/review-the-obama-deception-by-alex-jones/

EDIT: i think alex jones is a crackpot from memory..


----------



## Peter2047 (16 March 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

New world order ?


----------



## James Austin (16 March 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

i could only bare about 5mins of that video, 
and 5mins into this "documentary" (in inverted commas) i still didnt have a clue what the main thesis was, not a good sign 

but what i did get was a strong impression of the conspiracy genre, . . . . X files type nonsense

the yanks love a conspiracy, always struggling with reality


----------



## Doris (17 March 2009)

What a great nostalgic trip tonight's _Boston Legal_ was!

- Denny Crane and Alan Shore shooting paint balls at each other as they yelled out a summary of all the McCain/Palin versus Obama arguments.  Poor Biden didn't get written into the script.

Loved Denny crying out 'Yes we can, Yes we can...' whilst Alan countered with 'maverick, maverick...'  Lovedit!

It would have been a cliff-hanger end to mid-season as the balcony scene pondered waking up to a new president.  Denny, who changed his vote at the booth, actually pondered 'a new America'.  Love David E Kelly.  And his wife!


----------



## GumbyLearner (17 March 2009)

Obama - The Movie

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=5844783079631466214&hl=en


----------



## Doris (17 March 2009)

*banjosmyth* this movie, on an extension of your query, was released on March 15: New World Order.



GumbyLearner said:


> Obama - The Movie
> 
> http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=5844783079631466214&hl=en




This is a serious movie *GumbyLearner* - - well worth watching... especially the last 30 minutes!

Alex Jones puts a comprehensive case although there are aspects I'd question. He looks credibly at a conspiracy theory that has been around for decades but the pattern in this movie, with Obama being the 'chosen one' for a New World Order, needs to be out there now - to open up minds with open minds. 

The 'Human Crossroads' that he contends, ties in with the Mayan calendar's prophecy, when it ends its cycle (5126 years), seven weeks after the next US election - after Obama's first term.

I sensed shades of Al Gore's movie as I watched it, then Alex Jones named Gore as one of the conspirators! 

Jones warns that Obama is the puppet of a power behind the throne that orchestrated "GWB clearly stealing two elections" then used 9/11 to take liberties within the US... presenting the need for this 'saviour'.

Another conspiracy theory purported that 9/11 was orchestrated by the US SS to enable these 'liberties'!  

My friend in OC voted 'against Bush' rather than 'for Obama' even though she was a staunch Republican. She has always maintained the similarity between the frenzy whipped up by Hitler when no-one knew of his agenda for years later, and was deeply concerned with Obama's 'possible hidden agenda' for the future.

I have to say I'd wondered about the 'citizen corps' of Obama's platform but it was optional with community service and he had linked this to inspiring homeless/unemployed youth to take responsibility for their own lives. Bait and switch?

Jones urges to watch, look and be aware. Is it all just coincidence that GWB was so lame then their economy crashes, and a potentially fragile 72 year old man joins with a novice nutcase no-one would want running the country so there would be a landslide victory for Obama?  After all - she was chosen for him!

As Prince Charles said about Climate Change yesterday, 'We are boiled frogs'.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25198765-401,00.html

DIRECTOR ALEX JONES REACHES OUT TO OBAMA SUPPORTERS - to watch the movie.

 6:43

TRAILER #2 - This gives a good precise to want to know more:

 2:30


----------



## alwaysLearning (17 March 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



James Austin said:


> i could only bare about 5mins of that video,
> and 5mins into this "documentary" (in inverted commas) i still didnt have a clue what the main thesis was, not a good sign
> 
> but what i did get was a strong impression of the conspiracy genre, . . . . X files type nonsense
> ...




Yes you take this kind of thing with a grain of salt. But I think you should persist and watch the whole thing and then think about it. I had the same thought as you 5minutes in in.

But holy crap, some of the things discussed in that film warrent further investigation by me. I can't even believe it. But wow.

I'm at the stage where I don't know if it is true. But it has made me want to think more critically of this information in addition to geopolitical events and economic events about what is going on now.

Some of the things in that film IF accurate are truly damning. 

You know it's easy to say ahh yes this is conspiracy crap therefore it must be bs BUT I've watched the news long enough to know that the news itself is BS a lot of the time and politicans are full of the most bs.

I think the thing to be careful about with this film and any other film, is to be mindful of the editing, and to think about why the film was crafted and put together in the way that it was done. For example you notice certain things the speaker say is repeated several times. 

THis whole film is another kind of propaganda. And I just wonder what the vested interest is for those that created it. 

You are right though...it really is xfiles type nonsense and I can already see some flaws in it but that's the thing....IS there a grain of truth to it?

Having said all of that I do tend to agree with you that a lot of people can't face up to reality so they create all these conspiracy theories and distractions. I definitely see where you are coming from.


----------



## white_goodman (17 March 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

if you watch it throught the director guy implore people not to believe him and be suspicious of his motives and to go out and do further research... which i intend to do...

interesting how the federal reserve is a private bank..


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (17 March 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

The author of the movie makes money from DVD sales and stuff like that. For the effort of investigation and production that seems like a sensible way to recoup costs and earn a living. To say the author is a loony is loony in itself. The author displays all that is good for a person concerned for his country's future. There are many who know many things and a greater amount who know nothing and then attack anyone who speaks out about conspiracies. 

It is interesting to see that the people interviewed in the movie are credible. Mr Celente to name just one. I didn't see Michael Moore in it. 

And why is Russia posturing? Basing bombers in Cuba and Venezuela could happen and ask yourself "why"? Preserving national identity and sovereignty should be allowed.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (17 March 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



white_goodman said:


> if you watch it throught the director guy implore people not to believe him and be suspicious of his motives and to go out and do further research... which i intend to do...
> 
> interesting how the federal reserve is a private bank..




More interesting to hear the comments of Ron Paul's brother in the movie.


----------



## ZzzzDad (19 March 2009)

Doris said:


> *banjosmyth* this movie, on an extension of your query, was released on March 15: New World Order.
> 
> 
> 
> ...





What absolute nonsense.  No other comments needed.


----------



## beerwm (19 March 2009)

Doris said:


> What a great nostalgic trip tonight's _Boston Legal_ was!
> 
> - Denny Crane and Alan Shore shooting paint balls at each other as they yelled out a summary of all the McCain/Palin versus Obama arguments.  Poor Biden didn't get written into the script.
> 
> ...




hahaha, saw that episode

'maverick, maverick, maverick' :


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 March 2009)

Obama's "joke" about disabled people seems to have been ignored by his cheerleaders on this site.

From the National Review Online

Palin Hits Obama on 'Special Olympics' Joke

Gov. Sarah Palin responded to remarks made last night by President Obama related to the Special Olympics on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno":

    “I was shocked to learn of the comment made by President Obama about Special Olympics,” Governor Palin said.  “This was a degrading remark about our world’s most precious and unique people, coming from the most powerful position in the world.

The full article is here and worth reading. What a tasteless comment from the President.

http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTQ2Nzk1NjAzMjdiN2U4YTExZDg4ZTA5YjRmMTYxMTU=


gg


----------



## ZzzzDad (22 March 2009)

gg, without his teleprompter, Obama is a stumbling, bumbling, inarticulate man.  Give him a teleprompter, and his words (or I should say the teleprompter's words) soar.  Doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense - can you imagine the frenzy the left would be in if Bush had uttered this "joke" about the special olympics?  Double standard.  Now, obviously Obama meant no harm by the joke - just a dumb mistake.  But he should have known better.

I'll bet no one on this site knows that Obama's approval ratings are lower than Bush's at the same time (two months in) of their Presidencies.  The media is ignoring that.  Check Rasmussen if you don't believe it.


----------



## MrBurns (22 March 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> “I was shocked to learn of the comment made by President Obama about Special Olympics,” Governor Palin said. * “This was a degrading remark about our world’s most precious and unique people,* coming from the most powerful position in the world.




*precious and unique people,* ???

Give me a break, even they wouldn't go along with that toadying piece of grovelling crap.


----------



## MrBurns (22 March 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> I'll bet no one on this site knows that Obama's approval ratings are lower than Bush's at the same time (two months in) of their Presidencies.  The media is ignoring that.  Check Rasmussen if you don't believe it.




Tell you what if BS counted for anything he and KRudd could pull the entire planet out of recession in seconds flat and fix global warming after lunch break in time for dinner.


----------



## rederob (22 March 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> gg, without his teleprompter, Obama is a stumbling, bumbling, inarticulate man.  Give him a teleprompter, and his words (or I should say the teleprompter's words) soar.  Doesn't seem to have a lick of common sense - can you imagine the frenzy the left would be in if Bush had uttered this "joke" about the special olympics?  Double standard.  Now, obviously Obama meant no harm by the joke - just a dumb mistake.  But he should have known better.
> 
> I'll bet no one on this site knows that Obama's approval ratings are lower than Bush's at the same time (two months in) of their Presidencies.  The media is ignoring that.  Check Rasmussen if you don't believe it.



Hard to believe the white folk from Nashville haven't got the KK back into top gear given the colour of their President.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> *precious and unique people,* ???
> 
> Give me a break, even they wouldn't go along with that toadying piece of grovelling crap.




Burnsie, I think you have to look at it from the perspective of the mother of a handicapped child.



rederob said:


> Hard to believe the white folk from Nashville haven't got the KK back into top gear given the colour of their President.




Red, thats a "godwin" if I ever heard one. Go to your corner.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 March 2009)

The Silence of the Obams.



Q. From the Audience:    Where have yez all gone. 

A. From off stage     :     They've gone ateleprompting.


Curtain comes down.


end of thread


gg


----------



## MrBurns (22 March 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> Burnsie, I think you have to look at it from the perspective of the mother of a handicapped child.




What about looking at it from the perspective of the handicapped person ?, do you really think they want people fawning over them with that sort of rubbish, they're handicapped not "special" for goodness sake.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> What about looking at it from the perspective of the handicapped person ?, do you really think they want people fawning over them with that sort of rubbish, they're handicapped not "special" for goodness sake.




I can hear where you are coming from Burnsie but I still feel parents of handicapped children would not necessarily agree with you or Obama.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (22 March 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I can hear where you are coming from Burnsie but I still feel parents of handicapped children would not necessarily agree with you or Obama.
> 
> gg




Linking my comments with what Obama said ? nice try, how manipulating of you.

The mothers of handicapped children would not want their kids to feel any more different than they already do and fawning labels like that don't help, it's demeaning and unnecessary, in my opinion.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (22 March 2009)

MrBurns said:


> Linking my comments with what Obama said ? nice try, how manipulating of you.
> 
> The mothers of handicapped children would not want their kids to feel any more different than they already do and fawning labels like that don't help, it's demeaning and unnecessary, in my opinion.




Jeez Burnsie, I didn't mean it that way.

What I meant was 

1.       That the joke would upset parents of handicapped children and that they see those children as precious and a lifelong commitment.

2.        I can see that you are speaking from the point of view of empowerment of every individual whether handicapped or not. 


I would never , ever, compare a great thinker such as yourself to an ex Harvard Law professor and President of the USA.

I apologise if I upset you.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (22 March 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I apologise if I upset you.
> 
> gg




Not upset at all gg.

This statement 







> our world’s most precious and unique people



 just goes too far in my opinion.


----------



## electronicmaster (22 March 2009)

Anyone who would like to see the full video of the Obama Deception DVD can view it _*Here*_.

You can see the complete list of all videos (1 - 12), on the information section (click on the _more info_ link) of the youtube page.  (find the subscribe button if you not sure were to look for _more info_ link )


----------



## ZzzzDad (22 March 2009)

rederob said:


> Hard to believe the white folk from Nashville haven't got the KK back into top gear given the colour of their President.




What an ignorant statement.  In fact, Nashville voted for Obama - the rest of Tennessee didn't.  It is funny how any criticism of Obama invokes a charge or implication of racism.  Surely I'm not just against him because I don't believe in his policies, right?  

I am in an interracial marriage myself, with interracial children.  However, we don't think of it that way.  We consider everyone equal.  The only time race enters our thoughts (I'm talking about me and my family), is when a left winger brings up the subject.

At some point, the world needs to look at people for who they are, not what color their skin is.  That is how I live my life.


----------



## rederob (22 March 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> What an ignorant statement.



It was as well informed as your comment on Obama.
Obama is as good as you get with a teleprompter, and not too bad without one.
Not only does he speak well in most situations, he is comfortable with the most difficult questions, indicating a level of thought that was missing in action for eight years.  Here he is responding to the "Iraq" question before Bush's pre-emtive strike just over six years ago : 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po


----------



## ZzzzDad (23 March 2009)

rederob said:


> It was as well informed as your comment on Obama.
> Obama is as good as you get with a teleprompter, and not too bad without one.
> Not only does he speak well in most situations, he is comfortable with the most difficult questions, indicating a level of thought that was missing in action for eight years.  Here he is responding to the "Iraq" question before Bush's pre-emtive strike just over six years ago :
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sXzmXy226po




You can't get away from it that easily.  You directly implied that I was a racist because I criticized Obama.  Anytime - in the U.S. or elsewhere - that Obama is criticized, it is charged that those people are racist and they are KKK or whatever.  That is what you implied and you should admit it.  This kind of tactic is used to stifle criticism of Obama, and I won't let it pass.

We can agree to disagree on Obama's speaking skills.  I think he is a great speach reader, but not very good off the cuff.  He has made many speaking mistakes since his election, the list is rivaling Bush's.

Here are some (along with Biden):

Top 10 gaffes by Barack Obama and Joe Biden 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_h.../top_10_gaffes_by_barack_obama_and_joe_biden_

By the way, this list is just a small compilation of the gaffes out there that this great speaker has uttered.  I'll put some more up if challenged.


----------



## rederob (23 March 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> You can't get away from it that easily.  You directly implied that I was a racist because I criticized Obama.  Anytime - in the U.S. or elsewhere - that Obama is criticized, it is charged that those people are racist and they are KKK or whatever.  That is what you implied and you should admit it.  This kind of tactic is used to stifle criticism of Obama, and I won't let it pass.




I'm sure I was talking about the Khudai Khidmatgar (KK) movement, and not the KKK.  It was an intrinsically perverse statement about Obama being of non-white extraction - indeed, an American "Indian".
Given that, your responses were are bit testy.
Try not to read too much into what isn't actually there: I don't make many gaffes.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (24 March 2009)

Speaking well is especially useful for telling lies, propagandising and charming, teleprompted or naturally.


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (24 March 2009)

rederob said:


> I'm sure I was talking about the Khudai Khidmatgar (KK) movement, and not the KKK.  It was an intrinsically perverse statement about Obama being of non-white extraction - indeed, an American "Indian".
> Given that, your responses were are bit testy.
> Try not to read too much into what isn't actually there: I don't make many gaffes.



What has a Pakistani, Afghani movement got to do with America?


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (25 March 2009)

Did anyone see the Obama Rudd traditional White House get together in front of the cameras?

It looked like Rudd was going to fall asleep whilst Obama was talking very slowly. Perhaps there was no teleprompter in the room. 

Bush spoke with conviction.


----------



## Knobby22 (25 March 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Bush spoke with conviction.




Aw your just stirring Snake. Bush could hardly talk at all!!


----------



## Julia (25 March 2009)

It's Snake Pliskin said:


> Bush spoke with conviction.



Ah, but he had God telling him what to do.

Seriously, Snake, aren't you looking for a quibble here?  I doubt Obama will be able to save the USA, let alone the world, but he is mightily articulate, something to be immensely grateful for after George W's mangling of the language.  After all those years on the world stage he still couldn't pronounce "nuclear"!!!   Unreal!


----------



## It's Snake Pliskin (26 March 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> Aw *your* just stirring Snake. Bush could hardly talk at all!!



My comments were about bush talking with conviction, not grammatical perfection and elocution. But I am sure he would be able to write correctly the difference between your and you're. 

Julia,
See above.


----------



## GumbyLearner (26 March 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> What an ignorant statement.  In fact, Nashville voted for Obama - the rest of Tennessee didn't.  It is funny how any criticism of Obama invokes a charge or implication of racism.  Surely I'm not just against him because I don't believe in his policies, right?
> 
> I am in an interracial marriage myself, with interracial children.  However, we don't think of it that way.  We consider everyone equal.  The only time race enters our thoughts (I'm talking about me and my family), is when a left winger brings up the subject.
> 
> At some point, the world needs to look at people for who they are, not what color their skin is.  That is how I live my life.




Fair comment.
I agree with you ZzzzDad.

It's total dog**** when people think you are playing the man and not the ball. This is a modern world and people will have to get used to the fact that people from all walks of life are going to be elected to positions of responsibility. 

Regardless of their background they should still be held accountable. To argue otherwise is a fallacy!


----------



## kingcarmleo (26 March 2009)

I don't understand some people e.g snake, what is your problem with obama? The man is doing a good job so far considering the mess left for him to clean up. Why are people having a go at his speaking ability? It's just a joke.


----------



## GumbyLearner (26 March 2009)

kingcarmleo said:


> I don't understand some people e.g snake, what is your problem with obama? The man is doing a good job so far considering the mess left for him to clean up. Why are people having a go at his speaking ability? It's just a joke.




Because he's helping his buddy Senator Chris Dodd collect AIG bailout money from AIG lobbyists prior to his election. These guys are all magnets for corporate sponsorships. Oh, but we all love the hard-working people! Oh really...


----------



## Doris (26 March 2009)

GumbyLearner said:


> Obama - The Movie
> 
> http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=5844783079631466214&hl=en




Have a look at 'War Inc'.  It has John & Joan Cusack and Hillary Duff in it.

I'd say it was released straight to video but it's a comedy/satire on the future where multi-national companies, rather than nations, rule the world. - shades of this conspiracy theory.

Loved the ending!


----------



## Doris (30 March 2009)

There are now over 16 million who have joined the online Obama Support Group.

I'm wondering exactly how valid the current appeal is.  How informed will callers be when they make their calls. Will they just blindly urge voters to tie up their members' phone lines or do they have a favourable, comprehensive knowledge of all the plans? This is what I've been concerned about in the past two months.  It's one thing to try to get a favoured candidate elected but yet another to put pressure on members who were elected (and may be again) to cast their vote. 



> From: Jeremy Bird, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Sunday, 29 March 2009 4:40 AM
> To: Doris *******
> Subject: Time to pick up the phone again
> ...



Why does Organizing for America have an indemnity on their email yet the web site link is my.barackobama.com?

The message when I logged on to my account:


> You will be calling supporters across the country to ask them to call their members of Congress and express their support for President Obama's budget before the vote.
> 
> We will give you the names and phone numbers of each person's members of Congress so you can provide that information.




Below is part of the script. One can't see this unless they have an account and you must be in the US to do this.



> Hello, is _______ there?
> 
> Hi, _________, my name is [YOUR NAME] and I’m a volunteer leader with Organizing for America. I’m calling to spread the word about and build support for President Obama’s plan to create jobs and renew and strengthen our economy. In the midst of these tough economic times, our country's success depends on people like you joining with President Obama to get America back on track.
> 
> ...


----------



## ZzzzDad (2 April 2009)

Barack Obama gave Queen Elizabeth an IPOD - REAL classy guy.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/04/what-does-one-g.html



> What Does One Get a Queen?
> April 01, 2009 1:57 PM
> 
> President and First Lady Obama gave Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth II a video iPod with inscription, songs uploaded and accessories, plus a rare musical songbook signed by Richard Rodgers.
> ...




Thinks a lot of himself, doesn't he?


----------



## Green08 (2 April 2009)

Someone has to bring the Duck into reality..


----------



## Mr J (2 April 2009)

kingcarmleo said:


> I don't understand some people e.g snake, what is your problem with obama? *The man is doing a good job* so far considering the mess left for him to clean up.




That's...ah...debatable. Tell me, how has he done a good job so far?


----------



## Green08 (2 April 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

Freemasons........mmm


----------



## bumclouds (2 April 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

I haven't seen this doco, but I have seen many of his other ones.  Have you noticed how virtually all of his sources are internet based?  i.e those clippings that come up onto the screen are always screenshots of websites.


----------



## metric (2 April 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



bumclouds said:


> I haven't seen this doco, but I have seen many of his other ones.  Have you noticed how virtually all of his sources are internet based?  i.e those clippings that come up onto the screen are always screenshots of websites.




what...? like cnn, fox, cnbc, etc..?


----------



## Green08 (2 April 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

Should Dec 21 come to pass in the alignment that could be the next shazzam...complete shut down of electronics...back to the mail


----------



## refined silver (2 April 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

Anyone wnat to post a brief summary of the allegations of link to a text article with them, for those of us currently in countries without great internet connections?

Cheers!


----------



## Mr J (2 April 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

A summary of the vid is the suggestion that a global banking elite set the agenda and are trying to monopolise power. Sounds quite standard to me, and the only unique thing about it is the scale. If it seems ridiculous, take a look through the history books. Much of it is speculation, but none of it is unreasonable.

Can we deny that the controllers of powerful corporations control the government and media? Can we deny that they will naturally attempt to increase their power and influence? That much we should accept as fact.


----------



## Solly (10 April 2009)

*Is Obama the Financial Dubya?*

Here's a blog from harvardbusiness.org, not sure about the conclusions but is an interesting read.

http://blogs.harvardbusiness.org/haque/2009/04/dubya.html


----------



## tech/a (10 April 2009)

*Re: Is Obama the Financial Dubya?*

*Everyone *has a hidden agenda/Bank/Politics/Business/Countries particulaly when trillions are being handed out--perhaps even the author of this piece.

Look after your own backyard I say.
For me thats my IMMEDIATE circle.


----------



## Purple XS2 (11 April 2009)

*Re: Is Obama the Financial Dubya?*



tech/a said:


> *Everyone *has a hidden agenda/Bank/Politics/Business/Countries particulaly when trillions are being handed out--perhaps even the author of this piece.




Perhaps something a little simpler than a hidden agenda - good old fashioned deflect-the-blame. Harvard has a lot to answer for, and that's a sentiment being aired in circles not usually known for Trotskyitye sentiments:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aL0jFzKptwwg&refer=exclusive

Regards. Comra... I mean, fellows.


----------



## Knobby22 (11 April 2009)

*Re: Is Obama the Financial Dubya?*

Harvard business school is being blamed for this mess for training all the CEO's including GM and the banks. Of course they are defending themselves for teaching false theories. Of course they still believe the stuff they have educated to America's elite.

They have a lot to answer for.


----------



## pacestick (11 April 2009)

these comments on Obamas religious beliefs  were made by the  author of a book on his religous faith .It should be noted that the author disagrees politically with Obama

  ttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7iXVHnv_uo&annotation_id=annotation_862379&feature=iv


----------



## moneymajix (13 April 2009)

I posted this on the GFC thread and relevant here.


Associate Professor, William K. Black Criticizes the Bailout Plan -- 
Might Destroy the Obama Presidency


A giant fraud.
Instead of arresting the bankers they are giving them money.


The greatest looting of the American people in history and it will destoy the Obama presidency if it continues.


Baiing out favoured rich shareholders and bankers for no good and the American people will be incredibly outraged when they get the facts.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9HKKyNPe4k&NR=1


----------



## Calliope (13 April 2009)

The New First Dog


http://images.smh.com.au/2009/04/13/472235/420waterdog-420x0.jpg


----------



## Julia (13 April 2009)

I think it's six months old so presumably house trained.  Maybe a shame.
Could be a humanising experience for the President to be cleaning up puddles around the Oval Office, sort of grounding somehow!

Best of luck to the family including the dog.   Most dogs bring only a positive influence.


----------



## moXJO (14 April 2009)

moneymajix said:


> I posted this on the GFC thread and relevant here.
> 
> 
> Associate Professor, William K. Black Criticizes the Bailout Plan --
> ...





Even better let's give them jobs overlooking who gets tax payers money

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/fannie-mae-chief-executive-herb/story.aspx?guid=%7B861F527B-F191-4B0F-9381-9380AB2B4C03%7D&dist=msr_3



> LOS ANGELES (MarketWatch) -- President Barack Obama is expected to tap Fannie Mae  Chief Executive Herb Allison to head the government's $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, The Wall Street Journal reported late Monday, citing people familiar with the matter. Obama could announce his intention to nominate Allison as assistant secretary for the Office of Financial Stability as early as this week, the report said. He would replace Bush-appointee Neel Kashkari, who was asked by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner to stay on until a replacement was found


----------



## moneymajix (14 April 2009)

moXJO,

Should read... assistant secretary for the Office of Financial INStability.


Crazy stuff.


----------



## metric (19 May 2009)

Obama’s favorite stocks






> http://moneyfeatures.blogs.money.cnn.com/2009/05/18/obamas-favorite-mutual-fund/
> 
> There’s an old bit of investment advice: If you don’t have a lot of money, you invest to build your assets. If you already have a lot of money, you invest to protect them. Well, it’s the second part of that statement that applies to our president. Judging from the report, he and his immediate family had investments and savings, as of year-end 2008, of at least $1.4 million and as much as $5.9 million. (Sorry about the imprecision there; blame the report’s format for the wide range of valuations.) And, boy, is his portfolio safe and liquid. His biggest holding, by far, is his stake in U.S. Treasury bills–somewhere between $1.05 million and $5.1 million. The next biggest chunk is the $100,000 to $250,000 that Barack and Michelle have in their joint checking account. Face it: When either of them uses a debit card to gas up the limo at the 7-11, they don’t have to worry about those pesky overdraft fees.
> 
> ...






> http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/15/news/economy/obama-stocks/index.htm
> 
> The vast majority of his mutual fund holdings are in the Vanguard FTSE Social Index fund (VFTSX), with a range of between $115,000 and $250,000.
> 
> ...




””””””-



> so there it is..you would have to seriously consider looking at any company or fund obama is into..for the obvious reasons..he knows where the money is going..doesnt he?
> 
> 401



 seeker401


----------



## Doris (23 May 2009)

Interesting weight in pharmaceutical stocks Metric, considering the huge population currently unable to buy them!

This email reminds me of Swan's budget, in quoting voters he'd listened to... using Obama's strategy.

The grassroots organisation skills used in Chicago, the nomination and election campaigns, continue to involve people in feeling they have a say and thus can make a difference with inadequacies of their governance.




> ________________________________________
> From: David Plouffe, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Saturday, 23 May 2009 6:56 AM
> To: Doris *******
> ...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (23 May 2009)

Doris said:


> Interesting weight in pharmaceutical stocks Metric, considering the huge population currently unable to buy them!
> 
> This email reminds me of Swan's budget, in quoting voters he'd listened to... using Obama's strategy.
> 
> The grassroots organisation skills used in Chicago, the nomination and election campaigns, continue to involve people in feeling they have a say and thus can make a difference with inadequacies of their governance.




Doris, 

You should read some of Theodore Dalrymple.

His take on this would be that the Nomenklatura, the political class, alone rule, and eventually have everyone tapped.

Their opinions are then used not to increase the happiness or wealth of the nation but to keep the politicians in power.

Thus in a way their opinions are used against them, their jobs are converted to government/ union / dependent on government/ ones and thus they and they alone ( The political class ) know what is best for the people.

The Nomenklatura, as in the old Eastern Bloc.


This is an interesting article from a Canadian newspaper on the recent unravelling of politics in the UK by Dalrymple.


http://v1.theglobeandmail.com//servlet/story/LAC.20090521.COBRIT21ART2010/TPStory/Comment/


gg


----------



## Aussiejeff (30 May 2009)

Ooops!

Looks like the ObamaRama party is running out of champagne & ex$tacy......



> *Bond Vigilantes Confront Obama as Housing Falters (Update3) *
> By Liz Capo McCormick and Daniel Kruger
> 
> May 29 (Bloomberg) -- They’re back.
> ...



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=ad3g0wmJFaZQ&refer=home

Party on dudes???


----------



## Doris (7 June 2009)

Cairo was a brilliant, remarkable speech of course; he showed his respectful attitude as a standard for Arabs, Jews and Muslims to emulate and reciprocate, and an awareness and perspective for the layman on history, as he planted the seed for a new global beginning.





Garpal Gumnut said:


> Doris,
> 
> You should read some of Theodore Dalrymple.
> 
> ...




Barack has lived up to being a different politician hasn't he! 
He 'knows what is best for the people' by listening to them. He listens so people want to talk...
Your 'thesis' certainly applies to the stereotypical pollie and is reminiscent in Barack's Cairo speech:



> Some advocate for democracy only when they are out of power.
> Once in power they are ruthless in suppressing the rights of others.
> 
> * Without these ingredients elections do not make a democracy:
> ...




His 'unyielding belief' on democracy posed a challenge for many governments:
(He inferred by omission that tyrannical government was unacceptable to him/the US) 


> - ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed
> - government that is transparent and does not steal from the people
> - freedom to live as you choose.
> 
> ...






This student of history accepts and lauds the best of the past but urges the best in the future for US support:
Women's rights... a woman denied an education is denied equality... this is related to the country's prosperity.



Some huge goals for global partnership involvement for 'a world that we seek':



> 'We can only achieve it together'.
> One rule at the heart of every religion: Do unto others as we would have them do unto us.  God's vision.


----------



## Green08 (7 June 2009)

It's a fine juggling political speech.  He walked his way through rather well.  Besides the articulation, he had affirmative and open body language one of those obvious / veiled actions. It helps when your not an old white fat guy with the same agenda as the previous forementioned. He holds an air of elusiviness which natually inspires and engages curiosity. Not more of the same defense on possible attack.

Yes, daring at times regarding female education - they clapped I hope they follow up with action.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2009)

Yes, he is pressing lips to a variety of ass lately. "Believe in the US dollar" *smoochie smoochie*:arsch:


----------



## Green08 (7 June 2009)

It's politics. Kiss, smile and tell them what they want basic qualities. The best of the bunch to sway the world to a lesser prognosis of nuclear apocalypse is fine.  I like Obama he is a skilled orator, intelligent, affiable. He has his misgivings like all of us.  But hey, the other choice would have seen a bomb go off by now.


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2009)

Green08 said:


> It's politics. Kiss, smile and tell them what they want basic qualities. The best of the bunch to sway the world to a lesser prognosis of nuclear apocalypse is fine.  I like Obama he is a skilled orator, intelligent, affiable. He has his misgivings like all of us.  But hey, the other choice would have seen a bomb go off by now.




Yes I think he is the better person for the job. Shame he is more of the same but with some great speeches. But then George bush gave some memorable ones as well


----------



## Green08 (7 June 2009)

moXJO said:


> But then George bush gave some memorable ones as well




When did Bush string more than 4 words coherently together, let alone pages of speech.

Bush either had the worse speech writer in history or he couldn't read. My money is on the fact he had both detriments. Bush created a new class of idiot.


----------



## Doris (7 June 2009)

Green08 said:


> It's a fine juggling political speech.  He walked his way through rather well.
> 
> Yes, daring at times regarding female education - they clapped I hope they follow up with action.




Yes... He is not an egotist who sets out to show "I am the greatest".

Muslim women believe in their head-dress, which Barack justified as their choice, but they also believe in education which should give the Taliban a run!

Since this email came it's been interesting to see Republicans seeking fault in this woman purely for political gain IMO... taking her quotes out of context.  Yet of late there have been some actually acquiescing on her qualifications.

I so miss David E Kelly's _Boston Legal_ and its acute social issues now it's done.
Maybe now Barack's at the helm he feels he doesn't need to draw public attention to social ineptitudes in the US?

The last episode focused on the fallibility of the Supreme Court by nature of the wisdom and common sense of its members and their ability to interpret the law and judge!

Barack's video is well worth a look.



> ________________________________________
> From: President Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 27 May 2009 8:05 AM
> To: Doris *******
> ...


----------



## moXJO (7 June 2009)

Green08 said:


> When did Bush string more than 4 words coherently together, let alone pages of speech.
> 
> Bush either had the worse speech writer in history or he couldn't read. My money is on the fact he had both detriments. Bush created a new class of idiot.




Like I said memorable


----------



## Green08 (7 June 2009)

Doris said:


> Yes... He is not an egotist who sets out to show "I am the greatest".
> 
> Muslim women believe in their head-dress, which Barack justified as their choice, but they also believe in education which should give the Taliban a run!




Yes he gives acknowledgement and credit where it is due. I think people generally are still mystified about his personality, charism, charm, intellect.

He is new, refreshing and stands for many who have been ignored for too long.  

I enjoy watching and listening to him, as a human he comes across with modesty and straight talk, however, I remain reserved in opinion on what will eventually happen.  I do not like to compartmentalise someone this important so soon.  It is too easy to get caught in euphoria I will wait and see.

Mind you he is a dam better representative than Rudd.


----------



## Doris (7 June 2009)

Green08 said:


> Yes he gives acknowledgement and credit where it is due. I think people generally are still mystified about his personality, charism, charm, intellect.
> 
> He is new, refreshing and stands for many who have been ignored for too long.
> 
> Mind you he is a dam better representative than Rudd.




I have to say I appreciate an Obama trait that Rudd and Anna Bligh share:
They all speak on a topic rather than whinge and condemn and demand -- as McCain did. 

As a teacher, speaking to a feral student as you would have them be, will get a dialogue going.
Talk to people as though they are fools and they will retaliate or act like fools and you will both lose.

If you listen to Barack's video on Sotomayor, you'll see he's setting up models for young Americans to emulate:
... no matter what your situation or beginnings, effort can be rewarded with success.  
... education is the tool with which to build your life.
... focus on building not on complaining and tearing down 

His egocentric base is to create an America of the American dream.  What better goal than to be adulated for this?


----------



## Green08 (7 June 2009)

Doris said:


> If you listen to Barack's video on Sotomayor, you'll see he's setting up models for young Americans to emulate:




I've no problem with him nominating Sotomayor, she will be a defining and unparrelled challenge to the existing.  Obama is pushing and setting a new playing field - the USA needed it.


----------



## bellenuit (7 June 2009)

ZzzzDad said:


> http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/toby_h.../top_10_gaffes_by_barack_obama_and_joe_biden_
> 
> By the way, this list is just a small compilation of the gaffes out there that this great speaker has uttered.  I'll put some more up if challenged.




Not wanting to intervene in your argument, but this was one of Obama's gaffes:

"9. Barack Obama jokes about Nancy Reagan having sÃ©ances in the White House. He later called her to apologise after the AP noted that although she had consulted astrologers, "she did not hold conversations with the dead":"

I was reading this weekend (unfortunately I can't recall the source) where Nancy claimed that she sees Ronald at the end of her bed many nights and that she talks to him on those occasions.


----------



## Green08 (7 June 2009)

Dear Nancy - What would she do if Ronnie wasn't dead. She knows she's in the limelight and loves it, part of her comfort blanket, to be needed and acknowledged. There are more pressing issues but the USA just has to carry on the patriotic drama. It would give the Bold and the Beautiful a run for its money any day.


----------



## prawn_86 (7 June 2009)

Obama is just another President hamstrung by the political system and will not achieve what he set out to do.


----------



## Calliope (18 June 2009)

Obama's Cairo Cringe didn't work.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25652246-20261,00.html


Ralph Peters in the New York Post:



> IT must have been the viewing angle: The despots who run Iran somehow missed the halo gracing President Obama during his recent sermon to the Muslim world.
> 
> The ruling mullahs' contemptuous handling of Iran's presidential election was their response to "the Cairo effect" announced a tad prematurely by the White House.
> 
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (18 June 2009)

I've lost count of Messiahbama's *economic promises*, *uplifting speeches* & *policy announcements* already. After how many days?

Honestly, has he broken the all time Speed Of Deliverance record for US Presidents in each of those categories? Where does he get all that hot air from?? (It sure is helping to float the US "wet paper bag" economy.

I reckon Mr KRudd would be running a distant 2nd compared to the Big O!




aj


----------



## pacestick (19 June 2009)

Looks like he has nothing to worry about from the opposition

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usnews/20090617/ts_usnews/republicansstruggletouniteintheobamaera

t isn't getting any easier to be a Republican. Only 22 percent of the voters identify with the GOP, according to the Pew Research Center, compared with 39 percent who see themselves as independents and 33 percent who consider themselves Democrats. The party has no consistent message. And in an era when Barack Obama so clearly represents the Democrats, the Republicans are ill defined, with a multiplicity of voices inside and outside Congress, none of them very popular and most little known outside Washington or their home states.

It gets worse. One third of Republicans have an unfavorable view of their own party (compared with only 4 percent of Democrats who think unfavorably of their party), according to a new USA Today/Gallup Poll. Fifty-two percent of Americans can't specify the "main person" who speaks for the Republicans. Thirteen percent say it's radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh, followed by former Vice President Dick Cheney at 12 percent, Arizona Sen. John McCain (the party's presidential nominee last year) at 5 percent, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich at 4. Former President George W. Bush came in fifth, with only 3 percent. All these potential spokesmen are middle-aged or elderly white men, at a time when more and more voters are women, Hispanics, and young. 
Last week, the party's internal tug of war got a bit more intense when party leaders in Washington sparred with Sarah Palin, the charismatic governor of Alaska who catapulted to fame as McCain's vice presidential running mate last year. Palin has become a darling of grass-roots conservatives but an unreliable enigma to many veterans of the GOP establishment. 

The latest fuss seemed petty to some but exposed serious GOP fault lines. It started when Palin didn't confirm she would attend a Washington fundraising dinner Monday for the National Republican Congressional Committee and the National Republican Senatorial Committee. After several weeks of confusion, the organizers decided to give the coveted keynote speaker's slot to former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a potential competitor with Palin for the 2012 GOP presidential nomination. Just before the event, Palin decided she wanted to attend after all. But she wasn't assigned to the head table and wasn't given an opportunity to address the group, which some of her fans considered a slap. Palin was seated in the first row, however, and drew a big crowd of well-wishers. 

Palin's fans say that, while she is distrusted by Washington's conservative insiders, she remains one of the GOP's biggest draws. The weekend before the Washington fundraiser, she helped to attract 20,000 people to a parade in Auburn, N.Y., the hometown of William Seward, secretary of state in the 1860s and the man who arranged for the United States to buy Alaska from Russia.

But prominent GOP strategists don't understand why Palin has avoided appearing at events that could bolster her standing among conservatives who will be instrumental in the 2012 primaries. "She's getting a reputation for being on-again, off-again," says one conservative strategist. "People aren't even sure how to get in touch with her and whether their messages are getting through." Conservatives say their calls to her office in Alaska frequently aren't returned, leading to speculation that she isn't interested in cooperating with the GOP establishment and that her staff isn't ready for prime time. 

Some Republicans say she needs to concentrate first and foremost on being a good governor, but she runs the risk of alienating conservative leaders if she is too aloof. Palin needs to make a basic decision, the conservative strategist says: "Is she running for president surreptitiously or overtly?"

More important, Palin is doing little or nothing to create a consensus on what it means to be a Republican and seems reluctant to reach out to new voters, which many GOP strategists consider their top priority.

Meanwhile, others are trying to build a new majority, but their messages have yet to catch on. The GOP's appeal since Ronald Reagan made conservatism the dominant ideology has been based on four themes: cutting taxes, slowing the growth of government, preserving "family values," and strengthening national defense. But in recent years, many Republicans have felt their party going astray, especially on the issues of limiting government, restraining spending, and making common-sense decisions about using force and enhancing national security.

Gingrich is full of ideas and brio, but his failure to maintain GOP momentum when he was House speaker in the mid-1990s undermines his claim to be the conservative of the future. Limbaugh is bombastic and entertaining and draws lots of attention, but he has shown no interest in running for office. Cheney has made some effective arguments in defense of Bush administration national security policies, but he remains deeply unpopular with independents and Democratic voters. Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts and an also-ran in the 2008 GOP presidential race, has been working behind the scenes to cultivate grass-roots support, but many Republicans still wonder if he is a genuine conservative and whether he can bond with everyday voters. [Read 10 Things You Didn't Know About Newt Gingrich]

Meanwhile, GOP leaders in Congress such as Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Rep. John Boehner of Ohio haven't gained much traction with their critique of Obama as a big-spending liberal who is weak on defense and a neophyte in foreign policy. These are the same criticisms the Republicans have directed at the Democrats for years. Americans are indeed worried about some of Obama's policies but so far haven't converted these concerns about Obama into support for the GOP. [Read 10 Things You Didn't Know About Mitt Romney]

Of course, nearly five years ago, the Democrats were in the same boat. The White House and Congress were controlled by the GOP. The Democratic nominee, Sen. John Kerry, lost the presidential race to George W. Bush. And myriad Democratic voices were clamoring to be heard. "It's difficult when you don't have a president in office," says a senior Obama adviser, because a commander in chief tends to create unity in his party. [See photos of Obama.]

Frank Donatelli, chairman of GOPAC, a conservative political action committee, and former political director for President Reagan, adds that there is no permanent majority in American politics. He predicts that the GOP will make a comeback when the political pendulum swings to the right again, either because the Republicans manage to capture the country's imagination or because Obama falls flat.

But until that happens, chances are that Republican divisions will only get worse.


----------



## Aussiejeff (10 July 2009)

NOOOO!!!

This can't be true!! 

Please hurry everyone, plant some more grass and whiff the green shoots before the world wakes up from the "Yes We Can" dream ...



> *SIX months into his presidency, Barack Obama's honeymoon with the US public may be coming to an end, with a new poll showing a marked decline in his job approval numbers.*
> 
> The survey conducted by CNN and Opinion Research Corporation put President Obama's overall job approval rating at 61 per cent, down from February, when he had a 76 per cent approval level.
> 
> ...



http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25759792-5005961,00.html

*sniff*


----------



## electronicmaster (10 July 2009)

This is the full length video of The Obama Deception.  Since time has now passed, you can see how this information has been correct.


----------



## Calliope (10 July 2009)

Obama takes a sneaky look at the assets of Brazil's junior G8 delegate Mayora Tavares while Nicolas Sarcozy looks on.


----------



## MrBurns (10 July 2009)

Calliope said:


> Obama takes a sneaky look at the assets of Brazil's junior G8 delegate Mayora Tavares while Nicolas Sarcozy looks on.




I'm not sure what I could say here that wouldnt be deleted by the mods

Sarcozy's thinking, yeah already been there.


----------



## wallyt99 (10 July 2009)

MrBurns said:


> I'm not sure what I could say here that wouldnt be deleted by the mods




I think your avatar says it best.


----------



## wayneL (10 July 2009)

Calliope said:


> Obama takes a sneaky look at the assets of Brazil's junior G8 delegate Mayora Tavares while Nicolas Sarcozy looks on.




At least the value of some assets are constant :casanova:


----------



## Calliope (11 July 2009)

At least we know now why Kev didn't take the missus. It reminds me of that great Australian joke;  "What route are you taking?"


----------



## spooly74 (11 July 2009)




----------



## gav (11 July 2009)

wayneL said:


> At least the value of some assets are constant :casanova:




Actually those assets would have depreciated quite a bit in 10 years time


----------



## Doris (11 July 2009)

Aussiejeff said:


> NOOOO!!!
> 
> This can't be true!!
> 
> ...




In a few hours, Obama will visit Ghana.

One focus in his press conference last night was African governments' corruption and political unrest and the need for 'moral intervention' by the UN in situations like Rwanda. He compared Kenya, at the time his father went to Hawaii, as having a comparative GDP as South Korea. His message was clear to the governments of Kenya and other African countries... without accountability — no opportunity. If that’s not a maxim, it ought to be.

The video gives credence to Ghana being a model for African countries to emulate.
US aid dollars increasingly go to countries that use them and don’t blow them. Ghana is one. 

New face of America, meet the new face of Africa:
(hip-hop meets reggaetÃ³n meets rhythm and blues meets Ghanaian melody)


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 July 2009)

Doris said:


> New face of America, meet the new face of Africa:
> (hip-hop meets reggaetÃ³n meets rhythm and blues meets Ghanaian melody)




Nil significat, nil oscillat.
 ..It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing


----------



## spooly74 (11 July 2009)

2020hindsight said:


> Nil significat, nil oscillat.
> ..It don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing




Welcome back


----------



## Calliope (11 July 2009)

spooly74 said:


> Welcome back




There goes the neighbourhood.


----------



## 2020hindsight (11 July 2009)

thanks Spooly - howdy Calliope
couldn't have the various 'rant' threads overtaking the poetry thread.


----------



## Calliope (12 July 2009)

It's not the answer he expected or wanted.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf9q_4n5-1A&feature=player_embedded


----------



## noirua (13 July 2009)

AOL (United States) poll so far (It seems you can vote from anywhere in the world though?).
Vote on Obama's job so far:  Poor 56%,  Fair 17%, Excellent 14%, and Good 13%.
Vote on, has your opinion changed: Yes it's worsened 59%, No 31%, and Yes improved 10%.

I lodged a vote with my browser that's set to the United States.  Interested to know if it works on any browser setting?   http://www.aol.com


----------



## gordon2007 (20 July 2009)

*Obama's approval rating reaches new low*

From http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25808229-23109,00.html

'FOR the first time since taking office, US President Barack Obama's job approval rating has dropped below the 60-percent threshold as Americans expressed doubts about his handling of the economy, the deficit and health care, a new opinion poll showed'

Talk about a short lived honeymoon. Sure, his ratings are still high, but sure does seem to be dropping fast. Even 007's honeymoon lasted longer than this.


----------



## trainspotter (20 July 2009)

*Re: Obama's approval rating reaches new low*

I love how the "new low" is still a high 50+ result. Seeing how the good 'ol US of A is in deeper than a no armed man in quicksand I am surprised his good fortune has lasted this long. Soon the hungry media jackals will be baying for blood to be spilled. I find it peculiar that when someone like Obama gets in the country is STUFFED and they love him. He actually implements some strategies to lead them out of the finacial storm and they start to criticise. SHEESH .... what's a guy got to do? Walk on water ... No wait ... the last guy to do that was nailed to a cross. Hmmm .. bad analogy seeing how Obama is of an African American descent.


----------



## Knobby22 (20 July 2009)

*Re: Obama's approval rating reaches new low*

Yea, Fox News. The most unbiased news in the USA....not.


----------



## trainspotter (20 July 2009)

*Re: Obama's approval rating reaches new low*

Obama's greatest challenge revealed:

http://www.youtube.com:80/watch?v=ANTDkfkoBaI


----------



## queenslander55 (20 July 2009)

*Re: Obama's approval rating reaches new low*



trainspotter said:


> Obama's greatest challenge revealed:




I am unfamiliar with how that TV show works but I would like to think that the bimbo was made to donate her winnings to an education foundation of some description!


----------



## trainspotter (20 July 2009)

*Re: Obama's approval rating reaches new low*



queenslander55 said:


> I am unfamiliar with how that TV show works but I would like to think that the bimbo was made to donate her winnings to an education foundation of some description!




Yeah .. namely her own perhaps !! Very funny qld55 !!


----------



## Doris (24 August 2009)

prawn_86 said:


> Obama is just another President hamstrung by the political system and will not achieve what he set out to do.




The activists creating havoc and misinformation at some Healthcare town hall rallies would promote your opinion.  Universal, affordable healthcare by the end of this year?  A third paid for by improving administrative costs and another third by tax on those earning above $250k.  This is what he campaigned for. A huge goal. But he continues to set out to do it.

Obama moved to overhaul interrogation and detention guidelines soon after taking office, including the creation of a task force on interrogation and transfer policies.

Last week he signed off on The High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group (HIG).  It will consist of several intelligence and law enforcement agencies and be housed at the FBI.

The group will be overseen by the National Security Council, which means shifting the center of gravity away from the CIA and giving the White House direct oversight.

I recall experts saying if intelligence had a central reporting base, 9/11 could have been averted.  Who knows.


----------



## Doris (27 August 2009)

Comprehensive, concise and caring tribute from his Martha's Vineyard hotel holiday.
________________________________________
From: President Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Thursday, 27 August 2009 1:04 PM
Subject: Senator Ted Kennedy


Michelle and I were heartbroken to learn this morning of the death of our dear friend, Senator Ted Kennedy.

For nearly five decades, virtually every major piece of legislation to advance the civil rights, health and economic well-being of the American people bore his name and resulted from his efforts.

His ideas and ideals are stamped on scores of laws and reflected in millions of lives -- in seniors who know new dignity; in families that know new opportunity; in children who know education's promise; and in all who can pursue their dream in an America that is more equal and more just, including me.

In the United States Senate, I can think of no one who engendered greater respect or affection from members of both sides of the aisle. His seriousness of purpose was perpetually matched by humility, warmth and good cheer. He battled passionately on the Senate floor for the causes that he held dear, and yet still maintained warm friendships across party lines. And that's one reason he became not only one of the greatest senators of our time, but one of the most accomplished Americans ever to serve our democracy.

I personally valued his wise counsel in the Senate, where, regardless of the swirl of events, he always had time for a new colleague. I cherished his confidence and momentous support in my race for the Presidency. And even as he waged a valiant struggle with a mortal illness, I've benefited as President from his encouragement and wisdom.

His fight gave us the opportunity we were denied when his brothers John and Robert were taken from us: the blessing of time to say thank you and goodbye. The outpouring of love, gratitude and fond memories to which we've all borne witness is a testament to the way this singular figure in American history touched so many lives.

For America, he was a defender of a dream. For his family, he was a guardian. Our hearts and prayers go out to them today -- to his wonderful wife, Vicki, his children Ted Jr., Patrick and Kara, his grandchildren and his extended family.

Today, our country mourns. We say goodbye to a friend and a true leader who challenged us all to live out our noblest values. And we give thanks for his memory, which inspires us still.

Sincerely,

President Barack Obama



Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.


----------



## Buddy (27 August 2009)

Wow! Now that's what I call a eulogy. Obama certainly has a way with words, a bit like the Kennedys.
What a pity America is so divided.


----------



## wayneL (14 September 2009)

Yes...We...Can?

You'd...Better...Not!!!

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/...-Obamas-spending-tea-party-demonstration.html



> Up to two million march to US Capitol to protest against Obama's spending in 'tea-party' demonstration
> By MAIL FOREIGN SERVICE
> Last updated at 9:39 PM on 12th September 2009
> Comments (52)
> ...


----------



## MrBurns (14 September 2009)

Wow, thats incredible, I was in Hawaii a couple of weeks ago with some Yanks, they were anti Obama big time, I just thought it was them but apparently not.


----------



## Knobby22 (14 September 2009)

It's truly fearful.

Some parts of the USA seem determined to destroy the country.


----------



## Aussiejeff (14 September 2009)

Oh.

Is the Honeymoon over, then???


----------



## GumbyLearner (15 September 2009)

Obama live on C-SPAN now on

Post Handout US Financial System Reform

http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN2_wm.aspx


----------



## Calliope (17 September 2009)

Obama wants it to be "absolutely clear" that he hasn't got a clue on what to do about Afghanistan.

"I just want to be absolutely clear, because there's been a lot of discussion in the press about this, there is no immediate decision pending on resources," Mr Obama said.


----------



## wayneL (6 October 2009)

So what sort of Democratic president is this man?

Change for the better? 

Bullcrap!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ting-with-Dalai-Lama-to-keep-China-happy.html



> Barack Obama cancels meeting with Dalai Lama 'to keep China happy'
> President Barack Obama has refused to meet the Dalai Lama in Washington this week in a move to curry favour with the Chinese.
> 
> By Alex Spillius in Washington
> ...


----------



## Gamblor (6 October 2009)

I just got back from a month in the US and still can't wash the smell of that stinking hole off.

Obama is going to have a hard time getting anything good done unfortunately.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (9 October 2009)

*Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

This is just coming on the wires now.
To be honest I'm shocked.
I thought when he was inaugurated things really would change but have just seen more of the same policies.

what are your thoughts?

G


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*



Gordon Gekko said:


> This is just coming on the wires now.
> To be honest I'm shocked.
> I thought when he was inaugurated things really would change but have just seen more of the same policies.
> 
> ...




I posted this a few minutes ago on the Afghanistan thread. sorry for doubling up...........gg



There is further bad news.

Obama has just been awarded a Nobel Peace Prize.

We are in the middle of a war against the biggest threat to Western civilisation since the Plague, and the liberal media and their hangers on are celebrating the award of a Peace prize for gods sake to Barack.

Perhaps we should have a Nobel War Prize, to be awarded to the best Commander in Chief leading his country and Allies to victory.

That lickspittle Neville Chamberlain would have won a Peace prize while condemning the West to six years of world war.

A Peace Prize for the CIC of the western world, at this time in our history when we are fighting insane godbotherers ready to stick a grenade up their coits to kill our innocent population, and get to heaven.

What a load of cobblers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8298580.stm

gg


----------



## Gordon Gekko (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

I just think this is the biggest joke I've heard this year. I'm pissed actually!
Shouldn't this awarded be giving to people who dedicate there life to the pursuit of peace? And after a long life and career of promoting peace?

He has been in office less than a year and the US is involved in how many wars at the moment? 

Seems it's political to improve his ratings and cover up the massive sucking sound of the US economy going down the toilet.

What a sad day!

G


----------



## Ato (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

Wow...I'm shaking my head in disbelief. Nobel prizes have become a joke.

Maybe we need an interruption from Kayne West now to solidify it.

Shouldnt this be in General Chat btw?


----------



## So_Cynical (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

There have been some strange recipients of the Nobel Peace prize over the years.


2005 International Atomic Energy Agency :dunno:
2001 Kofi Annan & the UN (this 4 years after the Rwanda genocide)
1973 Henry A. Kissinger 
2007 Al gore


----------



## waz (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

I would have thought he might be a candidate for the future, although he is yet to do anything yet in regards to peace. 
There is a 'plan' to reduce visa restrictions to Cuba and reduce troop numbers in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although this hasn't happened yet. Hardly a reason to win.

Anyone can have a plan and nice ideas for peace. Only a few actually achieve their goals.

Then again, we dont know who the other contenders are.

We may as well give it to Mugabe as apparently he has now decided to embrace the west.


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*



Ato said:


> Wow...I'm shaking my head in disbelief. Nobel prizes have become a joke.
> 
> Maybe we need an interruption from Kayne West now to solidify it.
> 
> Shouldnt this be in General Chat btw?




The Nobel Peace prize became a joke when Gandhi died in 1948, having never been awarded the prize, despite nominations in 4 different years.

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/articles/gandhi/index.html

It would be akin to Einstein being repeatedly rejected for the Nobel Prize for physics.


----------



## wayneL (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

Totally agree with the comments here. Obama is not a man of peace, his foreign policy says he is a man of war.

I lost all respect for the Nobel malarkey when the lying sheister Al Bore "won".

This takes it to -10000000000 on the credibility Richter scale.


----------



## overit (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

Something smells fishy. Obama was inaugurated as president on January 20, 2009. Am I reading this right. 

....................

Process of Nomination and Selection

The Norwegian Nobel Committee is responsible for the selection of eligible candidates and the choice of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates. The Committee is composed of five members appointed by the Storting (Norwegian parliament). The Nobel Peace Prize is awarded in Oslo, Norway, not in Stockholm, Sweden, where the Nobel Prizes in Physics, Chemistry, Physiology or Medicine, Literature and the Economics Prize are awarded.


Who is eligible for the Prize

The candidates eligible for the Nobel Peace Prize are those nominated by qualified individuals. See Qualified Nominators.  » No one can nominate him- or herself.
How are the Nobel Laureates selected?
nomination process

Below is a brief description of the process involved in selecting the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates.

September – Invitation letters are sent out. The Nobel Committee sends out invitation letters to individuals qualified to nominate – members of national assemblies, governments, and international courts of law; university chancellors, professors of social science, history, philosophy, law and theology; leaders of peace research institutes and institutes of foreign affairs; previous Nobel Peace Prize Laureates; board members of organizations that have received the Nobel Peace Prize; present and past members of the Norwegian Nobel Committee; and former advisers of the Norwegian Nobel Institute.

*February – Deadline for submission. *The Committee bases its assessment on nominations that must be postmarked no later than 1 February each year. Nominations postmarked and received after this date are included in the following year's discussions. In recent years, the Committee has received close to 200 different nominations for the Nobel Peace Prize. The number of nominating letters is much higher, as many are for the same candidates.

February-March – Short list. The Committee assesses the candidates' work and prepares a short list.

March-August – Adviser review. The short list is reviewed by permanent advisers and advisers specially recruited for their knowledge of specific candidates. The advisers do not directly evaluate nominations nor give explicit recommendations.

October – Nobel Laureates are chosen. At the beginning of October, the Nobel Committee chooses the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates through a majority vote. The decision is final and without appeal. The names of the Nobel Peace Prize Laureates are then announced.

December – Nobel Laureates receive their prize. The Nobel Peace Prize Award Ceremony takes place on 10 December in Oslo, Norway, where the Nobel Laureates receive their Nobel Prize, which consists of a Nobel Medal and Diploma, and a document confirming the prize amount.
Are the nominations made public?

The statutes of the Nobel Foundation restrict disclosure of information about the nominations, whether publicly or privately, for 50 years. The restriction concerns the nominees and nominators, as well as investigations and opinions related to the award of a prize.


----------



## nunthewiser (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

unreal

might as well give one each to the jackson five while they are at it


----------



## overit (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*



nunthewiser said:


> unreal
> 
> might as well give one each to the jackson five while they are at it




Next year! LOL! - Fans seek Nobel Peace Prize for Michael Jackson


----------



## nunthewiser (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*



overit said:


> Next year! LOL! - Fans seek Nobel Peace Prize for Michael Jackson





unfarknbelievable!


speechless


----------



## overit (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*

I guess there is no members of the taliban on the nobel prize commitee! 

Also amazing how they can be reached for comment so quickly!



> Taliban condemn Obama's Peace Prize
> 
> October 09, 2009 10:04pm
> 
> ...


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins nobel peace prize*



nunthewiser said:


> unfarknbelievable!
> 
> 
> speechless




Speechless doesn't describe it mate.

I have a mate called Knuckles, who is a bouncer at one of our better clubs here in Townsville on Flinders St. East.

He deserves a Peace Prize.

He's had a lot of setbacks in life, a high speed motor bike prang in which he suffered a Required Brain Injury.

Anyway he's had a torrid time since, Been in The Creek, Mental Unit, did a bit of GBH, Armed Robbery etc.etc.

The Salvos got him off the grog, ice and weed and he is now a model citizen.

He is built like a brick ****house, he has a bit of Samoan , a large bit, in him.

He keeps the peace over a 20m space outside his club from 9pm until 5am every Friday and Saturday.

Nobody plays up on his 20m. He is a born diplomat, 6 foot four, 140k all muscle, reasons with drunks and those stoned or just off their face. I've never seen him hit anyone. Its the safest place to be when a fight starts on Flinders Dt. East, his 20m outside the club.

And he is a good bloke when not on the grog, ice or weed.

I am going to nominate Knuckles for a Nobel Peace Prize next year, but I'm buggered if I know how to do it.

Can anyone help me.

Would he have a chance?

gg


----------



## dhukka (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Economists have been proving for years that the Nobel prize (at least the one for economics) is a joke. However this may turn out to be the worst call yet. Could this signal the Nobel Death Knell?


----------



## Julia (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

I'd say the Nobel committee need to set out their reasons for this apparently nonsensical decision.  Two wars on the go, thousands of innocent civilians being killed amongst it all, and he gets the Peace Prize?


----------



## nunthewiser (9 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

perhaps GG can have a word to "Knuckles" to go take it back


----------



## Doris (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Julia said:


> I'd say the Nobel committee need to set out their reasons for this apparently nonsensical decision.  Two wars on the go, thousands of innocent civilians being killed amongst it all, and he gets the Peace Prize?




Obama gets out of bed and hits the ground running every day, to meetings, bloody meetings - to make change !


*Sometimes the Nobel committee awards the prize to encourage responsible action. * 

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the Nobel jury said in making the stunning announcement.

The committee attached "special importance to Mr Obama's vision and work for a world without nuclear weapons" and said he had created "a new climate in international politics."

The first black American president has brought the *Israeli and Palestinian leaders* together for a meeting, approved new diplomatic engagement with *Iran, Myanmar and North Korea* and signalled a new willingness to attack growing *environmental problems*.

Mr Obama went to *Cairo* to make a major speech on relations with the Muslim world, badly tarnished by President George W. Bush's order to invade Iraq. At the *United Nations*, he has launched an initiative to reduce the number of *nuclear weapons.
*
He was awoken at 6am at the White House by his spokesman to be told of the award. An administration official quoted Mr Obama as saying he felt "humbled".

Mr Obama was honoured "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," the head of the Norwegian Nobel Committee Thorbjoern Jagland said.

"We had no problem... It was a unanimous decision," he said.

The jury said: "Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations," it said.

"Thanks to Obama's initiative, the US is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic changes the world is confronting."

The committee said it was seeking to *encourage Mr Obama's ideals rather than recognise concrete results*.

Mr Jagland said: "It was unavoidable to give the prize to the man who has improved the international climate and emphasised negotiations and dialogue."

"Before he took office the situation was so dangerous. Step by step he has given the message to the world that he wants to negotiate on all conflicts, strengthen the United Nations and work for a world without any nuclear arms."

The gold medal, diploma and a cheque for 10 million Swedish kronor ($1.57 million) will be presented in Oslo on December 10, the anniversary of the death in 1896 of the prize creator, Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Ok so here is my conspiracy theory of the evening to explain why Obama won this peace prize.

Israel and the US are about to hold their biggest joint air-defense exercise ever, dubbed Juniper Cobra, to test their missile interceptors. They have a build up of over 17th ships in the area. These war games are not that uncommon but they are usually held in Spring and not fall, why the rush?

Today a suicide bombing in Pakistan which killed 49 and a Indian embassy bombing that killed 17. Seems to me that tensions are once again on the boil. The blame game will start which could be a good cover to start an incident.

so my whacked out theory is that the people in the know (UN) are aware that the US and Israel are going into Iran and an escalation of the mid east war is unavoidable . So they decide to pull a few strings and award Obama the peace prize in an attempt to stop or temporarily avoid this conflict.
What would all the people of the world think of Obama if just after the award of the Nobel peace prize he goes to war with Iran?

Some of these countries have nukes and will use them if backed into a corner.

Call me crazy

I here a helicopter over my house!!

G


----------



## overit (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Doris said:


> The committee said it was seeking to *encourage Mr Obama's ideals rather than recognise concrete results*.




This can be the only reason as far as I am concerned. He had 11days in office before the nominations were halted. An award on hopes and promises!



Gordon Gekko said:


> so my whacked out theory is that the people in the know (UN) are aware that the US and Israel are going into Iran and an escalation of the mid east war is unavoidable . So they decide to pull a few strings and award Obama the peace prize in an attempt to stop or temporarily avoid this conflict.
> 
> What would all the people of the world think of Obama if just after the award of the Nobel peace prize he goes to war with Iran?



You are not alone in that thinking.


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

That is novel. Not a typo!!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Gordon Gekko said:


> Ok so here is my conspiracy theory of the evening to explain why Obama won this peace prize.
> 
> Israel and the US are about to hold their biggest joint air-defense exercise ever, dubbed Juniper Cobra, to test their missile interceptors. They have a build up of over 17th ships in the area. These war games are not that uncommon but they are usually held in Spring and not fall, why the rush?
> 
> ...




It would make more sense to have a proper war and sort it all out in Afghanistan.

I'm no trickcyclist mate, but you sound more a bit scared about causing harm to people, and a good human being, rather than crazy.

So you'd be hopeless making decisions about war a bit jus as Obama is.


gg


----------



## Dark1975 (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Gordon Gekko said:


> Ok so here is my conspiracy theory of the evening to explain why Obama won this peace prize.
> 
> Israel and the US are about to hold their biggest joint air-defense exercise ever, dubbed Juniper Cobra, to test their missile interceptors. They have a build up of over 17th ships in the area. These war games are not that uncommon but they are usually held in Spring and not fall, why the rush?
> 
> ...




lol,I like your conspiracy theory,But there's one thing you may have forgotten?
CHINA?
China would differently not vote on the UN sanction.China has $70billion invested in iran's oil and gas(Sinopec corp deal)Add with they heavily rely on Iran's oil.Think the U.S wouldn't dare take on the chinese,Being that china owns $800 billion in U.S treasury securities.Gone are the good U.S days where they could just invade and ask later!(In reguards i mean Iraq).
Or are you suggesting i should start investing in oil?:


----------



## wayneL (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



> The committee said it was seeking to encourage Mr Obama's ideals rather than recognise concrete results.




Absolutely, totally and utterly laughable.

Nobel will be rolling in his grave.


----------



## Donga (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

We're in the midst of witnessing Obama steer the US psyche from their God given role as saviours of the world with little time for the UN, and diplomacy with rogue states, to the 21st century where China has be at the table and Iran given a role in the middle east peace process. Obama is gradually making progress, similarly with the long overdue US health reform. 

Peace prizes never go to the likes of Knuckles unfortunately, the same way Aussie of the Year rarely goes to the small people who make a difference. Obama winning the Peace Prize is at least more appropriate than Johhny Farnham winning our big one. 

In any case, who would people propose amongst the statesmen of the world?


----------



## Bobby (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> It would make more sense to have a proper war and sort it all out in Afghanistan.
> 
> 
> 
> gg




Yep the whole world should get involved to clean out this poop , notice all those UN member countries that do stuff all but some always seem to have their hand out .


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Bobby said:


> Yep the whole world should get involved to clean out this poop , notice all those UN member countries that do stuff all but some always seem to have their hand out .




I'd agree Bobby.

Most of the UN staff are relatives of the greatest bunch of dipsticks, dictators, murderers,thieves, inbred and godbohering bastards that you could ever collect in one building.

If the UN were folded tomorrow the GDP of most member sates would increase by Monday afternoon.

Its a failed organisation full of pimps, paedophiles and *****s.

gg


----------



## Bobby (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> I'd agree Bobby.
> 
> Most of the UN staff are relatives of the greatest bunch of dipsticks, dictators, murderers,thieves, inbred and godbohering bastards that you could ever collect in one building.
> 
> ...




Yep GG , what a pack of wANKERS run most of those tin-pot lands ,  so called country's .

 Geez lets look at Africa & try to find a descent run joint , its like the Olympics of corruption  in that Continent  .
But stop me before I mention the middle east


----------



## GumbyLearner (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

To Mr. Obama


----------



## joslad (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

This really is unbelievable - it belittle's everyone who has been awarded the Nobel Peace prize in the past.

What a farce!!!

How can he possibly accept it...


----------



## UBIQUITOUS (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



joslad said:


> This really is unbelievable - it belittle's everyone who has been awarded the Nobel Peace prize in the past.
> 
> What a farce!!!
> 
> How can he possibly accept it...




Considering dynamite was invented by Arthur Nobel, I guess the award to Obama is appropriate.


----------



## greggy (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



joslad said:


> This really is unbelievable - it belittle's everyone who has been awarded the Nobel Peace prize in the past.
> 
> What a farce!!!
> 
> How can he possibly accept it...




How can he possibly accept it? Easily and then he'll increase the number of troops in Afghanistan''...lol.
Surely the Nobel Peace Prize should be awarded on the basis of "concrete results". This has really turned into a popularity contest nothing more. Compared to his predecessor, Obama wins by a country mile.


----------



## Calliope (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

The leaders of the rogue states will be laughing. The Peace Prize  award is always politically motivated. This time it is designed to put pressure on Obama to go easy on the rogue states. This gives him an excuse to do just that.


----------



## Ato (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Apparently some of the undeserving folks he beat:



> Sima Samar, women’s rights activist in Afghanistan: “With dogged persistence and at great personal risk, she kept her schools and clinics open in Afghanistan even during the most repressive days of the Taliban regime, whose laws prohibited the education of girls past the age of eight. When the Taliban fell, Samar returned to Kabul and accepted the post of Minister for Women’s Affairs.”
> 
> Ingrid Betancourt: French-Colombian ex-hostage held for six years.
> 
> ...


----------



## Aussiejeff (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Julia said:


> I'd say the Nobel committee need to set out their reasons for this apparently nonsensical decision.  Two wars on the go, thousands of innocent civilians being killed amongst it all, and he gets the Peace Prize?




From the horses(asses) mouth (ie: Nobel.org)

_"FAQ

What is a Nobel Laureate?

A Laureate is a person *honored for high achievement in a particular field*. A Nobel Laureate is someone who is awarded the Nobel Prize."_

Based on that criteria, one wonders where the overwhelming & compelling evidence of Obama's "high achievement" to date might be hiding?

Oh, and the Peace Prize committee is _always_ Norwegian.  (Sorry. Didn't mean to be racist.... ) :hide:

Since Nobel Prize winners receive around $AU1.5Mill, I wonder if Obama will give it all to charity? Or by Michelle a new sleeveless dress? (sorry. Didn't mean to be sexist.... ) :hide:

Errrr. Sorry. I might just have offended a PC person. My sincere condolences.

Hey, Hey - I'm sooo Sorry.
Sorry.
Sorry.

:hide:


----------



## Doris (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



overit said:


> This can be the only reason as far as I am concerned. He had 11days in office before the nominations were halted. An award on hopes and promises!




Obama's campaign ran on his values and attitudes.  He didn't suddenly announce or change his goals when he took office. His two books gave background for the millions who read them. His speeches put his future plans on the table. 

The hysteric voting by demographics who had not bothered in the past shows the faith and hope that he had wielded in his country whilst the world waited with baited breath for voting day.  His efforts so far are what his campaign promised.  

The jury tapped him with 300 others for his potential but did not make the decision then.

They have obviously judged if he was all talk and no action by the reasons they set out on their decision.


----------



## Doris (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



joslad said:


> This really is unbelievable - it belittle's everyone who has been awarded the Nobel Peace prize in the past.
> 
> What a farce!!!
> 
> How can he possibly accept it...




Barack has always worked his groups by his philosophy of grassroots up.  He's the figure head.

Here's your answer.  Will his *leadership* work? GWB's tactics didn't.
________________________________________
From: President Barack Obama [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Saturday, 10 October 2009 7:03 AM
Subject: A call to action


This morning, Michelle and I awoke to some surprising and humbling news. 
At 6 a.m., we received word that I'd been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009.

To be honest, *I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures who've been honored by this prize* -- men and women who've inspired me and inspired the entire world through their courageous pursuit of peace.

*But I also know that throughout history the Nobel Peace Prize has not just been used to honor specific achievement*; it's also been used as a means to *give momentum* to a set of causes.

That is why I've said that *I will accept this award as a call to action*, a call for all nations and all peoples to confront the common challenges of the 21st century. These challenges won't all be met during my presidency, or even my lifetime. But I know these challenges can be met so long as it's recognized that they will not be met by one person or one nation alone.

This award -- and the call to action that comes with it -- does not belong simply to me or my administration; it belongs to all people around the world who have fought for justice and for peace. And most of all, it belongs to you, the men and women of America, who have dared to hope and have worked so hard to make our world a little better.

So today we humbly recommit to the important work that we've *begun* together. I'm grateful that you've stood with me thus far, and I'm honored to continue our vital work in the years to come.

Thank you,

President Barack Obama 



Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.


----------



## Julia (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Calliope said:


> The leaders of the rogue states will be laughing. The Peace Prize  award is always politically motivated. This time it is designed to put pressure on Obama to go easy on the rogue states. This gives him an excuse to do just that.



I guess that's right, Calliope.  However, if 'going easy' involves talking with them instead of bombing them, then I'm all in favour of that.

Why is it that every person who has ever received any sort of award for anything (including such crap as academy awards etc) always says they are "humbled" by such an honour?   Rubbish!  They're thrilled, tickled pink, anything but humbled.

If we're going to be judging Obama on his oratory and promises to do things, then we should be feeling equal admiration for our own Prime Minister.
He also is very big on muttering the right words, viz the "Sorry" speech to the aborigines, how he's going to fix the health system, having summits to people can tell him what they want, etc etc.  Doesn't necessarily translate into action as far as I can see.


----------



## Mr J (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



> Why is it that every person who has ever received any sort of award for anything (including such crap as academy awards etc) always says they are "humbled" by such an honour? Rubbish! They're thrilled, tickled pink, anything but humbled.




Well it would be interesting to see someone come out and say "it's about time my work was recognised; I deserve this!".


----------



## Julia (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Mr J said:


> Well it would be interesting to see someone come out and say "it's about time my work was recognised; I deserve this!".



Well, it would be a bit more honest.
It's the same at funerals.  The dead person is always just the greatest human being who ever existed, a joy to everyone.

No one ever says "well, Bob was a total ***** and it's a great relief to us all that we'll never have to put up with him again."


----------



## Prospector (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Maybe they just compared his performance with his predecessor?

I suspect even Obama is embarassed by this award.  How could he not be.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Doris said:


> Barack has always worked his groups by his philosophy of grassroots up.  He's the figure head.
> 
> Here's your answer.  Will his *leadership* work? GWB's tactics didn't.
> ________________________________________
> ...






Julia said:


> I guess that's right, Calliope.  However, if 'going easy' involves talking with them instead of bombing them, then I'm all in favour of that.
> 
> Why is it that every person who has ever received any sort of award for anything (including such crap as academy awards etc) always says they are "humbled" by such an honour?   Rubbish!  They're thrilled, tickled pink, anything but humbled.
> 
> ...




For a while there I thought Obama was going to be a force for change.

Now i believe he is one of the biggest distributors of horse**** and weasel words on the planet.

He leaves Kevin07 for dead in his use of OMO words and useless rhetoric.

What a complete waste of a medal.

They could have given it to Hamas, Mossad or old rotten kidneys BinLaden , for all the difference it will make.

gg


----------



## MrBurns (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

I have it on good authority they gave him this to make up for the Hey Hey skit.


----------



## wildkactus (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

what a joke I must have missed his great deed of peace from those fisrt 11 days in office, or is peace just a speech now.

anyway what a joke, just goes to show that the noble people are way out of touch.


----------



## wayneL (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> For a while there I thought Obama was going to be a force for change.
> 
> Now i believe he is one of the biggest distributors of horse**** and weasel words on the planet.
> 
> ...



Could not agree more GG.


----------



## Soft Dough (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

What a joke.

He has done nothing.

FFS next year Kevn Rudd will get one for Economic Sciences.

The science of creating a tax for something that does not exist... heck he might even get one for literature (fiction) while he is at it.


----------



## Naked shorts (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

I would like to nominate myself, Naked Shorts, for the 2010 Nobel Peace prize. While I have done nothing to further world peace, I have good reason to believe that I will do something peaceful in the future.


----------



## wayneL (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Naked shorts said:


> I would like to nominate myself, Naked Shorts, for the 2010 Nobel Peace prize. While I have done nothing to further world peace, I have good reason to believe that I will do something peaceful in the future.




LMAO

Exactly... 'nuff said.


----------



## Julia (10 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Naked shorts said:


> I would like to nominate myself, Naked Shorts, for the 2010 Nobel Peace prize. While I have done nothing to further world peace, I have good reason to believe that I will do something peaceful in the future.



Sounds good enough to me, Naked shorts.
Apparently the award carries a cash prize of around $1.5M.
By next year presumably inflation will have increased this.

For 10% I will generously offer to nominate you for next year.
I'm sure we could dream up a pretty impressive wish list of all the stuff you intend to do to create world peace.


----------



## Pager (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Compared to his predecessors hes been quite peaceful, well a few disgruntled Taliban may disagree as another Tomerhawk missile slams into there mountain hiding place.

Is a bit of a mystery as he doesnt seem to have done anything to warrant the accolade  maybe its a ploy by certain partys on the decision board to make him think twice before ordering an invasion or carpet bombing of Iran or North Korea


----------



## Aussiejeff (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



wildkactus said:


> what a joke I must have missed his great deed of peace from those fisrt 11 days in office, or is peace just a speech now.
> 
> anyway what a joke, *just goes to show that the noble people are way out of touch.*




FACT - The Norwegian Blue parrot is renowned for it's propensity to kip.

FACT - They have lot's of lumberjacks, and they're or'right.

FACT - The hot air from NOBEL Centro is helping to melt the North Pole.

Ja.


----------



## Pager (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

http://www.infowars.com/warmonger-wins-peace-prize/


It took 25 years longer than George Orwell thought for the slogans of 1984 to become reality.

“War is Peace,” “Freedom is Slavery,” “Ignorance is Strength.”  

I would add, “Lie is Truth.”

The Nobel Committee has awarded the 2009 Peace Prize to President Obama, the person who started a new war in Pakistan, upped the war in Afghanistan, and continues to threaten Iran with attack unless Iran does what the US government demands and relinquishes its rights as a signatory to the non-proliferation treaty.

The Nobel committee chairman, Thorbjoern Jagland said, “Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world’s attention and given its people hope for a better future.”

Obama, the committee gushed, has created “a new climate in international politics.”

Tell that to the 2 million displaced Pakistanis and the unknown numbers of dead ones that Obama has racked up in his few months in office. Tell that to the Afghans where civilian deaths continue to mount as Obama’s “war of necessity” drones on indeterminably.

No Bush policy has changed. Iraq is still occupied. The Guantanamo torture prison is still functioning. Rendition and assassinations are still occurring. Spying on Americans without warrants is still the order of the day. Civil liberties are continuing to be violated in the name of Oceania’s “war on terror.”

Apparently, the Nobel committee is suffering from the delusion that, being a minority, Obama is going to put a stop to Western hegemony over darker-skinned peoples.

The non-cynical can say that the Nobel committee is seizing on Obama’s rhetoric to lock him into the pursuit of peace instead of war. We can all hope that it works. But the more likely result is that the award has made “War is Peace” the reality.


Obama has done nothing to hold the criminal Bush regime to account, and the Obama administration has bribed and threatened the Palestinian Authority to go along with the US/Israeli plan to deep-six the UN’s Goldstone Report on Israeli war crimes committed during Israel’s inhuman military attack on the defenseless civilian population in the Gaza Ghetto.

The US Ministry of Truth is delivering the Obama administration’s propaganda that Iran only notified the IAEA of its “secret” new nuclear facility because Iran discovered that US intelligence had discovered the “secret” facility. This propaganda is designed to undercut the fact of Iran’s compliance with the Safeguards Agreement and to continue the momentum for a military attack on Iran.

The Nobel committee has placed all its hopes on a bit of skin color.

“War is Peace” is now the position of the formerly antiwar organization, Code Pink. Code Pink has decided that women’s rights are worth a war in Afghanistan.

When justifications for war become almost endless–oil, hegemony, women’s rights, democracy, revenge for 9/11, denying bases to al Qaeda and protecting against terrorists–war becomes the path to peace.

The Nobel committee has bestowed the prestige of its Peace Prize on Newspeak and Doublethink


----------



## Naked shorts (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Interesting comments out of AQR's founder, Clifford Asness.

http://www.stumblingontruth.com/ (his website)
http://www.aqr.com/ (his company's website)


----------



## MrBurns (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Wonder if this was a ploy to restrict him and the US militarily in some way, I mean you'd have to think twice if you were the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize wouldn't you ?

Maybe he should have refused it while he was still President.


----------



## Agentm (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> For a while there I thought Obama was going to be a force for change.
> 
> Now i believe he is one of the biggest distributors of horse**** and weasel words on the planet.
> 
> ...




lmfao

pure gold


----------



## Gamblor (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



MrBurns said:


> Wonder if this was a ploy to restrict him and the US militarily in some way, I mean you'd have to think twice if you were the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize wouldn't you ?
> 
> Maybe he should have refused it while he was still President.




That was my first thought - it worries me you also think this. I should make an appointment with my doctor


----------



## bellenuit (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Although I do think it is far too early to be awarding the peace prize to Obama, I must say it was priceless to watch the goons on Fox News choking as they made the announcement.

How ironic. The two groups most opposed to the award: Fox News and the Taliban.


----------



## MrBurns (11 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Gamblor said:


> That was my first thought - it worries me you also think this. I should make an appointment with my doctor




It's ok you just had a rare moment of clarity.


----------



## Zaij (12 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

Obama wins Peace Prize while US space agency (NASA) commences bombardment of the moon.


----------



## Calliope (12 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/peace-prize-becomes-a-travesty-20091011-gs9f.html



> Long before the Nobel Peace Prize was debased and trivialised into an episode of American Idol, the failure beneath the soaring rhetoric of Barack Obama had been exposed. Even the secretary of the Nobel committee sheepishly admitted on Friday: ''Nominations for the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize closed just 11 days after he [Obama] took office.''
> 
> Since then, the US President has knowingly propped up a corrupt and violent regime in Afghanistan led by a lying fraud. He has achieved nothing to prevent the continued building of Israeli settlements on the Palestinian West Bank. To hand the Nobel prize to someone whose credentials are in the potential rather than the execution confirms that the prize has degenerated into a beauty pageant.
> 
> Three times in the past eight years the starry-eyed progressives who run the prize have given it to leaders of the US Democratic Party - Jimmy Carter, Al Gore and now Obama. One of them, Carter, actively sowed the seeds of what would become a global jihad.


----------



## MrBurns (12 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



Calliope said:


> http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/peace-prize-becomes-a-travesty-20091011-gs9f.html




Yeah they really stuffed it this time........


----------



## nunthewiser (12 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

haahahahaha @ the "obama" banner at the top right of this page 

hows this work joe ? 

i noticed on the diamond thread a while back there was a diamond sellers banner appaearing ....... do they just latch on after so many hits on a certain word ? or are they actually proper advertisers with a deal with you ? 

if its none of my business thats cool just say so but it would answer some questions i have on how they keep targeting some email ads i get when i log on my mail pages


----------



## nunthewiser (12 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

oh bugger its disapeared now ..... it was " obama cares .................stop him " or similar. was there briefly when i opened this thread





3 mins later .it is back


----------



## Julia (12 October 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*



nunthewiser said:


> oh bugger its disapeared now ..... it was " obama cares .................stop him " or similar. was there briefly when i opened this thread
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Spooky!


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 October 2009)

I like Obama's style.

He was asked a very tricky question by a 9yo kid and responded well.

I believe he has enough bottle to bomb the Islamist terrorists into history.

Often these soft liberals when exposed to the realities of life and the enormity of the enemy make better commanders than those from the right.

http://www.smh.com.au/world/i-have-to-say-why-do-people-hate-you-20091016-gzxd.html?autostart=1

gg


----------



## Calliope (16 October 2009)

Garpal Gumnut said:


> I believe he has enough bottle to bomb the Islamist terrorists into history.
> 
> Often these soft liberals when exposed to the realities of life and the enormity of the enemy make better commanders than those from the right.




Not with the Peace Prize hanging around his neck.


----------



## wayneL (16 October 2009)

Calliope said:


> Not with the Peace Prize hanging around his neck.




War is Peace.

George Orwell - Nineteen Eighty Four.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 October 2009)

Calliope said:


> Not with the Peace Prize hanging around his neck.




He will ignore the Norwegians.

When was the last time you obeyed a Norwegian?

They are a rump nation on the edge of Russia. You wouldn't even call them Europeans. They are so up themselves they have disappeared up their arses.

gg


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (16 October 2009)

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.9264422c2946d8bf1cb62cde139e996e.741&show_article=1

What a pack of wankers the Norwegians are.

It appears poor old Barack won the Peace Prize on a 2 out of 5 majority.

Go figure!!

gg


----------



## overit (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

The sequal to the obama deception. Just downloading it now. Looks interesting!




> Fall Of The Republic Exposes How Brand Obama Is Destroying America
> 
> Alex Jones’ highly anticipated documentary lifts the lid on how seductive tools of propaganda are being used to hypnotize the masses into accepting tyranny
> 
> ...


----------



## GumbyLearner (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



overit said:


> The sequal to the obama deception. Just downloading it now. Looks interesting!




I watched it last night. 

Pretty much emphasises the same facts about the recent historical connections back to Bill Clinton btw Washington, The Fed, Global elites, Goldman Sachs & US Presidents. Mainly focuses on global elites, taxpayer-funded Wall St bailouts, Obamas push for a cap and trade system, Obama chairing UN meetings and the US unconstitutionality of it, the erosion of personal liberties of US citizens, carbon trading, historical fascist eugenics programs, Gore's links to Goldman Sachs and planning of carbon tax setups, snippets of US Congressional hearings, Skeptical Climatological Scientists & the Climate change scientific debate, the continuing problem of the quadrillion US Credit Default Swaps derivatives mess, the obsequious political puppets and their subservience to major global corporates and the general dumbing down of the American public. 

The only thing that disappointed me is that there was a surface level recognition of the impact of the GFC players on the environment. Although Alex did show a clear connection between Gore and Kenneth Lay, but zero mention of billionaires linked to MadeOff like Ira Rennert and his polluting ways. 

If you don't have a quick internet connection then I would just go to www.infowars.com.

If you want to read about the other side of the argument then go here
www.clubofrome.org/eng/home/


----------



## overit (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

WOW nice report! All the fun doomer topics! Cant wait. I have my youtube downloader working on it. 329MB so it taking awhile.


----------



## So_Cynical (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

I don't need to watch it to know its the usual Right wing, red neck, republican, reds under the bed, lets horde ammunition, new world order, conspiracy theory crap...this happens every time there a democrat in the white house.


----------



## GumbyLearner (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



So_Cynical said:


> I don't need to watch it to know its the usual Right wing, red neck, republican, reds under the bed, lets horde ammunition, new world order, conspiracy theory crap...this happens every time there a democrat in the white house.




And you're telling us this because.... 

Max Keiser is a right-wing red-neck! LMAO!!!!  As if...
I bet that's why the BBC gave him a season slot this year on BBC World! 

Check this out So Cynical. I'm sure you'd better be interested.

http://www.valuebuy.net/monkeys1.html


----------



## Wysiwyg (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



So_Cynical said:


> I don't need to watch it to know its the usual Right wing, red neck, republican, reds under the bed, lets horde ammunition, new world order, conspiracy theory crap...this happens every time there a democrat in the white house.



Yes you have to be slightly paranoid and delusional to be drawn into these dramas. The usual suspects purport this stuff and the aforementioned personality criteria are their main target.


----------



## GumbyLearner (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



Wysiwyg said:


> Yes you have to be slightly paranoid and delusional to be drawn into these dramas. The usual suspects purport this stuff and the aforementioned personality criteria are their main target.




Excellent point wysi, I agree don't be drawn into these dramas.

Check the facts for yourself.

I have provided the Club of Rome website above.

Copenhagen UN summit on climate change is only a few weeks away. 

There can also be a little/large sprinkle of bull**** in any published work. 
Finding primary evidence is always the key.

DYOR


----------



## Wysiwyg (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



GumbyLearner said:


> Excellent point wysi, I agree don't be drawn into these dramas.
> 
> Check the facts for yourself.
> 
> ...




The actors in the you-tube video do a good job in not sounding too extreme. Although some overact their part, most speak their thoughts in a manner that keeps the audience interested. The rotation from one selected comment or video footage to another would have taken the producers hours and hours to compile. As you say, finding primary evidence is always the key.


----------



## GumbyLearner (24 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*



Wysiwyg said:


> The actors in the you-tube video do a good job in not sounding too extreme. Although some overact their part, most speak their thoughts in a manner that keeps the audience interested. The rotation from one selected comment or video footage to another would have taken the producers hours and hours to compile. As you say, finding primary evidence is always the key.




Exactly. Even the Scottish academic in the movie mentions the Alpha state that people enter into when they absorb the message of the Idiot box. Also, the score used in the movie seems quite emotive. What about using The Violent Femmes tracks like America is... or Old Mother Reagan. Just wouldn't have the same effect would it.


----------



## GumbyLearner (28 October 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

Obama appointed US Manufacturing "Czar" (More Monarch than Trotsky-like of course )  Ron Bloom shares his views on the free market and Mao Tse Tung.


----------



## moneymajix (8 November 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

Republic of Fools 

*The Evil Empire *

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS 

The US government is now so totally under the thumbs of organized interest groups that “our” government can no longer respond to the concerns of the American people who elect the president and the members of the House and Senate. Voters will vent their frustrations over their impotence on the president, which implies a future of one-term presidents. Soon our presidents will be as ineffective as Roman emperors in the final days of that empire.

Obama is already set on the course to a one-term presidency. He promised change, but has delivered none. His health care bill is held hostage by the private insurance companies seeking greater profits. The most likely outcome will be cuts in Medicare and Medicaid in order to help fund wars that enrich the military/security complex and the many companies created by privatizing services that the military once provided for itself at far lower costs. It would be interesting to know the percentage of the $700+ billion “defense” spending that goes to private companies. In American “capitalism,” an amazing amount of taxpayers’ earnings go to private firms via the government. Yet, Republicans scream about “socializing” health care. 

Republicans and Democrats saw opportunities to create new sources of campaign contributions by privatizing as many military functions as possible. There are now a large number of private companies that have never made a dollar in the market, feeding instead at the public trough that drains taxpayers of dollars while loading Americans with debt service obligations. 

Obama inherited an excellent opportunity to bring US soldiers home from the Bush regime’s illegal wars of aggression. In its final days, the Bush regime realized that it could “win” in Iraq by putting the Sunni insurgents on the US military payroll. Once Bush had 80,000 insurgents collecting US military pay, violence, although still high, dropped in half. All Obama had to do was to declare victory and bring our boys home, thanking Bush for winning the war. It would have shut up the Republicans.

But this sensible course would have impaired the profits and share prices of those firms that comprise the military/security complex. So instead of doing what Obama said he would do and what the voters elected him to do, Obama restarted the war in Afghanistan and launched a new one in Pakistan. Soon Obama was echoing Bush and Cheney’s threats to attack Iran. 

In place of health care for Americans, there will be more profits for private insurance companies.

In place of peace there will be more war.

Voters are already recognizing the writing on the wall and are falling away from Obama and the Democrats. Independents who gave Obama his comfortable victory have now swung against him, recently electing Republican governors in New Jersey and Virginia to succeed Democrats. This is a protest vote, not a confidence vote in Republicans.

Obama’s credibility is shot. And so is Congress’s, assuming it ever had any. The US House of Representatives has just voted to show the entire world that the US House of Representatives is nothing but the servile, venal, puppet of the Israel Lobby. The House of Representatives of the American “superpower” did the bidding of its master, AIPAC, and voted 344 to 36 to condemn the Goldstone Report.

In case you don’t know, the Goldstone Report is the Report of the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict. The “Gaza Conflict” is the Israeli military attack on the Gaza ghetto, where 1.5 million dispossessed Palestinians, whose lands, villages, and homes were stolen by Israel, are housed. The attack was on civilians and civilian infrastructure. It was without any doubt a war crime under the Nuremberg standard that the US established in order to execute Nazis.

Goldstone is not only a very distinguished Jewish jurist who has given his life to bringing people to accountability for their crimes against humanity, but also a Zionist. However, the Israelis have demonized him as a “self-hating Jew” because he wrote the truth instead of Israeli propaganda. 

US Representative Dennis Kucinich, who is now without a doubt a marked man on AIPAC’s political extermination list, asked the House if the members had any realization of the shame that the vote condemning Goldstone would bring on the House and the US government. The entire rest of the world accepts the Goldstone report.

The House answered with its lopsided vote that the rest of the world doesn’t count as it doesn’t give campaign contributions to members of Congress.

This shameful, servile act of “the world’s greatest democracy” occurred the very week that a court in Italy convicted 23 US CIA officers for kidnapping a person in Italy. The CIA agents are now considered “fugitives from justice” in Italy, and indeed they are. 

The kidnapped person was renditioned to the American puppet state of Egypt, where the victim was held for years and repeatedly tortured. The case against him was so absurd that even an Egyptian judge ordered his release.

One of the convicted CIA operatives, Sabrina deSousa, an attractive young woman, says that the US broke the law by kidnapping a person and sending him to another country to be tortured in order to manufacture another “terrorist” in order to keep the terrorist hoax going at home. Without the terrorist hoax, America’s wars for special interest reasons would become transparent even to Fox “News” junkies.

Ms. deSousa says that “everything I did was approved back in Washington,” yet the government, which continually berates us to “support the troops,” did nothing to protect her when she carried out the Bush regime’s illegal orders. 

Clearly, this means that the crime that Bush, Cheney, the Pentagon, and the CIA ordered is too heinous and beyond the pale to be justified, even by memos from the despicable John Yoo and the Republican Federalist Society.

Ms. deSousa is clearly worried about herself. But where is her concern for the innocent person that she sent into an Egyptian hell to be tortured until death or admission of being a terrorist? The remorse deSousa expresses is only for herself. She did her evil government’s bidding and her evil government that she so faithfully served turned its back on her. She has no remorse for the evil she committed against an innocent person. 

Perhaps deSousa and her 22 colleagues grew up on video games. It was great fun to plot to kidnap a real person and fly him on a CIA plane to Egypt. Was it like a fisherman catching a fish or a deer hunter killing a beautiful 8-point buck? Clearly, they got their jollies at the expense of their renditioned victim.

The finding of the Italian court, and keep in mind that Italy is a bought-and-paid-for US puppet state, indicates that even our bought puppets are finding the US too much to stomach. 

Moving from the tip of the iceberg down, we have Ambassador Craig Murray, rector of the University of Dundee and until 2004 the UK Ambassador to Uzbekistan, which he describes as a Stalinist totalitarian state courted and supported by the Americans.

As ambassador, Murray saw the MI5 intelligence reports from the CIA that described the most horrible torture procedures. “People were raped with broken bottles, children were tortured in front of their parents until they [the parents] signed a confession, people were boiled alive.”

“Intelligence” from these torture sessions was passed on by the CIA to MI5 and to Washington as proof of the vast al Qaeda conspiracy. 

Amb. Murray reports that the people delivered by CIA flights to Uzbekistan’s torture prisons “were told to confess to membership in Al Qaeda. They were told to confess they’d been in training camps in Afghanistan. They were told to confess they had met Osama bin Laden in person. And the CIA intelligence constantly echoed these themes.” 

“I was absolutely stunned,” says the British ambassador, who thought that he served a moral country that, along with its American ally, had moral integrity. The great Anglo-American bastion of democracy and human rights, the homes of the Magna Carta and the Bill of Rights, the great moral democracies that defeated Nazism and stood up to Stalin’s gulags, were prepared to commit any crime in order to maximize profits. 

Amb. Murray learned too much and was fired when he vomited it all up. He saw the documents that proved that the motivation for US and UK military aggression in Afghanistan had to do with the natural gas deposits in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. The Americans wanted a pipeline that bypassed Russia and Iran and went through Afghanistan. To insure this, an invasion was necessary. The idiot American public could be told that the invasion was necessary because of 9/11 and to save them from “terrorism,” and the utter fools would believe the lie.

“If you look at the deployment of US forces in Afghanistan, as against other NATO country forces in Afghanistan, you’ll see that undoubtedly the US forces are positioned to guard the pipeline route. It’s what it’s about. It’s about money, its about energy, it’s not about democracy.”

Guess who the consultant was who arranged with then Texas governor George W. Bush the agreements that would give to Enron the rights to Uzbekistan’s and Turkmenistan’s natural gas deposits and to Unocal to develop the trans-Afghanistan pipeline. It was Karzai, the US-imposed “president” of Afghanistan, who has no support in the country except for American bayonets.

Amb. Murray was dismissed from the UK Foreign Service for his revelations. No doubt on orders from Washington to our British puppet.


http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts11062009.html


----------



## Largesse (8 November 2009)

*Re: The Obama Deception*

Can someone give me a summary of the above post plz


----------



## bandicoot76 (21 November 2009)

its obvious obama is just another puppet president! forget his fancy words just look at his actions! 
he spent trillions bailing out a parasitic banking system that started the rot in the first place, included in that taxpayer funded bailout was a $500 billion dollar bailout of non-us banking interests and the recipients of this huge amount of cash WERE NEVER AUDITED NOR REVIEWED BY CONGRESS.
 when asked on the matter of which US banks received the bailout cash in a congressional hearing bernanke refused to say, when asked where the $500 billion in bailouts to foreign banks went he said HE DIDNT KNOW!!!
 this from the head of the federal reserve bank, which by the way is privately controlled by a banking cartell NOT by the US govt yet can hand out trillions of dollars in cash with no govt oversight... 
WHO re-instated bernanke as head of the federal resereve? you guessed it our old mate barrak obama... actions speak louder than words... 
obama is a puppet controlled by, and looking after the interests of, the rockefeller/chase manhattan, goldman sachs, jpmorgan etc power brokers.
 for those who doubt this and believe that obama is looking after the people consider this... of the trillions of dollars in economic stimulus/bailout spent by obamas government only $1 out of every $40 was spent on civillian projects such as emergency housing, food vouchers, welfare or infrastucture projects.... 
the vast majority went to the corrupt banking sector that caused the crisis in the first place! he's no humanitarian his actions are that of a puppet head of state!


----------



## Dowdy (21 November 2009)

Knobby22 said:


> It's truly fearful.
> 
> Some parts of the USA seem determined to destroy the country.




Mainly the guys in Washington....


----------



## bandicoot76 (22 November 2009)

if he was such a great guy he would have used those trillions of dollars to bailout the people losing their homes and jobs due to the corrupt US banking system! 
why not offer those people a goverment backed, zero interest, long term loan so they could keep their home, pay it off bit by bit as they could afford to, and not get kicked out onto the street relying on welfare and soup kitchens to survive?
that would have been the action of a compassionate statesman concerned for the well being of his people! 
instead what does he do? he lines the pockets of the filthy rich banking fraternity who created the GFC in the first place! 
as i said before his actions speak louder than his slick rhetoric... beware the silver tongued devil... even dubbya, k.rudd and lil jackboot johnnie have nothing on this guy when it comes to sprouting gobbldygook to smokescreen blatant lies...
 he scares me a little actually... already he's broken his election promises and noones batted an eyelid! 
no taxes to be increased.... lie
decrease in overseas military activity...lie
more transparent government (5day period on conressional bill review)... lie
repeal the draconian patriot act... lie
theres more but you get the idea.... scary


----------



## Aussiejeff (22 November 2009)

Oh dear.

Looks like Mr ObamaSan lost some more marbles on his trip to the Pacific



> *US President Barack Obama, back from a tour of Asia, called for the United States to produce more goods to sell across the Pacific, touting trade as a way to revive the troubled US economy. *
> 
> Facing rising unemployment and slipping poll numbers, Mr Obama assured the public that creating new jobs back home was his top priority on the week-long tour that took him to Japan, Singapore, China and South Korea.
> 
> "I travelled to Asia to open a new era of American engagement," Mr Obama said in his weekly radio address, recorded while he was in Seoul.



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/br...e-to-create-jobs/story-e6frf7k6-1225801641240

If he thinks a few overpaid, overweight American workers can compete on a global scale with a horde of underpaid, underweight Asian workers in the business of making goods for trade, he is clearly losing some screws in his brainbox.....


----------



## Ato (3 December 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

So...Mr Peace sends another 30k troops off to fight ze enemies! 

Does anyone actually believe that he will withdraw in July 2011? I mean alot can happen between now & then...Call me cynical, but I dont have alot of reason to believe in a withdrawal as stated. (I can make a whole bunch of crazy promises for 18 months time too. Can I have 30k troops to see those ambitions realised?)

Anyway, just ahead of the Pees Prize, I figured it was interesting news.


----------



## Julia (3 December 2009)

*Re: Obama wins Nobel Peace Prize*

To me the announcement of the additional 'surge', followed by an assurance that withdrawal will commence in, I think, 2011, seemed ill considered.

Seems a bit dumb to tell your enemies that "hey fellas, we're sending a lot more fire power over your way but if you can just hang in there for another year or so, we'll be gone, so don't worry about it too much".

Obviously the latter part of the message was intended to reassure the American population that withdrawal was part of the strategy, but it just seemed a bit peculiar to be giving the Taliban et al this advice.


----------



## Calliope (20 January 2010)

Shock loss in Massachusetts ends Obama euphoria




> At 9.20pm today, in Massachusetts, or 1.20pm on the Australian east coast, the era of Obamamania abruptly ended. The euphoria surrounding the elevation of Barack Obama to the American presidency was brought to a crashing end.
> 
> It didn't even last a year.
> 
> Tomorrow is the first anniversary of Obama's inauguration as President of the United State.






> *On the eve of that anniversary, the people of Massachusetts, the bluest of blue Democratic states, delivered a thunderous rejection of the Democratic Party and, by implication, the President*.



http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...obama-euphoria-20100120-mksu.html?autostart=1


----------



## wayneL (20 January 2010)

Calliope said:


> Shock loss in Massachusetts ends Obama euphoria
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It reminds me of the old business maxim - Never over-promise and under-deliver.


----------



## Ato (20 January 2010)

Yeah, the Demos losing the Masshole seat is a huge blow to them. 31 years or something since anyone other than a Demo has held that state.


----------



## GumbyLearner (21 January 2010)

Ato said:


> Yeah, the Demos losing the Masshole seat is a huge blow to them. 31 years or something since anyone other than a Demo has held that state.




Yep. A wake up call for the people that care (worldwide...they don't) about workers or businesses!


----------



## Doris (24 January 2010)

Special interest groups and lobbyists were targets of Obama in the election.

I can't believe the supreme court has granted this ruling enabling both!

I guess it's like our unions being granted use of top money for advertising for our elections. 
But they are after jobs whereas spending money to buy people in power for your own ends is the goal here. 

________________________________________
From: Mitch Stewart, BarackObama.com [mailto:info@barackobama.com] 
Sent: Saturday, 23 January 2010 1:29 AM
To: Doris
Subject: A stampede


Yesterday morning, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that *corporations* can spend freely in federal elections.

*It's a green light for a new stampede of special interest money in our politics,* giving their *lobbyists even more power* in Washington. Now, every candidate who fights for change could face limitless attacks from corporate special interests like health insurance companies and Wall Street banks.

While the GOP is celebrating a victory for its special interest allies, President Obama is working with leaders in Congress to craft a forceful response that protects the voices of ordinary citizens. 

The Supreme Court decision *overturned a 20-year precedent saying that corporations could not pay for campaign ads from their general treasuries. And it struck down a law saying corporations couldn't buy "issue ads*" -- which only thinly veil support for or opposition to specific candidates -- in the closing days of campaigns.

The result? Corporations can unleash multi-million-dollar ad barrages against candidates who try to curb special interest power, or devote millions to propping up elected officials who back their schemes.

With no limits on their spending, big oil, Wall Street banks, and health insurance companies will try to drown out the voices of everyday Americans -- and Republicans seem ecstatic.

While opponents of change in Congress are praising this victory for special interests, President Obama has tasked his administration and Congress with identifying a fix to preserve our democracy -- and we need to show that the American people stand with him.

Add your name today:

http://my.barackobama.com/FairElections

Thanks,

Mitch

Mitch Stewart
Director
Organizing for America



Paid for by Organizing for America, a project of the Democratic National Committee -- 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, D.C. 20003. This communication is not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (24 January 2010)

Barack is back on the smokes.

He's a ten a day man now.

gg


----------



## Atlas79 (28 January 2010)

When narcissists don't get the praise they require (like a druggie) they get a bit unhinged. After Mass & other failures, we should start seeing some mental fireworks in the not too distant future. For entertainment's sake let's hope the meltdown is public. Good thing this guy doesn't have a nuclear arsenal at his fingertips, eh?


----------



## Wysiwyg (2 February 2010)

Great to see this special U.S.A. president, Barack Obama, coming to Australia next month. Despite the tight security and selected venues, I really hope he has a glimpse of the real Australia/Australians. Like away from the city hustle and bustle.


----------



## Aussiejeff (2 February 2010)

Hooray for the Big O coming to Oz  He might even draw a bigger crowd of disciples than Pope!! 

I can't wait to see the beaming grin on KRudd's face when they backslap.

All will be light and happiness.....


----------



## Naked shorts (21 April 2010)




----------



## frankie_boy (22 April 2010)

Ah I just had a read of the beginning of this thread... Quite amusing peoples thoughts on who was going to win/lose etc, and knowing how it has panned out, its light entertainment for me


----------



## Knobby22 (22 April 2010)

*Another good decision by Obama that has turned out to be correct.*


GM has paid back the loan the governments of Canada and USA in full 5 years early that were made by their respective governments to rescue the company.


The USA were so lucky they had a chance to vote Obama in during such a bad time. You can only wonder what Bush would have done in his shoes since the Republicans critiscised him for helping GM while they preferred to throw money at the banks. Its failure would have hurt their biggest manufacturing industry and greatly slowed jobs growth.


----------



## springhill (4 June 2010)

*Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

SO Mr Obama, first it was your "health reform", now it's the "oil spill crisis" what will it be next? You ran out of milk and had to head down the corner store? Are you too good for your Aussie mates?

Even B.O. can see this guy is political poison, imagine the swearing, carrying on and earwax chewing our pint sized leader must have dealt out to his flunkies today! Almost makes you look unimportant in the scheme of things hey Kevvy?
Nevermind mate, he promised to spend some time with you at the G20 (which will amount to no more than the Obamster posing for one quick pic, a slap on the shoulder and a 'run along now son, Presy has to talk to the big boys').

You'll figure out a way to get him Kev, oh yes you just bide your time..... no-one , not even the miners, crosses our little Kaiser..... MWAHAHAHAHA.

FYI on a side note... notice on the political advertising on radio for the Super Profits Tax, it's now called the Future Tax? Future Tax, hang on Future Tax/Future Fund..... that rings a bell..... hmmmmm.


----------



## Julia (4 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

I have to confess to a grin on hearing the news that the Dear Leader would be deprived of his photo-op with the President!  I bet the temper is a bit frayed tonight!  These photos would have been nicely planned for the election campaign.


----------



## GumbyLearner (4 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



Julia said:


> I have to confess to a grin on hearing the news that the Dear Leader would be deprived of his photo-op with the President!  I bet the temper is a bit frayed tonight!  *These photos* would have been nicely planned for the election campaign.




Obama may have had these photos on his mind Julia.


----------



## Joe Blow (5 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

Lets start this thread again.

However, I would like to warn everyone that insults and personal attacks will not be tolerated. If you disagree with someone you are free to take issue with their opinions but as soon as you start attacking them personally you have crossed the line.


----------



## vimuttirasa (5 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

Nice post,

political poison indeed, even his own party loath him! BTW well done to the Crows, they beat my boys today, and thoroughly deserved the win, esp for TE's last game. Freo will have their day.


----------



## Space Invader101 (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

As long as labor doesn't win the next election, if Kev and Obama want a happy snap together that's fine by me.

Every time Wayne Swan chants "fair share" like a sook bragging about being in power, it's like he's rubbing mine and every other angry investors nose in it.  That's just not going to change my Liberal vote.


----------



## medicowallet (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



Space Invader101 said:


> Every time Wayne Swan chants "fair share" like a sook bragging about being in power, it's like he's rubbing mine and every other angry investors nose in it.  That's just not going to change my Liberal vote.




Exactly, if people want a "fair share" of the mining boom, they had ample opportunity to buy shares in BHP etc.

In fact property price increases are probably largely due to the mining boom, so why doesn't the government also give every non-property owner their "fair share" and remove the first home buyers grant.


----------



## Space Invader101 (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



medicowallet said:


> In fact property price increases are probably largely due to the mining boom, so why doesn't the government also give every non-property owner their "fair share" and remove the first home buyers grant.




I'm not sure what your getting at with the second paragraph.  I've always believed the main reason for the property bubble is the government unwilling to raise the 5% down deposit on property investment.  When investors have 20X leverage, what do you expect?


----------



## medicowallet (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



Space Invader101 said:


> I'm not sure what your getting at with the second paragraph.  I've always believed the main reason for the property bubble is the government unwilling to raise the 5% down deposit on property investment.  When investors have 20X leverage, what do you expect?




It is a combination of things, and as you point out, extra leveraging contributes immensely. I also don't believe the government should have any input into the lending banks provide, which is against what Wayne Swann and Kevin Rudd think.

But one thing is the amount of money that mining brings into the country, which increases wages, and provided support against the fallout of the GFC. This gives people the opportunity to turn mining profits into concrete and wood, which unfortunately has become excessive at the expense of productivity of "our" money, if you believe the government position.


----------



## Space Invader101 (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



medicowallet said:


> It is a combination of things, and as you point out, extra leveraging contributes immensely. I also don't believe the government should have any input into the lending banks provide, which is against what Wayne Swann and Kevin Rudd think.




Are you saying Wayne Swan and Rudd intend on tightening leverage, if so, do you a have a reference to this?  An article maybe?  Or are you just referring to the home buyers carrot?


----------



## medicowallet (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



Space Invader101 said:


> Are you saying Wayne Swan and Rudd intend on tightening leverage, if so, do you a have a reference to this?  An article maybe?  Or are you just referring to the home buyers carrot?




No, I was referring to them beating up the banks about interest rates via the media (once again not the best way to go a bout things).  I said that they should not have a say in tightening leverage, or anything else that a bank does regarding its commercial interests.


----------



## Atlas79 (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

Obama's too busy having a nervous breakdown due to his utterly, utterly failing presidency than to come all the way out here in Oz. That's why they're not letting him do press conferences over in America any more.


----------



## noco (6 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

I beleive Obama like many other world leaders have woken up to Rudd and are all steering clear him.
Have also noticed our Prime Minister is staying at home. Has he out warn his welcome with world leaders?


----------



## GumbyLearner (8 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

Obama seeking 'ass to kick' over oil



I'm sure this guy has a tough enough time following the lobbyist cash and the "smart" deregulators. 

I'm sure BP has an exemplary environment safety record in the US.


----------



## nulla nulla (8 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*

I suspect you will find that Obama doesn't want to be seen to make the same mistakes as George W Bush did when George was slow to re-act to the Hurricane Katrina disaster. It cost George Bush dearly and Obama is wanting to be seen to be doing something quickly and forcfully for the American populace.


----------



## GumbyLearner (8 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



nulla nulla said:


> I suspect you will find that Obama doesn't want to be seen to make the same mistakes as George W Bush did when George was slow to re-act to the Hurricane Katrina disaster. It cost George Bush dearly and Obama is wanting to be seen to be doing something quickly and forcfully for the American populace.




Well of course he will consult with his Skull & Bones colleagues like John Kerry.

Ironically, your avatar bares a skull and cross-bones. I'm amazed and yet not surprised. 

But anyway back on Bush gee he was....um...he was...


----------



## nulla nulla (9 June 2010)

*Re: Obama Rudd Snub Part 2!!!*



GumbyLearner said:


> Well of course he will consult with his Skull & Bones colleagues like John Kerry.
> 
> Ironically, your avatar bares a skull and cross-bones. I'm amazed and yet not surprised.




At the time I joined, I had been watching the "Pirates of the Caribbean". When I looked through the list of avalailable avatars, this was the best of the modest lot avaliable, closest to a pirate flag. 
Since then I have learned how to import an avatar but having used this for some time I will stick with it.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (1 July 2011)

*Yellow Yank Media Ban Obama Dick Slur*

The Land of the Free really is still run by the Pilgrim Fathers, a reactionary mob of Christians in pantaloons.

A major player in US media described Obama as a "dick", and the entire country goes in to a spasm, and the editor is fired.



> Mark Halperin suspended over Obama remark on Morning Joe (video)
> 
> Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0611/58098.html#ixzz1QrCUB6AI




One wonders whether the USA is fit to lead the Free World.

gg


----------



## Gringotts Bank (2 July 2011)

*Re: Yellow Yank Media Ban Obama Dick Slur*

Yanks love to elevate certain people to super human status.  

Maybe there's a few exceptions, but most politicians are dicks, not just Obama.


----------



## Tanaka (4 July 2011)

*Re: Yellow Yank Media Ban Obama Dick Slur*



Garpal Gumnut said:


> One wonders whether the USA is fit to lead the Free World.




Lead the free world? I thought they were pillaging it


----------



## xyzedarteerf (22 October 2011)

*President Obama on Ending War in Iraq*

Now can we bring our Diggers home as well...


----------



## Starcraftmazter (22 October 2011)

*Re: President Obama on Ending War in Iraq*

Yep.  They need them to invade Iran.


----------



## Joules MM1 (29 April 2012)

excerpted: 







> So, it’s clear to see what spendthrifts the Democrats have been and how fiscally responsible the Republicans are what a canard it is to claim that Obama has been spending like a drunken sailor. In fact, Clinton and Obama have been the most fiscally responsible of the last five administrations – by a long shot (and do we really need to talk about St. Ronnie?). Of course, none of this matters because people just know what they know, notwithstanding the facts.




http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2012/04/hey-big-spender-2/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter


----------



## CanOz (29 April 2012)

Its amazing how the dirty little bastards (all Republicans) paint the last four years.

God (or Allah, or Budda) help us if they had been in power for the last fours years.

Spend it like its not yours, and then blame it on the next administration...that's their motto I'm sure.

CanOz


----------



## Calliope (30 April 2012)

Doris, where are you? This is your thread. Obama needs you.


----------



## Knobby22 (30 April 2012)

Calliope said:


> Doris, where are you? This is your thread. Obama needs you.




Yes, every Australian vote counts!


----------



## Glen48 (5 June 2012)

*Obama: Is he is one or not?*

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28

Make up your mind about Obama and see what you think   and is there a hidden agenda????


----------



## So_Cynical (5 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



Glen48 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28
> is there a hidden agenda????




No


----------



## Kee37 (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*

He's no Muslim.

Though as the rolly eyes suggest the "hidden agenda" is a whole other bag of worms.


----------



## dutchie (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*

Obama: Is he is one or not?

No I think he is much older.


----------



## joea (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



Glen48 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28
> 
> Make up your mind about Obama and see what you think   and is there a hidden agenda????




If you explained the "hidden agenda". or what you think it is, it would be easier to answer your question.

My perception is Obama was trying to reach out to them. To solve some of the worlds problems.

The link explains my thoughts what he is about.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/10/09/us-nobel-peace-obama-idUSTRE5981JK20091009

joea


----------



## stevetamer (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*

Noooooope


----------



## bellenuit (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



Glen48 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28
> 
> Make up your mind about Obama and see what you think   and is there a hidden agenda????




Glen. It should be bleeding obvious to anyone that all of those quotes were taken out of context. Many were cut mid sentence so you did not hear the entirety of what he was saying. That YouTube video doesn't allow commenting, so if one found the original complete videos that might throw a different light on what was said, no one was able to post them or link to them. This was just a botch video composed by some of the brainless idiots of the American extreme right. I am surprised you could give it any credulity.


----------



## Calliope (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



stevetamer said:


> Noooooope




Not that there is anything wrong with that, mind you.


----------



## Starcraftmazter (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*

Who cares whether he is a muslim or not? 

His real agendas are not hidden, let's review some key points of his presidency;

 - First thing he does is appoint goldman sachs and jpm executives to his staff
 - Then he sends more troops to Afganistan
 - Forces all US citizens to deal with private monopolies in the corrupt healthcare industry
 - Goes back on every single transparency and pro-whistleblower law he promised
 - Prosecutes Bradley Manning and tries to get Julian Assange extradited to the US
 - Opens more military bases around the world
 - Passed laws mandating that children be sexually molested at airports
 - Excuses every member of the Bush administration for their countless constitutional and international crimes
 - Signs NDAA making every US citizen a terrorist with a simple accusation without any involvement of the judiciary
 - Jamie Dimon and Jon Corzine are his biggest fundrasiers
 - Failed to property regulate US financial industry
 - Took no action when JPM and others stole $1.6Bn of MF Global customer money
 - Took no action to get the Feds to prosecute ANYONE involved with the GFC
 - Got the DoD to build technology to identify people with "negative views" of the US
 - NSA now building the world's largest datacentre in the Utah desert, and FBI is writing legislation to mandate government backdoors in every online website and service


Just off the top of my head really, there's probably more.

Point is - come on now, who gives a **** whether he's muslim or not - he is a corrupt son of a bitch either way.


----------



## Glen48 (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



Starcraftmazter said:


> Who cares whether he is a muslim or not?
> 
> - NSA now building the world's largest datacentre in the Utah desert, and FBI is writing legislation to mandate government backdoors in every online website and service
> .



Built on 13 Acres and able to record every phone conversation,ATM transaction, e mail and Fax In the World,Now OB has a panel set up listen  in on wireless talk back  shows for any negative or derogatorily remarks about him and his bunch of crooks.


----------



## CanOz (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



Starcraftmazter said:


> Point is - come on now, who gives a **** whether he's Muslim or not - he is a corrupt son of a bitch either way.




and the alternative is?

CanOz


----------



## Starcraftmazter (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



CanOz said:


> and the alternative is?
> 
> CanOz




Come now, this is an obvious one.


----------



## CanOz (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*

Fair comment but he's got a snowflakes hope in *ell of every getting the presidency...

The US needs another party...

CanOz


----------



## Starcraftmazter (6 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



CanOz said:


> Fair comment but he's got a snowflakes hope in *ell of every getting the presidency...
> 
> The US needs another party...




Don't be so sure - the delegate count will be closer than what most people think. Regardless, Ron Paul is the best (in fact the only) chance to end the status quo. If people aren't smart enough to elect him, I doubt there is any point in starting another party.

Americans are just too darn stupid :asdf:


----------



## jank (7 June 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*



Starcraftmazter said:


> Americans are just too darn stupid :asdf:




Well where is the Australian Ron Paul..... oh right!


----------



## Calliope (7 September 2012)

*Re: Obama: Is he is one or not?*

Obama offers Americans a clear choice.


----------



## Calliope (7 October 2012)

The empty chair and the empty head!



> The Obama of the imagination is the media’s Obama. Out of their fascination with the color of his skin and their mindless awe at his windy teleprompted rhetoric, they constructed a man of stature and accomplishment. Now, with the White House on the line, they’re waging an ongoing battle against the undeniable evidence that he has never been, in fact, that man.



Read more
http://www.city-journal.org/2012/eon1005ak.html


----------



## Doris (10 October 2012)

Knobby22 said:


> Yes, every Australian vote counts!






Calliope said:


> Doris, where are you? This is your thread. Obama needs you.




Watching and waiting with baited breath for the third debate guys.  

My belief is that the first debate last week was Barack's quietly setting a trap for Romney. It worked. 
Cocky Mitt told untruths (AKA lies) in four categories to appeal to 'the poor, er, low income earners'. 
The next day, Obama's Truth Team put out 30-40 sec TV ads with a video of Romney's claims during the debate and these were followed by independent experts refuting with actual facts as well as video of Romney's platform speeches even 2 months ago.  

The Vice-Presidential debate is on tomorrow lunch-time our time. Should be interesting. Many believe Romney chose Ryan because he had contacts with special interest groups and lobbyists which would, and have, yielded $ millions each in donations. Obama continues his pledge to avoid these and accept only from grass roots individuals. 

Debates 2 & 3 between Romney and Barack over the next two weeks will be worth watching.  Official data which will blow Romney out of the water. Again, at lunch time our time. Record them! You won't regret it.


----------



## Calliope (10 October 2012)

Welcome back Doris. Just in time!



> REPUBLICAN presidential candidate Mitt Romney has surged into the lead in opinion polls, his reward for beating President Barack Obama in last week's first head-to-head debate.


----------



## bandicoot76 (10 October 2012)

i still cant believe ppl think theres a difference between the two (obama v romney)! 

different faces on the same puppet, both blatant liars, scumbags & warmongers... 

seems its the same the world over though... we have juliar and the mad abott... talk about a global lose/lose scenerio....

 voltaire would be turning in his grave!


----------



## bandicoot76 (10 October 2012)

OBAMA LIES:
1) do away with presidential 'signing statements' to modify/undermine legislation...... LIE... he went on to use them even more than the despicable bush jr did to make sure he got his own way! 

2)end the despotic patriot act... LIE... not only did he not end it he re-inforced it by adding the NDAA act

3) stop wars /bring troops home/limit overseas miitary adventuerism.....LIE ...he has started even more military actions & committed more troops, and murdered more civilians in presidential authorized drone attacks than ever before

 4)bring to justice the corrupt financial institutions & practices that caused 2008 GFC...LIE ....how could he? all his financial advisors are goldman sachs cronies who were up to their neck in the corruption...plus no serious charges against corrupt individuals & corporations involved were ever followed through by the 'justice' dept...

ROMNEY ....made his fortune as a 'corporate raider' parasite feeding off the misery of others... enough said!

 this shows who the true rulers of the USA are and it sure aint either of these 2 bozo's!

the yanks dropped the ball bigtime by ignoring and rejecting the sanity of Ron Paul...


----------



## Doris (10 October 2012)

bandicoot76 said:


> ROMNEY ....made his fortune as a 'corporate raider' parasite feeding off the misery of others... enough said!
> 
> this shows who the true rulers of the USA are and it sure aint either of these 2 bozo's!
> 
> the yanks dropped the ball bigtime by ignoring and rejecting the sanity of Ron Paul...




I saw a doco set in almost all towns where Romney bought up struggling businesses, broke them up and sold the pieces for profit... putting all employees out of work.  The townspeople and previous employees were interviewed.  Reminds me of the movie 'Pretty Woman'.  But Romney claims he cares about increasing jobs!

Romney's increase of $1 trillion for defence (Obama is neutral) will increase jobs and "have the US ready in case China becomes aggressive".  I spoke to Chinese businessmen on vacation on the Gold Coast last Friday. They said China and the US were good friends... US their best trading partner... China had bought lots of US notes. They wondered why Romney would suspect animosity.  Doesn't the US initiate a war to improve the economy?  (See the John Candy 'Canadian Bacon' movie.  Old but good comedy)


----------



## gav (10 October 2012)

Yes we can!!!

[video=youtube_share;fH5hPlMfksQ]http://youtu.be/fH5hPlMfksQ[/video]


----------



## JTLP (10 October 2012)

Not that I follow US politics - but for all the years Obama has been in - it's all been about posturing and showboating.

Lots of young people in America and abroad (I've been back twice since he was elected) were so pumped to have the first 'black' president sworn in...yet couldn't list a thing he stood for!

Bandwagoning will get you so far...wouldn't mind seeing his 'hot air' blown off somewhere else.


----------



## Julia (10 October 2012)

Well, hello again Doris.  We haven't heard a whisper from since your last campaign to have Obama elected.
Please tell us you are not once more planning to bombard us with hundreds of copies of Obama's emails to the faithful.


----------



## wayneL (11 October 2012)

Julia said:


> Well, hello again Doris.  We haven't heard a whisper from since your last campaign to have Obama elected.
> Please tell us you are not once more planning to bombard us with hundreds of copies of Obama's emails to the faithful.




It is interesting that the Obarmy detractors in this thread (including moi) of 4 years ago were largely spot on. 10/10 for the soaring rhetoric, 1/10 for delivery on said rhetoric.

The first pres debate looks to have been a game changer, Mit well in with a chance now...

...it's possible the Big 'O' may get the Big 'A'.


----------



## Calliope (11 October 2012)

wayneL said:


> It is interesting that the Obarmy detractors in this thread (including moi) of 4 years ago were largely spot on. 10/10 for the soaring rhetoric, 1/10 for delivery on said rhetoric.
> 
> The first pres debate looks to have been a game changer, Mit well in with a chance now...
> 
> ...it's possible the Big 'O' may get the Big 'A'.




The big hurdle for Romney is that in the last election at least 95% of African-Americans voted for Obama. These people will vote again on the basis of his colour and not his performance which has been woeful. If he is re-elected it will be because he is a black man.


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

watching Biden v Ryan.....

twit of the day



> radleybalko ‏@radleybalko
> 
> You know what's depressing as hell? When a moderator in a U.S. presidential debate can say, "let's move to another war . . . "


----------



## So_Cynical (12 October 2012)

Joules MM1 said:


> watching Biden v Ryan.....




Joe wins by a mile...who the hell was that other guy and what the hell was team Romney thinking making him the nominee?


----------



## wayneL (12 October 2012)

So_Cynical said:


> Joe wins by a mile...who the hell was that other guy and what the hell was team Romney thinking making him the nominee?



Not according to a CNN poll:

Ryan 48% - Biden 44%


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

wayneL said:


> Not according to a CNN poll:
> 
> Ryan 48% - Biden 44%




from 2 hours ago.....



> David Grann ‏@DavidGrann
> 
> FOX: Biden needs to go an institution. MSNBC: Ryan humiliated. CNN: Draw.




best entertainment today


----------



## So_Cynical (12 October 2012)

Joules MM1 said:


> from 2 hours ago.....
> 
> 
> 
> best entertainment today




LOL what the hell were they watching :dunno: Joe the clear winner for me...no question about it.


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

So_Cynical said:


> LOL what the hell were they watching :dunno: Joe the clear winner for me...no question about it.




lulz.....Joes a blokes bloke isnt he.....







> Biden was quick to retort: “With all due respect, that’s just a bunch of malarkey. … Not a single thing he said is accurate.”




Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...residential-debate-in-kentucky/#ixzz293dfOle3

obviously to back up encumbent comic Samuel Jackson's advert


----------



## Calliope (12 October 2012)

So_Cynical said:


> LOL what the hell were they watching :dunno: Joe the clear winner for me...no question about it.




It all depends on your bias. You wanted Biden to win, so you thought he did.


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

So_Cynical said:


> LOL what the hell were they watching :dunno: Joe the clear winner for me...no question about it.




bahahaha......way too serious guys......



> Rex Huppke ‏@RexHuppke
> 
> I WANT MARTHA RADDATZ TO BE MY MOM AND JOE BIDEN TO BE MY DAD AND PAUL RYAN TO BE MY ADOPTED BROTHER WHO I HATE!!! #VPDebate


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

Calliope said:


> It all depends on your bias. You wanted Biden to win, so you thought he did.




twipperheads



> Bill Maher ‏@billmaher
> 
> Hello, under Bush: 3000 Americans killed by Al Quada on American soil; under Obama, 4 Americans killed in Libya. Next question.


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

So_Cynical said:


> LOL what the hell were they watching :dunno: Joe the clear winner for me...no question about it.




haha



> Christopher Hayes ‏@chrislhayes
> 
> The "we so badly want bipartisanship" act is truly hilarious. You can't blame Biden for laughing.


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

> julian ct ‏@joulesmm1
> 
> Joe Biden was so tough, Chuck Norris will looking under the bed tonight, just in case.....




just too funny to stay out of that carnivale


----------



## bandicoot76 (12 October 2012)

disgusting that they refused to let the libertarian contender gary johnson take a place in the debate as well, admittedly he doesnt have much of a chance but he is represented in all 50 states for the upcoming election and deserves a chance to put his positions forward against the 2 'mainstream' contenders...

 a bit of exposure to his ideology may even lead to an increase in support...

 probly why the demo'crips' & re'blood'licans wont let him, try to marginalise him with a media blackout same as their ron paul efforts in the past.


----------



## bandicoot76 (12 October 2012)

obama's pet project, the NDAA, heres something to make you wonder how he won the nobel 'peace' prize! very orwellian methinks!

http://amberlyonlive.com/2012/10/10...ournalists/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog


----------



## Joules MM1 (12 October 2012)

this electioneering stuff......meh..... international, really


----------



## bandicoot76 (12 October 2012)

obama's pet project, the NDAA, heres something to make you wonder how he won the nobel 'peace' prize! very orwellian methinks!

http://amberlyonlive.com/2012/10/10/...subscribe-blog


----------



## Julia (12 October 2012)

bandicoot76 said:


> obama's pet project, the NDAA, heres something to make you wonder how he won the nobel 'peace' prize! very orwellian methinks!
> 
> http://amberlyonlive.com/2012/10/10...ournalists/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog



The link offered me this result


> Sorry, what you’re looking for could not be found.




I wouldn't get too hung up on any Nobel Peace Prize winner.  It has today been announced that the new winner is the European Union.  Images of rioting come to mind, not to mention the whole financial debacle.

The award for Literature has also been announced in favour of a Chinese person whom virtually no one in the West has ever heard of, let alone read.


----------



## bandicoot76 (12 October 2012)

sorry my pc is freezing up, try:

http://amberlyonlive.com/2012/10/10...ournalists/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog


----------



## Calliope (15 October 2012)

Ain't that the truth. David Letterman, October 10:



> YOU know Obama's campaign is in trouble when they're looking to Joe Biden to turn things around."


----------



## McLovin (15 October 2012)

Julia said:


> I wouldn't get too hung up on any Nobel Peace Prize winner.  It has today been announced that the new winner is the European Union.  Images of rioting come to mind, not to mention the whole financial debacle.




But when you look at the previous 1,000 years of European history before the EU, it was certainly not a peaceful place.


----------



## wayneL (15 October 2012)

The Nobel prize isn't worth a pinch of camel dung anymore.

They offered me one for my thesis... I knocked them back.


----------



## Calliope (17 October 2012)

Scarlett Johansonn to the rescue of American women.


----------



## Miss Hale (17 October 2012)

Anyone else watching the second debate?   Just switched it on but from what I've seen I'm quite impressed with Romney.  He _sounds_ like he knows what he's talking about at least.  Obama reminds me of Kevin Rudd.


----------



## Calliope (17 October 2012)

Miss Hale said:


> Anyone else watching the second debate?   Just switched it on but from what I've seen I'm quite impressed with Romney.  He _sounds_ like he knows what he's talking about at least.  Obama reminds me of Kevin Rudd.




Obama Doesn't Like People. All his actions seem robotic.



> Clinton, being Clinton, had plenty of advice in mind and was desperate to impart it. But for the first two years of Obama’s term, the phone calls Clinton kept expecting rarely came. “People say the reason Obama wouldn’t call Clinton is because he doesn’t like him,” observes Tanden. “The truth is, Obama doesn’t call anyone, and he’s not close to almost anyone. It’s stunning that he’s in politics, because he really doesn’t like people. My analogy is that it’s like becoming Bill Gates without liking computers.”




http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs...-because-he-really-doesn-t-people_654636.html


----------



## wayneL (18 October 2012)

Obama in deep doo-doo

http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx

Mitt 51% Owebama 45%


----------



## gav (18 October 2012)

wayneL said:


> Obama in deep doo-doo
> 
> http://www.gallup.com/poll/157817/election-2012-likely-voters-trial-heat-obama-romney.aspx
> 
> Mitt 51% Owebama 45%




First, I thought The Fed Reserve re-elected him when it recently announced QE3. 

Then came the "miracle" unemployment figures.  

What's next? I'm guessing the Dow will finally make all time highs right before the election...


----------



## wayneL (18 October 2012)

gav said:


> What's next? I'm guessing the Dow will finally make all time highs right before the election...




Yes we can... :


----------



## Doris (19 October 2012)

gav said:


> First, I thought The Fed Reserve re-elected him when it recently announced QE3.
> 
> Then came the "miracle" unemployment figures.
> 
> What's next? I'm guessing the Dow will finally make all time highs right before the election...




My share portfolio has increased 2% since the debate Wednesday! Except NCM.

Obama is a clever man. Debate one was designed (IMO) to give Romney the rope to feel more cocky.
-- tell more untruths expecting no-one to bother about details and facts.

Obama fought some of those subsequent cocky untruths on Wed.
-- but why not Romney's _Bain Capital_ to show his business 'acumen'???:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/27/mitt-romney-rnc-workers-bain-_n_1834920.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/23/bain-capital-layoffs-dade-behring_n_1695960.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...ac1b4a6-16ea-11e2-a55c-39408fbe6a4b_blog.html

Romney was 'Pretty Woman's Richard Gere character!

Obama will strike with a hot iron next Tuesday our time (noon SBS) and I expect new house approvals, unemployment figures etc etc to show improvement circa this debate.

The US is China's biggest trading partner but China owns a plethora of US notes!!
China is currently pulling in on the county's bubbles in housing investment/building etc .
Cocky Romney threatens $1 trillion for the defence budget 'in case (they) have trouble with China not reducing the value of the yuan'. (to repay lobbyists, PACs and super PACs?)

Mitt Romney not only accepts big checks from these lobbyists, but as president he'd hire those same lobbyists in top-level positions. A report just this week said: "Industry insiders believe that Mitt Romney will unshackle the revolving door and give lobbyists a shot at the government jobs their Democratic counterparts have been denied for the past four years."

'We could get the head of the junk food industry as the Secretary of Health and Human Services. An oil executive as the head of the Environmental Protection Agency'.


----------



## Doris (19 October 2012)

Calliope said:


> Ain't that the truth. David Letterman, October 10:




And this week:

Poll on 'Undecideds':
50% said 'Ummmm'
50% said 'Errrrr'

Gotta laugh eh!
Love Letterman for his unbiased (LOL) political jokes each night.


----------



## Doris (19 October 2012)

bandicoot76 said:


> ROMNEY ....made his fortune as a 'corporate raider' parasite feeding off the misery of others... enough said!




Yes... Richard Gere's character in 'Pretty Woman'.


----------



## Joules MM1 (21 October 2012)

.......wondering who's getting/doing what?


*Trending:	

    Obama Is Back!
*
October 20, 2012

Latest Swing State Polls
*Here are the latest polls from the battleground, updated through the day:*
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/10/20/latest_swing_state_polls.html#.UIMPw0B5Rnk.twitter

......and another way to view who's getting/doing what:


* Investor Election Survey* -- Post 2nd Debate
Thursday, October 18, 2012 at 01:51PM 
http://www.bespokeinvest.com/thinkbig/2012/10/18/investor-election-survey-post-2nd-debate.html


----------



## bandicoot76 (21 October 2012)

Doris said:


> Yes... Richard Gere's character in 'Pretty Woman'.




dont quote me out of context.... obama and romney are peas in a pod, the same sh*t just a different shade... romney may be slightly ahead just due to the fact he is not a 'weatherman' acolyte... if you dont know what i mean then google it!


----------



## Doris (22 October 2012)

Final debate tomorrow SBS at noon.


----------



## Doris (22 October 2012)

Had to laugh at Obama's speech quip at the charity gala Thursday night (US time). 
(He and Romney drew high paying guests)

Obama said he'd been asked why he did so well in the second debate. 
He said it was because he'd had a good rest at the first one.


----------



## Calliope (24 October 2012)

Even a nine year old can see that Obama is just a blowhard. 

[video]http://freebeacon.com/msnbcs-morning-joe-crowd-boos-9-year-old-girl-for-supporting-mitt-romney/[/video]


----------



## Doris (24 October 2012)

Two weeks today!
It's not just US politics.  It'll affect us all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FOatTWJAlpI


----------



## white_goodman (24 October 2012)

Calliope said:


> Even a nine year old can see that Obama is just a blowhard.
> 
> [video]http://freebeacon.com/msnbcs-morning-joe-crowd-boos-9-year-old-girl-for-supporting-mitt-romney/[/video]




surprising they booed her, lefties are known to be tolerant to people with opposing views....


----------



## white_goodman (24 October 2012)

Doris said:


> Two weeks today!
> It's not just US politics.  It'll affect us all.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=FOatTWJAlpI




wait.. are people still believing in Barack "Peace Prize" Obama is the peace President? how quaint..

Him and Mitt have the exact same foreign policy, they are both interventionist and world police. Heaven forbid people look at the actions of the peaceful president rather than the rhetoric


----------



## Doris (25 October 2012)

white_goodman said:


> wait.. are people still believing in Barack "Peace Prize" Obama is the peace President? how quaint..
> 
> Him and Mitt have the exact same foreign policy, they are both interventionist and world police. Heaven forbid people look at the actions of the peaceful president rather than the rhetoric




He and Romney the same MO?
Obama has well established dialogue and consultation in all corners of the world -- even Iran.
He has gathered coalitions so that the US is not seen as world police. Economic sense for them!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71cstPjOt68&feature=colike


----------



## Doris (25 October 2012)

In the third debate Romney chastised Obama for criticizing him when in actuality it was his programs and 'facts' he was critiquing. 

The basic differences:

http://www.barackobama.com/plans?so...source=obama&utm_campaign=em12_20121023_sc_tt

Summation by Obama:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=uONGtgxHjYk


----------



## Julia (25 October 2012)

We may have cause for dissatisfaction about our politicians here, but none of them are quite this bad:



> A US Republican senate candidate who was endorsed by presidential candidate Mitt Romney has said that if a woman becomes pregnant through rape, “it is something God intended to happen”.
> 
> Richard Mourdock, the Republican candidate for the US Senate in Indiana, said: “Even when life begins with that horrible situation of rape, that is something that God intended to happen.”


----------



## Calliope (25 October 2012)

The clown can't even read his teleprompter properly.


----------



## wayneL (25 October 2012)

Doris said:


> In the third debate Romney chastised Obama for criticizing him when in actuality it was his programs and 'facts' he was critiquing.
> 
> The basic differences:
> 
> ...




Dear Lord... it's started!


----------



## Julia (25 October 2012)

wayneL said:


> Dear Lord... it's started!



My exact thought earlier today.
Never mind, wayne.  Last election it went on for months.  There are now only days to go.


----------



## bandicoot76 (27 October 2012)

Mike Krieger
 zerohedge.com
 October 26, 2012

The Seventy Percent

 People are going to be pissed off no matter who wins this election and that is a very important social dynamic I believe is vastly under appreciated by the majority of mainstream pundits and analysts out there.  This is also very distinct from the environment that prevailed in 2008.  Four years ago, the financial markets were crashing and the economic future of America was circling the toilet bowl, yet a majority of Americans embraced the potential of a young, inexperienced biracial politician from Illinois who was saying all of the right things.  Despite the gigantic disappointment he has proven to be as President, there is no denying that he had all of the Democrats and most Independents under his spell on this day four years ago.

Fast forward to 2012 and the country isn’t “divided” as mainstream media talking heads like to say.  The country is pissed off.  Genuine and legitimate frustration permeates the land from sea to shining sea and rightly so.  Ever since the banker coup of 2008, crony capitalism has been institutionalized as the only real way to make money.  If you aren’t connected or “too big to fail,” sorry but America isn’t the place for you.  What makes the economic nightmare so much worse is that it is being coupled with a complete and total decimation of civil liberties.  One by one the Bill of Rights is being ignored and indeed trampled on systemically by the political and economic oligarchs emboldened by their successful takeover of the executive, legislative and for the most part judicial branches of government.  Many Independents disagreed with Obama’s economic philosophy but gave him a pass because he promised to end the wars overseas and restore civil liberties.  Instead, what we got was a President who signed the NDAA on New Year’s Eve 2011, which included section 1021, allowing for the indefinite detention of American citizens without trial until the “end of hostilities.”  Well, because now know the Orwellian “war on terror” is never-ending, the indefinite detention is forever.  The worst part is that Obama claims he didn’t want these powers yet when a group of high profile plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against section 1021 and won a ruling deeming it unconstitutional, what was the President’s response?  He appealed it to death until he found a panel of judges to agree with him.  Not only did he want this power, he seems to crave it.  Another well deserved Noble Peace Prize.

The above is just one example of many.  His kill list, which the Administration now refers to as the “disposition matrix,” grows by the day to include people with zero affiliation with Al-Qaeda, and Obama seems to relish in the absolute power of being judge, jury and executioner.  Tragically, a President Romney will be no different.  He is already on record supporting the NDAA, war without Congressional approval and we heard his complete and total support of Obama’s drone strategy during the third and final debate.  Sure, people that care about civil liberties will vote for Romney saying that he will at least be better on economic policy, yet that is the exact same thing people did with Obama in reverse.  They ended up being disappointed with him and Romney will disappoint as well.  These guys are both big government, crony capitalist puppets and that’s the bottom line.

The above is invariably true and brings me to the key point of this article.  Should Romney win, the 28% of Americans that identify as Republican will be thrilled, and the remaining 72% will be largely upset and on edge.  Should Obama win, similarly, the 32% registered Democrat with be thrilled and the remaining 68% will be upset and on edge.  Hence, the 70% referred to in the title of this article

 this sums up my position on this joke of an american 'election' perfectly! bandicoot76


----------



## bandicoot76 (28 October 2012)

...or to put it in a more simple format for people who are intimidated by any more words than used in a sordid catch-phrase:


----------



## Calliope (29 October 2012)

Whoever wins the election will preside over an America drowning in debt, and it probably will be Obama, who will be elected by that section of the electorate most dependent on handouts.

*Drowning in debt: US crisis lurches closer*



> Whoever wakes up in the White House after the inauguration ball will have to soberly confront the ugly reality of US government's debt levels, whichtotals about $US16 trillion ($15.4 trillion). The US Treasury estimates this will rise to about $US20 trillion by 2015, more than America's GDP.
> 
> There are other current and contingent commitments not explicitly included in the debt figures: US government support for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, government-sponsored enterprises of more than $US5 trillion, *and unfunded obligations of more than $US65 trillion for programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security*. US state governments and municipalities have more debt, about $US3 trillion.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opi...s-lurches-closer/story-e6frg6ux-1226504863718


----------



## white_goodman (29 October 2012)

Calliope said:


> Whoever wins the election will preside over an America drowning in debt, and it probably will be Obama, who will be elected by that section of the electorate most dependent on handouts.
> 
> *Drowning in debt: US crisis lurches closer*
> 
> ...




the unfunded liabilities are easy to manage in theory, its politically untenable however.. a simple measure, re pensions is to index the pension age back to what it was designed to be.. pegged to life expectancy. Bringing the ratio of those working to those not working higher should be the goal.

Or they could go the French route, reduce retirement age, increase minimum wage, raise taxes to 75% in the highest income bracket.


----------



## white_goodman (29 October 2012)

Doris said:


> He and Romney the same MO?
> Obama has well established dialogue and consultation in all corners of the world -- even Iran.
> He has gathered coalitions so that the US is not seen as world police. Economic sense for them!
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71cstPjOt68&feature=colike




a dialogue that consists of economic sanctions has a lustrous history in the modern world. The Japanese responded well to it the 1940's..

your peacetime president is more of a warlord then Bush (which may or may not be a good thing in certain situations) jsut dont preetend its all sunshine and lollipops. Dont confuse 'hope' for 'change'


----------



## bandicoot76 (29 October 2012)

ITS GETTING TO BE LIKE 'ATLAS SGRUGGED' MKII,   SURELY ITS TIME FOR 'THE LOOTERS' TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS (OR LACK THERE OF!!)????  :frown:


----------



## Calliope (1 November 2012)

Any chances that Romney had are now dead in the water. The situation reminds me of Queensland last year after the floods. Bligh's popularity sky-rocketed after she showed effective leadership in the aftermath. If she had called an electon then, she would have won.

Romney's campaign cannot compete with Obama's huge exposure in New Jersey and other disaster areas. 



> In the meantime, former Democrat president Bill Clinton has stepped into Mr Obama's shoes as his surrogate on the campaign trail, not encumbered by worries about exploiting a national disaster. elsewhere.




http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...romneys-campaign/story-e6frg6so-1226507822081


----------



## McLovin (1 November 2012)

290 v 248 Obama wins is my prediction.

R$ wins back NC, VA, IN and FL.

FL is the most interesting state in the Union, it's guns and god in the Panhandle and pinko snowbirds down south.


----------



## white_goodman (2 November 2012)




----------



## Doris (8 November 2012)

Julia said:


> My exact thought earlier today.
> Never mind, wayne.  Last election it went on for months.  There are now only days to go.




I ask you. 
What is the point of a thread without information and consequent projection or a challenged refutation?
Julia, your nasty comments are the reason I removed myself from this site a few years ago.
They are not opinions but personal attacks.

Departing comment from me:  Woohooo!!
I won't be back.  Sorry Joe.


----------



## white_goodman (8 November 2012)

Doris said:


> I ask you.
> What is the point of a thread without information and consequent projection or a challenged refutation?
> Julia, your nasty comments are the reason I removed myself from this site a few years ago.
> They are not opinions but personal attacks.
> ...




no-one cares


----------



## Julia (8 November 2012)

Doris, your presence on ASF, a stock forum, seemed to be with the sole purpose of posting lengthy testimonials to your adoration of Barack Obama.  Whilst no one would want to deprive you of your worship, it became a bit tiresome after a while.

And sadly, he has not turned out to be the saviour of the US that you would have had people believe.

Good to have something to believe in, however.  I wish you all the best.


----------



## white_goodman (8 November 2012)

Julia said:


> Doris, your presence on ASF, a stock forum, seemed to be with the sole purpose of posting lengthy testimonials to your adoration of Barack Obama.  Whilst no one would want to deprive you of your worship, it became a bit tiresome after a while.
> 
> And sadly, he has not turned out to be the saviour of the US that you would have had people believe.
> 
> Good to have something to believe in, however.  I wish you all the best.




we need a like button on ASF


----------



## basilio (8 November 2012)

Julia said:


> Doris, your presence on ASF, a stock forum, seemed to be with the sole purpose of posting lengthy testimonials to your adoration of Barack Obama.  Whilst no one would want to deprive you of your worship, it became a bit tiresome after a while.
> 
> And sadly, he has not turned out to be the saviour of the US that you would have had people believe.
> 
> Good to have something to believe in, however.  I wish you all the best.




Unnecessarily mean  IMO Julia. Nice touch at teh end but even that seemed patronising..

Honestly,  I think Barack Obama is miles ahead in  terms of intellect, capacity, and integrity compared to anyone the Republicans could throw up.  

However on this forum it doesn't surprise me one iota that the large majority of members see him as a across between Osma Bin Laden and Hitler (to exaggerate ever so slightly).  And as Doris points out having a POV left of Genghis Khan here is attacked so comprehensively you can't feel welcomed.


----------



## prawn_86 (8 November 2012)

Lets keep things civil please with less hyperbole.

Ultimately, this thread is a general chat thread and i cannot remember any post in this thread by the main contributors relating back to Australian stocks and the effect Barack will have.

Further off topic posts or pettiness will be removed and deleted posts infracted


----------



## wayneL (8 November 2012)

Just a view from an American bro:



> Obama wins a second term and the first result is the biggest single day loss, (300+ points down), in the stock market in over a year?????? FAIL
> 
> If you voted for this moron in 2008 to prove you weren't a racist... good for you....... you had a chance to vote for someone else in 2012 to prove you aren't an idiot and you didn't??? FAIL
> 
> God help us all......... in four years the Spam we are all eating will come with duck sauce and a fortune cookie................. FAIL




Disclaimer: I refuse to confirm or deny whether I agree with this. 

But I suspect the next four years will be as disappointing as the last.


----------



## CanOz (8 November 2012)

wayneL said:


> Just a view from an American bro:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Good grief Wayne, has your mate forgot what a complete and utterly incompetent waste of oxygen GWB was? He managed to rack up a massive war bill and supervised a corruption binge by the banks the likes has never been seen before. 

Let face it, in global politics there are hardly any stunning leaders anymore...this, during the times of the most challenging financial circumstances in history when the world truly needs some inspiring leadership.

I think Bart Simpson:bart: would make a better President than either!

CanOz


----------



## wayneL (8 November 2012)

CanOz said:


> Good grief Wayne, has your mate forgot what a complete and utterly incompetent waste of oxygen GWB was? He managed to rack up a massive war bill and supervised a corruption binge by the banks the likes has never been seen before.




I don't know. But I can confirm that *I* haven't forgotten. I was glad to see the scurrying backsides of the neo-cons... even if I wasn't happy to see the advent of "yes we *can't*".

The point is moot, but my hope was that Mitt was a different sort of conservative...

...but Gary Johnson is more my style.



> Let face it, in global politics there are hardly any stunning leaders anymore...this, during the times of the most challenging financial circumstances in history when the world truly needs some inspiring leadership.
> 
> I think Bart Simpson:bart: would make a better President than either!
> 
> CanOz




Reagan was an actor turned politician.

Now we have politicians turned actors.... it"s all @rse about.


----------



## bandicoot76 (8 November 2012)

CanOz said:


> Good grief Wayne, has your mate forgot what a complete and utterly incompetent waste of oxygen GWB was? He managed to rack up a massive war bill and supervised a corruption binge by the banks the likes has never been seen before. CanOz




funny though how obama was elected with a clear mandate (& promised) to go after the corrupt bankers/corporations/financial parasites but (besides the token small fry sacrifice of bernie madoff) FAILED TO DO A DAMN THING, not one corporate pirate did he bring to justice! and to add insult to injury he filled his staff with the very goldman sachs cronies who were up to their eyeballs in engineering the removal of the safeguards (glass/steagal etc) that directly led to the GFC,

 and obama not only continued but increased GWBs warmongering ways, in the process racking up an even bigger national deficit than even dumb-ass dubya did! nothing to be proud of there i'm afraid!

have to say this election was a big lose/lose for the US, with no Ron Paul their only slim hope of salvation was gary johnson. unfortunately i fear more NDAA style legislation on the way for the yanks. then again i guesss the old saying 'you get the politicians you deserve' might ring true in this case.


----------



## CanOz (8 November 2012)

> funny though how obama was elected with a clear mandate (& promised) to go after the corrupt bankers/corporations/financial parasites but (besides the token small fry sacrifice of bernie madoff) FAILED TO DO A DAMN THING, not one corporate pirate did he bring to justice! and to add insult to injury he filled his staff with the very goldman sachs cronies who were up to their eyeballs in engineering the removal of the safeguards (glass/steagal etc) that directly led to the GFC,




Actually there are prosecutions taking place, but no where near what there should be and they're going after the banks that they can accuse of money laundering. So i agree that little was done...expect that it may have something to do with campaign contributions.



> and obama not only continued but increased GWBs warmongering ways, in the process racking up an even bigger national deficit than even dumb-ass dubya did! nothing to be proud of there i'm afraid!




Not sure how you get this? 

CanOz


----------



## Julia (8 November 2012)

basilio said:


> Unnecessarily mean  IMO Julia. Nice touch at teh end but even that seemed patronising..
> 
> Honestly,  I think Barack Obama is miles ahead in  terms of intellect, capacity, and integrity compared to anyone the Republicans could throw up.
> 
> However on this forum it doesn't surprise me one iota that the large majority of members see him as a across between Osma Bin Laden and Hitler (to exaggerate ever so slightly).  And as Doris points out having a POV left of Genghis Khan here is attacked so comprehensively you can't feel welcomed.



You are, of course, completely ignoring any criticism I offered of the Republican candidate.  It only matters to you to sycophantically defend your chosen left bias.

I don't think you were around when Doris inundated the forum with her lengthy missives on the wonders of Barack Obama, a politician who no Australian would be voting for unless they had dual citizenship, whilst making little or no contribution to any other content on ASF.  No law against that, but if some of us found it tedious, we're quite entitled to say so.  Here is just one page of examples amongst many.
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9159&page=24

In the last days I've expressed a preference for Obama, and I'm glad that he won over Romney.  It seems, however, a choice a bit like that presented to us here in Australia, i.e. the lesser of the two undesirable options.

And, before you criticise others for being 'patronising' which is absolutely not the spirit in which I responded to Doris, consider your own paternalistic proselytizing about climate change which you force on the forum ad infinitum.


----------



## Ferret (8 November 2012)

bandicoot76 said:


> and obama not only continued but increased GWBs warmongering ways, in the process racking up an even bigger national deficit than even dumb-ass dubya did! nothing to be proud of there i'm afraid!






CanOz said:


> Not sure how you get this?




Yeah.  GWB or maybe another Republican president would have had the US in both Libya and Syria!


----------



## basilio (9 November 2012)

Julia it's true I havn't followed this thread in much if any detail.  I was mostly responding to what I saw as the dismissal of Doris for her extremely enthusiast support of Barack Obama.  As far as I can see the majority of forum members left have a reflex dismissal of non conservative politicians  -  seemingly on principle.

I get particularly xxxxed off when the criticism is just blitheringly stupid (birthers) racist  or attempting to smear Obama as a Muslim etc.  And frankly it seemed that much of the criticism of President Obama  cited these areas.

My apologies to you as well if I did misconstrue your final comments.  I don't generally see you as mean or petty so if I got it wrong.. sorry.

With regard to my "hobby horse".  Firstly I didn't think this was a forum on CC . Was there a need to drag it in here ? But you have chosen to make it a criticism - my seemingly endless "paternalistic proselytizing" which I force on everyone... so I'll respond

Lets consider another perspective. On this forum I am one of the very few people left who can articulate  and also supports the evidence  presented by the overwhelmingly majority of scientists on this topic.  The consequences of being wrong on CC are the biggest our civilizations will ever face.  But most other other people in ASF who agree the problem is real have stopped beating their heads against the repeated abuse from the usual suspects.

*I've chosen to stay in the conversation.*  Obviously no amount of evidence or analysis is capable of changing the minds of Wayne, or Noco, or White GoodMan or the usual suspects.  So clearly I'm not directly addressing them.

But I'm hoping my contributions can inform other readers who have an open mind, can follow URls and are prepared to learn more on the topic. 

And what is wrong with that ?


----------



## sptrawler (9 November 2012)

Hey Basilio, lets go back to your favourite thread, saving the planet and helping the plebs.
I see today the government wants to roll out 'smart meters' so the plebs can save heaps of money.LOL
That would be, charge heaps of money for working families that cook and watch t.v between 16.00 and 21.00.
What a hoot, another tax on consumption, how can they avoid it. LOl,LOL,LOL
Forget the G.S.T Labor have found new G.S.T by stealth, clever, very clever. LOL,LOL,LOL


----------



## wayneL (9 November 2012)

basilio said:


> Julia it's true I havn't followed this thread in much if any detail.  I was mostly responding to what I saw as the dismissal of Doris for her extremely enthusiast support of Barack Obama.  As far as I can see the majority of forum members left have a reflex dismissal of non conservative politicians  -  seemingly on principle.
> 
> I get particularly xxxxed off when the criticism is just blitheringly stupid (birthers) racist  or attempting to smear Obama as a Muslim etc.  And frankly it seemed that much of the criticism of President Obama  cited these areas.



What an astonishing hypocrisy... again.

You may have had a point if you Trots were'nt guilty of reflex dismissal and disgustingl strawman arguments, but you are guilty of the same; and in greater measure!

Are questions of Obama's legitimacy any worse that the crap being dished out on Abbott?

CC response in appropriate place.


----------



## Julia (9 November 2012)

basilio said:


> Julia it's true I havn't followed this thread in much if any detail.  I was mostly responding to what I saw as the dismissal of Doris for her extremely enthusiast support of Barack Obama.



And that was my point.  Just take ten minutes, go to the beginning of the thread and start reading.  Then you will perhaps get some understanding of what I (and WayneL) have referred to.



> As far as I can see the majority of forum members left have a reflex dismissal of non conservative politicians  -  seemingly on principle.



Certainly there are one or two whose Right bias is seemingly entrenched, but overall my experience of this forum is much more of fair minded individuals who are capable of recognising attributes or disattributes of politicians on all sides.
Dogged insistence that either Right or Left is without fault is imo just silly and doesn't ever serve discussion well.



> I get particularly xxxxed off when the criticism is just blitheringly stupid (birthers) racist  or attempting to smear Obama as a Muslim etc.  And frankly it seemed that much of the criticism of President Obama  cited these areas.



I understand that, but it's not, as a result, reasonable to criticise others because e.g. they see the past four years of Obama's presidency as absolutely not having lived up to all that he promised.  It was this, in particular, that was irritating about Doris's persistent pages and pages of how Obama was going to save not only America but the world.  No individual could live up to the god-like expectations she expressed.



> My apologies to you as well if I did misconstrue your final comments.  I don't generally see you as mean or petty so if I got it wrong.. sorry.



Thank you.  Appreciated.



> With regard to my "hobby horse".  Firstly I didn't think this was a forum on CC . Was there a need to drag it in here ?



Probably not, but it just struck me that what comes across to me as your proselytizing was not dissimilar to the insistence described above by Doris.  You do, however, at least make a contribution in other areas.



> Lets consider another perspective. On this forum I am one of the very few people left who can articulate  and also supports the evidence  presented by the overwhelmingly majority of scientists on this topic.  The consequences of being wrong on CC are the biggest our civilizations will ever face.  But most other other people in ASF who agree the problem is real have stopped beating their heads against the repeated abuse from the usual suspects.
> 
> *I've chosen to stay in the conversation.*  Obviously no amount of evidence or analysis is capable of changing the minds of Wayne, or Noco, or White GoodMan or the usual suspects.  So clearly I'm not directly addressing them.
> 
> ...



You're exercising your capacity for choice which is fine, just as those of us who are best described as agnostic about anthropogenic climate change can exercise ours not to want to read it. I completely respect that you are genuine in your concern.


----------



## Calliope (20 December 2012)

Re the "fiscal cliff";



> Mr Obama said, he and Mr Boehner had moved significantly toward each other before talks reached a lull on Tuesday.
> 
> "*What separates us is probably a few hundred billion dollars*," Mr Obama said. "The idea that we would put our economy at risk because you can't bridge that gap doesn't make a lot of sense'




Chicken feed really.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-...arack-obama-says/story-fngeyb4x-1226540814398


----------



## Aussiejeff (20 December 2012)

Calliope said:


> Re the "fiscal cliff";
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yup. These days, with the world economy surfing along on the crest of a tsunami wave of printed $$$, $Billions, even 100's of $Billions,  are very small change indeed.

I'm sure the Fed and assorted big$hot$ much prefer to bandy about the _main unit_ of monetary policy - the $Trillion..I guess $Quadrillions are just around the corner..


----------



## Calliope (4 January 2013)

Gallup pollsters say Obama is the most popular man in the world and (wait for it) Hillary Clinton is the most popular woman in the world. Who the hell did they ask. Not me. What a dog!


----------



## Knobby22 (4 January 2013)

What about this girl? Would you go out with her? She's a pretty smart law student.


----------



## Calliope (4 January 2013)

Knobby22 said:


> What about this girl? Would you go out with her? She's a pretty smart law student.
> 
> View attachment 50261




There must have been some other reason Bill married her. It certainly wasn't sexual attraction. He wasted no time in getting a  bit on the side to compensate for her lack of attraction for men.


----------



## Julia (4 January 2013)

Calliope said:


> Gallup pollsters say Obama is the most popular man in the world and (wait for it) Hillary Clinton is the most popular woman in the world. Who the hell did they ask. Not me. What a dog!



Why do you always have to be so gratuitously nasty, Calliope?
Are you suggesting we should judge every US Secretary of State on their appearance?


----------



## CanOz (4 January 2013)

Spare a thought for Hillsy, she just got out of the hospital...

I like Hillary, thought she did well to get on with life and make a well respected name for herself...

CanOz


----------



## Julia (4 January 2013)

CanOz said:


> Spare a thought for Hillsy, she just got out of the hospital...
> 
> I like Hillary, thought she did well to get on with life and make a well respected name for herself...
> 
> CanOz



Exactly.  To be as publicly humiliated as she was by her husband's philandering (is that still a word?) and still manage to behave with dignity and courage is a great credit to her imo.


----------



## Garpal Gumnut (4 January 2013)

One of my mates, a tobacconist in Tysons Corner, a suburb of Washington DC tells me that Obama is back on the smokes.

Camel.

gg


----------



## Calliope (4 January 2013)

Julia said:


> Why do you always have to be so gratuitously nasty, Calliope?



 ALways? I think that is a little extreme. Sorry if I upset you. I guess we have different tastes. Or is this just another excuse for you to be gratuitously nasty to me? Never mind, I have learned to be tolerant of my critics and I forgive them and hold no grudges.


----------



## Calliope (24 June 2014)

It is said that both Barack Obama and Bill Clinton hate Hillary and she hates them amd Michelle... but they have to go through the motions.

[video]http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/1/b/2/hillary-obama-kiss.gif[/video]


----------



## Macquack (24 June 2014)

Calliope said:


> There must have been some other reason Bill married her. *It certainly wasn't sexual attraction*. He wasted no time in getting a  bit on the side to compensate for her lack of attraction for men.






Are you gay Calliope, like your brother?

I see a hell of a lot of curves.

If you have a issue with glasses, they can be taken off!


----------



## Calliope (24 June 2014)

Macquack said:


> Are you gay Calliope, like your brother?




Sorry Macquack, can't help you. Try gaymatchmaker.com, they will accomodate you.


----------



## Tisme (19 October 2016)

Something different


----------



## wayneL (20 October 2016)

Tisme said:


> Something different





that just made me feel violently ill


----------



## Tisme (12 January 2017)

> If I had told you eight years ago that America would reverse a great recession, reboot our auto industry, and unleash the longest stretch of job creation in our history… If I had told you that we would open up a new chapter with the Cuban people, shut down Iran’s nuclear weapons program without firing a shot, and take out the mastermind of 9/11… If I had told you that we would win marriage equality, and secure the right to health insurance for another 20 million of our fellow citizens—you might have said our sights were set a little too high.




Not impressed by the social engineering aspect of marriage, otherwise he did inherit a poisoned chalice made ready for him by his predecessor.


----------



## luutzu (12 January 2017)

Tisme said:


> Not impressed by the social engineering aspect of marriage, otherwise he did inherit a poisoned chalice made ready for him by his predecessor.




Beside taking it easy on homosexuals, Obama not only drank the chalice, he went and make a second dose.

Take out bin Laden... that's good, but then how many future bin Ladens has be created with that extra six wars he expand the US into? Funding and training "moderate" rebels... bin Laden was one of those moderates, remember?

Healthcare was written by the insurance companies. They make noises about being forced and all that but beside having to accept people with "pre-condition" like having some other illness not related to the eventual illness, insurers made a killing under ObamaCare. I heard premiums just gone up some 20% last year.

Are there no other alternatives than forcing people to buy health insurance?

GM... he just gave them more money to bail them out. Then return it to them once it's profitable again. Same with Wall St. He actually told the head bankers that he's the only one standing between them and the angry mob... so here's a few trillions.


----------



## noco (12 March 2017)

Is  Obama really a Muslim?



Link did not work..will try for a better one.


----------



## SirRumpole (12 March 2017)

noco said:


> Is  Obama really a Muslim?
> 
> 
> 
> Link did not work..will try for a better one.





Don't bother, it's completely irrelevant.


----------



## noco (12 March 2017)

SirRumpole said:


> Don't bother, it's completely irrelevant.




Well, we will see about that.


----------



## noco (12 March 2017)

I must admit, there is some conflict of interest in whether he was a Christian or a Muslim.....Some say he was a "GREAT PRERENDER" and leaned heavily to the Muslim faith and his back ground would surely indicate it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...rb-shows-deep-ties-to-faith-oreilly-says.html


----------



## luutzu (12 March 2017)

noco said:


> I must admit, there is some conflict of interest in whether he was a Christian or a Muslim.....Some say he was a "GREAT PRERENDER" and leaned heavily to the Muslim faith and his back ground would surely indicate it.
> 
> http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...rb-shows-deep-ties-to-faith-oreilly-says.html




He's a politician in a dominantly Christian society. So of course he's Christian.

His biological father was Kenyan; his mum was a hippy with a PhD; his step father was Indonesia [Malaysian?] Muslim. 

He didn't get religious until after Harvard when he figured that to get a chance in American politics, one have to pretend to be Christian and pious. 

See how Trump and having three marriages and countless extra-marital affairs is now all holy and god-fearing?


----------



## noco (12 March 2017)

luutzu said:


> He's a politician in a dominantly Christian society. So of course he's Christian.
> 
> His biological father was Kenyan; his mum was a hippy with a PhD; his step father was Indonesia [Malaysian?] Muslim.
> 
> ...




At least Trump did have all 3 wives living under the same roof as do Muslim men.


----------



## noco (19 March 2017)

I think VC has opened up a can of worms on Barack Obama.......Is it any wonder the country is in a financial mess.......To convert a country to Socialism you must first destroy the economy...Obama did it just like Rudd/Gillard/Rudd did 2007/2013.


----------



## noco (19 March 2017)

noco said:


> At least Trump did have all 3 wives living under the same roof as do Muslim men.




Just noticed my typo error.......It should have read "At least Trump did NOT have all 3 wives living under the one roof".


----------



## basilio (18 August 2018)

Worth reviving this thread for this story.

When Barack Obama became President he decided that each day he would read and personally respond to 10 letters  (from the  many. many thousands ) sent to him. 
He did it as a conscious effort to stay in touch with the American people. 
But the story is more than just the numbers. well worth reading.


*During his presidency, Barack Obama read 10 letters from members of the public every day. He reveals what they meant to him*
https://www.theguardian.com/books/n...erican-people-shaped-his-presidency-interview


----------



## noirua (9 September 2018)

Is soft-shoe-shuffle Obama doing anything other than reciting history? In his second term he was a-lame-duck-President and somewhat lame duck in his first term. Speaking to get cheered by an audience is easy and preaching like a priest is not impressive, it is about himself, as a failed President presenting himself as a great success?

*'We're supposed to stand up to bullies': Obama delivers stinging rebuke of Trump presidency*
https://www.yahoo.com/news/supposed...inging-rebuke-trump-presidency-174637412.html


----------



## CanOz (9 September 2018)

Interesting to compare Obama to Trump on trumps metrics...why is he a failed president?


----------



## noirua (9 September 2018)

CanOz said:


> Interesting to compare Obama to Trump on trumps metrics...why is he a failed president?




Apart from the commonly known as Obama-Care, what else did he achieve in his first term. As important, what did he achieve in his second term of office as President. Business deals were poor for America, failed on North Korea, was led by the nose on Iran, and floated around the world making himself look good in speeches.


----------



## Tisme (9 September 2018)

noirua said:


> Apart from the commonly known as Obama-Care, what else did he achieve in his first term. As important, what did he achieve in his second term of office as President. Business deals were poor for America, failed on North Korea, was led by the nose on Iran, and floated around the world making himself look good in speeches.




https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/38634360


----------



## CanOz (9 September 2018)

Well Trump is claiming economic triumphs, unemployment rate, equity market rise...etc. That's what I was curious about as that's what Trump is benchmarking...to be clear I'm not partial to one or the other, I just find the usual twisting of facts amusing and was curious of the actual facts...


----------



## bellenuit (10 September 2018)

noirua said:


> Apart from the commonly known as Obama-Care, what else did he achieve in his first term.




Sorry for the formatting, but I can't seem to get rid of the huge borders.


----------



## moXJO (10 September 2018)

bellenuit said:


> Sorry for the formatting, but I can't seem to get rid of the huge borders.
> 
> View attachment 89238



Need to show more history to the left.


----------



## CanOz (10 September 2018)

What are hoping to see there moXJO?


----------



## Darc Knight (10 September 2018)

moXJO said:


> Need to show more history to the left.


----------



## Darc Knight (10 September 2018)

moXJO said:


> Need to show more history to the left.




^ this still makes me laugh. One of your best Mo.
You do realize that the graph was intended to show that the Dow was already strong before Trump.


----------



## moXJO (10 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> ^ this still makes me laugh. One of your best Mo.
> You do realize that the graph was intended to show that the Dow was already strong before Trump.



 Lets see where the chart was. The dow was strong before the gfc as well during bush. 

Obama shored up the banks on a bush recommendation.  Thats what stopped the US from oblivion.

Pretty sure Trump is in new territory. And the business tax cuts had a lot to do with it. Dems predicted the economy would blow up as soon as Trump got in.


----------



## moXJO (10 September 2018)

Darc Knight said:


> ^ this still makes me laugh. One of your best Mo.



I've got years of material


----------



## luutzu (10 September 2018)

moXJO said:


> Need to show more history to the left.




You don't really need to see more to the left to know what an a-hole Obama was from just that chart.

The bank bailout alone was around $3 Trillion. If we include the bail out through quantitative easing... it's in the $10Trillion figure.

Now, if you give any handful of idiots trillions for practically nothing, you can bet your azz their stocks will go higher. 

Did he also bail out the 10M family whose home were under water? No, that'd be moral hazard. 

Then he ramp up two wars in the Middle East to about 7 or 8. Droning everybody. 

Basically, it got so bad for the average American that a lying, racist, incompetent, failing business reality TV star looks like a real deal. 

How in the world does a guy consider himself successful when the country he "lead" for eight years voted for him, a black president in a country that didn't exactly have a clean race record... then switch to someone like Trump?


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

Obama did a great job of showing that any American, can aspire to be something, from memory he tried to do other things but I can't remember them.
Trump has stomped on everyone's toes, is hated and all the media and actors want him out, but he seems to be getting the ball rolling.
Obviously the money is tightening up as the economy picks up, the 'free' money is drying up and the mega rich who would be borrowing it i assume, are getting pizzed off it has been a 10 year gravy train for the rich.
0% interest to buy appreciating assett's, what a hoot, why wouldn't you want that to continue?
To me it just seems the fat cats, are annoyed Trump is derailing the gravy train. Maybe I'm wrong.


----------



## luutzu (10 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Obama did a great job of showing that any American, can aspire to be something, from memory he tried to do other things but I can't remember them.
> Trump has stomped on everyone's toes, is hated and all the media and actors want him out, but he seems to be getting the ball rolling.
> Obviously the money is tightening up as the economy picks up, the 'free' money is drying up and the mega rich who would be borrowing it i assume, are getting pizzed off it has been a 10 year gravy train for the rich.
> 0% interest to buy appreciating assett's, what a hoot, why wouldn't you want that to continue?
> To me it just seems the fat cats, are annoyed Trump is derailing the gravy train. Maybe I'm wrong.




Trump added extra gravy, with sprinkles of truffles on top. 

He even raided the soup kitchen, the pension fund, the welfare office for grannies; ending subsidies to those smarty pants PhD students who like to study and know stuff. 

Hungry kids? Under paid teachers? Sick old grannies? Gotta learn the dignity of work; the freedom of choice between going to bed hungry or waking up hungry; buying stationary for your students from your own meagre paycheck or not give a damn. 

Trump and his admin is quite a piece of work. It's just mind boggling. 

Did you know that Trump's cabinet alone owns about 30% of the country's wealth? Yea, seriously, they're that rich.

His secretary of education owns 10, that's 1 and 0, yachts. No wonder she doesn't see anything wrong with gutting a few bucks from public education and sending it to "charter" schools where if your parents are rich and could afford private tutors, you too can get a leg up in life.


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

luutzu said:


> Did you know that Trump's cabinet alone owns about 30% of the country's wealth? Yea, seriously, they're that rich.
> 
> His secretary of education owns 10, that's 1 and 0, yachts. No wonder she doesn't see anything wrong with gutting a few bucks from public education and sending it to "charter" schools where if your parents are rich and could afford private tutors, you too can get a leg up in life.



Yes well just keep interest rates at 0% and let them own 100%?

How was Obama addressing the issue, did they only make their money in the last 2 years?


----------



## luutzu (10 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes well just keep interest rates at 0% and let them own 100%?
> 
> How was Obama addressing the issue, did they only make their money in the last 2 years?




They made money hand over fist under Obama. Trump just add "incentives" to it.

After the GFC, the fed lower interest rate down to practically zero. Bush Jr. gave the banks about $700B, then another few hundred billions more quietly as the initial bail out. 

Then Obama took over. Called the bankers into his office and told them... this I heard from I think professor Bill Black in the US... anyway, Obama told the banks that he's the only man standing between the peasants and the bankers.

The plebs are really upset at these junk Wall St have been selling; the collapse in the market, i.e. the collapse in pension funds, life's savings; property investment etc.

So what's a great leader of the people to do? He bravely told them to go back to their office and wait for a few more trillions coming their way - for free. And oh, probably followed by "don't do it again". 

The Feds have to print more cash to bail the bankers out. Part of it mean they need to borrow money through issuing bonds. Guess who now have the money to lend back to the gov't? Well, the freaking bankers of course. Would they lend it for free? No freaking way they'd lend it for free.

Then they pat themselves on the back for the great genius of getting free money and relending it to their lender. wtf?

On top of that, the feds and the US treasury also offload the toxic junk that's on the books of the bankers. They further made the US gov't guarantee any default from the selected banks - all the major ones. 

The figure I heard, and I could be wrong because it sounds too ridiculous... is that the bailout to the banks alone comes to about $17 trillion dollars. 

But who knows, maybe he also did a few good things. Small tiny things like a few bucks to provide health insurance for kids in poverty.


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

luutzu said:


> They made money hand over fist under Obama. Trump just add "incentives" to it.
> 
> After the GFC, the fed lower interest rate down to practically zero. Bush Jr. gave the banks about $700B, then another few hundred billions more quietly as the initial bail out.
> 
> ...




So what is the answer, we all know the question, why do the rich get richer.
Just put back huge tax on wealth and give it to the poor?
Then when the poor, get poor again, take it all off the rich and give it to the poor.
Then when the poor get poor again, take it of the rich and give it to the poor again.
I don't know about you, but I have four kids, three are doing fine, one you could give a million dollars to every week and he would still be poor the next week.
Feeling sorry for the poor is fine, it is a great latte conversation for some, to others it is a fact of life and it will never change.


----------



## luutzu (10 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> So what is the answer, we all know the question, why do the rich get richer.
> Just put back huge tax on wealth and give it to the poor?
> Then when the poor, get poor again, take it all off the rich and give it to the poor.
> Then when the poor get poor again, take it of the rich and give it to the poor again.
> ...




Pretty much all the wealth in the world are not "created" by those who have it. I know, it's hard to believe.

So if we want a more equitable, richer society... we ought to stop taking from the poor and hand it over to the rich. Leave the rich alone for all I care. Just don't take money from the plebs and hand it over to the rich.

How are money taken from the poor? First is through labour. Then taxation from bottom up; tax-reduction at the top.

You can see this in how taxes are imposed. Where infrastructures, where subsidies are spent on.

Take income tax... it's taxed to the max. Every last dime. What about capital gains tax? How generous are they? Both are income aren't they? So why is one taxed less while the other taxed more?

Then there's consumption tax. GST, Value added tax in other places. 

There's a flat tax on consumption. Assuming we all consume equally... that mean the poor are taxed a heck of a larger percentage of their asset/income than the richer folks. And if you're rich enough, travel frequent enough... duty free baby. 

Then there's gov't policies regarding education and training; healthcare funding; wage rates; the ease or difficulties in onshoring or offshoring of labour; the ease in hiring and firing of workers. 

So the idea that society is a level playing field where if you work hard you'll make it. If you fail you're just lazy... the statistics doesn't back that up. 

It's not about feeling sorry for the poor or the working class. It's just trying to stop decay and violent revolution. 

When you have too much dead wood, some prick will make good use of it and start something. 

-----------

Don't know about your black sheep so can't comment. But maybe he have great ambition he have yet to channel it to? 

Lao Tzu says, great talent blossom late. Great ships take the longest to be built.


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

luutzu said:


> Pretty much all the wealth in the world are not "created" by those who have it. I know, it's hard to believe.
> 
> So if we want a more equitable, richer society... we ought to stop taking from the poor and hand it over to the rich. Leave the rich alone for all I care. Just don't take money from the plebs and hand it over to the rich.
> 
> ...




Well in Australia, apparently you don't pay tax until about $50,000, below that you get more handouts than you pay.
Maybe best if everyone goes to SE Asia and lives the high life, that is what a lot of the retirees I know are doing.
So obviously there is options.


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

luutzu said:


> Don't know about your black sheep so can't comment. But maybe he have great ambition he have yet to channel it to?
> 
> Lao Tzu says, great talent blossom late. Great ships take the longest to be built.




Yes and BS is easy to produce.


----------



## luutzu (10 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> Yes and BS is easy to produce.




It's not that hard to get a job and be told what to do. 

Most jobs nowadays most anyone could learn in two days. 

So who knows, maybe that son of yours need time to figure out what the heck to do with his life. Doesn't look good but I reckon it beats rushing in head first to get a job and be miserable. 

Just don't give him a million while he's doing it.


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

luutzu said:


> It's not that hard to get a job and be told what to do.
> 
> Most jobs nowadays most anyone could learn in two days.
> 
> ...




He's nearly 40, has a trade, just doesn't like working.
He's figured out what to do with his life, pull on your heartstrings.


----------



## luutzu (10 September 2018)

sptrawler said:


> He's nearly 40, has a trade, just doesn't like working.
> He's figured out what to do with his life, pull on your heartstrings.




So he's an aspiring capitalist? 

Find him a wife, or a husband depends... let the love of his life work it out on him.


----------



## sptrawler (10 September 2018)

luutzu said:


> So he's an aspiring capitalist?
> 
> Find him a wife, or a husband depends... let the love of his life work it out on him.




He gets the girls alright, it just ends up the same, they leave him when they figure out he is lazier than them. 

As long as he leaves me alone and keeps pulling welfare, I'm okay with it, see I do like your attitude. 
I'm just grateful your in there batting for him.


----------



## basilio (31 July 2020)

* Obama hails John Lewis as founding father of ‘fuller, better’ US in eulogy *

Former president called for Americans to fight Trump’s effort to undermine the right to vote in eulogy at congressman’s funeral

.... Obama was one of three former presidents, along with George Bush and Bill Clinton, to deliver remarks. Jimmy Carter, the former president and a Georgia native, who is now too frail to travel, sent a written tribute that was read from the pulpit.

Notably absent was Trump, who refused to attend the services or pay respects to Lewis’s casket as it lay in state in the US Capitol Rotunda earlier in the week. He had clashed with Lewis, once accusing the civil rights leader of being “all talk, talk, talk – no action”.


----------



## basilio (16 August 2020)

Found this you tube clip of President Obamas parting letter to Donald Trump.

Be interesting to see how Trump leaves the White House.


----------



## moXJO (16 August 2020)

Obama is the reason Trump is in the white house. He roasted him during a dinner in front of everyone.

He has since whinged in typical democrat style.


----------



## SirRumpole (16 August 2020)

basilio said:


> Found this you tube clip of President Obamas parting letter to Donald Trump.
> 
> Be interesting to see how Trump leaves the White House.





A very gentlemanly letter. I wonder if the recipient expressed his thanks.


----------



## Knobby22 (16 August 2020)

SirRumpole said:


> A very gentlemanly letter. I wonder if the recipient expressed his thanks.



I would love to see Trumps letter to Biden (assuming he wins.)


----------



## moXJO (16 August 2020)

Knobby22 said:


> I would love to see Trumps letter to Biden (assuming he wins.)



Biden would probably wonder why his shopping list is so abusive.


----------

