WE Blog

They encouraged politics as usual. They probably don’t even recognize how stupid it made them look.

Philadelphia paper backs Obama
http://tinyurl.com/3u5awg

I found the comments to this article interesting.

I largely stopped watching televised news after the farce coverage in the 2004 election. I tuned into the first Democratic debate where BS questions about racism and other non-issues were being asked about.

Why would the media want to focus on the issues? Goodness, we may have an informed electorate who might actually demand change from their government. Let me guess about the coverage though, hardly any news about McCain’s FEC violations, his disdain for veterans, his weak performance on environmental issues, his incompetent economic policy and his worthless position on the mortgage issue.

What is being covered, I’m assuming, is the media blowing out of proportion any photo-ops about Obama’s former minister, his bowling score, what Clinton is wearing, something involving Monica Lewinsky, and Obama’s skin color.

chuckle…. It wasn’t the moderators who were bad.

Listen to the reich-wing . . .

Yeah, baby, McSame has some fresh ideas for turning things around.

For instance . . . and then there’s . . . but not only that, he’d . . . uh . . .

Kitty = Troll

The Democratic candidates were robbed of a chance to discuss their “differences” in regards to policy thanks to ABC’s focus on gaffes and non-issues.

If Obama and Hillary actually had any substantive differences, this “despicable performance” by ABC would be something more then a yawner.

Maybe the two candidates should go back to their bunker and figure out what it is they differ on. The only bombs that have been lobbyied in recent memory by both campaigns are those of:

“snipergate” and “bittergate” and so on.

What else do you expect the moderators to talk about if such trivial issues are the only things the campaigns themselves are talking about?

Outie and germ don’t like the democratic candidates? Why, I never would have expected that!

Capn

And Obamassiah DOES HAVE fresh ideas?

Yeah.

Tax the rich, feed the poor.

The Democrats came into this Presidential cycle in a cant-lose position.

Now they are stuck with two disciples of Saul Alinsky as the last two candidates vying for the nomination.

Screw the middle-of-the-road, let McCain have them.

lindainks55
Posted April 17, 2008 at 12:27 pm | Permalink
Even with the handicap of silly questions from sillier moderators last night’s debate showed both the candidates of the Democratic Party to have superior ideas, solutions and policies to those of McCain.
___________________________________
Linda I am very serious is asking you to list a few of those ’superior ideas’. I must have missed those.

I especially loved Obama when he responded after Hillary said she would talk with her military leaders and Sec. of Def. and he said he wouldn’t. When asked why he said ‘because the Commander and Chief is in charge’. Sounded a little arrogant and reminded me of all of the griping the demos have done about Bush when he made decisions they didn’t like and he did meet with his commanders.

Could be interesting.

Yes ksgrm, with Obama having 3 years experience in the Senate, he is no doubt a Defense Expert and doesn’t need to be advised.

:roll:

Obama is a danger to the American way of life with his Liberal Progress “feel good” policies.

Let’s do stuff without thinking about consequences is the interpretation of his “Change” politics.

“Let’s do stuff without thinking about consequences”

Like invading and occupying countries?

“Yes ksgrm, with Obama having 3 years experience in the Senate, he is no doubt a Defense Expert and doesn’t need to be advised. ”

About 3 more years experience the W had coming into the job. No, bad example, that one didn’t work out too well. But this comment is rich coming from this blogs expert on everything.

GHW Bush had a wealth of experience, but was a very weak president. What experience can prepare one to be POTUS? No other job in the world like it. Pick someone who will listen to the experts, and not go will some hardline party rethoric.

Libdave that is precisely why I had considered voting for Obama. After looking at his record and listening to him talk I fail to see where he will be an improvement. He is arrogant and has no desire to listen to others according to him. He will be the commander and chief. Case closed.

I have always thought that the very best managers hired the smartest staff they could then got out of the way so they could do their job. A micro manager only creates chaos. He sounds as if he is one of these.

It’s pretty easy for me, ksgrm.

I can’t find any discernible differences between McCain and bushco. I think electing McCain would give us four more years of bushco.

Several posters have asked anyone to say where McCain would be different than bush. So far, no one has pointed anything out. The most I’ve read is that in the opinion of some he would be better than either candidate who may be the nominee of the Democratic Party.

That’s an honest assessment for those who think that way. I am not one of them.

I don’t need to go into the many reasons I think we need change. We live in the same world so it ought to be easy for you to decide whether you think things are going pretty good and continuing on the same path is acceptable, or not.

I’ll take a chance on someone new. I think things are that bad under bushco and would remain that bad under McCain. Plus, I think either Senator Clinton or Barack Obama will nominate Supreme Court Justices that are closer to my political philosophy. Not to mention judges at several other levels who the next POTUS will appoint.

And, I think the Democratic Party will widen the majority in both the House and Senate in this fall’s elections, so even if McCain is elected every Republican will still have someone other than the pres. to blame.

If I had been smart I would have used a few words too. I wasn’t. Well said, Ben.

ABC is a loser at most things it tries to do.

Funny that a thread about last night’s debate ends up discussing McCain and Bush. Is that an indication nothing worth talking about came out of the debate.

Linda and Ben well said. I am not a McCain fan and certainly have my problems with Bush. The appointment of judges will be a very big issue of course. McCain has the same take on the economy as Hillary on many things. One thing in his favor is his displeasure and his promise to veto ear marks. That will go a long way to stopping the out of control spending in Washington. I do think that if McCain is elected we need a demo controlled house and/or senate. Not an election I am looking forward to but as much as I hate to say it I would rather see Hillary in the White House than Obama because of what my research on him has dug up.

I posted this on another thread and I think goes to your question about his “relationship with Ayers.” This is what Obama said last night:

“So this kind of game,” Obama said last night, “in which anybody who I know, regardless of how flimsy the relationship is, that somehow their ideas could be attributed to me. I think the American people are smarter than that.”

It is a game, isn’t it? If we give attention to the insignificant while ignoring what really needs attention, aren’t we complicit in the game? I think we are. I’m really sick of politics as usual, of the accusations of character faults, of all things negative about campaigning. The game of politics hasn’t gotten us anywhere we want to be.

If you can find credible evidence that the “relationship” is more than this link shows I will be happy to read it and rethink my current opinion.
http://tinyurl.com/4b64hm

I’m really into being treated as an adult by a candidate for POTUS. I like that he wants to partner with Americans to make improvements. I think we can be smarter and make a difference.

MP – Nathan’s response was typical for those who excuse THIS:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/34030.html

WASHINGTON — The Bush administration doesn’t have a comprehensive strategy for eliminating Osama bin Laden’s sanctuary in Pakistan’s tribal region and preventing the region from being used for launching terrorist attacks on the United States, the investigative arm of Congress said Thursday.

President Bush and his senior lieutenants frequently claim that eradicating the threat that bin Laden’s al Qaida terrorist network poses to United States and its allies is their top national-security priority.

But in a scathing report, the Government Accountability Office said there was no plan that “includes all elements of national power — diplomatic, military, intelligence, development assistance, economic and law enforcement support — called for by the various national-security strategies and Congress.”

“One thing in his favor is his displeasure and his promise to veto ear marks.”

The other thing is that although irritating, earmarks don’t really push the budget up that much, at least not in percentage terms.

What we spend a ton of money on is the military budget.

HALF of the budget goes to current and past military spending.

That makes sense when one considers that military spending is just another way of saying “big tax payer funded transfers of wealth to filthy, stinking rich people” like Dick Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton.

“Tax the rich, feed the poor.”

Exactly. And ya better hope it happens.

Elsewise the poor eventually take matters into their own hands…

And all that entails.

“Aren’t we sick of all the diviseness and hatred?”

Not me Capn. I hate Republicans. And it will be time for the divisiveness and hatred to end when THEY plead for it. We don’t need to.

We need to stand up and swing back. What the heck is the matter with some of you?

I agree that we need to get rid of earmarks, though there are something that are just to big and costly for locals to do or afford. Earmarks or used to simply buy votes and are not serving the true purpose of the Federal Government. Capt it really does not matter how much or little something cost that is not needed.
When it is YOU whom is paying for it.

The debate did have its’s problems.

Charlie Gibson is CLEARLY a Republican. Going on about decreased capital gains taxes increasing revenue and generally attacking both candidates.

In fact, ABC has shown a decided right wing slide the last several years. They are also the network that employs John Stossel! He’s as shilly as any of the cranks on FOX “news”. This debate was the first program I’ve watched on that network since the 911 blame Clinton movie.

Yeah CF.

I HEARD stephy in his interview with Hannity last week.

Hannity suggested the Ayers question. To which Stephy replied ( I am NOT kidding)

“Yeah Sean I’m taking notes as you speak.”

J R–

I hear you, man, and part of me agrees.

I want to crush the snot ‘Puke CONs just like they have done to us over the years–the Clinton witch-hunts, the stolen elections, the fired prosecutors who wouldn’t do Bush’s bidding, the refusal to develop alternative energy, the big pay-outs to the already filthy rich.

But where I part company is how to crush them. When I campaigned door-to-door, I met a heckofa lot of people who said, “I’ve always been a Republican, but I just can’t stand what Bush is doing.”

Those are the people we need to build a coalition to govern this country.

You can win with persuasion as well as brute power. The CONs choose power.

How’s that working out for them? A clear majority hate them.

We need to be better than that, if for no other reason than it works better to get what we want.

BTW, in the Spring of 1993, an Air Force General stationed in Europe said something to the effect on record that “Bill Clinton isn’t my Commander-in-Chief.”

BillyJeff’s response was to let the Air Force handle it.

This was a mistake.

He should have busted that SOB down to buck private and had him peeling potatoes in the mess hall.

Clinton’s mistake was he was too nice. Some people only respect the pain you can inflict on them.

Truman knew how to handle military prima-donnas.

Did he say he wouldn’t ask for advice?

I don’t really have a problem with Obama knowing and living in the same neighborhood as William Ayers.

Anybody who does needs to explain to me why this is a problem while I show them a pic of bush holding hands with that Saudi sheik.

OR they could explain away how the whole bin Laden family was air whisked outta the country after 911 when no one else could fly.

But politically it IS a problem. There will be people who will have a problem with it. That is why it is bad that it and the other discoveries come out this late.

It is not fair that the shine is a little duller on Obama only just now.

One wonders if John Edwards might have fared better.

And the Commander in Chief thing?

Obama’s take is essentially correct.

His explanation was flawed and did come off as arrogant. Kinda like “I’m the deciderer.” For his sake, I wish he had played that better.

Obama supporters?

I know you get impatient with me. But this is NOT a pillow fight. Obama NEEDS to be treated like a candidate NOW. It’s good for him.

I even heard today how he said something about he’d be ready to go at the Republicans if they came at him. THAT’S progress.

“The Joint Chiefs of Staff have already said that a two rapid withdrawal from Iraq would negate all of the gains we have made and it would turn into chaos rapidly.”

Obama has stated that he would withdraw from Iraq, a brigade at a time, over 16-24 months, depending on troop levels when he takes office.

Given that we are in the SIXTH year of war, two years certainly does not sound like a “rapid withdrawal.

linda I sat on this for a month.

Word to the wise to you Obama supporters.

Support him by better defining him NOW.

You know where I stand. I won’t bring the negatives here. But IF Obama is to be the Dem nominee YOU should define him and not let John McCain and the right wing attack machine do it.

Remember what they did to Kerry and Gore?

“But where I part company is how to crush them. When I campaigned door-to-door, I met a heckofa lot of people who said, “I’ve always been a Republican, but I just can’t stand what Bush is doing.”

Those are the people we need to build a coalition to govern this country.

You can win with persuasion as well as brute power. The CONs choose power.

How’s that working out for them? A clear majority hate them.

We need to be better than that, if for no other reason than it works better to get what we want.

Forgive me Capn. But to me that is just naive.

You know how the cons operate. They DON’T compromise. It aint in them.

“Working with them” the first thing they will want to know is what we will give up.

And they’ll make sure we give whatever it is up. (Trust but verify)

Then, because they are so astonished at the compromise, they’ll ask for another just to be sure it isn’t some sort of trick.

And so it will go.

And after we have compromised who knows how much, they might MIGHT give a little.

I cite this forum as evidence of con behavior study. That and I used to be one of them.

THEY are the ones who should be scared just now after all they have done. Let’s make them come hat in hand.

Linda I have to go but one place to start might be in something that Hillary said last night. I believe it was the Woods Institute that they set on a board together. Obama has said that when running for the Illinois senate he talked to Ayers about it. I heard him say this. He also said because their kids were in the same school and because of this and the fact that they lived in the same neighborhood that they have socalized together.

I have no links on these. You can probably find some on YouTube. So much going around and being said that it is not always recorded.

Shoot!

made should be mad.

Of course she wasn’t! IOKIYAR!

THE FACTS:

Ayers was part of the Weather Underground, a radical group that claimed credit for explosions at the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and more. Originally known as the Weathermen, the group took its name from a Bob Dylan lyric: “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.”

In 1970, a bomb the group was making — to use against an Army base — exploded at a New York town house, killing three members. Ayers fled and spent years as a fugitive. He met and married fellow fugitive Bernadine Dohrn during that period.

The two surfaced in 1980. Ayers had been charged with various offenses stemming from demonstrations in Chicago in 1969, but those charges had been dismissed for prosecutorial misconduct. He never faced any charges related to the town house explosion. Dohrn pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated battery and two counts of bail-jumping in connection with a 1969 anti-war protest.

Ayers now teaches at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and Dohrn heads the Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University. Ayers has advised Chicago Mayor Richard Daley on education issues.

Ayers and Obama both served on the board of directors of the Woods Fund, a Chicago-based charity that focuses on developing community groups to assist the poor. A variety of business executives, journalists and academics serve on the board.

When Obama was organizing his first race for the state legislature, the incumbent lawmaker he hoped to replace introduced him to her supporters and urged them to back Obama. One introductory event took place at the home of Ayers and Dohrn.

Ayers contributed $200 to Obama’s legislative campaign in 2001, but there is no other sign that he has actively aided Obama’s political career.

During Wednesday’s debate, Obama argued that if the candidates are to be held responsible for distant connections to the Weather Underground, then Clinton would fail, too. He pointed out that her husband, just before leaving the White House, commuted the sentences of two members of the group who had been convicted of weapons and explosives charges.

http://tinyurl.com/4b64hm

“Ayers now teaches at the University of Illinois at Chicago.” Completely off topic, I admit, but did you know that if your kid is admitted to pre-med at The U of I Chicago, they guarentee, that your kid will be admitted to their medical school. I have a friend who teaches in the psych dept there and it is a very good school.

Now, back to your regular postings…

Come on and answer, we already know its you.

Hillary got this point right:

http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/04/abc-news-was-loser-at-debate/#comment-333024

I don’t believe that my grandfather or my father, or the many people whom I have had the privilege of knowing and meeting across Pennsylvania over many years, cling to religion when Washington is not listening to them. I think that is a fundamental, sort of, misunderstanding of the role of religion and faith in times that are good and times that are bad.

And I similarly don’t think that people cling to their traditions, like hunting and guns, either when they are frustrated with the government. I just don’t believe that’s how people live their lives.

Now, that doesn’t mean that people are not frustrated with the government. We have every reason to be frustrated, particularly with this administration.

But I can see why people would be taken aback and offended by the remarks.

Clinton got this right too:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/the_pennsylvania_democratic_de.html

But I have to say that, you know, for Pastor Wright to have given his first sermon after 9/11 and to have blamed the United States for the attack, which happened in my city of New York, would have been intolerable for me. And therefore I would have not been able to stay in the church, and maybe it’s, you know, just, again, a personal reflection that regardless of whatever good is going on — and I have no reason to doubt that a lot of good things were happening in that church — you get to choose your pastor. You don’t choose your family, but you get to choose your pastor. And when asked a direct question, I said I would not have stayed in the church.

Another big hit by Clinton:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/the_pennsylvania_democratic_de.html

SENATOR CLINTON: Well, I think, in addition to the questions about Reverend Wright and what he said and when he said it, and for whatever reason he might have said these things, there were so many different variations on the explanations that we heard. And it is something that I think deserves further exploration, because clearly what we’ve got to figure out is how we’re going to bring people together in a way that overcomes the anger, overcomes the divisiveness and whatever bitterness there may be out there.

It is clear that, as leaders, we have a choice who we associate with and who we apparently give some kind of seal of approval to. And I think that it wasn’t only the specific remarks, but some of the relationships with Reverend Farrakhan, with giving the church bulletin over to the leader of Hamas to put a message in. You know, these are problems, and they raise questions in people’s minds.

And so this is a legitimate area, as everything is when we run for office, for people to be exploring and trying to find answers.

President McCain bit the head off a live snake today to prove that his fortitude is as worthy of terrorism of other nations.

“I will make Countries quake with nuclear bombs if they mess with me” he said, with snake guts and blood frothing from his mouth”. He then turned and slapped his wife, per requirement now by a new law instituted by the president last June that says anytime a man feels aggressive, they must also put a woman in their place.

Meanwhile, China, Iran, Australia, Russia, South America, Canada and all of Europe signed into an agreement to put sanctions on the USA in retribution for the United States’ continued aggression toward other countries. “I believe we’ve sent a clear message to the USA that their jobs are here, and now they can’t receive any oil nor supplies”.

Pat Robertson, James Dobson told the news today that they support McCain’s war against the world in a statement that “Jesus gave us a revelation that this is the end times and armageddon has begun. It is time to drop the bombs. Those countries (that signed the pact] against us will see the fire and brimstone that is predicted in the bible”.
_________________

ANOTHER HIT by Clinton!

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/the_pennsylvania_democratic_de.html

SEN. CLINTON: Well, I think that is a fair general statement, but I also believe that Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position.

And if I’m not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn’t done more. And what they did was set bombs and in some instances people died.

You’re foaming at the mouth Max. I dont think anyone is even reading.

Who sucks is you “max”

Get out of our nomination process you brown suck up. Go support your own doddering candidate.

Should be brown nose suck up.

What followed Gibson’s questions was an entire series of LIES from both Obama and Clinton:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/the_pennsylvania_democratic_de.html

MR. GIBSON: Back to the Philadelphia Debate, the Democratic Debate, just less than a week now before the Pennsylvania primary.

And I would be remiss tonight if I didn’t take note of the fact that today is the one-year anniversary of Virginia Tech. And I think it’s fair to say that probably every American during this day, at one point or another, said a small prayer for the great people at that university and for those who died.

It also, I suspect, makes this an appropriate time to talk about guns. And it has not been talked about much in this campaign and it’s an important issue in the state of Pennsylvania.

Both of you, in the past, have supported strong gun control measures. But now when I listen to you on the campaign, I hear you emphasizing that you believe in an individual’s right to bear arms.

Both of you were strong advocates for licensing of guns. Both of you were strong advocates for the registration of guns.

Why don’t you emphasize that now, Senator Clinton?

Why are you opposed to registration there “Max”?

Own some stolen weapons do you?

Maybe you in your zeal violated the Assault weapons ban and you know it is coming back.

Use your damn gun on your boss and grow a pair.

Asked and answered JR. We’ve covered the gun registration issue several times.

There is ZERO benefit to gun registration. Why do you support it? To make it easier for the Government to confiscate weapons, that’s why you support it.

Thanks KSgrm, but I just posted the words of Obama and Clinton.

In black and white, their words look very ugly indeed. (Listen to the Libs growl and scratch their claws.)

Not so much like a starving dog with a bone, as a Truth Detector going blind reading the Obama/Clinton transcript.

The Constitution was written before the internet, blogs, TV, telephones…etc…etc…

I suppose free speech only applies to those things which were available at the time the 1st Amendment was written.

Max is deluded, he posts scroll-over posts, to consider him otherwise is to make him have much more power than he should have… The man, if he is that, is absolutely NUTS. Thank you, good night…

Speech is a bit different from firearms.

But I do not expect cons to understand that.

They talk with their guns. Likely they talk TO their guns.

I guess I have much more power then I should have!

Looks like Max is clinging like crazy to his guns and god, and still hates anybody he sees as inferior!! Especially Democrats and Liberals, and maybe black and female candidates for President.

Max – Get rid of that delusionaal kool aid, before you hurt somebody or something!!

Good God! Hadn’t seen the debate when it aired, so I’m listening to it on Youtube.

It was far worse than I imagined. Absolute obsession with the trivial.