Candidate File: Obama, Barack H.

So you prefer him to stick to his word on something he made a mistake on? You must be a big Bush fan.
 
Exhumed said:
So you prefer him to stick to his word on something he made a mistake on? You must be a big Bush fan.
Click to expand...

So he is either incredibly naive and ignorant or just a liar(again) and a hyocrite(again), depening on the path he chooses. Regardless, neither one is becoming of a would-be-president.
 
I would call it a rather minor mistake as it probably was not foremost on his mind. Now he is correcting it to avoid technical loopholes and give the same result he intended.
 
Exhumed said:
I would call it a rather minor mistake as it probably was not foremost on his mind. Now he is correcting it to avoid technical loopholes and give the same result he intended.
Click to expand...

Lieing about a promise to the american public during an election cycle is not a "minor mistake". Put the crayons down.
 
So you'd prefer he kept his word to the letter to result in something contrary to the purpose of his word? :thumbsup:
 
Gee... All this attention on Obama, If only you looked as closely at bush and Halliburton, and Cheney and Enron, and all the other shit thats probably still going on...

Poor America, being ripped off and never knowing it.
 
Note when the Canada-Obama-NAFTA story actually occured...

Note when the media unleashes a full blitz of it, on the eve of voting day...

This is like a repeat of New Hampshire, last minute negative press on Obama before he has a chance to resolve. Seriously, I saw -zero- coverage on TV media about the Canada story, but yesterday they all go hardcore at it. Likewise for the Rezko trial, though not as much. Rezko is a very old story, and they knew his trial date would be soon--nothing that they focused intensely on yesterday was new, or anything besides a barrage of negative press.
 
Here is some starting material for the Obama detractors who make the claim he has no substance because they haven't had the media show them substance in the form of a two-second buzz line.

Obama's economic approach by Noam Scheiber, "The Audacity of Data":
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.ht...9-94bc9d19be1a

50 pages from Obama's website about his economic plans,
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/ec...as_Promise.pdf

Some 11 pages on energy I expect to go unread,
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pd...yFactSheet.pdf

Same for these 8 pages on the environment,
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/pd...tFactSheet.pdf
 
Boo hoo, Obama might not be the next president. At least with Obama I could hope the he might might try something new in trade policy and foreign policy.

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
Benjamin Franklin

Until Hillary tells me how she differs from Bill, I am going to assume that a vote for Hillary is a vote to return to Bill Clinton's policies. Many people say, "I am voting Hillary because the economy was better under Bill Clinton". That was the business cycle and the tech boom that made the economy better under Bill Clinton. Clinton did not do that. Clinton's trade policy showed a complete lack of understanding of America's most basic long term problem.

Clinton get's points for the balanced budget, but that won't be so easy to do without the capital gains tax revenues from the tech boom.
 
Poor America, being ripped off and never knowing it.
Click to expand...

Oh we know about it that's why we try to elect people that won't do worse to us rather than someone who will try to rob from the citizens even more.:mad:
 
Ten reasons ....

Source: The Progressive
Link: http://www.progressive.org/mag_wx030508
Title: "Ten Reasons Obama Slipped", by Matthew Rothschild
Date: March 5, 2008

I'm of a divided mind on the significance of Hillary Clinton's wins in the Texas and Ohio primaries. All in all, she played well in two states where she was expected to play well. And perhaps the strongest indicator is that she was not, heading into Tuesday, so far behind in the race that her supporters would throw in the towel and jump on the Obama bandwagon.

Nonetheless, some have pointed out that Hillary's poll numbers dwindled in the days prior to voting in these stronghold states. But the magnitude of the growing Obama wave was not sufficient to carry the cycle. Matthew Rothschild offers some analysis of why:

1. NAFTA Flap

When Obama’s leading economic adviser, Austan Goolsbee, met with a Canadian official and allegedly told him that Obama’s stated views on NAFTA during the campaign amounted to “political posturing,” this was a huge blunder ....

.... 2. Rezko

It certainly didn’t help the Obama campaign that Tony Rezko’s trial began on Monday. The Rezko story has been lying around like a pulled hand grenade next to Obama’s headquarters for months now ....

.... 3. A Blunder in the Last Debate

The Clinton camp wisely picked up on an Obama error in the Cleveland debate .... He all but admitted he shirked his duties to run for President! Clinton used this footage of Obama’s answer in an effective ad against him in the final week ....

.... 4. The Red Phone Ad

Negative advertising often works. That’s why we see it so much. And the “red phone” ad, I’m betting, did a lot to sow doubts in voters’ minds. Clinton almost split the male vote in Ohio and Texas, which is a huge switch for her. This ad helped position her as the “tough” candidate ....

(Rothschild)
Click to expand...

Rothschild provides ten points in all, hence the title of his article. It's superficial analysis inasmuch as I tend to think anything fit for general consumption these days is superficial. Well, that and each point only warrants a few sentences of analysis. But there is something of the tactical, strategic, popular, and psychological in there; it's broad enough to demand some legitimacy, though I confess I don't know yet how much.
 
I'm anxious about how effective the smear-tactics will be from here forward. If the far right most fears Obama most, and considers Hillary more beatable and/or manageable- now is the time for them to pull out all the stops.
 
Looks like Samantha Power has resigned from advising Obama. Over something as small as calling Hillary "a monster".

Power's apology came shortly after the The Scotsman newspaper published an article in which she makes the characterization (a comment she immediately tried to retract), and suggested the New York senator is trying to deceive voters.

"She is a monster, too – that is off the record – she is stooping to anything," Power was quoted as saying.

"You just look at her and think, 'Ergh,' " Power also said. "But if you are poor and she is telling you some story about how Obama is going to take your job away, maybe it will be more effective. The amount of deceit she has put forward is really unattractive."

...

The interview came the same day a top Clinton adviser compared Obama's recent actions to independent prosecutor Kenneth Starr, who prosecuted the Clintons while Bill Clinton was in the White House in the 1990s.

...

On a Friday morning conference call with reporters, the Clinton campaign called on Obama to end Power's role with the campaign.
Click to expand...

Aw. :(
 
Has anyone else heard how there was also a report from the Canadians that Hillary's campaign contacted them to tell them to take the NAFTA talk with a grain of salt... yet only Obama gets roasted for it, and on the eve of a big voting day. NAFTA is said to be important for Philadelphia too, I wonder if there will even be a peep about the Clinton campaign's "grain of salt" comment.
 
Can anyone verify for me if it is illegal for a foreign citizen to donate to Barack's campaign? I know a Canadian who wants to, but he thinks it is illegal, and the Obama website only seems to have American donation forms available.
 
According to the FEC, it's been banned since 1966 by the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Foreign nationals who don't hold green cards may not donate to campaign funds.

That only applies to the campaign funds, which are pretty strictly regulated by McCain-Feingold among other laws. But they can take out TV ads, contribute to 527 organizations (like MoveOn.org), and do anything else not directly connected to the campaign. There are various bits in the law trying to prevent that money from working its way into the actual campaign coffers.​

Not the most reputable source, but this seems right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top