Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Actually, the lessons of Carter are that the economy is incredibly important, image matters a lot in modern politics and that Republicans are willing to do anything, including make deals with America's enemies, to gain and retain power.
he's just stroking your liberalism to get you to vote for him with sweet nothings he knows you love
This is different from Clinton how?
Personally, I don't think either is doing that and I think that they'll both manage to get quite a bit accomplished. I just happen to think Obama will be slightly better at it.
So if Obama is the nominee in the Fall, will you still vote for him? Or only if Clinton is the VP? Hell, why not make Bill the VP? Hillary could do that too if she got the nomination.
Do you think Carter was a snake oil salesman, too? I always thought he was naive and love dovey;
Of course he was a snake oil salesman. I'm back to my "wake up, people" feeling. Do you honestly believe that you can become the governor of Georgia and then the president of the united states by being lovey-dovey? Why would a peanut farmer suddenly decide to run for political office? Where did this idea come from, just for fun? Carter was not a shoe-in, he came out of nowhere in the primaries, he had to struggle to win, why would someone do all that, if not for a lust of power? Sigh.
the Obama you describe in your post is anything but lovey dovey. He's a shrewd politician, calculated, and a little evil. And since it's obviously impossible to bring American's together, what does it matter if Obama doesn't accomplish it?
Because if he's making huge, ridiculous promises his butt can't cash, he will be a one-termer just like Carter, and the Repugs will be back in power. Is that what you want? Remember what happened last time with that, with Reagan & Bush I?
Isn't it good that he's actually a Washington insider who is ambitious to be president? Don't you think that will mean he will do whatever it takes to get his policies pushed through?
See, that's where I think Clinton will be more skilled, in actually being president, making legislation happen, fixing things, running things, doing the grunt work. Making shit happen. He's great at talking, but his record of accomplishments... not so hot. Why is that? Because he's been running for president his whole life, he's been too busy to make any landmark legislation.
Because he's been running for president his whole life, he's been too busy to make any landmark legislation.
And Clinton's been... what? Married to a politician? What Landmark Legislation has she created?
Because you don't like him. That's it. And that's fine. I learned in first grade that sometimes a person just rubs you the wrong way. It doesn't mean their a bad person (except sometimes when it does) or that you're a bad person (except sometimes when you are); you just don't get along. It's like how I feel about Michael Moore. Sure, he's right about shit, but dang it, I still secretly HATE him for it. I would punch him in the gut if I could.
And as for him going by Barry; I'm sure that's something his friends use. You're obviously not his friend.
I don't understand why some of the Broadsheet feminists, whose posts I've read for years and always agreed with, are so vehemently anti-Obama. It's weird. Look, I'm sorry Clinton actually has to run for the nomination and that you're disappointed, but you're not winning any friends by writing these type of posts.
Obama is a better speaker and is a Constitutional Law Scholar.
So this is why you're voting for him over clinton? To me, those are not good reasons, esp. considering Clinton is also a lawyer.
Will I vote for OBama? No, I can't vote for someone who I think is so fake, and who made so many ridiculous promises he knew would never come true to rally some gullible fools into voting for him. He's a very smart man, hopefully he doesn't believe his own ridiculous hype about how he will heal the country and make us love each, because if he actually does believe that, then he definitely needs to be kept away from the presidency.
You didn't answer my question as to why you're supporting Obama over Clinton. Try again.
At this point I am rooting for Obama because I do NOT want to see a brokered convention and I don't see Clinton winning the thing outright. So I hope Obama closes the deal in Texas, Ohio, PA.
To the Obama-mites: Save up your vacation time and get thee to your local election committee, and prepare to walk the polls. Buy a good pair of sturdy shoes. If Obama runs in the general the level of attempted electoral fraud is going to make Florida and Ohio look like patty-cake.
The advice: I caught part of Obama's speech from Houston. He was promising the moon. Methinks I'll invest in green cheese as a hedge against the coming recession.
So you like McCain then? Interesting. You're looking to jump over the supposed "Carteresque" stage and jump feet first back into the disaster of "Reaganesque".
Obama's never promised to "make us love each other". You're moving a long way from being "the only sane one".
So this is why you're voting for him over clinton? To me, those are not good reasons, esp. considering Clinton is also a lawyer
Like I said, it was a close choice. Close enough that speaking ability alone is enough. Clinton is also a lawyer, but she's not as experienced as Obama.
And as I've said repeatedly, whichever one wins the nomination, I'll be voting for them in the fall because 4 more years of Bush is too terrible to think about. And that's what you're voting for with McCain or even just by staying home.
While I have no desire to step into the back-and-forth going on here, I am still human enough to be fascinated by a bad wreck on the highway, so have been reading, and just found one comment of yours very interesting, namely that "...Bush's misdeeds are on the same level as Nixon's..."
I think perhaps reversing that emphasis might serve the facts better. What I mean is that Nixon's misdeeds might be better compared unfavorably to Bush's than the other way around, as Nixon did, at least, in his madness and brilliance (as compared with Bush's arrogance and stupidity) accomplish a few good things while in office, and it was his madness, his paranoid personality, which was his undoing, not trying to prove something to his dad.
As Nixon's craziness became more apparent he was still functioning. I don't think Dubya is anything more than an arrogant, ignorant son of privilege who has used us and the rest of the world to further a totally personal agenda. I'd have more sympathy for him were he totally nuts and brilliant, the two things which defined Nixon.
I know, it's all in the past, but history is at least interesting if not especially helpful.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Salon headlines in your mailbox
