Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Read Robert Samuelson's article in Newsweek and stop deluding yourselves about Obama being an agent of change. Karl Rove must be laughing his a** off right about now.
So you like McCain then?
No, fuck no. I won't vote for anyone. My state will go Democrat no matter what, so my vote would be purely symbolic. If I lived somewhere where it mattered, I would probably force myself to vote for OBama because I certainly don't want McCain.
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.
What? I know this is not going to make a bit of difference to you, but Hillary has far more experience practicing and teaching law than Obama. She taught law in Arkansas, she became a partner at a law firm, she worked in Congress, she was a staff attorney for the children's defense fund.
You know why it won't make a bit of difference to me? Because there's not a hell of a lot of difference between them. Because I'm voting for whichever is the nominee even though my state will also go Democratic no matter what. Why stay home and disenfranchise yourself? Why take the chance?
I think Obama will have a better shot at getting things done, you think Clinton will, neither of us really know. No-one does.
Swallow your pride, get out there and vote, engage in Democracy. If you really, really can't bring yourself to vote for a Democrat, skip the Presidential line and vote Dem down the rest of the line. Write-in Hillary for all I care. If you want to see any candidate be able to provide change, they need support at all levels.
From Samuelson's article:
Political candidates routinely indulge in exaggeration, pandering, inconsistency and self-serving obscuration. Clinton and McCain do. The reason for holding Obama to a higher standard is that it's his standard and also his campaign's central theme. He has run on the vague promise of "change," but on issue after issue—immigration, the economy, global warming—he has offered boilerplate policies that evade the underlying causes of the stalemates. These issues remain contentious because they involve real conflicts or differences of opinion.
The contrast between his broad rhetoric and his narrow agenda is stark, and yet the media—preoccupied with the political "horse race"—have treated his invocation of "change" as a serious idea rather than a shallow campaign slogan. He seems to have hypnotized much of the media and the public with his eloquence and the symbolism of his life story. The result is a mass delusion that Obama is forthrightly engaging the nation's major problems when, so far, he isn't.
and from The Root:
http://www.theroot.com/id/44630
. . . In Obama's corporate-sponsored universe of meaning, however, hope is not the predicate for radical social change, but an empty slogan that allows for a slick repackaging of the status quo.
Obama has clung to a rigid centrism that is incompatible with full-scale social change. Despite his claims of being a peace candidate, Obama has repeatedly expressed a commitment to ramping up military and continuing the presidential legacy of using war as an instrument of foreign policy. Although he opposes the war in Iraq, Obama refuses to vote against its funding.
While Obama supports health care for all Americans, he does not embrace a universal single-payer system that would effectively undermine private corporate interests . . . In addition, Obama has been conspicuously silent on topics such as the prison industrial complex, the Zionist occupation of Palestine, and the economic underdevelopment of Africa.
Why stay home and disenfranchise yourself? Why take the chance?
I think Obama will have a better shot at getting things done, you think Clinton will, neither of us really know. No-one does.
Swallow your pride, get out there and vote, engage in Democracy.
Oh, I'll go vote, I've voted in every election I could vote in.
If you really, really can't bring yourself to vote for a Democrat, skip the Presidential line and vote Dem down the rest of the line.
Absolutely not. That is just mindless and disnefranchises others who vote for better reasons than mere party affiliation.
Sorry, I'm trying to work and give you a very detailed reason why I'm supporting Obama. Though, to be honest, I'll support Clinton if she gets the Nom. It's just not that deep for me; Just as long as it's a Democrat.
First, I want to preface everything I say with the following:
1) I was completely undecided up until the day of the primary. I watched some of the debates and thought Clinton came out better; I liked the clips I saw of Obama's speeches, I guess, but fiery speeches remind me too much of church.
2) I read through Obama's website liked how in depth he went into the issues. I liked his Fiscal Plan (pay as you go), his Immigration Plan (provide citizenship for immigrant soldiers which I like.) Not new ideas, but so what. Nothing is ever new, in my opinion.
3) I liked Clinton's plans too, though, I couldn't really see much of a difference between them. Finally, down to the wire, I had to do a web test and figure out which one I agreed more with; It was Obama by 4 percent, so I voted for him.
To be honest, I've never actually listened to one of his speeches all of the way through, so for me, it has less to do with inspiring rhetoric and drinking the kool-aid. I like his policies; the same as I like Clinton's.
I say I'm a supporter, but it's really just that I voted for him. I decided at the beginning of this race I wouldn't campaign for anyone until they got the nomination; I respect and admire both of them. I'm sorry if that offends you Le Castor, but it's the truth.
"Obama has been conspicuously silent on topics such as the prison industrial complex, the Zionist occupation of Palestine, and the economic underdevelopment of Africa." Yes, these are winning issues for anyone .. on Neptune, perhaps. Here on our planet, anyone even mentioning this stuff in those terms would carry the black population of Berkeley, Calif., and nothing else. Come on. As for Samuelson, he's a GOP hack from way back. Bottom line: half the country hates Hillary Clinton and will NEVER vote for her. Obama will crush McCain in the fall. End of story. If you don't care, fine.
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
