Barack Obama Wins Democratic Nomination 1788
An anonymous reader was one of many who noted that Barack Obama has claimed the Democratic nomination having secured enough delegates and super-delegates to claim victory. Of course, technically this assumes that the supers all vote as they say they will and they are free to change their minds. So no doubt we'll continue to hear debate on this subject until either the convention or Hillary steps down.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
However, the counterpoint is that attitudes such as yours result in stagnation. There can be no change if those who would support change abandon their causes.
Even if Obama loses, the attention his campaign has been getting (and will get) will make it that much easier for the next candidate to break through the bigotry.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
He's only 37, is Indian but converted from Hindu to catholic a while back, has run many businesses, was a Congressman and then won a special election to be Governor of Louisiana.
He's younger than Obama, equally not white, and has actually done a thing or two that are worth while.
Frankly, I'd be totally OK with him as President -- then again, I am still trying to figure out if I hate McCain or Obama more.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
McCain: no change
Romney: no change
Huckabee: Had the best 'Obama-like' way of speaking (refreshing after 8 years of Bushisms), but unfortunately was the christian-religion candidate.
Paul: In general, most people can agree with him, but the man couldn't debate his way out of a paper bag. You can have the best ideas in the world, but if you can't convince anyone, then even if elected you won't change a thing.
To be honest, I don't know if Obama will change anything internal to the United States. He IS a Democrat afterall, and we have no reason to expect him to be anything other than a Democrat just as we have no reason to expect McCain to be anything but a Republican.
He will, however, be our best chance to repair our international reputation. That, at least, is something that I can be thankful for even if I disagree with most of his policy.
I just wish that I could vote for him.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:2, Interesting)
What is getting thrown out the window?
Why is leftism bad?
My View:
Obama may be the first presidential candidate I vote for from a major political party. Generally you Democrats and Republicans I don't see enough difference between Republican and Democratic candidates. Party voters still make me sick.
Re:Stands on Linux? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Why should she go away? (Score:3, Interesting)
If Obama has Clinton as a VP candidate, then all those votes reappear. Clinton supporters will vote in order to get Clinton into office in some capacity.
From Clinton's point of view, becoming the vice-president of the United States may be a concession, but it's still a very prestigious position. Moreover, being the first female US vice-president will guarantee her a spot in the history books.
Seems like a mutually beneficial arrangement.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
I believe the USA should be a beacon of hope and civilization, not a crowd of barbarians that so much of the world as been for so long.
That issue alone is enough to decide who I vote for.
Obama doesn't understand anything (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Why should she go away? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
Hmmm. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
The point is that it sucks that the government that we've got isn't as concerned with the citizens as it should be, but unless you've got some brilliant way to change it, we just need to work with what we've got, and make the best of it. Whatever the motivations of the democrats or the republicans are, they do tend to do some things differently, and there's certain areas where the goals of each party might align with my personal goals. What a senator in DC gets out of that whole deal might be completely different from what I get out of it, but that doesn't mean that the end result doesn't affect me and that I can't have an opinion on it.
It might be as simple as drawing up a list of the pros and cons of some of the basic direction that each party can be expected to go in when you see how it might affect you. Because it will affect you. Even if you believe that everyone at the top is motivated purely by greed, their selfishness leads them in different directions from each other, and one of those directions is bound to be more useful to you than the others.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, I'll grant that PNAC's ideas are insane, but they are hardly "fringe." When you get 90% of your program enacted by the executive branch, you aren't on the fringe anymore. They never were really, they've always had powerful friends in both parties. Heck, as I see it, PNAC won two presidential elections and have cowed the Democratic congress enough to basically go along with them ("impeachment is off the table," to quote the Speaker of the House).
Without copying their goals, I'd say any political movement in America would do well to study their strategy and tactics, they've really done well politically and I don't think that their ideas are particularly popular with the electorate. Even if other political movements find PNACs tactics repugnant, they still need to study them to effectively counter them if their opposition decides to use them.
Incidentally, I'm not a fan of Paul because he wants to repeal birthright citizenship, among other things.
Its going to be a landslide FOR Obama (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
I wish that I could agree with you here, but I can't. Of the people I come into contact with who usually vote Democrat and are white (generally labor union types, government union employees and folks on the dole), most are willing to totally ignore the fact that they have the most to gain from Obama winning and yet will vote against him because they're convinced that he will do things like legalize black men raping white women
I realize that the above was something of an overstatement but I guess that I am reacting to the frustration of dealing with how to respond to the sheer hostility towards minorities that I deal with constantly. Example within the past month include:
-A neighbor who refers to the Starlings that live in his eaves as "nigger birds."
-Another neighbor who regaled me with stories of a weekend camping trip with his cop friends that including a fellow camper shouting "white power" as my neighbor arrived.
-A co-worker who said that she voted in the primary for the first time (age 50) so "that we could keep America from being overrun by niggers."
I sincerely wish that I were exaggerating, but, sadly, I'm not. And considering that my conscience and lack of good sense causes me to almost always rebuke people for this sort of thing, I can only wonder what these people say to each other in private.
But maybe it's because I live in the Midwest and people are supposedly more racist here, but my many conversations with people in other parts of the country have done nothing to disabuse me of the notion that this is very widespread.
Great, now I've gone and depressed myself...
I fear the future (Score:0, Interesting)
Also all the new legistlation from our democratic congress (which is by the way the least popular congress in history) is just a giant welfare package under the guise of saving the planet.
I'm all for saving the planet but none of these laws actually do anything to lower the co2 levels to conciderable levels and thats according the EPA. Why not make laws that offer tax breaks as incentives to companys that produce alot of CO2 if they can show they are researching AND implementing cleaner methods. This way we get "green" technology that doesn't need government subsidies and we keep the economy strong. Sadly no one in politics seem to be able to grasp these concepts. Enjoy your jobs while you still have them.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
The republican primaries are about winning states--it's a winner take all for each state. It's a warmup for the election, where it's not a total popular vote that matters, but a state-by-state election. So the person who wins the most big states wins.
The democratic primaries apportion delegates from each state. Obama won the democratic nomination, but if it was done winner-take-all, as the real election is, he would have lost to Hillary, who did much better in key states like Ohio. Polling numbers also show she did better than Obama in Florida and Michigan, which weren't allowed to seat any/all (didn't follow up on how that turned out) of their delegates.
And as is typical, the Democrats picked the person who agreed most with their views. The Republicans picked the person who they thought would be the best candidate. So in essence, the Democrats picked nearly the worst possible candidate offered, while the Republicans picked someone who can actually win a general election. The republicans chose someone who, compared to the other candidates, is more of a centrist and has more of a reputation for working cross-party to get things done, while the democrats chose the most polarizing, and almost the most liberal (Kucinich was a candidate, remember) of their options.
The election itself will be about who can hold and mobilize their base support the best (something the Republicans are very good at, while the Democrats seem to suck at it) and grab the most non-affiliated voters (like me).
Let's see...I have a choice between an Ivy League lawyer, married to another Ivy League lawyer, who basically thinks I'm a depressed, oppressed, poor, and underprivileged person because I don't live on the east coast or the west coast...
Or a geniuine war hero married to a woman who owns a beer distributorship.
Hrm. Yeah.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:2, Interesting)
Go Go 2nd Amendment!
I wonder what Washington and his lot would be labeled if they did the same today as they did in the 1700's. If that happened today would we remember them in 300 years as heroes or terrorists?
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:4, Interesting)
The UK has the same problem -- you can only vote for one party (though there are three main choices, not two). This encourages tactical voting, and minority parties (socialists, nationalists, etc) get ignored. It also means the main parties lose their ideals and converge, so as to appeal to as many people as they can.
A slightly better system, used in the UK for some things (e.g. Scottish/Welsh/Northern Irish/London Assemblies) is to give two choices. Then people can vote first for their ideal candidate and second for a more mainstream party -- if their first choice doesn't get many votes their second choice counts. But the first choice getting some votes scares the mainstream parties
Even better is having many more choices, I think Australia does this.
Re:Why should she go away? (Score:2, Interesting)
Right, principles... My father-in-law (about as close to West Virginia hillbilly as you can get), has already started with the crude Obama jokes. He's standing on his "principles", refusing to vote for Obama because "you can't trust a black man". Obama's comment about guns and religion really set him off, "dumbest goddam thing I ever did hear". Excuse me, you live in the woods, go to church every Sunday, have a cabinet full of guns at home, carry a gun in your truck, and threaten to shoot everybody who crosses you? Truth hurts, I guess.
Re:Why should she go away? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:SecState (Score:2, Interesting)
The real interesting thing will be to see what Bill does on January 21st, 2009. Does he file for divorce? Does she? Etc...
Re:...but Hillary still won't leave. (Score:5, Interesting)
We'll see, of course.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
And how much were you paying for gas 8 years ago?
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
I think we'd see a lot of special interest programs drop of the map because they'd would have to convince the citizens that it's a worthy program as opposed to lobbying government officials. Not to mention I think it would make a lot of people feel like their taxes where actually doing something/going to a good cause as opposed to simply being "taken" by the government for whatever.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Someone help me with this... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
And that is McCain's weak spot. He spent the late 90's and early 2000's building up a GREAT maveric image, heck, John Kerry talked to him about a VP seat in the 2004 election! But since then, McCain has flip flopped on almost every stance he took out of line with the Republican party. Campaign finance reform, Gay marrage, Torture, even the war he has been pretty fishie on.
John McCain from 1999 would have been a great option instead of Bush. John McCain from 2003 would have been a great option instead of Bush. But at this point, he is so manipulated and has gone back on so many of his 'maveric' stances, that he's losing the independant voters and me along with them.
-Rick
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
Missouri and Kansas, where I live, are growing, due to a lower tax structure and fewer restrictions on employers.
Ireland has the lowest corporate taxes in the EU, and also has one of the fastest growth rates.
You're right that corporate taxes are a reality of doing business. And they're a reality of doing business...somewhere else too.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:4, Interesting)
First I didn't say that Obama will be different. What I said is Obama won because he projected himself as something different. And, his past actions do support this to a great extend. Again , Iraq is the best example. From day one he was against it while Hillary and most of the other leaders were supporting it. So there is reason to believe that he would be different.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
The money from Iraq's oil production goes to the provisional government, not to the US. The facts do not square with your theory.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)
I think the final straw for me was when Team of Rivals [amazon.com] came out, and all of the neocon pundits essentially ran a smear campaign... against Lincoln!! The Republicans of today are in name only.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Every once in a while (Score:1, Interesting)
In terms of larger more intrusive government, neither candidate is good. Obama seems to want to intervene in all areas of the economy, whereas McCain only wants to intervene in about half as many, but is intrusive in social issues that Obama is not.
A superannuated grouchy self-described moderate (closet conservative) with questionable associates (DC insiders and lobbyists), and an inexperienced gaffe-prone self-described liberal (closet socialist) with questionable associates (radical racist preachers)?
Is this really the best the US can come up with for presidential candidates?
Election 2008: we are screwed.
Re:Why should she go away? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:4, Interesting)
If Iraq is as important as the government claims it is, then shouldn't they be quite concerned that our national security is basically in the hands of this one company, because without them it's hopeless?
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Apparently war comes with Democrats or Republic (Score:3, Interesting)
Hi. Hate to break this unhappy news to you, but the current government is fundamentally incapable of controlling the country, because it is seen as illegitimate by most of the country. Any government formed under occupation, no matter how many stained thumbs you show off, is going to be seen as thus. No matter how long we stay, that government will fall as soon as we leave. Or it will have to start being very un-Democratic in order to stay in power. Either way, it will be brutal.
Also, this entire Iraqi enterprise has bolstered Iran, and nothing we do before we leave is going to change that either. The government, and especially the army, is closely tied with Iran. The largest political party, SCIRII* was formed by Iraqi exiles living in Iran. Their militia, the Badr Brigade, has effectively transformed itself into the army. It's the same militia, but now wearing uniforms with "official" standing. Remember in that recent farce of a conflict, where the Iraqi Army was trying to push Sadr's militia out, and failed miserably? Remember how they were calling Sadr "Iran-backed" in the stories to help justify the action? Well, he is Iranian backed, but the Prime Minister's party and SCIRII are even more. So in the conflict that comes after we leave, whoever wins, it's a win for Iran.
So while we shouldn't leave instantly, we shouldn't dawdle because there isn't much point. We should start drawing down, over maybe a year, two tops, and dedicate our time remaining to all the public works projects that we have failed to finish. Maybe it'll all be blown up the day after we leave, but maybe we can at least leave a positive last impression on our way out. Sticking around trying to prevent the inevitable is just making things worse.
* Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq, they call themselves something else now, without the scary "Islamic Revolution" part. Must have made the Iranian pedigree too obvious.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:2, Interesting)
Ever heard of preparing for the future? Quality of life could well be worse if a true oil shortage occurs and we haven't prepared for it. We won't prepare for it if our leaders keep enabling our addiction to oil. Heaven forbid we Americans make gradual adjustments now to avoid large ones later.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually the Democrats were the ones to pass a balanced budget under Clinton. With the Republicans in control they got us into a very expensive war we can't possibly pay for. What do you think is going to happen with all that debt? You don't think that's going to force someone, probably a democrat to raise taxes to get us back to some form of fiscal responsibility? Let us also not forget that under Bush the whole department of homeland security was created making government even bigger and costing us even more money so I fail to see how your statement has any modern relevance from that last 20 years.
Prior to Reagan you would have had a point.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:5, Interesting)
$608 billion (+4.5%) - Social Security
$386 billion (+5.2%) - Medicare
$209 billion (+5.6%) - Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP)
$324 billion (+1.8%) - Unemployment/Welfare/Other mandatory spending
$69.3 billion (+0.3%) - Health and Human Services
These add up to nearly $1.6 TRILLION DOLLARS!!! The current Population Clock [census.gov] puts the US population at 304,249,871, and the 2000 Census figures [census.gov] report 105,480,101 households. Doing the math, that's $15,168 dollars per year per household. The 2007 poverty level statistics [census.gov] show that $15,168/yr would exceed the poverty level for many family situations WITHOUT ANYONE IN THE HOUSEHOLD HAVING TO WORK A SINGLE HOUR. It also happens to exceed working all 2080 work hours per week at minimum wage BY $3000/year! ($5.85 * 2080 = $12,168).
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:2, Interesting)
Fixed that for you.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
From his very colorful list of friends (which include admitted terrorists, blatant racists, and corporate criminals) to his generally refuseal to take any leading stand on any divisive issue (he has a strong record of voting "present" in the Ill. legislature) he has made almost every decision based on furthering his political life.
I'm not saying he necessarily agrees with everything Rezco, Wright, Pleger or Ayers say and do, but many of his backers share enough of their values that his association with them was pretty much a prerequsite to his political run in Chicago and he made it quite clear he was more than willing to follow along as long as it was politically useful.
And like any good politician, every time he is caught it is someone elses fault. Such as the Wright fiasco where first, it was the reporters nitpicking selective events, and he was never there. Then when it was revealed that this was not an isolated event but a long history of racist preaching (including the very sermon he took as the title of his book) he began to point at anyone around him to take the blame, including the grandmother who raised him.
All I know is Obama's bus needs some servicing because will all the people he's thrown under it to help further his political goals, the suspension must be shot.
Re:Sorry (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:A small piece of wisdom (Score:5, Interesting)
By all means...provide evidence of political corruption, but when it is just another right wingnut blathering on with racist nonsenes and hate of them socialist Democrats it just highlights your own stupidity. Nevermind that the current Republican party is more like the Soviets they try to equate the Dems to.
To be fair that white guilt crap that says I am supposed to feel bad for racism and slavery that I had absolute nothing to do with is total bullshit too.
Re:The Republican Party is not "conservative". (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:2, Interesting)
You're not a homeowner then? Drowning myself in $140,000 of debt has been the best economic decision of my life. In 3 years the debt will be paid off. I'm not selling this year, or any time soon, so my investment will increase in value. I'm not even sure what I'm gonna' do with the money that I won't be paying in rent from the on.
Home ownership can't be directly compared to the national debt, but it is obviously worthwhile to go into debt sometimes. I think the Bush tax cuts were a good idea that probably had some small effect in helping the economy. The Bush spending has been a problem though. He should have learned to use the veto pen much earlier in the administration.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Sorry (Score:2, Interesting)
Look into how Obama disenfranchised voters and made sure his name was the only name on the ballot in some of his Illinois races.
Then look at all the money he got in the various bribery scandals over the years. Start with the $1million+ "discount" he got on his house.
That's just the tip of the iceberg.
Re:People don't learn from history (Score:3, Interesting)
I would rather have a single program such as this 'safety net' that was fair and across the board and take the hit on productivity than continue to fund an endless stream of hare-brained, feel-good programs that just waste money.