|
Election 2008
With relations between the White House and the Democratic Congress growing more acidic as the presidential election approaches, Mr. Frank, 68 and in his 14th term, has emerged as a key deal-maker, an unlikely bridge between his partys left-wing base and the free-market conservatives in the administration, particularly Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr.
First, as noticed in the LA Times, he may have made a slip in an MSNBC
interview by referring to whom he voted for in the state primary as a "him"
"I just voted, I just voted for him on Tuesday," he said. ...But he was also quoted on AP has having said on CBS's Face the Nation, talking about Hillary Clinton's new tack of suggesting that Obama is losing the White vote: "But I think the one thing that she has to be careful about ... going forward, is that, if she makes the case for herself, which she's completely entitled to do, she has to be really careful that she's not damaging our prospects, the Democratic Party, and our cause, for the fall"This is a more subtle comment, but Edwards' caution clearly implies that Clinton's approach to building up support for her candidacy can hurt the Democrats' chances in November. That can happen either by turning voters away from Obama, or turning voters away from herself, or both. Now, Clinton and her advisers must weigh in advance the potential impact of her words -- she would not say something self-defeating that hurt her chances more than it hurt Obama's, or if it impacted her overall electability.
Senator Edwards must know this -- thus we can infer from his comment
that he believes the impact would be on Obama's support, and as saying
that weakening Obama would weaken the Democratic Party's prospects in
the general election. This would only be the case if Obama were the
Democratic Party's chosen Presidential nominee. By voicing a caution
Edwards is implying not only that he believes this to be so, but that
interfering with it is undesirable: an endorsement.
The policies of this administration have created the greatest income gap
in decades, the largest national debt, the greatest depreciation of home
values in more than 40 years, and much more economic uncertainty. (I
won't even start about the war.) At the same time, the average person's
energy bills have tripled (gas, oil, electricity), the cost of food has
skyrocketed, as has the cost of health care and essentially every other
necessity of life, putting the average middle- and upper-class people in
a total bind, while the richest 1 percent of of our population has seen
the largest increase in personal wealth in our nation's history. (And
no, middle class doesn't refer to those making $200k per year, as last
Wednesday's debate moderators mistakenly said; talk about out of touch!)
Add to the fact that the tax burden has fallen essentially on the middle
class, services they they/we depend on most have been reduced or cut.
Right here in Norfolk, public education funding continues to shrink, so
the children are suffering; property taxes are skyrocketing to make up
the difference; and those same middle-class taxpayers who are
shouldering an disproportionate amount of the cost of the war and
enriching the country's wealthiest people, are scraping together an
extra few hundred dollars here and there to support the public school
system, allegedly one of the foundations of democracy and a truly free,
capitalist economy. Things have never been more upside down.
Ironically, pundits predicted this very scenario in 1999, when the oil
men threw their cowboy hats in the ring for the presidency.
So, while I am not clinging to religion, or loading up a shotgun, I am
bitter! Not un-American, unpatriotic, or anti-religion. It's just time
someone said what is true: The average American has been royally
fleeced these past 8 years. Nothing good happens from complacency.
It's about time people got angry, or bitter. Please, don't vote for the
person you'd most like to have a beer with. Vote for the person who is
most likely to serve the interests of ALL the people of this country,
not just a few. Have a beer with your real friends!
Foreign aid is a meritorious subject, one much neglected in this country,
but with the disasters that he will have to attend to first,
Obama will not have the time or opportunity to make any meaningful changes.
I'm much more interested in how the US Presidential candidates would deal
with the important issues that impact life in *our* country:
pointless unending war, looming economic cataclysm,
trampling of the Constitution, looting of the national wealth,
destruction of the civil service -- these are my important considerations,
not foreign aid.
During his post-Wright speech, he stated that he can not disown
Wright any more that he could disown the black community - a few days ago on
The View television program, he stated that he would have disowned Wright
had he not resigned from the racist church where Obama attended for 20
years.
The President has signaled that he is unhappy with the bill, being
reluctant to sign any "blank check" legislation. Our sources within the
White House tell us that the final decision has not been made yet, but
the President is displeased that an unruly Congress has seen fit to pass
such undisciplined legislation.
The Commander in Chief's gut feeling is that it is the majority party's natural
prerogative to lend its name to such high-profile national recognition.
There is a
real possibility that the seemingly benign legislation will be vetoed
to send a sharp message to an unruly Congress.
Meetings are scheduled, however, with the Vice President and the Texas
lobbying and market research
firm of Apreil and Feule LLC to decide on the prudent way forward.
Come November we can vote for more of same, or we can vote for the other
guy. After eight years, we know all too well what more of same is like.
Personally, I'm ready for something different.
Obama is articulate and talks a good game, but his only track record is his
association with Wright, his racist church and connections with the Nation
of Islam's Louis Farrakhan. Obama meant what he said during one of the
early debates when he slipped and stated that he would invite our
adversaries (Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah?) to the White House for talks - even
though he later spun it. Wright is not a hero! He is a racist pig who Obama
has supported financially and otherwise for 20 years and refuses to disown.
He is Obama's mentor - not my words but Obama's.
Obama is also likely to abandon Israel - after all that's the anti-semitic
trash that he has been listening to at church for 20 years and refuses to
renounce.
Since I know nothing about being Black in America, I wouldn't presume to
be able to meaningfully instruct Obama in counseling Blacks regarding
proper attitude. Also, mandatory reconciliation is an odd notion,
not likely to be taken seriously.
Out of the remaining candidates, one aims to continue the policies of
Bush/Cheney, another has steered a politically expedient course and went
along with Bush/Cheney. My top candidates did not make it to the final
cull, but nevertheless I don't see the remaining contenders as
interchangeable.
And that is the issue at hand.
The issue at hand, however, is Obama - not Clinton, Cheney or Bush. While we
will live with their legacy for a long time to come; they will soon be
history.
The conversation on race that Obama and his racist allies wish to have
consists of blacks talking about past atrocities and how that gives them the
right to make hate-riddled racist statements while others must site quietly
and take the abuse. No, no, no - if Obama truly wishes to move our country
beyond race he must acknowledge not only that these criminal acts happened
against blacks and the offenders were white, but he must likewise insist
that for the good of our country; blacks move beyond the legitimate anger
and hate that these acts caused. He has thus demonstrated no desire to do
that - which is further proof of his bad judgment.
A quote from the first Baron Acton (1834-1902).
The historian and moralist, who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887:An example of that was seen in the news recently, when an ABC News reporter interviewed Vice President Cheney, who is said to be very arrogant for an elected representative of the people: RADDATZ: "Let me go back to the Americans. Two-thirds of Americans say it's not worth fighting, and they're looking at the value gain versus the cost in American lives, certainly, and Iraqi lives."More...
For information, American casualties as of 3/21, 10 AM EDT were:
Operation Iraqi Freedom: Total Deaths: 3891. Wounded in Action, returned to duty: 16,281. WIA, not RTD: 13,170. Operation Enduring Freedom: (Afghanistan): Total Deaths: 483. WIA, RTD: 742. WIA, not RTD: 1156. (Ref URL [defenselink.mil pdf])
The war in Iraq has cost $505,103,680,000. to date, (3/23, 10 PM), money
which should be spent here at home on schools and all of the other
things which are being shortchanged. The cost is $341 Million per day.
(Ref URL
[link])
All of these figures are simply a snapshot in time, as the casualties
continue every day, and the monetary costs continue every day.
I've still got a closet full of Army uniforms, everything from fatigues
to dress blues, even though I'll never wear them again. I hate to see
what Bush and Cheney are doing to the services, especially to the Army
that I served in.
Also, something I hadn't come across before: Wright served six years in
the military, both the Marines and the Navy. A hero of our nation, no less!
Indeed it will, but then we may never again find such things out.
If the new administration follows existing precedent, the vice
president will issue the invitations and will absolutely refuse
under executive privilege to release the guest list.
However, civic figures and African heads of state don't rank
very high in US politics. Given the current geopolitics,
it will most likely once again be oil industry lobbyists,
fine-tuning the country's energy policy.
(1) Remain for 20 years in an anti-white, racist church that plans to bestow
a lifetime achievement award on Louis Farrakhan, the anti-white and Jewish
leader, of the Nation of Islam.
(2) Use the title of a sermon from his racist pastor, Jeremiah Wright, as
the title of his book.
(3) Use the words "typical white person" disparagingly in referring to his
grandmother, who raised him and ensured he got a great education.
(3) Pull US troops out of Iraq as fast as possible so the price of oil
doubles - then send them back in after al-Qaeda regains a strongholds
(Mistakes made by the Bush administration aside and stipulated).
It will be interesting to see who Obama has as guests in the White House if
he is elected: Jeremiah Wright, Louis Farrakhan, Muammar Gaddafi?
After all, Wright did go with Farrakhan to Libya to meet with Gaddafi (or
perhaps they will just continue the good guy - bad guy routine).
It seems that Obama's associations indicate that he is a typical black
nationalist in sheep's clothes; which means redistribution of wealth and
accepting black racists' comments and hostilities against whites as simply
the truth and acceptable because of past pain inflicted on blacks
historically. Obama will surely look after the needs of blacks - but thus
far has demonstrated little sensitivity to the feelings of whites who are
offended by the statements of his mentors.
[related National Review article] [Update 9:10pm: Obama's name was inadvertently mis-spelled, corrected - Wm.] "I must say, I'm a little envious," Bush said. "If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed." [It seems his own efforts at helping a democracy when he himself was younger left a lasting, if remarkable, impression... :-) - Wm.]
The "surge," primarily an arming and paying the Sunni insurgents so they
won't shoot at US troops, is keeping the carnage at bay for the moment,
but none of the underlying political dynamics have changed. The US is
still the only authority in Iraq that matters, and all the Iraqis know
this. The various groups are biding their time, waiting for the US to
leave to fight for their place in the power hierarchy.
Of course, "Iraq posed an imminent, urgent, and immediate threat to the
United States, its people, allies, and interests."
Oh, and I lucked into a terrific investment bargain! I just put down a
deposit on a primary thoroughfare spanning a river in a major East Coast
metropolis.
Ms. Obama recently stated that she is proud of her country for the 1st time
in her life (now that her husband has been anointed by the masses). Obama
spinsters later interpreted what she meant - even though her statement is on
video and the meaning clear. The Obamas' Pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright; is
clearly an anti-white racist who call's for God to Damn America. The Obamas
attended his church, Trinity United Church of Christ; on Chicago's south
side for almost 20 years and Barack has called Wright his spiritual mentor.
Three observations: (1) One does not sit in the midst of any gathering for
20 years and not internalize such racial hatred.
(2) One can not distance oneself from this sort of
racist after having a 20 year relationship with the institution and the man.
(3) Wright appears to be another Louis Farrakhan but
uses Jesus instead of Mohamed as a cover to spew his
hatred.
Questions: (1) Is Obama a wolf in sheep's clothing?
(2) Could you vote for someone who financially supported a
racist for 20 years; and as a public figure would not
condemn the racist for his hate inspired words?
(3) Was Obama in church during these speeches... similar
speeches?
Recommend: Google the man (Wright), his church and watch/listen to the
videos - recorded by his church members - watch the joy throughout the
congregation as he spews his racial hatred against whites. Notice how he
slams the Clinton's - even after all the tireless work they have done for
minorities over the years - Bill even apologized on behalf of America for
slavery while he was president.
Link:
[abc news story]
PS: The tax exempt status of his church should be revoked as it has crossed
the line from a religious organization to a political one and all such video
and audio tapes should be confiscated now as evidence to support same.
Please pass on this very important information.
Happy St Patrick's Day!
A recap, perhaps?
Fallon gained notoriety by strongly opposing a military buildup in the
Persian Gulf for the purpose of threatening Iran, and by conducting his
own independent fact-finding mission in Iraq concluding that a sharp
draw-down of troops was warranted. He also caused a stir with his
deep-seated and vocal dislike of General Petraeus, in part for the
latter's insistence on focusing troops in Iraq when they were more
urgently needed in Afghanistan and on the Pakistan border. Fallon was
known to be against any further military adventures while the armed
forces are so severely strained by the two on-going wars, and has been
quoted as saying that an attack on Iran "will not happen on my watch."
[read more]
Well, his watch is over, time for the show. It may have been the public
policy dispute on Iraq, of course. Or perhaps a nice little
election-year extravaganza, complete with fireworks, smoke and mirrors
-- a rerun, but a popular one. Stay tuned.
It worked for Slick Willie, it can work for you.
However, I find the high road discourse of Obama equally troubling. His
platitudes are a type of Orwellian Newspeak meant to obscure a very
liberal agenda. At least locally, Deval's "Together We Can" has run
into a legislature grounded in fiscal discipline. I'm not so sure that
will be the case at the federal level with a Democrat in the White
House. At least in McCain, there is a long standing record of his
disdain for pork barrel spending. Do you want to keep some change in
your pocket or vote for "Change" only to fund the next round of Democrat
Dreams the scope of which has not been seen since the Johnson
Administration?
Odd, all this political correctness in pushing for "balance" in the news.
Call me a contrarian, but I want my news to be accurate and complete, not
"balanced." I will temper the facts with my own judgement, thank you.
And Rush... ahh, Rush. I listened to Rush a bit back in 94, until one day I
found him bravely spouting forth on something he clearly didn't understand.
He apologized the next day. Well, apologized for not knowing what he was
talking about, but not taking the next logical step and admitting he was
wrong...
``My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts.''
Rush is an icon; icons aren't wrong if they don't care to be. I expect Rush
has never been wrong afterward, either, and I'm confident that he has
successfully evaded confusion as well :-)
The language that Hillary uses is terrible in this e-mail but everyone should read what the real Hillary is all about. I am just passing it on.
Keith Oberman is the biggest fib teller I have ever listened to. MSNBC
is the lowest rated network on cable for a reason. I can't speak for
Rush, because I don't listen to him. It is proven by 2 separate
non-profit organizations that FOX is the most balanced news outlet
today. And the Factor is the highest rated show on cable for years. I
know many of independents and conservative democrats that watch him on a
regular basis. He truthful and he tell's it like it is, no spin. He is a
true traditionalist and I admire him.
Then again, I am not for socialized healthcare and cradle to grave
government.
1/24 10:14am Don't know the first one; the second would be... umm, this week? Ever since the US presence in Iraq collapsed the Iraqi government and enabled terrorists to enter and find haven in the country, the US has been under fairly steady attack from terrorists.
Oil industry analysts estimate that the tensions in the Middle East have
added $20 to the price of a barrel of crude oil, which results in higher
heating oil prices, higher gasoline prices ...and higher oil industry
profits.
A former oil industry executive, driving up oil industry profits. What
an amazing coincidence.
There are so many kooks in the media spewing their ideas that some folks
actually believe the wild ideas of people like Rush Limbaugh, Bill
O'Reilly, and Bill Krystal. Fox News, or Fox Noise as some call it, is
the outlet favored by the Bush administration, and as such has become
neoconservative and untrustworthy.
An opposing outlet, MSNBC, has commentators like Keith Olbermann, who
tend to support the Democratic party and a more realistic way of
examining the issues. The ploy of "signing statements", appended by the
administration's lawyers to bills passed by the Congress and waiting
signature by the president, are often unconstitutional because the
administration notes that the proposed laws will not be enforced. The
reason given often is that the "powers of the executive" are being
encroached upon by the proposed law. Thus the president picks and
chooses what he will enforce. These instances and many other will have
to be reversed by the Congress and a Democratic president.
I, too, disagree with the economic stimulus package (approved with
bipartisan support in the House, mind you) but for opposite reasons. It
is patronizing to hand people a few hundred dollars so they can buy a
DVD player made in China, or pay their oil bill and ensure Exxon
continues to make "corporate history by booking $11.7 billion in
quarterly profit; earns $1,300 a second in 2007 (see
[CNN article])!
Putting two- or three- weeks worth of grocery money into one pocket
while the cost of health care, oil, groceries, property taxes, and
everything else is hemorrhaging money out of their other pocket is a
total scam. (Also, the non-taxpayers are people who make too little to
pay taxes, not tax-evaders.) It's insulting, and it's anything but
socialist.
How horrifying!
1) John F. Kennedy in 1960 (47 years ago)
He is the only practicing Roman Catholic to be elected President.
Events during his administration include the Bay of Pigs Invasion, the Cuban
Missile Crisis, the building of the Berlin Wall, and early events of the
Vietnam War.
2) September 11, 2001
PS: President Clinton and Sen. Obama have both admitted to experimenting
with drugs as well.
[Update 1/29 10:16am: The link works from a Google search page, but not when clicked here; I've made a local copy until I can locate a working version - Wm.]
I find it ironic that Obama is so clean they've resorted to making stuff
up. Couldn't they dig up something worse than calling his cricism of her
vote on the Iraq war ("poor judgement") a personal attack? $1 trillion
in cost, nothing to show for it -- what else is that but poor judgement.
Now, here's another little question: when will the US elect the
first president who's a former cocaine user? Only two guesses --
the first one and the correct one.
1) When was the last time a U.S. Senator was elected president without
having first been vice-president?
2) When was the last time the United States was successfully attacked by
terrorists?
I'm glad you don't dispute the essence of my remarks:
that the institutional changes the Bush administration is making to our
government's structure are fundamentally un-American, and that the
systematic dismantling of checks-and-balances and undoing legal protections
undoes what made our nation historically unique.
As to your specific points --
There is a difference between government harassment being illegal and just
not wide-spread. I agree it's not wide-spread, but surveillance and
detentions have been made subjective,
secret, and not subject to legal oversight. Without a rigid legal framework,
the only protections left are old-guard bureaucrats nearing retirement
who still hold principle above political expediency.
It wasn't Rove's philosophy, but his tactics and end-goals that were
questioned. Democracy is not a slogan, but a way of life. From all
indications, Rove is not a believer in democracy, but in single-party
rule.
And finally, opportunistic corruption, even if endemic, is not equivalent to
systematic limits on access.
Communism as practiced in Eastern Europe, with which I have more than a
passing familiarity, was a system with a unitary executive, and the ruling
party
enjoying a permanent majority in the legislature. The courts were staffed
by hand-picked loyal party members, and access to the system was controlled
by powerful quid-pro-quo network not unlike the K Street Project. Domestic
surveillance was wide-spread, national identity papers were mandatory, and
police checkpoints were commonplace. All to better protect the
citizenry from the nation's enemies, of course.
Thinking back over the headlines of the past eight years, it's startling
how ordinary, even sought-after, these abhorrent anti-freedom concepts have
become. One might have thought that all American organizations
would struggle against the very concept. It is sad irony that it was
the supposedly freedom-loving conservative political party that re-discovered
and is instituting these radical instruments of control and oppression.
Then again, maybe Karl Rove wouldn't have found Communism all that bad.
Very effective at what it did -- making the ruling elite richer.
The new Red party -- not your father's riff-raff.
Come election time, be careful what you wish for, you might get it.
The line between liberty and tyranny is a subtle one.
#1 - I can't believe for a second that Roger Clemens had
no knowledge his close friend (and former team-mate) Andy Pettitte was using
HGH.
#2 - How can we expect Hillary to run our country when she can hardly
control her spouse?
your community, on-line |