I was no Clinton supporter. I was and still am a huge support of Obama, but for different reasons than most here. I never viewed him as a one-man progressive revolution. As a matter of fact, I never viewed him any more progressive or liberal than Hillary Clinton. the only thing that seperated them for me was that he had the better judgement on the war than she did, and thus I trust his judgement more. I would've absolutely voted for her if she were the nominee because either Presidency would probably be just as progressive, which is to say not very unless the public begins to rally around progressive ideals on national security, foriegn policy and social issues.
It seems to me that the kossacks built Obama up to be something he's not AND NEVER CLAIMED TO BE because he was the anti-Clinton. He was never the anti-Clinton. He was the future Clinton. Despite my sig line, I now realize the party is and will be defined by the Clintons until the public soundly rejects conservative principles by voting out of office moderate Democrats in moderate districts. Maryland-4 doesn't impress me. Elect a Donna Edwards-type of Congressman in South Bend, Indiana or Fayetteville, North Carolina or Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and I will be convinced the public is looking for progressives and not a different type of Republican.
What Obama is doing is exactly what Clinton supporters hoped he would. He is avoiding the fate of Dukakis and McGovern. In the process he may end up like Kerry or Gore. It is becoming increasingly clear why Democrats cannot win elections. They either have the please their base or please the rest of the country and either way they lose.
yeah, I'll agree with the diarist to an extent. For me the real eye-opener this week was the seeding of the attacks on John McCain's military record. As mad as I was at Geraldine Ferraro, I have forgiven her for pushing insidious memes. Presidential politics is ugly ugly ugly. It is what it is. There are no saints running for the office. If anything, I'm glad Obama can play at this level -- not that any one should be surprised. Anyone who can beat a Clinton has to have all the clubs in his bag. we've just seen more of them this week.
Leave Geraldine alone. Every single thing she said was true. Every single word.
The majority of Illinois Democratic delegation voted against the war. Here is the list that voted against the war:
Sen Dick Durbin- Rep Jerry Costello- Rep Danny Davis- Rep Lane Evans- Rep Luis Gutierrez Rep Jesse Jackson, Jr- Rep Bill Lipinski- Sen Bobby Rush- Rep Jan Schakowsky
Only 3 members of Illinois Democratic delegation voted for the Iraq war resolution. Sen. Obama was getting ready to run for the US Senate and it was politically very important for him to get the support of majority of the delegation.
I am not trying to find fault with Sen. Obama.He is no idealist. He is a skilled politician and makes the right moves. We want a winning candidate against McCain not another loser.
and if not for a wife-beating scandal, Illinois' junior Senator would be Senator Blair Hull, Hillary Clinton would've been the Democratic nominee for President in February, and Barack Obama would be a name only known in Chicago.
You can say that, but the fact remains that, in his speech against the war in 2003, he described to an exact T exactly why the war would be a disaster. John McCain doesn't even know the difference between a Sunni and a Shia. At the time of that Senate election, vast majorities in the country supported the war. I think all elected officials who took a stand against it should be respected for that. Even if you are right, I'd take any politician who voted against war for political expediency over a politician who voted FOR war for political expediency.
Even if you are right, I'd take any politician who voted against war for political expediency over a politician who voted FOR war for political expediency.
Assuming, of course, that the politician who voted against war has other qualities to recommend him/her-- like being good at the job.
Being against the war for the right reasons is a good start.
What Obama is doing is exactly what Clinton supporters hoped he would
Right you are! The irony is that Hillary supporters are likely to prefer him more now, that he has shown he's not drinking his own Kool Aid and is a realpolitic politician.
If they can forget the whole the calling the Clintons racists who were no better than Bush thing....
just the supporters who misrepresented him badly and are not burning him at the stake.
He said it just not in words.
Talking about racial elements in the campaign
Standing behind people who called for katrina tears as a sign of non racism and the lack of them as a sign of racism.
Make no mistake he said it.
unless you can point out specific references to calling the Clintons racist, you have no credibility here. You are grasping at straws.
I can grasp at straws too, I just won't.
