US 2008 Presidential Campaign Thread - Part 2

[MrsSpringsteen]

Iowa's butter cow lady backs Obama

Democrat Barack Obama won over Iowa's butter cow lady.

Norma "Duffy" Lyon, known for carving life-sized cows from butter for 46 years at the Iowa State Fair, said she's backing Obama because he "doesn't believe in a lot of gobbly-gook" and spends time listening to ordinary voters.

The Obama campaign began airing radio ads Wednesday in which Lyon praises the Illinois senator.

In addition to cows, Lyon has carved butter sculptures of Elvis, John Wayne, a Harley-Davidson motorcycle and Leonardo da Vinci's "The Last Supper." The state fair is a must-visit for presidential candidates, and many hopefuls get their photos taken while gazing at the carvings in a huge refrigerated case.

"It's the first time I've done this," said Lyon, who retired last year. "He's my candidate and I want to see him do well."

Lyon, who raises dairy cows and beef cattle with her husband near Tama, made her endorsement a week after Obama offered a rural plan that would aid smaller farms, expand the renewable fuels industry and establish incentives for organic production.

In the ad, Lyon said that approach appealed to her.

"He wants to hear from the people," Lyon said in an interview.

[coemgen]

That should seal the deal.

[MrsSpringsteen]

Haha, I love Google

[LarryMullen's POPAngel]

Moo.

[phillyfan26]

Now if he just gets the salt and corn ladies, we can make a lot of popcorn for Obama's campaign.

[A_Wanderer]

During the Republican debate, Mike Huckabee said he believes one of the defining issues facing the country is the sanctity of human life. Arguing that the issue is of historical importance, he invoked the Declaration of Independence's rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and said that most of the signers of the declaration were clergymen.

Not even close.

Only one of the 56 was an active clergyman, and that was John Witherspoon. Witherspoon was a Presbyterian minister and president of the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University).

A few more of the signers were former clergymen, though it's a little unclear just how many. The conservative Heritage Foundation said two other signers were former clergymen. The religion web site Adherents.com said four signers of the declaration were current or former full-time preachers. But everyone agrees only Witherspoon was an active minister when he signed the Declaration of Independence.

One issue that may contribute to the confusion about which signers had a history in the clergy is that during the time the Declaration was written, people who studied at universities often received doctorates of divinity, a common degree designation, even if they were not working clergy, said Mary Jenkins of the Independence National Historical Park. As for religious affiliations, all of the signers were Protestant Christians with one exception, Charles Carroll of Maryland, who was Roman Catholic.

We'd like to give Huckabee every benefit of the doubt, but even if you consider former clergymen among the signers the best you could come up with is four. Out of 56. That's not "most," that's Pants-on-Fire wrong.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/137/

[Moonlit_Angel]

*Reads that story about that Iowa lady*

*Shakes head, chuckles* Ah, god love Iowans (is a former Iowan) .

I'm not gonna be going for any of the Republican candidates. I love Ron Paul's position on the "war on terror", but from what I've heard, I'd disagree with him on a lot of other issues, so he's out (and his position on the war on terror already likely counts him out as being the one to win the nomination anyway, 'cause he's kinda in a minority with his thoughts there). And the rest just really scare me.

And then the Democrats-right now Obama's about the only one I could vote for. Otherwise, I'll probably be looking at going independent and voting for someone like Kucinich.

Angela

[phillyfan26]

Kucinich has the best stances, it's a damn shame he won't get the nomination.

[martha]

More people vote for him, the better his chances.

[coemgen]

Originally posted by diamond
coemgen has a problem/fixation with a candidate who believes in Mormonism.

dbs

And the fact that he's as smart as Bush.

[maycocksean]

Originally posted by coemgen


And the fact that he's as smart as Bush.

Yes. . .I find him scary for that reason.

[verte76]

Originally posted by phillyfan26
Kucinich has the best stances, it's a damn shame he won't get the nomination.

I agree. I like him, too. I like his position on health care. I'm for universal health coverage.

[unico]

Originally posted by martha
More people vote for him, the better his chances.

[MrsSpringsteen]

WASHINGTON — In response to an uproar from gay activists, Democrat Barack Obama's presidential campaign on Wednesday added a gay minister to the lineup for its weekend gospel tour.

Gay activists had criticized Obama's "Embrace the Change" tour in South Carolina because the performers included gospel singer Donnie McClurkin, who says homosexuality is a choice.

Obama's campaign invited Rev. Andy Sidden, a South Carolina pastor who is openly gay, to appear on Sunday in Columbia. Obama discussed Sidden's inclusion Thursday with Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, which supports gay rights.

In a statement, Solmonese said he thanked Obama for including Sidden but told the Illinois senator he was disappointed McClurkin will remain part of the program.

"There is no gospel in Donnie McClurkin's message for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people and their allies," Solmonese said. "That's a message that certainly doesn't belong on any presidential candidate's stage."

McClurkin is a Grammy Award winner who performed at the Republican National Convention in 2004. He told AP Radio in an interview that September that he was "once involved with those desires and those thoughts," but God turned him away from them.

Obama has spoken out against homophobia, including in the black community. He supports civil unions for same-sex couples but not the right for gay marriage.

[unico]

Regardless of however Obama decides to sell himself to win the vote of the LGBTQ community, he has explicitly stated that he thinks marriage is only between a man and a woman.

Therefore, he does not believe in true equality.

[MrsSpringsteen]

The following piece was produced by the Huffington Post's OffTheBus project.

The leadership of the major presidential campaigns is dominated by men, with the Democratic campaigns slightly more balanced than Republicans.

An analysis of recently released federal disclosure documents reveals that while women make up 40% of overall staff, they hold 32% of the 88 senior positions among the top eight national campaigns. Click here to see the numbers, broken down by campaign.

Power is difficult to discern, but the relative influence of women within presidential campaigns can be partially gauged by gender ratios among salaried operatives playing strategic leadership and advisory roles, the top twenty best-paid individuals, and staff who were paid more than $9000 in the last quarter.

The campaign of Republican Mike Huckabee achieves the closest gender balance at a near 50% division between men and women on all measures (it is also the smallest of all the major campaigns). The campaigns of Democrats Hillary Clinton and Bill Richardson, and Republican Mitt Romney are also fairly balanced, with Clinton's somewhat favoring women and Richardson's and Romney's somewhat favoring men. The most gender-skewed campaign, in contrast, is that of Rudy Giuliani.

In the campaign of the former New York mayor Giuliani, there is only one senior female staffer, who holds the title of Communications Director. Fewer than one-third of Giuliani's staff who earned $9000 or more in the last quarter are women, and just a quarter of his top twenty paid staff are women.

The Democrats' campaigns are more gender-balanced than Republicans'. Just over thirty percent of Republican senior staffers are women, compared to just under 33% of Democratic senior staffers. And there are ten more top salaried women in Democratic campaigns: 32 of 80 (40%) compared to 21 of 74 (28%) in Republican campaigns.

Each campaign has its own organizational structure but this review focuses on traditional senior staff: campaign manager, deputy campaign manager, and directors of critical campaign functions, including operations, finance, communications, field, policy, research, Internet, and political strategy. In addition, the review considered chief pollsters and lead media consultants, as well as senior advisors confirmed by the campaign staff and who appeared on the FEC reports as making more than $20,000 in the last quarter.

Among the campaigns reviewed -- those of Clinton, Edwards, Huckabee, Obama, Richardson, Romney, and Thompson -- women play all these strategic leadership roles, with the exception of pollster and Political Director. However, women are far more likely to hold positions in finance and internal operations.

Some studies of gender and leadership suggest that less-balanced campaigns may be hindering themselves by not employing a more substantial number of women in their most senior positions. "Evidence of a link between the bottom line and women at the top is growing," writes the Financial Times, summing up research on a number of recent studies correlating corporate success with significant female leadership.

A just-released report by the management consulting firm McKinsey suggests that "companies where women are most strongly represented at board or top-management level are also the companies that perform best"--not only financially, but also in accountability, innovation, and work environment. The Harvard Business Review, in a separate study, found that to benefit from women's participation, a corporate board needs at least three female directors.

Arguably, female leadership on presidential campaigns is even more important than in the boardroom. After all, presidential campaigns must engage the American public--including an electorate that is majority female.

Here's a cumulative ranking of senior staff gender breakdown of the major campaigns:

HUCKABEE--Balanced, slightly favors women
Senior Staff: 4 of 6 (Communications Director, Finance Director, Field Director, Policy Director)
Top 15 paid staff: 8 women, 7 men
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 8 of 15 (53%)

CLINTON--Balanced, but favors women
Senior Staff: 8 of 14 (Campaign Manager, Chief Media Strategist, Traveling Chief of Staff, Policy Director, Director of Operations, 3 well-paid Senior Advisors)
Top 20 paid staff: 12 women, 8 men
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 85 of 161 (52%)

RICHARDSON--Balanced, but favors men
Senior Staff: 4 of 11 (Deputy Campaign Manager, Finance Director, Internet Director, one Senior Finance Advisor)
Top 20 paid staff: 8 women, 12 men
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 15 of 38 (39%)

ROMNEY--Balanced, but favors men
Senior Staff: 4 of 11 (Campaign Manager, Policy Director, Operations Director, Internet Director)
Top 20 paid staff: 7 women, 13 men
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 51 of 126 (40%)

OBAMA--Few women the top
Senior Staff: 3 of 12 (Research Director, COO, Finance Director)
Top 20 paid staff: 5 women, 15 men
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 67 out of 150 gender identified (45%)

EDWARDS--Few women at the top
Senior Staff: 2 of 15 (Research Director, Chief of Staff)
Top 20 paid staff: 7 women, 13 men
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 34 of 92 (37%)

THOMPSON--Few women at the top
Senior Staff: 2 of 9 (Research Director, Finance Director)
Top 20 paid staff: 4 women, 16 men
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 11 of 37 (30%)

GIULIANI--Very imbalanced
Senior Staff: 1 of 10 (Communications Director)
Top 20 identified paid staff: 4 women, 15 men, 1 unknown gender
All paid over $9K/3rd quarter: 36 of 122 (29.5%) [four unknown gender]

[MrsSpringsteen]

NY Times

In His Words: Giuliani on Torture

By Michael Cooper

DAVENPORT, Iowa — At a town hall meeting here last night, Rudolph W. Giuliani expanded upon his views of torture. Here is a transcript of the exchange.

Linda Gustitus, who is the president of a group called the National Religious Campaign Against Torture, began her question by saying that President Bush’s nominee for attorney general, Michael B. Mukasey (who happens to be an old friend of Mr. Giuliani’s) had “fudged” on the question of whether waterboarding is toture.

“I wanted to ask you two questions,’’ she said. “One, do you think waterboarding is torture? And two, do you think the president can order something like waterboarding even though it’s against U.S. and international law?’’

Mr. Giuliani responded: “Okay. First of all, I don’t believe the attorney general designate in any way was unclear on torture. I think Democrats said that; I don’t think he was.’’

Ms. Gustitus said: “He said he didn’t know if waterboarding is torture.”

Mr. Giuliani said: “Well, I’m not sure it is either. I’m not sure it is either. It depends on how it’s done. It depends on the circumstances. It depends on who does it. I think the way it’s been defined in the media, it shouldn’t be done. The way in which they have described it, particularly in the liberal media. So I would say, if that’s the description of it, then I can agree, that it shouldn’t be done. But I have to see what the real description of it is. Because I’ve learned something being in public life as long as I have. And I hate to shock anybody with this, but the newspapers don’t always describe it accurately.”

(Applause)

“If I can’t figure out that there’s been a significant media bias against this war, then I shouldn’t be running for president of the United States.”
(Applause)

“Sometimes they describe it accurately. Sometimes they exaggerate it. So I’d have to see what they really are doing, not the way some of these liberal newspapers have exaggerated it.”

“Now, on the question of torture. We should not torture. America should not stand for torture, America should not allow torture. But America should engage in aggressive questioning of Islamic terrorists who are arrested or who are apprehended. Because if we don’t we leave ourselves open to significant attack.”

“And the line between the two is very delicate and very difficult. But we can’t abandon aggressive questioning of people who are intent on coming here to kill us. Or killing us overseas. I think that that’s the point that the attorney general designate was trying to make.”

“And the powers of the president are pretty significant in protecting the national security of the United States. They always have been. So I think what he was also trying to do was protect the powers of the United States to deal with unforeseen circumstances like the hypothetical we were asked during one debate – I’ve forgotten which one: If there was a terrorist attack on an American city, and it was clear that there were all going to be additional attacks, some of them were going to be nuclear, and they were planned for the next couple of days and one of the people involved in it was arrested, and the head of the C.I.A. came to you and said we have to do certain things to get the information from him, would you authorize it? And I think most of us answered it, yes we would, we would authorize doing whatever we thought was the most effective to get that information.”

“The president has to have that kind of leeway. We’ve got to trust our president well enough to allow that. If we surround this so much with procedure, we’re going to have some unforeseen circumstance in which a president’s not going to feel comfortable making the right decision, particularly if you have the wrong person there. “

“So I think America should never be for torture. America should be against torture. It violates the Geneva Convention. Certainly when we’re dealing with armed combatants, we shouldn’t get near anything like that. There is a distinction, sometimes, when you’re dealing with terrorists. You may have to use means that are a little tougher.”

“And I see, when the Democrats are talking about torture, they’re not just talking about even this definition of waterboarding, which again, if you look at the liberal media and you look at the way they describe it, you could say it was torture and you shouldn’t do it. But they talk about sleep deprivation. I mean, on that theory, I’m getting tortured running for president of the United States. That’s plain silly. That’s silly.’’

“That comes from people who have never investigated a real criminal case, never investigated organized crime. You know how I put hundreds of Mafia people in jail? And I helped to put thousands in Italy in jail? You know how I did it? I did it by electronic surveillance and aggressive questioning. None of them wanted to give me the information. They didn’t walk into my office and say, ‘I want to tell you about all of those Mafia murders…”

“They got ‘em because we arrested them, we got very significant charges on them, and we questioned them for long, long periods of time. With very aggressive techniques. Never ever tortured anybody. I can tell you that. Would never allow it. Don’t know of any situation in which the F.B.I. did it.’’

“And then, please have a better view of the men and women who serve you in law enforcement and in the intelligence services.’’

(Applause)

‘’I know the liberal media paints them like, you know – These are the good guys, not the bad guys. They really are. I mean these are the people who put their lives at risk to protect you and me. These are people of scruples, honor, decency. They don’t want to torture anybody. They have no desire to harm anybody. What they are dealing with sometimes are these enormously difficult life and death situations, in which there is a possibility of getting information about a group of troops that are going to be killed, and they’re going to have to go tell their mothers and fathers that they were killed and there’s a chance maybe of stopping it. Or there are these – I mean, suppose some of the people who were going to do Sept. 11 had been captured beforehand. We sure as heck would want some very aggressive questioning to find out what they knew.’’

“So let’s be careful on how we define this. And, sure we should be against torture. But we should not be against aggressive questioning. And the line between the two is going to require some really difficult decisions about drawing it and kind of trusting each other with the discretion for the president to make decisions about what has to be done in the interests of the American people.’’

“I have known every American president since Gerald Ford. I knew Richard Nixon, but before he was president. I met him, I didn’t know him. I can’t say I knew Richard Nixon. But I’ve known every American president since Gerald Ford. Some Republicans, some Democrats. I can’t think of a one that would ever want to see somebody tortured. Also can’t think of a one that wouldn’t have the courage to make some tough decisions to protect the lives of the American people. And that’s the kind of person you have to have as president of the United States.’’

[MrsSpringsteen]

BLUFFTON, South Carolina (CNN) — At a campaign stop in South Carolina Wednesday, Fred Thompson said that the Iraqi insurgency is made up of "a bunch of kids with improvised explosive devices," and suggested that the appearance of losing to such an enemy would harm U.S. national security.

Thompson was confronted about Iraq by a Bluffton resident named Bernhard Steinhouse, who asked Thompson whether he would bring back U.S. forces from the country.

"We will not be a safer country, we will not be a safer America if the whole world watches us being defeated by a bunch of kids with improvised explosive devices," Thompson said.

Roadside bombs are one of the leading causes of U.S. casualties in Iraq.

Thompson's comments drew criticism from Joe Biden, the Democratic presidential candidate and senator from Delaware who has made funding mine-resistant combat vehicles a signature of his Senate efforts over the last year.

"If Sen. Thompson believes that we are fighting 'a bunch of kids,' he is totally divorced from reality," Biden said in a statement Thursday. "He should come back to Iraq with me and talk to our soldiers who are in the middle of a civil war between lethal militias or fighting the Bush-fulfilling prophecy of al Qaeda in Iraq or being blown up by IEDs."

Thompson did not say under what circumstances troops would be able to leave Iraq. He said that as of now, U.S. forces are succeeding in securing the country, a shared sentiment among all of the Republican presidential frontrunners, mainly by Sen. John McCain. He noted that things could change.

"As of right now, and circumstances will be different six months from now, a year from now, but as of right now, we're finally getting good news out of there, we're getting good news," said Thompson, who added that having a U.S.
presence in Iraq is crucial to freezing out the influence of Iran and Iranian-linked Hezbollah.

"They sent General Petraeus down there for a reason," he said. "They shouldn't have sent him down there if it was just a matter of saying, 'OK, you're doing a lot better, but we're going to declare defeat and bring you home.' I don't think that makes us safer."

Thompson told Steinhouse "we didn't know what we were facing" when we went into Iraq.

"Saddam lured everybody into believing he had weapons of mass destruction, which he had had previously, no question about it, he had used them against his own people," Thompson said.

Earlier this month in Iowa, Thompson raised eyebrows by telling a crowd that Saddam "clearly had had WMD" and that "he clearly had had the beginnings of a nuclear program." He later clarified that he was referring to Saddam's use of chemical weapons against the Kurds.

[Vincent Vega]

http://icasualties.org/oif/

Yeah, those kids with their improvised explosive devices.

[phillyfan26]

Wow, he's an idiot.