What Makes Obama Attractive? - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 01-21-2008, 02:48 PM   #201
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,725
Local Time: 05:34 AM
And the groundwork was done by Reagan liberalising the financial markets.

It was very short-sighted by both of them.
__________________

Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 01-21-2008, 03:06 PM   #202
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 10:34 PM
I believe Obama is referring to the 1980 Election. The centrists in the democratic party moved to Reagan.

I think Obama's tactics are EXCELLENT - He needs to move to the center. If he is painted as just the ANTI War candidate it hurts his long term chances.

It cracks me up to see him get ripped to shreds for making a tremendously obvious point.

Reagan changed the political landscape. He set the stage POLITICALLY - not policy wise - but politically for almost the last thirty years.

1980-1992 - Republican Presidency
2000-2008 - Republican Presidency

20 0f the last 28 years - If you throw in the congress over the course of the 90's until now. I think it is fair to say, that political opponents can admire this POLITICAL legacy.

You can recognize this political achievement without agreeing with the policy.

And many of the REAGAN democrats, were the older generation of first generation immigrants who's parents immigrated from eastern europe and russia. Thier relatives suffered at the hands of the communists. They were not polictical leftists. They moved to Reagan because he made a commitment to defeat communism. And that generation, had close ties to the effects of it on their relatives lives.
__________________

Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-21-2008, 03:09 PM   #203
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 10:34 PM
And let me think for a moment. I believe Reagan was a Democrat at the start of his career.
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-21-2008, 03:09 PM   #204
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 4,903
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Another short-sighted Clinton economic decision was NAFTA and WTO agreements with China. After that, over a million jobs went overseas.
ntalwar is offline  
Old 01-21-2008, 03:22 PM   #205
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 07:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox
And let me think for a moment. I believe Reagan was a Democrat at the start of his career.
yes,
I believe he flipped

with the McCarthy era

he may have even cooperated

I think he intervened on behalf of this young, attractive actress, Nancy Davis, that had some past associations with questionable people
deep is offline  
Old 01-21-2008, 03:35 PM   #206
Blue Crack Supplier
 
martha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Orange County and all over the goddamn place
Posts: 42,555
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Who has been ripping anyone to shreds here?
martha is offline  
Old 01-22-2008, 01:39 AM   #207
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,637
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreadsox

Reagan changed the political landscape. He set the stage POLITICALLY - not policy wise - but politically for almost the last thirty years.

1980-1992 - Republican Presidency
2000-2008 - Republican Presidency

20 0f the last 28 years - If you throw in the congress over the course of the 90's until now. I think it is fair to say, that political opponents can admire this POLITICAL legacy.

You can recognize this political achievement without agreeing with the policy.

Fair enough and good points. It just burned me a little bit and I'll admit to not taking in the full context.

What bothered me is when he gets the endorsement of a HUGE union days after (or before, I don't know the exact timeline) making remarks about how Ronald "Union Busting" Reagan was a force to be reckoned with, I guess he's factually correct. Just didn't sit well. That's all.

My contention with Reagan is that he sold a lot of the country into voting against their own self-interest and pretty much created the brand of "all dems are liberals and liberals are bad, mmkay?!?!?!" that we suffer from today and the same thing that Obama says he wants to change.
U2DMfan is offline  
Old 01-26-2008, 12:02 PM   #208
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 07:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by martha
Who has been ripping anyone to shreds here?
This guy is

Quote:
Obama's misuse of history
Despite the candidate's claims, Lincoln and Kennedy were seasoned politicians before they became president.

By Sean Wilentz

January 26, 2008



'God alone knows the future," Ambrose Bierce reputedly wrote, "but only an historian can alter the past." Although Bierce was undoubtedly right about historians, he should perhaps have added politicians and their ardent supporters as well.

In recent weeks, some of the presidential candidates and their surrogates have been evoking history more insistently than ever. Not surprisingly, those evocations often have been flimsy and faulty.

On the Republican side, the misuse of history has mostly centered on the presidency of Ronald Reagan; indeed, the GOP contest has at times looked like an "American Idol"-style competition over who can deliver the most convincing imitation of Reagan. At the Fox News debate on Jan. 5, the GOP candidates invoked the former president's name 34 times -- yet, on closer inspection, their evocations have more to do with nostalgia for a happier time for conservatives than with historical accuracy.

The more grievous abuses of history, though, have come from the Democrats, and particularly from the Barack Obama side, including his many avid supporters in the media and the academy. (Perhaps this is a good place to note that I am on record as a supporter of Hillary Clinton.)

Few will disagree that it is very rare for a candidate with as little experience in politics and government as Obama to capture the imagination of so many influential Americans. One way for a candidate like this to minimize his lack of experience is to pluck from the past the names of great presidents who also, supposedly, lacked experience. Early in the campaign, Obama's backers likened him to the supposed neophyte John F. Kennedy. More recently, some have pointed out (as did New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, among others) that Abraham Lincoln served only one "undistinguished" term in the House before he was elected president in 1860.

These comparisons distort the past beyond recognition. By the time he ran for president, JFK had served three terms in the House and twice won election to the Senate, where he was an active member of the Foreign Relations Committee. In total, he had held elective office in Washington for 14 years. Before that, he was, of course, a decorated veteran of World War II, having fought with valor in the South Pacific. Kennedy, the son of a U.S. ambassador to Britain, had closely studied foreign affairs, which led to his first book, "Why England Slept," as well as to a postwar stint in journalism.

This record is not comparable to Obama's eight years in the Illinois Legislature, his work as a community organizer and his single election to the Senate in 2004 -- an election he won against a late entrant, right-wing Republican Alan Keyes, in a state where the GOP was in severe disarray.

The Lincoln comparison is equally tortured. Yes, Lincoln spent only two years in the House after winning election in 1846. Yet his deep involvement in state and national politics began in 1832, the same year he was elected a captain in the Illinois militia -- and 28 years before he ran for president. He then served as leader of the Illinois Whig Party and served his far-from-undistinguished term in Congress courageously leading opposition to the Mexican War.

After returning home, he became one of the leading railroad lawyers in the country, emerged as an outspoken antislavery leader of Illinois' Republican Party -- and then, in 1858, ran unsuccessfully for the Senate and engaged with Stephen A. Douglas in the nation's most important debates over slavery before the Civil War. It behooves the champions of any candidate to think carefully when citing similarities to Lincoln's record. In this case, the comparison is absurd.

But on to the founding fathers. The historian Joseph Ellis, writing in the Los Angeles Times, likened Obama to Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, in a hazy way, as an advocate of nonpartisan politics. Yet Ellis had to sidestep what even he admitted is a large, inconvenient fact: Jefferson and Madison were not nonpartisan -- they actually founded what has evolved into the Democratic Party. Through highly selective and misleading quotations, Ellis then described them as nonpartisan at heart, ignoring Madison's recognition, in 1792, that "in every political society, parties are unavoidable," or Jefferson's pledge, as president, to sink the Federalist Party "into an abyss from which there shall be no resurrection for it."

Returning to more recent history: The Obama campaign, in asserting a supposedly innovative post-partisan politics, has endorsed a partisan Republican account of the post-Reagan years that is at odds with the facts. Obama has asserted that the GOP has been the "party of ideas" over the last 10 to 15 years -- that is, since 1993 or so. In other words: the old (and long discredited) right-wing bromides repackaged as the "Contract with America" in 1994, the Republican attack on Medicare that led to the government shutdown a year later, the endless recycling of supply-side economics (especially ironic, given the current meltdown), and the other ideological agendas pushed by Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, have made the GOP the party of intellectual daring and innovation.

Historians cannot expect all politicians and their supporters to know as much about American history as, say, John F. Kennedy, who won the Pulitzer Prize for a work of history. But it is reasonable to expect respect for the basic facts -- and not contribute to cheapening the historical currency.

Spreading bad history is no way to make history.

Sean Wilentz, a professor of history at Princeton University, is the author of "The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln," among other books.
deep is offline  
Old 01-26-2008, 03:30 PM   #209
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,738
Local Time: 10:34 PM
Michelle Obama seems very, very likable.

http://www.thestar.com/News/USElection/article/297631
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 01-26-2008, 05:29 PM   #210
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Ásgarðr
Posts: 11,782
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Quote:
Historians cannot expect all politicians and their supporters to know as much about American history as, say, John F. Kennedy, who won the Pulitzer Prize for a work of history. But it is reasonable to expect respect for the basic facts -- and not contribute to cheapening the historical currency.
Amen.
melon is offline  
Old 01-26-2008, 06:12 PM   #211
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,892
Local Time: 10:34 PM
Well, at least the author cops to being a Hillary supporter.

But still, this putting forth of the supposed "facts" while ignoring the "spin" on them while accusing the opponent of doing the very same really, really gets my goat.


From the article:
The Lincoln comparison is equally tortured. Yes, Lincoln spent only two years in the House after winning election in 1846. Yet his deep involvement in state and national politics began in 1832, the same year he was elected a captain in the Illinois militia -- and 28 years before he ran for president. He then served as leader of the Illinois Whig Party and served his far-from-undistinguished term in Congress courageously leading opposition to the Mexican War.

After returning home, he became one of the leading railroad lawyers in the country, emerged as an outspoken antislavery leader of Illinois' Republican Party -- and then, in 1858, ran unsuccessfully for the Senate and engaged with Stephen A. Douglas in the nation's most important debates over slavery before the Civil War. It behooves the champions of any candidate to think carefully when citing similarities to Lincoln's record. In this case, the comparison is absurd.


The only reason the comparison is absurd is because the author SAYS its absurd. This kind of argument (very popular on outlets such as Fox News) just drives me nuts. The facts are that Lincoln's only NATIONAL office was his two years in the House--whether they were distinguished or not is ENTIRELY subjective. Lincoln was very politically active for many years and the article makes a good case for that--but look at what the author's done--spun Obama's political activity as minimal and Lincoln's as substanstative. It's not as if Obama was just some guy sitting on his couch who decided to write a book and run for president last year. It's true most of his political involvement has been in the local and state level but here's the thing--the thing the author of this article won't say--SO WAS LINCOLN'S! The author is essentially suggesting that Lincoln's state and local political activity is worthy and Obama's isn't. THAT is absurd. That guy they had as the keynote speaker at the Democratic National Convention in 2004--was he just some neophyte somebody found and stuck on the stage?

But what the hell, a lot of people had great doubts about Lincoln's capacity to lead the country as well. That's historically documented as well.

The shorthanding of the Obama and Clinton campaigns as being about "change" and "experience" is another example of the dumbing down of political discourse in this country and it's very sad.
maycocksean is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 08:15 AM   #212
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 28,170
Local Time: 11:34 PM
NY Times

January 27, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
A President Like My Father
By CAROLINE KENNEDY

Over the years, I’ve been deeply moved by the people who’ve told me they wished they could feel inspired and hopeful about America the way people did when my father was president. This sense is even more profound today. That is why I am supporting a presidential candidate in the Democratic primaries, Barack Obama.

My reasons are patriotic, political and personal, and the three are intertwined. All my life, people have told me that my father changed their lives, that they got involved in public service or politics because he asked them to. And the generation he inspired has passed that spirit on to its children. I meet young people who were born long after John F. Kennedy was president, yet who ask me how to live out his ideals.

Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible.

We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960.

Most of us would prefer to base our voting decision on policy differences. However, the candidates’ goals are similar. They have all laid out detailed plans on everything from strengthening our middle class to investing in early childhood education. So qualities of leadership, character and judgment play a larger role than usual.

Senator Obama has demonstrated these qualities throughout his more than two decades of public service, not just in the United States Senate but in Illinois, where he helped turn around struggling communities, taught constitutional law and was an elected state official for eight years. And Senator Obama is showing the same qualities today. He has built a movement that is changing the face of politics in this country, and he has demonstrated a special gift for inspiring young people — known for a willingness to volunteer, but an aversion to politics — to become engaged in the political process.

I have spent the past five years working in the New York City public schools and have three teenage children of my own. There is a generation coming of age that is hopeful, hard-working, innovative and imaginative. But too many of them are also hopeless, defeated and disengaged. As parents, we have a responsibility to help our children to believe in themselves and in their power to shape their future. Senator Obama is inspiring my children, my parents’ grandchildren, with that sense of possibility.

Senator Obama is running a dignified and honest campaign. He has spoken eloquently about the role of faith in his life, and opened a window into his character in two compelling books. And when it comes to judgment, Barack Obama made the right call on the most important issue of our time by opposing the war in Iraq from the beginning.

I want a president who understands that his responsibility is to articulate a vision and encourage others to achieve it; who holds himself, and those around him, to the highest ethical standards; who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again that our country needs every one of us to get involved.

I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 08:25 AM   #213
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 10:34 PM
She scares me...
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 09:27 AM   #214
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 18,918
Local Time: 11:34 PM
Sweet Caroline
Good times never seemed so good....
anitram is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 06:27 PM   #215
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
sue4u2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 10:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
NY Times

January 27, 2008
Op-Ed Contributor
A President Like My Father
By CAROLINE KENNEDY

I want a president who understands that his responsibility is to articulate a vision and encourage others to achieve it; who holds himself, and those around him, to the highest ethical standards; who appeals to the hopes of those who still believe in the American Dream, and those around the world who still believe in the American ideal; and who can lift our spirits, and make us believe again that our country needs every one of us to get involved.

I have never had a president who inspired me the way people tell me that my father inspired them. But for the first time, I believe I have found the man who could be that president — not just for me, but for a new generation of Americans.
I hear ya, Caroline..

This is an impressive endorsement, to say the least.

It's been a long time, if ever, that I have strongly supported 2
candidates. This is going to be a tough call.
sue4u2 is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 06:35 PM   #216
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 07:34 PM
and with Uncle Ted's endorsement tomorrow

there goes the bridge to moderates, independents and Reagan democrats?
deep is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 06:36 PM   #217
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 07:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by sue4u2


I hear ya, Caroline..

This is an impressive endorsement, to say the least.

It's been a long time, if ever, that I have strongly supported 2
candidates. This is going to be a tough call.
what did you believed before you read this
that you no longer believe?
deep is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 07:10 PM   #218
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
sue4u2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: hatching some plot, scheming some scheme
Posts: 6,628
Local Time: 10:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep

what did you believed before you read this
that you no longer believe?
It's not that I believed one over the other.
I've supported Clinton all along.
My only concern with Clinton is that there are so many past resentments, on both sides, that uniting the parties to work together may be more difficult for her to pull off.

At this point I think Obama has the edge in doing this.
(if it's at all possible, that is)
sue4u2 is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 07:27 PM   #219
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,601
Local Time: 07:34 PM
I will cede the point that Obama attracts more younger people than Hillary


like Jackson he gets them

fired up and ready to go

Jackson was very influential in Clinton's 92 win
getting voters to the polls


and yes
I do believe Bill Clinton will work very hard for Obama in Nov, as the last Dem President

I just believe that Hillary has a better chance of capturing more (in all age groups) moderates, independents and moderate GOP like myself.
deep is offline  
Old 01-27-2008, 07:33 PM   #220
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,885
Local Time: 10:34 PM
The Clinton strategy was to paint him as the "black candidate" and lose SC. This will propell her to victory in virtually every other state.

Peace
__________________

Dreadsox is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com
×