Apart from George McGovern, a plainspoken man who knows something about losing elections, not a single Democrat of national stature publicly urged Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday to end her campaign for the White House.
They didn’t have to.
There was no shortage of other ways to signal, suggest, insinuate or instigate the same thing. And certainly no need to apply unseemly pressure to a historic political figure, a woman who has run a grueling race, won millions of votes and drawn uncounted numbers of new Democratic voters to the polls.
Instead, many Democrats instead preferred to say softly what the party’s 1972 presidential nominee said for all to hear. Barack Obama has won the nomination “by any practical test,” McGovern said.
“Hillary, of course, will make the decision as to if and when she ends her campaign,” he added. “But I hope that she reaches that decision soon so that we can concentrate on a unified party capable of winning the White House next November.”
http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/
If Obama manages to get elected he’ll make Jimmy Carter look like Truman.
I shudder to think what his lack of experience could lead him to do in the powerful office.
What’s scary about Obama is his silence on issues related to his philosophical, theosophical and political-ideological beliefs and how those beliefs would drive his analytic and decision-making thought processes.
What are his loyalties?
Obama is a ‘question-mark’ who speaks in pleasing adjectives and adverbs that seem to circularly say nothing about him.
I know that if I had been closely associated with a man who had strong and apparently anti-American ethno-separatist leanings and/or had associated more than once with a radical leftist who was a self-admitted anti-American terrorist, that I would have a difficult time obtaining even a CONFIDENTIAL security clearance as a military officer or a civilian employee of the federal government with access to sensditive issues.
If Obama becomes president, he and his appointees will have access to our country’s most sensitive and highly classified information.
He also will be able to re-structure and use/mis-use the national security forces of our country. Please remember that the primary reason that the CIA has lacked reliable and critical information regarding the world was due to President Carter’s dismantling of the CIA’s human intelligence resources in the late 1970s.
What would an Obama do to our national security?
I don’t know, but his lack of specificity regarding what drives his view of the world should disqualify him as a presidential candidate.
#2 Yes indeedy: Start a war under false pretenses, violate our civil liberties, make a mockery of the constitution, double gasoline prices. One shudders to think.
“I shudder to think what his lack of experience could lead him to do in the powerful office”
You’ll get to shudder—and pay—for years to come for the antics of the unprincipled hear-nothing, learn-nothing bonehead currently in the White House: the worst U.S. president since James Buchanan.
Reply to #5.
I disagree.
Our worst presidents were Andrew Jackson, Ford and Carter. There are several other doozies, but theser three top the pile.
Remember, this is Hillary we’re talking about. It’s not over till SHE says it’s over. I think she’s way too stubborn & ambitious to quit.
#4,
Actually, presidents can’t start wars on their own. They need the approval of Congress, including quite a few Democrats in this case. As for “doubling gas prices,” if Mr. Bush is really capable of manipulating the economy at will, one wonders why he simply doesn’t order gas prices back down again. Oh yeah, that’s right. Halliburton runs the country and he’s only their puppet. Blah, blah, blah.
Wow, #4 and #5, right on! #8 Don’t be naive. This Prez (or rather, the Vice Prez who has been the mainspring of this Administration) has sharply increased Executive power, to the detriment of civil liberties and our Constitution.
Egregious examples include the many ‘signing statements’ attached to THOUSANDS of laws passed by both houses. The ‘statements’ are basically a large ‘p.s.’ to any bill passed, saying that GWB refuses to follow the Constitutional mandate. He doesn’t veto the bill (that might mean he would be overidden by Congress); he just picks and chooses which part of it he will or will not execute. This has occurred to THOUSANDS of bills which have reached his desk! It’s outrageous and a serious attack on constitutional government.
George HW Bush would never have gone as far; at least he had some ethics and notion of American government. The neocons (under Cheney’s leadership, he’s the real power in this Administration) have undermined the Constitution and furthered an Imperial Presidency which the Founders strenuously tried to avoid.
Whomever is elected next has a terrible, tragic mess to clean up. And GW Bush, Cheney and the neocons are to blame. I believe the American people will hold them accountable at the ballot box.
9, it’s nothing that the Democrats don’t do. The plain simple fact is thet neither party pays any real attention to the Constitution. Where was the declaration of war against Serbia?
When our president visits at Buckingham Palace, he does’nt curtsy. When she comes to the White House…..he doesn’t curtsy…
Will someone explain to me why he holds hands with shieks, regardless of whose territory they are in? Oh yes; 1. its their custom and; 2, they have the oil…..
I’ve got a bottle of 15-year old Macallan against a similar single malt that says in 30 years the historians will rank GWB in the top quarter of US presidents. I’ve already won a bottle of 30-year old Ballentines on a similar bet about Reagan.
On Obama – beware of cults of personality, whatever their origin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yzrd6eVAsjA
No. 11. I certainly hope he wouldn’t curtsy. Men bow the head, women curtsy. And for a citizen of the USA, neither are expected as she is not your head of state.
#12, Now if you were offering 18 or 24 year I (my favorite, but only if someone else is paying), I might take you up on the offer. Hap tip to your good taste in single malt. Now back to politics, I seem to remember hearing the same things about Reagan that we hear about GWB, you know “cowboy”, “not very bright”, “delegates too much”, “other people are actually in control”, “worst president ever”, etc. I would still like to see a real list of supposed civil liberties that we have lost. I haven’t heard that Rosie has been arrested and sent to a Gitmo yet.
I just heard that a prisoner released from Gitmo was responsible for a suicide bombing in Iraq.
Who’d a thunk it?
Gentle folk,
The circus, that is the American presidential elections has had an amazing effect here in Australia. Support for a Republic is way down, the status quo looks so much better. Please call us when you have made up your minds who the new president is going to be. 😉
Jon R
RE: “if Mr. Bush is really capable of manipulating the economy at will, one wonders why he simply doesn’t order gas prices back down again.”
Heh.
Wow, there seem to be a number of liberals who are Deeply Concerned about the Constitution now. Several scores of years to late, really, to worry about the “living breathing document” whose True Meaning is in the eye of the reader and never actually existed at all.
On the other hand, in a dismal year for political conservatives, the only bright spot has been the Reality TV show of the primaries and the battle between Hillary and Obama.
Go Hillary! You go girl! . . . Let’s keep this up all the way through the season and right into the convention. ; > )
Signed,
Now an ardent feminist,
Sarah
I continue to be astonished by the extremes to which Bush-hating has led otherwise sensible people. Really, you’re worse than the extremes of the Clinton-haters. This is a disease.
Hillary will very likely take this to the convention, hoping for more fallout from Obama’s troubles.
Barack will be the next president because the Republicans really screwed things up. At least, that’s what most Americans think.
bush might be lest “hated” if he admitted mistakes and had a broader view of the world. As it is, he can barely speak engrish.
What do we know about Obama? We know he’s worked in poor communities. He’s been in the midst of the worst part of the US. He also knows machine politics – it was the Democratic Machine which helped Kennedy and Clinton get into power. He also knows how to be fair – which is how Harold Washington worked as Mayor. Obama’s politics are left and practical. He’s not a totalitarian. Instead, the government works to enable people to help other people. it doesn’t help big corporations exploit poor and middle class people. That’s what monarchies do. Look at who he surrounds himself with. Unlike Bush, a variety of opinions, people who care about the country, who are going with what works rather than any particular discredited ideology.
No. 19 – who are some of the people surrounding Obama that represent the “variety” of opinions you mentioned? Thx.
Obama is so little acquainted with a variety of opinion that he was reported by insiders to be genuinely puzzled by the reaction to his radical pastor’s ideas. All his Chicago radical connections thought Wright was only saying what was obviously true. Like other presidential candidates, he is surrounded by advisers who share and amplify his political views. An argument could be made that McCain has a more inclusive group, which is what makes many conservatives wary of him — they don’t know what he’s going to do, since he has ties to both conservative and liberal ideas. Obama is not a “maverick” Democrat. He’s a true-blue big government liberal through and through.
This thread is GREAT. The Clinton bashers in the Democratic party now realize how ugly the Clintons can be, gee if you had only listened to us Repubs years ago how differant it would be. The other thing is George Bush will not be on the ticket!! You will need to run against McCain! McCain has a record, unfortunatly Obama doesn’t. Oh, Rezko was convicted, haven’t heard much about the sentance yet, wonder why? Elitist mansion Resko sold to the Obama’s at a 300K loss.
Obama does have a record. He was rated the most liberal Senator last year, and his Illinois record is also hard-left.
The three most dangerous conversation topics at a party: Religion, Sex, and Politics. Of the three, only two are eternal (well, actually, to be accurate ONE). I remember a certain venerable Ango-Catholic rector in Dallas who is quoted as saying during the late 50s and 60s: “The only party for a Christian to belong to is the Democrat party.” The 80’s and 90’s brought us the reverse of that claim. Now? Well, now it would be helpful to elect men and women who held convictions that lastest longer than the next focus group poll.
I’m not claiming that my political views are the “Christian” view. Except on abortion, I think Christians can and do disagree on what good public policy is. I am suspicious and worried about candidates or factions who tell me that their view is the “Christian” one. Did you read the [url=http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGQ1MzFkMWU4MmYxMjhkZmNiZGE5YWY3NWUzNGMyMmY=]report[/url] of the Obama rally in Charlotte, where the Rev. Joseph Lowery said that Obama’s election would bring the Kingdom of God to earth? This worries me.
#19 – You’ve got Sam Nunn and Boren who have been talking to him about defense policy. Austan Goolsbee is a University of Chicago Economist (remember – that’s an anti-government school of economics) who is his top economics adviser. He’s got a few leftists giving him advice on human rights (not exactly a conservative strong suit). Then you’ve got the Daleys (good, bad? Smart!). You’ve got a range of Democrats from old school to New School – who aren’t part of the DLC.
If you really want to understand Obama and how he intends to operate, however, you might study Harold Washington. He is why he went to Chicago.
Kendall once posted the This American Life sequence on him.
Goolsbee is Senior Economic Advisor to the DLC and the Progessive Policy Institute, so it’s not exactly reaching across party lines, either.
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254329&kaid=86&subid=191
Two years in the senate and this “great intellect”,Obama, has done NOTHING except vote a streight party line leaning way to the left. He has written no bills and introduced no legislation. Name one time he crossed the Aisle in the senate? Obama got his rear handed to him in the debate and unless he has a scripted speach he fumbles, hence his reluctance to be interviewed on Fox news. No one has commented on the money funneled by Resko from a rich Brit to buy Obama’s house in a sweet heart deal.
Obama is gong to have a very difficult time winning the votes of people who do not fit into the following categories: people involved in academia (students/professors), affluent white liberals, and African Americans. His stance on partial birth abortion is going to kill him in states that lean right. And his decision not to vote for both John Roberts and Samuel Alito–two stunningly qualified candidates–will make him seem too radical for the mainstream. In addition, keep in mind he has one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate. This guy is a modern day George McGovern, and I think we all know how well that turned out for the Democrats in ’72.
I keep trying to think of that phrase used to discribe someone with no international experiance, limited legislative expreiance, no management experiance etc… I think it is “HE LACKS GRAVITAS”!!! Boy the reporters sure let that one drop out of thier vocabulary!!!
#6 – James Buchanan? Franklin Pierce? Ford did a wise thing by forgiving Nixon. Carter? It’s probably too easy to tell – but he did force the Democratic party to change.
#27 – Yes – but the DLC and the “progressive” policy institute are conservative organizations within the Democratic party. How many liberal Republicans does Bush Listen to? He ignored every liberal Republican, promoting their demise in New England (and I’m “bitter” being in that tradition myself).
Re #28 – look – if that’s your standard, nobody could be elected. period. It was a minor, and legal, deal.
He did a fine job being interviewed by Fox, and was quite charitable. Look, McCain’s not the best speaker, wouldn’t you agree? I mean, he can’t seem to get Iraq and Iran straight. Nor the economy. As far as Obama’s intellect, I think Obama’s writing and resume speaks for itself.
#29 You might compare him to McGovern, but to be honest, you might want to compare Bush to Nixon and see who wins out.
John ,”nobody could be elected” You are admitting Obama is like every other politician who has a ten year record of dealing with criminal power brokers? Gee maybe this isn’t change we can believe in after all. It may be legal but that doesn’t make it right!