Debate thoughts
Tue, 07/24/2007 - 8:30am — Barbara Gordon
Anybody have any thoughts on yesterday's debate?
Although the format was innovative, the candidates mostly repeated the platforms and rhetoric we've already heard.
Obama slipped into his "I'm from the south" accent, which he does occasionally. It cracks me up.
Obama and Hillary both did well with a couple of awkward, pointed questions. Obama also managed to have some fun with a couple of questions.
The candidates were supposed to each bring along a "youtube style" video campaign clip. I thought it was pretty clear that the candidates as a whole don't have a very good sense of what a youtube video is. But it was fun nonetheless.
Technorati Tags: Bookmark/Search this post with:
- Barbara Gordon's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Comments
Hillary did her typical blah
Hillary did her typical blah blah blah. Obama is clearly pacing himself waiting for her to screw up, which she will.
The real news today was how far the Republicans have fallen.
My gosh Gonzales was really sad today. This guy is a joke. What's much more pathetic though, is that Republicans are putting up with this in their party. And that it's far from the first time. Remember how they rallied around Rumsfeld for so long even after it was clear for so long he was falling down on the job with our boys dying as a result? Or how they tried to cover up Foley to save his seat and themselves from the fallout of the negative publicity of the truth would bring? Or how Bush told that dope Brownie he was doing a "heckuva job"? This is beyond partisan. What the Republicans have become is just sad for America.
<Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the panel’s senior Republican who has long been critical of Mr. Gonzales, went further, saying, “Your credibility has been breached to the point of being actionable.”>
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/25/washington/25gonzales.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
I've had this Gonzales farce
I've had this Gonzales farce on my mind all day ................. I can't recognize my Republican Party ............. I just can't believe every one tolerates this kind of conduct by the top law enforcement officer in this land. In my opinion, Ronald Reagan, Gerald Ford, and George H. W. Bush would have sent him packing a long time ago. As a matter of fact - not one of them would have appointed him in the first place!!!!!! When the Director of the FBI contradicts what you have testified to before Congress ............... you have reached a new low as Attorney General of the United States. OK - now I have that off my chest. Really bugging me, this character.
One of the things that pleases me the most about Senator Obama is his constitutional law background. Can't you just see him sending a lot of these turkeys packing - "that's not according to the Constitution or the laws of this land - forget it and I'll be glad to accept your resignation!!" I truly believe we have only one way to go this election........BARACK OBAMA
I too enjoy when Obama slips
I too enjoy when Obama slips into his "accent". I did not see the debates; do not watch television, but saw a few You Tube videos and read many opinions.
I was a bit disappointed when the Senator spoke about Iran. Going into Iran would be another "dumb war". When we speak about war, we speak about innocent people being harmed and I believe the Senator is a human rights activist. That we can find diplomatic solutions to problems other than resorting to violence.
I believe that citizens from any country are as helpless as I am in what our leaders do.
I'm a very active supporter
vote barack obama
vote barack obama
Third World, Structural
Third World,
Structural corruption , lack of accountability for social problems including
Intolerance, arms race, institutionalized corruption, Human Rights Watch, Freedom House, Amnesty International Reports are full of decades of reports
If anyone cares to read the African, Asian, latin americans etc reports which proof Higher Degree and volume of violence, discrimination ( including sex, religion etc , death penalty, domestic violence than anything in the Western world) The institutions of the Third World catered to Hypernationalism which consider treasonable to question the Myths and the society evils products of cultural long term established norms.
Example taboo regarding intermarriage between Tutsi and Hutsi, racial taboos in Asia about intermarriage among different racial groups, Hate race , religion related agaisnt chinese etc
hate between Budhist agaisnt Hindus in like in Sri Lanka which had suffered decades of horrible massacres and death toll, besides torture and Indonesia a very shaky society in which minorities be religious or etnic are under threat
Most of the members of the UN are from Non Western society most of them pay lip service or not to the Human Rights Declaration that they signed to become members of the UN. Most of them choose to ignor Sharia law, slavery in Sudan etc which was supported by most the Third World with the seat in the Human Rights Commission from where America was kicked off.
Most of the members and their societies from
ganda Cambodia, North Korea etc are the most prominent in using children as murderers
Most Third World Societies turn their back to the victims who suffer of such abuse either in their own lands or nearby.
showing lack of caring , compassion and love for others
but they taking the demagogic low ground, they focus on the WEst vitriolic hate while choosing Self denial of their own problems.
Why the West is so slam all over the world because people around the world knows that while they lack the courage to stand for justice in their homelands and call Evil , evil,
to use the West as punching bag is an easy way to discharge hate and to deflect any innner debate and any trouble conciences about the great evils which make their societies so corrupts , and intolerants
And in the WEst , there is an internalized sadomasochistic pattern to be unileral
bully by others. The Delusion internalized in the WEst all societies are equal,
Wrong A society that not allow freedom of conciences be secular or not is not equal than one which allows it
A society in which their presidents , or leader, can not be criticize , attack in which marches , agaisnt the goverment are forbidden is not equal to one which
allows it
A society which celebrates and solidarized which old fashion intitutiion of slavery banned in the WEst is not the same to America or the WEst
In this era of information age and new at one click
Those societies who celebrates system which brought to Humanity the horrors of Gulags, NVKD, KBG, Stasi, served as role model for the Nazis to be evil and
celebrates the idols such as Mao who was a mass murderers ( 80-100 most of them poor ) How come that a Third World mentality can be good compass for America , journey
God has mercy
Mao
In the Republican
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/06/us/politics/06debate.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
? They must have been reading that idiotic O'Hanlon and Pollack study that Frank Rich put the lie to. Or smoking something.
In contrast to claims of military successes, back in reality, I believe the statistics of Americans dead in Iraq last month were 81, the same number as in February and March, before the most recent escalation started. Iraqi casualties rose 33% over the prior month. And by the way on the political front a Sunni faction walked out of the government.
To cap it off the candidates knocked Obama for saying he would actually take action against bin Ladin in Pakistan if Pakistan refused to, then they said they might do it, but also said they shouldn't say they might do it because it might "offend" Pakistan to put such real pressure on it (horror of horrors to offend a country for not going after our real enemy).
These Fox-Republican officials and politicians (fops) are truly just that. Pandering idiots. Bad for America. It's time to turn the page already. If these idiot fop candidates are against Obama, that's the man I am for all the way!
"Both Mr. Romney and, to a lesser extent, Mr. Giuliani criticized Mr. Obama for a speech in which he threatened to send American troops into Pakistan without that nation’s approval. But later, under questioning, both said that as president they would keep open that very option, although they said Mr. Obama had been imprudent to raise the prospect of invading an ally.
“That is an option that should remain open,” Mr. Giuliani said. “I believe the senator didn’t express it the right way. I think the senator, if he could just say it over again, might want to say that we would encourage Musharraf to allow us to do it if we thought he couldn’t accomplish it.”
A spokesman for Mr. Obama, Bill Burton, said: “The fact that the same Republican candidates who want to keep 160,000 American troops in the middle of a civil war couldn’t agree that we should take out Osama bin Laden if we had him in our sights proves why Americans want to turn the page on the last seven years of Bush-Cheney foreign policy.”"
Kristol likes Hillary?
FDR was right: the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Change is needed. Let's be courageous.
"Hillary Clinton, Neocon? The blogosphere is atwitter today with the quote in the Washington Post from Bill Kristol, the editor of the Weekly Standard, that “Hillary Clinton is becoming the responsible Democrat who could become commander in chief in a post-9/11 world.”
(snip)
Back in the real world, Bartlett’s compatriot Matthew Iglesias, sees this as being less about political gamesmanship than ideology: “One can try to speculate that Kristol is playing some odd angles here, but I think the record indicates that he’s genuinely more committed to war — criticized Republican critics of the Kosovo War, criticized Bill Clinton for not killing enough people during the Kosovo War, backed John McCain in the 2000 primaries — and based on the evidence thinks Clinton will be more sympathetic to his agenda than the alternatives.”
Further to the left, however, the approval of the Weekly Standard isn’t considered a mark of distinction. Arthur Silber at Once Upon a Time feels a Democrat will be considered “responsible” only “if you think the United States should still have troops in Iraq at the end of your second term as president, which is to say, at least through the end of 2016 — which is, of course, the view of the entrenched foreign policy establishment that believes in a foreign policy of aggressive, neverending global interventionism maintained by an empire of military bases around the world, all to guarantee American hegemony.”"
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/?hp
If Bush wants Rove to write
By the way, you know, I criticize Bush for his secrecy. And Bill Clinton was vastly better many ways, such as waiving Executive privilege. But particularly in this environment, Hillary should release her records as First Lady. Hillary should be against, not a part of, the ridiculous secrecy surrounding Washington. Hillary knows that sunlight, as it is often said, is the best disinfectant for rotten politics.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-clintondocs14aug14,1,1086895.story?track=rss&ctrack=1&cset=true