Hillary, Obama and the Democratic Prospects
January 7th, 2008 at 09:12am Mark Noonan
Victor Davis Hanson excellently sums up the Democratic field, and leaves open the largest question of 2008 - what will Democrats actually run on in the fall?
Sen. Obama looks unbeatable, especially since Hillary’s campaign was well-funded, did almost everything by the book, and still is imploding. When John Edwards drops out—and he will—most of his money, supporters, and voters will probably go to Obama.
But all that said, Obama’s charisma and ex tempore rhetorical skills have a shelf life without concrete positions. The war in Iraq is no longer a key issue, so against it “from the beginning” does not resonate so much any more. Where does Obama stand on closing the border and amnesty? Does he want to raise taxes or cut spending to pay for his new programs, themselves poorly delineated.
If he doesn’t get specific, his “change” mantra will be like Gary Hart’s “new ideas” that Mondale deflated in 1984 with the “where’s the beef?” debate quip that Bob Beckel turned into a campaign stop staple.
Democrats have been saying “change” so often that I sometimes think I’ve stumbled upon coverage of a hobo’s convention. Certainly, after a spell of listening to them, one gets and urge for a drink or six. Personally, I don’t know how Democrats stand it - but, there they go, cheering at every full stop, even though what has been said was a bunch of mindless platitudes and talking points.
Right now, I have to give Obama the edge - because he has the purest anti-war credentials, and the leftwing base of the Democratic party is determined that an overtly anti-war candidate is what the nation wants in 2008. Hillary can turn this around, but she’s now got an uphill climb to the Democratic nomination (like Hanson, I think Edwards’ is toast, and he knows it). But in the end it doesn’t matter - Obama, Hillary or whomever will have to come before the American people, and after they’ve shouted “change” a few times, the people will want to know exactly what it is they will do, and that is where Republicans will be able to nail down at least 270 electoral votes.
Unless one believes that there is a massive wave of anti-war sentiment which will, alone, carry Democrats to victory, the Democrats in 2008 will be forced to run on their issues - high taxes, high spending, gay marriage, abortion, Hollywood values, etc, etc, etc. Carrying such millstones around their necks, it will be surpassingly hard for any Democrat to cobble together 270 electoral votes. Not impossible, but very hard - it will require holding on to every State won by Kerry in 2004 as well as taking States away from the GOP which were won by President Bush, twice. Just holding on in places like Minnesota, Michigan and Wisconsin will be a tall order for the Democrats in 2008 - expanding beyond it will be next to impossible. Unless, that is, Democrats really do come out with a compelling, new reason to vote for Democrats.
The trouble here is not that there aren’t any good, new ideas out there waiting for a Democrat to pick them up, but that the addition of any new idea into the Democratic party risks alienating a substantial part of the Democratic coalition (ie, Democrats can’t run on a secure border without risking liberal/left hispanic support). Democrats are locked in an iron ring of leftwing ideology, and they can’t break out without destroying themselves.
It’ll be fun to watch, this Campaign 2008.
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Democrats
68 Comments
1. Sunny | January 7th, 2008 at 10:17 am
“the Democrats in 2008 will be forced to run on their issues - high taxes, high spending, gay marriage, abortion, Hollywood values, etc, etc,”
Mark Noonan
I have watched almost all of the debates and many of the CSPAN speeches given by candidates of both parties. I have not heard even one Democrat candidate raise the issue of gay marriage or abortion. Those are Republican issues. Further, you say that the Hollywood values will be an issue for the Democrats, and yet, I have never seen a party so in love with Hollywood stars as the Republicans - first Ronald Reagan and now Fred Thompson. (And lets not forget Arnie) You seem to believe that the Hollywood values are acceptable only when it is the Republican candidate who is the Hollywood star. I do not recall ever a Democratic Party presidential candidate who was an actor. Although I do believe that the Democratic candidates are going to be hurt by their stand on illegal immigration, they are however advocating change from what we have suffered through for the past seven years. The Bush administration has been way too cozy with big business - oil, insurance companies, even tobacco. Mark, I think you need to come up with something more relevant in your attack of the Democratic candidates. Your arguement is so weak.
2. Web Smith | January 7th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Change, change, change, change.
That’s what they promised when we put them in charge of the Congress and Senate. Instead of ending the war as they promised, they attach their pork barrel projects to the funding and tell Bush, “You can have your war if we can have this.” Nancy Pelosi even worked a $25 million contract for her husband into the deal. This has not gone unnoticed.
Now, after Obama won, they are arguing about who will provide the most change leaving us to wonder who will be rattling the change in their pockets.
3. Joe | January 7th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Mark,
I’ve said this before and you and Matt both disagreed… but you guys really need to change the name of this blog from “Blogs for victo(r)y” to “Blogs against Democrats”.
You guys have more posts on why Hillary or Obama or any Dem is not going to win and why they are so bad. I can’t remember any posts saying why the Repubs are so good. Sure I’ve seen a couple saying that McCain is surging. But that is it. Nothing about why they are so good.
What you people are doing it what is wrong with politics today. Dig up any dirt and smear candidates as much as possible so your guy/party looks better. Even if they have nothing to offer, they have to be better than that slimed other party.
I’ve seen questions here from righties asking a lefty to say something good about my party without blasting a Bush. Can you say anything at all about your party without blasting a Dem?
All this anti-Dem posts, but no pro-Repub posts. From the looks of things, Dems are narrowing down their nominee much quicker than the Repubs. Maybe you should talk about that a bit more.
4. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 11:52 am
The campaign is great sport now! I love to watch Dims eating Dims and the lame stream media can’t possibly hide it! However when there is only 1 Dim running it will be same old same old, and the internet will have to suffice.
Really fun watching the personal injury lawyer and the Billary machine go at it. Hopefully that will continue. A great situation for Hussein Obama to be in.
5. Zach | January 7th, 2008 at 12:07 pm
It might be a good thing that Obama is getting all this momentum, the longer the spotlight is on him, the bigger chance his “change” platform will fade. Eventually his values/beliefs on things other than Iraq are gonna surface to the mainstream. I believe that that is where his downfall is likely to come. I like Obama as far as his personality goes. But he makes Senator Clinton look like a moderate. I cant possibly vote for someone who is Pro-choice, Pro-UHC, and willing to allow illegals the ability to gain a driver’s license. Surely i’m not in the minority?
6. Joe | January 7th, 2008 at 12:11 pm
SEW,
It sounds like you and the other Repubs are really upset that Obama’s middle name is Hussein. Why else would each and every one of you bring it up with ever comment?
I’ll tell you what is fun to watch… it is fun to watch Mitt squirm as he is getting bombarded from McCain, Rudy, Fred and Huck. This really is a 4-on-1 and it is hilarious. The only one not bombarding him is Ron Paul.
7. Joe | January 7th, 2008 at 12:19 pm
Zach,
What about his “values/beliefs” are you having issues with? If your whole argument is he is “Pro-choice, Pro-UHC…”, then you aren’t voting for any Dem anyway. Obama’s not my first choice, but would certainly have no problem putting my support behind him.
So… since you won’t be voting for any Dem, then what Repub do you like and why?
8. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
I’m very please his middle name is Hussein. Do you know who W is? Sounds to me you are not happy with his middle name, but why does the MSM always leave it out but always refer to either Bush or W, not President Bush? Your turn.
9. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 12:38 pm
Joe,
We needn’t worry about how the Republicans will campaign if Senator Obama is the nominee of the Democratic Party. SEW is just the hairs on the camel’s nose under the tent flap. If Senator Obama is the nominee there will be endless “accidental” references to “Barack Osama” or intentional references to the Republican nominee by his first and last name but a use of all three of Senator Obama’s names as a dog whistle call to Republicans cowering under their beds in fear of Muslims. We’ll be treated to more stories, such as the recent one from the Washington Post, asking rhetorically if the Senator’s campaign is “responding effectively” to the false stories that he attended an Islamic madrassa. There will be ample numbers of concern trolls worrying about the reactions of “those people” if Senator Obama should lose the election. Yes, Mark will have much to watch that will be “fun”.
10. Zach | January 7th, 2008 at 12:50 pm
Joe,
You’re correct, I wont be voting for any Democrat thats currently running for President. My point was just to make a comment about his personality being very attractive. I wont vote for Obama but if he makes it to the WH i wont be that upset.
On the GOP side, I’m not sure who my candidate is. Frankly, i’ve been a Ron Paul fan six plus months now, I’m just not sold on his foriegn policy. He’s really the only candidate that I find I want to listen to. I hope this doesnt draw fire from our reisdent conservatives for that. haha
Guiliani is too liberal for me, Romney is too fake, Thompson is too lame, and Huckabee is just..ehhhh, McCain is lame too for me as well. He’s not the same McCain from his previous campaign. Honestly, I need to dig deeper on these candidates and try to live with one because I dont Paul has a prayer.
Sorry Joe, I just think “Pro-choice” is slang for murdering the defenseless.
And our government can’t possibly effectively run a Health Program for 300 million people. Its impossible. Do you understand the sort of revenue it would take to keep such boat floating?
11. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
Diane, No one referred to Hussein as Muslim, other than you! No one referred to Obama as Osama, other than you! Yet you call Republicans out for what you said? You might keep your eye on Billary though. Remember the drug use plant?
And why so sensitive about Obama’s middle name but not so sensitive about Dubya or W? Hypocrisy rides again.
12. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Obama should be very proud to have such a distinguished middle name, especially since there is nothing in his political career to distinguish him.
And of course, Mohammed is the 2nd most popular given name in the UK now. All males of course, Sharia prevents that name be given to women. What a “progressive” world!compliedloyal
13. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
SEW,
Well, this took about 15 seconds to find:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/12/barack_hussein.html
and add on another 30 seconds or so:
http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200708080002
and maybe a minute for this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ask4hAdNlM
I’m not sensitive about Senator Obama’s middle name. You’re the one who brought it up. In case you forgot:
As to “W” or “Dubya”, I hate to remind someone else of basic history, but there was a President of the United States named George Bush prior to the current President Bush. There has never been a United States Senator, much less President, named Obama.
14. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
SEW,
Well, this took about 15 seconds to find:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2006/12/barack_hussein.html
15. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
and add on another 30 seconds or so:
http://colorado.mediamatters.org/items/200708080002
16. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
and maybe a minute for this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ask4hAdNlM
17. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
I’m not sensitive about Senator Obama’s middle name. You’re the one who brought it up. In case you forgot:
As to “W” or “Dubya”, I hate to remind someone else of basic history, but there was a President of the United States named George Bush prior to the current President Bush. There has never been a United States Senator, much less President, named Obama.
18. Sunny | January 7th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
SEW, maybe you need to go back and re-read Diane’s post. Put on your comprehension cap sweetie - give yourself plenty of time, and maybe (?) you will understand what she was saying. As to Dubya - he is old news. He isn’t in the race this time, remember? Time to move on.
19. Retired Spook | January 7th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Diana,
This took less than 15 seconds
20. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
But there was an Osama in a cave somewhere and a Hussein in Iraq. Is that why you are so sensitive about Obama’s middle and last name? Never occurred to me!
Yea, I reread! And she was proposing what Republicans will say while stating it herself, just as Billary mentioned Obama’s drug use, was afraid Republicans would use Obama’s drug use against him.
Got it now. Thanks for your help.
21. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Spook, You can tell Ted is impressed with Osama’s, uh, Obama’s congressional record! Didn’t even know who he was!
I am also impressed with Richardson’s request for Bush to change Pakistans’ President, and Billary thinking he is up for reelection even though he was just reelected. What a strong field the Dims have.
22. Mark Noonan | January 7th, 2008 at 1:47 pm
Sunny,
That is because Democrats won’t ask each other about it - they don’t have to; each of your senior Democrats has zero actually differences with any other senior Democrat other than a different opinion of which lefty intellectual clone should be President. The MSM also won’t ask Democrats about their real views - because (a) the MSM knows them and agrees with them and (b) the MSM knows that the Democrats core views are political kryptonite.
As we get into the general, however, and the Democrat is faced with a GOPer who will ask the questions, then it will be crunch time for the Democrats, and only a split GOP vote can save them.
23. sleepygene | January 7th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Mark-
I think the change chorus is going to continue right up to November. That will help Hussein Osama. You state that Iraq is more off the table as an issue, I would agree somewhat in that it isn’t as horrible as it was a year ago, but polling suggest (I know what you think of polling) that a majority of people think going in in the first place was a mistake, a mistake that Obama foresaw going on six years now. http://www.gallup.com/poll/102655/Opinions-Iraq-War-Show-Little-Movement.aspx
This is where Osama’s judgment in my opinion will trump the lack of experience charge. Though the lack of experience charge is a valid one to use I just don’t think it will be as effective as you think.
Further, polls show americans by and large want UHC, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/washington/01cnd-poll.html. Also, the economy which has been steered by Bush the last seven years with the help of a republican congress six of those seven years is begining to slow, some say possiblly dipping into recession, that is going to hung around the necks of Bush and the repubilcans and I think it will help Sen. Hussein Osama (D-IL).
24. plainjane | January 7th, 2008 at 2:22 pm
I would not count out Senator Clinton just yet. Now that Obama is the corporate media’s front runner he will get the same scrutiny as Senator Clinton. Now that the Huckster is the front runner he will get the same corporate media attention as Mitt. But what sport, every time Americans try to establish a hero, the media is there to find every piece of lint and dirt in order to tear them down. No doubt they are helped by the other candidates. Just look at how the Wall Street –Washington Republican Axis establishment lead by Rush Limbaugh is going after Huckabee. You think he is smart enough to come up with this Huckster dirt on his own?
25. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
The Huckster, being from Arkansas and all, PhD Clinton School of politics, destroyed all of his hard drives after leaving office. He apparently didn’t have storage space.
26. Joe | January 7th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
SEW:
Are you freaking kidding me????
Do you remember seeing bumperstickers of just a W and an ‘04 on it? He goes by George W. Bush. Do you remember that there was ANOTHER George Bush that was president? you may not remember that since it was over in a blink of an eye.
27. AAR | January 7th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
It’s not “Barack Osama”… it’s “Osama Obama” and has been for quite some time. Google it…
It’s going to be fun as more and more Conservatives start attacking the Democrat candidate(s).
It’s going be even more fun and games if the Democrats’ win in November. That should finally re-awaken Conservatives, and we can start the real and sustained attacks — just as Democrats have done to President Bush, Republicans, Conservatives, and Christians the past seven years!
Bring ‘em on!!!
AAR
28. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Yea Joe, I remember. That’s my point. Why so pouty about your candidates’ middle name. Or even his last name? I didn’t name him.
29. Joe | January 7th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
SEW,
My point (and thanks for missing it), is that you people that continually call him by Hussein or continually call him “Earbama” as some do on this blog are apparently doing so because you have nothing else to say.
Debate the issues, not the looks. Not someones name. Not on how their hair looks. All that is crap. You people obviously have nothing else to say.
Just keep trying to shoot someone down and never say why your guy is any better.
30. Sunny | January 7th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
AAR, please enlighten me as to what we Christians have suffered through for the past seven years. I have not once been stopped at the door of my church (United Methodist) and prevented from entering. Not one time has anyone stopped me from praying. And I cannot tell you how many times I said “Merry Christmas” this past season, and not one person spit on me, threw stones at me, or even so much as told me not to wish them a Merry Christmas. Even in the department stores - I was so surprised, expecting someone to chew me out for wishing them a Merry Christmas, since I have read and heard so many times how Christ was being removed from our Christmas celebrations and Christians are being persecuted. I even proudly displayed my Nativity Scene - not one objection! Go figure. Granted, I live in the heart of the Bible Belt, but I even heard people on TV programs wish everyone a Merry Christmas. Maybe you need to re-think your place of residence if you have this much trouble practicing your religious beliefs. I don’t have any here.
31. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
You’re the one raising Hell. I don’t raise Hell when you refer to W. Major sensitivity problem with you idiots. And what is there to discuss about Hussein’s congressional record? Sorry, I meant Osama, eh, Obama.
But go ahead, discuss his congressional record.
Other than, present.
32. Joe | January 7th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
AAR:
It’s going be even more fun and games if the Democrats’ win in November. That should finally re-awaken Conservatives, and we can start the real and sustained attacks
So you are saying that if a Dem does get the Presidency, you won’t even give him/her a chance? And you call Dems opposing the war UN-AMERICAN.
Look up Bush’s approval ratings in his first year or two. They were right up there. I voted for him in 2000. Then he f*cked everything up and now people don’t like him, his administration or anything the Administration does.
So if a Dem is elected, you are saying right off the bat, you are going to start attacking him/her? Nice. Real nice. Don’t wait to see what happens or anything. Maybe you folks can spend another billion dollars on another Ken Starr investigation of everything the Dem has done since they were a teen. If you are going to do that, I hope Hillary gets in. At least you clowns have already spent 8 years investigating everything. Maybe some money can be saved.
You AAR, is exactly the problem with politics. Keep trying to shoot the opposition down by whatever means possible.
Bring ‘em on!!!
What a clown.
33. David.B.Schmidt | January 7th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Zach (#11)
Take a look at the whitepapers put out by Sen. Thompson and make up your own mind. Right now, in this sound bite world, he is not getting a word in edgewise because he has actual thoughts that take more than 30 seconds to explain; however, IMHO he is the only real conservative in the race.
http://www.fred08.com/Principles/PrinciplesSummary.aspx?View=WhitePapers
34. Sunny | January 7th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Joe, you are right on. It has been attitudes like AARs that has caused this country to become so divided for the past seven years. I too voted for Bush in 2000 - and I regret that vote every day. In fact I have voted Republican for the past 40 years for the most part. I do believe it is important to check out the candidate and not just vote straight party tickets. But whoever is elected this next election, I hope that we as Americans, give the person a chance, regardless of party. As Abraham Lincoln said, “a house divided will fall” or something to that affect. And we are certainly a house divided at this time. We need to become united and strong once again.
35. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
“Maybe you folks can spend another billion dollars on another Ken Starr investigation of everything the Dem has done since they were a teen. If you are going to do that, I hope Hillary gets in. At least you clowns have already spent 8 years investigating everything.” Joe
What a hoot.
36. Just Another Taxpayer | January 7th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Posts are interesting. But they fail to address the following questions:
A. How much US money needs to be spent in Iraq to keep you from losing your house if you can’t make the mortgage payments?
B. How much does Bush lower your taxes so you can pay your mortgage when your gross monthly income is less than the mortgage payment?
C. How much less do equity fund managers who have their multi million dollar incomes taxed at roughly 10% less than the average American $50,000, need to have their burden lessened so they can make the market regain the roughly 1000 pts its lost in the last 2 weeks due to the credit crunch from the sub prime mortgage crisis?
D. How much US money needs to be spent in Iraq to keep your paycheck coming if your job is threatened because of writedowns due to the subprime mortgage crisis?
E. How much US money needs to be spent in Iraq to prevent Bin Laden from infilitrating his agents into the portion of the Pakistani military responsible for guarding that nations
nukes?
Like to hear what your thougts are. Even if we don’t talk about Obama middle name.
37. Faceplant | January 7th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Marky,
And you actually believe this?
“The war in Iraq is no longer a key issue, so against it “from the beginning” does not resonate so much any more.”
In what world is the Iraq issue “no longer a key issue?”
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Bill McInturff (R). Dec. 14-17, 2007. N=1,008 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1.
.
“Let me list some issues that have been proposed for the federal government to address. Please tell me which one of these items you think should be the top priority for the federal government. [See below.]” If more than one: “Well, if you had to choose just one, which do you think should be the top priority?”
The war in Iraq 18%
Health care 18%
Job creation and economic growth 14%…
CBS News/New York Times Poll. Dec. 5-9, 2007. N=1,133 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
.
“What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?” Open-ended
War in Iraq 25%
Economy/Jobs 12%
Health care 7%
Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg Poll. Nov. 30-Dec. 3, 2007. N=1,245 registered voters nationwide. MoE ± 3.
.
“What issue or problem do you consider the top priority for candidates running for president to address this election? Is it the war in Iraq, or protecting the country from terrorist attacks, or the economy, or education, or the environment, or health care issues, or illegal immigration, or other social issues, such as abortion and gay rights, or is there another issue?” Two replies accepted
War in Iraq 32%
Economy 25%
Health care 19%
CBS News Poll. Oct. 12-16, 2007. N=1,143 registered voters nationwide.
“Which one issue would you most like to hear the candidates for president discuss during the 2008 presidential campaign?” Open-ended
War in Iraq 26%
Health care 25%
Economy/Jobs 11%
No matter how much you plug your ears and scream “I’m not listening to you!” the reality is that Iraq has been, and easily still is one of the the most important, if not THE most important issue as far as the American electorate is concerned.
“Where does Obama stand on closing the border and amnesty?”
So Iraq is “no longer a key issue” but immigration is? Hmm, let’s see how important this issue is to Americans shall we?
In the first poll I posted 12% if Americans said it was an important issue.
In the second poll I posted 4% thought it was an important issue.
In the third poll I posted 15% thought was an important issue.
In the fourth poll I posted only 6% consider immigration an important issue.
In fact the issue of illegal immigration is consistently rated as less important than Iraq, the economy, healthcare, and terrorism. Issues by the way, that democrats are consistently outpolling Republicans on.
“Unless one believes that there is a massive wave of anti-war sentiment which will, alone, carry Democrats to victory, the Democrats in 2008 will be forced to run on their issues - high taxes, high spending, gay marriage, abortion, Hollywood values, etc, etc, etc.”
Or, you know Marky, they could run on the economy, healthcare, terrorism, or any of the other dozens of issues that democrats consistently outpoll Republicans on.
38. Faceplant | January 7th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
“Yea Joe, I remember. That’s my point. Why so pouty about your candidates’ middle name. Or even his last name? I didn’t name him.”
And this drivel passes for legitimate political discourse among Republicans.
You must be proud of your cult members Marky.
39. USA | January 7th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Wow you conservatives are lost in your own little world. Would any of you cowards actually debate the iraq war, high taxes, high spending, gay marriage, abortion, Hollywood values, etc, etc, etc.? I know you don’t. You never do on this site and you never do in the public eye. Because all the intellegent people and you know that on every issue you will fall flat on your face if a debate is even mentioned. You conservatives are a joke. Conservatives live in their own little world which doesn’t even exist, all they do is spout lies and ignorance, and when someone comes by to start a debate, or educate them about current events and give factual data they run away. So keep running away, what else can a stupid liar do? Would you like to debate anything I have said? No? Didn’t think so, you’d lose, just like your losing in the game of life.
40. SteaM | January 7th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
USA,
These conservatives, yes. But I hesitate to lump every single conservative into that stereotype.
Of course, those who aren’t in the same boat with the posters on this site are probably not going to vote republican, are now independents or have switched to a third party or even are now democrats.
One of my best friends, when I met him three years ago, was a hardcore Bush loving republican. Not anymore. He is fully aware of and would openly admit that the Republican Congress, Bush and his administration and the neocons are all very dangerous and he is not happy with the people who hijacked and ran his party into the ground.
41. Mark Noonan | January 7th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Face,
The poll is of “adults”, not “likely voters”, it is from weeks ago and, more importantly, the “key issue” part of it is whether or not Obama being “against it from the start” is something worthwhile.
Please pay attention.
42. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
“In what world is the Iraq issue “no longer a key issue?” Plantbrain
Hey Plantbrain, The Dims and MSM don’t want it to be an issue. Remember, other than voting for the war, the Dim position has been cut and run. “This war is lost.” Remember? Cut and run. This is a civil war and not winnable. Remember? Cut and run. The surge won’t work. Remember? Cut and run.
So I agree. It is an issue. But only a plantbrain Dim or a Republican want it to be.
43. Mark Noonan | January 7th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
Sunny,
You mean Gore saying in 2003 that President Bush had betrayed the United States and Michael Moore’s slanderious “Farenheit 911″ had nothing to do with the divisions in this country? It was all us on the right?
44. Retired Spook | January 7th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Wow you conservatives are lost in your own little world.
And a wonderful world it is, USA. It must suck to be you.
Would any of you cowards actually debate the iraq war, high taxes, high spending, gay marriage, abortion, Hollywood values, etc, etc, etc.?
What would be the point? We know where you stand: against, for, for, for, for, for; and you certainly know where we stand. Do you think you are going to change our minds, or are you afraid we might change yours? Just be satisfied with another hit on your bong.
You never do on this site and you never do in the public eye.
Boo-frickin’-hoo! And yet you keep coming here, asking the same questions, apparently hoping each time for a different answer. Do you know what that’s the classic definition of?
Because all the intellegent (sic) people and you know that on every issue you will fall flat on your face if a debate is even mentioned.
You’re right; you’re far too intelligent to debate with. That’s why we don’t try.
Conservatives live in their own little world which doesn’t even exist
That’s because, as you said before, “it’s lost”.
all they do is spout lies and ignorance, and when someone comes by to start a debate, or educate them about current events and give factual data they run away.
I can just picture smoke coming out of your ears about now.
So keep running away, what else can a stupid liar do?
I’m sorry, I’m having trouble typing at this point. I’m laughing so hard, tears are streaming down my face. I’m afraid I’m going to short out my keyboard. Toooooooo funny!!!!
Would you like to debate anything I have said? No?
NO!!!
45. AAR | January 7th, 2008 at 5:28 pm
Joe,
Oh, we’ll give your DIMocrat president EXACTLY the same chance and respect you looney LIBnuts gave President Bush, his administration, Republicans, Conservatives, and Christians!!!
I think maybe Osama Obama would be the best choice. We all know how bad “two face” Liberal Hitlery is and what to expect from her!
Can Osama Obama be worse? If so, that will only serve to irritate, agitate, motivate, polarize, and unite Republicans and Conservatives even more!!! It doesn’t really take many people to make a difference — just that they are fired up and united in purpose.
The Democrats’ uniter and rallying target — President Bush — will be gone. The Democrats will be in the barrel and any problems and unfulfilled campaign promises will be THEIR fault. It will be fun to watch the worst of the eclectic mix of extremist factions within the Democrat “Party” working to tear the party apart! What could be better and more fun to watch?!!!
Bring ‘em on! Let the battle begin!!!
AAR
46. AAR | January 7th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Retired Spook,
Well said!
AAR
47. FmrMarine | January 7th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
To ALL
this is the “church”- husein obama attends and wholly supports.
Think of the appointments he would make if he was president.
Think if a WHITE candidate belonged to a
church” who had the same doctrine, but use the word WHITE for every statement in stead of black.
Trinity United Church of Christ
About Us
We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian… Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain “true to our native land,” the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.
Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the Black Value System written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by Vallmer Jordan in 1981. We believe in the following 12 precepts and covenantal statements. These Black Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Blacks are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:
1. Commitment to God
2. Commitment to the Black Community
3. Commitment to the Black Family
4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education
5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect
8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of “Middleclassness”
9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community
10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions
11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System
12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System.
#
48. Faceplant | January 7th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
“The poll is of “adults”, not “likely voters”,
Uh, no. Of the polls (I posted more than one, in case you didn’t notice) two are of adults nationwide, and two are of registered voters. Furthermore, in the polls done of registered voters, Iraq scores as a HIGHER priority. In other words, among those more likely to vote, Iraq is MORE important.
“it is from weeks ago”
It is the most recent polls found on polling report.com, and there is no reason to think public opinion has drastically changed since then. If you have evidence that it has I would love to see it.
and, more importantly, the “key issue” part of it is whether or not Obama being “against it from the start” is something worthwhile.”
Complete and utter nonsense. Keep twisting yourself into pretzels Marky.
The article didn’t say that Iraq isn’t a key issue for Obama (because of the way he frames his opposition to it), but implies that Iraq isn’t a key issue for any candidate. You are playing word games, Marky, and not doing a very good job of it.
49. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
FmrMarine,
Thanks for proving my point in comment # 10. It didn’t take long. Senator Obama is not anything more than a candidate at this point. Yes, by all means, let’s be scared of this:
And this:
And this:
50. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 6:09 pm
If White replaced Black all Hell would break loose. Jesse and Al likely would claim a branch of the KKK. All the liberals on this board would be screaming racism.
But Hussein [given name present on his birth certificate]] can get by with it. For now.
51. Diana Powe | January 7th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
Yes, FmrMarine, we should “think of the appointments he would make if he was president.” Let’s be very afraid, especially, as you preferred to refer to him as “husein obama”. As I said, thanks for proving my point so completely.
52. Faceplant | January 7th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Hey Plantbrain, The Dims and MSM don’t want it to be an issue. Remember, other than voting for the war, the Dim position has been cut and run. “This war is lost.” Remember? Cut and run. This is a civil war and not winnable. Remember? Cut and run. The surge won’t work. Remember? Cut and run.
So I agree. It is an issue. But only a plantbrain Dim or a Republican want it to be.”
Right.
.
NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by the polling organizations of Peter Hart (D) and Bill McInturff (R). Dec. 14-17, 2007. N=1,008 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.1 (for all adults).
“Do you think the U.S. goal of achieving victory in Iraq is still possible, or not?”
Is still possible 37%
Is not possible 56%
Not sure 7%
“When it comes to the war in Iraq, which of the following statements comes closer to your point of view? The most responsible thing we can do is find a way to withdraw most of our troops from Iraq by the beginning of 2009. The most responsible thing we can do is to remain in Iraq until the situation in the country is stable.”
Withdraw most troops by 2009 57%
Remain until country stable 40%
Unsure 3%
CBS News/New York Times Poll. Dec. 5-9, 2007. N=1,133 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (for all adults).
“Regardless of how you usually vote, do you think the Republican Party or the Democratic Party is more likely to make the right decisions about the war in Iraq?”
Republican 30%
Democrat 45%
In case you didn’t noticed it is radicals like you that are on the wrong side of public opinion on Iraq. Your party’s view on Iraq has been rejected by the majority of Americans, and the majority of Americans now side with the Democratic party on Iraq. Maybe that’s not the way it is in fantasyland, but that’s the way it is in reality. Democrats have nothing to lose by running on Iraq.
53. Michael | January 7th, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Obama’s gonna get the nomination going away. The Hildebeast’s days are numbered - her campaign is falling apart and already the polls give Obama a 12 point lead in the next primary contest. On the Republican side, I cannot guess who will win. Huckabee is done; McCain is too old, so I guess it boils down to Mitt Romney or Rudy Giulani. Either of which stands a good chance of defeating the young and inexperienced Obama who won’t impress anybody in the general election. That “change” crap goes over well with teenie boppers and college students who typically come out in force for the primaries but once the real election is being competed, Obama will show what his really is; a hollow slogan with no experience, no plans, and very few friends where he needs them.
54. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 7:45 pm
Plantbrain, When was Gitmo closed? Any detainees scheduled to live with you? As usual you and your Dims base everything on absurd polls and ignore what is actually happening. And it is the Democrat Party, not Democratic. Moron.
So now your “position” has changed for the upteenth time until 2009, or when the situation is stable? I thought it was cut and run yesterday, except when you voted for the war. Moron.
55. phnx | January 7th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
I don’t see what the problem is with Obama’s middle name. He was named after Imam Hussein, the grand son of Prophet Mohammed, who was martyred and whose martyrdom is celebrated annually by Sunni Muslims around the world. Shouldn’t he be proud of his name. I sure he is. So what’s wrong if it is spoken? Are you Dems ashamed of his name? Are you trying to hide something?
And BTW to set the record straight it was that lush of a senior senator from Mass. who mumbled “Osama Obama…Obama Osama…errr… uhhhh…that young senator from Illinois.”
56. AAR | January 7th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Diana Powe,
It doesn’t say “Americans”…
It says “Black” Activists…
Just like the Congressional “Black” Caucus…
And that’s the way you racist Liberals want to keep things… Blacks separate from other Americans!!!
Thanks for proving my point!!!
AAR
57. Faceplant | January 7th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
“Plantbrain, When was Gitmo closed? Any detainees scheduled to live with you? As usual you and your Dims base everything on absurd polls and ignore what is actually happening.”
And what is actually happening? Becuase you know, we measure “what is actually happening” by conducting polls. But as Stephen Colbert said, “reality has a well known liberal bias.” Keep living in never-neverland for all I care SEW.
“So now your “position” has changed for the upteenth time until 2009, or when the situation is stable? I thought it was cut and run yesterday, except when you voted for the war. Moron.”
Huh. Apparently your reading comprehension isn’t quite up to the level of a fourth grader yet.
Where in that entire post was I laying out my position? I’ve never had a conversation with somehow who makes as little sense as you do.
58. Jones | January 7th, 2008 at 8:17 pm
Diana,
In post # 10, you made reference to how the Republicans will try to stir up fears of Muslims when referring to Senator Obama.
I guess liberals are much more sophisticated. Rather than the indirect attacks that you say the Republicans will launch, the Democrats would be more straight forward like this in early December 2007:
A day after the Hillary campaign hit the Obama camp for bullying voters in nasty phone calls, the Hillary crew has just acknowledged that an Iowa county chair volunteering for the campaign passed along the now-notorious email that smears Obama as a Muslim by repeating the false claim that he attended a madrassa as a child.
Also, when referring to any Osama Obama stuff, don’t forget that it was Ted Kennedy in one of his finer moments who started that.
59. Blogs For Victory »&hellip | January 7th, 2008 at 8:28 pm
[…] the agent of change. But it’s just rhetoric. Those claims don’t mean anything. As Mark pointed out earlier, Obama’s “change” mantra is meaningless because he hasn’t gone into […]
60. SEW | January 7th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
By your, I was referring to you and the Democratics [sic], not you. Your, as in plural.
“Where in that entire post was I laying out my position? I’ve never had a conversation with somehow who makes as little sense as you do.”
With somehow [sic] who makes as little sense as you do? You’re right, no comprende. And speaking of making no sense!
Can’t wait to see Hussein defend his
Congressional votes of “present” defended in a real debate.
61. 2008 Presidential Electio&hellip | January 7th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
[…] Mark Noonan put an intriguing blog post on Hillary, Obama and the Democratic ProspectsHere’s a quick excerpt […]
62. Sunny | January 8th, 2008 at 10:58 am
Mark #42 - yes, the Republicans are pretty much the blame for the division of this country. I don’t believe that Gore’s statement (frankly, this is the first I have heard of it) or Michael Moore’s movie had much to do with the division of our country. Did you even bother to see Fahrenheit 911? I doubt it, but most of the movie was just clips of statement by various politicians. Bush and his administration has been the most divisive that has ever been in office.
63. Michael | January 8th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Typical sweeping statement with no evidence, no proof. Abraham Lincoln declared war on the South and 100’s of thousands died. The South was defeated, but much resentment remains. Pretty devisive, in my opinion. There are probably dozens of other examples throughout history of divisiveness for one reason or another. But go ahead and make blanket statements - it helps us with the credibility issue.
64. Faceplant | January 8th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
“You’re right, no comprende. And speaking of making no sense!”
Ooooo, ouch, you pointed out a mistake in grammar!
Ouch, that hurts. OK, you win!
If this is all you got in response, then you don’t got much.
65. Faceplant | January 8th, 2008 at 8:48 pm
“I don’t see what the problem is with Obama’s middle name. He was named after Imam Hussein, the grand son of Prophet Mohammed, who was martyred and whose martyrdom is celebrated annually by Sunni Muslims around the world. Shouldn’t he be proud of his name. I sure he is. So what’s wrong if it is spoken? Are you Dems ashamed of his name? Are you trying to hide something?”
Due to the lack of a response from Mark, or Matt when people on his blog post this childlike level of drivel, I can only assume that you Mark and Matt, and blogsforvictory.com as a whole endorses this disgusting, and pathetic level of political discourse.
I hope you two are proud of your site. Now I’m off to let everyone know what a bunch of racists you allow to post your your site.
66. Huck Fillary | January 9th, 2008 at 4:37 am
Sunny, we’ve always had division in our political world; it’s just gotten more pronounced over the last 16 years. And you can blame “W” all you want, but let’s give credit where credit’s due–Mr. and Ms. Clinton get an assist…
67. SEW | January 9th, 2008 at 9:49 am
“you don’t got much” Plantbrain
Got? How’s life in the hills? Are you providing for your Gitmo roomies? Free health and dental care. Meals?
Oh wait, the detainees are still there.
Plantbrain, thanks for providing insight into liberal thought processes and humoring me at the same time. And I don’t have to log in to Kos to find it.
68. Timothy Horrigan | January 9th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Well, speaking as a Democrat, one good thing about having Hillary as the nominee is that we know what lies, smears and innuendos will be thrown at her.
Remember, BTW, that even massively unpopular candidates can win… as long as the other guy (or gal) gets even fewer votes. George W. Bush managed to win in 2004 even after the worst first term of any President ever. Hillary can definitely win in 2008: unlike Dubya, she actually has supporters. However, I hope one of the other two candidates gets the nomination.