Is he going to run on the Too Cool to be a Democrat ticket?
Posted by dj moonbat at January 16, 2007 07:51 AMOh, let's just wait and see what the man says and does. I think the good news is that he provides a welcome alternative to any Republican. I would like to see him do something in the Senate to hasten the end of Executive Over-reach, but I won't hold my breath. Too many senior-senators in the way.
Posted by suds at January 16, 2007 08:40 AMAfter his "surge" speech, I am all for hearings and trials and even impeachments proceedings...fuck it. Let's go down swinging.
Posted by Jim DeRosa at January 16, 2007 08:41 AMApparently half the Democratic senate thinks the '08 presidential field will be pretty fertile, while the Repubs pre-select their corporate-money-backed candidate and cram him down the mouth-breathing fundamentalists throats.
At least "Bipart" Obama won't have too many senate votes to analyze for heinous "flip-flopping". If the healing necter of "bipartisanship" will be his schtick, can we commence barfing now?
Posted by euzoius at January 16, 2007 08:53 AMI want a different kind of politics too, Barack. I want somebody who recognizes that the wingnuts hate the idea of America, and that they view Democrats as roadbumps on the way to their Talibanistic utopia.
You apparently are not that person.
Enjoy your flame-out. You and Hil can share pity stories in 2009.
Posted by God Of War at January 16, 2007 09:06 AMMaybe he should run to the left of Dennis Kucinich. Is that really what everybody wants? He's trying to win.
Posted by nerdoff at January 16, 2007 09:38 AMMaybe he should run to the left of Dennis Kucinich. Is that really what everybody wants?
I just want him to stop using the "some on the Left propose that we solve the problem by eating puppies and deflowering virgins, but I believe in a New Way" formulation that he seems to love so much.
Posted by dj moonbat at January 16, 2007 09:45 AMExcuse me, as a CT resident, while I finish retching. I've OD'd on "bipartisanship", having had the phrase stuffed in my ears repeatedly for the last year over a nasty whine. Obama just confirmed for me his lack of fitness for the office he seeks.
Posted by PrahaPartizan at January 16, 2007 10:38 AMDam, now he is putting more pressure on all those white people who won't vote for a black man for at least another 100 years, but lied to the pollsters out of political correctness.
Could Obama run as an independent, and be the Ralph Nader spoiler of 08?
Posted by TIKI AL at January 16, 2007 11:26 AMHillary's nightmare just came true.
Posted by Christopher at January 16, 2007 11:37 AMAs much as I hate to say it, this country will not elect a black man President, yet. The repukes and media will play his Barack "Hussien" Obama (Osama) name over and over. Before you know it, every southerner, white Christian male (think Virgil Goode), will be screaming for blood (think KKK).
He's going to have to get mean if he wants to win the debates. Nice guys finish last in politics and in battles against the repukes!
However, it's good that he is throwing his hat in the ring. Maybe he will make a good v/p candidate.
It will be interesting to see how he handles himself these next 2 years.
too bad all current candidates are losers
if we are patient, we may see the next president soon, but it isn't likely to be these jerks that spend their time running for pres instead of doing the business they were elected to do
first things first, make pelosi president and start the trials. If we don't, we won't have a country. When we have the trials and the sheep that make up the electorate may finally see proof that their government has been sold to the highest bidder.
It is highly premature to talk this out today. I would not vote for one of the existing loafers that aren't trying to get to the bottom of the criminal behavior of this admin. If they are trying to get elected, then they don't give a damn about what we, the people want.
know what I mean?
Ya'll are assuming there will be elections in '08. Bush still has time to make himself Dictator for life.
Posted by Judith at January 16, 2007 01:20 PMDon't say "any Republican" before you consider Rep. Ron Paul. This is a guy who could garner support from independents, Republicans and Democrats. He is a fiscal conservative, but social liberal....my kind of guy. He voted against the War in Iraq, against the Patriot Act, is for limited government, Constitutional respect, border security, decriminalization of marijuana (for all you heads out there), taking back money creation from the Federal Reserve and is not a member of the Council of Foreign Relations or the Tri-lateral Commission.
He is for Americans, not American corporations and deserves serious consideration and support. Check his latest op-ed. http://www.antiwar.com/paul/?articleid=10330
Posted by brisa at January 16, 2007 02:00 PMOh well said, Steve!!
Fuck Obama. The really ironic thing about his candidacy is that for all his relative youth, he is running a campaign with a very hackneyed theme---the outsider who will end the bipartisan bickering. If that's what he has to offer, we don't need him.
I'm very disappointed in Obama now, compared to how I felt about him two years ago, when I felt he had a lot of promise.
He's a demolished man---the ego stroking he has gotten has ruined his character.
I don't think John Edwards is a loser. I give him high marks for holding the Dems' feet to the fire over Iraq. Congress needs to act NOW, not only to get our troops out of Iraq, but to stop the war on Iran.
Posted by marky at January 16, 2007 04:23 PMIf you would bother to find out a little about Obama first. You'd find he is not like Liebermann or likes the jerk.
He is looking for away to cut thru the poison so that congress can work to fix the problems rather than play gottcha.
Like alot of bloggers you seem content to work in ignorance of the real person Obama is.
It's easy when you don't have a real job, like Edwards, to make noise.
when you do have a job and have to work with a bare majority you must play nice. You don't have the luxury of stamping your foot. You have to be a grownup. that means compromise and being nice. Not saying somethings you may want to. You have to dance on eggshells so you can help get the other party to agree to pass things. It is counterproductive to act foolish or blow hard about things. You hurt the party and ultimately the people because you blew it by pissing off the other side so there isn't enough votes to make change.
I suppose if Obama was unemployed like Edwards he would have that luxury.
grow up.
So you're casting aspersions on John Edwards because he 'doesn't have a job'?
Gee, I wonder if he's collecting welfare?
Posted by snark at January 16, 2007 08:22 PMThe dirty tricks begin.
FOX Affiliate Shows Video Of Obama Rally During Sex-Offender Story...
You Tube | January 15, 2007 05:44 PM
A news segment broadcast by Minneapolis-St. Paul's KMSP-TV, also known as "FOX9," shows footage of people marching with signs and placards supporting Barack Obama while the anchor reports a story about the sentencing of a sex offender. The station is owned and operated by Fox Televisions Stations Group.
HuffingtonPost.com
Oh BS on Obama and Lieberman. Lieberman and McCain are his fucking mentors! Obama refused to support Lamont.
And Obama's message of cutting through bipartisan wrangling is tired and WRONG!
As an African-American, I find it strange that in this corner of liberal(?), progresive(?) blogmania that Obama's resume alone doesn't put him ahead of everyone on the planet considering a run for the presidency.
The "white folks" lament about affirmative action vs. quotas is alive and well among the double-speak of liberal bloggers. This bullshit is about as perceptive, liberal and progressive as Sen. Clinton's handmaidens over at the Post and NYT.
The reality is that no matter what, you wouldn't vote for Obama if God came down and told you to. So stop all the mystic bullshit and look in the mirror. You are all just waiting for another opportunity to have a coffe table critique on the subject of "if he was white, he'd have won by a landslide" because there was no real difference between the other democratic candidates.
Who else has a real world view from " life experience" that may help us deal with other cultures on this planet? Who else was a professor of constitutional law (at the University of Chicago)and may have a chance to undo the Bush/Cheney powergrab/national insecurity legacy? Who else was a community orginizer and may have a clue about what our poor, our unions, and our elderly and minorities may really need.
Talk about experience, WTF do you want? Oh yeah, another sacrifical lamb, blueblood-wannabe pussy like Sen.Kerry, Sen. Edwards, Sen. Clinton, etc who wouldn't even stand up and call out Bush when it counted. Wake up, these people belong to the same club or wannabe. They aren't going to rock the boat, they all moor in the same harbor. Money says that Heinz products are on all the tables inside the Green Zone in Iraq. OK?
Obama has time to shape his message and agenda for a campaign of substance. Only a fool would put his entire program out there too early and let eveyone else glom-on or rip it to shreads.
With regard to Sen. Clinton, I'm sick to death of this political monarchy shit. I'm not anti-woman, I'm "anti" any woman who wouldn't kick the shit out of her cheatin' bastard of a husband that would shame his entire family (re: daughter) on the world stage.
Yeah, she's a real feminist alright. Career before family, pride, and friends who took a fall for her. Talk about baggage. You want this repressed egomaniac controlling our nuclear arsenal? What exactly is she supposed to do for women? Teach them how to knuckle under and sellout? Gee, what a great example for our daughters....NOT..!!!
Kennedy, Bush, Clinton? WTF, isn't anyone else allowed in the room? Don't get me wrong, I would have voted for Bobby in a NY minute, but Teddy, Sen. Clinton? PleeeeeeeZZZZzzzzzzzzz..!!
Evolve or Perish....Loyalists are not Patriots
One World,
Domino49
Posted by Domino49 at January 17, 2007 03:05 PM