UPDATED with video: Obama criticizes MoveOn.org in patriotism speech: Wesley Clark hears it too...
By John Amato Sunday Jun 29, 2008 1:15pm
I understand that Obama is going to move to the center during the general. It's a fairly common practice even if I disagree with it, but to go after MoveOn which supported him so strongly is a bit much.
Download | play 
Download | play
Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama on Monday, in a major speech on patriotism, criticized MoveOn.org for referring to Gen. David Petraeus as General Betray Us last year.
The Illinois senator said politics too often seems "trapped in old, threadbare arguments" that he called "caricatures of left and right." The Democrat argued that "given the enormous challenges that lie before us, we can no longer afford these sorts of divisions."
MoveOn.org, a powerful left-of-center interest group, endorsed Obama in the Democratic presidential race.
"None of us expect that arguments about patriotism will, or should, vanish entirely; after all, when we argue about patriotism, we are arguing about who we are as a country, and more importantly, who we should be," Obama stated in his speech from Independence, Mo. "But surely we can agree that no party or political philosophy has a monopoly on patriotism."
Obama also said that he would "never question the patriotism of others in this campaign." The senator made clear, however, that he would "not stand idly by when I hear others question mine."
I agree completely that he has to stand up strong against the smears that are coming and have been raining down on him by the right so far. And we haven't seen nothin' yet. We all want him to win very badly in the fall, but he's moving much more to the right than I would have thought this early.
And he rebukes Gen. Wesley Clark.
Sure enough, just as I was about to publish this blog post, I got an email from Obama spokesman Bill Burton: "As he's said many times before, Senator Obama honors and respects Senator McCain's service, and of course he rejects yesterday's statement by General Clark." So much for Vice President Clark.
UPDATE: Take our AOL Hot Seat Poll on whether Obama was justified in criticizing MoveOn and Clark below the fold
Wesley Clark responds here...
Login or Register to post comments.
You can sign a petition if you go to VoteVets to thank Wesley Clark for this statement and tell him not to back down...
Every other time Obama opens his mouth he disappoints his liberal base and looks more and more like a pandering and timid politician...
He should have stood strong against the attacks on Clark and defended the truth of the statement.
Here's the link to thank Clark and ask him not to back down:
http://ga3.org/campaign/petitionclarklink
It's all talk. ALL of it. All this kind of stuff bears little relation to what his actual presidency will be like. Obama is the guy, and I think it's useless to nitpick every remark or nuanced position.
obama's begining to act like those rich slugs who act like they deserve their lot in life because they were born to it, or if they did earn some of it, forget all the help they had along the way.
Whatever happened to the party of Thurston Howell III?
Nope. Just can't vote for Obama. First the FISA thing, then this. Can't do it. He's just another same ole, same ole. Which of course I knew since he made it through the primaries -- corporate media decimates anyone who might mean ACTUAL change. But. Still. I had hopes.
Guess I'll be writing in my friend Justin for president at election time. I know many people who will also be writing in candidates rather than voting for either mcsame or obama.
Very sad.
How about supporting FREE SPEECH Obama?
A t this point you appear to be your own worst enemy.
lordkoos @ 3:
Move on did wrong by coming out and supporting Obama. And Obama is stupid to come down on Clark .
ysbaddaden @ 4:
Are you referring to W or HRC?
JA-HRC is not Bush...
Remember when the Repugs went after Kerry with their inflamatory ads? Only the SwiftBoaters can make Kerry look weak and Georgie boy a military hero. Go figure?
wagonjak @ 2:
Bad link.
So much for Obama as an agent of change.
It's facism-left or facism-right, eh? no third party choices.
lordkoos @ 3:
pass me that crystal ball you got there.
call me nuts, but trust is lacking these days. maybe this IS what his presidency will be like, and the obama from the primary was just to get votes from the base?
ysbaddaden @ 4:
Didn't you hear? They went on a boat for what was to be a 3 hour tour, and were never heard from again.
While all of us are supposed to say that we honor McCain for serving in the criminal and bloody war in Vietnam...Clark is absolutely right on target.
The Democrat Party 2008: Craven Fascism ... but with a Smile.
I wonder how many of you "anybody but Hillary" people are not second guessing yourselves? It was a mistake to have Senator Obama as our nominee and he is proving it time and time again. I feel like Senator Kerry is running again.
dada @ 11:
Bad link
Hey Quick Response Team - READ the quote before you comment!
Good goddess, when are we going to stop REACTING to this garbage! Clark did NOT disparage McCain's service. Any fool could have read that. But as long as we allow Faux News and their minions to set the bar for the discourse, we might as well just hand the Big Chair over to McCain.
McCain's service to this country is wrought with favoritism and politics. Daddy and Grandpa were biggies in the Navy but Johnny Boy barely got out of Annapolis. He got shot down a lot and got caught by the enemy. That doesn't make in presidential, it makes him a lousy pilot.
Someone tell Obama's crack team of responders to try to read the quote before making the asinine statement.
Jesus Christ on a Whole Wheat Bagel, when are we going to stop shooting our own feet!
it's probably best that obama squash all the touchy feely supporters.
i guess...
When will McCain be making his speech on patriotism? How about his speech on race?
Phoenix Justice @ 17:
Kerry did a great job. When the MSMachine is against you what are you going to do,
Last week Obama capitulates on FISA and this week he throws both MoveOn and Wesley Clark under the bus.
Am I paranoid, or was it only the threat of Clinton's campaign that was keeping Obama from betraying us months ago?
Pathetic. Change we we can believe in indeed.
lordkoos Says:
It’s all talk. ALL of it. All this kind of stuff bears little relation to what his actual presidency will be like. Obama is the guy, and I think it’s useless to nitpick every remark or nuanced position.
I think the candidate of change has already changed and is now starting to bite the hands that feed him. He's supporting the FISA bill which is a capitulation to Bush and the criminal Korporations and a slap in the face to all citizens of this country. I am sick and tired of more of the same from weak kneed, spineless democrats who look more and more like repugs every time they vote against the Constitution and the people who elected them.
Obama had better start acting like the man of the people he claims he is or those people may chose to bite him back by ignoring him come Nov!
The battle sadly goes not to the smartest, the most accomplished or the most deserving. It goes to the least nuanced. MSM would pretend they didn't "get" a nuanced responce to Clark's comments. They'd pick it apart and feed on it. I've seen this movie before. I'm not happy about it, but
Lordkoos' comment above is dead on. Big picture: Swallowing campaign BS now vs. fewer dead people post elections.
Here is a link encouraging the Dems to not back down
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/6/30/65813/4639
Try this one:
http://ga3.org/campaign/petitionclark
Can we draft Hillary at the Convention?
I'm already disgusted by the Daschle-ization of Obama!
Oh hell, now this! Okay, okay; gotta keep my eye on the prize - Obama is still the best way to vote the repugnicans out...one more wingnut SCOTUS judge will move all women from second class status to biological serfdom....gonna vote for Obama because McSame is more of the McSame...it's noon in 20 minutes; I can hit the scotch then...my brain hurts
Remember that this election is ours to lose?
Yup. We're on that path.
Priceless.
Mickxotic @ 30:
If I have to wait until five o'clock, so do you. :)
Susan @ 5:
I don't know where you live, Susan. That matters here. If you live in a state with a close contest between McSame and Obama, refusing to vote for Obama is a big mistake.
I'm Canadian, so I don't have a vote in this contest for chief world hegemony guy. But this matters to me because you and other U.S. citizens have a chance to put an end to the Bush approach. You know, the contempt for international law and multilateralism, indifference to Iraqi lives, etc.
And I'm left-wing, not liberal, but I'd still vote for Obama if I could because the Bush Republicans must be stopped.
"I understand that Obama is going to move to the center during the general. It’s a fairly common practice even if I disagree with it"
You appreciate the lack of backbone from the left during elections?!?
If we liberals are really sincere about differentiating ourselves from the right, then we must reject the tactics of the right. Senator Obama is holding the high ground here by being consistant. If it is wrong to make personal attacks against him (as was done by swift boaters in 2004 against John Kerry), then it is equally wrong for the left to employ similar tactics in kind. While I agree that what Clark said was not an attack on McCain's record, but really just a statement of fact, it is the type of comment that is easily mischaracterized by the right-as was the "general betray us" tag.
We on the left just can't play that game anymore if we truly wish to bring something new and refreshing to politics. This is not a move to the center by Obama. It is an elevation of discourse. I encourage all to embrace his actions and follow his lead.
You SIR.
Ohh Bama - Got a pair? Best be brass and best you start showing that you have them firmly attached. The show's just begun and you are losing support. Try the word "conviction" on for size - show that you know the word and practice it and maybe I'll skip my write-in vote and still give you the nod come election day.
Phantom(God of Hellfire) @ 361:
Again, if Obama pisses on his base in favor of the 30%ers, who's being the idiot?
Otay @ 364:
I'll explain it slowly. If Obama demoralizes the base, and makes them too disgusted to send him contributions, who (along with the disenfranchised) is being an idiot?
Looks like we're getting Sister Soulja'd again.
Another week of this sniveling bullshit and even Obama Girl herself will start getting buyer's remorse.
If Obama buys into the Repub frames, and reinforces the Repub memes, who's the idiot?
If he comes across as desperately trying to be more like the Republican as a Repub lite, backing down from his previous positions, and supports the Repub candidate's strengths, who's the idiot?
All I'm saying is that in this election, you have two choices: Barack Obama or John McCain. Period. You can vote for any number of other people, but one of those two will win the presidency. Given that fact, I fail to see how it makes sense not to vote for him. I think that we should be focused on rebuilding the party, and losing elections does not help rebuild the party. And having McCain as president does not help rebuild the party, either.
When I talk about change, I'm not talking about Obama. I'm talking about the reshaping of the Democratic party from the bottom-up, getting better people elected locally and eventually on the national level, reshaping the policies and direction of the party. This doesn't all happen in one election, but it can happen if we keep at it. As I said, I think it is happening. I just think that not voting, even though he is NOT making any of us happy right now, is shortsighted and does not make sense for us. I agree that what he's saying sucks. I really do. But having McCain as president is not something I want to see. Basically, the best outcome is Obama. The worst outcome is McCain. Those are the only two outcomes. Does anyone really think that it doesn't matter which one becomes president?
Well, here we go again. Another Democratic candidate for President believing that becoming Republican Light is a winning strategy. This election is already starting to seem like a bad old movie that is in reruns, and I already remember the anticlimactic ending.
When Obama threw MoveOn under the bus once again, that pretty much ended my support for him or the Democratic Party which I have strongly supported my entire life. I've simply had it with the Pelosi's, Reid's, Blue Dogs, DLC, Lieberman's et al.
Most worthless opposition party ever. Fuck it, I'm done.
Every week, Obama disappoints me. A lack of concern about health insurance, immunity for telecoms, and now, disowning perfectly valid statements by Wesley Clark.
Clark as VP would have made Obama unbeatable. Oh, well.
I'm writing Obama For America a $500 check... but not before I write V-O-I-D on it, in large block letters. On the memo line, I'm writing "Re: FISA and Wes Clark and MoveOn, you are SUCH a disappointment. Suggestion: Grow A Set!"
If Barack Obama moves anymore to the right, we'll have to start calling him BarackO McBama.
On a related note, I heard that the Democratic Leadership Council (the group which keeps giving us Blue Dog Democrats who constantly lend support to the culture of corruption Republicans while dissing liberal, progressive Democrats) has finally endorsed Barack Obama's presidential run.
Which leads me to ask:
1) What did Barack Obama promise the DLC to get their endorsement, and
2) Did Obama's promise involve his promising to choose a DLCer, a Blue Dog Democrat, to be his running mate?
If so, then Obama's dumping on MoveOn.org and his dissing of Gen. Wesley Clark begins to make sense...as well as his almost McCain-like stance on FISA (with retroactive immunity for telecom companies), the Fairness Doctrine, gays, etc., which means that as our next president we'll end up with Bush the Same (McCain) or Bush-Lite (Obama).
This seems to be everyone looking through their own tainted glasses... If someone on the right had come up with some insulting but catchy slogan against a military person on the right, we would all be saying McCain should refute the comments. MoveOn might have been right about Petraeus saying merely what the administration wanted it to, but the slogans and insults need to be out of the picture, especially when we're talking about the presidency. Obama can't support immature rhetoric like that, and it was... no matter how much you want to argue that it made sense, it was used merely because it rhymed with his last name and was catchy. People getting offended he wouldn't back that statement are certainly too caught up in their own side. I'm glad he rejected that, Bush wouldn't have and Rove and the gang would have played it up as much as they could. This is not what real politics that make progress are about.
Also, for as much as this site and the people who read it criticize the media for manipulating politics, we all just got had. Most of the comments here are stating their disgust for Obama now, and all because people got soundbites and then more people wanted reactions of those soundbites and now half the people here hate Obama... get a grip
You guys are awesome. "I believe in the candidate that will put an end to political bickering and bring America together!" Yeah, as long as everyone agrees with you. Nearly every time I come to this site anymore you're all bitching about how Obama doesn't agree lockstep with everything you do and you threaten to stay home or to vote for McCain or to write in your dog's name. Go type your name on some useless internet petition, eat half a pint of Ben and Jerry's and cry yourselves to sleep, you fucking babies. The guy agrees with you 80% of the time, and those few times when he deviates in the slightest you go apeshit. You're looking down the barrel of the most liberal administration in a generation and you're still not happy. Well, go ahead, knock him some more, then let McCain win and watch as three more conservative judges hit the bench. Good luck with that.
What good did MoveOn's ad do? If anything it backfired tremendously. I'd bet a fiver that if not for that ad, Petreus would be long gone already. Attacking an ad that was universally condemned is no huge step out of character and goes a long way to getting more mainstream America voters. Voters who have been conned into believing that the Democrats have nominated a gay, muslim, crack smoking, black power, America hating radical to be president (ie, most of Ohio). If knocking MO's ad gets him 10,000 more votes, that could swing a county, and an election. Time well spent.
Criminny, let the guy win the election first, then feel free to go after him all you want.
Let Obama win the election? He's setting himself up for a loss. Good luck with that under-the-bus-tossing weak pandering tactic, Gary. I'm sure it'll work just as well as it has every time the Dem party has used it over the last 20 years.
Otay, you mean like it did for Clinton, twice?
gary burke @ 377:
you speak as if one's political and social principles are the result of a game of eeny-meeny-miny-moe . . . my belief in the inviolability of the constitution, however, is the very foundation of my identity as a citizen . . . and while i accept that obama's positions on the issues will align with my own somewhere in the 60% range, there are some beliefs that are held too dear to be abandoned for the sake of political expediency
and, fyi, the morons who believe that obama is "a gay, muslim, crack smoking, black power, america hating radical" aren't going to vote for him, no matter how much he panders
Is this the real Obama, or is it the strange bubble dreamed up by bad advisors?
Lately, Obama is starting to concern me. I want to believe he's only politicking, but he's starting to become the clone of Clinton.
Maybe Elizabeth Edwards was right about not publicly endorsing Obama. She'll work with him on the cause she feels strongly about, being Universal Health Care. However, Elizabeth Edwards was always wary about what kind of Demo Obama was really all about. I'm starting to get that feeling too.
Remember, Bill Clinton was the best Republican President we ever had. I hope Obama doesn't become the second best Republican President we ever had.
Here's my question -- where do we draw the line in the progressive sand that we wont let get crossed? To where do we hold our peace in order to get this guy elected because he's are only best option and still be able to look ourselves in the mirror. Is there some sort of moral dilemma here or a crisis of faith?
I know, I know, the campaign is early but is it necessary to pander to some right wing media types? Some things aren't really necessary like bad mouthing MoveOn , unless there's a strategy I don't recognize. Obama is this the change you are talking about or am I losing sight of a bigger picture? Obama don't let me down by turning into a Bill Clinton. I wanted something better. Please give me a sign or your Progressive love. And a whole lot of transparency wouldn't help either.
Until then BHO, you're not getting my money. It will go to ActBlue and work at putting better Demos in office.
sundog @ 381:
I prefer to think that electing Obama over McCain is our best out as far as the election goes. But at this point another Clinton is not a good thing. We need to get up off our butts as a nation and get the media out of partisan politics. We need to get the Fairness Doctrine reinstated. We need to outlaw paid lobbyists. We need to break up the media monopoly. Can you believe the response to Wesley Clark today? Total nonsense embraced by almost 100% of the media. Total media control is here, has been here and will not go away until we MAKE it go away.
it's starting to look like obama will throw anybody under the bus . . . his spiritual leaders, muslim america, wes clark, move on, anyone who uses telecommunications . . . and i know i've got tread marks on my back
i'd kind of like to see a list of people whom he wouldn't run over to get to the white house
I haven't read all these hundreds of comments. All I know is that Obama is confusing the hell out of the Netroots by saying and doing things that fly in the face of progressive thought, all apparently in an effort to broaden his support for the general election. I guess it's the politics of the man we are disappointed in at the moment, not the man himself or his prospects of being an outstanding president if elected. Clearly, Obama is playing a role as presumptive nominee that has us uncomfortable, at the very least. But, I think we have to take all this with large grains of salt, and realize what Obama's up to.
Simply put, Obama knows he cannot win if he paints himself as a lefty "netroots style" progressive. Thus, he has to distance himself from us for the time being in order to create a "moderate brand" that can win. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt, and not be discouraged. It's politics and we have to understand that he doesn't really intend to be this wishy washy as president. Remember that George W. Bush also ran as a somewhat moderate "compassionate conservative", but turned out to be anything but. Obama will be the mirror reflection of that. Keep your chins up, he's going to be fine.
Ken @ 384:
in the meantime, i have two huge problems with all the pandering . . . a) he's still a senator (mine, actually), and he is still obligated to legislate in accordance with the constitution . . . fisa does not fit that bill, and as a senator, obama is risking that president john mccain will have that weapon in his fascist arsenal . . . and b) he's got a very tall soap box, so when he affirms the drivel about mccain automatically being fit to be commander in chief because of his military service, his opinion broadcasts far and wide and drowns out more principled though less politically expedient voices, like wes clark's
george bush and the republicans dragged the national dialogue into the gutter, and the result was public support for many dangerously wrong-headed policies . . . not something i'd like to see obama repeat, regardless of which direction his pendulum swings
You couldn't see this coming??????? You f-----g morons.
Bush = Council on Foreign Relations
Clinton = Council on Foreign Relations
Obama = Council on Foreign Relations
The same CFR founded by Big Oil companies...and still staffed by Big Oil CEO's the same ones in Dick Cheney's secret Energy Committee...who wanted the war...and got it.
Arguing about which puppet gets to sit in the Big Chair at 1600 Pennsy Ave. Some choice. Some change. Yeah, right.
gary burke @ 379:
Clinton did not fall all over himself praising the other candidate. For all of his faults, at least he stood up against those who attacked him. He may a right-wing type, but few would call him a pandering pussy. People respect strength.
I was thinking of Kerry, the Dem congress, Daschle, the Dem senate, Harry Reid, Steny Hoyer, Nancy Pelosi, etc. Weak, spineless, caving pussies. And look at their approval. In the teens. The idiots lost support that they initially had.
Something that could well happen to Obama.
Otay @ 388:
Link Courtesy of LiberalinModeration. I thought you'd like to read this Otay.
Otay @ 388:
And Clinton would not have been so incompetent as to cater to the furthest right 30% (FISA), while pissing on his own base, during the elections. when it counts.
lordkoos @ 3:
The sure sign of a Teflon politician. They can do no wrong. I gives a new meaning to the word "nuanced".
G String @ 281:
I hope you're being sarcastic, because the wall street friendly economists are the farthest thing from the free-market there is. They are for corporatism- which could not happen in a free-market.
G String @ 281:
[blockquote] The country is against “free trade” and the party not only supports it, Obama has surrounded himself with economists who want to further the neo-liberal platform and reforms. Think the government should have been involved LESS after Katrina, more should have been left to the private market, well you’ll just LOVE Obama’s economic team. The public wants to take on corporate power and wealth concentration and Obama’s economic platform makes that impossible.[/QUOTE]
The country is AGAINST free trade? Where did you get this insane logic. I don't think there's anyone here who's against the idea of being able to start their own business- or trade goods with someone else in exchange for something they want. This country is not against HUMAN COOPERATION which is what free-trade/free-markets are all about. Obama's economic team is definitely NOT the type to support the free-market/free-trade, have you read any of his policies or looked at his votes? He's definitely for government collusion with corporations- but AGAIN THAT IS NOT THE FREE-MARKET- stop putting the blame in the wrong spot. These corporations could never get the powers or monopolies they hold without the government supporting them 100%.
G String @ 281:
If by more wealth concentration you mean more money in the hands of the few...no that's not going to save the dollar- infact that is what happens when the federal reserve causes inflation in the first place. Demand induced/financial inflation? Inflation is a monetary phenomenom created when the money supply is increased by the Federal Reserve. This is the SOLE cause of inflation. The Federal Reserve is a HIGHLY regulatory institution that controls everything in this economy and has made things get this bad. They caused the housing market to get inflated and subsequently collapse- they print out all the money to fund our military adventures and domestic programs. But I suppose you would agree with the solution to give them even MORE power like what has been done recently.
David Aquarius @ 19:
I don't understand why the Democrats insist on apologizing for telling the truth, while the Republicans smear them with falsehoods and never apologize for anything. I am beginning to think about leaving the Democratic party for the first time in my life and going independent. Still have to vote for Obama against McCain because of the Supreme Court positions that will open in the next four years--although, if he keeps cowering to the Republicans, his first nominee will probably be Robert Bork.
Stupid questions....Obama is not a saint...what the hell is wrong with you people. Move-on and Clark are a bunch political partisan hacks...and Obama playing the good guy while they play the bad guy is plain politics as usual.
I think that calling anyone in the military a "hero" no matter what they did has watered down the definition of the word. I've not served so I'll need someone who has to correct me if I'm wrong. I understand and admire people who serve in the military. I think they deserve recognition. I just think that there are military people who are heroes and others who were just good soldiers. Calling every good soldier a hero makes no distinction between the guy who fixes tanks way behind the lines and the guys who are up front throwing themselves on a grenade or risking their own lives to save other soldiers.
Is this OK with everyone in the military? To let us call all of them heroes so that none of them are?
lordkoos @ 3:
*****************************************
Sure seems to me that Obama nitpicks when it suits him (ie, Hillary & Bill) and decries it when he is the target (public financing, Rev. Wright, etc.)...
Obama for president? Surely, this is a joke perpetrated on the American People.
As a military veteren, the first obligation of a captured soldier is to ESCAPE BY ANY MEANS, so why are people so impressed that McCain didn't-he knew he would recieve favored treatment. Wake up people his injuries could have been from ejection from his plane.
Obviously none of you responders listened to him in the primaries. Obama said he wanted to stay above the same old attack ads and mud slinging and talk about the issues. McCain has no say-so in General Petraeus' decision making, and McCain's war-time heroics have nothing to do with the current presidential campaign. So explain to me how Obama has gone back on his word?
Progressives Complain About Obama’s New Slogan: ‘Yes We Maybe’
Dr. Acula @ 29:
Do you honestly think Hillary "Corporate Backed" Clinton would be better?
I was bummed by FISA, and this and a lot of stuff. But I understand it. It may be distasteful after 8 years of utter fascism and 20 of far right partisanship and 30 of cynical dismantling of the social and environmental structure and roll back of civil rights.
I get it. We want payback.
But the fact of the matter is. the POTUS should represent everyone, not just one ideologic view. This is true even if the right thumbs their nose at the very idea.
I will still vote for him. I still think he is not only the best option, but may prove out to be a good president. Remember that FDR was voted in on a fairly wishy-washy centrist platform and then went on to create the entire social safety net. THe right looks to his presidency as the point they want to roll everything back to.
So if it takes a little centrism to get the ball rolling again, so be it.
And so much for the Obama campaign getting another nickle from me. I'll still vote for him in November (I fear a McCain Presidency would irreparably damage the nation) but my campaign contributions will go to ActBlue candidates.
sparticus @ 35:
Finally, a reasonable and well thought out comment on this thread. Thank you!
Unfortunately I think this is less "political calculation" and more "what he really believes" than many people want to admit.
That's fine though. He's still the correct choice, but it just means that the honeymoon will be shorter than I expected.
BTW, McCain left his sick wife after she waited years for him to return from being a POW for a 20-something from a rich family who could bankroll his presidential ambition. Republican family values and all.
Barak, we hardly knew ye!!
For a group of people (conservatives) who attack and undermine our troops at every level, this baseless attack of Gen. Clark reeks of faux outrage.
Phoenix Justice @ 17:
First of all, Kerry never responded to the attacks, Obama does. Second, don't fool yourself for a moment that Hillary wouldn't be under attack if she were the nominee. And she's NOT. Obama didn't win because of this big load of 'anybody
but Hillary' voters, he wonbecause he ran a good campaign. She lost because she didn't, period.
That said, while I understand that BO doesn't want a nasty campaign, I don't think General Clark said anything wrong.
I knew long ago that Obama is a long shot in the huge, religious, racist, dumb world. So I've known to expect him to cater to audiences different from the one here.
But why did he have to bring MoveOn into the speech today? Patraeus HAS betrayed this country by choosing to act politically to protect Bush rather than to tell us the truth of Iraq. Now he is moving on to Iran.. The betray us conversation was last year and we know it was true. So why did Obama go back and dig it up?
I don't care for Wes Clark, but he spoke the truth too (just signed at VoteVets) . I guess Obama is trying to squash the contempt of the crazies, but their contempt is there regardless of anything he will do or say. Jeez Barack, who is it going to be next, Cindy Sheehan?
Kathleen @ 22:
Did you and I witness the same election cycle? On what planet did Senator Kerry do a "great job" in running for President? What drugs are you on and are you going to share so as we can see the world as you do?
I feel sick from some of Obama's recent activity, but the stupidest thing we could do is vote for John McCain or not vote at all. You might as well kiss the Constitution goodbye if you'd rather McCain be president. Talk about voting against ones interests! Obama is moving to the right so he will be elected (sucks I know), but once he's president he won't have to pander so much. McCain would be so much worse than you think Obama is bad now! Don't screw things up for the rest of us! I'm as pissed as anyone over Obama's rejection of Clark, his jab at MoveOn, and his lack of presence during the FISA bill vote, but the idiots in the media and John McCain will have won if you hold such a grudge! I'm still voting democrat, but just not so enthusiastically now.
Wesley Clark is a tool. The same exact reasons he thinks McCain is not qualified reflects on Obama too! Get him the hell off the TV before he embarrasses Democrats any further.
Clark thinks that Obama is suited for Presidency because he has a great personality, good communicator... Well doesn't that just make me feel all warm and fuzzy inside Clark. Go bomb some more in Kosovo. Oh wait we are the anti-war party, sometimes... when it suits us to be.
I think MoveOn is terrific, but their rhetoric can be over-the-top sometimes. I think the "General Betray Us" expression is unfair, but it's worth remembering that they were, at the time, criticizing Petraeas' report to congress, which he had slanted to make the Iraq war sound more successful than it was. At the same time, he's also one of the few figures in the whole Iraq disaster that has shown sense, judgement and good results on the ground in Iraq, and I think Obama is right to support him on that grounds. That he slanted his report to Congress? Guess who was pressuring him to do that? The same idiots in the White House who made wrecks of the work and reputations of so many other talented foreign policy, military and intellegence people by demanding they stick to the party line.
Give Obama a break, his forfathers might have been slaves.
McCain is crazy,but Clark makes him look rational. Remember,Clark is the guy that Clinton had to fire because he wanted to attack the Russians and start WW-3. He even gave the orders to attack the Russians,but the British General directly under him (General Michael Jackson) refused the orders and immediately called Tony Blair to let him know what was up.
The truth is that anybody that votes for either McCain OR Obama is too stupid to be allowed to vote. That choice is fascism of the left or fascism of the right. Some choice.
Vote 3rd party. Any 3rd party.
Mickxotic @ 30:
This Is A Perfect Example Of The Fact That Obama Will Do Anything And Say Anything To Get Elected. The Reason That Obama And The Clinton's Do Not Get Along Is That Obama Is Using The Clinton Play Book. They Are So Much Alike That They Can't Stand Each Other.
Kathleen @ 15:
Stupidity goes along way on here. The war in Vietnam was a Political war. None of these guys wanted this war. But fought with Honor for our country. The same country the liberal eliteist would destroy. There was nothing as criminal as the slaughter waged against the South Vietnamese by the North.
I can not wait to see the Obama Presidency so the same people who murder innocent unborn children get their wish and throw all morals and patriotism out the window. As for me I just will remain bitter and cling to God and my Gun.
Wesley Clark is a failed general. Do you remember Kosivo and Serbia..Yes he is the general who screwed it up.. As far as Obama hie is a cheap lying puss. Who has no honor no honesty... screw Obama
I ended my membership with MoveOn, whom I supported both financially and physically during Kerry's run, when they endorsed Obama. What goes around comes around! They deserve no better.
That poll should read:
-Yes, it was necessary.
-No, he's being an ass clown that capitulates to right wing talking points and manufactured outrage on anything from major issues (like FISA) to the comments of Gen. Clark who just so happens to be absolutely fucking right. Not to mention his quote was taken out of context. It was a direct response, in defense of Obama, to a statement by Bob Shieffer which posited the ridiculous notion that somehow because Obama didn't get into a plane and get shot down that he was somehow less qualified to be POTUS.
Honestly, I'm getting real sick of watching Obama squander opportunities to confront the bullshit distortions that are poisoning the political discourse in this country. He's just about full of it when he does this kind of shit and parades himself as some symbol of hope that we, as Americans, can speak intelligently about the important issues of our time and leave all this lame partisan rhetoric behind. How can we possibly leave it behind when he lends it credence in this fashion? A textbook example of "talking out of both sides of your mouth."
And another thing. Rejecting divisiveness is one thing, but you still have to pick one side of an issue. You cant sit around entertaining fact (Clarks evaluation of McCains record) and fiction (the right wing/MSM manufactured response to what Clark said) as equals with same level of credibility. There IS such a thing as right and wrong. And by rejecting Clark's statement, Obama showed that he is on the wrong side. Here's how to fight divisiveness: persuasiveness. Be more fucking persuasive Obama. Make a strong argument in support of valid ideas and convince people of where the argument should be. Stop letting CROOKS and LIARS dictate the rules of engagement. Stop being a chump. Try to stand up for something other than your candidacy.
Always the pet of the Chicago mob, Mr.Obama is thier greatest hope for regaining some measure of the power they once enjoyed.
Can't we just clone Theodore Roosevelt? Best conservationist Pres ever, and never backed down.
I also want to point out that the "No" side of the poll seems to miss the point. It's not about loyalty to Clark or to the Democratic party or anyone. It's about whats right and whats wrong. It's about the fact that Clark said nothing wrong, nothing he needed to apologize for, and certainly nothing that impugned on McCains service. I wonder if Obama even watched the whole interview or just heard the seriously out of context quote...
Obama is going to ruin the chance of a Democrat in the White House and probably make things worse than they already are. Unless or course you're a terrorist waiting for America to let our guard down and then you will probably be thanking Allah for all the stupid people who thought it was a good idea to vote in someone with no real experience, who can't pick a side and even stay loyal to the groups who have actually given him a shot at being the first black president. God Help us all.
I am a Democrat but will either NOT vote or will vote for McCain.
Flash @ 48:
You have summed it all up...Correctly...Bravo!
This is all a political ruse. IT's the same tactic he used with NAFTA and the Canadian government. Disown them in public but behind the scenes telling them not to pay any attention to what he is saying as it is all "campaign rhetoric". Obama is a total fraud!!!
He will take this country to a new level. Not one which we will be proud of mind you. He is all wrong for us. All you had to do was listen to a speech he made yesterday I believe. He couldn't even remember what he was to say. He was forgetting things already. at this point, I wish Bill could run one more time. There is nothing out there right now worth voting for. Obama can't think on his feet and when many things confront him, he will fail, and fail miserably.
even if the argument can be made that getting shot down is not a qualification for prez. the fact that mccain refused to be released from his captors (even tho he was severely injured, broken arms etc) before other pow's who were there longer than he says a lot about his mettle and about what he is made of. he showed that he is a good man with steel in his spine. it was wrong for clark to attack mccain in this way! shoot, even cnn disparaged clark's remarks.
also, the reason that obama is moving towards the right is because that is where most of our counntry's votes are. Americans, by and large, are not leftists.
Obama can dish the criticism out but he can't take it.
He gets my NO VOTE
Susan @ 5:
Yeah, right. Give the Republicans another four years in the White House, because Obama is... gulp... a politician. There will be at least three openings in the Supreme Court in the next eight years. The Radical Right is one justice away from a complete majority, and Susan can't vote for Obama because of what-- Obama dismissing negative attacks from his own side? I don't think you guys understand how important this election will be for our nation.
It reminds of my liberal Florida friends back in 2000. I'm not voting for Bush, but I can't vote for Gore. I'm going to send a message-- I'm voting for Nader. Stay focused and keep your eyes on the prize. Vote for the Democrats if you really want a change in 2008.
Obama is in a lose-lose situation. He cant say anything that wont be called on carpet for. He is damned if he does and damned if he dont. Doesnt matter what subject is. First its he is unpatriotic, so now he showing he is patriotic and gets bashed for it. Then its he is a muslim, then he tries to tell and show everyone he is christian man and he gets bashed. Now its this deal with Clark, granted Clark was just telling the truth but I was hearing way before Obama made statement about how Obama was "swiftboating" McCain. So he had to make statement. But it was still a damn if he does or damned if doesnt situation.
I generally agree with what OBama is saying and I find if humorous that almost 70% of the people polled agree with him, yet the majority of posters disagree with him. What that tells me is that a disproportionate percentage of people with extreme views post on blogs.
General Petreus didn't lie, but he did put a positive spin on the facts. Although I feel that he could have more of a backbone when it comes to telling it like it is, overall he's doing a good job in an almost impossible situation (unpopular war backed by an incompetent administration). In short Moveon.org was wrong in calling him "Betrayus".
As for Wesley Clark his comments were better left unsaid. You don't question a POW's war record, period. McCain can be criticized for a lot of reasons, but going after his military background is a huge mistake. Just very poor judgement by Wesley Clark that has backfired.
The bottom line is that this election will be won by convincing the moderates to vote for a particular candidate and OBama knows this. He can't back the far left any more than McCain can back the far right. What's sad is that both extremes are too stubborn or too stupid to realize this.
Blah blah blah blah....
Hope you are seeing how this is going. Pay attention and use your head about WHO and WHAT you support. Read between the lines. Obama is not your Savior.
I love how Obama has "other" people do his dirty work, then comes out and says he didn't do it and it "may" just be wrong and don't you dare do that to me......poor silly fool.
Like another writer said.....shooting yourelf in the foot.
FYI I am a Hillary supporter and will never, never, never vote for Obama.
Mc Cain is my vote and everybody else I know that has a logical mind that
does not expect a pie in the sky.
THINK THINK THINK
We are a Democratic Nation not a socialist nation. It will stay that way.
ghostrider @ 24:
Looks to me that Obama is the one doing all the changing!
Ann @ 422:
This country went so far to the right after 911 that this speech sounds like left to me. How pathetic is the U.S. when a banality like "no party or political philosophy has a monopoly on patriotism" has become an applause line?
If Obama is going to lead the whole country, he's got to cross the center line and give the fools who drove us into this mess a chance to save face. MoveOn will always be the organization that resisted the dark reign of the neocons. No speech by a progressive politician trying too attract do-little-to-nothing moderates will change that.
Our battle today is to back Clark's assertion that McCain's patriotism is honored but does not silence an analysis of his judgment. He's in a campaign for the highest office in the land. Then in February, we seek criminal indictments for any abuse of surveillance laws by the phone companies.
I heard Obama's 'so called rebuke'. Exactly where or when in that speech did he use Gen. Clark's name? He didn't. He made a general statement, but of course that is all he is required to do by the mainstream media. Heaven forbid he call someone out by name.
UNDER THE BUS:
Osama throws another one under the bus.....LOL
First it was his grandmother then his minister Rev Wright, then his chief fund raiser Tony Rezsko then WQesley clark and now Move On....MUHAHAHAHAHAA.....that skank michelle better keep her big mouth shut or she'll be next....ROTFLMAO
Everybody thinks that change will be such a good thing. Remember one thing both are gutless politicians and things can get worse and will no matter which of the two are put into office. And that will still be CHANGE.
It's funny to me how Obama uses people to make himself look good. He used a minister to appeal to the midwest church crowd no doubt, then the minister came out with some absurd comments and Obama was able to "be the better man" and "heroically" put the preachers words to rest while building attention for himself in general as well.
He then has a supporter slam his opponent's military experience and is able to "rise above" yet again, while the comments he disowned still made their point...
He allows "far left" rhetoric to resonate long enough to make it's point and then positions himself as mr. do good every time.
He is playing the dirtiest political game and getting away with it by setting himself up to look like he is above the bs his supporters are spewing in order to pick up support while his party makes outrageous claims in an attempt to discredit the republicans.
Obama is one slimy puppet.
moveon.org sunk into bankruptcy twice and would have been toast without george soro's money. Air America did go bankrupt even with soro's help. meanwhile, Fox News beats CNN ratings by about 15% and beats any other 2 news programs viewer ratings combined.
David Aquarius @ 19:
Finally!! Some liberals who understand what's going on!! It's probably too little to late this go round, but maybe in 4-8years you might have another crack at it.
Just because someone is completely different from anyone you have voted for in the past and goes around the country screaming "Change" without any true plan to change doesn't mean you put him in charge of the most powerful country in the world. Seriously folks, can you find someone who knows what they're doing before handing them the keys to the car???
I am all for new ideas and different way's of doing things because the old ways just have not worked and this was why I suppored Hillary Clinton. I am very reluctant to vote for Obama if Hillary is not on the ticket with him. I chose Hillary over Obam firslty because a woman should be our leader, secondly I don't trust him and it is a gut feeling that has just never gone away. Yes I am a Pastor but I am very concerned for the way the future will be, but without Hillary on the ticket I have turned this over to God because he has all the controll anyway's when there is such a difficult decision to be made. I am not saying that McCain would be better than Obama but I am just so afraid of Obama's continued attacks on people, groups and whom ever he chooses right out of the clear blue sky. I do not feel safe with him but agree that the old way's are out and we must find new ways to clean up the mess we have made.
it seems a lot of people don't understand what Obama really wants... Its not about the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, or the Independents anymore. Its about all of us as a NATION. Its time for divisiveness to end - Its time for us to work together towards our COMMON goals - Its time for CHANGE.
obama's record is that he has no record. he has done nothing whatsoever to deserve the nomination except that he ran against an opponent who had so much baggage. the next few months will be his undoing. do y'all really think that he is going to get a pass on all his contradictions? this is American hardball politics, folks. the toughest/roughest in the world. you ain't seen nothin yet!! just being a black man isn't going to cut it, and really, when you look at it in depth, thats all he's got...
Let's get real. We do not have a real candidate to vote for. Neither of these 2 men are viable Presidential material. Either they lack experience or they are beyond the age of someone who is living with the problems all of us are experiencing.
I say tell both parties that we do not want either of these candidates and either they come up with someone that will really present our problems and real solutions, or we the people will come up with someone and then all of Congress better look out as they may not like what we the people want.
We can all whine about the war. But, it is there. Everyone can sit back now and say I didn't want it and I didn't vote for it. But, it is there. Someone had to vote for it to happen and it is not only the President that decided we should go to war. Congress has continually funded the war. Besides, I don't know about you but when an act of terrorism is on the soil of my country, balls to the walls and get it done to show the world it is not acceptable and the US will take immediate action. That said.
You can slam Bush all you want and Lord knows there is not a lot than can be said in his favor, however, how many of you refused the stimulus check he had sent out? How many of you have benefited by his social security reforms or tax breaks benefiting the "middle class"? Remember that the position of President is just a bobble head. It is Congress that makes the laws and spends the money.
I am neither Repub or Demo at this point. I am loosing my home. I am dieing because I can't afford medical care. I have to hide my truck so they don't repo it. I wait every day to see if this is the day my elect, phone or cable will be shut off. I can't answer my phone because of bill collectors. I am disabled and can't work but my disability does not even pay my mortg. I can't go for public assistance because I can't afford to put gas in my truck.
And none of the candidates have given me hope that they will fix any of these problems. Socialized med? Sure, cut social security, rescind all the tax breaks and raise our taxes. That will sure help keep the middle class alive with a roof over their head and food on their table.
Let's see a divorced woman that has raised a few kids, without benefit of child support, whose kids have never been in trouble with the law and have even gone to college. Now that is someone I would vote for. How about you?
I think Obama's move to say no to name calling in politics is an idea that is long over due. And if you really want to do it, you have to do it for EVERYONE!!
Speak for yourself. I want someone who is not an enemy of the constitution.
This is four horse race. Two of the horses are reptiles for certain, the third one is starting to look like a reptile. The fourth one will never be.
As a member of MoveOn, let me say first; that I'm still going to vote for Obama because four more years of Bushco could destroy the earth. The second thing that I'd like to say is that the bus sure is heavy....hey; when the going gets tough, I take a nap. G'night!
Charles @ 42:
That's because they have nothing else.
but general clark was correct... even dubya is proof that "riding in a fighter plane" is no qualification
for being president.
Someone on another thread told me that Obama is just playing politics. He is just letting his surrogates do his dirty work. Well, sorry, I guess I am just not politically savy. I believed what Clark said and it definitely wasn't an attack on McCain's military record. I believed what Obama said when he disclaimed Clark's remarks and that he really was outraged about anyone attacking McCain. And I believed Obama when he said he wanted change. So what's with his vote on FISA? Well it looks like same old, same old to me.
So am I to believe this all was just a trick by Obama's campaign? A trick to really go after that old McCain without dirtying Obama's hands. Don't think so. Clark was right on and Obama should have praised him not throw him under the bus. Obama should have voted NO for FISA because I don't understand how his YES vote really means he is against FISA. Where is the Obama I cheered for? Where is the Obama we all thought we were getting?
Dr. Acula @ 29:
Obama won. He's our guy. I didn't endorse anyone so we could respond like we are to either Hillary, Edwards or Obama...
Buck Farak!!!
He is turning into a fucking weasel.
if obama is making the extremes on both sides upset with him, that's a good thing. move.on people, get over it. news flash: he's NOT going to agree with every word you utter, nor should he be expected to. just because you support him doesn't mean he's beholden to you. he's still far better than mcbush, but he is going to have to move to the center in order to lock up the election. in the grand scheme of things, it's small beans.
I don't really read a rebuke to Clark in the Obama statement, though the Burton e-mail is another Matter. All Clark did was say that McCain's service was honorable but was nothing special as a preparation for the Oval Office which seems to be a fairly reasonable statement.
If the e-mail is truly the position of Obama, then he either has a good-cop/bad-cop thing going or he really disdains the bulk of the Democratic party. Either way it's liable to blow up in his face.
Sorry to hear that once again Obama is throwing away the support of MoveOn, the group that he didn't feel good enough to support in their free speech debacle in the Senate. I think Iremember correctly that he felt it not worthy of him voting for their right to do what they did, while Hillary voted against the censure motion. However, he took all their help anyway to get himself the nomination. Now, out goes Clarke and can we take bets on who will be next? I am sorry, but once Obama started with the false cries of racism against the Clintons he lost me as someone who is just the same as all others in his quest to your presidency. You can complain against me all you want, but just remember that all "non Americans" around the world are not looking at him with blind adoration just waiting for him to "save us" along with you. I am sure he will probably get the nod over McCain, but he is no agent of change or hope that you are all relying on so heavily. He has proven that already numerous times when he only reacts to pressure or negative press.
So MoveOn is Sister Soljah? Why, Barack? Why?
And man, I was really pumped this wekend when Clark stood-up for Obama. Wes is the best VP choice to neutralize McCain's warrior appeal.
Obama, what the shit?
I still don't know what Clark said that was even remotely controversial.
dada @ 11:
http://ga3.org/campaign/petitionclark <--- This should work.
Obama may "of course" reject General Clark's statement.
I applaud it. And thank the General for saying it.
And curse the exploitive McCain campaign and the Vapid Vapors Media for spinning their false narrative about Clark's truth.
sparticus @ 35:
With all due respect: bullshit! Clark's comments are not comparable to what the Swift Boat Liars did four years ago. Unlike the Swift Boat Liars, Clark did not lie about McCain's record or even disparage it. What he did was raise a legitimate point: that McCain's Vietnam experience does not give him any special qualifications to be President of the United States.
In addition, I refuse to cower like a scared rabbit that a statement by a Democratic politician will be "mischaracterized" by the right-wing. The wingnuts are going to lie and distort no matter what--it's what they do. If there is one thing the last 8 years have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, it's that Reagan/Bush-ism is a failed ideology--almost as big a failure as the Communists they once reviled. The Republicans cannot run on the issues--if they do, they lose big time.
pissed off patricia @ 39:
nah, seriously?
so, you are saying that, although there was nothing wrong with clark's statement it should be criticized by obama because it might be mischaracterized?
you say it is a "fact" but warn against a GOP mischaracterization of said fact, and thus the obama campaign should avoid that type of messaging... following that logic obama might as well just throw in the towel now.
it also furthers the idea that democratic candidates are spineless, as the GOP is going to look to mischaracterize EVERYTHING that comes from the dems/obama/left.
Obama has to have a clear position on patriotism. He can't have one of those partial wishy-washy ones where it's sort of OK some of the time. The moveon.org ad was caustic and only served as a divisive wedge between the choir and everybody else. As for Wesley Clark, I think he should have supported Clark and explained Clark's position. But, I think he would have spent the next 2 months explaining the position.
Orangutan. @ 60:
Worked. folks should share this link with others and at other blog sites
John Amato @ 53:
Be that as it may John, I'm getting whiplash from BHO's quick turn from "progressive" to CENTRIST.
why did mccain lose in 2000 against a weak governor
g.w.bush?
This one annoys me.
What Clark called into question was McCain's qualifications to run a country *merely* because he was a prisoner of war and was tortured.
One could make a similar analogy: Would a prisoner sent to jail be qualified to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court because he was now an expert on Constitutional law?
By buying into the GOP outrage re: Clark's valid question, Obama is giving it an incredible boost and is making himself look like a traitor to those who've supported him AND someone who is incapable of listening to anything less subtle than a sonic boom.
Shazza @ 50:
They want to swiftboat clark from the VP or Secretary of Defense spot
Obama needs to learn that sometimes it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to give voice and remove all doubt.
Or as The Keith would say: "Shut The Hell Up".
Pastor Sandra,
I can understand your uneasiness with Obama, probably because he was a relatively 'unknown' political figure before running for president. I know a lot of people share your uneasiness.
However, most people that rooted for and voted for Obama, share his IDEALS. They all believe that there is no one else at the moment, who is as poised and as able to bring our nation together.
Understand that Obama isn't attacking anyone, but merely pointing out what should be DIFFERENT. It shouldn't be about being "left" or "right" anymore. It should be about finding COMMON GROUND in order to tackle the problems that we ALL face. Of course we will always have our differences of opinion, but that is a good thing - part of Obama's thinking, is that he will not disregard GOOD IDEAS, just because of POLITICAL AFFILIATION. (and vice versa - We should not accept BAD IDEAS, just because whoever presents the bad idea is "in our party".
Chris
Just heard on tv that McCain’s campaign strategy is to paint Senator Obama as just another politician. Seems McCain’s brand new little painters are out in force here today.
really! talk about the pot calling the kettle black.....
This charlatan will say anything, waffle on his supposed positions, throw anyone under the bus, essentially do whatever is necessary to be elected. I cannot believe that the U.S.A. is about to elect this fraud. 20 years at the same church and he "was unaware" of the Reverend Wright's racist position ? Oh, sure. Doesn't anyone see how ridiculous his statement "MY friends, we live in the greatest country in the history of the world....and I'd like you to join me in trying to change that country" is ?!!!
The Welsey Clark comments on McCain is NOT NEWS. Gen. Clark made these statements in the spring when he was a strong
Hillary Clinton supporter. If the statements were negative, why didn't the press raise that issue to Gen Clark and Senator Clinton?
Why is that OLD comment newsworthy at this time? Senator Obama would do well to stop commenting on every nonissue that is thrown his way and stick to issues that are newsworthy.
Excellent comments in clarity and purpose. This is true leadership. He takes politics out of the garbage can.
Looks like the same old politics to me; say and do whatever you have to to get elected with no concept of right and wrong.
The only change Mr. Obama will bring is in the rate of our descent into Communism.
Face it - he's a newbie that should have waited until he had several more years of experience under his belt before he opened his mouth up & agreed to run for the Presidency. He has thoughts & ideas but lacks the experience to face off with the various factions coming at him now. He tries to placate each individual group when speaking to them by saying what he thinks THEY wish to hear - forgetting that several minutes after the words are out of his mouth, they will be played back again and again to haunt him on various news stations, talk radio stations, U-Tube, & any where else the Internet wishes to diss him at. He is way over his head now - so imagine what it would be like should he win the Presidency!!! I never planned to vote for him anyway - but he's only given me more & more reasons why I shouldn't vote for him now! Too bad someone like Colin Powell doesn't want the job - but then, I don't think too many sane people DO wish for the job as President of the United States right now. It's easy for every one here to make arm chair comments but no one really knows what we would do as acting President. It's more complicated than it looks & you can't just take your own agenda and run with it! Many of you THINK you want someone who hasn't been around the political arena but bone up on your history, your politics, your government workings inside & out because you need to think again on this! Congress can & will squash anything he wishes to do if there isn't substance behind his desires. We have a checks & balance system people. You may hate President Bush BUT he wouldn't be able to do most of the things he has done if our government didn't support him (which translates into the people). After all - you also elected the senators and congressmen - if you REALLY want to change the government, you actually need to start at the bottom and not with just one man, which is the President! Change your congressmen and senators & who you put in for as representatives. Together they hold most of the power - not one single man or woman. Yes - your President can influence certain decisions & make some small decisions, but he/she has to have Congress & the House backing him/her. Too many people voting get caught up on some little thing - or they don't really do their own research on the subject (they tend to listen to only one side to get their arguments or their information). Whether you lean to the left or to the right or tend to remain somewhere in the middle, you must OPENLY listen to BOTH sides (without jumping up & down & going crazy whenever you hear the side you are against) & THEN you MUST research your HISTORY & use your mind to sort out the garbage and make up your own mind before deciding who to vote for and why. It's real work to do your own homework & obtain your own information but it's also your responsibility as a voter. Don't be lazy & hit the "all Republican" or "all Democrat" button when voting. Start listening & learning about your local and state politics & remember that most of our larger government problems start there. I don't vote across the board & I won't blindly vote for a person simply because he/she is on a particular ticket, making the assumption that they "must" represent what I believe in if they are on "my" ticket. You may hate politics but as a responsible voter it's your job to do your own research & vote appropriately. If you don't, then stop complaining when you don't like what you see later down the road! The issue of abortion or gay marriage may be what affects you & may be the issue most important to you in your small world, but leave it to more local figures that you put into office (your state leaders, congressmen, senators) - because let's face it - regardless of where the President personally stands, those issues aren't very important when he/she becomes President. Like it or not, it's the economy, what our spending budget goes for, and very much where the world is at politically that will take up his/her time. Even then, Congress & the House will help decide what is and what isn't - so let's start making the changes there if you don't like the direction our country has taken.
Login or Register to post comments.