Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
John Simkin

Barack Obama or John McCain

Recommended Posts

Speaking in Pennsylvania yesterday Hillary Clinton claimed that “I want the Iranians to know that if I’m the president, we will attack Iran… if it attacks Israel.” Clinton added that she promised to “totally obliterate” Iran.

I suppose she wants to show that she will be a tough president. She is also clearly after the Jewish vote. However, the use of the term “obliterate” is a strange one. US politicians mainly use the term surgical strike that suggests that only the “bad guys” are killed. However, “obliterate” means to totally destroy and would result in the deaths of millions of civilians. Will this gain her votes? Does Clinton really think that the American electorate actually reached this stage of depravity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gary Loughran

When I heard this report it had the word nuclear in it...as in if Iran launces a nuclear attack on Israel. This might be why obliterate is used in terming the response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The prophet Jeremiah discourses on Hermeneutics in a remarkable interview with Bill Moyers. You can witch video or read a transcript of the discussion here:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html

A recent report by the National Endowment for the Arts found that 53 percent of Americans surveyed hadn’t read a book in the previous year. That is the audience Hillary is appealing to when she says she would have walked out of Jeremiah's sermons.

The prophet Jeremiah speaks to afflict the comfortable as well as to comfort the afflicted. John McCain is very smart to repudiate the TV ads that attack Jeremiah. People who DO read books (and watch Public Broadcasting) also have a vote, and Hillary is not doing too well with that constituency. Appealing to the ignorant and the prejudiced has worked in the past, and it probably worked to some extent in Pennsylvania. The question is: does it work with Superdelegates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Congressman Clyborn promotes John Simkin's theory -- People are saying that Hillary's ultimate aim is a McCain victory, destroying Barack's career a la Gore & Kerry, and leaving her an open run in 2012.

“There are African-Americans who have reached the decision that the Clintons know that she can’t win this. But they're hell-bound to make it impossible for Obama to win."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24317580/#storyContinued

John McCain sees potential for him to capture 30% or more of the black vote, which could be just enough to put him over the top against Hillary.

Clyborn is not well known to the general public, but he is a key figure in Congress. Superdelegates will be VERY interested in his analysis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The prophet Jeremiah discourses on Hermeneutics in a remarkable interview with Bill Moyers. You can witch video or read a transcript of the discussion here:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html

A recent report by the National Endowment for the Arts found that 53 percent of Americans surveyed hadn’t read a book in the previous year. That is the audience Hillary is appealing to when she says she would have walked out of Jeremiah's sermons.

The prophet Jeremiah speaks to afflict the comfortable as well as to comfort the afflicted. John McCain is very smart to repudiate the TV ads that attack Jeremiah. People who DO read books (and watch Public Broadcasting) also have a vote, and Hillary is not doing too well with that constituency. Appealing to the ignorant and the prejudiced has worked in the past, and it probably worked to some extent in Pennsylvania. The question is: does it work with Superdelegates?

I understand that Jeremiah was the preacher that spent time with the Clintons when they were having their marital difficulties after 'that woman'. According to Michael Moore anyway. Hilary doesn't want to mention that apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Except for the matter of Supreme Court appointments it makes no difference which qualified candidate becomes president, because the government is bankrupt. The national credit card is maxxed out at 9 trillion dollars.

With regards to the war in Iraq, that will end because the US simply cannot afford to prosecute it much longer. The government cannot raise taxes without damaging the economy and the government can only cut domestic spending gradually; to do so precipitously would put a lot of government workers out of jobs and reduce citizens’ benefits. The government is the largest employer and sugar-daddy.

Talking about a national health care system is ridiculous; it is un-affordable and un-workable. Having one which works would cost more than the present Pentagon budget. Having one which costs considerably less would likely put lives at risk. Having one which “mandates” citizens to buy coverage won’t work either, because a lot of people won’t bother, and enforcing it would entail repressive “police-state” tactics.

I would like to hear one candidate say what he or she is going to do about reducing the national debt and balancing the federal budget. The silence on these topics has so far been deafening.

Erick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have deliberately avoided watching election-related coverage on television, and I have tried to minimizing reading about it online.

Nonetheless, am I the only one thinking that there has been a quantum shift in momentum toward HRC and away from Obama?

Obama seems to be in absolute free-fall.

The Indiana race is tied (as per the RPC average), but he is up by 12 in NC.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama seems to be in absolute free-fall.

Not according to today's Wall Street Journal.

Barack Obama is heavily favored to win what will be the final and decisive contest for the Democratic presidential nomination -- the "invisible primary" for the convention votes of party leaders.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1209429166...=googlenews_wsj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When does it all get decided?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It took the best part of 200 years for the law to catch up. In Barack Obama's candidacy we are now learning how far America's political culture has come in this regard and how far it still has to go. Because, for all the misty-eyed liberal talk of him ushering in a post-racial era, the past few weeks have seen Obama fighting not just for the nomination but for his patriotic legitimacy. Constantly questioning his national loyalty and obfuscating his religious affiliation, both the media and his opponents have sought to cast him not only as anti-American but un-American and at times even non-American. His bid to transcend race appears to be crashing on the rocks of racism.

"Race is intertwined with a broader notion that he is not one of us," Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Centre, told the New York Times. Pew conducted an extensive examination of voter attitudes, particularly among Democrats who have an unfavourable view of Obama. "They react negatively to people who are seen as different."

The point here is not whether white people are prepared to vote for him. First, they clearly are. Of the 10 whitest states to have voted so far, Obama has won nine. And there are countless reasons why people don't back him that have nothing to do with race - not least that they prefer another candidate on their merits.

At issue is the insidious and racist manner in which his candidacy is now being framed as that of a nefarious, foreign interloper whose allegiance to his country is inherently inauthentic and instinctively suspect.

Some of these charges have long emerged from familiar and predictable places. As early as last year, Rupert Murdoch's Fox News falsely claimed that he had attended an Islamist madrasa while a young boy in Indonesia. When rightwing radio hosts refer to him they generally emphasise and repeat his middle name - Hussein - even though Obama rarely uses it.

But soon these attacks shifted from the political margins to the mainstream. During the recent ABC debate, Obama was grilled about his refusal to wear an American flag tiepin. One of the moderators asked Obama of his former pastor, Jeremiah Wright: "You do believe he's as patriotic as you are?"

Having given up on the African-American vote, the Clintons have clearly decided that it makes more electoral sense to collude with these attacks than it does to raise the tenor of the discussion and challenge them. During the ABC debate, Hillary applauded the line of questioning. "You know, these are problems, I think these are issues that are legitimate and should be explored."

Being foreign, Muslim or unpatriotic should not be treated as slurs. But in a post 9/11 framework, the Clintons know full well how these allusions will be understood and what the consequences might be. When asked whether Obama was a Muslim, Hillary said that he wasn't: "There is nothing to base that on - as far as I know."

Three days after Obama made his landmark speech on race, Bill Clinton said of a potential match-up between Hillary Clinton and McCain: "I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country. And people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics." The implication was that Obama doesn't love his country and all this "racial" stuff is just getting in the way.

All this does have an effect. By February, 80% of Americans had heard rumours that Obama was Muslim. Even after the furore over the Rev Wright, one in 10 Democrats still believed this. A recent Pew poll showed that the only character trait on which Obama loses to Clinton is patriotism. Exit polls in Pennsylvania revealed that 18% of Democrats said that race mattered to them in this contest - and just 63% of them said that they would support Obama in a general election.

Unable to beat Obama on delegates and still unlikely to beat him in the popular vote, Hillary Clinton has just one strategy left - to persuade superdelegates that Obama is unelectable. She has tried branding him as inexperienced and slick-tongued, and neither of those have worked. At this stage she has just one argument left: his race. For several months now, her aides have been whispering to whoever would listen that America would never elect a black candidate. In desperation, some are now raising their voices.

But their accusations are not only cynical - by most accounts they also seem to be wrong. It seems they have underestimated the potential of the American electorate. Polls show that in the states won with less than a five-point margin in 2004 Obama does far better than Clinton against McCain.

The problem is not that Hillary Clinton is still in the race. She has every right to be. It is that she is running the kind of race that she is. Having failed to convince voters of the viability of her own candidacy, she is now committed to proving the unviability of his.

Hillary once said it takes a village to raise a child. Now she seems determined to destroy the village in order to save it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/20...laryclinton.usa

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When does it all get decided?

First Tuesday in November.

No, that is Melbourne Cup Day here. What we want to know is when the Primaries are over. When do we find out if it is Hilary or Obama?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When does it all get decided?

First Tuesday in November.

No, that is Melbourne Cup Day here. What we want to know is when the Primaries are over. When do we find out if it is Hilary or Obama?

That happens at the National Democratic Convention. The voters have little say in the convention...only the delegates and "super delegates".

The 2008 Democratic National Convention will be held from August 25 to August 28 at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado. The convention,

sponsored by the United States Democratic Party, will nominate a candidate for the presidency.

Jack

Edited by Jack White

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When does it all get decided?

First Tuesday in November.

No, that is Melbourne Cup Day here. What we want to know is when the Primaries are over. When do we find out if it is Hilary or Obama?

The thread title got me. Jack mentioned the National Democratic Convention in late August, but it is possible that the race will be decided before then.

From The New York Times political blog:

Clinton or Obama Will Likely Drop Out in June, Dean Says

By Lisa Tozzi

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said that either Hillary Rodham Clinton or Barack Obama needed to quit the presidential race in June in order for Democrats to win the White House in November.

“We really can’t have a divided convention. If we do it’s going to be very hard to heal the party afterwards,” Mr. Dean said during an interview Monday with Barbara Walters on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Mr. Dean did not say which candidate should drop out, only that it should happen after the voters had their say in the primaries, which end June 3.

“This is not about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama,” Mr. Dean said. “This is about our country.”

“If its time for them to go, they’ll know it,” he said. “You know when to get in and you know when to get out that’s just part of the deal.”

He added, “These two are wonderful people and know what’s right for the country.”

During an interview with Meredith Vieira on the NBC program “Today,” Mr. Dean said while the party rules said some Democratic delegates could wait until the party’s August convention to decide, that would be too late.

“The only way John McCain wins this race is if Democrats are not united,” he said.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04...op-out-by-june/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When does it all get decided?

First Tuesday in November.

No, that is Melbourne Cup Day here. What we want to know is when the Primaries are over. When do we find out if it is Hilary or Obama?

The thread title got me. Jack mentioned the National Democratic Convention in late August, but it is possible that the race will be decided before then.

From The New York Times political blog:

Clinton or Obama Will Likely Drop Out in June, Dean Says

By Lisa Tozzi

Howard Dean, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said that either Hillary Rodham Clinton or Barack Obama needed to quit the presidential race in June in order for Democrats to win the White House in November.

“We really can’t have a divided convention. If we do it’s going to be very hard to heal the party afterwards,” Mr. Dean said during an interview Monday with Barbara Walters on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Mr. Dean did not say which candidate should drop out, only that it should happen after the voters had their say in the primaries, which end June 3.

“This is not about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama,” Mr. Dean said. “This is about our country.”

“If its time for them to go, they’ll know it,” he said. “You know when to get in and you know when to get out that’s just part of the deal.”

He added, “These two are wonderful people and know what’s right for the country.”

During an interview with Meredith Vieira on the NBC program “Today,” Mr. Dean said while the party rules said some Democratic delegates could wait until the party’s August convention to decide, that would be too late.

“The only way John McCain wins this race is if Democrats are not united,” he said.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04...op-out-by-june/

However, with the new plan of "super delegates" who are uncommitted, there may be

no "clear leader" by August. Then one might "drop out" only if promised a good deal.

Or he/she might fight it out. Or settle for vice-p on the ticket. Hillary-Barack might

have a chance; Barack/Hillary has no chance, or if victorious would assure an assassination.

You gotta consider the redneck factor.

Jack

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×