Barack Obama or John McCain

[Guest David Guyatt]

At the very least, the currently invisible posts by Mr. Colby and Mr. Guyatt, are off-topic. I don't see why such tit for tat sillyness should be allowed.

I concur. Pointless and argumentative for which I apologize.

David

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Associated Press tally:

Obama effectively clinches nomination

The tally was based on public declarations from delegates as well as from another 15 who have confirmed their intentions to the AP. It also included 11 delegates Obama was guaranteed as long as he gained 30 percent of the vote in South Dakota and Montana later in the day. It takes 2,118 delegates to clinch the nomination.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080603/ap_on_el_pr/primary_rdp

[Christopher Hall]

Associated Press tally:

Obama effectively clinches nomination

The tally was based on public declarations from delegates as well as from another 15 who have confirmed their intentions to the AP. It also included 11 delegates Obama was guaranteed as long as he gained 30 percent of the vote in South Dakota and Montana later in the day. It takes 2,118 delegates to clinch the nomination.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080603/ap_on_el_pr/primary_rdp

Raymond-

It looks like HRC still won't go away:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/20...on-makes-l.html

[Maggie Hansen]

It's official. Barack Obama it is.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/bar...2258877549.html

Barack Obama makes American history

Barack Obamawith his wife Michelle after claiming victory.

Barack Obamawith his wife Michelle after claiming victory.

Photo: Chris Carlson

Tonight we mark the end of one historic journey with the beginning of another - a journey that will bring a new and better day to America.

Latest related coverage

Clinton congratulates Obama

Video: Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton addressed supporters in New York, where she congratulated Barack Obama.

Barack Obama Obama wins the nomination

Audio slideshow: Barack Obama makes history as the first black Presidential candidate. Hear his speech as he claimed the Democratic nomination.

Hillary, what next?

Audio slideshow: Clinton congratulates rival Obama and but does not withdraw from the election race.

* Obama's battle with Clinton over

* Obama on the brink as Hillary Clinton reaches end of the line

* Bill blasts 'scumbag' article

* Bruce Wolpe's blog: Thursday is V-O Day

Advertisement

Anne Davies

June 4, 2008 - 12:37PM

Barack Obama has made history by seizing the Democratic nomination and becomes the first African-American to run for president of the United States.

In jubilant scenes at the Xcel Centre in Minneapolis-St Paul in the heart of America's Midwest, Senator Obama announced that he had won sufficient delegates and superdelegates to claim the nomination.

"Tonight we mark the end of one historic journey with the beginning of another - a journey that will bring a new and better day to America. Tonight, I can stand before you and say that I will be the Democratic nominee for president of the United States," he said.

He thanked the Democratic Party and, in particular, his adversary on the campaign trail, Hillary Clinton.

"Senator Hillary Clinton has made history in this campaign not just because she's a woman who has done what no woman has done before, but because she's a leader who inspires millions of Americans with her strength, her courage, and her commitment to the causes that brought us here tonight," he said.

In a poignant moment he also thanked his grandmother, who was watching from Hawaii because she is too frail to travel.

"She poured everything into me and made me the man I am today," he said.

But then he turned his attention to the Republicans and John McCain, who will hold their convention in the same venue that Senator Obama chose for his victory speech.

"My differences with him are not personal; they are with the policies he has proposed in this campaign," he said.

But Senator Obama's victory was somewhat blunted by another loss in South Dakota, where Senator Clinton won, 56 per cent to 44 per cent with 35 per cent of the vote counted. He was expected to win Montana.

In New York, Senator Clinton told a rally of supporters she was making no decisions about her future.

"Now the question is: 'Where do we go from here?' I am making no decisions tonight."

She told her supporters she would be consulting advisers and party leaders about the next step.

The Democrats are hopeful of winning the White House in November after eight years of a Republican President whose popularity has plumbed new depths in the face of a sagging economy and rising petrol prices.

But the immediate challenge facing the party is uniting the party in time to campaign for the November presidential race.

The Clinton camp let it be known today that Senator Clinton would be open to the vice-presidential slot.

New York congressman Charlie Rangel, who is close to Senator Clinton said she had raised the idea herself during a meeting with New York legislators on Tuesday.

Other options include being part of an Obama cabinet, perhaps as Secretary of Health.

Senator Obama will be under enormous pressure to offer her a senior job in order to heal the party, and ensure that Clinton voters do not switch to the Republican Party or stay home on election day. But there are many doubters about whether the two could work together as president and vice-president after such a vigorous primary race.

Anne Davies is the Herald's Washington correspondent in Minneapolis-St Paul.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

And so it must be for us

Barack Obama's Victory speech in St. Paul tonight

Change is a foreign policy that doesn't begin and end with a war that should've never been authorized and never been waged. I won't stand here and pretend that there are many good options left in Iraq, but what's not an option is leaving our troops in that country for the next hundred years—especially at a time when our military is overstretched, our nation is isolated, and nearly every other threat to America is being ignored.

We must be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in—but start leaving we must. It's time for Iraqis to take responsibility for their future. It's time to rebuild our military and give our veterans the care they need and the benefits they deserve when they come home. It's time to refocus our efforts on al-Qaida's leadership and Afghanistan, and rally the world against the common threats of the 21st century—terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease. That's what change is.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9...;show_article=1

[Michael Hogan]

McKinney poised to challenge Obama for Left-Wing and Black vote

by Vivian Berryhill:

" ....It's time for people claiming to be progressives who supported Obama, to accept that they were bamboozled by a champion slickster. Actually, that's putting the best face on the situation, since most of Obama's progressive credentials were simply wished into existence by folks who were tired of even pretending to fight. Obama now dares to drop all pretense of progressivism, trusting that there will be no ramifications on the Left, especially among the otherwise most dependable progressive constituency, African Americans."

Full article: http://www.opednews.com/articles/McKinney-...080707-666.html

[John Simkin]

McKinney poised to challenge Obama for Left-Wing and Black vote

by Vivian Berryhill:

" ....It's time for people claiming to be progressives who supported Obama, to accept that they were bamboozled by a champion slickster. Actually, that's putting the best face on the situation, since most of Obama's progressive credentials were simply wished into existence by folks who were tired of even pretending to fight. Obama now dares to drop all pretense of progressivism, trusting that there will be no ramifications on the Left, especially among the otherwise most dependable progressive constituency, African Americans."

Full article: http://www.opednews.com/articles/McKinney-...080707-666.html

I have been hearing how Obama has been moving to the right since gaining the nomination. It might be good tactics but does little for his image as a honest politician. Do you think McKinney can hurt Obama?

[Michael Hogan]

McKinney poised to challenge Obama for Left-Wing and Black vote

by Vivian Berryhill:

" ....It's time for people claiming to be progressives who supported Obama, to accept that they were bamboozled by a champion slickster. Actually, that's putting the best face on the situation, since most of Obama's progressive credentials were simply wished into existence by folks who were tired of even pretending to fight. Obama now dares to drop all pretense of progressivism, trusting that there will be no ramifications on the Left, especially among the otherwise most dependable progressive constituency, African Americans."

Full article: http://www.opednews.com/articles/McKinney-...080707-666.html

I have been hearing how Obama has been moving to the right since gaining the nomination. It might be good tactics but does little for his image as a honest politician. Do you think McKinney can hurt Obama?

Probably not. The 2004 Green Party candidate, David Cobb, got just 0.1% of the vote in 2004. He was on the ticket in only 29 states. (Ralph Nader, running as an Independent this year, received 2.7% of the vote in 2000 and 1996)

McKinney has effectively been marginalized by the American media. The fact that oil and the economy have relegated the Iraq and Afghan wars to the second page won't help her either, in my opinion.

It is being reported today that McKinney has selected respected 35 year old hip-hop activist Rosa Clemente as her running mate. How this will affect her campaign seems unclear.

Edited July 10, 2008 by Michael Hogan

[Don Jeffries]

As usual, we have no good choice in this year's presidential election. While I can certainly agree more with Obama in general, I'm afraid that the media will focus exclusively on the historic nature of his election, with lots of feel-good stories, but completely ignore his policy decisions, which are almost certain to be more of the same garbage. As for McCainiac, I think he's about the only person on the American political scene who could actually be a worse president than Dubya.

I could vote for McKinney easily- she's got a lot of courage and was one of the few members of Congress I liked. Since I'm used to "throwing my vote away" anyhow on third party candidates....

[John Simkin]

Seymour Hersh was interviewed on C4 this week. He claimed that if it looked like John McCain was going to get beaten by Barack Obama it is likely that George Bush will order an air attack on Iran. The theory is that this will help McCain beat Obama in November.

Leaders of the Tory Party are arguing that they will support this attack because if the US does not do it, Israel will, and that this will lead to war in the Middle-East.

[Michael Hogan]

I have been hearing how Obama has been moving to the right since gaining the nomination. It might be good tactics but does little for his image as a honest politician. Do you think McKinney can hurt Obama?

Can McKinney Really Hurt Obama?

by Earl Ofari Hutchinson

The Huffington Post

July 12, 2008

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-h...t_b_112294.html

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I have been hearing how Obama has been moving to the right since gaining the nomination. It might be good tactics but does little for his image as a honest politician. Do you think McKinney can hurt Obama?

Can McKinney Really Hurt Obama?

by Earl Ofari Hutchinson

The Huffington Post

July 12, 2008

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/earl-ofari-h...t_b_112294.html

--------------

The democrats have amazed me in how they are at the fronteirs of nothingness. If anything the campaign has diminished activism. It has been a wet towel of generalization thrown over the real fires of anger and dissent. There is no mouthpiece for this dissent, and anyone who wants any change had better blast the Corporate Dems on mainstream newspaper websites.

Above all this election has shown the severe limitations of internets ability to challenge Corporate Politics. The Corporations have adapted to the internet, but the dissidents keep typing on websites that only they read. People had better recognize the weak points of internet politics, or the internet will only continue to marginalize. Yes there are great things about the internet, but there are also very serious weaknesses that no one seems to be funded to talk about.

[Don Jeffries]

America's economy is probably in the worst shape it's ever been. Gas prices, food prices, depressed housing market (including a record number of foreclosures), plummeting stock market- these are tangible concerns which effect all voters. Combined with the disastrous, very unpopular war (I think it's a misnomer to call it that- war requires at least two combatants), how could the supposedly "opposing" political party fail to sweep to a resounding electoral victory?

The only Democrat to be strongly anti-war was Dennis Kucinich (along with Republican Ron Paul). Predictably, he was ignored by the mainstream media, which early on concentrated 99% of their attention on Obama and Hillary. This election, more than any other I can think of, should demonstrate clearly that there is no "opposing" party- the Democrats and Republicans essentially agree on all significant points. Both are in favor of a globalist, meddling foreign policy which ensures that there will be perpetual "wars" and conflicts all over the world, as we try to police other countries into accepting "freedom." Both completely ignore the fact that so much wealth is in the hands of so few. Both do nothing about corporate welfare. Both do nothing to stop the massive influx of immigrants, many of them illegal, which has destroyed the ability of many nonskilled laborers to make a living, since these immigrants will work for so much less.

If Obama were truly an "opposing" candidate, the disaster in Iraq would be his #1 issue, and he'd use it to hammer home just how big a failure it's been, how morally wrong it is, and how insane McCainiac is to support it. My prediction is he'll do the opposite, and try to prove how macho and patrotic he is. Perhaps he'll threaten to work over Afghanistan again (like that is any better than what we're doing in Iraq). He should be blasting the oil companies in every speech, for their sinful profits, which come at the expense of every working American. At the very least, he ought to propose a huge windfall profits tax on them. He won't.

In reality, there is a huge elephant in the room here, which no one on the political scene will acknowledge. The tremendous greed which has always existed among the rich, has finally made it nearly impossible for the vast majority of Americans (at least 75%) to keep up with the cost of living. With prices rising so dramatically over the past year, and the two most conventional forms of investment available to the working class (real estate, stock market) slumping so badly, there can be only one solution- a dramatic increase in income for most workers. Is anyone proposing that? Uh, no. That's the sad reality; unless the rich agree to finally start sharing some of the wealth, the whole system they've created is going to collapse upon the shoulders of the workers who've been supporting it for so long.

If the Democrats were truly an "opposition" party, they'd be demanding a minumum wage that was tied to a maximum wage. They'd be strongly anti-war and strongly against the U.S. acting like a global policeman. They'd be harshly criticizing the corporate greed that is profiting from the gas crisis and created the alarming number of foreclosures. Instead, their candidate is issuing the stale, standard rhetoric about "change we can believe it." Cute slogans mean nothing. Why not bring up some golden oldies, like "strong leadership," "getting the country moving again," "the right man for the right time," etc.?

I truly believe that, in the very near future, there is a good chance of America either sinking into a third-world status, or being overturned by a violent revolution.

[John Simkin]

America's economy is probably in the worst shape it's ever been. Gas prices, food prices, depressed housing market (including a record number of foreclosures), plummeting stock market- these are tangible concerns which effect all voters. Combined with the disastrous, very unpopular war (I think it's a misnomer to call it that- war requires at least two combatants), how could the supposedly "opposing" political party fail to sweep to a resounding electoral victory?

The only Democrat to be strongly anti-war was Dennis Kucinich (along with Republican Ron Paul). Predictably, he was ignored by the mainstream media, which early on concentrated 99% of their attention on Obama and Hillary. This election, more than any other I can think of, should demonstrate clearly that there is no "opposing" party- the Democrats and Republicans essentially agree on all significant points. Both are in favor of a globalist, meddling foreign policy which ensures that there will be perpetual "wars" and conflicts all over the world, as we try to police other countries into accepting "freedom." Both completely ignore the fact that so much wealth is in the hands of so few. Both do nothing about corporate welfare. Both do nothing to stop the massive influx of immigrants, many of them illegal, which has destroyed the ability of many nonskilled laborers to make a living, since these immigrants will work for so much less.

Is Afghanistan an issue? As of July 12, 2008, there have been 807 coalition deaths in Afghanistan as part of ongoing coalition operations (Operation Enduring Freedom and International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)): 473 American, 110 British, 87 Canadian, 25 German, 23 Spanish, 16 Dutch, 15 Danish, 12 French, 12 Italian, 7 Romanian, 6 Australian, 5 Polish, 3 Czech, 3 Norwegian, 3 Estonian, 2 Portuguese, 2 Swedish, 1 Finnish, 1 Hungarian, 1 Lithuanian, 1 South Korean.

The American and British are taking most of the casualties because they are in the most dangerous areas. This is a war that cannot be won and these soldiers' lives are being used so that a few politicians can be seen as looking tough.

[John Simkin]

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/91355...95d95b820bd1e89

The New Yorker magazine hits the news stands today with a shocking cover -- a caricature of Barack and Michelle Obama depicting the presidential candidate in a turban, fist-bumping his wife who has a machine gun slung over her shoulder, while the American flag burns in the fireplace. The cover is shocking in that it depicts the Obamas in bizarre caricatured images and associations which reflect the very stereotypes with which the conservatives, particularly Fox News, have been trying to frame both the Obamas. Thus, instead of satire, the cover becomes a political poster for conservatives to reinforce their messages. Senator Obama was shown the cover image by a reporter covering the campaign on Sunday, and while seemingly taken aback, he declined to comment.

But the Obama campaign quickly put out a release condemning the magazine cover. Bill Burton, a spokesman for Obama, said in a statement: "The New Yorker may think, as one of their staff explained to us, that their cover is a satirical lampoon of the caricature Sen. Obama's right-wing critics have tried to create. But most readers will see it as tasteless and offensive. And we agree."

Unfortunately the impact of this image will extend far beyond the reading audience of the New Yorker; cable news and the right-wing media noise machine will amplify the derogatory image to millions more. And the New Yorker of course will reap enormous publicity, clearly translating to increased sales and notoriety for the brand, and for corporate owner Conde Nast -- one of the largest and most powerful media companies in America.

But the publicity could very well backfire. Editor David Remnick and artist Barry Blitt's attempt at satire seems so arrogant and indulgent in its insensitive and out of touch with political and media dynamics of tabloid TV and blogs, that it just might make a lot of people angry, including some subscribers. The cover turns the magazine into a potential Molotov cocktail, to be gleefully tossed by Fox News and the conservative blogs, into the already combustible tinderbox of race and muslim stereotypes just below the surface of America's public discourse.