- BIG NEWS:
- Barack Obama
- |
- John McCain
- |
- Sarah Palin
- |
- Voting
- |
So today I'm hanging out catching up on some sleep and occasionally flipping through the stations and all of a sudden I'm getting the three O's. Oprah has decided to get in bed with Mr. and Mrs. Obama, and Osama has decided that he wants to be a blogger. I guess if talk show hosts can choose presidents then perhaps terrorists should be blogging. And imagine the nerve of telling the Democrats how they should use their congressional majority. Pisses me off. Makes me want to go out and bomb something. If Osama wanted the troops out of Saudi Arabia then perhaps he didn't have to kill 3000 people. He could have just hired himself a lobbyist. He could have done things the way the rest of his family does.
The Osama Blog. I mean, as Wolf Blitzer of CNN so astutely pointed out, the dude has even DARKENED HIS BEARD!! Mr. Religious Jihad is concerned about his looks. I wonder if he used Grecian Formula. "Gets the grey out." I'll bet you his hair has actually gone white and he's probably looking a lot like Moses but without the magic staff. If he had that staff, he'd be kicking ass right now.
Perhaps instead of the magic staff he's got a short wave radio and he's plugged into the BBC so as to keep up on the news. If that's the case, my advice is to check out Andy Kershaw's World Music Program, the BBC's best non-news show..
Obama, "The Candidate of Change"; and, to make sure of that, he's hired every one who's ever worked for the Clintons. What's the Change you ask? We're moving from Yale (Bush) to Harvard/Princeton (Mr. and Mrs. Obama). That's quite a change I guess. Did Oprah go to college or did she become a billionaire right out of high school? If I remember correctly, she had gotten a call from GOD and was told to spend the rest of her life catching sexual predators. Maybe she'll work through legislation. You know, if Oprah can choose a president then she can do just about anything...3 O's, its been quite a day.
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Richard, I think you made an amazing point that will cause many problems in the opening days of the next presidents term, if a democrat wins the office. In the case of Democrat victory, Moveon, daily cos, and all of the far left people in this country will feel they have finally won and can end the Iraq war. What dont take into account is how long withdrawal takes, in Kuwait under optimal circumstances the withdrawal of U.S. forces took over a year to complete. So my question is this, will all of the people yelling for an immediate withdrawal be satisfied when it will take 12-18 months to withdrawal safely. If they are not will a president make a political choice to speed up the withdrawal having a detrimental effect on troop safety. And what will be the ramifications of that decision. All I am saying is that Richard is right no matter who wins, a magical 24 hour withdrawal just isn't gonna happen, So the first 100 days of a democrats presidency should be quite interesting and more than anything else have a huge impact on the 2010 elections. Also this shows how no matter what decisions are made, the Iraq war will effect American politics for many many years to come.
I'd also like to add that while Hillary may lay claim to Bill's legacy, Obama gets his footsteps. He has much more in common with Bill's 1992 run as the most naturally talented politician of his generation with little experience, namely foreign policy. You must also integrate into your 'no change' political calculus that the younger members of the former Clinton administration are the ones teaming up with Obama, and younger people are the most malleable and typically more interested in change than their elders.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20657194/site/newsweek/
I don't want some one following in some one else's footsteps. I want the real deal. If Obama is your candidate, thats fine. You like inexperience, you want to gamble for your pipe dream, thats your right. Which other black leaders are going to be brought into the fold?
The Clintons will hit the ground running: 1) the economy (we already know their record) 2) social laws (right to choose, civil unions, gays in the military) 3)What to do about perceived constitutional abuses by the previous government.
It's not the job for a green horn. It's going to get nasty.
I'm glad Mrs O has some one like O to take her around town.
By the way do you get paid for this stuff???
Cheers....
Hi Richard, thank you for your response. I agree with you that ivy leaguers are in their own world - even before they get to school.
However, one point of contention (full disclosure: I reservedly support Obama): True, Obama and Clinton have hired many of Clinton's former people.
However, Clinton has hired those who, like her, initially believed (like Bill Clinton) that Hussein had WMD, that going to war in Iraq was a good thing, and that - convenient with public opinion - now believe Iraq was a mistake.
Who is left? My guess is those who were in the administration who knew, like Obama, that it was a bad idea and parted company with the Clintons on this issue. The Clinton camp split, and many liberals did too (eg, Christopher Hitchens) when we invaded. However, the Clintons are hiring people who agree with them and Obama is hiring Clinton's people who agree with him. There is a difference for those who disagree with Hillary Clinton version 2002-2006.
Dear P.V.
I'm not going to get into a tit for tat with you but I'm assuming that Hillary's main advisor is going to be Mr Bill. Mr Bill's advice, I assume, will keep us out of wars and invigorate the economy. Their record tells me that the Clintons can succeed at these objectives.
We're at a critical stage internationally and nationally. I don't want some one that's learning on the job. Can't afford it. I've been witnessing the front lines of American Foreign policy here for the last 20 years. I've had a lot of conversations with a lot of people and I'm telling you, Obama's not ready. Maybe next time, but not now.
As for the war in Iraq, it's the Bush/Cheney war. It's personal. Gore wouldn't have gone. Hillary wouldn't have gone. Bill wouldn't have gone. I don't even think McCain would have gone, unless....and I've said this before, unless there's intelligence information some where that we're not yet privy to.
Understood. But it is important that you hold your view in light of facts, and you have already admitted to using misleading ones.
The fact is that to this day Bill Clinton defends the invasion of Iraq as the right decision, so much so that one of his billionaire contributors called him a liar to his face in front of many supporters for rattling off the same exact argument as the administration.
For Hillary, I can only offer you suggested reading from this very site as well as the nytimes to see how "ready" she is:
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F50712FD3F540C708CDDAF0894DF404482
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/why-hillary-clinton-was-t_b_50657.html
I thought Bill Clinton did a wonderful job in international affairs during his presidency, because he was a good decision-maker and he is brilliant. He also had no foreign policy experience... like Obama.
Thank you for the banter. I very much appreciate your time.
PV
I enjoy reading your blog, I was never into it until I one day discovered that you are one.
I would like to see you on Bill Maher one day, and if you have already been on his show, do whatever it takes to get back, because I am a big, big fan of your blog.
W. Vastey
Dear Mr Voyeur,
Sorry about the cherry picking. The Army's doing it. MSM is doing it and Blog sites are doing it, but you're right, I should rise above. If you're getting lost let me help you.
1) College wise Obama isn't bringing anything new. Columbia Harvard/Princeton Harvard/Yale Harvard, whatever.
2) Race relations in the Ivy League comes down to: "You hangin with them or you hanging with us".
3) Obama's staff is full of Clinton people so there's nothing new here except inexperience at the top.
4) Oprah is so sincere it's coming out her ears.
5) And more interestingly, I don't believe Osama is listening to the radio or watching tv. I think it takes weeks or months to get him his newspapers and correspondence.
r.m.
The shallow comparison works better if your goal is to narrow the choices for the next President to one between two candidates that voted for the war and think it was a good idea (Hillary and any Republican).
Taking the Iraq war off the campaign issue table as was done in 2004 didn't work out so well for the Democrats though.
The war was on the table during the 2004 election. Kerry was portrayed as a sissy despite his personal history and Bush was portrayed as a tough guy despite historical evidence to the contrary.
Liberals who think that all soldiers will be removed from the Middle East/Iraq region within 24 hours of the US presidential election are in for a big surprise, no matter who wins the election.
You're re-writing history... though accurate in your portrayal of campaign tactics and the results for the next election.
Kerry/Edwards did not challenge the reason for going into Iraq or staying in Iraq.
Dean was the only anti-war candidate, and the corporate media, the GOP and DLC worked together to sink him.
You wrote, "What's the Change you ask? We're moving from Yale (Bush) to Harvard/Princeton (Mr. and Mrs.
Obama)."
That's true - they did go to those schools, but you've cherry picked undergraduate and graduate schools, which is misleading and inconsistent.
Bush went to Yale, then Harvard.
Obama went to Columbia, then Harvard.
Mrs. Obama went to Princeton, then Harvard.
I think your point gets lost here.
Comparing grades or accomplishments while in school would cause the point to be lost further.
I take it that you are not a fan of Barack Obama, and that's OK. The questions/comments you raised about Oprah helping Barack's campaign are fair. Personally, I don't see a major problem with it, as long as it's done so that both retain their integrity.
I hope that Oprah's intention is to help Americans get to know Obama, so that the voters will better understand what his positions are. Let's face it, Hillary has name recognition going for her. Regardless of all the Clinton scandals, many still love Bill. I can't buy the fact that she claims her experience comes from being First Lady. How did all of her 'experience' help her to blow THE most important vote of her career in the senate, the vote to authorize the Iraq War?
Let's hope Oprah does this right. I have great faith in the women in this country who will be able to judge for themselves, if they feel that this an attempt to 'manipulate' them into supporting Barack. If that were the case, I am sure that they will know how to manipulate the ON/OFF button on their TV set.
I worry about how the MSM has been 'manipulated' I don't understand why so many journalists are staying clear of the stories of Norman Hzu, Mayor Rivera, Raul Martinez, and so many other sleazy people helping Hillary.
I bring this up because it seems like its deja vu, all over again. You have many of the same key people in leadership positions in Hillary's campaign as was in Bill's during the "China-gate" scandals in the '90s.
Why is the MSM giving them a free pass on this stuff? If this about Edwards, Obama, or Biden, it would have been 'all over but the shouting'
It seems that the media is more interested in dicussing haircuts, stinky socks and the wives of the candidates.
What ever happened to people like Woodward and Bernstein? It looks like real journalism is dead, because our political process appears to be on it's last leg.
Which way, America?
Oh oh oh!
One way around all that is to support and vote for the only untainted candidate, KUCINICH!
Omaha.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with