Look this is why the Repubs always win, because Dem's and Liberals are quick to change their minds about there candidate. Repubs never do this, they stay loyal, as much as they don't like McCain and are not showing much support right now, the majority of their base will vote for him because they vote for the Party not the candidate. Dem's haven't figured this out yet, always getting emotional when a certain policy doesn't go your way as if the candidate got his talking points from you. Give it a rest, let's get this man in office and watch him Blossom, he has always had "Centrist" ideas read his book, he believes in helping and bringing together all people, their is no shift no change just more emphasis and details on what he's trying to do and now some of you are not liking him so much, ridiculous. He is the same person that inspired and still inspires Millions here and around the world.
Stay focused!
Obama and My Achy Breaky Heart
Last week I was quoting the great poet Emily Dickinson to express my unease about the Obama campaign's swing to the right which is now erroneously called the middle. The radical right has been falsely claiming that ours is a conservative country -- forgetting that we were born in revolution and have thrived on revolutionary invention, innovation, the expansion of human rights and the use of talents that cross racial and class barriers. As a sign of how far the right wing has succeeded in creating a new reality, this past Sunday The New York Times Magazine in its cover story anointed Rush Limbaugh a genial voice of America, a good guy disguised as a snarling bully, just an entertainer at heart, a kind of genius rap artist, a seller of right wing political products with a heart of gold and a toilet seat to match. So much for the judgment of the Times and its editors, and the effectiveness of the past years of conservative propaganda.
I hate to join Limbaugh's knee jerk attacks on Obama but I've had some doubts lately, and though reluctant to express them, I've never had a doubt that I could hold back on. What Limbaugh mocks in Obama is what drew me to him, the idealism, and the possibility of his leading America with fresh insights and courageous decisions. I am one among many who saw in Obama a chance for America's moral and economic restoration, and like most folks who give their heart to someone, I don't take easy to disappointment. So I am abandoning Emily Dickinson and going hard core today, quoting the lyrics of country singer Billy Ray Cyrus's "Achy Breaky Heart," a song that has survived the early nineties better than Bill Clinton's reputation as a great politician. Sorry Emily, I love you dearly, but sometimes there is nothing but country music to tell it like it is. I offer a few of its choice lyrics. It's a plea for Barack not to toy with my affections and to stay the Barack who won my heart.
"Oh, you can tell your friends just what a fool I've been
And laugh and joke about me on the phone...But don't tell my heart, my achy breaky heart
I just don't think it'd understand...
You can tell your Ma I've moved to Arkansas
Or you can tell your dog to bite my leg...
But don't tell my heart, my achy breaky heart
I just don't think it'd understand...
Ooo"
Here are a few steps on the road to heartbreak. Obama fudging on FISA, fudging on the Court's gun control strike-down, the faith based charity funding -- no way that it doesn't compromise the separation of church and state. So far Obama seems to be testing the waters, seeing what will work for him in order to gain more independent voters, while still keeping his core beliefs intact. There's some fudging going on here but not yet the world-class flip-flopping such as George W. promising the electorate that he would have nothing to do with nation building. Flip flopping as we know it today is the exclusive province of John McCain: once anti-torture, now pro torture, once a friend of judicial moderates now the would be appointer of more Roberts/Alito justices, enemy of evangelical bullies, now a man who never met a right wing evangelist he wouldn't hug. He's the undisputed champ of the flip-flop. I am expecting Obama to continue to speak out about the wrongs of torture, the obscenity of the oil profits, and the forlorn and forgotten American worker reeling under NAFTA. I expect him to stand fast on the Bill of Rights and see the Constitution as a living document, not as the Dead Sea Scrolls. I am looking over my left shoulder and I don't like some of what I see calling itself "moderation" because it looks like a losing strategy shaped by experts whose expertise is in knowing how to lose elections.
Of course over my right shoulder is John McCain, a gas bag who in the name of fuel economy has become a wind-bag. Give him presidential power and that arrogant political hack (Keating Five) disguised as a maverick will complete the wreckage of the country that George W. Bush set in motion. Right now the pussycat press seems content to live with its McCain delusions. He is their revered POW and affable guest on Saturday Night Live. So who cares if he has no plans for this economically distraught country? So what if he is clueless? How bad can he be? Plenty! He is more dangerous than Dick Cheney because he wears a smile over his sneer, tells jokes that cover his irrational explosiveness, and carries his ignorance with senatorial pride. He doesn't have a notion as to what he will do to extricate us from the myriad economic and global messes of his predecessors, other than appoint more repressive, right wing judges to the court. What will a McCain Presidency accomplish in its first hundred days? If he sweeps in some additional Republican Congressmen and Senators we will finally have that offshore and Alaskan drilling that will ultimately end up in millions of Chinese and Indian cars that will complete the polluting of a suffocating universe. And of course there will be more tax breaks to stimulate the economy at Cartier and Tiffany? Against such a man there is no choice for me. Obama with all his flaws and his threat to my achy breaky heart keeps my vote. I suppose I'm just a fool for love.
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
"Repubs never do this, they stay loyal, as much as they don't like McCain and are not showing much support right now, the majority of their base will vote for him because they vote for the Party not the candidate."
Right you are, Truthfighter1. But, hallelujah!, we are not Republicans. To dust off an old Will Rogers saw: "I belong to no organized party. I am a Democrat." Do we want to win? Of course, we do. But the idea that by locking arms and marching forward in unassailable accord begs the question of who we are by doing so and what we gain.
Except that standing on principle and losing will get you no further than this quote. We are up against a lot this year. Disagree with Obama. Hold him accountable once he is president. But, if you decide you want to vote for McCain or not vote at all, then that is a stand I can't understand. You might as well tag along with the Republicans who have joined hands and are "marching forward in unassailable accord". You'll have to walk behind them as they march forward because I am sure they share none of your beliefs.
You are right. It is disturbing. We should have won in 2004 and this election should be won in a landslide by any Democrat running. Look at what the Republicans have done to the country over the last eight years. To think that we would trust the presidency to yet another Repbulican is the definition of insanity. Just take some time to consider what a McCain presidency will look like. If you are progressive or if you supported Hillary, you have decide if you want to sacrifice an entire agenda for a few issues. I hope you see the bigger picture. Obama has always said he would compromise and has a history of reaching across the aisle. He never said you would agree with him all of the time. BTW, do you really think the country will elect a president with a far left agenda. We won't. If we were ready for that Kucinich would be our nominee. We will elect someone with a far right agenda because no one seems to want to believe how far they will take that agenda if given the chance. Even seeing it over the last eight years hasn't convinced many of you that you don't want more of the same.
"If you are progressive or if you supported Hillary, you have decide if you want to sacrifice an entire agenda for a few issues. I hope you see the bigger picture.... BTW, do you really think the country will elect a president with a far left agenda."
First, no one has satisfactorily explained to me how holding the government accountable or seeking redress for a lawless administration is part of a "far left agenda". And, second, as for the big picture, "What profits a man to gain the whole world and lose his own soul?" (Matthew 16:26)
Here are the last two remaining reasons to vote for Obama:
1. World opinion
2. The Supreme Court
They're not bad reasons, but they're not what drew many to him in the primaries.
What a shame, to disgrace the heroic actions of Chris Dodd and Russ Feingold. Two member of an elite group of true patriots. 15 strong. Against many. We'll see if any turncoat see the error of their ways supporting a criminal executive branch. One that will see a strong liklihood of seeing Supoenas. Why do we cower now? Do the republicans need to be delivered stuffed and smoked before the Democrats attack! How lazy and cowardly is that? Or is it that Pelo si and Re id are as guilty as Bush? I'll not lay down my 4th for you or no man. I want powerful corporations to be brought to their knees. I require Barack to stand for stripping retroactive immunity for the sins that they've wrought. To enable this dictator's power of information through data mining his own country is utterly despicable and evil. Make the Telcos pay. They will rollover on Bush and we have evidence needed for thorough justice.
I don't expect him to stand fast on the Bill of Rights and see the Constitution as a living document!
"Lets Have a Little Revolution" is my song
As one of the disappointed people on the left who is dismissed by the Obamaniacs as irrelevant, they should just be glad I am stilling willing to vote for Obama as the lesser of two evils.
However, there is a line in which Obama and any Democrat is not allowed to cross for me to do that.
If he caves on federally-recognized civil unions and the repeal of DOMA or appoints Sam Nunn as VP, I will not vote for him, period. If he goes too much farther to the right on Iraq, he will cross that line too.
Since the Obamaniacs don't think they need my vote anyway, it won't matter to them.
However, I am sure Cynthia McKinney or some other genuinely progressive candidate would appreciate the support if he crosses that line.
I guess I must have dozed off at the computer........
I had this HORRIBLE dream that someone suggested Obama was considering Sam Nunn for vice President.!!!!
Why not Lidsay Graham, or Newt Gingrich
I'd go door-to-door for McCain ON MY KNEES........ I SWEAR!!......................................tm
That Sam Nunn was being considered, a long with everyone else and their brother, was posted on Huffingtonpost last week.
...., there is a line in which Obama and any Democrat is not allowed to cross....
He has crossed so many lines lately that it's hard to keep track--but, going wishy-washy on choice is _really_ a problem.
.....Since the Obamaniacs don't think they need my vote anyway, it won't matter to them.....
Yeah, it's funny how quick they are to toss aside 18 million voters who are not necessarily going to turn out for them in November. I'm on the fence, personally, and may just vote down-ticket.
No one can convince you to vote in November. Hillary's stand on the issues agrees with Obama's. So, to hold your vote hostage could result in a McCain presidency. For those of you who think a McCain and Obama presidency will look anything alike, you are fooling yourselves. Take the time to really look at what McCain is all about. He isn't the maverick he once was. He is now violating the spirit of the very campaign finance reform he helped write.
http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/stumper/archive/2008/07/07/for-mccain-money-talks.aspx
What are the "so many" lines he has crossed?
-He's expressed "conditional" support for FISA, and most of his supporters understand that his objection is to both the abuse of FISA by the Bush administration and immunity;
-He has proposed an extended faith-based initiative, that is not only inclusive of both religious and secular organizations that provide for those in need, but also a program that does not promote any religion;
-He's consistently said that he will be as careful in leaving Iraq as the Bush administration was careless in going in, and that while he will seek the advice of those on the ground, he alone will set the mission. His position has not changed;
-Finally, he has stated that he does not support the idea that mental distress justifies late-term abortions, a position that is already established in the Roe v. Wade ruling, and one that most Americans, as well as the medical community itself, agree with.
Most of Senator Clinton's 18 million supporters are now supporting Senator Obama. Therefore, the 18 million voters you are using to fortify your threat no longer exist, and those who choose not to vote for Senator Obama were never going to vote for him anyway.
Again, what lines has he crossed?
Are you really implying that all of Clinton's voters will not vote for Obama in November because why? Because her position on FISA is similar to his? Because she didn't even bother to vote against telecom immunity the first time while he did? Because she voted for the war and supported it for years after it began? Because she is willing to go to war with Iran if they don't do what we want? Because her stance on gun rights and capital punishment is not that different than his?
I just unsubscribed to the Obama mailing list. They wanted to know why. If you have to ask I really don't think you'll understand the answer.
they probably don't have a box to check that states, "because i'm ignorant" anyway!
If you are a Democrat and share the values of the Democratic Party, and if you ever truly supported the Democratic nominee, then I too would want to know why. I would hope that cancelling your subscription to his mailing list does not suggest that you are now voting for the Republican candidate, and if it does not, then I really don't understand what cancelling your subscription means! But if it does mean that you're now voting for the Republican candidate, either by casting your ballot or sitting the election out, then I still don't understand what your allegiance to the values and vision of the Democratic Party was based on in the first place if you can so easily abandon it. especially in an election that is this critical to the future of our party and the future of our country. I'm as confused as they were.
But I guess if I have to ask, I will never understand your answer.
StillIRise, let me begin by saying I greatly enjoy your posts. But, having just returned from the Great FISA Wars taking place on other pieces here, I can't help repeating something Bob Ostertag said yesterday: "I always vote Democratic, and I always vote. All my life I have voted for a long string of mediocre Democratic candidates." I think a lot of us are beginning to the feel the inexorable quicksand pull into mediocrity, no matter how exciting, or even historic, the candidate.
Many counsel support for Obama no matter what. Some say criticism is tantamount of supporting McCain. Others, like you, talk of the "values of the Democratic Party." Indeed, we believe our values are different (and better) and there are many issues we look to Obama to address, FISA should not be a "deal breaker". Yet, I see in FISA the very core of what we must challenge, i.e., the institutionalization of lawlessness in our government. Without taking a stand on this, everything else is built on sand, shifting and unstable.
Surely, some will not vote, some will vote third party, and a few will vote for McCain in pique. These are victories for the Republicans, as you note, no matter how they are justified. It would seem to me now that I will vote, as Professor Ostertag, for the latest in "a long string of mediocre Democratic candidates", wondering exactly what and where are the values of the Democratic Party.
As a Democratic voter for the last thirty years, I would be very interested in knowing what the bedrock principles of the Democratic Party are these days. I can't seem to suss any out from the performance of the Dem led Congress over the last couple of years. Perhaps you could enlighten us as to the lines that a Democratic politician will not cross?
so what
So what? So plenty if enough people do it.
Obama does not have unlimited room to triangulate.
Guys stop carrying water for the Rethugs. If you are a disgruntled Clinton supporter, go quietly, stop smearing Obama. Write something that builds the movement or do not write at all. I am getting tired of this type on nonsense.
I think you could deal with your problem more effectively if you self-censored your reading rather than demand that everyone else censor their writing to accommodate you.
.....If you are a disgruntled Clinton supporter, go quietly.....
Let's do the math. Say Senator Obama has 50% of the Democratic Party--and 25% of the electorate.
Senator McCain has the GOP vote, which is approximately 50% of the electorate.
The judicious Clinton voters who you all enjoy trashing and insulting regularly are 25% of
the electorate. If even 5% of said voters go over to McCain, Senator Obama will lose in a landslide.
So, maybe Senator Obama's zealous, unruly supporters ought to wake up, and recognize that they seem to be trying to ensure their own candidate's defeat.
It is time to jettison the myth that 50% of the Democratic Party will not be supporting Obama in the autumn. I know of absolutely no one who previously supported Clinton who will not be voting for Obama, and many of them are donating and working for him. Obama would have to move way further to the right in terms of foreign policy for him to catch up with Senator Clinton.
It is insulting and inaccurate to state that everyone currently upset or disappointed with Obama is a "disgruntled Clinton supporter."
I said a pox on both your DLC houses during the primary and I was proven correct.
Hear! Hear!
It is extremely important for Obama supporters to let him know that they are dissatisfied with his stands concerning the integrity of the United States Constitution. I am not surprised by his position on the Supremes disregarding the absolute phrase that introduces and specifies the conditions under which the right to bear arms cannot be infringed; after all he has always seemed to think that the introductory phrase had something to do with hunting, rather than national security as it was written. And his religious leanings are no surprise either; he's always promoted the cross. FISA is considerably more troubling, but in all three cases, it is important for both Obama and the nation to know that there are those of us who do not blandly accept this kind of anti-Constitutional activism.
If we do not sound off now, we will elect someone who has a false sense of his base support. The Democrats are easily painted as lacking the knees to really change things. If the rank and file do not prod our leadership, then there will always be another George Bush waiting in the weeds to feed the national cynicism about the American left.
Interesting post, CitizenE. And it highlights a concern I have long had:
Democrats don't gain (or keep) positions of leadership because -- well -- they don't lead. And there's always a Republican around the corner to remind the country of it.
Even now, there are those here who bemoan that the Republicans will paint Obama "soft of terror" if he stands against FISA. Here's a flash: they will anyway. And they will now add that Obama is not a man of principle, that he doesn't keep his word, i.e., "Senator Obama unequivocally opposes giving retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies and has cosponsored Senator Dodd's efforts to remove that provision from the FISA bill. Granting such immunity undermines the constitutional protections Americans trust the Congress to protect. Senator Obama supports a filibuster of this bill, and strongly urges others to do the same." (12-17-07)
Obama gains nothing with what one writer called "the empty center", but he loses a great deal with people who are looking for leadership.
Well said!
Posted July 7, 2008 | 03:27 PM (EST)