This Is Getting Good

[red states rule]

The fight between Obama and Hillary is getting good. Now Obama compares the Red Queen to Pres Bush

That should fire things up



Obama likens Hillary to Bush
By Christina Bellantoni
July 27, 2007

Sen. Barack Obama yesterday suggested Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's foreign policy smacks of "Bush-Cheney lite," in a spat dominating the Democratic presidential contest.

The two senators have fired political shots all week since a debate question about meeting with leaders from rogue nations, but the rhetoric sharpened yesterday and other White House hopefuls joined in.

Mrs. Clinton, New York Democrat, dismissed the back-and-forth as "silly," then accused Mr. Obama, Illinois Democrat, of abandoning his "hope" message.

The dust-up began at Monday's debate when Mr. Obama said "I would" meet, without preconditions, the leaders of U.S. enemies and explained his reasoning. Mrs. Clinton responded next, saying, "I will not promise" and noted such visits could be used as propaganda.

She later assumed the mantle of experience and told a newspaper that her rival's willingness to meet with such leaders was "irresponsible" and "naive." He countered by characterizing her October 2002 vote for the Iraq war with the same words.

"If we want fundamental change, then we can't be afraid to talk to our enemies," he said yesterday, keeping the fight alive in a Concord, N.H., campaign speech.

"I'm not afraid of losing the PR war to dictators, I'm happy to look them in the eye and say what needs to be said," he asserted without mentioning Mrs. Clinton. "I don't want a continuation of Bush-Cheney; I don't want Bush-Cheney lite."

Obama adviser David Axelrod did not retract the Bush-Cheney remark when asked about it on CNN. Mr. Obama characterized the Bush administration's foreign policy as "obsessed with talking tough and then not acting very smartly

http://washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070727/NATION/107270099/1001

 

[red states rule]

and the liberal media does not know which way to go


The Bran-Muffin Candidate
Thursday, Jul. 26, 2007 By JOE KLEIN Enlarge Photo
Illustration by Stephen Kroninger; Clinton Head; Stan Honda / AFP / Getty

Hillary Clinton looked awful. Her eyes were bleary and puffy, as if she had stayed up all night or was in the midst of a fairly dramatic allergic reaction. (Her staff later said it was indeed allergies.) But there she was, on a Sunday morning in Miami, being Hillary!--as her campaign signs say--in what was billed as una charla (a chat) in front of about a thousand Latinos at the annual conference of the National Council of La Raza, a Latino advocacy group. "Let's just talk like two girlfriends," she instructed her interviewer, a Latina newspaper publisher.

Yeah, right. Actually, I can easily imagine Senator Clinton chatting away with pals about the need for "cross-border cooperation on economic development with Mexico." She's a drop-dead policy wonk. And she's never going to be a warm, cuddly public person. She attacks her job like an assembly-line spot-welding robot, hitting each and every talking point precisely, even when she's rusty with allergies. And that, ultimately, is what she brings to this campaign: reliability, as opposed to experience. She has never been an executive decision maker, but she is solid as granite and righteous as a bran muffin. She isn't going to go all crazy or extreme on us, which is a relief after George W. Bush. She is, for the moment, the default position in the Democratic race.

Her most serious opponent, Senator Barack Obama, spoke to La Raza directly after Clinton, and he gave a gorgeous speech, using as his text a message that Martin Luther King Jr. had sent to Cesar Chavez in the midst of the farmworker activist's famous 1968 hunger strike: "Our separate struggles are really one." I hadn't seen Obama speak in several months, and his delivery had become more passionate, less cerebral. The substance of his message--on issues like immigration reform--was essentially the same as Clinton's. But he was more artful, using King and Chavez to draw together two ethnic groups, blacks and Latinos, that have a testy relationship in urban America. "Not only are our struggles one," he concluded, "but our dreams are too."

for the complete article
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1647468,00.html

 

[Big_D]

May I ask who you support for the next presidential election?

 

[Shogun]

Welcome to the board Big D.


You question made me laugh.

 

[William Joyce]

blacks and Latinos, that have a testy relationship in urban America. "Not only are our struggles one," he concluded, "but our dreams are too."

for the complete article
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1647468,00.html

Which candidate speaks to the struggles and dreams of whites?

 

[Big_D]

Welcome to the board Big D.


You question made me laugh.

Why did it make you laugh? I just want to know who RSR wants to win the next election.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

RSR is a REPUBLICAN and a supposed Conservative. No way any of the Dems attract him, and some of the Repubs do not either.

The only candidate I have any feeling for is Fred Thompson. If a certain former New York mayor gets the nod I may not vote at all. I am staring to think in that case Hillary might be a less bad choice. BUT damn if I would ever vote for her ass.

The truth is she is likely more moderate then most of the Liberals running, if we have her Husbands record to go on. I just don't like her disregard for law and rights and the " ends justify the means".

 

[Larkinn]

Which candidate speaks to the struggles and dreams of whites?

All of them.

 

[Big_D]

All of them.

I agree. All the candidates support whites, they just don't point out that they do.

 

[William Joyce]

I agree. All the candidates support whites, they just don't point out that they do.

Uh.... huh.

Can you name one candidate who has spoken to a white group, or specifically asked for whites' vote, or specifically addressed white issues?

 

[Larkinn]

Uh.... huh.

Can you name one candidate who has spoken to a white group, or specifically asked for whites' vote, or specifically addressed white issues?

They don't speak to white groups, because white groups represent a tiny minorities of whites...namely the racist shitheads.

They don't specifically ask for whites' votes because whites comprise a majority of the population. And pray tell, what exactly are "white issues"?

 

[Annie]

Uh.... huh.

Can you name one candidate who has spoken to a white group, or specifically asked for whites' vote, or specifically addressed white issues?

Why should they? I'd rather the candidates speak to the working poor, the middle class, the successful, than based on race.

 

[William Joyce]

They don't specifically ask for whites' votes because whites comprise a majority of the population. And pray tell, what exactly are "white issues"?

1. Whites are a minority in four states (California, Arizona, New Mexico and Hawaii) and the District of Columbia.

2. Whites will be a minority in the U.S. in about 40 years, according the Census Bureau. It will be about 20 years if amnesty passes.

3. Whites, and only whites, are hurt by affirmative action.

5. Illegal immigration hurts whites.

6. Outsourcing hurts whites.

7. The media insults whites -- no other race.

8. Black crime hurts whites disproportionately.

9. White families are suffering because they work hard to pay the taxes that fund black welfare queens. It's not the other way around.

10. Whites are asked to die in the military for Jewish wars. Jews are never asked to die for white wars because they skip military service.

11. Whites are kept out of college because of quotas.

12. Whites are kept out of police departments, schools, fire squads, you name it because of race.

13. Whites are not allowed to have their own groups. It's automatically "racist."

14. Whites are not allowed to associate with each other because of "civil rights" laws. The same does not apply to blacks. If there's an all-black neighborhood, no federal judge demands it be "broken up" and "integrated." Only white neighborhoods does this happen to.

15. Whites are not even allowed to THINK of themselves as a group that needs protection, while other races are ENCOURAGED to do so. And those groups get TAX MONEY, etc. to fund their causes, like "La Raza" for Hispanics, NAACP for blacks, etc.

 

[Larkinn]

1. Whites are a minority in four states (California, Arizona, New Mexico and Hawaii) and the District of Columbia.

Minority in this case means less than others...not under 50%.

2. Whites will be a minority in the U.S. in about 40 years, according the Census Bureau. It will be about 20 years if amnesty passes.

Then come back in 40 years.

3. Whites, and only whites, are hurt by affirmative action.

I would bet that Asians in Ca are hurt by it as well.

5. Illegal immigration hurts whites.

Thats nice. Doesn't make it a white issue, as it effects other races as well.

6. Outsourcing hurts whites.

See above.

7. The media insults whites -- no other race.

Bullshit.

8. Black crime hurts whites disproportionately.

And crime in general hurts blacks disproportionately. And the reason for separating it into black/white crime is arbitrary and meaningless.

9. White families are suffering because they work hard to pay the taxes that fund black welfare queens. It's not the other way around.

Blacks don't pay taxes and there aren't white welfare queens?

10. Whites are asked to die in the military for Jewish wars. Jews are never asked to die for white wars because they skip military service.

Doubtful.

11. Whites are kept out of college because of quotas.

Duplicate reason...whasamatter, having trouble thinking of them?

12. Whites are kept out of police departments, schools, fire squads, you name it because of race.

But yet they are disproportionately represented in most of those things. Hmm, why is that ?

13. Whites are not allowed to have their own groups. It's automatically "racist."

Really? So remind me when the Feds and the State cracked down on the KKK and disbanded them?

14. Whites are not allowed to associate with each other because of "civil rights" laws. The same does not apply to blacks. If there's an all-black neighborhood, no federal judge demands it be "broken up" and "integrated." Only white neighborhoods does this happen to.

Err thats because black neighborhoods don't have rules not allowing non-blacks to come in. White neighborhoods that do will be broken up. If they don't, then its fine.

15. Whites are not even allowed to THINK of themselves as a group that needs protection

So tell us about your personal experiences about the terrible things that have happened to you? After all if you can't even think it, and you are thinking AND speaking about it, I'm sure you must have some terrible tales to tell about what the feds did to you when they tortured you at Rikers, right?

, while other races are ENCOURAGED to do so. And those groups get TAX MONEY, etc. to fund their causes, like "La Raza" for Hispanics, NAACP for blacks, etc.

Care to give us a link to the tax money that goes to La Raza?

 

[DeadCanDance]

Uh.... huh.

Can you name one candidate who has spoken to a white group, or specifically asked for whites' vote, or specifically addressed white issues?

Haven't you been watching the GOP debates? Check out the audience. They're like 100% white.

 

[Big_D]

Uh.... huh.

Can you name one candidate who has spoken to a white group, or specifically asked for whites' vote, or specifically addressed white issues?

If they would do any of that, they would be perceived as racist.

 

[Paulie]

If they would do any of that, they would be perceived as racist.

I think that's part of the point he's trying to make.

 

[maineman]

and throughout it all, the blue numbers keep getting bigger and more numerous:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

and democrats in congress increase their poll advantage over the republicans in congress..... and twelve GOP congressional incumbents are bailing like rats leaving a sinking ship!

happy days are almost here again!