Obama

In article , rw
wrote:


The caucus went something like 42 for Obama to 8 for Clinton, and I was
chosen as the delegate to represent Obama at the state convention. So
yes, as it turns out I was the driver of the delegate. :-)

Wow!

To this long-time exile, could you, succinctly, explain why Obama is
much better than Clinton?

I have a republican (as opposed to Republican) dislike for dynasties

and she went the wrong way, and he the right way, over Iraq,

but beyond that?

(There's a nice article in today's Manchester Guardian about this -
http://tinyurl.com/37hyjs
but it's written by a Brit, and thus inevitably a bit suspect)

Lazarus

Lazarus Cooke wrote:
In article , rw
wrote:


The caucus went something like 42 for Obama to 8 for Clinton, and I was
chosen as the delegate to represent Obama at the state convention. So
yes, as it turns out I was the driver of the delegate. :-)


Wow!

To this long-time exile, could you, succinctly, explain why Obama is
much better than Clinton?

Change.

Succinct enough?

Their policy positions are nearly identical. I'm just sick of
Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton.

I don't care about charisma or oratorical skills. I just want something
different.

I have a republican (as opposed to Republican) dislike for dynasties

I feel the same way.


and she went the wrong way, and he the right way, over Iraq,

but beyond that?

Beyond that? That's BIG. That's HUGE! The establishment Democrats, like
Hillary Clinton, were afraid to vote against the Iraq war resolution in
the wake of 9/11 because they were afraid to be seen as weak on national
security. It was a cowardly vote, IMO.

If Hillary Clinton end's up the nominee I will enthusiastically vote for
her.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

The last president I voted for was Ross Pereau. The rest of them are
just crooked laywers.
"Do the Math"!
Need some Change Agentry!


--
DoubleHaul
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DoubleHaul's Profile: http://www.njflyfishing.com/vBulleti...hp?userid=1306
View this thread: http://www.njflyfishing.com/vBulleti...ad.php?t=13800


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Lazarus Cooke" wrote


To this long-time exile, could you, succinctly, explain why Obama is
much better than Clinton?

I have a republican (as opposed to Republican) dislike for dynasties

and she went the wrong way, and he the right way, over Iraq,

but beyond that?

(There's a nice article in today's Manchester Guardian about this -
http://tinyurl.com/37hyjs
but it's written by a Brit, and thus inevitably a bit suspect)



I think the article you site does a good job ... i.e. there aren't huge
'issue' differences

The reasons I prefer Obama include ... he strikes me as extremely
intelligent ( a very big change over the last 8 years ), not that Clinton is
dumb.

Obama has a quality you don't often see in politicians, he actually
listens. Let me use this ROFF place to explain how I mean that. Around
here, people read ( listen) only until they have something to attack or use
to gain points for themselves, often ending up mis-reading in the haste to
attack/ defend, this is the typical politicians style too. Obama gives me
the impression that he actually tries hard to understand what is being said,
and works as hard at finding things to agree with as to disagree with. I
base this observation over the long term and not just the last few weeks,
where, sadly, Obama has be forced more into a 'sound bite' mode.

Obama is bringing LOTS of new people into the process, young people and
older folk wanting to hope again. Democracy is about 'the people' and the
fact that several TIMES as many people are voting, this Dem primary, as in
the past IS ALREADY a wonderful accomplishment for the man.

Obama is truly interested in the future, in trying to find common ground and
start repairing the damage Rove et al have done to our country. I base
this on what he says and my "gut" evaluation of his honesty. Clinton
uses much of the same language of "change" and "future" but also slips often
into little lapses that, to me, indicate she really wants to go back to the
90's and 'settle some business' .... first you 'can't go home again' ...
second, we need a person that really wants to unite, not one with a chip
still shouldered.


ANY of the Republicans running would be far, Far, FAR, worse than any of
the Dems that have. McCain is better than Bush, but who isn't? That
said, 'electability' is a big issue ... right now polls show Obama would
beat McCain handily, Clinton would lose to him. Many Republicans don't
have anyone to vote FOR in this race, but Many, Many would come out to vote
AGAINST Hillary.

MY Country desperately needs an "image makeover" in the world thanks to Bush
( as you well understand ) IMHO, electing Obama in a country that has
our racist history will send a clear massage to the world that we ARE still
trying to be a place where anyone can 'make it' and greatly improve our
image ( this is my only 'racial' thought about this election ). Electing
Clinton II shortly after electing Bush II will increase the impression that
we are really becoming a place of dynasties


As rw says, if Clinton gets the nomination, I'll vote and work for her since
she stands head, shoulders, and bust line g above any on the other side
.... but Obama is the first ( mostly for 'gut impression' reasons )
politician in a long time that I have voted FOR ... strictly FOR .... i.e.
I didn't vote against Hillary .... I voted FOR Obama

P.S.

I read an article ( I tried to find it and link, but couldn't ) by a
political analist about 'why Obama won S.C." after that state voted.

Two things struck me. First, it was pointed out that Obama's campaign
worked much harder ( many statistics were quoted ), much of that work by
voluteers.
Second, the author said that Obama seemed to have great skill at "picking
talent" and went on to outline his paid staff, their achievements, and their
dedication.


At the time I called my wife to the monitor, had her read the page and
asked, "After Bush with his more vacation time than anyone in history and
'you're doing a great job Brownie' ...... what more could we really want
from a President than hard work and the ability to surround himself with
talent?" The only other thing might be that he actually listen to that
talented staff of advisors ... see my previous post G

On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 23:25:57 GMT, "Larry L"
wrote:


"Lazarus Cooke" wrote


To this long-time exile, could you, succinctly, explain why Obama is
much better than Clinton?

I have a republican (as opposed to Republican) dislike for dynasties

and she went the wrong way, and he the right way, over Iraq,

but beyond that?

(There's a nice article in today's Manchester Guardian about this -
http://tinyurl.com/37hyjs
but it's written by a Brit, and thus inevitably a bit suspect)



I think the article you site does a good job ... i.e. there aren't huge
'issue' differences

The reasons I prefer Obama include ... he strikes me as extremely
intelligent ( a very big change over the last 8 years ), not that Clinton is
dumb.

Obama has a quality you don't often see in politicians, he actually
listens. Let me use this ROFF place to explain how I mean that. Around
here, people read ( listen) only until they have something to attack or use
to gain points for themselves, often ending up mis-reading in the haste to
attack/ defend, this is the typical politicians style too. Obama gives me
the impression that he actually tries hard to understand what is being said,
and works as hard at finding things to agree with as to disagree with. I
base this observation over the long term and not just the last few weeks,
where, sadly, Obama has be forced more into a 'sound bite' mode.

Obama is bringing LOTS of new people into the process, young people and
older folk wanting to hope again. Democracy is about 'the people' and the
fact that several TIMES as many people are voting, this Dem primary, as in
the past IS ALREADY a wonderful accomplishment for the man.

Obama is truly interested in the future, in trying to find common ground and
start repairing the damage Rove et al have done to our country. I base
this on what he says and my "gut" evaluation of his honesty. Clinton
uses much of the same language of "change" and "future" but also slips often
into little lapses that, to me, indicate she really wants to go back to the
90's and 'settle some business' .... first you 'can't go home again' ...
second, we need a person that really wants to unite, not one with a chip
still shouldered.


ANY of the Republicans running would be far, Far, FAR, worse than any of
the Dems that have. McCain is better than Bush, but who isn't? That
said, 'electability' is a big issue ... right now polls show Obama would
beat McCain handily, Clinton would lose to him. Many Republicans don't
have anyone to vote FOR in this race, but Many, Many would come out to vote
AGAINST Hillary.

MY Country desperately needs an "image makeover" in the world thanks to Bush
( as you well understand ) IMHO, electing Obama in a country that has
our racist history will send a clear massage to the world that we ARE still
trying to be a place where anyone can 'make it' and greatly improve our
image ( this is my only 'racial' thought about this election ). Electing
Clinton II shortly after electing Bush II will increase the impression that
we are really becoming a place of dynasties


As rw says, if Clinton gets the nomination, I'll vote and work for her since
she stands head, shoulders, and bust line g above any on the other side
... but Obama is the first ( mostly for 'gut impression' reasons )
politician in a long time that I have voted FOR ... strictly FOR .... i.e.
I didn't vote against Hillary .... I voted FOR Obama

Well said and rightly spoken. And thank you for that...

/daytripper

Larry L wrote:

As rw says, if Clinton gets the nomination, I'll vote and work for her since
she stands head, shoulders, and bust line g above any on the other side
.... but Obama is the first ( mostly for 'gut impression' reasons )
politician in a long time that I have voted FOR ... strictly FOR .... i.e.
I didn't vote against Hillary .... I voted FOR Obama

I think Obama will eventually get the nomination, but it might be a
brokered convention. That alone would be an entertaining political
drama, unseen in America for many years.

The Democratic nomination might come down to the "super delegates," who
are typically office holders or insiders of some stripe. They can vote
for whomever they please.

I'm an ordinary delegate. My vote is committed to Obama, the
overwhelming favorite (50-8) of my fellow caucus members.

My biggest problem with Hillary Clinton is that she could energize the
rabid right-wing Republican vote. They hate her. Her campaign would be a
get-out-the-vote campaign for the wingers.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

Thanks, Royal and Larry etc..

You've convinced me.

Lazarus

Steve wrote:
On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:56:54 -0700, rw
wrote:


My biggest problem with Hillary Clinton is that she could energize the
rabid right-wing Republican vote. They hate her. Her campaign would be a
get-out-the-vote campaign for the wingers.


Even those of us who consider themselves Jeffersonian independents
tremble at the thought of 2-4 Supreme Court justices appointed for
their policy of activism. She has stated she's a big fan of Ginsburg.
A society does not benefit from an activist judiciary.

so, um, depends on whether or not the activism is based on service to
jeffersonian ideals, eh?

jeff

On Thu, 07 Feb 2008 01:09:25 GMT, Steve wrote:

On Wed, 06 Feb 2008 16:56:54 -0700, rw
wrote:

My biggest problem with Hillary Clinton is that she could energize the
rabid right-wing Republican vote. They hate her. Her campaign would be a
get-out-the-vote campaign for the wingers.

Even those of us who consider themselves Jeffersonian independents
tremble at the thought of 2-4 Supreme Court justices appointed for
their policy of activism. She has stated she's a big fan of Ginsburg.
A society does not benefit from an activist judiciary.

[..../]

Irony meter

/daytripper (it's gonna be a long political season ;-)