« Energy Deregulation Doesn't Work, Either | Main | GAO Slaps Bush for SCHIP Vetoes »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834530d9f69e200e551e81c0e8833

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tough:

Comments

I thought this was a good piece on the tough question: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/shaun-jacob-halper/standing-up-for-the-sissy_b_97350.html

I don't think Obama can't handle the fight b/c he's a sissy. That would be asinine. I think he can't handle the fight b/c he's never had to fight like this before, he doesn't want to fight like this (the system will melt before his awesome post-partisan self) and he doesn't know policy like she does. "Tough" was the wrong word. I should have gone with "Battle-tested."

Did you think the policy questions were good questions? Because everyone seems to think they were equally stupid.

Everyone except the Taylor Marsh crowd, who I'm not sure think at all.

Please tell me you're not voting for a DLC Democrat....

Well, kathy, if you're going to vote for a Democrat, you're going to vote for a DLC Dem either way. Obama doesn't quite have the DLC credentials that Hillary does but he's just as committed to its agenda. He lobbied them for months to get the Convention speech, and he kissed DLC ass for months after that to get them to take him seriously as a contender, promising them the moon for their support, no doubt.

Of course, they were already committed to Clinton, but they kept him on a string, even appointing his friend Harold to the DLC Chairmanship (altho Ford's heavy Wall Street connections had a lot to do with that).

Point is, he's almost as tied to the DLC's right-wing policies as Clinton, so there isn't all that much difference between them as far as corporate toadying goes.

Kathy: Yeah, as of now - although I'm already having buyer's remorse. My support is tortured. I agree with Mick. They're both "centrist" corporate Dems. With either candidate I end up mindreading hoping that s/he can be brought around to do the right thing while knowing in my heart that the pressure to get them to do those things will never be brought to bear. But, no matter what, I want a Dem in the White House to at least give us that one in a million chance that the country will be able to turn around a little bit. I honestly believe that Obama can't win, although I would love to add that to my long list of things I've been wrong about and if he's the nominee, I'll go crazy volunteering to help him win. I think that there is value in Clinton's knowledge of the system. And she is a fighter - nobody can even question that. The problem is that she probably won't be fighting for things I want (fully funded human needs programs and a more progressive tax code). BUT, if she manages to get that bond-funded WPA-style plan to fix the infrastructure through and if she makes headway on the health care and clean energy fronts, I won't be totally unhappy.

As for the quality of the policy questions: there comes a point when someone who is running for president has to rise above the question. With all the Jeremiah Wright sort of questions, that's nearly impossible to do b/c you have to dignify a dignity-free premise by answering at all. But if there's a kernel of policy anywhere to be found, then it's up to the candidate to find it and answer the hell out of it. I didn't see him do that on Wednesday and neither did my friends, some of whom will be voting for him on Tuesday.

I think Obama's proven himself plenty of times, but thanks to Clinton's repeatedly enabling the press, it's like each exposure to the media starts at zero, and the assclowns of punditry have to be re-educated all over again.

I'm 55 now, and I have NEVER seen a presidential candidate "instruct" the press as often as Obama has. In his gentle but firm way he has repeatedly asked for substance, and repeatedly that has been undone by Clinton's scorched earth strategies that keep the trivia at the forefront.

Obama seems to have gotten an overall boost in the polls from this debate, even in PA. 35,000 last night in Philly. Who else in American politics could draw 35,000 voters to a rally?

As an Edwards supporter I was slow to warm to Obama, but I'm adult enough to realize that even JFK had off nights. Obama's had fewer than most. He's a very good candidate and may be a very good president. Clinton's been a dreadful candidate, and I fear her presidency as one in which liberals would take the blame, but Wall Street would remain the same.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Bang for the Buck: Boosting the American Economy

Compassionate Conservatism in Action

Molly


  • "We are the deciders. And every single day, every single one of us needs to step outside and take some action to help stop this war."

  • Photobucket

Zinn


  • "[O]ur time, our energy, should be spent in educating, agitating, organizing our fellow citizens in the workplace, in the neighborhood, in the schools. Our objective should be to build, painstakingly, patiently but energetically, a movement that, when it reaches a certain critical mass, would shake whoever is in the White House, in Congress, into changing national policy on matters of war and social justice."

Bono


  • "True religion will not let us fall asleep in the comfort of our freedom. Love thy neighbor is not a piece of advice, it's a command. ...

    God, my friends, is with the poor and God is with us, if we are with them. This is not a burden, this is an adventure."

The Reverend Al Sharpton


  • Ray wasn't singing about what he knew, 'cause Ray had been blind since he was a child. He hadn't seen many purple mountains. He hadn't seen many fruited plains. He was singing about what he believed to be.

    Mr. President, we love America, not because of all of us have seen the beauty all the time.

    But we believed if we kept on working, if we kept on marching, if we kept on voting, if we kept on believing, we would make America beautiful for everybody.

Marx


  • ''With adequate profit, capital is very bold. A certain 10 percent will ensure its employment anywhere; 20 percent will produce eagerness, 50 percent positive audacity; 100 percent will make it ready to trample on all human laws; 300 percent, and there is not a crime which it will not scruple, nor a risk it will not run, even to the chance of its owner being hanged.''

Join Us!


  • Member, Project Hamad

Happy 71st Anniversary Social Security!


  • Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Countdown


Become a Proud Member of the Guppy Army


Blogroll

Count Me, Damnit!


Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 01/2004

Oh, I've Won Awards

alternative hippopotamus

Paperwight's Fair Shot

Your Liberal Media