Thread: Barak Obama

great article dong

Originally Posted by Cyrille

Yes - it worked for you, arnie!

Good, then.

I just hoped you didn't mean that being a Muslim is a virtue, because it's not.

And it shouldn't be a virtue.

Originally Posted by symphony

religion is a private matter and has no place in politics (wishful thinking)

barack is too young, he is jeopardizing his presidential prospects by entering the race. he cannot beat hillary, and its hard to recover once you have lost a visible race.

I am assuming he's smart enought to know this.

But as for today, he can get his name out. Cause some discussion.

And then fade out like the other candidates, leaving Sir Hillary and the DNC machine to take on whoever the GOP 'puts up.'

Originally Posted by Tommyk

So? Can he be worse than Bush? I think Mugabe is better than Bush..at least you can see Mugabe coming..

I'd vote for Obama over W. Bush in a heartbeat.

But my point is the whole U.S. system. Designed to allow "outsiders" inside the system.


For better or worse.

But this is how newbie major, governor, (w. Bush) or senator or Congressman or business man can all of a sudden seek, and potential get the more powerful position in the world.

Many negative to this.

Originally Posted by Tommyk

Hmmn, getting the point. I'm not comfortable with a "potential Muslim sympathizer" inside the White House and with the current electorate in the US it could be possible.

I have posted several times before that Barak Obama is a dead horse.


He is UNelectable.


He'll spark some discussion, get attention from the media, give a speech at the Democratic Convention, and then go back to the Senate.

He will NOT be chosen as V.P.

(He's also young, and has a many more elections to be a strong force and/or rise through the ranks, if he stays in the game.)

Don't worry the Clinton long-knives will take care of Obama.

Originally Posted by esoteric1

Don't worry the Clinton long-knives will take care of Obama.

Indeed.

They are investigating right now.

Going over his entire life and his families entire life with a fine-toothed comb.

They dig up everything they can, corroborate it, then sit on it, then let it out in the public at the most optimum time.

Originally Posted by Matthew

^ like calling the middle school he attended in Jakarta an extremist muslim madrasa?!?!

exactly! The Clinton machine loves a 'little' dirty pool.

-----

Yeah this guy is just another iconoclastic idiot, so let's only pay attention to the various lobby's lackeys, and empty suits the establishment's corporate whore press pushes for candidates. They're much better

http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2007/tst012207.htm




Can We Achieve Peace in the Middle East?

January 22, 2007



Former President Carter’s new book about the ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine has raised the ire of Americans on two sides of the debate. I say “two sides” rather than “both sides,” because there is another perspective that is never discussed in American politics. That perspective is the perspective of our founding fathers, namely that America should not intervene in the internal affairs of other nations.

Everyone assumes America must play the leading role in crafting some settlement or compromise between the Israelis and the Palestinians. But Jefferson, Madison, and Washington explicitly warned against involving ourselves in foreign conflicts.

The conflict in Gaza and the West Bank is almost like a schoolyard fight: when America and the world stand watching, neither side will give an inch for fear of appearing weak. But deep down, the people who actually have to live there desperately want an end to the violence. They don’t need solutions imposed by outsiders. It’s easy to sit here safe in America and talk tough, but we’re not the ones suffering.

Practically speaking, our meddling in the Middle East has only intensified strife and conflict. American tax dollars have militarized the entire region. We give Israel about $3 billion each year, but we also give Egypt $2 billion. Most other Middle East countries get money too, some of which ends up in the hands of Palestinian terrorists. Both sides have far more military weapons as a result. Talk about adding fuel to the fire! Our foolish and unconstitutional foreign aid has produced more violence, not less.

Congress and each successive administration pledge their political, financial, and military support for Israel. Yet while we call ourselves a strong ally of the Israeli people, we send billions in foreign aid every year to some Muslim states that many Israelis regard as enemies. From the Israeli point of view, many of the same Islamic nations we fund with our tax dollars want to destroy the Jewish state. Many average Israelis and American Jews see America as hypocritically hedging its bets.

This illustrates perfectly the inherent problem with foreign aid: once we give money to one country, we have to give it to all the rest or risk making enemies. This is especially true in the Middle East and other strife-torn regions, where our financial support for one side is seen as an act of aggression by the other. Just as our money never makes Israel secure, it doesn’t buy us any true friends elsewhere in the region. On the contrary, millions of Muslims hate the United States.

It is time to challenge the notion that it is our job to broker peace in the Middle East and every other troubled region across the globe. America can and should use every diplomatic means at our disposal to end the violence in the West Bank, but we should draw the line at any further entanglement. Third-party outsiders cannot impose political solutions in Palestine or anywhere else. Peace can be achieved only when self-determination operates freely in all nations. “Peace plans” imposed by outsiders or the UN cause resentment and seldom produce lasting peace.

The simple truth is that we cannot resolve every human conflict across the globe, and there will always be violence somewhere on earth. The fatal conceit lies in believing America can impose geopolitical solutions wherever it chooses.

Originally Posted by Storekeeper

"Sen. Hillary Clinton declared this weekend, " I'm in to win." Anyone who has watched her remarkable trajectory can have no doubt that she'll do whatever it takes to win the presidency. I wish she felt the same way about the war." -- Liz Cheney

Off-topic here above, and my response is off-topic in responding to this.

But:

No one felt the same way about the Iraq war - about winning it for the U.S.

Because they sent in 250,000+ too few troops.


These comments are directed towards the working and middle class that probably hasn't read about Iraq, but only watches TV and listens to the radio.
-----

Originally Posted by Matthew

^ like calling the middle school he attended in Jakarta an extremist muslim madrasa?!?!

Yeah, it's unbelievable how bad the news is today in the U.S. "NY Times" to TV, etc.

Here's more on the false Madrassa story.
January 24, 2007

Obama Versus Fox News

As Mark Mellman would say, there are three ways to interpret a memo distributed to reporters this a.m. from Sen. Barack Obama's staff about the libelous claim that he attended a madrassa as a young man.
1. The story still has legs, and Obama's staff are concerned that the madrassa rumor will never be fully put to bed unless it's tucked under the covers by Obama himself. Obama, we're told, was asked about the madrassa story at least six times yesterday. One reporter wasn't aware that CNN had proven the rumor false.
2. They're angling for a hit off the Obama versus Fox News match-up. The memo takes Steve Doocy and John Gibson to task for repeating the charges and documents how CNN (Fox competitor!) thoroughly debunked the story. Bashing Fox -- and in this case, Fox warrants a bit of bashing -- is like throwing a log in a heated fire. Compare this to Sen. John McCain's embrace of MoveOn.org's ads against him. The more liberals attack McCain, the more conservative he seems.
3. Obama will not be swiftboated. Period.
Explanations 1 and 3 are more convincing to us than explanation 2, but the side effects will be fun to watch.
From the memo:

To be clear, Senator Obama has never been a Muslim, was not raised a Muslim, and is a committed Christian who attends the United Church of Christ in Chicago. Furthermore, the Indonesian school Obama attended in Jakarta is a public school that is not and never has been a Madrassa. These malicious, irresponsible charges are precisely the kind of politics the American people have grown tired of, and that Senator Obama is trying to change by focusing on bringing people together to solve our common problems.

Link and Entire: http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.c...versus_fo.html

More evidence of a nation where the entire media cannot be trusted. We all remember the two 100% false article written by Judith Miller that appeared on the front page of the "NY Times" six weeks after 9/11claiming that Mohamed Atta met with Iraiq Intelligence agents in Prague.

It's time to simply tune-out, folks.

Behind the 'Madrassa Hoax'

What a bogus report on Barack Obama reveals about the media food chain.

Jan. 27, 2007 - What will the first full week of Campaign '08 be remembered for? That Barack Obama was under attack for his behavior as a six-year-old. It’s worth revisiting the Madrassa Hoax story for what it tells us about our warp-speed politics.