Woger -> RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election (22/1/2007 2:03:22 PM)
ORIGINAL: LB Jeffries
I have a feeling Clinton won't get it. The problem with being the front runner is that there is only one other direction to go...down. Look at Howard Dean last time. Obama has momentium, he's a political superstar in the States. Between him and Clinton and Edwards none of the other nonimations will get much airtime in the media. However I have a feeling the ticket we will end up seeing is a Edwards/Obama or vice versa. I don't think a Clinton/Obama ticket would work - still too much inherent sexism and racism.Would be great to be proved wrong though.
On the Republican side MacCain has an uphill battle if the new troop surge doesn't help in Iraq. It was an idea he has been putting forward for a while. Guillani has a lot of secrets from his time as new York mayor and will not be able to live off the goodwill brought about by 9-11 (esp after people see how much he charges for giving speeches about it).
The Democrats are actully in a pretty good position - they have at least three very high profile nominees while the Repulicans have two moderates as their frontrunners - which will damage the realtionship with the extreme right.
It is really anybodys guess at the moment- how many people would have predicted Kerry as running in 2004? That said, im sticking my flag in the Obama camp - one of the few people that voted against the war. And to folk that say he is inexperinced and too young, well it aint as if the old guys have been much use, and I can't see what experience Bush has had.
In the end im just glad we are starting to move away from one of the worst presidents in the modern age - not only for the what he has done internationally but also how he has created huge divisons in his nation - not since Nixon has someone done so much damage - and even he managed to start talks with China!
Obama wasn't around to vote I think, so I suppsoe he can say he didn't support the war, unlike the other spinless tools.
Your right he wasn't around to vote as he didn't become a Senator until 2004. But he was a State Senator in Illinois when the war started and he spoke out against it on the record:
Obama Speaks Out Against War - Oct. 2002
I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.
I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.
I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.
I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power.... The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors...and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.
I am not opposed to all wars. I'm opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure that...we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.
You want a fight, President Bush? Let's fight to wean ourselves off Middle East oil through an energy policy that doesn't simply serve the interests of Exxon and Mobil.
Those are the battles that we need to fight. Those are the battles that we willingly join. The battles against ignorance and intolerance. Corruption and greed. Poverty and despair.
Could you honestly see Hillary Clinton giving a speech like that?
Good speech, she wouldn't even come up with that now.