| Author |
|
Kevin Brown
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 31 May 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 9126
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 9:03am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
I'm still trying to figure out just what was so bad about Wright's oft-quoted
"God-damn America" speech. I got exactly what he was trying to say there,
and I agreed with him.
*********************************
You mean Edward Peck's comments that Wright was quoting, right?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21/meet-the-white-man- who-_n_92793.html
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Al Cook
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 December 2004
Posts: 12734
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 9:20am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Well, if Peck's comments can be summed up by "God Damn America as long
as she tries to act like she is God and she is Supreme," sure.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Stephen Robinson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 16 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5833
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 9:54am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Out of curiosity, does anyone here believe that if she loses the nomination Clinton will then run as an Independant in order to act as spoiler? The subsequent split would almost guarantee a Republican victory this year, and allow her to run again in 2012 as the Democratic candidate (if the party would have her), or as an Indepandant (if the party would not). Would attempting such a move now require a high-profile Democrat to "defect" to join her on the ticket to give her run more credibility, or is her name sufficient to carry the ticket without assistance?
****************
SER: If she were to run as an independent, her political career would be over. She wouldn't win the presidency, as you state, and she'd be persona non grata for the three years until she has to run again (2012) for Senate. I imagine that she'd probably get a strong primary challenge for her Senate seat and could possibly lose (heck, that could *still* happen if enough New York Democrats believe that her staying in the race now is going to cost the party the White House).
I think her goal is to run in 2012, which she can't do if a Democrat wins in November. She either wins the nomination this time out or runs again in 2012. An Obama victory does not help her in either scenario.
The good news for her is that she has every reason to stay in the race -- she can claim it's her responsibility to her supporters, and she has been winning -- just not in a way that can overcome her deficit.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Jason Czeskleba
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 April 2004
Posts: 4638
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 11:18am | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
Stephen Robinson wrote:
| I think her goal is to run in 2012, which she can't do if a Democrat wins in November. |
|
|
Well, she could still run in 2012 against an incumbent President Obama... look at Ted Kennedy in 1980 or Robert Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy in 1968 (before Johnson declared he would not seek re-election). It all depends on how successful and/or popular the hypothetical President Obama is. If he's as incompetent as she portrays him, he should be ripe for picking off in four years.
I really doubt that is her plan, though. I think at this point she is still in the race because she sincerely believes she has a chance to get the nomination. And the fact is, she does still have a chance, however unlikely.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Steve Bailey
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 30 January 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 98
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 12:58pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
The implication I got from Wright's answer was that he thought Obama didn't really believe what he was saying in that speech. I personally think friends and associates are a good source of info on someone.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Wayde Murray
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 October 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 3115
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 1:17pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
SER: If she were to run as an independent, her political career would be over.
Her effective political career as a senator would be over, agreed, but I think she might be willing to chance it. If McCain wins, the Democrats may not go back to Obama in four years time (as they never returned to Kerry), and she might see herself as the natural nominee. If the Democratic party won't go back to her, she might feel she has enough "name brand recognition" to run an effective campaign as an Independant, especially if she can tie herself to a prominent public issue (a la Gore) in order to stay in the public eye for 4 years. If Obama wins, she has to hope that his presidency sours the American public on him so that she can position herself as the savior of the party.
I see it as a long shot, but in either case she'll have 4 years to paint herself as a victim. That seems to be when she is at her most popular. This also works if she wins the nomination now and McCain is "mean" to her during the presidential race.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
William McCormick
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 26 February 2006
Posts: 3297
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 5:30pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
McCain has spent the last few days bashing Obama at every opportunity. Good to see he's standing by his promise to run a respectful campaign.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 5:47pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
I'm still trying to figure out just what was so bad about Wright's oft-
quoted
"God-damn America" speech. I got exactly what he was trying to say
there,
and I agreed with him.
Al:
You agree that the United States supports "State sponsored" terrorism
against Palestinians? Because Wright sad that -- he was not quoting
anyone when he said that phrase. Wright said (with code words) that
Israel terrorizes Palestinians. I don't agree with that at all, do you? When
you hear that doesn't it sound slightly anti-semitic?
By the way, Kevin, what is the difference if its a quote or not? He
endorsed the view. I really think you continue to draw a difference with
no distinction. If someone agree with those views its fine with me
everyone is entitled to their opinions, but I think they are wrong.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 5:56pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
Geoff, at the risk of offending here, I think neither side in that conflict is innocent. Nor do I think we should be involved with defending one side or the other. Their bloodshed is an abomination in the face of the gods they worship.
William - good point, though I note, at least, based in what I read, that McCain was attacking on policy issues (even if he got the facts wrong!) and not this Clintonian "gotcha" stuff like who Obama was in the same room with, and so on.
I'm waiting for the inevitable screw-up when Bill Clinton says in an interview "Did you know he fathered a couple of black children?"
The Clintons need to be run out of America on a rail.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 6:02pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
Regarding Wright's interview with Moyers --
When Obama addressed the controversy he did not reject Wright , he
maintained that Wright was a good man who said things with which he
(Obama) did not agree with. Wright, in turn, dismissed Obama as just
another "politician." Obama went out of his way to address the racial
problems in this country. He did not say everything WrIght said is wrong, in
fact he stated that much of Wright's criticism of America was found in the
historical racial divide. But Wright instead dismissed the weight and
historical import of Obama's "More Perfect Union" speech as a "political
speech." Now, I don't know if Wright is a good man or not, but I am pretty
sure he is an asshole.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 6:07pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
Mike:
I understand where you are coming from and I somewhat agree -- but there
are better ways for someone as eloquent as Wright to criticize any Israeli
action (and generally its a RE-action) against Palestinians than "state
sponsored" terrorism. I also think its worth noting that until recently most
Palestinian "governments" wanted not peace with Israel but the eradication
of the State of Israel.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Geoff Gibson
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 21 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5744
|
| Posted: 27 April 2008 at 6:10pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
I'm waiting for the inevitable screw-up when Bill Clinton says in an
interview "Did you know he fathered a couple of black children?"
I think Karl Rove (actually one of his acolytes) said that about John McCain in
2000 in South Carolina . . . .
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
e-mail
|
| |
Topic Closed)
