Reply With Quote
This is a excellent example of pointing out a fallacy (X knows how Y thinks) and using it in your own argument (ES knows how X thinks).
This is true but, it was in the context of demonstrating an opportunity to exploit a schism in Democrat iden y politics. I certainly don't consider her vice-presidential material because of either her race or sex.
After all, in the final analysis, it is about winning the White House and keeping, at least, the more conservative of candidates in the Oval Office.
True that. I would argue she's also more qualified than most Republicans McCain might consider. But, we weren't talking about a Republican-to-Republican comparison in this thread...we're discussing defeating the Democrats in November.
This is a excellent example of pointing out a fallacy (X knows how Y thinks) and using it in your own argument (ES knows how X thinks).
I typically vote democrat, but this Clinton/Obama pisses me off. I'm tired of the mudslinging. I wish Edwards had had more support.
I've pretty much decided Im going to vote for McCain so that in 4 years I can see a new fresh face from the democratic party.
OMG, you mean white liberals don't all think like that???? Crap, now I have to change my outreach strategy.
Nice job Obama now you have pointed out that you nor clinton have experience.. Brilliant!To: Interested Parties
From: Greg Craig, former director, Policy Planning Office, U.S. State Department
RE: Senator Clinton's claim to be experienced in foreign policy: Just words?
DA: March 11, 2008
When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of experience, it is important that you have evidence to support that claim. Hillary Clinton's argument that she has passed "the Commander- in-Chief test" is simply not supported by her record.
There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton played an important domestic policy role when she was First Lady. It is well known, for example, that she led the failed effort to pass universal health insurance. There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue - not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.
When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims - i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign - would conclude that Senator Clinton's claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.
I think I promised you a stuffed elephant. Is there someplace you would like it forwarded to? A PM is fine.
Actually, it was "brillliant" of Hillary to proffer an imaginary qualification to begin with.
Have you picked up your "McCain '08" button yet?
And my brothers and sisters actually said the negative politics between these two candidates wouldn't hurt them in the long run....
Laughable.
Are you kidding? This is the perfect storm of Democrat politics.
I'm pissed that everyone ignores the plight of the Puerto Ricans. You guys don't realize my ancestors were some banana peeling fools. I'm owed a check from the government and at least a VP candidate.
No, I have not decided on who I will vote for if Obama wins the Dem nomination..
Welcome to what conservatives have been trying to tell you for the past 20 years.
But what do those fascist rednecks know, right?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...flashback.html
March 11, 2008
Read More: Barack Obama
A Ferraro flashback
"If Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race," she said.
Really. The cite is an April 15, 1988 Washington Post story (byline: Howard Kurtz), available only on Nexis.
Here's the full context:
Placid of demeanor but pointed in his rhetoric, Jackson struck out repeatedly today against those who suggest his race has been an asset in the campaign. President Reagan suggested Tuesday that people don't ask Jackson tough questions because of his race. And former representative Geraldine A. Ferraro (D-N.Y.) said Wednesday that because of his "radical" views, "if Jesse Jackson were not black, he wouldn't be in the race."
Asked about this at a campaign stop in Buffalo, Jackson at first seemed ready to pounce fiercely on his critics. But then he stopped, took a breath, and said quietly, "Millions of Americans have a point of view different from" Ferraro's.
Discussing the same point in Washington, Jackson said, "We campaigned across the South . . . without a single catcall or boo. It was not until we got North to New York that we began to hear this from Koch, President Reagan and then Mrs. Ferraro . . . . Some people are making hysteria while I'm making history."
Ms. Ferraro responds to criticisms of her comment....
Okay, now the KKK is having a forehead-slapping moment. "Damn! Why didn't we think of that?"
What is it with you old people and racism? Why can't you let it go?
"Logan's Run" shows us a future where the remains of human civilization deem the price for their continued survival is that everyone over 30 must die.
I'm starting to see how a society would theoretically develop to reach that conclusion.
"There she goes again":
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...flashback.html
Hillary would gain points by just telling Ferraro to shut the up and go knit a sweater.
It was a bad use of words. Period. Her reasoning is pathetic.
That would be sexist.
Is it okay for an old white guy to disagree. He is where he
is at only because he is black, period.
He has no message, he has no plan, he has nothing, but
BS. I will surrender, I have bigger and better plans to
spend YOUR money.
I have a question. Are blacks prejudice? Seems most are
voting for the black guy.
Now all of you get in line and call me prejudice, I could
care less. Seems most don't want to hear anything
bad about the black guy.
And he screams bloody murder even when you call him
by his "real" name. Hussein.
What has this country come to.
I think you're only partially right. Yes, his race has played a factor in his ascendence but, give him this, he's charismatic like Clinton (Bill), intelligent, good looking, and puts on a good show.
After all, this is American Idol politics at its best. He's caused a buzz and the young ignorant voters like him.
I think his race only played a factor because Democrats wanted a token black in the race...they had no ing idea he'd become such a force to be reckoned with; I think they were thinking more along the lines of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton.
Their bad.
"American Idol politics"
Many analysts have said the Hussein's and Hillary's policy positions are nearly identical. So trashing one, trash both.
McCain is offering real policy substance, esp on health care, economy, and the Iraq war? His substance to stumblingly carry forward with the failed momentum of dubya and head.
Same old dubya that ed up the military and the economy, protect and enrich the super-rich and corps
Where does it ever say the government is responsible
for our health care? Or economy for that matter.
Damn, does anyone have any responsibility for anything.
Guess not.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
