Posts Made By: Mike Strieber

Jim Babcock said:

Now this is a PARTY Dem style:

http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=97741&catid=188

"Another New York delegate, speaking on condition of anonymity, predicted that as much as 30 percent to 40 percent of the New York delegation would pick Clinton over Obama during the symbolic vote."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12565.html

I understand that at the "secret Dem prison" the soup de jour will be served in the form of waterboarding. I've also heard they've hired Lynndie England to manage the place.

Jim Babcock said:

It looks like Obama is finally ready to announce his VP. Many are saying it will occur on or before Thursday, and that Biden is the most probable pick. While this would be a defensive move that acknowledges Obama's weakness, I really do not like Biden, so I hope he can find someone less obnoxious.

If in fact it is Biden I'll give credit to Obama [insert vomiting sounds here]. He certainly isn't picking him because he'll bring him a state...I mean come on, Delaware? No offense Delaware. Saying that, I would have to assume he would select Biden in an effort to collect strong advisors around him? I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. I can't stand Biden myself but there's no arguing he doesn't have some credentials when it comes to foreign policy, perhaps more than anyone in the Democratic party at this point. At least he wouldn't be picking his most trusted advisor...his grandmother (re: Saddleback Forum debate answer).

Mike

"McCain leads Obama among likely U.S. voters by 46 percent to 41 percent, wiping out Obama's solid 7-point advantage in July and taking his first lead in the monthly Reuters/Zogby poll."

"Support for Obama, an Illinois senator, fell 12 percentage points among liberals..."

"McCain now has a 9-point edge, 49 percent to 40 percent, over Obama on the critical question of who would be the best manager of the economy..."

"Obama's support among voters between the ages of 18 and 29, which had been one of his strengths, slipped 12 percentage..."

Interesting trend here. I believe McCain's "poor" showing at Saddleback had some influence here also . How about McCain and the economy? A typically strong left position. Obama still leads in that area but a 9 point drop? I know what you're going say left guys....McCain has bamboozled the public because we're stupid, he's using attack ads, we're ignorant because we suck up things like off-shore drilling, etc., same old excuses we always hear when things are not going quite as well for someone's favorite. Whatever you do, don't give any credit to the fact Obama positions are too liberal and the public is starting to learn more about him. Maybe even too liberal for run-of-the-mill liberals because he lost support there also. Even most liberals aren't as far left as he is.

While I understand this poll alone doesn't mean a lot, there appears to me to be a significant momentum swing going on here, from McCain's Saddleback performance to polls of this nature (to, dare I say, things going well in Iraq, notice I didn't use the "victory" word) . Things can always swing back, but the race is no longer a given at this point. The left better do something more than sit back and complain about McCain, call him names like McSame, discredit his supporters, attack him for attacking, same old crap they always do to lose elections.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080820/ts_nm/usa_poll_politics_dc

Mike

Do any of you besides Patrick B., and me for 15 minutes today, listen to this crap? I was literally shocked by the vile I was hearing. Yes, Limbaugh and Hannity are really far right (I don't listen to them either), but this channel was truly radical. The host (Alex something) was singing the praises of William Ayers and admiring his tactics to promote his agenda. He called supporting the troops bs (they can use this language, and worse on sat radio if you didn't know) because they volunteered to perpetuate the war. Just ragged on soldiers horribly. Even the far-left caller hung up on him at that point. Using adjectives to describe the troops like "sh*#", appears to be even too much for the "far left" as this guy was off the charts. Yeah I know, I'm a bit bias but the Sirius right channel (called "Patriot"....of course; because everyone knows only someone on the right could be patriotic ) is nowhere near as radical, at least from what I've heard there. The worst I've seen there is when Hannity comes on...it's at that point I turn the channel. Maybe there's another "right" channel spewing vile as Sirius Left and I haven't come across it, not sure.

I just find it hard to believe there's people out there thinking this way, making a living spewing crap like that, and there's a market for it. Maybe I'm being naive. I know, I can turn the channel...and I did.

Mike

Let's change the subject from all this racism stuff, it's depressing. I heard on the news today that US and Iraqi negotiators have agreed on a time table for US troop withdrawal that is complete in 2011. Now, this is at the negotiator level and certainly a number of hurdles have to be jumped before it's formalized, but I wonder how such an agreement would affect either candidate. Does it give Obama an out (since he appears to have slightly changed his view on the 16 month withdrawal plan)? Does it cut the legs out from under McCain's hundred year plan? I personally don't think McCain was as hard up over staying for 100 years as Obama was initially to getting the troops out in 16 months.

Mike

How about we get back to discussing politics in the political forum? Way too many one on one personal battles going on here the last few days....take it to email, call each other on the phone...something. Hell, I even apologized to Patrick B. yesterday....in the name of civil discourse mind you. Of course he accepted my apology and pounded me in the same post....but hey, that's the way of the left, kick you when you're down. ...at least we're good buddies again, eh Patrick? 8O

Besides, save some energy. We have a big two weeks coming up with a Democratic group hug snooze fest next week followed by a real convention by the Republicans the following week.

Regards,
Mike

So chill, don't make me get my Paint Shop Pro out. Too late.

I guess the Obama campaign figured out there are still some women out there they haven't offended yet.

Obama: "You can put lipstick on a pig,...it's still a pig."

Nice.

She came off as rather rehearsed I thought. At times she appears to me to be forcing the home town girl image. If you noticed she used his name in just about every sentence. Well Charlie, it's like this Charlie, etc. Sounded like a bit of forced comfort. She didn't do all that bad I guess, she could have sounded like G. Bush. While I hang in mostly conservative circles I believe a common theme amongst them is they agree with her policy positions (not all) but she's a bit too "homey"; maybe even too down to earth for leadership at the world level. I don't need to hear anymore about moose hunting, snowmobiles, and hockey moms. Generally though, I don't think it's affecting her enough for them not to vote for the McCain ticket. But that's just in the relatively conservative circle I hang in (mostly military, or retired military, folks BTW).

While I'm not big into political humor all that much (other than Colbert of course ) I found this cartoon interesting...

Sean Hannity is going to interview Gov. Palin next week. She better have her game face on!

The other day a guy (who considers himself a liberal by the way) presented an interesting concept to me about why the left has a tough time in national elections. I believe most would agree that they should be running away with this one but… It's more easily drawn graphically but I'll try and put into text.

If you put what defines a "conservative" on a scale of say 1 to 10 and you have that person who is truly independent residing at 0, the breadth of that definition is much narrower than that of liberalism. A conservative may range from 1 who might have mixed views on fiscal policy, taxes and abortion to that 10 guy who might be a religious fanatic maybe? Someone who perhaps lives secluded in the woods, hunts, eats twigs, and has a bomb shelter, etc. That guy is relatively harmless to society. Of course there are exceptions but that's not the norm. The conservative scale passes through to the 10 guy and along the way you come across the semi-religious guy who sits at maybe 3, through the Sean Hannity type sitting at maybe 8 and the Farwell type at 8.5. On the other hand the scale defining liberalism is much broader ranging from that 1 guy who differs little from the conservative 1 guy. But the scale progresses to something beyond 10 on the liberal side; in its extreme lies the philosophy of socialism and even communism (no, I'm not calling anyone here a communist but it does reside on the very extreme liberal side of the scale). As you pass through 1 to 15 you come across that average American who considers himself liberal but lives their life with a low voice, then passes through the Rosie O'Donnels, Michael Moores, George Clooney types (at around 10), then on to the protestor wearing masks and burning stuff in the streets (the anarchist type at maybe 11 or 12). I would tend to believe the "average" American resides somewhere between the 4 on the conservative scale and the 4 on the liberal scale. However, the voice and power of liberalism in America comes from the elite; the Soros', the Hollywood and Manhattan types. Those people, while wielding the power, voice, and money, reside well beyond the 4 range. The Democratic Party knows they need that power on their side to get anywhere. That means they need to put up a candidate that resides much further out on the scale, a place where fewer and fewer average Americans reside. Once they put up the Gores, Kerrys, and Obamas who reside probably around the 9-10 range they start to lose more of the fours, even fives and sixes at that point. It's a matter of trying to please a much larger demographic, philosophy wise, not quantity wise. When they put up the guys hovering around the 4-5 range or so (Bill Clinton) they're successful. Now Obama may win this election but it sure is closer than it should be at this point. The scale of pleasure so to speak might be expanded this time due to the overwhelming displeasure of Bush. Saying that, as bad as it is in that light, there appears (right now anyway) that a lot of people would rather put up with what you guys call "more of the same" than Obama's pretty far-left ideals. I believe that's very telling and shows where Obama falls on the scale, and what voters feel about those that reside there. Especially moderates and swing voters. In general, the liberal left has a wider range of idealism to please, the folks way out there wield the biggest stick and "select" the Democratic candidate, and it alienates the scale-region where the "average" American resides. Of course the same thing happens on the conservative side but the folks residing on that scale are more closely packed across so less get alienated if in fact a further-right candidate is put up. Generally speaking though, conservatives don't put that guy up while the left does. And for the record, I would personally place my self on the conservative scale, probably around 2. I'm not necessarily religious, believe in reduced taxes, generally am in line with the conservative approach to national security, but am pro-choice. Somewhat of a mixed bag. Saying that, I certainly could vote for an Obama-like guy if he hung around the liberal 4 range. Like I said, there are exceptions; these are by no means rules. I know you can give me examples of conservative radicals bombing abortion clinics and the like. You can also suggest the right is overly influenced by the religious right but that still alienates fewer people. Religion is one of those things that transcends the scale. Of course it ends somewhere further out on the liberal scale but there are a lot of liberals going to church (those 4-5 and below folks). But at a top level, and as in a general concept, I believe it makes sense. I feel it's along this scale that elections are decided, not because someone said they can see Russia from Alaska or Reverend Wright was a buddy for 20 years. It was certainly not my intent to support either side here; just making an observation and discussion. Something different than the so and so lied here, republicans are stupid, Obama's a secret Muslim stuff. Sorry for the long post. Feel free to shoot holes in it.
Mike