[VIEWED 35499
TIMES]
|
SAVE! for ease of future access.
|
|
|
|
Captain Haddock
Please log in to subscribe to Captain Haddock's postings.
Posted on 02-04-08 1:07
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Hillary sheds a tear (or two) again.Obama is catching up on the polls but may not have enough time to win.
by Jason George
NEW HAVEN, Conn. – Sen. Hillary Clinton teared up this morning at an
event at the Yale Child Study Center, where she worked while in law
school in the early 1970s.
Penn Rhodeen, who was introducing Clinton, began to choke up,
leading Clinton's eyes to fill with tears, which she wiped out of her
left eye. At the time, Rhodeen was saying how proud he was that the
sheepskin-coat, bell-bottom-wearing young woman he met in 1972 was now
running for president.
"Well, I said I would not tear up; already we're not exactly on the path," Clinton said with emotion after the introduction.
Clinton is holding a roundtable discussion with Connecticut women to talk about childcare and healthcare.
When Clinton got misty-eyed at an event in New Hampshire on Jan. 7,
politicos and pundits filled hours discussing if it helped her, and
Clinton eventually pointed to the moment as when she "found her voice"
and turned the corner in the Granite State.
At the time, there was much debate if the candidate's emotional
response to a question -- "How do you do it?"" -- was genuine or
calculated.
Let the conversation begin again...
|
|
|
|
Jonny
Please log in to subscribe to Jonny's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 1:00
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Obama is a media made candidate, epically by MSNBC. That channel looks more and more like Obama Campaign add all the time. About Obama, he talks good, I mean really good but talking is one thing and being President is another. I was watching his speech last night and he said he will do all the good thing a person can imagine. Now that sounds good to hear but the big thing is he doesn’t explain how will he do all those good thing he promise. Hillary is not a good communicator like him but if you watch her debate she gives pretty good explanation of how she will do things she promise. He drags Hillary about authorizing Iran revolution guard as terrorist vote, while he didn't even show up to vote for that. Also, the biggest fear I think with Obama is he is too nice and that may hurt him in general election against Republicans. I remember that John Kerry was leading by double digit in all the polls at this time in 2004 and one swift boat gave the election that year to Bush. With Hillary, I don't think the Republicans have any more weapons left. In Obama case he says that he will meet all the leader of so called state sponsoring terrorism including President of Iran, N.Korea, Cuba etc. in his first year as President, and will give driver’s license to illegals. Now this may play well in the Democrat Primary, but he can loose the general election just based on those two as we all know Republicans are experts on spinning things. Having said these, I'm not a Obama hater, just think Hillary is better candinate and has better chance of winning.
|
|
|
lootekukur
Please log in to subscribe to lootekukur's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 1:11
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
LOL bob, Politics is a game of power -- power of money and strategy/plan/appeal. The one who stands out in both goes all the way through the race as a winner. To reach out to the people out there, you gotta have a big pocket. And to collect that money, you gotta win the trust of people--the commoners. It's a cyclic process. If there ain't enough people backing you up, you won't be able to collect that much money as Obama is doing at the moment. It's our money for our prospective leader of future. That's why it's a clear indication of the support he is able to garner from his fellow countrymen. Visit: http://www.barackobama.com/index.php for more details on how the fund for campaigns is being raised. Election campaigning, for the most part, is about giving speeches. Once you occupy office, you're on your own. That's when you translate your speech into work. It's easy to be cynical but it's equally hard to stand for a cause and support the one whom you think can be trusted upon based on the choices of candidates you have been offered. Oh well, unless you yourself want to do the job they're doing hahaha... peace out!
|
|
|
Guest4
Please log in to subscribe to Guest4's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 1:34
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
CNN (Clinton News Network), and even the NYT, is far more biased towards Billary than what MSNBC is towards Obama. These are the establishment organizations that are fearing change. As Obama keeps repeating, the status quo doesn't give up easilly.
I find this argument ludicruous that he cannot win general elections. He will not ony win general election but will alter the electoral map!!
|
|
|
Bob Marley
Please log in to subscribe to Bob Marley's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 1:38
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
LT I understand the game of politics, thanks for reminding me. My question is "Change" for what? That too coming out of an inexperienced guy who's only weapon is his speech + his race as a defense. Too much lies and feel good speeches, that's all. The local TV spot that run on my local station says 3 so called APPROVED messages of Obama: 1.Health care to all Americans- Even if Jesus Christ was live, he's hesitate to make such statement. It's almost impossible 2. Stop outsourcing jobs- He doesn't seem to understand the force of global economy. 3. Pull troops out of Iraq- That I'll believe he can and might (???) do it.
Last edited: 07-Feb-08 01:46 PM
|
|
|
ss74k
Please log in to subscribe to ss74k's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 1:47
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
I am tired of hearing Obama Obama, too much hype by media, as if he is going to change everything. And you loote , why are you too excited for Obama? Are you supporting him just because he is minority ?Its a fact that he has ability to attract all kinds of people because he is charismatic and young. where as Hillary Clinton impression to most of the people here is bitchy woman. I myself have met lots of people telling me if Hillary Clinton wins the nominee they are definately going to vote for republican because she acts like a bitch. Most people have no reason why they dislike her so much but like Obama.What has he done? All he knows is how to give a good speech. Yesterday i was watching fox news and according to survey most people who voted for democratic nominee believes a man should be the head of state not a woman. America is still not ready for woman president, that is all i know.Well being a girl i am excited to see first woman as a president of United States. I still think she can win the nominee. If Obama wins the nominee i am all for McCain.
|
|
|
Bob Marley
Please log in to subscribe to Bob Marley's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 1:55
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
ss74k Good one. I'm hearing more people saying that,esp females. What these political pundit do not realize that if Clinton loose, people like you will go the other direction with McCain which I think will be a devastating effect for Obama and the Democratic party in general, a testimony of their unity. His so called "Change" might Change their chances to stop the Republican in final fight.
|
|
|
Jonny
Please log in to subscribe to Jonny's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 2:01
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Guest4, I checkCNN.com more than 10 times a day. I hardly find any positive article or news about Hillary. I know NYT endorsed Hillary but there are many editors who writes against her. Now to give you example, on tuesday night, when Obama won any state they(both cnn and msnbc) were like how he won red state and how white and women voted for him. When Hillary won any state they were questining how come she won that state? There was a recent survey about this and the result was Obama had 86% positive media coverage vs 16% for Hillary. Still don't believe than go home and watch Chirs matthews, Countdown and Morning Joe show on MSNBC. And what are you talking about establishment organization fearing for change and what change?
|
|
|
Jonny
Please log in to subscribe to Jonny's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 2:11
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Also, there is one important thing many here don’t know about Obama. Although, he supported the comprehensive immigration plan last year, he didn’t supported the point system for GC, which I think will benefit many here in Sajha. Hillary was architect of that plan. And because of her strong Indian ties, she is for increasing quota for H1. I’m not sure where Obama stands on that but during one speech last year he said he don’t like the idea of bringing worker from other countries for IT jobs while we layoff American workers. That sure will be some change for us.
|
|
|
geico
Please log in to subscribe to geico's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 2:14
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Gore Endorsement Rumor Kicking Around Clinton Campaign
A well-placed spouse of a Clinton campaign insider just told me that a rumor is spreading like wild fire in Hillaryland that Al Gore is going to endorse Barack Obama.
My source emphasizes that this is rumor and may just be paranoia and hyperventilation of the campaign, but it's important to know that this rumor is out there. Another source of mine inside Obamaland has told me that they have been working very hard to secure Gore's public support and trying numerous avenues to "encourage" him.
Frankly, I'm surprised that Gore would do this -- despite his clear disaffection for the Clintons. He is the undisputed king of the climate change franchise now, but even kingdoms can be assaulted, undermined, outfoxed, circumvented, ridiculed, and starved.
If Hillary Clinton wins this tight race -- which she may still do -- then Gore is gambling with his own status as a climate-change first-and-only transcendant politician.
It will be interesting to see what happens, and of course if Barack Obama wins the primary and then the presidency, Al Gore will get significant credit. The problem is that that can work the other way too.
-- Steve Clemons
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/
|
|
|
lootekukur
Please log in to subscribe to lootekukur's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 4:55
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
First off, from what they've been telling so far in their respective speeches and debates, if you do a plan-by-plan analysis, there is not much difference between Obama and Clinton.
1) On health care:
Obama says his health care plan will provide universal coverage. Clinton, on the other hand, claims that Obama's plan will leave 15 millions uninsured but her own plan promises universal coverage. Fact of the matter: neither plan is going to provide universal coverage. Let's face it.
From what I read, a plan with generous subsidies and an employer mandate would lead to 82
percent of the uninsured gaining coverage and that's based on 2001 data. Applied
to today's figures, that would leave about 8.5 million without
insurance. A proposal that included an individual
mandate would lead to 100 percent coverage of the uninsured. I've heard Obama mentioning "including mandate" but not sure if it's individual. I would guess it is. Clinton
calls for a mandate that would require all individuals to have health
insurance but
neither candidate has provided enough detail for analysts to predict
confidently how many might be left uninsured under either plan.
2) On tax:
Obama's plan is to raise the social security tax on earnings above $97,500 per year--that way only 6.5 percent of the people will be affected and they are "upper class" for the most part. This will help lessen the burden on middle class. But again, he doesn't say by how much and there are questions on Clinton's policy as well.
3) On war in Iraq:
Both of them have voiced criticism of the way President Bush has conducted operations in Iraq. Obama
didn’t take a seat in the Senate until 2005, so he didn’t vote on the
2002 congressional resolution authorizing Bush to use force in Iraq. Clinton did vote for that resolution and it's gonna come back to her during presidential debate if she manages to pull off the nomination. I think Obama has a slight upper hand on the issue. As for bringing the troops back, I think Obama's plan is more thoughtful and mature than Clinton's which is more impulsive. So there lies a clear division between the two on this issue. ------
Now coming back to 'change', I admit the word is a bit over-hyped but when Obama says "change", he really means looking forward rather than going back to the past as Billary's win is not really as much of a change as is Obama's since most of the changes after Bush Sr.'s 4 years of occupancy have already been witnessed during Bill's era.
I have, personally, nothing against Hillary and if Obama loses the nomination, I am going to support Hillary wholeheartedly but as long as Obama is there, my support-- undivided and unconditional--is for my man.
GO BARACK!
(Hi SS auntie, long tyam? How you doing? Hope alls well )
Last edited: 07-Feb-08 05:24 PM
|
|
|
Bob Marley
Please log in to subscribe to Bob Marley's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 5:37
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
jonny, You're right. Obama will definetly not allow skilled foreign workers to migrate in the US. It might be good for the American, but not for us.
|
|
|
lootekukur
Please log in to subscribe to lootekukur's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 6:16
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Cisco employees have been donating Clinton's Senate committee since Bill's era as the president. That's why they support Indian Techies coming in here. Bill Clinton has invested tens of thousands of dollars in an Indian
bill payment company, while Hillary Clinton has taken tens of thousands
from companies that outsource jobs to India. That's why they have soft corners for the Indian H1b holders.
As far as I know, Obama did not mean to say that curtailing the number of skilled foreign workers coming over to US right away is the right solution but he is concerned about the large number of them coming to US (of which not all are as skilled as skilled American workers) at the expense of American workers. And I don't see much problem with that. His dad himself was an immigrant and he understands our plight and that's why his support for the comprehensive immigration plan. I think he played the outsourcing card mainly to disrupt the cruising campaigning of Clinton (and that too almost a year ago). I am not too sure about his recent take on outsourcing, if it has changed.
Last edited: 07-Feb-08 06:20 PM
|
|
|
Bob Marley
Please log in to subscribe to Bob Marley's postings.
Posted on 02-07-08 6:56
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
LT " His dad himself was an immigrant" Whatever He didn't spent too much time with him though. He went back to Kenya, remarried and had tons of other kids, was alcoholic and died. By the way his father name was "Hussein". In an interview,Obama had so much praise for his father, which I don't understand. And not much about his white mother and the grandparents who raised him all his life. What a family value.
|
|
|
Jonny
Please log in to subscribe to Jonny's postings.
Posted on 02-08-08 7:45
AM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Loote, I did said that he supported the comprehensive immigration plan last year but he didn't supported the Point System for GC that Hillary supported. For many of us here in Sajha and I'm sure many Nepali in US, the point system works the best. Obama clearly said he didn't like the point system and even threaten to vote against the whole package if the point system were to applied. And his speech from last year gives some idea on where he stands on H1. Be careful on what you wish for!!!! Personally I like Obama, and think he is likable, but it’s the US president election, not American Idol and remember that Bush got elected both term because of his likable factor look happened.
|
|
|
Guest4
Please log in to subscribe to Guest4's postings.
Posted on 02-08-08 1:35
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Bob,
What's wrong with having a middle name "Hussein." Let us hear your name as well. You sound like one of those rednecks who thinks that every Muslim is a terrorist. May be, Obama praised his dad in ONE of the interviews that you watched, but I have seen many interviews, articles, speeches, where he praises his mother and grandparents. In fact, I have seen him being critical of his father. What "family value" are you talking about?? What's your family value??
Last edited: 08-Feb-08 01:37 PM
|
|
|
Rewire
Please log in to subscribe to Rewire's postings.
Posted on 02-08-08 1:51
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Last edited: 08-Feb-08 01:52 PM
|
|
|
lootekukur
Please log in to subscribe to lootekukur's postings.
Posted on 02-09-08 7:46
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Johnny, Good point and I for one like the point system as it will give the vast majority of legal permanent residency visas and GCs to immigrants based on the factors such as age, education, skill and English proficiency. On the other hand, the current system gives visas based on (for the most part) foreigner's family ties to relatives already in the US. I don't know for sure, where Obama's current stand is on the issue but I think there's a trade-off as going for the point system will make legalization of the status of the illegal immigrants ALREADY in the US far more difficult. So the comprehensive immigration plan which Obama is committed for will go begging. You cannot make two contradictory demands at the same time. And I suspect that's why Obama is against the point system, if he still is that is. Even if he still is against the point system, it does not and will not stop the US from welcoming skilled manpower, as it is doing now, coz otherwise its economy will never prosper. I think, in the long run, once the status of the illegal immigration is sorted out, irrespective of who is going to be the president, US is going to opt for the point system. It's just a matter of time as I see it.
Last edited: 09-Feb-08 07:50 PM
|
|
|
lootekukur
Please log in to subscribe to lootekukur's postings.
Posted on 02-09-08 8:19
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Obama is going great guns in Washington State. The 'change' wave has disseminated cross country and from here, it will be a tough job for Billary to stop this man. The only hope now for Hillary and as I see is to even the number of delegates with Obama at the end of all the primaries and then win the nomination, based on the superdelegates, in the convention. But that's still a far cry. The momentum, for sure, is with Obama's camapaign. YES WE CAN! From the Wall Street Journal:
Obama Makes Waves in Washington (State)
The Associated Press is reporting that Illinois Sen. Barack Obama
has a big lead in Washington state’s Democratic caucuses. With about
24% of the results in, Obama was winning 65% of delegates to New York
Sen. Hillary Clinton’s 33%. Obama was running strong
across the state, winning at caucus sites in a wide variety of
communities from Seattle to Yakima and Renton to Chehalis, the AP said.
The results seems to match up with local reports earlier. The Seattle Times’s David Postman blogged earlier
that: “Democrats are e-mailing me results from their caucuses. Every
one I’ve seen so far shows Obama winning easily. It’s only a small
number and only from a few places so far. That includes precincts in
Seattle, all points in Bellevue, Mercer Island, and Port Townsend. I’ll
be particularly interested in seeing Pierce County results where
Clinton is expected to do better.â€
The Seatttle Times also reported heavy turnout. Its “Dispatches from
the caucuses†feature reported that “One woman told me her precinct
went from 4 participants in 2004 to 56 participants today.†The AP said
that Washington State Democrats estimated turnout may have been more
than twice the 100,000 people who caucused in 2004.
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer said
state Democrats were calling turnout “record-shattering,†saying that
“reports from initial samplings across the state suggesting nearly
double the turnout from 2004.â€
Last edited: 09-Feb-08 08:21 PM
|
|
|
Captain Haddock
Please log in to subscribe to Captain Haddock's postings.
Posted on 02-09-08 8:32
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Voter turnout low in Louisiana ... this could bode trouble for Obama. If Hillary wins in LA, this could dent his momentum Exit polls seem to favor Obama but such polls have to be taken with a grain of salt. Waiting and watching :)
Last edited: 09-Feb-08 08:42 PM
|
|
|
lootekukur
Please log in to subscribe to lootekukur's postings.
Posted on 02-09-08 8:52
PM
Reply
[Subscribe]
|
Login in to Rate this Post:
0
?
|
|
Yo captain, sup? Yeah the hurricane Katrina has done no good to the enthusiasm of the voters out there. The local problem is so massive, they don't even care who stands out better in the national issues in general. But Obama is leading 54-36 and I hope he can maintain that until the end of the count. BTW, he sweeps Nebraska as well by 68-32. Fingers crossed for Ohio and Texas. Maryland and Virginia are sure shots. hmm....it's gonna be interesting, no?
|
|