Obviously I offended you with the one fit of anti-Clinton. I'm sorry. It wasn't my intention to pick a fight, I was just so angry that Bill Clinton had gone to the Republican tactic from '04 "vote for X and you'll die."
I'm glad you have passion, but frankly, when it comes down to it, I don't care that much whether it's Obama or Clinton. I could easily and happily support either one. I see good strengths and qualities in either.
To your specific request, I don't generally read newspaper editorials at all. I've read some of the backstory on the Krugman/Obama thing and I assume that's what you want me to comment on, but I generally don't get into editorials.
So, sorry if I made you mad. It wasn't my intention. I just twisted off at the echoes of '04.
Since you won't read it, here is the Krugman column in a nutshell:
1. Obama is gullible 2. Obama is easily misled by right-wing propaganda 3. A vote for Obama will be a vote for a continuation of the left's capitulation to the right wing.
On health care, on social security, on education, on religion and a host of other issues, Obama is the LEAST progressive candidate in the field. He has a lot in common with Joe Lieberman in fact (and if you remember, I said this in a comment on your blog about two years ago.)
Unfortunately, some progressives - perhaps won over by his war policy or smitten by his persona - do not see the concessionary nature of his personality.
BTW, I am NOT a HRC supporter. I have not voted for her here in NY in either 2000 or 2006. I don't know who I am voting for. I just know who I am NOT voting for - and that's Obama.
I would guess that you sincerely believe that Obama is a huge mistake, and I understand that, but I don't want to fight over this, at least not at the level of passion you're at.
It's like you're taking out a broader frustration on me, because, I haven't really said anything pro-Obama or anti-Clinton.
I critiqued a tactic, and made the observation that a Hillary Clinton administration would not have the same smoothing charisma of a Bill Clinton administration.
I think we have to bear in mind that, no matter which Democrat gets elected, the vetoes will end, the police state will end, the Long War will end, the supply-side 'economics' will end, the arrogance toward the rest of the world will end, torture will end or be severely limited, and the over-the-top secrecy and cronyism will end.
Even if we are only trading one ventriloquist dummy for another, it looks as if we will have an improvement on a lot of levels. I remind myself of this when I look at the shortcomings of Obama and Clinton as candidates. Personally, I like Edwards and I intend to caucus for him if he's still in the race by the time Minnesota gets its shot.
This is not the America I was brought up to believe in.
This blog seeks to highlight abuse of power, deception, corruption, and just plain bad ideas in government and corporations.
Updated several times a day.
11 Comments:
pathetic...
By Anonymous, at 3:26 PM
I was just thinking today how long it's been since I've seen him on the news.
We're all so anxious for the next president that he;s irrelevant.
By mikevotes, at 3:43 PM
Off topic, but could you respond to Paul Krugman's column in today's Times calling Obama the "anti-change candidate."
By Reality-Based Educator, at 8:18 PM
Obviously I offended you with the one fit of anti-Clinton. I'm sorry. It wasn't my intention to pick a fight, I was just so angry that Bill Clinton had gone to the Republican tactic from '04 "vote for X and you'll die."
I'm glad you have passion, but frankly, when it comes down to it, I don't care that much whether it's Obama or Clinton. I could easily and happily support either one. I see good strengths and qualities in either.
To your specific request, I don't generally read newspaper editorials at all. I've read some of the backstory on the Krugman/Obama thing and I assume that's what you want me to comment on, but I generally don't get into editorials.
So, sorry if I made you mad. It wasn't my intention. I just twisted off at the echoes of '04.
Mike
By mikevotes, at 9:15 PM
And besides, I'm in Texas. Our primaries are always too late too matter.
Mike
By mikevotes, at 9:17 PM
Since you won't read it, here is the Krugman column in a nutshell:
1. Obama is gullible
2. Obama is easily misled by right-wing propaganda
3. A vote for Obama will be a vote for a continuation of the left's capitulation to the right wing.
On health care, on social security, on education, on religion and a host of other issues, Obama is the LEAST progressive candidate in the field. He has a lot in common with Joe Lieberman in fact (and if you remember, I said this in a comment on your blog about two years ago.)
Unfortunately, some progressives - perhaps won over by his war policy or smitten by his persona - do not see the concessionary nature of his personality.
BTW, I am NOT a HRC supporter. I have not voted for her here in NY in either 2000 or 2006. I don't know who I am voting for. I just know who I am NOT voting for - and that's Obama.
By Reality-Based Educator, at 6:03 AM
This comment has been removed by the author.
By mikevotes, at 7:39 AM
Okay.
I went back and looked at the post that I think started this, and your reaction seems out of whack to what I've written.
http://bornatthecrestoftheempire.blogspot.com/2007/12/picture-of-day_16.html
I would guess that you sincerely believe that Obama is a huge mistake, and I understand that, but I don't want to fight over this, at least not at the level of passion you're at.
It's like you're taking out a broader frustration on me, because, I haven't really said anything pro-Obama or anti-Clinton.
I critiqued a tactic, and made the observation that a Hillary Clinton administration would not have the same smoothing charisma of a Bill Clinton administration.
And you seem very angry, and I don't get it.
By mikevotes, at 7:50 AM
I think we have to bear in mind that, no matter which Democrat gets elected, the vetoes will end, the police state will end, the Long War will end, the supply-side 'economics' will end, the arrogance toward the rest of the world will end, torture will end or be severely limited, and the over-the-top secrecy and cronyism will end.
Even if we are only trading one ventriloquist dummy for another, it looks as if we will have an improvement on a lot of levels.
I remind myself of this when I look at the shortcomings of Obama and Clinton as candidates. Personally, I like Edwards and I intend to caucus for him if he's still in the race by the time Minnesota gets its shot.
By Todd Dugdale , at 8:51 AM
I don't really have a problem with Edwards either.
And I think you hit on my belief that we're likely to get slight improvement, ending some of the more egregious sins.
But I'll take that.
By mikevotes, at 9:02 AM
2015-12-19keyun
cheap oakleys
abercrombie
canada goose outlet
cheap toms shoes
longchamp handbags
celine handbags
ugg australia outlet
christian louboutin shoes
oakley sunglasses
fit flops
uggs on sale
kate spade handbags
coach outlet store online
ugg outlet
ugg boots clearance
oakley outlet
abercrombie
ugg clearance outlet
ugg boots
nike huarache white
christian louboutin shoes
ralph lauren outlet
ugg boots outlet
oakley sunglasses
p90x
michael kors handbags
canada goose sale
polo ralph lauren
michael kors outlet online sale
retro 11
ugg outlet store
hollister uk
true religion
celine bags
jordan 11 concord
vans sneakers
ugg boots
louis vuitton outlet
coach factory outlet
michael kors outlet store
By 柯云, at 7:19 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home