McCain should win in landslide. Obama turning out to be a lightweight.

[gandalf]

surveyor, I don’t think you understand what I was saying.

That’s okay though.

In November, we’re headed back towards the center, more realism in foreign policy matters, less ideology and moralistic posturing, more effective pressure and policies to support our long-term interests.

That happens either way, with Obama or McCain. I think Obama is smarter, will surround himself with good people, and will cross the aisle. McCain isn’t horrible though. Bush has been. The Neocon thing has run its course, to disastrous ends, unfortunately.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.

[jficquette]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.[/quote]

Actually Obama’s voting record is rated more liberal then Ted Kennedy’s. I believe there is one other Senator ranked higher then Obama and that name escapes me.

I see no reason to think he would change anything if he got elected.

[jficquette]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.[/quote]

Actually Obama’s voting record is rated more liberal then Ted Kennedy’s. I believe there is one other Senator ranked higher then Obama and that name escapes me.

I see no reason to think he would change anything if he got elected.

[jficquette]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.[/quote]

Actually Obama’s voting record is rated more liberal then Ted Kennedy’s. I believe there is one other Senator ranked higher then Obama and that name escapes me.

I see no reason to think he would change anything if he got elected.

[jficquette]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.[/quote]

Actually Obama’s voting record is rated more liberal then Ted Kennedy’s. I believe there is one other Senator ranked higher then Obama and that name escapes me.

I see no reason to think he would change anything if he got elected.

[jficquette]

[quote=Allan from Fallbrook]gandalf: In one of my earlier posts, I suggested looking at Obama’s voting record and his stance on various issues. Combined with his inexperience on the world stage and with foreign policy matters, what evidence do you have that he will govern from the center and cross the aisle?

He is among the more left leaning politicians we have (not saying this as a pejorative, but based on his voting record), and he votes party line nearly without fail.

His suggested policy of engagement includes “peer to peer” discussions with rogue states like Syria, as well as muscular interventionism into sovereign nations like Pakistan (although, in fairness, this particular idea was probably motivated by the fact that he was unaware that Pakistan was a sovereign nation).

I am saying all of this because it does fly in the face of the hope that Obama will prove a centrist, capable on the world stage, and a realist when it comes to recognition that many of the players we are confronting at present are anything but reasonable, rational, and willing to allow diplomacy to work.[/quote]

Actually Obama’s voting record is rated more liberal then Ted Kennedy’s. I believe there is one other Senator ranked higher then Obama and that name escapes me.

I see no reason to think he would change anything if he got elected.

[gandalf]

Allan, these are good questions. I’ve been waiting for you to ask, actually! And I’m interested in your response, what I expect would be a rebuttal. Not trying to change any minds here but to exchange views such that we both might learn. If you have something worthwhile to say, I have an exceedingly open mind. I expect you do, to be honest. Likewise, if I’m wrong about the assessment I’ve made, I don’t suspect it’s by much. Maybe around the margins.

Preface, I have to be honest here, I have absolutely no way of knowing what will actually happen. Lots of us expected changes with Bush but that’s been a real ‘disappointment’, huh? Code word among Republicans for saying, “What a disaster.” So I’m not naive. Whatever I say, it doesn’t really matter. Only time will tell. And I do believe that it’s highly likely, given the current environment, that Obama will be elected from here.

The three reasons I’m voting for Obama:

– Energy policy
– Foreign policy
– New generation

My father is probably one of the 100 most knowledgable people in the world when it comes to oil and gas exploration, 30+ years at the top of his field working with all of the majors in all the seas and all the continents. He supports Obama. Obama is talking about major investments in infrastructure, R&D, energy technologies and greening our economy, vehicles, facilities, transport, etc. He ‘gets it’, in that we desperately need to reduce our dependence on petrol — NOW. It should have happened right after 9/11.

Meantime, McCain is out shilling for a gas tax holiday. The Bush Admin just shut down solar development in the Mojave for ‘environmental reasons’. Big oil has been booking billions of dollars in profits these past few years and spending didley on research and exploration. The republican party (lower ‘r’) and the oil and gas establishment has been bankrupt on what a lot of us believe is the CENTRAL ISSUE of our time.

Second, foreign policy. Iraq and Al Qaeda. An Obama administration represents a MOVE TO THE CENTER because his positions are consistent with the MAJORITY and CENTER of this country. Whether you agree or not, the majority of Americans correctly view Iraq as a disaster. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. We want out of Iraq. We want Bin Laden’s head on a fucking stake. Invading Pakistan is OKAY, if that’s where AQ is holed up. Prosecute the war.

It’s essential to note: the Neocon position, the idealogical right-wing that’s hijacked the republican party in the past decade, it’s not the center of the country. It’s the fringe, 20% at most. Bush is just reviled by half the population of this country. Dems hate him. Think about that for a second. We’re at war, and we are so divided. Can you imagine somebody like Eisenhower, a true leader, how different would things have been? OMFG.

Quick comment on this issue, as most of us who disagree with the war DEEPLY RESENT attempts by the right (see surveyor/Bolton on this very thread) to link people who disagree on this issue to appeasement, surrender or lack of patriotism. It’s a bunch of HORSESHIT and I’ll smash anybody who says it. We’re tired of hearing this out of gay-cowboy, pansy-ass politicians with wide stances and anonymous bloggers, no military service, disastrous foreign policy results, NO CRED. Enough is enough.

Sorry for the outburst. Back to foreign policy.

Obama’s position is draw down the Iraq footprint and redeploy to Afghanistan — and Pakistan if that’s where the trail leads. Allan, joke about BO not knowing Pakistan is sovereign, it’s not even funny. He’s a secret Muslim, remember? Of course he knows.

Bottom line is his position sounds exactly right to me. Enemy #1 is Bin Laden, AQ in A/P, and big-time pressure on the Saudis, Yemenis and others who’ve been vigorously stabbing us in the back (excellent phrasing, AFF). What’s not to like here? Sounds strategically correct to me. I’m interested in your viewpoints.

I would be ‘reassured’ if Obama puts somebody like Nunn or Biden in the Veep spot, or in his cabinet. I can actually see Powell coming back as Defense Secretary. Curious, AFF, how would this affect your views of Obama as a ‘policy dilettante’? If he adds somebody to the picture with chops and respect across the aisle?

BTW, if the shit hits the fan with Israel and Iran, all bets are off. Actually, I suspect this is the game the neocons are playing, which is really, really, really just scary and awful. There are so many better roads for us to travel, particularly after we’ve addressed the energy issue and ratcheted down our dependence on ME petrol…

Finally, new generation. I expect, as do quite a few Republicans (Obamacans?), that Obama is the candidate most able to put this whole partisan freak show baby boomer Bush-Clinton-Bush era behind us. I’m about the same age as Obama. He was at Columbia four years before me. He’s a smart dude. Not a lightweight. Also, it’s fair to say that those of us below the boomers don’t subscribe to the conventional labels and filters, red state – blue state, etc. It’s out of sync with my generation and an order of magnitude more ‘geezer-ish’ for the ones coming up below me.

Here’s an example. “Obama’s the most liberal senator”. Where does a rating like this come from? What if I’m a conservative libertarian who opposes government efforts to legislate social policy (think Terri Schiavo)? Does that make me a leftie liberal weenie? Because I’d really like to see a balanced fucking budget. That’s our future you’ve been mortgaging. And Republicans have been way worse than Democrats last couple of years, earmarks, scrapping PAYGO, etc. So that must make Republicans a bunch be a raging liberals, right?

Generally speaking, we see through it all, and I don’t think the Gen-X set really respects boomers too much. Narcissistic parents in divorce court, impeaching lying presidents, reliving Vietnam all over again. I’m generalizing here, of course. The music was cool. Hendrix rocked. I’m sure boomers have their issues with us too. Whatever.

In sum, we’re really tired of the whole boomer zeitgeist, and would like to get started actually solving some of the big problems we face instead of fighting about them and playing politics and triangulating, and on and on ad nauseum. That’s the chief reason Susan Eisenhower endorsed him. That was the moment I decided to vote for him. I’m not alone. Lots of us out there. I hope we’re not wrong. We need to turn the page.

“Why I’m Backing Obama”
By Susan Eisenhower
Washington Post
Feb. 2 2008

Allan, welcome your views.

[gandalf]

Allan, these are good questions. I’ve been waiting for you to ask, actually! And I’m interested in your response, what I expect would be a rebuttal. Not trying to change any minds here but to exchange views such that we both might learn. If you have something worthwhile to say, I have an exceedingly open mind. I expect you do, to be honest. Likewise, if I’m wrong about the assessment I’ve made, I don’t suspect it’s by much. Maybe around the margins.

Preface, I have to be honest here, I have absolutely no way of knowing what will actually happen. Lots of us expected changes with Bush but that’s been a real ‘disappointment’, huh? Code word among Republicans for saying, “What a disaster.” So I’m not naive. Whatever I say, it doesn’t really matter. Only time will tell. And I do believe that it’s highly likely, given the current environment, that Obama will be elected from here.

The three reasons I’m voting for Obama:

– Energy policy
– Foreign policy
– New generation

My father is probably one of the 100 most knowledgable people in the world when it comes to oil and gas exploration, 30+ years at the top of his field working with all of the majors in all the seas and all the continents. He supports Obama. Obama is talking about major investments in infrastructure, R&D, energy technologies and greening our economy, vehicles, facilities, transport, etc. He ‘gets it’, in that we desperately need to reduce our dependence on petrol — NOW. It should have happened right after 9/11.

Meantime, McCain is out shilling for a gas tax holiday. The Bush Admin just shut down solar development in the Mojave for ‘environmental reasons’. Big oil has been booking billions of dollars in profits these past few years and spending didley on research and exploration. The republican party (lower ‘r’) and the oil and gas establishment has been bankrupt on what a lot of us believe is the CENTRAL ISSUE of our time.

Second, foreign policy. Iraq and Al Qaeda. An Obama administration represents a MOVE TO THE CENTER because his positions are consistent with the MAJORITY and CENTER of this country. Whether you agree or not, the majority of Americans correctly view Iraq as a disaster. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. We want out of Iraq. We want Bin Laden’s head on a fucking stake. Invading Pakistan is OKAY, if that’s where AQ is holed up. Prosecute the war.

It’s essential to note: the Neocon position, the idealogical right-wing that’s hijacked the republican party in the past decade, it’s not the center of the country. It’s the fringe, 20% at most. Bush is just reviled by half the population of this country. Dems hate him. Think about that for a second. We’re at war, and we are so divided. Can you imagine somebody like Eisenhower, a true leader, how different would things have been? OMFG.

Quick comment on this issue, as most of us who disagree with the war DEEPLY RESENT attempts by the right (see surveyor/Bolton on this very thread) to link people who disagree on this issue to appeasement, surrender or lack of patriotism. It’s a bunch of HORSESHIT and I’ll smash anybody who says it. We’re tired of hearing this out of gay-cowboy, pansy-ass politicians with wide stances and anonymous bloggers, no military service, disastrous foreign policy results, NO CRED. Enough is enough.

Sorry for the outburst. Back to foreign policy.

Obama’s position is draw down the Iraq footprint and redeploy to Afghanistan — and Pakistan if that’s where the trail leads. Allan, joke about BO not knowing Pakistan is sovereign, it’s not even funny. He’s a secret Muslim, remember? Of course he knows.

Bottom line is his position sounds exactly right to me. Enemy #1 is Bin Laden, AQ in A/P, and big-time pressure on the Saudis, Yemenis and others who’ve been vigorously stabbing us in the back (excellent phrasing, AFF). What’s not to like here? Sounds strategically correct to me. I’m interested in your viewpoints.

I would be ‘reassured’ if Obama puts somebody like Nunn or Biden in the Veep spot, or in his cabinet. I can actually see Powell coming back as Defense Secretary. Curious, AFF, how would this affect your views of Obama as a ‘policy dilettante’? If he adds somebody to the picture with chops and respect across the aisle?

BTW, if the shit hits the fan with Israel and Iran, all bets are off. Actually, I suspect this is the game the neocons are playing, which is really, really, really just scary and awful. There are so many better roads for us to travel, particularly after we’ve addressed the energy issue and ratcheted down our dependence on ME petrol…

Finally, new generation. I expect, as do quite a few Republicans (Obamacans?), that Obama is the candidate most able to put this whole partisan freak show baby boomer Bush-Clinton-Bush era behind us. I’m about the same age as Obama. He was at Columbia four years before me. He’s a smart dude. Not a lightweight. Also, it’s fair to say that those of us below the boomers don’t subscribe to the conventional labels and filters, red state – blue state, etc. It’s out of sync with my generation and an order of magnitude more ‘geezer-ish’ for the ones coming up below me.

Here’s an example. “Obama’s the most liberal senator”. Where does a rating like this come from? What if I’m a conservative libertarian who opposes government efforts to legislate social policy (think Terri Schiavo)? Does that make me a leftie liberal weenie? Because I’d really like to see a balanced fucking budget. That’s our future you’ve been mortgaging. And Republicans have been way worse than Democrats last couple of years, earmarks, scrapping PAYGO, etc. So that must make Republicans a bunch be a raging liberals, right?

Generally speaking, we see through it all, and I don’t think the Gen-X set really respects boomers too much. Narcissistic parents in divorce court, impeaching lying presidents, reliving Vietnam all over again. I’m generalizing here, of course. The music was cool. Hendrix rocked. I’m sure boomers have their issues with us too. Whatever.

In sum, we’re really tired of the whole boomer zeitgeist, and would like to get started actually solving some of the big problems we face instead of fighting about them and playing politics and triangulating, and on and on ad nauseum. That’s the chief reason Susan Eisenhower endorsed him. That was the moment I decided to vote for him. I’m not alone. Lots of us out there. I hope we’re not wrong. We need to turn the page.

“Why I’m Backing Obama”
By Susan Eisenhower
Washington Post
Feb. 2 2008

Allan, welcome your views.

[gandalf]

Allan, these are good questions. I’ve been waiting for you to ask, actually! And I’m interested in your response, what I expect would be a rebuttal. Not trying to change any minds here but to exchange views such that we both might learn. If you have something worthwhile to say, I have an exceedingly open mind. I expect you do, to be honest. Likewise, if I’m wrong about the assessment I’ve made, I don’t suspect it’s by much. Maybe around the margins.

Preface, I have to be honest here, I have absolutely no way of knowing what will actually happen. Lots of us expected changes with Bush but that’s been a real ‘disappointment’, huh? Code word among Republicans for saying, “What a disaster.” So I’m not naive. Whatever I say, it doesn’t really matter. Only time will tell. And I do believe that it’s highly likely, given the current environment, that Obama will be elected from here.

The three reasons I’m voting for Obama:

– Energy policy
– Foreign policy
– New generation

My father is probably one of the 100 most knowledgable people in the world when it comes to oil and gas exploration, 30+ years at the top of his field working with all of the majors in all the seas and all the continents. He supports Obama. Obama is talking about major investments in infrastructure, R&D, energy technologies and greening our economy, vehicles, facilities, transport, etc. He ‘gets it’, in that we desperately need to reduce our dependence on petrol — NOW. It should have happened right after 9/11.

Meantime, McCain is out shilling for a gas tax holiday. The Bush Admin just shut down solar development in the Mojave for ‘environmental reasons’. Big oil has been booking billions of dollars in profits these past few years and spending didley on research and exploration. The republican party (lower ‘r’) and the oil and gas establishment has been bankrupt on what a lot of us believe is the CENTRAL ISSUE of our time.

Second, foreign policy. Iraq and Al Qaeda. An Obama administration represents a MOVE TO THE CENTER because his positions are consistent with the MAJORITY and CENTER of this country. Whether you agree or not, the majority of Americans correctly view Iraq as a disaster. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. We want out of Iraq. We want Bin Laden’s head on a fucking stake. Invading Pakistan is OKAY, if that’s where AQ is holed up. Prosecute the war.

It’s essential to note: the Neocon position, the idealogical right-wing that’s hijacked the republican party in the past decade, it’s not the center of the country. It’s the fringe, 20% at most. Bush is just reviled by half the population of this country. Dems hate him. Think about that for a second. We’re at war, and we are so divided. Can you imagine somebody like Eisenhower, a true leader, how different would things have been? OMFG.

Quick comment on this issue, as most of us who disagree with the war DEEPLY RESENT attempts by the right (see surveyor/Bolton on this very thread) to link people who disagree on this issue to appeasement, surrender or lack of patriotism. It’s a bunch of HORSESHIT and I’ll smash anybody who says it. We’re tired of hearing this out of gay-cowboy, pansy-ass politicians with wide stances and anonymous bloggers, no military service, disastrous foreign policy results, NO CRED. Enough is enough.

Sorry for the outburst. Back to foreign policy.

Obama’s position is draw down the Iraq footprint and redeploy to Afghanistan — and Pakistan if that’s where the trail leads. Allan, joke about BO not knowing Pakistan is sovereign, it’s not even funny. He’s a secret Muslim, remember? Of course he knows.

Bottom line is his position sounds exactly right to me. Enemy #1 is Bin Laden, AQ in A/P, and big-time pressure on the Saudis, Yemenis and others who’ve been vigorously stabbing us in the back (excellent phrasing, AFF). What’s not to like here? Sounds strategically correct to me. I’m interested in your viewpoints.

I would be ‘reassured’ if Obama puts somebody like Nunn or Biden in the Veep spot, or in his cabinet. I can actually see Powell coming back as Defense Secretary. Curious, AFF, how would this affect your views of Obama as a ‘policy dilettante’? If he adds somebody to the picture with chops and respect across the aisle?

BTW, if the shit hits the fan with Israel and Iran, all bets are off. Actually, I suspect this is the game the neocons are playing, which is really, really, really just scary and awful. There are so many better roads for us to travel, particularly after we’ve addressed the energy issue and ratcheted down our dependence on ME petrol…

Finally, new generation. I expect, as do quite a few Republicans (Obamacans?), that Obama is the candidate most able to put this whole partisan freak show baby boomer Bush-Clinton-Bush era behind us. I’m about the same age as Obama. He was at Columbia four years before me. He’s a smart dude. Not a lightweight. Also, it’s fair to say that those of us below the boomers don’t subscribe to the conventional labels and filters, red state – blue state, etc. It’s out of sync with my generation and an order of magnitude more ‘geezer-ish’ for the ones coming up below me.

Here’s an example. “Obama’s the most liberal senator”. Where does a rating like this come from? What if I’m a conservative libertarian who opposes government efforts to legislate social policy (think Terri Schiavo)? Does that make me a leftie liberal weenie? Because I’d really like to see a balanced fucking budget. That’s our future you’ve been mortgaging. And Republicans have been way worse than Democrats last couple of years, earmarks, scrapping PAYGO, etc. So that must make Republicans a bunch be a raging liberals, right?

Generally speaking, we see through it all, and I don’t think the Gen-X set really respects boomers too much. Narcissistic parents in divorce court, impeaching lying presidents, reliving Vietnam all over again. I’m generalizing here, of course. The music was cool. Hendrix rocked. I’m sure boomers have their issues with us too. Whatever.

In sum, we’re really tired of the whole boomer zeitgeist, and would like to get started actually solving some of the big problems we face instead of fighting about them and playing politics and triangulating, and on and on ad nauseum. That’s the chief reason Susan Eisenhower endorsed him. That was the moment I decided to vote for him. I’m not alone. Lots of us out there. I hope we’re not wrong. We need to turn the page.

“Why I’m Backing Obama”
By Susan Eisenhower
Washington Post
Feb. 2 2008

Allan, welcome your views.

[gandalf]

Allan, these are good questions. I’ve been waiting for you to ask, actually! And I’m interested in your response, what I expect would be a rebuttal. Not trying to change any minds here but to exchange views such that we both might learn. If you have something worthwhile to say, I have an exceedingly open mind. I expect you do, to be honest. Likewise, if I’m wrong about the assessment I’ve made, I don’t suspect it’s by much. Maybe around the margins.

Preface, I have to be honest here, I have absolutely no way of knowing what will actually happen. Lots of us expected changes with Bush but that’s been a real ‘disappointment’, huh? Code word among Republicans for saying, “What a disaster.” So I’m not naive. Whatever I say, it doesn’t really matter. Only time will tell. And I do believe that it’s highly likely, given the current environment, that Obama will be elected from here.

The three reasons I’m voting for Obama:

– Energy policy
– Foreign policy
– New generation

My father is probably one of the 100 most knowledgable people in the world when it comes to oil and gas exploration, 30+ years at the top of his field working with all of the majors in all the seas and all the continents. He supports Obama. Obama is talking about major investments in infrastructure, R&D, energy technologies and greening our economy, vehicles, facilities, transport, etc. He ‘gets it’, in that we desperately need to reduce our dependence on petrol — NOW. It should have happened right after 9/11.

Meantime, McCain is out shilling for a gas tax holiday. The Bush Admin just shut down solar development in the Mojave for ‘environmental reasons’. Big oil has been booking billions of dollars in profits these past few years and spending didley on research and exploration. The republican party (lower ‘r’) and the oil and gas establishment has been bankrupt on what a lot of us believe is the CENTRAL ISSUE of our time.

Second, foreign policy. Iraq and Al Qaeda. An Obama administration represents a MOVE TO THE CENTER because his positions are consistent with the MAJORITY and CENTER of this country. Whether you agree or not, the majority of Americans correctly view Iraq as a disaster. Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. We want out of Iraq. We want Bin Laden’s head on a fucking stake. Invading Pakistan is OKAY, if that’s where AQ is holed up. Prosecute the war.

It’s essential to note: the Neocon position, the idealogical right-wing that’s hijacked the republican party in the past decade, it’s not the center of the country. It’s the fringe, 20% at most. Bush is just reviled by half the population of this country. Dems hate him. Think about that for a second. We’re at war, and we are so divided. Can you imagine somebody like Eisenhower, a true leader, how different would things have been? OMFG.

Quick comment on this issue, as most of us who disagree with the war DEEPLY RESENT attempts by the right (see surveyor/Bolton on this very thread) to link people who disagree on this issue to appeasement, surrender or lack of patriotism. It’s a bunch of HORSESHIT and I’ll smash anybody who says it. We’re tired of hearing this out of gay-cowboy, pansy-ass politicians with wide stances and anonymous bloggers, no military service, disastrous foreign policy results, NO CRED. Enough is enough.

Sorry for the outburst. Back to foreign policy.

Obama’s position is draw down the Iraq footprint and redeploy to Afghanistan — and Pakistan if that’s where the trail leads. Allan, joke about BO not knowing Pakistan is sovereign, it’s not even funny. He’s a secret Muslim, remember? Of course he knows.

Bottom line is his position sounds exactly right to me. Enemy #1 is Bin Laden, AQ in A/P, and big-time pressure on the Saudis, Yemenis and others who’ve been vigorously stabbing us in the back (excellent phrasing, AFF). What’s not to like here? Sounds strategically correct to me. I’m interested in your viewpoints.

I would be ‘reassured’ if Obama puts somebody like Nunn or Biden in the Veep spot, or in his cabinet. I can actually see Powell coming back as Defense Secretary. Curious, AFF, how would this affect your views of Obama as a ‘policy dilettante’? If he adds somebody to the picture with chops and respect across the aisle?

BTW, if the shit hits the fan with Israel and Iran, all bets are off. Actually, I suspect this is the game the neocons are playing, which is really, really, really just scary and awful. There are so many better roads for us to travel, particularly after we’ve addressed the energy issue and ratcheted down our dependence on ME petrol…

Finally, new generation. I expect, as do quite a few Republicans (Obamacans?), that Obama is the candidate most able to put this whole partisan freak show baby boomer Bush-Clinton-Bush era behind us. I’m about the same age as Obama. He was at Columbia four years before me. He’s a smart dude. Not a lightweight. Also, it’s fair to say that those of us below the boomers don’t subscribe to the conventional labels and filters, red state – blue state, etc. It’s out of sync with my generation and an order of magnitude more ‘geezer-ish’ for the ones coming up below me.

Here’s an example. “Obama’s the most liberal senator”. Where does a rating like this come from? What if I’m a conservative libertarian who opposes government efforts to legislate social policy (think Terri Schiavo)? Does that make me a leftie liberal weenie? Because I’d really like to see a balanced fucking budget. That’s our future you’ve been mortgaging. And Republicans have been way worse than Democrats last couple of years, earmarks, scrapping PAYGO, etc. So that must make Republicans a bunch be a raging liberals, right?

Generally speaking, we see through it all, and I don’t think the Gen-X set really respects boomers too much. Narcissistic parents in divorce court, impeaching lying presidents, reliving Vietnam all over again. I’m generalizing here, of course. The music was cool. Hendrix rocked. I’m sure boomers have their issues with us too. Whatever.

In sum, we’re really tired of the whole boomer zeitgeist, and would like to get started actually solving some of the big problems we face instead of fighting about them and playing politics and triangulating, and on and on ad nauseum. That’s the chief reason Susan Eisenhower endorsed him. That was the moment I decided to vote for him. I’m not alone. Lots of us out there. I hope we’re not wrong. We need to turn the page.

“Why I’m Backing Obama”
By Susan Eisenhower
Washington Post
Feb. 2 2008

Allan, welcome your views.

[Author]

Posts