Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Geoff Altman who wrote (34229)	7/11/2008 2:35:13 AM
From: RMF	Respond to of 224748

O.K. eom

To: Geoff Altman who wrote (34229)	7/11/2008 7:36:21 AM
From: TideGlider	Respond to of 224748

BAY: Obama's tack on Iraq Friday, July 11, 2008 ASSOCIATED PRESS Sen. Barack Obama, speaks in Fargo, N.D., during a swing through Western states. Polls show him having impact in traditionally Republican country. We have now seen enough of Barack Obama's campaign to get an idea of his remarkably agile strategic plan. Mr. Obama bills himself as the candidate of "change and hope" — and change is a key component in his plan, if by change we mean radical political flexibility characterized by dramatic shifts in fundamental policy, or quickly substituting today's iron-clad principles for last week's rusting certainties, or adroitly morphing his eternal verity of Old Testament May into a revised piety befitting New Age July. Mr. Obama's change isn't simply the expedient replacement of once-upon-a-time principle, exemplified by his rejection of public election financing. When the winds shift, Mr. Obama's strategic plan changes people. Since the end of March, his "campaign of change" has used his grandmother and booted the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Convicted Chicago grifter and Obama buddy Tony Rezko? He is so changed he has vanished. It's a fair bet that Mr. Obama holds firm with one personality, however: bomb-wielding terrorist, connected elite and hard-left political radical Bill Ayers. Call it a suspicion, based on years of watching wealthy white radicals in California and Texas move from dashikis to Under Armour, but I don't think a moneyed up Maoist like Ayers is a candidate for Mr. Obama's "people change." Spoiled rich kids with glitzy left-wing credentials get the breaks. Dad's cash or the divorce settlement pays for the house and help. It's why they sport job titles like "artist and activist." Ayers will operate behind Mr. Obama's oratorical screen for the duration. Mr. Obama's biggest looming change involves war, specifically Iraq. Oh, I know Mr. Obama has set the stage for "change" on that issue. Foreign policy adviser Samantha Power got "changed" for calling Hillary Clinton "a monster," but what she told BBC interview ace Steve Sackur in March about Mr. Obama's Iraq policy was far more interesting. When Mr. Sackur asked: "So what the American public thinks is a commitment to get combat forces out in 16 months isn't a commitment, isn't it?" Power, from a cocoon spun of Ivy League presumption that everyone in the press is in the tank for Mr. Obama, answered: "You can't make a commitment in March 2008 about what circumstances will be like in January of 2009. He will, of course, not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or a U.S. senator." Hey, I believe her. Mr. Obama is a creature of political prestidigitation, and last week in Fargo, N.D., he began his "war flip-flop" by suggesting he might "refine" his Iraq policy. Mr. Obama, like his pal Ayers, thinks most people are just too dumb to notice his shiftiness or, like MSNBC's Chris Matthews, are too knee-tingling awed by his rhetorical pomp to care. Real-world trials and triumph trump Mr. Obama's Oz of words, however. Though antique media have reduced coverage of Iraq - fewer bombs means fewer sensational thrills — the people of Iraq and their coalition allies are well on their way to a democratic win over terror. Arguably the win was obtained as of November 2007, though its seeds were sown in August 2004 and the stage set when Saddam toppled in April 2003. The dates are fodder for another column — the point is that Mr. Obama faces a reality that questions the theology of defeat Democratic Sen. Harry Reid enunciated in 2007. I see a situation I call "strategic overwatch" emerging in Iraq in 2009, becoming full-fledged by 2011. "Strategic overwatch" is a limited U.S. and coalition victory — but a major victory for Iraqis. Iraqis already consider the destruction of Saddam Hussein's regime to be a victory. Iraq's Operation Charge of the Knights (March-April 2008) foreshadowed strategic overwatch: coalition air, intelligence and logistics assets support Iraqi planned, led and manned security operations. Iraqi gross domestic product increases, neighborhoods revive, Baghdad's business community revs. The "Update" video at austinbay.thearenausa.com has a full description of strategic overwatch. A President Obama isn't foolish enough to abandon Iraqis who have earned their democracy, or to hang the accusation of self-defeat on his legacy. Mr. Obama will "change" on Iraq, then claim his leadership — not the "Bush's maladministration" — assured victory. The real rubes in this election won't be the rural Pennsylvanians Mr. Obama slandered, the folks who cling to their guns and religion. It will be the gray-haired profs with ponytails, clinging to their cannabis and liturgy of defeat. Austin Bay is a nationally syndicated columnist. washingtontimes.com

To: Geoff Altman who wrote (34229)	7/11/2008 7:48:28 AM
From: TideGlider	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 224748

Barack Obama Regrets Kids on TV and Much More. Barack Obama says that he got “carried away in the moment” for allowing Access Hollywood reporter Maria Menounos to interview his young daughters (ages 10 and 7) on television. The program is usually known for reports on Hollywood sleaze, adulterer celebrities, and other decadence rather than presidential candidates. He now says that he had poor judgment with his children and regrets the decision. Obama’s Regrets Many analysts are questioning Obama’s veracity for this apology (see here and here), because the event was planned for days. He did not find himself suddenly in front of the cameras, but carefully planned the interview just like all campaigns do. Then he apologized immediately before anyone complained which also felt orchestrated. Nobody knows for sure why Obama did it so let us give him the benefit of the doubt. Barack Obama simply made a mistake. It seems to me the real campaign issue is that Obama is suddenly admitting to a lot of poor judgments. Luke Boggs has done a good job of chronicling several of Obama’s recent regrets over at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. He makes the interesting point that there over 1,000,000 search engine results for “Obama regrets.” We all know the big ones. Obama first expressed regret for Jeremiah Wright’s controversial comments, and then expressed regrets for his 20-year affiliation with the church. Earlier in the campaign Obama regretted calling rural Americans “bitter” for “clinging to guns and religion.” Those controversial comments came in progressive San Francisco when Obama thought he was out of the camera’’s eye. At the same time, Obama said that he regretted intervening to save Teri Schiavo, the brain-dead woman in Florida who captured the public attention in 2005. In a case of remarkable political theater (and I think an extraordinarily embarrassing moment in our history) an emergency session of Congress was held on the woman’s behalf. Obama voted for Congress to override the constitutional processes in the State of Florida. Still earlier he regretted saying that the lives of American military were “wasted” away in Iraq. This inflammatory comment was apparently part of Obama’s ultimately successful strategy of attacking Hillary Clinton from her left flank. The biggest regret is that Obama was closely tied to Tony Rezko, the felon who was convicted for money laundering, political bribery, and organized crime in Chicago. Obama later “regretted” his association when it was discovered. He had purchased property in a below-market loan on the same day Rezko purchased the vacant lot next door. Neighbors report that Obama fenced in both properties when he had only purchased one, the details of which are still entangling. When the arrangement was discovered by local reporters, Obama paid Rezko for a part of the property he was using. He still lives there and his gardener may still be mowing two lawns. Obama regrets the Rezko deal, which was inarguably poor judgment since Rezko was already indicted. The many Obama regrets are giving voters reason to pause. He has made judgment the cornerstone of his campaign rather than experience for obvious reasons. He successfully banked that anti-war voters in his party would value his singular vote against the Iraq War before he voted to fund it. That is all the “judgment” he needed and it worked. But can judgment on only one issue be enough to predict good judgment in the Oval Office, while Obama regrets all of the other things? It is hard to say at this point in the campaign but admitting poor judgment on so many issues will be used against him before the election runs its course. rightpundits.com