Barack Obama, The Presumptive Nominee for the Democrats

boloboffin · 4th June 2008, 07:50 PM

Thank you, Hillary!

https://www.democrats.org/page/contribute/joincampaign

Barack Hussein Obama is the Democratic nominee for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Elections. I couldn't be more pleased. In fact, I was choking up yesterday thinking about it. America has needed a rebrand in the worst possible way. Now it looks like we might get it.

Congratulations, Senator Obama!

Upchurch · 4th June 2008, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by boloboffin

Barack Hussein Obama is the Democratic nominee for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Elections.

WOOT!

Pardalis · 4th June 2008, 08:39 PM

Originally Posted by boloboffin

America has needed a rebrand in the worst possible way. Now it looks like we might get it.

I bet you voted for Bush twice...

Puppycow · 4th June 2008, 08:48 PM

Man in the News
Barack Obama: Calm in the Swirl of History

David Wong · 4th June 2008, 09:34 PM

Thank God that's over.

Now all we have to do is... get through five months of a national campaign.

Still I'll be glad once Friday comes, Hillary endorses and all those rabid Hillary supporters can stop living in denial. I understand the milestone of a female candidate was important to them, but that got a little weird toward the end as they kept claiming all these scenarios where Hillary could still pull it out.

Not now. Now it's Obama vs. McCain.

TriskettheKid · 4th June 2008, 09:37 PM

It was quite humbling to see his victory speech.

He seemed like he was choking up at more than a few points.

What an amazing primary season, though. The fall of the inevitable, the rise of the unknown, and the old guy in the back screaming for attention.

Pardalis · 4th June 2008, 09:48 PM

He's a great man, I don't recall witnessing such an inspiring public figure in all my lifetime.

ravdin · 4th June 2008, 10:02 PM

Smell ya later, Hillary Clinton!

Damien Evans · 4th June 2008, 10:36 PM

She'll be back.

Rika · 4th June 2008, 11:33 PM

Saturday. She's conceding on Saturday.

SezMe · 4th June 2008, 11:50 PM

OT

Have you ever seen the word "presumptive" used except in this one particular circumstance?

/OT

Tsukasa Buddha · 5th June 2008, 12:49 AM

Woot, my twenty bucks was not wasted!

Hokulele · 5th June 2008, 01:14 AM

Originally Posted by SezMe

OT

Have you ever seen the word "presumptive" used except in this one particular circumstance?

/OT

John McCain.

ETA: He's been presumptive for a few months now.

volatile · 5th June 2008, 01:40 AM

Jerome? Say, Jerome? Wasn't Hilary guaranteed the nomination? Hadn't the nefarious infidels who control the country from behind the scenes already decided she was to be granted the Presidency?

ronpaulisright · 5th June 2008, 01:55 AM

Ron Paul '08.

"meet the new boss, same as the old boss"

WW3 here we come! Thanks obama. Or mccain. I'm writing in Ron Paul. But out of the candidates that will be on the ballot, Nader will be the best choice.

SezMe · 5th June 2008, 02:12 AM

Originally Posted by Hokulele

John McCain.

ETA: He's been presumptive for a few months now.

No, no, no. I meant I have never seen it used except to describe a candidate who has won the nomination but has yet to have holy water thrown on him at the convention.

Bob Blaylock · 5th June 2008, 03:22 AM

Originally Posted by volatile

Jerome? Say, Jerome? Wasn't Hilary guaranteed the nomination? Hadn't the nefarious infidels who control the country from behind the scenes already decided she was to be granted the Presidency?

One certainly got the impression that she thought so — at least earlier in the campaign. But then this uppity nig… *ahem* “African American” dared to come along and tried to steal the Presidency from her; and now he seems to have succeeded. Throughout much of the campaign, it really seemed to me that Hillary felt that she was entitled to the Presidency.

Ideologically, there is little discernable difference between the two, but in terms of character and ethics, they seem to me to be worlds apart. Both are of the ideology that wants to make government bigger and more burdensome — that thinks that we Americans need government to be our nanny and take care of us as if we are all helpless children. For this reason, I cannot even think of supporting either one of them. But at least Obama comes across as being sincere in his belief that the policies he wants to pursue are truly in the best interests of the nation; while Hillary comes across as a power-crazed megalomaniac who cares far more about her own interests than those of the nation.

varwoche · 5th June 2008, 03:40 AM

Last night after Obama clinched, Clinton managed to plumb the depths of classless self-absorbtion yet one more time:

Originally Posted by Clinton

And I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be invisible. link

... implying that Obama has disrespected her supporters. And this is lapped up by the true believers no doubt.

The wanton destructiveness of fueling this particular nonsense at this moment (at any moment) boggles my mind.

I'm not used to having the candidate I support win the nomination. Thank Odin and yahoo!

Upchurch · 5th June 2008, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by TriskettheKid

and the old guy in the back screaming for attention.

Bill?

T.A.M. · 5th June 2008, 04:06 AM

Yes I think I will remove Jerome from my ignore list long enough to hear him say he was wrong.

TAM

Upchurch · 5th June 2008, 04:21 AM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Yes I think I will remove Jerome from my ignore list long enough to hear him say he was wrong.

Why? There's no evidence that Jerome was wrong. You're just going on faith.

[/Jerome]

timhau · 5th June 2008, 05:02 AM

Originally Posted by volatile

Jerome? Say, Jerome? Wasn't Hilary guaranteed the nomination? Hadn't the nefarious infidels who control the country from behind the scenes already decided she was to be granted the Presidency?

Yes, but they had no manpower left for the job because all the overtime hours had been wasted on granting the New York Giants the Super Bowl.

Elvis666 · 5th June 2008, 06:15 AM

Originally Posted by SezMe

OT

Have you ever seen the word "presumptive" used except in this one particular circumstance?

/OT

Yeah, I've heard it used in legal-related news stories, as in "presumptive innocence".

Darth Rotor · 5th June 2008, 06:45 AM

I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO.

No, Barry, not quite.

Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others.

Here are four US allies far more important than Israel:

UK
Germany
Japan
Turkey

An ally more important to cultivate in the long term

India

And ally to court:

Viet Nam

Israel is rather far down the list in terms of importance to American security.

Is he pandering to the Evangelical/Pentacostalist vote, who think McCain is not Christian enough? They tend to be pro Israel as well, while a considerable body of American liberals are not so keen on Israel being all that and a bag of chips.

Layers within layers here.

Puppycow · 5th June 2008, 07:06 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO.

No, Barry, not quite.

Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others.

Here are four US allies far more important than Israel:

UK
Germany
Japan
Turkey

An ally more important to cultivate in the long term

India

And ally to court:

Viet Nam

Israel is rather far down the list in terms of importance to American security.

Is he pandering to the Evangelical/Pentacostalist vote, who think McCain is not Christian enough? They tend to be pro Israel as well, while a considerable body of American liberals are not so keen on Israel being all that and a bag of chips.

Layers within layers here.

I think he's doing what is a political necessity. Less the evangelical vote than the Jewish vote and other forms of support. You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that the political power of Jews is greater than their numbers. There's also a lot of Americans who aren't Jews themselves, but sympathize with the Jews. They also make campaign contributions. There's a lot of them in the media and Hollywood. And they are a traditional democratic constituency. Guys like Marty Peretz, owner of the New Republic. Can you imagine a serious candidate for president who doesn't genuflect to AIPAC? I can't think of any recent one who didn't.

CptColumbo · 5th June 2008, 07:20 AM

I was at the Xcel center when he got the delegates he needed. The Who concert there was almost as loud.

Pardalis · 5th June 2008, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

And ally to court:

Viet Nam

I don't understand this one (?)

Quote:

Israel is rather far down the list in terms of importance to American security.

I think he was just trying to shut down rumours about his resolve to defend Israel, since the Republicans didn't waste any time to engage in fear mongering about his half Muslim heritage.

Pookster · 5th June 2008, 07:21 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO.

No, Barry, not quite.

Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others.

I suspect that as far as either McCain or Obama are concerned, "Barry" is quite right. Saying he's not is ignoring political reality. I seriously doubt you'll hear McCain say "not quite" either.

TriskettheKid · 5th June 2008, 07:22 AM

Originally Posted by Upchurch

Bill?

Well, I purposefully left it ambiguous.

It would allow one to think of Bill, McCain, His Royal Jester Ron Paul, Lieberman, Nader, etc.

Upchurch · 5th June 2008, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by TriskettheKid

Well, I purposefully left it ambiguous.

It would allow one to think of Bill, McCain, His Royal Jester Ron Paul, Lieberman, Nader, etc.

A political Rorschach Test, eh?

geni · 5th June 2008, 07:54 AM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO.

No, Barry, not quite.

Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others.

Here are four US allies far more important than Israel:

UK
Germany
Japan
Turkey

UK and Germany are somewhat unlikely to be attacked any time soon. In the case of Japan it can build any form of defence it wants itself should it chose to do so and turkey is a problem due to the kurd issue.

Darth Rotor · 5th June 2008, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Pookster

I suspect that as far as either McCain or Obama are concerned, "Barry" is quite right. Saying he's not is ignoring political reality. I seriously doubt you'll hear McCain say "not quite" either.

Israel as an American client has been mostly trouble since about 1990. The energy of the pro Israel lobby and sentiment in the US has run into the political reality that nations not particularly in love with Israel have a far greater geostrategic importance to America than Israel. To pretend Israel is as important as NATO is hogwash.

@ you and Geni: American security is not much changed if tomorrow Israel falls into the Mediterranean sea. The symbolic and emotional issues are being pandered to at the expense of realistic, geopolitical strategic interests.

Not so with the other nations I mentioned, be they economic or more force/geography security matters.

@ Pardalis: Viet Nam as an ally is a Pacific Rim strategic consideration, vis a vis China.

volatile · 5th June 2008, 10:25 AM

Originally Posted by timhau

Yes, but they had no manpower left for the job because all the overtime hours had been wasted on granting the New York Giants the Super Bowl.

Nominated, and QFT. I forgot there was a reason why Jerome was my favourite presenter of foolish opinions on the forum.

Pookster · 5th June 2008, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Israel as an American client has been mostly trouble since about 1990. The energy of the pro Israel lobby and sentiment in the US has run into the political reality that nations not particularly in love with Israel have a far greater geostrategic importance to America than Israel. To pretend Israel is as important as NATO is hogwash. ...

From a political standpoint, it's far from hogwash. Again, you'll hear nothing substantively different from either candidate. It is an election year.

Darth Rotor · 5th June 2008, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by Pookster

From a political standpoint, it's far from hogwash. Again, you'll hear nothing substantively different from either candidate. It is an election year.

I may be exercising wishful thinking, but I think it is high time AIPAC and the other pro Israel lobbyists were exposed to greater scrutiny, along with other lobbyists, and put in their place. This is a fine election year in which to do so.

On the more cynical side, your observation of the way politics as usual transpires is generally correct. Obama is allegedly for change. This isn't a good sign that he's sincere, damn the bad luck.

varwoche · 5th June 2008, 02:30 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel.

In particular, his statement about an undivided Jerusalem was hugely dissappointing.

Pookster · 5th June 2008, 02:36 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I may be exercising wishful thinking, but I think it is high time AIPAC and the other pro Israel lobbyists were exposed to greater scrutiny, along with other lobbyists, and put in their place. This is a fine election year in which to do so.

On the more cynical side, your observation of the way politics as usual transpires is generally correct. Obama is allegedly for change. This isn't a good sign that he's sincere, damn the bad luck.

He didn't say he wanted to change everything ... just what was politically to his advantage.

Jimbo07 · 5th June 2008, 03:07 PM

Originally Posted by Pookster

He didn't say he wanted to change everything ... just what was politically to his advantage.

IANAP

In a country with over 300,000,000 people, I think you are going to find approximately 300,000,000 issues. I would concentrate on working the issues important to me (and apparently to those voting for me), and let pandering take care of the rest...

Shadowdweller · 5th June 2008, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I may be exercising wishful thinking, but I think it is high time AIPAC and the other pro Israel lobbyists were exposed to greater scrutiny, along with other lobbyists, and put in their place.

While I agree, this is hardly feasible in light of the divided democratic party. Particularly considering that Clinton (formerly?) derived a solid chunk of support from the pro-Israel crowd. Politics, alas, necessitates compromise.

Dragoonster · 5th June 2008, 06:25 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

I may be exercising wishful thinking, but I think it is high time AIPAC and the other pro Israel lobbyists were exposed to greater scrutiny, along with other lobbyists, and put in their place. This is a fine election year in which to do so.

I agree and while his pandering dissapoints me personally, he has no choice in his first campaign. If he excels and the GOP offers a weaker candidate 2nd term (assuming he beats McCain which is far from certain), he could be more proactive. Plus it's lip service, US-Israel relations have nuances somewhere between withdrawing all aid and putting our military under their complete control.

I credit Bush with at least trying with his Road Map to broker a peace. And if Obama does the same and by some miracle planet alignment he or the next Prez actually helps bring about a two-state solution, the enormous downside to our blind alliance with them will be mitigated quite a bit (at least assuming Israel is a peaceful neighbor to then-Palestine).

Of course I'd prefer to withdraw all military/financial support for both sides instead of enabling, but realistically as long as we don't do that, what we should hope for is that our tremendous aid at least brings a final two-state peace.

It won't probably, but only a public revolution to our Israel alliance will ever change our politician's devotion to it.

4th June 2008, 07:50 PM	#1
boloboffin Guest Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Dallas, TX Posts: 5,005	Barack Obama, The Presumptive Nominee for the Democrats Thank you, Hillary! https://www.democrats.org/page/contribute/joincampaign Barack Hussein Obama is the Democratic nominee for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Elections. I couldn't be more pleased. In fact, I was choking up yesterday thinking about it. America has needed a rebrand in the worst possible way. Now it looks like we might get it. Congratulations, Senator Obama!

4th June 2008, 08:39 PM	#3
Pardalis Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 20,674	Originally Posted by boloboffin America has needed a rebrand in the worst possible way. Now it looks like we might get it. I bet you voted for Bush twice...
	__________________ "It is best to change your point of view in response to reality than to insist reality has it wrong because it doesn't agree with your point of view." aggle-rithm "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin "All we know is that we know much less and less, but at least we know less and less about much more and more" Christopher Hitchens

4th June 2008, 08:48 PM	#4
Puppycow Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 7,060	Man in the News Barack Obama: Calm in the Swirl of History
	__________________ I can't come to bed yet, honey. Someone on the Internet is wrong. -XKCD Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous

4th June 2008, 09:34 PM	#5
David Wong Graduate Poster Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,739	Thank God that's over. Now all we have to do is... get through five months of a national campaign. Still I'll be glad once Friday comes, Hillary endorses and all those rabid Hillary supporters can stop living in denial. I understand the milestone of a female candidate was important to them, but that got a little weird toward the end as they kept claiming all these scenarios where Hillary could still pull it out. Not now. Now it's Obama vs. McCain.
	__________________ Author, John Dies at the End. Available now in hardcover. Editor, Cracked.com.

4th June 2008, 09:48 PM	#7
Pardalis Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 20,674	He's a great man, I don't recall witnessing such an inspiring public figure in all my lifetime.
	__________________ "It is best to change your point of view in response to reality than to insist reality has it wrong because it doesn't agree with your point of view." aggle-rithm "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin "All we know is that we know much less and less, but at least we know less and less about much more and more" Christopher Hitchens

4th June 2008, 08:10 PM	#2
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 20,158	Originally Posted by boloboffin Barack Hussein Obama is the Democratic nominee for the 2008 U.S. Presidential Elections. WOOT!

4th June 2008, 09:37 PM	#6
TriskettheKid Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,432	It was quite humbling to see his victory speech. He seemed like he was choking up at more than a few points. What an amazing primary season, though. The fall of the inevitable, the rise of the unknown, and the old guy in the back screaming for attention.

4th June 2008, 10:02 PM	#8
ravdin Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: The People's Republic of Berkeley, CA Posts: 1,903	Smell ya later, Hillary Clinton!

4th June 2008, 10:36 PM	#9
Damien Evans Up The Irons Tagger Join Date: May 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 13,497	She'll be back.
	__________________ WHAT CAN THE HARVEST HOPE FOR, IF NOT THE CARE OF THE REAPER MAN? - Death

4th June 2008, 11:33 PM	#10
Rika Guardian of the Setting Sun Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Graham, WA Posts: 3,743	Saturday. She's conceding on Saturday.
	__________________ Stop Sylvia Browne! "It matters not how many men you throw at me, I will fell them all!" "And what if I threw kittens, Tadakatsu? Would you kill them too?" Tu Quoque is a very common fallacy in which one attempts to defend oneself or another from criticism by turning the critique back against the accuser

4th June 2008, 11:50 PM	#11
SezMe Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 9,504	OT Have you ever seen the word "presumptive" used except in this one particular circumstance? /OT

5th June 2008, 12:49 AM	#12
Tsukasa Buddha Other (please write in) Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: NeverLand Posts: 5,078	Woot, my twenty bucks was not wasted!
	__________________ Monk to Zen Master: What happens after death, master? Zen master: I don’t know. Monk: But you are a master! Master: Yes, but I’m not a dead one yet.

5th June 2008, 01:14 AM	#13
Hokulele Official Nemesis TLA Dictatrix Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Heck with subtlety, off to Redmond to unleash the MS-DOS UI developers! Posts: 23,669	Originally Posted by SezMe OT Have you ever seen the word "presumptive" used except in this one particular circumstance? /OT John McCain. ETA: He's been presumptive for a few months now.
	__________________ I'm ranged and my mana's being replaced with...rage or fury or something. - slingblade

5th June 2008, 01:40 AM	#14
volatile Scholar and a Gentleman Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Uncanny Valley Posts: 6,630	Jerome? Say, Jerome? Wasn't Hilary guaranteed the nomination? Hadn't the nefarious infidels who control the country from behind the scenes already decided she was to be granted the Presidency?
	__________________ - ""My tribe has a saying: 'If you're bleeding, look for a man with scars'" - Leela, Doctor Who 'Robots of Death'.

5th June 2008, 01:55 AM	#15
ronpaulisright Banned Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,228	Ron Paul '08. "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" WW3 here we come! Thanks obama. Or mccain. I'm writing in Ron Paul. But out of the candidates that will be on the ballot, Nader will be the best choice.
ronpaulisright Banned Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 1,228

5th June 2008, 02:12 AM	#16
SezMe Philosopher Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 9,504	Originally Posted by Hokulele John McCain. ETA: He's been presumptive for a few months now. No, no, no. I meant I have never seen it used except to describe a candidate who has won the nomination but has yet to have holy water thrown on him at the convention.

5th June 2008, 03:22 AM	#17
Bob Blaylock Forklift Operator Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: N38°35' W121°29' Posts: 1,631	Originally Posted by volatile Jerome? Say, Jerome? Wasn't Hilary guaranteed the nomination? Hadn't the nefarious infidels who control the country from behind the scenes already decided she was to be granted the Presidency? One certainly got the impression that she thought so — at least earlier in the campaign. But then this uppity nig… ahem “African American” dared to come along and tried to steal the Presidency from her; and now he seems to have succeeded. Throughout much of the campaign, it really seemed to me that Hillary felt that she was entitled to the Presidency. Ideologically, there is little discernable difference between the two, but in terms of character and ethics, they seem to me to be worlds apart. Both are of the ideology that wants to make government bigger and more burdensome — that thinks that we Americans need government to be our nanny and take care of us as if we are all helpless children. For this reason, I cannot even think of supporting either one of them. But at least Obama comes across as being sincere in his belief that the policies he wants to pursue are truly in the best interests of the nation; while Hillary comes across as a power-crazed megalomaniac who cares far more about her own interests than those of the nation.
	__________________ “Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion.”

5th June 2008, 03:40 AM	#18
varwoche Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Puget Sound Posts: 5,337	Last night after Obama clinched, Clinton managed to plumb the depths of classless self-absorbtion yet one more time: Originally Posted by Clinton And I want the nearly 18 million Americans who voted for me to be respected, to be heard and no longer to be invisible. link ... implying that Obama has disrespected her supporters. And this is lapped up by the true believers no doubt. The wanton destructiveness of fueling this particular nonsense at this moment (at any moment) boggles my mind. I'm not used to having the candidate I support win the nomination. Thank Odin and yahoo!
	__________________ GW evidence \| *Are you* gonna be alright?**

5th June 2008, 04:05 AM	#19
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 20,158	Originally Posted by TriskettheKid and the old guy in the back screaming for attention. Bill?

5th June 2008, 04:06 AM	#20
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 18,737	Yes I think I will remove Jerome from my ignore list long enough to hear him say he was wrong. TAM
	__________________ "Angry Young Man!" - The truth movement in a phrase, by O&A "His fists in the air, his head in the sand" - Angry Young Man, Billy Joel An English Professor that knew 9/11 from the Truth Movement quotes would conclude that hyperbole, simile, and metaphor caused the towers to collapse. - BigAl

5th June 2008, 04:21 AM	#21
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 20,158	Originally Posted by T.A.M. Yes I think I will remove Jerome from my ignore list long enough to hear him say he was wrong. Why? There's no evidence that Jerome was wrong. You're just going on faith. [/Jerome]

5th June 2008, 05:02 AM	#22
timhau NWO Litter Technician Join Date: May 2004 Location: East of Sweeden Posts: 4,115	Originally Posted by volatile Jerome? Say, Jerome? Wasn't Hilary guaranteed the nomination? Hadn't the nefarious infidels who control the country from behind the scenes already decided she was to be granted the Presidency? Yes, but they had no manpower left for the job because all the overtime hours had been wasted on granting the New York Giants the Super Bowl.
	__________________ When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me. - Emo Philips

5th June 2008, 06:15 AM	#23
Elvis666 Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 252	Originally Posted by SezMe OT Have you ever seen the word "presumptive" used except in this one particular circumstance? /OT Yeah, I've heard it used in legal-related news stories, as in "presumptive innocence".
Elvis666 Critical Thinker Join Date: Nov 2007 Posts: 252

5th June 2008, 06:45 AM	#24
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 29,313	I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO. No, Barry, not quite. Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others. Here are four US allies far more important than Israel: UK Germany Japan Turkey An ally more important to cultivate in the long term India And ally to court: Viet Nam Israel is rather far down the list in terms of importance to American security. Is he pandering to the Evangelical/Pentacostalist vote, who think McCain is not Christian enough? They tend to be pro Israel as well, while a considerable body of American liberals are not so keen on Israel being all that and a bag of chips. Layers within layers here.
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton____If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok____ "Your onus is aimed in the wrong direction." -- Cleon__"... they don't make pills for being a self-absorbed twit. --bookitty

5th June 2008, 07:06 AM	#25
Puppycow Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Japan Posts: 7,060	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO. No, Barry, not quite. Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others. Here are four US allies far more important than Israel: UK Germany Japan Turkey An ally more important to cultivate in the long term India And ally to court: Viet Nam Israel is rather far down the list in terms of importance to American security. Is he pandering to the Evangelical/Pentacostalist vote, who think McCain is not Christian enough? They tend to be pro Israel as well, while a considerable body of American liberals are not so keen on Israel being all that and a bag of chips. Layers within layers here. I think he's doing what is a political necessity. Less the evangelical vote than the Jewish vote and other forms of support. You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to see that the political power of Jews is greater than their numbers. There's also a lot of Americans who aren't Jews themselves, but sympathize with the Jews. They also make campaign contributions. There's a lot of them in the media and Hollywood. And they are a traditional democratic constituency. Guys like Marty Peretz, owner of the New Republic. Can you imagine a serious candidate for president who doesn't genuflect to AIPAC? I can't think of any recent one who didn't.
	__________________ I can't come to bed yet, honey. Someone on the Internet is wrong. -XKCD Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous

5th June 2008, 07:20 AM	#26
CptColumbo Just One More Question Join Date: May 2004 Location: Minneapolis, MN Posts: 7,960	I was at the Xcel center when he got the delegates he needed. The Who concert there was almost as loud.
	__________________ I've been involved in a lot of cults, both as a leader and a follower. You have more fun as a follower, but you make more money as a leader.--Creed, "The Office" The tools of conquest do not necessarily come with bombs and explosions and fallout. There are weapons that are simply thoughts, attitudes, prejudices to be only found in the minds of men. Prejudices and suspicion can destroy, and a thoughtless frightened search for a scapegoat has a fallout all its own.--Rod Serling

5th June 2008, 07:21 AM	#27
Pardalis Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Montréal Posts: 20,674	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor And ally to court: Viet Nam I don't understand this one (?) Quote: Israel is rather far down the list in terms of importance to American security. I think he was just trying to shut down rumours about his resolve to defend Israel, since the Republicans didn't waste any time to engage in fear mongering about his half Muslim heritage.
	__________________ "It is best to change your point of view in response to reality than to insist reality has it wrong because it doesn't agree with your point of view." aggle-rithm "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin "All we know is that we know much less and less, but at least we know less and less about much more and more" Christopher Hitchens

5th June 2008, 07:21 AM	#28
Pookster Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2007 Location: Southeast USA Posts: 1,790	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO. No, Barry, not quite. Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others. I suspect that as far as either McCain or Obama are concerned, "Barry" is quite right. Saying he's not is ignoring political reality. I seriously doubt you'll hear McCain say "not quite" either.

5th June 2008, 07:22 AM	#29
TriskettheKid Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,432	Originally Posted by Upchurch Bill? Well, I purposefully left it ambiguous. It would allow one to think of Bill, McCain, His Royal Jester Ron Paul, Lieberman, Nader, etc.

5th June 2008, 07:41 AM	#30
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: Funky Town (STL, MO) Posts: 20,158	Originally Posted by TriskettheKid Well, I purposefully left it ambiguous. It would allow one to think of Bill, McCain, His Royal Jester Ron Paul, Lieberman, Nader, etc. A political Rorschach Test, eh?

5th June 2008, 07:54 AM	#31
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 21,312	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor I note that Obama wasted no time in kissing AIPAC's behind, and standing tall for Israel. He stated that our security guarantees to Israel should be as strong as our security guarantees to NATO. No, Barry, not quite. Not all allies are equal. Some are more important than others. Here are four US allies far more important than Israel: UK Germany Japan Turkey UK and Germany are somewhat unlikely to be attacked any time soon. In the case of Japan it can build any form of defence it wants itself should it chose to do so and turkey is a problem due to the kurd issue.

5th June 2008, 08:40 AM	#32
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 29,313	Originally Posted by Pookster I suspect that as far as either McCain or Obama are concerned, "Barry" is quite right. Saying he's not is ignoring political reality. I seriously doubt you'll hear McCain say "not quite" either. Israel as an American client has been mostly trouble since about 1990. The energy of the pro Israel lobby and sentiment in the US has run into the political reality that nations not particularly in love with Israel have a far greater geostrategic importance to America than Israel. To pretend Israel is as important as NATO is hogwash. @ you and Geni: American security is not much changed if tomorrow Israel falls into the Mediterranean sea. The symbolic and emotional issues are being pandered to at the expense of realistic, geopolitical strategic interests. Not so with the other nations I mentioned, be they economic or more force/geography security matters. @ Pardalis: Viet Nam as an ally is a Pacific Rim strategic consideration, vis a vis China.
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton____If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok____ "Your onus is aimed in the wrong direction." -- Cleon__"... they don't make pills for being a self-absorbed twit. --bookitty

5th June 2008, 10:25 AM	#33
volatile Scholar and a Gentleman Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: The Uncanny Valley Posts: 6,630	Originally Posted by timhau Yes, but they had no manpower left for the job because all the overtime hours had been wasted on granting the New York Giants the Super Bowl. Nominated, and QFT. I forgot there was a reason why Jerome was my favourite presenter of foolish opinions on the forum.
	__________________ - ""My tribe has a saying: 'If you're bleeding, look for a man with scars'" - Leela, Doctor Who 'Robots of Death'.

5th June 2008, 12:55 PM	#34
Pookster Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2007 Location: Southeast USA Posts: 1,790	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor Israel as an American client has been mostly trouble since about 1990. The energy of the pro Israel lobby and sentiment in the US has run into the political reality that nations not particularly in love with Israel have a far greater geostrategic importance to America than Israel. To pretend Israel is as important as NATO is hogwash. ... From a political standpoint, it's far from hogwash. Again, you'll hear nothing substantively different from either candidate. It is an election year.
	Last edited by Pookster; 5th June 2008 at 01:03 PM.

5th June 2008, 01:33 PM	#35
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 29,313	Originally Posted by Pookster From a political standpoint, it's far from hogwash. Again, you'll hear nothing substantively different from either candidate. It is an election year. I may be exercising wishful thinking, but I think it is high time AIPAC and the other pro Israel lobbyists were exposed to greater scrutiny, along with other lobbyists, and put in their place. This is a fine election year in which to do so. On the more cynical side, your observation of the way politics as usual transpires is generally correct. Obama is allegedly for change. This isn't a good sign that he's sincere, damn the bad luck.
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is some one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton____If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok____ "Your onus is aimed in the wrong direction." -- Cleon__"... they don't make pills for being a self-absorbed twit. --bookitty