Sat, 06/14/2008 - 10:54pm — vastleft
Our standard-bearer makes a rather amazing rookie mistake, promising that "Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel -- and it must remain undivided."
As lefties go, I'm relatively sympathetic to Israel's interests (if not its religious underpinnings). But moving the capital to Jerusalem was a very provocative act, which keeps paying dividends of offense, and thus a pledge like this is provocative, as well.
A round of W.O.R.M.
followed, of course, but this is another unforced error caused by pandering.
I continue to wait for Obama to trust his legendary talent for persuasion more, as well as trusting that the American people are ready for real change, and not the ol' triangulation.
Trust the force, Barack!
»
- vastleft's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
I thought he had some of Bill's best former
advisers. I suppose it IS the candidate that makes the difference. Doh!
Clinton made the same promise
it is really upsetting because according to the Camp David Treaty the status of Jerusalem is to be left to future negotiation. To recognize Jerusalem as the capital is to break the Camp David Treaty.
DOH is Right
And there are 57 states plus 2 not visited which somehow count only as one. New politics. New math.
Obama had no clue regarding the Roberts nomination. He felt that Roberts was intelligent but never gave a thought to what Roberts might do on the bench. The Rosetta Stone.
A picture of a very narrow individual. I do not detect 'brilliance.'
What a spectacle for 2008, a contest between tweedle dumb and tweedle dumb.
We are so screwed.
"Rookie mistake"?
B-b-but, how is this possible?
Reporter to Mahatma Gandhi: What do you think of Western Civilization?
Gandhi to reporter: I think it would be a good idea.
Is this what they call
Is this what they call 'on-the-job-training'???
Because of this, I finally got my Obamanation friend to admit...
that Barry wasn't experienced.
After a lengthy discussion (what, me harrangue someone?? never!) it was more in the manner of a grudging,
"Okay, fine, he's not experienced!"
This was immediately followed by the roundhouse deflection:
"But that's what we need right now, fresh perspectives! Not the same old same old."
as my jewish grand aunt used to say, "oy"
dupager
dupager
he was pandering-badly-
why is it he's so awkward with Jews and women and Hispanics and so many other groups, but not at all with rightwing religious nuts and haters?
Elective affinities
He feels connected and comfortable with the latter but not so much with the former.
Go Global!
that what i fear, and it's not a plus--
Mr. Unity
is really awful at making connections and reassuring and selling himself to so many groups--and at the same time so many supporters of his think he believes as they do--it's weird, and it's a skill he should learned immediately--or learned to fake better.
And he does not seem to know how to adapt
or change course. It's the same stuff over and over again. So, he already has his base but is incapable to broaden it, either because he's too arrogant to think he needs to make changes, or he just does not know any other routine.
Go Global!
As a reluctant Obama supporter
I feel honor-bound to criticize these unforced errors. Someone has to step up and get him to lose the grandstanding and pandering.
He will win handily if he does, and he will able to preside with a mandate. If he doesn't clean up his act, he could blow it in a year that should be a cakewalk.
here's something i wish ppl would
take a look at--his refusal to grandstand, pander--or even show up at Gay Pride in Chicago---ever. (and no pics with Newsome of SF, etc...)
http://hillbuzz.blogspot.com/2008/06/day...
(even Rudy marched every year when he was Mayor here -- for a few token blocks only, with booing and protests, but he showed up for us--it matters)
Clearly, he has his own variation of Lambert's...
"And we get...?"
It's not unique among politicians, who make all kinds of calculated decisions to curry favor with those who give them the most leverage (and who frequently ignore or even shun those who don't). But it's certainly not transcendent.
It's clear he's made his choice of
whom he considers his base: the religious right or the LGBT community.
AFAIC, he made the wrong choice. Hillary got that one right.
LGBT issues = gender issues = feminist issues = progressive issues. Obama's not there on any of these. Hillary may not have been our dream progressive candidate but at least she "got it".
Go Global!
That's been clear for quite some time
http://www.correntewire.com/illinoise
And to give credit where it is due, CD beat me to the punch:
http://www.correntewire.com/buh_bye_barak
NYT says he's like Dubya--
very very interesting piece-- Obama the Delegator Picks When to Take Reins
"... a challenge that he has not faced in his career: managing a large organization.
The skill will become more important should he win the presidency, and his style is getting added attention as the country absorbs the lessons of President Bush’s tenure in the Oval Office. Mr. Bush’s critics, including former aides, have portrayed him as too cloistered, too dependent on a small coterie of trusted aides, unable to distinguish between loyalty and competence, and insufficiently willing to adjust course in the face of events that do not unfold the way he expects.
Mr. Obama’s style so far is marked by an aversion to leaks and public drama and his selection of a small group of advisers who have exhibited discipline and loyalty in carrying out his priorities. ..."
now he's more involved, apparently, but until PA, he was simply a puppet, i guess...so Johnson, the religious right meeting, and I/P stuff are his decisions?
not good--his chief priorities are the words...
"... If a presidential campaign is intended to be a test-run for the presidency, his chief priorities are the words in his speeches, messages in his television advertising and policy pronouncements. On other matters, even if he disagrees, he often allows himself to be overruled. ..."
"Nearly all information is funneled to him"
"... aides say how well he reads the (policy) materials may depend on what is on ESPN. ..."
The words are too often doubletalk
He's got my vote, but I'm not going to defend or ignore his say-everything stuff:
http://www.correntewire.com/the_audaciou...
To the extent anyone pays attention to one blogger on a C-list progressive group blog, I hope to influence him to run a better campaign as soon and as much as possible.
Yes, I know that some would prefer that I lie and not admit that I'm voting for the Dem this fall. But, AFAIK, I am.
Nonetheless, I'm continuing to speak what I see as the truth, and my desire for Obama to find and listen to his better angels.
It's not puppy love, it's not capitulation, and it's not identity politics. I want him to be one more Democrat in office, and a better one than he's shown himself to be thus far.
i'm glad--but
can you truly say which and what are his better angels? What is truly his? (and not Axelrod rewarming Dubya 1999, etc?)
this, for instance, is beyond shiver-worthy--"...The conservative legal scholar Douglas Kmiec has endorsed Mr. Obama, as have both the economic adviser to Newt Gingrich’s “Contract With America,” Lawrence Hunter, and the neocon historian Francis Fukuyama. ... " -- http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/15/opinio...
We all, one hopes, have better angels
Metaphorically speaking, that is.
yup--but what are his?
we've been learning which aren't, and which priorities are not his, etc ... but not the opposite, since his behavior and policy proposals never match his (lofty, better angel) rhetoric.