Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -7.12 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.64
Pretty stupid and poorly worded. Sometimes the statements were worded as positives, sometimes negatives. They know where Stalin and Ghandi stood on abstract art?
On the other hand it probably pegged me about where I should be for purposes of this discussion.
no, but the thought that Motown's stupid 2/3 plagiarized article has now been rendered irrelevant by the irrefutable progress in Iraq, to the point where even he doesn't bother to update it, sure does. The irony of the "not accepting the reality of the situation" argument is just to sweet.
I know you don't really care one way or another, but please...
You may remember Vita. He argued early on that the war would lead to the democratisation of the Mid East and the end of terrorism. Plus he argued as the worlds loan super power it was up to us to kick some but and let the world know we were in charge. We now have the worse situation ever for American interest in the Mid East and the rest of the world. Pakistan's nukes are up for grabs, we are losing Afganistan, our influence in the Arab world has dropped to zero, East Africa is in chaos...
So tell me again about this irrefutable progress, because I missed it.
I just want to say that I'm not mad at any one for supporting Ron Paul or Hillary, or even one of them other guys.
There have been a lot of misinfo here and hate. No need, lets just lay our bets on the caucus to night and vote next week and see what happens.
I will address one thing. I'm pretty sure that MLK never endorsed a canidate or worked for a party. Maybe someone would like to go to smokingun or something and check that.
I understand the appeal of a guy who is opposed to federal power. But when I think about what the country needs, he ain't offering it. I'm surprised that our most outspoken libertarian is not supporting RP. I'm guessing he's a little to practicle.
if by "responding" you mean saying a lot of empty "end of the world" platitudes that dont really mean anything and are not based on any facts, then yes, you did.
if by "responding" you mean saying a lot of empty "end of the world" platitudes that dont really mean anything and are not based on any facts, then yes, you did.
Not the end of the world. The end of Republican rule.
if by "responding" you mean saying a lot of empty "end of the world" platitudes that dont really mean anything and are not based on any facts, then yes, you did.
Not the end of the world. The end of Republican rule.
KVH (or anyone else)......Please inform us all who the 2-3 true "Black leaders" are in the U.S. in 2008???
This is the third time I've asked this question on the Strut and have yet to get an answer.
If Barack is NOT a "black leader" (as KVH stated) who the heck is??
And I mean someone who more than a fringe element has ever heard of.
Please, this is a serious question.
I don't know how many national black leaders there are because the media doesn't give black issues that much attention. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have had enough national support to launch presidential campaigns. Bill Cosby is not a politician but a social leader and he certainly has national credentials.
My guess is that on a local level, the black mayors, state senators, and congressmen are much more influential, as are the black clergy, who might trump everyone in terms of influence.
btw, the issue is not that Obama is not a Black leader, its that he easily could be, but chooses not to speak directly to african americans in his national speeches, or in debates or campaign ads. To me, that totally takes away from any progress he would be making as the first Black president.
If on one hand, as deej points out, Barack continually talks about his roots and achievements while facing the obstacles of racism....well, how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
btw, the issue is not that Obama is not a Black leader, its that he easily could be, but chooses not to speak directly to african americans in his national speeches, or in debates or campaign ads. To me, that totally takes away from any progress he would be making as the first Black president.
If on one hand, as deej points out, Barack continually talks about his roots and achievements while facing the obstacles of racism....well, how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
wtf are you talking about?
obama has the best shot of becoming the first black prez, right? that will be historic because of the obstacles blacks have faced...and still face. yet, obama doesn't talk to black people, like he talks to the middle class working family, or parents of kids in iraq, or various other specific groups. when have you EVER heard Barack direct a message to any part of the black community????
btw, the issue is not that Obama is not a Black leader, its that he easily could be, but chooses not to speak directly to african americans in his national speeches, or in debates or campaign ads. To me, that totally takes away from any progress he would be making as the first Black president.
If on one hand, as deej points out, Barack continually talks about his roots and achievements while facing the obstacles of racism....well, how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
the blackest man on soulstrut is not amused at your comments.
how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
wtf are you talking about?
obama has the best shot of becoming the first black prez, right? that will be historic because of the obstacles blacks have faced...and still face. yet, obama doesn't talk to black people, like he talks to the middle class working family, or parents of kids in iraq, or various other specific groups. when have you EVER heard Barack direct a message to any part of the black community????
There's an article in last week's Nation on just this topic, suggesting that he felt that he had the black vote wrapped up and was ignoring em on the campaign trail. However, once they crunched some numbers and found lots of states where black voters favored Clinton and/or Edwards, he reversed this strategy and in some states speaks to majority black crowds.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
wtf are you talking about?
obama has the best shot of becoming the first black prez, right? that will be historic because of the obstacles blacks have faced...and still face. yet, obama doesn't talk to black people, like he talks to the middle class working family, or parents of kids in iraq, or various other specific groups. when have you EVER heard Barack direct a message to any part of the black community????
You really have to be kidding with this bullshit. Again, please stop.
btw, the issue is not that Obama is not a Black leader, its that he easily could be, but chooses not to speak directly to african americans in his national speeches, or in debates or campaign ads. To me, that totally takes away from any progress he would be making as the first Black president.
If on one hand, as deej points out, Barack continually talks about his roots and achievements while facing the obstacles of racism....well, how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
He's not trying to be a Black leader. He's trying to be America's leader. America is only approximately 12.9% Black according to the 2000 census.
As for the progress he would make being the first Black president, I believe that would be best served by simply being the most effective executive he can be for the entirety of his constituents.
Or, to look at it another way, the rough estimate of the gay population is around 10%, right? If a gay man were running for president, do you think it would be more effective for him to address gay issues on the campaign trail or say, the war in Iraq and the failing economy? And would it be less beneficial to the gay community if he simply addressed the problems facing the nation while in office rather than focusing on gay issues?
btw, the issue is not that Obama is not a Black leader, its that he easily could be, but chooses not to speak directly to african americans in his national speeches, or in debates or campaign ads. To me, that totally takes away from any progress he would be making as the first Black president.
If on one hand, as deej points out, Barack continually talks about his roots and achievements while facing the obstacles of racism....well, how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
He's not trying to be a Black leader. He's trying to be America's leader. America is only approximately 12.9% Black according to the 2000 census.
As for the progress he would make being the first Black president, I believe that would be best served by simply being the most effective executive he can be for the entirety of his constituents.
Or, to look at it another way, the rough estimate of the gay population is around 10%, right? If a gay man were running for president, do you think it would be more effective for him to address gay issues on the campaign trail or say, the war in Iraq and the failing economy? And would it be less beneficial to the gay community if he simply addressed the problems facing the nation while in office rather than focusing on gay issues?
This is what Special Interest Group mentality has done to our country.
There's an article in last week's Nation on just this topic, suggesting that he felt that he had the black vote wrapped up and was ignoring em on the campaign trail. However, once they crunched some numbers and found lots of states where black voters favored Clinton and/or Edwards, he reversed this strategy and in some states speaks to majority black crowds.
thats what i'm talking about. first, i think its telling that he's strategic in when he speaks to black crowds, but second, and more importantly, i'd bet that even in these speeches he is just delivering his general messages and not talking to them directly. i'd like to read one.
I don't buy the gay candidate or even female candidate analogy, its not the same thing, and even if we were to draw the analogy, how outrageous would it be to have a gay candidate in '08 who didn't speak about same sex marriages, gays in the military, etc?
There's an article in last week's Nation on just this topic, suggesting that he felt that he had the black vote wrapped up and was ignoring em on the campaign trail.
you could say this about Democratic candidates in general, no?
There's an article in last week's Nation on just this topic, suggesting that he felt that he had the black vote wrapped up and was ignoring em on the campaign trail. However, once they crunched some numbers and found lots of states where black voters favored Clinton and/or Edwards, he reversed this strategy and in some states speaks to majority black crowds.
thats what i'm talking about. first, i think its telling that he's strategic in when he speaks to black crowds, but second, and more importantly, i'd bet that even in these speeches he is just delivering his general messages and not talking to them directly. i'd like to read one.
I don't buy the gay candidate or even female candidate analogy, its not the same thing, and even if we were to draw the analogy, how outrageous would it be to have a gay candidate in '08 who didn't speak about same sex marriages, gays in the military, etc?
He's very aware that if he's perceived as "too black" -- "pro-black," "anti-white, "militant," etc -- he's not in the race; he's catering to those people in the country who would'nt vote for Jesse but might vote for Colin Powell (which probably describes millions of white voters).
In other words, he's strategic about being aware of the racism that still exists in this country and navigating that racism -- which is smart. He wouldn't be where he is if he wasn't being strategic.
There's an article in last week's Nation on just this topic, suggesting that he felt that he had the black vote wrapped up and was ignoring em on the campaign trail. However, once they crunched some numbers and found lots of states where black voters favored Clinton and/or Edwards, he reversed this strategy and in some states speaks to majority black crowds.
thats what i'm talking about. first, i think its telling that he's strategic in when he speaks to black crowds, but second, and more importantly, i'd bet that even in these speeches he is just delivering his general messages and not talking to them directly. i'd like to read one.
no, but the thought that Motown's stupid 2/3 plagiarized article has now been rendered irrelevant by the irrefutable progress in Iraq, to the point where even he doesn't bother to update it, sure does. The irony of the "not accepting the reality of the situation" argument is just to sweet.
You mean "irrefutable progress" like this?
Iraq's leaders agree on key benchmarks By Waleed Ibrahim and Wisam Mohammed Sun Aug 26, 6:27 PM ET
BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq's top Shi'ite, Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders announced on Sunday they had reached consensus on some key measures seen as vital to fostering national reconciliation.
i know this must be a big bummer for you motown, especially since this was all going on at the very same time that you were drafting up you 10,000 word essay on how it wasn't. Don't let these things you get you down, and keep the dream (of failure) a live. I'm sure there will be a big suicide bomb to buck up your spirits in a day or two.
Since you posted that article 4 1/2 months ago the Iraqi government has come through with zero of what it promised. It introduced a new debaathification law after the old one got scrapped. Neither has been passed. There are no plans for new local elections, no increase in hiring of Sunnis into the government, and no Iraqi release of prisoners.
Or do you mean this kind of "irrefutable progress"?
The Sun Online Nov. 20, 2007
Road From Damascus
Iraqis are voting with their feet by returning home after exile The figures are hard to estimate precisely but the process could involve hundreds of thousands of people. The numbers are certainly large enough, as we report today, for a mass convoy to be planned next week as Iraqis who had opted for exile in Syria return to their homeland. It is one of the most striking signs that not only has violence in Baghdad and adjacent provinces decreased dramatically in recent months, but confidence in the economic and political future of Iraq has risen sharply. Nor is this movement the action of men and women who could easily reverse course and turn back again. Tighter visa restrictions imposed by Damascus mean that those who are returning to Iraq cannot assume that they could quickly retreat again to Syria if that suited them. This is, for many, a one-way decision. It represents a vote of confidence in Iraq.
There are 1.5 million Iraqi refugees in Syria. "Hundreds of thousands" have not returned. Not even the Iraqi government that was cooking the numbers on returnees was brazen enough to make that kind of claim. Since September 2007 about 25,000 Iraqis have come back, that's only 1.6%. They're coming back because they're out of money and Syria wants them out. That's a real "vote of conidence in Iraq."
When you actually know something about Iraq and give a rats ass about it other than to wave the flag once a month, talk shit and claim victory let us all know.
Comments
Economic Left/Right: -7.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.64
Pretty stupid and poorly worded. Sometimes the statements were worded as positives, sometimes negatives. They know where Stalin and Ghandi stood on abstract art?
On the other hand it probably pegged me about where I should be for purposes of this discussion.
I know you don't really care one way or another, but please...
You may remember Vita. He argued early on that the war would lead to the democratisation of the Mid East and the end of terrorism. Plus he argued as the worlds loan super power it was up to us to kick some but and let the world know we were in charge. We now have the worse situation ever for American interest in the Mid East and the rest of the world. Pakistan's nukes are up for grabs, we are losing Afganistan, our influence in the Arab world has dropped to zero, East Africa is in chaos...
So tell me again about this irrefutable progress, because I missed it.
I just want to say that I'm not mad at any one for supporting Ron Paul or Hillary, or even one of them other guys.
There have been a lot of misinfo here and hate. No need, lets just lay our bets on the caucus to night and vote next week and see what happens.
I will address one thing. I'm pretty sure that MLK never endorsed a canidate or worked for a party. Maybe someone would like to go to smokingun or something and check that.
I understand the appeal of a guy who is opposed to federal power. But when I think about what the country needs, he ain't offering it. I'm surprised that our most outspoken libertarian is not supporting RP. I'm guessing he's a little to practicle.
if by "responding" you mean saying a lot of empty "end of the world" platitudes that dont really mean anything and are not based on any facts, then yes, you did.
Not the end of the world. The end of Republican rule.
lol. dont count on it.
This is the third time I've asked this question on the Strut and have yet to get an answer.
If Barack is NOT a "black leader" (as KVH stated) who the heck is??
And I mean someone who more than a fringe element has ever heard of.
Please, this is a serious question.
That we can expect the witch burnings to commence directly following the inauguration.
I don't know how many national black leaders there are because the media doesn't give black issues that much attention. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have had enough national support to launch presidential campaigns. Bill Cosby is not a politician but a social leader and he certainly has national credentials.
My guess is that on a local level, the black mayors, state senators, and congressmen are much more influential, as are the black clergy, who might trump everyone in terms of influence.
If on one hand, as deej points out, Barack continually talks about his roots and achievements while facing the obstacles of racism....well, how he can also choose to willfully ignore those obstacles that are facing other Blacks while on the campaign trail.
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!
wtf are you talking about?
obama has the best shot of becoming the first black prez, right? that will be historic because of the obstacles blacks have faced...and still face. yet, obama doesn't talk to black people, like he talks to the middle class working family, or parents of kids in iraq, or various other specific groups. when have you EVER heard Barack direct a message to any part of the black community????
the blackest man on soulstrut is not amused at your comments.
There's an article in last week's Nation on just this topic, suggesting that he felt that he had the black vote wrapped up and was ignoring em on the campaign trail. However, once they crunched some numbers and found lots of states where black voters favored Clinton and/or Edwards, he reversed this strategy and in some states speaks to majority black crowds.
You really have to be kidding with this bullshit. Again, please stop.
He's not trying to be a Black leader. He's trying to be America's leader. America is only approximately 12.9% Black according to the 2000 census.
As for the progress he would make being the first Black president, I believe that would be best served by simply being the most effective executive he can be for the entirety of his constituents.
Or, to look at it another way, the rough estimate of the gay population is around 10%, right? If a gay man were running for president, do you think it would be more effective for him to address gay issues on the campaign trail or say, the war in Iraq and the failing economy? And would it be less beneficial to the gay community if he simply addressed the problems facing the nation while in office rather than focusing on gay issues?
if anything he's a little too vague & inspirational across-the-board
This is what Special Interest Group mentality has done to our country.
thats what i'm talking about. first, i think its telling that he's strategic in when he speaks to black crowds, but second, and more importantly, i'd bet that even in these speeches he is just delivering his general messages and not talking to them directly. i'd like to read one.
I don't buy the gay candidate or even female candidate analogy, its not the same thing, and even if we were to draw the analogy, how outrageous would it be to have a gay candidate in '08 who didn't speak about same sex marriages, gays in the military, etc?
you could say this about Democratic candidates in general, no?
He's very aware that if he's perceived as "too black" -- "pro-black," "anti-white, "militant," etc -- he's not in the race; he's catering to those people in the country who would'nt vote for Jesse but might vote for Colin Powell (which probably describes millions of white voters).
In other words, he's strategic about being aware of the racism that still exists in this country and navigating that racism -- which is smart. He wouldn't be where he is if he wasn't being strategic.
So what you mean is Obama needs to blacken up?
I picked Romney Edwards.
They are calling it for Huckababy and it looks like Obama might win and Clinton might get third.
I am ready to announce my support for Obama.
We are supporting the same candidate. You and I are like brothers now.
why do you gotta make it a racial thing
You mean "irrefutable progress" like this?
Since you posted that article 4 1/2 months ago the Iraqi government has come through with zero of what it promised. It introduced a new debaathification law after the old one got scrapped. Neither has been passed. There are no plans for new local elections, no increase in hiring of Sunnis into the government, and no Iraqi release of prisoners.
Or do you mean this kind of "irrefutable progress"?
There are 1.5 million Iraqi refugees in Syria. "Hundreds of thousands" have not returned. Not even the Iraqi government that was cooking the numbers on returnees was brazen enough to make that kind of claim. Since September 2007 about 25,000 Iraqis have come back, that's only 1.6%. They're coming back because they're out of money and Syria wants them out. That's a real "vote of conidence in Iraq."
When you actually know something about Iraq and give a rats ass about it other than to wave the flag once a month, talk shit and claim victory let us all know.