[FoRK] How Barack lost my vote forever

geege schuman <geege4 at gmail.com> on Thu Apr 24 06:40:11 PDT 2008

That's a good point.  And Obama's the only candidate with the cajones (or
ovaries) to stand up to Bush.  We could use a leader here, not someone who
plays the politics of expedience.


On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Jeff Bone <jbone at place.org> wrote:

> On Apr 23, 2008, at 4:24 PM, Luis Villa wrote:
>  All of which he buckled under on. (The failure to stand up for himself
>> But lets not pull the wool over our eyes- he may be decent and
>> honorable, but on every significant issue of the past six years, when
>> push came to shove, he buckled under and (typically) became an active
>> cheerleader. 'He was a decent guy who was just following orders' only
>> gets you so far when we're talking about a war that has cost
>> trillions, killed more Americans than 9/11, killed (at a minimum) 80K
>> Iraqis, alienated the entire world. And that's just the war; he's
>> offered up only token resistance on the budget, the environment, etc.;
>> actively campaigned for Bush in '04, etc. (Hillary did pretty much all
>> these things except campaign for Bush in '04, which is part of why I'd
>> have to consider voting for him.) A McCain presidency will be more
>> reasonable than a Bush presidency, but not by much.
> Disagreed.  ANY presidency w/o the theocrats and the neocons will be far
> more reasonable than Bush II, and I don't see either group having much
> affinity for McCain or vice-versa.    If the election is a referendum on the
> war, then sure, Obama's your man.  OTOH, I think you're confusing anti-Bush
> and anti-war sentiment ("campaigned for Bush" --- well hell, what do you
> expect, that was part of the dues-paying process) w/ real assessment of
> policy prospects.  But that's your prerogative.
> jb
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

More information about the FoRK mailing list