On Fri, 2 May 2008 13:11:29 -0700 (PDT), "Richard R. Hershberger"
<rrhersh@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On May 2, 11:59 am, "Richard R. Hershberger" <rrhe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On May 2, 11:26 am, Boron Elgar <boron_el...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Fri, 2 May 2008 07:43:38 -0700 (PDT), "Richard R. Hershberger"
>>
>> > <rrhe...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>> > >What sold me on Obama is that he is acting out of the ordinary. The
>> > >current example is McCain proposes a gas tax holiday. Economists of
>> > >all persuasions point out in small words why this is at best
pointless
>> > >and at worst a very bad idea. Clinton jumps on board with McCain
onto
>> > >the pander wagon. Obama refuses to join them, and instead gives an
>> > >explanation suitable for adults why not. Sure, all he is doing is
>> > >speaking like an adult speaking to another adult, but among
top-level
>> > >politicians this is virtually unheard of. Such behavior should be
>> > >encouraged, even if upon close inspection Obama turns out to be a
mere
>> > >mortal like the rest of us.
>>
>> > >Richard R. Hershberger
>>
>> > Since none of the three candidates could do much to put a fed gas tax
>> > reduction into play by summer, it seems like a game. Besides it isn't
>> > the sort of difference in thinking I'd make a decision upon.
>>
>> > The three differ on a lot of things. Following your reasoning, the
>> > Obama & Clinton heath care plans are similar (are they pandering) and
>> > McCain refuses to go along with them. Does that make McC's plan
>> > better?-
>>
>> Actually, that's pretty much entirely unlike my reasoning. My
>> reasoning is not that if two of them agree on something and the third
>> disagrees, the two must be pandering and the third the honest one. My
>> reasoning is that as intelligent adults we can look at a proposal and
>> judge it on its merits, and we can look at the various candidate's
>> statements about this proposal, and reach rational conclusions from
>> these.
>>
>> Yes, of course the tax holiday is a game. It is blatantly so. McCain
>> and Clinton are in fact in a position to try to push emergency
>> legislation through Congress, if this were a real proposal. They
>> aren't even pretending to do this. It is pure pandering in the hope
>> of gaining short term political game. To put it bluntly, they think
>> that they can persuade a few stupid people to vote for them by openly
>> lying. Obama refuses to do this. This is an objective difference
>> between Obama and the others.
>>
>> Clearly you are less impressed by this than I am, and that is fine.
>> But it is a difference, and I hope that you would agree that it is a
>> difference that reflects well on Obama. This need not mean that it
>> overcomes your other reservations about him, but you are so set in
>> your position that you will not acknowledge anything that mght put
>> Obama in a good light, this effectively means you have nothing to
>> say. Well, you and Binny could chat each other up, I suppose.-
>
>Edit: the penultimate sentence should have read "...but if you are so
>set..."
There is no reason for me to acknowledge that this particular
"decision" reflects well on Obama because I think it is too
insignificant to do so. To say that if I do not accept it as some
watermark or proof of leader****p indicates only that *you* think it is
im****tant.
In case you haven't been looking, voters vary greatly in what they
want from a candidate and "it's the economy, stupid" is high on the
list right now. You may call it pandering, I may think it is a waste
of time and likely dumb for HC to push it (although I am very much in
favor of windfall oil taxes), but there are people out there with whom
this resonates. It's a hot button issue, no one gets killed if it goes
into effect , the great unwashed, who do not think too deeply about
such things, are very happy, just like they are starting to be with
all those silly tax rebate checks that are going out. Bread and
circuses are well proven. I am not advocating for them, personally,
but it is true.
My political decisions are not going to be made about where a
candidate stands on a gas tax rollback over the summer. Really, I have
more im****tant issues to consider. You are quite welcome, though, to
make it the keystone of your own decision-making. Whatever rocks your
boat.
Now, the man on the stand he wants my vote
He's a-runnin' for office on the ballot note
He's out there preachin' in front of the steeple
Tellin' me he loves all kinds-a people
(He's eatin' bagels
He's eatin' pizza
He's eatin' chitlins).
I haven't found anything in Obama that I like other than his good
looks and sonorous voice. I think he is a bull****er, a very typical
politician, ***ist in his direct dealings with/about Clinton, and
those things ARE very im****tant to me. And I am entitled to feel that
way and to come to those conclusions and it does not make me a bad
person, or a stubborn one or anything less than the carefully thinking
researcher that I am.
I am tired of being told I must find good in Obama for whatever
reasons or there is something wrong with me, or that I must vote for
him in November or there is something wrong with me.. I am tired of
being called a racist for not sup****ting him, called old for not
sup****ting him, and called any number of other things because I am not
on the bandwagon. The very idea that *any* of this occurs (afca is not
my whole life, remember) should indicate to you that this Obama thing
has adulation/American Idol/Jesus Christ Superstar tied into it.
I do not think Obama is electable. I can't stand her politics, but I
think Clinton is. That woman has had **** thrown at her for over 20
years and there is nothing the right can dig up that she hasn't had to
defend herself against already. They haven;'t even spit in their hands
and picked up the shovels yet for Obama's **** pile. T
I am not sure to what you refer when you mention Binny, as I have
him in the KF, but I assume it isn't nice.
Boron
|
