future battle = futile battle

Posted at June 30, 2008 2:03 PM in response to Obama Campaign Condemns Wes Clark's Comments About McCain

Wes Clark made an academic argument. I personally don't totally buy it myself. I think commanding an air wing is legitmage experience. My problem with McCain are the policies he wants. This was inartful at best. Stop being so fickle, this small battle was lost the minute Clark opened his mouth. The question is do you want to live to fight another day, or do you go down in a blaze of glory arguing this future battle. Obama wants to win the war, not make internet posters happy every minute.

Posted at June 30, 2008 2:02 PM in response to Obama Campaign Condemns Wes Clark's Comments About McCain

There's no benefit to Obama in defending Clark's formulation. It's tortured logic, has a ton of holes in it, besides it being a political minefield. Its totally unnecessary, McCain's foreign policy ideas are the problem, not whether his military experience passes some sort of magical threshold of experience.

Posted at June 30, 2008 1:15 PM in response to Obama Campaign Condemns Wes Clark's Comments About McCain

In defense of Hillary, the opposite is true of well. This is true of McCain. His criticisms of his rivals, and theirs (which have been pointed out on TPM) don't paint a pretty picture. This would have been true whether Hillary got out early or later. What's important though, is that Hillary is eventually out there on the stump and in the media backing Obama.

Posted at June 19, 2008 2:36 PM in response to GOP Recycles Hillary Attacks On Obama Again -- This Time On Campaign Finance

Avoiding all the Obama haters here, I'll echo what others have said. He should have tried to stay out of the primary. I'm sure he was leaned on hard by Barrow, considering he endorsed him when his nomination was not certain. Barrow will owe him. Anyone thinking ANY presidential candidate would have actively sought to unseat incumbents is living in fantasy land.

Posted at June 19, 2008 1:23 PM in response to Obama Cuts Ad For Conservative Pro-War House Dem

As a progressive, I don't like it. I wish he would push every bluedog out of Congress. But really, imagine if he were to try that. Imagine if word got out to the House and Senate members, that if you don't follow what the progressive line, Obama is going to actively try to unseat you. I could only imagine the uproar, and when Obama is President, he would get nothing done. Not to mention that him supporting the challenger may not even work. And then how would he look?

Posted at June 19, 2008 12:26 PM in response to Obama Cuts Ad For Conservative Pro-War House Dem

I think we all know that once this is over, Hillary will deny ever having done anything, and will be the biggest Obama booster there is. One thing about her, she will not hesitate to change her tone on a dime.

Posted at May 22, 2008 12:50 PM in response to Wolfson: Even If Florida And Michigan Aren't Seated, An Obama Victory Would Be Legit

OK, at this moment in time, Clinton is stronger in three swing states. If only the Democratic party nominated candidates based on polls of three states!!! No doubt Clinton has an advantage in some important states (as does Obama), but this has no bearing on the direction of this nomination. He's won it, maybe it says she has to be VP, but she' not going to win the nomination. Is anyone willing to place a bet on that? (if thats legal of course :P) He's much closer in Florida than I would have guessed, the one that concerns me more is Ohio, since he's compaigned there. Yes, Hillary is a strong candidate, but so is Obama. Maybe the DNC should change the rules and allow the candidate who polls better on May 22 to receieve the nomination.

Posted at May 22, 2008 10:28 AM in response to Polls: Hillary Outperforms Obama Against McCain In Three Key Swing States

Obama's discussion position is easily discernable. Preconditions are requiring specific behaviors or acts from a country as a prerequisite JUST to talk. Preparations involve lower level talks, getting together the agenda, working out issues that may be solved at lower levels, gaining knowledge of who you're dealing with, who has the real power, all sorts of things. What Obama is saying, is that he will talk face to face with leaders, without requiring a country to acquiesce to our demands beforehand (which they won’t do anyway). It’s pretty simple really.

Posted at May 19, 2008 2:43 PM in response to Obama Responds To McCain: "Strong" Presidents Aren't Afraid To Meet With Enemies

Flufferwink, you have a good point. But before a reporter goes to "press", they could research. With the internet its not that hard. The series of tubes has answers for everything.

Posted at April 25, 2008 4:59 PM in response to Obama: National Journal Rating Of Me As "Number One Liberal" Is Bogus