<p>yellowdog:</p>
<p>Waste your effort on somebody else. I’m not voting for Obama in November. End of story.</p>
<p>
tega, you are aware, aren’t you, that the Republicans under Bush2, Bush1, and Reagan all increased the national debt in comparison with the GDP, more than doubling it by that measure? While every other president since WWII, Republican and Democrat, managed to finish his term with the debt representing a smaller share of the economy than when he took office? Frankly, I see absolutely nothing “fiscally conservative” about mindlessly demanding “low taxes.” Taxes have to be high enough to pay the bills - period. The profligacy of the Republican party can be traced to its “voodoo economics” mentality that cutting taxes is all you have to do, and voila - the sun will come out, tomorrow… </p>
<p>Except it doesn’t work. We’ve borrowed trillions to paper over the consequences of Reagan/Bush/Bush fiscal irresponsibility. And now we have to raise taxes just to pay the interest on the debt the Republicans have run up over the past 30 years, running harder every day just to stay in the same place.</p>
<p>Don’t be a sucker. Don’t buy the “free lunch” promises of the Republicans. They’re not “fiscal conservatives” anymore. They’re just snake oil salesmen with good PR men.</p>
<p>I don’t dispute that Republicans paid only lip service to fiscal conservativeness, esp. GWB. The scary part is Democrats don’t even bother, as if every solution to a problem is put more money into it. There is a philosophical as well as practical difference between the parties. I always think it’s the GWB supporters who are let down by him, I hope when Obama becomes president he is not going to let his enthusiastic supporters down.</p>
<p>
You say that, but the actual facts say otherwise… the last time we had a democrat in the white house we managed to take an inherited deficit and turn it around into a ballanced budget and eventually even produce a surplus to start paying down our nation’s debt. Now the strategy has returned to the same old “free lunch” politics of cutting taxes and taking out loans from China to make up the difference.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oooops, I forgot Bill Clinton, but he seems to be out of favor now along with his kind of policies. Who knows, maybe Obama’s policies will be closer to BC , I don’t think so however.</p>
<p>
Of course you’re not, I-dad. After all - “Nobody talks, everybody walks” right? ;)</p>
<p>Rocketman,</p>
<p>You mention that no one should vote for a woman simply because Hillary is a woman. First of all, Hillary is not just a woman. She is by far the best female candidate we women have seen come this far for a long time. She may remain to be the only female candidate that came this far for a long time to come as well.</p>
<p>I think she is an amazing woman and would have done a superb job! Perhaps why all the grey haired, powerful politico men tried to edge her out; namely Christ Dodd, Kennedy, Richardson… to name a few. This list goes on and on, actually. </p>
<p>Everyone has a right to vote for whoever they like for any single or all of the reasons they deem vital to them. Who knows? If McCain selects Bobby Jindhal as a VP, I can assure you that all of us South Asians (Indians) will come out in throngs to vote for this ticket!</p>
<p>Interestedad, please read the NY Times piece of January 20, 2008 (title listed
Op-Ed Columnist: Hillary, Barack, Experience about this big myth about “experience”. It correctly notes that some of the WORST presidents in history had the most experience and the best with very little political experience. I had many older women friends who feel passionately about Hillary and I totally understand this and don’t think it’s motivated by race. However that are many other people who are totally motivated by racial fears and ignorance. Wright and all of these other people are totally irrelevant. They are just convienient excuses not to vote for someone they had no plans to vote for in the first place. I was just listening to the news and heard how many racist comments and messages have been sent into the Obama offices. Thank God there many people in this country who have moved beyond the Klan mentality of the 1950s. I understand that Obama’s nomination have brought high praise around the world and signals a turning point in America’s racist history. My daughter took part in an international camp a few years ago and she said one of the exercises the kids had was to say what one knew and thought about one another’s countries. She said she was struck how often one of the views of the US to kids from around the world was “racist”. You can’t blame this view on Jeremiah Wright. It appears that other folks around the globe are well aware of this history as well.</p>
<p>Of course I will vote for Obama, and I hope Hillary is on the ticket. I am a Democrat first, and proud of it. Everything else comes after that. I felt a sense of loss that there won’t be a woman in the Oval Office, but then I had tears in my eyes over the prospect of the first African American president. Either way, it’s history, and it’s been a very, very long time coming.</p>
<p>Impw,</p>
<p>Barack not being favored by many older female voters is not because he is black. It’s because he is too ‘green’!</p>
<p>I love the idea of a female president, however I do not think that HRC is liberal enough. The more I hear her speak, the more convinced I became that this was not the right choice.</p>
<p>Barack actually has more legislative experience than Hillary, if you count his years in the Illinois state legislature. “First Lady” is not an elective office, and if it is a measure of “experience” then I suppose you could expect the GOP to nominate Laura Bush the next time around – but the bottom line is that Obama has held elective office continuously since 1997, 4 years longer than Hillary has.</p>
<p>
I wouldn’t disagree with that… but I’m still not going to vote for her (or any other candidate) if I think someone else on the ballot is likely to do a better job. </p>
<p>I have nothing against Hillary and am glad to have her in the Senate and in our party… I just thought that she wasn’t the best person for the job. The best thing that the democratic Hillary supporters can do now is support the party (and hopefully soon Hillary) in supporting Barack for president.</p>
<p>Finally, to those crying foul that we didn’t select a woman for a nominee let’s not forget that we DID select an African-American as our nominee… something that equally represents a major step forward for the party and our country.</p>
<p>Geezermom —</p>
<h2>“I felt a sense of loss that there won’t be a woman in the Oval Office, but then I had tears in my eyes over the prospect of the first African American president. Either way, it’s history, and it’s been a very, very long time coming.”</h2>
<p>I share your sentiments exactly!! </p>
<p>I prefer Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama because I think she is better qualified to be President. My daughters were so excited at the prospect of a woman president and are disappointed that Obama will be the party’s nominee. I would never vote for someone solely based on gender or race and you would never see me supporting Condoleeza Rice for President. You’d also never see me happy about a Supreme Court justice such as Clarence Thomas. </p>
<p>I’m glad that all the states were permitted to participate in a meaningful primary election. I’m tired of all of the personal attacks that occurred during the primary. We were split amongst Obama (my husband preferred him) and Clinton in my immediate family and in my extended family. (My 85 year old mother and many of my siblings and their spouses preferred Obama.) We are now all prepared to vote and support Obama as the Democratic nominee in the general election. </p>
<p>In my opinion a vote for McCain is a vote to sustain the Bush legacy: increased global aggression, failed international relations, and failed economic policies. A vote for the same-old, same-old. We’ve failed our children in the areas of housing, education, health-care, and yes, National Security. On a personal level it would be easy to vote for McCain because he has personality, surely is intelligent, and definitely can play better in the sandbox with others than our present leader. I don’t think, however, he’ll be able to improve the economy and I do think that he will aggressively expand the current military surge to other locations. Our economy is in a sorry state… McCain won’t make it better.</p>
<p>I think maybe that Hillary would be a good Secretary of State…and I would love to see her as the VP candidate although my choice would be to see her as the Presidential candidate.</p>
<p>If being female is reason enough alone to vote for the female candidate, then being a male is a valid enough reason alone to vote for the male candidate.</p>
<p>It’s nonsense of course!</p>
<p>Don’t these old scolds yet realize why they lost? No, and I think they never will.</p>
<p>/ If you are an Obama supporter, please do not post on this thread. /</p>
<p>I don’t think you can specify who you want to get replies from. If you are soliciting opinions only from certain group, aren’t you directing what responses you get, plus isn’t there some forum rules against this ?</p>
<p>Part of the Terms of Service here is being welcoming to other participants.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think McCain will be different, I believe he is the only fiscal conservative among the current bunch of Republicans. His stance on pork barrel gives me hope. I am not supporting the Republican Party, but I think I am willing to give McCain a chance.</p>
<p>Pharmagal, I know quite a few Indians who hate Bobby Jindal and would never vote for him. One of them is even from Louisiana. Apparently Jindal converted to Christianity, something that isn’t well received in the Hindu community.</p>
<p>But I agree with your point- you have every right to vote for Hillary simply because she is a woman. Men have every right to vote against her for the same reason. Blacks have the right to vote for Obama just because he is (half) black. Whites have the right to vote for ‘Anybody but Obama’ for the same reason. </p>
<p>Luckily for our country, most Americans are more open minded than that. That is why we have a (half) black nominee.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cuz making the tax cuts permanent (a total 180 degree turn, btw) would do wonders for the budget deficit.</p>
<p>And let’s not forget, McCain’s economic “guru” is none other than Phil Gramm - the person who helped deregulate the commodities and mortgage industries - resulting in Enron and the mortgage mess/bubble.</p>