Except Bush wasn’t down then. He had around a 70% approval rating.
It’s one thing to refrain from calling the president a moron, but it’s another entirely to say “I support our president,” when that president just started a war with a nation that we didn’t need to go to war with. If he thought, at the time, that we should have waited and that Bush had made a mistake, he would have said it then. Not a year later when it became more politically expedient
As for saying Bill Clinton took the high road in something, go ahead, pull the other one…
Just because the United States is “Friends” with France doesn’t mean everyone in the US likes French People. The same with the Culinary Unions endorsement of Obama, just because the Bosses support the man doesn’t mean all who work for the Uniion must support him…There are bound to be people who don’t agree with the establishment, it is between you and what you write on that ballot whether or not you vote for the candidate you said you would…Unless they force your hand behind the curtain, no one forces anyone to do anything.
That being said those who caucused for Obama on saturday went there of their own free will. I’m willing to bet most of the Edwards camp will go for Obama after he is finally through. Just like most counted Hillary out before New Hampshire, too many people are speaking waaay to fast and thinking Clinton will sail over Obama. He’s not done by a long shot, further, he could actually pull off the democratic nod if he continues to listen to his advisors.
Captain Amazing, even you must admit your cite is pretty weak. A couple of hearsay stories from people who don’t like Obama, one of which was admittedly a miscommunication. Neither of which actually resulted in anyone not voting. Frankly, if I believed those anecdotes were true and caused by Obama that would be reason enough for me to reject Obama. For the record, I give the same credence to the anecdotes about Hillary supporters suppressing votes by closing stations early, etc.
If so, this should be a pretty easy claim to cite. So do it for us. Show us where Obama praised Reagan’s policies. Show us where he was saying anything other than Reagan had ideas which changed the country. Be sure that whatever you cite as praise hasn’t been said by Clinton herself, otherwise we might call you and her a hypocrite.
My guess is you have only seen the part of the interview that Obama’s supporters have cited. I suggest you read the full transcript, in which he says:
So, they were the party of (bad) ideas. They were once new, under Reagan, now they are old and discredited. Don’t you wish Hillary and Bill hadn’t distorted this so we could be talking about policies and not lies?
Again, cite it for us. Show us what Hillary said and what Obama distorted.
Watching the debate right now, and Obama is calling Hillary on the exact things we’re talking about here. And she’s continuing to distort the truth in her response…
Of course they do, but it’s a question of accuracy, and more importantly, honesty and integrity.
Over the past several elections I’ve wondered why we the voting public are willing to accept dishonesty from our leaders under the umbrella of politics as usual. We pay these people to be public servants and we expect them to lie to us as a matter of course. Why do we tolerate it? Do we really think we can’t demand some integrity? Where is the line drawn? How much dishonesty are we willing to accept? A little political spin is one thing but at some point it becomes a revelation about the persons charecter. That in itself should tell us something about how we should vote. We have an example in the White House now of what kind of consequences we face from tolerating continued dishonesty.
If everybody is using the same dishonest tactics then maybe we need to choose the lesser of available evils. Daniel Ellsberg has said our political system is set up to discourage or corrupt sincere honest public servants. Does it have to be that way? Do we need people like the Clintons whose dishonest tactics are seen as being politically experienced or savvy, or can we use our vote to reward someone trying to change the way our political system functions?
Maybe I’m wrong but it seems to me , so far, that Obama is trying to wage a more honest , real issue focused campaign. IMO if you can’t beat the guy on the issues and have to resort to unethical practices and dishonesty to “win” then you don’t deserve my vote or the job.
Concerning your evidence in post #40. Comon’ you must admit that is pretty feeble especially when compared the reports about the Clinton organizers. No Candidate can control every action of their supporters. I wouldn’t hold any candidate responsible for the bad judgment of a few over zealous supporters. The question is do we see a pattern of dishonesty and unethical behavior coming from the campaign and the candidate. I think in the case of the Clintons we do. In Obamas case I haven’t seen the evidence.
Voters change. Maybe I’m being too idealistic but I’m hoping that enough people have had enough of that type of dishonest BS and are particularly offended by because of the cost of the last seven years of lies.
I think Obama has decided to fight back without using the same dishonest tactics. He challenges the dishonesty openly and will use it to question Hillary’s ability and/or resolve to really bring about meaningful changes.
Why? If Obama is the candidate who you agree with most, why not support him? I don’t have much of a problem with Obama. but his supporters are getting on my nerves with their whole “holier than thou” attitude. Obama isn’t going to change “politics as we know it”. He’s not a messiah, he’s not the second coming. Support him if you want, but don’t get all sanctimonious about it.
Do you really think his supporters are getting all sanctimonious? I’m a big fan of Obama, and am showing support by campaigning for him here in CT, and I have not seen any tinge of sanctimonious BS at his HQ in New Haven at all. Last night during the debate he finally got heated over HRC and her twisted truths - if she didn’t pull any punches last night and that’s all they have on Barack, it’s a pretty wobbly platform they are standing on.
My biggest beef with HRC is that she that I don’t trust her, my level of trust for the woman is very low. But from reading upthread, perhaps a low level of trust for the POTUS is a necessity.
It’s the voting public that is going to change politics by deciding who and what kind of leaders we are willing to support. We must be willing to put a little more time in scrutinizing our candidates and looking for facts rather than political speak.
I agree that no leader is going to be without some charecter flaws. He’s not a hero or a savior. Still, somewhere along the way we have to draw a line between what is acceptable political spin and what is over the line dishonesty. The issue for me is when it comes down to it is the candidate more concerned about serving the people of this country as best they can and helping us focus our energies and talents on important issues or are they more concerned with serving their own image and interests.
I’ve never been a fan of the Clintons because I thought they were too much the political professionals and loved the game of it all more than they loved the people they represented. It also occurred to me that maybe we needed that kind of hard nosed politician to get things done. Still, the kind of blatant dishonesty I’ve seen from the Clinton campaign and Hillary’s political “speak words but say nothing” crosses the line for me. I think Obama is sincerely trying to lead the political process away from politics as usual. It won’t happen overnight but we the voters can express what we prefer at the ballot box and by choosing who we support. That’s my point. Why should we excuse that kind of dishonesty and shrug and say “It’s only politics. They’re all that way” When offered a viable alternative we can influence the process by rejecting the dishonesty rather than excusing it. If voters continue to do this we can change the political landscape. If we believe we can’t and don’t bother to make the effort then we will get the leaders we deserve. Consider our current example.