Loading ...
Obama Clinches The Nomination
- Filed under: Democrats '08, Presidential
- Date: Jun 4,2008
Tonight, Barack Obama finally became the Democratic nominee to be the next President of the United States. It is a sight that has been a long time coming for those of us who have supported him through out this process. I first saw Senator Obama speak up at Cuyahoga Community College about 15 months ago. We got there two hours early and the lines were already out the door. Leaving that speech my friends and I knew that he was a different kind of candidate and the one that we wanted to see become the nominee. It is nothing short of amazing that he made it. Senator Clinton ran a tough race and our party is counting on her to help move us forward. I truly feel for my fellow Democrats who supported Senator Clinton, but came up short. I know those folks need a little time to reflect on the race and I respect that. However, I believe that after a little time passes the Democratic Party will be united like never before and ready to win in November. Tonight, it feels good to be a Democrat. Turn your speakers up.
26 Responses for "Obama Clinches The Nomination"
Obama faces demographic challenges like no Democratic nominee in recent history.
After all this, the real battle begins.
As I read tonight from Bill Bennett: "And thus the Democratic party is about to nominate a far left candidate in the tradition of George McGovern, albeit without McGovern’s military and political record. The Democratic party is about to nominate a far-left candidate in the tradition of Michael Dukakis, albeit without Dukakis’s executive experience as governor. The Democratic party is about to nominate a far left candidate in the tradition of John Kerry, albeit without Kerry’s record of years of service in the Senate. The Democratic party is about to nominate an unvetted candidate in the tradition of Jimmy Carter, albeit without Jimmy Carter’s religious integrity as he spoke about it in 1976. Questions about all these attributes (from foreign policy expertise to executive experience to senatorial experience to judgment about foreign leaders to the instructors he has had in his cultural values) surround Barack Obama. And the Democratic party has chosen him."
We may not win in November. Time will tell. But Obama is not the candidate everyone thinks he is. Time won't tell on that. I already know the answer.
I said it before: I do not trust this man!
And….the Republican Party has nominated a man in the tradition of the failed George W. Bush….only older.
Bill Bennett? Surely you jest.
Kyle: I second your "it feels good to be a Democrat".
It feels good to be an American.
That's a lovely piece of neo-Soviet propaganda icon art in the picture. I heard socialist realism was making a comeback but didn't believe it.
"Leaving that speech my friends and I knew that he was a different kind of candidate"
Other than being an eloquent speaker, how is he so different from any of dozens of Dem candidates of recent history? Policy position wise is there any difference between him and Kerry?
Clinton used the word "hope."
Carter ran a campaign based on the word "change."
Ben, for "knowing" so much about Obama, you were certainly DEAD WRONG on his battle with Hillary. As you kept doubting, into April, he kept proving you DEAD WRONG.
So you lack any significant credibility on what type of candidate he "truly" is. Your insight thusfar has been wrong, so I think it will be wise for most to ignore your claims now.
Your only true hope is pretty simple: can the mouthfoamers like "anonymous" and "larry d" scare up enough baseless fear in Americans to block Obama's message.
My guess is that these attempts will fail. Hillary failed to do so. Haneeler failed to do so with the Rev Wright stuff. And the fear-mongers will ultimately fail.
Obama is a great candidate that appeals to needs and hopes of most Americans. His opponent fails to do so.
does anyone else see him as apolitical newbie, with many stances that lack forward thinking, I was up much later than usual last night and caught one of my favorite writers on Colbert Report, George Will made a good point in regards to Obama, his stances are reactionary to policies he has put in place. As this election continues forward I actually see him alienating more mainstream voters, not because of "fear" but because he is advocating a society that will sacrifice personal responsibility and freedom for government provided existence.
That being said congratulaitons to all of you Obama backers, enjoy your day of victory
I saw that Will interview and found it interesting that he is an agnostic. He could not call himself an outright atheist.
I did find his outlook on life brutal and sad.
Moving on…. Contrast Obama's speech last night with McCains'. Not pretty. Even conservatives were calling it "creaky, ungracious, and unnecessary." -> http://tinyurl.com/4yhg4q
McCain is now calling for town hall meetings between him and Obama leading up to the conventions. Not sure this is a wise thing to do if you are McCain.
Hey, heading off to the salad bar at Applebees to meet David Brooks for lunch if anyone wants to join!
I just wonder how much energy was waisted in lifting that mass into the air like that? Could it have been put to better use?
i don't think his outlook is brutal or sad, he is a pragmatic
many people who just don't care or think about religion call themsleves agnostic. An atheist is someone who rejects the notion of a higher being, while an agnostic doesn't acknowledge the existence nor deny the possibility of a god.
I watched the Will on Colbert too. I was also shocked by his agnostic comment. I agree he doesn't seem very happy. I enjoyed the interview though. Few guest are able to match Colbert's wit. Will gave short and direct answers and it threw Colbert off.
An update. I'm now at Applebees and I can't find the salad bar. Brooks, typically, is late.
Will, with his massive intellect, is an agnostic? I wonder if he is agnostic towards the Tooth Fairy?
What's the matter with being agnostic? It's hard to be as self-righteous as the angry atheist when you're agnostic, but it's an honest approach to unanswerable questions.
not all atheists are angry, that is a silly portrayal
Oh yeah, Chuck K. What do you think of the iconic political rendering on the side of a building?
I can't remember seeing such a work depicting a living U.S. politician in my lifetime. I have seen similar works in other countries with strict authoritarian regimes, however.
I can't say I know what it means but why is it "mouth foaming" to point out the peculiarity?
Not all atheists are self-righteous either. But in my experience, self-righteous atheists are usually angry. And I suspect they're not even really atheists.
Well chuckles I don't have rabies and you think he appeals to the needs on your side but he sure don't with my side. Looks light the soviet polit bureau begins buisness today.
If Obama wins the era of the gov. providing for the people will be in full effect. Cant say I remember the saying but I believe it is something along the lines of –a gov. that is big enough to take care of your is also powerful enought to take things from you. But what the hell it will be done for the best interests of all the people.
Obama's government is going to help people get health care and education if they want it. GOOD!
And lets be very clear, that is what he wants to provide. He does not want government to take care of defense contractors, insurance companies, oil companies or telecom companies.
He wants to help "take care" of education and health care.
NEWSFLASH: MOST PEOPLE LIKE THAT!
And most people like a quarter million dollar home and a Cadillac in the garage. Does it mean everyone will have it? No.
Did anyone else catch that the day Hilary tossed in the towel was the anniversary of the 19th Amendment? It's neither here nor there, but still worth noting.
Obama supporters: What did you make out of his AIPAC speech?
Equating health care for a person in need to a Caddillac.
People like you just don't get it.
In larry's mind, atheists are "self righteous" and/or "angry".
I suppose that allows for non-atheists to claim some form of internal satisfaction. But neither is true.
I've paid my substantial dues to the religion discussion, over 15 years or so, working my way out from under superstition and self-centered wishful thinking approaches to reality.
I'm not angry, nor do I feel self-righteous. The truth existed before I subjectively believed it. It will exist long after I'm gone.
"angry", not you angry, and "self-righteous" are diversions from reality as well. My current understanding is neither, instead it is liberating and humbling. Liberating, in that pre-conceived notions are just that, pre-conceived. Humbling, in that I had been completely wrong about religion and the existence of some divinity.
jimmy….Wasn't Brooks there at Applebee's? That fictitious salad bar Obama isn't comfortable eating at is a bit like those WMD threats from Iraq Obama wasn't comfortable with either. Brooks is …a wanker. I know, that's not news.
And George Will? Now there's a bitter man who tries, yet fails, to hide his genuine self-righteousness. Funny how a guy who bathes in his own superior knowledge was so totally incorrect about the Bush/Cheney regime.
Well…not so funny.
I didn't mean to say all atheists are angry and/or self-righteous, Reverend.
Some are, however, and that type seems to enjoy scoffing at those primitive Christians and agnostics. I suspect that type of atheist is still trying to convince themself of something.
Leave a comment