As I'm sure that you have noticed, Hillary Clinton is trying to sell us this lie that Obama doesn't have any ideas or solutions and yet in the same breath claims he has stolen her ideas. She can't have it both ways. Which one is it Mrs. Clinton? And if they both has similar ideas, which they do then what is the difference between the two?
He represents true change, a fresh face, an inspirational orator, a more electable candidate who has cross-over appeal into the Independent voting block as well as some Republicans. He seeks to run a mostly positive campaign while she has been and continues to try and drag him into fights and mud-slinging. It looks desperate and nothing turns off an electorate more than playing dirty and negative attacks.
Is it really a good idea on her part to criticize a record turn-out and support of a Democratic candidate by an inspired youth? Does she really want to disillusion them and risk them turning away from her if she wins the nomination and campaign in the general election? I don't think it's smart of her to slam every other demographic that supports Obama (the more educated, the African American community, the youth) and basically say that the blue collar Democrats
He represents true change, a fresh face, an inspirational orator, a more electable candidate who has cross-over appeal into the Independent voting block as well as some Republicans. He seeks to run a mostly positive campaign while she has been and continues to try and drag him into fights and mud-slinging. It looks desperate and nothing turns off an electorate more than playing dirty and negative attacks.
Is it really a good idea on her part to criticize a record turn-out and support of a Democratic candidate by an inspired youth? Does she really want to disillusion them and risk them turning away from her if she wins the nomination and campaign in the general election? I don't think it's smart of her to slam every other demographic that supports Obama (the more educated, the African American community, the youth) and basically say that the blue collar Democrats
tend to favor her are the only real, true Democrats. She is hitting everyone hard that doesn't support her and in doing so keeps painting herself further and further into a corner. Obama is doing the opposite, appealing to everyone and building a diverse and strong coalition. He wants to include and she mostly wants to isolate, divide and conquer. She seems to be willing to destroy the party just so long as she wins the nomination.
Other than her similar ideas as Obama's she has nothing else to bring to the table other than pessimism, the same old politics, a less chance of being elected in the general and a controversial figure who carries a lot of negative baggage that would unite a factored, less popular Republican party. Do we liberal and Democrats want to win in November and move the country forward in a new direction or do we want to get mired again in the mud of the controversial, divisive Clinton years?
As for solutions, every presidential candidate has a reservoir of ideas and solutions or else they would've been discovered as one dimensional, not serious candidates from day one of their entrance in the race. She also is throwing this desperate net out there that Obama is all talk and that talk is cheap. Well then doesn't that cut both ways? It's obvious that he has ideas and solutions so then who is the one talking cheap and in an insincere manner? They say we project onto others our own weaknesses. So if that is the case then we can't help but come to the conclusion that this accusation of Obama is nothing but cheap talk and empty rhetoric on her part.
Then there is this still stale claim that she is a better manager than Obama and that because of that she is better capable to lead on day one. Well I think that we can get a good idea of each candidates management style by the way that they are running their campaigns. Obama has run a well oiled machine from the beginning whereas the Clinton campaign has made miscalculation after miscalculation. She blew off the caucuses from the start and then whined that they were disadvantaged by the caucus system but only after they started to get spanked by Obama in them. As if we are supposed to feel sorry for her and give her another chance. She was beat by Obama's superior ground strategy and knows it.
In addition, she hasn't been able to keep track of her funds and manage a budget within her own campaign so what does that say about how she'll handle the particulars of a federal budget? It also shows that she isn't as capable of running a well balanced and smooth operating administration. To that end she can't keep control of her advisers and we keep hearing of reports of infighting and resignations. Is this the kind of chaos that we should expect from a Clinton administration from "day one"? I think it shows a lack of judgment on her part in being able to put together a well balanced, competent and professional team.
That all being said, however, I'd like to return to the idea that Obama has no solutions. Take the FDR like National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to rebuild America's crumbling bridges, cracking highways and aging dams. Is that not a solution? It will create new jobs and invest back in America rather than investing in China's infrastructure and economy. I guess that isn't a solution to a vital problem facing us.
This is just one idea and solution that is easily found through one search with Google to find Barack's website that easily lists his ideas and solutions to vital problems in America.
Other than her similar ideas as Obama's she has nothing else to bring to the table other than pessimism, the same old politics, a less chance of being elected in the general and a controversial figure who carries a lot of negative baggage that would unite a factored, less popular Republican party. Do we liberal and Democrats want to win in November and move the country forward in a new direction or do we want to get mired again in the mud of the controversial, divisive Clinton years?
As for solutions, every presidential candidate has a reservoir of ideas and solutions or else they would've been discovered as one dimensional, not serious candidates from day one of their entrance in the race. She also is throwing this desperate net out there that Obama is all talk and that talk is cheap. Well then doesn't that cut both ways? It's obvious that he has ideas and solutions so then who is the one talking cheap and in an insincere manner? They say we project onto others our own weaknesses. So if that is the case then we can't help but come to the conclusion that this accusation of Obama is nothing but cheap talk and empty rhetoric on her part.
Then there is this still stale claim that she is a better manager than Obama and that because of that she is better capable to lead on day one. Well I think that we can get a good idea of each candidates management style by the way that they are running their campaigns. Obama has run a well oiled machine from the beginning whereas the Clinton campaign has made miscalculation after miscalculation. She blew off the caucuses from the start and then whined that they were disadvantaged by the caucus system but only after they started to get spanked by Obama in them. As if we are supposed to feel sorry for her and give her another chance. She was beat by Obama's superior ground strategy and knows it.
In addition, she hasn't been able to keep track of her funds and manage a budget within her own campaign so what does that say about how she'll handle the particulars of a federal budget? It also shows that she isn't as capable of running a well balanced and smooth operating administration. To that end she can't keep control of her advisers and we keep hearing of reports of infighting and resignations. Is this the kind of chaos that we should expect from a Clinton administration from "day one"? I think it shows a lack of judgment on her part in being able to put together a well balanced, competent and professional team.
That all being said, however, I'd like to return to the idea that Obama has no solutions. Take the FDR like National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank to rebuild America's crumbling bridges, cracking highways and aging dams. Is that not a solution? It will create new jobs and invest back in America rather than investing in China's infrastructure and economy. I guess that isn't a solution to a vital problem facing us.
This is just one idea and solution that is easily found through one search with Google to find Barack's website that easily lists his ideas and solutions to vital problems in America.
1 comments:
Nikola Tesla did not solve energy crisis- Nor Albert Einstein- SOLOMON AZAR HAS-period!
I took the ideas of many scientists the world has grown and finalized an ideology and experiment to end the global energy crisis with no greenhouse gases-That was the easy part-now i find myself trying to gain FAITH of my fellowman to spread this story-WHY-
for i did everything alone-a garage scientists who is successful- and now i need to be proven correct- so i come upon the fantastic invention called the net- invented after thousands of years- if not millions of the monkey race of man only to be ridiculed and bullied- like the jackasses that harassed several teenagers to suicide-
what i have found is disgusting and the reason why innocence is raped killed and beaten- why man goes to war over and over again- YOU DESERVE IT-
Truly- as a scientists and observer- i have found the reason for mans madness at times- it is meant to be- to antagonize and harrass each other- hardly any time to just relax in life- always on guard- WHY-
go live one day in nature and see how hard it is- technology is great and makes life far more stable- so get your head out your ass and understand there are still many grandparents alive right now that remember when the automobile first came out- the refrigerator- the television- medicine for this ailment and so forth-
and to this day half the children of the earth still die from simple drinking water untreated-
GET YOUR HEAD OUT YOUR ASS NOW BEFORE GLOBAL WAR BEGINS-
wars have always come and gone- a natural part of life to keep a civilzation the strongest- or die by your neighbors hands that keeps the torch brighter than another to find answers-
and now in a century man declars war to end all wars forever since ww1-ONE CENTURY NOW-
when will it end-
I am your messenger- over one year i state these words- you will never give me an ear to listen or an eye to witness until i give you a miracle- for part of your animal ways is giving someone attention ONLY after they do something for you-
CATCH 22
you care not to help me or investigate my science deeds because i say messenger of god- thus- only true solution will never be uncovered as YOU are an ignorant and selfish creature that says you love god by majority in the world- yet- does nothing when a disciple asks for help-or anyone for truth- and this is part of my message- i have much to say- and you will surely understand if total economy crumbles and you lose your jobs-and go off to war- for many look for answers why afterwards-
but for first time in human history- a chance comes for peace without global war- your window closes very fast as the military pawns have been set and iran russia pakistan and many others are ready-
ONLY a messenger can create peace between the nations without global war- but it seems man is still a savage monkey race-not children of god- thus- let the lessons continue
Posting Komentar