OBAMA and Republican good ideas:

[boston bean]

He was asked to give one good republican idea, but he gave two:

de-regulation(let the corps find the solutions) and privatizing public schooling(charter schools, home schooling and vouchers).

How could any good progressive find themselves agreeing with this?

[saltpoint]

1. If we progressives didn't have you around to post anti-Obama sentiments

on DU, we just wouldn't know what to do with ourselves.

[joeybee12]

6. Yeah, don't debate what the OP said...just slam it...

...I know, I know, God forbid any of his stands on the issues should be examined...that's evil, isn't it?

[saltpoint]

8. This OP is predictably hysterical about Sen. Obama.

It's fair game to say so.

[boston bean]

15. when you have nothing to say on the subject, you just bash the poster. good on you! nt

[saltpoint]

16. This would be coming from YOU, of all people?

Sheesh.

[boston bean]

17. I'm suprised you're not pissed I watched Fox news. nt

[saltpoint]

18. I'm not entirely surprised. That would explain a lot.

[boston bean]

21. so you didn't watch the interview and you want to criticize me? nt

[saltpoint]

22. Oh, you just predictably post these hysterical anti-Obama posts.

Dandelions in the yard.

[boston bean]

25. I must have made an impression. Iposted nothing anti Obama, I posted what he friggin said. nt

[saltpoint]

27. I'd be curious to hear your fair-minded take on oblierating

Iran.

And your fair-minded take on her praise for McCain, too.

Oddly, points like that don't make your OPs.

[boston bean]

36. If Iran ever did nuke anybody, they better be ready for the consequences.

I don't believe in pre-emptive war in any situation, but if a country uses nukes, well there will be consequences and for you to think otherwise is naive.

[saltpoint]

38. Well I'm nothing if not naive.

[cali]

34. no, hilldroid, you friggin' didn' t post what he said. duh.

no quotes. no links.

[boston bean]

37. is the transcript out? someone who didn't watch it knows better than someone who actually friggin

watched it.

[cornermouse]

48. Is this it?

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/27/transcript-obama-on-fns/

"OBAMA: Well, I think there are a whole host of areas where Republicans in some cases may have a better idea.

WALLACE: Such as.

OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation, I think that back in the ‘60s and ‘70s, a lot of the way we regulated industry was top down command and control. We’re going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.

And I think that the Republican party and people who thought about the margins (ph) came with the notion that you know what, if you simply set some guidelines, some rules and incentives for businesses, let them figure out how they’re going to for example reduce pollution. And a cap and trade system, for example, is a smarter way of doing it, controlling pollution, than dictating every single rule that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and red tape and oftentimes is less efficient.

I think that on issues of education, I have been very clear about the fact, and sometimes I have gotten in trouble with the teachers union on this, that we should be experimenting with charter schools. We should be experimenting with different ways of compensating teachers. That –

WALLACE: You mean merit pay?

OBAMA: Well, merit pay, the way it has been designed I think that is based on just single standardized I think is a big mistake, because the way we measure performance may be skewed by whether or not the kids are coming in the school already three years or four years behind.

But I think that having assessment tools and then saying, you know what, teachers who are on career paths to become better teachers, developing themselves professionally, that we should pay excellence more. I think that’s a good idea. So –

WALLACE: But, Senator, if I may, I think one of the concerns that some people have is that you talk a good game about, let’s be post-partisan, let’s all come together — just a couple of quick things, and I don’t really want you to defend each one, I just want to speak to the larger issue.

The gang of 14, which was a group — a bipartisan coalition to try to resolve the nomination — the issue of judicial nominations. Fourteen senators came together, you weren’t part of it. On some issues where Democrats have moved to the center, partial-birth abortion, Defense of Marriage Act, you stay on the left and you are against both.

And so people say, do you really want a partnership with Republicans or do you really want unconditional surrender from them?

OBAMA: No, look, I think this is fair. I would point out, though, for example, that when I voted for a tort reform measure that was fiercely opposed by the trial lawyers, I got attacked pretty hard from the left.

During the Roberts –

WALLACE: John Roberts, Supreme Court.

OBAMA: John Roberts nomination, although I voted against him, I strongly defended some of my colleagues who had voted for him on the Daily Kos, and was fiercely attacked as somebody who is, you know, caving in to Republicans on these fights.

In fact, there are a lot of liberal commentators who think I’m too accommodating. So here is my philosophy. I want to do what works for the American people. And both at the state legislative level and at the federal legislative level, I have always been able to work together with Republicans to find compromise and to find common ground.

That’s how I was able to provide health care for people who needed it in Illinois. That’s how I passed ethics reform, both at the state and the federal level. That’s how I have worked with people like Dick Lugar, from here in Indiana, on critical issues like nuclear proliferation.

It is true that when you look at some of the votes that I’ve taken in the Senate that I’m on the Democratic side of these votes, but part of the reason is because the way these issues are designed are to polarize. They are intentionally designed to polarize.

On partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions. I have said so repeatedly. All I’ve said is we should have a provision to protect the health of the mother. And many of the bills that came before me didn’t have that.

Now part of the reason they didn’t have it was purposeful, because those who are opposed to abortion, and I don’t begrudge that at all, they have a moral calling to try to oppose what they think is immoral, oftentimes what they are trying to do was to polarize the debate and make it more difficult for people so that they could try to bring an end abortions overall.

So the point I’m simply making is that as president, my goal is to bring people together, to listen to them. And I don’t think there is any Republican out there who I’ve worked with who would say that I don’t listen to them, I don’t respect their ideas, I don’t understand their perspective.

And I do not consider Democrats to have a monopoly on wisdom. And my goal is to get us out of this polarizing debate where we are always trying to score cheap political points and actually get things done."

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

63. Oh dear.

"On partial birth abortion, I strongly believe that the state can properly restrict late-term abortions"

There's no such thing as a "late term abortion".

The procedure that is done, is usually done because the woman is eclamptic, a life threatening condition, and due to massive organ shut down is not a candidate for anesthesia or surgery. I guess he's OK with "restrictions" that won't clarify whether a doctor is breaking a state law by trying to save the woman's life.

He does want to add the "provision" but that particular procedure is done almost exclusively to save the life of the woman.

A convenient piece of information no one wants to discuss.

See, that makes me a little nervous.

[cornermouse]

64. It makes me nervous as well.

But there doesn't seem to be much I can do about it at this point. And experience is that if you say very much they savage you.

[ekwhite]

71. I understand what you are saying, and partially agree

So-called 'partial birth abortion,' more properly intact dilation and extraction, is an emergency medical procedure, absolutely. No doctor would ethically use this procedure for anything else. Eclampsia is a life-threatening condition that absolutely requires emergency procedures.

I think that while most people are comfortable with first trimester abortions, they get less comfortable with abortions where the fetus could possibly survive outside the mother's womb. There is a point somewhere in the third trimester where the fetus becomes a premature baby. That is where I draw the line at abortion - where I feel it should be limited to medical necessity.

[Blue_Roses]

93. I hate it when it's called "partial-birth abortion" 'cause nothing could be farther from the truth..

it's a right wing talking point.

Abortion--I also hate that some men seem to think they know what to do with a woman's body. If they think they know so much, then they need to keep their pants zipped up.

I agree that third trimester abortions should only be done if medically necessary. That is something that should be between a woman and her doctor.
Once again, something men have no business deciding on.

[ekwhite]

116. No argument there

The RW opposition to IDX is a wedge issue. They want to use it to gain even further restrictions on abortion. My point was more of an ethical one - when is it ethical to terminate a late-term pregnancy? I would argue that it is when the life or health of the mother is at risk, or when the fetus is not viable or likely to be horribly deformed, to the point of suffering.

I would also argue that government has no business in the decision at all. Excepting a few isolated sociopaths, terminating a late-term pregnancy is not an easy decision for any woman. I would hope that when you say that men have no decision deciding on the termination, that you do not exclude the father from the decision, at least in a consulting role. The final decision has to be the mother's, excluding her incapacity.

[2rth2pwr]

125. What does that mean -"There's no such thing as a "late term abortion". ?

[depakid]

119. My reasons for NOT supporting Obama in a nutshell

Like Krugman, I smelled a phony and a sell out back last fall....

[dchill]

140. But you smelled nothing coming off Clinton?

That's a problem for you.

[Kittycat]

14. I tried..

But so far they don't seem interested in responding to it (nor do you).

[rodeodance]

7. Arrogant attitude. Not surprized.

[saltpoint]

12. Hi, rodeodance. It would be great to have a

civil confab with you one of these days, but until a nominee is decided, that appears unlikely.

[rodeodance]

49. you give up to easily.

[saltpoint]

122. We cultists are known for our passivity.

[rodeodance]

2. They can't --yet Obama supporters see them selves as progressives. they are phony--like obama is.

[joeybee12]

3. Especially charter schools...even Utah is against that these days...

...they end up performing more poorly than public schools, and they end up making their supporters rich. What a scam.

[MissMarple]

108. Are you thinking of voucher proposals for private schools?

Voucher proponents sometimes front for dubious companies that do take voucher money and provide little, if any, education.

Charter schools are a mixed bag, some are very good, some not so much. They are free of constraints and contracts that regular public schools are under in their respective districts. But they do have public oversight and are usually affiliated with a public school district, some are chartered through the state. The Colorado Education Association has one in Colorado Springs. They do ok. Getting rich...no way.

[rodeodance]

4. REC. good question.

[Kittycat]

5. You're a little off on point one....

He said that government sets the limits, and allows the business to explore options to self-regulate within those limits. ETA: The problem is the limits need changed. Many states have complained that their own state-wide regulations were stronger than the ones the republicans put in place.

I don't agree with point two, but I'll concede that over Obliterating another country.

[boston bean]

20. so in essence, he agrees with the republican policy. It never works that way.

The problem has never been how, but how much.

[Kittycat]

42. Agreeing with the premise, isn't agreeing with status quo.

On premise - I agree with the Republican Plan. But the problem is that the plan's limits are too high. That needs addressed.

[JimGinPA]

9. Dishonesty Doesn't Bother You In The Least, Does It? I Can See Why You Support Hillary

[boston bean]

11. I posted nothing dishonest. nt

[LWolf]

73. It's the truth.

How can you support the man without knowing and acknowledging his flaws?

[JimGinPA]

79. The Actual Transcript Has Already Been Posted Here...

OBAMA: Well, I think there are a whole host of areas where Republicans in some cases may have a better idea.

WALLACE: Such as.

OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation, I think that back in the ‘60s and ‘70s, a lot of the way we regulated industry was top down command and control. We’re going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.

And I think that the Republican party and people who thought about the margins (ph) came with the notion that you know what, if you simply set some guidelines, some rules and incentives for businesses, let them figure out how they’re going to for example reduce pollution. And a cap and trade system, for example, is a smarter way of doing it, controlling pollution, than dictating every single rule that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and red tape and oftentimes is less efficient.

I think that on issues of education, I have been very clear about the fact, and sometimes I have gotten in trouble with the teachers union on this, that we should be experimenting with charter schools. We should be experimenting with different ways of compensating teachers. That –

WALLACE: You mean merit pay?

OBAMA: Well, merit pay, the way it has been designed I think that is based on just single standardized I think is a big mistake, because the way we measure performance may be skewed by whether or not the kids are coming in the school already three years or four years behind.

But I think that having assessment tools and then saying, you know what, teachers who are on career paths to become better teachers, developing themselves professionally, that we should pay excellence more. I think that’s a good idea. So –

The Op cherry-picked and took what he actually said of of context, thereby creating a false impression, which is just a "nicer" way to lie.

[LWolf]

82. I also posted the actual transcript in this thread.

He's praising republicans for deregulation. We all know that we didn't get less pollution because of deregulation.

He's damned right, he gets in trouble with teachers. I'm one of them.

Charter schools ARE deregulation and privatization of public education.

Merit pay...he says he doesn't agree with basing it on tests, and then suggests different tests to base it on.

It's not a false impression that he leans republican on many issues; that he praises Reagan "accomplishments" while referring to liberal democratic gains as "excesses."

It's not a false impression that he supports republican agendas for education.

On education alone, he has ensured that I will NEVER support him for any political office.

[QueenOfCalifornia]

128. I agree with you

I support Obama but I do not agree with what he said. I also wish that some of the regulars who scream "LIAR!" would do a little research before flaming away.

I had to choose, Hillary or Obama.

I was put in the position and I chose the person I feel would be best for the job. I hardly agree with everything Obama does or says and this is one of those times.

There is nothing wrong with what the OP wrote except it would have been nice to have the transcript provided at the time it was posted - I found it posted kindly by someone else and it backed up what the original OP said.

[LWolf]

144. I don't like a forced choice

between two bad candidates. So I won't choose one of them. I'll write in someone else, probably Gore, for my primary next month.

I understand that most Democrats will make a choice between the two. :(

[QueenOfCalifornia]

146. If we do not

make a choice between the two McCain will win.

How does that, in any way, shape or form help? I believe that either one of the candidates will make better choices than any Republican. I think of federal judge appointments - of US Attorney appointments of SCOTUS. These decisions effect us all forever.

By writing in a person you are voting to not have even a chance at making things even a little better. :eyes:

[LWolf]

148. First of all,

voting for an unacceptable candidate in the primary sends the wrong message to the party, imo.

I believe in holding the party accountable, and I do that with my votes.

I think that my write-in vote, plus my letters to the super delegates, may help turn the tide, and get me a candidate I CAN vote for in November.

It's important to me to nominate a democrat that:

1. Can win in November; I don't believe either of the current two can.

2. Make a decent president; I don't believe either of the current two would.

I don't get in line. I don't march in line. I don't vote in line. I'm willing to compromise, but only so far.

Hell, Edwards, Biden, Richardson...they were the compromise I was willing to make. Gore is a compromise, should the super delegates help nominate him.

If you are really concerned about the SCOTUS, and about a possible republican win, you might want to put your support behind someone who CAN unite the party, instead of one of the two current dividers.

[mmonk]

10. Here we go.

The campaign of the DLC and republican campaign tactics is going to lecture us again about Obama not being democratic enough.

[Catchawave]

31. If an HRC supporter agreed with Republicans....

they're called Freepers here.

Don't you see the hypocrisy in your statement?

Obama is simply pandering for Republican votes, he's a politician! That's no lie :D

[saltpoint]

40. Your defense of someone who defends and praises McCain at the

expense of another Democratic candidate is untoward.

Shame on you.

[Catchawave]

LOL...."shame on me" ?

For defending DUers who get slammed daily for supporting a Democratic candidate....just not yours?

Oh the Obama mantra "Either you're with us, or the hell with you" ? I get it now.

:eyes:

[saltpoint]

58. Your gal praised McCain. She did so at the expense of a Democratic

candidate.

Obama is a Democrat.

McCain most definitely is not.

It's time for you to get it.

[Catchawave]

61. You're right, here's "my gal"

I'll take the shark over the bait any day :hi:

Now stop being such a crankypants. Geeesh.

[saltpoint]

62. Your characterization of Hillary Clinton as a deep-sea predatory eating

machine sounds pretty sexist to me.


:hi:

[rodeodance]

90. Your man said DO NOT CALL MCCAIN A WAR MONGLER.

[saltpoint]

98. But rodeodance, look carefully. Mrs. Clinton's praise of John McCain

was as a "patriot," a contributor to the great American landscape .... !

Where as Sen. Obama's only plus was "a speech."

Hmm. You don't suppose some of us are able to make that distinction, do you?

[Catchawave]

103. Et Tu ?

I thought you were smarter than this.

Since Obama wants to be the "anti-war" candidate because of "a speech", what has he done anti-war since then?

He gave an anti-war speech in front of an anti-war crowd in a very safe liberal neighborhood. Whoop-de-doo. I'm so fricking tired of hearing about his speech, that I feel I'm more qualified to be President because I had the cajones to march against the war in D.C. and New York. Where have Obama's cajones been since 2002?

[saltpoint]

109. Don't let certain posters hear you speaking of Obama's 'cajones' --

it would only upset them.

They would think you had overtly sexist viewpoints.

And man oh man, does that tick them off.

[mckeown1128]

113. Obama is the DEMOCRATIC nominee and this is DEMOCRATIC underground..

so get used to people saying get with it or to hell with you.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

13. he loves on his republicans

[cali]

39. you mean on the days you hilldroids aren't painting him as a radical lefty

or a scary black nationalist or the anti-christ? make up your fool minds please.

[Armstead]

47. Exacty -- The difference is that Obama has a consistent and three-dimensional view

What I like about Obama is that he really is looking beyond the straightjackets that have caused gridlock and GOP supremacy.

It's a three dimensional view. That approach, IMO, is going to advance liberal and progressive goals a lot more that the left/right dochotomy that politicians like Bush and The Clintons engage in.

[saltpoint]

46. ED, you might want to reconsider that assertion.

I think Senator Obama is a Democrat.

He was on, like, a couple ballots in Illinois, as a Democrat, and I'm pretty sure Howard Dean has him listed as a Democrat as well.

You could put in a few calls to double-check, but I'm pretty sure I have this one right.

[cali]

19. much easier than any progressive could ever agree with

hiilykins voting for and avidly supporting war for years, voting for K/L, voting against banning cluster bombs that kill kids in civilian areas, threatening to obliterate Iran, praising Reagan on social security reform, voting for pro-business bankruptcy reform and on and on.

hillbots. sigh.

[QC]

23. Neither one of them is progressive.

Both are corporate centrists. The differences between them are pretty superficial, which is why the campaign has been so close and nasty.

[cali]

28. The question wasn't whether either is progressive, it was how

progressives could support Obama. And sorry, there are some important distinctions. I pointed them out in the post you're responding to.

[NashVegas]

43. This Is Why I - and *Some* Others - Support HC

There was a very interesting dataset that came with the PA exit polls.

The question was "who is most honest and trustworthy?"

of the small group who said neither, 77% of them voted for HC. Some of them may have been Republican voters crossing over to mess up things, but not all.

Jon Stewart said something about Obama at the end of his show last week that his supporters didn't talk about much in this forum. He said "(Obama's) going to break are hearts. I just hope it's a financial scandal."

[Zhade]

115. That's arguable, but what's not is that their methods are very different.

Obama brings new blood to the party.

clinton lies, repeatedly, to our faces.

The choice is easy.

[LakeSamish706]

24. My God the Hillbotts are up early today and out in force.. n/t

[boston bean]

26. We had to be, we were waiting on Obama to spew cures for what ails us. nt

[saltpoint]

30. They get up early and go duck-huntin' and when they get back from that,

they're primed for a dust-up on DU.

[LakeSamish706]

32. Hahaha.. That about sums it up... Do they take Cheney along with them on these hunts? n/t

[saltpoint]

35. They do, yes. Which is why so many of them never come back, and why

she's lost support.

Her entire demographic has been wiped out by Dick Cheney's shotgun on these early-Sunday duck hunts.

Tragic, I tell you. Tragic.

[Armstead]

29. Clinton herself has supported cgarter schols and Bill Clionton was big on deregulation

I also was not bothered by the principles Obama stated about regulation, in terms of common sense.

He was not advocating blanket deregulation. Rather, he is addressing an underlying problem that has led to the rise of slash and burn conservativism and deregulation.

Regulations are good and necessary. But, like much else in life, it matters how it is undertaken.

if you assume the basic purpose is to achieve a particular goal -- let's say clean air -- you set a target and goals. But, beyond that, the choice is whether the state gets into micromanaging business and people's lives or provide some leeway in how they can reach such goals.

For example, there is a strong consensus for principles of planning that protect the character and environment of communities. This obviously requires regulation to achieve, and that is something that a concensus can be built around.

However, if that is done clumsily by micomanaging everything, it can undermine the very goals those regulations are intended to achieve. If someone has to get 5 building permits and submit themselves to an overwhelming array of nitpicky guidelines merely to build a deck on the side of their home, they get angry and frustrated. And that leads to movements towards total deregulation, and throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

[QC]

33. Did he say anything about so-called "merit pay"?

That's another Republican nostrum that he favors:

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3894699&page=1

[Armstead]

41. Yes, but based on difference metrics than "teach to the test"

I personally don't follow education issues much, but he did say that some form of merit pay outside the "no child left behind" straightjacket is worth exploring.

[SoxFan]

60. You hate children

:sarcasm:

[Armstead]

68. Damn little rugrats

"I love children -- As long as they're properly cooked." WC Fields


:)

[SoxFan]

69. With picante sauce and a nice shiraz, I say

[QC]

81. "Merit pay" is part of the corporate fad in education.

You know, the old "let's run schools like a business" model.

The new president at my college is a huge fan of merit pay and is trying to force it on a very unwilling faculty and staff. Of course, he also refers to himself as the CEO and demands that we think of our students as customers. Like I said, corporate.

The problem that most teachers have with this idea is that it introduces competition into relationships that are supposed to be collegial. Of course, competition is what the corporate supremacists love about it, since they believe that anything can be fixed by making it more capitalistic.

Sorry, but there is nothing at all progressive about supporting this sort of thing, no matter how one finesses it.

[LWolf]

74. And that's another reason why

I will NEVER support this man.

[QC]

104. Well, I'll vote for the nominee, but I'll never understand why people

think that Obama is Mother Jones and Eugene Debs all rolled into one while Clinton is Satan's handmaiden. Even Clinton has not come out in favor of privatizing public schools.

[LWolf]

118. That's why

I find the passionate support of Obama so shocking.

What if he gets the nomination, and beats McCain? With the election safely behind him, will Democrats continue to support a Democratic President with a Republican agenda?

[QC]

120. The whole things shocks me.

I have seen good progressives here, intelligent people I have known on DU for years, turn into nasty, obsessed partisans of a candidate who could teach Bill Clinton himself a few things about centrism and triangulating. It's bizarre, and I am at a loss to explain it.

[LWolf]

133. You express my experience, and my dismay, well.

:(

I don't know where we're going, but it doesn't feel right to me.

[NashVegas]

44. Did He *Really* Say That?

Jesus fucking christ on a corndog.

[rodeodance]

56. obama does play his WORT game alot.

[tishaLA]

75. No, he didn't *really* say that at all.

[LWolf]

80. Here's what he said.

It sounds like praise for republican de-regulation and privatizing of public schools (charter schools) to me.

<snip>

WALLACE: And we are back now with Senator Barack Obama. Senator, one of the central themes of your campaign is that you are a uniter, who will reach across the aisle and create a new kind of politics. Some of your detractors say that you are a paint by the numbers liberal and I’d like to explore this with you.

Over the years, John McCain has broken with his party and risked his career on a number of issues, campaign finance, immigration reform, banning torture. As a president, can you name a hot button issue where you would be willing to cross (ph) Democratic party line and say you know what, Republicans have a better idea here.

OBAMA: Well, I think there are a whole host of areas where Republicans in some cases may have a better idea.

WALLACE: Such as.

OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation, I think that back in the ‘60s and ‘70s, a lot of the way we regulated industry was top down command and control. We’re going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.

And I think that the Republican party and people who thought about the margins (ph) came with the notion that you know what, if you simply set some guidelines, some rules and incentives for businesses, let them figure out how they’re going to for example reduce pollution. And a cap and trade system, for example, is a smarter way of doing it, controlling pollution, than dictating every single rule that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and red tape and oftentimes is less efficient.

I think that on issues of education, I have been very clear about the fact, and sometimes I have gotten in trouble with the teachers union on this, that we should be experimenting with charter schools. We should be experimenting with different ways of compensating teachers. That –

WALLACE: You mean merit pay?

OBAMA: Well, merit pay, the way it has been designed I think that is based on just single standardized I think is a big mistake, because the way we measure performance may be skewed by whether or not the kids are coming in the school already three years or four years behind.

But I think that having assessment tools and then saying, you know what, teachers who are on career paths to become better teachers, developing themselves professionally, that we should pay excellence more. I think that’s a good idea. So –

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/27/transcript-obama-on-fns/

[kentuck]

45. I did not hear him say anything about home-schooling or vouchers??

And I thought I was listening very closely? :shrug:

[rodeodance]

50. Listen to his Milwaukee WI speech when he was pandering for Votes

[saltpoint]

52. No. Instead, you check out the vote totals by county in the Wisconsin primary.

He stomped her like a grape.

[rodeodance]

54. i know the results. Obama panders well. --he is bed with Tommy Thompson and his voucher program.

[saltpoint]

55. That's ridiculous. Obama won almost every county in the state of

Wisconsin, including yours.

The Clinton effort absolutely sucked doorknobs in Wisconsin -- one of the worst campaigns run EVER by ANYONE, and his was top-drawer.

People who voted FOR him and AGAINST her didn't do it because they have no ability to discern one nuanced issue point from another.

[rodeodance]

57. One thing about Hillary. She learns from mistakes. Her camp has not

served her well in the past. But i think they have turned it around.

[saltpoint]

59. They've gathered up a few loose strands since Feb. 5th, but there is no

analyst around who will claim that the screen was in focus post-Feb. 5th.

They simply refused to plan because they arrogantly assumed they'd have won by then.

It didn't turn out that way.

The Ferraro FOX interview was a very poor strategic choice, absolutely ensured to repel progressives at all levels -- content, medium, context, etc. Hubby Bill has not been a plus. Mark Penn? A total jerk, not to mention politically conflicted, earning fat bucks for policies SHE opposes. That's just dumb politics, plain and simple. She should never have hired him, and having hired him to have him undermine her effort, she should have shoved him out of a plane somewhere over Wyoming, which she also lost to Obama.

And with the cash she had to start with, now squandered, why didn't she hire someone like Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson to run her campaign? They are loyal Clinton supporters, brilliant career folk, and possessed of a LOT more acumen and political wherewithal than Wolfson, Carville, and that ugly bunch.

And she ought to have hired a speech writer to connect her excellent instincts on IT TAKES A VILLAGE to her current campaign. Absent that connection, progressives and independents are going to flock to Edwards' domestic proposals (he beat her in Iowa) and Obama's inspirational language.

Her campaign has been badly managed, and while she is not directly in charge of it all, she's the candidate, and ultimately responsible for the people she hires and retains.

[rodeodance]

89. you have not paid attention. pay attention--her camp and she are Rising.

[saltpoint]

99. In politics, anything is possible. Among the that are possible is that

a former First Lady with more money than God, an extremely well-connected husband, and instantaneous global name recognition can get her butt kicked by both Obama and Edwards in Iowa, yet STILL refuse not to plan for a campaign beyond Feb. 5th.

I'm not saying that would happen THIS cycle, but ya never know.

[LWolf]

85. He spoke about charter schools.

Privately run schools running on public funding.

[panAmerican]

51. On deregulation Obama wants us to stop chasing our tail

When you start listing specific things to be changed, whatever's not on the list is fair game. That is why we have myriad standards and industry manages to do endruns aroun them.

We should tell industry, "Reduce total emissions by X" instead of listing all the different chemicals and chemical compounds to be reduced by so many PPM (Parts per million) in our water. When we make broader laws, it's easier to go after them using the spirit of the law, rather then just the letter of the law.

[NJmaverick]

53. Do you agree with every single progressive idea??????

If not, this post is self serving crap trap.

[Forkboy]

65. How can any progressive agree with IWR, Kyl/Lieberman, etc?

Obama is a tried and true centrist that any sane Hillary supporter would also like if they opened their eyes, and any sane Obama fan would be happy with her too if they did the same. Most of his supporters understand that he's not progressive, though some surely do see him as such. They're as wrong as those who see Hillary as one. Their policies are so similar that you couldn't slide a rolling paper between them.

I consider myself very Liberal (large "L" because I won't flee from the tag like so many politicians do). It's why neither choice appeals to me.

[jefferson_dem]

66. Did you miss the "set some guidelines" part?

Here's the answer, in his own words.

OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation, I think that back in the ‘60s and ‘70s, a lot of the way we regulated industry was top down command and control. We’re going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.

And I think that the Republican party and people who thought about the margins (ph) came with the notion that you know what, if you simply set some guidelines, some rules and incentives for businesses, let them figure out how they’re going to for example reduce pollution. And a cap and trade system, for example, is a smarter way of doing it, controlling pollution, than dictating every single rule that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and red tape and oftentimes is less efficient.

[chill_wind]

67. Wakesha, WI Feb 13-- on school choice

Obama addresses state, U.S. topics
By GREG J. BOROWSKI
[e-mail]
Posted: Feb. 13, 2008


Waukesha - Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama said Wednesday that he is skeptical of private school voucher programs, such as the one in Milwaukee, but added if studies prove the programs are successful, "you do what's best for kids."

Election 2008


In a 45-minute meeting with Journal Sentinel reporters and editors, Obama pledged a quick - but measured - withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq, rebuffed critics who say he lacks experience and promised protection of the Great Lakes.

Here is a look at what Obama had to say on those and other topics:

School choice:

Obama said he has been a strong supporter of charter schools "as a way to foster competition in the public school system."

He pronounced himself a skeptic of private school vouchers, saying: "My view is you're not going to generate the supply of high-quality schools to meet the demand."

Obama said he was surprised to learn from Gov. Jim Doyle that "there was no assessment process" for the Milwaukee program but indicated he might be open to supporting voucher programs if studies show they work.

"If there was any argument for vouchers, it was 'Let's see if the experiment works,' " Obama said. "And if it does, whatever my preconception, you do what's best for kids."

(full text at http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=718193

(bold-face text mine)

I think thats a little bit more nuanced than the OP here would have you believe.

[cornermouse]

105. Charter schools are private schools.

Look up the definition for yourself.

[QC]

121. Worse...publicly funded private schools. n/t

[Milo_Bloom]

70. Because the ideas themselves aren't bad...

The current implimentation of those ideas are bad.

[LWolf]

86. The ideas aren't just bad; they are willfully destructive. n/t

[Milo_Bloom]

88. Not in the least.

Good ideas... poor execution.

[LWolf]

91. There is nothing good about deregulation.

There is nothing good about privatization of public education.

Unless you are a corporate republican.

[Milo_Bloom]

92. If handled properly, it works quite well.

You just need to have an open mind.

[LWolf]

101. It does not work quite well

for any but those making a profit off of it.

Deregulation is all about making money at the expense of the public interest. If you are a corporatist, that's great.

For the rest of us, it isn't.

[Milo_Bloom]

106. It works quite well.

You can create incentives that can act as regulation, without strictly regulating. You also want to bring businesses to the table and not have them fight you every step of the way.

Without deregulation, you are going to keep seeing more and more jobs move overseas... there are ways to do it without hurting the public interest... you just have to not close your mind and cry because you think you hear a buzz word you don't understand.

[cornermouse]

111. If regulation includes the pollution credit stuff that Obama was talking

about then we already have it here. The one that is allowing companies in the state to build not one, but two new coal power plants? The one that allowed them to put a 65,000+ chicken operation next to Roaring River? Is that the incentives you mean?

[Milo_Bloom]

126. Some work, some don't.

That is why you need everyone at the table.

[cornermouse]

129. The corporations wrote it.

The governor and the legislators passed it. This is not due to anti-corporation legislation.

[Milo_Bloom]

130. Which is why you need everyone at the table.

[cornermouse]

131. This is red state central.

No one else was allowed at the table. Something that I think you will find to be true in other states if not at time the legislation is drawn up then certainly in the amendments drawn up afterwards.

[Milo_Bloom]

138. Nice defeatest attitude.

This is why things don't get accomplished, b/c everyone thinks there is only one way to handle things.

This is why Obama is a breath of fresh air.

[cornermouse]

141. Anything else you want to

attack me for? ...Too bad. Good night.

[Milo_Bloom]

142. Just ignorance.

[LWolf]

117. Interesting that you should say that.

I support the repeal of NAFTA, and a return to fair trade policies based on labor and environmental standards, which would halt the flood of jobs overseas.

That's regulation, while NAFTA de-regulates. This is just one instance where regulation trumps deregulation to keep jobs here.

I want to bring small, family owned businesses to the table. I'd also like a new and updated fairness doctrine, and to update anti-trust laws.

I understand just fine, thanks, and I'm not going to further open the door to a right-wing corporate agenda.

[Milo_Bloom]

127. Well, it is going to be open whether you like it or not.

So either you learn how to live with it and make it work FOR YOU or you hold your hands over your ears and watch it all happened without you.

Clinging to some anti-corporate, isolationist agenda is just silly in this global economy. You aren't going to be able to REGULATE your way out of it.

You can however work with all sides to create a system where without strict government regulation it is more beneficial for the company to do the things you want.

[LWolf]

134. I'd rather have regulations

that hold all companies accountable for labor and environmental standards, myself.

I don't overlook the power of greed, and the power of power itself, to corrupt.

[Milo_Bloom]

137. You can use that power of greed to accomplish your goals.

But you have to take your fingers out of your ears and hands off your eyes to do it.

[LWolf]

143. My eyes and ears are open, thanks.

I don't want to "use" power of greed. I want to evolve away from power and greed, until they are extinct.

While I don't expect that to happen in my lifetime, or several, I know that the process of evolution moves forward by pruning out what is unused, and that, as long as something is in use, it stays.

I'm not going to use the lowest, the worst, of human characteristics to accomplish goals, but the highest, and the best.

There really is no way to dress Obama's right-wing leanings up to make them acceptable. You can wrap them in silk and loudly admire them, but those of us with open eyes can see beyond the wrapping to the corruption underneath.

[Milo_Bloom]

145. How cute and idealistic.

I am glad you are not expecting it in your lifetime, saves you some disappointment.

Here's a note... It's never ever, ever going to happen except in certain sci-fi shows.

Greed is hardwired into our DNA and is a part of the core survival instinct.

You can either use it to your advantage OR stomp your feet and demand everyone just do what YOU think is right.

One way works, the other gets us in the situation we are in today.

[LWolf]

147. Idealistic, yes. Cute? No.

I'm a confirmed and defiant idealist. I believe that working towards the ideal gets us farther than pandering to the lowest common denominator.

Nothing you can say negates that reality.

[LWolf]

72. I don't, and I've never pretended to.

This hits me where it counts, and Obama took himself PERMANENTLY off my table with this right-wing garbage.

[tishaLA]

77. except he didn't say anything about privatizing schools

and the OP also misstates his position on regulation

[LWolf]

84. Charter schools: what do you know about them?

They ARE privatized public schools. They get to operate with public school funding without adhering to many of the rules, regulations, etc., that their public school counterparts do.

Many charter schools are run by private corporations.

Sounds like privatizing public education to me.

[cornermouse]

95. Charter schools - wikipedia, your friend.

...There are two principles which guide charter schools. First is that they will operate as autonomous public schools, through waivers from many of the procedural requirements of district public schools. The second is that charter schools are accountable for student achievement. To date, 11% of the over 4000 charter schools operating in the United States have closed for reasons including academic, financial, and management problems, and occasionally consolidation or district interference.<6>

The rules and structure of charter schools depend on state authorizing legislation, and differ from state to state. A charter school is authorized to function once it has received a charter, a statutorily defined performance contract detailing the school's mission, program, goals, students served, methods of assessment, and ways to measure success. The length of time for which charters are granted varies, but most are granted for 3–5 years. Charter schools are held accountable to their sponsor—a local school board, state education agency, university, or other entity—to produce positive academic results and adhere to the charter contract. While this accountability is one of the key arguments in favor of charters, the United States Department of Education has found that charters are, in practice, not held to higher standards of accountability than traditional public schools.<7>

...Charter applicants may include local school districts, institutions of higher education, non-profit corporations, and, in some states, for-profit corporations. Wisconsin, California, Michigan, and Arizona allow for-profit corporations to operate charter schools. This is cause for concern in the opinion of educators who are concerned that for-profit charter schools are inherently flawed, as they divert part of the funding that in a traditional public school would be spent entirely on education to maintain profits. According to the National Education Association, for-profit charter schools rarely outperform traditional public schools, even when the charter receives higher funding.<9> Although the U.S. Department of Education's findings agree with those of the NEA, their study points out the limitations on such studies and the inability to hold constant other important factors, and notes that "study design does not allow us to determine whether or not traditional public schools are more effective than charter schools." .<10>

[cliffordu]

76. LINK PLEASE

[LWolf]

87. Here ya go:

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/27/transcript-obam...

[anonymous171]

78. You do know this is his biggest strength in the GE right?

[BootinUp]

83. There are plenty of examples where Obama is to the right

of Hillary Clinton, just enough to bring in the big bucks and some support from the Dinos and independents during the primary.

[cornermouse]

94. And he brought them all up in today's Fox interview.

He's not progressive. He's conservative.

[GarbagemanLB]

96. And Hillary 'nuke Iran, IWR, Kyl-Leiberman, land mines, bankruptcy bill' Clinton is a progressive...

[chill_wind]

139. Dogma. He's not a "conservative". On this much, he's a pragmatist. n/t

[Armstead]

107. I'm a crazy lefty and I agree with Obama's "conservative" approach

His answers on regulation, for example, made perfect sense to me.

It's about thinking in three dimensions.

I have another post above in this thread about this, if you want to look.

[Blue_Roses]

97. you're just a little ray of sunshine aren't you...

good grief and to think you're not bitter:eyes:

[futureliveshere]

100. You support Clinton I suppose.. Who of course doesn't support ANY Republican ideas??

:sarcasm:

[LWolf]

102. Newsflash:

While I can't speak to whom the OP supports, one doesn't have to be a Clinton fan or supporter to recognize right-wing garbage from Obama.

His recent appearance on Fox is not the first time he's said any of this; his rw republican leanings have been out there for anyone who wanted to look all along.

I am no fan of HRC, and do not support her candidacy.

I adamantly oppose Obama and his republican-friendly outlook.

[Name removed]

110. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cornermouse]

114. (sigh)

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/27/transcript-obama-on-fns/

WALLACE: Such as.

OBAMA: Well, on issues of regulation, I think that back in the ‘60s and ‘70s, a lot of the way we regulated industry was top down command and control. We’re going to tell businesses exactly how to do things.

And I think that the Republican party and people who thought about the margins (ph) came with the notion that you know what, if you simply set some guidelines, some rules and incentives for businesses, let them figure out how they’re going to for example reduce pollution. And a cap and trade system, for example, is a smarter way of doing it, controlling pollution, than dictating every single rule that a company has to abide by, which creates a lot of bureaucracy and red tape and oftentimes is less efficient.

I think that on issues of education, I have been very clear about the fact, and sometimes I have gotten in trouble with the teachers union on this, that we should be experimenting with charter schools. We should be experimenting with different ways of compensating teachers. That –

[QC]

124. I got lye on my hand once.

It hurt real bad.

[mckeown1128]

112. LIES..... he NEVER said vouchers or home schooling...

and you are leaving out his interpretation of de-regulation which differs greatly from Republicans.


Bus since you are trying to make this a "purity" thing... how do you feel abou Hillary voting to ban flag burning or her voting for the Iraq war or her voting in favor of using Clusterbombs on civilian populations or her recent bragging about how we are to nuke Iran if they nuke ANYONE in the middle east?

hmm? Don't go down the road of party purity... because your candidate will lose that battle.

[dchill]

123. Do you have links to prove either of your claims?

I don't believe you can put Obama, good idea, and deregulation OR privatizing anything together - any time any where, and I think you know it. But feel free to try:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=b5G&q=Obama+Republican+good+ideas&btnG=Search

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&hs=XOw&q=Obama+Republican+deregulation+privatization&btnG=Search

Post something that is not Freedom-fried shit, if you can.

[RBInMaine]

132. No SPINton fan, he said some "different appraoches to regulation" and charter schools as PART of the

equation ("experiment with them" IOW "take a look at these innovative ideas and see how they work.
Hey, there is nothing wrong with at least considering some ideas that could be seen as less than "liberal". Sometimes NO label fits. We have a math and science magnet school here in Maine. Pretty successful. Charter and magnet schools are PUBLIC schools. They can work. There are MANY ideas that are worthy of consideration. Hillary has said time and again that she too tries to work across the aisle and has taken on her own party on SOME issues. (Didn't she vote for the war and REFUSES to say it was an error??) Bill did welfare reform, NAFTA, shrunk government, said "the era of big government is over". Said his economic plan was neither liberal nor conservative, "it was both and different." SO there you are.

[Swamp Rat]

135. Just say "NO!" to a Clinton dynasty!

:patriot:

[susankh4]

136. That is some scary sh**.

And I ain't kidding.

Where is this man coming from? He is speaking out against the very principles that Dems stand on, and fight for.

Oi, vey.