Barack Obama waited just three days after Hillary Clinton pulled out of the race to declare, on CNBC: “Look. I am a pro-growth, free-market guy. I love the market.” Demonstrating that this is no mere spring fling, he has appointed the 37-year-old Jason Furman, one of Wal-Mart’s most prominent defenders, to head his economic team. On the campaign trail, Obama blasted Clinton for sitting on the Wal-Mart board and pledged: “I won’t shop there.” For Furman, however, Wal-Mart’s critics are the real threat: the “efforts to get Wal-Mart to raise its wages and benefits” are creating “collateral damage” that is “way too enormous and damaging to working people and the economy … for me to sit by idly and sing Kum Ba Ya in the interests of progressive harmony”.

Just a quick point on the Chicago school thing. His chief economic adviser was Austan Goolsbee who is pretty centre-left and clearly doesn’t belong to the Friedman school of economics.

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/01/31/econ_advisors_austan_goolsbee/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/03/AR2007100302003.html

Exactly right. The weak candidate here is John McCain, not Obama. On every measure including foreign policy, the man is clueless. The other day he though Iraq and Pakistan shared a border!

And yet Rumbold is trying to convince people Obama “purged” Muslims and wants to nuke Pakistan

Suppress was the wrong term. Apologies. But it would have been nice if he had stood up for it rather than just joining the bandwagon. It would have shown that he had a bit of a backbone.

Considering he is spending a lot of resources fighting the underground smear campaign that he is a radical Muslim, or a radical black Malcom X, or the not-so-subtle message by Republicans that he is not patriot enough, such cover while funny and sarcastic against the wingnut characterisation, it becomes part of the smear campaign.

What experience has he had outside the state-affiliated world (i.e. government, civil service, charities, academia)?

Nobody has experience in being President, unless you go through the whole … experience. Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas before becoming President, had no foreign experience – but he got it pretty quickly.

On the other hand, George W Bush has more experience in being president than most people – what does that give you? The real key is having someone who is knowledgeable in a number of areas, which can lead to good decisions, coupled with a moderate ideology that does not give way to extremist urges.

Some American firms haven’t benefited from NAFTA, but then some firms always suffer whatever the trade agreements are. And my point about intelligence and an academic record was that it doesn’t necessary make one a good politician. By the way, I am not a fan of George W. Bush.

“Who gave you the idea that Obama attempted to suppress the New Yorker? He definitely took offence at the caricature, as did everyone else, including McCain, except a few hacks here and there.”

Suppress was the wrong term. Apologies. But it would have been nice if he had stood up for it rather than just joining the bandwagon. It would have shown that he had a bit of a backbone.

“Cutting taxes? That’s such blatant skulduggery. Remember the tax cut of 8 years ago was announced at a time of record surplus. And these right wing ignoramuses have been touting it as the cure for everything since then, recession? cut taxes, deficit? cut taxes? need growth? cut taxes. And so on. The rich can move their money out of the country so you shdn’t tax them. The poor can’t so you shd tax them? Do you see the perversity of the logic?”

I would cut spending massively, and also cut taxes. Of course the rich should pay a higher proportion of their income in tax then the poor. My concern was that Obama is basing his spending plans largely on the ability to tax the rich, and as we all know, that can be difficult, because they leave or hire tax avoidance specialists. He should try and shift the burden from poor to rich, just not base his economic plans on it- this shows a remarkable innocence about the realities of taxation.

Sunny:

“So I’m still interested in some solid criticism that shows the guy isn’t experienced.”

What experience has he had outside the state-affiliated world (i.e. government, civil service, charities, academia)?

“Or… how about not attacking other countries, cutting the size of Pentagon and getting rid of nukes? That would save money… which is what Obama is proposing. I’m not sure why cutting taxes is some sort of a “solution” to global problems. I’m in agreement with that policy.”

I’m all for cutting spending and taxes. You really believe that he will get rid of nukes? My God. And he has already threatened to bomb Pakistan.

“You have to provide more context and examples here. This is a blanket statement that doesn’t give any proper context.”

http://www.citizen.org/cmep/energy_enviro_nuclear/electricity/energybill/2005/articles.cfm?ID=13980

http://www.obamaunveiled.com/energypolicy.htm

“Why should I criticise something I agree with? Shariq has already pointed out how the Pakistani military has been helping the Taliban. Would you do any different?”

So you think that it is a good idea to threaten to attack an ally if they don’t do something? Fair enough.

“Throw some proper criticism and I’ll bite.”

I see now that anything he says or does will never trigger any criticism from you, because you have decided whatever he says or does it right. Again, fair enough, but please don’t try and defend your lack of criticism as some sort of objective assessment.

So, objectively speaking, we have a younger moderate can-do candidate who seems to know the challenges ahead, and a clueless coot who knows absolutely nothing. The fact that Obama
is slightly ahead of McCain is a reflection of the wisdom of the American people who elected Bush twice… and took them 6 years to realise how wrong they were.

I am glad Obama ditched public finance of the campaign: McCain has been compromising and getting around every loophole there is to bypass a bill he sponsored. The whole point of public finance is not to be influenced by lobby groups – as we stand, McCain is heavily subsidised by lobbies, Obama’s campaign is subsidised by the people – not by lobbies. So why is this even an issue?

He’s still talking shit, then.

*facepalm*

Ben

Which includes various high-profile media representatives wittering on about how terrible Obama love is.

McCain’s promotion is terrible.

Ben

“And here’s more on that supposed media love of Obama”

Here is a vid from the McCain campaign no less about Obama love.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bNnauNITwGk

“Funny how no one seems to spot that the man has some dodgy Chicago School types for economic advisors.”

Whereas McCain had Phil Gramm of Enron disrepute. Not only that, but Robert Kagan, the co-founder of PNAC, advises him on foreign policy.

This isn’t moving the goalposts, incidentally, it’s a simple weighing-up of bastards.

“if i were an american, i’d be worried about the economy, the massive debts, the fact that military might seems to be the only thing leaders are thinking about.”

Ah yes, Gramm thought that they were suffering from “mental recession”, and were turning America into “a nation of whiners”.

And, incidentally, I will not only accept criticism of Obama but criticise him myself. His record on Iraq is far from what he claims – in July 2004, he said that he and Bush felt ‘about the same’ with regards to the invasion – while his rhetoric certainly alters sharply according to audience.

Ben

My friend, please stop reading this woman here:

http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/

Your doctor or your pharmacist can help you stop.

I do do smileys!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/30/iwashington-posti-fans-ou_n_115861.html

Dude, try sounding less like Melanie Phillips and I’d take your argument seriously.

“purge of Muslims” indeed.

Running a business, while not a prerequisite to high office, does teach you some important things- like balancing budgets, not wasting money and so on.

And those skills aren’t found only when running a business. So I’m still interested in some solid criticism that shows the guy isn’t experienced.

Otherwise it would be as stupid as argument as saying the guy hasn’t played any team sports so he doesn’t know how to do teamwork.

How about cutting tax? I would much rather the rich were taxed then the poor, but the rich have the ability to move or avoid taxes,

Or… how about not attacking other countries, cutting the size of Pentagon and getting rid of nukes? That would save money… which is what Obama is proposing. I’m not sure why cutting taxes is some sort of a “solution” to global problems. I’m in agreement with that policy.

So why did he vote for massive subsidies for oil and gas companies in 2005?

You have to provide more context and examples here. This is a blanket statement that doesn’t give any proper context.

The first step must be getting off the wrong battlefield in Iraq, and taking the fight to the terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan…If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won’t act, we will.”

Why should I criticise something I agree with? Shariq has already pointed out how the Pakistani military has been helping the Taliban. Would you do any different?

Or you expect me to criticise him because…. I should criticise it?

which is about the refusal of the Obamists to accept any criticism of the chosen one.

Throw some proper criticism and I’ll bite. All you’re talking about is some “purge” that never happened. American Muslims are overwhelmingly pro-Obama. In fact the two girls later released a statement thanking him for calling and apologising and saying they still plan to support him.

But oh no, he’s purging Muslims!

Have you opened a newspaper recently?

I’m sorry, I’m talking about proper research compared to… you asking your mates and your grandma about what you think is going on?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30ads.html

and more importantly
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/30/us/politics/30web-seelye.html

yet believed attacking it would bring him more support.

Well, he attacked it because it was rubbish. As did most people who read / saw it online. It was rubbish. How exactly does that square up to your claim that he wanted to “suppress any dissent or satire”??

Has he been suppressing Saturday Night Live from making fun of him to? Any complaints to Jon Stewart you know about?

All blanks. You’re becoming as bad as Avi Cohen!

I think Sonia’s post at 19 and her reference to Ravi’s post at 4 sum up what I think about race. It is, frankly an excuse, and I come from the most whingeing bunch of bastards on this planet.

It used to be that if something went right, it was down to wonderful Scottish invention, or gallantry or something. If it went wrong, it was down, inevitably, to an English failure: “Couldn’t do it mate, we were Lions led by Donkey’s”

Which has, historically been the case, the upper class, largely English Squires fucking up anyone else.

That is the mindset that most Scots, nowadays, are trying to get away from. In other words, blaming someone else is not healthy. It has taken us, what (?) 300 years to figure that out. 1707, I think?

I am reminded of a similar split. If a satellite was successful, it was a ‘marvellous scientific achievement’. If, on the other hand, it blew up on the launch pad, it was an ‘engineering failure’.

Perhaps, in that context, you can see what is going on here? One group ascribes failure to the other, and so the game goes, around and around

I’d assume that, somewhere in my ancestry, there are people of every race, if you trace it back far enough. Frankly, I am not interested. Tomorrow is more important to me than the past. And I am reminded that if you say your Scots, you are. Which, it seems to me is the point.

Ravi gets it. Sonia gets it. Sunny gets it.

Who, the fuck, doesn’t?

Falls over bottle of Pinot Noir, gets gout, goes to sleep.

Bloody angry that so few see the issue.

Of course, given the political system of lying and trying to force people to vote for you based on who tells the best lies that people want to believe, its no suprise no one is running on the kind of campaigns that are needed.

im surprised the nation is not smoking more pot in their effort to keep afloat their dreams and visions

It ‘s disgusting and appalling and that is what we should be pointing to and worried about, because frankly, our politicians want us to go in the same direction.

Complain about the NHS all we like, but head to America to see what lies in store for us. I am surprised anyone who has a choice lives there at all. I’m glad i’m back and i am lucky enough to have a choice where to live.

p.s. has anyone seen Harold and Kumar escape from Guantanamo Bay? Hilarious!! Highly recommmended, especially for the bit where George Bush smokes a lot of weed, rings up his father and says Fuck yOu Daddy!

Since you are missing he finer points about NAFTA, you shd know that there is a perfectly logical case for criticising it. It has meant the shut down of large swathes of manufacturing in the heartland of the US. It is true. Any revival – take steel for e.g., – has happened only with the aid of stiff import tariffs.

You didn’t say he isn’t intelligent or smart. I anticipated it and shut that down. And you should check your sources again, stay clear of the sub-75 IQ Townhall.com, Newsmax.com. RCP, Worldnetdaily.com etc., Bush’s GPA is unkown since it was redacted – but yes he had a 2 item arrest record that was waivered. Kerry at Yale was a standout debater, defeating a star team from Oxford that visited in his junior year. Kerry was discharged honorably as a decorated officer of the USN. We will not go into Bush’s record.

OK. I take your point. Churchill did not arrange troop deployments etc., he simply led the nation in war. Obama doesn’t knock on doors or scan mailing lists or slug it out on the streets campaigning. He simply manages and leads a very well organised and unprecedented 50-state campaign.

Who gave you the idea that Obama attempted to suppress the New Yorker? He definitely took offence at the caricature, as did everyone else, including McCain, except a few hacks here and there. This is a political campaign and it is but natural for the candidate and his supporters to issue rejoinders, correct the record, defend their position, anticipate any attack or misrepresentation. Especially in this case, where the NYker was caricaturing those who doubt Obama, it missed the possibility that the subject of the caricature – ie. the ones who do not know better who do not read NYker, only see its cover, would simply see this as conforming their opinion. More so because the ignorant few believe that the “liberal types” rallying around Obama actually celebrate such a lifestyle. That is why you won’t find a piece of xxxx-in-a-silk-stocking like “National Review” caricaturing McCain on its cover, as a Sugar Daddy, living it up with his moll, while popping pills. That rag knows that.

If anything it is McCain who is the media darling. He’s appeared on Sunday TV and other news discussions 150 times in the last 10 years! This is a man who gets a free pass for his not so insignificant peccadillos, his wife’s acts of omission and commission – surprised?

Cutting taxes? That’s such blatant skulduggery. Remember the tax cut of 8 years ago was announced at a time of record surplus. And these right wing ignoramuses have been touting it as the cure for everything since then, recession? cut taxes, deficit? cut taxes? need growth? cut taxes. And so on. The rich can move their money out of the country so you shdn’t tax them. The poor can’t so you shd tax them? Do you see the perversity of the logic?