Thanks I will --- Go Pyro -- win that Travers Stakes...

I agree wholeheartedly.

He is not comfortable attacking -- I think he needs to do it like he has attacked Bush and Clinton in the primary -- with humor...sarcasm and facts...

Well you folks are sadly mistaken if you think talking about ending the war in Iraq is going to get Obama elected. You need to think back to 1972 and how unpopular the Vietnam War was, much more unpopular than this one, and Nixon buried McGovern in a landslide.

I think about the only good thing which is going to come out of an Obama candiacy is it will put to bed the myth that the vast majority of Americans will vote for a candidate who is advocating losing a war.

Yes... and where are his surrogates to do the dirty work. Obama should know that he can't play softball in a hardball world and for him to remain above the fray he still needs others out there going on offense... STRONGLY.

McCain is selling flip-flopping bogus distortion and lies and nobody is calling him on it. He's been getting by with pure BS that sells... even if it is snakeoil.

More important than the "yes" Iraq war votes will be a VP's present positions on foreign policy.That was the problem for me with Hillary...I do see her as "hawkish"...many who voted for the war are not hawks.

Why not declare victory and withdraw? Doesn't that solve the problem?

McCain talking points. Well done Marine! McCain would be proud of you, I'm sure.

This election is going to be about one issue... the economy.

Unless McCain can change the channel to national security... by more Russian aggression or some other scare event his advantage on these issues is moot.

So far McCain has been playing to the ignorance of an ignorant public and has been largely unchallenged (by the MSM or otherwise... imagine that).

His plans and policies are about as sound as an eggshell.... but so far he's managed to sell them to a gullible and ignorant public simply because they are promises of painless solutions... which won't work.

Very true.

This is not the regular season anymore --- its the playoffs and the hitting is harder -- the attacks are sharper...

If McCain is using those as talking points he's right on track. The McGovern/Shriver ticket suffered a 61%-37% defeat to Nixon, at the time, the second biggest landslide in American history, with Electoral College totals of 520 to 17. McGovern's two electoral vote victories came in Massachusetts and Washington, D.C.; McGovern failed to even win his home state of South Dakota.

I suspect Obama/? will replace McGovern/Shriver in history's what not to do to win an election book.

Marine:

On this Iraq issue, you are almost comical.

You have repeatedly been proven wrong its amazing you persist.

The Democrats started urging benchmarks. We have benchmarks in Iraq.

Biden said we needed another 30-60,000 troops while McCain was saying we needed only a brigade and now we had the surge -- and its over...

Democrats endorsed the Iraq Study Group report --- which said talk to enemies -- and the Bush Administration has been despite saying they wouldn't.

Democrats called for a timetable...first McCain says 100 years in Iraq and then is forced to announce his own timetable --- 2013 --- then when Maliki endorses Obama's the Bush Administration (and McCain) agrees to a time horizon which is the same thing as a timeline...

And Obama since last November has been saying withdrawal depends upon the situation on the ground...

The Dems have been controlling this issue politically for the whole campaign...

So, you are flat out wrong here...my friend. The Dems have been winning this issue for months...

This ain't 1972 Marine and this ain't the Vietnam war...which is the problem you and McCain both have -- you are fighting Vietnam all over again and its making for distrubing US policy...

I suspect that you suspect a great many things that ought not be taken as very reliable predictions.

Obama is no McGovern. I am old enough to remember the guy.

Exactly right...Marine and McCain stuck in the past....

idiots are born every minute

some are sock puppetted into the world, like a two-headed turtle stolen in brooklyn

this does NOT describe Bayh or Hillary.

"I'm going to want somebody with integrity. I'm going to want somebody with independence - who's willing to tell me where he thinks, or she thinks, I'm wrong. And I'm going to want somebody who shares a vision of the country: where we need to go - that we've got to fundamentally change not only our policies, but how politics work, how business is done in Washington." (...)

"I think the most important thing, from my perspective, is somebody who can help me govern," Obama said. "I want somebody who I'm compatible with, who I can work with, who has a shared vision, who certainly complements me, in the sense that they provide a knowledge base or an area of expertise that can be useful. Because we're going to have a lot of problems and a lot of work to do."

Graham... a question for you...

Do you think that description would have fit LBJ in 1960?

He and Kennedy had two very different world views, styles and visions for the country.

However, Kennedy saw in LBJ some someone with the ability to serve as president, an opportunity that he would buy into and share the Kennedy vision, and that he would be compatible and loyal.

And guess what -- it worked out better than I think Kennedy might have expected looking down from heaven...

And even though Obama and Bayh in some respects may seem like polar opposites -- I think the marriage of them like the marriage of Gore and Clinton --- could work very well.

Obama sees in Bayh, what Kennedy saw in Johnson. Kennedy was right? Will Obama be? Only time will tell. But if you trusted JFK you should be willing to trust Obama.

bayh, a stooge who doesn't have an original thought would have been picked up by his ears by LBJ

LBJ is ten zillion times over Bayh. Maybe ten zillion and thirty.

I don't see how any rational person would think meek timid Bayh is like the strongest person in Congress LBJ was.
Bayh is just average.


don't you get it?
If Obama wanted LBJ this time, he would pick Hillary.
Obama is JFK to Hillary's LBJ not little meek bayh who wouldn't hurt a fly.

(like Norman Bates? They even look alike, they think alike sometimes they even act alike, what a lovely pair...yes their cousins, identical cousins...

I agree 100% and this is where Bayh is a perfect fit. Just as LBJ could talk to middle America -- and JFK the coasts -- Obama can talk to the coasts and Evan Bayh middle America...

They are a perfect fit.

And where Biden has no economic background...and has already taken himself out saying he is not the choice --- Bayh does have a strong economic background -- a folksy style which he can use to sell Obama to middle America...

It is all about trust --- and Midwesterners trust Evan Bayh...he will get them to trust Barack Obama...

Actually, in part you are correct.

BUT - the part I feel you are wrong on is - people will watch after themselves before they worry about Iraq, Russia, Georgia or Afghanistan.

Right now, people want to know if their house is safe, where they are going to live, where they are going to work, how to afford milk for the kids - and how to pay for the gas at the pumps.

The Economy is the lead issue for now - and that is how your AVERAGE voter thinks. The people on this board and others are not AVERAGE nor do they make up the majority of voters.

They need to be spoon fed in a clear concise way why McCain should NOT be president - and it doesn't have to have much to do with wars to accomplish that. When I see Obama in the defensive position so much I want to kick his arse.

Obama has so much money - his camp should be putting out quick, easy to understand, ads every single day from now till Nov 4th.

If he loses - it will be due more to allowing the RNC keeping him in this position - and that is where some of his inexperience comes into play.

You think Hillary would put up with this McCain bs? Hell no - she'd get 6 shades of ugly on them.

(My husband has a whole post he's trying to get me to type to you, but if he wants his thoughts known he can sign up for his own account)

Did I say Evan Bayh WAS LBJ in stature?

No.

I said that Evan Bayh could complement Barack Obama like LBJ complemented JFK.

Let's stick to what was written and not the fancifull notions in your head...

best you just sit there and not let them see you move...that fly over there...you wouldn't want to hurt it now, would you?

HILLARY WOULD BE LBJ in YOUR comparrison.

No -- because Graham -- Hillary is from New York...

Obama while from Chicago --- has a personality and is treated in the midwest like he is not from there particulalry in red states -- he is the JFK...the northeast liberal elitist type...

Bayh on the other hand is from the Midwest like LBJ...he can talk to the people in the midwest in words and phrases that they can relate to -- like Johnson could...

HRC and BHO speak the same way --- there would be little difference at all between them.

In this example, you are far too caught up in the statute question --- that isn't the issue.

Just saw this...dont shoot me, Im the messenger:

Basically, hopefully it wont be Bayh

okay this guy doesnt like obama or bayh...so take it for what its worth to you


Potential Obama VP Is Pro-War, Pro-Patriot Act Neo-Con
Evan Bayh served with John McCain on neocon Committee for the Liberation of Iraq to propagandize for invasion in 2003

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Wednesday, August 20, 2008

RELATED: Keith Olbermann Needs to Take Obama to Task for His FISA Betrayal


The man who many are tipping to become Barack Obama’s running mate is a pro-war, pro-patriot act, Bilderberg member who was an honorary co-chair of the neocon Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, a group that aggressively propagandized for the invasion of Iraq in 2003. Ladies and gentlemen - meet Senator Evan Bayh.

“Top Democratic Party officials are expecting Sen. Barack Obama to select Indiana Sen. Evan Bayh as his running mate as early as midweek,” according to US News and World Report.

So exactly where do the sympathies of the Indiana Senator lie and do they jive with Barack Obama’s proclaimed platitude to be offering “change” in the upcoming presidential election?

According to Wikipedia (with source link to WhiteHouse.gov), “On October 2, 2002, Bayh joined President George W. Bush and Congressional leaders in a Rose Garden ceremony announcing their agreement on the joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War, and was thanked by Bush and Senator John McCain for co-sponsoring the resolution.”

Not only that, but Bayh served as an honorary co-chair of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq along with John McCain, Obama’s Republican adversary.

As Talking Points Memo notes, “The Committee is a neo-con group that was formed to propagandize the country into war. It boasted such illustrious neocon members as Bill Kristol, former CIA director James Woolsey, and even McCain senior foreign policy adviser and Chalabi-bamboozler Randy Scheunemann.”

In a February 2006 interview with the Washington Post, Bayh “refused, as some of his fellow Senators already had, to renounce his support for the war”.

Bayh also voted for the re-authorization of the USA Patriot Act in 2006.

The Senator is also a keen supporter of the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC, having previously described his “lifelong affection for the state of Israel” at an AIPAC luncheon.

Bayh has warned that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon, despite the National Intelligence Estimate having refuted this claim, and the Senator has also introduced sanctions against Iran, repeatedly denouncing the country with heated rhetoric on national television.

Bayh is also a Bilderberg Group kingpin, having not only attended its meeting but also giving a keynote speech at their 1999 confab in Sintra, Portugal.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Bayh is nothing more than another pro-war, pro destruction of the constitution, elitist neocon scumbag. What makes him more dangerous is that he is - just like Obama himself - a wolf in sheep’s clothing, camouflaging himself amidst the mindless rhetoric of “change” while in reality representing nothing more than the status quo.

Okay RWS, I won't shoot the messenger. I will shoot Mr. Watson.

Basically the man is saying that Bayh is a Commie neocon. Okay...

This Bilderberger stuff is essentially a longtime bogey of the extreme Right.

Bayh is a centrist. and Obama is a center-leftist, so Bayh is hardly an extremist in comparison. He has made what I consider to be some blunders, but so have a lot of people. Other things that worry Mr. Watson simply don't worry me. Bayh is concerned about Iran? Well so am I, even if I don't want to bomb them.

Regarding the over-arching Hiearchy of Power in the Social System, with X = the customary referent, "Powers-that-Be," what is the relations between The Powers that be (X) and the central core of the Bilderberger Group in the Human Social System? How much independence and how much over-lap?

Well let's see... McCain has Kissinger in his corner... and Obama has Brzezinski.

So you've got Trilateral Commission on one side (globalist / elitist / PTB) and Council on Foreign Relations (globalist / elitist / PTB) on the other.

So...

With all due respect, who cares? These are powerful people. Well, there all kinds of groups and confabs of powerful people. There are probably dozens of meetings of such folks going on right now, just a few miles from me, of some names that none of us have heard of.

If there is any conspiracy going on I think it is by these right-wing groups who want to divert attention from the class system that is behind the ruling oligarchy, and instead perpetrate the fiction that it is all a matter of conspiratorial groups who intend to establish world government. Often the charge is that this world government will be organized along some kind of Communist lines. It is sad, but not really suprising, that many on the Left have bought into this garbage.

Now I would be leery of the goals of some of these people, but I certainly think it ridiculous to demonize any politician who would have connections with them. How can a serious politician function with no contact with the powerful? The question is how much they let the powerful influence them.

of course ARNEOKER you don't care
you don't believe that stuff

but that does NOT make you right.
that makes you wanna cover things up

and belittle it as you do, if the left, who cares about things like that, says NO to Bayh, and doesn't become enthused, then it's over.

I won't vote for Bayh.

If Bayh is in, it means NOTHING CHANGES

What in the world do you think CHANGE means?

You keep trying to cover up what is needed to change.
We don't need AIPAC and we don't need ISRAEL controlling us. And we don't want any of that.
Bayh is in their pocket
I have said this 100 times.

If Bayh is his VP, I will have lost my enthusiasm for Obama, and then, I will solely only care because he is black, and it will make the bigots choke, but I will know
THE FIX IS IN, WE ARE DOOMED, AND WE WILL DIE AS A DEMOCRACY.

You want change? you can't bring in the same.
It is why Gore said NO to Bill Clinton in 2000.

winning just to win, but having nothing change is losing.

life sucks for 28 years, we deserve better.

though, you arneoker, and the couple of others, will NEVER see it, and you know what, you don't have to see it. You arneoker already will vote for Obama either way.
But we who see it, will die a little more when it happens.

I have been correct all 3 times I felt like this- first with Gary Hart in the 1980s, then with John Edwards last year, and now with Evan Bayh. 3 for 3.
Bayh is as bad as john Roberts and Samuel Alito.

In modern times, Senator Obama has been grounded in the Chicago and midwestern Geography
of the US social system. It is also a fortunate outcome that his unique socialization and encultration
experiences and his own purposeful Self-directed Education and Training, allows him to relate empathically, respectfully, genuinely and mostly at the appropriate level of abstraction to an extremely wide range of individual Persons...this is one his major Leadership attributes. Obama
needs to name a VP most capable of attending to the Organizational Development of the Federal
Government as a whole (Reduce corruption and incompetence in the governments operations 20%
per year for next three years). Senator Obama was already in and of the middle of the Country
before all these persons and ideas and money from the two coast started pouring in.

winning with Bayh is losing.
simple as that.
Obama can win with 1000 others the same. Bayh is not better than Biden,Kaine or SEbilius by any stretch.
Obama is most comfortable with Sebilius from all I have watched. The two have a rhythm and ease.
And Biden is far more expeerienced and able than Bayh.

I just don'[t get Taz's love, and I feel he is not telling us all his reasons for his love...I think its more than personal.

bi the way taz

you seem to be forgetting a major item

CONDIE CONDIE CONDIE

she is more and more relevant again
and could be the vp and get the woman's vote

No I don't believe it. But I do care, or else I would not say why I think this is wrong, I would just make fun of it and leave it at that.



But I still could be right. And if I am right then there is nothing to cover up, so you aren't making sense here. Let's have a real debate on what we see, and what makes the most sense in terms of explaining it, as opposed to trying to do the best job in questioning the sincerity of who disagree (which is how a lot of these debates have gone, and you know it).



All I can say is that if there is a good case against Bayh you'd better have a stronger argument than this! And concerning the left, there is a part of the left who makes the exact same critique that I just made. They care that others on the left don't get bamboozled. And one needs both a good part of the left and a good part of the center to win. That is a fact. People need to deal with it, not try to explain it away.



I will vote for Obama, PERIOD! I am sorry, but the stakes are too high when I think about the future of my children. I don't care WHO is disappointed by that.



If McCain is in, things may change for the worse.

What does change mean? Either things get better, things get worse, or things get different, but neither worse nor better.



I have a different idea on what needs to be changed, improved, and how to do it. Distorting that fact does not make me wrong.



And your repeating this has what to do with its accuracy value...?



And losing is...losing!

What does what anyone deserves have to do with what we can do and how we accomplish it?



No, I just see enough to know that if I were to constantly mull over the idiocy and immorality of it all then I could not bear to get up in the morning. So I try to keep aware but not obsessed. I certainly see no need to make things up so I can avoid seeing too much of the horror.



So? Marine says the same thing before predicting that Obama won't get more than 35% of the vote.

Well I hope that it is more than personal with Taz! The problem I see with your hatred of Bayh is that it does not seem more than personal! And I think you are the one who is not likely being completely honest about why you hate and are so obsessed with Bayh, with your "anything goes" attitude in attacking anyone you think should be attacked.

Your tasteless "bi" insinuations are showing Graham...

Condi is a non-issue...

She has links to close to Bush --- put her on the ticket and McCain's candidacy goes down the tubes as a homage to Bush...

And Condi is not interested...

And even if she were talk about ties to big oil...

NO, I agree with your response, except I am not too worried about fascism, at least not now or for the next few years. Corporatism, however, is another matter...

I was the same way arguing Kerry instead of Howard Dean --- and Gore instead of anyone else...

I am passionate about my politics...

I think Bayh is our best chance for victory in 2008 as VP.

Graham can't deal with that...

I provide reasons -- he does not dismiss them -- he comes up with weak excuses. He libels Bayh with false accusations of scandal which he cannot support and then suggests that I have some secret ulterior motive for liking Evan Bayh...

I wish I was on his payroll --- but I am not.

But he is exactly the type of candidate I have been talking about for the Democrats for the last couple of years if anyone has been listening...(which Graham obviously hasn't been).

Howard Dean (whom after opposing him for president and DNC chair I have come to highly regard) has set the country up beautifully for a nationwide Democratic victory where we compete in all 50 states.

Obama speaks the language of the coasts and Bayh speaks the language of the heartland.

If Sibelius was in her second term i would push her but she isn't.

Actually if we were pushing a woman candidate, I would push Arizona's Napolitano...

But if you read my reasoning its not hard to see why I support Evan...and Obama must be of a similar thinking because he is one of three choices...

So Graham -- my VP choice has at least made it further than yours...so it can;t be that off the wall...

And I just don't get your silliness in not supporting Obama no matter who he picks.

I am a Democrat. I will support the Democratic ticket.

I would have worked and voted for Hillary if she was the choice.

Here you get your candidate --- a long shot candidate who defeats the heir apparent to the Democratic party -- and you on this historic occassion are going to let your pettiness and preconditions get in the way of voting for him for President...

Are you crazy?

All of the extolling you have done of Barack Obama the last couple of years and you are going to be so silly as to not vote for him because you trust your judgment regarding a VP candidate more than you do his...

Well, Graham, I'm telling you -- in Obama's eyes if that is your rationale then you look like one sorry excuse of a supporter...

I want to win in November just like the next guy...

It is important to me and my family.

And I think Bayh is the best chance. And you cannot support any of your wild accusations regarding Bayh.

I would suggest he was in but not of the middle of the country.

I think his worldview was always big city --- intellectual --- ivory tower...if you will -- and this does not sell well in rural America IMHO...not as well as Evan Bayh can sell it...

You are a lost cause Graham...

You have no faith at all in Obama.

You give him no credit at all.

You do not trust his judgment.

How many people thought Joe Lieberman was a good choice?

Graham, did you?

No.

But he helped deliver Floirda to Gore didn't he. Oh the Supreme Court took it away --- but he helped deliver Florida to Gore. No doubt about it.

Trust the candidate.

you cannot get rid of the Clinton's if you pick their boy toy

in 2000, I to be honest, never heard of Joe Lieberman except in passing
my first thought was that he was Jewish and it made me proud
But Joe in 2000 was not known to be JOe in 2008
He was a mole
either that or he just went bitter in 2004, when nobody wanted him
and in 2006, he lost

remember- in 2000 I wasn't into the conspiracies
It was only after 2000 loss that I knew Lieberman was pure scum

Actually Dennis Kucinich is Hillary's boy toy. That has to be true because you can read it on the Internet.

But anyway, you don't need a conspiracy theory to regard Joe Lieberman as one of your more useless politicians.

I don't trust any of them. My quandary is that my principle won't allow me to choose the lesser of two evils.

Oh and Taz: "Didnt we all want a free Iraq?" Are you kidding me? NO....most people with half a brain knew anything Bushco was involved in was going to be a big fat lie...which it was. It is not our job to "free the world". If that's the case then get ready for a millenium of nothing but war.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss...either way it really doesn't matter. The winds of war are blowing. Whether this latest GARBAGE between Moscow and Georgia is something egged on by OUR sticking our noses in once again where they don't belong, ...think about it...scare the people so they'll vote for McCain....could see that one coming a mile away....OR whether it's an inexperienced yet dynamic junior senator who will have to depend on the established powers that be who are just the other side of the coin...either way...I don't see a bright side...you have to look beyond the rhetoric. I think we are screwed.

Don't drink the kool-aid.

I didn't want Iraq.
I also didn't want Afghanastan either

You can't chase a phantom bombing a nation. Makes no sense. War is so outdated.