Status quo united against change

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

David ET
by David ET
10-Mar-2008
 

While all other states promptly have reported the results of their primaries and caucuses, the final results of the Texas caucus are still being withheld from the voters and the nation. After 5 days only 41% of the votes have been reported with Obama in the lead. 

Texas had a two tier system of both primary and caucus and announcing Clinton as the winner of the state of Texas based on the result of the primary was as biased as anyone announcing Obama as the winner, only based on the Texas caucus. In fact it is projected that Barack Obama is the winner of combined delegates in the state of Texas and not Hillary, but the media and Clinton Campaign continue to claim that Hillary was the winner.

Those in the democratic party who are intentionally withholding the results of the Texas caucus under the pretense that they are not yet legally obligated to do so, seem to have no respect for the voters in Texas who waited long hours in lines to cast their votes nor have respect for million of Americans who are anxiously waiting for the results. It is obvious that in the age of the computers and internet some are intentionally delaying the results . After all the longer their favorite candidate is the presumed winner of the Texas elections the better publicity for Hillary. A deliberate act that seriously questions the ethics of those in charge of the Texas democratic party who have been trusted with tallying people's vote.

Such games are in line with the statements by those who claim that they want the voices of the voters in Florida be heard by suggesting that the Florida delegates be seated in the democratic convention for Hillary Clinton, while ignoring the will of so many of Florida democrats who stayed home and did not vote since they were told that their vote did not count. The Florida voter records has shown that unlike many other states the majority of those who voted were republicans and not democrats. 

The same ones want Michigan delegates seated for Hillary while Obama's name was not even on the ballot. On the other Rush Limbaugh and other conservatives have been encouraging republicans to vote for Clinton versus Obama, because they know they will have a much easier chance of defeating Hillary Clinton than Barack Obama in November. But the same republicans who are now voting for Hillary will happily cast their vote for McCain once Obama is out of the picture .
 
No wonder Hillary Clinton, a democrat keeps repeating that McCain, a republican is more qualified than Obama. This is how she is winking back at republicans that: yes, I agree, TOGETHER we should get rid of this young "skinny black" candidate "with a funny name". ....and no wonder why Hillary is so much against caucuses because Republicans would not or can not vote for her in a the caucuses held by democrats. 

It is a fact that when the Washington establishment see their special interests in danger, they easily cross party lines to gang up against the candidate of change who is threatening their interests. This is not based on a presumption but based on the fact that Clinton has so openly and so many times been choosing McCain over Barack Obama , just as Rush Limbaugh and many republicans have openly done so. That is also why we see Senator McCain keeps attacking Obama and not Clinton. Indeed, the two forces of establishment have united against Obama.

Another farce created, has been the notion that the media have favored Obama which in fact there are so much about Hillary Clinton that have been withheld from the public while every little thing about Obama has been magnified. The media analysts still refer to Obama calling Canadian officials while the government of Canada has officially denied such contact by Obama and is looking in to who among the Canadian conservatives has actually leaked such false information. Most probably someone who received a call from Washington at 3 AM ! 

The elections of 2008 are in fact a test for all Americans to chose between the united candidates of fear and status quo: McCain and /Clinton or the forces of hope and change lead by Barack Obama.

This is also a test for Barack Obama to chose between his historic calling to stand up for the people and lead the change or abandon its supporters and join a ticket with Clinton or another assigned position.  Whatever the outcome, after the choices are made, America forever will be different: for better or worse. Time will tell and soon!

Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by David ETCommentsDate
A must see on US economy
9
Aug 10, 2011
لولوی سر خرمن آمریکا و اسرائیل
1
Jul 31, 2011
Need an invitation to join GOOGLE + ?
3
Jul 26, 2011
more from David ET
 
David ET

Dear Azarin

by David ET on Mon Mar 24, 2008 03:44 AM PDT

I atry to ddress your concerns in order:

- I do not "love" Obama. I believe he is better than the other two candidates :-)

- Actually Obama did the proper thing. The rule is “During the Pledge of Allegiance you put your hand over your heart. During the national anthem you sing.” . That photo was taken during the national anthem . During the Pledge of Allegiance he had his hand on his chest as he did in Congress too.

- It is a common practice that if you disagree with TERMS of a bill you only cast PRESENT . It is a tactic that is commonly used. It is different than NO which means you fully oppose. Most practice it.

- Chosing Obama is not a fashion is a choice and calling it a "fashion" or "love" ,  is just as wrong as calling your choice of Clinton is because she is a "woman" 

Now I hope you would use the same yardstick that you use to look at Obama in such detail, you would do same about Hillary. I have listed many examples already . The latest being her lie about her trip to Bosnia. I can never vote for someone who would so openly lie even before becoming a president: 

VIDEO: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=It6JN7ALF7Y 

WALL STREET JOURNAL : According to the first lady’s personal schedule detailing the trip, just two of the more than 11,000 official pages of personal schedules released today, this is what the day looked like:

Clinton landed at Tuzla Air Base at 8:45 a.m. on March 25, 1996. She was greeted by Bosnian officials and a seven-year-old Bosnian girl whose name was redacted, and a 7th grade class. The girl read Clinton a poem. Clinton and her aides had a 10-minute meeting with acting Bosnia President Ejup Ganic and his aides. There was an hour-long "notables roundtable" moderated by then-Ambassador John Menzies followed by a 30-minute closed-door meeting with the heads of unnamed non-governmental organizations, and a 30-minute closed door meeting with military officials.


The first lady also toured Camp Alicia, ate lunch with the troops, toured Camp Bedrock, attended the USO show where the aforementioned Sinbad and musician Sheryl Crow (misspelled "Crowe" in the schedule) performed, followed by an hour visit at the general’s house before it was wheel’s up at 5:45 p.m. and Clinton was on her way to Italy.


WASHINGTON POST: Clinton’s tale of landing at the Tuzla airport "under sniper fire" and then running for cover is simply not credible. Photographs and video of the arrival ceremony, combined with contemporaneous news reports, tell a very different story. Four Pinocchios.

best :-)

David 


  •  
default

Obama's Syrian Connection

by Babak56 (not verified) on Wed Mar 12, 2008 09:13 AM PDT


  •  
Azarin Sadegh

What bothers me about Obama...

by Azarin Sadegh on Mon Mar 10, 2008 10:19 PM PDT

David,

I understand that you really love obama, but actually, what bothers me the most in Obama, is some hidden sides of a particular attitude, slowly divulged in him.

For example, he seems not to follow a certain basic rules like respecting the American flag, or putting his hand on his heart during the national anthem, (I'm sure you have already seen this video://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fwog6E08CFU)

If he is nominated, and he continues this type of mistakes, I'm afraid that we might end up with McCain.

Plus, my other issue is with this obamania! Everything in his speeches reminds me of a preacher, perfect like the leader of a cult, the cult of Obama. As if you should just believe in whatever he says without questioning any of his words. He is starting to act a little bit arrogant. As an example, he has skipped to clarify his stands on certain issues by his vote in the senate, but if anyone dares to question him about them, he would give a nice speech...something we all love to hear.  (yes, he has great writers!)

But I wonder what would happen if anyone starts doubting in his powers...is he going to be named an infidel, or not-so-cool?

It brings me to my last point: The other thing that bothers me is that he seems to become like the latest fashion icon among hip and cool and young people (and we all know how educated these young and hip and cool people are!!), So, I'm afraid like any other fashion icon it would be just an ephemera of a phenomenon representing the superficiality.

So, I'd vote for Clinton who has shown more signs of being an extraordinary human being and not the almighty himself :-)

Voila!

Azarin


  •  
David ET

Dear Jamshid

by David ET on Mon Mar 10, 2008 04:30 PM PDT

In fact your hope to "change the political process in the US" is idealistic and romantacizing, not what many are trying to achieve by electing Obama.

The fact that Barack Hossein Obama has even reached where he is now in the American political process already has created a change , even if he does not get elected.

As Deppak Chopra called the phenomenon, it is alreadyt  "a qualtum leap".

This is NOT about Obama but about the change in mentality and acceptance of someone other than usual


  •  
jamshid

Re: David ET

by jamshid on Mon Mar 10, 2008 02:11 PM PDT

Please stop romanticizing Obama. He is no different than other leaders who are "pre-filtered" by the establishment. At best he is another Carter, an ignorant buffoon who fell into the hands of his oil cartel masters when dealing with Iran.

Obama will change NOTHING. The man you really want to be the president of the US is not, and will not be, running for presidency in the foreseeable future.

If you want "real" change, then you should root for those who want to change the political process in the US. Obama is a supporter of that process and he will change none of it.

Are you so desparate that you are willing to lie to yourself? The "change" is only in political words. As far as change goes, Obama doesn't match up even with someone like Kennedy. Now go figure.

 


  •  
David ET

power more important than parties

by David ET on Mon Mar 10, 2008 01:11 PM PDT

Fo Clinton and special interests, oower and personal interest is more improtant than political parties and people. They unite to protect things the way it is.

Here is what Obama said today to Clinton:

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=K81aIAH6xo0


  •  
IRANdokht

I worry....

by IRANdokht on Mon Mar 10, 2008 12:01 PM PDT

McCain not facing any competition would never have to resort to any negative campaigning, but the way Clinton has started the negative campaign against Obama, she's not only made Obama sound incompetent and inexperienced, she didn't do much for her own image either....

I am afraid that the democrats are weakening themselves and we might face a huge number of disappointed democrats and undecided voters turning away or just not voting which will end up with the election of McCain and 4 more years of the same mess.

I wish the general elections were tomorrow, before these two exhaust themselves and the voters. this momentum can slow down or even completely disappear fast...

IRANdokht


  •  
default

Terrorists Will Celebrate Obama Win

by Babak56 (not verified) on Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:31 AM PDT


  •