[Marxism-Thaxis] Clinton Camp: Obama Is Mean (and H e’s a Copycat, Too)
March 27, 2008, 4:47 pm Clinton Camp: Obama Is Mean (and He’s a Copycat, Too) By Julie Bosman Both sides battling for the Democratic presidential nomination have been throwing mud for several weeks now. But on Thursday, the Clinton campaign used its daily conference call to remind reporters that it has been a two-way battle, and that the Obama campaign has not been tactically pure. In a tense conference call Thursday afternoon, Clinton campaign aides complained bitterly that the Obama campaign was trying to play it both ways - promising a clean campaign, but then engaging in personal attacks anyway. “That is hardly in keeping with the politics of hope that have fueled Senator Obama’s ascent throughout this campaign,” said Phil Singer, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton. After accusing the Obama campaign of engaging in “character assassination,” Mr. Singer listed a few specific complaints: Samantha Power, a foreign policy adviser to Mr. Obama, called Mrs. Clinton a “monster.” (She has since resigned.) Merrill A. McPeak, a retired Air Force general who is supporting Mr. Obama, compared Bill Clinton to Joseph McCarthy, after Mr. Clinton seemed to question Mr. Obama’s patriotism. Mr. Obama himself suggested that Mr. Clinton was encouraging political attacks to go too far. “There’s a line that can be crossed where you stop focusing on the American people’s business and it just becomes about sport,” Mr. Obama said, speaking to reporters on his campaign plane this week. (For the record, Mr. Obama made those comments while largely agreeing with Mr. Clinton’s observation that politics is a contact sport.) But there was another reason for the Clinton conference call: Clinton aides complained that Mr. Obama was copying his policy positions from Mrs. Clinton. Neera Tanden, Mrs. Clinton’s policy director, said that one week ago, Mrs. Clinton proposed a $30 billion stimulus plan to help fight foreclosures. Thursday morning, Ms. Tanden said, Mr. Obama came out with “virtually the same proposal.” “If Senator Obama has to copy policy ideas when he’s a candidate on the campaign trail, how is he going to solve people’s problems if he’s president?” she said. “When it comes to fixing the economy, we need leadership, not followership.” Asked about the comments, Bill Burton, a spokesman for Mr. Obama, wrote in an email message, “The American people are tired of the sniping from the Clinton campaign -- both real and imagined.” Comments (285) E-mail this Share Del.icio.us Digg Facebook Newsvine Permalink barack obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton Related Posts From The Caucus 2008 Like It's TodayPoll: Obama, McCain Most Likely to Unite NationObama Warms to Wrapping Up Contest Poll: Democrats Might Vote McCain if Their Candidate Isn't the NomineeSlinging It Back and Forth Wright's Fla. Event Canceled From Around the Web The RCP Blog OR Head to Heads: Split DecisionPollster.com POLL: Pew National SurveyConvictions Obama: Law Professor or Resume Fluffer?The Page Three-Way Shoot Out Over EconomyThe Swamp Clinton camp: Democratic contest not 'in the bag'100 related »Powered by Blogrunner285 comments so far... 1.March 27th, 2008 4:49 pm Posting on behalf of many posters: I told you so. - Posted by A. Bluteau 2.March 27th, 2008 4:53 pm Pot calling the kettle black, much? - Posted by Sam 3.March 27th, 2008 4:53 pm BACKGROUND ON SEN. OBAMA’S DAY IN NEW YORK: On Monday, the Obama campaign responded to Hillary unveiling a comprehensive plan to deal with the housing crisis by attacking her for taking contributions connected to subprime lenders. Campaign manager David Plouffe said: “If we’re really going to crack down on the practices that caused the credit and housing crises, we’re going to need a leader who doesn’t owe those industries any favors.” As it turns out, those were just words… Today, Senator Obama gives an economy speech followed by a fundraiser at - you guessed it - one of the top 10 issuers of subprime loans in America, Credit Suisse. In fact, Senator Obama has taken more money from the top 10 issuers of subprime loans than BOTH Senator Clinton and Senator McCain [cq.com]. - Obama has taken $1,180,103 from the top issuers of subprime loans. [cq.com] - Obama received $266,907 from Lehman. [Cq.com] - Obama received $5395 from GMAC. [Cq.com] - Obama received $150,850 from Credit Suisse First Boston. [Cq.com] - Obama received $11,250 from Countrywide. [Cq.com] - Obama received $9052 from Washington Mutual. [Cq.com] - Obama received $161,850 from Citigroup. [Cq.com] - Obama received $4600 from CBASS. [Cq.com] - Obama received $170,050 from Morgan Stanley. [Cq.com] - Obama received $1150 from Centex. [Cq.com] - Obama received $351,900 from Goldman Sachs. [Cq.com] - Posted by joe 4.March 27th, 2008 4:54 pm We do need leadership not followshiip and a person who can deal properly with situations instead of complain when he got a grade that he felt was wrong or complain he
[Marxism-Thaxis] Mark Tomasik: Don’t discount Gore-led ticket
(5) Local talk radio a couple mornings ago: someone characterized Clinton as a suicide bomber (leader of the right wing) in the Dem Party: if she loses, she will take Democrats down rather than support Obama. ^ CB: Yea, a main expression of this was when she said McCain is ready, she's ready , but she's not sure about O. Basically , she endorsed McCain over O. Astonishing in the openness of her treacherous. ^ As far as I can see, Obama is as much an establishment candidate as Clinton, but is attractive insofar as he is more of a wild card, less predictable and perhaps less corrupted. ^ CB: Yea, it's not possible to predict, but there is at least a chance that he isn't totally sold out like the other two. There is some chance that he is a stealth progressive,given his history as a progressive activist. He won't be any worse than Clinton, and might be better. There's nothing to lose in supporting him. ^ The entire terms of the recent controversies displease me, because the issues under debate obscure the underlying dynamics of how we got into this situation. The race-baiting tactics of the Clintonites sinks much lower than I would have anticipated, and thus I instinctively react on Obama's behalf on this one issue, given its potential to sway voters. But this entire campaign season has been questionable from the start, including the media sea-saw: first, setting up the contest as an Obama-Clinton contest, squeezing out the other candidates; then by setting up Clinton as the shoe-in, bolstered by favorable focus groups (with a high approval by blacks), then by giving Obama a free ride while he was winning primary after primary, then giving Hillary a respite once she won Ohio and Texas, then emphasizing Obama's unstoppability, then turning on him now converting him from a transcendent figure into a race man, and now showing him in deep shit while Hillary is resurrected as a potential winner even though she can only win via manipulation of the superdelegates, etc. Hillary is now shown to be a liar, but still her advocates get lots of airtime. CB: However, it's hard to see all that tumultuous road as organized by he ruling class and their media. In other words, there's some real , dare I say, democracy going on. It got _out_ of control. I do not think the bourgeoisie planned for O to win or to have C steal it as the scenario. ^^ Note that the terms in which this contest is being publicly fought and reported makes it something other than what underlying political and economic forces are really driving this turn of events. ^ CB: Say that again ? ^ However, there may be also more superficial forces at work driving the eventual outcome in ways I did not anticipate. I knew that many supporters of Obama would not vote for Clinton in the general election because they were not Democrats or Democratic loyalists in the first place. But now to have the threat that Clinton and her supporters would sabotage their own party (assuming that most Clinton supporters are Dems and not independents) rather than see Obama win is something new and highly disturbing to me. This is not a factor in electability that I saw before. CB: Consider that this could do damage to the Democratic Party as is. It certainly could wean many Black people from the DP. This could be a crisis for the DP and two party system , no ? That ain't all bad This personal quest for power, if it is not about electability from the standpoint of voters for Clinton but only about Clinton's lust for power, is small and selfish in the extreme, for after all, the dashiki-clad jackass preacher notwithstanding, Obama is no radical; he has joined the establishment with considerable establishment backing. Now he is being portrayed not only as incompetent, untested, inexperienced, and a loose cannon, but as some weirdo race man outside the mainstream of legitimate politics. And not just by the Republishits, but by Clinton. CB: Well, the process is exposing the Clintons. Their honeymoon with Black people is ova. I still think O _is_ Blacker and more progressive than the persona he is running as. His tendency will be as progressive as it is possible to be in that office in this Reaganite period, which period by the way is almost fascist ! This situation is doubleplusungood. The only good that can come out of it is that black people may finally be rid of their illusions about Bill as the first black president and the Clintons as good white people to work for. ^ CB: Yea, see above. Also, it is allowing the masses of White people who are ready for an anti-racist , Black-White unity surge to express their anti-racism. Some of the mainstream Whites on television, journalists are really impressing me with how they are fighting the racism. And there are masses of White voters doing the same. There are lots of Whites on comments on newspaper columns and articles, and on talk radio like
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] The Next American Revolution
Thanks for this report. All the members of the Johnson-Forest Tendency persisted in their tendency towards dogmatic, prophetic, and unrealistic political thought. Grace has come up with some nutty philosophy in recent decades. This is not to pooh-pooh her or anyone else's community organzing activities. I don't see a great deal of promise in her political perspective, though. I was stunned to see the last 5 minutes of a TV interview she did with Bill Moyers on PBS. I had no idea Grace would live to become visible on American TV. Back in the 1940s she was the very first person to translate some of Marx's 1844 manuscripts into English. Jimmy Boggs, as I recall, was rather cynical about the American race/class hierarchy. Given the tendency for each succeeding ethnic group to shit on those below once rising in the class structure, Boggs I think concluded only that those on the bottom (Blacks in the '60s) could topple the system by upsetting the ethnic/racial hierarchy through radical/revolutionary struggle. -Original Message- From: Charles Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Mar 28, 2008 3:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], marxism-thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu Subject: [Marxism-Thaxis] The Next American Revolution 90 year old Grace Lee Boggs was one of the three leaders of the Johnson-Forrest tendency along with Raya Duneyevskaya and C.L.R. James. The Next American Revolution by Grace Lee Boggs Left Forum Closing Plenary, Cooper Union, New York, March 16, 2008 .. Full at: http://www.michigancitizen.com/print_this_story.asp?smenu=77sdetail=5818 ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
[Marxism-Thaxis] Good Morning, Vietnam!
http://www.feralscholar.org/blog/index.php/2008/03/27/good-morning-vietnam/ Good Morning, Vietnam! 27th March 2008, 03:54 pm by Stan Goff Nouri al Maliki, at the behest of his American masters, has thrown the new Army of the Republic of Vietnam against the militias of the most powerful and cohesive popular movement in Iraq, that of Muqtada al Sadr. By all accounts, even with their American advisers, tactical air and intelligence support, this operation appears to be a stupendous failure; the Mehdi Army of Sadr is reported to be routing the Iraqi “government” forces at every turn. Moreover, it has ignited an uprising that stretches from Baghdad to Basra and all points in between. This flagrant violation of the ceasefire that the Sadrists renewed only days ago for six additional months, by the American-controlled puppet government, has set the stage for the most dangerous moment in Iraq for the occupation forces since the dual rebellions in Fallujah and Najaf in April 2004. It has also quite probably signed the death warrant for the Iranian-trained and supported militias of the Supreme Council for the Islamic Revolution in Iraq (SCIRI), the foundation of Maliki’s last thread of legitimacy as an “Iraqi government.” The calculation is that this “strike” by Mailiki’s forces — many reported to have shed their uniforms and joined the Mehdi Army — will interrupt the breathing space that the US believes Sadr was using to rest, refit, and professionalize his forces… who the press calls “militants,” as it calls the Maliki forces “Iraqis.” The same US press, which has parroted the absurd claims of “surge success” for months now, a success that was based on successful ethnic cleansing in Baghdad combined with the Mehdi Army’s ceasefire, will now have to tie itself in rhetorical knots to explain how this success is now adrift in the columns of black smoke rising from one of the two main oil pipelines passing through the port-transit city of Basra, and why rocket-propelled grenades and mortar rounds are splashing onto the Green Zone like a storm. This past January, I pointed out in a Truthdig article, that “The principle aim of The Surge is to break the power of Muqtada al-Sadr. Sadr not only has the seats in the Potemkin parliament of Iraq that put Maliki (a leader in a relatively small Shiite party, the Dawa) into power against the SCIRI (the largest parliamentary faction); he commands the ferocious loyalty of two and a half million people and has an 80,000-strong militia concentrated a stone’s throw from the U.S.-protected Green Zone in Baghdad. Baghdad has about 6 million people; New York City has 8 million, just by way of comparison. The population of Sadr City, the “neighborhood” under the leadership of Sadr, is approximately that of Brooklyn.” If I could figure this out from Raleigh, NC, why can’t the press figure it out with reporters embedded at the Green Zone? Perhaps I just answered my own question. Just as was pointed out 32 months ago, the American occupation has been thrown into alliance with Iranian-backed partitionist Shia formations (by pressure from Sadr, actually), yet it cannot afford the dangers inhering in Iraqi partition. Yet the most popular nationalist, anti-partition Shia leader in Iraq — Muqtada al Sadr — cannot be relied upon to support either the occupation (part of the plan for permanent US bases in Iraq) or the oil law that lies near the center of the frozen heart of the occupation. And so, his power must be destroyed… if that is even possible. Now the US has plunged the knife into the back of even the obedient Kurds, allowing Turkish forces to rampage through Iraqi Kurdistan. The list of allies is shrinking; and the myth of “surge-success” evaporates. Good morning, Vietnam. Category: General | Comment (RSS) 3 Comments Cliss: Some comments - 1. Muqtada al Sadr seems to be pursuing a strategy of dividing US troops and drawing them out of Baghdad. There are reports of simultaneous bombings in both Baghdad and Basra. 2. Of the two cities, Basra is more vulnerable. If Basra falls, then US troops will be forced to move into Basra. Basra is the only port in Iraq - oil gets transported out of there, and it’s also an extremely important supply route for US troops - equipment, food, materials = incredibly vulnerable. This seems to be the plan - draw US troops out of Baghdad to defend Basra. Next: al Sadr supporters storm the Iraqi Government. Declare victory. Demand that the U.S. get out immediately. 3. U.S. strategy has been a series of misjudgements of the problems and the misapplications of the solutions. Problems which could have had a diplomatic solution had a bomb dropped on top of them. The US’s first option seems to always be pull out the heavy artillery; just drop bombs on the problems in the hope that they will go away. 4. If Basra falls, it’s doubtful they can bomb the city indiscriminately. There is an oil
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] Precis on theories of capitalist crisis
CB (from a past life): As to the true universal Doug asked Yoshie for, I would build it. not on a new idea, but Marx and Feuerbach's species-being. That is S Duff Henwood, isn't it? Asking someone else to do all the work by posing one of his pseudo-profound questions. Everyone else should turn in huge sweeps of unpaid prose while he works on a much delayed issue of his totally duff newsletter on interest rates. So what was the response to your manifesto CB? Did someone accuse you of some sort of essentialism that was not in keeping with real Marxism? BTW, are you reflecting an appreciation of Irigaray and Cixous here? CJ ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism
Another thing the discussion so far seems to have overlooked is finances. McCain isn't Bush 3.0 (or is that Bush 1.2?) because unlike Poppy Bush and Bushwa Jr., he can't seem to raise money. The fundamentalists and evangelicals aren't going to pay for his campaign (they didn't even really pay for Huckabee's). But the corporate establishment seems to be betting that the crisis is like the downturn at the end of Poppy's presidency and that a Democrat can fix it. That is also why national security state establishment types keep popping up (usually dressed like 'common people') at Obama rallies. That is about the only way to explain why Clinton and Obama both have so much money. We might be seeing a fundamental shift, too, like the way the business and military establishment got behind Blair's purged Labour Party and made it the party of the British establishment. But it is THE empire we are talking about here, not a former one. So the analogy is a weak one most likely. I would say it's still the Demoncrat's election to lose. I really hope that Obama becomes president and that his first appointment to the Supreme Court is Anita Hill. Then I would know he really is different. Guess I could have titled this with the crisis thread title. CJ ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] O and racism
Poor Bill, if only he had Cameron Diaz's surname! This is why I say Obama needs either an ethnic or Hispanic strategy, and I think he is probably smart enough that he does have one--as soon as he gets rid of the Clintons. However, by his very nature, he has upset the status quo of the Demoncrats. They are getting ready to absorb him into their bourgeois collective. The question is, will he see it as a loser strategy and do something really different with his one chance at the presidency and this election? If he loses, whatever strategy he chooses will always be second guessed. So chances are he will throw in with the Demoncrat consensus. If I were a betting man, that would give slightly better than even odds to win (because McCain thus far has failed to raise much money, because national security state types are showing up on the side of the Demoncrats too, not just the Repugs, and because the Repug in not an entrenched incumbent). OTOH, it all seems dicey precisely because of the racism, because of a lack so far of Hispanic support to Obama (or am I being misled by the media--afterall, he won Nevada, right?), and because the Demoncrats lose close elections because of the conservative/Repug/rural/southern/western biases built into the electoral system (and Senate too). They need a blow out. For a blow out strategy, Obama will have to lead. He will have to step outside the Demoncrat party that has rewarded him so far. http://www.freenewmexican.com/news/61293.html key quote: More than half of Latino voters in 23 states said no Latino was running for president. Only a quarter recognized Richardson as a Hispanic in the race. 2008 Presidential election: Richardson races to gain Hispanic recognition Related News---New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Democratic candidate for president, holds a forum with the Culinary Union at union headquarters Tuesday May 1,2007. Also on the Web More Richardson video resources The Richardson File Advertisement By Barbara Ferry | The New Mexican Sat May 5, 2007 10:31 pm Poll shows majority of Latinos unaware of governor's heritage If Bill Richardson's mother had been an American banker and his father had been the son of a prominent Mexico City clan, things might be different. As it is, the native Spanish-speaking presidential candidate with an Anglo last name faces a challenge convincing Hispanic voters that he, too, is Hispanic. ``For all the Latinos here, I want you to know that I'm Latino,'' Richardson said in Spanish at a recent campaign stop in California, according to a report by New American Media, a coalition of ethnic media outlets. ``I can't convince people with this last name.'' Richardson has repeated that he's running not as a Hispanic candidate but as a ``mainstream candidate'' who is proud of his heritage. He's also repeated that he's running on his resume and not as ``a rock star'' like Democratic front-runners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. But in the Hispanic press, Richardson has celebrity status. At campaign stops in Texas, Spanish outlets arrived en masse. He's been featured heavily on media such as Telemundo, which asked in one segment whether America was ready for ``a Mexican'' in the White House. In Los Angeles, he made history by giving a half-hour radio interview in Spanish to popular radio host Eddie ``El Piolin'' Sotelo. Univision anchor Maria Elena Salinas greeted him with a kiss at a convention of Hispanic journalists and wrote a boosterish column about him, ``El Presidente Richardson,'' on her Web site. In New York, Spanish radio station owners hosted a fundraiser for him. America Rodriguez, a professor of radio and television at the University of Texas at Austin, said Richardson's heritage and fluency in Spanish boosts him out of third-tier status for her and other Latinos. ``When it gets around to election time, we usually hear these candidates speaking this horrible Spanish,'' said Rodriguez, author of the book Making Latino News. ``For Latinos to be hearing someone who speaks our language correctly is very exciting.'' ``That's what makes him interesting to me,'' said Rodriguez, who is Cuban American. ``Otherwise, he's just another mainstream Democrat.'' Despite the Spanish media's excitement over having a candidate who can handle more than ``si se puede'' and other tired slogans, Richardson has an uphill battle ahead of him with Latino voters, according to one recent national poll. More than half of Latino voters in 23 states said no Latino was running for president. Only a quarter recognized Richardson as a Hispanic in the race. ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
