COMMENTS
Candidate Obama: A Less Risky Alternative
Posted, Tuesday, July
8, 2008 4:17 am
I am a Solicitor in Australia. I follow with interest American
politics and the future of the world economy.
I read with interest an article written by you “Candidate Obama:
A Less risky alternative”
I noticed with interest the following paragraph:
To conclude, Sen. Obama
may be a better alternative than Sen. McCain, but his propensity to double-talk
can be disconcerting. Let's say that he is possibly the least worst of the two
main presidential candidates. It is my contention that former Vice President Al
Gore, the candidate for whom a majority of Americans voted in 2000, would have
been a better and more logical, and most likely, a more successful Democratic
choice as a presidential candidate.
Would you consider it still possible that Al Gore could run for
President in 2008? Is it likely that he would accept the nomination if he was
drafted at the Democratic Convention?
Your thoughts would be interesting on this point.
Regards
Dean
Answer by R.T.:
It's
still a mystery to me why Mr. Gore did not run. Maybe his 2000 experience was
too traumatising to him and his family.
I
do not think that he can run as a presidential candidate this late in the game.
If there had been a stalemate between B. Obama and H. Clinton, he could then
have emerged as a compromise candidate.
As
of now, it would be a brilliant move on Sen. Obama's part to persuade Al Gore
to join him on the ticket. Mr. Obama's main weakness is his lack of experience
and Mr. Gore would provide that.
New
Posted, Monday, July 7,
2008 4:02 pm
I
just read your article about Barack Obama, and agree with your assessment.
However, I have this gnawing feeling that people will see him simply as a
self-serving politician, and he is doing nothing now to dispel that notion,
especially since US foreign policy in the Middle East necessarily requires
an agenda that is totally beneficial the State of Israel as the #1 priority.
David
________________________________________
Answer
by R.T.:
As
a matter of fact, most people do not know much about candidate Obama. That is a
strength for him for now, but this could hurt him later on. Polls at this stage
do not mean much. A large proportion of people have not yet made up their mind
about either candidate. It's only after Labor Day that things get really
rolling.
New
Posted, Monday, July 7,
2008 9:41 am
In response to your article with regards to the two 2008 US
presidential candidates I would like to point you to a widely known, but seldom
spoken of fact.
Please follow the links below. Notice who Obama's Foreign Policy
advisers are made up of.
Obama - Brzezinski [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama
- Foreign_policy_advisors]
Consider the fact that 1981-1983 Obama attended Columbia, majored in
Political Science and wrote his senior thesis on the disarmament of Nuclear
Soviet Union.
While attending, Brzezinski was the presiding director of the
Communist Affairs Institute at Columbia. I have no doubt that since that time
Obama has been indoctrinated with Brzezinski's Russia hating ideals. We are
headed for World War III with Obama. Not with Iran, but with Russia.
Consider the fact that Obama rose from relative obscurity to a
national political panacea worshiped by the mainstream media to a fault.
You have to ask yourself; how is this possible? Sure he charismatic, but
even your article points out, he has made several troubling comments as the
election nears. Could he be the CFR/Trilateralist/Bilderberg/NWO
manchurian candidate?
This is in no way support for John McCain, as he is definitely not the
ideal choice, but the substitution of the supposed "least worst of the two
main presidential candidates" is no better and possibly, in my opinion,
"the worst".
I intend to, and
urge all my friends to make a vote of protest and write in Ron Paul. I realize
this is futile, but my conscience cannot allow a vote for the lesser of the two
evils.
Matt
New
Posted, Monday, July 7,
2008 12:51 pm
Your article addresses a very small component of the issues at stake
in today's global disarray which, in my humble opinion, will require the
ultimate diplomacy to avert a third and ultimately fatal world war.
I emphatically reject John McCain's ability to engage in that
diplomacy while, at the same time, am thoroughly convinced that Barack Obama
has the gift for analysis, discretion and intelligent delivery.
I have traveled the world and spent the past ten years in Africa as a
volunteer health care giver with a non-faith based NGO. Recently, in
Kenya, I was startled to see a very large group of Kenyans marching with signs
indicating their support of Obama.
This is NOT a phenomena to be found only in Africa. My impression is
that the world, in general, sees Obama's white/black approach to governance as
the crossroads leading to world peace and cooperation. Everyone with whom I've
discussed world politics (literally, a cast of thousands) agrees that Obama
represents an opportunity for historical change in global equity.
Yes, he is doing what every thinking person does when confronted with
alternative opinions - he, at least, considers those opinions.
Barbara
Answer
by R.T.:
Of
course, this single article was not intended to tackle all of today's global
problems. I have written many articles on different related issues. You can
read them at:
http://www.thenewamericanempire.com/ARCHIVES.html
New
Here in the Neocon Reich we just celebrated Independence Day, the
irony of which was not lost on American Conservatives, as distinguished from
radical political and economic reactionaries, or patriots, as distinguished
from chauvinists and jingoists.
McCain surely would be Bush on steroids.
For all his recent pandering to Likudniks, Obama couldn't be worse.
And, as he changes his rhetoric frequently, Obama is likely to act less badly
than he has recently spoken.
Also, being neither an Old Money WASP nor a New Money arriviste, Obama
could never become intimate with latter day Robber Barons or Likudnik
imperialists. But McCain has often intervened on behalf of friendly
tycoons, and has Lieberman as his squire.
Thus, try as he might, Obama can't nail the role of neurotic
plunderer.
John
(Home: TheNewAmericanEmpire.com)