|
Latest Stories
Recent blog posts
|
May 21, 2008 - 12:47pm.
Robert Creamer has some extremely good news, I personally hope it's more than a pep talk, see,
Capitol Hill Blue's columnists, blogs and reader comments Capitol Hill Blue is an independent, non-partisan news site that belongs to no political party and subscribes to no political or philosophical point-of-view. Our columnists are welcome to their opinions but readers should understand that their views do not necessarily reflect the editorial policies of this web site. We also welcome comments to selected opinion columns and in our popular ReaderRant discussion forum. Please remember, however, that we believe in civility on this web site and comments may be reviewed, moderated or removed if we feel they contain obscenities, racism, bigotry, anti-Semitic remarks or attack other posters. Our goal is reasoned discussion on issues facing this nation and we do not feel that goal is served by personal attacks and by seeing how many cute adjectives you can attach to an elected official or politician's name. Copyright © 2008 Capitol Hill Blue
|
User login
|
A couple of months ago, when
Submitted by griff on May 22, 2008 - 7:44pm.A couple of months ago, when there was a big push for Clinton to capitulate, I tried to make that case, and people thought me crazy. Although I don't support any Democrats, it seemed logical that the long season would only serve to keep people engaged and interested.
Clinton and Obama are so close philosophy- and platform-wise that they really couldn't and didn't argue policy positions. The only substantial differences are race and gender, which was used to the fullest extent.
On the flip side, the Republican Establishment has done us a great disservice by the premature coronation of McCain. When Romney dropped out "for the good of the party", it only served to cut short the primary season and quell the momentum of Ron Paul's candidacy.
Since there was very little separating McCain, Romney, et al philosophically, the reason for their rapid departure was to stem the tide of Paul, who offered a diametrically opposite philosophy that once was the core of the party. A brokered convention was to be avoided at all costs, and the more popular Paul became, the greater the threat of that happening.
Griff, is there any chance
Submitted by Sandra Price on May 23, 2008 - 9:58am.Griff, is there any chance of keeping the Paul movement going even after the election? I am willing to continue to make the divide between whoever wins in November to Paul. If there is enough interest I will open my new website just for that reason. It is already to go.
It is a long-term endeavor,
Submitted by griff on May 23, 2008 - 5:11pm.It is a long-term endeavor, yes. While most movements die shortly after the election cycle ends, this is a campaign of education and enlightenment that will live beyond November.
We haven't given up on ousting McCain, so keep an eye on Minneapolis in September, and the remaining state conventions. The Establishment is pulling no punches in trying to derail it.
The Good Doctor has shown us the belly of the beast, and the means in which to slay it. The rest is up to us. We need to keep these ideals alive and in the consciousness of the People. And we'll suffer no fools in the meantime.
Since you're an avid reader, might I humbly suggest picking up his new book, "The Revolution: A Manifesto" (Hardcover, 173 pp, Grand Central Publishing)? I think you'll find it to your liking.
Read This
RichardKanePA No difference
Submitted by RichardKanePA on May 23, 2008 - 2:07pm.RichardKanePA
No difference between Hillary or Obama would mean that Griff believes that Hillary’s hysterical praise of Israel is just election hype. But as an upward bound woman she may have a deep anger at Muslim culture, with Muslims quicker to take offense with a woman President.
And no difference between McCain and Romney also assumes that McCain’s pledge to “Restore freedom in Cuba” is also hype, however, McCain speaks fluent Spanish, is on a lot of Hispanic boards and needs a lot of new immigrants to join the armed services to back up the tough new foreign policy, McCain is proposing.
McCain and Obama would both prefer no guns on the street, but Obama not wanting to put illegal gun owners in jail makes a big difference in implementing a no gun policy.
I would like to see Third Party Candidates condemn only McCain and on election day in states where the election is close actually hand out ballots with Obama’s name on the top but where a third party candidate most likely to win locally, and perhaps a local Republican will be substituted for the other candidates to pick and ballot questions to vote for.
I'd like to respond, but I
Submitted by griff on May 23, 2008 - 2:54pm.I'd like to respond, but I really don't understand what you've said.
Clinton supports Israel but Obama doesn't?
Didn't Romney want to double Gitmo and use our armed forces for further nation-building?
Obama doesn't want to put illegal gun owners in jail?
Third party candidates should endorse Obama?
Please clarify.
I will agree, though, that both parties would like to disarm the people. Republicans are merely tasked with pandering to gunowners and fostering the illusion of being gun-friendly.