http://www.twincities.com/ci_9436868


I read Joe Soucheray's column today, and it has been in the back of my mind all day. He sums up for me what the big problem really is, not just in Washington but, in this election; we are not seeing any leadership or innovative, new approaches. We are getting talked to about the need for them, but not seeing them or hearing them.

Joe is my age, so I expect a certain amount of being a curmudgeon. But he has a great way of summing up things that a lot of folks my age keep talking about, at least in the places I hang out.

We desperately need a leader.

I agree with him to an extent, but I disagree that none are leaders. I think both Obama and Ron Paul are leaders, unfortunately one has been made an almost non-issue by his own party and the other one is being judged on the words that some pastors speak.

As far as Bush goes, he has asked us that we sacrifice in this war he's created, we are to sacrifice the constitution and all of the limits on presidential power...that's the sacrifice that is asked of us. The worst part is, people actually buy into it.

Please do not take this as a knock, Rover, because it is not intended as such.
Ron Paul has indeed offered some new, innovative thinking. Obama has talked about the need for it, but I still have not seen evidence that he has anything that would meet the standards or level of Paul's ideas. I do remain hopeful, however.

I'm gonna rant here, but hopefully not derail.

I'm voting for Obama because I truly believe that he will listen, not only to the people but to his advisors and I wholeheartedly trust that he has the ability to pick good advisors.

If Hillary get's the nomination I'm voting for Ron Paul, whether or not he's on the Ballot, I'll write it in.

I won't vote for Hillary as she is just the same in the way that she feels that the rules don't apply to her. The Fla and MI primaries show that. The next president is one that will need to ask us to not so much sacrifice but to use our ingenuity to change things, to get us back in a position of advantage. These wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the so called "War on Terror" they are things that can be ended in an instant, the real "war" for lack of a better word is the economic war, the war of the economies and to the winner shall go the spoils.

This war is by far the most dangerous due to the fact that the destruction doesn't necessarily end in death, but in suffering and enslaving.

I wholeheartedly trust that he has the ability to pick good advisors.Lacking much experience, 'policy is personnel' means more for Obama. And more than anything else, he has shown an extreme lack of ability in choosing people to be ascociated with.

I agree with most of what you say there, but I believe wholeheartedly that we need to remain in Afghanistan and continue to hunt down the AQ hierarchy and those that orchestrated the attack on us. If we do anything less, it will only invite more from those that are indoctrinated to believe it is a show of weakness to not pursue a vendetta.

Lacking much experience, 'policy is personnel' means more for Obama. And more than anything else, he has shown an extreme lack of ability in choosing people to be ascociated with.


He has been associated with Rev Wright, the pastor of his church and due to Wright's quoting of a state department official (The chickens have come home to roost) I think its patently a ridiculous thing to say Obama can't be president due to that. The priest of the church I went to as a kid, the same priest who married my two older brothers, who I told confession to, made my first holy communion, gave my grandfather and my mother the last rights, counceled me when my wife died....well...this priest gave the most scathing sermons about the evils of the gays....I didn't and never will agree with him. Does that mean I have no judgement in who I am associated with?

The other people, you don't need to mention them, it gets boring. They are people who promote and are involved in community level social programs, they protested the war in Vietnam, they fought with the police, they advocated a revolution...they were 21, 22 years old when they did that for gods sake. The mid to late '60s were a time of huge change in this country, the youth of that time questioned authority, they just didn't lay down and obey. Maybe if todays youth did that...well...there might be less dead and maimed.

Anyone in a position of leadership surely knows, you lead those that lead...I'm sure you can decipher that.

I agree with most of what you say there, but I believe wholeheartedly that we need to remain in Afghanistan and continue to hunt down the AQ hierarchy and those that orchestrated the attack on us. If we do anything less, it will only invite more from those that are indoctrinated to believe it is a show of weakness to not pursue a vendetta.

I agree with you about Afghanistan.

Lacking much experience, 'policy is personnel' means more for Obama. And more than anything else, he has shown an extreme lack of ability in choosing people to be ascociated with.

Actually, he put together one hell of a campaign team, I think that speaks volumes. They blew away the other guys.

Rover, you can vote for Obama for whatever reason you feel like .. and you know I'm not going to vote for him.

But please spare yourself the bullshit. Obama has surrounded himself in attaining the political hilltop with some of the most vitriolic hate filled friends and advisors I've ever seen. Please, no 'youthful indiscretions' or taken out of context. Hell, the Weather Underground terrorist told the NY Times on Sept 11'th that he wished he could have done more. He's no uniter. Far from it.

Hell, the Weather Underground terrorist told the NY Times on Sept 11'th that he wished he could have done more. He's no uniter. Far from it.

Who's not a uniter Obama? or the former Weatherman guy?

And as far as the quote in question the man has fought viciously to show he was completely misquoted and I believe the NY Times even apologized for the situation.

The sad part is, an intelligent person like yourself is so influenced by the media hype about these guys.

The "Weatherman" most definately did bomb government offices, I agree this was wrong. The total casualties resulting from their bombing campaign was...ZERO..except for three of their own members who died in Greenwich village while trying to make a bomb. They always gave advance warning of the bombing and they also set the bombs off in the middle of the night to insure there were no casualties.

The group was formed in 1969, when Obama was 8 and living overseas, by the time the group disbanded in 1973 Obama had reached the age of 12.

After he graduated from Lawschool Obama worked for a group in Chicago that worked with the community groups on the south side. Some former members of the Weatherman and the Black Panthers also worked in those communities bringing educational and social programs where there was none before.

These "terrorists" as you call them did more to advance our society than any ten of members of the Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 administrations.

You have to remember that in those days people were drafted and sent to a war that was as or even more senseless than the current one in Iraq, I realize you probably have no memory of those times but I do and people protested as they should have, hell even the veterans were a majority against what was going on there. That war wasn't lost because of bad reporting it was lost because of assholes who were leading our country and our military...all bought and paid for by the likes of DuPont and other fine corporations of the day.

"Not terrorists" ?

Sorry Rover, you're over the deepend and floundering... and your rants against anything Bush has ever done is quite humurous in hindsight.

"Not terrorists" ?

Sorry Rover, you're over the deepend and floundering... and your rants against anything Bush has ever done is quite humurous in hindsight.


No I've actually been factual...how about you?

No I've actually been factual...how about you? No emotionally based terrorist sympathizing on my part. If the NY Times has apologized, they need to update the article (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1) - which they normally do immediately in grand fashion when they've wronged someone they ideologically agree with.

The sad part is, an intelligent person like yourself is so influenced by the media hype... Is that why I blindfully follow the media's narrative about Iraq? At least they're finally getting it right (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html) now. Hell, even the French are ahead (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5grDwPqYbcmnXyLapJUQ6OUIWKVng) of Obama in this regard.

If Obama is such a uniter and he's going to unite the nation when elected, he needs to start spreading the pixie dust cause I aint seeing it. And neither do I expect to from someone who takes their kids to a church for 20 years that teaches them to hate the whitey.

No emotionally based terrorist sympathizing on my part. If the NY Times has apologized, they need to update the article (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=1) - which they normally do immediately in grand fashion when they've wronged someone they ideologically agree with.

Is that why I blindfully follow the media's narrative about Iraq? At least they're finally getting it right (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/31/AR2008053101927.html) now. Hell, even the French are ahead (http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5grDwPqYbcmnXyLapJUQ6OUIWKVng) of Obama in this regard.

If Obama is such a uniter and he's going to unite the nation when elected, he needs to start spreading the pixie dust cause I aint seeing it. And neither do I expect to from someone who takes their kids to a church for 20 years that teaches them to hate the whitey.

Terrorist sympathizing? You know I had a long post all typed out and then I realized...your just an asshole.

Terrorist sympathizing? You know I had a long post all typed out and then I realized...your just an asshole.

These "terrorists" as you call them did more to advance our society than any ten of members of the Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 administrations.

Yes, people who blow up buildings to further their political cause are terrorists. And they're responsible for the murder of 3 individuals. I'm not crying over their death though. Karma is a bitch sometimes.

your just an asshole. Oh and I find it sad you hold me in lower regard than these terrorist assholes.

Who's not a uniter Obama? or the former Weatherman guy?

And as far as the quote in question the man has fought viciously to show he was completely misquoted and I believe the NY Times even apologized for the situation.

The sad part is, an intelligent person like yourself is so influenced by the media hype about these guys.

The "Weatherman" most definately did bomb government offices, I agree this was wrong. The total casualties resulting from their bombing campaign was...ZERO..except for three of their own members who died in Greenwich village while trying to make a bomb. They always gave advance warning of the bombing and they also set the bombs off in the middle of the night to insure there were no casualties.

The group was formed in 1969, when Obama was 8 and living overseas, by the time the group disbanded in 1973 Obama had reached the age of 12.

After he graduated from Lawschool Obama worked for a group in Chicago that worked with the community groups on the south side. Some former members of the Weatherman and the Black Panthers also worked in those communities bringing educational and social programs where there was none before.

These "terrorists" as you call them did more to advance our society than any ten of members of the Reagan, Bush 1 and Bush 2 administrations.

You have to remember that in those days people were drafted and sent to a war that was as or even more senseless than the current one in Iraq, I realize you probably have no memory of those times but I do and people protested as they should have, hell even the veterans were a majority against what was going on there. That war wasn't lost because of bad reporting it was lost because of assholes who were leading our country and our military...all bought and paid for by the likes of DuPont and other fine corporations of the day.

Have to say I take note of this statement and go....WHOA

Regardless of the when/why the act of bombing is not an approved method of revising government. There are methods and means to do so, their methods were not it. The fockers were WRONG and got off due to a technicality. They should distance themselves from public scrutiny and for Obama's sake drop off the radar.

Oh and I find it sad you hold me in lower regard than these terrorist assholes.


I also find it sad that when I "go negative" I get folks posting about me and reporting me, and talking about losing respect and blah blah blah.....but when a fervent Obama supporter does so it seems to be acceptable.

I guess that is the price I have to pay for not making a hasty decision on who I am going to be voting for, tho'.

And Akipt, one of the funniest lines regarding "assholes" I ever heard was from a waitress after bar closing shutting down a drunk: "Hey baby, can I get in your pants?" "No thanks, there is already one asshole in there."