Hillary "Loudly Booed" at Obama/Gore Rally in Michigan

[Evilmav2]

Hillary "Loudly Booed" at Obama/Gore Rally

By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer Mon Jun 16, 10:32 PM ET

DETROIT - Al Gore made his debut in the 2008 presidential campaign Monday night, encouraging voters to back Barack Obama because "take it from me, elections matter."
ADVERTISEMENT

The former vice president's speech at the Joe Louis Arena was part endorsement and part blistering attack on the man who denied him the White House eight years ago.

"After eight years of incompetence, neglect and failure, we need change," Gore said. "After eight years when our Constitution has been dishonored and disrespected, we need changes."

In 2000, Gore won the popular vote but lost the disputed election to George W. Bush, who captured Florida and its electoral votes after a divided Supreme Court ended the re-count of ballots. Since then, Gore has made combatting global warming his signature issue, and has been recognized worldwide for his effort — from an Academy Award to the Nobel Prize.

Obama stoked lasting Democratic anger over the 2000 outcome when he recognized Gore as "the winner of the popular vote for president."

"You remember that," Obama said as the crowd of 20,000 erupted in raucous applause.

Gore is one of the most popular figures in the Democratic Party, but he stayed out of the primary campaign.

It's the second time Obama has rolled out a major endorsement in Michigan, where he did not campaign during the primary because its election violated the party rules. Obama is counting on a win in Michigan in November, but brought Gore and 2004 vice presidential nominee John Edwards to help validate him among Democrats in the state after skipping their primary.

"I'm grateful Al Gore came to Detroit tonight," Obama said. "But I'm ever more grateful for everything he's done in the last 40 years for this country."

Gore announced his decision in a fundraising e-mail earlier Monday. "From now through Election Day, I intend to do whatever I can to make sure he is elected president of the United States," Gore wrote.

Gore told the rally that the Democratic primary was a contest between a strong and inspiring field of candidates, but "now we've made our choice."

He said Republican candidate John McCain deserves respect for all he has done for this country and for his willingness to debate his party on climate change and other critical issues. But he said the 71-year-old McCain's "age and experience" aren't the same as Obama's judgment, noting the Democrat's early opposition to the Iraq war.

He said Republicans criticized President Kennedy for being too young and inexperienced to be president as well, but Kennedy noted that Thomas Jefferson, George Washington and Christopher Columbus all accomplished great things before they reached their mid-40s.

"I feel your determination after two terms of the Bush-Cheney administration to change the direction of our country," he said. He accused Bush of myriad missteps, including a botched response to Hurricane Katrina, economic problems, foreign policy mistakes and allowing lead-tainted toys and poisoned pet food in from China.

"Even our dogs and cats have learned that elections matter," he said. "This election matters more than ever because America needs change more than ever."

The Republican Party pointed out that Gore's 2000 running mate, Sen. Joe Lieberman, has since left the Democratic Party and become an independent and is backing McCain.

In response to Gore's harsh critique of Bush, GOP spokesman Alex Conant said, "This election isn't about changing the past, it's about changing the future. It's telling that half of the 2000 Democratic ticket endorsed John McCain early in the campaign, while the other half waited until Barack Obama had been the presumptive nominee for weeks." Obama clinched the nomination on June 3.

Obama and Gore were introduced by Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, who backed Hillary Rodham Clinton in the primary. She held up a navy blue pump and said, on behalf of women everywhere, that she was proud to say she's supporting Obama.

She was loudly booed at the mention of Clinton's name, and Obama chastised the crowd for that when he spoke. He said he's a better candidate for having run against Clinton.

"She's tough," he said. "That's why this race took so long. She's a fighter. And we need fighters in the Democratic Party because we've got a lot to fight for."

___

http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/20...-at-obama.html
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080617/..._pr/obama_gore

[sike]

interesting...

[Flacolaco]

"Even our dogs and cats have learned that elections matter,"

My wife and I wanted to have kids soon, but clearly we're going to have to wait and see what happens after this idiot is done ruining the country.

[sike]

Originally Posted by Flacolaco

we're going to have to wait and see what happens after this idiot is done ruining the country.

I think there is a serious probability that he would be the worst prez in our history.

[mary]

Gore or Obama?

I'm confused.

Who's quote is that?

[jefelump]

"Even our dogs and cats have learned that elections matter" is a Gore quote, as best I can tell. Sounds pretty condescending to me.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by jefelump

"Even our dogs and cats have learned that elections matter" is a Gore quote, as best I can tell. Sounds pretty condescending to me.

It depends on whether you have a dog (or cat) in that fight...

[Arne]

Originally Posted by sike

I think there is a serious probability that he would be the worst prez in our history.

The current president was very angry when he heard about sike comment and was quoted saying: "No one steps on supermans cape."

[rabbitproof]

trash the Constitution, expand executive power, torture people in the name of the United States, start a foreign policy of attacking people who never attacked us either on preemptive or idealistic grounds, grow a huge expansion of federal debt, give tax cuts for people who didn't need, spiral deficit and produce a weakened dollar.

who dat.

[Rhylan]

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

trash the Constitution, expand executive power, torture people in the name of the United States, start a foreign policy of attacking people who never attacked us either on preemptive or idealistic grounds, grow a huge expansion of federal debt, give tax cuts for people who didn't need, spiral deficit and produce a weakened dollar.

who dat.

trash the Constitution - just about everyone

expand executive power - everyone since FDR (if not before)

torture people in the name of the United States - I'm against torture but certainly don't buy into the idea that Dick Cheney invented it.

start a foreign policy of attacking people who never attacked us either on preemptive or idealistic grounds - Pretty sure we started this foreign policy after WWII. We did lots of attacking between 1946 - 2001, and no attacks on American soil.

grow a huge expansion of federal debt - agree this needs to stop, but nothing new here.

give tax cuts for people who didn't need - who decides who needs?

spiral deficit - I assume you mean trade deficit. Show me the stone tablet that says we have to export more than we import. As we modernize our industries we are naturally becoming more service-oriented and less manufactured-goods-oriented. We can't afford to have a boatload of factories here like we did in 1947, because people who sit on an assembly line all day screwing in the same damn rivet over and over somehow got the idea that that job is worth $60k a year, and had state governments stupid enough to go into agreements with Unions forcing employers to give unskilled workers compensation well over market value. We talk and talk about how education & technology can (and has) transformed the country, yet we are expect to somehow preserve an identical profile of industry as 40, 50, 60 years ago, just because people in the rust belt think they're entitled?

produce a weakened dollar - the Federal Reserve is responsible for this.

Point I'm trying to make is that you can't bring up a bunch of stuff that has been going on since God-knows-when and "hope" that a "change" will suddenly erase it. Bush didn't invent this stuff, he just kept on carrying the mantle.

[Flacolaco]

give tax cuts for people who didn't need - who decides who needs?

Exactly. Who NEEDS a tax break?

I sure as hell do. If we would have just taxed everyone the same from the get-go we wouldn't have this problem.

[jefelump]

This is actually a point where I side with Ron Paul. Abolish the IRS. I would love to see a flat tax... say 10% perhaps, with no loop holes.

[DirkFTW]

Originally Posted by jefelump

This is actually a point where I side with Ron Paul. Abolish the IRS. I would love to see a flat tax... say 10% perhaps, with no loop holes.

Our unemployment rate would double with the influx of suddenly-unwanted tax people.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by rabbitproof

trash the Constitution, expand executive power, torture people in the name of the United States, start a foreign policy of attacking people who never attacked us either on preemptive or idealistic grounds, grow a huge expansion of federal debt, give tax cuts for people who didn't need, spiral deficit and produce a weakened dollar.

who dat.

Just keep chanting "hopey hopey change change". Everything will be ok.

[Flacolaco]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Just keep chanting "hopey hopey change change". Everything will be ok.

I love thig.

Hey maybe we should all chant that for the Mavs in the off-season as well.

[jefelump]

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

Our unemployment rate would double with the influx of suddenly-unwanted tax people.

Quitting a job just because you have to pay income taxes seems a bit extreme to me. Perhaps some people would do that, but then how would they eat? Unemployment only goes so far, and is not a never-ending benefit. Of course, we would have to do something about the Welfare State problem too...

Oh, and if our unemployment rate doubled, that would put us on par with Europe.

[DirkFTW]

Originally Posted by jefelump

Quitting a job just because you have to pay income taxes seems a bit extreme to me. Perhaps some people would do that, but then how would they eat? Unemployment only goes so far, and is not a never-ending benefit. Of course, we would have to do something about the Welfare State problem too...

Oh, and if our unemployment rate doubled, that would put us on par with Europe.

Sorry, I meant all the IRS employees and tax-advisers would be out of a job.

[Arne]

Originally Posted by Rhylan

grow a huge expansion of federal debt - agree this needs to stop, but nothing new here.

give tax cuts for people who didn't need - who decides who needs?

spiral deficit - I assume you mean trade deficit. Show me the stone tablet that says we have to export more than we import. As we modernize our industries we are naturally becoming more service-oriented and less manufactured-goods-oriented. We can't afford to have a boatload of factories here like we did in 1947, because people who sit on an assembly line all day screwing in the same damn rivet over and over somehow got the idea that that job is worth $60k a year, and had state governments stupid enough to go into agreements with Unions forcing employers to give unskilled workers compensation well over market value. We talk and talk about how education & technology can (and has) transformed the country, yet we are expect to somehow preserve an identical profile of industry as 40, 50, 60 years ago, just because people in the rust belt think they're entitled?

produce a weakened dollar - the Federal Reserve is responsible for this.

Point I'm trying to make is that you can't bring up a bunch of stuff that has been going on since God-knows-when and "hope" that a "change" will suddenly erase it. Bush didn't invent this stuff, he just kept on carrying the mantle.

I'm not gonna go on about the foreign policy and what it has done, but if you talk about the federal debt and the Dollar's decline, then you will have to take the federal budget and the foreign policy spending into account.

By the way, war industry can mean economic growth in terms of numbers, but it never contributes to the wealth of a nation. War is the enemy of a healthy economy, because it takes people out of productive jobs. - Therefore a smaller amount of goods and services has to be divided among an equal number of people.

Bush didn't invent a budget deficit but he continuously showed that he doesn't care about the budget. He doesn't care about taxing the poor and the middle class through inflation, which he creates whenever there is a deficit that the government has to pay for by making the Fed print more money. I'm not saying he invented it and I'm not saying that he had the same economic possibilities as Clinton had to balance the budget. But, in the end, through spreading this war, cutting taxes without cutting spending and other needless government programmes, like "No Child Left Behind", which doubled the size of the departement of education, he has managed to increase the federal debt by roughly 64% during the last 7 1/2 years. He will reach 75% when he's done and the effect of his costly war will continue to attack the budget for years to come.

That's stunning and fades in comparison to Clinton's 34%. It's even more stunning if you look at it only in terms of hard numbers and not %.

All of this has had a very negative effect on the Dollar. There's no doubt about that.

Then to the tax cuts. Whenever government gives tax cuts without cutting spending, what it acutally does is betray its people. Be it the rich, the middle class, the poor or all of them who receive this money. What happens is that the purchasing power of the money goes down eventually, since government has to go to the Fed and print some more money. And all of the tax relief is gone. However, now the government has to pay interest on this money. Since government can't handle money and by nature will never draw profit from its actions, it has to tax the people even more in order to come up with the interest it has to pay to the Fed. So it doesn't matter to me if he gave those tax cuts to the rich or the poor. It's just betrayal.

All of these actions lead to a decline in the value of the Dollar. - So you're quite incorrect when you say, that that has everything to do with the Fed and nothing to do with this administration.

Then to your point of deficites not being a bad thing. If America would use it's deficits in order to buy machinery and other things that it would need to be able to produce more goods and services like it did back in the days, then a trade deficit would not be a bad thing. But, when the US uses its deficit in order to consume stuff, it's a totally different story and will affect the value of the Dollar, as well. And at some point, the US will not be able to pay other countries back. Those other countries will then have the pleasure of consuming all of these goods and services themselves. Back in the days, the world was sure that they would get their money back, since the US didn't consume, but invested.

Furthermore, the Bush administration does have some influence on the Fed and Bush certainly didn't want to endure the recession that was necessary to have after the dotcom bust. The resulting cheap money brought to you the housing crisis and the resulting credit crisis. To what degree Bush is to blame for this can be subject to discussion, but at least Bush appointed Bernanke.

In the end, I'm not saying that Obama would be a real improvement. But at least he would've a slightly better foreign policy, intellectual power and would restore America's image around the world. If I were to vote in America I would decide for the lesser of the two evils, since the only candidate I would truely support has left the race and will only have a real effect on American politics in years to come through supporters turned politicians.

What I would certainly want, however, would be a departure from this arrogant and warmongering administration that will actually run a propaganda machine in order to convince people that the war is the right thing. - It's just to fascist a thing to me.

Anyways, we didn't even come to talk about the cut backs on individual freedom, property rights, etc.

[jefelump]

Originally Posted by DirkFTW

Sorry, I meant all the IRS employees and tax-advisers would be out of a job.

Ah, I mis-read your post. You're right, as usual. What was I thinking?!?

[rabbitproof]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Just keep chanting "hopey hopey change change". Everything will be ok.

I guess you're insinuating chanting changes things. How baseless.

[Rhylan]

Arne, I think you pretty much missed my point. I wasn't absolving Bush of anything, just pointing out that he's given us more of the same of what we got for decades (excluding some aspects of Reagan) and that Obama would be no different and even worse.

You're right about all those other conditions hurting the dollar. There's no question. But the Fed gives the government the free license to print the money to keep up with the bad habits you describe. At the end of the day, unless the Federal Reserve in its current form goes away, I'm already resolved to the idea that the dollar is going to keep going to shit no matter what we do. So as long as it is, I'd much rather it go to shit while in my pockets than in the pockets of Washington, DC.