Obama fans have had their adrenaline rush, now it's my turn to have mine

[Keith009]

Hillary Clinton to accept secretary of state: Report > World > LIVENEWS.com.au

Yay to Hillary as Secretary of State!!

As much as I supported a Democratic White House and hence the Democratic candidate's victory as the Democrats are the most analogous US political party ideologically to the ALP, I am not one of those who've seen the man walk on water. I have always supported Senator Clinton from the start. A large part of that was due to concern about the President-elect's foreign policy positions (no doubt he'd make an excellent President otherwise). However, his choice of Senator Clinton as Secretary of State even though they disagree fundamentally on various issues, eg she once effectively called him a softie over his various foreign policy positions to do with Iran and Syria (too right), shows that he's a pragmatic leader who recognises talent and the right person for the job.

Senator Clinton is a fine choice for managing the War on Terror, containing socialists in China, evil dictatorships in the Middle East and North Korea, as well as other illiberal regimes elsewhere. ^

 

[coco50]

It was a great election victory. I was in the US from Sept. 13th until Oct 10th and followed the campaign and debates on CNN. I was in NYC the day Lehmann Brothers failed and many US friends now have to work past retirement to be able to afford to live after they give up work. Obama's choice of Hilary Clinton is a good choice. She knows where all the skeletons are buried at 1600 Pennsylvania, too!

 

[stuartfaz]

I think I showed more interest in this election than any previously, including our own.

I had been following Senator Obama's campaign since the primaries and hoped he'd get over the line, and as soon as the Palin effect wore off, it was game over.

Senator Clinton was always going to be offered a cabinet role. I thought she'd be more likely to go to Health and Human Services given the prominence she gave healthcare in her campaign, but I think she'll make a terrific Secretary of State, and I look forward to her presidential run in 2016.

 

[drron]

It was a great election victory. I was in the US from Sept. 13th until Oct 10th and followed the campaign and debates on CNN. I was in NYC the day Lehmann Brothers failed and many US friends now have to work past retirement to be able to afford to live after they give up work. Obama's choice of Hilary Clinton is a good choice. She knows where all the skeletons are buried at 1600 Pennsylvania, too!

Hey how come i didnt see you in NYC-I was outside Lehmans then too.
I agree the choice of Hilary is good but does it make up for the scary VP-should have seen the bloopers he made during the campaign-and he promises to be a hands on VP.

 

[stuartfaz]

I agree the choice of Hilary is good but does it make up for the scary VP-should have seen the bloopers he made during the campaign-and he promises to be a hands on VP.

Agreed, Biden is the gaffe-master, but look at it in perspective. It was him or Palin.

And Palin scared me. The Republicans tried putting a dim-witted yet strangely popular first-term governor from an oil-rich state on the ticket before, and that's how we got W. She had no place that close to the Oval Office.

She's a looker though. Just thought that warranted comment.

 

[Keith009]

Hey how come i didnt see you in NYC-I was outside Lehmans then too.
I agree the choice of Hilary is good but does it make up for the scary VP-should have seen the bloopers he made during the campaign-and he promises to be a hands on VP.

Surely the Biden gaffes aren't to the extent of Palin's disastrous interview with Katie Couric? So much so that her own campaign banned her from unscripted media appearances. I mean, it's more than just gaffes with Palin - the woman clearly has no clue! Not to mention her extreme right wing views. She makes Tony Abbott and David Clarke look like trendily PC latte sipping, marijuan_ smoking, dreadlock wearing Fitzroy glitteratis in comparison.

Senator Sarah Palin is a real possibility atm btw...:-|

 

[drron]

Surely the Biden gaffes aren't to the extent of Palin's disastrous interview with Katie Couric? So much so that her own campaign banned her from unscripted media appearances. I mean, it's more than just gaffes with Palin - the woman clearly has no clue! Not to mention her extreme right wing views. She makes Tony Abbott and David Clarke look like trendily PC latte sipping, marijuan_ smoking, dreadlock wearing Fitzroy glitteratis in comparison.

Senator Sarah Palin is a real possibility atm btw...:-|

Did you watch Katie Couric's interview with Joe Biden-when asked what should be done about the financial crisis his reply was"well in 1929 FDR went on television and calmed the nation"
Well FDR was not president in 1929 and that comes from a fellow who has been in the US Senate for over 30 years-he surely aint as smart as a 5th grader.
Second TV was not available for the masses.And finally even if he were right things just happened to get a lot worse after 1929.
Then on foreign affairs when asked about the Middle East he confidently said the US and France had combined to kick Hezbollah out of Lebanon-again coming from a fellow who has been in the US senate for over 30 years-he certainly cant use the inexperienced tag now can he.The really scary thing to me is that now he is just a heart beat away from being president.

 

[opusman]

he certainly cant use the inexperienced tag now can he.The really scary thing to me is that now he is just a heart beat away from being president.

Luckily Obama's heart is (presumably) in much better shape than McCain's

Besides, Cheney has been a heart beat away from being president for the past 8 years, if that didn't scare you I don't know why Biden should.

 

[Keith009]

Ya know... tbh I was always hoping for a Obama/Clinton ticket and was disappointed when she'd lost the primaries, and further when she didn't get included on the ticket. But I guess such a ticket would've led to lots of internal s*itfights. What surprises me is the extent to which US politics is tied to personalities over ideology or policy, so much so that lots of jilted Clintonites were openly declaring their support for McCain. As far as I'm concerned the worst Democrat would make a better Prez than the best Republican. Partisan? Moi? Surely not? :mrgreen:

I s'pose Senator Clinton as Secretary of State is still a pretty good outcome. Great day for freedom.

 

[drron]

Luckily Obama's heart is (presumably) in much better shape than McCain's

Besides, Cheney has been a heart beat away from being president for the past 8 years, if that didn't scare you I don't know why Biden should.

Tsk tsk-a hint of ageism there.
An african american male in his late 40s who smokes is not necessarily at lower risk of heart disease than a 70 year old who has a family history of longevity.
Besides Cheney was almost certainly at higher risk of heart disease than Bush wasnt he.

 

[serfty]

Last year I was in the USA for the first week of November; then TV was interesting with lots of good stuff on football and the Pats/Colts.

This year at the same time I could not get out of the place quick enough - if you think the media here was full of it, it was nauseous over there ... I was hoping Nader would win to shut them all up! :-|

 

[moa999]

I think the amazing thing is more the difference between the Republican/Conservative/Liberal/Tory parties and the Democrat/Labour parties the world over. It is very dangerous to automatically transfer ones political views to another nation

Palin would not get a ticket with the Libs/Nats in Australia and would be a One Nation supporter. Other parts of the Republican party would be fervent Family First supporters (probably win a few states in the US) and half the Democrats would vote Green in Australia.

Afterall, the UK supported the war in Iraq under a very successful labour PM.

 

[stuartfaz]

Tsk tsk-a hint of ageism there.
An african american male in his late 40s who smokes is not necessarily at lower risk of heart disease than a 70 year old who has a family history of longevity.
Besides Cheney was almost certainly at higher risk of heart disease than Bush wasnt he.

Obama's quit smoking I think.

I have to admit that I thought one of the strangest/funniest parts of the campaign was all the talk of McCain's apparent impending death.

While it was unsettling to think of Palin as 'one heartbeat away' from the presidency, it is funny to think that one of the first things he had to convince voters of, before policy or anything like that, was that he'd still be alive in four years.

 

[Keith009]

I agree that it's difficult to transpose politics from one country to another. I like the rather mixed market economy we have in Australia and would consider myself a pragmatic collectivist. But more often than not I feel like a communist in the US, yet a right wing free market capitalist in Europe.

However for all their differences, the Democrats and Labour in the UK are the most analogous parties in their respective countries to the ALP in terms of basics such as universal healthcare, equally accessible education, social justice, and pro union policies.

All political spectrums are relative and I think it is fair to say that the Democratic/Labour/Labor parties and their respective opponents occupy similar positions on the political spectrum of their respective political environments.

Afterall, the UK supported the war in Iraq under a very successful labour PM.

A number of people in the ALP do support the war in Iraq,the devil is in the detail. I do support the war but I believe the justification on the basis of WMDs and the almost unilateral execution were flawed. A more constructive engagement with the UN would've resulted in a more successful, multilateral liberation of Iraq. Official party policy though against the war in Iraq (but i don't think I should be afraid of supporting something that's unpopular) does endorse on War on Terror in all but name. It's fair to say that most Labor moderates are supportive of policies that promote freedom and the containment of totalitarian regimes everywhere.

As for the Republican/Family First thing - you'd be surprised by how dominant the Christian Right is within the Liberal Party. Libertarians or classical Liberals in the LP as they call themselves are a dying breed with the more competent operators during preselection battles usually hailing from the far right of the party. Christian Right views are rather mainstream within the Liberal Party, as the prevalence of politicians like the incumbent federal Members for Indi (VIC) and Mitchell (NSW) and a certain former federal Health Minister would suggest. The main difference between Family First and the Liberal Party seem to be economic, as Family First actually espouses rather collectivist policies.

There is also a Catholic Right element in the ALP but again what distinguishes them from the Liberal variety is their economic worldview, and whilst influential amongst the moderate groupings in the party their overall numbers in the party is nowhere as overpowering as their Liberal counterparts.

 

[drron]

Keith I know where you are coming from.At Uni I was a card carrying ALP member-everyone assigned me to the left faction however it was because I really dislike corruption and in NSW the right wing-need I say more.
At 26 I was handing out how to votes for Gough in billy big ears electorate.Then I moved to the country.I was surprised to find that when you really got to know a whole community as you do in rural areas that many with my values were members of the Liberal party.Then when a NSW health minister decided to tip a bucket on me for being involved in a local hospital issue I joined the enemy.
People knew my background and were a lot more accepting than former friends in the ALP.As you can guess I am what is now known as a classic liberal but can assure you such groupings in the liberal party are a lot more fluid than the ALP and numbers depend on the issue.
As a former federal candidate and a senate preselector for many years I can tell you that although there are quite a few who will vote a certain way-unfortunately more now than there was,the most convincing candidate still stands a good chance of preselection-I did although the great majority of the preselectors were now what is known as the christian right.
I can tell you that now i do not belong to any party and my vote has gone to many different candidates.I believe stereotyping in politics can be very misleading and lead people to come up with some bad choices.
Of course with my history i am a firm believer in the very old line from Winston Churchill(who by the way represented more than one party in the Commons)-He who is not a socialist at 17 hath no heart,he who is still one at 30 hath no brain.I have now said too much.

 

[Keith009]

He who is not a socialist at 17 hath no heart,he who is still one at 30 hath no brain.I have now said too much.

Well I'll unashamedly announce that I have no heart and it is a state I'm happy to maintain. There I've said it.

As for a brain OTOH...

I'd admit to being a member of the left of the party as a bright eyed 16 year old. That's after nearly joining the Democrats -as in the local variety! :shock: But unlike many I was not afraid to decide that I was wrong and followed my conscience to the right (pun intended ) side of the party before the year was out.

edit: i might hasten to add that things at uni have changed dramatically since the day of CALPS - the 2 Labor factions are actually represented by seperate organisations at a student level - National Labor Students (left) and Student Unity (right) and each are represented on each campus with their own Labor Clubs ; so i guess people are just more readily factionalised these days as to join one or the other requires a voluntary and conscious decision rather than simply being "assigned."

I was just debating with someone about this yesterday - he reckoned it'd be his political wet dream if the Labor Right and Liberal Left split from their respective organisations and formed a new party. But what people often forget that there is a lot more to things than merely having policies that "look like" you might fit into "the other side." For instance even within the Right I often get panned for having "overly" pro US sympathies. The way I see it there is a fundamental articulating difference between the ALP and the Liberal Party that informs and inspires their respective policies, and broadly speaking the former is a party of collectivists whereas the latter places emphasis on the individual. For that reason I am sick of being told that I'd v easily be considered a small l Liberal.

 

[serfty]

... he reckoned it'd be his political wet dream if the Labor Right and Liberal Left split from their respective organisations and formed a new party. ...

Hmmm ... why do Don Chipp and the Australian Democrats [Circa 1977] spring to mind?

 

[JohnK]

I am glad I don't care that much about politics or the characters involved. I just vote for the party that offers me the most. And at the monent I am paying too much tax and the A$ is sliding....

 

[mainly tailfirst]

Hmmm ... why do Don Chipp and the Australian Democrats [Circa 1977] spring to mind?

Umm, because you want to back a party that will only last 30 years?

OTOH, why is it that new parties in Aust seem to germinate from the right half of politics? (OK, I'm ignoring the ADLP - but they were the Labor right). Is it the left are too "solidarity, brother" to actually split off?

BTW, I'm found that educating Americans on the phrase "Little 'l' Liberal" has help them enormously in understanding "Socialist" Australia.

mt

 

[oz_mark]

I am glad I don't care that much about politics or the characters involved. I just vote for the party that offers me the most. And at the monent I am paying too much tax and the A$ is sliding....

Well, given how the surplus is being splurged into nothingness, I suspect the annual rounds of tax cuts of the last few years will become just a memory.