Sunday, February 25, 2007

Obama Ba-Rocks Austin!

And squelches Cheney!

The Friday turnout was expected to be around 17,000 supporters. Obama's campaign staff estimated that about 20,000 people gathered to hear him speak.

The event was originally slated to be held at Gregory Gym on the University of Texas campus, but the overwhelming request for tickets required organizers to move the venue to a place where concerts, rather than political rallies, are held. So, the massive outdoor rally gathered in the rain.

Barack Obama chided Vice President Dick Cheney for saying Britain’s decision to pull troops from Iraq is a good sign that fits with the strategy for stabilizing the country. Actually, Senator Obama said, British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s decision this week to withdraw 1,600 troops is a recognition that Iraq’s problems can’t be solved militarily.
Now if Tony Blair can understand that, than why can’t George Bush and Dick Cheney understand that?

In fact, Dick Cheney said this is all part of the plan (and) it was a good thing that Tony Blair was withdrawing, even as the administration is preparing to put 20,000 more of our young men and women in.

Now, keep in mind, this is the same guy that said we’d be greeted as liberators, the same guy that said that we’re in the last throes. I’m sure he forecast sun today.

When Dick Cheney says it’s a good thing, you know that you’ve probably got some big problems.
You can listen to his speech:

16 Moderated Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Think about it, there hardly is nothing in this world than can turn one's brain to a pickled dill or glaze one's eyes over quicker than an average political speech! To me, to leave my comfy sofa for a political speech could not be accomplished even by using wild horses to do the pulling. Untill Obama that is. The man is an extraordinary communicator which, in my humble opinion, has been somewhat lacking the past six or so years. However, this is neither here nor there if Green Al announces his candidacy, which I personally expect him to do.

What comes to that English Poodle - his people, his party and Her Majesty's loyal opposition are totally fed up with him continnually lifting his hind leg and pissing on them. The English system has so much easier task to get rid of their unfortunate primeminister than you, Americans, have to get rid of your *#&*!!! president. I have gazed into those baby blues of Tony, and what I saw in there are; arrogance of his superiority and unshakeable conviction that his world view and that of his handlers in the White House are the only ones worthy of any consideration. Too bad for the Poodle, he is in the short leash now and soon he will be sent to doggie pound with a muzzler firmly placed on his muzzle. In the mean time, the happy tandem of Elephants are feverishly working on their freshly hatched great ideas such as the Surge in Iraq and perhaps even the Wrath of God on Iran. ALLAHU AKBAR!

2/25/2007 04:15:00 PM  
Blogger DB Cooper said...

Yes, Pekka. Where is that magical 'vote of no-confidence' that is supposed to stop an errant British government in its tracks? Why, given the Bush's war's immense wall-to-wall unpopularity, where was Parliament?

2/26/2007 06:20:00 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

I confess to sopping up my depression by escapism: watching the Oscars from reel to reel last night. Just exercising oversight to confirm in my own mind if Academy would legitimize itself as a professional custodian of American cinematic arts by inviting Al Gore into 'the house' and recognizing the President-Elect's achievements. I guess it did. (I was disappointed in the dearth of hard bodies among the ladies captured by the camera, but that's too much self-disclosure of my unrepentant sexism.)

On Al Gore's mischievousness: I think it's becoming. He deserves to have some fun at our expense.

We have all made much of Al Gore's possible redo of Richard Nixon's capturing the White House after eight years of political withdrawal. The difference is, that Gore won in 2000; the performance of his substitute president validates him historically as being the better choice. The positions he took on Kuwait in 1991 coupled with his position on Iraq in 2003, when added to his refusal to appease on atmospheric warming, qualifies him as one of the greatest statesmen of our time. Why would he want to saddle himself with a presidential responsibility of cleaning up Bush's mess in Mess-o-potamia? Nixon had nothing, and needed a presidential legacy; Bush has handed Gore his legacy.

Not that Gore doesn't deserve getting a draft if Clinton and Obama get reach deadlock on delegates. (What a dream!)

I would argue forcefully that presidential aspirants should (1) be selected on their past judgments and (2) being overly cautious, compliant or conservative should not provide a sanctuary. Thus, in my mind this would disqualify Clinton and qualify the likes of Gravel, Feingold, Hagel, Dean, Gore, Obama, and the like. Obama is running. I say let's go with him.

2/26/2007 08:35:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just that you know, Vigil, your last paragraph in your comment is precisely what I think. However, we should be aware of, that there still might be a piece missing in Gore's fulfilment, that of never have been the number one in the global pecking order. If he is able to resist this sort of a strong pull, I have to admit of not knowing the man at all.

2/26/2007 04:09:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vigilant, if Gore was the most exciting guest at the Oscars, no wonder the show was boring!

2/26/2007 05:43:00 PM  
Blogger Not Your Mama said...

Gore has no intention of running, why should he? He's doing what he wants to do and saying what he wants to say. He's moved on to better things and he doesn't strike me as a person who likes moving backwards or one who needs the trappings of power to feel special.

2/27/2007 12:19:00 AM  
Blogger Sapo said...

Oh, no. I see we have reached the cowboy hat stage...

2/27/2007 09:51:00 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...


2/27/2007 09:53:00 PM  
Blogger E said...


And re: Gore running. Why would he return to the stultifying game that is politics? Now he can go to the Oscars, say whatever he thinks, put on a little weight, be seen as an elder statesman in the area of global warming. I wouldn't touch the presidential race if I were him. Life is too short!

2/28/2007 04:34:00 AM  
Blogger Kentucky Rain said...

I agree with everything that E said, and everyone else, except perhaps "casey". I am just agreeable today.

So far as what I really think: Obama for President.

2/28/2007 01:41:00 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Right you are, Mike! 2008 doesn't have to be like 1984!

3/05/2007 06:33:00 PM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Vigilante, not quite the topic here but presently watching CNN report on candidate Hilary Clinton which is actually more on the woman gender thinggy - intl women day.

European voters cannot vote in the US elections but tell you what, my guess is that Hilary is a favorite here.

I would vote for her - hah!

3/08/2007 07:40:00 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Definitely on topic, Hills!

3/08/2007 08:31:00 AM  
Blogger Recidivist said...

Hillsblogger, I'm not surprised. Neither am I impressed. You English elected Blair. Your sorry-ass Parliament has an opportunity every day it meets to vote no-confidence in the Poodle, and has yet done so. So, your recommendation for Hillary, Americans' own domesticated bitch, falls on deaf ears.

3/08/2007 10:05:00 AM  
Blogger Unknown said...


You guys will never learn will you?

The domesitcated bitch you're talking about has handbagged her way to history through Bill, she's proven.

She has a better reputation for a more being a thorough bitch than the useless stud you've got presently, not even when he's got a nice pink English poodle to show off.

3/08/2007 12:41:00 PM  
Blogger Messenger said...

Nice comeback, Hillblogger. I don't know about women, but about Blacks, checkout and contrast these two photos. It's all over as far as the black vote is concerned.

3/09/2007 08:20:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home