DR: Pennsylvania primary -- economy, economy, economy. People don't know who to listen to. That could be Obama's opening.
*********************************************************************
Oh, how I admire Heather Arnet. She was prepared and she kept using the language of reconciliation to connect herself with Ricky Burgess. She was issue oriented and had her facts. Reverend Burgess seemed more focused on a higher level of debate and made not a single statement expressing reconciliation with HRC.
We needed an hour for this discussion. I wanted to hear Reverend Burgess talk in more detail about issues. I wanted them both to follow up on Roddy's comment about the economy. Ah well ...
Showing posts with label Ricky Burgess. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ricky Burgess. Show all posts
Sunday, March 23, 2008
KDKA: Round 2
After 8 minutes, I'm more in HRC's camp.
Before debate resumes, a bit of Jon Delano's interview with Hillary. I think I saw this on the news. She defines Pittsburgh as resiliant, as evolving, as worthy of admiration. Is Pennsylvania friendly to female candidates? She deftly avoids criticizing us on this issue. Democrats can't win the White House without Pennsylvania. JD -- Obama claims he had more foreign policy experience than Bill when he assumed office. HRC - I wonder what evidence supports that audacious claim. I'm proud of my record. HRC - Endorsements are votes of confidence. Reminds us that her work on CHIP (sChip) covers 140,00 PA children. Sidesteps issue of race and Rendell's campaign.
Back to the chat,
KR; The mathematics favor Obama. Impossible for Clinton to win conventionally.
HA: Come June, we'll see that Clinton has won every essential state so as a party that's something to consider. This will matter in the General Election. (This was taped on Friday).
RB: Everbody has a right to run for elected office. Obama will have the most pledge delegates and probably the largest popular voice. It is important for us to do what is fair and right. Obama has won this campaign. For specialized delegates or states to determine the nominee would be unfortunate. Because he earned it and because it will send a global signal.
HA: I agree, disenfranchising millions of voters is not just.
DR: This isn't a popular election. Are superdelegates supposed to mirror the popular voters or represent the party's interest.
RB: We have a history where the elite make decisions for everyone. This has to be a transparent obvious decision. They have to follow the will of the people. Anything that would turn this election to a few elite people to make a choice based on self-interest and ignore the masses Obama who has brought in for the first time, will take us back to racial divide and gender exclusion. It is dark and sinister.
HA: Superdelegates are complicated. They are often elected officials. In Burgess' scenario, Senator Kennedy should support Hillary because his state voted for her. Senator Kennedy is supporting Obama. There are many superdelegates on both sides who aren't following the will of the people who voted for them. Superdelegates are supposed to help determine how the party will fare in the general election.
Last commercial break ...
Before debate resumes, a bit of Jon Delano's interview with Hillary. I think I saw this on the news. She defines Pittsburgh as resiliant, as evolving, as worthy of admiration. Is Pennsylvania friendly to female candidates? She deftly avoids criticizing us on this issue. Democrats can't win the White House without Pennsylvania. JD -- Obama claims he had more foreign policy experience than Bill when he assumed office. HRC - I wonder what evidence supports that audacious claim. I'm proud of my record. HRC - Endorsements are votes of confidence. Reminds us that her work on CHIP (sChip) covers 140,00 PA children. Sidesteps issue of race and Rendell's campaign.
Back to the chat,
KR; The mathematics favor Obama. Impossible for Clinton to win conventionally.
HA: Come June, we'll see that Clinton has won every essential state so as a party that's something to consider. This will matter in the General Election. (This was taped on Friday).
RB: Everbody has a right to run for elected office. Obama will have the most pledge delegates and probably the largest popular voice. It is important for us to do what is fair and right. Obama has won this campaign. For specialized delegates or states to determine the nominee would be unfortunate. Because he earned it and because it will send a global signal.
HA: I agree, disenfranchising millions of voters is not just.
DR: This isn't a popular election. Are superdelegates supposed to mirror the popular voters or represent the party's interest.
RB: We have a history where the elite make decisions for everyone. This has to be a transparent obvious decision. They have to follow the will of the people. Anything that would turn this election to a few elite people to make a choice based on self-interest and ignore the masses Obama who has brought in for the first time, will take us back to racial divide and gender exclusion. It is dark and sinister.
HA: Superdelegates are complicated. They are often elected officials. In Burgess' scenario, Senator Kennedy should support Hillary because his state voted for her. Senator Kennedy is supporting Obama. There are many superdelegates on both sides who aren't following the will of the people who voted for them. Superdelegates are supposed to help determine how the party will fare in the general election.
Last commercial break ...
Heather Arnet and Ricky Burgess on KDKA
I'm watching KDKA's debate with Heather Arnet and Ricky Burgess. Dennis Roddy is along for the ride. Everything is paraphrased.
KR: Switch the positions and candidates, will you support them? Is this about identity politics.
HA: This challenges us to separate individuals out from their experiences, which is difficult to do. The question is a little unfair because their expeirences make them who they are.
RB: Obama has been steadfastly against the war. Obama's identity is powerful and is part of the reason he can unite the country. His campaign focuses on the promise of the future. Draws comparisons between his own campaign and Obama's. National political scene is polarization and we need a fresh figure.
DR: A story beats a resume. They are fighting more about their similarities. Do we measure them solely by narrative.
HA: I disagree. National healthcare is a critical issue that has mainstream support, including businesses. This is an issue she's been championing for decades. Voters are interested in the policy differences, which are not subtle. Both want better healthcare, but national healthcare for everyone is the only way to address it. That is a significant difference based on issues.
DR: The issue seems largely the same.
HA: It is significant, because the non optional part will hurt the most vulnerable.
RB: Healthcare is not he most important part of the debate. Nation is fractured. We need a figure of reconciliation. Importance of symbolism of the American Dream (I hate that analogy). We can't focus on individualistic issues or we'll miss a chance to elect a great leader. (huh?)
Talks about economic differences in a way that's unifying, not dividing (Isn't that what providing healthcare for everyone, regardless of income, is?)
KR: Switch the positions and candidates, will you support them? Is this about identity politics.
HA: This challenges us to separate individuals out from their experiences, which is difficult to do. The question is a little unfair because their expeirences make them who they are.
RB: Obama has been steadfastly against the war. Obama's identity is powerful and is part of the reason he can unite the country. His campaign focuses on the promise of the future. Draws comparisons between his own campaign and Obama's. National political scene is polarization and we need a fresh figure.
DR: A story beats a resume. They are fighting more about their similarities. Do we measure them solely by narrative.
HA: I disagree. National healthcare is a critical issue that has mainstream support, including businesses. This is an issue she's been championing for decades. Voters are interested in the policy differences, which are not subtle. Both want better healthcare, but national healthcare for everyone is the only way to address it. That is a significant difference based on issues.
DR: The issue seems largely the same.
HA: It is significant, because the non optional part will hurt the most vulnerable.
RB: Healthcare is not he most important part of the debate. Nation is fractured. We need a figure of reconciliation. Importance of symbolism of the American Dream (I hate that analogy). We can't focus on individualistic issues or we'll miss a chance to elect a great leader. (huh?)
Talks about economic differences in a way that's unifying, not dividing (Isn't that what providing healthcare for everyone, regardless of income, is?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
