Obama events in Hoboken
29
January
1/29/2008:
Again, for you Democrats interested in Barack Obama, here are some upcoming events which may float your boat. From Jen Riggins, political go-getter in town.
“These events are the most open to everyone, including the Undecided, as there still are many, with such a rich selection of candidates this year. As I mentioned, these are just a few of the daily events until Election Day, so if anyone is interested in volunteering for Obama for America or simply about learning more about Sen. Obama, please e-mail me directly at jkriggins@hotmail.com
Wednesday, Jan. 30: Two Events
- Rally at PATH Train from 6:30 to 8pm
More information at: here - Followed by Get Out The Vote Open House from 8:30 to 10pm
More information at: here
[411 Note: The invite fails to mention that 420 Adams is the Anthony Russo Civic Association]
Everyone is welcome to join us as the Results come flooding in at Hudson Tavern on Super Tuesday to celebrate everyone’s hard work, as well as relish in Fat Tuesday! More information: here
Remember, today is the last day to apply by mail for an Absentee Ballot. You can vote early in person at the County Clerk’s office up until next Monday 2/4. Both Independents/Unaffiliated voters and registered Democrats can vote in the Democratic Primary. To find your polling place, visit: Link
Also, it might be of interest to your readers that Hudson County for Obama’s efforts were featured in the NYTimes this weekend:click to read.
Hoboken, Democract, Barack Obama, Presidential Election, Primary, Super Tuesday
361. bazztrap | May 28th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
MidnightRacer wrote:
Well to back up a bit, US was always in Pakistan for very long time.
Before the recent President Mussaraf, who brought in the Military rule, US helped bringing down Democratic government in Pakistan by helping him assassinateBhutto ( Father of Benazir Bhutto who was assassinated recently trying to run against Mussraff as the first female president) so its involvement in the game has been so clear and blaming Pakistan for its volatile government is kinda wrong.
Also Pakistan which isn’t part of NATO has nuclear missiles and other nuclear arms, which it openly claims ( but Iran is a bigger problem, because they might have arms, not the country which might be harboring Osama) Why and how they bears arms, because of our failed foreign policy and funding Pakistani government to build those (profit??) .
So attacking is out of limits when you have influenced the country in a wrong and which might be the cause for it’s current situation
Only hope with Pakistan is its recently elected democratic government which has distanced its relationship with US, and would help bring down Osama without playing games like Mussaraff , who blew up his own people when there was a US media pressure.
Iran,
Well the biggest problem is how Iranian government is elected, even tough democratic, all elections has been rigged. Iranians aren’t the problem the government is ,which has been violating human rights for long time has been able to survive freely. The only reason for this is the disconnection between Iran and other countries. The diplomatic approach is the key because key allies need to participate with other political leader s and help Iranians to elect a free government and no it is not like Palestine where Hamas got elected in a legitimate way . Iranians have an history for having first democratic revolution. It is the ignorance which is the biggest threat than anything else.
362. Easy-E | May 28th, 2008 at 6:27 pm
Katie_Scarlett wrote:
That may be what the country was founded on, but you aren’t using that as justification are you?
OK, I see your point, maybe I am off base. I am not unfamiliar with that reality back in those days. What I referred to is the version that is sold to us. Ask any regular joe-shmoe and they’re liable to say something similar.
The economy is screwed up, and it’s not middle class who made it happen. There has been talk of speculators driving up the price of oil. Now, imagine Joe-schmoe entering the voting booth…
You are right about how the country was founded and the real reason of much of it, but you aren’t using that as justification are you? It’s a much different world we’re living in now.
363. MF | May 28th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
338 and 343…343 moreso - there we have it - the typical personal, non-issue based bashing that defines liberals, that is, when they’re not bitching and moaning about how awful America is. of course i voted for Bush twice; i’m not a socialist! you can disagree with such a selection, but clearly you can’t question my intelligence, as you did - trust me, while i’m of course not perfect, one thing for sure, my intelligence is not something that anyone has ever questioned me about in my life.
364. YipYap | May 28th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
re: oil
Financial speculation in oil futures lately has been offered increasingly as the reason for high oil prices. Speculation is rife no doubt about it. However, the futures market is a zero sum game. For every long position there is a short position and the price is ultimately struck by the company who takes delivery of the oil, which is then refined. As long as consumers keep demanding oil at ever higher prices, the price will continue to rise, perhaps the advent of the SUV in the 1990s as the everyman car should have been reigned in by taxes or CAFE standards.
The only way speculation could impact the oil price is under accumulation. Inventories of crude oil and refined products have been falling.
OPEC refuses to pump more for whatever reason, then our demand needs to fall to counter it. Since demand is not falling but only skyrocketing the markets react accordingly.
There are vast tracts in the USA that are under-explored in ANWR and off the east and west coasts where the US has placed a high price on protecting their own environment.
If the US which has grown imports from 30% in the 1970s to nearly 58% today wants to lower prices we will need to drill more wells in locally. We cannot continue to import oil at the current growth rate and expect lower prices especially when the dollar is so weak.
By a hybrid or take mass transit already, that will help lower the prices.
365. MidnightRacer | May 28th, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Quick points. The free market is the opportunity for anyone to make it - the essence of hope, which doesn’t come from others, but is the context in which an individual is not impeded by authority, or the elite to make it. Emphasis on opportunity, not guarantee, not entitlement. It’s an evironment in which the consumers exercise free choice, and maintain the health of competition.
What Easy is complaining about is the historical act of human corruption which reaches across all models of government and business structure. There is no other model, except the free market, in which a person who has an idea, can come to market without the authorities, the elite, the monarchy, et al being protectionists and stopping you short. Corrupt humans who run the corporation type are akin to communism in that the centralized elite and loyalists conspire against free market competition. Now, I know some of you here are more in favor of socialism/communism, so think about this.
366. Katie_Scarlett | May 28th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
beamrider9 wrote:
Sure, it wasn’t the democrats’ fault for putting up crap choices, it was our fault for voting for the lesser of two evils.
Whatever. We’re all to blame for the past 8 years… get a candidate who isn’t a crazed socialist liberal & I’d consider voting for him. Bob Barr (libertarian candidate) has a chance for my vote, but McCain is pretty moderate. When it comes time to choose, I suspect that McCain will have made his points to me.
367. MidnightRacer | May 28th, 2008 at 7:18 pm
OK, I’m back… when we left off, Easy question the Independent declaration on political stance.
I can only speak for myself. I am registered as Independent for many reasons. First, I don’t think a political brand x, or y as a corporation (which is what the DNC and RNC is) will ever stick to a solid stance - as historically proven. I think we can agree that neither party is the same as that in the past - whether it’s the brand “Republicans” who were classic conservatism (limited government, against foreign entanglement, mistrust of big government, understood the equality of each states’ rights, etc), or if it was the original brand Democrats (Democrat-Republicans) who were more of the Federalist type (wanted foreign entanglement, big centralized government, less states’ rights). And the Democrat brand today is no longer as extremely bigoted as in the past 150 years where they began the KKK, and legislated the Jim Crow laws. Obviously, today’s two major brands, Dems/Repubs are different and hardly hold a stable position as today’s brand Republicans are currently inundated with the too religious (which violates rights) which influence them, and the brand Democrats are inundated with socialist/communsits who influence them to a similar degree.
Who I choose isn’t who I want, but who I believe will harm the Constitution, the free market established in the Constitution, and individuals’ (and states in a unions’) rights over mobocracy.
Who knows who will take over, creep into, or influence each brand D’s or brand R’s gavel and change them again. That’s why I’ll always be registered as Independent, while checking and balancing position against the Constitution, the importance of individuals/states, and the free market.
Hope that answers that.
368. MidnightRacer | May 28th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
typo:
“Who I choose isn’t who I want, but who I believe will LEAST harm; the Constitution, the free market established in the Constitution, and individuals’ (and states in a unions’) rights over mobocracy.”
(for some reason, my posts didn’t post in the afternoon???)
369. Katie_Scarlett | May 28th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Easy - The only point I was making about the Declaration was that you saying: “Maybe you should read the Declaration of Independance. It’s pretty much the greatest example of the greater good of the many (the colonies) at the expense of and individual (King) ever written” was incorrect. I wasn’t using it as a justification, but you were.
As for the average Joe comment - I would hope they think the Declaration was written to get us out from under tyrannical British rule & taxation without representation, before they would think it was written to promote the greater good.
But I don’t know, I didn’t take a poll.
Again, I am saying that Obama’s speeches are sounding Marxist, and I think he has socialist leanings. Socialist leanings scare me. Nationalized health care, higher taxes, more gov’t spending (read: big gov’t), hefting more tax on the wealthy (aka the people with the discretionary income to actually have real purchase power in an inflationary period), all sound socialist and scary as hell to me.
This is a great country, and as long as we work our way toward a pure meritocracy I’d be happy.
370. bradykp | May 28th, 2008 at 10:16 pm
Katie_Scarlett wrote:
Yes. He did, along with the rest of the committee. I’m not saying it’s right or whatever, but I mean, the man OWNED people, he’s not exactly about the “Greater Good” unless by greater you mean “him and his buddies.”
easy- My point wasn’t “Poor me” it was “ENOUGH IS ENOUGH IS ENOUGH”. At some point when your hand is out you need to be at least trying to contribute.
i guess my overall point is, despite what the “intentions” were for the people who got the ball rolling, the ideals were fairly universal even at the time. even john adams thought it was contradictory that the country was going to be “free” but would still have slaves. obviously, in politics, you give up some concessions to get the overall goal.
but regardless, i am amazed at the absolute selfishness of many people in this country (i’m not directing this at you katie). my basic beliefs are that we have an obligation to help those less fortunate than us that want/need help. obviously there are people that can and will abuse help when it’s offered, but that doesn’t give us just cause to not help them.
i think the way our government operates is fairly ideal. for the most part, the opposing parties that control this country keep each other in check. through my adult life though, it appears to me as though one party got a little too much power.
i’d like to think that a majority of people aren’t as polarized as the media makes it appear. i don’t even enjoy watching the news anymore.
if people could get the help they need from the “free market” as many people argue, then i’d be all for it. unfortunately, i don’t trust companies to treat their employees right in all cases. i don’t think we all need unions either. unions have basically become as powerful as companies, and they abuse the power in many cases just as companies abuse the power.
i guess what i’m saying is, it’d be wonderful if we could all rely on each other to advance our society, but it just doesn’t happen. so rules and regulations need to be in place and governed by someone. at the same time, the entity governing us shouldn’t get too involved in our lives except where necessary.
i’m all for freedom of personal choice and responsibility, but i contradict myself in some areas because i am just strongly against the items to some extent: smoking in public places is where i go against my normal beliefs, because i think it is not only detrimental to society (health costs, second hand smoke affects, dry cleaning bills), but it also offers no benefit to the person smoking other than an addiction and a small high. oh well, i’m done for now.
371. Easy-E | May 28th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
MidnightRacer wrote:
Yes.
Honestly, you nailed it better than I was able to.
372. matt_72 | May 29th, 2008 at 8:05 am
Easy-E wrote:
Uh - so you praise the free market & competition with one part of your rant, but you then turn around and say you loathe the competitive response of “corporations” to new competitors with the other? Basically, you hate corporations. I get it………
373. Katie_Scarlett | May 29th, 2008 at 3:36 pm
matt_72 wrote:
It’s impossible to make any sense of what Obama’s saying or what his disciples believe.
Sniff.
374. MidnightRacer | May 30th, 2008 at 11:41 am
It’s because they don’t understand the manipulation against them that what they champion (unseen by them) is the very target of their hatred - while (by trickery) what they hate is the very salvation of individual merit.
See post #365. If you want me to extrapolate, I can. History is interesting.
375. Katie_Scarlett | May 30th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Midnight- I always find your posts interesting, extrapolate away!
376. Katie_Scarlett | June 12th, 2008 at 10:47 am
http://theobamafile.com/
HILARIOUS
377. devilbat | June 12th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Katie_Scarlett wrote:
I know the old guy wants us in Iraq for another 100 years.
378. MidnightRacer | June 16th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
And I always though Father’s Day was a day in which you celebrated, not criticized. That’s why there’s 364 other days to do that…
source: apnews myway
Race has nothing to do with it. Some fathers are great and responsible, others are not, most in between the two. But to call on race to criticize fathers on Father’s Day is a bit off, to me at least.
It’s the one day of the year that you fathers a happy day, not trounce on them.
379. MidnightRacer | June 16th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
It’s the one day of the year that you (wish) your fathers a happy day, not trounce on them.