Paralele//Paralele

Aici. Poate modelul ar putea fi preluat şi la noi, şi nu doar pe audio-vizual. Toate reclamele campaniei le găsiţi aici

După provocarea cu Medvedev, revin cu o alta care mă cam roade de mult timp. Şi anume susţinerea faţă de candidatul preferat în cursa Democraţilor pentru Casa Albă. Luând act de faptul că la Republicani zarurile sunt de mult timp aruncate, Mc Cain putându-se deja pregăti pentru marea bătălie din noiembrie, ne îndreptăm atenţia în mod evident spre Democraţi, chiar dacă în cazul unora (me included), candidatul acestora nu ar fi oricum votat în noiembrie. Este important cine e contra-candidatul Democrat, mai ales în contextul luptei Hillary-Obama, doi oameni cu profile destul de diferite. Deşi l-am susţinut de la bun început pe Mc Cain, recunosc că, în contradicţie cu behavior-ul specific Republican, am o slăbiciune pentru Hillary Clinton. Pentru că e din sistem (din punctul meu de vedere ăsta e un avantaj), pentru că e hard-working, pentru că spre deosebire de Obama a avut o activitate satisfăcătoare ca senatoare de New York, pentru că e mai puţin populistă decât Obama în privinţa temelor de politică externă şi argumentele ar putea continua. În opinia mea Obama nu este altceva decât un populist carismatic, echivalentul unui Haider, Le Pen sau mai nou Veltroni într-o societate totuşi mult prea democratică pentru a da gir extremelor. Oricât de bun speaker ar fi, nu văd în Obama decât echivalentul Democrat al lui G W Bush, şi nu cred că America, şi lumea în general, îşi mai permite un nou experiment la Washington. Vremea idealiştilor tip Kenedy a cam trecut. Alegerile preliminarii din Texas şi Ohio de mâine pot reprezenta sfârşitul drumului pentru Hillary, dar ar putea fi şi un nou început pentru Convenţia din Denver. Electoratul latin va fi foarte important în această ecuaţie şi sper că trendul de până acum (susţinere majoritară pentru Hillary în rândul comunităţii latino) va fi continuat. În încheiere, aş îndrăzni să cer şi părerea Doinei, Dianei, lui Mihnea, lui Alex, lui Moromete, Aurei, lui Cristi, lui Liviu şi altora interesaţi de alegerile din State. Pe cine susţin şi de ce. Ştiu deja că Mihnea şi Alex îl susţin pe Obama (foarte curios de motivaţie), Doina pe Hillary iar pe Diana o bănuiesc de simpatie Obama

Restul aici

In conditiile in care Rudy Giuliani, principalul candidat neocon din tabara Republicanilor, a fost ridiculizat in cele 2 caucusuri din Iowa si Wyoming si in conditiile in care primele preliminarii de maine din New Hampshire vor confirma startul pierdut al acestuia in cursa pentru nominalizare, Mike Huckabee a devenit se pare noul preferat al neoconservatorilor. Un articol pe aceasta tema, scris de William Kristol, in New York Times-ul de azi. Alte asteptari privind alegerile din New Hampshire gasiti si aici.

Pentru cei care mai sunt interesati si de alte evenimente politice decat cele din Romania, va recomand o analiza interesanta legata de primele alegeri preliminarii din State, alegeri care prin traditie dau trendul pentru intregul scrutin prezidential. Alegerile prezidentiale din 2008 sunt mai stranse ca niciodata, atat la Republicani cat si la Democrati nimeni nu se poate socoti castigator din start. Ca un pariu personal, merg pe o finala Hillary Clinton-Rudy Giuliani, dar, asa cum veti vedea in analiza mai sus recomandata, rezultatele din Iowa si la 5 zile in New Hampshire vor arata altfel.

Intreaga poveste aici

Un articol foarte interesant pe tema asta aici. Primele alegeri preliminare din Iowa vor arata daca electoratul de dreapta din State mai este interesat de o abordare neoconservatoare in politica externa americana. Eu pariez pe Romney totusi.

www.foxnews.com

www.redstate.com

AHMADINEJAD

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday questioned why Iran can't have a nuclear program when the United States does and repeated his inference that historical accounts of the Holocaust are myths in animated remarks before students and faculty at Columbia University.

He also denied that Iran sponsors terror, instead pointing the finger at the U.S. government as a supporter of terrorism.

"We don't need to resort to terrorism. We've been victims of terrorism, ourselves," he said. "Within six months, over 4,000 Iranians lost their lives, assassinated by terrorist groups. All this carried out by the hand of one single terrorist group. Regretfully, that same terrorist group now, today, in your country, is operating under the support of the U.S. administration, working freely, distributing declarations freely, and their camps in Iraq are supported by the U.S. government."

During his third visit to New York in three years, Ahmadinejad asked why the United States was allowed to develop nuclear weapons capabilities, but his country was not.

"How come you have that right and we don’t have it?" he challenged.

On the issue of the Holocaust, Ahmadinejad said more "research" was needed on what took place, but he seemed to acknowledge that it did exist.

"I am not saying that it didn't happen at all. This is not that judgment that I am passing here," he said. "Granted this happened, what does it have to do with the Palestinian people? ... Why is it that the Palestinian people are paying the price for an event they had nothing to do with?"

And the Iranian leader denied that homosexuality exists in his country when asked to explain the execution of homosexuals in Iran.

"In Iran we don't have homosexuals like in your country," he said, to laughter and boos from the audience. 'In Iran we do not have this phenomenon. I don't know who's told you that we have this."

But he said he believes that the United States and Iran have the potential to be great friends.

"I think that if the U.S. administration, if the U.S. government, puts aside some of its old behaviors, it can actually be a good friend for the Iranian people, for the Iranian nation," Ahmadinejad said.

"If the U.S. government recognizes the rights of the Iranian people, respects all nations and extends a hand of friendship with all Iranians, they, too, will see that Iranians will be one of its best friends."

REAGAN

I can tell you that nothing would please my heart more than in my lifetime to see American and Soviet diplomats grappling with the problem of trade disputes between America and a growing, exuberant, exporting Soviet Union that had opened up to economic freedom and growth.

Is this just a dream? Perhaps. But it is a dream that is our responsibility to have come true.

Your generation is living in one of the most exciting, hopeful times in Soviet history. It is a time when the first breath of freedom stirs the air and the heart beats to the accelerated rhythm of hope, when the accumulated spiritual energies of a long silence yearn to break free.

We do not know what the conclusion of this journey will be, but we're hopeful that the promise of reform will be fulfilled. In this Moscow spring, this May 1988, we may be allowed that hope — that freedom, like the fresh green sapling planted over Tolstoy's grave, will blossom forth at least in the rich fertile soil of your people and culture. We may be allowed to hope that the marvelous sound of a new openness will keep rising through, ringing through, leading to a new world of reconciliation, friendship, and peace.

Thank you all very much and da blagoslovit vas gospod! God bless you.

Intreaga poveste aici

FRED THOMPSON: FIRST LOBBYIST FOR PRESIDENT



By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN



Published on FoxNews.com on September 10, 2007.



There’s a new first in the 2008 presidential campaign.



We’ve already seen the first woman candidate, Hillary Clinton and the first
African American with widespread support and a serious chance at winning the
presidency.



But now there’s another groundbreaker: the first lobbyist candidate — Fred
Thompson.



Thompson was a lobbyist for 20 years before he was elected to the Senate,
representing the Tennessee Savings and Loan Association, the deposed Haitian
President Aristed and the National Planning & Reproductive Health
Association.



Although Fred bills himself as strongly against government interference and handouts,
he also lobbied for Westinghouse in its bid for government subsidies for a
nuclear power plant in Oak Ridge. After retiring from the Senate in 2002,
Thompson went back to lobbying, earning $750,000 since then from Equitas, the
British insurance company that wants to limit payments to the families of those
who died due to asbestos exposure.



Now Fred’s campaign is attracting other lobbyists, who are bundlers and donors
to the Thompson campaign.



Most Americans feel strongly that a presidential candidate should not accept
any money from lobbyists. According to a recent Gallup Poll, 75 percent of
Americans find it unacceptable for candidates to finance their campaigns with
contributions from lobbyists — and 80 percent want candidates to return any contributions
they do receive from lobbyists.



But Fred definitely doesn’t agree with them. His promising campaign is
positively overflowing with advisers and donors who are lobbyists, former
lobbyists or employees of lobbying firms. Aside from Thompson, there’s his
wife, Jeri, who worked for the PR/lobbying giant Burson-Marsteller and law
firm/lobbyists DLA Piper after she met Fred. Then there’s Ken Reitz, a senior
campaign adviser, who works for 360Advantage — owned by two lobbying firms
Burson-Marsteller and Quinn Gillespie & Associates. Reitz is the former CEO
of Burson and became famous for creating the National Smokers Alliance — a faux
grassroots group opposing tobacco regulation that was funded by the tobacco
companies.



Fred’s first campaign manager, Tom Collamore, was a former tobacco lobbyist. He
is one of the many Thompson staffers who was shown the door after disagreeing
with Mrs. Thompson. Fred’s chief counselor is Michael Toner, an adviser to
Bryan Cave Strategies, which represents Shell Oil and other corporations. Then
there’s Tom Daffron, COO of the Jefferson Consulting Group that lobbies on
homeland security issues. Ed Gillespie, co-founder of the Quinn Gillespie &
Associates lobbying firm is also a close adviser.



Then there are the bundlers and donors. Public Citizen identified six Thompson
bundlers as registered lobbyists, but the number associated with lobbyists
significantly increases when the names of employees of lobbying firm, who are
not necessarily registered lobbyists, are added:



Bundler/Lobbyists (amounts collected are not available)



• Richard F.Hohlt, a lobbyist for tobacco, nuclear energy, Chevron, and Fannie
Mae

• Rachael Jones Hensler, lobbyist for the Nickles Group

• William Hilleary, lobbyist, Sommerstein, Nasy & Rosenthal

• Robert L. Livingston, lobbyist, The Livingston Group

• W. Timothy Loche, lobbyist, Smith-Free Group

• David Lugar, lobbyist, Quinn Gillespie

• Mach F. Mattingly, lobbyist

• Tom Collamore

• Michael Toner



Registered Lobbyist Contributors:



• Katie Huffard

• Chris Lamond

• Jeffrey Bloemaker

• Patrick O’Donnell

• William Timmons

• William Hilleary



Sources: Washington Magazine, Center for Responsive Politics



Other:



• Johanna Hardy, Dir., Legislative Affairs, Rolls Royce

• Kirk Clinkenbeard, Potomic Advocates

• John Dowd, partner Akin, Gump which has lobbying practice

• Sarah Newman, employee, Cassidy and Associates



Sources: Washington Magazine, Center for Responsive Politics



So the "Fred Thompson for President" campaign — based on his promises
to shake up Washington — is being run by and paid for by corporate insider
lobbyists.



Do you think Fred will make any big changes if he’s elected?