""""""

What sin has Obama committed by saying that those left out of the prosperity, now more than ever, were "bitter" about being left behind during the Clinton and Bush administrations?

""""""

The same sin you just committed, lying about what he said.  He'll get away with it because both Team McCain and Team Clinton harp on "bitter" and "elite" which can be easily moved around.

""""""

And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

""""""

The "sin" was saying that these people 1) are racists for daring to recognize the very real impact of modern day illegal immigration to their livelihoods and 2) are psychologically damaged -- they aren't just bitter, they let their bitterness pervert their religious faith.  Even Obama recognized the error in his words.

Speaking of sins, I see you're pimping the Darfur genocide again to make your cheap political points.  

Marty,

First, very few people were left out of the prosperity during Clinton administrations. We can argue who deserves most of the credit, nut we should not argue with facts.

Second, most of Obama supporters are Carter democrats as far as Israel is concerned.

Third, Obama position that he is going to have summits with worst dictators during  his first year in the office unconditionally  with exceptions of rulers of Gaza makes no sense.

It's pandering, pure and simple.

We need to have open lines of communications and "negotiate"  without preconditions with all worst dictators in the world including Hamas without giving them the prestige of having press conference with the American current of former President .

We also have to continue to apply pressure on the enemies while "negotiations" are going on.

Therefore both Carter and Obama are morons who are full of themselves.

i am trying to understand the threats here.  he is/was president of all the people and  the rest of us may very well want to hear what he has to say. for some of us who care the situation is not so black and white.  to deny him  a place because he offends one group is ridiculous.  and what is going on with florida anyway?  why would it not be democratic  tons of hispanics there and all sorts of other retirees who think differently.  

The Dems have a pretty slim chance at winning Florida as is.  Frankly, Jimmy Carter isn't going to affect that in the slightest.  Do you honestly think an appreciable number of people will decide not to vote for Obama because Jimmy Carter spoke at the convention?  When it comes down to it, people want to know where the candidate stands, not where the candidates supporters stand.  Carter isn't the one running for President.

The Dems have very little, if any, chance to win FL anyway.  Regardless of the nominee or how much or little Mr. Carter is seen or speaks.  FL goes McCain by 4-6 points.

check said:  “i am trying to understand the threats here.”

Threats what threats?

“he is/was president of all the people and  the rest of us may very well want to hear what he has to say.”

Good you do that, you listen to him. He was my President and unfortunately I voted for him. He no longer my President and wouldn’t vote for him for dog catcher.

“for some of us who care the situation is not so black and white.  

For some of us threatening Israel by supporting Hamas and organization which has worn to destroy the Jewish State and make the mid East Juden Rein is a black and white issue.

“to deny him  a place because he offends one group is ridiculous.”

Then why don’t allow someone who offends, say Black people to speak at the convention. After all he too would be offending only one group. Or are the Jews the only group that it’s ok to offend.

“and what is going on with florida anyway?  why would it not be democratic  tons of hispanics there and all sorts of other retirees who think differently.”

Come again, tons of Hispanic think the same way too. And how do you know how other retirees think?

With every post “check” you reveal yourself as a Jew hater.  

I still feel like anyone who can't distinguish between heads of state (even of Iran, North Korea, etc.) and heads of terrorist organizations (Hamas) must be on a huge Hillary high.

ackyri, I can distinguish and I am also on a "Hillary high."

Still, I am not impressed by Obaman's claim that he won't tallk to Hamas. The reaons is that Obama would have no choice but to talk to them if Hamas takes over the PA authority.  

Better, if he says that he would talk to despicable dicators like Ahmadinejad if and only if they abandon all support to terrorist organizations and stop their production of nuclear weapons.

Marty,

There are only two Democratic Ex-Presidents available for the Convention.  If you don't have President Carter, you're looking at President Clinton.  Pres. Clinton may be a bit pissy if the Clinton name isn't on the ticket.  Might look a lilttle akward.  Might be refreshing.

Republicans aren't doing much better with two Bushes to choose from.  At Least they can do the sentimental farewells to Ford & Reagan.

Should be fun to watch as summer winds down.

ackyri,

"I still feel like anyone who can't distinguish between heads of state (even of Iran, North Korea, etc.) and heads of terrorist organizations (Hamas) must be on a huge Hillary high."

Nice spin. Hamas leaders are the rules of de-facto state, Gaza.

AlanSP - a little bit of (numerical) context for Peretz's post: our side lost FL, hugely, in 2004 because of the defection of hundreds of thousands of Democratic Gore2000 voters to Bush in 2004. In Dade and Broward counties alone, by my reckoning using precinct polling data regarding voters' party affiliation and how it changed from 2000 to 2004, there were ~200,000 Gore2000 voters who shifted to Bush in 2004, and nearly all of them were Democrats.

Obviously, these were national-security liberals and moderates concerned, post-911, about our side's commitment to a robust fight against the jihadists. In Dade and Broward, it's a good bet that most such nat-sec'y liberals are transplanted northeasterners who are fiercely committed to Israel. Ergo Peretz's comment.

If you put Carter on national TV at the convention, you can guarantee that at least 100,000 solidly liberal Democrats in Florida will switch to McCain. Carter puts a knife through the heart of any strategy for winning Florida.

Tep... you are absolutely right... given the distrust of the more parochial (excuse the pun) conservative Jews on Obama because of his association with Wright (i didn't think Jews would be so quick to do guilt by association... but there you are).  Carter really is an old idiot and made in my mind a hopeless president... so the farther he stays away from the convention the better... he has done the Democratic party enough harm with this last jaunt of his.

As long as the Democratic leadership continues to treat Carter as a slightly dotty but beloved old uncle, they are in danger of giving away the election. Arguments that guilt by association is wrong and irrelevant to a candidacy don't hold up against political reality. Just ask Obama. We're talking here about an election, not a criminal trial.

An easy recipe for dealing with Jimmy Carter at the Democratic Convention:

1.  Give him a speaking slot at 2:30 PM Eastern Time on the day before the nomination (or, better yet, on the first day of the Convention).  Sorry, you can't exclude an ex-President of your party from the convention, no matter what.

2.  In the nominating speech, include some sharply worded comments about how a Democratic foreign policy needs to distinguish between our friends and our enemies, and how some Democrats may have lost sight of that distinction in the past but that the party, and the country, cannot do so now.  A couple words about Israel and Hamas, and the difference between the two, in that portion of the nominating speech to make the issue a little more concrete for the average voter in Florida (or anywhere else).

My guess is that the public and pretty much all the media would notice #2, but not #1.

"Parochial" is an unfair description. Most of the Florida Jews are old enough to have vivid memories of the Holocaust era, and naturally feel a bit threatened by the steep rise in world wide anti-Semitism. They probably sympathised greatly for the Civil Rights cause and now feel betrayed by the likes of Wright, and Obama by association, particularly if it is exacerbated by an endorsement by Carter. It is not "parochial" to decide to stand up for yourself.

Jimmy Carter was the worst president of the 20th century.  He left office with the US economy in disarray (inflation over 13%, unemployment over 7%), the US military in weakened through malign budgetary neglect, American diplomats in the hands of terrorists (one of whom apparently went on to become the current president of Iran) and the Soviets in Afghanistan.  His post-presidential years have  been dedicated to his tireless efforts to promote his bad judgment, whether it be his independent nuclear negotiations with Kim Il Sung, laying wreathes on Yasir Arafat's tomb, and meeting with Hamas terrorists.  A true megalomaniac, who believes his own bullshit and will just not keep his stupid thoughts to himself.  He shouldn't be on the platform because he is a continuing embarrassment to his party and his country.  In simple political calculus, allowing Jimmy Carter a platform to spew his drivel can't possibly win the party and support, but could well cost it.