RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events Barack Hussein Obama in '08?

While I find Obama's speech to be well written and delivered as well as agreeing with a good deal of it, I still feel it's a bit hollow considering his campaign's own use of race in the past to further his own candidacy. It seems that Obama's race, beliefs, and upbringing are off limits to everyone but Obama himself. It's as though he is the only one who can address those things when it helps to further his own goals; and when anyone else does it, it's racism. He can stand before a black church in Alabama and claim that he was conceived because of the 'Bloody Sunday March' during the Civil Rights movement; but to point out that he was three when it happened, you're either a racist or too ignorant to realize that he was speaking metaphorically.

At the end of the day, this speech just proves to me that Obama is another politician. He's just really damn good at it. The PT Barnum of Washington. He understands how to tap into people's emotions and has the charisma to captivate an audience.

Come on, now. Why else would she have made them? She was member of the Clinton advisory team, wasn't she?

No, you come on now. How could her comments have beneffitted anyone other than Obama? He's proven he's good at playing the race card to his advantage. (at least till the Wright thing made him unelectable) There was no benefit to Hillary out of it.

Obama's national lead has literally evaporated according to Reuters & he's losing to McCain by a larger percentage than Hillary according to Rasmussen. For the good of the party he may want to start considering dropping out.

Hindsight's 20/20, MEM. In order to accept your interepretation of events one must assume that Geradline Ferraro, a vocal Clinton supporter, was trying to sabotage her campaign. Highly unlikely.

It's much more likely that Ferrarro, a long time feminist and former VP candidate, simply believed that she was making a legitimate criticism that would help Hillary and, unfortunately for them, it backfired.

Wow!

So you're pleased that Hillary has bloodied Obama significantly for the Republicans?

You're just as deluded as Hillary is. all that matters is Hillary coming out on top. Whether they survive to win the Presidential race doesn't seem to factor into your equations. All that matters is Hilary Hillary Hillary and screw the Democratic Party's chances. Obama still has more delegates so the only one that needs to drop out and needed to drop out weeks ago is Hillary Clinton.

<iframe height="339" width="425" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/23696693#23696693" frameborder="0" scrolling="no"></iframe>

(please embed)

The results of the "Take Back America" conference straw poll are in, and Obama trounced Clinton among the progressive attendees by a 72-16 percent margin.

Perhaps even more interesting than the headline number is the fact that 41 percent said they would be "disappointed" if Clinton were the nominee, compared to only 8 percent who would be disappointed by an Obama nomination.

I'm sure her intention wasn't to hurt Hillary's campaign with her comments but I read them & knew Ferraro had just helped Obama by grumbling about how she saw things. The interview wasn't her trying to talk up Hillary but came across as a sick old lady being bitter about her candidate having a hard time.

I don't disagree with that but it does tend to indicate that her comments were made with the intention (however mistaken) that they would help Hillary if, in no other way, by pointing out flaws in Obama.

I attribute most of Obama's recent big drop because alot of voters were probably turned off because of his spiritual advisor/mentor's whole "god damn America" crap. That's not Hillary's fault nor has she tried using it against Obama. The blame for Obama's current problems fall directly on his own shoulders. Perhaps I'm wrong but I find it highly unlikely he can win the general election at this point.

You must admit, however, that it is possible that the publicity over Reverend Racist came when it did due to leaks from Clinton. After all, candidates do engage in opposition research and attempts to smear opponents.

Would this constitute a smear?

Anyways, anything is possible but I doubt this was a case of them leaking it out. Reguardless of how you might feel about Hillary, don't you think this would have been out alot sooner if they had the scoop?

Actually, MEM, you make a good point. If Hillary did leak this I think it would be unfair to call it a smear since it appears to be true. My point was simply that it would be unsurprising for her to have leaked it.

I'm rather surprised that you didn't just blame her automatically for leaking it. Your getting soft G-man.

Just saw Obama's speech in Philadelphia. "Perfecting the union."

I disagreed with his comments about the wrong of sending jobs overseas. But otherwise it was inspiring, unifying and ever-hopeful. You people will be extremely fortunate if you get him for President.

Starting out with making a speech about Rev. Wright and coming out being almost universally praised and compared to Lincoln, Kennedy and FDR if not simply 'historic' ain't small change.

The speech is being compared to speeches by your greatest presidents. And so, sorry, what's your point?

obviously youve never listened to bill schneider, he hypes everything as the greatest ever...


also dave, i suppose you missed the story a few weeks ago where another supposed "written by himself" speech was lifted from someone else, in most colleges that;; get you kicked out...

Well for one thing, it shows that he's a lot more statesman than politician. And I like what one of his fiercest critics these past few days actually said about him yesterday.



And there it is. We pick presidents to LEAD, not to write legislation, not to divide us along political and ideological lines. We pick them to make tough decisions and to show leadership. And that's pretty much how he handles most controversies in this campaign. Head on and unafraid. The standard M.O. for politicians faced with a hard question or a crisis is to retreat with advisers an then come back with one mealy mouthed politically safe and somewhat ambiguous carefully worded answer. What Obama has consistently done is meet those questions head on and defuse them. Which with anyone else would seem fairly obvious but with American politicians of late, seems remarkable.

Plus of course the fact that his opponent's Senate Career has been all about making the safe political choices that would advance her career for higher office. Stating with the initial back to back Iraq votes.

Er Whomod, you are aware that Obama's senate vote concerning Iraq is virtually identical to Hillary's & his thin record doesn't contain much in the way of showing that he's any different from other politicians?

I saw the jfk mention but am not sure to which 'greatest' presidents you are referring.

Yes, but Hillary's record shows that despite being against the Iraq war, she cast 2 votes authorizing Bush to do just that while abdicating Congress' role in making that decision. Yes, to you that is simply one (or two) votes, but that vote is pretty much the central issue of our time. And she showed remarkably poor judgement. As she claims about Obama, speeches are nice but speeches aern't decisions. In her case though, speeches are about the only thing she does. Taking decisive action against Bush's abuses of power or bad descisions are another matter entirely.

She's also against No Child Left Behind despite having also voted FOR it. etc. etc.

Being Anti-NAFTA despite having helped Bill campaign for it.

She's good at the rhetoric but when it comes down to actually challenging, she plays it politically safe. As do a lot of Congressional Democrats fairly enough, but that's the challenge for the Democratic Party. To rid ourselves of these timid calculated milquetoast DLC Democrats.

Obama hardly 'stood out in front' and tackled the issue head on. His first approach was to simply say that he wasn't there for those sermons. When the story wouldn't go away, that's when he stood out in front and gave this speech.



Exactly. Too bad Obama's Senate record is pretty sparse on showing actual decisions.

bloomberg
This isn't going to go away.

And Anna Nicole Smith was compared to Marilyn Monroe (I mean, geez! Not even close!)

Just 'cause the media hypes it doesn't mean it's true.

He's gonna be in Eugene tomorrow. I think I'll go and piss off all the obamanauts.

Not that I'm characterizing you as a full time speech critic, but I remember some comments being made by you about politicians and double-speak; I believe it was in the "It's not About Oil of Iraq" thread. The fact that you are not able to see through Obama's song and dance after being so critical of such things (or are able to and are simply giving him your nomination for prez as a wordsmith) is really sad.

Something else to note: The only reason that any speech from one of our greatest presidents is remembered is because of their actions as presidents. Do you really think their speeches would be so memorable if they were crappy Commander and Chiefs? Then there's the fact that more renowned speeches in US history are hailed as being philosophically and morally profound; Obama's speech is politically reflective in nature and is in regards to controversies that surround him.

What a night.

The Washington Post reports a major security breach involving Barack Obama's passport:



This is not good. We know how much we can trust anyone who works for George Bush. NOT AT ALL.

The Post article included this statement from the Obama campaign:



The first Bush administration did the same thing to Bill Clinton. The State Department is saying that Secretary of State, Condi Rice, is saying that she only learned of the breaches yesterday and as Joe diGenova,Joe diGenova, former U.S. Attorney who investigated a similar breach of President Clinton’s passport records during his first run for president in 1992 states, it is inexcusable that she wouldn’t know about something this important and that it shows an incredible lack of leadership and gross negligence. DiGenova also says that even if the Inspector General does do a formal investigation, the employees who were fired cannot be called to testify. In light of these facts, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi should call for an full investigation immediately, and these employees’ computers, bank and phone records should be gone over with a fine tooth comb. Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC noted that each intrusion happened within a day or so of an Obama victory - *Iowa, Wisconsin/Hawaii and Mississippi. Coincidence? We need to know who knew what, and when.

To put this into perspective, diGenova is outraged by the news of this compromise, and he’s known for being a partisan hack who believes he was a victim of the White House slander machine during the Clinton administration, just happens to be married to Victoria Toensing, counsel on the impeachment case against Clinton and who testified before Congress in the Valerie Plame case, repeatedly attacked Plame and saying that she was not a covert CIA operative.

…from Nov. 1992:

Valerie Plame and Joe Wilson both worked for George W. Bush. Does this mean you don't trust them either?

I notice they were contract employees. I also recall Hillary's people had a history of getting into confidential FBI records.

Are you sure, given that Hillary has more to lose vis a vis Obama than a guy who isn't running, that HER people didn't reach out to these employees?

I hope that as a matter of clarity Obama will agree to release his entire passport records, so as to quell any questions as to why anyone would snoop.

Good point. I'm sure he has nothing to hide.

And, in all seriousness, shouldn't (with the exception of sanctioned, classified, diplomatic missions) any elected official's passport record be public? Doesn't the public have a right to know where our officials might be going, especially if it might involve the use of tax funds?

i'll answer for whomod. no.

i'd also for whomod like to reserve the right to change my mind if it involves anyone other than obama.

Richardson Backs Obama: New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson to endorse Obama today at campaign rally, calling him a 'once-in-a-lifetime leader'; superdelegate had been relentlessly wooed by Clinton camp.

It's funny how so many people who have worked with the Clintons are backing Obama.

i think theyre scared he will have al-quaida bomb them

A little while back, the Hillary campaign asked a question:

• As voters evaluate you as a potential Commander-in-Chief, do you think it's legitimate for people to be concerned that you have traveled to only one NATO country, on a brief stopover trip in 2005, and have never traveled to Latin America?

I remember hearing their charge that Obama had only visited one NATO country in his life and it seemed pretty hard to believe... out of countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Spain, Italy, Turkey, etc., Obama had only been to one? The boy who grew up in Indonesia, and visited relatives in Africa, never made it to any of those European countries? The guy who lived in Chicago and went to Harvard never made it to Canada? (I presume Canada wasn't the site of the brief stopover trip.)

Now, I'm not saying that the Hillary camp did the snooping in the passport file. But in asking that question, they seemed awfully certain that Obama had never been to one of those countries earlier in his life, didn't they? Note they didn't say, "you have traveled to only one NATO country as a senator", (it wouldn't be all that surprising that Obama had only taken a few foreign trips since taking office in January 2005); they worded the question so that it encompasses his entire life.

The question came from the Hillary camp on March 12; two of the breaches were before that date. One breach occurred two days later.