Originally Posted By Mr X <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/17/poll.democrats/index.html" target="_blank">http://edition.cnn.com/2008/PO LITICS/03/17/poll.democrats/index.html</a> Just for the record (since some LPers seem to be claiming a meltdown or something...personally I haven't changed my views though, he's too shady for me).
Originally Posted By woody I do hope the Dems stick with Obama. Obama is experiencing a campaign crisis, but it's not unfixable. Hillary's various scandals is largely overlooked. She even created NEW ONES, but the press isn't biting. There's a bit of a Hillary fatigue. They just won't do anything about it. Obama will survive. This Wright scandal is another manifestation of anti-religious bias. The press did it to Republicans before. Now, the press is focused on Obama. Let's get over it.
Originally Posted By Mr X The wright thing bothered me somewhat, but not enough to lose faith in the guy (it really DOES bother me that he stuck with that church though, considering what his minister was spouting...it's not good for a potential president to be tacitly supporting such vitrol). What bothered me a lot more though was the lying about how much they received in contributions from that criminal that gave them a house at a deep discount. The lying is pretty scary. What else is Obama lying about??
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan His speech this afternoon is one of the most heartfelt I have ever heard in my lifetime from any politician. I think he knocked it out of the park with that speech. How refreshing it would be to have a president that speaks of the bigger picture, the long range goal, and to do so with eloquence and optimism.
Originally Posted By MissCandice Do Lp'ers think Mr X is having a meltdown or Obama's campaign is having a meltdown?
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 So he disagrees with how Obama lied and now you are resorting to talking smack about him? That's real professional... we are adults here right?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << How refreshing it would be to have a president that speaks of the bigger picture, the long range goal, and to do so with eloquence and optimism. >> Wouldn't it have been more refreshing if Obama had made that speech before he came under scrutiny for his relationship with Rev. Wright? I'd think someone who has the "big picture" would be more ahead of the game and not have to present these sorts of ideas as a defense mechanisme instead of a proactive campaign of good ideas. Obama's only big picture, long range goal in making this speech was to preserve his political viability. His speech was eloquent, but and also very calculated. Obama is a run of the mill politician just like any other -- putting self preservation ahead of all other concerns. Personally, I'd like to know what Obama thinks of the Fed bail out of Wall Street banks while the American consumer gets to pay for all of this economic mess through accelerated inflation, job losses, and foreclosures on homes. When does the government intervene to help the average American consumer and not the fat cats on Wall Street? Instead, we get lofty rhetoric designed to preserve a political campaign, and the continued trend where Obama says absolutely nothing of consequence about the issues that will matter when he becomes President.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Wouldn't it have been more refreshing if Obama had made that speech before he came under scrutiny for his relationship with Rev. Wright?<< Sure. But I think he explained it well. People will either accept the explanation, or they won't. We'll see. What impressed me about it is that he didn't trash the guy, just explained how we all have differences of opinion with people we respect at times. I can relate to that. Most people, if they're honest about it, can as well. We've all had relatives and friends, as in Obama's example with his grandmother, that at times say things that make us cringe. Sure, that was a calculated example, but it works – because it's authentic. >>Personally, I'd like to know what Obama thinks of the Fed bail out of Wall Street banks while the American consumer gets to pay for all of this economic mess through accelerated inflation, job losses, and foreclosures on homes. When does the government intervene to help the average American consumer and not the fat cats on Wall Street?<< As would I. Perhaps if this episode is behind him (we'll see about that) he can address that issue and others. But if people keep chasing after snippets of outrageous one-liners from Rev. Wright instead of asking thse hard questions, we may never know.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 (SG): <Personally, I'd like to know what Obama thinks of the Fed bail out of Wall Street banks while the American consumer gets to pay for all of this economic mess through accelerated inflation, job losses, and foreclosures on homes.> So would I. I'd also like to know Clinton's and McCain's positions on the same things. I don't. I watch quite a bit of news, but you won't find those positions reported. Because they're all talking about what Wright said. And before that, Ferraro. Hour after hour of punditry and airtime on them. On an important issue like the one you mentioned? Not so much. Again, we're focused on marginalia, and Obama pretty much had to make that speech yesterday just because that's what the media conversation was. Luckily, he turned it into something of an opportunity. (Kar2oonman): <His speech this afternoon is one of the most heartfelt I have ever heard in my lifetime from any politician. I think he knocked it out of the park with that speech. How refreshing it would be to have a president that speaks of the bigger picture, the long range goal, and to do so with eloquence and optimism.> Agreed. As Jon Stewart said last night in a rare moment of seriousness, "...on a Tuesday at 11 a.m., a Presidential candidate actually spoke to Americans about race as though we were adults." I hope he didn't overestimate us.
Originally Posted By woody >>What impressed me about it is that he didn't trash the guy, just explained how we all have differences of opinion with people we respect at times.<< I'm glad he did this. I suppose it took a Democrat liberal to put down the flames of political correctness. Now, it is harder to call people on racist comments. We have to look at the reasons and give pity. Very funny.
Originally Posted By woody >>As Jon Stewart said last night in a rare moment of seriousness, "...on a Tuesday at 11 a.m., a Presidential candidate actually spoke to Americans about race as though we were adults."<< Hook, line and sinker.
Originally Posted By woody <a href="http://www.townhall.com/columnists/KathleenParker/2008/03/19/guilting_america_to_the_white_house" target="_blank">http://www.townhall.com/column ists/KathleenParker/2008/03/19/guilting_america_to_the_white_house</a> Barack Obama is a magician. He could tell me it's raining on a sunny day, and I'd grab an umbrella. He could tell me the moon is the sun, and I'd reach for my shades. He could even tell me that the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's rants god-damning America and blaming AIDS on a white-man conspiracy were wrong but essentially justified by a racist past ... and I'd have to slap myself before I saddled up a polka-dotted horse and galloped down the Yellow Brick Road. Obama's speech Tuesday from Philadelphia -- the city of brotherly love -- was eloquent, inspiring and will be read in schools for generations. But between the lines of change and reconciliation were a discomfiting hint of buried fury, a sense of racial righteousness and a tacit approval attached to his expressed disapproval of Wright's now-famous raves that will leave many Americans wondering: Is he with us? Or is he against us?
Originally Posted By Dabob2 < Is he with us? Or is he against us? > The exact opposite of RESPONDING to the speech as if one was an adult. Oh well.
Originally Posted By woody It's obvious that some have RESPONDED to the speech and perceived it as "adult" and others did not. Kathleen Parker said the speech was "eloquent" and "inspiring", which means it is an "adult" speech, but it also has a rather chilling message.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 But then she turns around and wants to know if Obama is "with us" (the us presumably being white people) or "against us." That's simply not an adult response. It's insisting on a binary answer to a complex question. Inadvertently she reveals her actual response. And the message of Obama's speech was anything but chilling.
Originally Posted By jonvn It doesn't matter who wins the nomination if they can't win in the general election.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>Inadvertently she reveals her actual response.<< I've never heard of her, but considering the rest of the content on that site, it's more right wing chum.
Originally Posted By woody >>And the message of Obama's speech was anything but chilling.<< Some have characterized it "throwing Grandma under the bus" in Obama's reference to his Grandmother in equating her to Rev. Wright. But Obama has made racist comments a bit more acceptable in that you don't need to disassociate from racists. You can separate the person from their views.
Originally Posted By woody >>But then she turns around and wants to know if Obama is "with us" (the us presumably being white people) or "against us." That's simply not an adult response. It's insisting on a binary answer to a complex question. Inadvertently she reveals her actual response.<< Here's an adult analysis by Dick Morris. <a href="http://thehill.com/dick-morris/pastor-wright-this-too-shall-pass-2008-03-18.html" target="_blank">http://thehill.com/dick-morris /pastor-wright-this-too-shall-pass-2008-03-18.html</a> "Will the Gospel According to Jeremiah Wright sink the Obama candidacy? Not very likely." "As the controversy matures, he can increasingly depict those who fan its flames as trying to live in the past and re-fight the civil wars of race that have divided America." (Us vs Them - BINARY) "All these themes were evident and articulately presented in Obama’s Tuesday speech on race." (Adult speech)
