• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Obama in the ring

billydkid said:
Now this is what I don't understand. Who was George Bush before he was elected? He had never served in national office of any kind and clearly he was unequiped for the job, yet he was twice elected. I don't believe that Obama's lack of experience is going to bother most voters.
Click to expand...
Same with Bill Clinton, but he grew into it.

Barack "Sweet Home Al" Obama (call me a Chris Berman fan) has the problem of not being a governor. The good news is that he has not been in the Senate long enough to have a body of work that is easily attackable.

He's got a shot. The question is, what does he stand for?

DR
 
Tricky said:
Here's the hottest news, straight off the Colbert Report. Obama is not Black. That's right. According to Deborah Dickerson, only descendents of slaves are entitled to that label. Obama is the decendant of fairly recent Kenyan immigrants, so he has not had the Black Experience.
Click to expand...

Hey, as no one in my family ever owned a slave, then I am obviously not white!

Where do I line up to get me some melanin*?





*I'm serious. It's summer down here and I burn easily.
 
Well, news flash: Evidently the Australian prime minister said that, if he were Al Quaeda, he'd circle March 2008 (reference to primaries in the US) and hope Obama, and the Democrats, would win things.

To which Obama replied something like, well, Australia has sent 1400 troops. If they really want to fight the good fight against terrorism and Al Quaeda, they can send 20,000 more.

Probably won't vote for him, but this deft handling makes me at least open an eye. Sweet!
 
Will anyone admit I was fairly prescient about Obama? Not that I was the only one. Also, Ron Paul's message has resonated with many hundreds of thousands of people who heard it. I truly believe that had it not been for GOP directive to the media marginalize, ignore and discredit Ron Paul he would have reached many more. I truly believe the criticizms I have heard of Dr. Paul have unfair and unfounded and based planted disinformation and are sincere only in as much as their intent was to damage his candidacy - the truth be damned. To me it is more than telling that people find it necessary to resort to flat out falsehood in order to discredit a candidate.

I have precious little reasoned argument against his positions. And for all those people who so detest Dubya and his war and his inclination towards contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution - here you had a man and a candidate who is the very antithesis of the rot George Bush represents and all you could think to do is character assassinate him. Shame on you. As the value of you dollar and your savings sink progressively lower and as the price of oil sky rockets beyond anything you could have imagined 15 years ago - remember you have the Federal Reserve inflationary policy to thank for it. You might not know, but the dollar is currently worth 4 cents compared to its value in 1913 when the Federal Reserve came into being. People seem think this is the natural course of things - that money naturally becomes less valuable over time, they are so conditioned to it.

Someone said that the genius of the American political system lay in its ability to get ordinary people to vote continually against their own best interests. Here we have a case in point. I would have given some of you more credit for being able to at least attempt to think outside of the box - at least reconsider everything you take so comfortably and smugly for granted. I have to add that smugness and self satisfaction are not virtues in and of themselves.

I like Obama, he is a decent and inspiring guy, but he will change nothing fundamentally and our government will go on doing what all governments have done from the beginning of time - serve, ultimately, only the interests of the powerful. As long as there is enough on the table for the rest of us to get the scraps - our cell phones and our PS3's and our DVD players and our Lexuses- we'll trudge along like we always have, oblivious to the realities of our serfdom. But it won't go on forever. God help us when it collapses.
 
You watched Kennedy vs Nixon debates when you were a young boy? What did you like about Kennedy when you were that age?
 
Speaking as someone who has never been remotely interested in politics, I can tell you that Obama has already accomplished one thing...at the age of 34, I registered to vote, solely so that I could vote for him. He's the first candidate I've ever seen who actually makes me want to trust him.
 
SnuggleSmacks said:
Speaking as someone who has never been remotely interested in politics, I can tell you that Obama has already accomplished one thing...at the age of 34, I registered to vote, solely so that I could vote for him. He's the first candidate I've ever seen who actually makes me want to trust him.
Click to expand...

So all this time you were just waiting for the candidate to come along that, in addition to the policies of the usual candidates, finally would represent the "I'm a nice man" platform.

FSM help us if tv psychic John Edward runs for president on his emotional manipulation ability too. :eek: After all he's such a nice, fresh, down to earth guy who gives people so much hope.

edit:

Or FSM forbid it:

Unleash the power within, America!

225px-Robbinscrop.jpg
 
Last edited:
billydkid said:
I like Obama, he is a decent and inspiring guy, but he will change nothing fundamentally and our government will go on doing what all governments have done from the beginning of time - serve, ultimately, only the interests of the powerful. As long as there is enough on the table for the rest of us to get the scraps - our cell phones and our PS3's and our DVD players and our Lexuses- we'll trudge along like we always have, oblivious to the realities of our serfdom. But it won't go on forever. God help us when it collapses.
Click to expand...

If governments have served only the interests of the powerful since the beginning of time then how did we ever get to the point where "scraps" that non-powerful masses get are things like cell phones and PS3's and DVDs and Lexuses? The non-powerful masses of today are more powerful than the most powerful people were a hundred years ago. And the two richest men in the US grew up in families that were non-powerful.

Don't get me wrong, I don't mind people trying to agitate for improving things but that paragraph just kinda seemed a bit over the top to me. "The realities of our serfdom," wrote some person on the *INTERNET* in their *LEISURE TIME.*

Nothing is going to collapse. Things are going to change, as they always have and always will. But a good way to bring about change is avoid using over the top rhetoric that makes people roll their eyes.
 
latent aaaack said:
So all this time you were just waiting for the candidate to come along that, in addition to the policies of the usual candidates, finally would represent the "I'm a nice man" platform.
Click to expand...


Interesting assumption, and wrong. I wouldn't bother to register and vote based on anything so warm and fuzzy.

What I like about him is that, in every platform in which he has taken a stance, regardless of what his stance is, he is all about disclosure. The star system for rating credit cards, the disclosure of error rates in hospitals, the publishing of lobbyist "donations," ensuring that broadband internet is available in every corner of the country and that every government communication is available to the public online, the "21st Century Fireside Chats"...after the last 8 years in which EVERYTHING is a "state secret," it's refreshing.

I can find a lot to agree and disagree with in all of the candidates, and as usual, a lot of them say the same things. However, a full disclosure policy appeals to me.
 
Tricky said:
Here's the hottest news, straight off the Colbert Report. Obama is not Black. That's right. According to Deborah Dickerson, only descendents of slaves are entitled to that label. Obama is the decendant of fairly recent Kenyan immigrants, so he has not had the Black Experience.
Click to expand...

That's really interesting...so, despite his appearance, the bigots he has come into contact with somehow knew that he wasn't really black, and therefore refrained from showing him the same hatred and discrimination that they would heap on anyone else with his skin tone.

Wait...which Black Experience did he miss out on??
 
Last edited:
The Jackie Kennedy created Camelot myth seems to still resonate with some who were impressionable children when they saw JFK on TV. With all that we know about JFK since 1963, how anyone can still prop this guy up as some sort of shinning beacon among U.S. Presidents is disconcerting.

"Our security and strength, in the last analysis, directly depend on the security and strength of others, and that is why our military and economic assistance plays such a key role in enabling those who live on the periphery of the Communist world to maintain their independence of choice. Our assistance to these nations can be painful, risky, and costly, as is true in Southeast Asia today. But we dare not weary of the task. For our assistance makes possible the stationing of 3.5 million allied troops along the Communist frontier at one-tenth the cost of maintaining a comparable number of American soldiers. A successful Communist breakthrough in these area, necessitating direct United States intervention, would cost us several times as much as our entire foreign aid program, and might cost us heavily in American lives as well."

JFK Trade Mart Speech, November 22, 1963
Killed before giving this speech.

As demonstrated in his own words, or sentiments (since Sorensen wrote most of JFK's utterances), JFK had no intention of getting out of Vietnam, the Oliver Stone nonsense not withstanding.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom