Obama behind in polls

[Guest 2smart4u]

No, stupid, he expresses his thoughts in his words. But it's clearly "beyond" you to understand.

Wrong again. All his words are read off a script that someone else wrote. Keep trying, dummy.

[Guest Guest]

Wrong again. All his words are read off a script that someone else wrote. Keep trying, dummy.

It must take a lot of energy to hate so many people.

[Guest Guest]

Wrong again. All his words are read off a script that someone else wrote. Keep trying, dummy.

Semper lie as usual. Don't you ever get tired of bullshitting?

[WilliamK]

Wrong again. All his words are read off a script that someone else wrote. Keep trying, dummy.

It's true that Obama has a speech writer. A very good one, in fact. And that speech writer now has two people working under him. But it is also true that Obama has written speeches himself, and that the ones he doesn't write himself are written with his direct involvement. Speeches that Obama wrote himself include two of his most famous. The one he delivered at the 2004 Democratic Convention, and his "More Perfect Union" speech on race. Both of those were outstanding, and are recognized as such even by most of his political opponents.

That Obama is as good at writing speeches as he is at delivering them, is something that he's renowned for. Did you really think you could get away with such a blatant lie as that?

Not to mention the over-the-top hypocrisy. Do you think John McCain doesn't have a speech writer? (see http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=93473084 ) McCain's speech writer also co-authored five of his books. In fact, there don't seem to be any books for which McCain's is sole author, not even the autobiographical ones. Barack Obama, however, wrote "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope" himself.

[Bern]

Intelligence is an important attribute in a president. You can't just pass it off as though it's not important - not if you want to think about the matter intelligently.

It's offensive to draw a comparison between Obama and either Hitler or Stalin, let alone both of them. And it's not well-taken. There is not the slightest indication that he would try to exercise dictatorial power or that he would oversee the murder of innocent people or that he would try to stifle dissent. Before you make a comment like that, don't you think you should have some basis for suggesting a comparison - regardless how you intended it.

You could probably call every American politician running on the national level slick and disingenuous. But again, I see nothing in Obama to suggest that he's any worse than any of the others, and plenty of reasons to think he's better. Having the guts not to wear a flag pin on his lapel, for example, demonstrated a real desire to bring politics around to what's real instead of keeping it focused on symbols that can as easily be appropriated by hypocrites, and regularly are. The evolution of politics by television has dumbed down our politics considerably. We're struggling just to have the real issues discussed, much less focused on. From what I've seen, Obama gets that, and that's very important IMO.

You're not looking at my comparison correctly. I guess the point I was trying to make escaped you. So be offended.

Lately, I'm noticing that a lot in the US of A are "offended". We've become such a sensitive people and with so many special needs. It seems half of the population would be very happy if they were placed into the "nanny state nursing home."

The flag issue? Obama folded the minute the Republicans brought it up. Hopefully he'll do better in the world stage with Russia, China, Iran, EU.

What real issues are you struggling with? Please enlighten me.

[Bern]

Very well said !

If you have the IQ of a potato.

[Bern]

Why am I not surprised that it's the McCain supporter who can't even SPELL "speech"? Likes attract, I guess.

Why so many bring up insipid posts on typos?

[Bern]

Wrong again. All his words are read off a script that someone else wrote. Keep trying, dummy.

They all do that.

In Obama's case it is or was Jon Favreau.

Favreau who led the team that wrote Obama's victory speech in Des Moines last week—a moment that prompted the TV pundits to drop months of skepticism about Obama's candidacy to make breathless comparisons with the Kennedy era.

Obama can also write his own speeches. He has claimed to have written the speech he gave at the 2004 DNC convention.

The problem is Obama may not be good at the give and take of real political debate, where he cannot use the staff prepared canned soundbite scripts. Which explains why he refused to do townhalls with Clinton and refuses to do them now with McCain and has limited the number of national political debates to three (McCain wanted more).

Obama and his campaign claim to be very open, with the "new Way" of doing things. However, it seems the only access Obama wants the common public to have is when Obama has prepared speeches and through his adverts.

[Guest Guest]

Why so many bring up insipid posts on typos?

First of all, when someone is implying that Obama isn't smart enough to make a statement without a teleprompter, it's worth pointing out the irony that the one making the attack can't even spell a simple word right. It's not rocket science.

Secondly, "speach" is not a typo. A typographical error is when you make a mistake because of the keyboard. "E" and "A" are not adjacent on the keyboard, so there is no way the latter was typed accidentally. "Speach" means you don't know how to spell the word.

[Guest Guest]

It's true that Obama has a speech writer. A very good one, in fact. And that speech writer now has two people working under him. But it is also true that Obama has written speeches himself, and that the ones he doesn't write himself are written with his direct involvement. Speeches that Obama wrote himself include two of his most famous. The one he delivered at the 2004 Democratic Convention, and his "More Perfect Union" speech on race. Both of those were outstanding, and are recognized as such even by most of his political opponents.

That Obama is as good at writing speeches as he is at delivering them, is something that he's renowned for. Did you really think you could get away with such a blatant lie as that?

Not to mention the over-the-top hypocrisy. Do you think John McCain doesn't have a speech writer? (see http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=93473084 ) McCain's speech writer also co-authored five of his books. In fact, there don't seem to be any books for which McCain's is sole author, not even the autobiographical ones. Barack Obama, however, wrote "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope" himself.

All serious presidential candidates have speech writers.

[Guest Keith]

If you have the IQ of a potato.

I'm sorry Bern, let me rephrase that.

"f**k you!"

[Guest 2smart4u]

I'm sorry Bern, let me rephrase that.

"f**k you!"

Keith's limited vocabulary fails him again.

[WilliamK]

All serious presidential candidates have speech writers.

Naturally.

I'm not sure whether you meant that to add to what I said or to counter something I said. If the latter, then please understand that I did not bring up McCain's use of a speech writer and book co-author as a criticism against McCain, but just to highlight 2Smart's hypocrisy in making that criticism of Obama. It's really no big deal that writing isn't McCain's forte'. And, there's nothing wrong with enlisting some help in any case.

[WilliamK]

I'm sorry Bern, let me rephrase that.

"f**k you!"

A bit uncouth, but I can't say it was uncalled for.

[Guest Paul]

You're not looking at my comparison correctly. I guess the point I was trying to make escaped you. So be offended.

Lately, I'm noticing that a lot in the US of A are "offended". We've become such a sensitive people and with so many special needs. It seems half of the population would be very happy if they were placed into the "nanny state nursing home."

The flag issue? Obama folded the minute the Republicans brought it up. Hopefully he'll do better in the world stage with Russia, China, Iran, EU.

What real issues are you struggling with? Please enlighten me.

Bern, you're hyperventilating, your posts have become rude and arrogant, and your contempt for one of the most talented politicians and brilliant minds of our time is hard to understand.

In the first place, the very fact that you admit that your invocation of Hitler and Stalin in reference to Obama was a comparison tells me you're either completely off the deep end with some sort of irrational rage, or you're just not thinking things through. If you wanted to make the argument that intelligence alone does not make for a good president, that's easily made without reference to two of history's most brutal dictators. A person who was thinking clearly would recognize that a comment like that will be seen as a comparison, and the comparison will be to the feature that most characterizes Hitler and Stalin in people's minds. It's not intelligence, but their unchecked viciousness on a mass scale.

On the flag issue, Obama has done what he had to do. If he hadn't done it, he wouldn't be competitive in this election.

You try running for president as a 47-year-old black man in his first term as a federal legislator. Obama has made an historic accomplishment winning the Democratic nomination as a black man. It takes an extraordinary person to have done that. Have we become so jaded that this has become passe already?

[Bern]

"He thinks in levels of complexity that are beyond most people". You're privy to his thoughts ?? A classic example of Kool-Aid ramblings.

Obama Messiah infatuation.

[Bern]

I'm sorry Bern, let me rephrase that.

"f**k you!"

Thank you for validating my statement.

[Bern]

Bern, you're hyperventilating, your posts have become rude and arrogant, and your contempt for one of the most talented politicians and brilliant minds of our time is hard to understand.

In the first place, the very fact that you admit that your invocation of Hitler and Stalin in reference to Obama was a comparison tells me you're either completely off the deep end with some sort of irrational rage, or you're just not thinking things through. If you wanted to make the argument that intelligence alone does not make for a good president, that's easily made without reference to two of history's most brutal dictators. A person who was thinking clearly would recognize that a comment like that will be seen as a comparison, and the comparison will be to the feature that most characterizes Hitler and Stalin in people's minds. It's not intelligence, but their unchecked viciousness on a mass scale.

The comparison is valid because we don't know what we will get. I know its exciting to many that a black man is running for president. And as stated by many of his supporters, he does seem intelligent and is articulate. I agree he's intelligent. We'll see how articulate he is during the free wheeling debates (which Obama has limited to three).

The fact that Obama is looked upon by many so highly with such passion tells me we may have issues. Previously, I've detailed some of his inconsistencies, a warning to us that all is not as it seems.

Will he be given a pass simply because he's charismatic, seems articulate and is intelligent? For example, Obama stated in his Iraq trip that we must win Afghanistan and if need be we will have to ramp up there. So, he's changing the war theater from Iraq to Afghanistan, which could be a much worse hell hole. If we ramp up so much that we will get a draft, will the articulate man of the people Obama, get a pass? Or more likely, we will end up being heavily bogged down in Afghanistan, but because its under Obama's presidency, its all right?

You never know what you get until the individual is in power. Hitler and Stalin who were articulate "peace loving" orators who fooled the people. There were warning signs which were ignored.

When I hear about change and movement, I get nervous. It is a promise that has been given before

. . . we want this people to be peace-loving but also brave and you must be peace-loving!

But the Movement is alive and stands

firmly as a rock as long as one of us can

still breathe life into it, just as in

the many years past. Then drum will join

drum, banner will join banner, group will

join group, district will join district,

and then, at last, the once divided

people will then follow the gigantic

column of a united . . .

[Guest Guest]

My comparison with Hitler and Stalin is valid. You never know what you get until the individual is in power. There were warning sign with Hitler and Stalin. Both were articulate "peace loving" orators who fooled the people.

That's your reasoning? On that basis, anyone running for president could be compared to Hitler and Stalin. All you've shown us is how poor your judgment is and how unable you are to draw rational distinctions.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Bern, you're hyperventilating, your posts have become rude and arrogant, and your contempt for one of the most talented politicians and brilliant minds of our time is hard to understand.

In the first place, the very fact that you admit that your invocation of Hitler and Stalin in reference to Obama was a comparison tells me you're either completely off the deep end with some sort of irrational rage, or you're just not thinking things through. If you wanted to make the argument that intelligence alone does not make for a good president, that's easily made without reference to two of history's most brutal dictators. A person who was thinking clearly would recognize that a comment like that will be seen as a comparison, and the comparison will be to the feature that most characterizes Hitler and Stalin in people's minds. It's not intelligence, but their unchecked viciousness on a mass scale.

On the flag issue, Obama has done what he had to do. If he hadn't done it, he wouldn't be competitive in this election.

You try running for president as a 47-year-old black man in his first term as a federal legislator. Obama has made an historic accomplishment winning the Democratic nomination as a black man. It takes an extraordinary person to have done that. Have we become so jaded that this has become passe already?

Let's call a spade a spade (no pun intended), Obama got the nomination because of "white guilt". This junior Senator, who has spent 142 working days in the Senate would never have gotten the nod if he had been white. Being the most liberal member of Congress didn't hurt him but his skin color got him the nomination.

But it's a moot issue anyway. The latest polls out today have 30% of Hillary supporters voting for McCain. If that number holds, Obama can't win.

[Bern]

That's your reasoning? On that basis, anyone running for president could be compared to Hitler and Stalin. All you've shown us is how poor your judgment is and how unable you are to draw rational distinctions.

Actually, you show your ignorance of how Stalin and Hitler worked their way into positions of power.

Hitler appealed to the masses and industrialists (the Krups and so forth). Stalin was very personable, working less with the masses. Instead, Stalin (hard working but jolly Joe) worked his way up by gaining the trust of his peers, becoming the first citizen or comrade. But the dynamics of Hitler's and Stalin's rise were very similar. The new replacing the old, promising change, men of the people, causing the masses and their peers to become infatuated with them. There too were warnings, and they were disregarded.

Obama's rise and the infatuation held for Obama is eerily similar to Hitler's and Stalin's rise. This infatuation, this trust and the charisma Obama exudes did not extend to previous presidential candidates.

I'm not saying that Obama will be a Hitler or a Stalin. No one is perfect and one should beware and always be prepared. The danger is that Obama will constantly be given a pass when making poor decisions because he's a charismatic politician of change, who so many are infatuated with.

Its a fact that societies or mankind do not learn from history.

[Guest Guest]

Let's call a spade a spade (no pun intended), Obama got the nomination because of "white guilt". This junior Senator, who has spent 142 working days in the Senate would never have gotten the nod if he had been white. Being the most liberal member of Congress didn't hurt him but his skin color got him the nomination.

But it's a moot issue anyway. The latest polls out today have 30% of Hillary supporters voting for McCain. If that number holds, Obama can't win.

lol, what makes you think you're any less wrong now than any of the other times you've made predictions on this election?

Your prediction is a good sign that Obama will win.

[Guest Guest]

Let's call a spade a spade (no pun intended), Obama got the nomination because of "white guilt". This junior Senator, who has spent 142 working days in the Senate would never have gotten the nod if he had been white. Being the most liberal member of Congress didn't hurt him but his skin color got him the nomination.

But it's a moot issue anyway. The latest polls out today have 30% of Hillary supporters voting for McCain. If that number holds, Obama can't win.

The 'white guilt' that will elect Obama is the guilt over being unable to come up with a better candidate than John McSame. America needs Bush III about as much as it needs another Pearl Harbor.

[Guest Guest]

Actually, you show your ignorance of how Stalin and Hitler worked their way into positions of power.

Hitler appealed to the masses and industrialists (the Krups and so forth). Stalin was very personable, working less with the masses. Instead, Stalin (hard working but jolly Joe) worked his way up by gaining the trust of his peers, becoming the first citizen or comrade. But the dynamics of Hitler's and Stalin's rise were very similar. The new replacing the old, promising change, men of the people, causing the masses and their peers to become infatuated with them. There too were warnings, and they were disregarded.

Obama's rise and the infatuation held for Obama is eerily similar to Hitler's and Stalin's rise. This infatuation, this trust and the charisma Obama exudes did not extend to previous presidential candidates.

I'm not saying that Obama will be a Hitler or a Stalin. No one is perfect and one should beware and always be prepared. The danger is that Obama will constantly be given a pass when making poor decisions because he's a charismatic politician of change, who so many are infatuated with.

Its a fact that societies or mankind do not learn from history.

I didn't show ignorance of anything. Your point was that Hitler and Stalin "were articulate, peace-loving orators who fooled the people." Any politician can fool the people. All he has to do is lie. Bush fooled the people. Reagan fooled the people by running against the budget deficit, then tripling it while he was in office.

You're making an argument, apparently, that Obama's ability to speak and persuade is a danger. In a sense, it is, but the alternative is worse: incompetence. A president has to be able to speak and persuade, so your argument is meaningless. For it to make sense, you have to look at what made Hitler and Stalin brutal dictators. When you do that, you see that Obama is the exact opposite.

Hitler rose to power by keeping his message brainlessly simple and repeating it endlessly. That is the tactic of the Republicans and their media cheerleader Fox noise, not the Democrats and certainly not Obama. Obama is criticized for being too intellectual and talking over people's heads. What people forget is that he is smarter than they are. He's being himself. If we pass by a leader like that, we're the losers. Do you really want someone of average intellect and abilities running the country? The American people have to wake up to the demands of leadership, or get stuck again with an idiot like Bush.

Stalin rose to power in the Soviet Union, a Communist state. There is no comparison to Obama's run for the presidency in the USA in 2008. You're the one showing your ignorance, and your blind hatred of a very talented and patriotic leader.

[Guest 2smart4u]

I didn't show ignorance of anything. Your point was that Hitler and Stalin "were articulate, peace-loving orators who fooled the people." Any politician can fool the people. All he has to do is lie. Bush fooled the people. Reagan fooled the people by running against the budget deficit, then tripling it while he was in office. You're making an argument, apparently, that Obama's ability to speak and persuade is a danger. In a sense, it is, but the alternative is worse: incompetence. A president has to be able to speak and persuade, so your argument is meaningless. For it to make sense, you have to look at what made Hitler and Stalin brutal dictators. When you do that, you see that Obama is the exact opposite. Hitler rose to power by keeping his message brainlessly simple and repeating it endlessly. That is the tactic of the Republicans and their media cheerleader Fox noise, not the Democrats and certainly not Obama. Obama is criticized for being too intellectual and talking over people's heads. What people forget is that he is smarter than they are. He's being himself. If we pass by a leader like that, we're the losers. Do you really want someone of average intellect and abilities running the country? The American people have to wake up to the demands of leadership, or get stuck again with an idiot like Bush. Stalin rose to power in the Soviet Union, a Communist state. There is no comparison to Obama's run for the presidency in the USA in 2008. You're the one showing your ignorance, and your blind hatred of a very talented and patriotic leader.

"Very talented and patriotic leader"?? What??? Having spent 142 working days in the Senate, he has no experience any area of government. I haven't seen any talents on display nor have I seen any examples of patriotism. Your nonsensical babbling is typical of the Kool-Aid sideshow.