Obamamania!

[101A]

Lyrics:


It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the destiny of a nation.
Yes we can.

They had a purpose and a cause. They wrote a document about it - called it the Declartion of Independence. Went to WAR over it



It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail toward freedom.
Yes we can. Yes we can.

They also had a cause; ran an undergound railroad; lobied politicians, made no bones about their opinion; went to WAR over it.



It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores
and pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness.
Yes we can. Yes we can.

They were tough bastards who got on whatever would float, headed over here with nothing, rolled up their sleeves, busted their asses, and built this nation!



It was the call of workers who organized;

Risked life and limb to make working conditions better for themselves and others; again, made CLEAR the problems, and what they saw as the solutions.



women who reached for the ballots;

Stood up to the establishment; got men behind them - and got it done; again, everybody knew what they wanted, and they got it



a President who chose the moon as our new frontier;

Dude gave a speach about what he wanted - and he wanted to beat the Soviets. Pretty clear.



and a King who took us to the mountain-top and pointed the way to the Promised Land.
Yes we can to justice and equality.

Ultimately gave his life for his dream. Wanted equality; made it clear. An amazing, charismatic, determined individual with a purpose and a plan to go with his well documented, and established dream.


(yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can...)

Yes we can to opportunity and prosperity.
Yes we can to opportunity and prosperity.

Our country has opportunity and prosperity now; who is this directed at? It's unclear



Yes we can heal this nation.

Of what? How?



Yes we can repair this world.
Yes we can. Si Se Puede
(yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can...)"Repair" it from what? Terrorism? Communism? Poverty? America (I think this is the answer) David Hasselhoff?



We know the battle ahead will be long,
but always remember that no matter what obstacles stand in our way,
nothing can stand in the way of the power of millions of voices calling for change.
We want change!
(We want change! We want change! We want change...)Change from what and to what? What battle is going to be long? I guess it will - since we don't know who or what we're fighting, or when we will have won!


We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics who will only grow louder and more dissonant.
Do what?

We've been asked to pause for a reality check. I'd like you to pause and tell me what the fuck you're talking about!


We've been warned against offering the people of this nation false hope.

I have false hope that I'm ever going to know what the problem is!



But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope. We want change!
(We want change! I want change! We want change! I want change...)There's that "change" again. What are we changing? What is "THIS" all about?



The hopes of the little girl who goes to a crumbling school in Dillon are the same as the dreams of the boy who learns on the streets of LA;

To win the lottery? Meet David Hasselhoff?



we will remember that there is something happening in America;
that we are not as divided as our politics suggests;

Apparently SOME of us are divided. Some of us don't know what you are talking about.



that we are one people;
we are one nation;
and together, we will begin the next great chapter in America's story with three words that will ring from coast to coast;
from sea to shining sea - Yes. We. Can.
(yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can, yes we can...)One people, and one nation. Got it. YES WE CAN!!

Do what, again? :bang

Would a Obama supporter please explain this to me?

It looks pretty empty, or even completely empty.

It is written and delivered, to mean whatever the listener wants it to mean; because it can. THIS is what the big deal is? He isn't brave, he isn't going to change anything. Listen to his own words that have "inspired" so many, for the proof.

[Mr. Peabody]

Lyrics:

One people, and one nation. Got it. YES WE CAN!!

Do what, again? :bang

Would a Obama supporter please explain this to me?

It looks pretty empty, or even completely empty.

It is written and delivered, to mean whatever the listener wants it to mean; because it can. THIS is what the big deal is? He isn't brave, he isn't going to change anything. Listen to his own words that have "inspired" so many, for the proof.

I think you fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of the speech. It's not a policy speech, merely a motivational speech. At the time Obama gave this speech, he had just lost the New Hampshire primary, one in which he was heavily favored just before the election. It was a speech meant to fire up his supporters in the wake of a loss that some saw as the start of a Clinton ascension.

Remember, post primary speeches are what gave us the Dean Scream, Clinton calling himself the comeback kid, etc. What you have to explain to me is why you are analyzing a post-election concession speech for policy and depth. I think you are taking some memes too seriously.

[101A]

I think you fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of the speech. It's not a policy speech, merely a motivational speech. At the time Obama gave this speech, he had just lost the New Hampshire primary, one in which he was heavily favored just before the election. It was a speech meant to fire up his supporters in the wake of a loss that some saw as the start of a Clinton ascension.

Remember, post primary speeches are what gave us the Dean Scream, Clinton calling himself the comeback kid, etc. What you have to explain to me is why you are analyzing a post-election concession speech for policy and depth. I think you are taking some memes too seriously.I'M taking it too seirously? Theirs a damned song with a bunch of famous people singing this damn speach. Somebody else did it in Spanish and Dan posted a link in another thread! THIS SPEACH, and the subsequent song written from it, is a primary force attracting people to Barrack Obama!

He obviously is comparing his campaign to the most earth-shattering movements and events in our nation's history! I couldn't tell you, however, what, if anything, is earth-shattering, or even novel, about his policies.

[Mr. Peabody]

Plus, I would also point out that you assume just because you don't understand what a phrase means that no one else understood it either. For example, when Obama mentions "some people asked us to pause for a reality check" you responded


I'd like you to pause and tell me what the fuck you're talking about!

This line was in response to a Clinton statement during the New Hampshire debates




OBAMA: Look, we are now disclosing if they're bundling money for members of Congress. They've got to disclose who they're bundling money from and who they're giving it to.

But here's the critical point that I want to make. Not only does this have to be personal, John -- and I completely agree. When I think about health care, I think about my mother, who when she was dying of cancer had to read an insurance form because she had just gotten a new job and they were trying to figure out whether or not this was going to be treated as a preexisting condition, and whether or not they would pay her medical bills.

So I've seen the costs of a health care system that is broken in very personal terms.

But what I also believe, if we're going to bring about real change, then we have to bring in the American people. We have to bet on them.

OBAMA: And that's what's been lost. People, I think, feel that they are not heard at all, they are not involved. And the only way we're going to muster enough power over the long term to actually get something done is if we've got a working majority, which is why it's so important...

(CROSSTALK)

CLINTON: Can we just have a sort of a reality break for a minute? Because I think that it is important to make some kind of an assessment of these statements.

You know, Senator Edwards did work and get the patient bill of rights through the Senate -- it never got through the House. One of the reasons that Natalie may well have died is because there isn't a patient's bill of rights. We don't have a patient's bill of rights.

[Mr. Peabody]

I'M taking it too seirously? Theirs a damned song with a bunch of famous people singing this damn speach. Somebody else did it in Spanish and Dan posted a link in another thread! THIS SPEACH, and the subsequent song written from it, is a primary force attracting people to Barrack Obama!

He obviously is comparing his campaign to the most earth-shattering movements and events in our nation's history! I couldn't tell you, however, what, if anything, is earth-shattering, or even novel, about his policies.

It was a very effective motivational speech. What's wrong with acknowledging that? Look at the "I Have A Dream" speech, I don't recall any specific policy or details in that speech. It was just motivational and has been characterized as one of the great speeches in American history (and before you do it, I'm not claiming the two are equal, just equating the types of speeches).

And contrary to your dismissal, his campaign is a momentous event in our nation's history. Just fifty years ago, this guy wouldn't have been able to vote and now he is the frontrunner to be a nominee for president. Isn't that momentous? For a country that has been labeled as racist by many to have a Black general election candidate shows just how far we have come as a nation. I think that's pretty earth-shattering.

[101A]

I Have a Dream Speach:



I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.


Five score years ago, a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today, signed the Emancipation Proclamation. This momentous decree came as a great beacon light of hope to millions of Negro slaves who had been seared in the flames of withering injustice. It came as a joyous daybreak to end the long night of their captivity.


But one hundred years later, the Negro still is not free. One hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity. One hundred years later, the Negro is still languished in the corners of American society and finds himself an exile in his own land. And so we've come here today to dramatize a shameful condition.


In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, yes, black men as well as white men, would be guaranteed the "unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note, insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked "insufficient funds."


But we refuse to believe that the bank of justice is bankrupt. We refuse to believe that there are insufficient funds in the great vaults of opportunity of this nation. And so, we've come to cash this check, a check that will give us upon demand the riches of freedom and the security of justice.


We have also come to this hallowed spot to remind America of the fierce urgency of Now. This is no time to engage in the luxury of cooling off or to take the tranquilizing drug of gradualism. Now is the time to make real the promises of democracy. Now is the time to rise from the dark and desolate valley of segregation to the sunlit path of racial justice. Now is the time to lift our nation from the quicksands of racial injustice to the solid of brotherhood. Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children.


It would be fatal for the nation to overlook the urgency of the moment. This sweltering summer of the Negro's legitimate discontent will not pass until there is an invigorating autumn of freedom and equality. Nineteen sixty-three is not an end, but a beginning. And those who hope that the Negro needed to blow off steam and will now be content will have a rude awakening if the nation returns to business as usual. And there will be neither rest nor tranquility in America until the Negro is granted his citizenship rights. The whirlwinds of revolt will continue to shake the foundations of our nation until the bright day of justice emerges.


But there is something that I must say to my people, who stand on the warm threshold which leads into the palace of justice: In the process of gaining our rightful place, we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must forever conduct our struggle on the high plane of dignity and discipline. We must not allow our creative protest to degenerate into physical violence. Again and again, we must rise to the majestic heights of meeting physical force with soul force.


The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.


We cannot walk alone.


And as we walk, we must make the pledge that we shall always march ahead.


We cannot turn back.


There are those who are asking the devotees of civil rights, "When will you be satisfied?" We can never be satisfied as long as the Negro is the victim of the unspeakable horrors of police brutality. We can never be satisfied as long as our bodies, heavy with the fatigue of travel, cannot gain lodging in the motels of the highways and the of the cities. *We cannot be satisfied as long as the negro's basic mobility is from a smaller ghetto to a larger one. We can never be satisfied as long as our children are stripped of their self-hood and robbed of their dignity by a sign stating: "For Whites Only."* We cannot be satisfied as long as a Negro in Mississippi cannot vote and a Negro in New York believes he has nothing for which to vote. No, no, we are not satisfied, and we will not be satisfied until "justice rolls down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream."¹


I am not unmindful that some of you have come here out of great trials and tribulations. Some of you have come fresh from narrow jail cells. And some of you have come from areas where your quest -- quest for freedom left you battered by the storms of persecution and staggered by the winds of police brutality. You have been the veterans of creative suffering. Continue to work with the faith that unearned suffering is redemptive. Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed.


Let us not wallow in the valley of despair, I say to you today, my friends.


And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.


I have a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."


I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.


I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.


I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.


I have a dream today!


I have a dream that one day, down in Alabama, with its vicious racists, with its governor having his lips dripping with the words of "interposition" and "nullification" -- one day right there in Alabama little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.


I have a dream today!


I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."²


This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the South with.


With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm#) of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.


And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:




My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.


Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,


From every mountainside, let freedom (http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/mlkihaveadream.htm#)


And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.


And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New



Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.


Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of
Pennsylvania.


Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.


Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.


But not only that:


Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.


Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.


Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi.




From every mountainside, let freedom ring.


And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:


Free at last! Free at last!


Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!³

UMMM. Mr. P.

NOT just motivational, although motivational it certainly is!

Dr. King makes it VERY clear what he's talking about, and what he wants.

Obama doesn't say anything specific AT ALL; he simply motivates.

Motivates to what? Barrackness, I guess.

[Mr. Peabody]

UMMM. Mr. P.

NOT just motivational, although motivational it certainly is!

Dr. King makes it VERY clear what he's talking about, and what he wants.

Obama doesn't say anything specific AT ALL; he simply motivates.

Motivates to what? Barrackness, I guess.




Oh god, now you're going to make post the full text of the "Yes We Can" speech -


I want to congratulate Senator Clinton on a hard-fought victory here
in New Hampshire.

A few weeks ago, no one imagined that we'd have accomplished what we
did here tonight. For most of this campaign, we were far behind, and
we always knew our climb would be steep.

But in record numbers, you came out and spoke up for change. And with
your voices and your votes, you made it clear that at this moment - in
this election - there is something happening in America.

There is something happening when men and women in Des Moines and
Davenport; in Lebanon and Concord come out in the snows of January to
wait in lines that stretch block after block because they believe in
what this country can be.

There is something happening when Americans who are young in age and
in spirit - who have never before participated in politics - turn out
in numbers we've never seen because they know in their hearts that
this time must be different.

There is something happening when people vote not just for the party
they belong to but the hopes they hold in common - that whether we are
rich or poor; black or white; Latino or Asian; whether we hail from
Iowa or New Hampshire, Nevada or South Carolina, we are ready to take
this country in a fundamentally new direction. That is what's
happening in America right now. Change is what's happening in
America.

You can be the new majority who can lead this nation out of a long
political darkness - Democrats, Independents and Republicans who are
tired of the division and distraction that has clouded Washington; who
know that we can disagree without being disagreeable; who understand
that if we mobilize our voices to challenge the money and influence
that's stood in our way and challenge ourselves to reach for something
better, there's no problem we can't solve - no destiny we cannot
fulfill.

Our new American majority can end the outrage of unaffordable,
unavailable health care in our time. We can bring doctors and
patients; workers and businesses, Democrats and Republicans together;
and we can tell the drug and insurance industry that while they'll get
a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair. Not this
time. Not now.

Our new majority can end the tax breaks for corporations that ship our
jobs overseas and put a middle-class tax cut into the pockets of the
working Americans who deserve it.

We can stop sending our children to schools with corridors of shame
and start putting them on a pathway to success. We can stop talking
about how great teachers are and start rewarding them for their
greatness. We can do this with our new majority.

We can harness the ingenuity of farmers and scientists; citizens and
entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil and save our
planet from a point of no return.

And when I am President, we will end this war in Iraq and bring our
troops home; we will finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan;
we will care for our veterans; we will restore our moral standing in
the world; and we will never use 9/11 as a way to scare up votes,
because it is not a tactic to win an election, it is a challenge that
should unite America and the world against the common threats of the
twenty-first century: terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change
and poverty; genocide and disease.

All of the candidates in this race share these goals. All have good
ideas. And all are patriots who serve this country honorably.

But the reason our campaign has always been different is because it's
not just about what I will do as President, it's also about what you,
the people who love this country, can do to change it.

That's why tonight belongs to you. It belongs to the organizers and
the volunteers and the staff who believed in our improbable journey
and rallied so many others to join.

We know the battle ahead will be long, but always remember that no
matter what obstacles stand in our way, nothing can withstand the
power of millions of voices calling for change.

We have been told we cannot do this by a chorus of cynics who will
only grow louder and more dissonant in the weeks to come. We've been
asked to pause for a reality check. We've been warned against
offering the people of this nation false hope.

But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been
anything false about hope. For when we have faced down impossible
odds; when we've been told that we're not ready, or that we shouldn't
try, or that we can't, generations of Americans have responded with a
simple creed that sums up the spirit of a people.

Yes we can.

It was a creed written into the founding documents that declared the
destiny of a nation.

Yes we can.

It was whispered by slaves and abolitionists as they blazed a trail
toward freedom through the darkest of nights.

Yes we can.

It was sung by immigrants as they struck out from distant shores and
pioneers who pushed westward against an unforgiving wilderness.

Yes we can.

It was the call of workers who organized; women who reached for the
ballot; a President who chose the moon as our new frontier; and a King who took us to the mountaintop and pointed the way to the Promised Land.

Yes we can to justice and equality. Yes we can to opportunity and
prosperity. Yes we can heal this nation. Yes we can repair this
world. Yes we can.

And so tomorrow, as we take this campaign South and West; as we learn
that the struggles of the textile worker in Spartanburg are not so
different than the plight of the dishwasher in Las Vegas; that the
hopes of the little girl who goes to a crumbling school in Dillon are
the same as the dreams of the boy who learns on the streets of LA; we
will remember that there is something happening in America; that we
are not as divided as our politics suggests; that we are one people;
we are one nation; and together, we will begin the next great chapter
in America's story with three words that will ring from coast to
coast; from sea to shining sea - Yes. We. Can.

I think this describes what he wants. Again, in terms of structure, they are similar speeches.

[Yonivore]

UMMM. Mr. P.

NOT just motivational, although motivational it certainly is!

Dr. King makes it VERY clear what he's talking about, and what he wants.

Obama doesn't say anything specific AT ALL; he simply motivates.

Motivates to what? Barrackness, I guess.



I agree with 101 on this one, Peabody. King was both motivational and substantive in his "I have a dream" speech. I've yet to discern anything of substance from Obama.

And, the things he is specific on are scary. Universal Healthcare, negotiating with terrorist states, surrendering in Iraq, and depending on who you talk to, Killing NAFTA or expanding NAFTA.

[101A]

Our new American majority can end the outrage of unaffordable, unavailable health care in our time. We can bring doctors and patients; workers and businesses, Democrats and Republicans together; and we can tell the drug and insurance industry that while they'll get a seat at the table, they don't get to buy every chair. Not this time. Not now.

Our new majority can end the tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and put a middle-class tax cut into the pockets of the working Americans who deserve it.

We can stop sending our children to schools with corridors of shame
and start putting them on a pathway to success. We can stop talking
about how great teachers are and start rewarding them for their
greatness. We can do this with our new majority.

We can harness the ingenuity of farmers and scientists; citizens and
entrepreneurs to free this nation from the tyranny of oil and save our
planet from a point of no return.

And when I am President, we will end this war in Iraq and bring our
troops home; we will finish the job against al Qaeda in Afghanistan;
we will care for our veterans; we will restore our moral standing in
the world; and we will never use 9/11 as a way to scare up votes,
because it is not a tactic to win an election, it is a challenge that
should unite America and the world against the common threats of the twenty-first century: terrorism and nuclear weapons; climate change and poverty; genocide and disease.Thanks for that, P. hadn't seen the whole speach.

THAT clears it up. He's a typical Democrat candy man, with better oratory skills. But what in the heck does 9/11 have to do with climate change? (the last paragraph)

[Mr. Peabody]

I agree with 101 on this one, Peabody. King was both motivational and substantive in his "I have a dream" speech. I've yet to discern anything of substance from Obama.

And, the things he is specific on are scary. Universal Healthcare, negotiating with terrorist states, surrendering in Iraq, and depending on who you talk to, Killing NAFTA or expanding NAFTA.

Yoni, I'm not expecting you to agree with his positions. My only point is the speech was a post primary concession speech designed to motivate supporters after an unexpected loss. I don't understand why such a speech should be criticized for not being a policy speech. And as you point out Yoni, there are specifics.

Also, if you read my extraordinarily long-winded post about my experience at the primaries, I am the first to admit that some of the criticism of Obama supporters does have basis in fact. Hell, some of the campaign volunteers didn't know anything about the Rezko scandal. However, that's an entirely different discussion....

[Mr. Peabody]

Thanks for that, P. hadn't seen the whole speach.

THAT clears it up. He's a typical Democrat candy man, with better oratory skills. But what in the heck does 9/11 have to do with climate change? (the last paragraph)

I don't think he says 9/11 and climate change are related. I think it's just pointing out that these are the issues that will shape the outcome of this century.

I agree he does have a progressive (or liberal) agenda. The big hope for Obama among us liberals is that he can sell such an agenda to the general public by couching it in universal terms. We'll see.

[Spawn]

UMMM. Mr. P.

NOT just motivational, although motivational it certainly is!

Dr. King makes it VERY clear what he's talking about, and what he wants.

Obama doesn't say anything specific AT ALL; he simply motivates.

Motivates to what? Barrackness, I guess.




I Have a Dream motivational? Speech full of fairytales is more like it.

Somebody post Dr. Kings "Beyond Vietnam" speech and see if you all consider that motivational being that it is anti-war as well as anti-capatilism too.

[clambake]

I agree with 101 on this one, Peabody. King was both motivational and substantive in his "I have a dream" speech. I've yet to discern anything of substance from Obama.

And, the things he is specific on are scary. Universal Healthcare, negotiating with terrorist states, surrendering in Iraq, and depending on who you talk to, Killing NAFTA or expanding NAFTA.
is iran a terrorist state?

[BonnerDynasty]

Who cares about substance. Substance? We talkin' bout Substance?? This is America. Let us charge our expenses and worship celebs and we are goooooood to go :elephant


YES WE CAN!

[George Gervin's Afro]

This is hilarious..I was attacked for saying Obama lacked substance ... now we have people acknowledging that as well.. :rolleyes

[Yonivore]

This is hilarious..I was attacked for saying Obama lacked substance ... now we have people acknowledging that as well.. :rolleyes
Yes, it is freakin' hilarious. :lmao

[Mr. Peabody]

This is hilarious..I was attacked for saying Obama lacked substance ... now we have people acknowledging that as well.. :rolleyes

Let me get this straight, because Yoni and 101A also have criticized Obama, that somehow validates your point? Look, I respect Yoni and 101A's opinions on matters, but let's be honest, they're not exactly impartial observers. That's almost like saying if boutons agrees with you about Bush, that somehow creates a consensus.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Let me get this straight, because Yoni and 101A also have criticized Obama, that somehow validates your point? Look, I respect Yoni and 101A's opinions on matters, but let's be honest, they're not exactly impartial observers. That's almost like saying if boutons agrees with you about Bush, that somehow creates a consensus.


All I'm saying is, in my opinion, that Obama is all fluff. I like the dude but of the 3 remaining people he is the least experienced and that means something to some people. You seem to now want to be 'right' as opposed to being objective.. Is it possible that he may not be ready?

So If I can provide other democrats stating the same thing would that bolster my point? Of course you will respond that they are backers of Clinton's so they can't possibly be unbiased. Who does that leave us with to inquire about his readiness? The obamaniacs!! Nice how you can exclude anyone who has an opinion about him because they have agendas.. so who exaclty will you accept as an unbiased opinion? Michell Obama?

[101A]

Look, I respect Yoni and 101A's opinions on matters, ...Sig. worthy.

[Mr. Peabody]

Sig. worthy.

:lol

I try and give credit when I can. I don't always agree with you and Yoni, but at least you have reasoned arguments to support your points of view.

[Mr. Peabody]

You seem to now want to be 'right' as opposed to being objective.. Is it possible that he may not be ready?



I'm not objective and never claimed to be. I am one of the biggest Obama supporters on this board. SA210 and I went round and round over Edwards and Obama early on in the primary. I volunteered for the Obama campaign. Hell, most of my posts during the primary have been Obama-related. I'm not positing objectivity. I'm simply trying to refute your arguments with regard to Obama. My whole point above was that using the fact that other people on a political message board have echoed your criticisms as evidence of the merit of that criticism is a bit of a stretch.

[SA210]

I think Obama should credit Dolores Huerta and the United Farm Workers for his plagirizing of, "Yes We Can"/"Si Se Puede"

[Mr. Peabody]

So If I can provide other democrats stating the same thing would that bolster my point? Of course you will respond that they are backers of Clinton's so they can't possibly be unbiased. Who does that leave us with to inquire about his readiness?

Yes, it would bolster your argument, but it would not provide any additional evidence of your argument's merit. What leads you to believe that he is not ready to be president, aside from other people telling you that he is not ready to be president ?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Yes, it would bolster your argument, but it would not provide any additional evidence of your argument's merit. What leads you to believe that he is not ready to be president, aside from other people telling you that he is not ready to be president ?


Isn't that what your telling me? That he's ready to be President based on your opinion. What gives your opinon more weight than mine? So now we have conflicting opinions... we both think we're right..

[101A]

Yes, it would bolster your argument, but it would not provide any additional evidence of your argument's merit. What leads you to believe that he is not ready to be president, aside from other people telling you that he is not ready to be president ?Jumping in here...

I would ask you the same question, transposed.

Prove to me he is. Show me what experience in his past, and his handling of that qualifies him to be Commander in Chief. It's difficult to prove a negative (and in Obama's case, I thing difficulty in finding negatives is by design, not accident). They guy just BURST on to the scene in '04; gets elected to the Senater, and now wants to be president! His record, other thant at winning elections, and giving speaches is unremarkable.

If I was HIRING either he, Hillary, or McCain for the JOB of Commander in Chief? His resume doesn't even get him an interview.

[George Gervin's Afro]

Jumping in here...

I would ask you the same question, transposed.

Prove to me he is. Show me what experience in his past, and his handling of that qualifies him to be Commander in Chief. It's difficult to prove a negative (and in Obama's case, I thing difficulty in finding negatives is by design, not accident). They guy just BURST on to the scene in '04; gets elected to the Senater, and now wants to be president! His record, other thant at winning elections, and giving speaches is unremarkable.

If I was HIRING either he, Hillary, or McCain for the JOB of Commander in Chief? His resume doesn't even get him an interview.



Gulp....Sigh..

This is my point..

[Yonivore]

Let me get this straight, because Yoni and 101A also have criticized Obama, that somehow validates your point? Look, I respect Yoni and 101A's opinions on matters, but let's be honest, they're not exactly impartial observers. That's almost like saying if boutons agrees with you about Bush, that somehow creates a consensus.
If you cut me, do I not bleed?

[Mr. Peabody]

Isn't that what your telling me? That he's ready to be President based on your opinion? What gives your opinon more weight than mine?

Nothing, but I am not trying to use other people opinions as evidence that I am correct. I base my opinion that he is ready to be president on his background. The guy is Ivy League educated; gave up guaranteed wealth to serve his community, first as an organizer and then as a civil rights attorney; was a constitutional law professor; all of that before spending 14 years as an elected official.

[Mr. Peabody]

If you cut me, do I not bleed?

:lol

I said almost like boutons....

[Yonivore]

:lol

I said almost like boutons....
Okay, I'll recover.

[SA210]

I think Obama should credit Dolores Huerta and the United Farm Workers for his plagirizing of, "Yes We Can"/"Si Se Puede"

[Mr. Peabody]

Jumping in here...

I would ask you the same question, transposed.

Prove to me he is. Show me what experience in his past, and his handling of that qualifies him to be Commander in Chief. It's difficult to prove a negative (and in Obama's case, I thing difficulty in finding negatives is by design, not accident). They guy just BURST on to the scene in '04; gets elected to the Senater, and now wants to be president! His record, other thant at winning elections, and giving speaches is unremarkable.

If I was HIRING either he, Hillary, or McCain for the JOB of Commander in Chief? His resume doesn't even get him an interview.


Obama's experience, limited in the Senate, is varied in the outside world

By Christopher Wills
ASSOCIATED PRESS

10:47 a.m. January 16, 2008

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – By some measures, Barack Obama has a thin record. He's a Senate newcomer who has never worked in the White House, governed a state or run a business.

Democratic presidential rival Hillary Rodham Clinton points to his resume as evidence that Obama is not ready for the White House. “He was a part-time state senator for a few years, and then he came to the Senate and immediately started running for president,” she says dismissively.

Obama's accomplishments are more substantial and varied than Clinton suggests. And he has a longer record in elected office than she does, as a second-term New York senator.

Obama was a community organizer and led a voter-registration effort in Chicago that added tens of thousands of people to the rolls. He was a civil rights attorney and taught at one of the nation's premier universities. He helped pass complicated measures in the Illinois legislature on the death penalty, racial profiling, health care and more. In Washington, he has worked with Republicans on nuclear proliferation, government waste and global warming, amassing a record that speaks to a fast start while lacking the heft of years of service.

The Illinois Democrat likes to quote something Bill Clinton once said: “The truth is, you can have the right kind of experience and the wrong kind of experience. Mine is rooted in the real lives of real people, and it will bring real results if we have the courage to change.”

After college, Obama moved to Chicago for a low-paying job as a community organizer. He worked with poor families on the South Side to get improvements in public housing, particularly the removal of asbestos.

“Nobody else running for president has jumped off the career track for three or four years to help people,” said Jerry Kellman, who first hired Obama as a community organizer.

Obama also fought for student summer jobs and a program to keep at-risk children from dropping out of school. More importantly, say those who worked with Obama, he showed people how to organize and confront powerful interests.

“He had to train residents to stand up for their own rights,” said former organizer Loretta Augustine-Herron, who was part of Obama's Developing Communities Project.

Obama left that job to get a law degree. Afterward, he returned to Chicago and ran Project VOTE. The organization recruited hundreds of registrars to sign up new voters, particularly within the city's black population. Registration jumped nearly 15 points between the 1992 primary and the general election.

The registration wave was credited with making Carol Moseley Braun the first black female senator and helping Bill Clinton carry Illinois in his first presidential race. It also got insiders talking about Obama as a political candidate.

Obama then spent several years focusing on the law, both as an attorney at a small firm specializing in civil rights and as a lecturer on constitutional law at the University of Chicago.

As an attorney, he was on the team that successfully sued the state of Illinois for failing to implement a federal voter-registration law. Obama also worked on case of a whistle-blower who lost her job after exposing waste and corruption in a medical research project. The whistle-blower ended up with a $5 million settlement.

Obama was elected to the Illinois state Senate in 1996, when Democrats were in the minority. He proposed hundreds of new laws, including universal health care, tougher gun control and expanded welfare, but saw most of them spiked by Republican leadership.

He did have some successes, though – particularly in passing legislation sharply restricting the gifts that Illinois politicians could accept from lobbyists. Illinois has notoriously weak government ethics laws, and the Gift Ban Act was the first major new restriction since the Watergate era.

Obama also helped set up Illinois' “KidCare” program that provided health care to children in families that did not qualify for Medicaid.

John Bouman, president of the Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law, said Obama's work helped make the program more consumer-friendly. He also said Obama was often willing to give up credit for the legislation if that helped win Republican support.

“It tells you something that as a relatively junior member in the minority party, he was an important negotiator,” Bouman said.

When Democrats gained a majority in the Senate, Obama's political mentor, Senate President Emil Jones, gave him high-profile assignments, including two contentious issues involving police – videotaped interrogations and racial profiling.

Police weren't happy about recording their interrogations of murder suspects or having to study racial bias in traffic stops. Initially, they opposed both pieces of legislation.

But Obama made clear that something was going to pass with or without their support. Ultimately, police groups endorsed both bills and they won unanimous approval in the Senate.

Obama was generally regarded as an effective and practical, although decidedly liberal, state lawmaker. One of his Republican colleagues was so wowed that he has appeared in an Obama campaign ad, but others aren't impressed by his legislative record.

“I would say it was run of the mill, honestly,” said Sen. Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, who entered the legislature at the same time Obama did.

Obama was a part-time state senator in that he served in the Illinois legislature at the same time he practiced law. He became a state lawmaker in 1997, four years ahead of Hillary Clinton's entrance into elected office, as U.S. senator.

When Obama was elected to the U.S. Senate, he said he wished to get things done rather than grab headlines, and cited Hillary Clinton as the sort of workhorse he wanted to be.

He teamed with Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., to study the dangers of nuclear proliferation and pass legislation meant to keep nuclear material from falling into the hands of terrorists.

Obama also joined with Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., after Hurricane Katrina to improve oversight of federal spending.

And he shared billing with a Republican presidential hopeful when he joined Arizona Sen. John McCain in sponsoring legislation that called for sharp, mandatory cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. The effort failed.

[Spurminator]

I think Obama should credit Dolores Huerta and the United Farm Workers for his plagirizing of, "Yes We Can"/"Si Se Puede"


:lol, now "Yes We Can" is a trademarked phrase.

[SA210]

:lol, now "Yes We Can" is a trademarked phrase.
What do you know about it?

[101A]

Insert long article with list of accomplishments hereThat's great.

But I specifically stated the job title as,

"Commander in Chief"

NOT

"Far Left Chief Executive"

Thanks for making my point for me.

[101A]

Don't know how to embed this video (if somebody knows how, do it so I can see) @ MSN; but check it out. Hilarious.

Black Congresswoman vs. White Man Senator Clinton vs. Obama (m/?mkt=en-us&vid=c21ac081-9f5a-4d7e-88cf-a8196ef1f218&playlist=videoByTag:tag:election_08:ns:Gallery:mk: us:vs:1&from=MSNHP&tab=m1191248204226&GT1=10856)

[Mr. Peabody]

That's great.

But I specifically stated the job title as,

"Commander in Chief"

NOT

"Far Left Chief Executive"

Thanks for making my point for me.

Look at two notable foreign policy decisions regarding how we use our military. First would be the decision on whether to invade Iraq, which has been poured over so much that I don't know that we'd have a productive discussion about it.

The other decision I'd point you to is when Obama, in a debate, said that he'd go after terrorist cells in Pakistan using small tactical forces, with or without Pakistani cooperation. He was blasted by Hillary, who said it showed naivete and others in the media. It was an unpopular position. I remember listening to Rush Limbaugh saying things like "Senator Obama would bomb Pakistan. Folks this shows how little he understands foreign affairs..." This was in August. Later on, we learn -



CIA Operation Similar to Tactic Obama Advocated, Bush criticized

On the front page of Tuesday's Washington Post was an article detailing how in late January U.S. forces, acting with autonomy inside Pakistan, were able to target and kill Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander.

The strike, which came without the Pakistani government's knowledge and helped eliminate an individual who had long eluded the spy-agency's capture, was an obvious boon in the War on Terror. But the political implications of the operation were just as fascinating.

In August, Sen. Barack Obama had made the argument that, as president, he would target Al Qaeda officials in Pakistan even without the country's acquiescence -- the type of attack that, six months later, proved to be successful.

At the time, Obama was roundly criticized for his remarks, both by his Democratic competitors for the White House and by the Bush administration.

"We think that our approach to Pakistan is not only one that respects the sovereignty of Pakistan, but also is designed so that we are working in cooperation," said then-Press Secretary Tony Snow.

And just one week ago, President Bush himself lambasted Obama's approach to foreign affairs.

"I certainly don't know what he believes in," Bush said on February 10, about Obama. "The only foreign policy thing I remember he said was he's going to attack Pakistan and embrace Ahmadinejad."

To be sure, not everything is known about the extent and execution of the CIA's operation. But, on the surface, it carries similarities to Obama's stated approach towards Pakistan's terrorism problem, the same approach Bush trivialized.

Here is Obama's August 2 statement at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars:


"I understand that President Musharraf has his own challenges... But let me make this clear. There are terrorists holed up in those mountains who murdered 3,000 Americans. They are plotting to strike again. ... If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf will not act, we will."

And here are some excerpts from Tuesday's Washington Post article.


In the predawn hours of Jan. 29, a CIA Predator aircraft flew in a slow arc above the Pakistani town of Mir Ali. The drone's operator, relying on information secretly passed to the CIA by local informants, clicked a computer mouse and sent the first of two Hellfire missiles hurtling toward a cluster of mud-brick buildings a few miles from the town center.


The missiles killed Abu Laith al-Libi, a senior al-Qaeda commander and a man who had repeatedly eluded the CIA's dragnet. It was the first successful strike against al-Qaeda's core leadership in two years, and it involved, U.S. officials say, an unusual degree of autonomy by the CIA inside Pakistan.

It is an approach that some U.S. officials say could be used more frequently this year, particularly if a power vacuum results from yesterday's election and associated political tumult. The administration also feels an increased sense of urgency about undermining al-Qaeda before President Bush leaves office, making it less hesitant, said one official familiar with the incident.

Having requested the Pakistani government's official permission for such strikes on previous occasions, only to be put off or turned down, this time the U.S. spy agency did not seek approval. The government of Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf was notified only as the operation was underway, according to the officials, who insisted on anonymity because of diplomatic sensitivities.

[Spurminator]

What do you know about it?


I know that as campaign slogans go, "Yes We Can" is about as generic as they come. It's the "Go Spurs Go" of campaign slogans. If the LA Kings started making banners that said "Go Kings Go" would you accuse them of plagiarism??

I also know that "Si Se Puede" is Spanish for "Yes We Can." Obama is trying to appeal to Latinos? Plagiarist!!!

[101A]

Look at two notable foreign policy decisions regarding how we use our military. First would be the decision on whether to invade Iraq, which has been poured over so much that I don't know that we'd have a productive discussion about it.

The other decision I'd point you to is when Obama, in a debate, said that he'd go after terrorist cells in Pakistan using small tactical forces, with or without Pakistani cooperation. He was blasted by Hillary, who said it showed naivete and others in the media. It was an unpopular position. I remember listening to Rush Limbaugh saying things like "Senator Obama would bomb Pakistan. Folks this shows how little he understands foreign affairs..." This was in August. Later on, we learn -The "decision" on whether to invade an Iraq was nothing of the sort. It was an opinion. By that standard, Boutons is more qualified than Hillary in your eyes to be President.

Regarding Pakistan; what Obama said, was he would act unilaterally in Pakistan - and did not, at all, sound diplomatic; Also, he promised to send troops, we sent a single drone - and told them it was underway. Different in scope, IMO.

[Mr. Peabody]

The "decision" on whether to invade an Iraq was nothing of the sort. It was an opinion. By that standard, Boutons is more qualified than Hillary in your eyes to be President.

Regarding Pakistan; what Obama said, was he would act unilaterally in Pakistan - and did not, at all, sound diplomatic; Also, he promised to send troops, we sent a single drone - and told them it was underway. Different in scope, IMO.

boutons wasn't running for political office and speaking out against popular support for the war. I think Barack's exact quote in 2002 was that the war would be "an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs and undetermined consequences." It turned out to be true.

On the issue of Pakistan - what we did was act unilaterally. We told the Pakistani government the attack was underway after it was underway. How is that not unilateral? Also, now we're arguing scope? Before, it was he has done nothing to show the capability to be Commander-in-Chief. Then when it turns out his plan for combating terrorists in August was the same plan the CIA used in January, the argument becomes "Well, his plan was different in scope."

Ok, you win, he's unfit to be Commander-in-Chief because he said he would send troops and he should have said drones....

[101A]

boutons wasn't running for political office and speaking out against popular support for the war. I think Barack's exact quote in 2002 was that the war would be "an occupation of undetermined length, with undetermined costs and undetermined consequences." It turned out to be true.

On the issue of Pakistan - what we did was act unilaterally. We told the Pakistani government the attack was underway after it was underway. How is that not unilateral? Also, now we're arguing scope? Before, it was he has done nothing to show the capability to be Commander-in-Chief. Then when it turns out his plan for combating terrorists in August was the same plan the CIA used in January, the argument becomes "Well, his plan was different in scope."

Ok, you win, he's unfit to be Commander-in-Chief because he said he would send troops and he should have said drones....Go ahead defend what he said; it sounded undiplomatic and inflamatory toward an ally of ours, naming Musharraf specifically, who has supported US policies DESPITE the fact that it is unpopular in his country. Whatever we ultimately did, apparently, hasn't had ill consequences, we can only guess why.


Again, Obama DOES NOT get full credit for not supporting the war; he was a freaking STATE SENATOR at the time; he could say ANYTHING and it didn't amount to a hill of beans. I can imagine, in HIS little, meaningless district in Illinois, it was the politically expedient thing to say! I, personally, have NO IDEA what my state senator thought about the invasion; nor do I care.

[Extra Stout]

:lol, now "Yes We Can" is a trademarked phrase.
Unless Obama invents a completely new language and does his campaign speeches exclusively in that language, he is a phony, unlike John Edwards, who actually invented the English language, and is also the father of modern hair care.

[Extra Stout]

Bill Clinton is a plagiarist phony. He didn't invent "Don't Stop Thinking About Tomorrow." That was Fleetwood Mac! When will Bill Clinton come up with his own ideas and stop stealing them from popular '70s musical groups?

[Mr. Peabody]

Go ahead defend what he said; it sounded undiplomatic and inflamatory toward an ally of ours, naming Musharraf specifically, who has supported US policies DESPITE the fact that it is unpopular in his country. Whatever we ultimately did, apparently, hasn't had ill consequences, we can only guess why.



101, did you read the last paragraph of the article? We had asked this ally of ours for permission to go after Al Qaeda in Pakistan and they would refuse or stall.

My point is that Obama said he would utilize such a unilateral strategy if necessary. He was roundly criticized for this statement and the strategy proved to be a successful one six months later. I think that it is evidence that he is fit to be Commander-in-Chief.

[clambake]

i just want the mccain supporters to tell me if Iran is a terrorist state.

[Holt's Cat]

Nothing, but I am not trying to use other people opinions as evidence that I am correct. I base my opinion that he is ready to be president on his background. The guy is Ivy League educated; gave up guaranteed wealth to serve his community, first as an organizer and then as a civil rights attorney; was a constitutional law professor; all of that before spending 14 years as an elected official.

And he made his career on his own.