Posted 2 months, 9 days ago in 
Loading ...
The early euphoria regarding Sen. Obama’s candidacy is completely understandable — many of us were similarly swept up in JFK’s run for the Presidency. Much more difficult to understand, however, is that the fantasy continues in light of the senator’s incredibly thin resume and his undeniable connections to Jeremiah Wright, quintessential anti-American venom-spitter, William Ayers, quintessential home-grown terrorist and Tony Rezco, quintessential crook. Though the major media refuses to give these legitimate news stories any traction, I’m still amazed that so many of the electorate is thoroughly bedazzled. Perhaps few know the meaning of the word “quintessential.”
MERLE MILLER
Grand Junction
68 Responses to “Why are people still bedazzled with Obama”
Posted September 24th, 2008 at 9:18 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
More hysterical reactions from the right wing to the Obama express train. The latest polls show that Colorado is now solidly in the Obama camp much to the dismay of people like Mr. Miller, no doubt accounting for this underhanded and generally discredited tactic (insinuations of guilt be association). Bfrog who loves to quote polls to us has been strangely silent the last few days as the polls across the country show evermore support for Obama.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 7:15 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
What a condescending letter. Rest assured, the electorate is neither bedazzled nor stupid, although I do wonder what knowing the definition of quintessential has to do with all this (and yes, I know the definition). It’s just that many of us support Obama for a whole variety of good reasons. We have access to the same internet and news outlets that you do, and we’ve drawn different conclusions about our candidate.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 7:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Class, I haven’t been “strangely silent”. You may have missed it but I admitted a few days ago that the financial crisis had turned the polls around and that if things did not improve soon, Obama will win the election. Not because he would deal with the problem better than McCain, but because folks who see a mess, and don’t understand it, want a change, any change.
So I have reduced my expectations, but haven’t completely thrown in the towel yet. Obama should be up in the polls by double digits given generic disatisfaction with Republicans in this country. The fact that he is not, is a clear indication that the letter writer’s sentiments a shared by an awful lot of independents.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 7:46 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I can tell you a very simple reason why I have an Obama bumper sticker on my car.
It has nothing to do with being “bedazzled.”
It’s because he’s better than John McCain.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:00 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bullish is right; the financial crisis is a big factor in the election, and I think we can credit it for wiping away McCain’s post-convention bump in the polls. I don’t think McCain’s ’suspension’ of his campaign is going to help him much, either. I don’t know who is advising him, but there have been some serious tactical errors coming from the McCain camp, as of late. I think he may be listening to the wrong people.
But I don’t agree that the letter writer is any kind of “Independent”. The letter writer’s condescension belies the approach that many staunch right-wingers follow; the dangerous combination of willful ignorance and an unwavering belief that they are right. Therefore, in his mind, anyone who supports Obama must be a fool.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mini: “But I don’t agree that the letter writer is any kind of “Independent”"
I did not mean to suggest that the letter writer was an independent. I meant to say that many “independents” share the letter writer’s opinion. Let’s face it, the vast majority of Democrats and Republican weill vote for their party’s candidate.
By the way, have folks been following Bill Clinton’s statements in recent days regarding the candidates? The honey is flowing when he refers to McCain and Palin. He says he will support Obama because he is a Democrat. But let me tell you, if I was a betting man, I would bet that Bill CLinton, in the privacy of the polling booth, votes for McCain.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:28 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think he would, too, Bullish; for the same reason I believe he torpedoed his own wife’s campaign with his statements. I think he’s more concerned with protecting his own legacy than he is with any ‘greater good’.
If Hillary had been the nominee, he would have become a footnote in history, secondary to his wife.
If Obama wins (as I hope), Bill Clinton will be pushed further back out of the limelight.
So I think you’re probably right; after all, he’s done a lot more good for Republicans than he ever has for his own party.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:30 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Could this have something to do with the attraction?
Barack Obama
Occidental College - Two years undergraduate work
Columbia University - BA. Political Science with a specialization in international relations
Harvard Law School - Juris Doctor, Magna Cum Laude
Joseph Biden
University of Delaware - BA, History; BA, Political Science.
Syracuse University College of Law, Juris Doctor
-or-
John McCain
United States Naval Academy - Class rank 894 of 899
Sarah Palin
Hawaii Pacific University - 1 semester
North Idaho College - 2 semesters - general study
University of Idaho - 2 semesters - journalism
Matanuska-Susitna College - 1 semester
University of Idaho - 3 semesters - B.A. in journalism
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:39 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
OOPS, I overlooked the fact that intelligence and education are meaningless and elitist in this forum to some. I guess the attraction is charisma and hope for the future with sombody who can walk and chew gum at the same time and some times hesitates on giving an answer to questions until he has actually thought things through rather thn spouting out the day’s memorized talking points.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:51 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
John, you have to remember the way it works with many of the far-right fringe;
Intelligence = Snobbery
Education = Elitism
Open-Mindedness = Lack of Conviction
Eloquence = Deceit
Questioning the Government = Treason
Right now, George Orwell is laughing his butt off. Or weeping.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 9:06 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think our liberal friends have it right. A graduate from an Ivy league school definitiely is superior than a candidate who did not attend an Ivy league school, irrespective of life experience.
Now, let’s see, where did Dubya go to school?
Oh, that’s tight, he has degrees from Yale and Harvard.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 9:13 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Hey, I never said anything about Ivy League being better. As far as I’m concerned, there is no real difference between the Bushes and the Kennedys, except that the Bushes have been at it a longer time, and are richer. Anyone who thinks there are any real ideological differences between the two dynasties is a fool.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 11:03 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well Mini, it appears that John did.
But let’s go ahead and accept John’s premise that intelligence and schooling at a prestigious university is the reason many are attracted to Obama.
I will certainly concede the man is well educated and very intelligent.
So, having conceded that point, how do I square his intelligence and education with his attendance at the church of a racist and liar (as well as his close relationship to the preacher?), and his close association to a left wing radical ex-terrorist not long after graduation from Harvard, and his dealings with a crook in Chicago?
I would have to conclude that someone as intelligent as Obama would not have been involved in these relationships without full knowledge of what kinds of folks they were.
But see, I am not surprised at those relationships. They would indicate that the Senator, at least in the past, leaned heavily to the left of the political spectrum. And since his legislative record is in no way distinguished, many have to rely on what is known of his past in order to get a better fix on what he may do in the future.
And that, my liberal friends, is why the man is not leading in the polls by 12%.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 11:15 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
he got a great education, allied himself with the chicago democratic power brokers, and learned how to copy mlk’s speech patterns. he got elected to congress and a short time later announced his candidacy for president, which he’s been working on instead of gaining experience in the senate. qualified for president? i don’t think so!
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 11:36 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Obeying classof52’s requirements that all sources must be educated in their field, have had peer reviewed papers, and books to their credit before being considered a viable source (in his opinion).
I present the following from a person that meets ALL of the ‘required qualifications’ and as such is to be accepted as totally factual, true, and unassailable.
*************************
http://townhall.com/columnists/MichaelMedved/2008/09/24/bidens_financial_history_disqualifies_him_for_high_office
” If a candidate for high office does a spectacularly poor job in managing his own family’s finances, why on earth should we trust him in a national leadership position at a time of acute economic crisis?
Senator Joe Biden’s recently disclosed tax returns display a consistent pattern of poor judgment and shabby values that ought to disqualify him for the vice presidency or any other post of significant responsibility.
Over the course of ten years (1998 through 2007) the Bidens averaged an adjusted gross income of $245,000 – placing them uncomfortably close to that threshold of $250,000 a year that Senator Obama considers “wealthy” and deserving of sharply increased taxes. In several years during the last decade Biden and his educator wife Jill definitely entered into that privileged territory, reporting income of $319,853 last year (and even more in 2005).
Despite this impressive revenue stream (including a recent six-figure advance for his unreadable—and unread – memoir “Promises to Keep”), Senator Biden has managed to save almost nothing for his own retirement of to benefit his children and grandchildren. In 2007, when announcing his second presidential bid, he reported a total net worth of $100,000 to $150,000, making him the least prosperous member of the U.S. Senate.
As the Washington Post sympathetically observed: “Biden has spent virtually his whole life in public service and does not have much else aside from a small array of mutual funds and cash accounts.” In June of 2008, he even listed significant liabilities including a loan up to $50,000 against his life insurance policy and line of credit indebtedness of more than $100,000 to the Wilmington Savings Fund Society.
At the time of his selection as Senator Obama’s running mate, some of his Biden’s die-hard fans took perverse pride in his shaky financial situation. But why should any American feel proud of reaching retirement age (Biden will turn 66 this November) without accumulating notable savings, assets or property? A normal, hard-working middle class wage-earner who put away a few thousand dollars a year in a tax-sheltered IRA or 401K would have achieved several times Biden’s net worth through the magic of regular investment and compound interest. What sort of irresponsible flake averages $245,000 in annual income (plus lavish expense allotments from the U.S. Senate) while spending nearly all his compensation and diverting next to nothing to the family’s long-term security? What, exactly, did the Senator do with the literally millions of dollars he earned in recent years? The one possible explanation that’s easiest to rule out is the notion that he gave away his wealth to charity. Between 1998 and 2007, his adjusted gross income never dipped below $210,797, but his charitable giving never exceeded $995 (while actually dipping as low as $120 – a paltry $10 per month). In other words, the Bidens’ charitable contributions always remained well below three-tenths of one percent of their adjusted gross income – or one-thirtieth of the familiar standard of tithing upheld by many people of faith. Arthur Brooks of Syracuse University, author of “Who Really Cares?”, orstartly observed: “On average, Biden is not giving more than one tenth as much as the average American household, and that is evidence that he doesn’t share charitable values with the average American. In place of individual initiative or communal responsibility for assisting the less fortunate, Biden strongly prefers to rely on governmental compulsion. The Senator recently told Kate Snow of ABC news that he considered raising taxes a form of patriotism. “It’s time to be patriotic,” he solemnly intoned. “Time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.” Apparently it wasn’t “time to be part of the deal” in previous years, or else he considers givings home, willingly to charity inherently less patriotic than involuntary seizure of income by government In any event, Biden’s refusal to help his neighbors without a federal directive to do so puts him at odds with the instinctive generosity of ordinary Americans, as does his ongoing reliance on Washington bureaucracy to provide for his every need.
For thirty six years – since his initial election to the Senate at age 29- Biden’s been one of 100 members of the “Most Exclusive Club in the World” with all the privileges and prerogatives associated with that status. Senators receive generous travel allowances, the support of lavish, well-paid staffs to cater to your every need both in the Capitol and on visits home, gold-plated family medical benefits and a stunningly lucrative pension program that most corporate executives would envy. Many United States Senators (and other top officials) look with favor on the ideal of a protective “nanny state” because they cherish its indulgent benefits in their own lives.
For Joe Biden, there’s been little impetus to build a personal nest-egg or to plan for his retirement because Uncle Sam has always been there to take care of him. He feels no need to devote resources to private charities because he lives in a Beltway bubble where bureaucrats on the federal payroll can salve all guilty consciences by busying themselves with officious projects of cradle-to-grave “compassion.”
Still, Biden’s inept handling of his personal finances, and his even more pathetic failure to contribute his resources to communal organizations, demonstrate an appalling lack of judgment and maturity. The records shows his emphatic rejection of the American dream of steady, slow economic advancement by restrained spending and regular saving. Americans who’ve achieved personal wealth seldom reach their goals through winning the lottery, or making sudden millions with a big, dramatic score. Far more commonly, the “millionaires next door” (to borrow a phrase from an influential bestseller) advance the interests of their families and their country through patience, hard-work, and long term planning.
Joe Biden may see his failure to provide for his own future as a point of connection with the vulnerability of many stressed and over-extended Americans but do we really need a Vice President of the United States to serve as a negative role model or warning example? A legislator (and loser) who fails to consider the long-term horizon in his own affairs represents a conspicuously terrible choice to safe-guard the future for 300 million of his fellow citizens. ”
**********************
In essence, Biden is a personal finance moron with no clue as to what it takes to balance a checkbook, live on a budget, or any of the other REQUIREMENTS of life in Main Stream America.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 12:02 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Good thing he’s not nearly as likely to become President as Sarah Palin would be then, huh?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 12:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I am not nearly as concerned as WLJ is about Biden’s personal finances as I am be about his memory and/or lack of knowledge of history (did he really major in history in college?).
The other day in an interview with Katy Couric he said that after the crash of 1929 FDR went on TV and spoke to the nation. He was apparently denigrating the fact that President Bush had not done so in the current crisis. Of course, Senator Biden did not know (or had forgotten) that FDR was not the president in 1929 and that there were no TVs at that time.
Can anyone here imagine how the press would have handled that comment if it had been made by McCain or Palin?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 12:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
naw, I was just commenting on the quality of intelligence contained in the democrat ticket.
Sort of like olbammer not actually being the candidate for President, just the mouthpiece for the person running the teleprompter and the speech writers.
Get that feller away from a teleprompter, he gets lost very quickly, then tries to bluff his way….
Funny to watch. Sort of like the teleprompter being placed above his eye level so it looks like he is raising his eyes to see the whole crowd of 3 people.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 12:43 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Townhall as a source? No partisan opinions there. Check out all the contributors and it is a “who’s who” of conservatve, hard-right commentators. I wonder how McCain would stack up without having married his mistress? He has never had a job except at the government trough. He didn’t even have to pay for the millions of dollars of the taxpayers money lost for the planes he crashed. What was it? Four or five? There’s a good example of conservative fiscal responsibility. Even a free education. How’re Sarah’s finances? Go to TownHall’s website mast head and check out the cast of characters there. I wonder how their nesteggs are coming along. They make their money satisfying the WLJ’s of the world with their red meat commentary rather than doing public service. Accuracy or truth is not a requirement in their commentary. How about the “current occupant”? How did he obtain his nestegg? Failure at every business enterprise he ever tried. Somebody gave him the opportunity to buy into a baseball team with somebody elses money and he and the other owners convinced the citizens of Arlington, Texas to build them a stadium and then he sold out for a big price because the value of the franchise was multiplied by the presence of the stadium. See, governments are good for something. Conservative pocket-picking. Is Biden on welfare? Has he ever been bankrupt? Biden is known for his dedication to family. How has he helped his kids financially? Is it any busines of anybody other than Biden and the kids? Could Biden be President? Of course. Could Palin? Only on Saturday Night Live.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 1:08 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I’m sorry John, but class is the person that set the requirements.
But, I also notice that you do not complain when salon.com, huffingtonpost.com, dkos.com are used as sources which do not contain all the requirements that class set out for others to adhere to.
Are you operating under the assumption that the double standard is alive and well on this site?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 1:14 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Easy everyone. Froggie and Willie just recieved their latest batch of WH talkiing points. Once exhausted, they will slide back into the shadows waiting for more instructions.
The main reason Obama bedazzles is because the last 8 years have produced one disaster after another and the darkness cannot be lit by someone totally controlled by lobbists, see Mc. Next to the extinguished candle of Mc, Obama and almost anyone else would “bedazzle”.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 1:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
And obviously oneperson just got his talking points from TASS, USA.
One disaster after another…?
Lets see, saddam, gone from power, disaster for the democrats/ yes.
taliban, gone from power, disaster for democrats? yes.
Terrorists kept from attacking on US Soil since 9/11, disaster for the democrats? yes.
Pretty much right on the disaster thing.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 1:23 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oneperson finally gets one right.
He says:”The main reason Obama bedazzles is because the last 8 years have produced one disaster after another”.
In other words, Mickey Mouse running under the Democratic banner should easily win this year. So he’s merely repeating what I’ve said.
Perhaps he could next explain why Mickey Mouse would be up double digits in the polls while Obama cannot break away.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 2:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
WLJ, what’s your #22 all about? Who said being a POW was a cushy job? Was that on some other thread? Whose loyalties are you talking about? Who worships corrupt politicians? Making stuff up again? Still? McCain lost the plane over Viet Nam because he was shot down. Another plane was hit by a misfired rocket while awaiting take-off from a carrier deck. That’s two he had little or no control over. That leaves three planes he destroyed through incompetence, carelessness or lack of responsibility. He was known by his peers as being a poor pilot and an accident waiting to happen. The joke on the carrier he was assigned to was that the accident rate for his unit was cut in half after he was no longer flying. Incompetent or careless, take your pick. Nothing to do with North Viet Nam. Everything to do with being a screw-up in the Navy because that was the thing to do in the McCain family. Being in the Navy, that is.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 2:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
John: “That leaves three planes he destroyed through incompetence, carelessness or lack of responsibility.”
Thanks for that information John. Now, would you please give us the sources that show the three crashes were, in fact, a result of incompetence, carelessness, or lack of responsibility.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 2:30 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oh now bullishfrog, he just doesn’t like it when he gets called for his poor behavior.
He didn’t like it that I used Townhall.com as a source, but as I explained, it meets the requirements that class set forth, but neither he, nor any other left wing poster feels the need to adhere to.
When people like John start slamming those who use sources funded directly by foreign billionaires with a severe case of HATE AMERICA, and start acting like there is a lot of good in this nation, then I may begin to show a little respect for them, their positions, and their politics.
As is proven daily on this site, the only Freedom of Speech allowed is by the left wing posters.
Any, and all conservative opinions are blasted from the instant they are posted. But never on substance, because they will lose in the field of ideas, thus they attack the messenger and hammer constantly in hopes they will shut up and go away.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 2:46 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bullish, pretty simple, just Google “McCain plane crashes”. Have a ball! Read what his squadran mates had to say. I spent six years living amongst Navy aviators in Virginia Beach (Oceana NAS ) and Jacksonille,FL (Jax NAS )and when a pilot lost a plane in other than combat they didn’t worry much about the details. You got busted. You were supposed to bring the plane back no matter what problems you had. Funny how McCain never had that problem. One of my neighbors flew out of nearby Cecil Field which was commanded by McCain after his rehabilitation and before he was some kind of Navy attache’ in Washington. He was respected for his POW years but his reputation preceded him–hot dog, screw up with connections. It was well known. Sorry, I have no way to document that. Maybe you’ll find it in your Google search.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 2:50 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sorry John, according to the requirements set forth by classof52, anecdotal ‘evidence’ is not allowed.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 2:53 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
“Sorry, I have no way to document that. Maybe you’ll find it in your Google search.”
Actually, I did do the search you suggested, before I asked you for proof. What I found is that two of the crashes were due to engine failure. I don’t know about the third.
Now, if all you are doing is relaying conversations you had with your buddies, my suggestion is you get them all together and do a “swift boat” ad.
But then, again, if there was any truth to your comments, don’t you think some pro-Obama organization would have already made that ad?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 3:01 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
But John, George Soros does HATE AMERICA.
And prove me wrong. Class sets the requirements, I didn’t.
When I used Townhall.com, you seemed to have a problem with it.
When have you ever complained when dailykos.com was used? And dkos is supported by George Soros, a foreign billionaire that truly does HATE AMERICA.
Facts are facts.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 3:05 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bullish, depending on circumstances in the next month you may see such an ad. I guess McCain was just unlucky in having planes with bad maintenance. A dead engine does not necessarily mean an engine that “failed” as any fighter pilot will tell you. But that’s only annecdotal, too, right?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 3:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
John, I’ll wait for that ad. In the meantime, unless you can show a source that shows the navy agrees with your accusation, you will pardon me if I don’t buy it.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:11 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bllish, didn’t think you would. It doesn’t agree with what you think McCain should represent. He’s a light weight, impulsive,bad-tempered screw-up, not that different from the current occupant. He’s accomplished little that name and money didn’t get for him. I don’t expect you to buy that either. We’ll agree to disagree. We’ll know on November 4 what the future holds for our country. More of the same or a new day.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:21 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
John, with Biden talking about how much more wonderful a VP choice Hillary would have been, his constant gaffes on a wide variety of issues, what do you think of the possibility that he will either step down, find a medical reason to walk away, or just get kicked off the ticket just to get Hillary on in hopes she will get olbammer back on track?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:21 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well John, I am open minded but I’m not going to buy your uncorroborated “facts”. And for you to say that John McCain is “a light weight” is laughable.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:28 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
WLJ, the Obama/ Biden ticket will be just fine. Count on it. McCain blew it this week and it will stick. He admitted to know little about economics and he’s proving it.
Bullish, have a good laugh. He knows not what he’s doing and he’s proving that as every day goes by. Light weight is being charitable
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:34 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I’ll admit there are much more qualified persons that should be the republican contender, but McCain was the one chosen by the media and the rinos that run the national party.
Similar to the Dole debacle, Bob wasn’t showing very well against better qualified people, but the national committee told the others that they would lose all funding and support from the party if they didn’t bow out in favor of the chosen one.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:36 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oh, sorry, I hit submit one sentence too soon.
McCain, for all his faults, is still a better person to LEAD this country.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:44 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
WLJ, given the dissatisfaction that the majority of Americans feel with the current conditions of the country, don’t you think that any Republican would have had an uphill climb in this presidential election? And given that, don’t you think that McCain, despite the fact that he does not fit the conservative Republican mold, had the best chance of winning?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:46 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I was surprised that John only looks at education as a qualification to be a president. When I was in college some of the professors I had were very intelligent, but could not lead a puppy on a tether out of a phone booth.
Obama’s claim to leadership was that he has managed a campaign that is larger than the city government of Wasilla, Alaska.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:51 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Yes Bullish, I do agree, up to a point.
I think a pro law enforcement, pro border enforcement would fare a lot better.
I used to think the democrats were missing the boat on not running someone against Hautzinger, but then I realized, they have no need to replace one of their own.
So, which ever one wins the presidency, the liberals win.
With the minor inconvenience of Mrs Palin.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 4:57 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sullivan, what John is doing is very transparent. Since he cannot provide a logical counter to the charge that Obama is too inexperienced to be president, he merly calls MCCain a lightweight because he has no other defense.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 6:01 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I am always surprised that some are quick to jump on Palin’s “lack of experience” but turn a blind eye to the same about their candidate.
Any attack on McCain’s military record is, in my opinion, despicable. Both McCain and John Kerry served their country, in harms way. I respect them both for their service and sacrifice.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 6:37 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis,
“taliban, gone from power, disaster for democrats? yes.”
Don’t keep up with the news, do you? The Taliban are hardly gone from power.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 7:18 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sullivan states: “Both McCain and John Kerry served their country, in harms way. I respect them both for their service and sacrifice.”
The question I would ask is. When the ’swift boaters’ character assassination campaign against Kerry was going on, was Sullivan as incensed about it? Did he/she speak up or remain silent AT THAT TIME? Or, is this a sudden conversion?
Whatever a person’s military record, that was a long time ago, and bears no relationship to qualification for the presidency. That is particularly true when the individual never achieved a rank sufficient for him/her to become involved in matters of policy, be that foreign or domestic. Those who attempt to use it, on one side or another of an argument, are doing that experience a disservice. They are ‘prostituting’ the service for political advantage.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:27 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
RL,to answer your questions,
YES!
YES!
NO!!!
If you think that a person’s military service “no relationship to qualification for the presidency” then you would have to agree that their education or class standing, which was before the military service, would have even less meaning.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 8:35 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott,
Taliban the current government?
taliban lost power, bad for the democrats.
Hugo Chavez/Sandinistas in power? Well, that is what kennedy, dodd, biden, and crew fought so hard for in the halls of congress now isn’t it? Must be good for democrats.
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 9:55 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sullivan states: “If you think that a person’s military service “no relationship to qualification for the presidency” then you would have to agree that their education or class standing, which was before the military service, would have even less meaning.”
Military service has absolutely no bearing. Unless one reaches flag rank, one is not a determiner of policy, except to a limited extent. As to whether formal education is relevant, that would depend upon what one studied during the process; i.e. engineering(what type), Foreign Affairs (what is it), etc. So, it does at least provide an introduction to what things are. Those being absent, one only knows facts relating to them; i.e. facts and factoids. That does not produce any framework within which to operate.
As to ‘formal’ education, and in any field, that provides but a starting point; finding the library, walking through the stacks, and recognizing the smell of books. One does not really learn until later, that is provided one makes an effort to do so.
One of the things that is quite notable in McCains running mate is that the individual knows absolutely nothing of foreign affairs or foreign policy, no idea of what it consists of, and therefore not even a recognition of its importance in its conduct. That is why we see evasion, confusion, and bluster whenever asked any question relating to the subject, even when presented with ’softball questions’ by interviewers. And, asking scripted questions of foreign leaders, so as to ‘appear’ knowledgeable, does not make one an ‘expert’
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 10:22 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
WLJ: But, I also notice that you do not complain when salon.com, huffingtonpost.com, dkos.com are used as sources which do not contain all the requirements that class set out for others to adhere to.
???? What in the world is WLJ dreaming about now? I do not set any standards for this forum, nor could I if I wanted to (and I don’t). WLJ just makes these things up like the following:
WLJ: “Obeying classof52’s requirements that all sources must be educated in their field, have had peer reviewed papers, and books to their credit before being considered a viable source (in his opinion).”
Totally out of WLJ’s fervid and heated imagination. In my opinion sources should be independent and not have an ax to grind or else their contribution should be clearly labeled as opinion, not fact. If the source is speaking authoritatively about a particular technical subject, the writer should have demonstrated expertise in the area. Now isn’t that simple WLJ?
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 10:43 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sorry, Willis. The Taliban is still in power in a large portion of Afganistan, and has actually been making a comeback.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 1:13 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
The original letter is merely ‘assuming’ that the only attraction that Senator Obama has for his followers is ’star power’. The gentleman might do well to recognize that, although that may be the basis upon which HE makes his decisions, some of us look for far more substance than that. What we look for is the individual is mature enough, has the intelligence and temperament required to handle the pressure of the position the individual is seeking. That is what we see in Senator Obama. He listens, thinks, then and only then, acts. Such is his history in every position he has held. Have we not already had enough of an individual in the oval office who acts impulsively, ideologically and unthinkingly, totally disregarding reality? Perhaps Mr. Miller has not, but many Americans have.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 7:21 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
C;ass, have you had your memory tested lately?
You sure seem to forget a lot of things lately.
From just one of your posts from the recent past.
” Warren Meyer who writes all that nonsense in the Coyote blog that WLJ keeps quoting is a small business owner in Phoenix Arizona, has no background in any of the earth sciences related to climatology, has never published a paper in a scientific journal on any subject related to climatology amd knows about as much about climatology as I know about astrology. He is simply another one of these amateurs who comes at the subject from an ideological point of view (Gore haters every one) rather than a scientific one and gets quoted by like minded people such as WLJ.
I prefer to believe the professionals who devote their life to the study of this complex subject. And they overwhelmingly tell us that the current global warming is caused at least in part by human activity with very high degree of confidence. ”
***************
YOU place the requirements for posters to follow when providing sources.
You really need to get some help.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 8:06 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
RL: “The gentleman might do well to recognize that, although that may be the basis upon which HE makes his decisions, some of us look for far more substance than that. What we look for is the individual is mature enough, has the intelligence and temperament required to handle the pressure of the position the individual is seeking.”
That may very well be a starting point for any job, whether it be auto mechanic or president. But if those were the only requirements, there would be no need for resumes.
In the Senator’s case, the resume is thin. And so what is the basis for his sudden rise to the top of the party? It is, indeed, star power.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 8:15 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oh scott, I am aware that the taliban still exists, thanks in no small part to their sympathizers and cheerleaders in the senate and house of representatives, as well as those among us here in happy valley.
However, the taliban is not the government of Afghanistan.
Now I know this causes a great deal of stress in your life, but you need to ask yourself the following question.
“As an atheist, why do I desire murderous religious zealots that kill innocent people to be in control of any government? Wouldn’t it be better if it was a bunch of flower power folks that pass out happy weed and drugs to everybody that ran the country?”
Get back to us on that answer if you don’t mind.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 8:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
RL, I watched olbammer 15 minute ad for his plan on tv.
Not once did he look at the camera, but kept his eyes glued to what would have been his left, near the camera and you could see his eyes shifting as he read the teleprompter.
So, one of the skills and abilities that you adore in a candidate is the ability to read from a teleprompter?
Are you voting for olbammer? Or his speech writer? Or the person running the teleprompter?
OR….. the money behind the person posing as a presidential candidate?
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 12:08 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
BFrog: “So, having conceded that point, how do I square his intelligence and education with his attendance at the church of a racist and liar (as well as his close relationship to the preacher?),”
BFrog, you act as though you have not seen the video circulating all over the internet made when Palin was running for governor of Alaska. This shows her with the black pastor of her church (a Kenyan) performing a “laying on of hands” Pentecostal ceremony. It is instructive to note that the Pastor believes in witchcraft (well documented. He accused a “witch” in his native village of causing traffic accidents)). Should we draw your conclusions about Palin’s intelligence as a result of her association with her pastor? (Of course there are a lot of independent reasons to doubt her intelligence including the disastrous interview she gave last night with Couric)
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 12:45 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Class, there are a lot of lies floating through the Internet including the lies about the books Palin wanted banned at the library. I have not seen the Palin video to which you refer, probably because I don’t spend my day looking for dirt on the candidates. I have seen Obama’s pastor on TV many times and there is no denying what he has said.
And if you want to use media interviews to be an indication of intelligence then I guess you would label Biden as an uneducated dunce given that he believed FDR gave a tv speech to Americans after the 1929 crash.
But, of course, you are swerving from the main point. I have acknowledged Obama’s intelligence and I, therefore, am sure that his associations with the shady characters listed in my post were done with full knowledge of their history and positions.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 2:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis,
“As an atheist, why do I desire murderous religious zealots that kill innocent people to be in control of any government? Wouldn’t it be better if it was a bunch of flower power folks that pass out happy weed and drugs to everybody that ran the country?”
Way to completely miss the point Willis. You must take lessons.
I never said that I wanted them in power. Lie #1. I never said I wanted them killing innocent people. Lie #2. I never said anything about who should be running Afganistan. Lie #3.
What I did was correct your self-admittedly (post #54) incorrect statement that the Taliban were out of power. They are not. They are no longer the official government, but I never said they were. They are still in control of a large portion of Afganistan, and contrary to what you said in post #22, they are nowhere near gone from power. You admitted this in post #54, so I consider the matter closed.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 2:24 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Now scott, you keep bringing up how powerful you want me to believe they are, which indicates that the fact they are not the government is irrelevant in your eyes.
The taliban is out of power.
Post #22 when the subject first arose.
” Willis_Leon_Johnson
Posted September 25th, 2008 at 1:20 pm PM This User Report this comment
And obviously oneperson just got his talking points from TASS, USA.
One disaster after another…?
Lets see, saddam, gone from power, disaster for the democrats/ yes.
taliban, gone from power, disaster for democrats? yes.
Terrorists kept from attacking on US Soil since 9/11, disaster for the democrats? yes.
Pretty much right on the disaster thing.”
taliban, pretty much not the controlling power in that particular country, in spite of your desires to make them seem to be more than they are.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 2:32 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
The troops fighting them disagree with your assessment of the situation. Have you talked to any lately? I have.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 2:34 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
BFrog: And if you want to use media interviews to be an indication of intelligence then I guess you would label Biden as an uneducated dunce given that he believed FDR gave a tv speech to Americans after the 1929 crash.
You were the one who brought that relationship up, not I.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 2:36 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
OK scott, one tiny step at a time.
Are the taliban the ruling faction in Afghanistan?
The answer is no.
The taliban is NOT in power in Afghanistan.
TRUE.
Why is that such a big stumbling block for you?
Simple concepts elude you?
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 2:40 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott, there appears to be a misunderstanding here. To say that the taliban are back in power implies that they are running the government. I assume you know that the taliban used to be in power before we invaded the country. That country is now a democracy and they are no longer in power. They are fighting a guerrilla war and hiding, mainly, in Pakistan.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 3:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis/Bullishfrog,
The people I have spoken to, which include people who have been over there personally, have indicated that the degree of control that the democratic govenment has over certain areas varies greatly. In certain parts of Afganistan, the Taliban are the dominant power and not the democratic government. I never said the Taliban were back “in power” meaning they were the official government, but to say that are not “in power” at all is an incorrect statement as well, which is what I was pointing out to Willis.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 3:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
bullishfrog states: “That country is now a democracy and they are no longer in power.”
The question is, as suggested by Scott, is bullishfrog speaking of ‘democratic in form’ or ‘democratic in substance’. There is a very wide gulf between the two. The Soviet Union and even Hitler’s Germany were democratic in form, as they still retained the old Constitution (It was never revoked) but, in substance, both were anything but.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 3:42 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott/Willis/Bullishfrog - The latest published intelligence reports regarding who is in control of Afghanistan clearly states that the Karsi (sp?) government, backed by U.S. and Coalition forces, are in firm control only of Kabul and its surrounding suburbs. The rest of the country is controlled by a combination of warlords and the Taliban.
An international aid worker friend of mine who has just returned from 10 months in Afghanistan tells me that once outside an approximately 20-25 mile perimeter around Kabul, you’re in “Indian Country.”
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 4:13 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well scott, I suppose you could be correct much in the same way one could say that the Kentucky State government is not in power in Colorado.
But now you are down to playing with semantics, and that is hardly an honest way to further a discussion.
Oddly enough, when attempting discourse with you in numerous threads lately, we find ourselves delving into the finer nuances of semantics because that it where you seem best able to operate.
Posted September 26th, 2008 at 5:44 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis,
You are using “in power” to mean the legitimate government.
I’m using “in power” to mean who is actually in charge.
By our own definitions, we’re both right.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.