Skip to main content

View Diary: Obama Spokesman Robert Gibbs (304 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  live by the meta sword ... (16+ / 0-)

    Politics don't interest me when all the talk is meta, and right now you've got two campaigns heading the pack whose explicit messages are meta. You've got Hillary's "I'm in to win" and Obama's "I'm here to change the tone of politics" ... the end result of all this is inevitably personal attacks and focus on process issues like this (and I don't fault Kos at all for mentioning it, it's totally legit to bring it up in the context of Obama's campaign).

    In the end, the choice for me came down to Edwards and Richardson because those two were focusing their campaigns on a mix of real issues: Edwards focusing on economic fairness, and Richardson focusing on American leadership for peace and environmental action.

    I like Obama. A lot. As a person and as a thinker. But until he puts some more meat on them rhetorical bones, he's really vulnerable to this kind of stuff.

    •  Some 'more' meat? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Athena, loudGizmo, Silverleaf

      How about 'some' meat.

      Of everyone officially running, I'm leaning in Richardsons' direction, but I don't see him being a contender.

      An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy. (Woodrow Wilson)

      by Alter Ego Manifesto on Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 11:23:28 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh that perennial question, where's the beef? (7+ / 0-)

      Give us policies.  Specific detailed workable policies.  Sure, with plenty of conviction and passion behind them.  And some charisma and intellect.  But the cult of personality is a distraction from real business in my opinion.

      "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

      by lgmcp on Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 11:25:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  well said (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cosbo, Silverleaf, poemless, pioneer111, TomP, AJ WI

      That's why I'm putting Edwards ahead of Obama when I think they're fighting for the same voters.  Edwards is more substantive.

      I was pretty ticked when Obama introduced his own Iraq bill too.  I would much rather that he co-endorse and promote Feingold's bill, or some other acceptable bill that represents his position.  Being the one to "introduce legislation" isn't as big a bragging point as it seems.  But helping herd the cats that are Democrats, getting all of Congress behind a single bill - THAT is leadership.  So Obama blew a leadership test with me, trying to be a "leader" rather than simply leading.

      I guess anyone can be a winner if their definition of victory is flexible enough.
      -The DM of the Rings

      by Leggy Starlitz on Thu Feb 22, 2007 at 11:25:20 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you! (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Leggy Starlitz, creeper, pioneer111

        I agree on Edwards. But I was ticked off too about the Obama's bill, and I think I said it the day he did it. I was pissed because on such an important issue, in a democratic controlled congress, they can't get together long enough to think about each others proposals and bang something out that they all agree on for the sake of suffering troops!

        Having your very own bill is not leading. It's playing defense to the rest of  the presidential field for brownie points. Obama and Hillary should be supporting ALL the bills trying to get out of Iraq, regardless of whose name is on it. And pray one them works!

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site