Skip to main content

Think about it.  What was Bush's political resume before 2000?  Like it or not, he has permanently lowered the bar for presidential candidates (and this is not a slam against Obama, by the way).
       I actively campaigned for Wes Clark in 2004 and I was furious with the treatment he got from the sluggish, pay-your-dues, stand-in-line Democratic partisans. This inertia is endemic to the party and it's how we got stuck with Kerry as a candidate, and that's how we'll keep getting stuck with well-entrenched party hacks who LOSE presidential elections.  
       Do you think Republicans diddled around and debated the party purity and experience of Bush pre-2000?  Hell no.  They snatched him up, embraced him  and made him their candidate.  We MUST do the same with Obama if we want to win.  If you want to navel-gaze and discuss whether or not Obama is "seasoned" enough to run, see you later--I'll be working to draft him for president.

Originally posted to ...and your little dog too on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 10:52 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Obama won't be running against (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FightTheFuture

    George Fucking Bush. He'll almost certainly be running against John McCain. I believe John McCain will just walk all over him.

    •  McCain will look like Crocker Jarmin ... (5+ / 0-)

      Did you see The Candidate? (Robert Redford in 1972) if not...go see it.

      Obama will look like Kennedy next to Nixon.

      McCain has lost his sparkle. He had one chance in 2000. Like Powell in 1996. Like Cuomo in 92. Like Obama in 2008.

      McCain ain't so special anymore. His stand on Iraq: 100,000 more troops. Run that idea against Obama and a phased withdrawal and what would America vote for?

      McCain is all Bushy now and that's not a good thing going forward. Times are a changin' .. .show some vision and courage and take a chance.

  •  THANK YOU! God -- some common sense...this crowd (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Fredneck

    Sucks! They're good workers and get a lot of good people elected -- but geeze, they have zero vision.

    They're so ideological and so dogmatic ... they'd have been Clean for Gene in the face of Bobby Kennedy for sure. And who do you think would have fared better against Nixon in '68?

    They're a pain in the ass sometimes.

    Obama is more than simply a resume or credentials. All the conventional measuring sticks and markers go out the window with him. He trumps it all with his intelligence, poise, youth, biography and vision.

    Team him with Bill Richardson and while the bitchers and complainers in Kos-ville who demand 100% purity throw tantrums and storm out -- the rest of the world, from villages in Kenya to the streets of Chicago and Albuqurque and Peoria -- will move forward and make some history.

    So go for it!

    •  Yes team him with Bill Richardson, he of (0+ / 0-)

      the skelton filled closet. That's a great plan.

    •  Is Obama ready for primetime? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FightTheFuture

      Can the man who wants to heal the divide handle the barrage of attacks that the Republicans will throw at him? Obama ran basically unopposed in his Senate race, Keyes was a joke. So Obama better do some serious self vetting and get all his dirt out and get his dirt explained, he better define himslef before he get's defined, the man better be smarter then the average bear, so to speak, he better be ready for the fight of his life. If thought being who he was growing up was difficult he ain't seen nothing yet.

      My choice for a dream ticket is Obama and Schweitzer, a healer and a fighter.

      absolute freedom for one individual undoubtedly limits the freedom of another.

      by jbou on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 12:16:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Good post....but shit...history is made when (0+ / 0-)

        people take chances... Let him try. If he fails to win ... oh well, he's still a great Senator who could become governor or vice-president and eventually president.

        But roll the dice. Baptism by fire. Lots of other cliches apply.

        We -- Democrats -- need some folks willing to throw caution to the wind and take some chances.

        If he thinks he can do it -- he should. And we'd be fools not to take a serious look.

        •  After reading... (0+ / 0-)

          the cover story in Time this past week Obama doesn't seem like much of a risk taker, he comes across like Hillary, parsing every statement, and afraid to go out on a limb when asked about policy positions.

          That is why i question the man's heart and if he is ready for the rigors of a Presidential campaign, but all of this hype could be a well timed bluff to sell us some books.

          absolute freedom for one individual undoubtedly limits the freedom of another.

          by jbou on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 12:33:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  of course selling books is what his publisher (0+ / 0-)

            wants and his family. He's not a trust-fund baby.

            So --- what's in his heart? We'll see. Will he serve up fiery rhetoric for the base? Or will he offer something sunnier -- ala Edwards?

            I sure hope it's the latter. I'd like to win a general election sometime soon -- and you?

            •  I want... (0+ / 0-)

              to see Obama take some chances in the Senate and grasp onto an issue and sell it to the people and turn it into law. i want to see him battle tested. Right now we have a bunch of gun shy Democrats(Hillary), and the ones willing to fight are marginalized(Feingold). I'd like to see if Obama can thread the needle.

              And of course i would like to win.

              absolute freedom for one individual undoubtedly limits the freedom of another.

              by jbou on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 12:58:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  A Black man never runs "unopposed" (0+ / 0-)

        That guy has fought hard in life and he is not at all naive.  Of course, he doesn't have the successful experience fighting the Republican attack machine that Hillary Clinton has, but he can learn that.  If he wants to win ever, he's got to run sometime.  The only way to get the experience he needs is to give it a try.  He'll learn a lot in the context of the Democratic nominating process.  

        •  The Democratic nominating process? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          joemcginnissjr

          Who will go to the mat with Obama during the primary season? If Obama is smart he hires the head Democratic party hitman Chris Lehane.

          Obama seems very risk averse, when Joe Klein challenged him to take a stand on some issues he shied away from it, and told him he has to be careful what he says. I think Obama needs to take an issue and make it his own and try to get it turned into law, this will show he can get into a fight and win.

          absolute freedom for one individual undoubtedly limits the freedom of another.

          by jbou on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 12:42:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I suppose you'd support Lieberman 'cause that's (0+ / 0-)

      "strategic".  Right?  No need to worry about values when you are "strategizing".

      People like you are such a "pain in the ass sometimes" because your're the reason we are where we are.  Always compromising to the point where you haven't a clue as to what you stand for.  When you figure it out, it's really not much and it's so far away to where you started, that it's useless, even dangerous.

      As for Obama, he simply sucks right now. Maybe he'll get better, but that's to be seen.  FDL summed up my feelding about Obama very well recently: How Now, Barack?

      •  Keep fighting the future, sir. (0+ / 0-)
      •  I support the terrorists b/c I want out of Iraq!! (0+ / 0-)

        You're a fool, FTF.

        I support Lieberman because I like Obama and Edwards because I think they can win.

        See...that's who I am. Like to go with winners who offer no principle and no vision and want to do nothing but keep the status quo -- as is -- you know, stay the course.

        You got me nailed. Busted. I'm outed. A cup full of Joementum every morning.

        We will lose in 2008 with ideological purity testers like you guarding the bridge to the future. The fighter for all that is pure and right.

        And another election lost and another 4 years of falling behind and losing ground. Sleep well.

        •  don't go batshit..lieberman sucks like terrorists (0+ / 0-)
        •  Dumbfuck. Elections are lost because they (0+ / 0-)

          have been stolen.  I've seen that starting in 98 with Hagel, and 2000 with Gore, 2002 with Georgia and many other areas, 2004, etc.  When did you first notice it?  Or, are you still in denial?

          Of course, let’s not forget all the bullshit started under Reagan with his shady '80 election and his "October surprise" with the hostages.  From there, the dismantling of our country and their agenda really took off.

          What have the DC Dems done about this agenda and about the election problems?  Jack shit.  They've been outmaneuvered every time.  If the Dems win this time, it will just to have some patsies holding the bag when the country implodes.

          It's not about purity either; it's about cleaning out the shit in our party and holding the milquetoasts accountable so we can build a party that is capable of fixing this mess.

          I don't want republican-lites pansies in who will stabilize the system just long enough to be blamed for the failures.  All we will have then is a new round of "conservatives" that would make Bush blush while we are all boiled like frogs in a pot.  I want a Democratic party that is liberal back and Obama is simply not there yet.

          So, keep on "strategizing", accepting weak and non-existent substitutes for the real thing just so you can win!  Win what?  Lackeys a bit more pretty looking than the current thugs?   That's worked so swell thus far.  Sleep well.

          •  Ouch....um...deep breath, dude... (0+ / 0-)

            Let's do this....you stay where you are and rant and rave and stuff envelopes and lick stamps for your kick-ass liberals (who, again, are the kick-ass liberals you're so sure will lead us to victory?) and i'll hang around with our soft, middle of the road, sell-outs like Obama and Edwards. Good luck to you and yours and when it's all said and done -- and you've pissed away your time and energy on hapless losers and vote Green and give another election to the Republicans so that you can claim ideological purity -- feel better. You'll have earned it. But stay on your toes, and fit, because the next war is scheduled for Iran and we're going to need warm bodies for that one.

            •  This diary is about Obama, and he's a wimp. (0+ / 0-)

              If you think that's about purity, then your are a fool.  Personally, I like Edwards and his Two Americas message.  Obama has no message that has stuck, thus far.  He has  along way to go and is a good poster boy to why the Dems are such spineless weasels.

              So, shove your purity "purity" test up your centerist ass.  "middle of the road"?  An illusion for clueless shmucks who keep being pushed to the right.  BTW, I'm not worried about Iran, I'm worried about here and all the other Joe Liebermans in the Dem party.  Good strategy.

              •  You're raging, dude. Chill. Obama the Wimp...un (0+ / 0-)

                -real.

                So Bill Clinton was a wimp too. And RFK too. And his brother. And who else was a winner aka a wimp?

                Look -- Obama doesn't have a national message yet becuase he's not running. Quick: what's Feingold's message? Clark's? Kerry's?

                Didn't think so. See -- try a little more vision and a little less rage. We're all pissed off -- but be mature enough to see an opportunity and put the anger aside long enough to be smart enough to win.

                Then we can get something done. Until then, be grateful that we have one of the most popular American politicians on our side and maybe even as our presidential nominee. There is not a more intelligent and attractive and compelling personal narrative than Obama's. We'd be fools to pass him over. Then again, we are Democrats so let the pissing away of another election commence.
                You wanna' lead?

                •  Clark and Feingold have defined themselves (0+ / 0-)

                  on hard issues such as the war when it wasn’t popular.  Can you tell what Obama's done on the hard issues?  I'm waiting.  That's the thing.  I’m asking for justification of your starry eyed hopes.  He will be flayed in national politics, not safe in his blue state womb.  If the media does support him at this point, I would be very skeptical of him being any Trojan horse for liberals and more suspicious of being one for conservatives.  Also, to conflate my comments about Obama with RFK, Clark, Kerry and Clinton is quite disingenuous of you (admittedly, I conflated you with Lieberman and that was not fair).  

                  Clark was calling the war and its management of it a folly back in 2004. He also had good plans to fix it, at that time.  He was also pointing out that this is a liberal democracy; don't hear that too much from most Dems.  Clark's tax cuts... no taxes on the first $50K, then graduate from there.  This is from memory, look up the rest.

                  RFK is a hero, has been for years.  His work on environment, mercury toxicity, and now exposure of this voting fraud is his latest blockbusters and well earned feathers in his war-bonnet.

                  Feingold's actions?  Do you know what he's done? How about he voted nay on the War; nay on the Patriot act; called for censure of Bush?!?  He doesn't need a "message".  His actions have spoken louder than words.  Obama can take a lesson here about doing the right thing and not the “strategic” thing.

                  Bill Clinton is a upper mid-level president, at best; which is pretty good considering some of his DLC inspired gaffes!!.  His big claim is a tax increases on the 250K+ crowd and balancing the budget with a plan to pay off the national debt by 2010.  In contrast to today, he can seem almost equal to FDR with some!!  Clinton was smart and had heart and finally, he spoke out against this cancer of the right so I will give him points for that.

                  Kerry, let's face it, he blew it; big time. That weasel DC politician of "if I knew what I knew now" was the moment I new he lost it; even though I kept pushing him with Repuke "friends", defending that mess, and contributing to his campaign.  It's good he is starting to speak out, but I have no desire of supporting him again as president even if he should run.  Enough of skull and bones entrenched DC politicians already!  Gore however, I would support in a heartbeat; just to be clear.

                  Obama is a cipher, an unknown.  Talks a good game, but has not walked the walk; too timid when he does not have to be (he’s from Illinois).  Here he is breaking, once again, from more Senior Dems Feingold, Durbin and Kerry on Iraq, for example. Start listing his hard stands, his accomplishments, then yeah, I might be convinced.  Until he builds a record that is more than just an "inspirational" book, and being led by Republican talking points, Obama's just a pretty boy for desperate people; a dangerous combination.

                  So, don't tell me I lack of vision, or my "purity" is too high, or to chill.  Your desperation, wrapped as "strategizing", is simply too odorous for me.  

                  If the Dems win, even the House, and that’s iffy given our compromised voting system, they had better start ripping apart these pricks.  I fear all they will do is play it safe for 2008, and people like you will be calling it “strategy”.  I will call it what it is--losing.  

                  I hope I'm wrong, but all I have to judge for the future is actions of the past and present.  My one hope is the House may be won, and Pelosi is a fighter.  Of course, she has to take care of that asshole Dem Whip, Steny Hoyer.

                  P.S.  I'll Be voting Dem and supporting them; they are the only game in town to save this country short of rebellion.  That's not strategy, that's pragmatism. Strategy, to me, is giving them a spine transplant, and clearing out those that won't take it, ala Joe Lieberman.

                  •  appreciate the thoughtful response -- not much of (0+ / 0-)

                    a split though -- kind of proves some of my point about the exacting standards imposed by people here on otherwise strong leaders.

                    Obama was against the Iraq war from Day I. He wasn't in the senate then but spoke out against it. He voted with Reed and Levin for a plan to withdraw.

                    From your link:
                    Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Durbin backed a proposal by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) that only asked Bush to design a plan for a military withdrawl by the end of the year. Republicans voted party line and this measure failed 60-39.

                    Obama ran in the heavily contested 2004 Illinois primary as the candidate who opposed the war in Iraq.

                    •  That's the point, Obama is not a leader, yet. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      NeuvoLiberal

                      The hype around him does not match the leadership he has shown thus far. He's has been very deferential in a time when the country is imploding.  Too busy building "coalitions" with people who would stab him without pause.  He also has a knack for saying things that are right in Republican talking points.  Talking about him as some presidential hopeful is projecting, more than anything.  He has not shown himself ready, IMO.  

                      That Iraq vote I see as him taking the most deferential path when confronting "fearless leader".  Being against it during the election, that is the weakest "against it" position there was.  This is my concern with his experiences growing up and what happened with his dad; being crushed by power.  Sure, Obama seems to have learned concepts of justice, but also is walking on eggs a bit too much.  He is safe in Illinois, and that provides a real shield to take a stand; like Durbin has (although Durbin was cut off at the legs by that dick Daley last year for his statements on GitMo, it does not lessen him for saying it).

                      I will agree that he ran on opposition to the War, NAFTA and Patriot Act and told the DLC to kiss off.  Good things, but once in power, he is too quiet.  He even voted to reauthorize the Patriot Act in March! Although he opposed CAFTA and Alito, although Alito weakly; that was his (paraphrasing) 'Dems should win elections rather than rely on political maneuvers' quip that was thrown back at the Dems.  There was no need to say that and every reasons to stand against Alito with the Filibuster.  He needs more spine; I hope he finds it. Time will tell on Obama, the jury is still out with me.  

                      Now a Gore/Obama ticket I could support whole heartedly; but that is just wishful thinking.

                      Have a good day.  Sorry again for the Lieberman crack, I was annoyed with you labeling me the "purity gatekeeper".

                      Oh, it looks like Obama is now considering running in 2008.

  •  Please read "Dreams from my Father" (first book) (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Al Rodgers, Torta, joemcginnissjr, jj32

    Anyone who wants to have an informed opinion on Obama needs to read his first book (written before he went into politics).  I found it fascinating.  If he is the same man who wrote that book, he is our guy:  incredibly smart, empathetic, multi-cultural beyond belief.  That people like him are willing to go into politics is amazing.  He could do anything, yet he chooses public service.  I think we have a very promising field for 2008 -- Edwards, Obama, Clark, Feingold.  McCain's surliness is going to hurt him.  I'm not that worried right now about him.

    •  ??? Where Daddy got stomped by the govt so the (0+ / 0-)

      son is now a scardy cat?  Don't upset those in power?

      Whatever.

      He talks a nice talk, But Obama, from a very dafe Blue state of Illinois has NOT done the walk.

      Don't be stupid on this cypher, Obama.  Too little is known about Barrack, and that is HIS fault, his lack of action!! He needs more, and some kicks in the ass incentives.

      •  Plenty is known about him -- read his memoirs!!!! (0+ / 0-)

        Am the only person on this thread who has read "Dreams from my Father?" I can't think of a single politician who has written so much in detail about the forces and experiences that shaped him. Please read that book before writing him off. He is extremely gifted.  We can't afford to belittle him because he hasn't done every thing we would wish in two years.  He's a once-in-a-lifetime politician for our generation.  I suppose that kind of talk just gets people madder, but read the first book and you'll see what I mean.

        •  Fuck that!! I'm looking at his actions so far (0+ / 0-)

          and they do not inspire nor impress. He really hasn't done shit.  A Pretty boy with no backbone.  Too soon to even talk of President for Obama.  Years too soon.

          Understand, I am not writing him off, and if I am harsh sounding, well, these days, kisses and flowers and STFU don't cut it.  Obama better start getting much more liberal and take the hard stands, or I, living in Illinois, will work to ship him out and get someone who will.

          Talk of President for him is just star struck bamboozeled asshattery at this juncture.  

  •  Good point (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Ottoe, extradish

    I'm going to share my two cents, even if it's only worth one cent around here.  

    You're right.  Obama is many times more intelligent than the current president.  He got into Harvard based on talent and was Editor of the Harvard Law Review when Bush was barely passing his business administration courses with C's.  

    Obama is a loving husband with a loving wife and children.  He is the American dream incarnate.

    I have to say some negative things about Obama.  (At least these are negatives at DailyKos.)  Barack Obama is a stellar fundraiser and very popular with ordinary Americans who don't identify with the Left.  He gets tons of free media attention and, so far, it's all positive.)  

    Of course, Barack Obama is black.  His advancement in American politics is a measure of America's attained ability to take advantage of brillance regardless of its skin color.  

    Everyone here knows that I strongly support Hillary Clinton in 2008. But, I would support Barack Obama just as strongly if he were the nominee.  (Sorry, Obama.  I feel compelled to express my admiration for you, even though I fear it may cost you support at DailyKos.)

    •  I just saw Hillary (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      extradish
      in a debate clip on the tube. She was asked why she thought she was such a polarizing figure.

      Now, one would think an intelligent woman (as she is) would be able to answer that question honestly, without risking any political capital.

      But she didn't. She acted like it was a non-question and gave some blandishment about she just gets up every morning and tries to do the right thing.

      I'm not going to get all bill safire on her and say she is incapable of being honest. She just seems too tentative about being human.

      Rome wasn't burnt in a day.

      by Miss Devore on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 11:21:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  To quote Carville from 92 about Bush, sr: (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Miss Devore, Desbrisay

        Hillary Clinton just "reeks of yesterday. The stench of yesterday."

        Next to Obama ... are you kidding?

        Who represents the future? A new era...better than Obama? Hillary Clinton -- please...

        She will not run if he runs. She will not win if he runs. She will not run if she can't win. She will not run.

        Obama '08. I think I'm on board.

        •  She won't run if he runs? I (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          francislholland

          really doubt that. If he wins the primaries, fine. Maybe he would have a better shot that her. But he isn't going to push her out.

          •  Obama will suck the air out of the room (0+ / 0-)

            the spotlight will be all over him.

            The crowds will be insane. The electricity off the charts. Then there's old Hillary Clinton with her 2 tons of baggage and tired old rhetoric and monotone droning on about nothing in particular.

            Please. There's no contest and she knows it. She is intelligent. Supremely so. And has sound political instincts and is as cautious as they come.

            The writing is on the wall and she's literate too.
            "Hillary Not Wanted"

            "Senate Majority Leader's Office: VACANCY"

            Turn the page, my friend. History is happening. Try to keep up.

            •  Plenty of air left.... (0+ / 0-)

              JoeJr, let him suck away; you are so full of
              hot air, there is an endless supply for Obama.
              You know nothing about him; no one does, and
              of late he turns out to be a hound for celebrity.
              Avoid like the plague for now. Save your heat
              for later.
              good luck!
              jim/santafe

              •  toil away out there in obscurity --- a true Dem (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                CSI Bentonville

                dig your holes and beat your drums and cross your fingers and hope the world comes around to your way of seeing things. Nominate another Dukakis or Stevenson or McGovern or Kerry. Fail to see a chance at history. Lack vision and courage. Play it safe. Lose another election and sleep at night knowing you're right, damn it. That's what you're used to -- so why change now?

                And Jim, don't tell me what I do and don't know about Mr. Obama. You don't know me -- so how can you propose to know what I know?

                And best wishes to you out there in neverland (as in Never going to win a general election)

                •  Trolling for facts.... (0+ / 0-)

                  You don't like criticism, do you?
                  Well, I like facts: I find no one giving
                  facts of Obama's qualifications, points
                  of accomplishment, legislation, leadership.
                  All you guys rant and rave over his smile
                  and his rhetorical proficiency - period.
                  What else is there.
                  Not impressed!
                  JimSantaFe

                  •  inside washington accomplishments only? (0+ / 0-)

                    what about in the state senate in Illinois? what about as a community organizer in Chicago? What about Harvard Law Review? What about Civil Rights attorney? What about his first term in the senate?

                    What about his native intelligence, drive, compassion? I mean -- the guy's human -- he's going to screw up -- he apparently smokes three cigarettes a day and is trying to quit -- but come on -- there are rare leaders who come along each generation and he is one of them and he plays on the right team.
                    If you and yours piss this chance, his chance, away simply because of a thin Washington, DC resume, then you get the tired old windbag loser nonimee you deserve in his stead.

                    Me -- I like smart folks who can win people over by making a good case and sticking by a few core principles they're willing to fight for. Harder to find than you'd think.

        •  Viva la/las/los (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          joemcginnissjr
          Kosobamists!

          Rome wasn't burnt in a day.

          by Miss Devore on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 11:40:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  What would you have had her say? (0+ / 0-)

        What do you think would have been the right or adroit answer to that question?

    •  I was just thinking about Obama vs Hillary (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ThatBritGuy, francislholland

      Like you, I admire both.

      I think there may be a hugely ironic twist of the dialectic ahead if we continue down this road and Obama and Hillary become the chief competitors for the nomination.

      Obama, as Atrios and others have been superbly pointing out, has shown one major flaw, at least so far. He is too credulous towards the notion that the rethugs have arguments with integrity (maybe they once did, but not this crowd) and towards the claim that Democrats who concentrate on pointing out that lack of integrity themselves therefore must "lack ideas."

      Hillary may be a centrist ideologically; but she is a partisan and she is not naive about what kind of a fight we are in. If she drinks with McCain, she's watching his every move the whole time and getting ready to draw if he draws.

      So in an Obama vs Hillary fight, while the netroots will no doubt be infatuated with the former, I predict they'll come to like what the latter says on their issues and attitudes, or on their issue of attitude.

      How other candidates (Edwards, Clark) will play across this polarity will be interesting to watch.

  •  Pig-in-a-Poke (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FightTheFuture

    Sen. Obama is the Great Unknown, a true
    pig-in-a-poke. He has begun to show a
    side to his nature that is worrisome, the
    love of celebrity. That contributes to my
    inclination not to trust and not to
    support. Gore, Clark, Kerry, Clinton -- all
    all known people; seasoned and long in the
    spotligiht. Obama is Ombre! In the shadows;
    we don't really know what he is or would do.
    I would say from his background, anything
    could happen. It is just too soon to trust
    him. Please consider this!
    jim/santafe

    •  He should strive to be unpopular, like Kerry? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CSI Bentonville

      Maybe he should strive to be milquetoast, like Al Gore was when he lost?

      Remember Reagan was a professional actor "long in the spotlight" before he became Governor of California and President of the United States.  There's nothing wrong with being popular and being comfortable and happy being popular.  We might even win the presidency again with a candidate who has those characteristics.

      •  Worrisome reply.... (0+ / 0-)

        Francis....you worry me and many others
        in the Obama discussions do, because ALL
        you talk about is electability. Don't cite
        Reagan, for Pete's sake! Sure he was charming
        and electable, and look what we got! Disaster.
        If I may respectfully suggest it, you pro-
        Obamaites need to find out who you man is and
        what he stands for. So far, I see nothing
        tangible.
        Best of luck!
        JimSantaFe

  •  (videos) How I Spent My Summer (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    extradish

    "ma ca ca - yo pee pee"

    by Al Rodgers on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 12:10:16 PM PDT

    •  Wait... is Obama left-handed, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Al Rodgers

      just like Clinton and Daddy Bush?  That should increase his chance of being elected President.

      "We *can* go back to the Dark Ages! The crust of learning and good manners and tolerance is so thin!" -- Sinclair Lewis

      by Nespolo on Sun Oct 22, 2006 at 12:23:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Obama's a pansy-ass and has a long way (0+ / 0-)

    to go before I would ever vote for him for President, or perhaps even Senator again.  He is much to willing to work with people who would stab him in the chest right to his face with a smile!!  His stands have alsoe been lackluster, at best.

    He comes from a safe blue state and his behavior is unacceptable.  I am thinking of not voting for him the next time just to send a message; not that Mr. Dreaming of Daddy will ever get it!

    FDL has a great post that sums up my dissapointment with Obamam very well.

  •  New AP Article: (0+ / 0-)

    Sen. Obama says he's weighing 2008 run

    WASHINGTON - Sen. Barack Obama acknowledged Sunday he was considering a run for president in 2008, backing off previous statements that he would not do so.

    The Illinois Democrat said he could no longer stand by the statements he made after his 2004 election and earlier this year that he would serve a full six-year term in Congress. He said he would not make a decision until after the Nov. 7 elections.

    Check out the full article.

  •  Who created the Obama hysteria? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    extradish

    As an Obama constituent, I have been pleased with his performance since his days in the state legislature. Even then, he was a liberal who was known for reaching across the aisle to reach a compromise.

    For my part, I don't buy the "Obama is getting to big for his britches" malarky. At least in my observation, he has not brought up the subject of a candidacy in 2008. He has only responded to questions from the media and his audiences.

    There is a long way to go before the 2008 nomination. I will likely support any Democratic candidate. But, to be fair to Obama, who has created the current Obama hysteria? I would say, WE created it; he didn't.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site