So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:54:59 GMT, "asadi"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

When all else fails (as is has for so many years), just smack that cue ball
as hard as you can.

john

Well, I suppose...the main problem, at least as I see it, is the last
time there was some wild ball-smacking going on, the US got 4 years of
Jimmy Carter...who, IMO, is a decent, honorable man but also who, if he
had just a little more experience, might have made one fine POTUS...as
such, I'm not going to be surprised if Obama has a female running
mate...Geraldine Ferraro...

TC,
R

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:45:37 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

wrote:

...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

...youth, intelligence, tolerance, gifted, persuasive, redemptive,
inspiring, unifying, empowering, thoughtful/insightful, problem-solving
skills, hope, hope, hope, symbolic power, listens, collaborative,
notbush, nothillaryclinton, notmccain, respect for balance of powers in
federal system, adapts and adjusts effectively, small government/big
government experience in elected office, understands/recognizes racial
and socioeconomic problems from a unique perspective, not a washington
dc insider...there's more, but i suspect these will be sufficient for
your critique and counterpoints.

jeff

Unless you know him a whole lot better than you have let on, only two
(possibly three) of the above (the "not(whomever)" obvious items
excluded) items are seemingly within your range of knowledge: his being
persuasive and inspiring (and possibly "hope," depending on who you
intend to mean is doing the hoping). Fine qualities, I suppose, if
properly directed, but IAC, they are qualities that speak more to you,
the persuaded and inspired, than he, the persuasive and inspiring. IOW,
from reports contemporaneous, Hitler and Gandhi were called both...at
least by those they persuaded and inspired...and oh, BTW, did you simply
forget to add "objective" to your list, or did you not think him such?

IAC, I still think he would do well as McCain's veep, and if nothing
else, it'd keep his dream alive. Given the overall situation _today_,
McCain's the next POTUS, and really, McCain doesn't have a clear running
mate. If Obama REALLY didn't want red or blue states, only united
states, one might think he'd be all over such an arrangement...

TC,
R

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:45:37 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

wrote:

...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

...youth, intelligence, tolerance, gifted, persuasive, redemptive,
inspiring, unifying, empowering, thoughtful/insightful, problem-solving
skills, hope, hope, hope, symbolic power, listens, collaborative,
notbush, nothillaryclinton, notmccain, respect for balance of powers in
federal system, adapts and adjusts effectively, small government/big
government experience in elected office, understands/recognizes racial
and socioeconomic problems from a unique perspective, not a washington
dc insider...there's more, but i suspect these will be sufficient for
your critique and counterpoints.

jeff

Unless you know him a whole lot better than you have let on, only two
(possibly three) of the above (the "not(whomever)" obvious items
excluded) items are seemingly within your range of knowledge: his being
persuasive and inspiring (and possibly "hope," depending on who you
intend to mean is doing the hoping). Fine qualities, I suppose, if
properly directed, but IAC, they are qualities that speak more to you,
the persuaded and inspired, than he, the persuasive and inspiring. IOW,
from reports contemporaneous, Hitler and Gandhi were called both...at
least by those they persuaded and inspired...and oh, BTW, did you simply
forget to add "objective" to your list, or did you not think him such?

IAC, I still think he would do well as McCain's veep, and if nothing
else, it'd keep his dream alive. Given the overall situation _today_,
McCain's the next POTUS, and really, McCain doesn't have a clear running
mate. If Obama REALLY didn't want red or blue states, only united
states, one might think he'd be all over such an arrangement...

TC,
R

And the last time that happened was around 1825-1829, I believe. And that
was a Democratic President with a Republican VP-- John Quincy Adams and John
Calhoun.

This came about, if memory serves me correctly--which it may not, when the
VP was chosen as the runner-up in votes tallied for President. That being
changed with the ratification of the 12th Amendment to the Constitutions.

So, you might want to think in terms of what is likely to happen. Not likely
that either a Dem. or a Repub. would chose a VP from the eopposition party;
however, if such an event were to come to fruition, it is more likely that
Obama would chose McCain as his running mate--historically that is.

op

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "uphis leg," and...
 

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 07:40:35 -0500, "Opus--Mark H. Bowen"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:45:37 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

wrote:

...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

...youth, intelligence, tolerance, gifted, persuasive, redemptive,
inspiring, unifying, empowering, thoughtful/insightful, problem-solving
skills, hope, hope, hope, symbolic power, listens, collaborative,
notbush, nothillaryclinton, notmccain, respect for balance of powers in
federal system, adapts and adjusts effectively, small government/big
government experience in elected office, understands/recognizes racial
and socioeconomic problems from a unique perspective, not a washington
dc insider...there's more, but i suspect these will be sufficient for
your critique and counterpoints.

jeff

Unless you know him a whole lot better than you have let on, only two
(possibly three) of the above (the "not(whomever)" obvious items
excluded) items are seemingly within your range of knowledge: his being
persuasive and inspiring (and possibly "hope," depending on who you
intend to mean is doing the hoping). Fine qualities, I suppose, if
properly directed, but IAC, they are qualities that speak more to you,
the persuaded and inspired, than he, the persuasive and inspiring. IOW,
from reports contemporaneous, Hitler and Gandhi were called both...at
least by those they persuaded and inspired...and oh, BTW, did you simply
forget to add "objective" to your list, or did you not think him such?

IAC, I still think he would do well as McCain's veep, and if nothing
else, it'd keep his dream alive. Given the overall situation _today_,
McCain's the next POTUS, and really, McCain doesn't have a clear running
mate. If Obama REALLY didn't want red or blue states, only united
states, one might think he'd be all over such an arrangement...

TC,
R

And the last time that happened was around 1825-1829, I believe. And that
was a Democratic President with a Republican VP-- John Quincy Adams and John
Calhoun.

This came about, if memory serves me correctly--which it may not, when the
VP was chosen as the runner-up in votes tallied for President. That being
changed with the ratification of the 12th Amendment to the Constitutions.

So, you might want to think in terms of what is likely to happen. Not likely
that either a Dem. or a Repub. would chose a VP from the eopposition party;
however, if such an event were to come to fruition, it is more likely that
Obama would chose McCain as his running mate--historically that is.

Er, no. Taking your memory as having served you correctly, at least for
the purposes of your own premise, no candidate has ever _chosen_ a
cross-aisle running mate, and so, neither McCain or Obama could be "more
likely" to do so based on historic precedent.

But your exercise does bring up another facet of Obama's "dilemma" - who
is he gonna get to be his running mate? Hillary? I'd guess that he
isn't THAT naive, but I'd guess she might accept if asked. Was the
choice of running mate what got him Teddy's support? I have no doubt
whatsoever that Teddy extracted _something_, even a list of somethings,
and if it was that, Obama's screwed.

And whomever Obama gets, what are McCain's options? While he is a bit
more well-placed to pick who _he_ wants, who would he want? Romney?
Naw. Huckabee? Hardly. Rudy? Maybe, but do either of them want him
attempting to play second-string? But Obama, at least in general terms
(which is all anyone has to go on at this point), seems to be close (or
at least close enough) in politics and temperament. I think most would
agree that such a pairing, given the field as it appears today, would
sweep into the WH with a mandate-level vote and they would be the only
possible pairing that could do so. And mandate-level votes are about
the only way things get changed - 50.01% versus 49.99% don't get it
done...

OTOH, do I think it's gonna happen? No, not really, at least not enough
to bet big on it, but maybe they'll see the light...

TC,
R

op

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 12:20:54 -0800 (PST), rb608
wrote:

On Feb 14, 2:33 pm, wrote:
I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

I'm a somewhat late arrival to the Obama bandwagon, and my enthusiasm
is tempered by the fact he's actually my second choice; but he is my
choice at this point, so I'll foolishly assume for the moment your
question is genuine and give you a genuine answer.

Thanks in large part to the success of GWB in the job, I've come to
believe that virtually no experience or ability is necessary to do the
job well. As snarky as that may sound, I mean it. Bush is likely the
worst president in the history of the country, and despite the
******** he's driven this country into, he's managed to make it
through two terms with continuing support from at least his party's
base.

What that makes clear is that the president doesn't really need to do
anything except set the tone of the administration. The next
president, if he's at all competent, will be surrounded by staffers
and functionaries willing to take his wishes and priorities and make
them happen. Bush didn't need to know how, and likely doesn't. Obama
has that beat by a mile.

So getting back to Obama,

Um, "back to Obama?" You haven't gotten to him yet...but I'm guessing
his not being Bush is a big thing for you...

I see a man who expresses a vision for this
country that I believe would be a vast improvement for nearly every
aspect of the nation, from foreign policy, health care, poverty,
preparedness, national secruity, and domestic security. I believe
that if he is in the Oval Office trying to effect that vision, the US
will be significantly better off than we are now, and surely better
than if John McCain is imposing his.

So McCain would be imposing his vision (bad, very, very ba-a-a-d...),
whereas Obama will be bettering the US simply by trying to effect his
(understandably) non-specific vision (good, oh, wonderful,
sunshine-and-bluebirds kinda day...)...er, OK...

In Obama, I see a man in whose integrity I see few flaws, but many
highlights.

Uh-oh...he has "few flaws," huh? That doesn't speak very well to his
ability to be an effective politician...

I see a man who will honestly try to bring this country
together, not divide us by fear or dogma. His oft repeated "no red
states, no blue states, only United States" is something I believe is
more to him than a platitude.

There has already been criticism of his rhetoric for being long on
ideals but short on specifics. To that, I say bull****. No candidate
can be specific at this point of their campaign; promises are all they
have to offer.

Um...what? Hell, I'm not even running for or desirous of ANY office,
and I could be quite specific as what I'd do as POTUS, PM of an
assortment of countries, or benevolent dictator of others...granted,
those specifics wouldn't likely get me in, but hey, I could still be
specific. IOW, if he hadn't thought about it enough to get pretty
****ing specific BEFORE he announced he was running, he has no business
running. Plus, the vast right-wing conspiracy might hint around that he
should try to get a little specific about a couple of things, at
least...

With Obama, more so than any other politician I
remember, I actually believe he intends to do his best to keep those
promises. He gives that impression, maybe correctly, maybe not; but
even if not, he's peddling the snake oil I want.

I want someone in that office who promises change from the
fearmongering, war mongering, war profiteering, Constitution
destroying, corruption and incompetence at all levels that are the
hallmarks of this administration. I believe he's the guy who can
deliver that change.

So IOW, you can't be specific and certainly wouldn't be so intrusive as
to ask him to be, but by golly, he gives you a feeling up your leg?

Well, all I can say is that you're a very lucky man - no matter who or
what wins, you'll be getting exactly - no more and no less - the leader
you deserve.

See what happens when you foolishly assume for the moment the dicklet's
question is genuine, Joe? :)

And why do I suspect this won't help,

Pathos amuses but otherwise, no, it doesn't help.

Wolfgang

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 Feb 2008 20:45:37 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

wrote:

...apparently, he gets middle-aged white folks - yep, the guy-crush
types, too - all jungle-feverish, but why should anyone vote for him? I
mean this seriously and I'm not suggesting that folks shouldn't vote for
him (or should), but I'm asking for opinions as to what real (or
imagined) credentials/abilities folks feel, think, or believe Obama
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS.

TC,
R

...youth, intelligence, tolerance, gifted, persuasive, redemptive,
inspiring, unifying, empowering, thoughtful/insightful, problem-solving
skills, hope, hope, hope, symbolic power, listens, collaborative,
notbush, nothillaryclinton, notmccain, respect for balance of powers in
federal system, adapts and adjusts effectively, small government/big
government experience in elected office, understands/recognizes racial
and socioeconomic problems from a unique perspective, not a washington
dc insider...there's more, but i suspect these will be sufficient for
your critique and counterpoints.

jeff

Unless you know him a whole lot better than you have let on, only two
(possibly three) of the above (the "not(whomever)" obvious items
excluded) items are seemingly within your range of knowledge: his being
persuasive and inspiring (and possibly "hope," depending on who you
intend to mean is doing the hoping). Fine qualities, I suppose, if
properly directed, but IAC, they are qualities that speak more to you,
the persuaded and inspired, than he, the persuasive and inspiring. IOW,
from reports contemporaneous, Hitler and Gandhi were called both...at
least by those they persuaded and inspired...and oh, BTW, did you simply
forget to add "objective" to your list, or did you not think him such?

IAC, I still think he would do well as McCain's veep, and if nothing
else, it'd keep his dream alive. Given the overall situation _today_,
McCain's the next POTUS, and really, McCain doesn't have a clear running
mate. If Obama REALLY didn't want red or blue states, only united
states, one might think he'd be all over such an arrangement...

So, what real (or imagined) credentials/abilities do you feel, think, or
believe McCain
possesses that makes him suited for POTUS?

Seriously.

Wolfgang

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:13:09 -0500, jeff miller
wrote:

and old! g

And just *what* is the matter with old?

d;o)

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
 

wrote in message
...

...mandate-level votes are about
the only way things get changed - 50.01% versus 49.99% don't get it
done...

And what is it that you want to get changed?

Seriously.

Wolfgang

So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up hisleg," and...
 

On Feb 15, 8:26*am, "Wolfgang" wrote:
See what happens when you foolishly assume for the moment the dicklet's
question is genuine, Joe? * * * :)

He never fails to live down to my expectations. At worst, it was an
open invitation to proselytize, so I took a shot. Inexplicably, there
are a couple of folks here I respect who have vouched for the man's
integrity and character; but I don't see it.

Joe F.