![]() |
So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
....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 |
So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
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. Well, he's started fewer wars than your dreamboat. Seriously. Wolfgang and the odds are he can actually read a recipe. |
So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up hisleg," and...
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, 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. In Obama, I see a man in whose integrity I see few flaws, but many highlights. 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. 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. Joe F. |
So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
"rb608" wrote in message ... 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, 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. In Obama, I see a man in whose integrity I see few flaws, but many highlights. 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. 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. Well said. I'm not as sanguine about Obama as you and some of the others here (personally, I believe even rank cynicism falls far short of the level of skepticism to be expected from any rational person with regard to candidates for national office in this country), but I can hardly deny that he is the most attractive choice currently available. That said, this hoary old bugbear of qualifications comes up in every election that doesn't have an incumbent in office.....or has for a long time, anyway. The same question was asked of Lincoln supporters. I believe Abraham Lincoln's experience in national political office prior to his election to the presidency was a single term in the House of Representatives, where his service was deemed less than stellar. Wolfgang |
So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
"Wolfgang" wrote in message ... ...this hoary old bugbear of qualifications comes up in every election that doesn't have an incumbent in office..... Um.....one should hardly need to add that it should come up a great deal MORE often in elections in which there IS an incumbent......but then, this IS usenet. Wolfgang |
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...
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 |
So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
"asadi" wrote in message
When all else fails (as is has for so many years), just smack that cue ball as hard as you can. I have to say that I admire your ability to view things from a completely different yet simultaneously valid perspective. Joe F. |
So, OK, he's for change, he gives Chris Mathews a feeling "up his leg," and...
"asadi" wrote in message When all else fails (as is has for so many years), just smack that cue ball as hard as you can. john Joe the elder offers----and hope you don"t scratch---with the choice of canadates we were offered I think Obama turned out to be the best ball in the rack! |
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 |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:23 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2006 FishingBanter