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

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

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

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

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

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

wrote:
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

odd response...not fully what i expected, though close...especially, the
hitlerghandi thing. but, all is well, we have you and krauthammer to
keep us ardent, doe-eyed, admiring cultists in control. g

i confess i have never known a single candidate for president
personally, that all of my "range of knowledge" of such candidates is
based on my individual perception...which i hope has a rational
foundation in personal experience and principle. ultimately, most of us
want to make an informed choice. frankly, i think the only hope of
delivering us from another republican president is obama and the rabid
conservative republicans. mccain has now been fully revealed...he's a
chameleon...and old! g

jeff

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)

Dave LaCourse wrote:
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)



in terms of living...nothing, and it certainly is much preferred to the
alternatives. however, in terms of mccain and the presidency, "old" was
intended to have several meanings..."stale", "dated", "used", "not new",
and, of course, just too friggin OLD! g

jeff (old, and lookin forward to gettin older...)

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

wrote:
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

odd response...not fully what i expected, though close...especially, the
hitlerghandi thing. but, all is well, we have you and krauthammer to
keep us ardent, doe-eyed, admiring cultists in control. g

Folks who call others "inspiring" or "persuasive" have always both
saddened and amused me when they do so. I can fully appreciate the
_specifically_ _inspired_ or _persuaded_, such as a young black man
saying that Obama's life thus far inspired him to run for Congress, etc.
or someone saying that Obama's argument in favor of premise "x"
persuaded them that he was right on that issue, but to call someone
generally "inspiring" and/or "persuasive" is the first step in, to touch
upon your words, the formation of a cult of personality...at least...

i confess i have never known a single candidate for president
personally, that all of my "range of knowledge" of such candidates is
based on my individual perception...which i hope has a rational
foundation in personal experience and principle. ultimately, most of us
want to make an informed choice. frankly, i think the only hope of
delivering us from another republican president is obama and the rabid
conservative republicans. mccain has now been fully revealed...he's a
chameleon...and old! g

Um, well, as to "true colors," I'd offer that there have been little
more than hints, even assuming they are not red herrings, in "revealing"
Obama, but those few hints indicate that he ain't exactly married to
this color or that (and while a pun isn't exactly _intended_, it ain't
not intended, either...). And if Obama is "the real deal," and
literally means what he says, I'd offer that he doesn't want your
support, at least until you can get past being so rabidly anti-GOP...
after all, they were, IIRC, the party of ideas not so long ago...

TC,
R

jeff

wrote:

Folks who call others "inspiring" or "persuasive" have always both
saddened and amused me when they do so. ...

It must suck to be as cynical as all that, on the other hand
I suppose it's a good thing to be easily amused.

Um, well, as to "true colors," I'd offer that there have been little
more than hints, even assuming they are not red herrings, in "revealing"
Obama, but those few hints indicate that he ain't exactly married to
this color or that (and while a pun isn't exactly _intended_, it ain't
not intended, either...).

"Little more than hints" ? Are you serious ? Have you actually
read "The Audacity of Hope" ? No presidential candidate in his
or her right mind is going to spell out policy specifics in the
primaries. Presidents do not rule by fiat so anything they propose
will necessarily be watered down and transmogrified in Congress
anyway. And like Huckabee said the other day, when you elect a
president you don't want the guy who can fix the carburetor you
want the guy who can drive the car.

And if Obama is "the real deal," and
literally means what he says, I'd offer that he doesn't want your
support, at least until you can get past being so rabidly anti-GOP...
after all, they were, IIRC, the party of ideas not so long ago...

Yeah, the party of bad ideas and they remain so. Look there's
nothing wrong with voting for Obama because he's not a Republican.
In fact that's reason enough to vote for him.

--
Ken Fortenberry