Obama '08?

@Cycloptichorn,

The American public has a very short attention span. I suspect that each campaign will wait until the October timeframe to expend the majority of their resources (commercials). Polls will probably all remain relatively balanced until late October.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

I wouldn't waste your time suspecting ros.

Everybody has known about what you've said since elections began. Do you really think you are imparting words of wisdom?

If the polls are unbalanced the public can't extract enough promises. Compare a girl with two suitors to one with only one.

Can't you tell us something we don't know? You're a classic pub bore.

What are the candidates going to do about the Russians shoving your nose out of joint? Change might just mean moving the furniture in the Oval Office.

0 Replies

http://www.foxnews.com/video2/video08.html?maven_referralObject=3041532&maven_referralPlaylistId=&sRevUrl=http://www.foxnews.com/

Wesley Clark snubbed, Obama favorability ratings dropping, negatives rising, he is beginning to sound shrill, attacking McCain, vp selection a mystery, is it also a mystery to Obama, fake text messages appearing in regard to vp selection, supporters clearly worried, what next? Troubles in the camps.

1 Reply

@okie,

Eh.

He was just on vacation for a week.

The Dem convention is coming up.

I think McCain's last, best chance is evaporating. He pulled closer, but he didn't put anything over the top. And Obama is now starting the home stretch -- he has a plan, he has focus, he has discipline, and I cannot WAIT for the debates to start. I think a lot of people are going to be surprised (and I think that surprise might be strategic).

0 Replies

Obama says: “I won’t comment on anything else until I introduce our running mate to the world,”

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/08/21/obama-says-hes-chosen-vp-not-saying-who/

I thought the vp would be of the U.S., not the world. Why not just introduce him the to the American voters? What is it with Barry, and the "world?' Does he think he will be over the whole thing before long, or what?

2 Replies

@okie,

It's just a semantic problem.

See, not only are the United States, as President Bush himself pointed out, the "greatest nation on Earth". No, the President of America is, at the same time, "the leader of the free world". The Vice President said so, I should aid.

So, essentially, every presidential candidate not only announces his running mate to the citizens of the United States of America, to the population of the greatest nation that exists on the whole wide globe - no, he announces his choice simultaneously to the whole free world at large.

And then, Americans get to vote.

2 Replies

@okie,

Quote:

Obama says: “I won’t comment on anything else until I introduce our running mate to the world,”

Why "our"?

1 Reply

@spendius,

I'd say that's an "our" as in "the Democratic party".

After all, if he wanted to say "Our" as in "We, the Queen of England", he would have said “We won’t comment on anything else until We introduce Our running mate to the world.”

Or rather, he wouldn't have said that. The Queen of England doesn't have a running mate.

...

And doesn't get elected.

0 Replies

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

So, essentially, every presidential candidate not only announces his running mate to the citizens of the United States of America, to the population of the greatest nation that exists on the whole wide globe - no, he announces his choice simultaneously to the whole free world at large.

And then, Americans get to vote.

Only some of the candidates have the hubris to do that: I doubt that McCain will do so. The other comments of Bush & Cheney you cited were at staged events that called for such statements; merely cant formalisms and not affirmations of place. European leaders routinely use the same phrases when they want something from us.

As Walter is so fond of pointing out, the new EU is far more populous and much larger than the United States. Nothing stops you from exerting a bit of leadership yourselves. That you don't (consider Bosnia and Croatia) is not our fault, and surely doesn't give you any rights here.

That many Europeans may resent the current role of the United States is understandable in human terms, but merely amusing in historical ones. This country was largely built by Europeans risking everything to flee the ghastly histories of their European homelands. That the descendents of the priviledged and merely timid souls who stayed behind might resent what their cousins created here is perhaps understandable. However, in view of what they themselved did in the ensuing centuries, it is entirely laughable.

Surely, the United States has repeated many of the errors and follies of the great nations that preceeded us. However, we have, for the most part, so far avoided the colonial exploitations; authoritarian political horrors;, and slaughter that have been the principal European exports of the modern age. Indeed we are still dealing (imperfectly to be sure) with the worldwide consequences of European colonialism and the follies of WWI.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Come off it George.

That's a bit oversimplified.

How do you think European colonialism might have been avoided and what consequences do you imagine, speaking hypothetically, had it not happened?

What does "many Europeans" mean?

Your post is laughable.

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius,
Perhaps you should reread what I actually wrote, but more carefully this time.

The cited rhetorical flourishes of Bush & Cheny were indeed merely cant formalisms offered at canned events that called for that stuff; and formalisms that are indeed often used by European leaders who want something from us.

old europe's point, namely that he is unfairly (in view of the Bush, Cheney rhetoric) denied a vote here, is indeed properly answered by pointing out that nothing we do stops the "new" Europe from exercising a little leadership itself. That it doesn't is surely not our fault, and it even more surely doesn't give Europeans any rights here.

The reflexive anti Americanism of popular European culture has been a visible component for centuries - just consider the stock Yankee character of 19th century European literature. It continues today in the pious hypocrisy of the Guardian and other like rags that so constantly assure their readers that they have somehow created something new and wonderful, thus justifying a mass forgetfulness of their ghastly pasts and the constant criticism of America it pours forth.

If you are suggesting that European colonialism in all of its features was an inevitable consequence of history, that there were no alternatives - then we have several far more fundamental disagreements involving human behavior, history and philosophy that must first be resolved before we can reach any common understanding.

"Many Europeans" means many Europeans.

3 Replies

@georgeob1,

I don't think statements by Bush are out of line, such as this is the greatest country, etc., after all I think most presidents in my memory have said the same things. I think my home is the best on earth, but I fully recognize my neighbor down the street probably thinks his is as well. Likewise, if oe thinks Germany is the greatest country, I am not offended. I have relatives in Europe, and they think their country is grand, and I am glad for them, I am certainly not offended. I don't think I have to be ashamed of this country, as perhaps Obama might think, I'm really not sure what he thinks, which is equally troubling.

I do find Obama's statement about introducing the vp to the world is more than mere words, it does show a mindset, and that is why I mentioned it. I am offended at Obama, that he doesn't at least first show the respect to the American voter first. After all, the vp candidate is nothing to the world at this moment, contrary to what Obama might think, he has not been elected yet. I am beginning to get more tuned into Obama's mindset, and just how egotistical it may be.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

Quote:

old europe's point, namely that he is unfairly (in view of the Bush, Cheney rhetoric) denied a vote here, is indeed properly answered by pointing out that nothing we do stops the "new" Europe from exercising a little leadership itself.

...

Remind me that I occasionally need to add little <irony> tags when posting in politics...

1 Reply

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

Remind me that I occasionally need to add little <irony> tags when posting in politics...

Not really. The irony was self evident. You just appear to have missed its real significance.

1 Reply

@okie,

See, I think when people say that their country is "the greatest nation on earth", you're already off into hyperbole territory. There may be reasons for that kind of rhetoric, and politicians have often made use of it, but it's still hyperbole.

Also, I don't think that saying "This is the country I love the most in the world" is equivalent to saying "This country is the greatest nation on earth". I don't think that there is one single country that is better than all the others. That's ridiculous. Sure, you can compare certain aspects of certain countries, and for you, personally, that might lead to the decision that living in one country suits you better than living in another country... but that's really all you can say.

---

What I really don't get is reading all that nonsense into Obama's statements. That's ridiculous. If McCain had made the exact same statement, you wouldn't even have noticed.

But as soon as Obama says something, anything, you're completely willing to read some secret plan for world domination into his words. That's really just ridiculous.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Probably missed it. What was its real significance?

0 Replies

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

What I really don't get is reading all that nonsense into Obama's statements. That's ridiculous. If McCain had made the exact same statement, you wouldn't even have noticed.

Perhaps what you don't get is the distrust of who really is Obama, what motivates the man. He is an unknown quantity, with troubling past and present associations.

In contrast, McCain is a known quantity, the American people know pretty much who McCain is, and they either like most of what he is, or they don't, but they are comfortable with who he is. There is no equivalent feeling about Obama. And so, the question is still being mulled over in peoples minds, who is Obama? And so, we take a look at his words, and since he seems to hide his true beliefs, we look for words that give us a hint as to his thinking, such as people clinging to their guns and their religion, that was a very revealing statement, not one that somebody makes accidentally unless they harbor much different beliefs than the people I know.

3 Replies

@okie,

Um, I know more about Obama then I do McCain. So speak for yourself. And I bet a lot of Americans do too.

You are doing nothing but projecting your bias, Okie. You don't trust him b.c he's a liberal. You'd be saying the same bullshit about any liberal. Just be honest with your partisanship.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

@old europe,

old europe wrote:

See, I think when people say that their country is "the greatest nation on earth", you're already off into hyperbole territory. There may be reasons for that kind of rhetoric, and politicians have often made use of it, but it's still hyperbole.

Also, I don't think that saying "This is the country I love the most in the world" is equivalent to saying "This country is the greatest nation on earth". I don't think that there is one single country that is better than all the others. That's ridiculous. Sure, you can compare certain aspects of certain countries, and for you, personally, that might lead to the decision that living in one country suits you better than living in another country... but that's really all you can say.

I fully agree. I'll go farther - where we live and assign our loyalties is mostly an accident of birth. While we do have choices in the matter, the fact is few of us consciously exercise them.

As to the matter at hand, it is Obama who chose to take his campaign to Europe, not McCain. That he did is a reflection of prevailing European attitudes towards the United States and the reaction of some credulous people here, whose votes he seeks, to them. Wiser heads know that this favor is, in the long run, not worth having.

0 Replies

@okie,

Plenty of long-term senators have ended up being scumbags.

I don't think that a long history of winning elections is necessarily a rousing endorsement of personal integrity.

Some will read that and assume that I mean a long history of winning elections is an indightment of someone's personal integrity. Not so. My point is that winning an election means squat about whether someone is a good person or not.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know