Miller
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 08:46 am
mysteryman wrote:
Are you sure it was 3000 people?
As much as I like Obama,he has shown a tendency to multiply numbers by a factor of 1000 sometimes.


But does Obama have that kind of math ability?
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 08:48 am
It would require significant tunnel vision to think MM was making anything other than a harmless (and appropriately clever) joke referencing Obama's gaffe in citing 10,000 tornado deaths in Kansas rather than the actual 10 or so.

The media has given Obama an appropriate pass on that blowing it off as an inadvertent error--a pass they (and the liberals they represent) do not generally extend to Republican or conservative candidates/politicians.

But there is always something to trip up a candidate. The following will also be presented as much ado about nothing if it is reported at all by the U.S. press, but it is illustrative of the kinds of tangled webs they all weave to present themselves as God's answer to the problems of the world.

And for those who think the union organized and backed assault on Wal-Mart is unAmerican and counter productive might want to look more closely at Senator Obama's position on that:

Obama called hypocrite for wife's Wal-Mart link
By Philip Sherwell in New York, Sunday Telegraph
Last Updated: 11:37pm BST 12/05/2007

As a fluent public speaker, independent-minded wife, devoted mother and professional woman, Michelle Obama has been hailed as an invaluable asset to her husband Barack's mission to capture the Democratic 2008 presidential nomination.

Yet, while her style and performance are winning plaudits on the campaign trail, a little-reported business interest of Mrs Obama's has opened her husband up to one of the criticisms that politicians fear most - the taint of hypocrisy.

She is taking a break from her main job, as a well-remunerated Chicago hospital executive, to campaign for her husband. But she has just been re-elected to the board of an Illinois food-processing company, a position she took up two years ago to gain experience of the private sector.

And the biggest customer for the pickles and peppers produced by Treehouse Foods is the retail giant Wal-Mart, the world's largest corporation and the bête noire of American liberals, including Sen Obama, for its employment practices, most notably its refusal to recognise trade unions.

As the Illinois senator prepared to join the presidential fray late last year, he threw his weight behind the union-backed campaign against Wal-Mart. He declared that there was a "moral responsibility to stand up and fight" the company and "force them to examine their own corporate values".

According to the couple's tax returns, Mrs Obama earned $51,200 (£25,700) for her work as a non-executive director on Treehouse's board last year, on top of the $271,618 salary she was paid as a vice-president of the University of Chicago Hospitals.

She also received 7,500 Treehouse stock options, worth a further $72,375, as she did the previous year, when she banked a $45,000 salary from the company.

The apparent contradiction between Sen Obama's political calculation to join the Wal-Mart-bashing lobby, and his wife's profitable role with a company that makes money from Wal-Mart, is being closely scrutinised by "opposition" research teams working for rival White House candidates, The Sunday Telegraph has learnt.

They are collecting information about Mrs Obama's Treehouse ties, anticipating that - in a country where "going dirty" is a political way of life - the link may provide valuable ammunition in the election campaign.

Such attacks could be particularly damaging for Sen Obama, who has promised a change from politics as usual. Just last week, on her first foray to the crucial first primary state of New Hampshire, Mrs Obama praised her husband's "moral compass", reflecting a key message of his campaign.
SOURCE and MORE HERE
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 09:05 am
Miller wrote:
mysteryman wrote:
Are you sure it was 3000 people?
As much as I like Obama,he has shown a tendency to multiply numbers by a factor of 1000 sometimes.


But does Obama have that kind of math ability?


Yep, he can add, subtract multiply and divide.

Clean, too.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 09:11 am
snood wrote:
"factor of 1000"? that would mean there were 3 people in Kansas City. You sure you're not the one exaggerating?

...and I'm sure your concern is that he is honest, and that you have similar concerns about all the other candidates.

He's on This Week with George Stephanopolis right now - maybe if you watch, you can find some other things to be concerned about.



You sure are defensive,arent you.

As far as honesty goes,I want EVERY candidate to be 100% honest,but you and I both know that isnt gonna happen.

I was referencing his saying that 10,000 had died in the tornadoes that hit Kansas,when actually only 10 had died.

His campaign said it was because he was tired that he made that mistake,and that does leave me wondering...If he can make that mistake now,what kinds of mistakes will he make when ALL of the worlds problems are on his shoulders as President and he gets tired?

Now,if you cant tolerate a joke about his ability to count,then you need to lighten up.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 09:25 am
One thing for sure, our man, Mitt doesn't lie.

Laughing
0 Replies
 
noinipo
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 09:28 am
When the number of dead is 10, to say 10 000 sounds like an honest mistake. 10 million would be a bigger mistake.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 09:59 am
Remember the gaffe by Bush saying the Queen of England was 230 years old? I'm sure most people doesn't give a hang about Obama's gaffe.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 10:17 am
Much ado about nothing. It is obvious he misspoke. The thing that he and his camp take great pains to crow about is that he was against the war from the beginning. So for a matter of fact was I. Hmm. Got to give some thought about throwing my hat in the ring. :wink: :wink:
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 11:12 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
... I'm sure most people doesn't give a hang about Obama's gaffe.


How interesting...
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 11:13 am
noinipo wrote:
When the number of dead is 10, to say 10 000 sounds like an honest mistake. 10 million would be a bigger mistake.


So, Obama made a mistake?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 11:14 am
Miller wrote:
noinipo wrote:
When the number of dead is 10, to say 10 000 sounds like an honest mistake. 10 million would be a bigger mistake.


So, Obama made a mistake?


Um, yes?

Quit being a jerk

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 11:15 am
What gave it away to you?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 11:21 am
Miller wrote:
noinipo wrote:
When the number of dead is 10, to say 10 000 sounds like an honest mistake. 10 million would be a bigger mistake.


So, Obama made a mistake?


Obama is making an even bigger mistake by running for President against Mrs. Clinton.


Shocked
0 Replies
 
noinipo
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 12:38 pm
Wouldn't it be a nice surprise to see him support Mrs Clinton? The two of them would make a good team.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 12:40 pm
This is not new news, but at one time Obama was even with Clinton in the polls. With the elections still more than a year away, to say that Obama shouldn't be running against Clinton is not politically astute.


By: Mark Memmott and Jill Lawrence

Latest Rasmussen poll has Clinton & Obama tied
Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has pulled even with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., in the latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely Democratic primary voters.

According to Rasmussen, Clinton and Obama each earned 32% of those voters' support. John Edwards was third, at 17%.

"For the fourth straight week, Illinois Senator Barack Obama has gained ground and he has finally caught New York Senator Hillary Clinton in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination," Rasmussen reported earlier today. It said the margin of error on its numbers is +/- 4 percentage points. The survey was done April 16-19.

In the latest USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, done the weekend of April 13-15, Clinton led Obama by 5 percentage points, 31%-26%, among Democrats and independents who lean toward the Democratic Party. In early April, her lead over Obama was 19 points.


The polls can change many times before November 2008.
0 Replies
 
noinipo
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 01:02 pm
The polls can change many times before November 2008.
.
So true. But I dislike candidates from the same party arguing in public.
.Sometimes the other party uses their quarrels to make ugly attack ads against them.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 01:21 pm
Infighting amongst same party candidates is not new; look how the GOP destroyed McCain during the 2000 elections.
0 Replies
 
teenyboone
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 02:07 pm
Re: Obama '08?
sozobe wrote:
Didn't want to derail nimh's thread about Republicans. This can become the equivalent about Democrats, but my initial question is: Would Obama work, after all?

I have personally loved him but have been hesitant to back the idea of a presidential bid in 2008 for three main reasons, and also the ways they interact:

- Race
- Admitted drug use
- Inexperience

I'm wondering if they may not be as crippling as I had thought, though.

Race: If Hillary is really the presumed nominee, race could be in his favor in getting the nomination. Part of what is exciting about Hillary is that she could actually maybe (I don't think so, but in theory) be the first woman president. It's much more exciting to make the nominee another inspirational groundbreaker rather than defaulting to yet another old white guy.

Admitted drug use: While this is bad, it's the kind of thing that just possibly could play up a couple of Republican weaknesses. One is that he's already taken full responsibility. Sure, he tried it, he didn't like it, let's move on. I think that kind of full disclosure and accepting responsibility might be seen as refreshing by the electorate. Another is that it's the kind of thing that if the Republicans pounce on, it might just make THEM look bad. "Oh, sure, smear the black candidate with the drug allegations, dirty politics again." I think people are really sick of that crap.

Inexperience: This is the one that has changed the most since Obama first came up. I, personally, like to have a leader with a lot of experience. But things I've read here and that I've seen in general seem to be indicating that the zeitgeist is more towards "FRESH START." Get rid of the lying liars, the politicos, the fat cats. Get a breath of fresh air in there, someone with integrity and enthusiasm. Obama has that, in spades.

Things I've always liked about him:

Public speaking skills: This guy is GOOD.

Bipartisan appeal: He did amazing work in connecting to Republicans in Illinois, and has gotten a good reaction among many Republicans I know.

Savvy: He's made a lot of good decisions, politically.

Charisma: He's got it.

Idealism: This goes back to what I said re: inexperienced -- I think it's something that people really like to see, and can be especially good when paired with young.

Humor: Slightly different than charisma, and what made me start this thread. Read Maureen Dowd's column about his performance at a press dinner on Saturday (?), and it sounds like he did an amazing job.

Quote:
In the capital's version of "Dancing with the Stars," Senator Obama won, turning in a smoothy, funny performance that lifted him from his tyro track.

He tweaked fellow Democrats, telling the white-tie crowd: "Men in tails. Women in gowns. An orchestra playing, as folks reminisce about the good old days. Kind of like dinner at the Kerry's."

He mocked the president's unauthorized snooping, saying he'd "asked my staff to conduct all phone conversations in the Kenyan dialect of Luo." He advised W. to "spy on the Weather Channel, and find out when the big storms are coming."

After saying that he'd ejoyed the Olympic baithlon of shooting and skiing, he, deadpan, turned to Dick Cheney: "Probably not your sport, Mr. President."


She points out that Obama is 44, and that JFK, "who had a reputation as a callow playboy and lawmaker who barely knew his way around the Hill, was 43 when he became president."

What I know for sure is that when I think of all of the possible Democratic nominees, my reaction ranges from "could be OK" to "OH LORD PLEASE NO!!!", with one exception. Obama is the only one who makes me think, "Oh man, that would be SO great!!"

What do you think?

Just joining the thread:
For Blacks, picture this! If Blacks have been voting for whites, all along, what's wrong, with voting for a qualified Black person, when so many whites have already screwed the system up, reneged on promises, are in bed with the opposition, when they say they're not, are as corrupted as the Republicans, who are also sexually oppressed! They preach abstinance and behind closed doors, make Clinton, look like an altar boy!
I'm going for the Black Guy, with the education! Hypocrite? I don't see no hypocrite!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 02:09 pm
Hi teenyboone, thanks for joining us, I've noticed you talking about Obama elsewhere.

Were you responding to my post? I don't really see a connection, if so.
0 Replies
 
teenyboone
 
  1  
Sun 13 May, 2007 03:18 pm
sozobe wrote:
Hi teenyboone, thanks for joining us, I've noticed you talking about Obama elsewhere.

Were you responding to my post? I don't really see a connection, if so.

Not in particular. I clicked a link referencing this thread and went to the first post to see if it was relevant or worth getting into. Decided to reply and try to follow along, is all. Seems as though the media wants to choose for us, as usual. They quote this or that poll and until Obama got involved in the race, I was for Dennis Kucinich! I still am, up to a point and wondering if getting a Black to run, will gum up a Hillary Clinton or Edwards. Right now, it's a toss up, but Obama has all that the first post says he has. Experience? I say, you don't need experience for something guaranteed under the constitution, or a litmus test, either! We already have a dunce, in the white house, so what could be worse? At least Obama has his education, wasn't a "C" student, doesn't brag or boast, is a real African American, due to his American mother and African father. I don't know which tribe, I came from, yet my people have been here for 450 years and has never received reparations, like the Jews or Japanese, or the so called "forty acres and a mule". Lincoln didn't free me, because Jim Crow, was practiced throughout the 48 contiguous states, until 1965! Schools are still segregated, although "de facto". Blacks, are still the last hired and first fired, profiled, etc. Katrina proved that! Terrorism is still being practiced at home, why ordinary Americans are searched, spied upon illegally, cameras on every corner, employers spying on workers. Are you sure this is America? I've entertained leaving the US, before I can't! Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 197
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.19 seconds on 08/08/2025 at 10:04:12