Is Obama done?

[Boxlicker101]

Did you even read my post?

*sigh* Yes, he wrote it himself.

Out of curiosity, why are you so certain that Obama sat down, pen in hand, and wrote out what he was going to say. I know you say it was very personal, but all that means is that he had a hand in writing it, such as contriburing certain details the professionals might not have known about him.

Why are you so sure that Darkniciad has a closed mind on this? Both he and I readily agree that bama made contributions; we just say it was mostly written by somebody else. You seem to have a more closed mind than we do.

 

[cloudy]

Out of curiosity, why are you so certain that Obama sat down, pen in hand, and wrote out what he was going to say. I know you say it was very personal, but all that means is that he had a hand in writing it, such as contriburing certain details the professionals might not have known about him.

Why are you so sure that Darkniciad has a closed mind on this? Both he and I readily agree that bama made contributions; we just say it was mostly written by somebody else. You seem to have a more closed mind than we do.

Because it's been reported, by more than one source, that he wrote it himself. Because I read, and don't just rely on conjecture.

 

[Darkniciad]

Out of curiosity, why are you so certain that Obama sat down, pen in hand, and wrote out what he was going to say. I know you say it was very personal, but all that means is that he had a hand in writing it, such as contriburing certain details the professionals might not have known about him.

Why are you so sure that Darkniciad has a closed mind on this? Both he and I readily agree that bama made contributions; we just say it was mostly written by somebody else. You seem to have a more closed mind than we do.

Actually, having heard a few of Obama's speeches before he hit the national scene, I think his wording and structure are pretty consistent. He has a big hand in the final presentation of his speeches.

The notion that you're going to get unvarnished truth from a warm-n-fuzzy campaign statement about how the speaker "did it all himself" and that somebody in the rat-race of a Presidential campaign has time to sit around and write those speeches from the ground up without the aid of wranglers is far-fetched, at best.

If the words of those around a candidate or elected official to the press are automatically "fact", then there's a lot of ranting against Bush about lies and misdirection that need retractions

 

[Stella_Omega]

Seems to me he could certainly write it, and, just as we do, have some people around to "Beta" it.

Writing his own speeches is part of the race, for him.

If the words of those around a candidate or elected official to the press are automatically "fact", then there's a lot of ranting against Bush about lies and misdirection that need retractions

By whom?

 

[Darkniciad]

Seems to me he could certainly write it, and, just as we do, have some people around to "Beta" it.

Writing his own speeches is part of the race, for him.

By whom?

I don't think any of us are getting three or four hours of sleep a night, running all over the country, on a daily schedule that would drive most people out of their minds, trying to get a message out, and answer to the attacks from opponents.

Let's face it, he's going to be frazzled, and he has almost no time for contemplation, let alone to himself. It takes a dedicated individual to run for President ( or any office ) and quite frankly Obama is holding up better than most. He's certainly running a cleaner campaign than Hillary, and I take that as an indication of fortitude for the long-haul.

Maybe a mother with several small children comes damn close to the chaos he's living right now, but you'd be hard pressed to find a mother dealing with all of that and two equally eager contenders going after him on a daily basis on top of it. There's no real comparison.

About the only time he's not going to have to be actively engaging the public, thus precluding any possibility of speech-worthy contemplation, is when he's in between those public appearances. Rest assured that his wranglers are sucking up all that time briefing him on polling numbers, surveys, the news cycle, and everything else.

Unless it's the few minutes a day he's in the bathroom to shower or answer nature's call, he just doesn't have the time.

As I've said, he's showing remarkable skill in delivering these speeches, and his unique voice is certainly in them. He just does not have the time to sit down and speech write without assistance. There has to be a framework from the people who have time to deal with all the issues on a full time, concentrated basis. His speeches would come across with a lot less impact if he was writing them from the bullet point briefings that he's absorbing every hour on the hour.

As to "who?" *shrug* Anybody who's ever said "bullshit" when Bush's press sec., advisors, etc. have issued a statement to the press concerning a matter that only those present could possibly prove/disprove.

If the statement from the Obama camp printed on MSN and elsewhere is "fact", then so is any of that. If you weren't there, you can't know.

The point is, it's not a fact. It's a statement released by those who want to make sure to paint Obama in the best light possible. His speeches all fall in the range of "well done" to "fucking brilliant", and it looks good to say that he's doing it all himself like Lincoln on the train to Gettysburgh.

And once again, it comes off as plausible and almost close enough because his voice is evident in every speech he delivers. I don't believe he's memorizing something he's seeing for the first time that someone else wrote the night before the speech

But I know, I'm "one of them" to the largest chunk of the forum, so I'm more or less wasting my breath *laugh* Probably should have just ignored it and left it alone, but the statement was tweaking me for some reason.

And with that, I adjourn.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

You know, it's possible...just possible, mind you, since there isn't any evidence to the contrary, that Obama DID write his own speech...BUT WITHOUT HIS OWN PENCIL.

OR PEN! (if he doesn't use pencils)

Or he used someone ELSE'S word-processing program on someone ELSE'S computer!

I mean...you CAN'T prove THIS conjecture wrong, now CAN you?

Not meaning anything BAD, but...you gonna vote for someone who can't drag his own ass to a Staples or Costco to get a regular, inexpensive box of No. 2's to write his own stuff? And don't forget about having an old-school hand-twisting sharpener...if you're keeping it real, then keep it real ALL THE WAY, ey.

Jus' sayin'...

 

[Boxlicker101]

You know, it's possible...just possible, mind you, since there isn't any evidence to the contrary, that Obama DID write his own speech...BUT WITHOUT HIS OWN PENCIL.

OR PEN! (if he doesn't use pencils)

Or he used someone ELSE'S word-processing program on someone ELSE'S computer!

I mean...you CAN'T prove THIS conjecture wrong, now CAN you?

Not meaning anything BAD, but...you gonna vote for someone who can't drag his own ass to a Staples or Costco to get a regular, inexpensive box of No. 2's to write his own stuff? And don't forget about having an old-school hand-twisting sharpener...if you're keeping it real, then keep it real ALL THE WAY, ey.

Jus' sayin'...

It's really a big "Who cares" whether he writes his own speeches or they are written for him with his input. One way or another, he was the one who said it.

What is puzzling, almost appalling, is the way some on this forum seem to be almost worshpping this man. He is just a man, although a charismatic one, and fallible. He may turn out to be one of the truly great men of history, but it's too soon to say right now.

 

[kendo1]

As Rumsfeld put it:

"Osama is either alive and well or alive and not too well or not alive."

 

[IrezumiKiss]

It's really a big "Who cares" whether he writes his own speeches or they are written for him with his input. One way or another, he was the one who said it.

What is puzzling, almost appalling, is the way some on this forum seem to be almost worshpping this man. He is just a man, although a charismatic one, and fallible. He may turn out to be one of the truly great men of history, but it's too soon to say right now.

Meh. I'd say it's more like his detractors who are falling over their clown shoes with every little bit of minutiae they can wring out of the wash to discredit him or are finding all sorts of ad hominem-based excuses to convince themselves he's less than worthy to be President.

We just like the guy and wanna stand up for him. He ain't perfect, he ain't gonna cure cancer or save the world from an Earth-killing meterorite or have Jesus rise from the dead again to speak at the convention if he gets nominated.

Unless he does something extremely foul or bent, like shoots Paris Hilton or something, I don't see any reason and will continue not to see any reason why he's not worthy of being President.

 

[Liar]

Just a thought... How come that everywhere I look - in the media, in statements by other pols, in political discussions like these - people are on first name basis with Osama and on second name basis with Obama?

Rhymes can be powerful things.

 

[Stella_Omega]

It's really a big "Who cares" whether he writes his own speeches or they are written for him with his input. One way or another, he was the one who said it.

It certainly seems important to you.

What is puzzling, almost appalling, is the way some on this forum seem to be almost worshpping this man. He is just a man, although a charismatic one, and fallible. He may turn out to be one of the truly great men of history, but it's too soon to say right now.

Listen we know ALL about fallible. If Obama is less fallible than the clowns who've been running this country into the ground and beyond, that will be a relief.

Just a thought... How come that everywhere I look - in the media, in statements by other pols, in political discussions like these - people are on first name basis with Osama and on second name basis with Obama?

Rhymes can be powerful things.

Does Rumsfeld call Mr. Obama "Barack"? That's the real thought.
Myself, I talk about "Osama Bin Laden," if I talk about the Al-Qaeda leader, because naming conventions are different in the Aramaic languages.

 

[sr71plt]

Unless he does something extremely foul or bent, like shoots Paris Hilton or something, I don't see any reason and will continue not to see any reason why he's not worthy of being President.

Shooting Paris Hilton would be foul or bent? I don't think so.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Shooting Paris Hilton would be foul or bent? I don't think so.

Hmmm.

Now that I think about it, if he does that, he just might surge in his approval ratings...

 

[Stella_Omega]

Shooting Paris Hilton would be foul or bent? I don't think so.

Sounds like an act of charity, come to think of it...

 

[Boxlicker101]

Meh. I'd say it's more like his detractors who are falling over their clown shoes with every little bit of minutiae they can wring out of the wash to discredit him or are finding all sorts of ad hominem-based excuses to convince themselves he's less than worthy to be President.

We just like the guy and wanna stand up for him. He ain't perfect, he ain't gonna cure cancer or save the world from an Earth-killing meterorite or have Jesus rise from the dead again to speak at the convention if he gets nominated.

Unless he does something extremely foul or bent, like shoots Paris Hilton or something, I don't see any reason and will continue not to see any reason why he's not worthy of being President.

After I read this post, I went back and looked over the posts I left in this thread and the related one. I said not a single negative thing about Obama, and I even referred to him by his last name, sometimes using his proper title.

At the same time, I would not call it minutiae to question his associations over the last twenty years. I mean, if you had a white candidate who had been attending a particular church for the last twenty years, and the pastor was an anti-American racist who spewed lies, and the candidate referred to the pastor as a spiritual mentor, he would rightly be called to explain himself. To the degree that I have any clout, which is none, I would be doing so as loudly as anybody.

Instead, we have a black candidate who has been attending a particular church for the last twenty years, and the pastor was an anti-American racist who spewed lies, and the candidate referred to him as a spiritual mentor. Why should not this candidate also be called on to explain himself? He didn't, you know. Although he made a nice speech, he did not explain why he did not leave this place of hatred and racism. Not only did he not leave, he started bringing his young daughters there to listen to the same diatribes.

 

[cloudy]

After I read this post, I went back and looked over the posts I left in this thread and the related one. I said not a single negative thing about Obama, and I even referred to him by his last name, sometimes using his proper title.

At the same time, I would not call it minutiae to question his associations over the last twenty years. I mean, if you had a white candidate who had been attending a particular church for the last twenty years, and the pastor was an anti-American racist who spewed lies, and the candidate referred to the pastor as a spiritual mentor, he would rightly be called to explain himself. To the degree that I have any clout, which is none, I would be doing so as loudly as anybody.

Instead, we have a black candidate who has been attending a particular church for the last twenty years, and the pastor was an anti-American racist who spewed lies, and the candidate referred to him as a spiritual mentor. Why should not this candidate also be called on to explain himself? He didn't, you know. Although he made a nice speech, he did not explain why he did not leave this place of hatred and racism. Not only did he not leave, he started bringing his young daughters there to listen to the same diatribes.

It was one sermon, and it was given on a day when he wasn't even there.

for fuck's sake...

You know, Box, I would probably respect you a whole lot more if you just came out and said you didn't like him because he's Black, instead of finding minutiae that you can take issue with....especially when you don't seem to have the first clue what you're talking about.

 

[Darkniciad]

It was one sermon, and it was given on a day when he wasn't even there.

for fuck's sake...

You know, Box, I would probably respect you a whole lot more if you just came out and said you didn't like him because he's Black, instead of finding minutiae that you can take issue with....especially when you don't seem to have the first clue what you're talking about.

I know I should probably keep my mouth shut, but there are clips from multiple sermons that raise questions, and no way of knowing when Obama was there. One of the least offensive of the lines is even quoted in one of Obama's books.

 

[Boxlicker101]

It was one sermon, and it was given on a day when he wasn't even there.

for fuck's sake...

You know, Box, I would probably respect you a whole lot more if you just came out and said you didn't like him because he's Black, instead of finding minutiae that you can take issue with....especially when you don't seem to have the first clue what you're talking about.

It was at least six sermons, and probably more. I know that because he was wearing different clothing in the different videotapes.

I do not dislike Obama at all, and and I voted for him in the California primary. I would not call it minutiae when a man such as Wright has so much influence on a major presidential candidate as to be called his spiritual mentor. I just don't think he should be given a pass, anymore than the hypothetical white candidate I referred to would ber given a pass.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I know I should probably keep my mouth shut, but there are clips from multiple sermons that raise questions, and no way of knowing when Obama was there. One of the least offensive of the lines is even quoted in one of Obama's books.

One of them is the title of one of Obama's books.

 

[Kev H]

I just don't think he should be given a pass, anymore than the hypothetical white candidate I referred to would ber given a pass.

See...here's the cool thing about all this--he's not given a pass. He's in a shitstorm of embarassment and scrutiny over his friend's freakish views. That's a good thing and he seems to be handling as best as he can, with the question of how much it will hurt him still up in the air (though the well-timed Richardson endorsement certainly helps Obama). Satisfied?

Unlike some people who voice their opinions here, I don't think he's getting less heat than someone else this might have happened to (and it's solidly arguable that he's getting far more heat than McCain). This situation has raised alot of questions that Barack will have to continue to answer as he makes the rounds.

 

[Darkniciad]

I just don't think he should be given a pass, anymore than the hypothetical white candidate I referred to would ber given a pass.

He's hardly being given a pass. "Shitstorm" is about the right word for it.

Have to give the man points for handling it well. If he'd come at this with less of a level headed response, it would have been worse. He'd have sunk his own battleship for sure.

Without knowing how often he might have actually heard such statements ( The Rev. might have even toned things down when Obama was actually in attendance, because he was a public figure as a state senator long before he went national... plus, we have no idea if he showed up regularly or popped in for Easter and Christmas ) I don't give the association all that much relevance, really.

It might be one thing if he was there and heard all of the more outrageous statements, but we don't ( and probably won't ) have any clue about his actual attendance.

Absent any of that information *shrug* We don't know what kind of actual advice and counseling Wright gave to Obama. May not have said a single word that would put anybody into a tizzy.

It raises questions, but not large ones. Just another thing to throw in the pot and stir around before the November taste test ( or earlier if you vote in the Dem primaries )

I'll still vote for McCain, but I at least feel better about Obama taking the Dem nomination than Hillary. My concerns about Obama are a molehill compared to the volcano of national disaster I consider Hillary.

 

[Boxlicker101]

See...here's the cool thing about all this--he's not given a pass. He's in a shitstorm of embarassment and scrutiny over his friend's freakish views. That's a good thing and he seems to be handling as best as he can, with the question of how much it will hurt him still up in the air (though the well-timed Richardson endorsement certainly helps Obama). Satisfied?

Unlike some people who voice their opinions here, I don't think he's getting less heat than someone else this might have happened to (and it's solidly arguable that he's getting far more heat than McCain). This situation has raised alot of questions that Barack will have to continue to answer as he makes the rounds.

I know he's not being given a pass on the national level, but he certainly is on this forum.

McCain isn't getting much heat because he has never done all that much to get heat about. The NY Times did a hit piece on him about an unfounded rumor of an affair with a lobbyist eight years ago, and some nut case, extremist preacher is claiming McCain wants his endorsement, but that's also unfounded rumor. I don't know where McCain goes to church, but I doubt if it is with that nut. At the same time, he is a televangelist, and McCain might watch him and listen to him at every opportunity, for all I know.

If the election is between McCain and Obama, I think it will be one of the most gentlemanly ones in history. Both men respect each other, and McCain, from what I have read and heard about his integrity, would not let anybody sling mud on his behalf.

 

[sr71plt]

I'll not be shy. Yes, it means something to me that Obama continued attending a church (and taking his family) and having a close association with the pastor of that church where such ideology was being promoted. And, no, I'm not naive enough to think the guy gave just one sermon like that and mimiced Billy Graham the rest of the time and/or has an entirely different philosophy when he's not in the pulpit.

But then, I wasn't blind to how Obama got his house and what he was doing when he lawyered for a slum landlord, either.

Nor do I think that it was Bill Clinton who was behind the Whitewater stuff, if it comes to that.

Nor am I blind to the overlap in involvement time between McCain's last wife and his current one.

I don't hang on one issue, though, and don't have an illusions that a politician gets to the national nomination process squeaky clean. I look pretty much at what they're likely to do in office--and the biggest problem I have with Obama--I definitely look at whether I think they can get it done. Any candidate who tells me they're the one because they have no connection to the Washington bureaucracy comes across as useful as a screen door on a submarine to me.

 

[Kev H]

Without a doubt, McCain is the best possible Republican nominee at this time, and he seems to be in a far stronger position than anyone could have believed (it was once taken as fact that the Dems would win, regardless of almost anything, and that McCain was once considered the weakest Republican candidate--it's quite uncanny how far things have come for him, but then again, that's a reminder of the power shifts in the political game). He is in a position to meet either Hillary or Obama in an issues-driven campaign and actually marginalize many of their standing points without alienating the conservatives completely. I wouldn't be surprised, if as you say, the race (after this Dem bloodbath gets completed) was quite genteel. We will probably all want a breather after the Conventions. We'll soon see.

 

[Darkniciad]

It could very well be a civil, and quite refreshing campaign between McCain and Obama.

Some small part of me would rather see Hillary get the nomination, because I honestly think he would mop the floor with her without problem.

Sue me, I like McCain, always have. *laugh* I'd rather have a McCain/Lieberman Independant ticket, if I thought it was remotely possible.

I honestly half wonder if Bill didn't go a bit off the tracks a while back because he didn't want to be First Lady. The man's smarter than he was acting for a while there...

But I digress.

There will still be shit-flinging, but it will come from the fringes ( MoveOn, Hannity, Democraticunderground, Rush ) and I think the candidates will actually distance themselves from it, rather than paying lip-service to such if it's Obama vs. McCain.

That civility could very well translate into the winner having a better position to kick our do-nothing Congress in the ass and make the jackasses earn their frikkin' paychecks, too. The Congress feeds on that crap during the election cycle to stay fat on partisan bickering for the next four years and accomplish nothing.

That's one of the reasons I like McCain. He already has inroads on both sides of the aisle. He might be able to broker some compromises that Bush or Hillary could never hope for.

Finally getting around to the OP - I don't think this is anything resembling a death-blow to Obama's run. He hit a speed-bump, for certain, but Hillary still has an uphill battle to even catch up, and the math just doesn't give her much chance of doing anything more than that.

Barring a "stolen election" through the Superdelegates, that is.