What Makes Obama Attractive?

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
BonoVoxSupastar said:


You're funny, you'll defend Rush and others for racist and sexists remarks saying "they're just words" "he mispoke", etc.

Yet you're getting all high and mighty about the word "really"?

You are as fair and balanced as Fox...

Rush doesn't want to be first lady of the United States. Michelle Obama has the possibility of representing the United States all over the world and representing millions of women as the first lady. To hear "this is the first time I've been proud of my country" rubs me the wrong way.

And, since you are wrong once again, if Rush had said that exact same thing, I wouldn't have liked it either.
 
2861U2 said:


And, since you are wrong once again, if Rush had said that exact same thing, I wouldn't have liked it either.

You once said, you don't believe Rush would ever lie. That comes off a little as blind worship to me...

Personally, the quote doesn't rub me the wrong way at all, I don't care who said it...:shrug:
 
2861U2 said:
Michelle Obama has the possibility of representing the United States all over the world and representing millions of women as the first lady.
The President represents American women, not the First Lady. If we had a married female President would you say that her husband represents American men?

Anyway, I can agree that it was an unfortunate statement...it does seem clear enough to me from the context that what she in fact meant was more on the order of 'It makes me so proud of my country to see so many people coming together around common issues and seeking change; I haven't seen that on this scale in a long time, and it's an exhilarating feeling.' But I can agree that it was an unfortunate way to put it.
 
2861U2 said:

To hear "this is the first time I've been proud of my country" rubs me the wrong way.

Her comments were worth a clarification. She did that today. It's pretty inconceivable that a person with her background wouldn't feel proud of America......this story won't gain much traction.
 
BonoVoxSupastar said:


You once said, you don't believe Rush would ever lie. That comes off a little as blind worship to me...


Huh? Show me. I'm pretty sure I would never say that.
 
ok,
lets get back to Obama the plagiarist.


Barack
"What do you mean I don't get credit?
Deval said I could copy his homework."
 
deep said:
ok,
lets get back to Obama the plagiarist.


Barack
"What do you mean I don't get credit?
Deval said I could copy his homework."



Barack would know better -- best to cheat off the annoying white girls.
 
U2democrat said:
You're missing the point.

It's not about words his friend said he could use, it's a bout the MESSAGE that is resonating with voters.

On this we disagree.....

I have read enough to believe that Deval is not telling the whole truth about this incident.

It is about the words, when the perception (and perception is reality) is that the candidates stregnth is his words, and the way he inspires people to get off their asses...and believe in hope....ect....and the words are not his....

This is an issue.

What is not being reported is Duval used parts of Obama's earlier speeches when he was running for governor.

It does not sit well with me.
 
U2democrat said:
You're missing the point.

It's not about words his friend said he could use, it's a bout the MESSAGE that is resonating with voters.

the messenger and the writer of the words does not matter?

if it is only about the MESSAGE
then any qualified speaker / actor could deliver it



Obama is the Tony Robins of politics

they each are good at getting people

FIRED UP
AND READY TO GO
 
Take A Chance

Duval http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbYFKUsaKpY
Obama http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qj_sApZ4Q9Y

[Q]Deval Patrick's Timeline Doesn't Mesh with Reality
February 19, 2008 11:42 AM

Speaking to the New York Times Sunday, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick attempted to excuse his friend Sen. Barack Obama's lifting of part of his October 2006 "Just words" speech.

“In a telephone interview on Sunday, Mr. Patrick said that he and Mr. Obama first talked about the attacks from their respective rivals last summer, when Mrs. Clinton was raising questions about Mr. Obama’s experience, and that they discussed them again last week," the Times' Jeff Zeleny wrote. "Patrick said he told Mr. Obama that he should respond to the criticism, and he shared language from his campaign with Mr. Obama's speechwriters.”

But Obama was quoted using Patrick's language before the Summer of 2007.

"'We hold these truths to be self-evident, all men are created equal.’ Those are just words," Obama was quoted as saying in a March 19, 2007 New Republic story. " ‘I have a dream.’ Just words.”

So....the claim that Patrick an Obama "first" discussed this last Summer does not make sense.

It should also be noted that in addition to the "Yes We Can" slogan that Obama used in 2004, Patrick used in 2006, and Obama uses today, other language from the two clients of political guru David Axelrod has come from both men's mouths.

To wit:

Patrick in June 2006, at the Massachusetts Democratic party convention: "I am not asking anybody to take a chance on me. I am asking you to take a chance on your own aspirations."

Obama one year later, as quoted in USA Today: "I am not asking anyone to take a chance on me. I am asking you to take a chance on your own aspirations."

Just words?

- jpt

UPDATE: Some folks have pointed out that when Obama borrowed the line on voting your aspirations in Portsmouth, NH, on December 21, 2007, he footnoted Patrick, saying, "Don't vote your fears, I'm stealing this line from my buddy, Deval Patrick, who stole a bunch of lines from me when he ran for the governorship, but it`s the right one. Don`t vote your fears, vote your aspirations."

But in my original post, I wasn't referring to that quote.

I was referring to a month before, in November 2007, when Obama according to news coverage stood on the steps of the Clarendon County Courthouse in Manning, S.C., and, according to USA Today, said:

"Now, I've heard that some folks aren't sure America is ready for an African-American president, so let me be clear," he told his mostly black audience. "I never would have begun this campaign if I weren't confident I could win. But you see, I am not asking anyone to take a chance on me. I am asking you to take a chance on your own aspirations."

Don't believe me OR USA Today? Fine.

Check out the Obama website where they have the speech posted -- no credit to Deval Patrick is given:

"Now, I've heard that some folks aren't sure America is ready for an African-American president, so let me be clear: I never would have begun this campaign if I weren't confident I could win. But you see, I am not asking anyone to take a chance on me. I am asking you to take a chance on your own aspirations."

Or watch it HERE.


[/Q]

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/02/deval-patricks.html


THis was going on BEFORE and the evidence is there that Duval Patrick is either lying, or is misremembering the timeline.
 
Dreadsox said:


On this we disagree.....

I have read enough to believe that Deval is not telling the whole truth about this incident.

It is about the words, when the perception (and perception is reality) is that the candidates stregnth is his words, and the way he inspires people to get off their asses...and believe in hope....ect....and the words are not his....

This is an issue.

What is not being reported is Duval used parts of Obama's earlier speeches when he was running for governor.

It does not sit well with me.

When Obama delivered those lines
and I watched them and heard them on TV
he was connecting with the listeners, he was intentionally conveying the feeling that he was speaking from his heart, in his own words, that is how he sold them and that is how the audience recieved them.

The honest thing to do,
Would have been to say,

"Just words? this is what was said to my friend Deval, too. And I will answer it the same way he did. .........."


Obama has a believability problem
 
also, it was really weak

for Obama to try and deflect by saying that Hillary plagiarized off of him


When she said

And we are fired up

and we are ready to go!


Did anyone not know that she was using Obama's slogan?

People that are in comas know that Obama is the
FIRED UP AND READY TO GO guy.
 
The punditocracy is now saying that Hillary's comeback may be mathematically impossible.

The magic and momentum are amazing.

And the annoying Internet banners are talking about an Obama-MCCain contest.

Just because his speeches are beautiful does not mean that they are empty. I listen to his rhetorical riffs every day, and they do not seem the least bit empty. And they are at least as spot on as the competition when it comes to details.
 
Why is this whole thing any different then when a politician's speechwriter comes up with some powerful phraseology and the politician then uses it in his/her speeches? The politician would still be uttering powerful words that he didn't write, so what is the difference? Nothing.

Furthermore, not once have I heard Obama say anything even resembling 'These words are unique to me'. That is an assumption that many have made based on watching/listening to him speak, nothing more.
 
deep said:


Obama has a believability problem

In your eyes.

I think you are not necessarily following the plot here with respect to the pulse of the nation.

I would be willing to bet big bucks that most people don't give half a shit about this "plagiarism" issue and it has not affected Obama's believability in any concrete way that will cost him.
 
I've supported Hillary throughout, this so called plagiarism (sp?) is just garbage.

She's getting beat and her supporters are grasping.

The bigger question is a queston that (of all people) Chris Matthews asked last night on MSNBC. He went after an Obama supporter on Barack's accomplishments in the Senate. He couldn't think of any and he admitted so.

He's most likely the nominee, maybe the McCain camp could use that. I hope not but it's legitimate.
 
I find it ironic that the hard-eyed skeptics, the ones that won't be swayed by a bunch of high-flown rhetoric are shocked. . .SHOCKED. . .and appalled that Obama is not speaking his own words in these speeches.

The non-wild-eyed Obama supporters (and there are a lot of us. . .it's just the Obamamaniacs get more press) understand that Obama is still a politician after all, a politician with speechwriters who may on occasion "borrow" material from fellow politicians who support their candidate. Surely you don't think Obama just shoots these speeches straight out of his golden gut anymore than JFK did (he had speechwriters too).

But we live in age where mountains get made of molehills--how much people spent on haircut, how much somebody's spouse is proud of America, and now this. . .

Now if turns out that Obama plagiarized elements of his books--well, that's a different story.
 
2861U2 said:


And, since you are wrong once again, if Rush had said that exact same thing, I wouldn't have liked it either.

I've always said it about Rush and now Rush says it about himself:

Q: What is it that the mainstream media don't understand about you and conservative talk radio?

A: I don't think they understand why I do it. I treat it as a business. My definitions for success have nothing to do with who wins elections but rather, Is the program growing audience-wise, are we attracting new sponsors? In terms of the content, I just come here and try to have fun every day. I don't say outrageous things I don't believe just to get people in a tizzy. I have the benefit of not having anybody telling me what I can't say.

From TIME magazine, February 25, 2008
 
Last edited:
deep said:


he was connecting with the listeners, he was intentionally conveying the feeling that he was speaking from his heart, in his own words, that is how he sold them and that is how the audience recieved them.


Ah, come on. When Kennedy said things like "Don't ask what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." or "Ich bin ein Berliner" or Reagan said "Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall.", they were also connecting with the listeners, selling it as if it were their own words when in fact they all had speechwriters. They also spoke from their heart, like definitely Obama did, but still borrowed the words from other. So what? No one cares, as long as you convey the message in a honest way.

While some may be Obamamaniacs, you seem very occupied opposing Obama's success with your continuous repetition of the "Fired up and ready"-line, though especially the posters here have made clear that they care much more about his actual politics than just some soundbytes.
 
[q]New head-to-head polls show that Barack Obama would beat John McCain in key general election swing states but Hillary Clinton would not. SurveyUSA released hypothetical matchup results from Wisconsin, Iowa, and Virginia, all states that figure to be key battlegrounds in November: McCain beat Clinton by seven, 11, and three points, respectively; Obama beat McCain by 10, 10, and six points, respectively. Obama won all three states in the Democratic primary, although John Edwards was still a factor in Iowa.

http://www.slate.com/id/2175496

[/q]
 
Back
Top Bottom